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

The poster that says they are Bridget posted documents here a while back with the account of how the Garda was satisfied it was an old injury.

I know people want to think there is a lot more to this case than Ian Bailey and that it being Bailey is just not juicy enough.

Its natural to sit here and wonder is there something else to it all, something the authorities didn't see but that one of us sees.

It's why true crime and unsolved cause "media" is so popular these days.

We sometimes like to see ourselves as smarter than the authorities also.

But after listening to the West Cork podcast and watching a few documentaries about this and also the real lack of any media putting forward a strong alternative I personally feel that Bailey is the best suspect for this.

That doesnt establish it as an actual fact. So you are guilty when you stated it as such of whatever you were so bothered about in your last post. S

He didnt go round with a bandage in all the time, there are no such reports. So why that day. Maybe a perfectly innocent explanation but there was clearly some recent issue.

The case has not been solved. Police forces do get the suspect wrong and miscarriages of justice occur.

The Garda investigation was botched and we have unsafe conduct with witnesses and evidence lost and logs tampered with. The integrity and competence of the investigation is very much open to question.

Something that has been pointed out to multiple times in the thread and you just ignore and treat as if it never happened.

All of that points to a higher than usual likelihood the Guards have the wrong suspect

Witness statements from Jules and from Marie Farrell.

Baileys coat.

The wine bottle.

The Garda Jobs book was tampered with and had pages deliberately removed

The gate could not be located at the timr of the GSOC investigation.

https://www.thejournal.ie/grave-concern-over-missing-evidence-in-du-plantier-murder-investigation-4161933-Aug2018/

The media say otherwise that bailey is the focus of the review

What about the unknown DNA sample, is that not a suspect?

Have you listened to the Bandon tapes?

What exactly is in the Bandon Tapes that is so incriminating?

Not sure what point you think you are trying to make splitting hairs about whether it was lost or destroyed or tampered with.

Its GSOC reporting these things.

The gate could not be located at the time of the GSOC investigation - chain of evidence failure.

It all speaks to the investigation being of dubious integrity and competence which was the original point made. Are you going to claim otherwise and if so what is the basis for your claim?

In what way.

What was said ?

From what I believe there was no great revelations in them.

But if there was please elaborate on them.

The main point I got was their relationship with Marie Farrell was extremely friendly and their chat was unprofessional. It implies that they could have coerced Marie into lying as a witness. It was almost like Marie was one of them. There is no doubt that their relationship with Marie was improper and went way beyond boundaries. Hopefully Marie tells the truth some day.

Read the article above re gsoc

Its not news that the eyewitness testimony is dodgy and there was Garda shenanigans

I disregard Marie Farrell completely

exactly.
I’ve pretty much given up on this thread as it’s full of baileyites, keep talking sense please.

If it quacks like a duck folks.

1. Do any of us know AN other person other than Bailey killed Sophie .

No

2. Do any of us know Bailey killed Sophie .

No

Unlike many here in denial re point ,1, who think they know bailey didn't kill her

I am not in denial about 1 or 2, there's no proof either way

Im not going over all the old ground re evidence

I'll put it this way

Very unlucky for a man with 0 evidence against him to be convicted of murder in a french court

I think we can all agree on your two points above. The only difference between you @drury.. , @Fr Tod Umptious etc. and the rest of the people on here is that you guys are happy with the status quo, happy to draw a line in the sand for whatever reasons….

Most of the rest of the people on here believe there is likely further information available, as well as further opportunity for testing of samples (no brainer imo), which may open up a new line of enquiry, or enhance an old one. Many loose ends have been left open. This would also include potentially further evidence proving Bailey's guilt by the way.

By definition, if the cold case team are open minded and continue to investigate open lines of enquiry (in particular the unknown DNA), re-interview witnesses etc. then further evidence can be found against the killer, Bailey or not.

To put it another way, some people on here want to find proof of the killer's guilt, and some people don't….

Stop putting words in my mouth.

I'm not happy with the status quo, I'd much prefer that the case get solved.

But I am happy in my opinion that Bailey is the prime suspect and I am happy to acknowledge that there has never been enough evidence against him to bring a charge, and also that the French trial was sham.

I also believe that just because the Garda investigation was a mess it doesn't automatically mean that Baily can't be the killer.