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

Sophie: A Murder in West Cork - Netflix.

1131416181997

Comments

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    And yet after a frenzied attack the big drunken lunk somehow managed to leave not one single trace of himself behind. What a stroke of luck! But then he volunteered DNA samples because he wanted to get caught. But foiled again, the Gaurds were totally inept.

    I reckon Sinead O Connor is more likely to confess to the murder than Bailey. She's on a twitter rant about her 'interview' right now.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    This is fun for her. A young woman battered to death, a son lost his mother, parents lost a daughter, if Bailey is innocent his life has been unfairly ruined, if he is guilty justice has utterly failed. But Sinead O Connor is having fun, because she thinks this is all about her.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 517 ✭✭✭Atlantis50


    This blog is a great resource for everything to do with this case and helpfully includes free links to both the Netflix and Sky programs:

    The blog also contains some crime scene photographs which appear to be screenshots from the documentaries.

    One in particular caught my attention:

    The killer retrieved a cinder block from this concrete structure and used it to to attack Sophie.

    This concrete structure is approximately 20 ft behind the location of the attack and on the other side of the boreen, so not immediately to hand for the killer.

    The attack almost certainly happened at night so how could the killer have possibly known that there would be a loose cinder block that he could retrieve from this structure?

    The only logical answer is that the killer was involved in the construction and/or maintenance of this structure. It's simply implausible that anyone else such as a "French assassin" or some other person unfamiliar with the property would have known about this or stumbled upon it - in the dark.

    The structure appears to be communal for the three houses up the laneway and Ian Bailey is known to have done "gardening work" for one of those property owners, Alfie Lyons. Jules Thomas mentions in the Sky documentary in the context of her own property how Ian Bailey had done a lot of hard labour around her property including the building of walls.

    I wonder if he was ever asked by Gardaí (or anyone else for that matter) if he had anything to do with the construction or upkeep of the structure from which the cinder block was taken to attack Sophie?

    In a related matter, if the Gardaí still have that cinder block they should be analysing it for touch DNA as it would be a good repository for skin cells of the killer if he was ungloved.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]





  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Sorry, but this website really is a piece of ****. Impossible to carry on any disourse in it, which is unfortunate because that's supposed to be the purpose of the site. Twitter links appear and then dissappear. The site is a disaster.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 248 ✭✭deeperlearning



    Absolutely amazing.

    Especially given he trampled through the crime scene during the investigation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭OwlsZat


    Nice detective work. So the killer knew the lay of the land for sure.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭OwlsZat



    If you wear gloves for example you won't leave prints. If you don't rape someone or get cut, you'll not leave blood or semen.

    If your unlucky enough to leave trace blood. If you did so in 1996 there's a huge chance you'd still get away with it as the amount of blood required at that time was vast.

    Again even if you did leave a vast sample in 1996 you still might not get caught as a huge amount of DNA samples are mixed and regression techniques weren't established until decades later.

    Lastly, if the crime scene is outdoors it's less likely that any DNA would be preserved. Further to this if a crime scene isn't protected or forensically investigated immediately then DNA or forensic evidence can be lost. Also if the perpetrator isn't arrested in a timely manner possible forensic evidence can be destroyed or disposed of.

    The forensics evidence or lack of doesn't prove IB's innocence, he is just a hugely lucky man that the crime was committed in 1996.



  • Registered Users Posts: 58 ✭✭HoliyMoliy


    Such a tragic story. The guards completely botched the case and a killer remains free.



  • Registered Users Posts: 467 ✭✭nj27


    It was an interesting doc at times, but I hated the ugly bitch with the books behind her, awful face. And why were there so many bellies ready to burst out of shirts below crossed arms in the frame? Just raise the camera a bit so I don't have to look at this tumescent loaf of flesh around some weird guy's belly. Some odd choices for interviewees too, you're really going to have somebody titled "psychic" giving their hot take? Doubt Bailey did it either.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭OwlsZat


    I feel for the guards a little because like in every job your only as good as your training. Clearly, they had little to none in dealing with this kind of serious crime.

    I also think the interview process in Ireland is unhelpful. Obviously, you want to detain and interview all suspects as early as possible and let themselves tie themselves in knots before alibis are created and possible evidence is destroyed. I'm not sure on the current setup if anyone knows but it certainly lends itself to people getting away with serious crime.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    it is not necessarily the only logical explanation "that the killer was involved in the construction and/or maintenance of this structure." Someone may have ran away found it by chance and ran back to finish her off. Or may not have intended hitting her again until they stumbled on it. Someone moving around there would have to move somewhere, could have found it by chance. A "French assassin" may have been there some time and searched around for ways to make it look local

    I don't recall that shot exact from the docs but i skipped over the cringy Sheridan one



  • Registered Users Posts: 604 ✭✭✭a_squirrelman


    Jaysus what a weird take. I hope you don't have this judgy commentary on people's looks offline too. But if it makes you feel good about yourself fair enough.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,514 ✭✭✭MoonUnit75


    Yes, I think the big concrete block was just to ensure she was dead, the attack was probably over by that stage and by moonlight you could easily see the structure with the loose blocks nearby.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40 kkcat11


    it seems very strange that we still do not know who was in that car that night with Marie Farrell.  I think though that Ian was out that night with Jude so that rules him out as Marie Farrell was out most of the evening with this mystery man!



  • Registered Users Posts: 604 ✭✭✭a_squirrelman


    Yes it's absolutely bizarre we still don't know who Marie's mystery man was.



  • Registered Users Posts: 58 ✭✭HoliyMoliy


    Very true. They had no experience to deal with such a case. The delay in the post mortem and not being able to establish a time of death really put them on the back foot. You can only deal with circumstantial evidence after that.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,514 ✭✭✭MoonUnit75


    I was making the same point earlier in this thread. Just because it's a crime scene people expect DNA to be everywhere. If you go out to chop wood in the garden you would be unlikely to leave DNA around the place, a brutal attack like this is not that different in terms of opportunities to leave DNA. I remember reading somewhere that in the Meredith Kercher murder case, the only place they found Amanda Knox's DNA in the house she lived in was on a cigarette butt in an ashtray and in mixed DNA footprints in the victim's blood where she walked barefoot on tile floors.

    If he wore fabric or cotton gloves you can easily get scratches from briars while leaving no fingerprints. Good luck finding the briars with DNA among the thousands they clipped off.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 265 ✭✭boardlady


    I can't find the post now - but early on in the thread, someone mentioned that Sophie was aware that someone had been in her house - used her bath, gone through her stuff. Here's a mad proposal .. maybe it was Marie Farrell and her lover who were using it as a love nest when Sophie was largely away. Maybe it was them who went there for a tryst and were unaware Sophie was there at the time ??? Did the unidentified male murder her to keep his identity and his infidelity a secret? As someone also mentioned earlier, there has always been a rumour that she was having an affair with a guard ..



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    That mad proposal has been made early in thread too when it was said someone was in Sophie's house



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,422 ✭✭✭dublin49


    no DNA is often cited as a Bailey defence,there was no DNA from the murderer so for me it just proves Bailey got lucky .He was probably worse for wear when he started out but the walk and God knows how long he was outside would easily be enough time to sober up.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,276 ✭✭✭Deeec


    I agree with you that the netflix doc had a weird selection of interviewees - all appeared to be English blow ins- except Forence Newman. The area seems to be full of arty, hippie, stoners who are stranger than normal - all wanting to be part of the action. Some of them make Ian Bailey appear normal! It would have been better to hear from more balanced local people. The true locals have Im sure a different view on the events and seem to be keeping their mouths shut.

    I dont think how they look matters though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 591 ✭✭✭Garlinge


    Just back to that concrete block, perhaps it was nearer to hand to the place where she was killed? That gate was on an incline and maybe the block was used to prop it open as otherwise it might have closed over by itself?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,276 ✭✭✭Deeec


    Its possible it was at the gate - The concrete block may have or may not have been close by. The block seems to have been used to make sure she was dead. She may have been already knocked out and the killer had time to go and find something ( the block ) to finish her off.

    Where the block was picked up from is probably irrelevent.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,367 ✭✭✭JimmyVik


    I think the garda is more loving the limelight than Baily even.

    He says things like, "When you are investigation a murder you do x, y and z". "And when you are called to a murder scene ...."

    Id love if they asked him "Exactly how many murder cases have you investigated then?"



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,276 ✭✭✭Deeec


    I think the phrase Dwyer used to Bailey ' I will place you at Kilfeada bridge' is very telling. Both Bailey and Dwyer used the exact same phrase to describe what was said at their first meeting in Jules house. Its very strange words to use - ' I will place you' . Its like Dywer was letting him know Im going to pin this murder on you and I will get a witness to say they seen you at Kilfeada bridge. Dwyer doesnt even deny saying this - very odd.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭OwlsZat


    Anyone got a link for where Sophie had said someone was in her house?

    Maria Farrells missing evidence I.e. who she was really with is the most glaring missing evidence off all.

    I don't know the legal wranglings but surely someone can't turn up to court and refuse to answer a simple question. Can the judge not hold her in contempt and charge her with perverting the course of justice?

    A guard would make a bit of sense, as guards / courts seem not pushed. She was also willing to lie to get IB put down and the local guard not sending the body to the hospital to speed up the pathologist examination was strange too.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭OwlsZat





  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,114 ✭✭✭Xander10


    Don't have a link, might have been in west cork podcast. It was a statement from the housekeeper that use to prep the house ahead of Sophie's visits. On an occasion when see arrived, I think with the french bloke she had the affair with, she noticed that the bath had a big black ring mark. The housekeeper had cleaned it a a couple of days in advance. The housekeeper suggested setting up a camera to catch who ever was using the house in her absence, she didn't. She changed the locks and this appears to have stopped the person .

    Who else might have got keys and/or made a copy.

    Did they continue to snoop around outside?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,114 ✭✭✭Xander10


    Sinead O'Connor has her well documented mental issues. Bailey clearly has to, through years of abuse if alcohol.


    I find sineads video mocking Bailey, very offensive. I'm sure if the shoe was on the other foot, we would have to listen to endless tales of demeaning a woman.


    Her and the Sindo are a perfect match.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement