Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Murder at the Cottage | Sky
Options
Comments
-
Yes I would be , but the point I was making was if the Guards seemed to want it to be him (rightly or wrongly) , if Jules had said it was him , there would have been no way they'd have released him , a murderer , from custody, so he'd have had no opportunity to harm Jules.
Also, would you really continue raising your children in a house with someone you even slightly believed was a killer?
In all honesty, she should have kicked him out after the assault in April, but she loved the man and most probably felt a certain misplaced loyalty to him after he was accused of the crime, especially if she felt he was innocent of it.0 -
Sophie was a very beautiful young woman married to a famous film producer, much older than her. He wasn't good looking. But he was a powerful film producer. She is rumoured to have had an affair with another powerful man even older than her husband.
Sophie saw a spray of sea foam on the day before her death and it's said she was so terrified by this that she ran to a neighbours house.0 -
Ultimate Gowlbag wrote: »She's so terrified that she has kicked him out?
Why would he kill her over been kicked out , if she reported him to the police , he would have nothing to lose and could easily murder her.0 -
Ultimate Gowlbag wrote: »The Alfie theory was put to bed earlier the thread for me....actually a lot of theories were,just a lot of rehashing going now!
I don't think it was put to bed though? Someone said he could hardly knead dough in 1995..okay - so he was somewhat frail? He did live in a very rural location though, with a lot of land.
Presumably he did work around the house such as chopping wood or whatever? And I think he lived there until relatively recently.. So able to live independently in this setting for another 20 plus years?
People can go crazy over thinks like shared access to a property - could he have flipped and lost it?! Combined with her 'always complaining', her concerns about drug use in the area and her concerns that someone was using her house when she was not there..
Without tmi.. She was a very petite lady, who would have been hugely taken by surprise.
I would love to see justice done and closure for the family.0 -
how can Jules maintain Baileys innocent if he wasnt in bed with her the night of the murder.She can say she doesnt know what he got up to during those hours but how can she be convinced of his innocence when all accept he was not with her.Your partner who has a propensity for violence against women leaves your bed for the night and a local gets murdered and you are convinced your partner wasnt involved,this really doesnt add up.0
-
Advertisement
-
New lead from none other than Marie Farrell
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/sceptical-gardaireview-sophie-toscan-du-plantier-murder-file-following-new-lead-40610650.html
Must be nothing on telly0 -
It would have been nice if the Healy-Rae style detective had a bucket of his incompetence thrown at him to chip away at some of that jaw dropping smugness.
Question : detective does it not keep you awake at night reflecting on the complete comedy capers attempt at processing this investigation.
Detective just how much of the evidence remains and why do you think it’s missing?
Detective have you apologised to the parents for your abject incompetence?
Detective MF really?
Note to self - never get into any trouble in France because they can say any auld boll1x and it’s taken as fact. The friend who suddenly remembered 18 years later talking about a strange poet who I advised her not to meet in private. Didn’t think of it tell then. Another random bloke pops in with his actual statement she named IB before she left.0 -
how can Jules maintain Baileys innocent if he wasnt in bed with her the night of the murder.She can say she doesnt know what he got up to during those hours but how can she be convinced of his innocence when all accept he was not with her.Your partner who has a propensity for violence against women leaves your bed for the night and a neighbour gets murdered and you are convinced your partner wasnt involved,this really doesnt add up.
They had a second property close by and he regularly went there to write at odd hours. It wasn't unusual for him to get up.
I suppose she thinks he 'seemed normal' at 9 when he brought her coffee. Surely a person who just committed a crime like that would be agitated? Be full of adrenaline? Be different? She knew some scratches were normal for him.. He does a lot of physical work around the house.
The person who did this would surely have been splattered with blood and gotten bruises, etc? If he drove the car it would have had blood in it? She didn't see any 'evidence' like that.. The Italian girl saw 'something' soaking in a bucket - her Netflix piece is quite different to her original statement which I think is very irresponsible of the producers.
I don't know if he did it or not.. I suspect he didn't.0 -
I assume everyone who has the theory that AL did it early in the morning have reached the conclusion that his partner SF is co conspirator, so we are to believe a man who reportedly couldn't knead a loaf of bread bludgeoned a woman 50 times than picked up a huge cement block ,raised it up and dropped it on the victim ??he had IB doing gardening work for him around that time, which would also point to his frailty, how did he get her down to gate? Did he carry her?? Or did he say c'mon down here to gate oh and let me grab that axe you have by back door,
When he went back up to Shirley did he say need to put a wash on love,sorted the gate issue, you light the fire and head off shopping oh and when you get to bottom of lane come screaming back up in case there is anybody around I will phone the guards??
None of it adds up, to me there must have been an iron tight reason why AL was cleared so early in investigation, i doubt he was capable of such exertion,0 -
Mentioned this before but here's a video of Chris Watts interview. Every single word in this interview is a lie. He murdered his pregnant wife and two daughters earlier in the day:
https://youtu.be/ugoYkx04E2Q
This is Stephen Daniels caught live on camera when he discovers his crime he planned meticulously was unravelling by a simple delay on a garbage pick up
https://youtu.be/KIroLgiCyP8
Compare this body language from these individuals to anything from MF or IB. You will see who has more tendency to be involved.0 -
Advertisement
-
They had a second property close by and he regularly went there to write at odd hours. It wasn't unusual for him to get up.
I suppose she thinks he 'seemed normal' at 9 when he brought her coffee. Surely a person who just committed a crime like that would be agitated? Be full of adrenaline? Be different? She knew some scratches were normal for him.. He does a lot of physical work around the house.
The person who did this would surely have been splattered with blood and gotten bruises, etc? If he drove the car it would have had blood in it? She didn't see any 'evidence' like that.. The Italian girl saw 'something' soaking in a bucket - her Netflix piece is quite different to her original statement which I think is very irresponsible of the producers.
I don't know if he did it or not.. I suspect he didn't.
my point is she cannot be convinced because she doesnt know what he got up to,if his demeanour that morning convinced her well thats pretty flimsy to say the least.All the other questions about blood car etc would have taken weeks or months to emerge but she had to decide within days on his innocence,a dreadful horrible position for any partner, to me its plausible she dithered and he manipulated that delay.0 -
New lead from none other than Marie Farrell
https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/sceptical-gardaireview-sophie-toscan-du-plantier-murder-file-following-new-lead-40610650.html
Must be nothing on telly
Ffs.... this must be the most infuriating woman on Gods green earth0 -
I don't think it was put to bed though? Someone said he could hardly knead dough in 1995..okay - so he was somewhat frail? He did live in a very rural location though, with a lot of land.
Presumably he did work around the house such as chopping wood or whatever? And I think he lived there until relatively recently.. So able to live independently in this setting for another 20 plus years?
People can go crazy over thinks like shared access to a property - could he have flipped and lost it?! Combined with her 'always complaining', her concerns about drug use in the area and her concerns that someone was using her house when she was not there..
Without tmi.. She was a very petite lady, who would have been hugely taken by surprise.
I would love to see justice done and closure for the family.
Put to bed as in "already proposed" yes.
Put to bed as in "demolished or proved impossible" no
For me - and its me who posted the theory - it does not conflict with what we know to be the facts. and, the more I think about it, the more I am troubled by the " nobody saw or heard anything" Not even a car engine.
Alfie and Shirley were 100 yards away from woman being savagely battered. she had 50 wounds so it likely that it was a prolonged attack. Her fingers were broken indicating defensive wounds so she was conscious for a least a portion of this time and almost definitely would have been screaming.
It was a clear, cold still morning. Why didn't Alfie or Shirley hear anything?
However, it seems likely that if Alfie was responsible, then Shirley must have known and kept quiet about it all this time. Not impossible but questionable.
Furthermore, the discarded bottle of wine found a few months later does not fit this theory - if, indeed, it has any relevance to the case.0 -
Gussie Scrotch wrote: »Put to bed as in "already proposed" yes.
Put to bed as in "demolished or proved impossible" no
For me - and its me who posted the theory - it does not conflict with what we know to be the facts. and, the more I think about it, the more I am troubled by the " nobody saw or heard anything" Not even a car engine.
Alfie and Shirley were 100 yards away from woman being savagely battered. she had 50 wounds so it likely that it was a prolonged attack. Her fingers were broken indicating defensive wounds so she was conscious for a least a portion of this time and almost definitely would have been screaming.
It was a clear, cold still morning. Why didn't Alfie or Shirley hear anything?
However, it seems likely that if Alfie was responsible, then Shirley must have known and kept quiet about it all this time. Not impossible but questionable.
Furthermore, the discarded bottle of wine found a few months later does not fit this theory - if, indeed, it has any relevance to the case.
If I remember correctly no one heard Shirley continuously blowing the car horn when she found the body she had to run back to the house to get help, also I wouldn't imagine there would have been much screaming, I think one blow from the rock would leave a woman totally dazed or unconscious.
Also, why would the person use the rock and then use the block, it must have been obvious that the damage was done (imo). Were there 2 people at the gate?
The excuse of coming over Christmas week to get the heating fixed sounds ridiculous and untrue, was there ever confirmation that thos was a genuine reason, surely it would have been easier to just give a person access to do the work, no need for her to travel herself to sort it.0 -
They had a second property close by and he regularly went there to write at odd hours. It wasn't unusual for him to get up.
I suppose she thinks he 'seemed normal' at 9 when he brought her coffee. Surely a person who just committed a crime like that would be agitated? Be full of adrenaline? Be different? She knew some scratches were normal for him.. He does a lot of physical work around the house.
The person who did this would surely have been splattered with blood and gotten bruises, etc? If he drove the car it would have had blood in it? She didn't see any 'evidence' like that.. The Italian girl saw 'something' soaking in a bucket - her Netflix piece is quite different to her original statement which I think is very irresponsible of the producers.
I don't know if he did it or not.. I suspect he didn't.
Didn't Larry Murphy drive over to someone he worked with to either pay them or get paid while the woman he just abducted and was planning to rape and murder was in the boot of his car? Don't underestimate the ability of some people to take this kind of thing in their stride.0 -
Exactly right.It would have been nice if the Healy-Rae style detective had a bucket of his incompetence thrown at him to chip away at some of that jaw dropping smugness.
Question : detective does it not keep you awake at night reflecting on the complete comedy capers attempt at processing this investigation.
Detective just how much of the evidence remains and why do you think it’s missing?
Detective have you apologised to the parents for your abject incompetence?
Detective MF really?
Note to self - never get into any trouble in France because they can say any auld boll1x and it’s taken as fact. The friend who suddenly remembered 18 years later talking about a strange poet who I advised her not to meet in private. Didn’t think of it tell then. Another random bloke pops in with his actual statement she named IB before she left.
This Dermot Dwyer leading detective comes across as so smug. No hard questions are asked of him in either tv documentaries regarding lost or destroyed evidence or overly focusing on just one suspect. Neither are real documentaries in the true sense just selective and subjective series that are flawed because of what they don't ask especially the Netflix one.0 -
padraig1963 wrote: »Exactly right.
This Dermot Dwyer leading detective comes across as so smug. No hard questions are asked of him in either tv documentaries regarding lost or destroyed evidence or overly focusing on just one suspect. Neither are real documentaries in the true sense just selective and subjective series that are flawed because of what they don't ask especially the Netflix one.
Id imagine he wouldn't participate if he had to explain himself in anyway.0 -
I find that the gate went missing from evidence is pretty telling.
The gate had been closed on the night in question but open on discovery of body. So the murderer most likely touched it.
I think they went back to the house after the bad deed for some reason, possibly to retrieve the bottle of wine or something else. Maybe turn off the lights.
Is it established that the front door closed behind Sophie or was it on the latch? Is that why he used the back door.
People saying "Why didn't Sophie run up to the neighbors house?", I think she ran in any direction away from the killer.
Does anyone have a theory on the blood marks on the gate?
Was it Sophie opening the gate to escape? Was it the killers hands?0 -
Deleted User wrote: »If I remember correctly no one heard Shirley continuously blowing the car horn when she found the body she had to run back to the house to get help, also I wouldn't imagine there would have been much screaming, I think one blow from the rock would leave a woman totally dazed or unconscious.
Also, why would the person use the rock and then use the block, it must have been obvious that the damage was done (imo). Were there 2 people at the gate?
The excuse of coming over Christmas week to get the heating fixed sounds ridiculous and untrue, was there ever confirmation that thos was a genuine reason, surely it would have been easier to just give a person access to do the work, no need for her to travel herself to sort it.
If this is what indeed happened, then it would make sense for Alfie and Shirley to deny hearing anything.
I would find it difficult to believe that Sophie didn't scream...the broken fingers show she was defending herself so it wasn't a case of he being rendered immediately unconscious or even dazed.
There is some doubt as to whether Sophie was bashed by the block or had her head repeatedly bashed against it.
It is possible that there were two people at the gate.
I agree that the stated reason for the visit - to get the heating fixed - seems very suspect...she could easily have arranged it through Mrs Hellen, her housekeeper.
Did Sophie have another, secret, reason for the visit? Possibly. But she came through Cork Airport alone - that's on CCTV. She visited the Ungarnen family alone, she visited that pub in Crookhaven alone, there was no evidence of her being observed with any other person, no evidence of any other person having been in the house and the PM report stated no evidence of recent sexual activity so not much to go on.0 -
how can Jules maintain Baileys innocent if he wasnt in bed with her the night of the murder.She can say she doesnt know what he got up to during those hours but how can she be convinced of his innocence when all accept he was not with her.Your partner who has a propensity for violence against women leaves your bed for the night and a neighbour gets murdered and you are convinced your partner wasnt involved,this really doesnt add up.
Well she knows him better than anybody else does. I suppose she feels there would have been certain signs if her long term partner had got out of bed in the middle of that night, walked for an hour up roads and boreens, battered a stranger to death, walked an hour back through the same roads and boreens, washed himself, scrubbed both his studio and home free of any incriminating DNA evidence and then calmly brought her tea in bed at 9am?
Do you think you'd notice something was a bit 'off' with your long term partner had they committed a random brutal murder just a matter of hours before? Perhaps in the 25 years that followed, a confession may have slipped out at some stage?
Like I said before, she should have left him in the April before the murder, but she didn't and stayed with him for a quarter of a decade after the fact, so unless you or I know something she doesn't, we would have to give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she believes in his innocence for a good reason.0 -
Advertisement
-
Weddings ahoy wrote: »I assume everyone who has the theory that AL did it early in the morning have reached the conclusion that his partner SF is co conspirator, so we are to believe a man who reportedly couldn't knead a loaf of bread bludgeoned a woman 50 times than picked up a huge cement block ,raised it up and dropped it on the victim ??he had IB doing gardening work for him around that time, which would also point to his frailty, how did he get her down to gate? Did he carry her?? Or did he say c'mon down here to gate oh and let me grab that axe you have by back door,
When he went back up to Shirley did he say need to put a wash on love,sorted the gate issue, you light the fire and head off shopping oh and when you get to bottom of lane come screaming back up in case there is anybody around I will phone the guards??
None of it adds up, to me there must have been an iron tight reason why AL was cleared so early in investigation, i doubt he was capable of such exertion,
I don't know who did it.. But all possibilities should be looked at.
Could it be that Sophie looked out the window and saw Alfie at the gate in the early morning moonlight.. And thought I'm going to talk to him now about leaving this gate open - something that had annoyed them both on an ongoing basis. She walked down to the gate and they argued. He didn't set out to hit her but was enraged by this 'blow in, holidaymaker' telling him what to do with his gate.. One blow led to another - he 'lost it'.. He then went back up the hill - paused at her door to check if it was open, double check nobody else was there... And then back up to his partner who would have to go along with it or lose the life they has waited so long for - I know nothing about her. This is just a theory.. Like all the other theories.
He had a huge garden (a number of acres?) so would have gotten help.. That would not necessarily point to his fragility in itself..
The murder happened so close to their home... In an eerily quite place.. It is odd that they heard nothing at all - no screams, no shouting, no car engine.. It is often said that Bailey loves the sound of his own voice - did he commit this crime in complete silence??
Again.. I don't know who did it.. But the Guards were so blinkered in how they approached - it is an awful shame that they didn't investigate all possible scenarios. The 'evidence' against Bailey is shockingly flimsy.0 -
dark crystal wrote: »Between making her initial statement in 1996 or 1997 and 2005 when she retracted her statements (which changed frequently from beginning to end), she lived in the same town as Bailey. She wasn't scared enough to move at any stage during that decade. That's a long time to stay in a small town with someone you're in deathly fear of.
She says she was coerced by the police into making false statements implicating Bailey, as was another potential witness, who was bribed to do so. Many of these calls were recorded and released as part of a probe into Garda corruption. There were 36 calls between Farrell and the police included.
https://www.thejournal.ie/garda-recordings-1397232-Apr2014/
Edit: Apologies, I see you were actually talking about Jules Thomas, not Marie Farrell.
Unless she also changed her name, her husband and children's names, what would the point be in moving somewhere else? She'd have to emigrate. People who are threatened by others rarely go to such drastic lengths to move their entire family unless it was an organised gang or something.
She sent solicitors letters, made complaints to the gardai and witnesses in the documentary describe her running to them in a panic after being threatened by Bailey. You think it is credible the gardai forced her to do all that over 5-10 years when it was completely unnecessary to corroborate the statements already given. This is fantasy stuff.
You can honestly imagine the gardai saying to a witness 'thanks for the incriminating statement, that will be very useful. Now, we need you to fake a pattern of intimidation over the next few years against our suspect. Get your solicitor to write to him, run around the town in a panic, give media interviews about it, that sort of thing'.
Bailey's solicitor got a letter from her saying she will only retract her statements if they guarantee Bailey won't take legal action against her in the future. She wanted it in writing and she sent it the same day the gardai finally pulled her in for driving with no insurance. A witness gave testimony under oath that MF told her Bailey was in to win millions if he won his action against the state, in which she was now his star witness, and she was in line to get some from that.
It was only during this dramatic u-turn that her claims of intimidation and harassment against gardai started. She claimed a garda tried to sexually assault her in the toilets she was supposed to be cleaning as part of her job, but she couldn't describe the layout of these toilets correctly and cleaning toilets was not part of her job. I would take any claims of intimidation and coercion by the gardai with a bath tub of salt. The Bandon tapes did not corroborate her claims of coercion.0 -
dark crystal wrote: »Well she knows him better than anybody else does. I suppose she feels there would have been certain signs if her long term partner had got out of bed in the middle of that night, walked for an hour up roads and boreens, battered a stranger to death, walked an hour back through the same roads and boreens, washed himself, scrubbed both his studio and home free of any incriminating DNA evidence and then calmly brought her tea in bed at 9am?
Do you think you'd notice something was a bit 'off' with your long term partner had they committed a random brutal murder just a matter of hours before? Perhaps in the 25 years that followed, a confession may have slipped out at some stage?
Like I said before, she should have left him in the April before the murder, but she didn't and stayed with him for a quarter of a decade after the fact, so unless you or I know something she doesn't, we would have to give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she believes in his innocence for a good reason.
for me the fact he was a proven women beater and was absent during the crime and was one of a handful of locals who knew where Sophie lived trumps her intuition.Remember on the morning in question she would not have been looking for any signs as she would have been unaware of the crime and it was probably days before she would have started to challenge her memory of the morning in question.0 -
for me the fact he was a proven women beater and was absent during the crime and was one of a handful of locals who knew where Sophie lived trumps her intuition.Remember on the morning in question she would not have been looking for any signs as she would have been unaware of the crime and it was probably days before she would have started to challenge her memory of the morning in question.
He may not have been absent...that depends completely on the time of the attack. It could have happened at 9am (ish) if so, he couldn't have been there.
The fact that he was a proven wife beater is not evidence of his guilt for this crime.
Nor is his knowledge of Sophie's holiday home.
He may have been able to conceal his actions from Jules but one would think that, over the 25 years since, he would have let the mask slip at some stage.
I don't for one minute, think that if Jules knew or suspected him of this crime that she would cover for him.0 -
Gussie Scrotch wrote: »He may not have been absent...that depends completely on the time of the attack. It could have happened at 9am (ish) if so, he couldn't have been there.
The fact that he was a proven wife beater is not evidence of his guilt for this crime.
Nor is his knowledge of Sophie's holiday home.
He may have been able to conceal his actions from Jules but one would think that, over the 25 years since, he would have let the mask slip at some stage.
I don't for one minute, think that if Jules knew or suspected him of this crime that she would cover for him.
There's absolutely no evidence the crime happened between 8am and 9am though, apart from the lights being off, is that correct?
His mask slipped several times when he beat her to a pulp. She must have known he was capable of killing her, he beat her with a crutch, pulled out her hair, bit her, smashed her eye in, tore her lip off. She said in the podcast she couldn't trust him when he drank whiskey. Someone who sticks by someone who does that to them is not a reliable gauge on whether they would stick by them after killing someone else.
She seemed to agree with his rationalisations that she was just as much to blame for getting brutally beaten by him and it took two to argue etc. even though there's no account of him having even a black eye over the decades they have been together. How do we know he didn't rationalise the same way about Sophie? 'She came at me with a large knife and almost cut my throat, I grabbed whatever I could lay my hands on and made her stop trying to kill me. No one would believe my account though, I could never get a fair trial here'.0 -
orangerhyme wrote: »I find that the gate went missing from evidence is pretty telling.
The gate had been closed on the night in question but open on discovery of body. So the murderer most likely touched it.
I think they went back to the house after the bad deed for some reason, possibly to retrieve the bottle of wine or something else. Maybe turn off the lights.
Is it established that the front door closed behind Sophie or was it on the latch? Is that why he used the back door.
People saying "Why didn't Sophie run up to the neighbors house?", I think she ran in any direction away from the killer.
Does anyone have a theory on the blood marks on the gate?
Was it Sophie opening the gate to escape? Was it the killers hands?
The gate was tested and all the blood was hers I think. No other DNA was found on the gate.
DNA was found on her body by the French investigation and on a boot I think and it was tested again using modern technology but all they have is it's "unidentified male".
If it was IB and the guards have his DNA you think that would be the smoking gun to charge him or at least send the file again to the DPP.0 -
The gate was tested and all the blood was hers I think. No other DNA was found on the gate.
DNA was found on her body by the French investigation and on a boot I think and it was tested again using modern technology but all they have is it's "unidentified male".
If it was IB and the guards have his DNA you think that would be the smoking gun to charge him or at least send the file again to the DPP.
I thought the 'new' DNA could only be identified as male, but a complete profile could not be established ie. there was a Y chromosome which meant it must be from a male. Unfortunately, that wouldn't be of any use to include or exclude Bailey.0 -
padraig1963 wrote: »Exactly right.
This Dermot Dwyer leading detective comes across as so smug. No hard questions are asked of him in either tv documentaries regarding lost or destroyed evidence or overly focusing on just one suspect. Neither are real documentaries in the true sense just selective and subjective series that are flawed because of what they don't ask especially the Netflix one.
Dwyer comes across very poorly in both series, he thinks he's so clever. I'd love to see him try and explain the missing evidence etc.
The Gardai don't come out this looking too clever in general, I thought the clip outside of Brandon station where one on them seemed in a rush to make last orders in the pub was particularly cringe.0 -
MoonUnit75 wrote: »There's absolutely no evidence the crime happened between 8am and 9am though, apart from the lights being off, is that correct?
His mask slipped several times when he beat her to a pulp. She must have known he was capable of killing her, he beat her with a crutch, pulled out her hair, bit her, smashed her eye in, tore her lip off. She said in the podcast she couldn't trust him when he drank whiskey. Someone who sticks by someone who does that to them is not a reliable gauge on whether they would stick by them after killing someone else.
She seemed to agree with his rationalisations that she was just as much to blame for getting brutally beaten by him and it took two to argue etc. even though there's no account of him having even a black eye over the decades they have been together. How do we know he didn't rationalise the same way about Sophie? 'She came at me with a large knife and almost cut my throat, I grabbed whatever I could lay my hands on and made her stop trying to kill me. No one would believe my account though, I could never get a fair trial here'.
There's absolutely no evidence the crime happened between 8am and 9am though, apart from the lights being off, is that correct?
There is also the uncovered loaf of bread on the kitchen table and the fruit and nuts found in her stomach, both indicating she had started breakfast when was disturbed, She had to put her walking boots on, lace them up and tie the laces, get her keys, insert them into the lock etc. Hard to accept that she would do all this in darkness.
If it was dark when shHis mask slipped several times when he beat her to a pulp. She must have known he was capable of killing her, he beat her with a crutch, pulled out her hair, bit her, smashed her eye in, tore her lip off. She said in the podcast she couldn't trust him when he drank whiskey. Someone who sticks by someone who does that to them is not a reliable gauge on whether they would stick by them after killing someone else
All true, he was an arsehole of the highest order. She did report him to the police on at least one occasion, later withdrawing the complaint. I agree that she was weak where he was concerned and should have let the bastard go the jail for what he did. But, I think even she would draw the line at covering for a murderer, even more so so considering she had two daughters in the house.
How do we know he didn't rationalise the same way about Sophie? 'She came at me with a large knife and almost cut my throat, I grabbed whatever I could lay my hands on and made her stop trying to kill me. No one would believe my account though, I could never get a fair trial here'.
With respect, this is speculation.0 -
Advertisement
-
crackcrack30 wrote: »Disappointed with the documentary... rehashed old news rather than explore new avenues..
At that time of the year alot of people return home from afar for x-mas...
Early release or festive release from jail.... has anyone not returned since?
Were the flights in and out of dublin/cork/ shannon examined... Her flight?
Most country homes have a bike, did she or Ian have a bike..
Old work rosters can be checked , accounted for, radio transmissions recorded.
(Silverfox)
I can only imagine that at that time of year most people on that peninsulla would have a purpose or place to stay, random backpacker dosent do it for me.
Alot of (passion) deaths in this country occur over property... land , rights of way , wills etc... rational people loose control.
***
I have worked in the emergency services and I can veirfy that depending on where/when crimes happen not much has been learned with regards to scene preservation.. I've seen scenes trampled on, destroyed..
And I can also verify that on almost every street or in most villages, large towns there is an type of unstable , violent , alcoholic, narcistic, peado, recluse, obsessed potential monster with one foot sliping off the reality cliff, but not all go on to act or kill.. most behave well.. Sleep safe.
Some good theories emerging..
What if both did proceed to the suspected party that IB thought may be on and a quarrel ensued at the gate?
What if IB Was dropped off at the gate for the party...
Wouldn't you bring a bottle of wine to a party? Boots laced up...
Was the party (suspected party) loud and annoying?
Did anyone have a bike??
On another point..
If I.B Admitted to his friends that 'he did it, went to far' & admitted to a student that he 'bashed her head in' in moments of quilt at some point you would imagine that over the years he would have broken down in front of jules with similar confessions..
Could she have been dragged by a car?0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement