Murder at the Cottage | Sky

CowgirlBoots

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117817767#Comment_117817767

Marie Farrell was the one who said she signed blank pages - not Jules Thomas.

https://twitter.com/NFoster66/status/1431269183132667905?s=19

I see Scooby Doo is still desperately trying to insert himself into the narrative. What kind of a clown would push for a media stunt like this in an ongoing murder case? He probably replays over and over in his head exactly what he will say to trick the dastardly Bailey into confessing on live TV.

To be fair to Moonunit, he/she is far more articulate than this deluded donkey.

john9876

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117818132#Comment_117818132

The thing is that if Bailey stood in front of me with his hand on a Bible and swore he'd done it I don't think I'd be any the wiser.

MoonUnit75

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117818104#Comment_117818104

They both seemed quite sure it was a premonition, not an observation that something bad was actually happening right then. There wouldn’t be much point ringing Alfie and asking him if he was aware that some ominous event may or may not happen in the near future in the general vicinity.

MoonUnit75

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117818032#Comment_117818032

No, they were all in the Garda file. It seems there was a typed report of another statement JT made a couple of weeks after they were released but the original hand written memo it was based on was not in the file. I haven’t seen any reference to what was in that statement mentioned in any of the court cases in any case so it may have been of little relevance.

Bannasidhe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117818303#Comment_117818303

I'm sorry but that's a load of tosh. "Will I drunkenly stagger in the dark all the way over to Alfie's to find out why he has a light on cos I've a funny feeling or will I just phone him?". "Alf - mate. Sorry for disturbing you but I've a funny feeling", "F Off Ian you complete knob."

MoonUnit75

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117818325#Comment_117818325

I don’t think the Gardai ever thought he actually intended to call to Alfie or had a real premonition that something bad was going to happen, my understanding of their case was that he may have mentioned this to JT as a pretext to him leaving the house to go to Sophie’s house. They had both been drinking and it was late at night, I doubt it was the most rational and reasoned discussion they ever had.

Her statement, which she said has been altered, said he stopped the car on the way home and got out to look at the moon, he mentioned there was a light on at Alfie’s and that he had a bad feeling. The statement says at some point he mentioned he might go over to Alfie but JT herself was too tired to go. The Garda seemed to believe this was all laying the groundwork for him wanting to go over to Sophie’s after he observed that she was alone in Schull that afternoon. He had not gone back to the house with her at all the previous night.

Part of her statement is quoted in Nick Foster’s book, taken from court transcripts:

“At that time, you can call me green but I never associated the comments made by Ian on Hunt’s Hill the night before when we were looking up at Alfie’s house and him getting a bad feeling about something going to happen there, and the murder subsequently happening and the fact that he was missing the night before.”

Thomas: “I didn’t say it.”

O’Higgins: “Invention?”

Thomas: “Yes, I didn’t say it.””

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117817983#Comment_117817983

The GSOC report is an embarrassment for everyone involved in the investigation but when it comes to the Garda Siochana's powers of arrest, GSOC was only going to come to one conclusion: that this arrest was lawful because of the "honest belief" of the investigating Gardai. I don't believe the Garda had any grounds for suspecting Jules Thomas, even as an accomplice after the fact. Neither did the DPP. Why did the Gardai abandon this "honest belief" but persist in their belief that IB is the murderer.

But you are not answering my central thesis: if IB didn't know Sophie, he had no motive to murder her brutally at the bottom of her laneway in the early hours of a Christmas morning. And if IB had any form of relationship with Sophie prior to the murder (e.g. if he was the poet she allegedly was to meet during her last visit), he would have told anyone and everyone in earshot. The Gardai knew this undermined their whole investigation but, despite interviewing everyone with any contact to IB, they couldn't get any better than vague recollections about a brief introduction years before and some post-hoc hearsay.

All that convinces me that IB did not have even a tenous relationship with Sophie and therefore he had no motive to murder her. She may have been murdered by a stranger e.g. a serial killer or a hired assassin, but not IB.

Wombatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117818872#Comment_117818872

He was in a relationship with Jules. Would he really be telling all and sundry he was interested in another woman? If he knew, or even knew of, Sophie he most likely would have been interested, knowing what we know of him.

As to the motive. Judging by the scene the killer was in a blind rage. Blind rage is not premeditated and can come on in an instant in some people. Rejection or ridicule or even resistance, possibly to an attempted rape, could bring on the furious anger necessary.

flanna01

I agree somewhat that the murderer went into a blind rage. The amount of blows to the head points towards a frenzied attack were the murderer had lost the plot altogether...

Sophie had a wad of cash in the house, so robbery wasn't the motive.

This murder appears to be a crime of passion, a passion that was maybe rejected, rebuffed, ridiculed??

A lot has been said about Sophie rolling up just before Christmas (broken heating my arse).

She was filmed carrying a load of luggage from the airport, why so many cases for such a short stay.. (just to check the heating is working)??

Had she not arranged to lend some of her art pieces to her former boyfriend to display somewhere (that one that nearly choked her)?

Is all her luggage accounted for? Bar the missing bottle of wine?

Was she meeting somebody in Ireland?

If Bailey had stumbled over to Sophie's on that fateful night, knocked on her door at daft o'clock, and made a half baked pass at her, I'm sure the door would have been slammed in his face, followed by a call to the Gards.

To think a drunken Bailey chased her down to the gate, through the briars, and then smashed her face in beyond recognition, is fanciful to say the least. To then click his heels, head back home, make coffee for Jules and act perfectly normal is stretching it a bit... Assuming he drove part of the way, would he not be scrubbing the car down to the metal work, in between washing and scrubbing his hands, nails, hair.....etc

If he had murdered Sophie, he would know first hand that there was blood everywhere down there, probably hair and fibre's too.. Would he really 'VOLUNTEER' his blood samples or Dna to the Gards without being asked to???

I cannot understand why people still think Bailey could have done this murder....

EdHoven

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819107#Comment_117819107

He's 6-4. She was 5-0. If he wanted to rape her I'm sure he could have overpowered her. And disgusting as it is, he could have easily carried away her body and still done the evil deed.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117818104#Comment_117818104

Why would you phone someone because there was light in their house? I used to regularly drive a rural country road route at 5am years ago. i recall one house always had a light on. I never thought i should stop and ask why

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819432#Comment_117819432

That is a very good point. In fact a man his size and strength may not have needed to hit her so many times

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117818872#Comment_117818872

The GSOC report is just GSOC opinion. GSOC do not have to the power to say whether JT arrest was legal. It would have to be ironed out in a criminal court to get a determination of whtether the arrest was legal. GSOC's view is just GSOC's view. I am sure if Bailey were prosecuted in a criminal court it would be an issue and would be decided by the court not by GSOC.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819107#Comment_117819107

Bailey wouldn't have to tell the whole town they were having an affair... but why would he have kept quiet had there been any sort of professional element to it, even as a cover story. Or that could have been the cover story for Jules and the rest of the town, but to his male buddies he would have been more frank.

And how was this contact meant to have been carried out.

Nobody saw them together.

No letters were found.

No phone calls traced.

Sophie was in France most of the time.

Had Ian been hanging around Sophie's, Alfie or other neighbours would have noticed.

As for this spontaneous incident turning into a murderous frenzy, I can't remember any cases like that from the courts that happened between two people who barely knew each other, living in same area, and the incident occurred at her property.

So we're back to, no connection between the two that could in any way be a motive, and no credible scenario for why Bailey would have killed her. And no forensics evidence linking him to the murder. And no eye witnesses putting him at the crime scene, and one very dubious* witness who may or may not have put him in the vicinity or put some short, sallow skinned man there instead. Oh, and the mystery man who was supposed to be in the car with him. Who didn't recognise Bailey either.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819469#Comment_117819469

I think that's pretty much the point the OP was making. You just don't do that, so why someone would use it as a pretext for visiting Alfie is ludicrous - the whole angle of the light being on and a premonition of something bad being about to happen is absurd.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819534#Comment_117819534

GSOC can't even question Gardai who don't want to be questioned.

They can't explain why 35 pages were deliberately cut out from the book of evidence.

You'd have to be a particulary dumb or blatantly obvious Guard to be caught out by GSOC in your wrongdoings.

But yeah, GSOC are infallible in their conclusions if you believe some here!

Darc19

If people actually thought about it, they'd be looking at every possible angle on Daniel du Plantier

I'm in no way pointing a finger at him but

1 - Ian bailey lived locally, barely knew Sophie, no known motive. Drunk on the night and 5km+ away in a very rural location.

2 - Daniel du Plantier. Financial issues, all but separated from Sophie, new girlfriend, has many contacts, has the means. Knew of Sophie's movements. Has the Motive

Yet very little real digging done on Daniel du Plantier.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819867#Comment_117819867

The Guards were told to do one when they arrived in France asking questions.

Laughable there are posts on this thread defending the farcical French trial when you consider that.

The path of least resistance lead to Ian Bailey, which is no way to conduct a murder investigation.

https://www.thesun.ie/news/7515631/retired-detective-inspector-not-too-late-sophie-toscan-du-plantier-murder-probe/

This says DNA can stil solve it and confirms what i said before that cold weather would preserve rather than destroy DNA

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117817254#Comment_117817254

some on page 5 and on page 7. put p5 or p7 after sky/ in the url. Sorry if you know this

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117491629#Comment_117491629

Can you elaborate on "complain about everything"

jimwallace197

Is there anymore obvious evidence that the French case was a shame than when Marie Farrell actually offered to go to France to recant her earlier statements accusing Bailey because of Garda coercion and she was in fact denied access to attend by the French. Instead they took her earlier statements as fact.

Now, this is key because some posters on this thread have indicated that Marie Farrell only wanted to recant her statement against Bailey because of a financial motive for the libel trial but that would completely contradict that because with this, there was zero financial motive along with the inconvenience of attending a court in a foreign country for a man she barely knows.

This case shines a light on the corruption of our own Gards, the farcical nature of the Napoleonic law, our own inept government politicians who bow down to anyone from France or Germany, the integrity and decency of some of our own citizens who would happily see an innocent man imprisoned if it means they get some money, drugs, favours in return, amongst many many other things. The land of saints and scholars we certainly are not

MoonUnit75

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819290#Comment_117819290

I suppose it would be very fanciful to think that a man who had just killed and dumped the body of one of his friends and neighbours would go over to the victim's house hours later to offer their help to look for the missing boy. But it happened.

Someone carried it out and was not acting in such a way that seriously concerned anyone they met afterwards, at least not more than the small number gardai were alerted to and had ruled out.

It would be very handy if the killer had somewhere to go back to where no one else was living, somewhere that wasn't their residence but had excellent privacy, bathrooms, baths, running water etc. There doesn't seem to have been any actual hand to hand fighting, it was very one-sided and was probably over in less than a minute or two. There's no reason to think you shed any more DNA or hair than if you had been out chasing a cat from the garden.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819107#Comment_117819107

I don’t mean a sexual relationship, which nobody (not even the Gardai) thinks he had . I meant any form of interaction.

If he had any such connection, he would have told the whole parish and definitely John Montague. If he had any knowledge of her, it is inconceivable that he would have talked at length about French film to Bannasidhe without mentioning Sophie even though they were standing looking at her house. If you didn’t, it is nonsensical to imagine that he would be knocking on her door in the early hours of the morning.

MoonUnit75

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117819820#Comment_117819820

GSOC's conclusions were the same as those of the jury in the High Court and of the judge in his remarks, having heard everything IB and MF could throw at them. Any of the gardai, journalists or members of the public who would not speak to GSOC or sign statements could be required to give evidence in the High Court, as many of them did, including retired gardai. I feel like it's groundhog day around here, it's like the GSOC report and High Court proceedings just go in one ear and out the other. If it doesn't agree with the conspiracy theory, it must be fake news, false reports, false conclusions. It's painful at this stage.

MoonUnit75

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117820431#Comment_117820431

The French made the right call on this. MF's first statements could not have benefitted her in any way, were corroborated in two instances by other independent witnesses and were made before a well documented series of complaints of intimidation and an eventual admission of perjury while recanting the initial statements. The earlier statements should be considered the most reliable ones considering all she went through afterwards.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117820508#Comment_117820508

It would look suspicious if all the neighbours came out to look for a missing child, and one person did not. It's completely different situation.

And Bailey was supposed to have gotten scratches at the scene.

So what's this new red herring comparing it to chasing a cat around a garden?

I don't know how you can compare getting cuts from briars at the scene, and brutally beating and killing someone at close quarters, to chasing a cat around a garden with zero contact.

MoonUnit75

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117820540#Comment_117820540

There's no reason to think the killer made any physical contact with the victim, the injuries were all consistent with a rock, a concrete block, a boot and some sharp implement.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117820094#Comment_117820094

Pat Marry deserves great credit for catching David Lawler for the rape and murder of Marilyn Rynn in 1995, based on DNA from her body. Pity Marry wasn’t running the investigation into the murder, almost exactly one year later, of Sophie Toscan du Plantier.

He thinks they might recover DNA even now but surely that has been tried time and again? He also talks about genealogy databases, which could help if they recovered a DNA sample (not relevant to IB as he gave blood samples).