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.

1141517192097

Comments

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


    Seems a bit like a red herring. There is an Independent article about it. I mean she bought the house from someone. So who was that and who had they shared keys with? The article also said once they changed the locks it stopped happening. So wasn't happening around the time of the murder.

    The bit that's more jarring is who was Maria Farrell with and why was there no will from the guards/courts to find out.

    I think the assumption she was with a guard is a fair one. The idea she can't say because the husband would find out is nonsense as he already knows she's with a mystery man so the horse has bolted on his feelings.

    If the murder is ever to be solved full honest for Maria Farrell is a requirement. If I was her I wouldn't be able to sleep knowing my information might be holding a murdered woman's family from knowing what happened. Maybe that's the reason the locals don't speak out, because they know what guard she was having the affair with and are unwilling to put the cat amongst the pigeons.



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


    I honestly think Marie was at home in bed that night with her husband and never left the house - thats why she cant say who she was with because there was no man. Her husband knows this and this is why they are still together.

    Why would her husband stay with her if he knew she was having an affair - Marie is a liar its as simple as that.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,531 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    What should they do, detain everyone on the Mizen peninsula? Suspects only emerge as evidence is discovered and interpreted.

    Detaining someone is a serious restriction on their rights and freedom. It is not something that should be done lightly. Detaining someone should only be done when there is sufficient evidence to suspect them and that naturally takes time.



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


    Wouldnt believe a word out of her mout at this stage.

    Next she will be saying she killed her herself. Compulsive liar.



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



    From some discussion on Reddit sounds like her husband Chris liked to sow his wild oats, and had a history of small run ins with the guards. Sophie had the locks changed in her house, because someone was coming in and using her house while she was away. Maybe it was Chris, or Maria! 🤣 Apparently Chris has some charges dropped by guards around the time of the false statements. Also Maria left England after getting caught in a £27k benefit fraud. there is every chance Maria was out that night maybe with a guard, maybe not. Maybe checking on Chris having an affair maybe having one herself.

    The more you know of them the more suspicious they seem to be. As I say, Jim is apparently planning on a season two. Would love to see the spot light thrown onto their past the same way with was with IB. Obviously, she knows more. Shame on the irish state for not getting it into the open. Hopefully, Jim will have better luck.



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


    There was an article on one of the court cases where a barrister was trying to work this out with Marie Farrell. Marie said the gardai told her to say she was out and spotted Bailey. However, Marie also admitted that when she told a detective that the man she was with drove a certain type of red car and lived in Longford, the detective went to Longford and spent some time there trying to track this person down. Marie agreed with the barrister that it made no sense for the detective to do this if they were both 'in on it' to frame Bailey by making up the story about seeing a man at the bridge. The gardai believed her and also did try and find out who the man she was with was.



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


    She seems more a master of deception than IB himself.

    Makes 400k on sale of home, has to hand back 100k and declarers it a loss. Never needed a mortgage to build it and bought the site for 1k...

    She does some amount of **** talking bless her.






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


    Request they come in for a voluntary statement. Give them an expected date of a couple days time or else you explain that you'll be calling in to interview them. What rights are you loosing by having to give an interview/statement?

    Apart from the the right to deceive the state in the matter of serious crime. I'm not saying this should be a run of the mill thing but murder or the loss of life isn't normal. Having legislation which supersedes the standard in the event of serious crime would make sense.



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




    I agree they are a strange couple. It does sound like they owed the guards a favour.

    I think Dwyer or another garda could have peruaded Marie to come forward as a witness. I dont think Marie had men falling at her feet being honest - I think the man in the car is made up to suit the scenario. The sighting was made up by the guards, Marie was used as a witness and the husband was in on the deal. In return she was rewarded. The gardai couldnt have picked a more unreliable person for the job though. She messed up bigtime - no wonder she had to leave Cork.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,083 ✭✭✭tibruit


    What a huge favour to give, fingering a man for murder.



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



    Huge - But Marie couldnt continue with the lie. She seen sense at a later stage.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,531 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    Nothing wrong with making door to door enquiries or asking people to make a voluntary statement if they have any information which might help an investigation but detaining someone, which was the situation in question, is a different matter. Any detention should require reasonable grounds for suspicion.

    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    "Place you" is just cop talk for I will provide evidence/produce a witness to prove you were at Kilfeada. i think the same word was used to Joanne Hayes, I may be wrong. Bailey didn't even need to tallk to the cop but Bailey likes drama with giving the cop the mince pies and there being an underlying agenda between him and Dwyer. Bailey thinks his life is a movie. No one has to talk to cops unless arrested and even then they can stay silent. But then Bailey would not have the drama had he made that choice



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



    Exactly it means I will provide evidence/produce a witness - very strange for a guard to say this. To me it suggests he would go to any lengths to frame Bailey including recruiting a witness to support this story.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    i wouldn't necessarily think it strange or showing determination to frame. possibly an interrogation technique, possibly to see the reaction



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


    This was at their initial casual meeting ( not an interrogation ) over mince pies and coffee. Dwyer could have said ' I have a witness who seen you at Kilfeada bridge' instead he said ' I will place you at Kilfeada bridge'. Stinks of a set up to me.



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


    Farrell has skin in the game. She's done wrong or someone she knows has.

    On the statements I don't think asking people for an interview is enough if they can just say no comment. The longer you leave it without people drawing definite lines in the sand the further you are from the truth. Imagine giving a statement 3 or 4 weeks after a crime. Sure you've to run through it prior with a solicitor prior and made sure you've told a version of events that absolves you of the crime. Then you just say no comment over and over and your scott free.

    This happens in our "justice" system over and over. Just cite reasons the last people got away. Refuse future questions. Done. Baring cast iron evidence you've gotten away with it.



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


    That's more a colloquial way of speaking than any threatening intent I would say. A 'Cork' thing perhaps!



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    you think he wouldn't use an interrogation technique in a 'casual' meeting.? you don't know much about cops



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,531 ✭✭✭FishOnABike


    Marie Farrell only identified the man at Kilfeada Bridge as Ian Bailey on 28th January having previously given a number of statements describing a man different to Ian Bailey and having failed to recognise Ian Bailey in a video shown to her on 27th December as the man she saw in Schull on 21st December, thumbing at Airhill at 7:15am on 22nd December and at Kilfeada Bridge at 3:00am on 23rd December.

    Saying "I will place you at Kilfeada Bridge" takes on a far more sinister tone when one considers Marie Farrell's retraction of that identification, her earlier failure to recognise Ian Bailey in a video shown to her and claims of Garda pressure to identify the mystery man as Ian Bailey.

    It could charitably be attributed to confirmation bias fuelled by over enthusiasm on the part of the gardai. Less charitably it could be considered deliberate pervertion of justice.

    It would appear the French Courts have engaged in similar confirmation bias in accepting evidence which suits their desired outcome while rejecting evidence which would bring it into doubt.



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


    Maybe Maria and Chris were the two out and about that night and it was them who had the extra key for Sophies. Maybe they were taking a jaunt over late at night so see if they could go for a bath and literally **** about her place.

    They learn that she's in and turn back spotting this mystery man at the bridge. She has now most recently picked out as the 5"8 man who still resides in Paris and knew Daniel Sophie's husband. This would also explain why Daniel didn't come over when she was murdered. Perhaps he was piss with the Bruno affair and lined someone up to kill her. This suspect is the line of enquiry currently being followed up. I'm sure the mystery boot DNA is being tested against him and his travel in and out being checked. Sophies uncle already denied its likely to be significant because obviously the French will look like twats if its not IB.



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


    This would also explain why the guards might have something over Maria Farrell. Wonder were their prints and DNA also found in the house. The Farrells house was built by Chris himself. Builders are notoriously slow to work on their own places. Would love to know the dates of the build were. Wonder was Sophie's place being used for a sneeky upmarket late night wash.



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


    As someone else already alluded to I wouldn't say people were queueing up to have affairs with Farrell. Seems a hugely unlikely tale. Even the nonsense she spouted about the Guard undressing himself and soliciting her. Felt like that particular lie was told to make us believe other people were interested in the ride.



  • Registered Users Posts: 79 ✭✭Polly701


    Presumably Chris Farrell doesn't have an alibi for the night as his wife was out? And I read somewhere that he has been charged with assault? Was he ever even interviewed in relation to the murder, even informally? Has he confirmed that Marie was out at the times she said she was?

    It does seem strange that they have stayed together throughout this time. In spite of her 'affair'.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,184 ✭✭✭riclad


    This case will never be solved, the Gardai did not conduct a proper investigation, they lost evidence, the gate etc most of what we have is rumours or maybe statements that may or may not be true I did not read the article but I saw a headline

    On an Irish website

    Ian Bailey says no one believes he is guilty wtf?

    Why are these documentarys being made now?

    Simple, there's Netflix and other streaming services that have an endless demand for true crime documentarys cheap to make and they get good ratings

    I don't know how a French court found him guilty as there's no real evidence against him yes he acted strangely at the time of the investigation but being eccentric and egotistical is not a crime. he seems happy to talk to anyone as he thrives on attention or maybe he also gets paid for any TV interview he does



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


    The Guards didn't loose the gate. They clarified it was disposed of as had been tested twice over by Irish and French and only included Sophie's blood.

    They didn't preserve the crime scene hugely well and seemed to only investigate links to IB.



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


    The Farrells also built their house without taking a mortgage, which later sold for 500k+. While it's not completely impossible it does seem a little unlikely to me. What are the building costs for building such a home 100-200k? and she ran a very small shop, and he did odd jobs. All sounds very fishy to me.

    The guards did mention that they detected some petty crime in the area. One person stealing gas cylinders etc., could this have been Chris?

    I rate the chances of someone wanting an affair with Maria as close to zero, more likely the guards have him/them for something so she agrees to finger IB.

    If you think of all the scrutiny that Jules got through association to Ian. You'd think a "character" such as Chris we'd all know very well at this stage.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,329 ✭✭✭nc6000


    Yes, they did lose the gate. In 2018 GSOC investigated an allegation from Bailey that the Gardai tried to frame him. During this investigation they admitted losing a number of items of evidence and a bunch of original witness statements.



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


    The Farrells did it.

    Its so clear now.



  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement