Ian Bailey RIP - threadbans in OP

What is the point of these photos taken several weeks after the murder?

The bottle of wine is a bit of a red herring. As far as I recall it was found in April and half covered over by grass which would suggest that it was there much longer than four months. Minimal grass growth from December to April. If it originated in Sophie`s house it was probably stolen during the break in three years earlier where the perpetrator apparently took a bath. It isn`t hard to figure out a number one suspect for that either. Sophie joked with Josephine Hellen at the time that it was probably Alfie, but Alfie had his own bath. On the other hand Jules kicked Bailey out for a while that year after an assault. Local, down on his luck, fond of a drink, needed a bath. Yep.

ah things were fine until I went up there and bashed her brains in

Things were fine until they started saying I went up there and bashed her brains in.

And of course the DPP’s assertion was - “he could have burned clothes- not he did burn clothes”

Aside from I think Jules mentioning that if the blood stains from shorts worn when killing the turkeys didn’t come out, these might have been burned- there was no other mention of other clothes being burnt

I saw the Dwyer fella on the Jim Sheridan documentary and thought he was an embarrassment - is it any wonder the case was never solved with Gardai like him working on it?

Another item going missing. You wouldn't want be working in lost and found with this lot.

I've never heard that statement before as reliable as chocolate fire guard:) . Suits him perfect.

I couldn't believe how drole he was a on Netflix documentary..reminded me this is what the case is like. May or may not get answers... trudging along. Sure once we are seeing to be doing a bit we will be grand sure. No panic. We will get evidence eventually , something will turn up sure. Put on kettle there.

"Another item going missing. You wouldn't want be working in lost and found with this lot."

Or maybe you would... sticky fingers.

Yes for level of knowledge they are supposed as super intendant to have I felt he was nasty price of work.. it's on his conscious that he let course of investigation go on way it did...the book would have stopped with him..and can't believe he went along with tampering of statements , misleading witnesses etc. , etc.

Every minute of first two weeks were vital..and they were wasted on this investigation.

There have been countless “ex detectives” rolled out for TV programmes and radio interviews through the years - each one more pompous and arrogant than the last. The programme documentary on the 70s /80s “heavy group of detectives” or whatever they were called was one of the most repulsive I’ve seen where they had no problem in justifying their actions of interrogation - sick bastards is too polite a description for them

1993

Nobody said the only water used was the bath. Just that the bath was dirty so noticed. If you just used water from the place for your toilets, how would anyone know.

Why would Bailey go to a random house when there was the separate studio cottage?

No reports of any bottles of wine being taken from the property.

A dirty ring in the bath is noticed but not a missing wine bottle? I think we can safely rule that out.

Then you make a statement like "The reality is that Sophie was probably to the forefront of Bailey's thoughts"... based on complete speculation.

So, fixed your post:

Probably a nonsense pedaled by someone trying to find a reason to propose it was Bailey.

"Nobody said the only water used was the bath"

There is no evidence that any other bathroom fixture was used.

"A dirty ring in the bath is noticed and not a missing bottle of wine?"

The wine was more likely to have been assumed consumed by one of the numerous welcome visitors. I wouldn`t notice a bottle of wine going missing from my house.

"based on complete speculation"

Actually no. It is based on Leo Bolger`s description of the lead up to Alfie`s introducing Sophie to Bailey on West Cork Podcast.

"Why would Bailey go to a random house when there was a separate studio cottage?"

First of all it wasn`t a random house. It was the holiday home of the French TV producer that Bailey was clearly initially anxious to be introduced to. Of course there also has to be something of interest that gets you all riled up to go out for those famous long night time walks. Was it you or perhaps someone else who was recently going on about the studio being part of the family home and not a separate entity down the road at all? If he was banished to the studio after that assault, are you sure there was hot water available there? God forbid he had to buy his own alcohol.

You should take a listen to the West Cork Podcast. It undermines a couple of your core beliefs that you have pedaled on these threads to undermine the case against Bailey for some time now.

Other posters have taken apart this entire line of argument on multiple points.

"There is no evidence that any other bathroom fixture was used."

Why would there be? Some actions don't leave any evidence as has been pointed out to you. This is all then more ironic given that you have absolutely zero evidence or reasonable suggestion it was Bailey.

And this is from the Irish Independent:

"Ms Hellen claimed that Sophie suspected that someone was getting into the house to use her water and bathroom facilities while she was away."

You're seriously arguing that a ring in a bath was noticed and not a missing bottle of wine! This is speculation on top of speculation which has no credibility.

So you know Bailey had access to another property, a property that might reasonably expected to have hot water... yet still continue with this speculation he would go to another place 4km where he could be seen, on the off chance he might be able to get into it and it would have hot water and wine? The proposition makes no sense.

Leo Bolger of the miraculous memory and the suspiciously light suspended sentence for a sophisticated drugs operation? He has no credibility either. Remembering unimportant (at the time) social interaction years later - nope. Nor does he say that Sophie was to the "forefront" of Bailey's thoughts at time of the murder if ever.

Nobody involved suspected Bailey, the locks were changed. It was pretty obvious who was suspected as you well know from following the case.

Does the West Cork podcast suggest Bailey as the person using the bath? Which episode? Or are you misrepresenting them to support your own invented claim?

It is still a miraculous memory, to remember a brief social interaction from years earlier, utterly unimportant at the time it occurred, to which he was just a bystander.

Reason one to be suspicious of it.

Did Leo Bolger ever say when this happened? It was not recent to the murder by all accounts, and yet he recalls it years later but not after the murder. Doesn't add up and never has.

He didn't disclose this information directly after the murder which was when it would be obvious to anyone sincere that it when it was most timely?

So again that should immediately make people suspicious of the story.

Here we have him putting himself forward because a newspaper was looking for someone to corroborate their defence in a libel case. Purely out of the goodness of his heart for sure.

A man running a sophisticated drugs operation who got off with a suspended sentence. Who knows what shenanigans such a man could get up to.