Well maybe he should stick to behind the camera then but his record as a director and writer is not to be sneezed at.
So? I think he was crap narrator and in front of camera. Cringeworthy. I skipped parts of it because of that
Well she was arriving at 12 anyway as per her arrangement with Sophie.
Finbarr is the housekeepers husband.
The gardai knew them both as did Alfie /Shirley so I'd say she was obviously not considered the victim.
Come off it...
So the body is found at 'x' time.... the jungle drums start drumming (and are heard across the hills according to some) but the house keeper isn't called, contacted or located if only to rule her out as being the victim.... The last to know it seems.
What does Oscar nominated mean? Nothing really.
He was painful in front of the camera and narrating
He is not a national treasure in my opinion
They all care about being the one to solve it
Oh I'm sorry, Oscar "nominated" then, winner of untold other awards.
Are you actually calling Jim Sheridans credibility into question here? He's a national treasure.
He said himself this case has got under his skin for 25 years and he wants to know the truth. Not unlike alot of posters on here.
I dont think he really gives a flying one about being the one to solve it.
What did he win the oscar for? Trying to make a name as the one who solved the murder i said, not making movies. It was very bad judgement showing ian drunk. He was hoping Bailey would slip up. At one point bailey said can't do this now.
Trying to make a name for himself?
He's a world famous Oscar winning director.
I'm certain Sheridan is only interested in finding out the truth, whatever it is.
That was Sheridan trying to make a name for himself as the one who solved it. Very poor judgement showing IB drunk
They didn't find any one's DNA or fingerprints on the body or the murder weapon - I haven't seen anything to suggest they found person X's, discounted or otherwise. The concrete block doesn't retain fingerprints. They weren't looking for touch transfer DNA back then and there are no reports of any later touch transfer DNA being identified and discounted. It's also doubtful a perpretrator back then would be concerned about touch transfer DNA.
There was only Sophie's DNA \ blood and possible poor quality unmatched sample of blood from one of the boots.
Just not adding up for me...
No.
I have put no effort into analysing Bailey at all. I have more important things to be doing. He was only barely keeping a lid on it at times in the Sheridan documentary when under no provocation. In fact Jim Sheridan has done far more damage to the Bailey public persona outside of his own locality than Foster ever will.
Are you suggesting Alfie Lyons or Shirley Foster are in the frame...??
"So who was inside the cordon? Unless A Guard? Doctor? Alfie?"
We know Shirley and Alfie were there before the Guards arrived, then the Doctor and the Priest were there along with the Guards.
So, besides the above think about who else was inside the cordon between 10:40 and noon.
They didn't "breach" the cordon as such but were invited in by the guards.
Any DNA or fingerprints found there would have to be discounted.
Much as I hate to admit it, if this is Fosters new tack there may well be something in it.
"giant counter bell"
Ding
Finbarr Hellen because he was working on the land up there anyway. I think around midday but would have to check.
Who identified the body and at what time?
For someone who has expended a lot of energy analysing the character of Bailey you, like many others, appear to have zero curiosity about Nick Foster, who quite recently came on the scene to be more convinced of the guilt of Bailey, and more importantly the evidence from the original investigation against him, than any other Irish journalist.
I can be reasonably certain that had Foster become convinced of Bailey's innocence and immersed himself as completely as he has in this case, there would be an almighty racket to find out who this pr*ck was. But there is no interest in speculating if there might be any more to his story than meets the eye. He saw this case was unsolved and for no other reason other than he's apparently a real nice guy he wants 'justice for Sophie'. I'm just a little surprised, knowing that there are a myriad of unsolved cases around, why this crusader for justice is only interested in finding justice for a very rich influential French family.
Yeah well I won`t be holding my breath.
You could be waiting a while
I can`t be sacked. Apart from that, if you`d read anything I`ve said about Foster you would see that I`m not exactly a groupie. But I am prepared to delay a decision on what he may come up with until he actually presents it.
Ignore. This post and the above!
Anyone who calls witness testimony and evidence spam, surely can`t expect to be taken seriously by logical thinkers. But then it was you that thought there was a giant counter bell beside Sophie`s bed a few pages back. So that sort of explains it.
Fear that talking about Nick Foster might get you sacked?
Fear of Bailey reduces certainty from 100% to 90%.
Wow! there's prompt. No thoughts on Nick "the Diplomat" Foster?
Fear is the greatest persuader.
Bingo! If Alfie was 90% sure he saw this and Shirley just 50% sure, that's still 140% certainty
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1891d95e9e926c005ad3f5c153aacc5.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w3.vanillicon.com/v2/37b29390e71419ead582d06229ae30a3.svg)
