My theory about the bottle of wine is that it was stolen from her house sometime in '95 or '96 or even on the Sunday she was away from the house and was the kind that gets kept for a special occasion. It was thrown away after she was murdered because whoever had it definitely didn't want to be found with it. Obviously there are only a few people would have had the opportunity. Could be as simple as that.
You could take that further and say it might have been a banal reason for a confrontation. I'd be very pissed off about something like that and might even accuse someone of stealing from me with no proof, but we all make mistakes.
Expensive bottle of French wine most likely lifted by someone with access to Sophie's house either before or after the murder.
If before the murder it wouldn't look good if found in the house of the thief, so was disposed of by someone
with access to the area in which it was found, maybe to steer the investigation away from the locality -towards France?.
Who found the bottle and where was it was found ?
I doubt it was taken after the murder as it would be part of an inventory from the crime scene, but still possible
and placed where it was "found" to steer the investigation towards France
Why on earth would they fling a bottle of expensive wine into a neighboring fields ditch & why wouldn't they have come forward about it before now if they had. Also, her husband didnt travel until well after this I'm sure and whether her son traveled or not who was only 15/16 in this time period is unknown. Yes, someone related to her may have flung this bottle of wine a while after her murder into the ditch in a fit of rage, its just unlikely, that's all. We'll never know because like a lot of things, it wasn't followed up on.
I can't see any relevance to the bottle of French wine, if it was clear that it was put there after the murder. Either the Guards / forensics missed it due to incompetence, or it was placed there after the murder. We simply don't know.
As far as I can recall it was found in a ditch in a nearby field, 4 months later. Can't see that it would be unrelated to the murder, just too weird.
If the bottle was found in April the next year anybody visiting the cottage since the murder could have brought it. Like her husband or her son taking care of things at the cottage? It might be totally unrelated to the murder, or then it might also not.....
This would make sense of everything...
Yes the forensics were probably gone by the time it was found but the make, year, date of purchase, place of purchase, name of buyer, if it was a favourite of hers were traceable. Like the missing poker/axe it could be very relevant.
It was 8.40am but you have the stages of daylight prior to that.
There's several: sophies blood was still wet when the first officer on scene saw her body, there was a basket loaf of bread out with knife about to be cut, food indicating cereal found in her stomach and recently ingested, a packet of Jordans muesli on shelf which suggests it was that, and notably zero alcohol in tox report despite 2 glasses of wine with Ungerers and at least one in evening verified by wine glass on mantlepiece.
The bottle was found the following April so any forensics likely destroyed by winter weather.
I don't think they even looked into sourcing where the wine came from. Not that garda incompetence surprises me anymore in this case.
Daylight would have probably broken around 9am at this time of the year. Even if the murder took place around 6, 7 or 8am the murderer would have still had the advantage of darkness. Just wondering, which evidence would point to a morning murder?
Regarding the bottle of wine, I am also inclined to think that somebody brought Sophie the bottle, rather than her buying it. Just wondering, when was the bottle of wine actually found? Forensics canvassed the area pretty well, I'd say. Would they have missed a bottle of wine? It's also possible that the bottle of wine was left there for some unknown reason later, after the murder happend.
Yah, some of the evidence contradicts each other which I guess tends to happen in cases like this sometimes.
If the gards had identified the bottle of wine, make type, region, they could have at least found out from Sophie's friends or family if it was a type of wine she liked. If it was, it would heighten the chances that the killer knew Sophie quite well & it wasn't a spur of the moment killing from a randomer or from a hitman.
Points to the senior gard theory who she was supposedly making numerous complaints to, Ian Bailey if he did actually know her but this has never been proven or an ex lover such as Bruno Carbonnair & few more.
All good points Jim.
I still think there's far more evidence that points to a morning murder however.
Of course we'll never known thanks to hungover Harbison not making it down for 30 hours 🙄🙄
Wine bottle is key, an unusual & expensive bottle of French wine is rare in those parts of Ireland, even more so back then. And what are the chances it turns up a short distance away from the only female French citizen in the locality who was murdered. Completely improbable. With some proper investigative work, it should have been possible to at least narrow down when & where it was likely to have been purchased.
I doubt Sophie brought it with her because why would it end up in the nearby field if she did, unopened, the killer would hardly have taken it from her, leave prints/dna on it and fling it away close by. That would be beyond the realms of stupidity. I think it points to someone who either knew Sophie from France, knew what type of wine she liked and knew she would be visiting this time of year. This points towards an ex lover from France who is yet unknown. Or alternatively it points to a local who sought to impress her with expensive french wine, knew where she lived & was arrogant enough to think she would get out of bed at that time of night for him.
It also points to the motive being a romantic one as who brings a bottle of wine around like that at that time of night unless they have one thing on their mind. It rules out the drugs angle, the neighbor dispute angle, the crazy wild man running through the woods naked and shouting angle😂 amongst others. It also points to a night time killing rather than a morning one.
It is only speculation about the wine bottle but that is the realm we're in here. The wine bottle may have been part of the whole incident if not the cause. A weapon, a bribe, a make it up gift, an introduction, a Christmas gift (to or from someone), just something nice to have some evening? I can't see it not being involved somehow. Who throws away an expensive bottle of wine? Someone in a fit of pique or getting rid of evidence.
😀 OK i haven't been keeping up here much it is going round in circles
It only makes sense if, say, they heard something but perhaps saw who it was... And pretended they hadn't heard or seen anything.
This adds up if it was a garda who murdered Sophie, especially as Alfie had an ongoing situation awaiting court for cultivating weed.
That would be my theory anyway.
Don't worry, mamboozle outed themselves 🤣
Yah, it definitely begs the question, do they know more than what their letting on? I still can't for the life of me, see why they grilled Bailey & Jules Thomas to see if they would contradict each other in interviews but failed to properly question the neighbors who slept abnormally long that night, whose house STDP ran in the opposite direction of, who didnt hear a thing in what was an extremely violent crime, had links to drug activity in the area however tenuous those links were & who were known to have had a dispute with the victim over the gate to the properties.
Again, not saying they did anything but they definitely should have been questioned more thoroughly, even aggressively like Bailey & Jules Thomas were to see if they knew more than what they were letting on.
No need to be smart with "You haven't just joined". I had forgotten about Shirley's claim re her meeting Bailey which he denied. Maybe IB lied?
I cant give a definitive answer re Nick. i doubt it. He was born in Liverpool.
I agree with you re Cassidy. He was shown by phone records to have lied but still stuck to his story. Why would he have lied?. Of course non of the so called journalists would ask that. I think he is senior in the examiner now which shows what joke they are
Wouldn't it be more illuminating to have Eddie Cassidy explain on camera why he changed his story around the timeline of phonecalls on the day the body was discovered two or three times?
Was Cassidy asked to take part? Doubt he would go on. And Barry Roche won't say anything about him. Like the cops. Stick together.
Wasn't me on twitter, i don't have twitter
As well as their claim of hearing nothing, I find their claim of going to bed at 10pm but not being up until 8am quite convenient and unusual. I don't know many people who sleep for 10 hours a night, especially older people who tend to be early risers.
Is Shirleys surname Forster or Foster - theres alot of articles where she is named as Shirley Forster instead of Foster.
As regards Nick Foster - hes a leech out to make money from Sophies murder. He knows nothing more than anyone else and should not be given airtime. The guy befriended Ian Bailey to try and find proof that he was guilty - he found nothing though. His posts on social media are just to create interest in him and his thrash books. He is a nasty individual and I suggest we dont discuss him anymore on this thread as we are doing exactly what he wants - creating more publicity for him.
Fair enough but a quick Fb search pulls up SF easily enough, verified by 2 Lyons and one Richardson in her friends list. No mention of NF.
It's a fairly common surname TBF
I think this only shows how badly managed the investigation really was. I myself honestly don't think if it matters to a murder conviction in a courtroom just who actually knew whom, or who may have known whom, or if somebody may be only 90% sure, that he introduced him to her or who slept with whom. Alfie's statement of being 90% sure is more than badly phrased, he should have stated that he didn't know, rather than this 90% statement. I would strongly suggest that on this peninsula everybody knew who everyone else was, or sort of was. Bailey could have even had a sexual relationship with Sophie however short, however secretive, it's still no evidence for murder. In the end, it wouldn't even have made any difference, since knowing somebody or sleeping with somebody or being out or supposedly being out at Kealfadda Bridge that night doesn't make you a murderer at all. For a conviction beyond reasonable doubt more is needed, whoever the killer is or was if he passed away....
What it all comes down to is that it was a complete failure to link murderer to crime scene and establish motive. The incompetence started in Ireland with the Guards and was finished in France. Also credible witnesses ( somebody other than Marie Farrell ) were missing or non existent in this case. Based on that or on that "nothing we have", you can't convict somebody to 25 years in prison for murder, - it's more like justice in a banana republic, I am very surprised that the French went for that, the Du Plantier family being influential or not doesn't matter here. It's also the French judiciary whose reputation is in the focus here, same as the Garda in Ireland.
We need to talk about Nick😉. What's the angle? Why this case? Lived in Caracas during Chavez. If he took the opposite line on the case but his name was Nick Bailey you can be sure we'd have more information on him than you get in "who do you think you are".
Nope!!
Bailey generally treated Jules like **** so if he were unfaithful it would hardly be a surprise. Did Jules daughter not allege that he once tried it on with her?
Someone asked this on twitter this evening which surely can't be a mad coincidence ðŸ¤ðŸ˜‚
The surname, on the other hand, likely is.
So you can give a definitive answer?
You haven't just joined
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wa.vanillicon.com/v2/a04babac7ef9d681628a280d81c51a1e.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1891d95e9e926c005ad3f5c153aacc5.svg)
