Murder at the Cottage | Sky

Hello all. I've been following this thread, and of course the case, with interest for some a while now. Perhaps now it's time for me to weigh in with my own thoughts about it all. I've just pasted my comments from Reddit's Unsolved Mysteries below--please delete if this is against the rules.

---

(This was originally in response to a deleted comment that referenced the local belief that a member of the guards was responsible for the murder)

Yes. And I believe he had the same car, a blue Ford Fiesta, that was seen speeding away from the area at 7.30 that morning (other evidence that points to the murder possibly being committed early in the morning are the fruits and nuts found in Sophie’s stomach).

Apparently he was known to be violent and for having affairs with women in the area.

It also explains the guards’ incompetence which actually goes beyond incompetence and starts to seem like something quite sinister. Missing evidence, witness statements torn out of books, witnesses bribed, coerced and threatened to implicate Bailey etc.

In my opinion this is what happened. I have spent a lot of time researching this case. In fact if anyone has any questions that come to mind I may be able to answer them.

Like many others for a long time I thought it was Bailey, but in the end I had to consider the evidence and question whether I just wanted it to be him. Because he fits. Because he seems like he could have done it. Because he’s an arrogant violent narcissist who gleefully centred himself in a dead woman’s story. He is vile. He’s also alive, which I think is one reason he makes a good suspect for many people. It means that hope remains for justice for Sophie, and revenge on Bailey who is really just such a prick. Truly sees himself as the noble Englishman come to live among the peasants.

Whereas the aforementioned sergeant is dead. And if it was him, justice will never be done. We might not even find out the truth, ever.

At the end of the day there is not one bit of evidence to implicate Bailey. He did not know her. (This is pretty much certain.) He was not seen by Marie Farrell. Witnesses confirmed they saw him cutting down the tree and killing the turkey when he got those scratches on his hands. His coat was not seen soaking in a bucket of water, originally that witness said she saw clothes soaking in the bathtub. And also he was wearing the coat at the Christmas Day swim two days after the murder. People say he burned the cot in the bonfire but then it turns out the guards took that aforementioned coat into evidence. So like???? Come on.

The bonfire? Nothing of evidence was found. Lots of people disposed of things this way in the countryside in the 90s including my father.

His alibi? He did get up in the middle of the night for a few hours. Drunk, so it’s not really a surprise he forgot to admit this at first. But if you’re suggesting he walked for miles in the freezing cold (he had a car, like) and then took a route home after killing a woman that doubled his return time then... I don’t really know what to say. Anyway we can discount Marie Farrells testimony about her sighting of a man (later turned into Bailey) at the bridge, the woman is a fantasist at best or knows something more than she’s letting on at worst.

His confessions? Not out of character with the kind of man he is. In fact kind of tallies with his gross glee at being able to centre himself and lead the stupid Irish peasants on when in reality he, the smart Englishman, knows the truth. It’s a form of control. And we already know he’s controlling and abusive.

His violence? Many, many, MANY men beat their wives in rural Ireland in the 90s. The place was **** horrendous for women in that time. There were still Magdalene laundries being run for gods sake.

There is not one piece of evidence to suggest he killed Sophie Toscan du Plantier. None. Literally none. And there’s a lot of confusion about when he knew about the murder and how he knew but I believe this has been ironed out and anyway these witness statements weren’t taken until weeks or months later I believe?? And it’s fair enough that people wanted to help the guards pin it on him, the guards had everyone terrified of Bailey and made the public believe they needed their help to make their home safe again. Also do not discount an Irish person’s ability to weave a tale or believe in things that aren’t quite true, or to see things that aren’t quite there. This is not England or America. This was the westernmost tip of Europe, as isolated as you can get, a country where farmers refuse to cut down fairy forts for fear of getting cursed.

As for one of Sophie’s family members saying that Sophie got a call from a poet called ‘Eoin Bailey’ who wanted to meet when she was back in Ireland... this was not ‘remembered’ until years after the murder.

If anyone can compare the two theories—that the guard did it, or Bailey—(obviously it could have been someone else entirely) and come away still thinking that Bailey was the likely culprit, then I’m afraid that you too are seeing things that aren’t quite there.

----

A few other things. An unopened bottle of French wine was found in a ditch nearby months later, it was expensive and not available in Ireland.

Sophie seemed anxious to have someone come with her to Ireland, she asked different family members and none of them could go.

Apparently her husband said she was pregnant when she died?

Much has been made of the fact that she went to Ireland for three days right before Christmas: why? It would have been freezing and the house is so far away from everything that it took the coroner 48 hours before he could eventually arrive. Did she have something to tell someone, i.e a lover? Was the news not well received? Was she a bit afraid of him?

I do believe it all adds up. This was an intensely personal rage-filled murder by someone Sophie knew and probably had had as a lover at least at one point. And they knew where the house was.

Maybe they stayed the night and an argument ensued the next morning that led to her death. Either up at the house or down at the gate.

Here’s a scenario: the person turns up to Sophie’s house in the night with a bottle of wine. (Don’t know if it’s true that it wasn’t available in Ireland). She rejects him and perhaps tells him it’s over, get lost. He attacks her at the door (explaining the blood there) and chases her down to the gate where he kills her.

Maybe he even leaves and then realises that he left evidence behind—the bottle of wine. He goes back. It’s December, so it’s still dark even in the morning. Maybe Sophie to his horror is even still alive and he finishes her off with the block? (Just speculation, after all no time of death was confirmed). The lights in the house are still blazing... he goes up to the house, gets Sophie’s blood on the door (and maybe in the field in front of the house, if he was avoiding the lane way that Sophie shared with Alfie) (this would explain how blood ended up there if Sophie wasn’t attacked up at the house, but only at the gate). He gets blood on the door. He flicks off the light. Collects the bottle of wine and discards it. His car is seen speeding away from the scene of the crime at 7.30.

(Very willing to consider as well it was the ex lover from France who had been to the cottage before, who previously tried to strangle her, and then the travel agent in Galway had an encounter with an anxious Frenchman who mentioned west cork and was booking a flight to Paris on Christmas Eve. He could very well have brought the wine. And the exact same circumstances, with the possible pregnancy, could arise in this situation. I know he had an alibi but there’s something weird about it... first he said he was at an art expo, then he said he was at home getting a phone installed or something.)

I don’t put too much credence in this theory as I don’t know if it all fits (I think possibly the guards said Sophie accidentally locked herself out so I don’t know how the perpetrator would have let himself in then) but it’s just that... a theory. I think the truth resembles something like what I described.

One point of interest is that in all these years, Ian Bailey's story has never changed. He has never wavered from it. Apart from when he admitted getting out of bed in the middle of the night to write an article but... this can be simply explained by the fact that it doesn't look good, so why would you mention it. Other than that, his story has never changed, not once.

Someone on boards.ie has detailed how they were at a party at Alfie Lyons a few months before the murder and it was there that Bailey learned of Sophie's existence (who lives in that house? etc.) But he changed the subject and started going on about his knowledge of French cinema, showing no interest whatsoever in the neighbour. It is doubtful that there would have been much opportunity between summer 96 and Christmas 96 for Bailey and Sophie to ever become acquainted—she wasn't there that often. They didn't know each other. They never met.

Whereas someone like Marie Farrell has inserted herself and changed her story multiple times even as recently as LAST MONTH to say the man she saw in the dark on the road in 1996 was a Frenchman she saw in a photograph with Sophie's husband. I'm willing to entertain a suspicion that Marie could have been involved in the incident herself. Who on EARTH was she driving around with in the middle of winter? Going to have sex at Barleycove beach in a car two days before Christmas? No way, man. The bitter cold of the night would skin you alive. What's interesting to me is that Sophie had her locks changed because someone seemed to be using her house when she wasn't there. The bath etc. Was Marie Farrell having an affair with someone—possibly even the aforementioned sergeant—and they were using Sophie's house while she was away? When they found her there after all, the murder ensued.

Someone else has pointed out—look how easily Marie Farrell lies. When she said she saw Ian Bailey, when she said he threatened her. A few years later: when she said she did NOT see Ian Bailey, it was someone else entirely. She has the exact same expression when relating both versions. She is a dangerous fantasist IMO. And possibly more involved than one might think. Hence her self-insertions into the investigation. Running away from the witness stand when asked to name who she was with that night. An absolute agent of chaos.

Marie Farrell was very tangled up with the guards' investigation. To the point where they seem to have been letting her husband off on assault charges and the like in exchange for her implication of Bailey.

Whatever about her, though, I do think the likeliest explanation is that the sergeant was responsible. I have seen him named online before but can't remember who he is. It's a shame that Gemma O'Doherty turned out to be a racist homophobic conspiracy nut, but she did used to be a respected journalist and in 2018 she wrote a pretty thorough article on the suspect who was a member of the police force, and how the guards' behaviour pointed towards a stitch-up:

https://villagemagazine.ie/did-gardai-target-bailey-to-shield-sophies-killer-by-gemma-odoherty/

while condemning Bailey for his attitudes to the Irish that is full of cliches. Edge of Europe wife beaters apparently.