Well perhaps Alfie or Shirley liked wine, and had bought it at an off duty previously?
seeing as there was tension between the neighbours, perhaps one of them brought it to Sophie as a peace offering/Christmas present that morning. Maybe she rejected it and became cutting or even said I’m not going to let this drug thing go ...maybe that’s when one of them grabbed her and the altercation ensued.
I read it cost about 70 punts and wasnt available in Ireland but was sold in France including aairport.
Seems more likely it was bought to impress or as a thank you than a neighbourly present.
Of course it might not have anything to do with the case, but ties in with reports of holiday homes being broken into and their drinks cabinets raided.
Just a note about the wine bottle... something I haven’t seen mentioned is the possibility that it wasn’t a romantic gesture, but a Christmas present from a neighbour?
In the rural area where I live the neighbours dropped a bottle of wine into us in the days leading up to Christmas.
I also don’t really know how the claim that ‘not everyone is completely shook by a murder happening on their doorstep’ re Shirley going about her business that day ties in with the fact she was said to be a completely broken women later in life.
anyway being an accomplice to a murder has every possibility of leaving you a broken women for the rest of your days.
By serious investigation, do you mean pulled in separately like Bailey and Jules with no evidence against them?
She and Alfie were the only people within a fairly wide radius of the crime scene. Of course they should have been the subject of serious investigation.
Bailey was around Sophie`s age (two years older). He also looked to be in good physical shape at the time. Apparently he used to do quite a bit of walking.
If the coffee was a regular event, well then it isn`t any indication of guilt. But it wouldn`t indicate innocence either because if he was covering up, then he would need to keep to his routine. But if he rarely or never brought her coffee in bed, then I would question what came over him to do it on the morning of the murder. If someone does something unexpected for me I am immediately thinking "Well what have you done or what do you want?"
That's how any investigation should take place. Keep an open mind and investigate all suspects and leads. It's as if you've forgotten too.
But you have zero evidence against them.
How is it ok for you to cast aspersions on Shirley with no evidence, yet you feel it unfair if someone does the very same to Jules?
Hinting at? I'm saying that there was a higher probability that Alfie and Shirley were the perpetrators than someone like Ian Bailey. The Guards failed to investigate them for whatever reason.
I wonder which way you're leaning..... :D
If coffee was every morning, he kept his routine to hide his guilt so he didn't seem suspicious?
If it was a once off, he only did it because he felt guilty?
So, if you assume for one second he's innocent, what should he do about the coffee that won't make him look guilty?
This brings up an interesting point regarding the possible age of the killer:
Suppose Sophie was at first hit at the entrance of her house where the blood stain was found, confronted with something, threatened and then started running towards the gate, trying to outrun the killer. The killer caught up with her at the gate ( the gate was quite possibly closed and Sophie took some time trying to climb over the gate), the killer then killed her with that cavity block and later dumped her body on the road side, than it should be considered that the killer must have been physically fit to keep up with Sophie.
Sophie running to the gate must have had a practical reason out of a simple survival instinct and knew that she had little to no time and every second mattered. Possibly knowing that Alfie and Shirley were asleep at this late hour and waking them up, them getting to the door to open up would have taken to long, so Sophie tries to escape somewhere where she thought she could outsmart the killer, hiding behind briars, brambles, possible other bushes and that all under the guise of darkness.
Shirley and Alfie were older than Sophie and so was Ian Bailey, plus Bailey would have had a lot to drink that night. So Sophie would have outrun him easily that night.
I would therefore suggest that the killer must have been either around Sophie's age or even younger, or if older, somebody who is in excellent physical shape. ( Possibly pointing to a Gard, as a suggestion )
But she Did carry on about her business that day. That's a fact. And I don't think there is anything at all suspicious about that.
So what's your point then? What are you hinting at?
You make it sound like she went to the shops;
"and a box of Christmas crackers there please".
"Jaysus Shirley was that your neighbour got murdered this morning?"
"Yes awful it was. Are you ready for the Christmas swim?"
This is from someone who knew Shirley which doesn't fit your impressions;
"If Shirley was involved she is the greatest actress who ever lived. I saw her in August '96, she was lighthearted and looking forward to her retirement. In January '97 she was a broken woman who was in the absolute horrors and feeling trapped in a house she no longer felt safe in. She worried she could be next. Yet, at no point did she indicate any fear of Alfie. In fact they stayed together until his death a few months ago. They also stayed in the cottage but only because they could not raise the funds to move."
I would go so far as to say.... If there is no vantage point as Mamboozle says (from local knowledge,) then Drum roll...
The cops are full of **** and further evidence that this was an effort to stitch him up..
So what/who do we believe here? as this 'viewing of a light' is possibly the only evidence linking I.B to the crime scene that night... which sounds crazy.
This is jules v Gardai. ....
Any video evidence /interviews of Jules or I.B talking about hunt hill?
What usually happens is the parish priest gives an interview to RTE, 'the entire community is in a state of shock...' Meanwhile the entire community just gets on with its business. Did they cancel the Christmas swim? No. Was it a morbid affair? No.
For another thing Shirley barely knew Sophie. Why would she hide away for the day, especially in those extra busy days approaching Christmas? Would you say the same if it was a passing male farmer who found her, or do you just think female sensibilities find it hard to cope?
No
Well that has cleared that up!
The Irish Times link, I mean.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/ian-bailey-s-partner-some-material-in-statements-invention-1.2018797
Couldn't disagree with you more. If your neighbor is murdered and left on your shared laneway. You don't continue with your day, bake some scones, yoga, and head to the dump because you had it planned. You down tools, you stay indoors as it's safer. You ring relatives tell them you love them. Discuss the situation, the turn of events, the theories. Equating it to driving by an accident is totally wrong IMO.
If you can read the top sentance Jules stated that ... something something... when we were looking accross the terrain Ian remarked Something Alphies house accross the way and and then said thers a light on...
There must be a vantage point & these are Jules words/ Statement...?
Do you know where hunts hill is?
Jules Thomas gave evidence in court in 2014;
"She denied telling gardaí Mr Bailey said to her, when they stopped at Hunt’s Hill near Schull sometime earlier that night on their way home, he had a feeling something bad was going to happen. That was “absolute invention”, she said."
There was a lot of invention. I know the area well and I haven't been able to find any vantage point on any road where you can see those three houses.
Yes, I'd say the gate was open which was a bone of contention for Sophie. Cattle roaming around her lane & house, **** and licking her windows and car etc....I wouldn't blame her & I'm from a farming background.
I think particular notice/observation was made of the french lady being home....
& it was a moon lit night so you'd imagine they could tell the two houses apart...
I'm with you on point 1, I got my fields mixed up earlier. She must have been in some panic to flee the house. Whoever was outside must have been very aggressive and vocal to make her run for it rather than stay inside. I'm only presuming here but I can picture Bailey being like a drunk bear trying to get inside but giving up and moving on. She could have fell too running down the hill which allowed her attacker to catch up but you wonder how it quickly turned to a murder rather than a vicious assault, if it wasn't Bailey who else was wanting to do this to her.
1;
I'd say she got onto the lane through the gap at the pump house and was caught and assaulted up against the open gate.
She either tried to flee back up the lane or fell along the gate into the briars.
She was then pulled back out of the briars ,about a yard (you can see the stretched pyjama bottoms in the photo above) and the assault continued with the rock and block while she was on her back.
2;
I don't know where Hunts hill is , but I'd say it would be distance away if they were coming home to Lissacaha North from Schull.
They may have mistaken Sophie's outside light, which she usually left on, for Alfie's.
Jeez this thread moves fast... I can understand the frustrations of all as its hard just to concentrate on one point at a time as every one is in/or at a different stage of the murder from doors to gates to access and weapons...….but everyones will/hope is in opening a small crack that possibly lead to an understanding or possibility.
2 points today for me.
1 . it looks like the gate was open during the assault (not sophies preference) as the blood marks/stickers are on the road side of the gate.... Or was she further out the lane?... made her way back to the gate and either opened it or climbed it... assaulted inside.
Looking at the photos of the lane and access to and from her house on foot it's unlikely (not impossible) that she ended up on that side of the wall in the field. The more accepted likely route was down the front of her house through the field and through the other gate/opening which was on the opposite side of the lane to the open bloody gate.
The last part about being 90% certain is one thing that gets stuck in my throat over him. Makes so little sense.
"So you introduced the two of them... are you certain?"
"Yes"
"I'm certain"
"Definately"
90% is saying. I want to make you think I'm certain but giving myself an out if contradicted. It's the mark of someone lying imo. Nobody says they are 90% of a recollection. An exact % is just stupid. It's yes or no, or can or can't be certain.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e8040f74ccd8f7c0f1f8b2804da972be.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bd89cdce15309a6ec2dff928c865017a.svg)
