Murder at the Cottage | Sky

It's highly likely that Alfie left the blood on the door when checking for whatever reason, he might have touched the body but didn't want to say he had. That doesn't mean he had anything to do with the murder but it seems like everything he said was accepted without question. For all that Detective Dwyer says Bailey tried to point them in the direction of France, he very quickly came up with the idea of the monster in the night supported by the nonsense about Kealfadda bridge. Any half serious investigation would have come to a conclusion that there were only two people in the immediate vicinity so they would have to be arrested. The fact they weren't indicates there was no desire to hear what they had to say.

Jaysus that's all wrong, you can't arrest someone just because they happen to live closest to a crime scene. Reasonable cause to suspect that an arrestable offence had been committed by them is required. There was definitely a desire to hear what they had to say. Statements were taken from Alfie and Shirley.

The Guards were able to find bs reasons to arrest Bailey. You had two people who said they approached the house after seeing a dead body that should instantly have been recognised as being the owner of the house. There's reason straight off as that doesn't sound credible. Not only would there have been no problem arresting them, there would have been a public acceptance of the logic. Bailey was arrested twice but never charged. What was Jules Thomas arrested for?

Giving a statement where all you have to say is I heard/saw nothing is very different from the kind of grilling Bailey got, which might have yielded something useful in Alfie's case. If people are innocent they'll get over it, won't they?

So they should have dug deeper but not arrested Alfie and Shirley? How else do you dig deeper? Ian Bailey's arrest was cobbled together far too quickly, most probably because of what would have become inevitable; the arrest of the only two people who were in the immediate vicinity, who discovered the body and whose dna/fingerprints were very likely on external (internal?) surfaces of the house.

The Guards already knew about plant growing in Alfie's land since they'd busted him, so try to be serious. It's almost amusing how on this thread so many people believe they have an idea of the kind of person that is capable of killing another person when time and again it's been proven that almost anybody is. Since nothing remotely like a credible suspect has ever been found for this crime, the most logical conclusion is that this was a dispute between neighbours that went too far. Manslaughter.

I'm beginning to believe, that in all probability, the chances of Marie Farrell and the invisible man driving around the vicinity of the murder scene at 3am that morning, is at best a long shot. (In all probability it didn't happen).

Why do I think this?

Logic really.. One of the most brutal murders in recent Irish history occurred in a sleepy coastal region of West Cork, the national, international, and world press are all over it. The story was white hot.

A witness is found, that reports seeing a figure dressed in black near the crime scene in the early hours of the morning before the body is found.

A witness that was allegedly accompanied by a mystery man that was actually driving the car that night, so must have been paying attention to the road(s), and any night time murderers wandering around at that hour...

Yet the mystery man was never tracked down and interviewed.. The second eye witness to verify the man in the long black coat, simply wasn't followed up.. Really????

If my memory serves me correctly, Farrell went on to give three different names to identify the invisible man, all of whom were already dead.

Now.. That should have been a red flag straight away, the bells should be deafening... In fact, Big Ben would be quiet in comparison...

Yet the Gards made her their star witness?? In fact, the case was underpinned by her revelation.

Ok.. So lets assume the investigation was tainted, and Farrell was coerced to continue with the charade, we need the testimony..

Two points cross my mind (this is assuming the investigation and Farrell are as bent as each other at this stage)

1) With such a spot light on the case nationwide, why did the invisible man not present himself to a Garda Station just to eliminate himself from further interest..?? I'm sure having an uncomfortable interview about his sordid double life, could be no more embarrassing than being caught with his pants down with Marie Farrell being made public across the RTE news at 6... How was he to know she wouldn't break, give his name up??

2) Farrell's Husband stayed loyal..? Realistically, could any marriage withstand that? Every person in the country was listening to his Wife meeting a mystery man and zipping around the coast line and having romantic walks on the beach at 4am in the morning.... Yeah right!! He already had form for violence, taking a knife to another fellow.. Doesn't strike me as the understanding, forgiving type of person...

I'm not a detective, nor do I have all the interview manuscripts, but from sitting in my armchair, I read it like this..

Marie Farrell was a fantasist, an ambulance chaser... Liked to be on the fringes of the latest drama. She inbedded herself into the investigation by making hoax calls to the Garda hotline.

Her lack of brain cells would be her downfall (in many incidences yet to unfold), her first brain fart was using her own household phone to contact the hotline again, this resulted in her 'capture' so to speak.. The Guards had already placed all their chips in her basket, and must have been horrified to find she was a total Loo Lah of the highest order..

But without Farrell the Guards had nothing. Hence the cooking of the books (or the statements in this case). I believe Farrell was threatened with severe punishment for wasting police time, and was probably made aware that she, her husband and family would be finished in Cork forever, and their name the laughing stock of Ireland...

Unless....

We know it was Bailey 100%. He needs to be locked away before he does it again, and he will do it again, and their blood will be on your hands forever.. Help us out, and we will look after you, your family will be safe.... Blah, blah, blah..

This theory works well with my two points...

1) No need for the invisible man to present himself, simply because he doesn't exist. Also, no need to waste Garda resources chasing shadows, this explains why they never pushed (too hard) to find this man / shadow. They knew he was just a figment of Marie Farrell's mind.

2) The Husband knew she never left the house that night.. She had five kids, where was she going?? Sounds like she was suffering a bit with the nerves, the hubby probably felt sorry for her.. No way did he stay with her if her own account was true.. He knew it was all BS.

Fast forward a few years from the murder... Mr & Mrs Farrell and their brood (expensive brood) have gone from modest market traders to owning a half million property, thanks to the assistance of the Guards.....

Marie became locked to the Gards, they had her bang to rights. When it got real, she had to protect her family...

In later years when it went bad, the Gards couldn't have a loose cannon walking around, they needed her to stay on side.. Hence the friendly word in the right ear to get them the dream house as hush hush reward.

Excuse the long post... I enjoy breaking down and dissecting each and every piece of this puzzle.. A rubiks cube would be easier.

The point is that any of this hearsay 'evidence' would never make it to trial, regardless of how convinced different people are of its veracity. That's not saying that hearsay is not a factor in prosecutions, the conviction of some Limerick criminals proves it is, but that hearsay evidence must be incontrovertible in the context of other indisputable facts (or at least the 'courts' must accept something which unsurprisingly is very much not accepted by some people presently behind bars)

So worse than useless🙂?

The Guard first on the scene reported that the blood on Sophie's face / head, was still wet (not congealed yet). This indicates a recent death of no more than a few hours.

Blood begins to congeal more or less straight away, otherwise the body would just bleed out.

So the multiple traumas to Sophie's head would have produced many deep cuts and plenty of blood (as seen in pictures a few posts back).

The Guard stated that the blood around the nose and mouth was still visibly wet, he made a note of this in his book.

Assuming that Sophie had no medical disorder that prevented her blood from congealing, it points towards a morning murder.

If this is the case, and I suspect it is.. How does that change things?

Who would be roaming around West Cork in the middle of a winters night? In all probability they were driving a car (gate was open). There's not many horney Romeo's that chance their arm with a dame whilst she's eating her breakfast.. Like, would a man get a notion in the morning to take a spin over to that foreign birds house, see if he can charm the knickers off her... I know its West Cork, but even they have their limits.

So who was in the vicinity, and what business had they around them parts that night? (basically the backend of nowhere).

The only known people around that night were Alfie Lyons, Shirley Foster, Marie Farrell (allegedly), and The Invisible Man (allegedly).

So what could have been going on around there?? It was Christmas time, was there a session going on in somebody's house nearby? Did one of the guests leave the party the following morning the worst for weir..??

If there was a party going on at Alfie's house (which Bailey stated he seen lights on there after leaving the pub), would the revellers not have to pass Sophie's windows to get to the lane?

The morning time window for the murder is relevant if correct.. It changes things significantly.