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

That's not half way down the lane, is it?

The newspaper editor who didn't know Bailey was a suspect, having printed several of his articles after he was nominated a suspect.

Not surprising she was bitter. She knew very well what he meant.

It seems obvious to you from behind your keyboard yet the lady that he actually said it to (who was entrusted and experienced enough to be appointed Editor of The Sunday Tribune) was flabbergasted by it, reported it to the Gardaí and never spoke to Bailey again.

You know it was said by Bailey in the context of him being questioned about being the main suspect in the murder case yeah?

Which of his other confessions would you take more seriously?

None of them.

He didn't "admit" it. None of them are direct plain admissions.

This is your interpretation of some offhand or vague remarks - an interpretation that is not supported by the DPP. Something that's been pointing out multiple times on the thread.

If you rate one of the confessions the most obvious not to be taken seriously which one would you rate as the least obvious not to be taken seriously or is it that you class the others as a dead heat?

The Editor of The Sunday Tribune to whom the confession was made obviously took it very seriously and was in shock after hearing it, reported it to the Gardai, and pretty much sacked Bailey over it.

You obviously, for some reason known only to yourself, take her opinion less seriously than that of Malachy Reid the 14 year old boy who Bailey also confessed to.

Its a link but I wouldnt consider it a strong one.

Having seen what the Guards got up to on this case, and some other cases around the country... I wouldnt automatically consider assume a lie is guilt. The innocent can lie too.

Bailey may have lied about a tenuous link to Sophie, he may even have lied about his alibi - and still be innocent.

He could have told the truth about the scratches... Marie Farrell may have lied about about seeing him... and he still be guilty.

That is the maddening thing about this case... we have enough data to argue and pick over but not enough so far to be sure.

He is, was and will be forever the only known credible suspect. Unless you know otherwise?

Someone obviously did it, it certainly wasn't wild horses :)

Cue someone posting a theory about how wild horses could have done it!

Bill Fuller is a hysterical wreck... this is from the DPP report.

On the 20 February 1997 Bill Fuller, his partner and child had gone to the causeway at Kealfadda Bridge in order to pursue his own investigation of the murder. He was with his wife and child. He saw a man whom he thought to be Bailey and this caused them to run away in blind panic believing the man had seen them. They ran a considerable distance until they reached Toormore Beach where they ran along a lane way which led out onto the roadway to Goleen. Screaming and roaring they ran in front of the first car to approach them. It was being driven by a Ms. Breda O’Reilly. Her initial reaction was not to stop, but when she saw that Bill Fuller was carrying a three-year-old child under his arm she thought the child was sick. When Ms. O’Reilly lowered the car window both Bill and Kerri Fuller screamed at her that the murderer Ian Bailey was down the road, pointing towards Kealfadda Bridge. Ms. O’Reilly drove them directly to Goleen where Ms. O’Reilly contacted the Gardaí. In her statement Ms. O’Reilly describes the terrible state of shock and fear that the Fullers were in and she stated that they feared for their own safety.

It transpires that a local farmer was working near their van that day and they had mistaken him for Ian Bailey in their high state of apprehension.

Did you actually read the article you linked, or did you just read the bit that was not paywalled?

Here it is:

It' actually hilarious;

Mr Fuller, who was removed from court last week after he allegedly went up to Mr Bailey and said, "I've got you now," yesterday said he had been misheard.

He apologised to the court for his comments and said he had remarked to Mr Bailey: "You've got sweat on your brow."

So now you are attacking Bill Fuller. This coming after implicating Daniel, Alfie and Shirley as stronger suspects than Bailey. And after denying Bailey was a known violent hothead.

And you wonder why I said you see Bailey as wronged saint. Not made up at all. An incredibly accutate portrayal of you.

Bill Fuller was telling the truth. The story of what happened on the bridge is irrelevant and part of a pattern of distraction from you which has involved attacking witnesses and never addressing what they say.

Another distraction.

Can you account for how Bailey and Fuller knew accurate forensic details years before it was common knowledge and only months after the murder?

What accurate forensic details are in there that could only be known by the murderer? I didnt read anything that people couldnt put together from 2+2 = 4 from where the body was found.

As Bailey said... Mr Bailey has denied this and said he was repeating what others were saying about him.

And remember the Guards were spreading all kinds of rumours about the murder and Bailey to locals as is noted in the DPP report. We see the fruit of that in the panic driven hystria of Bill Fuller posted above.

So you admit to arguing black is white - good we cleared that up.

I admit to using the ignore function which I will now be using once again to good effect!