nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Murder at the Cottage | Sky

CorkGunJonny

Anyone know what channel it's on? The jim sheridan documentary about sophie toscan du plantier

Find more posts tagged with

Sophie

Quick Links

Comments

monkeybutter

CoBo55 wrote: »

Did you listen to the West Cork podcast? You might view Bailey differently after that.

I did, these things are entertainment pieces, like a radio show or a tv one

They just regurgitate the story, but can't really add anything, unlike say an episode of murder she wrote, its not their job

Whether you judge a person after a few mins of audio or not, I wouldn't

I mean this would place a heavy toll on even the toughest person

Just the 4 years up to the dropping the case was unreal pressure for him, imagine what it was like

He was guilty in the court of popular opinion because that was what was fed to people at the time by the police etc, everyone in cork was talking about it

its like the mccans, there are still people out there willing to believe they did something cause they thought they looked a bit off in an interview

yourdeadwright

CoBo55 wrote: »

Did you listen to the West Cork podcast? You might view Bailey differently after that.

He didn't say anything about his view of Bailey ,
He said there is no evidence so he doesn't need to clear his name for murder,

Everyone knows Bailey is an out there character

nc6000

CoBo55 wrote: »

Did you listen to the West Cork podcast? You might view Bailey differently after that.

Podcasts don't decide if there's enough evidence to press charges.

CoBo55

monkeybutter wrote: »

dpp chose not to proceed due to lack of any evidence

thats a better result than going to court and winning

i mean even the manufactured evidence didnt stick

that is name cleared

Did you listen to the West Cork podcast? You might view Bailey differently after that.

monkeybutter

CoBo55 wrote: »

Well, not really, the guards made a complete hash of the investigation from the very start, it was so bad he couldn't even be changed never mind getting to court to clear his name(or not).

dpp chose not to proceed due to lack of any evidence

thats a better result than going to court and winning

i mean even the manufactured evidence didnt stick

that is name cleared

CoBo55

monkeybutter wrote: »

his name has been cleared in ireland

why do it again

given the low bar the french have set previously on the matter

Well, not really, the guards made a complete hash of the investigation from the very start, it was so bad he couldn't even be changed never mind getting to court to clear his name(or not).

nc6000

It's very cheeky of the French really to expect him to travel there for a trial in a French court. I can't think of an example of that happening before. Extradition back to a country where a crime was committed yes but never for a crime committed in a different country.

It's a slippery slope.

ShamNNspace

Furze99 wrote: »

The only person who gives a toss about Bailey is himself. If he wants to clear his name, let him present himself to the French justice system. No sympathy at all for him, none.

Whether anyone gives a toss or has sympathy for him is neither here nor there, IB would have no business presenting himself to the french justice system leaving his fate in the hands of the judiciary there, given the flimsy "evidence" connecting him to this heinous crime and how that show trial was conducted... Today its IB tomorrow it could be me, you or any other citizen of the Republic

The_Honeybadger

Finished this last night, very well put together I thought. Based on what was in the documentary I don’t think we can come to any conclusion as to whether IB did it or not. The Gardai do not come out of it looking well to put it kindly, leaving aside their stunning incompetence their main witness is not trustworthy. While I do think she saw somebody on the bridge the vagueness around who her companion was was a major loose end. Surely he was followed up with to corroborate?

I don’t understand those saying that he should have travelled to France to clear his name. The French trial was a witch-hunt, nothing more.

I’ll probably read in to it a bit more and might listen to the podcast but this documentary was well worth a watch

oceanman

Furze99 wrote: »

The only person who gives a toss about Bailey is himself. If he wants to clear his name, let him present himself to the French justice system. No sympathy at all for him, none.

the crime, whoever did it, happened on irish soil therefore its up to our dpp to decide to sent it to trial or not....they decided not. it has noting to do with the french justice system.

monkeybutter

Furze99 wrote: »

The only person who gives a toss about Bailey is himself. If he wants to clear his name, let him present himself to the French justice system. No sympathy at all for him, none.

his name has been cleared in ireland

why do it again

given the low bar the french have set previously on the matter

Furze99

jimwallace197 wrote: »

Bailey would'v be mad to consider going there and now cant even leave the country because of this nonsense.

The only person who gives a toss about Bailey is himself. If he wants to clear his name, let him present himself to the French justice system. No sympathy at all for him, none.

yourdeadwright

Why in gods name would anyone travel to another country to be tried for a crime that happened else where ?

Oh what because a French women died ....oh so there defiantly not going to be looking for any opportunity to convict you then are they ,

The Crime happened here and was investigated by Irish police & there wasn't enough evidence for a trail even begin ,
Do you honestly think France want him to give him a fair trial ?????????????

Remember there is no evidence just hear say rumours from locals , & France a country who speak a different language will understand that better than the Irish system ?

Acosta

I didn't realise how archaic the French legal system is compared to elsewhere before this case. Ian Bailey was right to stay put here and there's no way he was ever going to be extradited based on evidence which had already been disregarded by the DPP.

Yurt2

Furze99 wrote: »

France is a civilised country, a fellow member of the EU. It's not exactly some tin pot state or banana republic. We should have no reason to question the impartiality and quality of their justice system any more than our own. If a citizen is happy to be tried here, then then should likewise in France. End of story.

Mother of God. Let's dispense with the legal niceties of extradition shall we? Got a call from a Mr.Orban in Hungary. He wants to see you about legal bother of some sort. We've skipped the whole extradition thing because as you say yourself, EU bretheren and all that, so it's all completely sound and there's no real point about consulting a solicitor. We have you on the first Wizzair flight to Budapest in the morning.

I doubt Bailey is happy to be tried here. Even the DPP is not happy to have him tried here. The Supreme Court told the French to go to stuff themselves on the warrant because there is no reciprocity between France's extraterritorial jurisdiction on French victims of crime.

Are you aware where that extraterritoriality stems from? The French Imperial Age, when Paris wished to exercise swift justice for French citizens in the likes of Indochina and North Africa if the uppity natives stepped out of line. The Supreme Court were entirely right to tell the French to go do one.

Mebuntu

Furze99 wrote: »

I repeat France is a civilised country that has a long history of justice, longer than ours. We have no cause or reason to assume that a case would not be tried fairly there.

Oh yes we have.

A quango of high-up judges convicted a man for a murder in another country with no evidence connecting him to it.
That's all we need to know about the French justice system.

discostu1

jimwallace197 wrote: »

The very fact that they held a show trial while Bailey was in absentia in the first place doesn't say a lot about their legal system.

They had some neck on them even attempting this, the crime was committed here, what would the response have been had an Irish citizen been murdered in their country I wonder. They undermined the office of the DPP & our judicial system thinking they know better & then proceed to convict him based on statements from a corrupt garda & completely unreliable witnesses whom they expected to travel to France to give testimony with 8 days notice. The whole thing was a farce from start to finish.

Bailey would'v be mad to consider going there and now cant even leave the country because of this nonsense.

This was is mentioned on the West Cork Podcast it man s worth a read some parallels with IB and how a doctor was "kidnapped " by a grieving father broken but to France to stand trial https://morbidology.com/the-man-who-abducted-his-daughters-killer-andre-bamberski/

sugarman20

this is why I would've encourage IB to go and present his side of the story.

That's one of the worst things he could do.

Gussie Scrotch

Furze99 wrote: »

I repeat France is a civilised country that has a long history of justice, longer than ours. We have no cause or reason to assume that a case would not be tried fairly there.

OK, but by that logic, the French should accept Ireland in the same context - a civilised country, fellow member of the EEC etc - and should assume that if the Irish Justice system saw no case to answer they should have no doubts either???

CoBo55

Furze99 wrote: »

France is a civilised country, a fellow member of the EU. It's not exactly some tin pot state or banana republic. We should have no reason to question the impartiality and quality of their justice system any more than our own. If a citizen is happy to be tried here, then then should likewise in France. End of story.

There's no comparison between the two legal systems. They convicted a man using files that had been dismissed by our DPP, no actual evidence to speak of, he did right to stay here. Whether we like it or not everyone is entitled to due process. The French had him hung drawn and quartered before the case ever started.

listermint

Furze99 wrote: »

I repeat France is a civilised country that has a long history of justice, longer than ours. We have no cause or reason to assume that a case would not be tried fairly there.

I'm fully aware of France and how it is as is the UK or the US or Spain for that matter. But you would catch me or I'd say most people getting on a plane from your home for so much as a parking ticket.

You'd want to just enjoy throwing the dice if you'd do that.

jimwallace197

Furze99 wrote: »

I repeat France is a civilised country that has a long history of justice, longer than ours. We have no cause or reason to assume that a case would not be tried fairly there.

The very fact that they held a show trial while Bailey was in absentia in the first place doesn't say a lot about their legal system.

They had some neck on them even attempting this, the crime was committed here, what would the response have been had an Irish citizen been murdered in their country I wonder. They undermined the office of the DPP & our judicial system thinking they know better & then proceed to convict him based on statements from a corrupt garda & completely unreliable witnesses whom they expected to travel to France to give testimony with 8 days notice. The whole thing was a farce from start to finish.

Bailey would'v be mad to consider going there and now cant even leave the country because of this nonsense.

Furze99

listermint wrote: »

In fairness that's rubbish no right thinking person would ever willingly leave their home state to get tried elsewhere.

I repeat France is a civilised country that has a long history of justice, longer than ours. We have no cause or reason to assume that a case would not be tried fairly there.

[Deleted User]

Mackwiss wrote: »

this is why I would've encourage IB to go and present his side of the story. I do think the French trial expected him to go and provide the evidence himself from his side countering what the accusation had against him...

This would then focus on the Gardai handling of the case.
I wouldn't be surprised though IB did not go just not to incur in even more expense after two failed civil cases...

Considering they have already convicted him with basically no evidence whatsoever if I was him I wouldn't go near their legal system.

Mackwiss

Furze99 wrote: »

France is a civilised country, a fellow member of the EU. It's not exactly some tin pot state or banana republic. We should have no reason to question the impartiality and quality of their justice system any more than our own. If a citizen is happy to be tried here, then then should likewise in France. End of story.

this is why I would've encourage IB to go and present his side of the story. I do think the French trial expected him to go and provide the evidence himself from his side countering what the accusation had against him...

This would then focus on the Gardai handling of the case.
I wouldn't be surprised though IB did not go just not to incur in even more expense after two failed civil cases...

listermint

Furze99 wrote: »

France is a civilised country, a fellow member of the EU. It's not exactly some tin pot state or banana republic. We should have no reason to question the impartiality and quality of their justice system any more than our own. If a citizen is happy to be tried here, then then should likewise in France. End of story.

In fairness that's rubbish no right thinking person would ever willingly leave their home state to get tried elsewhere.

Utter nonsense on a basic human level home is where you feel safe

monkeybutter

Furze99 wrote: »

France is a civilised country, a fellow member of the EU. It's not exactly some tin pot state or banana republic. We should have no reason to question the impartiality and quality of their justice system any more than our own. If a citizen is happy to be tried here, then then should likewise in France. End of story.

This case is reason enough to question it 100%

Furze99

Yurt! wrote: »

I'd doubt that very much.

odyssey06 wrote: »

Any 'completely' innocent person would be mad to go before the French judicial system for a crime that didn't even take place in French jurisdiction. They don't seem too concerned about such matters as due process, presumption of innocence, or even you know this isn't their ****** colony.

France is a civilised country, a fellow member of the EU. It's not exactly some tin pot state or banana republic. We should have no reason to question the impartiality and quality of their justice system any more than our own. If a citizen is happy to be tried here, then then should likewise in France. End of story.

[Deleted User]

Gamb!t wrote: »

Maybe Richard was after a few drinks too?

Yes they were all drinking. They had been at the pub and continued drinking at Jules' house

The DPP report says

Richie Shelley states that on New Years Eve 1998 he was drinking in Hackett’s bar with his wife. They were joined by Ian Bailey and Jules Thomas. At the end of the night,they went to the house of Jules Thomas and continued drinking there

Gamb!t

SoulWriter wrote: »

The DPP report says Bailey was in bed and got up to show the Shellys where the phone was. they had decided to go as they felt bailey didn't want them there even though he gave them sleeping bags. No mention of showing clippings

"Bailey got out of bed and showed Richie Shelley where the phone was located. After making the call, Richie Shelley alleges that Ian Bailey came into the kitchen and cried “I did it”, repeating this about four or five times. In response, each time Bailey allegedly said “I did it”, Richie Shelley allegedly asked “you did what”? Bailey did not answer.

However, when Richie Shelley allegedly persisted with the question, Bailey allegedly said “I went too far, I went too far”. Richie Shelley asked Bailey what he meant bysaying he had gone too far, but Bailey did not answer him."

It was new yars eve i expect Bailey was well drunk

Maybe Richard was after a few drinks too?