Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Murder at the Cottage | Sky

1166167169171172210

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,133 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    The evidence from the French and Irish witnesses is laughable.

    On the French side, people who didn't remember Sophie mentioning Ian Bailey when he was arrested for her murder, but years later? Were they on an expedition to the Arctic? You believe them?

    On the Irish side, we have Alfie Lyons being 90% sure of very briefly introducing Bailey to Sophie. Whatever 90% means. But notice he never mentioned seeing Bailey at the cottage in any other capacity despite living next door. No one mentioned ever seeing the two of them together around the area. There's no evidence of any letters, phone calls, any individual contact whatsoever from any credible source.

    As for Leo Bolger, who remembers Person A being introduced to Person B by Person C which was an event of no particular signifiance to him.. either he has a photographic memory or he's a lying weasel. An individual who got a suspended sentence despite running a sophisticated drugs operation. An honest believale witness? Not even remotely.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    This is also part of the reason, why my gut feeling says that the murder was planned, not unplanned. It's also my gut feeling that the murderer knew that Sophie was in the way or some kind of threat for whatever reason and "had to be dealt with" meaning eliminated.

    However I am aware that opinions differ on that one, even on the definition of planned vs unplanned.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭tibruit


    "The evidence from the French and Irish witnesses is laughable"

    Only to the biased mind.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,133 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    Only the biased, corrupt or gullible could believe such garbage and in some cases obviously fabricated lies.

    Is Leo Bolger one of the Irish witnesses whose evidence you are standing over?

    Or the French woman who remembered 'Bailey' 10 years after his arrest? You are standing over that?

    As I said, laughable.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Says one of the few people on here who can't consider other suspects except Ian Bailey 🤦‍♀️



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'm open to Sophie being in the way or some sort of threat, but I find it difficult to believe her murder was planned. If it was it was very badly planned, as the perp used random weapons they found to hand.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,238 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    The scene could have been staged after the killing to take attention away from evidence elsewhere. I don't think it was planned but maybe an attempt was made to convince her/change her mind and then it got out of hand. From what I read of her she had little fear and may have started off very angry?



  • Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭flanna01



    Half of me is convinced it was a spur of the moment attack. I believe it started and ended outside. This points so some sort of altercation that went from zero to a hundred in a split second.

    The assailant in a fit of rage, grabbed the nearest thing available to him, in this case a cavity block. Then, driven by temper, proceeded to smash Sophie's brains in.

    I don't think a sexual rejection was the motive, more like some quarrel over the gate / laneway.

    The other half of my brain is disputing this theory....

    If it really was a spur on the moment act of madness, thirty seconds of mindless violence, a sudden unexpected act of rage...

    How come was there not one shred of evidence left at the crime scene... Not one iota of anything to link the slaying to the murderer..?

    Even the best planned murders leave something at the scene.. But nothing .. diddley squat!

    I know it was 1996, but we've been killing and murdering for hundreds of years, most perps are caught without the dna technology that came later.. But this dude left nothing ...

    (Unless certain evidence was removed from the crime scene that would implicate somebody that the Gards didn't want implicating)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    I'd say she must have been some sort of a threat, otherwise the murderer wouldn't have killed her. If it was in rage, I'd suggest it was because she rejected somebody's sexual advances. That's just my thoughts here. I would also find it hard to imagine that suppose the horny Guard would have visited her at 7am in the morning for a sexual encounter. It's not impossible, but rather unusual.

    For an unplanned murder surprisingly little evidence was found, hence my feelings. Yes, it's possible that the murderer staged the crime scene after the murder. Even if the murderer didn't plan the murder ahead, I'd say the reason for the visit to Sophie's whatever the nature must have been of grave important to the murderer. If the nature of the conversation was drug trafficking the murderer would have contemplated the option killing her prior to the visit. He also must have known that she was home. If there was no meeting arranged by phone, how could the murderer have been so sure, she was home, and also home alone? I'd say his chances of finding Sophie home alone were higher in the early morning, she'd be unlikely to have had any guests at 7am? ( unless another man stayed the night over., which we all know is not beyond possibility.... )

    It's also my gut feeling the murderer parked his car down by the gate, rather than at Sophie's house and they may have walked down to the gate together.



  • Registered Users Posts: 662 ✭✭✭mamboozle


    I believe that in early morning twilight about 8 am, she saw some activity and went to confront somebody. It could very probably be a spur of the moment thing with the assailant wearing gloves because of the cold. Either grabs a poker from Sophie's hand or has something else like a nail bar to hand, that after one or two blows there is no turning back. Finishing off with the block is making sure. There is no reason there should be much by way of evidence left by the killer at the scene.

    It has been established that there was something happening around the main entrance gate and the gap into her field where someone may have been making a claim to some right of way. It wouldn't be the first time people have come to blows over this very thing. How much did the investigators dig into the background of what was happening at this precise location in the days and weeks prior to the murder? It seems like such an obvious flashpoint but the investigators set their sights on Bailey with undue haste. He would have found out what was going on and had to be stopped.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭tibruit


    There are no other suspects. Some come on here and accuse people based on imagined evidence, or rumours that must be true because they heard it down the pub. You are one of those. Yet you ridicule me for referring to real actual statements that have been given by real actual witnesses. But yeah...work away....sure it`s all just one big conspiracy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,133 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    No other suspects?

    What does that mean? I don't even know. Do we just convict people even if they are innocent, when we don't have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt - cos no other suspects could be found?

    What about the crimes with no suspects? What do we do then?

    Anyone with a passing knowledge of other cold cases solved decades later, or miscarriages of justice, could never come out with such dangerous nonsense. It's a charter for more miscarriages of justice.


    The evidence of the French witnesses, Leo Bolger and to a lesser extent Alfie Lyons is ridiculous, it deserves to be ridiculed.

    Do you believe the evidence of Leo Bolger?

    Do you believe he, as a bystander, actually remembered in such detail Alfie very briefly introducing Sophie to Ian during gardening work?

    I don't think I would remember such an event, I don't think most people would.

    Can you explain why he, running a sophisticated drugs operation, received a suspended sentence?

    Because he is one of the witnesses you are relying on when with your vague references to Irish witnesses...

    And I think if Sophie had mentioned knowing Ian Bailey to someone in France, that when Bailey was arrested for her murder, that would have triggered the recollection. Someone remembering years later? Simply not credible and believing such nonsense is - again - a charter for miscarriages of justice.

    And that's what we see here with Ian Bailey, a potential miscarriage of justice which our DPP has - three times - seen right through. We should be thankful we have honest brokers in such positions given the known corruption in AGS and the kangeroo court in France which is a stain on France's justice system.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,238 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    Were they wearing gloves? No answer to that it seems but would explain lack of fingerprints skin on the block. Was the block to be re-tested for traces of fibres/skin cells?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,163 ✭✭✭chicorytip


    I don't think she would have had a clear, unobstructed view of the entrance gate from any vantage point in her house and certainly not in darkness. It's far more likely she was chased down the lane from the house by her murderer or else was alerted to his presence at the gate by the sound or lights of a car or by the sound of his voice calling her. A dispute over a right of way ? Only the Lyons could possibly have been involved in that kind of dispute with Sophie and neither of them were physically capable of perpetrating such a violent assault. So,that leaves a drug angle. I don't think drugs were being landed in the locality. It's many miles from the sea and where would they be stored? Maybe Sophie was a drug user and had a dispute with her (local) dealer and he killed her. There was no evidence or parephanalia associated with drug use found in the house. All roads still lead back to the prime suspect.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    Of all the theories and suspects, I find the drug trafficking theory and the local police being in on it the most likely scenario.

    Whether the horny Guard from Bantry did the killing of Sophie or they coerced somebody else, like Alfie, or Leo or even another Guard, to do the killing is hard to guess and prove today.

    The reason why I think that this theory is most likely is that the local police did so much in terms of, to date proven, cover up and collusion that it automatically begs the question as to the motive of their doing so? In the end the local police went to great length with that cover-up activity.

    In the case of a possible French hitman, hired by either an avenging lover or her husband wanting to avoid a costly divorce and cash in on the life insurance the local police would never have considered coercing Marie Farrell into making a false whiteness statement or involving Martin Graham with drugs and money to get close to Bailey.

    The local police would never ever have coerced or colluded or covered up, if it wasn't to direct attention away from them.

    The local police would also not have done so, if it was just down to simply one of their own having certain sexual desires. The local police would only have done so, if they knew it was way more than one officer involved, at least 3 or 4 of them, I'd suggest. A drug operation in the SW of Ireland could not be done by just having one bent Guard, but more likely 3 or 4, or even more.... And I find it more likely 3 or 4 Guards were rather in it with the drugs than they all wanted sex with Sophie. We would have known about the latter by now.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 111 ✭✭kerry_man15


    I agree, I think this all has to do with land/property. From the aerial shots of the crime scene it is clear there is fencing being done in that field also, with posts laying in the grass. I've never heard it mentioned that Sophie had commissioned this work nor have I ever heard who was doing it. It beggars belief if this line of inquiry was never followed up.



  • Registered Users Posts: 662 ✭✭✭mamboozle


    Of course you'll find the usual suspects here ready to pop up and tell you that yes it was investigated, but the Guards were satisfied that it had nothing to do with the killing. Some people will have the nerve to suggest that while Sophie could practically survey the countryside all the way down to Toormore she wouldn't have been able to see activity at the bottom of her garden because it's pitch dark at 8 in the morning. Given the extent of the focus on this killing it does beggar belief that we don't know precisely who was working around the gate, who put up a new gate, who left fence poles in Sophie's field/garden and how much Alfie and Shirley knew about it, since they presumably passed by there everyday. Why it was deliberately ignored is another story but it is beginning to emerge as the only credible reason for what happened

    Proof of the fact that the investigation of a land/property dispute was only given scant regard is in its omission in the Netflix documentary or some of the books by people who are more inclined to the 'official' investigation. After all the shenanigans of the Guards in the area, their telling us that it had no relevance, alone, should be reason for suspicion.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭tibruit


    "No other suspects? What does that even mean? I don`t even know"

    Sure you do. Evidence is what it takes, plain and simple. We have had a myriad of names proposed here as suspects. But when you get down to the nitty gritty with them there is no evidence that goes beyond what we should imagine exists or what someone heard in the pub. There are no other realistic suspects.

    There is no reason not to believe Bolger. It`s not rocket science as to why he received his suspended sentence. He was a potential future murder trial witness and they wanted to keep him sweet. Anything else you have in mind belongs over in the conspiracy theory forum. I would remember making that introduction too by the way, sorry if it means you have a bit of brain fog.

    The DPP, apart from showing some basic lack of understanding of localized minutiae, went through the various "he said she said" scenarios and came up with some reasons why a future defense counsel might undermine a number of witnesses. Some of this however is nothing more than believing Bailey to be truthful. This ignores the fact that Bailey lied on the initial questionnaire and lied early on under interrogation. You can treat every statement as a microcosm and try to find fault with it as you have just tried to do with Bolger, but there comes a tipping point when the burden of witness testimony should be considered as a whole. This became apparent at the libel trial when 20 witnesses contradicted various aspects of Bailey`s evidence. They were all subject to cross examination by Bailey`s team and none of them were undermined.



  • Registered Users Posts: 662 ✭✭✭mamboozle


    @odyssey06 you really shouldn't bother with this comedian. Look at this "The DPP, apart from showing some basic lack of understanding of localized minutiae". "apart from" if you don't mind.

    There are many people in Louisiana that will swear blind that many convictions of overwhelmingly African-American males by non-unanimous jury decisions based on hearsay evidence are perfectly sound. It's a strange world.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,133 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    There are no other suspects .. does that mean you pin it on a whoever else you can find?

    What about crimes were there are no suspects? How did they do it leaving nothing linking them to the crime? And why couldnt that be whats happened here?

    Read up on some solved cold cases or miscarriages of justice? Because your ignorance is dangerous if you are ever on a jury.

    Theres no reason not to believe a guy facing a long prison sentence... who now has a motive to lie?

    A suspended sentence for a large scale drugs operation?

    This is one of your witnesses?

    This is part of your tipping point of evidence?

    Garbage tainted evidence is still garbage evidence no matter how much of it you sling. And thats all there is. Garbage evidence from people with a reason to lie, dodgy memories which resurface years later and a community whipped up into a frenzy by AGS that they had a dangerous killer in their midst who would strike again and needed to be put away. A result was needed.

    Its the recipe for miscarriages of justice seen so many times.

    Yeah there is no reason to your argument, just gullible delusions and illogical thinking.

    Its a charter for miscarriages of justice.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 662 ✭✭✭mamboozle


    “Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”, is a law of propaganda often attributed to the Nazi Joseph Goebbels.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭tibruit


    "Theres no reason not to believe a guy facing a long prison sentence....who now has a motive to lie?"

    You might have a point.....except he made the statement over a decade before he was arrested.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,133 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    No he didnt as far as I can tell.

    And even if he had... he was involved in the drugs for how long... he could have been setting up a favour with AGS to turn a blind eye at the time to his illegal activity. His testimony has no credibility.

    As I said relying on garbage evidence is a recipe for miscarriages of justice.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭flanna01



    I think most of us agree, that the cast in this bizarre murder case are unique at best, or total bonkers at worst...

    So, taking a step away from the community of West Cork, and focusing solely on the actual case investigation, what set of events elevated Ian Bailey to become the prime suspect for the murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier?

    This is not a Bailey haters vs Bailey supporters question - I respect all views, and encourage debate.

    For me, it appears the scratches on his hands, the getting out of bed during the night of the murder, his barbed sarcasm (especially at a time of an horrific murder), his contradictory statements, and finally, his well documented issues with domestic violence, seem to have nailed his colours to the mast.

    Of course, I have contemplated each and every one of these factors, and bunched together, they certainly make Bailey a person of interest.

    But...

    The scratches on his hands could be conceived as damning evidence? But would the murderer have walked around the harbour with his hands exposed for all to see...? The one physical red flag that was guaranteed to cock an eyebrow of two was not covered and hidden?? That makes no sense at all to me. He attended a large gathering were the locals were throwing themselves into the sea, it was obvious he would be seen by many people, and didn't cover his hands up??

    Getting up during the night...? Not a crime, and apparently he often did it.

    His comments about having a good day until he went over and smashed her brains in, was a crass comment. He has a sense of black humor, or sarcasm if it was correctly labelled. Again, not politically correct, but not a crime either.

    His contradictory statements can be off loaded by confusion? He was drinking heavily, I doubt he could recall every waking hour with absolute accuracy. Pick any day from a fortnight ago, and I would struggle myself.

    The domestic violence - Yep it occurred. Regretfully it happens all to often across Ireland, usually by a bullying spouse, usually full of liquor.. It very, very rarely leads to murder.

    If Bailey knew Sophie, he would have been shouting it from the rooftops.. A celeb in the movie business, rubbing shoulders with the red carpet brigade... He'd have thrived on it.. But not once did he ever mention her name to anybody...

    I just can't see why the Gards made Bailey their prime suspect in this case, and basically gave up on anybody else being in the frame for the murder?

    I may well be missing something, help me out here.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,858 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    "I just can't see why the Gards made Bailey their prime suspect in this case, and basically gave up on anybody else being in the frame for the murder?"


    He wound them up.

    Posh, English, public school educated, with a superiority complex.

    Started out poking fun at the yokel guards, but it all went a bit Pete Tong .

    He always thought they would solve the case and he would be in clover .

    But our Gardaí had other ideas, they got stuck in to him and couldn't care less whether he was guilty or not.

    They went all out to nail him at any cost.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,238 ✭✭✭saabsaab


    A French magazine has quoted Nick Forster as saying that he now believed that there is new evidence available to the Garda that wasn't there a few months ago. Also that the case is close to being solved.

    Must be something in it or is he spoofing?



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Spoofing.

    Talking utter shite. Foster with his paedo mate and his prison whispers and the wine bottle he claims was a big secret that wasn't.

    He should be ashamed of himself for giving false hope to Sophies poor family and just admit he's been barking up the wrong tree for years.

    Tosser.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    ....he now believes..... Believing it, doesn't prove it in a court of law.

    And if the Guards had new evidence we will hear it from them, we don't need Nick Forster and we don't care what he believes or doesn't believe.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    It's a well timed exercise in twattery to sell more books in time for Christmas.

    Nothing pisses me off more than people pretending to want justice for sophie when they actually want to make money out of her murder.

    That Laura Richards is another wan. Her podcast is full of basic misinformation, it's a disgrace.

    Lads I know we argue on here but at least we all want the same thing: the truth, whatever that is.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭flanna01



    Chooseusername: If your theory is correct, we are no better than the Taliban.

    I was talking to a Guard very recently, and the conversation turned to a ninety something year old pensioner that he had arrested for being drunk and disorderly.. I was shocked, and stated couldn't he have used his discretion and got the old boy home to sleep it off instead??

    His answer was blunt and too the point.. 'We have to be seen to be impartial to all age groups, colour and religion' Although a bit harsh on the old boy, his directive serves the force well.

    In this day and age, nearly everybody is walking around with a camera in their pockets (phones). Never has police corruption been so difficult to engage in.. A far cry from 1996 I agree.

    But would an entire murder investigation be rattled so much by one pompous individual ?? Did they really care about nothing else but nailing this guy? Had they no professionalism? Were they not duty bound to follow each and every lead?

    You may be right?? They did supply money and drugs to secure information to make a conviction. And some of the more seedier characters got off some fairly serious charges for giving evidence against Bailey..



  • Registered Users Posts: 935 ✭✭✭flanna01



    Nick Foster is living in the same realm as Marie Farrell as far as I am concerned.

    He can't be taken seriously, has made some outrageous claims, and is a proven turncoat.. (anything to turn a buck).

    The very fact that he wants to make money from Sophie's murder says it all..

    He wormed his way into Bailey's and Jules home, milked them for information, carried it over to Sophie's family, and then wrote his fantasy book after finding proof that Bailey killed her... Some Budda God or something (no I'm not interested in the exact wording he stated).

    As the previous poster stated, he's now running around with a peado with some hot jailhouse inside news.... Give me a break!!!!

    Note - As peado's go... This is a nasty piece of goods, he's particular crime was gut churning, Hell is too good for him.

    Nick foster can tweet all he wants, he's a parasite.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 100 ✭✭Glen Immal


    So many suspects, all of which are more interesting than Bailey...


    This guy interests me the most...can any one confirm if this is the son of the French-speaking publican who was interviewed in Netflix series,


    (Text copied from indimedia)..After Mr Baileys libel case it emerged that a local man had not been interviewed, let alone suspected, was present in the immediate location of the murder on the night i question . A local Garda who was involved in the investigation "from the beginning" admitted he had never even heard of this man. He had visited the home of the mans family but did not know he existed!


    This young man, a fluent French speaker who had been educated in private schools in France and Ireland was staying with his family a very short walk from the murder scene on the night of the murder. Why did Gardai not investigate him? Why did his family not mention his presence in the locality that night in December 1996? The man quickly left the area on a date unknown and now resides with his new wife in Britain.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,858 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    "was staying with his family a very short walk from the murder scene "

    Calling it "a very short walk" is a bit misleading.

    It's 1.7 miles to the bridge, so 1/2 hour walk.

    Add another 15 mins, so it would be about 2.5 miles, hardly a very short walk.

    However the same poster later posted this;

    "The Suspect that the Gardai "didn't know existed" lived a very short distance from the bridge at Kealfadda where Mrs Farrell said she saw a man she later claimed was Bailey washing his boots. This would have been on the Suspects direct route home. From there he could have walked to his house in fifteen minutes by road or in about eight minutes over the beach and rocks, thus not passing any houses."

    and didn't Marie Farrell say the person on bridge was walking towards Goleen?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,858 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    deleted.

    Post edited by chooseusername on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,858 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    "Why is the red gate gone in the second ('gap') picture, taken much later?"


    I've had another look and may have answered my own question;

    It appears that gate is already gone in the photos taken later at the time of the murder.

    It may have been used to replace the bloodstained gate on the lane, taken by forensics.

    But the questions remains;

    why was it put there ,and who put it there in the first place?

    Also who put up the fence where Sophie parked her car, and why is that fence gone in later photos?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 662 ✭✭✭mamboozle


    I think you're on the right track with this, there were probably a few people ready to dispute property rights with Mrs. Moneybags, as they saw it. You'll notice whenever these issues are broached, the usual subjects start pitching in with something about Marie Farrell, Bailey's scratches, the bottle of wine, anything to deflect.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭tibruit


    "The man left the area quickly at a date unknown"

    How do you know he left the area quickly if you don`t know the date? The old Chinese Whispers will do that to you I suppose.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,548 ✭✭✭FishOnABike




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭tibruit


    Foster really upsets you, doesn`t he? He must have been saying something on Twitter again. Just out of interest, what are the outrageous claims that he has made? I`ve read the book and don`t remember anything particularly outrageous. The whole Kali thing was a bit underwhelming and certainly wasn`t the slam dunk he was claiming beforehand. Although it was sort of interesting that Bailey spewed it out to a young blonde French woman.

    Has he even met the paedo? I thought he pulled that statement from the file? I`m also not convinced about the bottle of wine. Based on the statement of the young man that found it, it sounds to me like the wine was in situ since the previous summer at least. I won`t be holding my breath for the end game.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    I have similar feelings on this. Getting "Justice for Sophie" mainly means accusing Bailey without any evidence, - it's become the general doctrine.

    As said before, Nick Foster just has a personal commercial interest and seems rather desperate. He doesn't know anything, nor does he have "new and compelling evidence" exclusive to him.

    It's not impossible to think that the murderer is a suspect we all never heard of and never even considered. Bearing in mind that Sophie was in the habit of sleeping around, it could have been anybody and the motive was only sexual. If this was today, she would have gotten her contacts via Tinder and similar sites, but back then, online dating was limited, so one can't even use these solutions to trace any possible unknown murderers.

    What I also don't know is if her circle of friends and sexual partners or possible sexual partners in West Cork is completely known by the Guards?

    It has been mentioned Sophie was into S&M practices? What if something had gone wrong, and the bashing in with a cavity block was to cover up the real causes of death? Not certain, but then again, the coroner would have found something?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,109 ✭✭✭tibruit


    So she had a habit of sleeping around, there was a circle of sexual partners in west Cork and she was into S&M?? God she was a right goer wasn`t she? You see, this is the kind of bulls$$t that has Scooby and a few others all riled up and coming on here with their randy Garda stories. Ffs.



  • Registered Users Posts: 662 ✭✭✭mamboozle


    "Bearing in mind that Sophie was in the habit of sleeping around" "It has been mentioned Sophie was into S&M practices?" I tend to think this is designed to provoke because if it isn't I think you must be reading what you say has been mentioned with one hand. You're sounding like Detective Dwyer and his horny Frankenstein's monster roaming west Cork.



  • Registered Users Posts: 662 ✭✭✭mamboozle


    There isn't much you can say with certainty about this case other than Ian Bailey did not kill Sophie. Of that I am certain.

    What with your only neighbour having being up in court for drug cultivation disputing the ownership of a building obviously yours, a fence having been/being erected at your gable wall, more gates and fences being put up directly in front of your house, having to change your locks because of intruders and on-going water/heating issues, this haven of solitude appears to have been busier than Grafton street on Christmas eve. I believe in the land of cead mile failte, Sophie Toscan du Plantier was getting what we all know to be the reality "this is how we do things around here and if you don't like it you can always leave".

    This hassle she was getting was a conspiracy, of that you can be sure. There was a determination to make her life miserable but somebody went too far hence the obvious cover up because if any one of those involved broke they'd start naming names and that would have had serious consequences for 'serious' people. The killer was known by some people on the same day but the truth had to be buried and will stay buried.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Er, no. I am in complete agreement with you that this type of speculation is nonsense.

    Sophie had one affair that we know of. S&M etc is fictional, and in poor taste.

    I don't actually believe she was in a relationship with the garda, more connected through the Alfie/drugs link.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I don't think it's ever been mentioned.

    She was writing about some dark themes which could have included sexual violence, but that doesn't mean she was into it herself.

    Maybe tiny has got confused because she knew Tomi Ungerer, who was definitely at least interested in S&M, as shown in his various writings.

    There's a documentary about him actually that I must dig out.



  • Registered Users Posts: 662 ✭✭✭mamboozle




  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Tomi Ungerer documentary.

    Very interesting character.

    https://youtu.be/AaeWU8LgsFc



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,575 ✭✭✭tinytobe


    It's possible that S&M is a fabrication of some users here. I've certainly only read it in this forum that Sophie was apparently into S&M.

    I'd say the sheer number or better unknown number of sexual partners Sophie might have had, leaves a lot of possibilities and speculations open......

    If one wants to speculate a lot of things could have happened that night.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Actually if the first 5 minutes doesn't bump him up on the suspects list I don't know what will.

    "I rape a piece of paper... When something is raped, new life comes" (not exact words)

    "I'm always being arrested in my dreams"

    He's a very likeable, interesting character tho.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    We don't have any knowledge that sophie was promiscuous tho. One affair does not equal sleeping around.

    Daniel, on the other hand...



  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement