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

It's an anonymous Internet forum.

I'll remain sceptical.

Ah now it makes sense why that Rows Grower account only replies to people he’s trying to antagonise.

I don’t know if it is anything to do with the incident you described but there was an incident at a house in Toormore in 2005.

The man who shot C Farrell had been accused of stalking M Farrell.

For such a small little area of West Cork it sure had its fair share of criminality and lawlessness. Not quite the rural idyll many would have imagined.

More here:

Irish Independent, June 1st 2006

Husband of Bailey libel witness fined €1,000 for attack

James McKenna: ‘was hit repeatedly’ during attack

Chris Farrell: convicted despite not guilty plea

Ralph Riegel

THE husband of the key witness in the Ian Bailey libel case, Marie Farrell, has been convicted of assaulting a man he claimed had been stalking his wife and children. Chris Farrell (52) was convicted of assaulting James McKenna in a west Cork car-park.

He claimed that Mr McKenna (44) had been stalking members of his family, trespassing on his property and writing articles about his wife on the internet. This, he claimed, was in connection with the libel action taken by journalist Ian Bailey over newspaper coverage of the Sophie Toscan du Plantier murder investigation.

Farrell also claimed in court that, just three months before the car park confrontation, he had himself been assaulted by Mr McKenna with a firearm after he had called to his house to try and sort out their problems.

Inspector Dan Keane pointed out to the court that gardai had investigated the incident at Mr McKenna’s home on January 10, 2005 which resulted in Mr Farrell being taken to hospital.

However, while a file was sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions, a direction to take no action was given.

Chris Farrell yesterday denied the assault charge before Judge James McNulty in Bandon District Court. His solicitor insisted that any confrontation that occurred between the two men had happened because of long-running provocation.

But, in evidence, Chris Farrell of Ard Cleire, Ardmannagh, Schull, Co Cork admitted that he had struck Mr McKenna on March 29, 2005 in a car park behind the Spar Supermarket in Schull.

Mr McKenna insisted that the confrontation was entirely sparked by Chris Farrell. He told the Court he was merely trying to return home with his shopping when the defendant punched him in the stomach, threw his groceries all over the carpark and then repeatedly punched and pushed him.

Mr McKenna said that Farrell challenged him over whether he had been around his property, whether he had followed his wife and whether he had taken items from the Farrell’s garden.

“I have never stalked Mrs Farrell or any member of her family,” he insisted.

Chris Farrell told the court he had not “acted like a lunatic” in confronting James McKenna but acknowledged that he was “very annoyed”.

“It was getting beyond belief. It was a nightmare < a nightmare we are glad to be out of,” he said, explaining that his family had sold their Schull home and moved out of Cork. He said he was “very concerned” to learn that his wife, Marie, claimed that McKenna met her on the roadway in Ballydehob and was able to detail her movements from 6am.

“He had to be watching our house,” he said.

Mr McKenna vehemently denied any suggestion that he had provoked or targeted the Farrell family.

Judge McNulty said he was satisfied that Chris Farrell had assaulted James McKenna. He imposed a €1,000 fine saying that in light of all the evidence and the history between the two parties, the case did not merit a custodial sentence.

Interesting point. The question that occurs to me is who was doing all the snitching on those who were in that area.

Alfie Lyons was anonymously shopped to the Guards.

Thank you. B

Maybe. I was thinking more annoying a lot of people and making them paranoid and suspicious and looking for someone to blame. The Guards in the area don't seem to be pro-active that they'd be going around busting these guys on their own initiative... seems more like somebody tipping them off.

It's quite clear from their posts that bjsc has an uncommon insight into the forensic aspects of the case, which has been presented in level headed, factual terms. I don't recall her making any comment on Bailey's guilt or lack thereof - or of anyone else's - so I find it odd that the 'Bailey did it' contributors seem to presume that she doesn't believe Bailey did it when she hasn't offered any opinion that I recall. Then again, for some of these posters, anyone with a clear grip on the facts is to be feared I guess.

But literally it could be anyone writing that.

I've seen lines like "Officers did remove the rubbish sacks that she was taking to the tip"

How are we to know that it was true or not?

Actually I've some bad news for everyone who is taking everything that bjsc as gospel.

I'm bjsc.

More detail on Jim Sheridan's project

Shirley Foster's own statement refers to officers removing the sacks from the car before she was allowed to leave on the afternoon of 23rd December and there is a scenes of crime photograph which clearly shows a pile of rubbish sacks at the side of the road adjacent to the scene. I hope this clarifies matters. B

Well isn't that interesting.

For months, even years, people here have claimed that Gardai let Shirley Foster just drive off to the dump without batting an eyelid, never checking her car or anything.

Now you are here saying that they removed bags of rubbish from the car.

Probably the most ridiculous post I have read on this thread and I have read a few..

Please reread this placing yourself as the "drunken murderer" who committed the crime and tell me how you can wake up the next morning and the next and the next and know you didn't leave any DNA???

Laughable stuff.

I don't know whether Bailey murdered her or not but to say he (as the murderer) knew his DNA wasn't there is ridiculous..

Does that not POTaeNTIALLY apply to all posters?

Fr Tod, try and pick something more insightful/obvious. You probably have noticed that Bridget has only ONE STAR up. She also said that she has ‘joined ‘ Boards recently. So ———- .

The bags must have been put back in the car, otherwise why would Shirley drive to the dump?

A few points if I may;

Was there not other DNA found on Sophie's boot besides the blood spot pointed out by Dr Harbison?

In the Independent article you say all the doors were found locked closed in the morning:

The back door had 2 locks, a 'Yale' lock and a 'Chubb' lock. If Sophie left by the back door surely she would have left the key in the Chubb lock inside the back door, not in the front door. If she did in fact leave by the back door she could have then gone down through the lawn , the same route in reverse that Shirley foster took when coming back up to alert Alfie.

The front door had one lock and the fact the keys were in the lock on the inside made it more likely than unlikely she left by this door. The crime scene photos actually show this door unlocked with the sliding latch pulled back- open, which is rather odd (but then..). If she did leave by the front door her route down to the gate whether to investigate or if she was being chased would have to be down the lane and not via the lawn in front of the house. There is a retaining wall across the front of the house with no access to the lawn and pallet propped in the gap on the Western gable blocking the way, she would have to go East to where her car is parked and down the lane that way.

You're right about the block lying only partially on Sophies house-coat, but could the blood spatter on the block not have happened after the attacker was finished with the block and a final few stamps on her chest and neck area caused an exhalation of blood?