Advertisement
Boards Golf Society are looking for new members for 2022...read about the society and their planned outings here!
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards

Murder at the Cottage | Sky

12357286

Comments



  • listermint wrote: »
    Does the violence of the murder point towards a rage. Rage from the murderer being found out for something else. E.g an affair. Like I'll let your wife know about this you wait and see. These style murders are often rage induced to protect the preparator from exposure not of the murder at hand but another act known to the victim and the murderer.

    Does seem to have the hall marks of a jilted lover though with the visit back to Ireland at that time of year.




    she was known by her maiden name to locals, need we say more




  • listermint wrote: »
    Does the violence of the murder point towards a rage. Rage from the murderer being found out for something else. E.g an affair. Like I'll let your wife know about this you wait and see. These style murders are often rage induced to protect the preparator from exposure not of the murder at hand but another act known to the victim and the murderer.

    Does seem to have the hall marks of a jilted lover though with the visit back to Ireland at that time of year.

    Jilted lover tries to meet her and was seen in town by marie farrell.she tells him its over.
    He calls to the house in his blue vauxhall but shes says its over,she walks him to the gate for the last chat and he gets upset and kills her in a rage.he goes back to the house to collect the flowers/gift he brought her and leaves the blood on the door.he is seen speeding away from the scene and disappears forever.
    marie farrell is upset because the gaurds didnt believe her true statement so makes up another one about the man on the bridge




  • Radio5 wrote: »
    Watched the 1st episode last night. Was surprised to learn that at least 1 of the houses close to Sophie's house was occupied. I thought they were holiday homes which were empty at that time of year. Strange that those people heard nothing given their proximity.
    The murderer clearly knew the area well, it didn't look like somewhere you'd be just passing by chance and you'd need to know your way out. Given the location, there weren't likely to be too many witnesses out and about.

    I knew the occupants of that other house - it was one of them found the body.
    He was a retired chef and his partner - who never recovered from finding Sophie - was a just retired teacher. She had literally just moved there from London that Summer.
    This was their dream retirement home and they intended to live there permanently.

    To get to their house you had to pass by Sophie's. It was up the side of a mountain in West Cork and I can confirm there was zero mobile phone signal in the area. I know as we got lost looking for the house in the summer of 1996 and were trying to phone them on the one mobile available between 5 people.

    In the dead of Winter unless there were lights on in the house it would not be seen by the neighbours. There was also a lot of foliage between the two houses. However, Sophie's house could be seen from the road. Neighbour's house couldn't be seen as it was painted sky blue and very well camouflaged - which is why we couldn't find the blasted place even though our driver had been there many times.

    We were going to a retirement party (a BBQ) attended mostly by people involved in the hospitality industry and one of the guests was Ian Bailey. I got the feeling he had invited himself and was infamous for gate-crashing.
    I spent most of the evening talking to him and found him a boor, tbh - no-one else wanted anything to do with him.

    Much was made of Bailey's attendance at this party - yet, the Gardaí seemed confused about who was in attendance. To give an example - of a well known Cork family one brother was there - Gardaí requested an interview with another brother who had never set foot in the place.

    The brother who had been there contacted Gardaí himself and insisted on being interviewed. The thrust of the questions was if Bailey had made any comments about Sophie. Gardaí were told as he spent most of the time talking to me they should ask me that.

    Did Bailey comment on Sophie?
    Yes, in a roundabout way.

    Another guest (not a local) asked who lived in the house we passed. Our host said it was a French film producer who comes and goes and they never know when she's there. Bailey asked if it was "that blonde woman, Sophie something". He was asked if he knew her and replied "just to see around" - there then followed a discussion on French cinema in which Bailey tried to demonstrate his knowledge. He was a know it all and a boor, and that guest that everyone who was there considered the why did you invite him person.

    I have never been interviewed by the Gardaí. Or anyone else.

    Gardaí were given all my contact details several times.

    When I was leaving the country in 1999 I again contacted them to ask if they wanted a statement.

    No one got back to me.



    From day one the investigation was a cock-up.




  • upupup wrote: »
    Jilted lover tries to meet her and was seen in town by marie farrell.she tells him its over.
    He calls to the house in his blue vauxhall but shes says its over,she walks him to the gate for the last chat and he gets upset and kills her in a rage.he goes back to the house to collect the flowers/gift he brought her and leaves the blood on the door.he is seen speeding away from the scene and disappears forever.
    marie farrell is upset because the gaurds didnt believe her true statement so makes up another one about the man on the bridge






    was it not a blue ford fiesta, are you trying to cover your tracks?




  • Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I knew the occupants of that other house - it was one of them found the body.
    He was a retired chef and his partner - who never recovered from finding Sophie - was a just retired teacher. She had literally just moved there from London that Summer.
    This was their dream retirement home and they intended to live there permanently.

    To get to their house you had to pass by Sophie's. It was up the side of a mountain in West Cork and I can confirm there was zero mobile phone signal in the area. I know as we got lost looking for the house in the summer of 1996 and were trying to phone them on the one mobile available between 5 people.

    In the dead of Winter unless there were lights on in the house it would not be seen by the neighbours. There was also a lot of foliage between the two houses. However, Sophie's house could be seen from the road. Neighbour's house couldn't be seen as it was painted sky blue and very well camouflaged - which is why we couldn't find the blasted place even though our driver had been there many times.

    We were going to a retirement party (a BBQ) attended mostly by people involved in the hospitality industry and one of the guests was Ian Bailey. I got the feeling he had invited himself and was infamous for gate-crashing.
    I spent most of the evening talking to him and found him a boor, tbh - no-one else wanted anything to do with him.

    Much was made of Bailey's attendance at this party - yet, the Gardaí seemed confused about who was in attendance. To give an example - of a well known Cork family one brother was there - Gardaí requested an interview with another brother who had never set foot in the place.

    The brother who had been there contacted Gardaí himself and insisted on being interviewed. The thrust of the questions was if Bailey had made any comments about Sophie. Gardaí were told as he spent most of the time talking to me they should ask me that.

    Did Bailey comment on Sophie?
    Yes, in a roundabout way.

    Another guest (not a local) asked who lived in the house we passed. Our host said it was a French film producer who comes and goes and they never know when she's there. Bailey asked if it was "that blonde woman, Sophie something". He was asked if he knew her and replied "just to see around" - there then followed a discussion on French cinema in which Bailey tried to demonstrate his knowledge. He was a know it all and a boor, and that guest that everyone who was there considered the why did you invite him person.

    I have never been interviewed by the Gardaí. Or anyone else.

    Gardaí were given all my contact details several times.

    When I was leaving the country in 1999 I again contacted them to ask if they wanted a statement.

    No one got back to me.



    From day one the investigation was a cock-up.




    do you still have the ford?


  • Advertisement


  • Bannasidhe wrote: »
    I knew the occupants of that other house - it was one of them found the body.
    He was a retired chef and his partner - who never recovered from finding Sophie - was a just retired teacher. She had literally just moved there from London that Summer.
    This was their dream retirement home and they intended to live there permanently.

    To get to their house you had to pass by Sophie's. It was up the side of a mountain in West Cork and I can confirm there was zero mobile phone signal in the area. I know as we got lost looking for the house in the summer of 1996 and were trying to phone them on the one mobile available between 5 people.

    In the dead of Winter unless there were lights on in the house it would not be seen by the neighbours. There was also a lot of foliage between the two houses. However, Sophie's house could be seen from the road. Neighbour's house couldn't be seen as it was painted sky blue and very well camouflaged - which is why we couldn't find the blasted place even though our driver had been there many times.

    We were going to a retirement party (a BBQ) attended mostly by people involved in the hospitality industry and one of the guests was Ian Bailey. I got the feeling he had invited himself and was infamous for gate-crashing.
    I spent most of the evening talking to him and found him a boor, tbh - no-one else wanted anything to do with him.

    Much was made of Bailey's attendance at this party - yet, the Gardaí seemed confused about who was in attendance. To give an example - of a well known Cork family one brother was there - Gardaí requested an interview with another brother who had never set foot in the place.

    The brother who had been there contacted Gardaí himself and insisted on being interviewed. The thrust of the questions was if Bailey had made any comments about Sophie. Gardaí were told as he spent most of the time talking to me they should ask me that.

    Did Bailey comment on Sophie?
    Yes, in a roundabout way.

    Another guest (not a local) asked who lived in the house we passed. Our host said it was a French film producer who comes and goes and they never know when she's there. Bailey asked if it was "that blonde woman, Sophie something". He was asked if he knew her and replied "just to see around" - there then followed a discussion on French cinema in which Bailey tried to demonstrate his knowledge. He was a know it all and a boor, and that guest that everyone who was there considered the why did you invite him person.

    I have never been interviewed by the Gardaí. Or anyone else.

    Gardaí were given all my contact details several times.

    When I was leaving the country in 1999 I again contacted them to ask if they wanted a statement.

    No one got back to me.



    From day one the investigation was a cock-up.

    Very interesting post.

    It seems once they have their narrative they won't deviate, but interestingly in this instance one would imagine they would have contacted you at least to see if you had anything they could use against him (i.e a statement he may have made).




  • I watched the whole thing and spent most of my time wondering how Bailey and his partner funded their lifestyle.
    Lovely well maintained house, lots of money from booze - all from selling some paintings and bits of tat in the local market?




  • If you read the DPPs report, it becomes clear they that office is certain that the guards were trying to stitch Bailey up on every turn possible. No one was really in charge and plenty of the them were using intimidation tactics and coercion to twist the case.

    - IB knew too much too soon. This was completely shot down by the DPP, as 96FM posted it on the 2pm news bulletin. IB was contacted by Cassidy at 1.40pm (approx). After hearing it was a French woman he made his way towards Alfie Lyons. Cassidy later tried to say he never mentioned French woman, but it was clear this was urged by the Guard who the DPP named as his likely source for all the info.

    - IB offered DNS very early on. As a crime journalist, he would have been aware of how DNA works, and it would have been expected that hair and blood DNA would have been found at the scene of this crime. This was seen as a show of innocence. remember the guards are painting a picture of a drunken rage from Bailey. There is no way he went about the murder like that and then cleaned up all traces of DNA etc. in the middle of the night.

    - Lost evidence; Why on earth has the most critical pieces of evidence in this case gone missing???
    The blood stained gate is lost. Ian Baileys black coat is missing, even though Detective Dwyer seems to insist he burned it in the fire even though the Guards themselves seized it. Missing the earliest statements from IB, Marie Farell and Jules Thomas, which are basically pages that were ripped out of the copy book.
    An expensive bottle of wine that was found in the ditch is missing, why was this never fully traced?

    - Breakfast food found in Sophies stomach may suggest she died closer to early morning than actually in the early hours (this is only something I heard and haven't been able to verify)

    - Finally, and most crucially, the French apparently found further DNA (blood) on the boot of Sophie that was never identified other than not being IB. Why is this not being chased up further?


    To me, there is far too many circumstances that need to be followed up on. Maybe they are not all true. But constantly chasing IB and reporting on what he said, what he didnt say is absolute stupidity.




  • BraveDonut wrote: »
    I watched the whole thing and spent most of my time wondering how Bailey and his partner funded their lifestyle.
    Lovely well maintained house, lots of money from booze - all from selling some paintings and bits of tat in the local market?

    She had a lot of money to begin with from parents/grandparents




  • was it not a blue ford fiesta, are you trying to cover your tracks?

    I never had a blue feista but i did have a blue opel????


  • Advertisement


  • I have listened to West Cork (some time ago now) which I thought was excellent. We watched the first 2 Episodes on Sky but need to watch the rest and will watch the Netflix one.

    What is the thing about the blue car ? I don't remember that from the Podcast but maybe I have just forgotten.




  • upupup wrote: »
    I never had a blue feista but i did have a blue opel????




    you are grand so, only looking for a blue vauxhall, you are in the clear




  • SusanC10 wrote: »
    I have listened to West Cork (some time ago now) which I thought was excellent. We watched the first 2 Episodes on Sky but need to watch the rest and will watch the Netflix one.

    What is the thing about the blue car ? I don't remember that from the Podcast but maybe I have just forgotten.




    A witness just reported a blue ford car speeding past them in the area the morning after


    could be anyone really, could be someone




  • Cona44 wrote: »
    Ive always said that the answer in this case is most likely the simplest one. To often, we look for far flung theories about what may have happened and this gets gradually worse as time goes on.

    For me, its quite simple. Whoever did this, had to know the area well. On top of that, if it was a local they would have had marks to the body in some form. Bailey was a known vicious, womaniser who was close to killing his own partner.
    He was wearing the long dark black jacket that all of a sudden went missing as part of a bonfire in the following days. His hands were destroyed in cuts as well as a nick to the face.

    In my opinion, its a bit far fetched for all the above to be a coincidence. The guards knew this too as well as many locals. But without any DNA evidence they knew they would have to prove it by other means. Marie Farrell was the absolute bombshell though. I cannot figure out why she inserted herself into this case at all. I can only guess she wanted a bit of fame which ultimately backfired on her.

    I think she probably did see Bailey on Ceal Fada bridge that night. The rest seemed to be lies forced out of her by gardai. Who was in the car with her though and why would she not release the info. She should have been arrested and prosecuted for not supplying this info.

    Baileys “long black dark jacket” was taken as evidence by the Gardai and went missing in their custody. The “bonfire” found absolutely nothing of evidential value. The story that he burnt his coat etc was local hearsay.




  • Cona44 wrote: »
    If you read the DPPs report, it becomes clear they that office is certain that the guards were trying to stitch Bailey up on every turn possible. No one was really in charge and plenty of the them were using intimidation tactics and coercion to twist the case.

    - IB knew too much too soon. This was completely shot down by the DPP, as 96FM posted it on the 2pm news bulletin. IB was contacted by Cassidy at 1.40pm (approx). After hearing it was a French woman he made his way towards Alfie Lyons. Cassidy later tried to say he never mentioned French woman, but it was clear this was urged by the Guard who the DPP named as his likely source for all the info.

    - IB offered DNS very early on. As a crime journalist, he would have been aware of how DNA works, and it would have been expected that hair and blood DNA would have been found at the scene of this crime. This was seen as a show of innocence. remember the guards are painting a picture of a drunken rage from Bailey. There is no way he went about the murder like that and then cleaned up all traces of DNA etc. in the middle of the night.

    - Lost evidence; Why on earth has the most critical pieces of evidence in this case gone missing???
    The blood stained gate is lost. Ian Baileys black coat is missing, even though Detective Dwyer seems to insist he burned it in the fire even though the Guards themselves seized it. Missing the earliest statements from IB, Marie Farell and Jules Thomas, which are basically pages that were ripped out of the copy book.
    An expensive bottle of wine that was found in the ditch is missing, why was this never fully traced?

    - Breakfast food found in Sophies stomach may suggest she died closer to early morning than actually in the early hours (this is only something I heard and haven't been able to verify)

    - Finally, and most crucially, the French apparently found further DNA (blood) on the boot of Sophie that was never identified other than not being IB. Why is this not being chased up further?


    To me, there is far too many circumstances that need to be followed up on. Maybe they are not all true. But constantly chasing IB and reporting on what he said, what he didnt say is absolute stupidity.

    When the guard was chiming on about the coat being burned, why wasn't he stopped in his tracks and told about the garda report that shows it was taken into evidence? Would have loved to see his response.

    Why was he allowed to spin that untruth as fact without being challenged by the makers of this documentary?

    The cops were a disgrace, no doubt wanted a swift conviction as the french were watching on.

    Sometimes these documentaries annoy the hell out of me, as sometimes its the very small things the need to be looked into and cast iron answers given relating to such small issues.

    The gate, the bottle of wine, the missing statements and the blood. Cover all of these and rule them out on factual stuff, don't ever presume or assume.




  • AdrianG08 wrote: »
    When the guard was chiming on about the coat being burned, why wasn't he stopped in his tracks and told about the garda report that shows it was taken into evidence? Would have loved to see his response.

    Why was he allowed to spin that untruth as fact without being challenged by the makers of this documentary?

    The cops were a disgrace, no doubt wanted a swift conviction as the french were watching on.

    Sometimes these documentaries annoy the hell out of me, as sometimes its the very small things the need to be looked into and cast iron answers given relating to such small issues.

    The gate, the bottle of wine, the missing statements and the blood. Cover all of these and rule them out on factual stuff, don't ever presume or assume.

    I agree here with you. I really wish someone would make a documentary that actually looks to progress the case as highly unlikely that is. Going over the same stupid issues that leads nowhere is pointless.

    Dermot Dwyer strikes me as a man, if you told him the sky was blue he could argue with you. Still though would agree with you, would love to see his reaction or get an answer on all of the above points that still stand. He seemed like one of the head investigators




  • AdrianG08 wrote: »
    Very interesting post.

    It seems once they have their narrative they won't deviate, but interestingly in this instance one would imagine they would have contacted you at least to see if you had anything they could use against him (i.e a statement he may have made).

    Seemed at the time like someone came up with a list of people who had been present at a party when Ian Bailey was known to have been in the vicinity.

    I honestly can't remember what month it was but I think late August 1996.
    Whoever supplied that list was not present as they got names wrong, missed out people, named wrong members of family etc. As I said, the majority of people were involved in the high end hospitality industry in Cork and knew each other by reputation if not in person. Bailey was the exception but fancied himself as a gourmand. Our host was an exceptional chef.

    From those who were eventually interviewed (less then half those in attendance) by Gardaí the thrust of their interest was on 'proving' Bailey discussed/showed a lot of interest in the victim. He didn't. Ian Bailey spent the afternoon smoking spliffs and trying to portray himself as an expert in everything.



    Ever single person who had been there contacted the ASG and offered to give a statement.

    Funnily enough the AGS did call my bother for an interview as he was heard speaking French on a mobile phone by a Guard. 2 weeks later. In Cork City.
    He wasn't even in Ireland at the time of the murder, this wasn't a circle he moved in, and when he asked when they were going to talk to me the Guard got snotty with him.

    We're still shaking our heads over that.




  • do you still have the ford?

    Never owned a ford in my life.
    We had a silver Nissan Sunny and others in our party were in an burgundy Isuzu jeep. :p

    *edit - just remembered I owned a classic Ford Capri in the early 80s in London. It was black.




  • Why is there such a hoo ha over the coat? Sure he’s wearing it on Christmas Day so obviously didn’t wear it when he murdered her, if he did.

    What’s also baffling is that the hair in her hand was her own, why would she have her own hair in her hand? Also the blood under her fingernails, was that also ruled as being just hers or just not Ian Baileys?

    Obviously the man on the bridge is complete crap or is nothing to do with Sophie. It’s over 2km from the house, a person didn’t walk to and from Sophie’s remote house, they wouldn’t have decided to wash their boots on a busier road/ area than they came from…..




  • Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Seemed at the time like someone came up with a list of people who had been present at a party when Ian Bailey was known to have been in the vicinity.

    I honestly can't remember what month it was but I think late August 1996.
    Whoever supplied that list was not present as they got names wrong, missed out people, named wrong members of family etc. As I said, the majority of people were involved in the high end hospitality industry in Cork and knew each other by reputation if not in person. Bailey was the exception but fancied himself as a gourmand. Our host was an exceptional chef.

    From those who were eventually interviewed (less then half those in attendance) by Gardaí the thrust of their interest was on 'proving' Bailey discussed/showed a lot of interest in the victim. He didn't. Ian Bailey spent the afternoon smoking spliffs and trying to portray himself as an expert in everything.



    Ever single person who had been there contacted the ASG and offered to give a statement.

    Funnily enough the AGS did call my bother for an interview as he was heard speaking French on a mobile phone by a Guard. 2 weeks later. In Cork City.
    He wasn't even in Ireland at the time of the murder, this wasn't a circle he moved in, and when he asked when they were going to talk to me the Guard got snotty with him.

    We're still shaking our heads over that.

    Why exactly would guards need a statement from people that were at a party months before that Bailey also attended? He strikes me as a person that attended the opening of an envelope so nothing strange or particular about that party.


  • Advertisement


  • Sadb wrote: »
    Why is there such a hoo ha over the coat? Sure he’s wearing it on Christmas Day so obviously didn’t wear it when he murdered her, if he did.

    What’s also baffling is that the hair in her hand was her own, why would she have her own hair in her hand? Also the blood under her fingernails, was that also ruled as being just hers or just not Ian Baileys?

    Obviously the man on the bridge is complete crap or is nothing to do with Sophie. It’s over 2km from the house, a person didn’t walk to and from Sophie’s remote house, they wouldn’t have decided to wash their boots on a busier road/ area than they came from…..

    If someone is dragging you by the hair, or pulling you by the hair, your first instinct will be to put your hand/a up and try to pull their hands away, you’ll inevitably get some on your own hands if you have long hair.




  • I remember from the podcast that I had a fairly low opinion of Marie Farrell. Seems like a total time sink. I think she came out of the podcast worse than anyone.

    I don't really believe that someone would walk to murder someone and then walk home. Isn't that the implication with the bridge sighting? It seems so counter to the crime itself, which was fairly frenzied (from what I remember).




  • Sadb wrote: »
    Why exactly would guards need a statement from people that were at a party months before that Bailey also attended? He strikes me as a person that attended the opening of an envelope so nothing strange or particular about that party.






    there is feck all else to do down there, its fishing or going to gallery openings in schull




  • Them knowing where the crime scene was/who was murdered also doesn’t sit well with me. They said that they heard it was a french woman but we do know that there was definitely another french woman in the area at that same time.

    My parents have a house in west cork and if you mentioned that a German/french/Dutch person died it could be any of 20 houses in the local vicinity.

    Also why did jules go with him? He was there apparently as a reporter but why was she there?




  • awec wrote: »
    I remember from the podcast that I had a fairly low opinion of Marie Farrell. Seems like a total time sink. I think she came out of the podcast worse than anyone.

    I don't really believe that someone would walk to murder someone and then walk home. Isn't that the implication with the bridge sighting? It seems so counter to the crime itself, which was fairly frenzied (from what I remember).






    I'd walk myself, its not that far, how else would you get there



    you don't necessarily intend to kill someone on the way and then it happens


    people aren't known for being meticulous about these things and then smashing someones head in a rage




  • Information travels in small areas like osmosis. It doesn't have the same checks and balances as elsewhere.

    Motive and hard evidence are what was needed.




  • Sadb wrote: »
    Them knowing where the crime scene was/who was murdered also doesn’t sit well with me. They said that they heard it was a french woman but we do know that there was definitely another french woman in the area at that same time.

    My parents have a house in west cork and if you mentioned that a German/french/Dutch person died it could be any of 20 houses in the local vicinity.

    Also why did jules go with him? He was there apparently as a reporter but why was she there?




    I doubt there would be too many french women staying out near schull in December




  • I doubt there would be too many french women staying out near schull in December

    You’d be surprised! But there was definitely at least another one. Why didn’t they go to her house?




  • Poor Jules. How she put up with all she did for so long.
    Who is keeping him now?


  • Advertisement


  • Sadb wrote: »
    You’d be surprised! But there was definitely at least another one. Why didn’t they go to her house?

    The town land was most likely mentioned which would pin point it down.


Advertisement