Read them a long time ago.
Mr. C is not Ian Bailey.
Moonunit will respond as follows:
'GSOC, Gsoc, gsoc....'
Jesus, I can see Moonunit squirming from here when he reads those Garda recordings 🥴
It doesn't say Bailey by name, but Mr C is labelled as a suspect in the Sophie case here:
So either it's another suspect referenced here or Mr C is Ian Bailey
It doesn't say Bailey i never heard of him being assaulted
a. On the night of 13 April 1997, two telephone calls were made to Bantry Garda Station reporting an assault on Mr C. These were carefully recorded in the Occurrence Book. It was noted that Mr C had been “badly assaulted” and that he had been brought to Bantry Hospital by members of An Garda Síochána in the Bantry Station patrol car. These are the only available written records of the matter that were provided to the Commission, although the issue was subsequently investigated by members of An Garda Síochána and figured largely in the telephone conversations with which this section is concerned.
b. Garda Epsilon was on duty in Ballydehob when the patrol car from Bantry passed through the village, en route to the scene of the alleged assault. On his own account, he travelled with them and took responsibility for the investigation of the assault.
Because they clarified he was not charged here and the French court found him guilty. These are facts. how would data protection come into it?
With the amount of witness and statement tampering involved in the case you'd have to be incredibly naive to take anything at face value.
https://assets.gov.ie/1987/221018150627-28665ac2ce7f4bcbaa610616d084f429.pdf
I never heard before about MF husband beating Bailey. would he be able
is this mess of a site finished? i cannot delete the link above
The problem with this is that Alpha has been shown to be right. Gamma was taken in by Jules. A number of witnesses have since contradicted Jules testimony about her movements on the day after the murder. One of them is her own daughter and she has never retracted what she said.
Very interesting reading through the Fennelly Commission Report, I can't link it here as new account. I could be getting it wrong but it seems to imply that Marie Farrell's husband (Mr A) gave Ian Bailey (Mr C) a hiding and bailey was dissuaded from pressing charges by the guards.
Cont'd, side note interesting that the detective involved was noted as deceased when the Fennely Report was produced :
12.5.10 Later that evening at around 10.30 pm, Detective Sergeant Alpha made a telephone call requesting to speak to Detective Garda Gamma “about the statements” and was informed that he was not there, to which the Detective Sergeant replied “Ah, I’ll get him so in a day or two.” Detective Sergeant Alpha was then put on to Detective Garda Delta and they had a further conversation about Detective Garda Gamma’s statement, in the course of which Detective Sergeant Alpha said “Like ... ifI’m trying to make a play out of these things, to have him, **** then, turn around and say she wastelling me the truth.”
12.5.11 In a recorded conversation on 25 June 1997 with an unidentified member of An Garda
Síochána, Detective Sergeant Alpha again referred to his difficulties with the positive opinion of Ms Thomas expressed by Detective Garda Gamma in his statement of 11
February 1997. He said:
“But you see there are statements here that I have to go back to fill it in, I have to talk to them, one man put in here: ‘I believe she was attempting to tell me the truth and trying to recall’ - you know, yer man interviewing her like, when the evidence clearly shows and everything we were doing that she is anything but, she has been out there working, conniving, twisting.”
12.5.12 The other participant responded by stating, “That is not **** evidence.” Detective Sergeant Alpha then said: “I know but it is in the statement, it has to be taken **** out.”
12.5.13 The other participant in the call then discussed how best to approach the Garda who had made the problematic statement and the contents of his statement:
“Then you have to go, to handle these fellas they get indignant, you have to be careful with them, and so you better get it taken out without hurting feelings type of thing.”
12.5.14 The Commission could not pursue the matter further with Detective Sergeant Alpha, who is deceased, or with Detective Garda Gamma, who was unable to provide evidence due to illness. It is possible that the matter was discussed between the two officers at some stage, but, as there are no recorded calls available for the period 26 June-21 September 1997, this cannot be established one way or the other.
12.5.15 The Commission notes that, in other recorded telephone conversations around this time,
Detective Sergeant Alpha, who was engaged in preparing the investigation report for the DPP, expressed some concerns about the overall strength of the case being made against Mr Bailey as it then stood. In a telephone call on 17 June 1997, he described it as “a very 50/50 case against your man and I’m trying to make something of it, you see”. He went on to state
Long read but very interesting quotes from the Fennelly Report regarding Gardai and Jules Thomas' statements, I don't understand how some posters here really believe gardai weren't pushing "witnesses" towards incriminating Bailey.
"12.5.6 The first matter of concern was the view taken of a statement made by a Detective Garda Gamma, who was involved in interviewing Ms Jules Thomas during her detention on 10 February 1997. In a handwritten statement dated 11 February 1997, the Detective Garda gave an account of the matters discussed during the interview. He also offered his own view regarding the truthfulness of Ms Thomas’ evidence on that occasion, stating:
“In my opinion she was trying to recollect to the best of her knowledge her movements and those of Ian over that weekend.”
12.5.7 On the morning of 23 June 1997, Detective Sergeant Alpha telephoned another member of the investigation team, Detective Garda Delta. They discussed the general difficulties facing the Detective Sergeant whilst writing the report. Detective Sergeant Alpha then appears to have raised the subject of the statement made by Detective Garda Gamma regarding Ms Thomas in February 1997, as the following extract shows:
Detective Sergeant Alpha: Okay, yeah. I need to talk to you about, em, your colleague’s statement of evidence. I need him to...but I’ll talk to you first...I just want...
Detective Garda Delta: Yeah.
Detective Sergeant Alpha: I need to talk about it anyway.
Detective Garda Delta: The most honest man.
Detective Sergeant Alpha: Yeah.
Detective Garda Delta: (laughs)
Detective Sergeant Alpha: (laughs) He has comments in it like “I knew she was making every effort to tell me the truth.” Do you follow?
Detective Garda Delta: Yes.
Detective Sergeant Alpha: I don’t need them, for starters.
Detective Sergeant Alpha: **** it, she wasn’t anyway.
12.5.8 At around 5 pm, in a further telephone conversation between the same officers, Detective Sergeant Alpha stated:
“Ah **** it, it’s awful. When I see your friend then, like writing them stupid **** statements, like I mean... what man... “I believe” he says “that she was doing her best to recall the night in question and being truthful.”
He continued:
*“Yes, that statement has to get **** chopped up anyway.”*
12.5.9 Further on in the same conversation, having discussed other, unrelated matters, the following exchange takes place:
Detective Sergeant Alpha: And you can start building up your co-partner, if you’re able to do that, or maybe I should just do it meself to –
Detective Garda Delta: Well, the thing about it is this ... it will have to be explained to him like, that that is the way – I mean surely he can see it in hindsight now that Jules is very devious.
Detective Sergeant Alpha: That statement is very damaging to have in there – I mean it’s not – it’s not – it doesn’t do himself any good anyway.
Detective Garda Delta: No.
That was the night before. It is mentioned in West Cork podcast
Forgive my ignorance but of what relevance is that to Bailey potentially being the murderer the following night
It is all part of the timeline. He was seen hitching, by MF I think. You need to listen to all of the West Cork podcast to get the background
Minor statement? No - an essential piece of evidence in any prosecution of IB for this murder. Without evidence that Sophie knew IB, I doubt if any judge would even allow this case to go to a jury.
Nor did I suggest the judge in the drugs case was part of a conspiracy. He may not even have known Leo Bolger's connection with the murder investigation but he was told that Leo was "helping the Gardai with another case" and there appears to have been no other mitigating circumstance which might explain the extraordinarily lenient sentence. It is well known that District Justices are very responsive to the views of the local Gardai, not for conspiratorial reasons but simply to assist with law and order in the locality.
It is reasonable to assume that the Gardai did not want a crucial witness in their most important investigation to go to jail as a drug dealer. Imagine the cross-examination: "Mr. Bolger, at the time you say that you introduced my client to Ms. du Plantier, were you in the habit of getting high on your own supply?".
The Gardai's relationship with Marie Farrell, her husband and her son is a catalogue of bad policing practice. She is an inveterate liar but the Gardai assiduously cultivated her because, like Leo Bolger, her evidence was vital - she is the only person who placed IB near the scene of the murder.
Do you mean the previous night as in the night before she was found the next morning? Or a day further back again?
Forgive my ignorance but of what relevance is that to Bailey potentially being the murderer the following night?
Did he say he wasn't at the party?
Thanks for this article link.
The party was the previous night.
I've seen posts in this thread from people saying that Bailey was much closer to the crime scene that night, claiming he was at a party and stayed over on a sofa and was heard leaving in the middle of the night etc.
Does anyone know where has this information been found or taken from? Did someone give statements with this info?
I struggle to believe its from anywhere official when so much around the case has revolved around the sighting at Kealfeada Bridge, why would so much importance be placed on that if people have said IB was at a party much closer to the crime scene?
It's very difficult to control a narrative when your "star" witness is blabbing to multiple sources. You'd expect that's why the witness reports were cut out of evidence books and job books lost. Under review it would have been obvious that the investigation was deliberately traveling in a direction away from the actual evidence. Wonder if Dwyer ever worked on the Kerry Babies investigation...
Unfortunately, I wasn't able to watch the interview on the Late Late Show, and I wouldn't avail of the RTE player if you paid me.
But what struck me is this.. Every person is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven otherwise in a Court of law. That is one of the basic perks of evolving from the stone age, and living in a democracy.
So, we have the national broadcaster running a segment on a brutal crime, and shining the spot light on one of the Country's residents..??
Now, where I work, you can't mention anything personal about one of your colleges for fear of breaching the data protection act. This was brought home recently when an off the cuff remark resulted in a serious disciplinary action..
So, can anybody explain too me how a person not charged with any offence, in an 'on-going' investigation, has been identified nationally on television???
There was no respect for the presumption of innocence here... Absolute zero protection of a citizens basic rights to privacy... And of course, any future trial could be deemed hampered due to the tarnishing of any potential jurors...
It's beyond belief... Not one scrap of evidence to place Ian Bailey at the crime scene. Not one witness to place him in the vicinity of the crime area (bar the shag happy Mother of five). And to top it off, the prime suspect was the first person to volunteer his own blood and hair samples to the Gards to rule himself out.
And now.. 25yrs after the tragic event. Identify him on National TV. Sweet Suffering Jaysis! It they treated a citizen like that in America, the banks couldn't print money fast enough to keep up with the libel actions...
After 25yrs - Still no evidence.. I say screw a new trial, complete waste of money.
Give the public what they want - Tie Bailey up, dunk him under water for long periods of time. If he lives he's innocent, if he drowns, then we knew he was guilty all along. Welcome to the French justice system 2021.
Just wondering. Saw a few recent articles where he's vociferously stating that he and his attorney were watching the LLS and monitoring everything that's said. He's a media junkie and always threatening to sue. So now that JT kicked him out and he complains of fears of being homeless - it occurred to me just how does he afford all these legal machinations? By selling pizza at the market? It really makes no sense.
" Asked about the “tone” of a recorded phone call between himself and Ms Farrell of April 20th, 1997, which featured a number of swear words, he said he supposed some of the language was “inappropriate”, that was “regrettable” and he was unaware his phone call was being taped. He was annoyed because Ms Farrell had made a statement to Sgt Maurice Walsh after he reported to the murder incident room she would not be making a statement because she had told him she would not.
Mr Fitzgerald also said he never went to the home of an actress, Claire Wilkinson, who had alleged she was put under pressure by gardaí to make a statement adverse to Mr Bailey. He was also not involved in alleged leering at daughters of Jules Thomas, Mr Bailey’s partner.
It was “totally untrue” that he had suggested Ms Farrell should give the name of a dead person as her companion on the night of December 22nd/23rd 1996, he said."
Weird behavior from Fitzgerald. Seems to be going to great lengths.
Why would he be so wound up at Marie Farrell giving a statement to another Garda?
I know. Was even worse watching it live. Had to sit thru nearly 2 hours of tubbers as they put him last to get the viewing figures
Trying to watch Sophie's son on the Late Late Show but the RTE player is honestly an absolute disgrace, 4 ads just to get into the clip and then when you try fast forward to the interview it asked to watch another 6 ads.
They can F right off.
whats that got to do with anything?
christ above, glad I skipped it
interesting, hadn't heard that previously; certainly a peculiar exchange
She would have had no mobile phone so arranging a 'pick up' at 3AM in the arse of West Cork would not really be possible. So she and her "friend" either happened across a man in the dead of night by pure chance; or "they" were directly involved in the crime; or the entire thing is a figment of her wild imagination and she was at home that night reading Walter Mitty.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bd89cdce15309a6ec2dff928c865017a.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1891d95e9e926c005ad3f5c153aacc5.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c2d01dc58c93157b55e4469cba109cf9.svg)
