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

flanna01

Two things bother me about Ian Bailey:

1) Why did he state that he never left the house on the night that Sophie was murdered?

2) He states that he went down to the studio to write a piece for a newspaper as the deadline was imminent? The studio is a good walk away on a winters night, and the property would have been like siberia inside.....Why couldn't he write it from the warmth of Jules's house??? After all, everybody was in bed..

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120118379#Comment_120118379

I would think that he was using an old-fashioned and mechanical typewriter to type. This would have woken anybody up. I recall several pictures of Bailey sitting beside an old manual typewriter, so he did indeed own one.

But what is really strange here, is that at first Bailey stated that he never left the house. Later he admitted to leaving the houses and going to the studio, which is clearly a bit of a walk away. And even if he lied, the Guards would probably not be able to prove otherwise, as he had no alibi either way and Jules was fast asleep.

The deadline by the newspaper could easily have been just an explanation, he could as well have written the paper earlier, if he wanted to and pretended to have written that overnight.

Maybe Bailey wanted to be honest, and probably thought that it's going to come up in the investigation as to what he did that night and writing an article to a deadline could have worked as some form of a very weak alibi?

We don't know but theoretically Bailey had the whole night to himself to kill Sophie and he was burning something behind the studio later on. That something could easily have been an overcoat with incriminating evidence, like blood of Sophie.

We still don't know Bailey's motive. If Bailey killed Sophie in a rage, I don't think it was sexual. I just don't see him hiking for one hour during a cold night after a night out in the pub, arriving at Sophie's around maybe say 2am at the earliest, with a bottle of French wine, demanding sex, and if turned away kill her with whatever means around, like a concrete block, and hiking back, cleaning up and pretend nothing happened.

Apparently Sophie received 50 blows to her head or body. That's a lot of blows and I would suggest it wouldn't be the handwriting of a drunk killer, more somebody who was under the influence of drugs? 50 blows is an unusual high amount and lacing up her boots and talking a walk to the gates would look like walking an old friend back to the car, which was parked by the gates.

Or the murder was committed by somebody wanting it to look like a rage killing. That's also possible.

kirk.

So was there an article printed or evidence to back Bailey's claim ?

That was definitely suspicious the initial lie

That and the climbing pine trees and plucking turkeys story

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120121598#Comment_120121598

He did kill a turkey and climb a pine tree to cut a christmas tree.

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120121622#Comment_120121622

Was there any evidence he wrote an article?

Presumably that was followed up by gardai ?

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120121598#Comment_120121598

Yes, it was published in the Sunday Tribune, it was about internet hubs in pubs, I believe under the name Eoin Bailey.

Jules said she saw a handwritten article on the kitchen table in the morning.

He claimed he wrote it at the kitchen table and went to the studio between 7 and 8 am. to type it up to fax it as he was unable to dictate it over the phone.

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120121702#Comment_120121702

Hmm..

Suppose he could have planted it as cover

Why did he lie then initially

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120121805#Comment_120121805

Yes it's possible he could have planted it, but after brutally murdering someone a couple of hours before?

The initial statement that he never got up was made some time after, (I haven't got the dates to hand.)

This is someone who had spent the Sat night before and probably the nights before that, boozing till all hours and again on Sunday night.

Would you remember some weeks later what you were doing on one of those particular nights under aggressive interrogation?

Edit;

(apologies I ninga edited my post after your reply)

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120121973#Comment_120121973

Yet he was able to write an article

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120122100#Comment_120122100

Very possible, after 4 or 5 hours sleep, (assuming he hadn't spent that time trekking 2 miles to kill someone and back again in the meantime).

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120121973#Comment_120121973

To me it is possible that Bailey killed Sophie which doesn't mean that I think he did it. He certainly did have time, he did know where she lived, he knew how to walk there in darkness and he may have known that she stayed at her holiday home for a few days. Neither Jules nor anybody else would have seen him. He had the night to himself if he wanted to. He could have cleaned up at his studio, changed clothes, and prepared his coat and other clothes to be burnt.

Whether he could have done it in terms of physical capability after several drinks in the pub or whether he had a motive for the murder, we all don't know. The physical exercise to hike there for at least one hour would have been a strong effort for a strong motive, and I don't think Bailey drove.

The place referred to as "the studio" is actually a completely separate house a few minutes walk down the road from Jules' place. The house was actually extended a couple of years ago and possibly sold? It is likely that Bailey had a bathroom and a shower there, also a washing machine.

I doubt very much that Bailey's motive would have been sex or offering to contribute a bottle of expensive French wine would have lead to sex with Sophie and certainly not at a time from 2am to say 7 or 8 am. Sophie wasn't looking for companionship at this time, I'd suggest.

I also imagine Sophie had a busy schedule during her time in Ireland, meeting with contractors, getting the heating fixed, and having a meeting in the morning with the caretaker, plus her flight to France would have been later on in the afternoon.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120122545#Comment_120122545

" getting the heating fixed, and having a meeting in the morning with the caretaker, plus her flight to France would have been later on in the "afternoon.

The heating was already fixed and working. she had arranged 2 meetings for noon on Mon, with Josephine Hellen, and a plasterer to do some work.

Her flight back was next day, Tues 24th. Oddly Josie Hellen turned up for her meeting, not aware of what had happened, even though she lived only a mile away, but the plasterer didn't turn up, so he must have heard about it.

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120122156#Comment_120122156

So he initially said he didn't leave the house

So when did Jules say she saw the article

Was she lying initially as well and they both came up with the "article on table " story later ?

Was she contradicting him from the beginning on him "not leaving house" ?

Sorry if been answered not followed all the details

kirk.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120122545#Comment_120122545

Hiking for an hour is nothing to anyone used to walking

Deeec

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120122628#Comment_120122628

This is the first mention I've seen of a plasterer meant to call to Sophie's house that day.

Also do you know what day she got the heating fixed?

Its possible that both these guys also knew she was alone.

Must love hardship

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120122545#Comment_120122545

Why would he not have driven there? Why do people think he walked?

Also the expensive bottle of wine. It was not for sale in Ireland. How would he have it? Does it not make more sense that this bottle was brought to ireland by sophie and was removed from her house? Or given by Sophie as an xmas gift/ peace offering to one of her neighbours ?

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120122691#Comment_120122691

"So he initially said he didn't leave the house"

Yes

"So when did Jules say she saw the article"

In one of her statements, there are several..

"Was she lying initially as well and they both came up with the "article on table " story later ?

As well as what?

I've only seen Jules mentioning the "article on the table" I haven't seen it said by Bailey anywhere.

"Was she contradicting him from the beginning on him "not leaving house" ?

As far as I know the question of him leaving the house ( his alibi) did not come up until they were both arrested, first Bailey early morning, then, when they realised they couldn't crack him, they brought in Jules and played one against the other.

A quote from the Bandon Police tapes before their second arrest" we must break Jules" or "we have to break Jules" words to that effect.

Two statements here, first is handwritten by a Garda at her house before her arrest The second close to midnight after 10 hours of questioning.

garda statement written.jpg

garda statement printed.jpg

flanna01

Whoever was using Sophie's bath tub did not force an entry..

There was no breaking and entering.

The invader has access to the property.

Or.. Had access to the keys to the property, even if they were being held by somebody else at the time.

Now.... Where was that wine found again.....???

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120122908#Comment_120122908

He was drinking in a pub before.

Driving under the influence wasn't that uncommon in Ireland back then.

However if he was driving to Sophie's he would have run the risk of being stopped under the influence. He would also needed to clean the car after the murder as he must have had blood all over him, - the way Sophie was hit. And then Jules place was lived in, somebody may have heard the car coming and going, - but there were no such reports.

Cleaning up the car would have aroused suspicion, if done during the day.

However it's sure possible he could have driven, and later also cleaned up the car at his studio and then driven to Jules place.

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120123166#Comment_120123166

That bath incident happened several years previously though.

According to the housekeeper, they changed the locks after that and didn't notice any signs of someone in the property after doing that.

So that suggests whoever had been using it had old keys but was now locked out \ got the message OR just got more subtle about it.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120123423#Comment_120123423

"OR" part probably right

Probably would have access to the new keys.

Deeec

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120123319#Comment_120123319

Just to add to what you have said here - Bailey/Jules drove the car to the murder scene the next day. Surely he wouldn't take this risk if he had drove and cleaned the car. The car would still smell of cleaning fluid or be wet etc.

If he did murder Sophie he walked there which I find hard to believe. If he did he fitted alot into that night - to get there, murder her, walk back home, clean himself up and be there ready for Jules morning coffee - all this done after a nights drinking.

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120123459#Comment_120123459

I think the same way as you described it.

However it might have been different if Bailey and Jules were in it together. Bailey did the killing, Jules the cleaning up, including the car.

In the end, it's hard to speculate, for Bailey we don't even have a clear motive. I personally simply don't believe it was sexual for Bailey, even though it's not impossible. Maybe it was really about a freelance contract which was turned down by Sophie and Bailey in rage and under the influence of Whisky and one thing lead to another? Also possible, I'd say.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120123423#Comment_120123423

It's possible that Sophie didn't change the locks when she bought the house, and the previous owner may have given the keys to Alfie and Shirley and had a better relationship to them.

I don't think anybody other than Alfie and Shirley are responsible for the bath incident. I just don't see anybody driving from afar, just to take a bath? Or the caretaker did it, or did a poor job in cleaning? All possible.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120123523#Comment_120123523

"It's possible that Sophie didn't change the locks when she bought the house, and the previous owner may have given the keys to Alfie and Shirley and had a better relationship to them."

That's a possibility, Alfie used water from Sophie's before she moved in when he was renovating his house, with the permission of the previous owner.

"I just don't see anybody driving from afar, just to take a bath? 

Maybe from not from so afar at all. Could be someone who was coming and going around the place on a regular basis.

The finger was pointed at Alfie straight away, maybe to cover up the poor cleaning job or for somebody who had access to the keys.

Gussie Scrotch

Just to throw another speculative angle on things:

I am of the opinion that the attack took place in the morning ( after dawn - in daylight ) for the following reasons:

1) There were no lights on in the house when the Gardai arrived.

2) There was an uncovered, cut loaf on the kitchen table, indicative of breakfast.

3) Both the first responding Gard, and the doctor, noted that the blood on Sophies nostrils was still wet.

4) The contents of her stomach included fruit and muesli. Again, typical of breakfast.

5) The donning of the boots show that she intentionally left the house and went down to the gate. I doubt she would do that in the dark.

6) There was no alcohol detected in her blood or urine, despite there being used wine glasses in the kitchen and the fact that she had drunk alcohol at the Ungerers . Given the time that alcohol takes to be fully metabolised, it suggests a significant time lapse between her last drink and the time of death.

If the attack did take place in the 08:00 - 09-00 timespan, what are the implications for Bailey vs other suspects?

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120124075#Comment_120124075

Add to your list;

6) The attacker went back up the lane 12 to 15 yards to pick a block from the pumphouse. first light was about 8:10, Sunrise 8:45.

Gussie Scrotch

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120124164#Comment_120124164

Yes,

I have a theory about the concrete block too. Is it possible that the block had been used as a prop to keep the gate open?

tinytobe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120123926#Comment_120123926

Both Alfie and Shirley are also always one possible consideration of mine. After all both were the only ones who were completely alone with Sophie that fateful night and would have among all possibilities of killer the most secure feeling during the whole night on what to do in that rather remote part of land. They would have felt secure during the perpetration of the crime.

Alfie used drugs, Alfie had a brush with the law at some point, also the relationship between Alfie, Shirley and her neighbour Sophie wasn't the best. If they were using Sophie's bathroom without her consent that also leads to suggest that honesty wasn't Alfie or Shirley's strong suit.

Also, both of them reporting not hearing anything that night is questionable, could be true (depending on how Sophie was hit), could not be.

chooseusername

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120124184#Comment_120124184

In the photos the gate is open, and does not need anything like a stone or block to keep it open.

There is sheep wire attached to the bottom of the gate which drags on the ground as the gate meets the higher ground uphill and this will keep it open.

The gate may well have been hung in such a way that the default position is open. The reverse is quite common with farm gates.

EdHoven

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120121598#Comment_120121598

That is feeble. As pointed out multiple times there is circumstantial evidence against a good few deceased men we can mention. Lyons, Ungerer and her husband. Never mind those still alive we can't mention.

Bailey is patently a "character" but a few scratches got in activities that are attested he did is not enough to send someone to prison. Remember it is better a hundred guilty go free than one innocent is convicted.