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.
I was looking at Reddit, where a site link was posted with some unpleasant but informative pictures of the unfortunate scene and some of poor Sophie’s injuries. It struck me that she was likely dragged unconscious through the briars and possibly battered against the block rather than the block being lifted up to her. She was a very small woman, about the size of my mother’s sister, and it would have taken only moderate strength to overcome her and have her down on the ground.
First, you said it was just some randomer on boards. Now you directly contradict yourself and say it was older sources - so that's an admittance your earlier comment was a bad faith argument. I think that says it all about the credibility of your position here.
It is not a guess. They are timings from the DPP report and the Guardian meanwhile your source is what exactly? Image.IE?
Bailey and Jules were in the pub at 10pm, they were not at home in bed. They were not at home until several hours later. These are well established, long established facts about the case.
You've provided nothing of substance to contradict the timings from the DPP report or Guardian. The timings stand there is something reputable and solid to amend them. Image.IE is not that.
The facts are Bailey and Jules concocted a false alibi for Bailey on the night of the murder, both their original statements matched perfectly.
Then under questioning by Gardai Jules admitted her previous statement that Bailey was next to her in bed for 8-9 hours on the night of the murder was completely false
What original or previous statement are you referring to in relation to Jules before her arrest?
I believe Bailey killed her therefore there no issue with recollection
I also believe Jules doesn't know he killed her
What was the sequence of events re: the change in alibi
Did it start off he never left the bed. Then Jules admitted he did and then Bailey said he left to write the story ?
Have I got that correct so I can try figure out what was really going on there
I'm quoting from the DPP report. I'm quoting from the Guardian. The alternative is Image.ie - but I'm the one scouring the web for different reports? Eh no. Your post is already self discrediting.
You obviously are ignorant of basic details of the case if you think they weren't home in bed at 10pm that night instead of in the pub after 10 that night.
These are long established, well established basic facts about the case. You have provided exactly zero evidence to contradict the timings, zero, but still jump in with a pointless contribution.
Killers are known to revisit crime scenes. It would look suspicious if he didn't go back in his capacity as a local crime journalist. By being there the next morning he may have thought any potential physical evidence could be explained away if he interfered with the scene.
If he was the killer, and with him being a crime journalist, he would surely know how to go about it. Also regarding inconsistencies in his alibi, perhaps he was careless rather than it being an indication he was innocent? He was an alcoholic by all accounts, so perhaps he was forgetful at times or had memory lapses. He was said to have blacked out with drink in the past.
Well exactly, the story just never added up to me. It is a very weak motivation for a cross country trek on a cold winter's night on the off chance of what... after a previous 36 hours of drinking, killing turkeys, cutting down a christmas tree, sleeping on a friend's couch.
Then you add the implausibility of him being supposedly scratched at the scene yet leaving no forensics trace. It is implausibility heaped upon implausibility.
That would be contrary to guards theory who arrested her twice.
Not only did Jules know about it she was involved in it.
It would look a little suspicious if he didn't turn up, but then, it was winter, people get sick, flu or whatever, just take to bed.
Would he know how to contaminate a crime scene or even that he would have access to do so?
Would local crime journalists regularly be given such close access to a murder victim body they could contaminate the scene?
Seems a bit of a stretch.
He was a local journalist, he wrote stories about the murder, that is the most obvious explanation for someone turning up there and this is a bit of a stretch for me.
I have made similar point about the alibi, some of the haziness could be down to drink.
I wonder why people are vehemently defending every piece of circumstantial evidence that points towards known scum.
Can you back up that last statement some way
Not saying you're wrong but based on her recent words I believe she doesn't know
Her providing an alibi I have an explanation for that
Or it could be he was a crime journalist, a crime was committed in his locality and he wanted to sell the story.
Which is what actually happened.
I’ll believe the more recent source. You said yourself you were not sure about 11. Bit of a bad faith argument from yourself.
What was the sequence of events re: the alibi changes
Can someone post the short version
Well given the incompetence of the guards it wouldn't surprise if me he was able to. If he was the killer going there was the calculated risk he had to take. As a crime journalist he would surely have more knowledge about the subject than the average person. It certainly no more of a stretch than the idea a hitman decided to batter her with a rock. It's also strange that no other suspect ever really emerged. I would agree it still doesn't mean he did it of course
He was a crime journalist?
You're waffling now, again.
Are you trying to dispute what I posted is factual?
Aren't you the lad who only found out yesterday that the gate did not go missing but was destroyed by the National Forensic Lab?
You'll believe a random article over Image.iE over the DPP report and The Guardian? I think that destroys any credibility of any of your claims about this case.
You've already admitted when you said it was a claim just by some randomer on boards you knew the statement to be false and that it was based on sources.
I’ll believe the more recent details in a publication. I’d be very very surprised if that journalist made up those times. Jules Thomas is litigious. But either way with everything , you are a contrarian.
They arrested her for murder.
Then they arrested her again 3 years later for S.7 (2) of the Criminal Law Act 1997.
7.—(1) Any person who aids, abets, counsels or procures the commission of an indictable offence shall be liable to be indicted, tried and punished as a principal offender.
(2) Where a person has committed an arrestable offence, any other person who, knowing or believing him or her to be guilty of the offence or of some other arrestable offence, does without reasonable excuse any act with intent to impede his or her apprehension or prosecution shall be guilty of an offence.
Considering they didn’t have a “friendship” no less a relationship, for me, to believe he trekked to her house that night/morning, you have to start believing that we’re in the territory of a Larry Murphy type mindset of attack/murder, where he seeked out victims/strangers from afar- he was a violent man towards women yes- but was he that calculating also?
Again, no evidence to suggest that he had this secret world of past crimes hidden completely from those that knew him well. He was also a drunk and committed assaults on women when drunk- hardly a cunning and calculating master criminal - more a pathetic excuse of a man that could easily be caught had he committed such crimes outside of his home.
The abuse of a partner usually depends on there being some form of controlling relationship in place - he didn’t have anything resembling “relationship” of any kind with Sophie and by now, you’d think that something would have come to light- so I do find it very hard to believe that he went to her house on that night. I’d love to know what Gardai believe was his motivation and what evidence they might have.
id imagine gardai believe there could have been a sexual motive. He made advances towards Jules 18 year old daughter, she gave a statement about this. That is fairly out there behaviour.
He made advances towards Jules 18 year old daughter, she gave a statement about this.
First I heard about this? Have you citation?
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/ian-bailey-made-advance-on-partner-s-daughter-18-trial-hears-1.3909355. But again I’m sure you’ll all claim nothing to see there lol. Also to note this was BEFORE he was accused, I know people love the oh well if you were accused of murder you’d be a bit weird too bolix line.
Yes that was widely documented in subsequent years alright - it points to a potential sexually deviant behaviour alright but again this was towards someone he knew (albeit the young daughter of his partner) - it’s still a jump in thinking to believe he’d seek out a stranger in the middle of the night no less kill her when she spurned his advances.
But is it possible? Absolutely it is 😀
Yeah in this case there’s always going to be jumps there is no hard evidence. For example -French hit man with a rock… oh what a jump.
A publication that currently includes a definitive guide to crystals and 10 healing stones to add to your collection?
Maybe we can dangle a crystal from a piece of string and finally get the definitive answer to the murder.
good plan.
Extremely inappropriate behaviour TBH.
It would be fair to suggest she did not like him very much.
Being a drunken sleaze does not mean he battered someone to death with a rock though.
Her statement did back up this though.
Ms Thomas said Mr Bailey had killed three turkeys for Christmas on Sunday, December 22nd, 1996. She said he had then climbed up a tree to cut off the top to use as a Christmas tree and she noticed scratches on his hands when he came back down.
Of course it doesn’t. Just many of the list of things as to why he was and likely still is a suspect.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/1751471ae521095b085946f3afd00e1d.svg)
