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

Sophie: A Murder in West Cork - Netflix.

Agent Coulson

Drops June 30th.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-FoSNGGldg

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

FileNotFound

c.p.w.g.w wrote: »

Oh agreed, I have seen zero credible evidence the IB committed the murder...all those theories that is was a member of AGS could be plausible, especially with all the evidence that disappeared, but again there is no evidence to support that

Honestly given the estrangement and violence in both previous relationships combined with the connections both ex husbands had.

You could create a great narrative around French assassination

But once again no evidence at all.

[Deleted User]

Gussie Scrotch wrote: »

He did so based on the balance of probabilities. The DPP have to apply a different standard. 80% credibility is not acceptable.

You're conflating burden of proof in civil and criminal law with regard to witnesses' evidence. witnesses give evidence in both and are subject to cross examination to cast doubt on their credibility. These were found to be credible.
(Well, bar one anyway)

Gussie Scrotch

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

You're conflating burden of proof in civil and criminal law with regard to witnesses' evidence. witnesses give evidence in both and are subject to cross examination to cast doubt on their credibility. These were found to be credible.
(Well, bar one anyway)

No,

judge Moran was very careful to qualify his acceptance

"on the balance of probabilities", he accepted the version put forward by other witnesses".

"Mr Lyons gave evidence that he was 80 to 90 per cent sure he had introduced Ms du Plantier to Mr Bailey. On the balance of probabilities, I accept his evidence."

"On the balance of probabilities, I accept what Mrs Farrell told me, that the man she saw at the bridge was, in her view, Ian Bailey." He added that he did not know to what extent such evidence of identification would stand in a criminal trial".

I am anxious that this case does not take on the mantle of a murder trial. Any findings of fact I make is on the balance of probabilities and nothing else."

Tiger20

I've just had a theory after reading a lot of comments and seeing both documentaries. What if IB did get up, but to go to Alfie Lyons house as he thought there was a party there. He opened the gate on the lane way which STDP saw and put on her boots to go out and confront him over the gate. Row follows and he looses it. In his mind he reasons its her fault, it takes 2 to tango and shouldn't be in this country anyway, bloody foreigners and their holiday homes. So while he did it, he didn't plan to or mean it. Then feels important reporting on it and gets caught up in the whole thing

DellyBelly

Tiger20 wrote: »

I've just had a theory after reading a lot of comments and seeing both documentaries. What if IB did get up, but to go to Alfie Lyons house as he thought there was a party there. He opened the gate on the lane way which STDP saw and put on her boots to go out and confront him over the gate. Row follows and he looses it. In his mind he reasons its her fault, it takes 2 to tango and shouldn't be in this country anyway, bloody foreigners and their holiday homes. So while he did it, he didn't plan to or mean it. Then feels important reporting on it and gets caught up in the whole thing

But he is a foreigner himself...why would he think bloody foreigners?

wpd

just watched this documentary and thing that amazed me is that
a man convicted of murder in france (another EU country) with a european arrest warrant out for him is standing
in an open air market in Cork reciting poetry

How can this be, how can the irish court system overrule another EU country legal system and EU arrest warrant
As I understand it if Bailey steps foot out of Ireland to any other country he will be extradited by them to France including
the UK when it was part of EU

odyssey06

wpd wrote: »

just watched this documentary and thing that amazed me is that
a man convicted of murder in france (another EU country) with a european arrest warrant out for him is standing
in an open air market in Cork reciting poetry

How can this be, how can the irish court system overrule another EU country legal system and EU arrest warrant
As I understand it if Bailey steps foot out of Ireland to any other country he will be extradited by them to France including
the UK when it was part of EU

We aren't overruling another EU country's legal system they have tried to overrule ours.
France claims the right to extradite non-citizens for crimes that happened outside its jurisdiction based on the citizenship of the victim.
There is no reciprocity between Ireland and France on this, which is why their attempt to use the EU arrest warrant in this manner was rejected.
Had the crime happened in France it would be an entirely different story.

Our legal authorities have shared evidence with the French authorities. When the Guards went over to France to follow up leads the local police stonewalled them. The French have zero interest in getting to the truth of this matter.

patobrien12

sekiro wrote: »

I wish the article would be a little clearer in this instance.

If they had taken 49 random photos and then inserted a photo of someone they knew as a suspect and she somehow, unprompted, pointed to that one photo out of the 50 then they would be onto something for sure.

If they've said to her "here are 50 people we thought might be suspects can you identify any of them" then it's just a complete waste of time and more or less what they already did with her when she identified IB in the past.

It's not really clear.

If she does pick some random person out and that's there only evidence it will never in a million years get to a trial.

OwlsZat

odyssey06 wrote: »

We aren't overruling another EU country's legal system they have tried to overrule ours.
France claims the right to extradite non-citizens for crimes that happened outside its jurisdiction based on the citizenship of the victim.
There is no reciprocity between Ireland and France on this, which is why their attempt to use the EU arrest warrant in this manner was rejected.
Had the crime happened in France it would be an entirely different story.

Our legal authorities have shared evidence with the French authorities. When the Guards went over to France to follow up leads the local police stonewalled them. The French have zero interest in getting to the truth of this matter.

Ya I did find it very strange when the family were saying she was off to meet a poet way way after the fact. Why weren't they interviewed straight after.

easy peasy

I've spent quite a bit of time down in West Cork and have a few friends down there. I would say that most initially felt it was Bailey but with the passing of time they are less sure.

In fact, most of them that I have spoken to feel that there's a less than 50% chance that it was him. But feel that he was completely stitched up by the Gardai.

I don't believe there has ever been an adequate apology or repercussions for the quality of the Garda investigation. The family have now had 25 years of suffering. Bailey may in fact be innocent, but his life has been ruined. The circus just rolls on.

OwlsZat

easy peasy wrote: »

I don't believe there has ever been an adequate apology or repercussions for the quality of the Garda investigation. The family have now had 25 years of suffering. Bailey may in fact be innocent, but his life has been ruined. The circus just rolls on.

My family had a relatable tragedy. Crime scene not preserved, evidence destroyed. Child like drawings of evidence instead of photos/videos etc., Interviews not done for weeks after crime. The person was charged in our situation and then got off. It actually felt like AGS were helping them get away with it the standard of the investigation was so bad.

wpd

odyssey06 wrote: »

We aren't overruling another EU country's legal system they have tried to overrule ours.
France claims the right to extradite non-citizens for crimes that happened outside its jurisdiction based on the citizenship of the victim.
There is no reciprocity between Ireland and France on this, which is why their attempt to use the EU arrest warrant in this manner was rejected.
Had the crime happened in France it would be an entirely different story.

Our legal authorities have shared evidence with the French authorities. When the Guards went over to France to follow up leads the local police stonewalled them. The French have zero interest in getting to the truth of this matter.

Thanks for explaining I wasnt getting it, but from your explanation now I understand

[Deleted User]

Gussie Scrotch wrote: »

No,

judge Moran was very careful to qualify his acceptance

"on the balance of probabilities", he accepted the version put forward by other witnesses".

"Mr Lyons gave evidence that he was 80 to 90 per cent sure he had introduced Ms du Plantier to Mr Bailey. On the balance of probabilities, I accept his evidence."

"On the balance of probabilities, I accept what Mrs Farrell told me, that the man she saw at the bridge was, in her view, Ian Bailey." He added that he did not know to what extent such evidence of identification would stand in a criminal trial".

I am anxious that this case does not take on the mantle of a murder trial. Any findings of fact I make is on the balance of probabilities and nothing else."

I stand corrected!

[Deleted User]

Tiger20 wrote: »

I've just had a theory after reading a lot of comments and seeing both documentaries. What if IB did get up, but to go to Alfie Lyons house as he thought there was a party there. He opened the gate on the lane way which STDP saw and put on her boots to go out and confront him over the gate. Row follows and he looses it. In his mind he reasons its her fault, it takes 2 to tango and shouldn't be in this country anyway, bloody foreigners and their holiday homes. So while he did it, he didn't plan to or mean it. Then feels important reporting on it and gets caught up in the whole thing

As theories go, it's not a bad one.

MoonUnit75

Tiger20 wrote: »

I've just had a theory after reading a lot of comments and seeing both documentaries. What if IB did get up, but to go to Alfie Lyons house as he thought there was a party there. He opened the gate on the lane way which STDP saw and put on her boots to go out and confront him over the gate. Row follows and he looses it. In his mind he reasons its her fault, it takes 2 to tango and shouldn't be in this country anyway, bloody foreigners and their holiday homes. So while he did it, he didn't plan to or mean it. Then feels important reporting on it and gets caught up in the whole thing

He might also have been going to Alfie's house to see if he could get weed? AL apparently had a stash growing for personal use according to someone on the other thread on this case. I think, in fact, either the DPP or GSOC report says that the appointment to 'collect garlic' that Bailey had the next morning was actually to collect cannabis, so it sounds like he may have run short?

Deeec

MoonUnit75 wrote: »

He might also have been going to Alfie's house to see if he could get weed? AL apparently had a stash growing for personal use according to someone on the other thread on this case. I think, in fact, either the DPP or GSOC report says that the appointment to 'collect garlic' that Bailey had the next morning was actually to collect cannabis, so it sounds like he may have run short?

Sophie could also have been a problem for Alfies sideline dealing business.

easy peasy

OwlsZat wrote: »

My family had a relatable tragedy. Crime scene not preserved, evidence destroyed. Child like drawings of evidence instead of photos/videos etc., Interviews not done for weeks after crime. The person was charged in our situation and then got off. It actually felt like AGS were helping them get away with it the standard of the investigation was so bad.

I've heard of numerous similar situations.

One item that got under my skin was when the Garda (can't remember his name) held an impromptu press conference outside the Garda Station to announce IB's release. He said something along the lines of "hurry up now and ye'll make it to the pubs before they close at 11pm" and he also said "Ye expected me to come out holding a head".

This just completely struck me as amateur hour. Like this is a murder investigation following a gruesome killing. I thought the tone was incredibly amateur and disrespectful.

Gussie Scrotch

MikeOxsgreen wrote: »

I stand corrected!

Yurt2

easy peasy wrote: »

I've heard of numerous similar situations.

One item that got under my skin was when the Garda (can't remember his name) held an impromptu press conference outside the Garda Station to announce IB's release. He said something along the lines of "hurry up now and ye'll make it to the pubs before they close at 11pm" and he also said "Ye expected me to come out holding a head".

This just completely struck me as amateur hour. Like this is a murder investigation following a gruesome killing. I thought the tone was incredibly amateur and disrespectful.

That struck me as well.

The Gardai have come a long way since then. The reality of Gardai in the 90s though is that they were for the most part a monoculture of big thick heads from the countryside - usually the younger son who doesn't inherit the farm, and not academic enough to go to college. All from 'good stock', can do no wrong according to their mammies and society and acted it.

I'll give the Gardai credit for becoming more diverse and professional these days though. Definitely some residual elements of the above I'd submit.

FileNotFound

Tiger20 wrote: »

I've just had a theory after reading a lot of comments and seeing both documentaries. What if IB did get up, but to go to Alfie Lyons house as he thought there was a party there. He opened the gate on the lane way which STDP saw and put on her boots to go out and confront him over the gate. Row follows and he looses it. In his mind he reasons its her fault, it takes 2 to tango and shouldn't be in this country anyway, bloody foreigners and their holiday homes. So while he did it, he didn't plan to or mean it. Then feels important reporting on it and gets caught up in the whole thing

Beyond knowing he left his own house, there is no evidence to say he ever went near Sophie's house.

The only testimony that placed him was retracted as it was pushed on the witness by the Gardai under the promise of it being the right thing. Then the french used an already retracted testimony to try and convict!

Sure it could have been anyone in cork not accounted for at that rate of going.

EmmetSpiceland

FileNotFound wrote: »

The only testimony that placed him was retracted as it was pushed on the witness by the Gardai under the promise of it being the right thing.

It, also, placed him in an area that didn’t make sense for him to be in.

dmn22

I thought the guard Dermot Dwyer came across really badly in this. He was incredibly smug and arrogant during the whole thing implying Bailey was clearly the murderer.

When I think of corruption in rural Ireland, he's the exact kind of fella I think of. Smug, overly confident, and you can tell he loves being in a powerful position.

EdHoven

Yurt! wrote: »

That struck me as well.

The Gardai have come a long way since then. The reality of Gardai in the 90s though is that they were for the most part a monoculture of big thick heads from the countryside - usually the younger son who doesn't inherit the farm, and not academic enough to go to college. All from 'good stock', can do no wrong according to their mammies and society and acted it.

I'll give the Gardai credit for becoming more diverse and professional these days though. Definitely some residual elements of the above I'd submit.

The Met is one of the best police forces in the world but they couldn't find who shot a star TV presenter in broad daylight 3 years after Schull with phone records, CCTV DNA, ballistics etc.
The French can't find who shot the Al-Hilli family in 2012.
AGS are no worse in regards to unsolved murders than any other cops. Blaming it on culchies whereas sophisticated French or English detectives could crack the case is ignoring reality.

[Deleted User]

EdHoven wrote: »

The Met is one of the best police forces in the world but they couldn't find who shot a star TV presenter in broad daylight 3 years after Schull with phone records, CCTV DNA, ballistics etc.
The French can't find who shot the Al-Hilli family in 2012.
AGS are no worse in regards to unsolved murders than any other cops. Blaming it on culchies whereas sophisticated French or English detectives could crack the case is ignoring reality.

The thing is they engaged in constant corruption in an effort to pin it on an individual. No other suspects, nothing.

MoonUnit75

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

It, also, placed him in an area that didn’t make sense for him to be in.

I suppose if you just murdered someone in a savage attack you might flee the scene, contemplating never returning to the area at all? I think it's also possible that the sighting was before the murder, maybe the killer was in a car with someone and was kicked out for disturbing behaviour and went from the main road to a house where they knew the owner, like Alfie's?

MoonUnit75

Deleted User wrote: »

The thing is they engaged in constant corruption in an effort to pin it on an individual. No other suspects, nothing.

That's not the case though, GSOC's report says there is no evidence for corruption, falsification of evidence, coercion of witnesses or changing statements. There were other suspects, one man explained how he went to his solicitor because the gardai were investigating him so persistently that he thought he would be charged. I think it was the man who kept horses on the land around Sophie's?

Slick666

FileNotFound wrote: »

Beyond knowing he left his own house, there is no evidence to say he ever went near Sophie's house.

The only testimony that placed him was retracted as it was pushed on the witness by the Gardai under the promise of it being the right thing. Then the french used an already retracted testimony to try and convict!

Sure it could have been anyone in cork not accounted for at that rate of going.

What about the scratches on his hands and head, the coat soaking in the bucket in the bathroom, the bonfire outside his house, Sophie knew him as she mentioned his name to her aunt, he 'confessed to killing her', the woman saw him on the bridge even though she then retracted her statement, his partner said he went out that night and wasnt sure if he did it ( his own partner ), he said to people about the murder of a french woman even before the guards announced it. Its obvious he did it and Ive no idea why stupid f**king ireland wont give him over to france!!

OwlsZat

Add in the confessions too. It's partly dupers delight but it's also the weight of the crime weighing on him. Really doubt three different people make up the same confession story.

odyssey06

Slick666 wrote: »

What about the scratches on his hands and head, the coat soaking in the bucket in the bathroom, the bonfire outside his house, Sophie knew him as she mentioned his name to her aunt, he 'confessed to killing her', the woman saw him on the bridge even though she then retracted her statement, his partner said he went out that night and wasnt sure if he did it ( his own partner ), he said to people about the murder of a french woman even before the guards announced it. Its obvious he did it and Ive no idea why stupid f**king ireland wont give him over to france!!

The scratches on his head and hand had nothing to do with the murder, or else where are the forensics? No hair at the scene, no clothing fragments, no blood, no DNA, no fingerprints. If he picked them up at the crime scene there would be traces.

Sophie didn't 'know' him, she may have been introduced to him very briefly, once.
If Sophie knew him and was in contact with him, where are the letters, phone number matches etc
The French witnesses that came forward years later naming Bailey are not remotely believable.

Lots of people burn rubbish.

Marie Farrell didn't see him on the bridge. She said she saw the same man outside her shop and the man she described was not Bailey.
Plus being on that bridge makes no sense if it was Bailey leaving the scene of the crime, it's the wrong direction.

Lots of people knew about the murder before the Guards announced it publicly.
There is no evidence Bailey knew anything special about the murder.

I suspect he had a blackout from drink and that's why he doesn't know himself what he did in parts of that night, hence his "I don't know".

His 'confessions' are not confessions but sarcastic angry remarks.

There are more reasons "Why I think Ian Bailey didn't do it" here:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=117594475&postcount=2219

Deeec

Slick666 wrote: »

What about the scratches on his hands and head, the coat soaking in the bucket in the bathroom, the bonfire outside his house, Sophie knew him as she mentioned his name to her aunt, he 'confessed to killing her', the woman saw him on the bridge even though she then retracted her statement, his partner said he went out that night and wasnt sure if he did it ( his own partner ), he said to people about the murder of a french woman even before the guards announced it. Its obvious he did it and Ive no idea why stupid f**king ireland wont give him over to france!!

Scratches on hands and face - no photos was taken of these scratches, IB said they were from cutting a christmas tree and from killing a turkey. Jules Thomas daughter confirmed he cut down a christmas tree.

Coat soaking in bathroom - this was remembered years after the murder by an Italian girl who stayed in their house ( she seen it on christmas eve ). This is also the coat that Ian Bailey supposedly wore on christmas morning. He done very well to squeeze that large coat into a bucket of water and then have it fully dry for the next morning. The gardai also took this coat for forensic testing but lost the coat. How would the Italian girl know that this was a coat without taking it out of the bucket. This is also the coat he was supposed to have burned. So you tell me which is story is correct

The aunt - Remembered years later that Sophie said she was going to meet Ian Bailey.

There is no evidence that he said that a french lady was murdered before anyone else knew. News like this would have spread like wildfire in a small community. My guess was Alfie Lyons and Shirley were on the phone straight away telling locals what had happened.

You need to read up on the case and listen to the 'West Cork podcast' before you throw IB in jail. There is no evidence whatsoever that IB is guilty.