Ian Bailey RIP - threadbans in OP

The remains of Ian Bailey have been cremated in a private ceremony in Cork, with no one bar crematorium and funeral director staff in attendance.

His solicitor, Frank Buttimer, confirmed the news on Tuesday evening on behalf of Mr Bailey’s UK-based sister.

Given his previously well-documented health difficulties, including two heart attacks last September, no autopsy was conducted and the cause of death was recorded as natural causes.

Mr Bailey’s body was retained in Bantry General Hospital until arrangements were made for its collection by a funeral director from outside West Cork for transport to The Island Crematorium in Ringaskiddy, near Cork City on Tuesday morning.

It is understood that his family wanted a low-key service away from the media spotlight.

In a statement issued this evening, Mr Buttimer said he was authorised on behalf of Mr Bailey's next of kin to confirm that Mr Bailey’s remains were cremated at a private event earlier today.

He said that no further statement would be made in relation to this matter.

There was no notification of Mr Bailey’s death on the RIP.ie website.

So what about this blog? it refutes some of what you’re saying at least - I’ve no idea where the truth lies btw, I’m just curious as to what you think. It’s just another online poster just like you

“We know the coat was never in fact burned because the police bagged it with lots of other clothing as evidence on 10th February 1997 while other police officers interviewed Bailey at the police station. Nobody has ever seen any of those items again. Think what evidence there might have been on those clothes. Although, of course, it might be that there was no evidence on them at all. The only logical thing for the police to do, if they couldn't tie any of Bailey's clothes to the murder, was to lose them. Funny, because that is exactly what happened. And not much more than that is documented fact.”

https://www.crimeguy.com/p/the-magic-disappearing-coat

Statements of fact about what? I'm simply quoting the differing alibis. Not my statements of facts, Bailey/Thomas's statements.

You're all over the place. It honestly feels like you're on one big wind up.

I would suggest that if he was heading over there thinking about sex with the classy French lady, he wouldn`t have been wearing the manky black coat. At the end of the day, what evidence is there that he was wearing his black coat that night....Marie Farrell. I would seriously question if she was out at all that night.

I'd find it very difficult to believe that Thomas didn't know that Bailey was the murderer. I honestly believe he told her the day after the murder that he did it.

She refuted this

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-20300124.html

Nobody here has said Bailey was a saint. We all know it's possible he could have done it. The intelligent people here also know there is alot of evidence to suggest the gardai tried their best to pin it on the ignorant English oddball that noone liked and invented so called evidence and roped in witnesses to support this - which stinks being honest.

I think it could be argued that a couple out drinking for a night will give varying accounts of what happened that night. That still doesn't mean Bailey was a murderer - it just means he doesn't have an alibi for every minute of that night. It also doesn't mean Jules is lying - she admitted she was a sound sleeper especially after drink. She can't say for certain what Bailey done that night - that still doesn't mean he committed a murder though.

Likely under his influence. He had beaten her several times before, so she could hardly not go along with any requests he made.

One of the first of many many lies Ian Bailey told journalist Senan Molony:

"Then I asked: “What about the scratches, Ian?”

He said he had told the guards when under arrest that he had a sidebar selling Christmas trees, and got them from lopping them down. I can still see his mouth opening and closing like a goldfish when I protested: “Who the hell buys a Christmas tree on the 23rd of December? They’ve already got them up.”

Turkeys came into it days later – belt and braces, because he never said turkeys to me that night, but had instead told trees to the gardaí. Henceforth he had been nicked by an upside-down bird… but I knew then he was lying."

I would remove names from your theory orangehyme. Bailey was a known suspect so safe to discuss him.

No Tom it's not. Your knowledge and understanding of the entire investigation is very lacking.

You are just saying the same thing over and over again. You fail to give any consideration or discuss other theories which shows you to be quite ignorant. Do some proper research and then maybe I will take you seriously. For the moment you appear ill informed on the entire case.

It's possible you are right and Bailey was the killer but it's also possible He was innocent and his life ruined by an incompetent Garda investigation.