The abduction and murder of Nicola Bulley (part three)

Timeline revealed

Introduction

My suggestion is to read the whole thing through in its entirety before unpacking it in your mind, due to the way I’ve ended up writing it.

Unlike my first two blogs on the initial sham investigation, there’s no need to review every last distraction within this new, largely fictitious narrative that Lancashire Constabulary have had concocted for them. This latest timeline (yet another one!) to do with Nikki’s disappearance on Friday 27^th January was revealed alongside the inquest after four long tedious months of preparation and involves the same script writers as before. The controlled media, by the start of the second day of the inquest, had started publishing a barrage of misleading and fabricated reports as is required of them to confuse all the same people all over again. It remains necessary to obscure the truth about the abduction and murder of Nikki Bulley.

Think how proud these journalists would be of themselves if they had the ability on waking up in the morning to reflect on their existence, working away as a slave for a corrupt system that in this case supports the latest twisted agenda, while concealing the horror of what happened to a beautiful soul. There are only two sides to this spiritual war.

• The important points to remember:

(1) To maintain a successful cover-up to Nikki’s abduction, they have to continually weave a web of deceit in order to conceal the truth, while simultaneously herding the public towards their lame duck river narrative that had been decided on from the outset. With nowhere left to go, they have to resort to as many red herrings as possible wrapped up in a mix of outright lies as well as truthful elements to craft what we’ve been presented with once more.

(2) If anyone hasn’t grasped by now that Lancashire Constabulary are being forced to replay the same hand as first time around but with a new fairytale, then I’m afraid there’s no helping that person. They are lost.

My first two blogs (Justice for Nicola Bulley parts one & two) from March explain in some detail the original cover-up, exposes their lies and shows how all the facts were obscured with ambiguity and contradiction to leave nothing but supposition. This would be the place to start from afresh for anyone who is lost or simply new to the realisation that they’ve been played all along.

For everyone else, we need to strip away and dismiss from the new narrative anything that doesn’t pass the most basic test of being factually-based, so as to see what remains. I’ll debunk the important deceptions without which it isn’t possible to determine the truth, but ignore many of the trivial aspects that have no bearing either way other than the objective to dilute attention away from the right places. To start with, from 10am onwards is irrelevant as it was all over by then so there’s no merit in reviewing activity beyond this point.

Two weeks before the inquest I wrote an update blog: ‘The fateful day: Nicola Bulley’s disappearance’ where I revisited the first day - in readiness to make far more headway. Under the sub-heading of ‘Disappearance theories’ I outlined two plausible theories based on the little tangible information available at the time. The inquest has since served the purpose they would have wished it hadn’t. It has filled many blanks and helpfully confirmed the only plausible scenario left as to what happened.

Prepare yourself to think and don’t let yourself be distracted by what you beLIEve.

Debunking false & misleading information

(1) CCTV (timeline)

By way of example of what has been published in media reports from the Lancashire police files provided to the media are CCTV images such as these.

For the first obvious observation perhaps I’ll apply a crude tool to split people into two groups: those with the capacity for critical thinking and those who will continue to believe anything they’re told, such as this never-ending deception by the satanic organisation that is NASA, run by high-level freemasons.

Which group are you? 🤭I’m expecting that most that have followed my blogs for a while now didn’t fall into the trap of thinking these are timestamped CCTV images? The Ring doorbell footage of Nikki leaving her home in the morning - that was a timestamp. The latest images is just someone using photoshop to add a white label and add in whatever time they choose to help deceive the same gullible flock all over again with their fabricated nonsense.

“Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me”.

Think long and hard about this proverb if you did fall for it. There’s going to come a time soon there will be no second chance so it’s worth the commitment.

I chose these particular CCTV images as they were clearly taken from the same property (1 Allotment Lane), albeit cropped differently. Up to this point I haven’t considered who might live there having had no cause to, but seeing as these are bogus one can’t help be intrigued. However, so as to avoid casting unnecessary suspicion without foundation I suggest that the most likely possibility is that these images could have been obtained on any day and at any time by a remote attack hacking into their CCTV system. Child’s play for a technical expert. This is only an opinion, but I offer it so as not to otherwise make the only other possibility that exists which would lead to a direct accusation of persons unknown at this address cooperating in the subterfuge. As a reminder, Richard Fife’s own sworn statement at the inquest confirms he was not there at 8.33am and I'll address the other image shortly.

In summary, not only can you not rely on any times from published CCTV images but you cannot be confident even as to what day the image may have been obtained. At any point during the four months leading up to the inquest some or all will have been staged for the express purpose of supporting their new narrative - a new narrative that we know is garbage. As an aside you want to see what they can do with CGI these days, they’ll make you believe anything!

To take you back, there are but two genuine CCTV images that we can be sure were from the day itself and these are the ones that were published in the media at that time (Christine Bowman and the woman in yellow rain jacket and pram). A reminder the one of Christine Bowman was misdirection on the part of Rupert Fletcher, so the time of her walk isn’t known either. Given she provided a statement to the police on the day itself, it suggests she was in the vicinity later in the morning and of course, Dr James Adeley omitted both her and her statement from the inquest. It’s elementary psychological manipulation for media reports to continue using a familiar character, such as the lady in red from the original (fake) timelines, to associate with the new fairytale with the expectation of lending credibility to the all-new star cast introduced. Can you see it yet?

(2) Fake witnesses

The couple from the very first timeline (9.15am on the riverpath) who’d claimed to have interacted with Nikki (‘joking and laughing’) but then disappeared into the ether never to be mentioned again has always frustrated me. I referred to them as phonies who were intentionally deployed to mislead Lancashire police right from the start.

I didn’t know of a way to idenfity these phantoms until, thanks to Olivia who sent me this BBC article from 2^nd February linked below, I could see the reference made to a woman called ‘Amanda’ who’d spoke to BBC Radio Lancashire. (oops BBC, that’s careless!)

Mystery phony witnesses from timeline 1

I know from digging a little into the phony that is Richard Fife - you can review my prior blog (part two) on his written statement submitted under oath - that his partner is a woman by the name of Amanda Davies. Boom! Richard Fife and Amanda Davies are established assets in the cover-up to Nikki’s abduction that day playing the role of fake witnesses twice! I know from an exceptionally reliable source that the pair both relocated back from La Creuse in France around twelve months ago to live in St Michaels-on-Wyre, having previously been abroad since 2005.

Ivy makes a great observation in her latest video that his purpose in this final crack at a script was most probably to detract away from the actual suspicious characters observed the day before, by introducing a hilarious rendition of a comedic man in black. Very often they just like mocking people, but in this case it served a purpose and will have given Dr James Adeley reason to make disappear any notion of the heinous crime having been pre-meditated and regain control of the narrative by introducing a new villain to entertain. Richard Fife and Amanda Davies remain remarkably low profile and all but invisible, but you can make your own deductions as to who they might answer to.

The same BBC article above also includes the 9.10am fake eyewitness account by Keith Barlow (with his fluffy white dog) - which was introduced as part of timeline 2 after the above couple’s fake eyewitness account from timeline 1 was magically disappeared. However, we return to Keith later.

(3) Fake times

You must put all these times out of your heads as if they’d never been mentioned. Right from the start the intention was to focus us all on a “ten-minute window” prior to the crunch time of the claimed 9.33am discovery. These are both inaccurate and false, as is their attempt to gaslight everyone with 9.22am as the suggested moment that whatever happened to Nikki occurred. I’m sure by now I don’t need to go over why the alleged last eyewitness sighting at 9.10am in the upper field is also false.

Brace yourself, as this is going to be the singularly most important part to grasp to see the sequence of events as they occurred from information that’s available.

To mentally prepare you for this, I’ll start with my considered opinion that Nikki was assaulted at 9.35am. Before reading on any further, maybe jot down bullet points as to why you currently think differently (you do, don’t you?). I’ll try my best to explain why the basis for what you think is incorrect, in so far as it’s founded on either inaccurate or purposefully misleading information to steer everyone away from the real timing. This is often what it comes down to, understanding what it is they don’t want you to see.

[a] 9.22am

This is an extension to the great blog and video that Mickey and Ivy respectively have done (the links attached below), for which the reason will become clear.

Imagine you have the following smartwatch data from three activities in this graphical form presented to you and have to make sworn statements in court as to what you understand from it. Please indulge me and take a couple of minutes to study each of these activities, recorded by a device that works in exactly the same way as Nikki’s Fitbit. They show heart rate in beats per minute plotted against distance in kilometres. What would you be confident in summarising?

So you’re not tempted to cheat 🧐here’s a musical break, one of my all-time favourites, by way of interlude to help you consider the above question.

Ok. You’ll have noticed the inconsistent spiky pattern of the two activities on the right-hand side. These are both riverpath walks with no elevation, at a consistent pace similar to that which Nikki would walk, both a little over five kilometres displaying an average heart rate of 93bpm. The relevant point is that it’s impossible to pinpoint any reliable heart rate at any point for the reason the devices do not measure heart rate itself. The devices use algorithms to calculate approximate heart rate via the optical heart-rate sensor which flashes green LEDs many times per second, using light-sensitive photodiodes to detect volume changes in the capillaries above your wrist.

When DC Greenhalgh told the inquest Nikki “very possibly” went into the water at 9.22am from analysis of her Fitbit he was talking out of his arse to fit the chosen narrative. This should not come as a surprise. For clarity, neither was Nikki assaulted then. The devices are simply not sensitive enough to reflect quick changes to actual heart rate, like a sudden shock for example, and consequently you experience these random variations. While it made for good rhetoric it’s just trickery. He’s a puppet used to persuade people that a reading of 100bpm was indicative of something. Look again at those activity graphs above. You can make up any story you like from these. This time should be ignored altogether which was only for show purposes to draw you in to their web away from elsewhere.

The activity graph of the left on the other hand is an athletics track-based intervals session using a chest strap that syncs to the watches. Only a chest strap measures heart rate accurately, as is clear from the smooth data profile. You cannot replicate this from a wrist device.

Here’s the great post on the Fitbit by Mickey and a wonderful presentation, well-researched as ever, by Ivy. These comprehensively deal with the primary issue that many of us have known from early on that the river is irrelevant. In simple terms the battery would cease to have charge in a few days. I too know a reasonable amount about how these devices perform as I’m an elite masters-level athlete and use them as a training tool.

It seems remarkable that Lancashire Police - with a gormless looking Dr James Adeley out of his depth during this part of the testimony at the inquest - ended up being the ones to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Nikki could never have gone into the river. After all their hard work to deceive. 🤡

Fitbit blog - by Mickey

[b] 9.33am

This one is easy. I’ll come onto why DSI Rebecca Smith was parachuted into the investigation as SIO, together with her whole new account of fictional timeline 2 that was unveiled on 3^rd February amidst a storm of other distractions to hope no-one would noticed. Part of this new timeline claimed the discovery took place at 9.33am and they have had to stick to this ever since - they must! I’ve previously emphasised how Penny Fletcher has never been interviewed by the media, as well as being continually hounded by Curtis Arnold to prevent her telling her story. It’s only a surprise that the script writers haven’t invented a non-existent CCTV image of Penny from a non-existent CCTV camera by the bench with a nice white label saying 9.33am. More than half of people would believe it too, were it printed in mainstream media or shown on one of the many hypnotising Youtube channels that people seem so keen to be deceived by🤪

Penny is withholding information that would be extremely damaging to the fragile narrative but I don’t believe she’s a liar and she had no reason to lie under oath safe in the comfort that no real questions were to be asked of her. She took her dog for a walk from her farm up through the five-bar gate that follows the river around, confirming she saw no-one at all, arriving at “9.40am earliest” to the wooden style adjacent to the bench. That’s a direct quote. There’s nothing more to dissect other than to accept 9.33am has always been a lie - and I will tell you shortly what I now understand to be the reason for it.

[c] 9.10am

This is the most intriguing of all the invented times which leads to the only possible conclusion that can be made that Clare Chesham was brought in to give false testimony and by implication lied under oath. She should be the first port of call as part of the real investigation. Since this is a major statement allow me to explain it clearly.

You must all by now know off by heart the subterfuge used to introduce Keith Barlow as the phony eyewitness in the upper field - the last supposed sighting of Nikki at 9.10am. I suggest you refer back to my first blog if it’s slipped your mind - it’s too important not to understand.

Here is the full update straight from Lancashire Police’s website ten whole days into the investigation together with the specific point we’re interested in.

Lancs Police update 6th February

I mean, come onnnnn! You’re expected to believe that after this was all faked and they were exposed red-handed for all to see, that a seemingly mystery person (who’s very well known in the village) just appears out of the blue to take Keith Barlow’s place. One Clare Chesham. There’s no escaping that this is just bollocks. Not least as I revealed in part two (witnesses), they’d originally earmarked Richard Fife judging by his written statement that placed him in the fields at this exact same time seeing Nikki. I suggest the script writers got their lines crossed. Ooops! It’s worth taking note that both false witnesses emphasised that Nikki had her phone out in front of her which implies this too has always been part of a script and unlikely the case during the time she was listening to her Teams call. I’ll come back to this.

To top it off, according to Clare Chesham, Nikki was in the process of walking her second loop of the fields when she exited the fields. It’s again unfortunate that the hapless DC Greenhalgh provided evidence that this never happened at the inquest itself. What you’ll not have seen reported anywhere is the breakdown of steps taken from the analysis of Nikki’s Fitbit in fifteen minute segments between 8.00am and 9.30am that was communicated in court. The media have this but their script writers definitely don’t want you to have it.

I’m not entirely satisfied with the steps that seem to be recorded when she was driving to school but understand that Fitbit isn’t that great at making the distinction. Garmin is far superior in my opinion but let’s move past this. For the detail-oriented, we’ll not delve into how and when the Fitbit must surely have synced to her iPhone - after 27th January🧐 - to allow for the detailed data from the last seven days to be analysed (please see Ivy’s video for more on this).

Focusing on the steps shown from 8.45am onwards guarantees that Nikki could not have walked two loops of the fields that morning. The distance in kilometres stated by DC Greenhalgh was a total of 1.3km from 8.45am. The step count would have been much higher had she walked two loops. We also shouldn’t forget SI Sally Riley confirming at a press conference the efforts being made to review dashcam footage from a roadside appeal, especially focused on the period 9.10am - 9.15am. Logical as it turns out, since there was no Claire Chesham, nor sighting in the field of Nikki at this time.

Claire Chesham, you’ve been rumbled! What this boils down to is that there was no-one present at the same time as Nikki - other than her assailant(s) nearby (and perhaps one other person who could shed light on this, but is being kept from the limelight).

(4) Creative phone location data

The Daily Mail among others have published a dazzling minute-by-minute account of how the phone handsets supposedly corroborate the location and movements of Nikki that morning. Impressive stuff for those who’d never ask any questions about anything. What neither the police nor the press will want you to know is that DC Greenhalgh also testified that from an analysis of Nikki’s iPhone between 8am - 11am they had no reliable location information whatsoever, other than lots of pings in the bench area and in the Rowanwater lake area. You can imagine he had to go on to explain how he field-tested this himself with another iPhone so as to allay unnecessary suspicion as to what this spurious information would otherwise indicate. He displayed his slide alongside the location data from Nikki’s phone to show how little they could in fact determine for which he gave an unconvincing explanation In short, what is being published now is part of a smokescreen to fool you into believing their fairytale. It can be ignored as it contradicts the information from the ‘digital expert’ himself at the inquest and is only part of trying to reinforce the notion of a precise timeline to fool you into thinking that it has some bearing on reality.

Evidence-backed hypothesis

Without dwelling in irrelevant minutiae like many duplicitous Youtubers would have you do, I’ll now give my opinion based on everything that’s properly known as to what really happened. I’ll go on to sum up with additional supporting observations that go a long way to explaining actions taken in the earlier days of the investigation. Everything must hang together, without exception. If any aspect can be firmly contradicted by fact then a theory goes up in smoke and has to be revisited! This is what made DSI Rebecca Smith’s main working hypothesis such a fucking embarrassment and a total insult to the most simple (non-brainwashed) person.

• Nikki walks from school with Willow toward the fields. She may have completed a slower loop than usual, occupied with drafting a work email and responding to a text message before listening in to a call. At 9.01am I envisage Nikki using her wired headphones (that we see her with in outdoor pictures of her) to dial into and listen to her Teams call. My opinion to explain the reason the volume may have been increased at 9.18am on her phone was that on returning back to the bench she planned to sit down to listen in to the remaining part of the call, so unplugged her earphones and placed the phone on speaker - which by necessity required her to increase the volume to hear better. (The headphones are unimportant in the scheme of things as she’d need to increase the volume anyway if she moved any distance away from it). She’s alone in the field at this time until the unidentified person(s) known or unknown to her show themselves. I suggest there was initially some interaction that concluded with her being assaulted (this being the scream Helen O’Neill heard at 9.35am). While it could be one of any number of vehicles, it’s hard to ignore the white van that the same local resident spotted at 10am arriving into Allotment Lane as potentially the vehicle that an unconscious (very lightweight) Nikki may have been bundled into. Everything that happens after the event relating to the alarm eventually being raised is irrelevant.

Regarding my earlier comment on additional supporting observations, other aspects that were previously difficult to reconcile, but now become clearer with evidence provided from the inquest and this hypothesis include:

[1] Helen O’Neill (a genuine witness):

“I heard a scream, it's not an alarming noise, it was just over in a couple of seconds. I'm quite used to hearing the children in the school out back, but it was not that noise. I vividly remember thinking it's unusual at this time. In my head, I had two females, walking along by the river and one jumped out on the other. I didn't think anything of it until later on. There were no other sounds for me to be concerned about.”

I believe this pulled the rug from under the feet of what should have been a routine cover-up led by dozy SI Sally Riley. This being the reason why DSI Rebecca Smith - an experienced senior officer in organised crime - was drafted in together with an ambitious and false new version of events for a script she has then had to stick with more or less. All to explain away a scream.

[2] Penny Fletcher (wrong place, wrong time)

With DSI Smith falsely claiming the discovery was made at 9.33am, and with the (controlled) media helpfully duping people into suspecting that Penny was there much earlier still (that included the adept manipulation of “Ron” in the live Sky News broadcast by the Rashid & Burley dynamic duo), this would assist in eliminating the possibility of the scream being linked to the assault.

It can also explain why Penny is undoubtedly concealing information as she must have heard this scream. I stated before and suspected she may have seen more than she ought to, having appeared not from the riverpath along which you can see people coming from a great distance away, but rather unannounced via the wooden style. I don’t believe the harness was meant to be left in a bundle on the riverbank as Nikki treated it with great care. Perhaps she used it as an impromptu weapon of sorts in defence? However, based on the information we have, Penny was the only person to see it in a heap before it miraculously found it’s way to the bench a short while later. After Penny had left having tied up Willow with twine, I suggest someone was still in the vicinity and made proper the scene for the subsequent individuals who arrived after 10am to find everything on the bench.

[3] Hilary & Keith Barlow

The last, but very important piece of the puzzle is to find a plausible reason as to how this couple would be caught up in the seemingly unnecessarily complex and entirely fabricated 9.10am eyewitness account provided. Don’t forget this also included deployment of bare-faced journalist liar Isla Traquair on national television and one of the more ‘respectable’ newspapers (The Times) in the vain attempt to have people swallow their BS. Penny had provided her witness statement including her encounter with Keith Barlow the first day, but it wasn’t until DSI Smith took up SIO four days later that the dodgy police appeal for white fluffy dog man was by coincidence issued (as part of a clear plan).

Naturally, he was omitted from providing any witness statement at the inquest but nonetheless we know for a fact he was the second person on the scene having chatted to Penny near the bench area before she retreated to Allotment Lane to make her phone calls. From Rowanwater, he’s also now placed in the fields between 9.35am and 9.59am. He too surely would have heard the same scream? I have no better theory and am confident nor has anyone else, other than to suggest he must be privvy to some very important information to have been written in as an earlier eyewitness so as to be otherwise distanced from events. So much so that his wife was the go-to person to relay the false witness accounts while Keith himself has never spoken nor written a word, yet he was the only person right there.

Two additional points to consider. Given everything points to a planned abduction, for anyone not familiar with the area, you only need two look outs if you want to cover your bases. Firstly by the gate into the fields to provide ample notice of anyone coming along the river path. Secondly by the gate into Rowanwater so as to account for any potential dog walker from this residential estate. Penny’s more unusual route might not have been accounted for?

At present he remains the only person (other than an unknown third party) who had the opportunity to place the harness onto the bench after Penny left, before leaving back through Rowanwater at 9.59am ahead of the next small group who were responding to Penny’s telephone call to retrieve Willow, the phone and the harness.

Summary

It has been quite difficult to put this all into writing, but a useful exercise. If you cannot explain something with facts and evidence from which to base sensible speculation from, then that’s a sure sign of being entirely detached from any sort of reality. I’ll refrain from extrapolating here to the current insanity that has gripped most of the Western world especially in the last few years and accelerating, but the principles are much the same.

The deception has continually sought to direct attention away from what occurred to the fullest extent possible and through whatever means at their disposal, but when the misdirection is looked at for what it is and stripped away, the bad actors become visible - potentially so much so that their involvement could be more than a secondary supporting role.

I suggest the likes of Curtis Media, Jason Rothwell, Chris Neill and Richard Fife have the same ultimate paymasters and financially motivated in their respective roles. Something else may be afoot with the Barlows, but as was evident very early on they hold a key to the real story, as it would appear, does Clare Chesham. Similarly, I don’t believe a word of Veronica Claesen’s statement at the inquest that was theatrical and rang hollow. It screamed (pardon the pun) of a smokescreen to lessen the impact and discredit what I believe to be the genuine event as reported by Helen O’Neill, that was only fortuitously heard due to her being in her back garden at that time.

Food for thought………………………………