. I was just stating,
I was just stating,
ok i thought you were asking
Yes I read this - not a nice thing to say and an unnecessary comment really. I think its his clumsy way of saying he didnt fancy her. Im hoping he does himself justice in the interview and doesnt make anymore foolish comments like that.
how do you know what i would miss? Anyway i want to see it. I will decide if the hour is worth it
Daily Mail quotes him as saying Sophie "wasn't the most beeautiful woman he'd ever seen." So chivalrous to the last is our Ian...
You won't be missing much,
find something useful to do for that hour.
Put it another way , Moonunit will not lose much sleep.
That's how it was back then. Not that it matters to the crime. I was just stating, for those who aren't old enough to know these times.
Am I right you cannot watch VM IB online unless you have a paid VM account? I do not have TV
It's also a bit hard to imagine how a man like Bailey would have done his freelance job without decent internet connection or decent cell-phone coverage. But apparently he was able to do so.
Landline, typewriter, fax , shoeleather, payphones like everyone else, journalist and non journalist business people
I think one also has to go back into the mid 90ies in Ireland especially South West of Ireland. The Gards were not really known for a whole lot of competence back then and police corruption wasn't exactly one single isolated case. Murder is was probably a once in a lifetime event in this part of Ireland. I also suspect that the Gards were totally inexperienced and ill-equiped to handle the case of Sophie back then, and a possible stake in drug trafficking would have taken care of the rest.
It's also a bit hard to imagine how a man like Bailey would have done his freelance job without decent internet connection or decent cell-phone coverage. But apparently he was able to do so...
I recall the saying "If you want help you call the Gards". "If you don't want help you call the Gards".
Now things have changed for the better regarding policing in Ireland. There was a good number of cases were the Guards were having a good amount of success against drug trafficking.
Plus the witness himself never actually came forward. Especially after she was caught out with the anonymous calls and brought in to be questioned. I know they wouldn't have had smart phones and internet access but are we really to believe that this person dropped her off at her van and then drove off into the night never to be heard from again?
One theory is that she has come out with her story because they were worried another witness would be able to make a statement that MF and the mystery man (mystery woman?) had been seen around the area. Just getting ahead of it? Just in case?
It all seems so convenient. The mystery driver never comes forward. The man at Kealfadda Bridge never comes forward. Maybe she did make it all up but then that just completely destroys any case against Bailey.
The Garda case and the French case relies on the idea that Bailey and Sophie knew each other and that Bailey was down at Kealfadda Bridge at 3am on the night/morning of the murder. Both items being backed up by extremely unreliable witnesses.
I wonder why they dont want to touch this topic with a barge pole hmmmm
the man in the car with her is it? ;)
Like alot of the utter madness of many of the other actions the gards took in this investigation. Who was the guy in the car with her that night, if she wasnt willing to name him, she should have been imprisoned, simple as that and she seemed willing to risk that. Now, one would ask, why would someone be willing to risk imprisonment over protecting the identity of another in a case as serious as this. Nine times out of ten its because they are intimidated by that person & that person is in a position of authority & can do great damage to them and their family. Her husband was up on an assault charges and conveniently this was forgotten about. A senior gard in the area fits the bill perfectly again especially if Marie Farrells husband was up for an assualt charge. Also, to say she is still petrified of the gards is an understatement. She certainly wouldn't have been covering for the average joe soap like this.
For people ruling out the theory that a senior gard committed this crime. Look at the damage this would have done to An Garda Siochana had this come out, it would have destroyed what is already a poor reputation. There was a clear motive for covering up for one of their own if he committed the murder. There would have been serious repercussions for them otherwise.
I can't keep up, just a week ago I was 'Nick Foster'. I have suspicions of two posters on boards that might be gardai and there seems to be a few that post on legal stuff, as far as I can see none want to touch this topic with a barge pole and I don't blame them!
If she was there herself, and if she did see a man, this man has not been eliminated and has not come forward. That's a big red flag, if she is telling the truth.
If she was 'put up to it' by the gardai, why were they saying on the Bandon Tapes that there was a major problem with her statement, in that she wasn't saying who she was with? They had no idea they were being taped so the conversation makes no sense if the gardai were in on some scheme to invent the story.
I think that's why she withdrew her statement? Because she was put up to it by the Guards and had enough?
Exactly. But also the fact she got away with lying about his name several times tells me she was either put up to it by the Gards and it didn't happen, or he was a gard.
I'm sorry, but how the hell did she get away with never correctly naming this supposed co-star witness???
Utter madness.
The thing is, it doesn't really matter who this man was that Marie Farrell had apparently either seen or not seen at Kealfadda Bridge at 3am that morning. Kealfadda Bridge is neither the crime scene, nor does it mean that that man was the murderer or even could have been the murderer. Any of us could have been at Kealfadda Bridge at 3am, would we all be suspect then? I'd say Kealfadda Bridge is around a little more than 3km away from Sophie's house.
And even if it really was supposed to mean something, wouldn't it have been up to a judge to question Marie Farrell how to recognize a man in darkness at 3am at night? How could she have been so sure? I'd say any of us would have looked similar to any driver passing by wearing a dark coat at 3am on Kealfadda Bridge that night.
There is some cover up of something going on but it's not really clear what that could be.
It could be as simple as Garda being convinced that Bailey is the murderer and making stuff up to ensure that they get him convicted. I mean, we actively see this with the French investigation where they barely even try to hide the fact that the goal is to just find the guy guilty and get it over with. So why wouldn't the Garda at the time be thinking similar?
The timeline for MF is just strange.
She's in Cork City on the 11th of January and for some reason decides, using an alias, to call the Garda and say that she saw a man at Kealfadda Bridge at 3am on the night of the murder. This almost a full 3 weeks after the murder.
This call prompts the Garda to make an appeal on January 20th for this woman to come forward.
She calls them again on January 21st from Leap.
She calls them again on January 24th but for some reason does this one from home and so they can trace her. From this point her testimony develops into a story that it was IB that she saw down by the bridge.
Almost 7 years later she retracts the statements that the man she saws was IB but does not retract that she saw a man down by the bridge, that she was being driven around there by someone at 3am etc etc.
It's strange. I feel like if I were the guy driving that car I'd be in touch with her as soon as possible. Obviously the technology of the time would mean I might not be able to get a hold of her right away buy you'd assume that conversation would be along the lines of "oh sh!t, Marie, we were driving around out there on the night that woman was murdered." Is that why she eventually called the police to make the report?
I genuinely wonder what must have motivated her to make that call in the first place. Did she have that image of some strange man out by the bridge in the middle of the night in her head waiting for an opportunity to be in Cork so she could take a moment to make the call. I wonder why after making two calls in locations quite far from home she decided to call from her own house the 3rd and final time, nearly 5 weeks after the murder.
😂😂😂😂
You forget MoonUnit is the Lord High Executioner of Ireland and you must defer.
Zzz change the record, been on leave guard?
MF has lied and lied and lied over the years - nothing she says can be believed. Chris has said nothing on this over the years. It wouldnt surprise me if the gardai never even spoke to him. There are not many men out there that would stand by their wife given she admitted so publicly to have been out with another man. Chris has a few assault charges to his name over the years so that tells me hes not mild mannered so Why has he stood by his wife? Its either he knows she was'nt out with another man or he was the man in the car with her.
I was just about to post this. In the same clip she says she doesn't know that the road from the bridge goes up to Sophie's house. Pull the other one Marie.
Can't trust a single word she says. Her story is so nonsensical you would have to question if she ever left her house at all that night. I mean, why would they be driving up and down that stretch of road at that hour of the night anyway? She says they drove it multiple times?
Has her husband, Chris, ever verified that she actually did go out that night?
A good memory is essential if you want to get away with lies, especially over a 25 year period.
I'm convinced she was not abroad at all that night.
The lie was to cover up for someone, or something.
Reading that statement again it seems even less likely that if Marie Farrell saw anyone at Kealfadda Bridge that it could have been Ian Bailey.
The person she saw was staggering towards Goleen. So not only would the person have been taking a much longer, more trafficked road from Sophie's house by going via Kealfadda Bridge, they were heading in the opposite direction entirely!
In the five minutes or so it would have taken to drive to Toormore and turn back towards Goleen the person seems to have disappeared - Marie Farrell makes no mention of seeing him when she and her mystrey man were driving from Toormore to Goleen.
The the most plausible explanation is that this pedestrian either turned off the Toormore to Goleen road towards Ballyrisode beach or went into one of the houses along the road. There's nothing to suggest this pedestrian had anything to do with the murder either. It could just as easily have been someone stumbling home after a party.
She described the pedestrian as stumbling, with his two hands to the side of his face. How much of his face could she have seen, passing by in a car? She didn't recognise Ian Bailey in the video Garda Kelleher brought her to his house to see. A video which featured Ian Bailey. Yet weeks later in her statement, which lacked any detailed description of the pedestrian, said she now knew it to be Ian Bailey. It's absolute nonsense!
If it wasn't such a serious matter the whole affair would appear to be a complete farcical comedy of errors.
Wow. That makes it worse, really.
So we pretty much know then that there was some other guy driving around in the area on that night and efforts have been made to conceal the identity of that person.
Unless MF is lying about the whole thing. If that were true though then why not just retract the entire story? Just say she made it all up. The part about being driven around by a mystery person, and the efforts to hide that persons identity, remains for whatever reason.
In sheridan doc she said she was driving and drove the same route with JS. https://streamable.com/a99oct Just shows she is a liar
Toscan du Plantier as well as her husband were very well known in France, celebrities, I should say. As written before the outcome of the trial was to please the Toscan du Plantier family. The judge must have been very biased. I don't however think, that money talked here, but celebrity status certainly had an influence.
I don't think that the result of the trial could have stood a chance if it was challenged in the EU court of justice. Maybe Bailey didn't have the money to pay another solicitor. I don't know. But passing a long jail sentence without evidence is certainly not going to go stand up in any decent court.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1891d95e9e926c005ad3f5c153aacc5.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c2d01dc58c93157b55e4469cba109cf9.svg)
