It's possible. However if it was just directed at women, he could have been violent towards Jules on that night. Or even started showing signs of violence in the pub? To me it's just hard to imagine that Bailey hiked for a whole hour in a violent rage to Sophie's not even knowing if she would open the door to him at that time? I'd say there must have been more to it.
I suppose for motive ,Bailey + drink = potential for violence against women ,
In my opinion the motive of Bailey was never properly investigated. The attitude "Bailey did it" was narrow minded from the start, as it stood for, we have nothing on him, let's pin something on him, ah, we can't find anything on Bailey, ( Marie Farell, Martin Graham....), but still the opinion "Bailey did it". Hence the investigation by the Police was going nowhere from the start.
I'd say physically he is a big strong man, could handle a larger amount of drinks in the pub with ease, maybe 5 pints or 6 one evening, and a longer hike over to Sophie's is probably easily accomplished by him? But that would have meant, he would have arrived at 2am at Sophie's at the earliest. I don't even think Sophie would have opened up the door to anybody at that hour of the night, unless it was something urgent, or something pre-arranged or a close neighbour like Alfie or Shirley.
And yes, then Bailey was burning clothes in the back of the studio, he had scratches on him, both would be incriminating, but circumstantial, but certainly suspicious.
However the police was never able to shine any light on Bailey's motive and investigate from a motive and evidence point of view. It was "Bailey did it" from the start.
i'm a bit rusty with the details of this story - I watched all the docs/listened to the podcasts an age ago..
but I rem that Sohpie's friend said that someone wanted to meet her about "the arts" or something like that... writing, poetry... I reckon that was Bailey..
He was out drinking.. walked up to her house that night and recited a few of his poems to her and she laughed - and he didn't like it and went crazy after a feed of whiskey...
thats one theory I had on it back then..
But in any event - the cops made a mess of this case from the start.. there wer 2 other suspects if I rem right, a German lad and someone else.. and they wer not chased up at the time..
The cops made soooo many other errors with this case... from the start - too many to mention
It did look like they wanted to frame Bailey.. but he gave lots of rope with which to hang himself...
I doubt they will ever get to the bottom of it now though.. which is a shame for the family and Sophie
so bizarre it is not worth a reply.
that is from the podcast Did you not read what i wrote re the quote from netflix. post 1052
Detective Gilligan, the forensic detective part 3 about 43 mins in of netflix doc said
"Big old spoon and I literally went through all the ash to see what was remaining within that fire scene.
We removed big items including mattress, springs
Then i found small items from clothing, buttons, coat buttons, jeans, boots there was there was there was even boots"
That is a direct quote from Gilligan who said COAT BUTTONS were found in the fire
Wow....what a bizarre post. Everything Gilligan said was factual and certainly wasn`t slanderous. You on the other hand have accused him of corruption which is slanderous because you can`t substantiate it. I don`t know why I even bother.
It was a fire..
Items had been deliberately destroyed? - When do you burn items with the intention to not destroy them?
Back in the day, it was common practice to burn excess material (garbage) once in a while.. Especially in the rural area's.
The quote from Gilligan is bias and misleading.. 'Straight off we were aware that a lot of items had been deliberately destroyed'
Could that not have been.. 'We were aware that Bailey had recently had a clear out and burnt some rubbish out the back, nothing related to the murder was recovered'
The context of Gilligan statement was designed to add weight to the suspicion of Bailey committing the murder - Nothing less.
It was the likes of Gilligan and his colleagues that made a total hash of the original investigation. Instead of working the case from the get go, getting the supporting evidence they needed to bring a case against a suspect, they did the total opposite...
Focused only on one suspect. Used every innuendo and illegal entrapment technique under the sun to sway public and national opinion, which backfired spectacularly, thus allowing the murderer to get away with.... well, murder.
Gilligans statement plays straight into the hands of any good defence lawyer worth his salt.. It's a bias, unsupported statement.
Bailey could be the man...? I don't know who murdered Sophie. But the failure to bring the killer to justice lies soley with the pathetic antics of the Gardai investigation from day one.
If you can't see how bad the discrimination was, how corrupt the whole investigation was, how rotten to the core the lead detectives were.... I can't help that.
Gilligan's statement is only the tip of the ice berg when it comes to corruption. In this day and age, he would have been sued for slander at the very least.
Suppose Bailey killed Sophie, what would his motive have been? ( and he must have had a motive, because hiking for nearly 1 hour to her house, and then back in the middle of the night after a long night out in the pub takes some effort )
Did he have a financial interest in killing her? I don't think so. Was it sexually motivated? Like did he want to sleep with her and she denied? Possibly, but not certain.... Or was it sheer lust of killing?
Or even, did she know something incriminating about him, and was blackmailing him, so he killed her?
Was a motive ever investigated by the Guards?
Which could be interpreted as a general cleanout e.g. mattress and random clothing.
But it does not substantiate your original claim:
the forensic policeman says they found coat buttons in the garden fire remains
In the West Cork Podcast Detective Gilligan, after explaining how he used the spoon to sort through ash, says "shoe eylets, clothing buttons, jeans other tiny bits of bed clothing there was parts of the mattress of beds sprung mattress there was shoes. Straight off we were aware that a lot of items had been delibeartely destroyed"
Direct quote from Gilligan
That is a direct quote from Gilligan
it was the detective who went through the fire who said itso it is an original source.
The Gard interviewed in West Cork podcast explained how they searched the remains of the fire with a spoon,
They found among other things, lace eyelets from boots and "clothing buttons", no mention of overcoat or whether buttons were plastic or metal.
Buttons need not necessarily come from clothing.
If you would like to see the quote it's in podcast someplace.
Just because something is mentioned in a documentary, that's not an original source.
I would like to see the specific quote on what was found
Then do your research as i did. in netflix doc
When in this investigation are DNA results from this M-Vac test expected?
How long does it usually take to get DNA results with M-Vac?
Probabilities are multiplicative, not additive. therefore 30% X 25% X 25% = 1.875% Less than 1 in 50.
That's before we even start on the entire 'logic' of your argument and where you pulled the percentages from.
If I have 100 people who think there's a 1% chance a horse will win a race does that make it 100% certain the horse will win?
The "former British soldier" was Martin Graham. I think he passed away as well by now. The police offered him money, clothes, and even drugs to try to get close to Bailey.
Who is the 'former British soldier'?
I don't think Bailey did it. For such a small place there were a lot of 'strange people' in the area at the time. Many of whom have gone under the radar as there was such intense focus on Bailey.
There were 2 other young men staying in the Thomas house on the night in question...neither of them noticed the bloody clothes soaking in the bucket (as described by the Italian lady). It seems crazy to think that the overcoat of a man of Bailey's height would even fit into a bucket? And Bailey was clearly seen wearing his long black coat on a video of a Christmas Day swim in Schull two days later.
On the day of her murder Sophie had called to her friends , the Ungerers, and had seem 'spooked'...I think there was something going on in her life that we don't know anything about. Her ex boyfriend (Carbonnet?) had previously assaulted her and her husband Daniel did not even bother to make the trip to Ireland at the time of the murder...these 2 are far more likely suspects to my mind than Bailey. There are other plausible suspects too...it is a fascinating case - I welcome the review and would love closure for her family.
In the end, somebody must have placed that block there, prior to the murder. It could have been anybody, a construction worker, a local farmer, but let's say it was Alfie just for the exercise, then his DNA may be on the block? But that doesn't prove that he was the killer, nor the construction worker or the farmer.... Anybody's DNA could have been on the block just by placing it there or even using that block to keep the gate open.....
People moved away, some passed away, memories fade away. It's hard after so many years, to remember even a Ford car speeding away from the scene.
Alfie died, Shirley lives in England? The former British soldier died as well. A German musician committed suicide. The Guard from Bantry died as well. Jules still around? What about the Richardsons? Ungerer died as well, the children run the show these days?
I think you could be right on both counts. There is a very real chance evidence which could have been gathered thru the latest tech has been destroyed or compromised through poor storage and elapsed time
Doesn't DNA evidence fade as well? Not certain, about that one. It's also possible that this particular block contains DNA of every Guard handling the matter, - apparently they were not that competent back then as well.
And what else could the buttons have come from.
I would like to see the specific quote on what was found. In the online chinese whispers... Buttons becomes buttons that could be from a coat and ends up as coat buttons.
Ian? I dont think they were the kind of bargains he was on the hunt for if he had spare cash. Seemed more of a live in the moment kinda guy.
Thought about it long ago. The bleach would have been the initial plan. It wouldn`t have went as well as expected as Mr Crimeguy succinctly suggests so the only out becomes a good old bonfire. Two similar coats is perfectly possible. But then if he did go over there, who says he was wearing the long dark coat at all? Oh yeah....crazy Marie.
Some buttons have metal core that is covered with fabric? I think Bailey was in the habit of picking up clothing in charity shops. More than likely that he had a spare coat if he had spotted a bargain in his size ?
I don't know, the forensic man said he found buttons.I would accept that. i assume plastic buttons or parts of them would survive a fire, they are small and might fall underneath. But i don't know only he said he found buttons. not everything gets destroyed in a fire parts of things can survive. That's why they do forensics
So his coat had metal buttons? I've had a few overcoats in my time and I don't think any of them ever had metal buttons or the type of buttons which would survive a fire.
Yeah I know
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
