lucan

[Magpie]

If it must be asked why didn't Lucan finish the job then it is also a fair question to ask why didn't the alternative-theory-killer finish the job either. The fact that the killer (Lucan or someone else) failed to accomplish their goal simply points to inexperience, IMO.

What makes you think that the killer didn't accomplish their goal?

Edit: Sorry, that sounded snotty. Obviously anyone who accepts the official story also accepts that the killer didn't accomplish their goal. What I was trying to convey was "what if the killer did accomplish their goal?"

[louisa]

What makes you think that the killer didn't accomplish their goal?

Edit: Sorry, that sounded snotty. Obviously anyone who accepts the official story also accepts that the killer didn't accomplish their goal. What I was trying to convey was "what if the killer did accomplish their goal?"

So what was the goal? To kill the nanny? In my opinion....definitely not.

DrummondStreet's scenario sounds very plausible to me.

[DrummondStreet]

Magpie: Do you believe that Sandra was the target???? She wasn't even supposed to be working that night.

Veronica was the intended victim. It was her house and she was in the midst of a very bitter custody battle (that she was winning).

Also, the murder weapon was a lead pipe wrapped in surgical tape. Two such items were found. One was covered in blood and laying on the floor at the crime scene and the second (unused) but similarly wrapped pipe was found in the trunk of the car that Lord Lucan had borrowed.

[DrummondStreet]

Magpie: Are you implying that Lady Lucan killed the nanny and tried to frame her husband to get custody?

If so, Lucan's very own account of events would absolve her. He claimed to see a man struggling with his wife in the basement. Not two women (Veronica + Sandra) but a man and a woman.

[Magpie]

"Magpie: Do you believe that Sandra was the target???? She wasn't even supposed to be working that night."

I think "target" is attributing a unwarranted degree of intention to the attack. I'm not sure there was a "target" that night--just a set of circumstances that resulted in a victim.

"Magpie: Are you implying that Lady Lucan killed the nanny and tried to frame her husband to get custody?'

Imply that a litigious member of the nobility with a phalanx of lawyers and possibly something to hide may have committed murder and got away with it? Moi?

It's good to see that you are willing to start thinking outside the confines of the Official Version, but you are still hindering yourself with the assumption that it's all about Lord Lucan and his wife and the conflict between them. Even the current Lord Lucan rejects the notion that the events of that night had anything to do with the custody battle.

[Ally]

Magpie,

What precisely is your opinion on what happened? I have not read nearly enough to have an informed ( or even an uninformed) opinion.

[Magpie]

More hinkiness: The crime scene

So supposedly Lord Lucan removed the lightbulb at the bottom of the stairs to the basement, resulting in him mistaking the nanny for his wife when she came down to make the tea that evening. However there was broken crockery in a pool of blood in the breakfast room (where the lights were working fine) strongly suggesting that the nanny had at least started the process of making tea when the attack began. This leaves three options:

1) Miss Rivett came down the darkened stairs and crossed to the breakfast room and proceeded to start making the tea in the pitch dark (for some reason) before being attacked by Lord Lucan in the mistaken belief that she was Lady Lucan.

2) Miss Rivett came down the darkened stairs and crossed to the breakfast room, switched on the working light and started making the tea before she was attacked by Lord Lucan who under the circumstances couldn't possibly have mistaken her for Lady Lucan.

3) The light was working fine and everything in the basement as completely ordinary until Miss Rivett was bashed on the head, after which the lightbulb was removed and carefully placed on display in order to create the narrative that Lord Lucan had crept into the basement and planned an ambush for his wife.

[louisa]

I'm not sure why you think that the lightbulb was removed after Sandra Rivett had been attacked?

If Sanda had come downstairs to make tea and found the light didn't work then very possibly should would have had a go at making the tea in the dark, she knew where everything was kept. Changing a lightbulb (which may have been high up on a wall or on the ceiling) in the dark however may have been a task she knew was beyond her.

I could probably make make a cup of tea in the dark in my kitchen if I had to. She had the light from the upper hallway illuminating some of the scene.

[Magpie]

I'm not sure why you think that the lightbulb was removed after Sandra Rivett had been attacked?

If Sanda had come downstairs to make tea and found the light didn't work then very possibly should would have had a go at making the tea in the dark, she knew where everything was kept. Changing a lightbulb (which may have been high up on a wall or on the ceiling) in the dark however may have been a task she knew was beyond her.

I could probably make make a cup of tea in the dark in my kitchen if I had to. She had the light from the upper hallway illuminating some of the scene.

Why would she make the tea in the dark when the light in the breakfast kitchen was working just fine?

[louisa]

Oh well she wouldn't then would she? Sorry, it's been a while since I read up on this story and probably misconstrued what was said in an earlier post.

[DrummondStreet]

Magpie: You still haven't addressed the fact that a piece of lead pipe wrapped in surgical tape was found in the trunk of Lucan's car. It was identical to the murder weapon found at the scene. I think that the unused weapon was prepared for an accomplice who backed out at the last minute. Lucan had no shortage of (unscrupulously) devoted friends.


The fact that the current Lord Lucan does not want to believe that his father is a murderer is irrelevant. He certainly isn't the first child of killer who can't come to terms with a parent's guilt.

[DrummondStreet]

It's good to see that you are willing to start thinking outside the confines of the Official Version, but you are still hindering yourself with the assumption that it's all about Lord Lucan and his wife and the conflict between them.

Quite honestly, that sounds quite arrogant. Unless you were an eyewitness to the crime or have received information not available to the public, what makes you believe that your insight is more valuable than that of anyone else?

[Magpie]

Magpie: You still haven't addressed the fact that a piece of lead pipe wrapped in surgical tape was found in the trunk of Lucan's car. It was identical to the murder weapon found at the scene.

Several days after the crime, and it was twice as long as the murder weapon.

[Magpie]

Quite honestly, that sounds quite arrogant. Unless you were an eyewitness to the crime or have received information not available to the public, what makes you believe that your insight is more valuable than that of anyone else?

I'm sorry you took it that way. I was merely observing that you were willing to set aside the official story in order to consider the possibility of different assailant, but not of a different motive.

However, unless you were an eyewitness to the crime or have received information not available to the public, what makes you believe that your insight is more valid than mine?

[Magpie]

[B]
The fact that the current Lord Lucan does not want to believe that his father is a murderer is irrelevant.

Really? Because the current Lord Lucan has "received information not available to the public," which according to you is one of the two criteria that would make his insight "more valuable than that of anyone else". So if his insight is more valuable than anyone else's, but yet irrelevant, what value is anyone's?