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

Looking at this it seems to have been identified as Sophie's:

The second testing was done by a scientist in the Forensic Science Laboratory in Wetherby, Yorkshire, UK. She used 11 STRS, and unfortunately the file does not record the profiles she generated, only her conclusions. She tested only two exhibits, the first was a blood flake (EG9) taken from the back door handle at the house. This time she had more success than the tests in Northern Ireland. She was able to generate a partial DNA profile from a blood flake taken from the door handle. Although this was a partial profile, she said the result provides “very strong support” for the assertion that the blood flake came from Sophie Toscan du Plantier.

https://www.reddit.com/r/MurderAtTheCottage/comments/vraf9q/forensic_tests_on_the_body_exhibits_and_crime/

Somebody could easily have been with her, but it would have been unclear if it was that particular evening and night, or the evenings or nights before.

The ultimate evidence to say who was there and who not would have been fingerprints, say on the empty glass of wine, etc… If nothing was found, and the caretaker's were only found together with Sophie's it would have been it from a police perspective. Unless the visitor cleaned up all possible prints.

This all would certaninly not have been enough evidence that the fingerprints would have been the murderer's. The visitor could have visited the night or nights before.

Also, I believe Sophie's last known contact was when she spoke on the phone with her husband after she was ready for bed.

Presumably any visitor would be gone by then.

At least, it is strange that she didn't mention having had someone over. And no fingerprints or DNA ever detected that would point at a suspect. And then she is found murdered the next morning - not in her house, but in the entrance lane.

I take the point that Mrs Hellen knew the house best, but of course Sophie had been there a day or two, leaving washed dishes on the drainer, moving things around etc.

I don't think the case is very strong for an evening visitor.

We will probably never know the answer to this one. Also two glasses of wine, doesn't mean two people were drinking. Suppose it was her both times, just taking a fresh glass and being lazy in washing them later on? Or pulling a chair just to rest her legs, not to have a visitor over? It could have been any number of reasons. And yes, as you said, if somebody was visiting her, he or her would never come forward voluntarily as he or she would most likely be suspect, especially if no alibi was there.

I often believe the reason for the blood stain at the door is that Sophie was killed then and there, or at least knocked unconscious at the the door, and later carried to the site where she was found and "finished off" with the cavity block.

The murderer may have come on foot rather than driven. Suppose, I was the murderer, if I would have come with a car, I would at least have taken the cavity block with me, disposed of it somewhere in the sea, water would have washed everything off the block, that is if the block would ever be found.

And then, why was she left clearly on the side of the road? Why not dump the body behind the brambles and briars? Alfie and Shirley would have just driven past, nobody would have suspected, only that she didn't return the rental car, or arrive at Paris at the airport. A cell phone rininging, Sophie not answering, I'd say it would have or could have been as long as maybe midday that the body would have been discovered at the earliest. The murderer would have had more time to get away.

What would have been Sophie's motivation to even answer the door at midnight or in the very early hours? And to whom? Probably only to somebody she knew or expected? But whom? ( honestly, even as a man, I wouldn't have opened up the door to a stranger at night time) Wouldn't it be more likely to expect somebody in the morning, even if it was the early morning?

All questions we don't and will most likely never have the answer to.

Just to clarify my position here, as I realise it seems I may be pushing an angle of someone visiting with Sophie the night before. I don't believe this to be the case either, I just think it is intriguing that Josie went so far as releasing this information to the press, giving her own opinion etc. Marie Farrell for example was a nobody, busybody, basically, sticking her nose in and causing trouble, Josie was a prime witness no matter what. Giving her opinion, and in addition counter to what the guards believe is extremely careless. Just another example of how the investigation got off on completely the wrong footing from the get go.

I think hiding the body may have been difficult, and also there was a lot of blood. I image that trying to cover up may not have been successful, and perhaps could have run the risk of being caught in the act. Shirley could literally have come down the lane at any point, especially if she happened to hear something.

Also the 'getaway' may not have been that far. Once you were out on the main roads, you're mostly free and clear. If you lived nearby perhaps you'd be home in 10 minutes, even 60 minutes would cover half of cork and Kerry. The risk/reward was not worth it imo.

I remember Ireland of the 90ies as a place where illegal dumping was often taking place, so seeing something in a field near or behind brambles or briars would probably not have been too much out of the ordinary, - or only out of the ordinary in a cul de sac road setting, - nobody only those who live there come and go, and maybe the odd visitor.

I would agree that Josie would have been the only one who had a clear understanding about the house, what was there in terms of every item, and would have had a very strong idea on how she left it for Sophie, and how things looked like after the murder.

Marie Farell was the wrong person in every sense. Not credible, running a shop not known how profitable that venture was, seeking a bit of attention here and there, and seeing unshaven men in dark coats loitering while Sophie was visitng her shop, "seeing" a man at night out alone. Most statements from her are not credible at all, in every sense.

Josie at least had enjoyed the trust of Sophie, looking after the house. It's not known if there were ever arguments, shortcomings or differences of opinion? And even if, she was still looking after the house.

Apart from Josie I would guess her strongest bonds in the area would have been with the Ungerers. Apart from Josie, it would have been likely that the Ungerers were the only ones who knew in advance about her visit around Christmas.

I don't think Sophie would have "enjoyed" a longer talk with a glass of wine with Bailey. Bailey drank Whiskey and Beer as far as we know and certainly wasn't good company, even worse if alcohol was involved. The "scene" at the cottage would have looked more like a fight soon after his visit, but these are all guesses of mine. I also don't think Bailey considered a sexual intention with Sophie, Sophie's visit around Christmas would most likely have been a surprise to Bailey as well. If he wanted casual sex, he would certainly not wait for 6 months. Again, it also could have been, but in my gut feeling it seems unlikely.

Many aspects were wrongly approached by the Gards in every sense. For instance, everyone understood soon that Sophie and Daniel's marriage was nearing an end. What would Sophie's plans have been in case of divorce? Would she have continued working for Daniel after a possible divorce? How much in child support and as a divorced mother would Sophie have been entitled to, and who would that from a legal point of view differ if she continued to be working for her then future ex husband? Did she consider moving to Ireland to the cottage as it was suggested by some with her son?

These are all excellent points. I would guess, apart from Josie, the Ungerers, her husband and somebody at the pub nobody knew Sophie was even in Ireland. Maybe Bruno? Alfie and Shirley would probably have been surprised, a car parked, lights on, and a neighbour they didn't particularly like….

One would expect the husband to come and visit Ireland, if it's his wife, who just died, regardless of the state of the marriage. It's also understood that there was a life insurance taken out on Sophie and a rather large amount was paid out upon her death. It's a bit too convenient for Daniel, especially since he was already in bed with his next wife, whom he married soon after. Even the not too competent Guards in Ireland would have spotted this with ease.

Thus I always believed that there was some form of "French connection" to the case. Not impossible to think and examine.

Also Bruno's alibi is sort of vague, I think. Anobody posing as Bruno, any man of similar size and description, could easily give a signature to a telephone techncian, a brief look at a fake ID, and the technician wouldn't have noticed the difference anyway….

With only Sophie present and the Richardsons not there, one would expect that the nights in this area would have been dead quiet, maybe some foxes or other animals making noise, and every now and then the wind blowing. Anything out of the ordinary would have been heard by Alfie and Shirley. But they didn't hear a thing? Or were they involved?

Did the police ever investigate Alfie and Shriley's finances? Anything unusual, out of the ordinary? ( drug activity in mind, anything would have stood out rather obviously…)

One of the most obvious lines of enquiry in the absence of any DNA or fingerprint evidence would have been following the money. Looking for any unusual financial transactions of all the neighbours or people Sophie knew and was in contact with.

Anybody, from Bruno, her husband Daniel, Alfie and Shirley, even the Ungerers and Josie. I think this alone could have lead somewhere. What was their normal income and what was out of the ordinary? Or even large withdrawals as well…. However I haven't read anything in this case about this. Only that Daniel avoided a costly divorce and received a life insurance payout upon his wife's death is known.

The general incompetence by the police must have surprised everyone, especially Bailey. Compared to the UK they were far inferior. Bailey volunteered his DNA, to eliminate him. His thought processing was logic, if his DNA wasn't on the scene, it simply wasn't him. Period, case closed for him. However Bailey was wrong about that one. I am sure he didn't expect that. Furthermore, Bailey had no local support, other than his partner Jules he wasn't liked, nobody stood up for him, etc… He was easy prey for the incompetent Gards.

I wonder did anyone else volunteer their DNA, or in fact if even more interesting would be if anyone refused to do so? I wouldn't be surprised however if the guards just didn't bother following up on anyone else. What is unfortunate is the timing of the results. They likely thought that it was going to come back positive for Bailey, and once it didn't (6 weeks after his arrest/questioning I believe) the window of opportunity was well closed.

Just revisiting the blood stain. When I look at it again it appears to me that it maybe came from the sleeve of a jacket/jumper rather than a hand. The position is basically off the end of the handle, which is not where you would typically put your hand when pushing down on it.

Also there doesn't appear to be any blood on the handle itself, indicating the hands/gloves were clean at that point (perhaps gloves taken off etc.), or perhaps they tried to clean up both the handle and door, but the door held onto the blood easier than the metal handle perhaps.

I mean we have heard Sophie was somewhat feisty, and it would just take another hot headed person and some significant disagreement for things to escalate. Things like road rage etc, are pretty common causes of murder. I would think that in the escalation the perpetrator maybe began getting physical, and then realised they may have taken it too far. If they knew Sophie at all, and she could recognise them, they might be willing to murder them, hence the block. A lot of murders happen due to reputation control, not necessarily financially motivated.

Looking at the pictures again, in one of the few home videos that was released Sophie is sitting on the chair by the window in the kitchen looking out in the direction of the gate. Ominous really, quite chilling.

Note in the forensic photos the chair is actually turned 90 degrees parallel to the window, which would make it even easier to sit on and look out. I wonder was she observing things out the window down at the gate and then went on down.

@jesuisjuste I'd guess it's more like a fireside set of tongs, shovel and poker near the bellows. An axe, even a light one, would have a much sturdier handle.

The taller object at the right of the bellows is more difficult to figure out but again the handle, although heavier, is too light to be an axe.