Ian Bailey RIP - threadbans in OP

It might seem trivial or unimportant to some, but where the block was before the attack is important I believe.

If it was at end of the open gate keeping it open, and Sophie fell on or near the block any attacker, if the were so inclined could just pick it up and use it spontaneously.

If on the other hand it was 15 or so yards away on the other side of the lane it points to a different attacker, someone who was aware of the block beforehand.

Also you would have to ask yourself, who in their right mind would lift the roof of the pumphouse to get a block to keep the gate open when the area was srewn with rocks and stones?

Yes that's fair point and exactly what I was trying get at with earlier post that going out of way to get block and or reason for it and would show knowledge of scene. It was easier use rocks stones there and as you say of block happened to be there then it was used but to go back up lane for it...wouldn't make sense...

Although just on this point, wasn't it said Lyons didn't see it hear anything..but they were up at 8am on that morning per statement if that's right ..so still dark to not see anything maybe down the lane..but might surely hear something if it did happen at 7am..

I'm watching the Netflix documentary and have reached the bit about the bonfire. A witness says she was walking past Bailey's house a few days after Christmas and a bonfire was smouldering in his garden. A guard says they found coat buttons in the remnants of that fire, but all the evidence was gone.

Previously, I was under the impression that they had examined his long overcoat, the coat he was thought to have worn that night, and found nothing. Which is it? If I had just murdered someone, that last thing I would do is set a fire in the garden to get rid of bloody clothing. I'd look for a less conspicuous way of disposing of the evidence.

@Padraig Mor

I would tend to think exactly that. Harbisons estimated time of death was really a guesstimate but it tied in with the sighting at the bridge. Another very dubious piece of evidence.

My understanding is that there were a few Individuals identified as potential suspects but they were pretty much ruled out as soon as the gardai fell head over heels with Bailey.

What followed wasn’t too dissimilar to what can be seen on these threads. The case was totally derailed by confirmation bias and group think.

I personally believe a very credible suspect was let fall through then cracks when the gardai focussed on Bailey. He was referred to earlier today but I won’t repeat it as the post got deleted. This person is no longer alive.

In another location I'd more consider a hit and run... given the location, and the reports of the injuries I'm not sure if it quite lines up as a classic hit and run \ being driven over. But it is possible there was some dispute involving a vehicle... perhaps Sophie blocking its path.

I'm keeping an open mind on the block. I'm not sure if the specialist interviewed in the Irish Independent had the full picture, or only partial information but does raise some interesting questions about blood spatter. The damage to the pump house requires an explanation.

They found buttons which "could be from a coat" was the phrasing ai recall. They could have also come from jeans for example.

The buttons were never independently examined to clarify exactly where they came from, maybe not possible given they'd been burned up for so long. So limited evidential value like much of this case... circumstantial.

Also found in the fire were mattress springs and shoe eyelets.

The Guards were peddling a theory of two coats... the one they took as evidence was a different one and the one worn on the night was burned. This doesnt tally with any witness accounts or video footage and the coat that was given was one of the pieces of evidence the Guards "lost".

Here's the link:

Tyre marks with forensics numbered markers;

There were no injuries to the lower body. Give forensics and Harbison some credit, I'm sure they would recognise a hit and run, even if hit while on the ground.

How would you account for Sophie's blue house coat being under the bloodstained block.

Where did you hear that the doctor noted rigor mortis?

I'm not doubting you, just curious.

One other aspect of the timing debate to consider is that Garda Prenderville noted, at the time of his arrival, that blood beneath Sophie's nostrils appeared to be wet.

It seems to me that ther are good reasons to think that the attack happened in the morning, rather than the middle of the night. If so, then a lot of the assumptions would need review.

For example, if it was a morning attack, the speeding car which overtook that guy on his way to work, comes into the picture.

According to the DPP, Bailey said he didn`t go back to Jule`s house until 11 am.

Jules said 9 am. Either way, it doesn`t get Bailey off the hook. Jules was in Goleen by about 11-30. Nobody knows where Bailey was, but the youngest daughter says he wasn`t at home and Jules was seen driving in the direction of Goleen alone. This leads to the speculation that he had returned to the scene of the crime.