Murder at the Cottage | Sky

sydthebeat

Four of us watched it together on Sunday night.. We all broke our **** laughing when we saw the drawings of the hands and cuts.

Is that really how basic the gardai were in 1996??

nonsheep7

Yurt! wrote: »

Ah here, don't leave us hanging like that. Giz a clue.

D is the clue , would say Bailey was no angel but well stitched up here, reckon a few fancied in positions of power their chances with her

monkeybutter

listermint wrote: »

Point is, it happens. And murder is mostly commited by someone who knows the victim and is known by the victim.

Neither of these events where random attacks .

That could have been a one off random attack, no one knows, those are the rare ones

It's always so won't you know, that's what I said, usually intimately, as in bf or husband or relative

The times it happens by an acquaintance like suggested here basically never happen

JP Liz V1

Did GSOC Ombudsman ever investigate the Gardai involved in this case?

listermint

Xander10 wrote: »

Bizarre comment, given no one has ever been convicted.

Another messed investigation and another case where there is marked suspects.

But sure look the hallmarks of rage killing and the fact that these are known to be passionate or protective by people with relations to the victim is a well known and researched fact. Look it up .


Bizarre. No, not at all. Reality.

monkeybutter

sydthebeat wrote: »

Four of us watched it together on Sunday night.. We all broke our **** laughing when we saw the drawings of the hands and cuts.

Is that really how basic the gardai were in 1996??

In fairness it's not quite that simple as has been explained above

Xander10

listermint wrote: »

Another messed investigation and another case where there is marked suspects.

But sure look the hallmarks of rage killing and the fact that these are known to be passionate or protective by people with relations to the victim is a well known and researched fact. Look it up .


Bizarre. No, not at all. Reality.

Very weird and hurtful to the family to suggest same with zero grounds, other than your imagination.

monkeybutter

listermint wrote: »

Another messed investigation and another case where there is marked suspects.

But sure look the hallmarks of rage killing and the fact that these are known to be passionate or protective by people with relations to the victim is a well known and researched fact. Look it up .


Bizarre. No, not at all. Reality.

The problem is the word suspects

It could have been basically a randomer met on the night

All speculation really

I mean even Dwyer was questioned if that is to be believed

listermint

Xander10 wrote: »

Very weird and hurtful to the family to suggest same with zero grounds, other than your imagination.

Ok, thanks for your input. Good times x I suggest you go and read up on that particular case. Rather than you know assuming ...

Yurt2

nonsheep7 wrote: »

D is the clue , would say Bailey was no angel but well stitched up here, reckon a few fancied in positions of power their chances with her

Think I know who you're angling at.

Loafing Oaf

dark crystal wrote: »

No, it's just a theory.

It's not though:

dark crystal wrote: »

it was a local...
I think they know the killer alright, as he's a local,

Have you been looking in your dark crystal?

Xander10

listermint wrote: »

Ok, thanks for your input. Good times x I suggest you go and read up on that particular case. Rather than you know assuming ...

I am very familiar with the case, and followed it from day one, since I know a family member. But, there you go again, making assumptions.

listermint

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

It's not though:



Have you been looking in your dark crystal?

Tbf it's a more plausible theory based on the functions of the crime than local howl at the moon man traipsing over there with a purpose to murder and traipsing back miles in the morning for what seems to have been the late hours of the am if the victim having had breakfast part is true.

monkeybutter

Was she not pregnant according to her husband?

listermint

Xander10 wrote: »

I am very familiar with the case, and followed it from day one, since I know a family member. But, there you go again, making assumptions.

Well then you'll know that the investigators believe that the perpatrator knew the victim and it wasn't some randomer walking the streets.

listermint

monkeybutter wrote: »

Was she not pregnant according to her husband?

Wouldn't the autopsy have shown that...

monkeybutter

listermint wrote: »

Wouldn't the autopsy have shown that...

Well you'd think the husband would know

And why would would they need to be looking at that when the cause of death was so obvious, so would it come up

And would it be brought up

listermint

monkeybutter wrote: »

Well you'd think the husband would know

And why would would they need to be looking at that when the cause of death was so obvious, so would it come up

And would it be brought up

I think pregnant woman murdered in schull would have made the papers. Definitely think that would have come out at the time tbh

monkeybutter

listermint wrote: »

I think pregnant woman murdered in schull would have made the papers. Definitely think that would have come out at the time tbh

How would the papers know the details of the autopsy unless told

And if it was noticed which it seems it wasnt or it wasn't relevant

And it was in the papers when the husband said it, circa 2000ish while it was still ongoing

How else do you think I know it, she didn't confide in me personally

whippet

I’ve listened to the podcast series and just finished watching the sky doc.

Seems to be bits and pieces left out of both versions.

The testimony of the woman who took the video on Christmas morning seems to contradict the video ... while this was never mentioned on the podcast. Also - the podcast, IIRC never mentioned that the ‘missing’ black coat was actually taken as evidence.

Mantis Toboggan

Sad thing here is that if Bailey is innocent which seems most likely then the state has ruined both his and his partners life.

Fandymo

monkeybutter wrote: »

to randomly do this and not get caught is not easy

Too many mistakes blood up, gruesome close up killing

You'd have to plan it

If you can follow a simple map you'd find it, even with basic directions from schull

It’s actually the opposite. Random killings/assaults are a lot more difficult to solve as the police will always look for means, motive etc. I remember a cop saying this in a documentary years ago.

Mantis Toboggan

Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

Sad thing here is that if Bailey is innocent which seems most likely then the state has ruined both his and his partners life.

It’s frustrating that the Gardai either can’t or won’t make a clear statement of their position on this- is Bailey still a suspect? Is he not? If not then how many others are and what are they doing to progress the case?

The documentaries and indeed this thread just highlights how unclear a case there really is against Bailey - the incompetence of the Gardai at the outset is staggering- you don’t need to go to Garda school to know the importance of scene preservation and evidence gathering- any fan of TV detective shows back in 1996 could have done a better job than they did.

Bailey did nothing to help himself though in the early days of the case in terms of preserving his perceived innocence - drawing attention to himself was just stupid and looking for trouble.

One piece of testimony though in these early days has always stayed with me- it’s this testimony that has always left me, and others, wondering.



https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/court-hears-plaintiff-knew-of-key-facts-1.400426%3fmode=amp

Polly701

The above article refers to Ians ex partner as Ms Bailey. They were never married. It wasn't just the Guards who did a poor job on this case. The media also were irresponsible in much of they're reporting.

Mackwiss

dark crystal wrote: »

It didn't have to be a raging serial killer, just someone who drunkenly went too far one night. Plenty of people just snap once and do things in the heat of the moment they would never ordinarily do in a million years. Or maybe they do have violent tendencies, but have just never killed before - who knows?

I just wish whoever it was had enough of a conscience to own up and give her family some closure. I wouldn't hold my breath, though. They've gotten away with it this long, unlikely they'll ever do the right thing. In fact, they're probably getting a thrill out of the fact the Guards have fitted up someone else entirely and the French courts have convicted him in abstentia.

Agree with this.

I'm frequent stallholder in a few markets in West Cork and there are quite a few bachelors around the age of IB. There's this weird old man in Bantry that is always eying young foreign girls to give them hugs and kisses. We all tell him off and shoo him away. Ask any stallholder in Bantry everyone knows him.

Also these Bachelors that would be middle aged back then, hound a few female stallholders of the same age they know to not have a partner or husband, some of them never even had a girlfriend in their lives and they go around to all the markets in the region. There's this particular elderly woman she always has five or six of them around her stall. She just rolls her eyes sometimes at the situation...

It shows how loneliness was probably a big part of life back then when so many of these elderly men where middle aged trying to find a partner or wife and to follow the cultural steps they where told they had to do so in this society

West Cork is a place of huge social contrasts. You got the local Irish, traditional, conservative. The Blow Ins progressive hippies looking for that hermitic lifestyle, and then you got the tourists both from abroad and Ireland.

It is a social clash between different mindsets, and in the markets you don't see these groups mingling with each other that much in long conversations despite the normal courtesies.

monkeybutter

Fandymo wrote: »

It’s actually the opposite. Random killings/assaults are a lot more difficult to solve as the police will always look for means, motive etc. I remember a cop saying this in a documentary years ago.

The ones that are hard to prove are the ones planned but the victim not connected, so randomly selected as such


that's what they mean


thankfully they are exceptionally rare



for you to be known to the victim and then have a freakout over something out of the blue is not the same

Polly701

I'm from Cork and have always followed this case. There are huge avenues left unexplained and unexplored.

We know that Sophie had a scone on the afternoon of the 22nd in a pub. In the post mortem it was breakfast food that was found in her stomach - fruit and nuts. This suggests that she may have been killed in the morning and not at night. Her body was found at 10am and a speeding blue car (which was never traced) was seen in the area at 7.30am.

This might tie in with why they were no lights on in the house (as there surely would have been if she had been disturbed at night?). And this puts an entirely different slant on the case. Ian Bailey was at home on the morning of the 23rd. And he and Jules didn't have a blue car.

Also Ian was drinking a lot that night with Jules... Would he really have been able to drive 20 minutes to her house, murder her savagely without leaving a trace and drive 20 minutes home again, clean himself up so that nobody in the Thomas household noticed anything bloodstained?

Yes, he had scratches on his hands but Jules daughters witnessed the rough work done with the tree and turkeys on the 22nd. He didn't have bruises or any other injuries that would surely be associated with such a savage murder.

I believe that the Guards thought they had their man with Ian and pursued him doggedly - they were going to make the evidence fit no matter what.

Someone should be accountable for all the missing evidence... It is absolutely farcical. The blood stained gate?!! Were the blood samples really not kept?!! This seems crazy.

A very expensive (unopened and couldn't be bought locally apparently) bottle of French wine was found in the ditch. This was like the sort of clue the Secret Seven might have found!! And what a surprise.. That has gone missing too along with numerous other crucial things such as written statements.

And the idea that he was wandering around Kealfadda Bridge is ridiculous - it is close to an hour walk each way (between their houses) and this is not on the direct route at all.

Marie Farrell should be charged with wasting everyone's time - she is a fantasist who really muddied the waters. And the Guards should be held to account for all the missing evidence such as the coat Ian owned - one item fair enough.. these things happen, two items 'ah c'mon lads', three items 'a lady was murdered - show some respect'.

Apparently there was DNA found on Sophie that was not her own or Ians - this has never been traced. I heard Ian Bailey in an interview recently asking that the case be reviewed and that this be examined. Why on earth wasn't this done previously?!

So many things about this case point to someone else but Ian Bailey was 'a local weirdo'... Case closed.

monkeybutter

Mackwiss wrote: »

Agree with this.

I'm frequent stallholder in a few markets in West Cork and there are quite a few bachelors around the age of IB. There's this weird old man in Bantry that is always eying young foreign girls to give them hugs and kisses. We all tell him off and shoo him away. Ask any stallholder in Bantry everyone knows him.

Also these Bachelors that would be middle aged back then, hound a few female stallholders of the same age they know to not have a partner or husband, some of them never even had a girlfriend in their lives and they go around to all the markets in the region. There's this particular elderly woman she always has five or six of them around her stall. She just rolls her eyes sometimes at the situation...

It shows how loneliness was probably a big part of life back then when so many of these elderly men where middle aged trying to find a partner or wife and to follow the cultural steps they where told they had to do so in this society

West Cork is a place of huge social contrasts. You got the local Irish, traditional, conservative. The Blow Ins progressive hippies looking for that hermitic lifestyle, and then you got the tourists both from abroad and Ireland.

It is a social clash between different mindsets, and in the markets you don't see these groups mingling with each other that much in long conversations despite the normal courtesies.

maybe you did it?

sydthebeat

monkeybutter wrote: »

In fairness it's not quite that simple as has been explained above

The "explanation above" is part of the hilariousness and incompetence of the gardai... If the theory is that the particular guard that saw the scratches on his hands can accurately recall the number, position and direction of said scratches at a time so long after seeing then that the scratches had healed on Baileys hands. It was like something a 4 year old would draw in playschool.

Its another laughable example of the ineptitude shown in the investigation of this case

listermint

sydthebeat wrote: »

The "explanation above" is part of the hilariousness and incompetence of the gardai... If the theory is that the particular guard that saw the scratches on his hands can accurately recall the number, position and direction of said scratches at a time so long after seeing then that the scratches had healed on Baileys hands. It was like something a 4 year old would draw in playschool.

Its another laughable example of the ineptitude shown in the investigation of this case

Tbf notes are made for references all the time for all sorts of matters. Hand drawing references to scratches for recollection purposes later isn't a hill you should die on for the mishandling of this case there are plenty of actually problems with the investigation but not a reference sketch.