Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed. **Threadbans in OP**

orangerhyme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121679647#Comment_121679647

It's hardly contrarian if the DPP thought the same thing.

orangerhyme

I just noticed in the Netflix documentary, Ep2 29:50, IB says Dermot Dwyer asked him if he played poker and then said "you should". Dermot Dwyer denies this. But I wonder was this a ploy to gauge IB's reaction to the word "poker" as it may have been the missing murder weapon.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121678787#Comment_121678787

We all don't know, that's the mystery. Otherwise it wouldn't be one.

However I don't think it's someone local, yes it's possible, but not a proven fact.

The killer only knew that Sophy was at her house.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121679726#Comment_121679726

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121679776#Comment_121679776

We all know that there was not enough to charge Bailey, and that the French trial was a sham.

But what I'm talking about is people who, based on everything we know, still conclude that someone other than Bailey is responsible.

They like to cherry pick things like the lack of a clear motive is enough to clear Bailey while at the same time suggesting it was some randy Guard from Bantry that did it because a car of the same make and model was seen speeding in the area at some stage the same night/morning.

Along with all the evidence against him, the thing that really convinced me that Bailey was the most likely suspect was the West Cork podcast and the audio of Bailey on it.

Most of the time he can talk away with confidence and be in total control.

But when probing questions were asked he was a different guy, gone was the confidence and he was far less assured in the way he was talking.

It's been a few years since I listened to it so I'd have to go back and listen again for examples, but that's what I came away from that podcast with.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121680244#Comment_121680244

"The killer only knew that Sophy was at her house".

Not necessarily!

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121680254#Comment_121680254

The thing is, probing questions around something that has defined the last twenty years of your life is likely to affect your demeanour. I think we have a reasonable cause to view the possibility of somebody other than Bailey being the killer. The amount missing from the Garda file(including around other suspects iirc), the fact that the dpp viewed the Gardai to have prejudiced the case against Bailey.

There's every possibility Bailey was responsible but the evidence is far from clear on it.

orangerhyme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121680254#Comment_121680254

I heard someone say the same thing.

When asked about anything that suits him, his memory is perfect, he's articulate, self assured.

When asked about anything accusatory, his memory is hazy, he's stuttery, inarticulate.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121680562#Comment_121680562

That's exactly it, that describes what I was saying perfectly.

I'm sure Gardai noticed the same when interviewing him.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121680254#Comment_121680254

The problem I always see with Bailey doing it is the total lack of motive. Those who think Bailey did it build their case on him building up because he beat up his wife and drank too much. Any form of sexual motive has also been ruled out many times.

There was no blood found on any car accessible to Bailey, - that has been established. So, if he did it he didn't drive to Sophie's.

He had to walk, for at least one hour, ( after several drinks in the pub before ), expect Sophie to answer the door to somebody she barely knew, and then walk back again for one hour. He then would have to clean up, shower and pretend nothing happened.

It's all possible, but a bit hard to believe. But some find it easy to believe.

Fr Tod Umptious

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121680714#Comment_121680714

This is typical of what another poster described as "pro Bailey"

Focus on the absence of a clear motive and ignore everything else around him, including the fact that walking the roads late at night was not uncommon for him.

I find this line of thinking much easier to believe than the thinking that some randy Guard from Bantry did it and it's been a great big multi decade cover up every since, or that some hired killer came over from France and did such a messy job.

orangerhyme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121680714#Comment_121680714

There's no proof that he did or didn't drive.

It's only a 40 minute walk anyway.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681046#Comment_121681046

There was no trace of anything found in the car, nobody in the house reported hearing the car move. It's plausible to argue on that basis it is highly unlikely the car was used.

Is it a 40 minute walk both ways, at night, after a long day and drinks? With a violent murder in between? I doubt that. That sounds like the timings for someone fresh in good conditions. So you're looking at something more like nearly 2 hours out and about if on foot.

orangerhyme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681071#Comment_121681071

I don't think the car is important.

Would people hear a car if they're asleep after drink? Probably not.

He bought bleach in one of the days after. Maybe he cleaned it.

It doesn't matter anyway.

It's completely possible he walked 40 minutes to Sophie's house and back and not be spotted.

If he left at 2am, he'd be back at 3.30 am. Still plenty of time to clean up, shower, finish his article etc.

It proves nothing either way.

Is this when he was supposed to have killed the turkey also or was it the day before?

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681100#Comment_121681100

I have never heard comments reported such that the car looked like it had been cleaned... given all the dirt thrown at Bailey, had there been signs of such cleaning it would surely have been noted.

On the 22nd, Bailey is noted as "he cuts the top off a 20ft high tree to decorate for Christmas and kills 3 turkeys, of which one is sold to a local butcher." He was in the pub from about 9pm to after midnight, and got home about 1am. One of Jules statements has her noting him present at 230am.

For sure, there is a window of time in the middle of the night \ very early morning where Bailey could have done it. But it is still an unlikely scenario to set off given the hour on the off chance of a fling. It's not merely going out for a walk at that hour, but doing it in December and at a time the person is unlikely to be amenable to any visitor. And in the Garda version of the story, he doesn't just throw himself on Sophie, but makes a pass and is rebuffed.

If he set off with sexual assault in mine, i.e. consent not a factor, this is discredited by there being zero signs of sexual assault.

And while it is possible he did it in 40 minutes, I'd be extremely doubtful it would have been done in that time for all the reasons listed above: tiredness, terrain, darkness. Given all that, I think we should be looking at something more like 2 hours for the round trip.

orangerhyme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681130#Comment_121681130

I'm not disagreeing with you.

Just saying the car or the timeline proves or disproves nothing.

When was the car looked at? Was it 6 weeks later?

Jules' testimony has been inconsistent so it doesn't hold water.

What we do know though is that it's completely possible he got out of bed and walked to Sophie's house and back.

Also applying logic to Ian Bailey's motive isn't logical either.

Logically, why would he badly beat his life partner 3 times also? He's supposed to love her or at least care deeply about her.

Also he was dependent on her for somewhere to live. He didn't have a big support network or income even in Ireland. So, logically, even if he didn't love her, wouldn't he at least treat her respectfully as he was dependent on her.

thecretinhop

https://youtu.be/42gxyHNsz8w?si=RLkKDEEbopMWXZuf

This is very good.

I never knew 1 boot was on fully the other only barely on.

She reckons attacked at door. I think Bailey is innocent but she makes a good argument for his guilt

orangerhyme

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681211#Comment_121681211

I think both boots were on and laced. There's photos online.

Also they had an elasticated opening, so it's not unreasonable to think she threw them on quickly already laced.

Also the blood smudge was on the backdoor. The YouTuber above gets this wrong.

The keys were in the inside of the front door.

Sophie almost never used the backdoor.

It's assumed the killer left the smudge on the backdoor after killing Sophie but obviously can't be certain.

This raises the question, what would be so important to walk back 60m to the backdoor for?

Incriminating evidence perhaps.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681033#Comment_121681033

The thing is, we just don't know.

We're interpreting things what's more likely than other things and applying our own way of thinking.

Suppose Bailey did it and he was paid doing it, by Sophie's husband? Paid in a way the police couldn't track, or were incompetent to track. Also possible, even a plausible thought.

Bailey's financial situation as a free lance writer was most likely not the best.

Money can be a very very strong motive. And Sophie's husband would certainly have the strongest financial motive in Sophie's death. That's one thing that can't ever be denied.

Xander10

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681366#Comment_121681366

Let me get my head around this possible scenario.

Bloke in France wants wife dead. Manages to contact a local stranger who writes for the papers. And has the confidence that the journo won't expose the bloke looking to have his wife murdered...............

orangerhyme

Has anyone considered the possibility that Jules was more involved?

They both drove to Alfie Lyons house for a party.

They got into an argument over the gate with Sophie. Jules struct her first but Bailey finished her.

Is there anything to disprove this? Or suggest otherwise?

It would explain why she was so happy to cover for him.

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681033#Comment_121681033

No that's not right.

Firstly, I can't think of any poster on this thread who's "pro Bailey". I would suggest that regardless of anyone's position on his guilt or innocence of this particuar crime, all would accept that he was a drunken, wife - beating thug with an over inflated sense of his own importance.

Personally, I would have been happy to see him imprisoned for the attacks on Jules.

Secondly, not only is there no apparent motive for hiom to have done this, there's no evidence that he had any association with Sophie.

Thirdly, nothing, no eyewitnesses, no DNA, no hair strands no clothes fibres no forensics whatsoever link him to Sophie, the crime scen or the weapons used.

Additionally, he would have had two walk a total of about six miles, on a cold December night to have done it.

I would add, that there are very good reasons to conclude that the attack happened in the morning...in daylight. Which would virtually eliminate any possibility that he's guilty.

I don't see any evidence that the Bantry Guard was responsible either. In fact I don't have a real opinion on who the guilty person is/was. I just don't think it was Bailey.

irishspiderplant

I think it’s a bit disgusting and disrespectful to describe those who want justice for Sophie and her family as ‘pro Bailey’, a nasty narcissistic man with main character syndrome who centred himself in the whole saga and is almost more associated with the murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier than the woman whose life was taken. He paid a pretty heavy price for it. Essentially he fucked around and found out. I don’t really care.

Seth Brundle

In terms of the Bailey "motive" being used (where in a drunken state he walked the four or so kilometres to Sophies in order to get laid and killed her when rejected) is there anyone who can show that he actively walked to someone's house in order to get laid, either before or after the night if Sophie's murder?

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681581#Comment_121681581

I find this possible as well.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681402#Comment_121681402

Let me get my head around your statement. You're just making this scenario ridiculous.

This this theory of Bailey being paid could have been explored as a possible motive.

It would certainly have looked odd if an unusual amount of money would have shown up at his or one of his accounts after the murder? ( But in the end, they would have been more prudent )

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681741#Comment_121681741

And who might that be?

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121682028#Comment_121682028

Sorry, I don't understand the question...........?

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121682122#Comment_121682122

I've misread your statement. I thought at first you had an idea who the murderer was.

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121682137#Comment_121682137

OK. No, I've no idea really. Just doubt Bailey was involved.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121682141#Comment_121682141

I also doubt it was Bailey. The time frame is just a bit tight, hiking at night after several drinks in a pub, no motive at all.

Rows Grower

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121681211#Comment_121681211

This is a crime scene photo of the boots.....

Must love hardship

Quick question, maybe it's been answered before?

Daniel, Sophie's husband spoke to Sophie on the phone between 11pm and midnight irish time.

The last known person to chat to her ( apart from the murderer)

After they hung up did he make any additional calls?

If there was a "hired hitman" you'd imagine they would have to be phoned to confirm sophie was at home.. doubtful Daniel would make this call from his own phone. But you'd never know.

Also separately. Bailey saying he killed the Turkeys on the 22nd. That seems very close to Christmas to be killing Turkeys. Most would be killed 5 or 6 days in advance of Christmas to allow time for blood to drain properly . Maybe even a week before Christmas. Also the 22nd seems late to be cutting down a xmas tree. A busy day for Bailey after spending the previous day on the beer with the Murphys.