It apparently is what she said in her statement (during her 10th Feb arrest
t apparently is what she said in her statement (during her 10th Feb arrest
Is that statement available?
can youlink your reddit time line. Is there any more clarity around IB's movements the morning of the murder?
I have never been able to find her statement from the time of the arrest, just what has been reported about it.
It's still a work in progress at the moment. I'm trying to be unbiased and include all the perspectives to get a picture of what was going on at the time.
Actually, probably the main thing I found I was missing when doing these timelines was Jules' statement from 10th Feb. I don't know why we haven't seen it reproduced anywhere... It's the most crucial statement in the case.
He mightn't be having any luck on grinder or tinder whatever so trying anything now
Almost like a threat violence...
someone who speaks to Bailey might be able to get it
Very strange.... When whoever was "invited" obviously doesn't accept the offer gaaaarda hater feels like de proper hard man. He be delighted....Like a dog with two holes to lick.
I think it's fairly obvious I'm suggesting her dislike of the limelight is selective of the light in which she's cast. It isn't a conclusive opinion, it is simply an acknowledgement of how it would be approached in a legal environment.
If somebody on this thread was in conversation with Bailey, then yes, it would be great to share that insight with the rest of the forum.
However, I don't think for a minute, that Bailey would share anything of relevance with an armchair detective over the inter-webs..
As far as I can make out, Bailey is quite approachable, and often indulges in conversation with random passers by.. Might even flog you a book or two of poems.
*Note - Armchair Detective is a term I put on all posters on this thread *
You recently, very naively, posted that the Gardai could have planted evidence on Bailey if they'd been so desperate to frame him. When I pointed out the obvious flaw in the argument; it would have backfired if the real murderer turned up. You proved you are capable of some judgement by not replying and moving on to some other of your obsessions about Bailey's guilt.
Given that, it's a little galling to read this about somebody who hasn't made any stupid pronouncements; "I would not trust Jim Sheridan's judgement on anything much."
There would be no legal reason to look at such things. It's not an acknowledgement of anything. Mere waffle.
It's that thing when some barrister says ; Mrs Summitatem, you expect your parvenu hysterical vulgarity to be taken seriously when the decline in the intelligence of your contributions is becoming apparent although you have barely begun and from such a low base? Is this a starting or end point? The latter.
More waffle.... To reiterate "it is simply an acknowledgement of how it would be approached in a legal environment"... That's complete waffle. A legal environment wouldn't be looking at a citizens behaviour in the various "limelight"
This is my last reply to you, so don't think I'll rise to your nasty vitriol again, OK?
Your behaviour towards me for months has been downright weird and stalkerish. YOU pmd me when I was Scooby, you have a private profile remember? You kept all the pms? Well that's bloody strange for a start. Why exactly would you say that on a thread? Does it give you a feeling of power? Maybe you have a small dick π€π what exactly do you hope to achieve by keeping all my pms, I'd love to know? All I know is I saw through your nasty facade so rest assured I didn't share anything of interest with you. You must think I'm stupid.
I'm sorry, I must publicly declare my connections and if I know Bailey??? Have you heard yourself? It would be hilarious if it wasn't so weird. Nobody, absolutely nobody on this public forum is under any obligation to share anything whatsoever, least of all with you.
I'm amazed that people have liked your nasty drivel posts, but I guess it takes all sorts.
Thanks to you, this thread has descended into nasty personal attacks and is rarely about finding the truth and justice for Sophie.
I will say it again, leave me alone. You are only embarrassing yourself. Unfortunately I can't ignore you because you have a private profile and that function is unavailable.
And by the way, I'm not abusive to anyone. I'll say my piece and move on. Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of the word because you're an abuser yourself who manipulates people and pretends to be their friends by pm to get information. What a very sad existence you lead.
This looks like an attempt to lock the thread. Couldn't you just ignore whoever offends you and shut the f#78 up?
WTF?? Have you actually read the last few pages?
At least I don't jump from here to twitter asking the same questions and ignoring all the thought out responses, people have put alot of effort into answering you yknow? I'm in a group chat on twitter where a certain poster you approached wanted to make sure what he told you was accurate. People spent time on that. Do you even care?
Why would I want to lock the thread? I'm one of the few that has added something, only to receive endless abuse in return.
Seriously
ET tu mamboozle
Ahh mamboozle you've sided with the trolls, you must be so proud.
ππππ
I don't engage with anybody on pm and so ignored you, scobie or whoever. It didn't take me long before that to see who you were, so I've scrolled past most of your posts since.
I don't really care tbh.
Just don't expect DM responses on twitter from my associates with your endless and pointless questions.
Cheers.
Excuse me ?
So. The distractions have been about as much fun as toothache. Does anybody expect to see Murder at the Cottage; Series 2. (How it was finally solved)?
maybe a small dick..
non sequitur on cue! your specialty
I mean, I know the answer to this but how could I possibly share without being accused of something??
So I guess you'll have to wait π π€·ββοΈ
Great to know we'll be seeing much less of you
You kept all the pms? Well that's bloody strange for a start.
why did you delete them when i said i had saved them?
what exactly do you hope to achieve by keeping all my pms, I'd love to know? All I know is I saw through your nasty facade so rest assured I didn't share anything of interest with you
You did share things of interest but maybe you lied. Do you object to me posting the pms?
your pms were pleasant till i posted online i think IB is a violent thug whether he killed sophioe or not, then you sent a snotty pm so I do not owe you any privacy. You are great to give it tell people what to post but anyone who sees through you is said to be stalking you.you love then to play victim. Last night you told a new person he should not post certain things. If you do not want to be challenged why come here
justice, as you see it, for IB is what you want, not for sophie. i think i am embarrassing you.why would you care about my embarrassment?
I will say it again, leave me alone. You are only embarrassing yourself
if you post on a public forum i can reply so long as i keep to the rules. I believe i do since i am not saying anything personal to you but challenging what you say. You are an advocate for Bailey and should declare that to other posters.
And by the way, I'm not abusive to anyone. I'll say my piece and move on. Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of the word because you're an abuser yourself who manipulates people and pretends to be their friends by pm to get information
what information? you said you did not tell me anything, so who did i get information from by pretending friendship?
Β What a very sad existence you lead.
even if that were true it would not be relevant. sad people can make observations too
I must publicly declare my connections and if I know Bailey??? Have you heard yourself? It would be hilarious if it wasn't so weird. Nobody, absolutely nobody on this public forum is under any obligation to share anything whatsoever, least of all with you.
Then why don't you deny it?
Thanks for sharing
scoobs is pleasant until you question st ian then gets snotty. i can say bailey is a thug because of the way he hit jules but i can also see he may not have killed sophie. Scoobs cannot divorce one from the other. Hope that is non sequitury enough
If anyone here feels like sharing their expertise on the case, I would appreciate the help with these questions:
Why would anyone repeatedly change their name and delete posts on boards? Only one reason I can think of LOL
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b1891d95e9e926c005ad3f5c153aacc5.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w3.vanillicon.com/v2/37b29390e71419ead582d06229ae30a3.svg)
