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

I don't need to give such an example. You are the one making the argument of plausibility, now the best you can do is throw in a smokescreen about another case which is NOT the same scenario and ask to be proved wrong. All because you can't prove your own argument. Desperate stuff.

For something to be the 'most plausible', it had to be plausible to begin with. You've entirely failed to provide any objective evidence of how that theory is plausible for a murder. Completely incapable of pointing to similar examples. So it is possible yes, but not plausible based on what's been provided.

It's not all I've got and you know it, because it has been put to you again and again that the DPP looked at all of this and was scathing of the evidence. You know what's very weak? The case against Bailey. That's not merely my opinion. But that of the DPP.

It has been put to you that witnesses lie or are mistaken in murder cases. Miscarriages of justice happen. It's not a conspiracy theory especially given the documented malpractice in this case by AGS. BY that 'logic' the DPP is a conspiracy theorist which establishes the certainty your claim is absurd.

You yourself admitted as much that Marie Farrell was lying. And some of the people who gave evidence supporting Bailey's position must be lying because you dismiss their evidence. But apparently that doesn't make you a conspiracy theorist!

It's obvious you are working backwards from an assumed position - Bailey is the likely culprit, and working backwards from that to say aha this piece of data and that piece of data reinforces its plausibility. But that's just confirmation bias and circular logic.

So you can't give an example. That must mean they have the wrong man in the Aisling Murphy case. That's how ridiculous your argument is.

It's the most plausible explanation. Not just based on Bailey's statements but all the other details we know as well. The miscarriage of justice might be that Bailey has got away with murder because of Garda incompetence.

As explained, you have to assume everyone is lying to back up your opinion on Bailey's guilt. It's an argument based on quicksand. In fact, it's confirmation bias pure and simple. Something you like to throw out there. Anyway, I'm out for the weekend. I know the pro Bailey faction don't like hearing it but he's still the main suspect in many people's books.

Nope you are mixing up two different pieces of knowledge \ data. The actual explanation of what occurred in another case doesn't have to be the most plausible one at the outset. So whatever happened in the Aisling Murphy case has no bearing on this one. Unless you can show it's a similar scenario - which evidently you cannot. So it's an irrellevent point and shows how you cannot directly support your claims with regard to this case.

Why do I have to assume everyone is lying? Did the DPP? Nope. Do I? Nope. Again, it's another statement of fact made by you without foundation as a substitution for an actual supported position.

Restating its the most plausible explanation with no objective data to back it up just shows the hollowness\lack of foundation to your claims.

Someone coming and going on a regular basis? Someone who ventured onto her property with no right to be on it. Someone who knew the area and especially that area around the pump house. Someone Sophie knew well enough to venture out and maybe confront. Someone who perhaps had done work for her in the past. Someone Alfie had allowed to use his shed and maybe was not part of any agreement they may have had about access. Someone the Gardai had questioned “aggressively “ and thought it was worth taking samples from. Someone who shared Alfie’s love of certain herbs. Someone who sold up and left the area afterwards. Someone who had approached Sophie about buying land for his horses only for her to refuse. Someone who was among the first if not the first to go through the police cordon to visit Alfie and tend to their horses on Alfie’s land.

Someone like that?

.....or an insecure, paranoid partner of a hot-blooded male, who saw a single, attractive female as a threat. Motive?

I think the crux being that they never considered any other likely perpetrators.

A frenzied attack, without the strangulation (a certain level of strength required), should include the possibility of a female attacker.

The issue I have with this is that Sophie being labelled as liking to sleep around - there is no evidence at all that Sophie was like that. Yes she had 2 affairs while married but so did her husband have affairs - the marriage may have even been over when these affairs happened. I dont think this means she liked to sleep around though. The notion that she was promiscuous seems to just come from the media trying to sell papers at the time.

That December was the first time she came to Ireland alone. We also know that she kept to herself while in Ireland. She would have had no opportunity to be sleeping around with anyone in West Cork. Yes it could have been revenge by a spouse of someone abroad - but thats very doubtful in my opinion.

Looking at the article bit by bit:

1)

“Somebody came there, and for some reason Sophie interacted with that person outside the house. There is no evidence of a crime occurring within the house. The crime occurred outside.”

-->OK we know that one already.

2)

"Meanwhile, a mystery male DNA profile found on Ms Toscan du Plantier’s lace-up boot is being sent for fresh forensic analysis in the hope that technological advances may help identify it."

-->But this DNA if matched doesn't prove murder, it could have come about at any other stage way before the murder. But it might be a possible indication.

3)

"A small number of unidentified fingerprints found in Ms Toscan du Plantier’s house will also be examined again. A statement from a garda technical expert in 1997 said the “many fingerprints” identified in the house belonged to the housekeeper and members of her family – but “a few” fingerprints could not be identified."

-->Again, it's maybe an indication to have these fingerprints identified, but it won't prove murder either. Could be a tradesman, could be one of the former lovers, like Bruno? Or from anybody who's been there unrelated to the murder, but also worth following up on. Also the inside of the house was not the scene of the crime

4)

"French witnesses expected to be approached include a friend of Ms Toscan du Plantier who says the Frenchwoman told her about a “strange” man in Schull who wanted to meet her to discuss a poetry project.

Agnes Thomas said she spoke to Ms Toscan du Plantier by phone on what turned out to be the last day of her trip to Ireland. She was never interviewed by gardaí because she recalled the conversation many years later. However, she testified against Ian Bailey at the trial in absentia in France in 2019 that found him guilty of murdering Ms Toscan du Plantier.

Ms Thomas’s account echoes the account of a French film producer, Guy Girard, who said his friend and colleague Ms Toscan du Plantier mentioned an Eoin Bailey who was a “writer in Ireland”. Mr Girard made a statement to gardaí in 1999."

-->This would point to the idea that there was some prior contact between Sophie and Bailey. However Agnes Thomas ( whoever she is, we haven't heard from her before) remembers that later on? Why? How credible would she be? Does she have any evidence to support her statement? Or is it just one word against Baileys? Bailey keeps saying and insisting he's had no contact with Sophie. To date there is no way to prove any of both. There are no phone records proving that Bailey called Sophie.

5)

"The investigation team will also revisit alleged sightings of a “Frenchman” with a scratch on his nose in a pub in Kerry days after Ms Toscan du Plantier was murdered.

A garda in Cahirsiveen, Co Kerry, made a statement soon after Ms Toscan du Plantier’s murder, saying he was approached by a local bar owner on December 30, 1996.

“He said a Frenchman had left his pub and he had a scratch on his face. He was travelling in a Ford Fiesta,” said John Sugrue, a garda working at the time. "

--> This is again pointing to France. How is it known he was a Frenchman? Were ID papers checked? Or did he fake a French accent? Also possible.

6)

"At 3pm that afternoon, Mr Sugrue stopped a black Ford Fiesta. The man driving the car had a mark on his face. He gave his name, said he was from Mexico and an advertising producer. Mr Sugrue traced the registration of the car to a woman in Cork. There is no statement on file from the bar owner or the advertising producer from Mexico."

--> Can it be proven that both men were the same men? Was the mark on the face the same as the other man? He said he was from Mexico? ID wasn't verified, I'd suggest? Who was the woman the car was traced to in Cork? Was she ever investigated? ( Also the car speeding on that morning wasn't a black Fiesta, but a blue Fiesta, as far as I remember )

7)

"Ms Farrell was not the only witness who saw a man in a black beret and long coat outside her shop before Ms Toscan du Plantier was murdered.

Dan Griffin, a retired publican in Schull, who has since died, also identified a man in a long coat wearing a beret in his first statements to gardaí. In a subsequent statement he identified this man as being Ian Bailey, and said his “black beret” may actually have been his “very black and heavy hair”.

--> Ms Farrell is certainly not credible. Also regarding that retired and now deceased publican in Schull, I'd say that publicans would be able to remember people better than others, and able to discern between Bailey and somebody else? Is it known if Bailey ever owned a black beret?

Also, how do you identify a man more than 2 decades onward? He may have lost hair, or turned white or grey, lost or put on weight?

In a nutshell a lot of new information, but nothing real regarding evidence for a conviction. All we seem to know is that there was another strange man, possibly of French or Mexican origin traveling in a black Ford Fiesta in the area around the time of the murder.

It's possible. And Sophie did have at least a reputation, I'd say. Also people do talk in small villages and rural places, often making things to be more than they are in reality. Somebody would have interpreted that either way, and jealousy only made the situation worse.

By reading this, all we can say is that the new revelation would be that a foreigner, either French or Mexican was driving a Ford Fiesta which he borrowed from a lady in Cork. If that lady in Cork is still alive the police would be able to question her and find out the identity of this man. Also what she could do, is say she didn't remember or something? After such a long time, not impossible to say. Any cross examination wouldn't be credible at this stage.

But this would still not prove murder. It would only fuel further speculation:

Was the man French: Sophie's husband sent him or maybe it was the ex lover Bruno taking care of things himself?

Was the man Mexican: The stereotypical drug trafficker from Mexico came to silence Sophie and the drug theory would come up again.

Was the man indeed Bailey: Bailey did it, and wore a black beret or maybe a strange wig if his hair looked like a black beret. But then why would Bailey drive a borrowed Ford Fiesta when he could hike to Sophie's himself?

Well, a man in a coat and a black beret borrows a black Fiesta from a woman to drive to Schull? I think, if you're borrowing somebody your car, you would at least tend to ask where it's going to be driven. You would also know the name of that man. So the woman from Cork must know something, at least whom she borrowed the car to.

Or is she in the habit of lending cars to complete strangers? I don't think so and the police won't have accepted an "I don't know" as an answer here. After all the car was stopped by a police officer later on and the car was traced to this lady in Cork as the article says.

I think the police would have gotten something out of her. Suppose this man was French, and not Mexican, would he be the one the Guards spoke to on that trip to France?

It's a bit adding two and two together.

But still this doesn't prove murder.

What I am suggesting or more speculating is that the police investigation may quite possibly as far as they traced a man from France or maybe from Mexico ( or maybe a Mexican living in France) to the car registered to a lady in Cork and was driving it in Schull. The nature of the trip by this man may be anything, maybe totally coincidental but it would be interesting if there was some connection between this man and Sophie?

Could all be unrelated to the murder.

A man with a scratch on the face and a black beret in a pub in Co Kerry? Possibly also driving a car traceable to a woman in Cork.

But at least the police should be able to get the name of this man and find out whether he's French or Mexican.

Is the pub in question in Cahirsiveen or in Schull?

It’s in the link you posted yourself above. And where did you get the story about the man in Cahersiveen wearing a beret?

She may not have screamed or exclaimed loudly at any stage during the physical attack which killed her or during whatever transpired at the house beforehand. If she was running for her life down the driveway the killer probably first stunned her into submission with a blow from behind before the final onslaught.

She knew trying to rouse Shirley and Alfie from their slumber would be futile and she would just be running into a trap by heading for their door.