Old thread seems to be permanently locked. It will be interesting if anything can come of this at last.
Threadbanned Posters:
What about this report in the Mirror?
The pair were hiding out in the isolated rural area after receiving death threats from a French criminal gang. It is understood that Sophie had met the men while she was in Ireland and Gardai are investigating whether she was targeted because of her friendship with them.
I also saw that the guards speculated at one point that the murder was a botched kidnapping.
edit: also, … Sophie was a filmmaker. Not the journalistic kind but if someone heard the word ‘filmmaker’ they might think otherwise. Someone who mightn’t be happy with that. After all 1996 was the same year Veronica Guerin was murdered while writing a book about organised crime
I think it was the West Cork podcast that I heard he was known to walk the roads late at night.
I agree re a type. In most developed countries police forces employ experts to develop a potential profile of the killer in cases like this. I'm not sure it was done in this case though.
The French magistrates or police did hire a criminal psychologist though for the Du Plantier case. However he profiled Bailey, rather than profiling an unknown murderer which would have been better. He had some interesting takes on Bailey though. I will post a link if I can find it.
Theres as much real evidence for all the things Ive listed as there is for Bailey thats the point... when you discount the speculation, the hearsay, the projection, the indirect and the weak circumstantial evidence. Little evidence.
None of the things you have listed for Bailey are positive proof or real evidence of involvement in murder. It is all indirect.
There are murders where there are no suspects. None. Think about that.
There is no name. Just a 'type'.
Person or persons unknown.
And yes there are reports of other strange characters or occurrences, they are all mentioned on the thread. None of them are 'solid'. They are more 'leads' than evidence. Sometimes people get away with murder, without even arousing suspicion.
That should give you pause before latching onto Bailey because he is the 'only' suspect when that is based on indirect evidence only, especially considering the unsafe Garda investigation and focus on Bailey which indicates other leads not followed up.
Oddballs are exactly the sort likely to end up in miscarriages of justice.
A hitman using a rock is an interesting take, maybe it was James Bond. I bet he had an English accent though
If my auntie had balls...
Could ask the same question if they don't find any of Bailey's DNA at the scene.
I probably shouldn't but I'm going to bite on some of these.
The gardai interviewed the German musician and discounted him I believe. Apart from him playing in the same pub she attended, can you find any other evidence of them knowing each other or anything linking him to her murder. I know you will probably mention he told someone he did something bad but theres little evidence for that. Was he the sort of man who.could easily overpower someone, known for violence etc?
Re the murderer not living in or knowing the area, any evidence of strangers following Du Plantier, asking directions to her house on the day in question, staying in a local b&b or acting suspiciously?
Which married man are you referring to? Name please.
Ah why am I bothering, most of what you are saying is hearsay. No real suspects, no one came forward in any credible way to seriously incriminate anyone else, but Bailey.
Someone actually said on here the day Bailey died that the locals all thought he was innocent. What an absolute lie that was, most of them shunned him and he had few if any friends left.
A complete oddball, very much a psychopath, the beating up of Thomas, denial of medical care and beating her up again when she came home from hospital was proof of that. Among other things.
There is no way he drove. Anyone who has seen the photographs of the crime scene would know this.
There was a huge amount of blood and there is absolutely no way that blood wouldn't have been found in Bailey's car.
She was in the other bed though.
It depends. And you dont have to be a conspiracy theorist to ask questions such as.
What specific items - could Bailey (or others) have touched the item unrelated to the murder eg visiting Alfie.
How sensitive are the tests - did they pickup Bailey alone or many other profiles.
What was the chain of evidence like - there are reports that Sophies boot that was sent for testing was not sealed in the bag. Touch transfer DNA can be spread and in 1996 they would have been concerned with blood, hair, fibres, fingerprints etc
“is expected to focus on preserved exhibits such as the victim’s nightclothes and a bloodied rock and concrete block found at the scene”
You are wrong on virtually every point in this post. For a start I have gone through multiple suspects on this thread and the other on their motives, alibis and so on.
If you'd bothered to read my posts, I have consistently said the hitman with a rock theory hired by Daniel or his mistress is just a laughably bad explanation for this murder, although I doubt its one you have entertained at any stage!
The other theories are not much better, eg arguments over rights of way and so on.
Her ex boyfriend had a proveable alibi.
Who does that leave? The German musician?
She had her bed raised and slept with the curtains open so as to see the lighthouse in the distance. There's always the possibility that she spotted something in the fields and went out to investigate.
What are they testing?
All those instances have been explained in the other thread by another poster. Sorry you'll have to post a link to the story about her always being on the phone to Bailey.
Again saying Bailey had no clue who she was at the time of the murder is complete nonsense if he sat in on a conversation about her. That and the fact Alfie said he was 90% sure he introduced them.
Leo Bolger, how was he to know what Bailey and others told the gaurds.
And the Frenchie remembering years later? I'm sure he told multiple people before then about it.
Let’s not forget they’re doing fresh DNA tests using advanced technology
if the tests prove Bailey was at the scene, will that finally put it to bed or will there still be some conspiracy theorists who won’t accept it?
So you keep telling us. You also are happy to ignore the fact that there is no evidence pointing towards Bailey, there is no actual motive, there is not even anything to indicate he knew her and that she was there at the time. You are also conveniently ignoring the fact that two Directors for Public Prosecutions who cases every day were comfortably able to say that there was nothing here to incriminate Bailey. Lastly, you're unwilling to consider any other possibility - that someone else might have done it. You know it was Ian just because!
In post #3834 above, I'm discussed various motivations for Bailey to go there at that hour on that night. I did not exclusively focus on the Garda version or yours but both were in scope of my answer. One of the main motives advanced for Bailey to go up there was for a fling. Do you think it is a credible motive, why not?
You have absolutely no clue what happened on that night either. It is not positive proof of anything. If that's your standard, we can fill the gap a million different ways.
No I don't accept the murderer had to be living in the area, the murder didn't require deep knowledge of the area, the house is not that hard to find by people used to finding places. The use of the cavity block is suggestive of someone very familiar with the property, but it could also be down to someone using the pump house as a vantage point to observe, and noticing that it was loose.
Any motive advanced for Bailey is highly implausible, and some of the scenarios simply not credible. There's no real motive that 'points' to Bailey, discernible by others before the fact. It is all just rationalisation. There's no real motives, it's all speculation based on assumptions or generalisations, whether it is Bailey or not
That Daniel or whoever would want Sophie out of the way to avoid a messy divorce. Wives are murdered for such reasons, because they are in the way. It is a motive for murder with far more examples than the scenario advanced for Bailey.
That Alfie was either obsessed with her, or annoyed by her as a meddlesome neighbour. Neighbours have arguments over seemingly trivial things like this, parking spaces even, and it can lead to violence and even murder.
That Karl Heinz Wolney, say, was obsessed with her.
That an unknown peeping tom was obsessed with her.
That she was a witness to serious criminality e.g. drug smuggling and was threatened \ murdered into silence.
That she was involved with a married man and killed either by a vengeful wife or a husband with much to lose.
My view is it was well within the abilities of the young, fit but slightly eccentric (local weirdo) Ian Bailey to take a wander in the middle of the night.
If Joe O'Reilly had left his mobile back in Broadstone garage, he may have gotten away with it. All they had then was some CCTV of his car, but without a number plate. I don't think that's enough.
Elaine O'Hara's case wasn't even a murder investigation. If Graham O"Dwyer had disposed of the mobiles properly, they probably wouldn't have charged him either but probably suspected him.
I always wonder who the anonymous source was though.
How could he have used a bike? Sure he lived 400km away and it would have taken a couple of days to get there (or so we are led to believe!)
Yes the advent of mobile phone technology is what got both of them in the end. Without that and the ability to track them using mobile phone masts, both cases could have gone either way.
Joe O'Reilly was given an alibi by a friend which was disproved by the mobile phone mast data. Entirely possible he could have escaped otherwise.
As regards a conviction where there was no actual forensic evidence linking someone to a murder, and guilt was determined mostly by circumstantial evidence, the Mr Moonlight case is one. The DPP took a risk on that one but managed to secure a conviction.
Please don't say keep up
It makes you look bad
See how easy it is to propagate nonsense? "Multiple witnesses" say Bailey knew Sophie - case closed so!
Sophie's friend in France who 'forgot' that Bailey was always on the phone to her but helpfully remembered it years later - bullshit. Wasn't there another Frenchie or two as well who all 'forgot' for years?
Leo Bolger - also forgot for years and helpfully remembered then. Bullshit.
Alfie - can't even remember if he introduced them or not. LOL.
We've been lucky on Boards to have had the insight of a poster who talked extensively to Bailey a few months before the murder at Alfie's house, where the subject of Alfie's 'pain in the arse' French neighbour (briefly) arose and who is quite adamant that Bailey seemed to know sweet feck all about her or have any interest re her.
Someone posted earlier that Bailey was known for walking the roads late at night with his walking stick. Can they post a source for this?
As the local nutjob and weirdo I don't see why he wasn't capable of this.
You keep saying he turned up for a fling.
You appear to be arguing with the garda version of events, not mine.
Secondly you have absolutely no clue what happened on the night.
Thirdly there is no motive that points to anyone else. Arguments over the opening or closing of a gate are not a credible motive, nor is the motive you suggested where the mistress bumps off Sophie for some gain using a hitman with a rock and block.
Do you at least accept the murderer was living in the area with a good knowledge of the area?
If Bailey could have used a bike so could anyone! This widens the radius of possible suspects.
Dont fancy Baileys chances trying to cycle after all that booze in that black coat.
Rosie has cracked it, he was on a bike. Keep up.
It is a long enough walk if you are supposed to be seized by a mad violent drunken impulse. Its a long walk for 3am in the middle of a December night.
The car Bailey has access to was checked and no evidence of forensics linked to the crime. No report of deep cleaning happening. No report from anyone in the house hearing the car move or noticing it was gone.
The only report of a car is at 730am and iirc was not the same model as Baileys.
Just because Bailey didnt go there with malign intent doesnt mean others didnt. So how am I arguing against the facts? Your claim is illogical.
And theres a world of difference between somebody turning up at 4am versus 8am or 9am. You well know 4am is a bizarre time to turn up unannounced looking for a fling with someone who hardly knows you if at all.
That's a fair aul walk to and from, then carry out a brutal murder. Be up again at 10am after a heavy session and go about the day he was meant to have. I suppose he could have been running on Adrenaline.
I just started listening to the West Cork podcasts and one of the Gardai at the scene mentioned Bailey was acting stranger than when he had previously turned up a few months before as a Journalist to look into another death in the area (case of suicide). That time he was more relaxed and asked more questions. Not sure if I believe any of the Gardai on this case though, but an observation all the same.
![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)
