Murder at the Cottage | Sky

Gussie Scrotch wrote: »

Yes, I noticed that too.....very hard to read. She might be lying....she might not.

i just saw in the netflix doc she lied again in baileys court action when the judge ordered her to name the man she was with. She gave a name but awrong name .I didn't know that. I would say she is a kind of female walter mitty type

Treppen

el Fenomeno wrote: »

It also protects her in the future if someone else saw her near the bridge, or the scene of the crime.

If she says nothing, volunteers no information and keeps her head down, and plenty of time passes - and no doubt several Gardaí appeals for anyone who was in the area also pass - and then it comes to light she was there, she's in trouble. If she's innocent, why not speak up and answer one of the appeals? Why wait until someone else says they saw her or accused her?

Whereas if it comes to light that someone else saw her after she's already volunteered that she was there for a different reason, it's less damning.

Ya the mysterious person in the long black coat and beret across from her place of work just sounds a bit weird. It's almost like she was first told to implicate bailey.... Then to stick a beret on the mysterious guy to imply it was a Frenchman to say well if bailey didn't do it then it was a French assassin... But definitely not an Irish man.. shur he would have had shamrock on him.

Mackwiss wrote: »

The other scenario that could implicate Bailey if that if it proves true he saw the lights at Alfies, and wanted to go to the party. Goes home. Wakes up in the middle of the night to go to Alfies to the "party" tries to open the gate and the confrontation happens.

Though... as Jules mentioned, he would've hidden very well this situation. IB is an emotional man as one can see from so many interviews.. He is not a cold blooded killer able to hide something like this.

Here's a killer being uncovered decades after the fact and just look at her reaction:
https://youtu.be/WLSNPkf8RCU

I would also like to point out these videos:

Innocent until proven guilty: https://youtu.be/BemHqUqcpI8

Stephen McDaniel's reaction when he found out during a live interview his crime was being uncovered (first 4 minutes of the video): https://youtu.be/HkRjIq8Cp2A

Multiple killers pretending to be insane and an actual mentally unstable killer confessing it directly: https://youtu.be/Mwt35SEeR9w

Was there a party at Alfie's house that night?

SoulWriter wrote: »

MF should be an actor. She speaks with conviction when she say it was bailey at Kilfeada bridge and is equally convincing when she withdraws her statement looking straight at the camera, no sign of anxiety or stress

Yes, I noticed that too.....very hard to read. She might be lying....she might not.

el Fenomeno

Mackwiss wrote: »

this right here! The weight of guilt would also mean why she keeps changing her story. Also a common trait in killers...

It also protects her in the future if someone else saw her near the bridge, or the scene of the crime.

If she says nothing, volunteers no information and keeps her head down, and plenty of time passes - and no doubt several Gardaí appeals for anyone who was in the area also pass - and then it comes to light she was there, she's in trouble. If she's innocent, why not speak up and answer one of the appeals? Why wait until someone else says they saw her or accused her?

Whereas if it comes to light that someone else saw her after she's already volunteered that she was there for a different reason, it's less damning.

el Fenomeno wrote: »

Rather than wait to be accused and then argue their innocence, guilty people will often volunteer their innocence to try get in ahead of any accusation.

It's not too dissimilar to the oft-utilised "he who smelt it, dealt it" counter-argument of "he who denied it, supplied it".

Of course I'm talking about farts, but the same behavioral science applies to murder.

this right here! The weight of guilt would also mean why she keeps changing her story. Also a common trait in killers...

el Fenomeno

SoulWriter wrote: »

the sentence is a lot different though

I don't drink very often, but if you ever decided to visit my house the morning after a feed of pints and a 3-in-1 from the Chinese, you might take that back.

el Fenomeno wrote: »

Rather than wait to be accused and then argue their innocence, guilty people will often volunteer their innocence to try get in ahead of any accusation.

It's not too dissimilar to the oft-utilised "he who smelt it, dealt it" counter-argument of "he who denied it, supplied it".

Of course I'm talking about farts, but the same behavioral science applies to murder.

the sentence is a lot different though

el Fenomeno

Gussie Scrotch wrote: »

Its a long shot....why would she subsequently contact the Gardai? It would seem, in such a scenario, to be far safer to keep her head down.

Rather than wait to be accused and then argue their innocence, guilty people will often volunteer their innocence to try get in ahead of any accusation.

It's not too dissimilar to the oft-utilised "he who smelt it, dealt it" counter-argument of "he who denied it, supplied it".

Of course I'm talking about farts, but the same behavioral science applies to murder.

MF should be an actor. She speaks with conviction when she say it was bailey at Kilfeada bridge and is equally convincing when she withdraws her statement looking straight at the camera, no sign of anxiety or stress

listermint wrote: »

To catch him ? Overall his film made the majority of viewers think he didn't do it. Which was at odds to the cork podcast which made many including me question bailey more.

So if that is your assertion then Sheridan's editing was so poor people came out feeling sorry for the man .

i thought js film was very poor overall. his appearing his narration and his filming bailey drunk

CoBo55

The three Netflix episodes are available from the usual sources;)

listermint

SoulWriter wrote: »

No offence to your opinion either but you can set up what you film, you can slant and put a spin, and i think JS had an agenda to e the one to catch bailey.His film is pretty tabloidy amateur is in comparison to netflix.

I doubt what was in front of him was always drunk.I'm sure there is lots of sober footage

To catch him ? Overall his film made the majority of viewers think he didn't do it. Which was at odds to the cork podcast which made many including me question bailey more.

So if that is your assertion then Sheridan's editing was so poor people came out feeling sorry for the man .

The other scenario that could implicate Bailey if that if it proves true he saw the lights at Alfies, and wanted to go to the party. Goes home. Wakes up in the middle of the night to go to Alfies to the "party" tries to open the gate and the confrontation happens.

Though... as Jules mentioned, he would've hidden very well this situation. IB is an emotional man as one can see from so many interviews.. He is not a cold blooded killer able to hide something like this.

Here's a killer being uncovered decades after the fact and just look at her reaction:
https://youtu.be/WLSNPkf8RCU

I would also like to point out these videos:

Innocent until proven guilty: https://youtu.be/BemHqUqcpI8

Stephen McDaniel's reaction when he found out during a live interview his crime was being uncovered (first 4 minutes of the video): https://youtu.be/HkRjIq8Cp2A

Multiple killers pretending to be insane and an actual mentally unstable killer confessing it directly: https://youtu.be/Mwt35SEeR9w

Deleted User wrote: »

I believe Bailey was given a camera and filmed himself.
Also, with regard to the actual killing it was described by the guards to be after an 'extended chase'. Obviously indicating that she was running away from the killer and not towards him. Not sure how much evidence there is of that though.

some of the drunk shots he is talking to someone presumably JS

listermint wrote: »

No offence to your opinion nor defence of JS no love for him. But you film what's in front of you. That's how you document stuff with video.

That can come across as salaciois or unfair but thats film. If you sanitised it then people would see through it too.

No offence to your opinion either but you can set up what you film, you can slant and put a spin, and i think JS had an agenda to e the one to catch bailey.His film is pretty tabloidy amateur is in comparison to netflix.

I doubt what was in front of him was always drunk.I'm sure there is lots of sober footage

Mackwiss wrote: »

She could be coerced to ring the Gardai to throw off the real killer being the guy in the car. This would explain also ringing anonymously and ringing often at the direction of the killer. I wouldn't be surprised he is still alive and she's still afraid for her life.

Though she does sound genuine in JS's work

Yes.....good point.

Gussie Scrotch wrote: »

This theory has some merit but:

B]She actually said she wasn't having an affair but I agree, she almost definitely was.[/B]

Their is no evidence that anyone other than Sophie was actually in the house. PM said no evidence of recent sexual activity, no strange fingerprints found.

Its a long shot....why would she subsequently contact the Gardai? It would seem, in such a scenario, to be far safer to keep her head down.

I think its a strong possibility that the man in the car was a Garda. I can't accept the naming of a dead man was anything other than a convenient "get out".

I think that, at some point ( perhaps more than once..... )she had seen this Garda naked. The story about him telling the husband about the mole is stretching credibility to breaking point.

She could be coerced to ring the Gardai to throw off the real killer being the guy in the car. This would explain also ringing anonymously and ringing often at the direction of the killer. I wouldn't be surprised he is still alive and she's still afraid for her life.

Though she does sound genuine in JS's work

chicorytip

BarneyJ wrote: »

In Ep 1 of JS's documentary he said that the gate was found open by the neighbour and that this would have been very unusual.

I think that we can rule out that anything turned nasty within the house itself. There is no evidence at all to suggest this. Everything was neat and tidy in there and there was no blood found inside.

At least one of the neighbouring houses was occupied because it was the occupant of one of those houses who discovered Sophie's body in the morning.

When I speculate about things turning nasty in the house I am thinking about the behaviour or attitude of the individual she may have been in company with, a male. It could have been an unwanted sexual advance or comments which made her fearful enough to attempt to flee the situation. If that is what happened it does not necessarily follow that there would have been signs of disturbance in the kitchen which would likely have been the case had there been a prolonged physical struggle inside between victim and assailant. I still think the most credible theory is that she was attempting to flee, was caught and then bludgeoned to death at that spot inside the front gate.

EmmetSpiceland

listermint wrote: »

No offence to your opinion nor defence of JS no love for him. But you film what's in front of you. That's how you document stuff with video.

That can come across as salaciois or unfair but thats film. If you sanitised it then people would see through it too.

One thing is didn’t show was him losing his temper, not to any great degree, while drunk. Whiskey was blamed for his domestic abuse but the camera only ever seem to pan across empty beer cans, wine bottles and ciders.

Could that have been intentional? A lot was put into him being impulsive, narcissistic and violent but we really only saw the first two. Granted, he did seem to get a bit frustrated and threw a few expletives but nothing explosive.

yourdeadwright wrote: »

MF is having an affair with man in car she said so herself,

[

Man in car also seeing Sophie or thinks he has a chance & is in the house,

MF finds out goes and confronts them that said night , Sophie & man come out to her & something happens & they end up killing Sophie,

MF says shes out having and affair that night as alibi , Man in the car if ever questioned also has Alibi,

Man in car is never ever named Garda never really push her on it ,
MF is scared of her life of the Garda to this day
Garda blame IB
MF says she knows growth on main Garda private area

Conclusion man in the car was Garda , hence why the investigation was a **** show ,

Garda constantly on MF case to make sure she stays quite, MF hates him now but MF can't say it was Garda in the car that night as it would implement her ,so makes up story about him getting naked in her house to embarrass him ,

Garda knows nobody likes IB and thinks he is odd so plots to set him up, Also being a Garda he made sure that night the crime scene was clean ,

Hollywood story or real life

This theory has some merit but:

B]She actually said she wasn't having an affair but I agree, she almost definitely was.[/B]

Their is no evidence that anyone other than Sophie was actually in the house. PM said no evidence of recent sexual activity, no strange fingerprints found.

Its a long shot....why would she subsequently contact the Gardai? It would seem, in such a scenario, to be far safer to keep her head down.

I think its a strong possibility that the man in the car was a Garda. I can't accept the naming of a dead man was anything other than a convenient "get out".

I think that, at some point ( perhaps more than once..... )she had seen this Garda naked. The story about him telling the husband about the mole is stretching credibility to breaking point.

chicorytip

Treppen wrote: »

Might be hard to catch him when he's sober.
Thats probably the reason why they kept focusing on the multitude of empty bottles in their gaffe during interviews.

Say he had committed the crime... Do people think he could have walked all the way from his house to hers (at 1am I think they said he left Jules' bed).
Roads were unlit.
Then get back into bed after changing his clothes etc
Anyone know the distance?

It is quite a short distance from his then residence to the DuPlantier house.Three or four kilometres, a distance easily covered on foot within one hour.

listermint

SoulWriter wrote: »

very amateur to be filming him drunk.

No offence to your opinion nor defence of JS no love for him. But you film what's in front of you. That's how you document stuff with video.

That can come across as salaciois or unfair but thats film. If you sanitised it then people would see through it too.

listermint

dmn22 wrote: »

How is it more likely that she was attempting to flee from her attacker than meeting a visitor at the gate? It's been said Sophie liked to have the gate locked. I'm sure if she's staying on her own she would be even more likely to lock it.

I think a car pulled up, she threw on her boots quickly and went down to investigate or unlock the gate and that's when the incident occurred.

The alternative is that she was known to be very protective that the gate was closed. She was eating breakfast saw the gate was wide open and threw the boots on to go down and close it . At that point there was a confrontation with unknown person.

The wine bottle still is an odd piece of evidence in this scenario.

SoulWriter wrote: »

very amateur to be filming him drunk.

I believe Bailey was given a camera and filmed himself.
Also, with regard to the actual killing it was described by the guards to be after an 'extended chase'. Obviously indicating that she was running away from the killer and not towards him. Not sure how much evidence there is of that though.

yourdeadwright

MF is having an affair with man in car she said so herself,
Man in car also seeing Sophie or thinks he has a chance & is in the house,

MF finds out goes and confronts them that said night , Sophie & man come out to her & something happens & they end up killing Sophie,

MF says shes out having and affair that night as alibi , Man in the car if ever questioned also has Alibi,

Man in car is never ever named Garda never really push her on it ,
MF is scared of her life of the Garda to this day
Garda blame IB
MF says she knows growth on main Garda private area

Conclusion man in the car was Garda , hence why the investigation was a **** show ,
Garda constantly on MF case to make sure she stays quite, MF hates him now but MF can't say it was Garda in the car that night as it would implement her ,so makes up story about him getting naked in her house to embarrass him ,

Garda knows nobody likes IB and thinks he is odd so plots to set him up, Also being a Garda he made sure that night the crime scene was clean ,

Hollywood story or real life

TomCor1 wrote: »

I agree. But at the same time, why would she draw attention to herself in the first place, if she was actually involved.

I don't think she was directly involved. And I don't think her "companion" was directly involved either.

But I think there is a possible link between the identity of her companion and the quality of the investigation.

Just my hunch....I don't know anything that isn't already in the public domain. but there are peculiarities that are glossed over ( particularly so in the Netflix doc which was really a hatchet job on Bailey)

If the failures by the investigators were purely don to incompetence then it was nothing less than gross negligence, unforgiveable carelessness and total ineptitude. Otherwise, they point to something much more sinister.

TomCor1

Gussie Scrotch wrote: »

I have felt, for a long time, that her stubborn refusal to name this guy, the Garda failure to force her to do so, and the subsequent ( too convenient ) naming of a dead man , holds the answers to many of the open questions.

I agree. But at the same time, why would she draw attention to herself in the first place, if she was actually involved.

Mackwiss wrote: »

The whole MF affair is so dodgy.... so dodgy it even makes me wonder if she wasn't directly involved and "placed" a man at the bridge to cover up someone she knows that did it.

I have felt, for a long time, that her stubborn refusal to name this guy, the Garda failure to force her to do so, and the subsequent ( too convenient ) naming of a dead man , holds the answers to many of the open questions.