Murder at the Cottage | Sky

Ash.J.Williams

I missed something along the way , what happened to the hair samples?

MoonUnit75

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

I missed something along the way , what happened to the hair samples?

All of the hair samples turned out to be Sophie's as far as I know.

Wildsurfer

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Well that sounds extremely unlikely. Simply repeating what the guards had told him my elbow! They rang to get collected from the house after saying they would stay the night, they left the house after he got upset. They haven't sold their story to any of the papers as far as I know.

I think if someone you only met that evening was sobbing and then put their arms around you saying 'I did it', 'I went too far' you would remember that moment pretty damn well.

In the report it alludes to the fact that Bailey didn't want them to stay the night, and then he woke to find them snooping around apparently looking for a phone. Maybe he just said it to frighten the bejaysus out of them and get them to sod off? They had all been drinking well into the night so hard to take anything any of them said too seriously

MoonUnit75

Wildsurfer wrote: »

In the report it alludes to the fact that Bailey didn't want them to stay the night, and then he woke to find them snooping around apparently looking for a phone. Maybe he just said it to frighten the bejaysus out of them and get them to sod off? They had all been drinking well into the night so hard to take anything any of them said too seriously

IB is a forthright man who beat his partner to a pulp, I highly doubt he had to resort to confessing to a murder he didn't commit instead of just insisting that they leave.

Nicbuc

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Donald McIntyre has a poor reputation as a reporter. He is almost the definition of a sensationalist tabloid journo. I'm very interested in this case, but I'll give his leap onto the bandwagon a very wide berth.

True, fair point! I’d tend to agree.

TP_CM

bb12 wrote: »

regarding the 2 wine glasses on the drain counter, my tuppence worth is that they were not washed together at the same time. if you look what is on the draining board, there is also the parts of an espresso maker...now if you were going to wash 2 glasses and also an espresso maker at the same time, i'd suggest you'd start off with the 2 glasses together first and therefore end up placing them side by side on the drainer, before tackling the more messy maker with all the coffee grinds etc...therefore i think the 1st glass had been used and washed at an earlier time

I don't understand the significance of them really. Maybe she used one and didn't wash it and then used the other and washed the two at the same time. Maybe she finished a bottle of wine with one and used the other with a new bottle of wine. Maybe she poured herself a glass and forgot she had done so and so poured a second. I've done all the above numerous times when living alone.

Ash.J.Williams

Has there been any reconstructions / maps of how Bailey could have done it? 6mile round trip I believe? Was there a crow flies route off road ? Was he on foot ?

fin12

monkeybutter wrote: »

That is just totally untrue

I mean he has done interviews, been on the radio, been in podcasts etc

They definitely paid him. He wouldn’t feature otherwise cause ur man hasn’t two pennies to rub together and no way of making money , like who would actually buy anything from his stall.

bb12

so IB was at the christmas day swim that year wearing his black coat yeah? seems like this was a big annual event. wonder if IB had been at previous years swims and if so had he participated or was just always an observer. would be suspicious if this one year he didn't participate if otherwise he normally did

Caquas

Henry... wrote: »

Is there anything they know that isn't in the public domain

It’s possible but I doubt if they know anything which would tend to solve the mystery. We have seen (very unusually) the DPP’s response to the Garda file which should have contained everything the Gardai knew relevant to IB’s guilt or innocence.

I think it’s IB or nothing for the Gardai.

chicorytip

jimwallace197 wrote: »

Some very reasonable points & I agree, I seriously doubt the Gardai given how they approached this case properly checked the Alibi's of those in the vicinity thoroughly.

Imo, alot of evidence points to a cover up, a lot of evidence points to the perpetrator being a man of power, influence & someone who was feared due to the fact no one has come out so far. I still believe she left the house willingly rather than ran from it due to an attack from the inside (no way would she have had time to get boots,clothes on) & I don't believe many people would leave the house willingly in the middle of the night (especially a foreign French woman in an isolated area) so who would you need to be in order for that to happen? A senior Gard would fit that bill perfectly especially if she had contact with them before over drug issues in the area. If the perpetrator was known to the victim, I believe some people in the community would have noticed and she would have mentioned it to a friend/family member etc so I'm not convinced it was a jilted lover who had a fight with her in the house.

Why I think a local Senior Gard carried this out
1) Explains the refusal of the removal of the body to the morgue as per the state pathologists request.
2) key evidence going missing including a Gate of all things, how does one lose that especially one covered in blood.
3) it explains now why to this day Marie Farrell is terrified of the gards & not Ian Bailey,
4) it shows why they(Gards) want to pin it on Bailey so the case can be put to bed without more investigation
5) it explains Sophie leaving the house that night willingly.
6) Its consistent with the behaviour of some of the Gards in the area at the time, making sexual passes/getting naked in front of Marie Farrell and I'm sure many more, threatening, bribing & Co-ercing witnesses, to say they were a law unto themselves was an understatement it seems.
7) It explains why the lights were on very late in the garda station that night which a number of locals noticed.
8) It explains why alternative theories that were put forward were met with volatility and aggression
9) It explains why Marie Farrell has never named the individual who was in the car with her that night & why the gards didn't follow up with him to at least try and corroborate her sighting.
10) It explains why no one has come forward in all this time to implicate anybody but Ian Bailey. Who would be capable of holding an influence like that over a community?
11) It explains their gross incompetence & while many who have resided in this country for a while know this can happen, to happen on this scale & for such a serious crime is another thing entirely.

Why I think Ian Bailey didnt do it?
1) If he really did have scratches on his arms and hands from killing her, do people not think he would have tried to cover them up rather than walking around town and going to the local Christmas swim where he was likely to be spotted.
2) Jules Thomas backs him fully and completely denies he had any role in the killing. Describing his behavior as completely normal in the days after the murder. And whatever about him, she comes across as a very decent person only splitting from him recently so she could spend more time with her daughters. I also believe after 25 years of being in an intimate relationship with someone I believe the person would at least give away some signs that he did it.
3) He willingly gave over his DNA/fingerprints for analysis which the gards were unable to match or do anything constructive with conveniently
4) He took a civil case against seven newspapers & the state for implicating him in the crime. I dont know about you but any sane person would avoid taking a case like that if they were guilty as no doubt more evidence would come out in those actions which could trigger a criminal trial which it nearly did.
5) His coat was not burned but taken by the gards which showed no evidence of blood or an attack. This is backed up a gards statement in fact.
6) He is still protesting his innocence, has stayed in cork for the last 25 years instead of moving away & has lobbied the current Garda Commissioner to open the case. Hardly the actions of a guilty man, if he was guilty, would he not have just moved away.
7) He was drunk that night and managed to walk the 4 kilometres to Sophies house and then back again after beating her to death with a block & large rock striking her about 50 times. I dont know about anyone else, but you would need to seriously strong and fit to be able to carry this out especially when drunk.
8) He wakes up the morning after killing her and proceeds to the crime scene in the afternoon to cover the story and then begins writing about the story. Either he is innocent or he must have balls of steel.
9) The DPP at the time who I trust alot more than the gards saw fit that he shouldnt be charged and heavily criticised the gards behaviour.
10) The only witness to put him anywhere near the scene has told so many lies at this stage that I wonder does she know the truth anymore herself. Without her false statement to the gards, the gards had diddly squat and they knew this themselves but continued to persecute Bailey and his partner.

You just don't like "gards"(sic) very much, do you?

Caquas

TP_CM wrote: »

I don't understand the significance of them really. Maybe she used one and didn't wash it and then used the other and washed the two at the same time. Maybe she finished a bottle of wine with one and used the other with a new bottle of wine. Maybe she poured herself a glass and forgot she had done so and so poured a second. I've done all the above numerous times when living alone.

You’re right. Initially, both IB and the Gardai drew an inference from those wine glasses that Sophie had a visitor but there are many alternative explanations and, ultimately, the Gardai abandoned that theory because it didn’t fit their case against IB.

Weddings ahoy

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Well that sounds extremely unlikely. Simply repeating what the guards had told him my elbow! They rang to get collected from the house after saying they would stay the night, they left the house after he got upset. They haven't sold their story to any of the papers as far as I know.

I think if someone you only met that evening was sobbing and then put their arms around you saying 'I did it', 'I went too far' you would remember that moment pretty damn well.

You're absolutely right, if I had a skinful and heard IB the most notorious man in Schull at the time confessing that to me it would sober me right up,

what I wouldn't do is meet that same man and his partner for drinks again the very next day in the pub with my wife who was supposedly so upset after over hearing the confession left IB house immediately,

I would have avoided that man at all costs, plenty other pubs and ppl to drink with in Schull

EdHoven

Curse These Metal Hands wrote: »

It's definitely stated at some point that it was her blood.

Possibly episode 4 when they are discussing forensics again.

Ralph Riegel uses the term "alien" blood which given its strangeness I assume comes from the French end of things. Riegel seems on the ball he would hardly make it up out of thin air.

MoonUnit75

Weddings ahoy wrote: »

You're absolutely right, if I had a skinful and heard IB the most notorious man in Schull at the time confessing that to me it would sober me right up,

what I wouldn't do is meet that same man and his partner for drinks again the very next day in the pub with my wife who was supposedly so upset after over hearing the confession left IB house immediately,

I would have avoided that man at all costs, plenty other pubs and ppl to drink with in Schull

Richard Shelley says he told IB in the pub the next day that he now believed he had murdered Sophie.

EdHoven

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Richard Shelley says he told IB in the pub the next day that he now believed he had murdered Sophie.

Do all these people live in the pub? They are either growing weed, smoking weed, drinking in a pub, drinking at home, having indoor affairs, having outdoor affairs or writing poetry.
It sounds dreadful.

EdHoven

EdHoven wrote: »

Do all these people live in the pub? They are either growing weed, smoking weed, drinking in a pub, drinking at home, having indoor affairs, having outdoor affairs or writing poetry.
It sounds dreadful.

It sounds very like blow in/crustie/bohemian communities I have known Even among ex-pats living in cheaper parts of Eastern Europe that I know, the scene is pretty loose. You get the quiet hermits and then the others who are living in dream time.

In one community in an area I once lived there was a murder - it did not attract the same kind of attention. But for sure the full story was never told publicly, and people do clamp up and go quiet and vow not to get involved, and do not want to offer bits of info that might be considered evidence.

I think there is a lot more known by some people about this case than is publicly revealed. And things that go on off the beaten track can be quite weird by times.

john123470

EdHoven wrote: »

Do all these people live in the pub? They are either growing weed, smoking weed, drinking in a pub, drinking at home, having indoor affairs, having outdoor affairs or writing poetry.
It sounds dreadful.

Yes, a prodigious amount of drinking ..

They sobered up at Xmas to put up trees, clean the glasses, kill someone .. then straight back on it ... Twylight zone stuff

Mackinac

orangerhyme wrote: »

Donal McIntyre said to Nicola Tallant on her podcast that their own pathologist thinks the cuts on Sophie's face were caused by a knife.

He suggested maybe the killer went back into the house and washed the knife and put it back by the bread as it looks "staged". That also explains the blood on backdoor.

But that suggests the killer was already in the house to grab the knife. I don't buy that, I think everything happened outside. But I do think the killer went back to the house, maybe they just turned the doorknob and that was it. No blood was found inside the house.

He said also the food in her stomach had been consumed within 6 hours. So the fruit and nuts could've been an evening snack or breakfast, impossible to tell.

Or she hears or sees something outside and takes the knife to defend herself.

MoonUnit75

EdHoven wrote: »

Do all these people live in the pub? They are either growing weed, smoking weed, drinking in a pub, drinking at home, having indoor affairs, having outdoor affairs or writing poetry.
It sounds dreadful.

Ever been in West Cork or Kerry over a long, dark, winter?

leath_dub

orangerhyme wrote: »

Donal McIntyre said to Nicola Tallant on her podcast that their own pathologist thinks the cuts on Sophie's face were caused by a knife.

He suggested maybe the killer went back into the house and washed the knife and put it back by the bread as it looks "staged". That also explains the blood on backdoor.

But that suggests the killer was already in the house to grab the knife. I don't buy that, I think everything happened outside. But I do think the killer went back to the house, maybe they just turned the doorknob and that was it. No blood was found inside the house.

He said also the food in her stomach had been consumed within 6 hours. So the fruit and nuts could've been an evening snack or breakfast, impossible to tell.

I listened to that podcasr. Nicola Tallant and Donal McIntyre were all over the place with details, for example:

1. THey said Sophie had visited West Cork several times before her marriage (at lest 5 or 6 times). In fact it was stated elsewhere that Daniel Du Plantier had bought the cottage for his wife
2. Nicola Tallant said that Sophie had flown into Dublin Airport, hired a car and drve to Schull when it is fact that she flew into Cork
3. Nicola Tallant also stated the body was foind on the morning of December 21st

I wouldn't place much faith in any of the theories proposed in that podcast given how sloppily done it was

chooseusername

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Her first statements after her arrest were probably the closest the gardai felt they ever got to solving the case. Before her arrest all they had was Bailey arriving home and going to bed with Jules for the night. After JT's interview they had:
- a statement showing his previous alibi was false
- that he had not only got out of bed, but had left the house
- that he had a cut on his forehead that wasn't there the night before
- that they had stopped on the way home on the night of the murder, after taking a detour, to 'admire the view' on a hill from where Sophie's house could be seen
- that Bailey had remarked that a light was on in Alfie's house while parked on the hill
- that he suggested they go over to Alfie's that night
- that JT's daughter gave a statement that they both left the house the following morning for around 2 hours when they said they were both at home

What detour could you take between Schull and the prairie cottage to be able to see Sophie's house from a hill ?

Henry...

Bailey was certainly very busy with turkeys and Christmas trees the day before the murder

I think I smell a rat there

EltonJohn69

Henry... wrote: »

Bailey was certainly very busy with turkeys and Christmas trees the day before the murder

I think I smell a rat there

Rat is a actually a traditional Christmas meal in Cork.

odyssey06

Henry... wrote: »

Bailey was certainly very busy with turkeys and Christmas trees the day before the murder

I think I smell a rat there

It was the in the week before Christmas.

When should he have been busy with turkey and Christmas trees... July???

MoonUnit75

chooseusername wrote: »

What detour could you take between Schull and the prairie cottage to be able to see Sophie's house from a hill ?

The accounts all call it 'Hunt's Hill' but this must be local name, I can't find it on the map.

john123470

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

Ever been in West Cork or Kerry over a long, dark, winter?

Well, its not like you'll catch any of them out jogging when spring arrives

The drinking is endemic and is an underrated character in this whole saga. If you could get it into the witness box, it would be found guilty ..

FileNotFound

Watching the Netflix Doc now and the first thing that struck me was the examiner claiming he got to the scene just over 12 hrs after the call.

I understood pre docs that the examiner was well over 24hrs late as he was out drinking at a party and could not travel (would not was actually the way i understood it).

If the officials are changing the tale for a Doc its not a great start at all.

mossie

FileNotFound wrote: »

Watching the Netflix Doc now and the first thing that struck me was the examiner claiming he got to the scene just over 12 hrs after the call.

I understood pre docs that the examiner was well over 24hrs late as he was out drinking at a party and could not travel (would not was actually the way i understood it).

If the officials are changing the tale for a Doc its not a great start at all.

Different guy. That's the forensic officer not the medical examiner. They drove down on the day and arrived around 10pm

FileNotFound

mossie wrote: »

Different guy. That's the forensic officer not the medical examiner.

Grand that makes sense - was thinking surely it would not be the case.

Much appreciated.