Sophie: A Murder in West Cork - Netflix.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119720744#Comment_119720744

nothing to elaborate. Just Bailey backers trying to divert attention from him

tibruit

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119720514#Comment_119720514

C`mon now Scoobie, keep it real.

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119720744#Comment_119720744

I don't know the answer to your question Fr Tod,

I just think the AL proposition is more plausible.

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119721248#Comment_119721248

What do you mean?

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119721034#Comment_119721034

For clarity, I'm not a "Bailey backer"

In fact I regard him with the same contempt as I would any boring, self obsessed, alcoholic, obnoxious wife beater.

I just don't see that the evidence supports the proposition that he comitted this crime.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119720514#Comment_119720514

Even though Bailey is a suspect and could potentially have done it, his motive for murder is very weak. Also a one hour hike at night after several drink in the pub and leaving no traces at all doesn't appear plausible, but yes at the same time also possible.

I'd say the biggest financial motive to me is still the cheating husband Daniel Toscan Du Plantier trying to avoid a costly and messy divorce. Hiring a hitman and how that hitman did it or made it look like, or got there, and how he was paid, is just an organizational matter which can be overcome with ease, neither leaving a chain of command, nor a money trail....

And by the looks of the later on cover ups, collusion, coercion and all the length the Guards went in an attempt to implicate Bailey, it appears to have been a local Guard of middle rank hierarchy, at least sergeant, not constable. Somebody who had insight into the workings of the police force, how to tamper with evidence, get rid of evidence or send false DNA samples to the respective labs in Ireland and later on the UK.

Whether that Guard had a sexual motive regarding Sophie, or was in on it regarding drug trafficking we don't know.

Also the fact that Alfie and Shirley heard nothing at all that night leads to suggest they played some kind of active or passive role and had at least more knowledge on what happened that night.

May Shirley live a long life, but she isn't the youngest, so there is some possibility there might at some point be a death bed confession on what went on that night, even as a witness to the murder and to date coercion to stay silent.

OwlsZat

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119717552#Comment_119717552

Take it or leave it. There only the facts of the matter. AGS have admitted they made a huge mistake. Time for you do the same.

oceanman

Anyone who lives in the countryside will know that noise can travel a long way in the dead of night or morning, yet when a savage murder was taking place only yards away from their house Alfie and Shirley heard noting!...that just dosent add up for me. i dont think either of them were being completely honest.

Ms Robini

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119721280#Comment_119721280

Evidence that supports the proposition that Ian Bailey murdered Sophie Toscan du Plantier:

Opportunity to commit the murder combined with a changing account of his movements at time of the murder, and the lack of an alibi: He was within walking distance of the victim’s house and although he originally claimed he was in bed with Jules Thomas all night and did not leave the house, he subsequently admitted that he was out of the house in the early hours of the 23rd of December. He claims that he was in the kitchen of Jules Thomas’s house and then at the studio premises some distance from that house at various times that morning. He does not have an alibi to corroborate his claim.

Motive: The evidence suggests that Ian Bailey’s attack on Sophie was sexually motivated and committed at a time when Bailey was heavily intoxicated: he made an advance on the woman whom he found sexually attractive and then became enraged when that advance was not welcomed. Ian Bailey’s personality and character is that of a malignant narcissist; he is an alcoholic with a long history of extreme violence against women. One of his attacks on his former partner - which took place approximately 6 months prior to the murder - was heavily concentrated on the face and head and the injuries inflicted on that occasion bear similarities to the attack on Sophie. While he denies that he knew the victim, multiple independent witnesses in Ireland and in France have provided statements indicating that Sophie was known to Ian Bailey. There is also evidence which indicates that Ian Bailey found Sophie sexually attractive. There is evidence from multiple witnesses that he was in Schull the day before the murder and observed standing across the street from Sophie and watching her as she entered a shop. Ian Bailey had consumed alcohol on the night of 22 December 1996, including spirits. By Ian Bailey’s own admission, spirits tended to affect him for the worse and his assaults on Jules Thomas tended to take place after he had been drinking spirits. He has a history of violence against women when intoxicated and particularly where spirits were involved. There is evidence that he expressed an interest in going to Alfie Lyons house on the night of 22 December 1996/early hours of 23 December 1996. Alfie Lyons’s house is next door to the murder scene. When Sophie’s rental car was examined in the aftermath of the murder, it was observed that the passenger seat was pushed the whole way back, indicating that when the seat was last occupied, it had been occupied by a person well above average height. Ian Bailey was at that time over 6ft 2inches. There is evidence of motive and of opportunity for Ian Bailey to have committed the murder, combined with the lack of an alibi and the fact that he changed his account of his movements on the night of the murder in circumstances where his first account that he was in bed with his partner all night was untrue. Then there are the injuries to his face and arms.

Injuries consistent with those found on the victim: The day after the murder he was observed to have visible scratches consistent with briar marks in circumstances where he did not have those marks the day before and where the murder victim was found in or near a patch of briars and had also sustained similar scratch marks in the attack that led to her death. Ian Bailey also had another wound on his forehead in the aftermath of the murder. He has failed to provide any credible explanation for the scratches or the wound.

Destruction of evidence: Ian Bailey purchased bleach from a local shop on 24 December 1996 and there is evidence that a heavy, dark garment was being soaked in the bathroom of the house where he was living and that his partner at the time confessed to having washed blood from clothes in the aftermath of the murder. There is further evidence from multiple sources that there was a fire at the back of the studio premises on 26 December 1996, three days after the murder, in which a mattress, clothing and boots were burned. The post-mortem report indicates that boot marks were evident about Sophie’s upper chest and neck area. There is other evidence involving a missing hatchet which I won’t go into now.

Confessions: Bailey made statements indicating that he had committed the murder to numerous witnesses and while he claims that these were not in the nature of a confession, each witness interpreted them as such and remained consistent in their accounts of those admissions, including under cross-examination, noting that one such witness is now an eminent Senior Counsel.

Whereabouts on late morning of 23 December: There is evidence of Ian Bailey and of Jules Thomas having made statements to numerous people which indicate that by 11am on the day of the murder they knew Sophie had been killed, before that information was in the public domain. There is evidence Ian Bailey returned to the murder scene in the late morning of 23 December 1996, although he denies this and claims that it was after 1pm when he first attended the scene. Jules Thomas’s daughter has given a statement that both Bailey and her mother were out of the house on the morning of the 23rd. There is evidence that Jules Thomas approached her daughter to seek to put pressure on her to change this aspect of her statement - this is supported by her daughter’s husband, who witnessed the approach.

Also, after his first arrest in connection with the murder, Ian Bailey enquired about being hypnotised by a therapist by the name of Irma Tulloch. She refused in part on the basis that she was not registered to perform that treatment in Ireland at that time. In the course of that encounter, Bailey expressed a view that ‘he would go down for mental’, suggesting a view that he may be found guilty but insane/not guilty by reason of insanity, given he claimed not to have any memory of what he had done or of having murdered Sophie that night.

Can each individual strand of evidence be challenged - yes, for example we could say all the witness accounts of the confessions were unreliable either because they failed to interpret Bailey’s seeming admissions correctly or because they are lying; you could say all the witnesses giving evidence that Bailey knew Sophie are mistaken or lying or in some other way all unreliable or lacking in credibility. You could say the turkey caused the wound to Bailey’s head, and the scratches were sustained while cutting down a Christmas tree. You could say the Italian lady that saw the dark garment soaking in the bathroom is mistaken or unreliable. You could say everyone that gave statements indicating Bailey knew about the murder earlier than he could have known about it but for having committed it are unreliable, lacking credibility or otherwise wrong. You’d have to say that all the people that have given statements - independently and consistently - indicating Ian Bailey’ had the motive and the opportunity to commit the murder are wrong for one reason or another.

There is evidence that Ian Bailey intimidated witnesses in the aftermath of the murder in order to bring about retractions of statements that implicated him.

His pattern is to deny, deny, deny: like his ornamental wall hanging seen in the Jim Sheridan documentary that say ‘Denial is a river in Egypt’. He also made a similar statement, thinly disguised as a ‘joke’ after the Christmas Day swim, saying on camera ‘talk to my solicitor’, and ‘I put my faith in God’, apropos of nothing.

Does the evidence prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt - maybe it will, maybe it won’t, maybe there’s more, that is for a jury to decide. Is there evidence that supports the proposition that Ian Bailey murdered Sophie Toscan du Plantier? There is a volume of evidence of motive and of opportunity, with the contradictory accounts of his whereabouts on the night of the murder and the absence of any credible explanation for the injuries to his arms and face the most damning evidence in my view. That is, the most damning of the evidence that is in the public domain. I’d expert there’s more we don’t know yet.

dublin49

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722308#Comment_119722308

take the week off,every witness ,every scratch will challenged to the death,poor you.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119716613#Comment_119716613

You do realise anything that takes the discussion away from Bailey will upset a lot of people.

A lot of people have invested a lot time, emotion and resources in this case. Whether it's documentaries, TV programmes, books, podcasts, newspaper and magazine articles, and internet forums. A huge amount has been devoted to Ian Bailey and his part in the story. The only part of the job the Gardaí did well, was to brainwash first the locals, then the media, hence, the mob. Even the West Cork podcast, often quoted here as the bible, devotes just 30 seconds towards the end, in episode 12 titled "loose ends," to 2 local suspects they didn't even name. A German who lived closer than Bailey to Sophie, whose wife left him because he was violent towards her, so he lived alone and had no alibi for the night. He told the Gardaí he didn't know Sophie or anything about her Also a Frenchman who knew Sophie, had spoken to her, and knew where she lived, as he had viewed her house when it was for sale, also lived closer to Sophie. Leo Bolger as a suspect was not given much coverage. He lived locally. He knew Sophie, her house and surrounds very well, he had done work on her house in the past. He had asked to buy some of her land which she refused to sell to him. He had horses grazing on Alfie's land at the time of the murder, one of which was unbroken. If the horses were in the field next to Sophie's then the only access to this field was either up through Sophie's lawn, or up the lane and along the rear of Sophie's house close to her kitchen window and back door. Sophie had complained about the mud around the back of her house and this may have been the reason she preferred to use the front door. Then there is Alfie and Shirley, much has been made of the fact they heard nothing that night/ morning, but remember Shirley screamed for Alfie and blew the car horn down by the gate, but Alfie heard nothing. As to whether they had anything to do with the murder, it's been said Alfie was too frail, but I believe the person that attacked Sophie was unlikely to have been a 6'4" ex rugby player in his thirties, who would have dispatched Sophie quickly, and not having to engage in a prolonged attack against the gate and then having to resort to a rock and block. I've often wondered if Shirley or Alfie got close enough to Sophie's body to pick up some blood on a glove and deposit on the back door. Shirley had to pass along the rear of the house close to the back door on her way back up to alert Alfie. Also, did Alfie go down for a look before calling the Gardaí ? When he did call them, he was told not to go near the body, but he was able to report she was dead even though he said he went no closer than 20 yards.

The one thing the cute hoor Dwyer said that made sense to me was " the answer lies in the locality" I believe that locality is a couple of miles radius of Sophie's house, that would include Bailey. Enough has been said about Bailey, so I'm not going to get into that echo chamber.

I'm neither a Baliey backer, or a Bailey basher, just someone not close minded enough to stick rigidly to one track.

Ms Robini

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722550#Comment_119722550

You’ve said that ‘a 6'4" ex rugby player in his thirties’ would have ‘dispatched Sophie quickly’ and I think anyone would agree that Ian Bailey was at the time physically strong enough to have been capable of killing his victim quickly. But he didn’t kill her quickly and then leave, it is a case of ‘overkill’ in that it involved the infliction of massive injuries by far exceeding the extent necessary to kill the victim. This is characteristic of a psychopathic killer - a killer that was disorganised, that had no intention to kill and who in an intoxicated state experienced a sudden and uncontrollable outburst of rage. Who may have experienced the greatest level of regret afterwards, for himself if not for her.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722639#Comment_119722639

I agree, whoever killed her did not kill her quickly, but this may be because they were not physically able to.

It is even possible that the attacker may have even failed to kill her in the attack, and left her for dead, so time of death could have been some time after the attack had finished. The first Gardaí on the scene said the blood on the body and ground appeared darker and older than the redder fresher blood around the mouth and nostrils. The blood appeared to be still wet I believe he said.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722308#Comment_119722308

Very interesting Ms R. Have you any more info re Irma Tulloch? Are you getting this from the reddit thread? It says Tulloch herself said that Bailey was "talking around in circles" and she felt "inappropriate interrogation techniques had shaken his belief".

I don't know how she would know the interrogation techniques were innappropriate

Ms Robini

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722710#Comment_119722710

There could be something in what you say re the time between the infliction of the first blow to the head and the victim’s death. Given the injuries to the skull, and I can’t remember if the post-mortem examination was conclusive about this or not, it seems that Sophie could not have lived long after the infliction of the last blow to the head. The other possibility is that she died during the course of the attack/that the attacks continued after death. The statement about the blood in the nostril appearing to be fresh while the other blood that had pooled about the body was dried does not only lead to the conclusion that she had lived and continued to breathe for a long time after the attack ended. I’d need to consider the post-mortem evidence. I also see your point about others in the vicinity possibly having had some role either in the murder or in the immediate aftermath. I don’t believe Ian was sophisticated or controlled in any way at all in how he acted before, during or in the immediate aftermath of the murder - I suspect there were people who knew more than they admitted to.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119721248#Comment_119721248

is the scoober back. Hi scoobs if you're looking in. Tell Iano i said hello

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722308#Comment_119722308

You are making statements of fact which are your own conclusions such as no credible explanation for the scratches.

To take one example:

The DPP report accepted Baileys explanation of the scratches with reference to witnesses who corroborate his version.

I would add - it was winter and Bailey could have easily concealed the scratches if he thought they were something that could incriminate him.

You keep using the phrase "there is evidence" but the reason why we can pick it apart is because it is poor quality or dubious in some respect.

It is not just for jury to decide but for the proper legal authorities to gatekeep such evidence to avoid miscarriages of justice. And the DPP here has correctly performed that duty in not sending Bailey forward to trial.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722768#Comment_119722768

 don’t believe Ian was sophisticated or controlled in any way at all in how he acted before, during or in the immediate aftermath of the murder - I suspect there were people who knew more than they admitted to.

Are you saying more than one was involved? What qualifications have you to say does not only lead to the conclusion that she had lived and continued to breathe for a long time after the attack ended. I’d need to consider the post-mortem evidence

Ms Robini

I think Irma Tulloch’s statements are covered in some or other of the Riegel, Foster and Sheridan books. I think that Reddit comment is a bit biased - it’s presenting Tulloch’s statement as having been sympathetic towards Bailey after his arrest as he was visibly shaken. Understandably. If you’ve killed a woman and been arrested and questioned about the murder, it must be a very difficult experience, despite efforts on the suspect’s part to claim they meditated through the interrogation or that the Gardaí hadn’t had experience of someone of Ian’s level of intelligence before etc.

Ms Robini

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722807#Comment_119722807

There is a new DPP in office now who will bring fresh eyes to the file, including new statements gathered in recent months.

but remember Shirley screamed for Alfie and blew the car horn down by the gate, but Alfie heard nothing.

or decided to hear nothing?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722816#Comment_119722816

Not in Riegel book and i don't remember it from foster book which i read last week. Long time since I read Sheridan edit just searched Sheridan death in december. No Tulloch

Ms Robini

I don’t believe that the murder was a joint enterprise - I believe one person killed Sophie. But people in the vicinity may have known more than they told the police (E.g. as a result of being too intimidated to disclose everything they knew for fear of repercussions for them, if they had reasons to keep away from the police themselves etc.)

I don’t have medical qualifications - I was making the point that there was a witness who gave a statement that the blood in the victim’s nostril appeared uncongealed when other blood at the scene was dried does not lead to a conclusion that she was breathing up until a relatively short time before the body was found.

Ms Robini

Maybe it was Sheridan’s book then, one of them does deal with Irma Tulloch’s statement.

I was making the point that there was a witness who gave a statement that the blood in the victim’s nostril appeared uncongealed when other blood at the scene was dried does not lead to a conclusion that she was breathing up until a relatively short time before the body was found. 

How do you explain it? I cannot find Tulloch in any book I have.

Ms Robini

Ok, those are the three books I’ve read on the case. It may be that the facts of the conversation with Irma Tulloch are described in one or other of the books but Ms Tulloch is not referred to by name.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722832#Comment_119722832

Why would Alfie decide to ignore Shirley's screams and the car horn.

I don't know. it would seem congruent with people who say they were involved. If Alfie heard the screams and car horn then why did he not hear sophie. So if alfie was involved he could have arranged for Shirley to scream so he 'would not' hear it

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722914#Comment_119722914

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722910#Comment_119722910

There may have been passing refernce to hypnotist but not detail you say. Not in Riegel, Foster or Death in December. Sheridan has others but Sheridan is a spoofer as shown in Kathy's Story

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119722951#Comment_119722951

So you think Alfie might have killed Sophie, and set up Shirley to find the body, or was Shirley also involved?