Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1258259260261263

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 100 ✭✭PolicemanFox




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    What's Leo Bolger talking about here ? (French is double Dutch to me and subtitles are crap)

    Also, (sorry for all the questions), but is there any mention in Sophie's diaries or journals about Alfie and Shirley or Leo and Sally Bolger?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,277 ✭✭✭nc6000


    Apparently Bailey dropped in some food to Alfie and Shirley as they couldn'd drive into town while the end of their drive was being "preserved" as a crime scene.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    I gathered that much, but my question was to @PolicemanFox. If Bailey was allowed up to Alfie's with Leo Bolger, was it before or after he went up there with Jules? What was his excuse for his visit with Jules on Fri 27th?

    Edit;

    Just looked again and it appears Leo Bolger says it was 6 or 7 days after the murder, so 3 or 4 days after he had been up to Alfie's with Jules. What was his excuse for that visit?

    Post edited by chooseusername on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    The whole murder case of Sophie Toscan du Plantier shines a very bad light onto the French jucial system. Either it's flawed by design, or it's flawed due to influencial friends, - otherwise I can't explain it.

    So Bailey was suspected and arrested because of a statement by Marie Farrell which was later withdrawn. She called it "total bullsh…." that she's seen Bailey on that night. She also stated that she was coerced to that statement.

    And even if Bailey would have been out that night at Kealfadda Bridge it doesn't prove murder not in an Irish or a British court. Remember that Marie Farrell was out at the same time with a man at Kealfadda Bridge and nobody tried to pin the murder on her and that mysterious male compagnion.

    Sophie's son believes that there is "hundreds of evidence" ( as stated in one video interview ) pointing to Bailey? Apparently he's putting this statement of his in context to Bailey beating his partner Jules not in terms of real evidence.

    In Ireland the police may have done a bad job, but not the judge as there is no evidence at all to connect murderer to crime scene or victimg to ever convict Bailey.

    I do understand that Sophie's son is upset that the murder is still unsolved. but is the French judicial system really that flawed?

    The idea that under the French judicial system one can be sentenced to prison for murder without any evidence beyond reasonable doubt scares me. And even if evidence is withdrawn the French judicial system can still used it against somebody ? ( suppose it would have been myself being out that night at Kealfadda Bridge, or any of us….) Even worse that Sophie's son believes in that.

    I still doubt to this day that the conviction for murder of Ian Bailey would have stood up at the European court of justice.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 869 ✭✭✭Gussie Scrotch


    Its a bit more nuanced than that.

    The French system incorporates a check and balance system at every stage of the investigative process.

    Our system simply allows the investigation to proceed to the point where the Gardai arec satisfied that they have a case and present the evidence file to the dept of Public Prosecutions for scrutiny.

    When the evidence was presented to the French courts, it had not been through the French investigative process and was taken at face value.



  • Registered Users Posts: 869 ✭✭✭Gussie Scrotch


    My guess is that it was an attempt to get an early/inside track on the situation to enable him to steal a march on the other reporters.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,598 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Elements of the French judicial system would have to be aware though of this distinction when dealing with extra judicial cases and evidence.

    That it should not just be presented to court like that.

    I think it was done that way because it suuited them.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 214 ✭✭jesuisjuste


    The way it works from my understanding is that they recognise that somebody did the crime, and therefore when all the evidence is gathered appropriately, and investigation is conducted properly, then whoever the 'bouquet' of evidence points towards is the highest likelihood killer. If there was no clear direction, the investigators would admit defeat and it would not be taken to trial.

    In this case it is a mashing together of the Irish investigation team, and the French judicial system. They would say that the (Irish) investigating team felt there was more than enough to go to trial, and the evidence only pointed to Bailey. The Irish team did not admit any evidence that pointed elsewhere, and furthermore claimed they were convinced it was Bailey. Therefore it went to trial and everything was taken as gospel on the French side. It's a nonsensical situation, but the French felt that the Irish justice system broke down, and therefore they should take it on.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    ….



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,627 ✭✭✭thecretinhop


    Such a tragic case.

    My mind keeps coming back to this 90pc of cases are someone close either near by or husband etc.

    Alfie was having a row with her he did have cuts on his hand very weird they heard or saw nothing (in staircase audio was done to see could music drown out screams)

    Was Alfie the one having baths whoever that was it's dodgy

    They though the gross corruption of the guards pages missed etc etc steers you to protecting someone higher up.

    So many angles it's like a snow sperhe shake it you get a new picture..



  • Registered Users Posts: 163 ✭✭Zola1000


    Still fine for french consider the Irish system to be broken down and yet they still take the files and happy to reach the conclusion it was bailey. Don't want any Irish investigation taking place on french soul. Was french system not broken not to in way unearth the suspicions Sophie's family had of Daniel and the life he was leading and if he even cared for Sophie. In any estimation his behaviour in not travelling to Ireland immediately after murder and not willing to be involved in investigation or welcoming a new family with his partner with months later is ultimately on par with any of chief suspects for entire case. That could be bouquet of evidence in itself if it was process adopted in Irish system.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 236 ✭✭champchamp


    I don't remember seeing an "unopened bottle of champagne" in the kitchen photos, is that correct?



  • Registered Users Posts: 100 ✭✭PolicemanFox


    Ah Yes, thank you! I remember seeing that now but I had forgotten. The problem is that the Gardai made statements about this which don't mention Leo - see statement from Garda John Galvin below. Garda Galvin maintains he walked Bailey and Jules to Alfies and back again. If Bailey tagged on behind Leo, why didn't the Gardai tell him to give the briquettes to Leo instead. Alfie made a statement in January 1997 to say than Bailey called him and asked if he needed anything and he told him to bring briquettes.

    So is Leo correct? Is the Garda Galvin covering his rear? I don't think we can say. Alfie did say the Bolgers called around that Sunday, so he could have been walking up with him, but the Gardai maintain they made sure nobody unauthorized entered the scene.

    It is an interesting documentary but it contains a lot of misconceptions and falsehoods. I believe those pictures of Bailey peering in the window were taken by Colman Doyle who was working with Caroline Mangez for Paris Match. This would mean they were taken in early January. In any case you can see all the vegetation was stripped at that stage so it was after the cordon was lifted. It is very misleading for the documentary to suggest this is a photo of Bailey entering the crime scene. The interview just before with Catherine Mangez says "Bailey was on the scene even before the Gardai arrived" and was talking about it being a murder before anyone else did. Mangez didn't arrive in Cork until January and she didn't even meet Bailey until 11th January so she is just repeating rumour. We know that the 999 operator gathered it was a murder from Alfie on the first call and the Schull gardai were calling for a scene of crimes detective over the radio, so the whole county knew it was a murder by 11am. Unless everyone is in a massive decades long conspiracy Bailey was not on scene before the Gardai arrived.

    It is very unfortunate the Gardai didn't interview Leo Bolger after Bailey was a suspect or if they did it was decades later. So there is nothing about Bailey in his Garda statements. In his first statement Leo was very clear that he had no personal contact with Sophie since 1994 when he fixed a window and she paid him. Yet in the documentaries and podcasts he is telling everyone he was workingon her roof in 1995 when Bailey was working for Alfie and was allegedly introduced to Sophie. So this doesn't quite fit with his earliest, and presumably most accurate statements.

    Statement of Garda John Galvin of Bantry Garda Station taken on 12/02/2002 at Bantry Garda station by D/Sgt E O’Callaghan

    I remember the 27th of December 1996. I was on duty at the scene of the murder of Sophie Du Plantier as part of a search team under the supervision of Sgt P. F. Looney. I commenced duty there at 9am and was on duty there for most of the day. I recall at some stage during the day Ian Bailey and a female who was unknown to me at the time, being accompanied by Garda Martin O’Sullivan past the cordon point and up through a field towards Alfie Lyons’ house. Garda O’Sullivan requested that I escort these people up past the rear of Sophie Du Plantier’s house to the gate of Alfie Lyons’ house. I cannot recall how long they stayed there, but I recall escorting them back down from Alfie Lyons’ house, past Sophie Du Plantier and back along the route they had taken until they reached the cordon point where Garda O’Sullivan was on duty. Ian Bailey, who was known to me at the time and the female accompanying him, did not interfere with the scene or did not approach the house other than to walk along the laneway to Alfie Lyons’ house which was along the back of the Du Plantier house. This statement is correct.

    Signed: John M Galvin Gda



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,667 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    The missing "poker" (if poker it was) gives me much cause to ponder.

    Was this the same object as the "small hatchet for chopping firewood" that Mrs Hellen said was missing from the back porch? Or are two such items missing?

    Let's examine the possibilities - assuming that Mrs Hellen, who knew the house very well, is correct, and the fire-iron really is gone.

    The attacker did not enter the house, as far as anyone could tell; no blood, no fingerprints, no DNA was found there. So who took the poker?

    I can only surmise that Sophie herself picked it up and took it with her as she went to approach someone….

    You might think this is foolhardy (and it was) but many women would have done much the same as a kind of primitive protection. It is always a dangerous move, against an aggressive male, by the way; much more likely to to escalate the situation than to defuse it.

    We can only guess what happened next. But she was battered to death and this weapon is still missing. I really do wonder where it is now.



  • Registered Users Posts: 100 ✭✭PolicemanFox


    If we are in a legal glasshouse, there are no unbroken panes left. I don't think either legal system comes out looking well out of this fiasco. It would be interesting to know if it would be any easier today to investigate a cross border homicide.

    Yes a judge is appointed to direct the investigation to make it fairer for the investigators and the accused, but doesn't always work out that way. The French system is intended to be inquisitorial - the ideal is to reach "la manifestation de la vérité" - they want to find the truth of what happened. Common Law in UK/Ireland/US is adversarial - to answer the question is only if a particular person is guity of a specific charge and nothing else. We have inquiries/tribunals/Grand Juries for questions of what happened.

    There is a good article explaining the French system and how it works here: Investigating Homicide investigation in France

    Post edited by PolicemanFox on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    I do get the feeling it fitted them, - and Sophie's parents as well as Daniel's family are apparently rather influential in France.

    But from what I've been following about the case it appears very much like a farce trial or a kangaroo court. One would expect more integrity from a judge in France.

    There was nothing in terms of evidence that could have linked Bailey to the crime. And even if Bailey would have been on Kealfadda bridge that night or not is also never ever evidence of murder. So even if Marie Farrell was telling lies or withdrew these lies later on, it's still no evidence of murder.

    Since when is being a man with an unpleasant personality and a presence out at night and not even close to the scene of the crime proof of murder? So when the Irish police coerced Marie Farrell, they must have known this coersion doesn't go anywhere, certainly not in an Irish court.



  • Registered Users Posts: 100 ✭✭PolicemanFox


    Leo and Sally Bolger and their phone number are mentioned in a list of items that need fixing including windows, and a shutter. Unfortunately this entry is not dated, but it is in a plain black book which seems to have stuff pertaining to Ireland, and the house. It appears after a thank you note from one house guest for a stay dated August/Sept 94 and before a bill from Josie Hellen dated January 1995, so I think these items were listed in 1994, matching Leo's first statement that he fixed a window & a chair in 1994, was paid for that and that was his last personal contact with Sophie.

    Alfie's telephone number appears in her agenda in the telephone numbers for Ireland, along with Leo & Sally Bolger, Richardsons, Josie Hellen, David Dukelow (heating guy), John Scully (electrician). There is no mention of Alfie & Leo otherwise. Note this is not from a "diary" but a year planner, with a two page spread per week where she would write in dates, meetings, flight details etc, like a filofax. She clearly used it extensively to plan her life diligently writing in lunch dates, meetings, parties, telephone numbers, flights etc.



  • Registered Users Posts: 100 ✭✭PolicemanFox


    If there was "influence" was rather useless. Daniel died in 2003 and his family basically did nothing about the case after that. Even before he died he didn't do all that much, it was really Sophie's parents continually writing letters pleading with the French prosecutor to do something for decades. Then they started writing to the DPP and others and just tried to keep the case in the headlines. Eventually the family (the Bouniol family, mostly) rallied together and created an association for the truth called ASSOPH.

    The trial was rather farcical, but they did present a lot more material. It was always realized that Bailey wasn't going to be there so they went through the motions without a defence. It was to accomplish two things - firstly give the family some closure or victory, but more importantly it was intended to be used as a lever to get a third European Arrest Warrant. The previous EAW failed because they asked for Bailey to be extradited to face questioning, not a trial. This was not allowed under the relevant extradition acts. So they had to have a trial. Then after the trial they argued they had a case for a third EAW also because the law had changed on extra-territorial jurisdiction.

    As regards Marie Farrell, the Gardai never expected it to end up in court, murders rarely go to trial. The Gardai just needed enough to arrest Bailey and put it to him that he was seen at the crime, they had his bloody clothes and his partner Jules had already shopped him in. Unfortunately for them Jules went on Pat Kenny 3 days later and recanted everything, the bloody clothes turned out to have his blood on them, not Sophie's and the Gardai were left with nothing except their dodgy witness.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,522 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    As far as I know you'd need a trial to convict somebody for murder.

    If say, Bailey's clothes clearly belonging to Bailey were found with Sophie's blood on them, it'll be beyond any reasonable doubt. He'd be looking at a life sentence in Ireland not 25 years in France.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 100 ✭✭PolicemanFox


    No. For example Malcolm McArthur was never tried, he simply pleaded guilty.

    Murder is a little different in that there is a mandatory life sentence, so the judge doesn't have discretion. That's why we have so many murder trials, there is no incentive to plead guilty. In any case this is what the Gardai thought, that once they presented all this to him, he would have broken down and confessed. If it came to trial they wouldn't have needed to call on Marie Farrell, forensics or whatever he revealed when he confessed would have been enough.

    I probably don't have to remind you how the Garda strategy of obtaining confessions didn't work out so well in the 1980s & 1990's. Even so they did catch serial killers Geoffrey Evans and John Shaw, so this is how they justified the technique.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    Alfie made a statement in January 1997 to say than Bailey called him and asked if he needed anything and he told him to bring briquettes."

    Bailey probably wanted an excuse to chat to Alfie for a news story, which he got. ("The stream of male visitors to the love nest")

     "but the Gardai maintain they made sure nobody unauthorized entered the scene."

    I suppose it depends on what they classed as the scene at the time, it could have been a few sq mtrs down by the pumphouse and gates. If they allowed Leo Bolger up to feed his horses it would have meant him passing along the back wall of Sophie's house close to her back door with the blood stain. Here's a photo posted earlier that @bjsc assumes is Leo making a detour to go up to his horses, this route would take him along by Sophie's back door. Difficult to date the photo, the only clue is the rubbish bags from Shirley's car, so can only say it was taken after 2pm on 23rd. Difficult to even say if the hire car is still there. But he must have been up to his horses from Tue 24th and this is probably his route.

    The route map is from MapGenie 1996-2000

    " In his first statement Leo was very clear that he had no personal contact with Sophie since 1994 when he fixed a window and she paid him."

    Did they have a falling out I wonder, maybe she felt she was being ripped off? Fairley common with holiday home owners. Or was there a jealous wife?



  • Registered Users Posts: 303 ✭✭head82


    This should be an interesting read when published on 12 September:

    https://www.easons.com/sophie-the-final-verdict-tpb-senan-molony-9781399742634?srsltid=AfmBOoqcyNMAEfP5KMadcPQOLdRgJH-c_ezqc0jaTRNOThbgPk6DJ79V

    Joe Duffy was due to talk about it yesterday but never got round to it. I'm not overly familiar with the authors credentials. Credible or sensationalist?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,598 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    I believe he has been described on boards as Senan Baloney so I'm not optimistic.

    Seems a bit too ready to give credence to Nick Foster who is known for making claims about the case that don't pan out… promising evidence that never surfaces. Similarly accepting tidbits he gets from Guards as fact.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 100 ✭✭PolicemanFox


    No, there is no evidence there was a falling out, its just that Sophie pretty much kept to herself. None of these people were her friends. She would wave and acknowlege her neighbours but they were only acquaintances or casual employees at most.

    What we do know is that the Hellens really disliked Alfie. This is where we get all the accusations about Alfie using the bath, dragging up ancient history about Alfie being arrested for drugs etc.

    Was that picture of Leo? It's hard to tell. Leo is quite short and was relatively young (early 30s) at the time. That man looks older but it is a long way off. It could be Finbarr Hellen and there were other farmers with animals in the area.



  • Registered Users Posts: 100 ✭✭PolicemanFox


    I have ordered it but I know I am going to find it very irritating.

    Also let's never forget. The Irish Daily Star two page spread "MURDERED SOPHIE'S TANGLED LOVE LIFE" which caused so much hurt to her family was something that Senan Moloney collaborated with Bailey on. He was the crime correspondant for the Star.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,667 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    LOL

    Senan Moloney is definitely not Inspector Alleyn!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,220 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    i think solving this would take Sherlock Holmes now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    16 Smackers?

    I think I’ll have 3 pints.

    It’ll be all the same **** he’s been spouting for the last 28 years.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,321 ✭✭✭MonkieSocks


    =(:-) Me? I know who I am. I'm a dude playing a dude disguised as another dude (-:)=



Advertisement