Which is one theory I read that she was hit by the dog went in head first its a high bank so no slip marks and I read the water was higher than it was now.
Which is one theory I read that she was hit by the dog went in head first its a high bank so no slip marks and I read the water was higher than it was now.That’s assuming she hadn’t had an event that made her unconscious before she went into the water?
I thought the same, he’s definitely had it done within the last week.Really? With his face full of fresh botox and filler?
Dan Walker mentioned that Paul and Nicola had plans to get married during lockdown and asked if they would get married when she is found. Completely unnecessary and hurtful in my opinion.What was the marriage thing? Haven’t got watching the full channel 5 thing yet!
Not meaning this as a question to you but in general (and in agreement with @Jwren post just after this one) -The falling in the river from near the bench doesn’t make sense to me now given its depth at that point (3ft) & very SLIGHT current. She would have been able to stand up in it. For her to have fallen at such a force that she entered the water head first , then banged her head on rocks would have meant she would have had to positively hurtle herself down the embankment, enter the water head first, rendering her unconscious and thus drowning. That’s assuming she never put her hands / arms out to break the fall as people naturally do.
If she had slipped on her bum down the embankment and entered the water that way she would have been able to stand up and get out.
Also if the police timings are to be believed (phone being on the bench at 9.20am and Appointment Woman finding phone at 9.33am) appointment woman could have looked in the river and seen her if she had gone in mere minutes earlier?
But cannot rule out being in the river from a different location, or that Nicola never actually got to the bench. I’m sure the technology police have had access to details more, but for example my iPhone tells me I’m at least 50 metres away from where I am. ( that current location thing) and my car is .6 mile of a mile away from me. It’s not. It’s in the drive.
The one thing that makes me think she could’ve been followed and attacked is that she tracked her walks ( and I think they were public ) and it has been noted a creep has been liking all her pictures/following her on Strava. Absolutely terrifying.Yep, like someone coming down the path , through the kissing gate, clobbering her from behind which jolted the phone on to the floor… and then goodness knows…
Ring doorbells are not concrete evidence. When the battery is low they don’t always pick up every movement.Ring
Is it possible to do that without there being footprint? Genuine question as I don't fully understand how they work. It would have to be a reasonably significant length of time.
They asked him about plans to marry, they hadn't got round to it. They asked when she's back home will you?What was the marriage thing? Haven’t got watching the full channel 5 thing yet!
He said in the interview he works for an American company so because of the time difference he doesn’t start work until 10am and he enjoys that hour aloneAs it stands, as I understand it, he was on the computer dealing with work related stuff, which will be obviously verifiable and phoned and WhatsApp’d her and received calls in … also verifiable and the doorbell camera wasn’t activated for anyone going out the house. Also verifiable. To all intents and purposes by all the means they have to verify his whereabouts, he was sat at home working.
Only 3ft deep at the entry point near the bench. It’s not 3ft everywhereNot meaning this as a question to you but in general (and in agreement with @Jwren post just after this one) -
If it’s only 3ft deep, why did they need to send divers in?
The question didn’t come out of the blueHe paused for a moment after it was asked. I think he was quite taken back at the insensitive nature of it but answered anyway, because I suppose he had to. He's between a rock and a hard place here.
Yes sorry I realise that, but I mean initially when they thought she’d gone in by the bench and they sent divers in - they thought she would have still been in that area.Only 3ft deep at the entry point near the bench. It’s not 3ft everywhere
What are you getting at? Setting him up to read his reactionThe question didn’t come out of the blue
Entry point for NB could be literally anywhere, especially if you went hurtling off that steep edge and if there‘s an undercurrent you can soon be caught up in it however shallow and that’s assuming there wasn’t a deep hole where she entered.Only 3ft deep at the entry point near the bench. It’s not 3ft everywhere
Didn't they say that the divers were searching the shallow reeded parts and the sonar was searching the deeper parts. Looking at some of the footage, the divers were also covering the deeper parts.Not meaning this as a question to you but in general (and in agreement with @Jwren post just after this one) -
If it’s only 3ft deep, why did they need to send divers in?
100% this! Totally agree with you.Sorry if this has already been mentioned.
I was convinced she’s gone into the water until the interview with C5.
Looking back at history, Karen Matthews, Ian Huntley, Mick Philpott. All did television interviews proclaiming their innocence.
Do you think the police had some responsibility in setting this up to profile the husband’s body language?
Two weeks and still not found, water been checked extensively. Are the police now looking at other avenues?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?