He died earlier from a heart attack, very curious guy whatever you think of him. If he didn’t kill Sophie Toscan du Plantier he certainly didn’t help himself by his attention seeking behaviour.
the removal of the pages from the jobs book wasn't tampering with evidence though
now I know they did get caught discussing predating a statement on the Bandon Tapes, but presume they didnt actually do this.
The Guards hadn't a notion of whether the claims the below were true.
In a report submitted to this Office on 26 February 1997 for the purpose of a consultation the Gardaí stated the following:
1. It is of the utmost importance that Bailey be charged immediately with this murder as there is every possibility that he will kill again.
2. It is reasonable to suggest that witnesses living close to him are in imminent danger of attack.
3. The only way to prevent a further attack or killing is to take Bailey into custody on a charge of murder and this point cannot be over-stressed.
It is understood that the Gardaí issued similar warnings about Bailey to members of the community.
It generates a climate of fear, don't pretend otherwise. As witnessed by the bonkers reaction of Bill Fuller.
Here is the DPP commenting on unsafe Garda operational practices:
On 29 September 1998 Garda Kevin Kelleher advised that D/Garda Leahy was the sole officer assigned to dealing with Bill Fuller. Superintendent Twomey confirmed this to be the case. Such an investigative practice is unsafe.
As the DPP says report says:
Once Ian Bailey was believed by the public particularly in the local area to be responsible for the murder the fear thereby engendered was bound to create a climate in which witnesses became suggestible.
None of this is reasonable conduct by a police force.
Re-read if you don't understand its all there. My common sense and life experience tells me that Ian Bailey (or any other violent man) probably sexually active from age of 16, don't just start hitting their partner for the first time at the age of 34/35 or whatever age he was when there was the first, known, incident with Jules Thomas in early 1990s. It was in earlier posts but bears repeating Bailey gave Thomas a vicious beating:-
'Bailey is questioned about Thomas where he's told that she "nearly lost an eye" during one of the multiple assaults inflicted by Bailey and that "her eye was the size of a grapefruit."
"I think that was a gross exaggeration but I do accept," he said.
At this point, Fitzpatrick interjects and says: "She was in the hospital, Ian."He responds: "Yeah, she was."
The interviewer added that her lip was "almost completely severed from her gum" as she had to get eight stitches. '
Technically he may not have hit Limbrick. But clearly explain why Limbrick (and any potential witnesses from 1980s England) may have run a mile from getting involved. This was a violent man, convicted of assault and held by the libel trial judge to have been a violent man. He hit other partners aside from the woman its known he hospitalised.
they thought he was the killer at the time, so not unreasonable to warn people in the community
everyone thought it was him, because there was evidence to say he did it
very reasonable
Well just like Mick Clifford proclaimed to the listeners of the radio, the person who reported it missing to GSCOC also reported wrongly.
It didn't go missing.
The tampering wit evidence is detailed here.
The spreading of fear around the locality is well documneted " we need to get this guy before he kills again"
"the investigation into Mr Baily was thoroughly flawed and prejudiced" - Eamon Barnes Director of Public Prosecutions.
It was missing during the GSOC investigation. That it was subsequently traced does not alter the fact that it was missing at that point in time.
And other items missing at the time have not been found subsequently afaik.
So read the link I provided:
The watchdog found that there was a lack of forensic material obtained from the scene, “particularly given the precise nature of the murder and the state in which the body of Madame Toscan Du Plantier was discovered”.
It was reported to GSOC that extensive searches had been carried out by An Garda Síochána for the missing items, which include:
https://www.thejournal.ie/grave-concern-over-missing-evidence-in-du-plantier-murder-investigation-4161933-Aug2018/
It wasn't known at the time HE WILL KILL AGAIN.
That was purely being put about to scare the local community to try to get Bailey.
About 20 years ago there was a trial in London re a murder in Dublin- I killed her by accident, says doctor who stabbed lover | Independent.ie
he was the main suspect in a murder, someone had said they saw him walking back from the murder
the garda didn't need to do anything, they did think it was him, everyone did at the time, because of the above
exactly the same thing would happen today
What part of that four word sentence is causing you difficulties?
Read the link I provided.
he was the main suspect in a murder, in 1997 and 1998, due to someone making a false report
this is the newspapers the TV spreading what was known at the time
what do you expect
Then why didn't AGS have a clue where it was during the GSOC investigation? It went missing as far as they were concerned.
i think the irish law only covers irish people committing crimes in other countries
so even if he was irish he would have had to have been french
Spreading fear yes.
Snippets from the DPP report.
On 24 December 1998 the Irish Independent under the headline “Sophie’s Murderer Will Kill Again”, published a report stating that “the savage killer of French woman Sophie Toscan Du Plantier will murder again unless West Cork locals help Gardaí bring him to justice, her distraught family warned yesterday (23 December 1998)”.
AGS put it about to the media that Bailey was the killer.
How would you describe this reaction from a grown man?
On the 20 February 1997 Bill Fuller, his partner and child had gone to the causeway at Kealfadda Bridge in order to pursue his own investigation of the murder. He was with his wife and child. He saw a man whom he thought to be Bailey and this caused them to run away in blind panic believing the man had seen them. They ran a considerable distance until they reached Toormore Beach where they ran along a lane way which led out onto the roadway to Goleen. Screaming and roaring they ran in front of the first car to approach them.
https://syndicatedanarchy.wordpress.com/2014/09/30/30/
No, I don't think Daniel did it...I just said he would be top of my suspect list as he, clearly, would have benefitted most from Sophie's demise.
However, if Daniel was involved he certainly would not have done the deed himself. He would have arranged for it to be done. (He certainly had the resources) and, of course, he would have stayed in France to alibi himself.
With regard to the contention that a "hitman" would not use that method to kill......its not classic "day of the jackal " And it didn't have to be a professional asassin......it could be someone who Daniel called in for favour. But it also hade the effect of not looking like a planned asassination. If Sophie had been killed by a rifle shot or a close up shot to the back of the head, I think the possibly of a "hit" may have been given more consideration. And if Gardai has suspected a "hit" then Daniel would have been well up in the suspects list.
So, I take your point, but its also possible that the killer was instructed to ensure it didn't look like one.
Daniels unwillingness to come to Ireland may also be suggestive of minimising the risk of arrest and interrogation.
In summary, you're quite right....its a long shot. But whoever did this had some motive, and Danielwas obviously the one with most to gain
It didn't "go missing", it was destroyed by the Forensic Lab because it was of no use and taking up too much space.
spreading fear? I mean what
They made it known in the locality that it was only matter of time before he battered someone else to death, the inference being people may have been persuaded to say things that weren't actually a 100% true because of fear.
The gate went missing from the knowledge of AGS, who were unable to account for its whereabouts during the GSOC investigation. It directly reflects poorly on AGS in terms of the investigation.
And it wasn't the only piece of evidence AGS can no longer account for.
It's been common knowledge for quite some time.....
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/blood-stained-gate-in-sophie-murder-inquiry-was-not-lost-gardai-reveal/40647261.html
Have you citation for that?
In the GSOC investigation it is very much listed of one of the 22 exhibits that went missing.
what tampering evidence
this hash witness was totally unreliable, nothing he said was to be believed, but its not uncommon to try and coax info out of someone
They certainly went overboard in their attempts to get bailey, this is the flaw, I don't think you could poke holes in the actual investigation itself
The libel case that he won was specifically in relation to claims about conduct towards Ms Limbrick, which is specifically the point I challenged you on. Not sure what point you think you are making. You still have exactly zero evidence that overturns that verdict.
From what I understand being British is what saved him.
The law has to be reciprocated.
If Baily was alleged to have killed an Irish citizen in Paris, no law existed to extradite him here either, because he was British and not French.
French authorities previously sought the surrender of Mr Bailey in 2010. The High Court ordered his extradition but this ruling was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2012, which held that section 44 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 prohibited surrender because the alleged offence was committed outside French territory and Irish law did not allow prosecution for the same offence when committed outside its territory by a non-Irish citizen. Mr Bailey is a British citizen.
This was reaffirmed by the High Court in 2020.
The High Court has ruled that Ian Bailey cannot be extradited to France to serve a 25-year prison sentence imposed on him by a French court for the murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier in West Cork 24 years ago.
Mr Justice Paul Burns delivered his judgement on Monday rejecting the State’s application for the extradition of Mr Bailey, ruling that his surrender remains precluded under Section 44 of the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003.
The judge also found that surrender of the Englishman was prevented because of an “accrued or vested right” on the part of Mr Bailey “to the benefit of the previous judicial determinations refusing such surrender”.
I listened to that interview yesterday, Mick is a good journalist but he's far from up to speed on Sophie Tuscon murder investigation.
The gate did not "go missing" it was deemed to be of no evidential value to the investigation.
It was offered back to the rightful owners who didn't want it back and thus was destroyed by the National Forensic Lab in Dublin who had been storing it for the previous 6 years. This is common knowledge to anyone with an interest in the case and shows a shocking lack of knowledge about the case from Mick Clifford.
It would be pretty obvious it was a contracted hit if it was carried out that way wouldn't it?
That would point a big arrow directly back to Daniel.
Plus, you're assuming hitmen don't make mistakes, don't get nervous, don't have guns jam, don't slip or get surprised or startled. Jails and crime annals of failed hits says otherwise.
That's not to say I'm persuaded Daniel \ hitman was involved, just I don't find this disproves it.
The libel case where he lost 6/8 claims and (notwithstanding I'm presuming a cap on damages to circuit court levels) got relatively modest total award of £8,000 against two newspapers. Judge found 20 years ago:-
Mr Ian Bailey is a violent man and one who sought the limelight and enjoyed notoriety, according to Judge Patrick Moran. Judge Moran found that the articles, which had said that Mr Bailey was the chief suspect for the murder of Ms Sophie Toscan du Plantier in December 1996, were justified.He found in favour of Mr Bailey in relation to one allegation contained in articles published by two newspapers who claimed he had been violent towards his former wife. Judge Moran found that no evidence was brought to support this contention in articles in the Sun and the Irish Mirror, and he awarded Mr Bailey damages of €4,000 against each of them. He also said that where there were inconsistencies between Mr Bailey's version of events and that of other witnesses, "on the balance of probabilities", he accepted the version put forward by other witnesses.'
No evidence brought would be consistent with Ms Limbrick not speaking to media or getting involved at that time with someone who had not been part of her life since 1983. Her son also murdered her grandmother 6 months or so before libel trial. Likewise friends and neighbours from Gloucestershire in the 1980s may not have wanted to get involved in events in Ireland. Bailey absolutely battered Jules Thomas and would have gone to prison for that save Thomas asked District Court judge to not jail him. As libel trial judge noted:-
' "I deal with a lot of family law in this court. One rarely comes across instances of beatings. In this case we have three. Violence once would be unusual. Violence twice would be very unusual. Three times is exceptional. The District Court gave a six-months suspended sentence, because his partner said she forgave him. Otherwise, the district justice would have had no hesitation in imposing a custodial sentence.'
"I certainly would have no hesitation in describing Mr Bailey as a violent man.
they certainly did grill him and Jules
I think you have been watching too much NCIS
They did a load of leg work on this case
You really think it’s plausible that a foreign man as distinctive looking as Daniel Toscan Du Plantier was able to come into a small rural area like Schull and, unseen, sneak up to Sophie’s house, batter her to death and leave the area again without anyone knowing he was ever there?
Even the hitman-hired-by-Daniel hypothesis doesn’t hold water. A hitman wouldn’t kill the way Sophie’s murderer did. He’d take a shot from a distance or find some other method that didn’t involve him getting his hands dirty.
No?
What about tampering with evidence?
Spreading fear in the locality?
Bribing a "witness" with hash?
conducting a "flawed and prejudiced investigation"?
