Buckets come in more than one size. We have one for taking clothes from the washing machine that would probably fit two of those coats.
The scratches were noticed when he was paying for something at a shop, then two gardai saw them while doing door to door enquiries. He wasn't arrested or an official suspect at the time as far as I know. I still can't imagine gardai knocking on your door asking where you were at the time a crime was committed and asking to take a photo of your hands. Maybe now with every phone having a camera, but not in 1996 where one of the gardai would have to know in advance to bring a film camera and then ask for consent from someone who was not a suspect.
I think the French said there were 40-50 injuries on her body, not that the block was used 40 times. Might be a translation problem. The block surface is so porous and brittle that you probably wouldn't be able to get a clean swab from it. Unless the killer left a small flap of skin on it or lots of their own blood you are unlikely to get a trace on it I'd think.
I don't think he (Dwyer) was telling lies in relation to the particular issue of the coat. I saw the Netflix documentary and, as far as I can recall, he was expressing his strong belief that Bailey burned the coat he wearing at the time of Sophie's murder on the following morning of the 24th of December. The fact that Bailey was subsequently seen dressed in a long black coat at the Christmas Day swim in Schull is of no great significance, I believe. As I said, it is quite possible he owned more than one.
Maybe he had more than 1 dark coats?
"It takes two to tango" was a line he used.
Not only that, in episode 5 of the West Cork podcast, a Garda at the scene (Martin Malone) noted that when Bailey turned up the following morning at Sophie's cottage, he was wearing a long dark coat. Surely to God this coat at the centre of things would be liberally covered in blood if he was the murderer and he wouldn't be as stupid to show up in front of the Gardai wearing it?
did he show any remorse for beating up Joules? watched all of it but can't recall
Funny to see how the big media fish, the Sky and Netflix sharks, bring along with them the schools of clinging fish, like the ever needy Sinead O Connor and Fintan 'here's an article about Bailey and why no one should write articles about Bailey' O Tool.
It wasn’t shambolic. Just a case without a break. GSOC found no corruption. As for the comparison to the Kildare case, how long was that unsolved for?
There was mention that a concrete block would not retain fingerprints
Keys in front door. So she went out the back, down her field out her gate and was found at the shared gate.
Her blood then at the back door.
By the amount of blood it could have been on the killers sleeve,
So incident starts at the gate and killer goes and checks the house is empty leaving the mark?
If it started at the house and she ran there would be more blood no?
No lights so did the killer turn off lights or did it happen in the AM?
If the lights were turned off there would be blood /footprints leading up to the house?
Very strange
Only truthful witnesses? How do you figure that considering how Dwyer lied about Bailey's coat during the series?
I'm interested in the block used to crush her head. If a block that size was used with such force (40-50 times say the French) surely there would be trace evidence from where the block was handled? Whether it be from a glove or even better the hand itself. The guard with the hairlip never mentioned anything regarding the block and evidence taken from it.
This sums it up well. Bailey fits the profile of a killer but no physical evidence to link him to the case.
What witnesses?
I am sure none of the neighbours had an albi backed up by anyone other than their partners.
Wasn't she having an ongoing argument with a neighbour about the gate at the bottom of the hill?
Its almost impossible to believe the neighbors heard nothing.
Another thing that is unusual is Bailey fully cooperating and providing DNA.
There is it was tested and belonged to a unknown male by the French.
The only fact beyond dispute in this case is that Sophie was murdered. Everything else - I don’t know who or what to believe. 🤷♂️
they didnt manage to convince the DPP as it turned out....
The same Guards that maintained that there were scratches on Baileys hands and instead of taking photographs of his hands they decided to sketch them!
The Guards failed miserably in solving this case.
very hard to open a cold case review when there is no DNA to re examine.
My unqualified opinion is that Ian Bailey is innocent, based on his demeanor when interviewed.
He seems at ease with discussing the case (I know, it's because he enjoys the attention) and any reluctance to field certain questions or interviews may be due to him attempting not to look like he's enjoying the attention.
There seems to be no evidence that he left any dna or other material at the scene.
Neither does there seem to be any evidence that he carried any dna or other material FROM the scene.
the witnesses contradicting Bailey ,the changing alibi,the history of violence ,the confessions,lets ignore all that and blame a neighbour.
I think Sophie was hardly known in Schull. Her only interactions appear to have been with a local shopkeeper and her next door neighbour. That's probably how she liked things - a quiet,private individual. Apparently, she spoke little English. If Bailey went to her home that night I imagine it was certainly not by invitation and his motivation would have been sexual. As for the black coat- he may have owned more than one such garment. As for the "missing" gate - it never went missing. It was sent to the Garda forensic lab in Dublin and examined for evidence. None whatsoever was found so it was then disposed of. Never underestimate the shrewdness of a country copper. O'Dwyer may have appeared like some stage Irish buffoon to some but everything he said was convincing and had an air of credibility. The same could be said of his detective colleague from Dublin. They are probably the only truthful witnesses in this entire sorry story.
Maybe he had 2 coats?
Anyhow I think the Italian visitor who saw bailey washing something in the bucket (purporting to be the black coat) is far fetched.
Look at the size of the coat ! You'd just about fit an arm from that coat in a bucket.
Completely agree about Dwyer. It’s baffling that the “burning of the coat” angle is still being used despite the video footage of IB wearing it two days later.
Dwyer should have been pulled up on his false claim that Bailey burnt the coat. Sure they admitted to GSOC that they lost his coat.
I think both. And the West Cork podcast.
All 3 talk about things not mentioned in the others. Like the Italian girl that stayed with Ian and Jules. Very interesting.
Imo he did it out of Jealousy. He was supposed to be the darling of Scull but everyone was mad about Sophie. He couldn't hack it and it would be a tremendous story to put yourself in the middle of as a Journo. 2 birds one breeze block so to speak.
Having said that, Dermot Dwyer is a disgrace and should be in jail himself.
At home and heard absolutely nothing.
Agree, except the Garda's failure to secure the scene means we don't really know when the print was made. It could also have been one of the neighbours who touched her body then opened the door - anything really.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bd89cdce15309a6ec2dff928c865017a.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/a60d925045ba5eba03f4a5f3c3d31c8b.svg)
