Nicola Bulley, what does everybody think?

[erobitha]

Have they said whether she could swim or not Ero?

They claimed she is a strong swimmer.

[caz]

got it. but reading between the lines it sounds like they are implying mental issues and suicide by drowning does it not?

That would be speculating, Abby. The police are implying nothing specific so, for all we know, Nicola could have been vulnerable due to the behaviour of some other person or persons. Did she have any enemies for instance? Was she being bullied, threatened or stalked by someone - either a stranger online or someone she knew? Had a previous partner been making trouble? Granted, all these situations would cause mental stress and could even lead to suicide in extreme cases, but they would also make a woman physically vulnerable to the individual concerned.

If she was mentally unstable or had suicidal thoughts for no external reasons, how could her partner possibly be so certain that wherever she vanished to, it wasn't the river? And why are the police implying that the man who knew her best is most likely wrong? They are still saying they have no evidence of anyone else being involved. But I'm seriously beginning to wonder how a strong swimmer would expect to be able to drown herself in that particular part of that river, and why her body has still not been found if she did. An overdose of pills and a note left for her family would seem a kinder and more likely way out of a mother's despair.

Love,

Caz
X

[Herlock Sholmes]

I believe the red van has been described as 'not suspicious', but frustratingly that's not quite the same as saying it has been entirely ruled out.

Thanks Caz

[Herlock Sholmes]

yeah they need to check out these caravan parks, especially since the sighting of the two suspicious fisher men. two men abducting her and taking her to their camper nearby would make sense.

also, i nbeleive i read that she was a strong swimmer.

Cheers Abby, I did wonder if it had been mentioned.

[Ms Diddles]

I feel somewhat voyeuristic speculating, but I still think it's likely that there was something in the content of that conference call that could have prompted the disappearance (either through suicide or simply prompting a breakdown / walk away due to stress) which also caused the police to describe Nicola's circumstances as "vulnerable".

Almost as soon as the disappearance was announced the police stated that they did not suspect any third party involvement, which I thought was strange.

To me that implied that from the offset they had much more information than was in the public domain.

I'm sure I read of texts sent prior to the conference call, sent to a friend which appeared completely normal and involved scheduling a playdate for their kids (or similar).

I know that's far from definitive proof that all was well prior to the conference call, but it could support that notion.

I'd be really interested to know the content of that conference call, as it's possible the answer is in there somewhere.

[Herlock Sholmes]

They claimed she is a strong swimmer.

Cheers Ero

[Herlock Sholmes]

I feel somewhat voyeuristic speculating, but I still think it's likely that there was something in the content of that conference call that could have prompted the disappearance (either through suicide or simply prompting a breakdown / walk away due to stress) which also caused the police to describe Nicola's circumstances as "vulnerable".

Almost as soon as the disappearance was announced the police stated that they did not suspect any third party involvement, which I thought was strange.

To me that implied that from the offset they had much more information than was in the public domain.

I'm sure I read of texts sent prior to the conference call, sent to a friend which appeared completely normal and involved scheduling a playdate for their kids (or similar).

I know that's far from definitive proof that all was well prior to the conference call, but it could support that notion.

I'd be really interested to know the content of that conference call, as it's possible the answer is in there somewhere.

‘They did mention that she’d arranged a play date.

[Abby Normal]

who sends an email to their boss and joins a conference call if they are planning an immediate suicide??

[Abby Normal]

That would be speculating, Abby. The police are implying nothing specific so, for all we know, Nicola could have been vulnerable due to the behaviour of some other person or persons. Did she have any enemies for instance? Was she being bullied, threatened or stalked by someone - either a stranger online or someone she knew? Had a previous partner been making trouble? Granted, all these situations would cause mental stress and could even lead to suicide in extreme cases, but they would also make a woman physically vulnerable to the individual concerned.

If she was mentally unstable or had suicidal thoughts for no external reasons, how could her partner possibly be so certain that wherever she vanished to, it wasn't the river? And why are the police implying that the man who knew her best is most likely wrong? They are still saying they have no evidence of anyone else being involved. But I'm seriously beginning to wonder how a strong swimmer would expect to be able to drown herself in that particular part of that river, and why her body has still not been found if she did. An overdose of pills and a note left for her family would seem a kinder and more likely way out of a mother's despair.

Love,

Caz
X

the police need to say what the hell they meant by vulnerable. it could help solve the case if the public knew. all its doing is causing confusion and wild speculation.

[caz]

I feel somewhat voyeuristic speculating, but I still think it's likely that there was something in the content of that conference call that could have prompted the disappearance (either through suicide or simply prompting a breakdown / walk away due to stress) which also caused the police to describe Nicola's circumstances as "vulnerable".

Almost as soon as the disappearance was announced the police stated that they did not suspect any third party involvement, which I thought was strange.

To me that implied that from the offset they had much more information than was in the public domain.

I'm sure I read of texts sent prior to the conference call, sent to a friend which appeared completely normal and involved scheduling a playdate for their kids (or similar).

I know that's far from definitive proof that all was well prior to the conference call, but it could support that notion.

I'd be really interested to know the content of that conference call, as it's possible the answer is in there somewhere.

Hi Ms D,

Sorry to meet again under such sad circumstances.

I'm not sure it's helpful for the police to keep saying they do not suspect any 'third party' involvement. I assume this is just poor wording, when they mean they suspect no 'second' person was involved, but it could be a bit misleading.

I'm sure the police will have examined all the phone evidence, in connection with the 'specific vulnerabilities' they were informed about, but we may only learn more if their enquiries lead anywhere.

Love,

Caz
X

[Ms Diddles]

who sends an email to their boss and joins a conference call if they are planning an immediate suicide??

Agreed Abby!

That's why I'm curious about the content of that call.

Did something transpire which resulted in the disappearance?

It's rather a vague theory I know!

[Ms Diddles]

Hi Ms D,

Sorry to meet again under such sad circumstances.

I'm not sure it's helpful for the police to keep saying they do not suspect any 'third party' involvement. I assume this is just poor wording, when they mean they suspect no 'second' person was involved, but it could be a bit misleading.

I'm sure the police will have examined all the phone evidence, in connection with the 'specific vulnerabilities' they were informed about, but we may only learn more if their enquiries lead anywhere.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

I suspect that the poor wording is all my own!!!

I can't recall the exact phrase which the police used, but it stood out to me how they almost immediately downplayed the possibility of someone else being involved.

IIRC it was a while before they came out and stated that they believed Nicola was in the river, but they seemed to favour voluntary disappearance or suicide from the very outset.

That implied to me that they had significant information which was not in the public domain.

My first thought was that conference call but it could also be mental health, personal circumstances or a million other things.

To me "specific vulnerabilities" sounds like much more than simply being a lone woman walking her dog in a quiet place.

The above would make some kind of sense if the police favoured an abduction, but as they are backing the river theory it doesn't add up.

Little about this case does.

[Darryl Kenyon]

Nicola may not have fallen into the river where her phone was. The dog could have ran off chasing a cat say, Nicola could have chased after and slipped/fallen in further down the river . Do we know how far the weir was from the bench ?

Regards Darryl

[caz]

the police need to say what the hell they meant by vulnerable. it could help solve the case if the public knew. all its doing is causing confusion and wild speculation.

Although it's confusing and frustrating for us, the police evidently don't think it will help at this stage to elaborate. I'm not sure why they said anything, because it was bound to create more public speculation, but they presumably have their reasons.

The thing is, Nicola is not here to confirm or deny these unspecified, but supposedly 'specific' vulnerabilities, so the police will have needed to know who else knew about them, among her friends, work colleagues, other family members or medical professionals, before assessing their potential relevance to her disappearance. What we don't yet understand is why this aspect has only been made public now, and in such a cryptic and ambiguous fashion. If her vulnerabilities are of a private nature, known only to her partner, that would only add to the mystery. It's possible that the police are hoping someone will come forward with details about her life that have not been made public, and could confirm or contradict the information they already have to work with.

Alternatively, the police may simply have wanted to justify their own position, of not suspecting anyone else's involvement, and wrongly imagined that mentioning Nicola's existing "vulnerabilities", without further qualification, would suffice. If so, I think that was a mistake.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

Hi Caz,

I suspect that the poor wording is all my own!!!

Not at all, Ms D! I keep reading it in all the reports.

I can't recall the exact phrase which the police used, but it stood out to me how they almost immediately downplayed the possibility of someone else being involved.

IIRC it was a while before they came out and stated that they believed Nicola was in the river, but they seemed to favour voluntary disappearance or suicide from the very outset.

That implied to me that they had significant information which was not in the public domain.

You were right, and we know that now because of her 'high risk' status from the start.

My first thought was that conference call but it could also be mental health, personal circumstances or a million other things.

To me "specific vulnerabilities" sounds like much more than simply being a lone woman walking her dog in a quiet place.

The above would make some kind of sense if the police favoured an abduction, but as they are backing the river theory it doesn't add up.

Little about this case does.

Indeed. That's why I wondered if the police are really backing the river theory, or if this is a red herring, dangled in the hope of someone slipping up or revealing something new.

Love,

Caz
X