Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed. **Threadbans lifted - see OP**

Where is this quote from?

I believe I read somewhere in the thread that Sophie was an early riser. What time counts as "early rising"?

Apparently, too, she liked these comfortable shoes and used them as "indoor shoes" on the cold tiled floor of the cottage; you wouldn't necessarily use socks in that context, though you might venture outdoors - though not far - since she was in her night clothes and dressing-gown anyway.

If she got up before 7 and ate something before 7.30, and then noticed someone down at the gate before 8 am, it might have already been early daylight enough to see by; suppose the attack took place at 8 am. would the body have been "still warm" by 11 o clock, three hours later?

Interesting, so in this case it would appear that everyone was directed to not touch the body, since we have evidence that at least one person was told specifically not to, and nobody else actually did touch her. In addition they didn't follow the direction of the pathologist either…..

As far as I know the cavity block was never used to prop open the gate.

I always understood that the killer dislodged the cavity block only by force, damaging the pump house and using it for killing Sophie.

One direction of collecting or looking for DNA would have been around the pumphouse or the roof of the pumphouse as it's possible that the killer left DNA there? Whether that was done or not, I don't know.

The good thing now is that people can see Gilligan being interviewed in episode two of the Netflix doc and make up their own minds as to whether he is being truthful or not. The fire was "fresh". He found remnants of "boot", "coat", "jeans". Jules knew nothing about a Christmas fire. Is she lying? Bailey…"a hoarder who never got rid of anything."

I know you've mentioned this a few times throughout the threads going back a while and it was your biggest issue with a morning murder, and tbh I was under the same impression re the socks. However, I was reviewing the post-mortem again and came across the following from Harbison:

The clothing

-The clothing on the deceased comprised:

• A short cotton top with elbow length sleeves,
• A pair of cotton, "Long John" style underpants,
• Shoes of heavy sole type, almost small boots, and socks.

Now I'm wondering where we got this impression of no socks, because it seems to be pretty prevalent on here, is there other evidence that says she wasn't wearing any.

Ok thanks, I understand.

I assume that the sock-like material actually provided a comfort as if wearing a sock. i.e. the boot style may have been chosen by Sophie as it can negate the need to wear socks. Perhaps she may never have worn socks with these boots when popping outside for a few minutes.

Whatever about Dwyer,for me everything Gilligan recounted in the documentary had a ring of truth about it. He never states that he believes Bailey was the killer - which Dwyer did more or less - but the implication in his tone was clear. He believes Bailey destroyed bloodstained clothing by incineration. Ian may have been a hoarder but not when it came to incriminating evidence.

It`s not my biggest issue with a morning murder.

It was reported that she did ask several people to come along with her.

This is true, but it still doesn't mean she was pregnant. Again there was no evidence for pregnancy.

I presume it had largely to do with the fact that she wasn't happy in her marriage and didn't always enjoy working in an environment where she was often seen in public. Apparently she liked the isolation and the wilderness and remoteness. That's what I've read a lot here.

I thought that the gardai accepted Jules' time for breakfast, is that correct? I think the DPP agrees with them here or am I missing something

Hi. Just a question for anyone here. I've watched both documentaries again for netflix and sky. I always was of the thinking that Sophie wouldn't have frequented any of bars in schull or certainly any of the ones bailey might be in regularly. But former publican of courtyard said Sophie was often in..and by herself or whatever..but just felt that was certainly new to me..and if bailey definitely would have seen her more often that not if she was in there odd times..just a possibility maybe, as publican mentioned bailey was often in..and wouldnt care much if he never came in

I'm not sure if you're Irish but pubs in rural areas are a pretty common place for people to go even just to read books/newspapers, have lunch, tea etc. alone or with others, not just for drinking and socialising. Bailey I imagine used to frequent many of the different bars for different reasons, he was into reading poetry etc. Since they were in the same area when Sophie was in town, they most probably crossed paths (literally I mean) at some point.

Thanks for that. No I get totally what you mean. I'm Irish for sure..I was more thinking maybe they were never in same type areas..at one time on few occasions

yes that's true . no clarification of what times I guess she would be in..but yes I'm sure IB was more of night time. I see..I didn't realise that was same bar the courtyard she had scones and tea on that late afternoon.

I'm more or less trying see if bars ever crowed and they started conversation..but unlikely given Sophie's more normal lifestyle and wouldn't be late night in them.

I believe she asked in the Courtyard about what live music they had on. So she may have been planning on a night-time visit.

Edit;

May not have been the Courtyard, now I think of it.

Sliding Doors and all that, She could have ended up listening to Bailey banging his drum.

The theory and speculation about Karl Heinz Wolney is probably met with overthinking. Mostly this is fueled by the fact that he committed suicide and stated "he'd done something terrible". I think Jim Sheridan is also rather fond of the "Wolney theory".

There is actually no evidence that Sophie ever met Wolney, nor would Wolney have known that Sophie was at her cottage.

And if Wolney did know he only found out by accident, also would have met her by accident, maybe in some pub. None of the conversations the police had with publicans and bar keepers statet that Sophie met Wolney. If so, it would have been without anybody taking notice.

There is also no history of any form of connection between Sophie and Wolney nor would there have been a motive, excpet maye and speculatively something sexual.

A very good question. I haven't read any. However if something was found indicating the responsability of the murder we would know that.

As far as I know Sophie was neither in contact with Wolney nor with Pecout. It could simply have been like they've seen light on, vaguely knew that there was a woman alone and expected something sexual, and this resulted in an argument and in an unplanned murder. Personally I don't see this as likely also there is no indication of attempted rape.

The AGS sadly can't be trusted, given their record, least of all Dermot Dwyer.

The AGS speculation hinges on the idea that Sophie knew Bailey and the arrest of Bailey hinges on false and coerced statement by Marie Farrell that he was seen a good 3 or 5 km away from the murder site, at Kealfadda bridge.

I mentioned it in the context in terms of getting a picture of Sophie's socialising while in West Cork, not really with the intention of speculating on Wolney himself.

But as for the rest of your post, it occurs to me you could easily sub in Bailey for Wolney there!

So Bailey never meeting Sophie except a disputed introduction is well documented - is there any chance that Bailey “bumped into” Sophie in the days or even hours leading up to her death and arranged to go to her house or said that he’d pay her a visit sometime or whatever?

Would this be far fetched? Just thinking out loud - IF Bailey was proved to be the murderer I’m just trying to think what would have prompted him to visit in that night.