Old thread seems to be permanently locked. It will be interesting if anything can come of this at last.
Threadbanned Posters:
This is well argued; but we have no idea at all who such a person might be.
Did any neighbours, acquaintances, or people from the town admit to visiting that house? Driving on to the property - maybe to turn the car? (simplest explanation, really)
Does anyone have precise coordinates for Hunt's Hill where Ian Bailey and Jules Thomas stopped on their way home on the night of December 22nd?
I don't, this is a screenshot of a map of the area from the Sheridan documentary.
https://imgur.com/zjFRdIy
But as an aside about the location, I remember reading something on Reddit from someone who went there:
I've been to Hunt's Hill, you can't see Sophie's house or Alfie Lyons's from Hunt's Hill unless you have a telescope, its 4 km away. That is in daylight. At nighttime it's impossible. In 1996, Sophie's house did not have a light on the eastern gable. She had a light over her back door, but this faces west and is not visible.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MurderAtTheCottage/comments/xf1kc4/bailey_didnt_do_it/
Just in relation to the suggestion that Bailey had a prophecy, seemingly it was another invention by AGS...
However, to asnwer your question about the location, according to the following map, it would be here
_________________________________________________________________________
4.44 km or 2.75 miles as the crow flies.
Invention by AGS you say?
But, in a bizarre reference, Mr Bailey admitted stopping on Hunt's Hill - overlooking the valley in which Ms du Plantier's house stood - on the evening before the tragedy and feeling that something was going to happen.
Direct from Ian Baileys mouth.
Regardless it's difficult to know whether Jules is honest anyhow
If bailey is guilty it hasn't been established whether jules knows
Finbarr and John Hellen, and Leo Bolger
It's a public laneway as far as the gate, after the gate it's aright-of-way for the 3 properties, Sophie, Alfie and Richardsons.
It was not Sophie's gate, she had a right to use the gate and the lane the same as anyone from the other 2 properties.
The lane is marked in yellow here;
How it was in 1997, Alfie's shed and field now belongs to Pierre-Louise.
So anyone coming through the common gate should not concern Sophie. However if they came through the gate into her lawn or the gate at the back of her house she would have a right to confront them.
Nope, I didn't say it - Jules did (under oath) in 2014
She knows he's not guilty.
This was linked earlier, maybe it was a bit long for you, but give it a go.
Edit; forgot link
Ok, well its not an invention of the AGS. It is and always was an invention of Bailey.
We don't know what she knows if Bailey is guilty
We have her spoken words to go on
As I said, Bailey didn't have a "prophecy" or a premonition (as per the Garda file) - he had a "feeling" and to quote him:
From Philip Boucher-Hayes' interview with Ian Bailey in 2016 on RTE Radio 1:
Boucher-Hayes: "On the night of the murder, after leaving the pub, you went to a place called Hunt's Hill and while looking at Sophie Toscan du Plantier's house, you expressed a sense of foreboding. Did that happen?"
Bailey: "No it didn't. We went home over Hunt's Hill where we stopped momentarily to have a look at the lights over the bay..."
Boucher-Hayes: "And the sense of foreboding?"
Bailey: "No. I don't know where that came from."
Boucher-Hayes: "But you didn't have any sense of anything ominous about to happen? You didn't say anything to your partner [Jules] about it?"
Bailey: "No. I didn't."
I think this is that interview: https://soundcloud.com/rte-radio-1/ian-baily-interview
...and this interview...
Ian was interviewed on RTE Radio's Drivetime on 8 Aug 2016:
Interviewer: On the night of the murder, you and Jules were driving home from the pub and you stopped the car at a place called Hunt's Hill. Now the arrest warrant says, and I'm quoting, At that moment Ian showed her the house where Sophie lived and said that he had a premonition that something bad would occur there. Did you-?
Bailey: No No, I mean, that's a total fiction. That's a completely made up statement. We did stop on the way back, briefly. The bit about the premonition and the pointing out of the house is a total and absolute fiction.
Amazing how posters can be so sure of things without proof
Guesswork is all we have to decide what Jules does or doesn't know
Same with Bailey
Posters say assuredly he had less motive than Alfie or the husband when we simply don't know whether bailey had motive to visit Sophie or not
It's not even clear whether bailey knew Sophie
You made this point recently on the thread and it was explained to you there is no such known motive based on the information available. None. Thats not guesswork.
And what was asserted was Bailey had no motive to murder Sophie as of 6pm on the 22nd. No gain from her death. No ill will towards her.
So we can be reasonably sure for the purposes of the discussion in comparison with other suspects.
Now you shift the goalposts to no motive to visit... well no information has been provided of a familiarity sufficient for Bailey to think a 3am call would be welcone. None.
Dragging this up again now without any regard to the recent discussion is just a bad faith argument.
Don't think I need yourself or gusser username etc explaining things to me
You are correct that there is no known motive
That doesn't however imply that Bailey had less motive than Alfie
Are you following so far
Bailey however is the self confessed prime suspect and if he did kill her he had motive to travel to her house
Bailey had less motive than Alfie
Jules knows bailey didn't kill her
Neither of the above statements by users are facts
And that's really not very complicated to understand
If.
Talk about putting the cart before the horse.
Which is exactly the point being made.
Neither are facts as thrown about by posters here
Are you disagreeing
Disagree with what?
No idea what you mean by that vague remark.
You are putting the cart before the horse with reverse logic starting from If...
The point being discussed was about grounds to suspect. There is no known information giving Bailey a motive to murder, to gain from it or to have ill will towards Sophie. No known information pointing to a degree of familiarity that a 3am call from Bailey would be welcome.
Therefore we come back to the point there are suspects with more plausible motive and / or oppirtunity than Bailey.
Even if more information emerges, even if Bailey turns out to be the killer that does not invalidate the points being made when discussing 'likely' suspects at this point in time.
Its pretty obvious and I'm sure bjsc and most of the experts would or have agreed, this was a "motiveless" crime. There was no planning gone into it. The weapons were opportunistic ones. Who carries a rock with them to a murder scene?
It was obviously a hot head who lost their temper.
As for Alfie being a suspect, why on earth would he and his wife load up their car with rubbish, head to the dump and then call in the murder, all the time leaving the car in full view of everyone? Only the dumbest murderer in history would do this!
The motive I was referring to anyhow was a motive to go to the house late at night ,not a motive to murder
Posters throw out the sex motive as if that's the only possible explanation for bailey to show up but that's not definite either
Either way Bailey is the prime suspect and may or may not have had motive ,that's unknown
Jules may or may not know he's innocent ,that's also unknown
Neither are proven facts either way
Alfie now seems less likely
Bjsc has said hitman and random stranger are also unlikely
Was someone who knew she was there and possibly also knew she was alone for the first time
Interesting re it being possibly the first time Sophie visited on her own - I had seen this mentioned previously but was unsure as to its provenance. I can't help feeling the reason for her visit is a key to the whole mystery:
It just doesn't add up for me! I can't shake the feeling that if we knew for certain *why* she was there, we'd know who killed her.
Of additional interest is the fact that she seems to hardly ever have been there in reality - another notch against the "xxxxx was obsessed with her" (be that Bailey or assorted randy Gardai) theories.
I believe that a main reason for her visit was to enable a plumber to fix her heating, something that she could easily have organised remotely through her housekeeper, Josephine Hellen.
It's quite possible the correct theory and killer isn't being discussed here on this thread
Her missing diary (or travel notes) would probably show the real reason for her visit.
Her diary isn't missing it was in her handbag together with her notebooks.
Ok, thought there was some missing diary/papers for a few days. Read somewhere that she noted everything when she travelled..Were they fully up to date?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
