There is a youtube page called the behaviour panel.A panel of 4 body language/behavioural experts who analyze interviews from celebs to criminals.
They analyzed Baileys interview with Philip Boucher Hayes 2 months ago and completely ripped him to shreds.
Interestingly they made a point about the fact Bailey wore a bright tie to the interview which was a bad choice as it threw attention to his chest and when a person lies their heart rate will quicken something which could be picked up by the naked eye ..he wore a scarf to last nights interview..could be nothing
The whole thing is 1 hour and a half long...here are some of the points they covered.
They more or less said he is grandiose for someone who is an out of work writer,thinks he is smarter than what he is.One of them said for a poet/journalist who should be skilful in the english language he is extremely inarticulate in his answers.His response to the turkey question was he said, word salad.
Another point was his use of the word absolutely as in I absolutely did not kill her, they said it is an odd word to use.
They said there were red flags everywhere and his body language was all over the shop.
Myself personally I think his delivery of answers and his oddness is more linked to maybe high performing autism than to guilt.I think he is def on the spectrum.
Josie hellen. I think she did enquire about other work to the house when she was there tbf, I'm just saying the heating myth is a myth.
Are you saying her family are lying, or that she was lying to them? Can you elaborate on where you are getting this 'information'?
It's hard to remember the days before online booking but as far as I remember when we booked flights with a travel agent you were given a carrier name and a transfer location and gate number. Most carriers had partnerships with other airlines and you only checked your luggage in once, with the original carrier. The tickets would have the logo of the first carrier.
He came the week before. This is not the reason she came, despite what the ever reliable netflix will tell you.
course it is
maybe he thought (as I did when I was 4 years old) that the only aeroplanes were Aer Lingus aeroplanes ... certainly possible 🙃
oh ok thanks - and what makes him a suspect apart from the car and footprint? was there any known connection between him and Sophie?
Of course, why wouldn't I?
No idea
I had a fella arrive a week late once. 25 years is just taking the piss though.
Did the boiler repair guy \ plumber ever show up to fix the heating?
Right, but as far as I remember in the 90s you either booked flights through a travel agent or had to ring the airline yourself, and then the tickets themselves had to be posted out to you. If she was using a travel agent then she would not be booking a connecting flight herself, the travel agents took care of organising connecting flights. Most people used travel agents for this kind of thing in the 90s. So it's entirely possible that as far as she was concerned, or at least all she needed to tell her husband, was that she was catching an Aer Lingus flight home on a certain date.
Fair point.
I should have said "evidence that we know of"
He says "Aer Lingus flight" in his statement brains.
It's what it reveals about the attitude, not the intention. I highly doubt it was said hoping for her actually to be flogged. It's just an interesting thought to have and then put out there on the web in the context of the woman questioning him on domestic violence, while lambasting her for doing so. It's all a matter of public record and is relevant in the discussion on how his life has been affected by the case.
Are you for real? Moonie continually provides us with the facts of the case. I suppose there`s nothing worse than facts getting in the way of your "otherwise interesting discussion".
Do you still think it was a good idea to suggest she should be flogged for robust questioning over his history?
He writes his posts in an (admittedly long winded) fictional style, as in an old style detective novel or movie. You should not take his suggestion of flogging Collete Fitzpatrick literally.
Do you have a difficulty distinguishing between literal and figurative speech? It is quite a common condition and not a problem but you should be up front about it if that is the case.
Just seems like a real wasted opportunity to me.
If you really wanted to trip the guy up you'd just ask him about the case. He was covering it in his capacity as a journalist after all. Maybe he would accidentally let something slip. Even ask him about who might have been in the car with MF or ask anything about the days leading up to the night of the crime etc.
I absolutely hated his attitude around the domestic violence in the West Cork podcast because he is just so eager to brush over it. There's no point in dragging that all out again since everybody knows what he did at this point and all he will say is "water under the bridge" or other BS.
This guy knows A LOT about the case. It seems that before all this he was actually a pretty good journalist? I wonder if there would have been more value in framing the interview as "we know you say you are innocent and we know there is no evidence against you but nobody is closer to this case than you so lets hear your theories".
So wasteful.
He's basically saying it was a Grada, now deceased, who killed her but that's somehow not the main headlines? Would have really like to see if she could tease a full theory out of him.
We've had it impressed on us how much Sophie Toscan du Plantier loved nature, the quiet life etc., but we must remember she also spent time partying with the rich and famous. We often get a glimpse of this world when some rehabilitated actor or whatever tells an interviewer how they went through an awful time drinking non-stop while taking cocaine by the bucket load. The interviewers rarely say "wow that's a lot of illegal drugs, it must have cost a fortune, where did you get it?". As the answer would be something along the lines of; I could tell you but I'd have to shoot both of us.
We know the answer, from fiction since we've seen "Love/Hate" or "The Guard", from fact since we've heard of Michaella McCollum. That one where the not so naive girl is told by someone to go somewhere with a lot of luggage in which is concealed a lot of money, but don't worry because customs are taken care of. Then go somewhere where there will be an exchange for a big bag of drugs and while this is often the riskiest part where the deal goes wrong and people get killed, don't worry as it's all taken care of. Then we'll tell you when to head to the airport when our customs guys or guards are working and they'll wave you through. Don't worry nothing can go wrong.
So is Prince Andrew. Will MoonUnit be clamouring for one of her precious royals to be extradited?
How are you so certain she wasn't getting a connecting flight, from the UK maybe?
There were no flights from Ireland to Toulouse. I put up the 1996 timetable further back on this thread. So he either made that up for some sinister reason or didn't really give a proverbial what had happened to her.
Would she have been to return on the 25th? I didn't know there were flights out of Ireland on Christmas Day.
I believe the story that her parents had told was that they had been over and the heating wasn't working. The plan was for Sophie to go over and fix the heating so that the family could use the home later on in the New Year.
The problem with the French side of things is that we have quite a bit of contradictory information. Not unusual as people might not be 100% truthful on the reasons for doing things and they don't really ever expect something like this to happen.
If she was asking everyone she knew to go with her then that is kind of a red flag but we don't really know if that's true or even why she was asking.
Same as we don't know if it's true that she was supposedly meeting some poet she was worried about meeting. We know for a fact that she DID visit the Ungerer's place and the husband WAS a writer and an artist so there is maybe a grain of truth there? People say she was going to meet a writer and she did but the writer we want to point a finger at is Bailey so we kind of have to twist it a bit.
From the French side we also have the story that she was intending to stay longer but after some discussion decided to return home on the 24th? That's another area of uncertainty. She arrives in Ireland on the 20th to stay until the 25th? She has a call with her husband on the evening of the 22nd. During this call it is decided that she will actually now fly back on the 24th. Some time between the end of that call and 10.30am on the 23rd she is murdered.
It's so difficult to get a good handle on what "facts" are actually facts and keep all the bits of information together. Most reports say that her plan was to return to France FOR Christmas but I am sure that an interview with her husband had him saying that she decided to change her flights to the 24th after some discussion. So we don't actually know even a basic point like this.
From the Husband “I am saying that in a telephone call that I received on the morning, my wife had told me she had finally intended to return to France on 24th December and that she had been able to get a seat on a flight arriving in Toulouse at 8.00pm, though she had initially anticipated returning on 25th December. There was no particular reason for this change of plan and it was agreed that I would meet her at Toulouse-Blagnac, on the arrival of the Aer Lingus flight. During the last telephone conversation Sophie did not make any reference to any particular plan."
Is that not a bit strange? That she brought her flight forward probably by less than 24 hours and probably to the first flight she was actually able to get out of there. Like, there's a bit of urgency to that, maybe?
I dont necessarily find it crazy that she came to the house at this particular time. It was already well known she didnt like the hustle & bustle of Paris(I can only imagine what its like in the build up to xmas) and maybe she needed to get away for a few days to clear her head before returning for xmas like she intended to. Her husband was relatively rich so in effect she was and that's what people like them do from time to time, a few days break here and there. As for her son, he was with her husbands family so nothing too unusual there. On top of this, she liked solitude so for me, the exact reason why she came isn't that important, she had many reasons to come.
As well as this, I dont think she intended to meet a lover there because she had asked many friends and relatives to come with her & they all refused. So I wouldn't put alot of heed in that. Also, there was zero evidence of anything having happened in the house.
In my opinion, it sounds like a individual who knew her through her complaints (a garda, neighbour) or a local in the community who knew a little bit about her and where she lived. There was probably rumors in the community that she was married twice at 38 (fairly scandalous in 90's Ireland) and had previously had a man or two over in the house. Who then thought they'd chance their arm, probably high on drink or drugs and when she rejected him, went berserk & once he hit her a couple of times, knew he'd have to finish her off or he was done for. This is the most plausible theory to me and would explain why the bottle of wine as well found nearby & the sighting of the speeding car away from the scene. Like someone knew they had gone too far this time and panicked or was so powerful in the area that they didnt care and knew they'd be fine.
Bailey (if he did do it) was the very opposite of someone who panicked. Despite being inebriated, goes to Kealfadda bridge to wash himself down, comes back home, makes Jules a cup of coffee, then proceeds to the scene to report on it. Almost like some sort of professional. For a man who never killed anyone before or after (that we know of:)), it just doesnt sound plausible to me that Bailey did it.
I take it, you're referring to the Gard, living in Bantry, who had a blue Fiesta and is also speculated to possibly having had a brief sexual encounter with Sophie?
The Gards would certainly not have investigated one of their own, especially if they were in on it as well.
How do you know there's no evidence?
Yes - this is the Garda, first name J*hn I believe, now deceased, that has been proposed as a possible suspect. There is no evidence at all to back it up - apart from gossip and the thought that he might have driven a blue fiesta (though I suspect half or Ireland had blue fiestas in those days). There were also rumours that the boot imprint on Sophie's face was from a Doc Marten of the type issued to the Garda - again, there is nothing much to back this up (the idea that it matches Garda footwear).
... and apparently the heating had already been fixed by the cleaner...
... but countering that is that she appeared to be sleeping in the smaller room because the main room was too cold ...
I think this is another good question which was never asked or thoroughly investigated. Now 35 years on that's nearly impossible.
Was this trip of Sophie's planned ahead longer? Or more a short notice trip? Did somebody in Ireland she knew motivate her to take that trip? What I've heard is that the reason for the trip was to fix something with the heating at the house. However she could have done that later on, during a longer vacation trip to the house?
It's always been one of my speculations that due to the short notice trip, Sophie noticed or seen something she shouldn't have.
Also, the worst speculation, but one I wouldn't rule out, is what is if Sophie herself had a role in a local drug gang? ( I wouldn't believe that any moment, but I would also want that possibility ruled out with certainty )
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wc.vanillicon.com/v2/c2d01dc58c93157b55e4469cba109cf9.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bd89cdce15309a6ec2dff928c865017a.svg)
