Old thread seems to be permanently locked. It will be interesting if anything can come of this at last.
Threadbanned Posters:
nobody could describe Bailey as someone who kept his cards close to his chest. He never met a microphone he didn't like
There are too many open possibilities and no real evidence.
I agree.
But far more of them open possibilities lead to Bailey than anyone else.
"You're a man of few words."
That was part of the question!
It was all part of the performance.
He talked about things (not himself), let on he knew more than he did. But about himself tried for an air of mystery.
An innocent person, but like that, could easily say it. Most of us know someone like that.
You're breaking up there odessy, what are you saying?
Im saying there are people who talk and talk about events or arts or whatever but about themselves try to cultivate an air of mystery.
Baileys answer there was in keeping with such a persona. Doesnt mean he was involved in the murder. Just thought it was the edgy answer.
If he had just given a bland answer to the question wouldnt have gotten the same attention as the answer he gave.
You can view the remark like that or as if it hints at guilt which really means it is not positive proof of anything. Just reinforcing a view already held.
The search is an interesting development
The gardaí must have had something to be granted the warrant
Do you think it was a cool answer?
In a west Cork bohemian sense.
Hard to know.
They may have just wanted to go through his stuff before it got dumped and made sure they had a warrant just in case.
But I suppose it is somewhat interesting that they still wanted to go through his stuff in the first place.
It seems he was never really out of the frame when it came to suspects.
Did they use a warrant or just get the landlords permission to search through his junk before it was binned?
A court warrant according to this
I would think they would have had to satisfy a judge that there was reason to believe a crime had been committed
Interesting interview with Jim Sheridan.
Says he has another documentary coming.
Says they've a name for the person following Sophie.
Says he thinks she was dead before she was hit with the rock.
Another pathologist thinks she was strangled before being hit with a rock.
Poor woman had an awful ordeal.
The defence wounds on her hands suggest she was being struck with something though, so maybe that was a stick or poker or other implement.
Yea ,yea, I know it's the Independent, but;
https://archive.ph/InXsA
The lack of alcohol in urine suggests morning also.
The fruit and nuts prove nothing though. She might've been nibbling on them whilst on the phone to her husband, padding around the kitchen.
From the interview:
NH: Who do you think killed Sophie?
JS: I do know there is a suspicion that the police might know who was following her. It’s my belief that person lives in France. I didn’t give the name to the police, but somebody else has sworn an affidavit. I hope the police will question him. I’ll feature the suspect in the documentary, but we can’t name him.
NH: Have you approached him?
JS: No comment.
Quelle suprise!
Can somebody publish the full article here? I can't read it.
Archive.ph
Provided a false alibi
AFAIK when he was being questioned,he said he went to bed after the pub and never left the house.
Jules was being questioned at the same time and eventually said that Bailey got out of bed.
When this was put to Bailey he admitted he got out of bed to write the article and then typed it up in the studio.
This is definitely suspicious.
He could say Jules' testimony jogged his memory perhaps.
It was 6 weeks prior so having a hazy memory is understandable, but he knew for weeks he was a suspect before being brought in for questioning.
So he would've getting his alibi straight in his head. So this means he blatantly lied about being in bed all night.
There was a point the Netflix documentary where he didn't answer a question
Can't remember what it was but it made me suspect him more
Was the article submitted, or published? Is there a record of it anywhere?
"have sex" is the terminology i would use
That may not have been the motive for bailey
Yes both were very late for Xmas
In summary.
A former forensics investigator from a UK police force thinks there are other suspects.
They become interested in the case after watching documentaries and listening to podcasts.
They got a copy of the Garda file from Ian Bailey and talked to him a number of times.
There suspicious are around the stomach contents which makes them think it was earlier in the morning rather than late at night that Sophie was killed.
It would be great if you could be more specific.
I noticed something similar in a YouTube interview of Bailey.
At 45:40 the interviewer asks him slightly unorthodox questions, and Bailey kind of dodges and stutters and evades the questions cos he doesn't have prepared answers.
The article wasn't due to be published for a week so it seems implausible he got out of bed
Yeah it was published alright. I think he submitted it 5pm on the Monday. This is all confirmed.
There's no doubt he wrote the article but the deadline had been extended 2 or 3 times so it may have been mostly completed and just needed touching up.
You never know.
He might have been lying awake in bed and had a Eureka moment about his article and got up to write it there and then rather than waiting for the next morning.
Writer people are like that.
I find it extraordinary that Gardai are encouraging people to come forward who may have been frightened up to now whilst Bailey was alive
In one incident in recent times, with his illness, he had to be helped across the road by a shop keeper - he was a man in poor health for some time.
I do wonder about this though - much and all as I’ve criticised the initial investigation, and really felt other avenues should have been more thoroughly explored such as the person who killed himself a few months later leaving a very cryptic note around having done something terrible,
this is 2024 now- Gardai have had a long time to reflect on this case -you’d hope they are a better police force than they were in 1997- but it’s obvious they’re still focusing a lot of attention at Bailey and looking for a particular person to come forward and maybe change their statement completely that they previously gave- maybe to the degree that this person would then be implicated in shielding Bailey from justice or assisting in the cover up of a crime.
I don’t see that happening - maybe a statement left behind after their own passing in due time but I don’t see that person coming forward now- that’s of course if such activities took place - I’m doubtful they did, BUT, this is the 2024 version of the Gardai, not the 1997 version - on that basis I’m listening more closely .
https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-41314840.html
There's never any explanation as to why he provided a false alibi
Not here or elsewhere
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e68aa2b0e039b12ade8384a2f42841c6.svg)
