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

"could have"

Graham Dwyer and Joe O'Reilly cases were entirely circumstantial.

Can you think of any other case where the self proclaimed chief suspect for a murder admitted he did it to different people on 3 different occasions?

Oh yeah, and changed his story for the night of the murder leaving himself with no alibi.

No,

Because murderers, do not advertise their guilt.

He made no such admissions. He attempted some ill advised black humour which the Gardai susequently tried to manipulate.

He didn't change his story. He corrected his statement having been reminded. 7 weeks is a long time.

No knowledge of the victim, no evidence linking him to the crime, no evidence linking him to the scene and no motive.

I never said that.

What I said was that there is no evidence that Bailey knew Sophie

There is no evidence that he was at the scene.

There is no evidence that he had physical contact with her.

He had no motive.

Unfortunately , all across the globe there are many cases of men killing women they hardly know because they have been rejected by them. I came across an article on these ‘rejection’ killings in India that I thought was interesting (and profoundly sad)… On 3 December 2016, a 22-year-old dancer was shot dead at a wedding in Maur, Bathinda, after a guest shot her because she was unwilling to dance with him. Her husband said: “The men, four-five in number, were making advances towards the girls on the stage, and when we stopped them from climbing the stage, one of them fired the shot directly into the head of my wife,”

The accused, the groom’s friend, was drunk and wanted to dance on the stage with Kaur’s troupe. When he was refused that, he opened fire. Police arrested the prime suspect and three others. However, the reporting of the case passed this off as an accidental shooting or celebratory firing gone awry till some media outlets pointed out the discrepancy.

In another case, on April 29, 1999, Jessica Lall, a bartender at Tamarind Court, was shot dead by Manu Sharma, after she refused him a drink as he was already inebriated. Manu Sharma and the other accused were initially acquitted by a lower court after eyewitnesses, including actor Shayan Munshi, turned hostile in the case. There was a huge outrage over their acquittal, following which the Delhi High Court reopened the case and sentenced Manu Sharma to life imprisonment.

Per media report: “Both these cases involve men who somehow felt entitled to do whatever they wanted and the frustration of rejection turned them violent. Their victims were hardly known to them but that did not stop them”.

I believe if you look more into this “witness” and her husband, when you actually look into them both it’s eye opening the lives they had!!

he has a history of violence and she’s a conwoman wanted for benefit fraud etc and when you read the gsoc report she made a small fortune from her newspaper stories

The crime scene was contaminated by multiple people over the course of the morning including I believe Bailey himself who trekked up to the house and apparantly looked in the window.

How on earth could he forget he (allegedly) wrote a story for the Sunday Tribune on the night of the murder? It makes no sense. If he could forget that, what else could he blank out? Maybe he just blanked out everything. Wouldn't be the first time.

No knowledge of the victim, that's complete nonsense. You can argue how well he knew her, but to argue he didn't know of her at all is rubbish.

Black humour? Designed to confuse and disarm. Largely worked.

Apparantly motiveless crimes where the victim and perpetrator did not know each other are very common both in Ireland and elsewhere.

Randomer violence after drink taken is one of the most common causes of crime related deaths or serious injury in Ireland today. There are cases in the newspaper almost every day of the week.

So to say a person never attacked a stranger in Ireland after drink was taken is simply not true. It happens all the time.

Was it 4km by road or 4km cutting through fields?

By road.

The Bailey fan club all seem to think it's not him because he couldn't have walked the 6km to and back from the studio to Sophies house.

It's a ridiculous suggestion to believe and a very weak arguement to be putting forward and quickly becoming the only line of defence.

Furthermore, who is to say he didn't drive to the house or near to the house?

Oh yeah, the other couple of people who were all probably langers drunk and out of their heads on God knows what after being out all night didn't hear the car pull off or arrive back or didn't notice it missing when they came back at all hours of the night. FFS, get a grip.

Who's to say he didn't hop on a bike and cycle over there? Even now 27 years later, people don't bother to lock their bikes in deep rural Ireland.

The Cold Case Review Team are still putting the work into solving this case and when they are finished they will be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Bailey, the scumbag, was responsible.

That's a fair aul walk to and from, then carry out a brutal murder. Be up again at 10am after a heavy session and go about the day he was meant to have. I suppose he could have been running on Adrenaline.

I just started listening to the West Cork podcasts and one of the Gardai at the scene mentioned Bailey was acting stranger than when he had previously turned up a few months before as a Journalist to look into another death in the area (case of suicide). That time he was more relaxed and asked more questions. Not sure if I believe any of the Gardai on this case though, but an observation all the same.

Rosie has cracked it, he was on a bike. Keep up.

You keep saying he turned up for a fling.

You appear to be arguing with the garda version of events, not mine.

Secondly you have absolutely no clue what happened on the night.

Thirdly there is no motive that points to anyone else. Arguments over the opening or closing of a gate are not a credible motive, nor is the motive you suggested where the mistress bumps off Sophie for some gain using a hitman with a rock and block.

Do you at least accept the murderer was living in the area with a good knowledge of the area?