Old thread seems to be permanently locked. It will be interesting if anything can come of this at last.
Threadbanned Posters:
It is.
If someone asked me what I did on a Sunday night 6 weeks ago, I'd struggle. Ask me what I did on a Sunday night 8 days ago, I'd have a much better idea, especially if I had evidence such as a Sunday newspaper article to back it up.
Why would anyone feel the need to falsify an alibi? You can understand why it raises suspicions.
He must have done it so- couldn’t be any more crystal clear than that- guilty as charged - hang em high
Ah come on. He gave his first alibi 8 days after the murder which was 2 days after the article he was supposedly working on was published. He faxed in the article so the proof would have been on the fax machine.
He wasn't put on the spot as in an interview, it was a questionaire. He had plenty of time to consider and check what he was doing. Pretty important when there has been a murder near by.
8 days after the murder, he can't remember, but 6 weeks later he remembers when put on the spot, and only after his original alibi fell apart. Its almost cartoonish.
Presumably?
There was no forensics there that day
Are you disagreeing or otherwise. ? It can be hard to know with the cryptic responses
Ok. Yes the routine thing would be critical you'd imagine. What time she rose, did she put down a fire most mornings, etc. Its possible she was getting fire wood when attacked, or something like that. We may never know. Establishing a routine seems like detective work 101.
And don't forget, they called the gardai while their car was supposedly loaded up with incriminating evidence! Most people have discounted them as suspects, including the gardai. The gardai discounted most of the suspects for one reason or another, provable alibis, etc.
Most people wouldn't be quite familiar with the details of the case so no point using them as a reference.
As for Bailey being the only one remaining after others discounted, I don't nbelieve that to be true - unless the reasons for discounting the others weren't all above board!
They focused on Bailey because of a number of incriminating statements, actions and suspicious behaviour before, during and soon after the murder which included giving a false alibi in a questionaire barely a week after the murder, before suddenly remembering the truth 6 weeks later when he heard his original alibi was no longer believed. Not suspicious at all!
Bailey didn't give a false alibi - he changed his alibi. Again the DPP was satisfied with this. as I've previously posted, I can barely recall the details of what I was doing a few days ago never mind weeks ago.
He also admitted to having a feeling the night before to his partner and said this was true in a court case years later before later denying he ever said such a thing. And having a bonfire a couple days after a murder in the locality with clothes and shoes burned. If that doesn't raise suspicion, I don't know what does.
A feeling means nothing but again, you're incorrect in what he denied - he denied that suggestion put forward (by AGS?) that he had a prophecy.
The suggeston that his clothes and shoes being burnt in the fire following the murder doesn't stack up when AGS took his coat (AGS made this claim in the DPP report). garda Kevin Kelleher also saw Bailey in this coat a few days later. [I think he also had it on him when he went to/from the swim]
They are the files that AGS passed to the French Authorities. There is very little about other suspects but that is to be expected as the prosecution was against Ian Bailey. Had he been tried in Ireland he would have been entitled to see everything that the police held. However that did not apply in France.
And having a bonfire a couple days after a murder in the locality with clothes and shoes burned. If that doesn't raise suspicion, I don't know what does.
Plus there was also ambiguity about the timing of the bonfire.
Bailey and Thomas said it could not have happened any later than early December.
But neighbour Delia Jackson said she saw the bonfire when she was home from England at Christmas time.
@bjsc The files you got from Bailey, are these the files the Gardaí passed to the French investigators?
Was all the evidence just about Bailey, or was there any evidence around other suspects?
Unfortunately that is one of the questions that absolutely should have been asked but appears not to have been. Although it may be somewhere in the information held by AGS that has never been disclosed.
You are assuming they both had to be in on it. One can create a scenario for Alfie being the murderer as plausible as the one the Guards have outlined for Bailey. The point is not to state Alfie did it, but to show how easy it is to make a case against someone based on the same flimsy standard the Guards used against Bailey.
You are stating as a fact reasons as to why the Gardai discounted certain suspects, when you do not know - and the log of same has been tampered with.
What was the provable alibi of Karl Heinz Wolney?
Several of the "suspicious" items you have listed came to light after the Gardai seem to have identified Bailey as a suspect and focused on him. So they can be discounted as reasons for him being focused on, can't they?
You will need a thick skin on here, just as an fyi. I would just ignore anyone who questions your authenticity.
Good interview on the Indo podcast btw, summed the whole thing up nicely, and also pointed out some of the flaws in the original investigation such as establishing Sophie's routine. One question on that, have you any idea what time Sophie generally rose in the morning? Had she an alarm clock, was she an early riser in general?
You think both Alfie and Shirley went to the dump before the forensics arrived?
Edited
All I have ever tried to do is to bring some clarity to the debate and to point out where assertions are backed by facts and where they are not. When I have been asked to provide evidence I have, to the best of my ability, done so. I realise that some people may not like what I have to say but I refuse to indulge in speculation. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and whether I agree or disagree I have never disrespected one of you. So what gives certain people the right to disrespect me.
Didn't Alfie and Shirley proceed to the dump with bags on the morning of the murder ?
If so there was no forensic examination as they hadn't arrived by then
It hardly seems more likely there would be something incriminating in the bags compared to the likelihood of evidence simply being hidden or burnt in open fire etc.
Weren't the bags simply "hiding in plain sight" in view of gardai ?
The posts have not moved. I previously asked whether the bags had been checked in any detail (including by forensic experts) or whether they were given a cursory glance. Feel free to scroll back to find those posts!
mod
discuss the topic, not other posters.
Well spotted.
Why do you persist in trolling bjsc?
The previous suggestions were that the gardai may not have looked at the bags forensically and that surely the car shouldn't have been let head off without being checked. Do you have evidence that the bags were checked forensically or were given just a quick glance if even?
I have no evidence that the poster bjsc is who they claim to be.
If that's trolling then report me and I'll discuss it with a mod.
So the goalposts are now moving when it comes to the rubbish.
We now want to know were they checked forensically.
The word facts are in inverted commas because some posters here claimed that Shirley was allowed to drive through the cordon unaccosted to the dump with a boot full of potential evidence.
That was claimed as a "fact" by some as part of their narrative that Alfie and Shirley had more circumstantial evidence against them than Bailey.
But since you have posted information that contradicts this "fact" continuation of the use of that narrative has disappeared from these pages.
You are allegedly Bridget Chappuis.
I remain sceptical and don't apologize for reminding sceptical.
No they didn’t - they stated that there were many people whom were worthy of further investigation other than Bailey but hadn’t been examined in the same detail as Bailey for whatever reason
Posters have stated there's more pointing at others than bailey
I'm not going back looking for it
There's lot of bits of evidence disputed or otherwise pointing to Bailey
There is nothing other than innuendo and presumption pointing towards Bailey, all of which have been dismissed from a legal perspective.
I'm seeing practically nothing evidentially pointing at another suspect.
Were other suspects looked at in as much detail and with as much conviction than Bailey?
Posters are stating as "fact" that there's more evidence pointing at ANother but are continually omitting to backup their assertions
Who has said there is moe evicence pointing at another? What I think was said was probably that there is nothing on Baliey (despite what you'd like to believe) and there is nothing on anyone else.
That gardai couldn't even protect their own evidence for the case shows how flawed the investigation has been. We don't have an idea who killed STdP but what we do know is that certain members of AGS deliberately tried to alter the record so that it pointed towards Bailey. Why was this? Given the absolute lack of evidence presented to the DPP (repeatedly!) to send Bailey for trial, why were AGS so determined to present him as the murderer. Now, he may have been responsible but nothing AGS presented to the DPP supports that belief!
As for another potential suspect would have come to light, again let me remind you of Joanne Hayes. Stop making naive assumptions here!
Notice how quiet it has gotten here about Alfie and Shirley since the alleged poster called Bridget brought into question the "fact" that Shirley was allowed to drive through the cordon unaccosted to the dump with a boot full of potential evidence.
Oh and look - there are the sacks lying by the side of lane.
Oh and incidentally the facts come from statements by both Shirley and the officer who took the sacks from the car so not sure about the inverted commas.
I'm not an "alleged" poster because I do actually post!!!!!
![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)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/925678a10b2fdb0546d802550390a10f.svg)
