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

Ian Bailey RIP - threadbans in OP

Options
1444547495090

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 40,228 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    According to Sheridan it was blood and no one has ever confirmed to him it was compared to Bailey.

    The only confirmation was it came from a male.

    Looks like blood TBF.




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭tomhammer..


    "It is clear as day that guards tampered with the evidence that would have cleared Bailey as a suspect and the dodgy evidence they had was flimsy at best."


    You just made that up!



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,130 ✭✭✭lmao10


    Why are the only people bringing up the walking thing people who think he didn't do it then? What is the point of bringing it up at all? Yes he can walk it easily. I imagine it takes 50 minutes but we could add 20 minutes on if that suffices. Still absolutely no reason why he couldn't have walked it comfortably. You keep mentioning "Coming home from the pub and after a long day" as if that is an excuse or reason he couldn't have walked it. Just stop mentioning the walk as a reason against him doing it. It's really not holding up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,620 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    @Boggles

    In this 2023 article it says 'sample' rather than confirming it as blood. It might be blood, but haven't seen that confirmed anywhere - happy to be corrected if there is more information on it.

    "We do know that there was alien DNA, in other words not the victim's DNA, found on a sample on her shoe. It was not mine - it was tested against mine and it was not mine. Whose it was we do not know."

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ian-bailey-compares-himself-to-birmingham-six-over-wrongful-linking-to-sophie-murder/a686524429.html

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,228 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    They were recorded discussing just that.

    But you know, you can believe whatever you want.

    It's clear you have absolutely no interest in discussing the actual case.

    He is guilty MmmmKay.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,741 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    The unidentified DNA is on the left boot by the botton loop of the lace, You can see the white mark, just visible;




  • Registered Users Posts: 1,304 ✭✭✭tomhammer..


    Nah

    You've no proof they tampered with evidence that would have cleared bailey



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,497 ✭✭✭TokTik


    100% and footprints on a muddy country lane would freeze over in December and remain for days. Were there ever any footprints found?



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,620 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06



    Nobody is saying he couldn't have done walked it, you are arguing against your own fictional invention.

    They are saying it is implausible as a scenario \ motivation. That's the point of bringing it up. Saying he could walk it "easily" after a long day and drinking in the pub, in the dark in a December night is just speculation. Especially if you've to do both legs, with a violent rage murder in between.

    It's a highly unusual thing to so. It would be one thing is he was walking home, came to a fork and decided to go to Sophie's. But was already at home. It's also implausible as a time to be randomly knocking on someone's door you barely know if know at all. And given the length of the walk, a long time for some random drunken impulse to still hold and for him not to come to his senses.

    But if you think it is not an unusual thing to do, find us similar cases.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 261 ✭✭sugarman20


    I'm sure the roads/paths from her house were searched so no blood or any other either evidence along the roads/paths found either. It doesn't add up. To me it points to someone who was driving and knew her personally.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 30,620 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Good question, I've never seen any mention of it or attempts to match a footprint versus Baileys. Plus there were so many people milling about inside the cordon it was probably not pristine enough.

    I'm not 100% sure the weather was that cold it would have frozen. Chilly but not freezing.

    Maybe on the 24th?


    https://weatherspark.com/h/m/32637/1996/12/Historical-Weather-in-December-1996-in-Cork-Ireland

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    Now you're contradicting yourself. He had a rock solid alibi that the scratches were nothing to do with any murder. So why would he feel a need to hide them?

    The ones on the arms were unlikely to be on show unless he was wearing a T-shirt or something? The one on the head came from a turkey, a story he made up later after telling his partner originally it was from a stick. Conflicting stories never help your cause.

    As for Bailey ingratiating himself and chatting with gardai, witnesses at the scene say otherwise, that he was off in the distance, aloof. According to Maloney:

    "When we got there, Bailey hung around in the background and did not make any introductions to gardaí, despite my assumption that his level of knowledge must have come from his relationship with local officers.”

    I think I will listen to someone who was at the scene on the day rather than a randomer on the internet 27 years later.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,130 ✭✭✭lmao10


    You're reaching bigtime. People walk long distances when drunk easily. It's not "implausible" at all. An hours walk while drunk is handy. He's motivated enough while drunk to cause serious injuries to Jules so what is on his mind we don't know but we know hes capable of violence to women and seems to have an increased interest in Sophie. He's been seen watching Sophie during the day. We're not talking about some squeaky clean guy with a clean record behind him. Absolutely nothing odd or implausible about him going there at all and a huge reach by the "he didn't do it" crowd to hold it up as some kind of reason to help their argument against him doing it. It shows a bias I think and makes it hard to respect the posters opinion overall if they are allowing this to sway them in any way.

    Just telling you how it looks to a neutral observer.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,141 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    You would think that if you had unknown DNA at the scene, whilst not necessarily traceable to a specific individual, there are enough crime data bases alone that you’d be able to determine most likely nationality background and even potential distant relatives



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,620 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    No contradiction, just you making a false assumption. Why bring attention to the scratches? Just wear gloves. It was December.

    The DPP looked at all the information re: the scratches, and my opinion on them is the same as that of the DPP. That's not some randomer on the internet. You are the randomer on the internet disputing their take on it.

    Bailey is noted in the Garda file as arriving at 14.20. How is that possible if he didn't make any introductions? He is also noted as interacting with Guards.

    You should know by know to take anything Senan Maloney says about the case with a pinch of salt.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,228 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Yeah, seems to be lost in translation, some outlets reporting it as blood probably misinterpreted it.

    AFAIK back at the time of the murder it was extremely difficult to get someone to hand over a DNA sample.

    Bailey handed his over willingly. The lad was Cut to bits whilst murdering her apparently.

    Was it ever recorded that the Guards asked anyone else for DNA, either to eliminate people who worked at the scene or just as a canvassing exercise?



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,620 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    I haven't read anything to that effect re: DNA samples from others.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,620 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    There's "absolutely nothing odd", about setting out from home at approx. 3am in the middle of a December night, after a long day and drinks in the pub, to walk 2.5 miles across country fields or lanes, to someone you barely know if know at all? On the off chance of a fling?

    Absolutely nothing? But we're the ones "reaching"?

    Read that back to yourself "as a neutral observer".

    You're making our argument for us.

    And if you think it's a demonstration of bias, find us similar cases in the crime annals. It's highly implausible.

    You have been asked before, and have exactly nothing.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,228 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    That would seem rather strange. Especially to eliminate people working at the scene.

    A canvass for DNA could have been preformed at any stage in the past 27 years too.

    The family are acting extremely odd in this case, they must know at the very least, how badly it was investigated.

    But according to Sheridan who interviewed them, they were absolutely obsessed with Bailey and would not entertain the notion of any other suspect.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,077 ✭✭✭tibruit


    So you think then that as part of that great big conspiracy, the Gardaí knew all the way back in 1997 that Bailey would let it slip in 2023 that Sophie was actually parked on the Ardmanagh Road.

    And I don`t make stuff up. If you want to see that part of Farrells statement, you`ll find it on Murder At The Cottage, episode 2, 14 minutes in.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    He drove home from the pub. Does that sound like someone who was falling over drunk? He spent a couple of hours in the pub according to several accounts. He was unlikely to be very drunk.



  • Registered Users Posts: 30,620 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Nobody said he was "falling over" drunk. He took a drink home for the pub, according to some accounts. We don't know if he had drink at home also.

    The point is that it was a long day, and he had drink taken. He was back at home. He wasn't fresh. Reasonable to expect he would be tired given the previous 24 hours. It wasn't a detour on his way home from the pub.

    It's a highly implausible scenario for setting out at 3am on a December night on the off chance of a fling with someone you barely knew if knew at all.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    Yes it does appear as if he had no choice but to be at the scene. This murder would also have been high profile with a strong international element and could have launched Bailey's career as a mainstream renowned journalist. The idea that he wouldn't turn up at the biggest crime scene to happen in Ireland in years despite it being only 3 miles away doesn't hold water.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,130 ✭✭✭lmao10


    I didnt say it wasn't odd. If he killed her then it's the definition of odd. Being pissed, an hours walk at 3am to get to the girl who you've been seen watching is plausible. A drunk oddball who has been seen watching Sophie could definitely do it and of course it's odd but it's nothing implausible. If he wants to get to her for whatever reason, that walk is perfectly plausible is all im saying. Your stance that it isn't, doesn't make sense.

    You're also asking me to find a case of a lad getting drunk and walking an hour to commit a crime in the early morning. Do you think you need hard evidence in order to believe that has happened previously? A very large number of times. Use some common sense.



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    There appears to be no statement from anyone that they heard a car on the night in question. Separate neighbours heard their dogs barking around the same time during the night. But no mention of a car, hearing a car, or lights from a car.

    So whoever perpetrated this murder likely walked to the scene, unless it can be shown otherwise. Now I'm not saying that was Bailey, just making the point someone walked there.



  • Registered Users Posts: 40,228 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Was the German lad that lived a mile away that had no alibi and confessed to doing something terrible before he threw himself off a bridge ever investigated?

    Or did he even exist?



  • Registered Users Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    I doubt he was that drunk. There is no mention anywhere in accounts of him being very drunk that night, unless someone can find them and he was able to drive home. As a notorious oddball its perfectly possible he went for a walk at that hour.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,130 ✭✭✭lmao10




  • Registered Users Posts: 4,527 ✭✭✭tobefrank321


    Yes because Sheridan knows it was blood whereas forensic experts with years of experience thought otherwise. Who should we believe?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 30,620 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



Advertisement