I would be inclined to think that forensics were from further afield from the next bigger Garda station
They were from the Garda Technical Bureau in Dublin including Detective Gilligan, who went through the remains of the fire, and Dr James Donovan , the man Martin Cahill targeted with a car bomb
Yes i did read that. And you have read something about road rage drivers/ serial killers.
It was they who said over certain amount meant it was personal.I don't say i believe it. just it is theory like your idea. One is as possible as the other
To state that the severity of the violence indicates a personal interest is simply wrong and is disproven both by e.g. road rage incidents and serial killer de-personalisation attempts
No more simply wrong that what i read is simply right
Not unheard of, I've had one with brass like buttons myself at some stage.
I find the buttons claim to be a bit odd as it means they must have been metal. What sort of overcoat has metal buttons?
Or it means you've read something by one of those profilers and taken away the idea that to make something look like a crime of passion, inflict many wounds- This is actually a plot point in a TV series I watched recently and am sure has popped up in books and media since profiling became a thing.
General query - We don't know how many wounds were actually inflicted by the attacker? There were 40-50 wounds identified on the body but it's not clear how many came from briars, barbed wire, or a single blow could have caused multiple wounds.
There were items missing from the cottage - a poker and an axe? So either Sophie brought them out with her to confront someone and was dispossessed of them and then assaulted with them, OR the assailant was in the cottage and picked them up to use - somehow leaving no trace in the cottage (or outside). The former seems more likely to me.
"Sophie was disturbed, that is clear."
You have no evidence for this but it's just one more thing you say like it was fact.
'Evidence' isn't required for Guards to seek search warrants. Alfie's admission of having been at the backdoor of Sophie's house could be construed as an attempt to cover for himself allowing a Guard to believe a crime may have been committed and so having grounds to seek a search warrant.
I think a forensics team from Dublin travelled down to carry out tests. This was mentioned in the Netflix documentary. The lead detective in the unit was interviewed about this and also spoke about the examination he carried out on the scene of the fire lit, allegedly by Bailey, at the rear of Thomas' studio on either the 24th or 26th of December. It was suspected he may have been destroying evidence linking him to the crime, namely the black coat and other items of clothing. No admisssable evidence was discovered, only some buttons.
It was asked if it was an axe or a poker that went missing. Could it be a combination as below?
To state that the severity of the violence indicates a personal interest is simply wrong and is disproven both by e.g. road rage incidents and serial killer de-personalisation attempts.
It is supported by some profilers who say over a certain number of blows or stabs wounds is personal. you could say it is guesswork but so is road rage serial killer depersonalisation
Your posting and theory is only as good or bad as all the other theories. None of us were actually there and the "it could have been" is actually a very wide variety of options. Evidence to link the murderer to the weapon or crime scene was never found, and we are barely speculating on the motive. In the end, we've got absolutely nothing at all, only indications but no proof. I would however agree with most user's previous posts that Alfie and Shirley would have been at least equally suspect as Ian and Jules and would have to have had stronger background investigation. One would also have to question whether Shirley really found the body where it was or if it was moved, and if so by whom ( her husband? ) and why? The blood on the door and the blood on the gates certainly bring up a lot of questions, if the body was between the two places.
And suspecting somebody doesn't automatically make them murderer. Suspecting also can mean to investigate and to exclude somebody, to narrow the field of possibilities. And yes, there would have been every reason to also suspect Alfie and Shirley. Regardless of closed windows that night, wind, or deep sleep, it's hard to imagine they didn't hear anything if a woman was fighting for her life and screaming on top of her lungs, and regarding sleep, even that is often hard to prove as well, some people are light sleepers some not.
I honestly couldn't see a PI killing Sophie and also don't think that the PI theory is very realistic. The PI would have been hired by Daniel, to investigate, and nothing more, he would have been paid more than well by Daniel for "pictures in back and white or colour". Maybe it was really an argument and a brawl getting out of hand, as Sophie discovered the PI? Yes it could have been, but can we prove it? Certainly not. Yes, Daniel and Sophie were considering a divorce, Daniel knew that his wife was having affair after affair, so why send a PI after her to confirm what he already knew. ( Sophie most likely knew the same about her husband ) The whole PI theory is a bit far fetched in my opinion, but I also wouldn't rule it out, same as all the other theories we have.
The Sheridan documentary mentioned "forensics investigating the scene". I would be inclined to think that forensics were from further afield from the next bigger Garda station, thus they would not have been a corrupt local Gard. Thus it is really possible that there was absolutely no evidence found, and not a case of deliberately not looking.....
How many serial killer victims have these gardai or journalists come across? How many murder victims full stop?
And for someone with a very low knowledge of crime scenes, they have done a remarkable job of not leaving any identifiable forensics.
The person who killed her wasn't normal. It wasn't a normal person who happened upon her or was spying on her.
Yes, people respond with violence. But the level of violence here is extreme. It wasn't a random person. Someone bashed her face in to the extent her own brother couldn't recognise her.
For a death of this severity, you do have to have a personal interest. Her face was battered beyond recognition. Almost everyone involved or had an interest (gardai, journalists, etc) said it was the worst scene they ever came across. Also, the scene itself was untouched. That indicates it was someone with very low knowledge of crime scenes. That rules out a PI as well.
Why would anyone? Why would anyone normal?
People who 'feel' they have been 'provoked' can respond with vindictive violence.
Someone capable of inflicting this level of violence, well once they lose the head, the level of violence inflicted is a factor of what weapons they can lay their hands on and their strength \ stamina.
You don't have to have a personal interest.
Why do people get brutally beaten to death in road rage incidents by strangers?
Serial killers inflict horrible injuries to 'depersonalise' a victim who they do not know.
I'm not saying it wasn't someone with a personal interest, I'm just challenging the point it has to be.
If we are allowed to speculate about Ian and Jules, the same goes for others.
If Alfie and Shirley had murdered Sophie down by the gate they'd have had to concoct a story. What would that story have been like?
Why would a PI decide to race across a field after her and beat her to death with rocks and a cement block? Do you realise how ridiculous that sounds?
This was a crime of rage and passion. Her face was unrecognisable, which could be a clue that it was a crime of passion. No one loses their head and beats someone to death in this way, the violence was astonishing. The killer had a personal interest in her. It definitely wasn't a PI.
It was mentioned the clothes Ian was wearing when killing the turkeys for christmas were stained in blood and could have been in a bucket being soaked.
A PI who doesn't take confrontation well? If Sophie spotted someone lurking outside by moonlight, may have thought it was a peeping tom who would flee in shame, went out to challenge... and the guy lost it. Sophie's ex-husband mentioned she was the sort to jump in first and think later, although that doesn't tally with fears of her being a bit 'spooked' on this particular visit.
Just because Person X is a PI / Guard / whetever ... doesn't mean they can't lose the head in an incident if they 'feel' they have been provoked, and aren't used to being challenged... thinking 'who does this person think they are challenging me, showing no respect'.
Attaching a PDF of the original DPP report to the thread in case it disappears from online sources...
There is nothing to suspect Alfie and Shirley, other than they lived next door. The Gardai investigated over 50 suspects, Alfie & Shirley would have been looked at also. Living next door to someone does not make you a murder. The member who mentioned showing up to Alfie's with a search warrant... you need evidence to search someone's home. There was none.
As for the noise, they said they had gone to bed around 9:30pm. Sophie spoke to her husband until midnight approximately. Her bed was rumpled so someone disturbed her. If you are asleep for two to three hours it's probably a fairly deep sleep at that moment. In addition, they live in a remote area, up high, and are not far from the sea. Any wind whatsoever would carry through the air.
One question that was worth asking was why didn't she run to Alfie's and raise the alarm? When you look at the house, it seems that she'd have to run back towards the car to get to Alfie's house. The killer was likely blocking that path as she ran through the field. Alfie's house was not an option.
Sophie was disturbed, that is clear. She was alone and someone called to her home. When thinking of this case we get caught up on whether she knew the person personally or not. I think that is a mistake, she didn't know loads of people in West Cork. It may have been someone she knew however, if someone came to her back door, knocked, and when she came down and asked who is it mentioned they knew Alfie or Shirley, why would she not open the door? It was 1996 and murders were incredibly rare in that part of Ireland or any part of Ireland really. There was no reason to be so alarmed. She came to Ireland alone and her home was often unlocked. Sophie seemed to feel safe there.
The location of the house is very remote. Whoever killed Sophie and called to her would have known of Alfie and Shirley. They knew this area and had local knowledge.
On the PI: I can't believe people still suspect that. The crime was full of explosive rage, the man who did this exploded in anger. He didn't take rejection or confrontation well. We know that from her injuries. It wasn't a PI. The person who killed Sophie showed up and killed her with the weapons at the scene. Which PI would do that?
There was no evidence of any attempted break in as far as I reacall
Shirley saw the body from her car and beeped her horn and screamed and ran back up to her house. Alfie rang the guards. They told him not to touch the body. He then went down but only saw the body from a distance of 20 meters. He says he then went back up and knocked on Sophie`s kitchen window to warn her. Then he went to her back door to knock and saw the blood. At first they weren`t sure it was Sophie.
Shirley blew the horn repeatedly, but it went un-noticed so she had to run back to the house to alert Alfie.
That visitor to the Thomas household saw some sort of clothing being soaked in a bucket.. She couldn't have known it was a coat as such - she didn't look too closely at it. Even if it was a blood soaked coat the blood dna would still be found if it was examined.
I do not believe that Jules or her daughters would have covered for Ian if he was trying to dispose of blood soaked clothing.
It is surprising that Shirley has hardly ever received any attention at all really as a witness.. I assume the Guards interviewed her at length about Sophie and yet I don't know of any quotes or information that has come from Shirley. I am amazed that they would continue living in that house.. Surely they would be terrified knowing how vulnerable their neighbour had been?
He mentioned in the very recent TV3 big interview he was trying to source a cottage to rent for the winter months. He said tourism in the summer of 2021 meant little availability. I assume his income is the dole, rent allowance , and selling chickens and other stuff at the market. He has had no real income for 20 years. He is also publishing books of poetry etc.
I think in the sky documentary a visitor that was staying at cottage around the date of murder mentioned a coat steeped in water in a bucket in the bathroom. She now lives in Canada or USA and thought at the time it's unusual to wash such a heavy coat in winter steeped in a bucket. He may have had multiple coats, but shortly after the murder a coat was washed in a bucket, which may have removed possible evidence.
I suggest the evidence is so vague for all theories a procecution is impossible and there is really nothing linking anyone to the scene. That said I think it was ...
I think she ran down towards the gate to get away from her attacker and this is where he caught up with her and the small rock done the damage but that person finished the job with the block. It seems very excessive force.
You know that how?
I just wonder about Shirley's reaction. Maybe you don't go near the body to see if you can do anything, after all there could be a killer still around. Running up a field, and then a steep enough lane, screaming is hard to understand when you could jump in your car, lock the doors, start blaring the horn and turn around. You could run into the killer
Neither Alfie nor Shirley went close to the body. Alfie saw the blood on the door. He didn`t put it there.
If the door was on the latch or not the evidence really points to her making her way down to the gate for whatever reason. The scenario you consider was planted in our imagination by the investigation along with a supposed sighting at Kealfadda bridge. The little blood around the back door, near the handle and in the paddock can be accounted for by the movement of Alfie and Shirley and doesn't imply guilt.
The concrete block used seems to be strangely excessive. Unless it was to hide something perhaps? Sophie could have bitten the person (an arm?) who had held her (by the hair? ) and their DNA could have been in her mouth throat and by obliterating the skull it would be very hard to find unmixed DNA present especially if it wasn't being looked for.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1891d95e9e926c005ad3f5c153aacc5.svg)
