Sophie: A Murder in West Cork - Netflix.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346100#Comment_119346100

Not sure what DNA you think he could have left? In that era they would have been looking for blood, skin etc not touch transfer DNA.

Deeec

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346100#Comment_119346100

He would not have been allowed to touch the body so it would not explain his DNA on her body. If he done it he would have had no way of knowing that he left no trace so why would he risk going to the crime scene.

TaraghGreen

Help! Am I supposed to hit Quote (not Reply) for the post I'm responding to? If so what is the purpose of the Reply option? Thanks.

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346254#Comment_119346254

He had a good reason to visit the crime scene.

As a freelance journalist, he was asked to cover the crime by a newspaper. It was nothing to do with providing himself with an alibi.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346258#Comment_119346258

If you hit “quote” everyone will know which post you are responding to.

Esel

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346258#Comment_119346258

Reply is used to make a post without quoting a previous post.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346100#Comment_119346100

So, what time would this have happened do you think?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346254#Comment_119346254

There is claim he was allowed behind the cordon and so if dna was found it would be easy to challenge

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346716#Comment_119346716

i think you are quoting the wrong person? what time would what have happened?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346258#Comment_119346258

Quote is to reply to a specific post

reply is a standalone comment

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346849#Comment_119346849

No, quoting you ,

What time was he allowed through the cordon to contaminate the scene do you think?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346174#Comment_119346174

Yes, I am speculating like everyone else of us here.

you write in definite terms. you say Bailey had absolutely no motive andSophie could out run Bailey bacause he was that drunk

In your opinion Bailey had absolutely no motive and Sophie could out run Bailey bacause he was that drunk

we do not know is motives/ how drunk he was/how fast he could run and we cannot say anything absolutely

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346841#Comment_119346841

What DNA? Based on an understanding of DNA evidence in 1996?

It's not even clear he was allowed behind the cordon, but even if he was, the claim makes no sense.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346864#Comment_119346864

well the part you quotes was not me it was what i replied to in post 1409

I said "on the contrary he would be making an alibi if he got inside the cordon and went near the body. Then any DNA of his would be explained"

i don't know the time . there was a claim this happened when he visited the scene. i do not say it is true

chicorytip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119345559#Comment_119345559

Bailey could have killed her in a drunken rage after she rejected his advances. That's a far more compelling scenario to me than the alternatives being speculated upon, namely the hired hitman, the drug connection or the priapic Bantry cop. Bailey knew Sophie. They may never have been formally introduced as he claims - a dubious assertion -but he surely had seen her, knew her identity, knew what she did and where she lived. She had been coming over on a fairly frequent basis. So, I think he fancied his chances with this attractive, sophisticated newcomer. Given his narcissistic, deluded mindset he probably regards himself as the only intellectual in the village and craves a meeting of minds and the chance to get his leg over, of course.

This is a man who,whilst under the influence of alcohol, is capable of beating his own partner and inflicting severe injuries on her requiring hospital treatment on not one but several occasions.

So Ian shows up uninvited and unwelcome, there is an unpleasant exchange at the front door or inside the house. Sophie says or does something that enrages Bailey. He assaults and, possibly, attempts to rape her. She manages to escape his clutches and flees in terror and in genuine fear for her life but Ian is a big guy with a long stride and the drink/drugs have not dulled his senses or reaction time that much. He knows that there's a good chance any commotion won't be heard by the neighbours and he also knows that, if she escapes, Sophie will go to the guards and he is in serious trouble. So, he has to finish her off.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346906#Comment_119346906

More likely scenario than any others re hitmen/ pumps out of order.I would add it may have been alfie he drove to see and when there was no party he could have seen her light on and knocked her up

and the drink/drugs have not dulled his senses or reaction time that much.

and the adrenalin would give him strength

He could have burned a coat and given a similar one to a thick cop

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119346906#Comment_119346906

Bailey could have killed her in a drunken rage after she rejected his advances.

He could have done, but there is no evidence to support this theory.

Bailey knew Sophie.

There is no evidence that he knew her. He knew of her, yes, but so did everyone else locally.

I think he fancied his chances with this attractive, sophisticated newcomer. 

Speculation. There is no evidence that points to him being attracted to her.

So Ian shows up uninvited and unwelcome.

No evidence that he was there.

And no evidence that he was sexually aggressive to the extent of attempting rape, much less murder.

The sexual rejection motive is, statistically very low on the list of probabilities. And the fact that there was no evidence of sexual assault (or attempted sexual assault) renders this possibility even more remote. Had there been anything which indicated a sexual purpose to the attack, then this discussion would be very different in nature. But there wasn't

It is far more likely ( again, statistically) that marital problems, jealousy, money - even a dispute, were the motive , but of course, none of these fit the Bailey is guilty theory.

Yes, its possible that your theory is correct, but there is nothing, evidentially, to support it.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119347067#Comment_119347067

Looking at motive or possible motive Bailey is just not the killer. He had no motive, not even a remote motive. He also had no history of sexual violence, rape or attempted rape. Yes, he was physically abusive towards his partner, that's known, but I don't think he ever raped her, or attempted to rape another woman.

The connection between Sophie and killer or hired hitman would have been a lot closer knit than Bailey having some casual knowledge that a French woman lived on occasions there....

The motive would either have been financial, or drug related, or love/sexually/jealousy related.

Bailey fitted none of these options.

And yet again, Bailey is accused of hiking in moist-cold December-Ireland for 1 hour after a whole evening of drinking in the pub, to a remote house in the countryside to knock on some woman's door in the middle of the night, or the early morning to demand sex.... A women whom he hardly knows, or may have only seen from a distance, and upon rejections of his sexual advances he beats er up and kills her, just like that.... Incredible story, yes it could be true, but I don't think so at all.

kirk.

Well someone killed her

The drug and hitman theory is a tall order

I reckon bailey did it , plenty of circumstancial evidence and he shut down during filming when he didn't want to talk

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119347315#Comment_119347315

Lots of murders go unsolved. Dont even have a suspect. Then there are the disappearances where we dont even have a body.

What I suggest by that is that many murderers get away with it - without even suspicion.

This should give us pause in jumping from circumstantial evidence / most plausible suspect to thinking him guilty. We dont have to get a result at the risk of a miscarriage of justice.

chicorytip

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119347067#Comment_119347067

Yes, of course, every point you make is valid.

There is no evidence to date that supports any part of my hypothesis but a criminal profiler or cold case investigator looking at all of what is known about this case might well form a similar view to my own.

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119347370#Comment_119347370

Based on the information currently in the public domain, I doubt that a criminal case /cold case expert would take the view that this was a sexually driven crime.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119347342#Comment_119347342

I've had various unorthodox thoughts about disappearances as well. If the murderer arrived by car, he could easily have driven Sophie to some remote site, and dumped her into the sea, provided that he cleaned the car afterwards. A cavity block tied to her body and she wouldn't have surfaced as well. Sophie vanished without a trace, and it's hard to prove murder without a body.

From this angle, it would seem the killer wanted Sophie to be found. This alone would possibly point to somebody doing a hitman job, wanting to be known that his mission is accomplished.

Or suppose the killer had dumped the body just behind the brambles and briars? - just to gain some time and disappear.... Shirley wouldn't have found her in the morning, just driving by, doing a bit of X-mas shopping. But the killer didn't, - he left her or put her body right at the side of the road, to be discovered.

The caretaker would have arrived some time in the morning, Sophie wasn't there, caretaker drove off, missing the body as it was behind the briars..... Maybe they found her by noon or when she didn't show up for her flight, not return her phone calls not showing up in France for X-mas with family.....

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119347427#Comment_119347427

the boots are an intriguing aspect of the puzzle.

why leave the house in her nightie, only stopping to put boots on her bare feet It wasn't just to answer a knock at the door....she was heading down to the gate.

Why would she want to go down to the gate?

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119347494#Comment_119347494

Nobody knows? Anybody visiting could have opened the gates himself as well, especially if the visitor wanted to surprise the victim. If the murder was in the morning, it's possible that the murderer tampered with the pump in order to have a low pressure for the shower, and waiting for Sophie to come down and check up on the problem?

Nightie and boots would even suggest she didn't expect to meet anybody down by the gates?

Did she meet the killer by her door and then walk slowly to the gates or was she chased by the killer?

Or did she go over the fields, or on the road to get there?

Would they have had an argument, and then the killer killed her in rage? Or did the killer try to kill her straight from the beginning? And if they argued, what was the argument about? Apparently it wasn't rape or attempted rape?

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119347526#Comment_119347526

I think, whatever the circumstances were, she was in a hurry. She put her boots on but didn't even throw a coat over her shoulders before going out on a cold December night/morning.

I think it was morning actually, and I think she saw something/someone at the gate and quickly went out to confront him/her.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119347549#Comment_119347549

It certainly would have been dark at the time of the murder. I don't know if Sophy was able to see from her house down to the gates or the pump house?

So it probably wasn't something she has seen from her house to go down there, but something else? A noise? or the water not working? I'd say this is another thing to think about.

If Bailey wanted sex with Sophie he would hardly have lured her to go to the gates. He would rather have knocked at her door and possibly forced his way into the house, with intention of rape? But that doesn't appear to have happened....

Or a totally different line of enquiry: Sophie spent her youth at times in Ireland to learn English? Suppose it was somebody from way back?

Yurt2

Probably covered elsewhere, but did the Gardai ever inspect the passenger manifests of flights to and from France in Irish airports in the days around the murder?

That's not exactly information that would have been difficult to retrieve at the time. And even perhaps they still exist out there somewhere (or perhaps not with the passage of time).

OwlsZat

It's amazing how the case moving forward with a new French suspect and people are still here talking about Ian Bailey?? As a gigantic narcissist who inserted himself into this story he'd be delighted with the continued notoriety.

OwlsZat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119347717#Comment_119347717

No details of this work or of any attempt to create a DNA database to cross check samples against. We know they have Bailey's but you'd have hoped they'd also have all the investigating Gardai, the Fosters, new Paris suspect and the Bantry detectives...