Apologies if this has been posted previously. I haven't read all the pages. But here's a copy of the DPP report.
https://syndicatedanarchy.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/30/
It's worth remembering that there are several assertions in the report that are just plain wrong.
Neither the arrest of Ian or Jules was unlawful, much of what was said in the interviews that the DPP was ruling out as inadmissible would have been admissible. GSOC officially confirmed this. This includes Ian's change of story on his alibi, the DPP incorrectly said this would be 'fruit of the poison tree' and inadmissible as he only changed his story about being in bed all night after Jules revealed he had left during the night. It also disregards the fact that he could be cross examined on the change in story during a trial regardless of his statements as he had spoken to the media about it.
The report states that the 'studio' that IB claims he went to during the night the murder was committed was directly beside the house and was on the Thomas lands, presumably to make it sound like his assertion he was 'at home' all night could be technically correct. The studio is actually on a separate parcel of land 100m or so further along the public road. There is no way of getting there without leaving the Thomas lands and going down the public road.
It takes IB's explanations of 'confessions' as jokes completely at face value, even though he was visibly upset for at least two of them. It says at other times he forcefully proclaimed his innocence but didn't draw the obvious distinction that when he was sober and collected, he denied it, but when he was drunk/upset/challenged, he repeatedly replied or blurted out that he was responsible.
The DPP says that Kealfadda Bridge was neither on the way to or the way back from IB's house when you can go either north or south along the peninsula to get there. The travel times are very similar. In the podcast IB drives the two interviewers along the route he and Jules took to the scene after 2pm, he said they will turn left to go down the lane to Sophie's house, this is the way from Kealfadda Bridge.
That's just a start.
This bleach thing came up a couple of times in this thread. Who the hell doesn't buy bleach? It's mental people are pointing at that as if it's weird.
The same as "getting up in the night", FFS, I wake up randomly sometimes and go play video games or read a book or whatever.
Are you saying that the GSOC report stated that the DPP were incorrect and that the arrest of Jules was in fact lawful?
I haven't read the GSOC report, is there a link available to this?
How often do you buy bleach? Do you usually leave the house when you wake up during the night?
Yes but people arent desperate for you to be guilty of a murder there's very little evidence you committed!! 🤣
https://www.gardaombudsman.ie/news-room/archive/information-report-from-the-garda-siochana-ombudsman-commission-at-the-completion-of-the-investigation-into-the-complaints-of-ian-bailey-catherine-jules-thomas-and-marie-farrell/
That's what it says on page 8 of the GSOC report:
3.11 From the material reviewed by GSOC in this investigation, it appears that there was a reasonable belief held by gardaí at that time that Ian Bailey and Jules Thomas were responsible for the murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier. The arrests of both were therefore lawful. It appears to GSOC that the Custody Regulations were complied with in full by gardaí at that time in relation to both prisoners with both being offered access to a solicitor during their detention. GSOC is satisfied from its investigations that both were detained lawfully.
https://www.gardaombudsman.ie/news-room/archive/information-report-from-the-garda-siochana-ombudsman-commission-at-the-completion-of-the-investigation-into-the-complaints-of-ian-bailey-catherine-jules-thomas-and-marie-farrell/?download=file&file=2748
How many people have bleach on their mind on Christmas eve though? I agree it's not incriminating in itself, it's an odd thing to be thinking about on that day though.
He didn't just get up, he said he got up to write a story for the paper, then said he went down the road to an unheated, unoccupied house to type it up. All during the night, in the middle of winter. The story he apparently wrote all night Sunday/Monday morning wasn't actually dictated to the paper until Tuesday afternoon. It's not clear why you would get fully dressed in the middle of a cold winter night to go and type it up in an unheated, unoccupied house down the road when it was to be dictated anyway.
GSOC being satisfied is just their opinion. It is not a legal determination or judgement. It would have to be argued in court to determine if the arrest of Jules was lawful
Thanks for that, I must read the entire thing.
So based on that, GSOC were of the opinion that the arrest was lawful. The GSOC report only refers to the legality of the detention rather than the admissibility of the evidence though.
From my understanding of it, the DPP position was that because Jules had been arrested on suspicion of murder (rather than say of being an accessory) and yet wasn't actually questioned about her own involvement in the murder that that was what would have made the evidence gathered inadmissible i.e. she was arrested for one thing and then questioned exclusively about another thing.
So I guess it comes down to a difference of legal opinion as to whether the detention was legal and / or the evidence is admissible rather than one point of view or other being right or wrong.
It would have to be argued in court to determine the legality of Jules arrest. GSOC "satisfaction" is not a legal judgement. I am sure the DPP knows better than GSOC what would happen if it were challenged in court and knows better than GSOC the evidence needed for conviction more than anyone desperate to find against Bailey. Any court case would have a broader brief than a GSOC investigation
I think this was addressed in his case against the state and dismissed. JT has not pursued any case of wrongful arrest or detention despite having the DPP document sent to IB's defence team.
I buy bleach as it's needed, if me buying bleach happened to be around the same time a murder happened in my town would that make me the murderer?
I don't leave the house but I'm sure many people do, and I'm sure if they grilled others in West Cork as much as they grilled Bailey you would surely find another person out that night. Sure maybe it was Maria Farrell and her lover.
I'm sure nobody ever has bleach on their mind ever. It's just something you need to buy from time to time. And maybe especially at Christmas you would think of it as you're cleaning and mopping etc in preparation for having a nice gaf the next today.
Ian Bailey: "oh s* we need bleach I better pick some up"
About the story for the paper, it still doesn't make him a murderer, he's a bloody loon for sure, but that doesn't make anyone a murderer. Otherwise half my neighbours would be in the same boat.
That was not a criminal case. The only way the legality of jules arrest could be determined would be in criminal case. I expect there would be alot of legal argument about it far beyond a joke like GSOC
He`s just unfortunate I suppose....buying bleach the day after his neighbour was murdered....burning his clothes and boots two days later.....just happened to be out of the house in the dead of night at the same time she was murdered....lying about it to the Gardaí....waking up the morning after the murder with a scratch on his head that wasn`t there the night before....don`t even get me started on that lunatic fantasist that saw him at Kealfada Bridge at 3 AM..... all those scratches on his hands.....the fact that he battered his partner to a pulp and wrote about his murderous fantasies.....then to top it all off he had to go around telling people he did it.... Poor Ian. If he didn`t have bad luck, he have no luck at all.
Case closed. 🙄
Being a weirdo doesn't make someone a murderer.
The garda plan to frame him was brilliant though. I can imagine the meeting: 'Right, what we need lads is a guy who is going to give a false account of their movements over most of the weekend. It would be great if he had visible indications of being involved in a tussle in briars and admits leaving his own house in the middle of the night in question. A bit of extreme violence in his recent past would be good. Maybe a witness who will go on national radio with Pat Kenny and say they saw him near the crime scene would go down well. What would really be top of the wish-list though is someone who will say to numerous people that he did it, even though he's innocent.'
Looks like I was wrong, JT did try and pursue a case for wrongful arrest etc. and it was dismissed: https://www.irishlegal.com/article/roi-court-of-appeal-dismisses-action-by-jules-thomas-to-prevent-pre-trial-hearing-in-damages-case
snip
Is anyone pursuing Bailey for his legal costs? There can 't be that nany pro-bono lawyers in the country.
JT's case was a civil case, not a criminal trial. It being dismissed does not necessarily mean a criminal trial would accept JT arrest as lawful.
Nobody is denying that he wasnt a good fit for the gards. Thats one of the main reasons why they focused in on him so quickly. None of the things you have said make him a murderer though. All of the points you have mentioned have been discussed numerous times already & you just keep going on & on with your narrative, failing to seriously consider any other possibilities. Are you working for the gards by any chance?? Because you seem to be making them out to be victims of false accusations by Ian Bailey & Jules Thomas.
Heres what we do know from numerous witnesses & other sources. They stole drugs from the evidence room to bribe ex con witnesses in painting Ian Bailey as a murderer. They threatened the likes of Marie Farrell that they would expose her affair amongst other threats if she wouldnt also paint Bailey as the murderer. They no doubt purposely lost vital pieces of evidence such at the gate and numerous other pieces of evidence that could have exonerated Bailey considering he gave over his DNA & fingerprints willingly. You're relying on GSOC, dont make me laugh, you couldnt find a more toothless & useless organisation in the land especially back then. They have told continous lies about Bailey in the local community which succeeded in turning a number of locals against him. They have disregarded one of the fundamental points of our judicial system, innocent until proven guilty. They have disrespected the office of the DPP continously because he wouldnt go ahead with their corrupt & incompetent investigation.
Going north from Sophie Toscan du Plantier's house to Ian Bailey's would have been a little less than 6/10 the distance going south via Ballyrisode / Kealfadda Bridge. Going north would pass fewer houses and also be on local roads with far less chance being seen by passing traffic.
Would it make sense for someone to walk one and three quarters times the distance, along two regional roads ('main' Durrus to Goleen and 'main' Schull to Goleen roads), with a greater chance of being seen by passing traffic and around Toormore village, with more houses on the route if they were trying to avoid being seen?
It's so feeble that the fiesta drivers were never found. Yet when MF mentions some random car it's followed up and the owner found. Clear difference in treatment from AGS. Makes you wonder why?
Sure, but a good stretch of the road along the northern route is a single lane, twisty road that has grass growing down it. If they did come across another car, you'd have to stop and negotiate a way past them. The other route is mostly two lanes. When IB took the West Cork team on a reconstruction of his trip to Sophie's house after hearing from Eddie Cassidy, they clearly went the southern route. He said to turn left to go down the lane to Sophie's house, from the northern route its a right turn.
he's in a car though
could see why you'd go the long way in a car but less likely to walk it especially on a cold winter's night, even with your very best thick wooly gloves on
you read comments online that the Bantry Garda who is (quietly) considered a suspect drove a similar fiesta -- but it's impossible to know how accurate that is really -- particularly because, as you point out, the brain-trust-siochana did fcuk all actual investigating other than "I knew that lanky brit was a wrong 'un"
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1891d95e9e926c005ad3f5c153aacc5.svg)
