Nicola Bulley, missing persons case

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

This Californian grew up with using/hearing paddling all the time, so I think your assumption might be regional.

This Californian grew up with none of that, so maybe unique to your family?

[Matthew Best]

It seems that the ball the dog habitually played with has also not been found, which lends support to the theory that she was playing with the dog, throwing the ball, the ball went into the river, she tried to retrieve it and fell in. The only thing I'm confused about is that, from the photographs I've seen, the river looks as still as a statue and not very deep. How easy would it be to drown and then disappear in that river? Or are the photos misleading, perhaps?

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Matthew Best

It seems that the ball the dog habitually played with has also not been found, which lends support to the theory that she was playing with the dog, throwing the ball, the ball went into the river, she tried to retrieve it and fell in. The only thing I'm confused about is that, from the photographs I've seen, the river looks as still as a statue and not very deep. How easy would it be to drown and then disappear in that river? Or are the photos misleading, perhaps?

I've heard on the TV news that it is deep, and just read that it's as much as 18' at its deepest in the area in question.

[TheGoldcountry]

Originally Posted by theprestige

This Californian grew up with none of that, so maybe unique to your family?

Yes, because I've never swam with anyone outside my family. Go troll somewhere else. All I did was cite hearing it and using it.

[Rolfe]

The theory that she fell in while trying to retrieve the ball sounds like the most plausible thing, for sure.

[smartcooky]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Yeah, I'm pretty impressed that the UKians can pinpoint exactly when someone went missing, down to the minute.

Most modern mobile phones can sense motion because they have accelerometers. Since they know exactly when she was last seen, if the phone stopped moving ten minutes after that sighting, that will pinpoint the timing of whatever happened to her quite accurately because they also have the time her phone was found on the bench. It is therefore it is reasonable to assume that she went missing sometime between when the phone stopped moving and when someone found the phone.

[TheGoldcountry]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

The theory that she fell in while trying to retrieve the ball sounds like the most plausible thing, for sure.

Placid looking water can always be deceiving.

[ohms]

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

Placid looking water can always be deceiving.

The river would have been quite cold this time of year too. If she did fall in then cold water shock may have played a part.

[novaphile]

Originally Posted by ohms

The river would have been quite cold this time of year too. If she did fall in then cold water shock may have played a part.

Was also just about to post this.

Cold water can render a person unconscious very quickly.

Family lore refers to my grandfather, who was painting the side of a ship when he fell into the Tyne.

He was already unconscious when he was pulled out, and attributed his survival to his woolen coat that kept him afloat.

[Skeptical Greg]

Quote:

....attributed his survival to his woolen coat that kept him afloat.

Should one conclude that sheep are quite buoyant?

[mgidm86]

People can hit their heads on the way into the water.

I fish from a fishing kayak (it's made to stand and sit on) and wear a PFD (life jacket) mainly in case I hit the side of the boat or a log on the way into the water.

That river even if ice cold could be swam across to get out if the side she was on is steep. I don't know her age or physical abilities. And that exact section of river does not look like it could be 18 feet deep. Deep enough to drown, yes of course. And the waters don't look fast, though current can be a little deceiving, especially in a photo.

A body would be easy to find with today's electronics. Seems to be two possibilities, she was either abducted or fell in, fell in being highly more likely.

[Rolfe]

I would have thought they would have found some evidence if she'd been abducted - either eyewitness or on CCTV camera.

[novaphile]

Yeah, if someone disappears near a river, 'fell in' would be my goto.

There are some exceptions though...

In Australia: "eaten by a crocodile" or "eaten by a bull shark".

In the UK... Abducted by narrow-boat?

[Myriad]

Originally Posted by novaphile

Yeah, if someone disappears near a river, 'fell in' would be my goto.

There are some exceptions though...

In Australia: "eaten by a crocodile" or "eaten by a bull shark".

In the UK... Abducted by narrow-boat?

I had very similar thoughts about riverside hazards in the UK. "Vikings? Nah, 900 years too late. An alligator? Hah, 150 years too early."

[wobs]

Originally Posted by Darat

I’m surprised she hasn’t been found yet if she had fallen into the river. We have a couple of people a year around here that fall into the Thames and drown, which is very deep and very wide in places yet I don’t think it’s ever taken more than 48 hours to find a body once they start to look.

Round here, if someone falls into the River Hull, the body will end up in the Humber (assuming tide is going out), and usually not found found for weeks.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by ohms

The river would have been quite cold this time of year too. If she did fall in then cold water shock may have played a part.

I suspect her clothing will also have played a part, can see that getting waterlogged and becoming very heavy, plus tangling up in her legs.

[Nessie]

A "top forensic scientist" states she is not in the river because otherwise they would have found her by now. Though he does confess to not knowing how deep the river is!

https://www.gbnews.uk/news/nicola-bu...t-river/436927

The other side of that argument is that if she did walk away, she would have been found by now!?

I have a horrible feeling this will end up like the Suzy Lamplugh or Madeline McCann missing persons cases, with no definitive answer or body.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by Nessie

A "top forensic scientist" states she is not in the river because otherwise they would have found her by now. Though he does confess to not knowing how deep the river is!

https://www.gbnews.uk/news/nicola-bu...t-river/436927

The other side of that argument is that if she did walk away, she would have been found by now!?

I have a horrible feeling this will end up like the Suzy Lamplugh or Madeline McCann missing persons cases, with no definitive answer or body.

Breathtaking. Why not just ask the locals, or pay attention to reports?

"..a source from St Michael's Angling Association said the stretch of river where Ms Bulley vanished is notorious and 'very dangerous', with a depth of about 15ft. "

I've seen various pieces mentioning the depth and they're all fairly close to the 15' quoted there.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by Nessie

A "top forensic scientist" states she is not in the river because otherwise they would have found her by now. Though he does confess to not knowing how deep the river is!

It appears he has the depth correct. According to the River Levels UK that uses data from the Environment Agency the river depth varies quite a bit and can change rapidly from about 0.5 meters to 4 meters. It has been at about 0.5 meters since the beginning of the year. So the river depth since the disappearance has been about 18 inches. There are some videos of people searching the river who are wading (or paddling, if you prefer) where the water is up to about mid-crus to mid-thigh, so about 1-2 feet.

[Nessie]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

It appears he has the depth correct. According to the River Levels UK that uses data from the Environment Agency the river depth varies quite a bit and can change rapidly from about 0.5 meters to 4 meters. It has been at about 0.5 meters since the beginning of the year. So the river depth since the disappearance has been about 18 inches. There are some videos of people searching the river who are wading (or paddling, if you prefer) where the water is up to about mid-crus to mid-thigh, so about 1-2 feet.

It was in reference to the depth next to the bench.

[GlennB]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

It appears he has the depth correct. According to the River Levels UK that uses data from the Environment Agency the river depth varies quite a bit and can change rapidly from about 0.5 meters to 4 meters. It has been at about 0.5 meters since the beginning of the year. So the river depth since the disappearance has been about 18 inches. There are some videos of people searching the river who are wading (or paddling, if you prefer) where the water is up to about mid-crus to mid-thigh, so about 1-2 feet.

That's a little silly. There's plentiful photos and videos of police divers going well under the surface.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by Nessie

It was in reference to the depth next to the bench.

That depth gauge is about 150 meters from the bench. It is about twice that following the river because the river goes in a loop right there. Other gauges in that general area show about the same depth.

Here is video of people searching and walking in the middle of the river with the water about knee deep. That is about 70 meters south of the bench.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by GlennB

That's a little silly. There's plentiful photos and videos of police divers going well under the surface.

I have seen a video of divers. I'm not sure, but I think it is right next to the bench. The diver is underwater, but I can't tell the depth. Even in something like 4 feet a diver would be going underwater to look at the bottom of the river. The river would have spots with somewhat different depths. My guess would be that spot is not much more than 4 feet because we can see the steep bank representing where the river normally flows with depths of 1-9 feet followed by a less inclined bank representing where the river occasionally has short periods of a depth up to about 14 feet. Even if that is deeper pool of even 6 feet next to the bench, it quickly gets shallow not far downstream (within sight of the bench) where the bottom of the river is visible and people are walking in it at about keep deep.

[P.J. Denyer]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Indeed. I'm a norteamericano and to me "paddling" means actually swimming, but feebly: it's being immersed in water but not seriously attempting to swim at speed or with skill. "Wading" is walking through water, but implies a depth to the water that requires some degree of effort- I'd never use "wade" for anything lower than mid-calf height. I don't even have a term for walking in water lower than that.

Brits would call feebly swimming without skill "Doggy Paddling" appropriately enough (strictly speaking it's the specific unskilled, informally recognised stroke, but it doubles as a term for splashing around aimlessly)

[Rolfe]

I think basically "paddling" is walking in water shallow enough for it not to require any effort. The sort of thing children do, and adults who have just taken off their shoes and rolled up their trouser legs. Maybe mid-calf depth .

Paddling is also what waterfowl do, and what canoeists do, and a human being swimming rather inexpertly might also be described as paddling, or indeed doggy-paddling would be a more specific term. So the word has more than one meaning and thus can be ambiguous.

Once the water is deep enough to require some effort, probably from knee-depth up, you're wading. You're past the point of "going for a paddle".

[Dave Rogers]

If you can pick your feet up out of the water, you're paddling. If you can't, you're wading.

Dave

[Rolfe]

Ah, that's a good explanation.

Paddling in the shallows, as opposed to wading through quite deep water.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

If you can pick your feet up out of the water, you're paddling. If you can't, you're wading.

Which means a Rockette or MMA fighter can paddle in water so deep everybody else would be completely swimming, or drowned.

[Nessie]

There has been a lot of criticism of the speculation and armchair detectives who have shown an interest in this case. I wonder what the critics would make of a discussion about paddling?

[TragicMonkey]

Originally Posted by Nessie

There has been a lot of criticism of the speculation and armchair detectives who have shown an interest in this case. I wonder what the critics would make of a discussion about paddling?

The critics said they're okay with it.

[Myriad]

In the U.S. central Atlantic coast area and in New England I've never heard "paddling" for "wading in shallow water." In these places, the entire range of standing/walking around in water, from your insteps getting wet, until your feet are no longer on the ground, is wading.

Dog (or doggie) paddling is inexpert swimming, but any other kind of paddling as a leisure activity -- wait, let me rephrase that, any other kind of paddling related to water sports -- wait, let me rephrase that again, any other kind of paddling for the purpose of propulsion through water -- requires at least one paddle and a canoe, kayak, stand-up paddle board, or similar small craft.

[Nessie]

Still no evidence as to what happened, which is very unusual. There is no evidence she went into the river and no evidence she walked anywhere else.

[Rolfe]

Thinking about this as I was pedalling to the Post Office this afternoon, past our small and difficult-to-drown-in river, I can't see that anything other than that she somehow slipped into the river and was carried away is really plausible.

I don't think we'd necessarily expect evidence that she slipped into the river. Yes there might have been a skid-mark or footprints or something, but not necessarily. In contrast I think if anything else had happened there would have been some evidence. There are CCTVs all over the place these days and the police are on it - nothing. They've interviewed everyone who was around there, and nobody saw anything. If she'd been murdered or abducted or walked off of her own volition or had some sort of massive amnesia attack and wandered off, something would have been seen, I think.

I agree it's a bit surprising that they haven't found a body yet, but rivers are tricksy things. I think that is the thing that's least surprising compared to all the other possibilities that I can think of.

[Nessie]

There is apparently one path that is not covered by CCTV, which in itself shows how pervasive CCTV is, and that path crosses the main road, which is why the police have appealed to all drivers in the area that day.

They say they have ruled out everything else, since CCTV would either cover her leaving on her own, or with another, or another with a bag big enough for a body.

https://metro.co.uk/2023/02/08/nicol...iver-18246263/

I have been present for a few underwater searches and in murky conditions, a diver has to feel to search and an inch is enough to miss something.

[catsmate]

Originally Posted by Dave Rogers

If you can pick your feet up out of the water, you're paddling. If you can't, you're wading.

Dave

An excellent differentiation.

[Darat]

Still not found the body - searching the coast now: https://news.sky.com/story/nicola-bu...e-bay-12806835

[ZirconBlue]

Originally Posted by TheGoldcountry

Placid looking water can always be deceiving.

Indeed, I've heard that still waters run deep.

[Nessie]

The public are being banned from trying to conduct and film their own enquiries

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-64580789

[Dr. Keith]

Originally Posted by Nessie

The public are being banned from trying to conduct and film their own enquiries

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-64580789

The ban does not apply to linguistic enquirers, so carry on.

[Skeptical Greg]

Originally Posted by Nessie

The public are being banned from trying to conduct and film their own enquiries

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-64580789

How do they go about enforcing that?

Did I miss where this is taking place in China?