monkeybutter wrote: » Im not saying he is the person Mf saw, that's obviously not true, do you think the French court measured him yeah? I'm just looking at what height was reported in the papers He is not huge by an stretch People over play it and anyone can see him in bantry or schull markets so don't think you are unique I'm the same height as him, never get described as some man Mountain
Curse These Metal Hands wrote: » When Jim Sheridan gets MF to stop at the spot where she supposedly saw the man at the bridge, he says this is also near the turn off for Sophie's. She says "I wasn't aware of that." Did she mean at the time or now? Beggars belief that she wouldn't be aware of that at this stage.
bb12 wrote: » started listening to the crime world podcast but they've got their facts wrong...they say sophie was coming to that cottage for years before she got married...but her husband bought it for her...then they say she flew into dublin airport and drove to schull from dublin...she arrived into cork airport...cant really trust any other details they come out with if they get these basic ones wrong
monkeybutter wrote: » Don't forget the worst thing, he's a tan
FileNotFound wrote: » At the time nobody in France was spoken to according to the Gardai, upon arrival in France for interviews the Gardai were brought back to the airport and informed they could not interview french citizens.
FileNotFound wrote: » That was odd alright.
Table Top Joe wrote: » I mentioned in my previous post how other people in this very thread had seen the guy so I don’t know why you would think I thought I was unique in seeing him. But we’re all exaggerating, “who ya gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes?” Eh?
Curse These Metal Hands wrote: » I think she's a compulsive liar and fantasist to be honest.
dublin49 wrote: » its amazing every witness statement ,thats anti Bailey is seemingly easily dismissed as unreliable,hearsay,too long has passed,vested interest ,etc etc etc,does the sheer quantity of witnesses that need to be dismissed/under mined not give Bailey supporters pause for thought.Even statements attributed to Jules Thomas that are adverse to Baileys account are dismissed .Lots of witnesses appear to be genuine,why are they all intent on stitching up this innocent man.Must something in the water down there
orangerhyme wrote: » Donal McIntyre said to Nicola Tallant on her podcast that their own pathologist thinks the cuts on Sophie's face were caused by a knife. He suggested maybe the killer went back into the house and washed the knife and put it back by the bread as it looks "staged". That also explains the blood on backdoor. But that suggests the killer was already in the house to grab the knife. I don't buy that, I think everything happened outside. But I do think the killer went back to the house, maybe they just turned the doorknob and that was it. No blood was found inside the house. He said also the food in her stomach had been consumed within 6 hours. So the fruit and nuts could've been an evening snack or breakfast, impossible to tell.
Caquas wrote: » The whole of West Cork were racking their brains trying to think of anything to help the investigation, then the Gardai went around hyping up Ian Bailey as a menace to every woman in West Cork. No wonder people started coming forward with tales about IB but they were all long after the event. And IB is his own worst enemy with his theatrics and egotism. But he never made a confession that a court would accept I.e. in his sober senses, a clear admission of guilt to a reliable witness (not e.g. the teenage son of a neighbour he barely knew). Most tellingly, none of these “confessions” added one iota to the Garda’s knowledge of the crime. The sorry fact is the Gardai know nothing about this murder that they didn’t know within a half hour of their arrival at the scene. No accumulation of rumour and hearsay will ever amount to proof.
Henry... wrote: » Is there anything they know that isn't in the public domain
EdHoven wrote: » According to Ralph Riegel the blood on the back door of Sophie's house doesn't match anyone who gave samples. If that is true then they know it wasn't Bailey that smeared the blood on the door.
Xander10 wrote: » But hasn't it been confirmed as Sophie's blood on the door? which is less mysterious.
tibruit wrote: » Jim Sheridan said it was Sophie`s blood on the door.
ingalway wrote: » Where did you hear that they went out with them the next day? Something I have missed but definitely paints a different picture if it did happen.
Henry... wrote: » Lot of confusion about this blood on the door If its Sophie's it's less significant Is there any certainly at all about the sequence of events In terms of who went up and down the lane from the gate to the house
Pirate Master wrote: » Also, Bailey said that he was repeating what the Guards had been hammering into him during his arrest, that he had done it, he had done it. And with the Shelleys not coming forward with this information until much later, it's easy to think that they misremebered him actually confessing and him simply repeating what the Guards had told him.
Mervyn Skidmore wrote: » Just listened to the podcast and they said they couldn't get DNA from the door sample as it was too small.
nc6000 wrote: » When did he say that? I've just watched the section from episode 2 where he demonstrates opening the door and how your hand/arm would rub off the door. He never said whose blood it was.
Nicbuc wrote: » Strange alright, I think Donal McIntyre worked with Jim Sheridan on the Sky Doc. None of what he said to NT featured in the sky doc..
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bd89cdce15309a6ec2dff928c865017a.svg)
