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

Mackinac

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122130699#Comment_122130699

Thank you for posting that. First thing I noticed is it said blue Ford - so possibly not a fiesta after all but another type of Ford.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122130914#Comment_122130914

The problem is that we don't even know that for certain. It's been nearly 30 years now.

The car could have been mistaken, either for a similar size car, like an Opel Corsa, or it could really have been a Ford Fiesta, or a 80ies Renault 5 / Nissan Micra? What we could probably rely upon more is the colour, the size, and the type of license plate and the at the car was speeding.

In any case the police would have to have followed up on that, but they didn't.

Suppose if it was a Guard who killed her, he would have known from day one that the odds would forensically be stacked against him, - DNA evidence would have overruled everything, a blue small speeding car or not, wouldn't have mattered.

Upon the earliest convenience he'd have to get rid of the gate conveniently and possibly mess all the possible evidence collected at the scene of the crime. Anything sent for DNA evidence to the UK for forensic analysis would have to be tampered with. If this Guard from Bantry had a bit of seniority within the force he would have had access to everything, nobody would have questioned his actions while doing so.

Once that was done, he could direct the focus on Bailey or focus on coercing a witness or giving drugs to transients.

Is it known precisely by name who of the Guards was ordering or decided to coerce a witness or give drugs to transients? Somebody must have. Was that question ever asked or investigated?

drury..

An attractive french woman beaten to death in a rage fulled killing leads to one likely scenario

FishOnABike

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122140061#Comment_122140061

...which is?

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122140536#Comment_122140536

"French" must be the key word, otherwise why would it be there?

drury..

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122140536#Comment_122140536

Foreign attractive visitor

Someone turns up late and gets repelled beats her to a pulp

Seth Brundle

Yeah, I think you're wandering down the "Bailey did it" road despite having absolutely no evidence except the belief based on garda misinformation*

* I'm aware that the above makes me sound like a mad conspiracy theorist but worryingly we actually know this to be true!

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122140737#Comment_122140737

If it is a "likely scenario" according to your earlier post, you should be able to find lots of other examples of the scenario playing out as it did here. So where are they?

drury..

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122140751#Comment_122140751

Not really

The scenario is unlikely overall so wouldn't happen much

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122140751#Comment_122140751

We can basically discuss this until the cows come home, but never get anywhere.

Some people like more this theory, others like other theories. They all seem plausible, but none of them have any evidence to them.

One needs to understand: The Guards botched up the investigation big time. Because of that behaviour the killer gotten clean away. The Guards were never really investigated, nobody seems to have been disciplined, nobody seems to have been sacked.

Now fast forward nearly 30 years:

The cold case is opened for review again in a sentiment of self pity, after all they were the ones who botched it up in the first place. The Guards travel to France, talk to some French geezer, ask a couple of questions some of them possibly awkward ( somebody in her husband's circle of friends, sleeping with Sophie every now and then, etc…), but gotten nowhere. They try to investigate maybe some DNA or whatever usable is still there also no results.

The only real evidence we have in this case is how much the Garda colluded and coerced and clearly didn't behave professionally. Just by that behaviour I would conclude that it must have been somebody's interest inside the Garda to draw attention away from the real killer and try to pin it on Bailey.

Regardless of cold weather, or winter, or night time, it's highly unlikely the killer left absolutely no traces, no DNA at all. That is, unless the crime was really very carefully planned and executed.

To the theories: The cheating husband wanting to avoid a messy and costly divorce and hiring a hitman is probably not as strong. Albeit the motive is strong, by far the strongest financial motive, but her husband would have needed some form of planning. And Sophy's trip was apparently on the spur of the moment.

Bailey? To a certain degree also not. Why would Bailey wait for 6 months or longer ( Sophie didn't visit her cottage more often ) to hike for two hours, one hour one way, after a night of drinking, just to either beat up a woman or demand sex with her? Also this story doesn't make too much sense.

The drug theory would be more fitting: Sophy arrived on the spur of the moment unplanned and on short notice, disturbed whomever she disturbed (Alfie Lyons, Leo Bolger or whomever) with some shady drug activity which was thought and planned to be carried out in the remoteness of rural SW Ireland but was noticed by Sophie, she then complained to the Guards, not knowing they were in it as well. Somebody tried to reason with her, she didn't agree, and was then killed. If it was the "horny Guard from Bantry" they sent to talk to her, or one of the neighbours, we don't know.

Whoever did it, didn't have an awful lot of time to plan, and there must have been a very strong reason why the Guards acted they way they did. Giving drugs to vagrants to get close to Bailey, coercing a possible whiteness to give false statements in a court of law or making key evidence just disappear is certainly not normal police procedure. It is actually more than gross misconduct and abuse of police powers.

Baz Richardson

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122140904#Comment_122140904

It is possible that guards genuinely believe it to be Bailey, hence their very strong reason to pin it on him. It is also possible that it was normal police procedure in the 1990s to do whatever it takes to get their man. None of that means guard involvement in the murder, just plain old abuse of powers.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141023#Comment_122141023

It's a bit hard to think about it that way. I also didn't say the Guards were involved in the murder, but there is certainly more than enough evidence to prove the Guards did wrong and one automatically asks the reasons as to why.

If the Guards lose evidence, it could easily also have been negligence on the job.

Giving drugs to transients in hopes Bailey would talk, could be called unorthodox in the best case, it's certainly more serious than that. After all you're giving a controlled substance to some transient whilst you're supposed to fight controlled substances. Suppose the transient sells the drugs on the streets to others, supplied by the police?

But if they coerce witnesses to falsify statements in a court of law, that's criminal in my understanding. Back then and even way further in legal history, and even today, that's criminal.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141023#Comment_122141023

Or a sort of group think set in, high profile murder, perception early stages of the investigation botched, desperate to get a result, 'latch' onto someone they think they can make a case against to 'get a result'.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141042#Comment_122141042

Surely from their early interaction with Bailey, the Gardaí would have realised he would make a difficult patsy to crack- well educated, journalism background etc, unless of course the "big black English Bollix" led them on and belittled them.

Why not go for the Odd-bod peeping tom?

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141204#Comment_122141204

Bailey was an outsider though, not a local and they didn't seem to give much respect to his 'journalistic' background and seemed to think it was all a front from the get go. And he may have rubbed them up the wrong way, not that it takes much to do that.

I don't think they went looking for a 'patsy' as such, as you note, the local odd ball would perhaps have been an easier target.

I mean their desperation to get a result \ get pressure off their backs, led them into a tunnel vision on Bailey, when they knew they only had flimsy evidence and then were so far committed started dredging up any old rubbish and engaging in malpractice. That's how it comes across to me. After screwing up the early stages of the investigation, could they afford after arresting Bailey, to then turn around and properly be open enough to look at the evidence and say actually … it's not him. Their reputations would be shot to bits.

But I can't rule out the possibility that there were other reasons why the Guards engaged in the malpractice such as covering up some other involvement in the murder, directly or indirectly.

This seeming group think belief the Guards had that it was Bailey is not proportional to the evidence they had on him, whether gathered through fair means or foul - there's very little there.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141243#Comment_122141243

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

As a police officer you don't get sacked if you don't solve a crime. Yes there is pressure, but not automatic job loss.

However you would have to live with the consequences if you coerce a witness to make false statements in a court of law, or give controlled substances to transients, etc… This would normally not only get you sacked, but also legal trouble, and you yourself as a police officer would be in court, - as the accused.

So the question would be why was it worth the risk to the Guards to do that?

This goes a bit further than just tunnel vision and pressure on the job.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141326#Comment_122141326

I take your point, and you may well be right in what you have outlined. I would not be surprised if something along the lines of what you have outlined is the case.

I am just outlining how it looks to me and I think pressure \ reputation can create its own dynamic.

There's a lot of different Guards involved in some dodgy conduct… I think it is possible a small number of Guards could have been covering something up initially, but it still needs an explanation of how that spread to this belief outside that group in the investigation that it must be Bailey.

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141243#Comment_122141243

I think thre may be an element of truth in that.

Its the old story…..once you tell one lie, you have to tell another to cover it and then another etc. etc.

And, in a short time, you're so invested in it that holding your hands up is too painful to contemplate and you have to double down again and again even if its obvious to most that the cause is lost.

The absurd contention that Joanne Hayes must have had sex with two men and become pregnant by each, resulting in the birth of twins from different fathers is a glaring example of this.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141497#Comment_122141497

I am not saying that I am of the correct opinion.

However certain things the Guards did are hard to ignore.

Also, nobody was disciplined or sacked as well, while the risks of ending up as the accused in court would have been high and any normal judge wouldn't have seen this lightly.

That alone is pretty grave, I also don't believe it was by accident, but rather by design.

This would sadly imply a Garda interest to cover up, lead things into the wrong direction.

This would be irrespective of who actually did the killing.

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141703#Comment_122141703

GSOC report on their findings (conclusions only)

Conclusions
6.1 It is GSOC’s view, formed after an extensive investigation, that while there was evidence of a
lack of administration and management of aspects of the investigation into the murder of
Sophie Toscan Du Plantier, there was no evidence of the high-level corruption by gardaí
alleged by the complainants Ian Bailey, Jules Thomas and Marie Farrell. A number of factors
led to Ian Bailey being identified as a suspect at an early stage of the murder inquiry—his
subsequent arrest and the arrest of his partner, Jules Thomas, therefore could not, as the
complainants allege, have been construed as unlawful or illegal.
6.2 GSOC found no evidence that Marie Farrell was coerced or intimidated (as alleged by Ian
Bailey and Marie Farrell) into making false statements against Ian Bailey; in fact, a phone call
Information Report from the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission at the completion of the
investigation into the complaints of Ian Bailey, Catherine “Jules” Thomas and Marie Farrell Page
35
listened to in the course of the investigation could be seen as evidence of a relationship
between Marie Farrell and an investigating garda that was not coercive. While it does
certainly appear that journalists were in possession of information in advance of Ian Bailey’s
arrests, GSOC was unable to establish the source of the media’s information.
6.3 It is a matter of grave concern to GSOC that a large number of original statements and
exhibits relating to the murder investigation are missing. It is GSOC’s view that a lack of
administration and management are the likely explanation for this state of affairs. GSOC
found no evidence of corruption.
6.4 As a result of the examination of material conducted during this investigation, it is GSOC’s
view that it does appear that journalists were in possession of sensitive information about
the murder at the time of the garda murder enquiry.
6.5 While there was general cooperation from garda members during the course of the GSOC
investigation, a number of garda members were less than cooperative and thus it was not
possible for GSOC to fully establish some of the details pertaining to the arrests of Ian Bailey
and Jules Thomas. Other garda members who may (or who may not) have had information
of relevance to the GSOC investigation are now deceased.
6.6 Pages missing from the original garda “Jobs Books” in relation to the garda murder
investigation are of the most concern to GSOC. These books form a complete record of all
activity undertaken in respect of a major or critical incident (or investigation) along with the
rationale for the decisions made. This concern is compounded further by the fact that the
specific pages missing are from an area of the book when Ian Bailey seems to have first been
identified as a potential suspect in the murder by gardaí – and as such, they are potentially
very significant.
6.7 The books are hard-backed in nature, A4 in size and the pages are retained in the book by
way of a glued-in spine. As a result, it would not be possible for pages to simply fall out of
the book by accident and for them to be removed, this would have to have been a deliberate
act. The original books were seized by GSOC as part of this investigation in order that
forensic tests could be conducted to try and establish if the missing pages held any
information of significance (or to offer clues as to why they may have been removed). The
results of these tests are discussed earlier in this report at Section 3.12. At the time of
writing, no explanation has been found from anyone within the Garda Síochána as to when
these pages were removed, how this was done, by whom and for what purpose. However
this may well have occurred after December 2002 (as explained at paragraph 5.7 above).
6.8 The significant amount of missing original garda documentation, witness statements,
suspect files and physical exhibits in the garda murder investigation suggest to GSOC that
there was a lack of administration and management of the incident room (even when
viewed through the lens of the time) as opposed to clear evidence of malpractice or
corruption. It was not entirely clear from statements provided to GSOC who was in charge
of the investigation at any particular moment in time and who was ultimately responsible for
strategic decisions (including the arrest plans). The lack of forensic material obtained from
the scene, particularly given the precise nature of the murder and the state in which the
body of Madame Toscan Du Plantier was discovered, is also of concern to GSOC.
6.9 The review of telephone call recordings provided to GSOC during this investigation indicate
that Marie Farrell had not been under pressure in her interactions with a detective garda to
Information Report from the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission at the completion of the
investigation into the complaints of Ian Bailey, Catherine “Jules” Thomas and Marie Farrell Page
36
provide accounts. The relationship between the detective garda and Marie Farrell appears
to GSOC to not have been appropriate at times.
6.10 GSOC was not able to substantiate other serious allegations such as that a witness had been
provided with illegal drugs by gardaí, though the telephone calls which have been reviewed
noted that drugs were mentioned by the witness himself. The reluctance of witnesses
(including the witness himself) to cooperate with GSOC in relation to this aspect of the case
has resulted in these allegations being incapable of being proven to any evidential standard.

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141820#Comment_122141820

A number of factors led to Ian Bailey being identified as a suspect at an early stage of the murder inquiry—his
subsequent arrest and the arrest of his partner, Jules Thomas, therefore could not, as the complainants allege, have been construed as unlawful or illegal.

...

6.6 Pages missing from the original garda “Jobs Books” in relation to the garda murder investigation are of the most concern to GSOC. These books form a complete record of all activity undertaken in respect of a major or critical incident (or investigation) along with the rationale for the decisions made. This concern is compounded further by the fact that the specific pages missing are from an area of the book when Ian Bailey seems to have first been identified as a potential suspect in the murder by gardaí – and as such, they are potentially very significant.

🙄

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141820#Comment_122141820

I know of that report.

However how do they define "high level corruption". This does not exclude "low level corruption" I'd say.

I would guess that the difference between high level and low level would be the rank of the officers involved.

We could put in doubt whether Marie Farrell was coerced or not to examine the situation. It was her statement which we heard as far as I know. But suppose would Marie Farrell make wrong statements "just out of the blue" if she wasn't coerced?

Also the question about giving controlled substances to transients as well as the loss of evidence hasn't been answered here, even though mentioned. That's certainly not normal police procedure.

redoctober

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141243#Comment_122141243

Totally agree with most of this. I think they were desperate to pin it on someone as they were beginning to look incompetent (which they were) and the big arrogant Englishman would do fine as a scapegoat. This probably took on a life of its own after a short time. People imagining things, seeing innocent remarks in a different way and putting 2 and 2 together and getting 17! In a weird way Bailey led them on probably thinking there's no way they could pin it on him (which they couldn't) but possibly not foreseeing the impact on his life. In a strange way too, I feel Bailey found purpose in his life because of the whole thing. Otherwise he would just be some nobody part-time journalist scraping a living. It's bizarre but he definitely enjoyed the spotlight.

Summitatem

Is it not well known that Bailey was at the scene prior to him turning up to report at it. This explains why his DNA was everywhere but obviously doesn't mean he wasn't there the previous night.

The major AGS fnck up was allowing him contaminate the scene like that

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141892#Comment_122141892

There are no reports of Bailey's DNA being anywhere at the scene, let alone everywhere.

So no, that's not well known, it is well rumored, but not remotely established with any reliability.

Summitatem

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141958#Comment_122141958

Didn't the chap who wrote the book state it's in the file that went to the DPP?

As in Bailey was there before he turned up reporting, AGS caught him there as their cordon was p1ss poor.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141977#Comment_122141977

Which chap is this, and how many other things has this chap said that turned out to be false \ without foundation?

There's nothing in the DPP file about it, and nothing in any forensic report showing any trace of Bailey at the scene.

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122141977#Comment_122141977

Bailey arrived at the cordon and didn't get past it. There is zero evidence of Bailey being anywhere near the house, the crime scene or even ever having met Sophie.

As for the author who wrote a book, there have been a few who had damning stories all of which are based on bullsh1t, much of which is rumour supplied by proven liars and the gardai but none of it is based on any actual facts!

Edit: maybe read the DPP's unusual act in publicly chastising the garda "evidence" on Bailey…

https://us.v-cdn.net/6034073/uploads/QKG4P4PPKMOV/dpp-report.pdf

Summitatem

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122142045#Comment_122142045

Where did he get the photographs?

Summitatem

How do you know what's in the DPP file?