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

Of course Bailey might have formed an "interest" on this very nebulous acquaintance. And so might anyone else who was fleetingly introduced.

There really wasn't much opportunity for any greater friendship than this, for several reasons:

1 Sophie was rarely at the cottage, and whenever she DID visit, she had always had a guest with her, prior to this occasion.

2 She didn't speak good English and all her closest contacts in the area spoke some French. Except for mere businesslike contacts like the housekeeper and her family, and the immediate neighbours.

Yes there's different views on this, I don't really follow some of your post, it reads like a rant

I haven't heard any solid theory as to why she would get beaten to death like this at the gate in a morning murder

I believe bjsc is likely correct in her assertion that this likely wasn't a random caller that morning, if it was a morning murder

Did bailey lie ?

Been done to death but both Ian and Jules changed their stories regarding the time prior to the murder

The alleged introduction supposedly witnessed by Leo Bolger was a few years before the party.
This is what the guest at Alfie’s party posted on the old closed thread “Murder at the Cottage”

It appears Sophie was not at her cottage at the time. It was a conversation between the party guests about Sophie .


My only knowledge is that I was at Shirley's retirement party in the Summer of 1996 at their house.

While there I got landed with talking to.. or rather listening to...Ian Bailey stoned blow holing for bloody hours. Alfie was a great but very slow cook.

I didn't actually know he was Ian Bailey until after Sophie's death when someone told me I had been talking to him. As far as I was concerned I had been amusing myself winding up a pompous tall English bloke with a beard who was full of his own self importance. And to be fair to him, he took it with good humour.

I was involved in the conversation where there was a reference made to who lived at the neighbour's house. As part of that conversation my impression from what was said was Bailey knew Sophie to see but not that she lived there.

So in short, I knew and worked with Alfie for many years. My then in-laws were very close friends of both Alfie and Shirley. I was at the location in late August 1996. I met Ian Bailey there.

Sophie was not in residence. Her house was unoccupied.

I did later meet him on campus at UCC about 2001 and we had coffee. He was not the same man. By then all that was keeping him going was anger and frustration. The arrogance was gone.

And no. I don't think he did it.

I do think he was planning on spinning being the accused into an eventual book once he was cleared. A tell all 'I fought the Law and I won' exposé.
He was a bit of a grifter, living casual job to casual job. This probably looked like his big break. Chat shows, interviews, book sales beckoned.

There is another post, I’ll try to dig it out.

Interesting indeed that Alfie did not mention introducing Sophie and Bailey. To be fair though, I probably wouldn't have mentioned it either as Bailey was saying he knew her by sight. For me, knowing that I had briefly introduced them a year earlier wouldn't be worth mentioning in that case. However had he completely denied knowing her by sight too, then I may have mentioned it to correct him.

Alfie's comments about Sophie certainly cement the allegations around their strained neighbourly relationship.

It is also interesting that Bailey had no interest in discussing Sophie, further evidence that he simply did not know her, or even had the slightest interest in her, a short time before the murder.

Thank you for digging out the OPs comments though, I tried and failed myself!

I guess the “hope” for progress in this case lies here- no guarantees though. Even if the person themselves can’t be identified, the make up of the DNA will point towards their background country - Irish, English, French other - and also potentially some distant relation if the samples can be legally shared on sites such as ancestry.com

“DNA samples taken from 134 exhibits at the crime scene are likely to be sent for further analysis. One male genetic profile on Ms Du Plantier’s boot has never been identified.Fingerprints also remain unidentified. A statement from a garda technical expert in 1997 said the “many fingerprints” identified in the house belonged to the housekeeper and members of her family, but “a few” fingerprints could not be identified.”

Also interesting that Bailey only "knew of" Sophie, and knew her "to see", yet did not know where she lived considering he was supposedly introduced to her on the lane outside her house a year or so before. The idea that he was lying and pretending not to know her at that stage is just nonsense.

Remember Alfie and Shirley and the Bolgers were thick as thieves, Bolgers had horses on Alfie's land and both Leo and Sally Bolger visited Alfie and Shirley regularly when tending their horses. Alfie would find it difficult to contradict Leo's story about the introduction, hence the 80 -90%.

here's the link,

(page 83)

That’s a hard leap for my mind to make- it would be even harder for a jury to make that leap. Theres no history of Bailey becoming fanatical over someone he just met or saw from a distance - his history of partner abuse happened in a well established relationship - the fact that there’s no writings from him about Sophie prior to her death would also support that view- Bailey communicated a lot through the medium of writing - if he were obsessed he would have written something down - of that I’m certain

So the memories can’t be vague OR precise?

What’s left? And why are half a dozen separate people lying to frame an innocent man?

There's more than one way to skin a cat!

no, there really isn’t. They would have to extract a new dna sample and generate autosomal results which can be used in this way. Existing samples wouldn’t do.

Ah well if we are to believe he burnt stuff

Who's to say he kept those writings

I already put forward theories as to way he may have feigned ignorance of Sophie

People feign ignorance or disinterest when there is an interest or attraction

Ita niave to be certain he would be straight up in this regard

It also might be the case that none of what you’ve posted ever happened - and that he’s completely innocent of any wrongdoing against her - much easier to believe in my view than going down these elaborate theory routes - show me hard evidence and I’ll instantly change my position but these “theories” are fine if you wish to spend your time dreaming them up but don’t expect them to catch on

Where have I ranted?

You seem to be offended that someone doesn’t accept your “theory” - well there will be others too so I wouldn’t waste much energy on that.

I’m just stating such theories are far fetched especially as there’s zero evidence to support them. You’re the person who dreamed up this narcissist reaction of Baileys espying Sophie from afar and developing a fixation with her.- it’s not something I’d “rant” about, I just find the whole theory comical if I’m honest 🤪

“Agree 

That's the way I'm thinking 

Narcissistic, fantasist , violent would-be poet bailey

Attractive mysterious curt/rude french lady 

It wouldn't take much to spark his interest there and the outcome is predictable”

Don't know what that is

Are you disputing that bailey may have burnt anything incriminating in his diaries

I believe it's a possibility

It's not a FACT