monkeybutter wrote: » maybe you did it?
listermint wrote: » Your words "That particular piece of "investigation" stunk to high heavens for me" This reads as if you think this was a particular cunning plan to catch him. So that's why I'm pointing to your own words ...
sydthebeat wrote: » I don't think it's a lynch pin or "Hill to die on" Why do you keep saying things like that?? My comment was its hilarious in its ineptitude
listermint wrote: » And the bribery and the missing gate didn't ? The wine bottle. The sketch is a nonsense reference it's not the lynch pin you think it is
sydthebeat wrote: » Note book?? It was a A4 sheet which clearly someone had outlined their own hand on. Bailey didn't become a suspect until nearly two weeks after the murder, when his articles drew suspicion. Are we to believe that a guard drew a sketch of baileys hands prior to that?? If so, why?? If not, why not photo the hands at that first interview? That particular piece of "investigation" stunk to high heavens for me
listermint wrote: » Guards live and die by their notebooks. Notes sketches references all done in the notebook for recollection purposes later. Do you know any guards ? If yes ask them The sketch has nothing malicious about it. It's not part of the stitch up . There are other things that could be like the bribing the fella to be friend him. For note I don't think B did it.
sydthebeat wrote: » Its no hill, it's pretty much peak ineptitude though. If its for reference, just go photo the hands. If it's so long after the fact that the hands have healed, there's no way anyone can recall the number, position and direction of scratches. I doubt anyone could recall anything like that 10 mins after seeing it, never mind a number of days. Screams to me though of another stitch in the stitch up.
listermint wrote: » 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.
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
monkeybutter wrote: » In fairness it's not quite that simple as has been explained above
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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
listermint wrote: » Wouldn't the autopsy have shown that...
monkeybutter wrote: » Was she not pregnant according to her husband?
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.
Loafing Oaf wrote: » It's not though: Have you been looking in your dark crystal?
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 ...
dark crystal wrote: » No, it's just a theory.
dark crystal wrote: » it was a local... I think they know the killer alright, as he's a local,
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