I have a life
so you want someone else to do your legwork to support your claims? Maybe they have a life too
Don't forget the obsession with starting fire. Cruelty to animals, starting fires and precocious sexuality often signal the psychopath to be
Not every psychopath is necessarily violent, but if one is a violent psychopath (and I suppose that murdering someone would put a psychopath in the 'violent-' category), they would probably have had some of those early tells in youth. Trying to remember from the documentary what it said of Ian as a young man - that he was into playing rugby and liked drinking a bit too much, but I don't remember anyone saying much about overly concerning activity at this time. A wild and ostentatious young man, maybe, but that's not necessarily the smoking gun for psychopathy.
Are you suggesting they were trying to sabotage their own action?
There are one or two here that seem to have fingertip access to the details of the case. MoonUnit75 in particular who I am grateful to. I`m working a lot from memory.
was talking about the one in 2015?
Accident or design? By design you half-wit. It was required to initiate arrests where statements could be fabricated.
No you are most definitely working from fantasy
No evidence of that at all. Just claims by individuals who are already proven liars.
BTW. As the most relevant claims IB had to make had to do with the period around his first arrest, 6 years had long passed by the time MF developed a conscience anyway. The judgement in the libel case wasn't until Jan '04.
I don't think the DPP rejecting the 'investigation' means the investigators are proven liars
MF was trying to explain, fact ; I have been manipulated and intimidated by certain Guards into expressing and putting my name to scenarios that are fiction but these people are putting words in my mouth. The judge decided very helpfully(for the state) to warn her solemnly about perjury, which was tantamount to telling the jury that you can't believe a word that comes out of this poor woman's mouth, oh and by the way, all your deliberations should hinge on whether you find anything she says credible.
That`s not what I meant. However the DPP was well aware of the shitshow that would ensue with a murder trial. The prosecution would have set out their case on circumstantial evidence and the defense would have relied primarily on Garda malpractice. OJ got off the hook on much less. There are a number of individuals here who are particularly bitter and seem incapable of disassociating the questionable Garda behavior from what is the considerable amount of circumstantial evidence. The Gardaí are corrupt, therefore Bailey is innocent. It`s not that simple though and when confronted with the facts of the case that don`t suit their agenda they resort to petty name calling. A jury would probably have the same issues, thus making a conviction unlikely.
There are three classic signs. obsession with fire/arson, animal cruelty and i think precocious sexuality is the third.. Dahmer was obsessed with dismembering animals and i think fire too. i may be wrong
I`m working a lot from memory
sloppy research. people should be able to show evidence for what they say. If they can't be bothered then the thread just becomes "he said, she said"
You don't appear to realise how laughable it is, that while you accept certain policing realities, people like you seem incapable of understanding that there is a lot of circumstantial evidence BECAUSE of garda malpractice. Which is what the DPP thought. People might accept your proposition if there was any forensic evidence, but there is precisely zero.
The most unsettling thing about this case is that the ham-fisted nature of the investigation might have achieved the desired outcome, which was to never have a trial. A mystery that will never be solved.
The lone crazed lunatic who has a sublime ability to cover his tracks? A sketch of someone's hands? FFS. Wake up
DivilsAdvocateSep 17, 2021
DivilsAdvocate
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117904455#Comment_117904455
In the interest of clarity, that man later denied saying it was Ian Bailey who came to get the photos developed
"A SECOND key witness in the Sophie Toscan du Plantier murder probe has reportedly said he will withdraw part of his evidence.
Retired garage owner Paddy Lowney told a newspaper he no longer intends to stand by statements he made to gardai implicating self-confessed suspect Ian Bailey.
Any update on source for this? I searched but found no reference to Paddy Lowney saying it wasn't Bailey
The best way to proceed from here then is if you highlight the specific circumstantial evidence that you believe results from Garda malpractice.
For me this murder case evokes the old adage that there's no smoke without fire, if you'll pardon the pun. The main protagonists have much to hide in it. Circumstantial evidence against IB, some of which dubious in nature, does give credence to his involvement in the crime. Gardai mishandling of evidence, alleged coercion of witnesses for statements and the Bandon tapes lends itself towards a conclusion that the force too had something to hide. Marie Farrell and her escapades with the mystery lover, she too has skeletons in the closet which must be damaging to her. Daniel Tuscan du Plantier, doesn't come to Ireland in the aftermath of his wife's death, throws his stepson out of the house soon after her murder, he too behaved somewhat strange. Showing at the very least that his relationship with his wife at that time was strained. A German man, known to Sophie, commits suicide a short few years after the murder but not before allegedly confessing to his friend that he had done a terrible thing. Alfie Lyons, only one of two people who admitted to being in the vicinity of the crime at the time it took place, the other being his wife. A man who hand was mysteriously bandaged in the days following the murder. Who's only alibi is his wife.
The crime for me has now become unsolvable, the Garda investigation made well sure of that. To the benefit of whom we will likely never know. If it was a piece of TV fiction it would make for great viewing but alas the stark reality is that a real person is dead, a mother, a daughter and a wife. Killed in the most horrific of manners and her family goes without justice for her death. There's a lot to think about here, but for me there has been many more high profile instances of Garda malpractice and negligence over the years to not see the similarities in this case. IB may have committed the crime but he will never face justice based on the Garda investigation and of that I am certain.
I've always seen this case as unsolvable at this stage. The only real possibility that it would ever be solved is if there is one or several strong pieces of evidence which were overlooked or somebody still alive admitting to it. For that all to happen, I'd say, that's highly unlikely, but not impossible. Also many possible suspects have either moved away, passed away, also memory fades with the length of time.
Other that that my thought on this crime were always purely on the motive and the possibility to do it. Questions like who would have had the biggest motive, the biggest benefit of her death?
Individually, nothing of note,
but collectively you've got ;shoes , jeans, potential coat, mattress , bed clothes ...
No sign of a murder weapon, but a lump of wood would be long gone in a fire.
Was the fire at the studio or the cottage?
The fire was behind the studio.
Out of curiosity, was it ever explained how the Gardai lost / disposed of the metal gate? In fairness, you'd more than likely need two people and a truck / van so surely the disposal of such an item would have to be logged somewhere.
During the GSOC investigation the Gardai did not know what happened to it.
Later reports in the media was that the national forensics lab said they destroyed it after completing all possible analysis.
Strange the Gardai didnt even seem to know well... we last sent it to X.
So in that sense the Gardai lost (track of) the gate.
But then so many Gardai didnt cooperate with GSOC and the evidence keeping was shoddy verging on incompetent verging on deliberately tampered with. All responsibility conveniently assigned to a deceased Guard.
Correct, during the GSOC investigation nobody seemed to know where the gate (and other items) went. As soon as this is highlighted in two TV series making them look bad then they suddenly remember that it wasn't lost at all. 🤨
Third time posting this.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/blood-stained-gate-in-sophie-murder-inquiry-wasnot-lost-gardai-reveal-40647261.html#:~:text=A%20five%2Dbar%20gate%20to,value%20to%20the%20murder%20investigation.&text=Senior%20sources%20said%20the%20gate,property%20but%20was%20not%20wanted.
It was removed to the Garda forensic lab in Dublin for testing. Nothing evidential whatsoever was found on it. Eventually, a decision was taken to dispose of it or scrap it because it was occupying too much space in the storage room. So, it was never "lost", in the sense that some have erroneously claimed. This particular aspect of the investigation was handled competently. What would be the point of keeping it?
not heard that before - do you know this as fact?
"The lone crazed lunatic with the sublime ability to cover his tracks" ?????
That`s a laugh. As soon as he heard the sirens that morning he thought it was safe to tell Jules what was going on. He told Caroline Leftwick at noon. He hadn`t the cop on to realize that he might later have to account for how he knew about the murder so soon. He had to stick to the truth....Cassidy was actually the first to contact him and tell him. He couldn`t say it was Alfie or any other neighbour before then because they would have denied it.
The biggest mistake the Gardaí made in my opinion was that they weren`t all over a possible clean up by the perpetrator in the days after the murder. Who was buying cleaning products locally and who was lighting bonfires. They should have been all over him by Stephens day. Had they known about the bleach they would been in that studio before the bonfire.
Because forensic science is an evolving field and this is an unsolved murder with few pieces of evidence. I also love the use of the word destroyed. Unless they melted it down in a furnace what they really mean is dumped.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1891d95e9e926c005ad3f5c153aacc5.svg)
