Old thread seems to be permanently locked. It will be interesting if anything can come of this at last.
Threadbanned Posters:
What'll the mob here to do with one ?
New alternative suspect based on Marie Farrell assisted photofit
If you read my posts yad know it was an opinion
I believe there are probably reports in reputable newspapers
Can't recall right now and I'm not going looking
Well thanks at least on confirming that it’s your own opinion and not based on fact that Gardai are making strides in this case.
There are no reports in any reputable newspaper that I have read around significant new evidence in this case - yes Gardai are continuing their investigation- that’s not news- but no one outside the Gardai actually know what if any new evidence they’ve uncovered- they may well have solved this case but that’s doubtful at this point.
Let's hope there is more to go on than just Marie Farrell with this angle.
It is understood the individual had connections to Sophie’s former late husband Daniel... Sheridan said he knows who the man is and the name was given to the gardai by another person in an affidavit. He has called on the gardai to track down the man and get his DNA to see if he was the killer. He was identified after a photo-fit was drawn up in co-operation with witness Marie Farrell, who made a statement to gardai saying she saw the man following Sophie in Schull, Co Cork, on December 23, 1996.
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/director-jim-sheridan-focus-new-31989279
Mostly correct , although you're putting a slant on what i'm posting
1. I believe it's "likely" the gardai are focussed on Bailey and strengthening the case based on media reports
2. I don't have any evidence except media reports
3. It's not a "fact" that I am correct on point 1
4. I'm careful with the use of the word "fact".
Facts are thin on the ground in this thread we're mostly working off opinions and beliefs and likelihoods.
Who's this new suspect ?
Is it the bantry garda , the guy who died by suicide or someone else ?
Suppose he has to fire up something "new"
"Sheridan stands by his assertion that prime suspect, the British freelance journalist Ian Bailey, who died of a heart attack in January of this year, was not guilty of the crime.
“For 27 years, this man was blamed for the murder with no actual evidence. The trial in France was a trial of a file from the Irish police that our director of public prosecutions said shouldn’t even allow him to be charged,” he said.
“I’ve done a lot of in-depth on it which you can’t get to do anymore in the newspapers because of the financial structure of the newspaper world now. Documentaries have replaced that in-depth reporting. I just wanted to get justice for Sophie and to a certain extent Iain Bailey. I don’t think he did it.”
Sheridan confirmed recent reports in the Irish press that he is going to bring a new suspect into the frame in the film, the emergence of which led to a reopening of the cold case by the Irish police in 2022.
The director acknowledged that Bailey’s death made it easier to proceed with the project, because of the complex nature of his private and public persona, linked to accusations of domestic violence.
“It makes it much easier because he was such a complicated character. It was hard for people to empathize with him, especially when the images of him with the domestic violence were forefront in your mind,” said the director."
Reporter seems to imply that the emergence this new suspect was the reason for reopening the cold case, which I doubt somehow.
I’ve no doubt he was telling the truth - doesn’t mean he was correct. The very fact he’s only 80% sure is a clear indication he’s leaving the door open for reasonable doubt- as a result that testimony is as useful as a glass hammer in supporting a case of murder against Bailey.
The DPP believed Graham. I’ll go with that.
There is no one else the gardai are looking at because in 27 years no other credible suspect has been found. There may be a completely unknown suspect out there, but unless some new evidence comes to light, its not an avenue they will pursue.
The outcome of this cold case will either be to exhonerate Bailey or confirm him as still the most likely suspect.
Sophies family rightly or wrongly think Bailey is the perpetrator and with his death are satisfied to draw a line under it.
So Sophie's neighbour who knew both states he was 80-90% sure he introduced Bailey and Sophie, and a judge ruled in a libel trial that he was likely telling the truth, but an internet randomer 20 years later who knew no-one related to this case thinks they never met? You couldn't make it up!
If there was an award for worst post on this thread this would be it, albeit with stiff competition.
When was this forensic search of Baileys house and car for "specs of blood and fibre" done as a matter of interest?
You’ve been posting for the last few pages as it Gardai have made major strides in this case since Bailey has died without one shred of evidence- it’s becoming incredibly annoying now and it’s completely derailing the thread with fiction.
I don’t believe Bailey met Sophie- he’s denied it from the start which would have been a dangerous thing to do had he met her, considering it was a small enough place- someone would have seen.
It matters in the sense that he denied meeting her- had there been a confirmed sighting of both of them together, it would have undermined his credibility on this matter.however no confirmation has ever been truely determined on this matter.
In terms of the likelihood of him murdering her had he known her a little or a lot, it’s probably a rarer occurrence of someone murdering a person they hardly knew -I posted an example a number of pages back of such a serial killer in the US- but it’s much more common for someone to be murdered by someone they know reasonably well.
Gards supplied drugs & money to stooges to extract a confession out of Bailey
Never been proven, all that came from Martin Graham.
In the picture of the bag of drugs it's never been proven that it was actually drugs.
In the West Cork podcast the producets are very careful to say it's a picture of Graham holding up a bag which contains "what looks to be a block of hash".
They are not willing to say it was hash, it's never been proven it was hash.
When Graham decided to go public with it all for the Sunday World the recording device he had inexplicably failed and there was no story.
And it was Graham who approached the Gardai first about Bailey, not the other way around.
Do you mean the searches of Bailey's flat and electronic devices?
As I've said before, it is nowhere near opening the door at 3am level of familiarity.
I don't see how it matters if IB met Sophie T du P;
Even if they had met briefly at a previous time, does that mean they "knew each other"??
There are neighbours in this very street to whom I've been introduced, but I've never had a conversation with them and wouldn't even be sure of recognising them. [True fact, I swear]
Does that make me somehow more likely to have murdered them (just supposing...) than a person who knew them better? I really don't think so.
Subject to you stating that you are in a fact a criminal lawyer
I will hazard a guess that these statements are in fact possibly an exception to the heresay rule as miss du plantier is dead
Happy to be corrected by any criminal lawyers posting here but not by Google
The recent searches
Posters are stating as fact that the searches yielded nothing
Is this the case as I haven't seen it
Which searches are you asking about?
Had it been shown that the searches have yielded nothing
This seems to be another creeping "fact"
that certain posters are misusing here
All roads lead to Bailey...??
Review team strengthening the case against Bailey...?
Complete and utter tosh!
They didn't have a scrap of evidence against him 30yrs ago, and neither have they today.
Spare me the 'Oh yeah, I remember now' brigade - It's embarrassing.
There is absolutely nothing placing Bailey at the crime scene - Nothing! There was no specks of blood or fibres found at Bailey's residence or car he had access to - Nothing!
But what we do know as factual is this:
Pages were torn out of the jobs book
The Gards spead the word among the villagers that Bailey was the murderer, and he would kill again.
This is an iron clad case of gross negligence on the part of the Gards - It stinks to high heaven of corruption.
If people cannot see that - I feel sorry for them.
The facts are not pointing towards Ian Bailey... Quite the opposite.
Yeah we’ve discussed these so called “witness” statements ad nauseam on this thread - aside from the “90% sure recollection” of an introduction to Sophie, all of the others are simple hearsay and as you pointed out, all many years later - anyone continuing to believe that these pieces of information could be possibly classed as “evidence” no less compelling and convincing evidence, really needs to stay away from jury duty if ever called.
I believe when this was pointed out to Mark McCarthy, he more or less admitted he was wrong, confused Sophie with the actress in the RTE reconstruction or some-such rubbish. He also made a statement that he witnessed scratches on Bailey's arms at the Christmas swim. He was a friend of Jules Thomas' daughter and no friend of Ian Bailey!
All of them are either not sure or only mentioned it years later or it seems dubious they would have a basis to recall a trivial thing.... sometimes all three!
I dont find them credible accordingly.
Where's the evidence all 6 are codswallop
Anything to support a statement like that
Indeed - there’s no credible evidence anywhere that Bailey met Sophie - what’s being posted now here in the thread around new evidence and 1/2 dozen witnesses of Bailey meeting Sophie is complete and utter codswallop
I was skeptical about such memories being reported years later and now more so when it contradicts her diary account.
Also, according to her diary, over the 1st weekend in September 1995 which I believe is when the festival was held Sophie visited Blarney on the Saturday and returned to France on the Sunday.
![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)
