Well, Ive heard numerous reports about her
From where and what did they say., you said "This woman is known to have a number of psychological issues"
A number?. How many. What are they, and what is your source?
she says she was not interviewed for years after it happened
there are a lot of clickbait journalists and a lot of Bs on websites too
Im not asking you to take my information over indo reporters. I said be careful where you get your sources because theres alot of clickbait wannabe journalists out there nowadays & many are working in the likes of the Sun & the Indo. I dont care what you believe tbh.
Well, Ive heard numerous reports about her but I think the simple fact that she stayed with the so called murderer of the most high profile crime this country has ever seen & then decided to keep a key piece of evidence to herself for what, 20 years doesnt say alot about her mental health. No doubt Buttimer and his colleagues would have a field day with her in court and waste more taxpayers money because shes looking for her 5 mins of fame. This investigation has had enough ridiculous witnesses already, lets not add more to the pile because the garda still clearly have an agenda after being exposed as being incompetent & corrupt in the last investigation.
Well, Id take a 5 time oscar nominee from Ireland who took the time to properly study the case over a nobody whos had one half decent documentary in his entire career. John Dower. Jesus wept.
but I should accept what you say over the indo reporters when i am being careful where i get my info?.
and you did not answer what psy issues does the italian girl have and how you know. where did you get your info? I just watched her again on the netflix. she does not seem coerced as bailey claims she was and the director denied. i do not believe she was coerced
i do not have much faith in sheridan and disagree his film was very much superior. he was boasting how he would trace someone if he was given a budget.
And before anyone starts saying Bailey is a scumbag and deserves it,
he certainly is a scumbag and woman beating thug
good question. you could equally ask that of all the new people who have now come forward
Why didn't Hogan ( who was Sophie's friend) report this to the Gardai in 2001 if he believed this to be true?
Marie Farrell does lack any real credibility but its interesting in that many years after the case, she says she's more afraid of the gards now than she ever was of Bailey. In fact, she's said she almost gets a panic attack if she comes across a checkpoint or even a Gard. Now thats interesting dont you think. She could have had immediate protection from Bailey if she wanted to but then instead came along to support him in his libel trial AGAINST the gards.
Anyways, she's not a witness worth talking about but either is Ms.Boriana. But as the gards have shown before, they dont care about that, if they can get an obvious liar with an agenda to go against Bailey, they'll go all out to support them & manipulate the evidence to help themselves. Now more than ever with foreign political pressure from the No.2 economy in Europe.
If this Ms.Boriana comes out as a key witness, its Marie Farrell mark two imo.
So Marie Farrell who committed perjury is more credible than Ms Borina .Thats a stretch to suit your position.I presume you mean the latter day Marie Farrell and not the one that contacted the guards numerous times to report intimidation from Mr Bailey.I preferred the Netflik programme but like your opinion thats just a matter of individual choice.
I agree - the Italian girl lacks credibility. She said she saw the coat soaking in a bucket and then in other reports said she saw it soaking in the bath. She can't seem to get her story straight - there is a big difference between a bucket and a bath.
It wouldn't be possible to get a big overcoat in a bucket. Only a complete idiot would soak a bloodstained overcoat in the bath of a house full of people and think nobody would notice. Who wouldn't think clothes soaking in a bath was unusual. If it did happen which I highly doubt why didn't she say something at the time.
Ms Borina's statement is nothing new and lacks any real credibility. Why didnt she come out at the time when the murder was international news so? she was staying with a suspect of the murder and supposedly saw blood stain clothes. Why are we only hearing about this information in recent times & why hasnt anyone else living in the house backed it up? Also why did Jim Sheridan (who's documentary was far superior to the Netflx's nonsense) not even feel the need to interview her. (And he knows more about this case than you or I will ever know). Its BS & shes trying to get attention. I'd give Marie Farrell probably more credibility than her in terms of a witness. Also, be careful where you source your info, I wouldnt trust half of the indo's reporters as far as I could throw them & I doubt their investigative journalism practices are much better either. They're not much better than a tabloid these days.
All this new nonsense of a specialist garda branch who review cold case crimes ( I doubt any of those Gards are experts at much else outside of GAA & Supermacs & I would love to know how many cold case crimes this 'specialist' branch have solved previously) investigating the murder is nothing more than a witch hunt to get Bailey to trial to appease Sophie Tuscan De Plantiers family who've applied continuous pressure to the French Govt through their connections. The French govt up as far as Macron has in turn made it known to our lame duck of a Taoiseach that something needs to be done & he has duly obliged no doubt.
Whats happening is political & wrong on so many levels its not funny. And before anyone starts saying Bailey is a scumbag and deserves it, this has wider implications for Irish citizens as a whole.
what psychological issues does she have?
todays indo also mentions "The “Italian girl” is Arianna Boarina, who was a teenage friend of Ms Thomas’s daughter, Virginia, who in turn has also previously provided a separate statement setting out an allegation about Mr Bailey to gardaí." and
"Ms Boarina’s alleged new statement about bloodied clothes echoes a statement made to gardaí last year by Bill Hogan, a former West Cork cheesemaker who knew Ms Toscan du Plantier well.
Mr Hogan said a woman had allegedly confessed to him in 2001 – at a time when Mr Bailey was on remand in Cork prison over assault charges on which he was later convicted – about having to deal with bloody clothes on a man’s behalf.
Mr Hogan has alleged to gardaí that the beneficiary of such efforts was Ian Bailey, whose clothes they are claimed to have been."
I have to disagree with you on the final point. This woman is known to have a number of psychological issues, decided to come out with this so called key information many years after the murder. If she had seen blood stained clothes in a bucket, that means Jules & her three daughters would have seen it too most likely. Funny that none of them came out with this information even though the daughters disliked Bailey & Jules is finished with Bailey now.
She's an attention whore, nothing more & must be reveling in the attention that she got from the Netflix documentary & now as a result of her clearly false statements. Unfortunately we live in a society with plenty of these type of people around nowadays. Her behavior doesn't add up one bit.
I think he does so many doc and interviews so he can claim he could not get an impartial jury. even if jailed he would still say stitch up, what else would he say now? I cannot see why the italian girl would lie about seeing blood stained clothing. She is referenced in todays Indo
Seriously You should be ashamed. Your back of the cigarettes packet maths are insulting to anybody with a functional brain. Embarrassed for you captain Kirk
Keep talking looks like the embarrassment is on you
Some egg McMuffin this fella with his "not strictly scientific". The babblings of a child would make more sense
Stop embarrassing yourself Clouseau. Is that addition out of 100 or did you just pluck it out of your arse?
Christ.....!
I hope you're never on the jury if I'm being tried....
Can you provide a link to the Gardai survey that returned a 30% conclusion that Bailey committed the murder? Could that same result not be reported as 70% of surveyed Gardai don't think Bailey did it??
TV Shows have Bailey to be 25% highly suspect...??? What in the name of sweet Jaysis does this even mean? TV shows..??? Are you serious???? TV shows?? Really..??
Everything else known about Bailey another 25%? I can't even begin to fathom what this statement even means? Everything else as in what like? How did you reach the number 25%? Really curious as to what formula was used here...
Let me get this right... Some Gardai survey reports that a third of the Guards think Bailey did it, or two thirds think he did not?
The TV shows lump on another 25% And everything else in the Universe consists of another 25%.... (this is hard reading)
My God - that's making a tally 80% that he did indeed murder the French lady.. Not much wiggle room there for the good Ian.. Looks like an open & shut case to me.
Have you been legally trained by the French by any chance? Did you proof read you're post before publishing it? Are you French?
I have read many theories on why Bailey could be considered a suspect. The most of them are valid and well thought out. There is plenty of circumstantial evidence that could be used to condemn Bailey or vindicate him.
But the 80% formula you have presented to suggest Baileys guilt is truly bizarre, in fact, it's up there in the stratosphere somewhere.
Are you also confirming that your research concluded that:
70% of Gardai don't suspect Bailey of the crime?
75% of TV shows don't think Bailey did it?
75% of everything else known about Bailey suggests he didn't do it?
You are dead right about one thing.. Your thinking is not strictly scientific!
My gut feeling says, it wasn't Bailey.
Especially in terms of motive and possibility to commit the crime, it's not pointing to Bailey.
To me it's still hard to imagine, one drinking all evening in a pub, and then making the 45 minute to 1 hour hike to Sophie's at night and leaving no real trace connecting him to the crime scene seems unrealistic. It's not impossible, but seems unrealistic in my mind.
The husband wanting to avoid a costly divorce, a drug dealer wanting to get rid of somebody who seen something, or some other sexually overactive guy, like that Guard, are far more stronger motives for murder at any rate.
It's rubbish.
That's a lie detector analogy not scientific
My gut says bailey, everything points to him
Even if the dpp get a trial, could it be fair?
What the feck?
At this point none of us know what happened that night. DNA evidence may or may not shine a light on the mystery. However also evidence get's older, and also a lot of suspects are by now dead.
As far as I know, Bailey had no financial connection to Sophie, he would not have benefitted from her murder, no divorce issues, no inheritance matters. So there are not the obvious financial motives for murder.
And sex? He was in a relationship with Jules. Don't know if he cheated or not, don't know if he felt the need. However taking a longer hike after a long night out in the pub many drinks, etc..., with intention of sleeping with Sophie does sound a bit unrealistic to me, but it's not impossible.
However I still wouldn't be able to understand Bailey's motive. It wasn't money, it wasn't sexual,
how do you know his motive ws not sex or money?
I've often had the same thought. In terms of behaviour, yes, but I also think this is the only thing that would point to Bailey.
But to date, to me Bailey is just suspect, like all the other possible suspects. Suspect was never matched to murder weapon or murder site, beyond reasonable doubt.
Remember, we also have reports of a car speeding away in the morning hours, or drug activity in the area, a sexually over active Guard in Bantry and husbands wanting to avoid a costly divorce.....
I think Bailey did it...
Why would he have been burning a mattress and his boots on Stephen's day.. or Xmas eve - which ever it was.. and soaking his over coat in a tub
Destroying evidence if you ask me
It's a possibility. However I find it hard to believe that Bailey either walked or drove after a longer night out in the pub. Yes, I am familiar with the area, the walk from The Prairie to Sophie's must have been 45 minutes to 1 hour depending on physical fitness and choice of direction.....
I still don't think that Bailey did it. After all, Bailey voluntarily submitted DNA samples shortly after the murder to be excluded? - I'd find it hard to believe that he could have committed murder, not leaving any traces, after a night out in the pub. And if he did, I'd say, it's quite an accomplishment.....
I think it was either drug related, or a sexual motive by the guard from Bantry.
I don't know if they found fresh tyre marks on the quite muddy road leading up to gateway. He could have parked a car somewhere near the junction of this and the "main" road which leads down to Kealfadda Bridge and walked up to the house. Or he could have walked there and back to his own home, The Prairie. If you know the area this journey would take maybe forty-five minutes each way - at a brisk speed.
I think his motive was partly sexual but also motivated by ego. He fancied himself as a talented writer and probably regarded himself as the only real intellectual in the village. So, the arrival this somewhat exotic French lady and what he learned about her and her background piqued his interest. He probably had met her previously, possibly at the Cape Clear poetry festival. So, his motivation for going up there that night might not have been entirely sexual. He wanted to impress her. She was not impressed, either by his bloody awful poetry or by his arrival - without prior notice - at such a late hour and half pissed. What exactly happened then we can only speculate upon. Her rebuffal of him, her possible terror and panic and attempt to flee and his violent rage leading to her bloody death.
He could have taken Jule's car, without her knowledge, driven there, killed her, and driven back, cleaned the car, - but that all, having had more than a few drinks in the pub it would have been quite an accomplishment for not leaving any incriminating traces on the murder scene......
However I still wouldn't be able to understand Bailey's motive. It wasn't money, it wasn't sexual, and drugs? I doubt that if Bailey would have been on anything, like Cannabis, or something like that, he would have had anything to do where Sophie gotten in the way.
I'd still suggest the motive would either have been drugs, in terms of Sophie having seen something, reported something, but the police or somebody in the neighbourhood was in it as well, or it was sexual, revenge, even a hitman hired by her husband wanting to avoid a costly divorce, or the often mentioned Guard from Bantry wanting her sexually.....
Not driving, hiking to her place, after a night out in the pub and more then a few drinks, killing her and hiking back, all beyond the notice of his partner....
the partner claims she was zonked on painkillers and drink so it would be reasonable for him to be able to do all that. First she did not know he got up then she did when it suited her to say so
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
