Murder at the Cottage | Sky

The car and the footprint don`t make him a suspect ffs. I have yet to see where the source for this blue Fiesta originated. If someone knows can they point it out please and I don`t mean Gemma O Doherty`s piece which was worthless and only highlighted Chinese whispers.

The only people that would be able to shed light on what really happened are the Guards who were part of the original investigation and who had something to do with removing pages from a log book in Bantry station where the idea of Ian Bailey becoming a suspect was discussed. There might have been a Guard involved in the murder but the determined framing of IB indicates there were going to be serious repercussions for more than one Guard. Remember this case was central to a Garda Commissioner having to resign.

A DPP rubbished the investigation and spoke about an improper approach from senior Guards to get Bailey prosecuted. The whole thing stinks but still people persist with absurd theories around Ian Bailey.

There are some people who have been all over this case for 25 years. I have yet to see MoonUnit make a contribution that is substantially factually incorrect. There are a bunch of amateur detectives here who are poorly informed and are continually proposing theories that cannot be evidentially supported. A new generation of them come along every week or so. Hence the circular nature of the thread. You are one of those. You said a week ago that Gemma`s blue Fiesta was corroborated elsewhere. I asked you where and you dodged the question. I don`t have any problem with speculation and theorizing. But then Moonunit comes along and confronts ye with the facts, some of ye throw the rattle out of the pram with personalized attacks that verge on bullying.

It's not even what Nick said in the book. Jim Sheridan is misrepresenting what it says in the book. According to Jim's retelling of the story, Ian 'confessed' to the cameraman and Nick quotes him saying 'I did it', as though he is reporting that Ian confessed to doing it.

What it actually says in the book is that Ian was 'floating the idea, with the camera off, that he could say to the French that yes, he did it, he killed Sophie, but it was a crime of passion', in the context of explaining to the cameraman that people get off for murder if it is seen as a crime of passion. In other words, the conversation was IB wondering if he claimed to have committed the murder but as a crime of passion, maybe he would be found not guilty under an historical law. Both IB and his legal team predicted he would be found guilty regardless, so it would be a tactical outmanoeuvre. That's not IB confessing, it's IB thinking it might work out better for him if he went along with the prosecution but got himself off on a quirk of French law.

Where are the figures from? There's a report on it online http://justice.ie/en/JELR/Pages/Payments_legal_actions_taken_against_Garda%20Siochana

Between 2009-2018 there's an average of 3 court awards per year for legal actions against the gardai and an average of maybe 35 settlements. That covers practically everything, wrongful arrest, personal injury, damaging property, unlawful detention and legal actions taken by the gardai themselves.

I agree with your comments re domestic violence. Its the lowest of the low - but this still doesnt make IB a murderer. Yes he was capable of it but no credible evidence backing up this theory that he done it has been found.

You're quite right about the McBrearty, Mary Boyle and Fr Molloy cases that the gardai dealings were corrupt. But I dont see how you can applaud the Gardai involved in the STDP murder case and say that they are squeaky clean. I think most rational intelligent people who have looked into this case would disagree with you on this bigtime.

Also please please dont reply to me with what GSOC found. I couldnt care less about GSOC - its like asking me to review and give an opinion of myself.

You are twisting MoonUnits words. In the post you quoted he/she acknowledged there were shady goings on in the investigation. No one has said the investigation was squeaky clean.

There's three conversations. Jim had a recording of one.

1. There's the conversation IB had with the cameraman.
2. There's the conversation the cameraman had with Donal MacIntyre. Nick did not hear that conversation, he only heard Donal saying 'No! Say that again.. So Ian's wondering what would happen if he pleads guilty to a crime of passion?'.
3. There's the conversation after the phone call (conversation 2) that Donal then had with Nick and whoever else was present.

The section in Nick's book is based on conversation number 3 and what he overheard in conversation 2. Jim played what he says was the entirety of conversation number 1. We don't know that that was the entirety of the conversation, it cuts off during an interruption while they are discussing it. So you can't say Nick lied about conversation 1 when he is discussing what he learned from conversation number 3. There are no recordings of conversations 2 and 3.

But then you're basically accusing Jim Sheridan of lying. He seems like a man who clearly has no motive to lie about it? He's actually clearly pissed off that Foster lied about it. He makes a remark like "This is a ongoing murder investigation, you can't just **** write that" and "Somethings are so important that they need to be called out".

I really don't see any reason why Sheridan would lie about that, it's farfetched to say the least. Foster let himself down and needed to rush to a conclusion so he could push his book out to coincide with the documentary releases and the rise in popularity of the case. I've heard him talk on Newstalk, the man is clearly biased against Bailey and is desperate for him to be charged. I get the feeling it's moreso so he can be proven right rather than wanting justice for Sophie.

I'm not sure an opportunistic rape in the street is as directly comparable to repeated domestic violence against a wife or partner as you seem to think. They are very different crimes. Do you have any better examples that actually comparable?

I don't think they mentioned it much at all, maybe in passing? I'd be interested in finding out when that was, which episode. No other mainstream source talks about this alleged statement or blue fiesta.