[Deleted User] wrote: » Who says you cant get away with murder?:eek::eek:
Woody79 wrote: » https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/in-depth-tea-and-scones-at-the-table-of-sophie-toscan-du-plantiers-suspected-murderer-40608188.html This lad certainly thinks he did it. His argument is well framed.
monkeybutter wrote: » Thanks for posting That article was of the usual standard of guff you'd expect from the info He has no idea nothing to add other than his predjudice
Woody79 wrote: » Tiny finger of land, maybe 200 houses. Half of them summer homes, unoccupied, leaves 100. Four-fifths of those remaining occupied by retirees and seniors, not enough strength to lift and wield a cavity block. So that’s 20 houses left. You’re looking for a well-built man in his prime, aged 25 to 40, living locally. How many of those are around here When you know, you just know.A hitman from France with adept skills in cavity block killing. I get it, hes not going to jail for it, ever. But he did it. Just like OJ.
Woody79 wrote: » Who says you cant get away with murder?:eek::eek:
Loafing Oaf wrote: » Yeah I thought we weren't allowed to copy and paste whole articles on the forum:p
odyssey06 wrote: » Remind me again why the murderer had to come from one of those 20 houses??? Why does the murderer have to be aged between 25 and 40??? The article is complete and utter guff. Seasoned hacks are they? Just comes across as arrogant. "What about the scratches" you say Senan. Well explain to me seasoned hack how someone could get scratches and leave zero forensics at the scene. Zero. No hair, no DNA, no blood, no fingerprints. In a supposed frenzied attack. You need to upgrade your baloney detector.
odyssey06 wrote: » Remind me again why the murderer had to come from one of those 20 houses??? Why does the murderer have to be aged between 25 and 40??? The article is complete and utter guff. Seasoned hacks are they? Just comes across as arrogant. "What about the scratches" you say Senan. Well explain to me seasoned hack how someone could get scratches and leave zero forensics at the scene. Zero.No hair, no DNA, no blood, no fingerprints. In a supposed frenzied attack. You need to upgrade your baloney detector.
Gussie Scrotch wrote: » I am reminded, again and again, of the Colin Stagg case in London. There are so many parallels it is spooky. a) The evidence against him consisted of of mistaken sightings of him ( times wrong especially) b)questions about his personality and character - he was interested in Wicca etc, c) some previous misbehaviour ( he had been done for indecent exposure, for sunbathing nude in a secluded spot on Wimbledon common ) d) a relentless campaign by the police, through the media, to paint him as the culprit. e) Total lack of a link between him and the victim ( Rachel Nikel - who was also French!) f) Complete lack of any concrete evidence to link him to the crime g) Huge swathes of the public utterly, utterly convinced he was guilty ( I was too) h) The parents of the victim believing totally the police story and saying, publicly, that his acquittal was a travesty of justice. i) when they couldn't find any hard evidence against him the police resorted to unsafe and unethical methods to try to trap him. j) Although, unlike Bailey he was charged, the judge threw the case out in short order, publicly castigating the police for their handling of the case. The police, however, made it absolutely plain, again through the media, that they still thought he was guilty and would not be pursuing the case further. k) He was ostracised and demonised by the local population. His life was made a misery....... Until, years later, proper methodical and forensic police work identified that he could not have been the killer and another man, in jail for a similar offence was matched through DNA analysis and convicted of the murder. Colin Stagg was given a public apology and a huge chunk of compensation.Bailey may be the killer, I don't believe he is, but I acknowledge the possibility. But the evidence pointing his his direction is no stronger that that which implicated Stagg.
Woody79 wrote: » Senan Molony <snip - text of article>
Weddings ahoy wrote: » Sophie said she thought someone was using her house when she wasn't there, is it a stretch to think someone could also have been squatting in the Richardson's house behind her house at the time, and perhaps she saw them returning or leaving the property that night and went to confront them ?
Woody79 wrote: » I told you he's never going to jail. Gardai did a perfect job. Oh we happened to lose a galvanised gate with blood all over it from the scene. Many gardai incompetences. This is a who donit forum. Who did it then?
odyssey06 wrote: » But leaving a body out in the open where it could be discovered at any time seems a bit off to me.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Tiny finger of land, maybe 200 houses. Half of them summer homes, unoccupied, leaves 100. Four-fifths of those remaining occupied by retirees and seniors, not enough strength to lift and wield a cavity block. So that’s 20 houses left. You’re looking for a well-built man in his prime, aged 25 to 40, living locally. How many of those are around here When you know, you just know.A hitman from France with adept skills in cavity block killing. I get it, hes not going to jail for it, ever. But he did it. Just like OJ.
odyssey06 wrote: » I hope you are right re: never going to jail. Even with the garda incompetences, I think they would not have lost anything that they thought would pin it on Bailey. It's not my theory, but I'm inclining towards whoever Marie Farrell is\was really protecting OR whoever was using the holiday home when Sophie wasn't there. This may be the same people.
Loafing Oaf wrote: » To me this is virtually a slam dunk against the hired gun theory (or anyone thinking even semi-rationally really). The hitman's number one priority (even beyond getting the job done) is always to get in and out without incriminating themselves or their client. Even dragging the body behind a ditch could easily have given the killer a few days grace before the alarm was raised.
john123470 wrote: » MF was having a fling with one of the Gardai. They were using one / both of the holiday homes for their trysts. Sophie got in the way somehow Case closed. Book em, Danno .. starting with Inspector Clouseau-Colombo-Dwyer
Wompa1 wrote: » Moloney didn't notice the scratch or cut on his forehead but Jules did and it was mentioned in her statement. He didn't have it when they last saw each other around 1am and did have it when she saw him again around 9am. He said he was killing Turkeys. She corroborated that despite not seeing him do it because she didn't see him again until he brought her the coffee at which time he had the scar.
In the Netflix documentary, they had locals stating they saw her with scars on multiple occasions. The retelling of her poor daughter seeking help was heartbreaking. Jules has said, she couldn't see her daughters or grandkids because they didn't want Ian around. Jim's documentary made it seem like it was a once off drunken rage when he hit Jules. She suggested it herself, as people in abusive relationships often do. Bailey is manipulative, violent and abusive. I'd love to hear what Jules' kids have to say considering they were in the house at the time too.
Gussie Scrotch wrote: » I think Alfie role should be considered. He's the only one who was definitely there at the time of the death. The actual site of the killing is interesting also - at the gate - the gate over which Sophie and her neighbours had been in dispute. He had a possible motive and, i think, it is very strange that neither he nor Shirley saw or heard anything.
john123470 wrote: » That is definitely an angle. That gate was becoming a real source of friction How did they go and lose a gate ? It's so Irish It hurts thinking about this puzzle but on balance, it looks like there were a lot more players involved than the man iin the long black coat ..
john123470 wrote: » That is definitely an angle. That gate was becoming a real source of friction How did they go and lose a gate ? It's so Irish It hurts thinking about this puzzle but on balance, it looks like there were a lot more players involved than the man in the long black coat ..
odyssey06 wrote: » Wompa1 wrote: » Moloney didn't notice the scratch or cut on his forehead but Jules did and it was mentioned in her statement. He didn't have it when they last saw each other around 1am and did have it when she saw him again around 9am. He said he was killing Turkeys. She corroborated that despite not seeing him do it because she didn't see him again until he brought her the coffee at which time he had the scar./ How did he get the scratches at the murder scene and leave no trace of forensics? Even by the standards of 1996 forensics that's a slam dunk. It's a bit of a jump from that kind of abuse, in the emotions of close domestic contact... to walking for hours in December in the dark to someone you barely knew and kill them with a concrete block? I’m sure the walk to the house was supposed to have been far less, 30-40 minutes across the open country? He could have driven all or part of the way, he admitted to driving while drunk on several occasions and has been caught at least once.
Wompa1 wrote: » Moloney didn't notice the scratch or cut on his forehead but Jules did and it was mentioned in her statement. He didn't have it when they last saw each other around 1am and did have it when she saw him again around 9am. He said he was killing Turkeys. She corroborated that despite not seeing him do it because she didn't see him again until he brought her the coffee at which time he had the scar./ How did he get the scratches at the murder scene and leave no trace of forensics? Even by the standards of 1996 forensics that's a slam dunk. It's a bit of a jump from that kind of abuse, in the emotions of close domestic contact... to walking for hours in December in the dark to someone you barely knew and kill them with a concrete block? I’m sure the walk to the house was supposed to have been far less, 30-40 minutes across the open country? He could have driven all or part of the way, he admitted to driving while drunk on several occasions and has been caught at least once.
How did he get the scratches at the murder scene and leave no trace of forensics? Even by the standards of 1996 forensics that's a slam dunk. It's a bit of a jump from that kind of abuse, in the emotions of close domestic contact... to walking for hours in December in the dark to someone you barely knew and kill them with a concrete block?
listermint wrote: » If it was left at the back of a local station in cork it's probably hanging in some locals field or swiped by the local crafty fingers for quick sale.
MoonUnit75 wrote: » I’m sure the walk to the house was supposed to have been far less, 30-40 minutes across the open country? He could have driven all or part of the way, he admitted to driving while drunk on several occasions and has been caught at least once.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/cc5c49cbcd8338fb80f9b4941d6b358e.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1891d95e9e926c005ad3f5c153aacc5.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bd89cdce15309a6ec2dff928c865017a.svg)
