Old thread seems to be permanently locked. It will be interesting if anything can come of this at last.
Threadbanned Posters:
It does not take long to search a car, a minute or two at most.
Do you have any proof or evidence the bags removed from the car were NOT searched?
What exactly do you think was left in the car once the bags were removed? I'm guessing you are going to say murder weapon or some other incriminating evidence?
So do you think gardai looked in car, a gardai sat into and drove the car, and Shirley drove the car to the shop and returned, but no one noticed a murder weapon or similar?
So once the car was searched and bags were removed, what else of relevance do you think remained in the car?
I have been reading this thread and the other threads about this case from the very start.
Never have I seen a CITE for a search of Baily's / Jules car or the Praire and Studio
Thanks for clearing that one up
Do you have any proof they were "clearly searched"
"What exactly do you think was left in the car once the bags were removed? I'm guessing you are going to say murder weapon or some other incriminating weapon?"
I've no idea what was in the car.
"So do you think gardai looked in car, a gardai sat into and drove the car, and Shirley drove the car to the shop and returned, but no one noticed a murder weapon or similar"
See above.
Garda Ombudsman report, includes calls from Marie Farrell
https://www.gardaombudsman.ie/news-room/archive/information-report-from-the-garda-siochana-ombudsman-commission-at-the-completion-of-the-investigation-into-the-complaints-of-ian-bailey-catherine-jules-thomas-and-marie-farrell/?download=file&file=2748
You're right. Whatever was or wasn't in the car it was near the scene of the crime and who knows someone may have thrown incriminating evidence into the bags.. then it was driven over the site of the crime! crazy stuff..
It implied, to me anyway, that the bags had just been taken out of the car. The photo of the rubbish bags could have been taken anytime.
This link details the items taken from the Prairie and Studio... which could only have been found in a search.
https://www.reddit.com/r/MurderAtTheCottage/comments/vraf9q/forensic_tests_on_the_body_exhibits_and_crime/
Sorry about quality. It's a screenshot from my laptop.
I see you edited your post, you should have checked the timing before rushing to post
Thanks re Studio & Praire but still no mention of search of Fiesta or whether it was forensically searched, EG luminol sprayed, swabs taken etc
Where Shirley stoped the car ( white peugeot )
Bags at the side of the road........note man walking in field...
Car Again ( white peugeot ) Man in cap talking to Guarda
Man in cap on the right side of what looks some reporters
I still think even from reading this it was in relation to the murder! Either way she seemed to love the attention or the fact it was taking the attention off someone else
I just think it odd that she didn't mention that Sophie was in the shop at the time she saw this man. Surely that was the whole point.
The man in the cap is, I think, either JP Twomey or Noel Smith. The man walking across the field is probably Leo Bolger on his way to feed his horses which were at Alf Lyons. He didn't go on the Monday so this photo must have been taken, at the earliest, on Tuesday 24th.
But she did;
4.1.3.3 Marie Farrell stated that on 21 December 1996, Madame Toscan Du Plantier entered her shop around 3pm.
Around the same time, she alleged that she saw a male standing across from her shop.
She described the man as thin, sallow skin, late 30’s to early 40’s, 5’8” tall,Mediterranean looking and wearing a long black coat.
After Madame Toscan Du Plantier left her shop, the male walked off in the same direction as her.
Marie Farrell stated the man was not Ian Bailey who at this time was unknown to her.
4.1.3.4 On 22 December 1996(Edited Bolded), Marie Farrell alleged she saw the same man looking for a lift around 6am outside Schull when she was driving in the opposite direction.
4.1.3.8 On Christmas Day 25 /12 /1996(Edited Bolded), Marie Farrell rang Bandon Garda Station and told them about seeing the man opposite her shop and seeing him looking for a lift the next day but did not mention seeing the man at Kealfadda Bridge.
On 27 December 1996(Edited Bolded) she was visited by a named detective at her shop and she states that she either completed a statement or a questionnaire.
She states that this detective insisted on putting down the height of the man opposite her shop as 5’10” tall (and not 5’8” tall as she had described) owing to the street level being lower on the side of the Main Street where she had initially seen him.
Marie Farrell then stated that another garda came into her shop on 28 December 1996 and gave her a video tape to watch and see if she recognised anyone on it.
She brought the video tape home and watched it with her husband.
The video reportedly showed Ian Bailey reciting poetry at the annual swim in Schull on Christmas Day of that year.
Chris Farrell recognised Ian Bailey as someone who had been into their shop.
Marie Farrell did not recognise the man on the video tape and stated that he was not the same man that she had seen previously opposite her shop on 21 December 1996 or at Kealfadda Bridge.
Marie Farrell returned the video tape to Schull Garda Station.
Link
Start at page 15 re Marie Farrell
So you've no proof the removed bags were not searched?
Maybe you should stop implying certain things are facts while offering no evidence to back it up.
I'm aware of all of the above but the statement I posted preceded all of those and is a record of her first contact with AGS on 25/12. Two days before her first formal statement on 27th.
That statement by Farrell and reference to Sophie was made in 2012 when she met gsoc investigators.
She does not mention Sophie in the original statement from 1996 as shown by bjsc.
Seems like Farrell was adding bits on, which was a habit of hers. Started out as a strange man outside her shop and then moved onto strange man following Sophie.
“So you've no proof the removed bags were not searched?”
Yes.
“Maybe you should stop implying certain things are facts while offering no evidence to back it up.”
What things?
So Marie may have made up the story about Sophie browsing in her shop?
Wouldn’t surprise me.
We've had a couple posters on here, starting with flanna, stating Bailey was innocent because no specs of blood etc were found when his car was forensically examined. Yet once again no evidence has been offered as to when this examination of the car took place. And in the event it took place 6 weeks after the murder it was unlikely to yield anything of value. If it was examined.
So on the evidence of the last photo the car was not driven back over the crime scene again when Shirley returned from the shop as some have alleged?
And also thanks to your good detective work with the photo of rubbish bags outside the car, she was not allowed continue on her way to the dump as some have alleged.
Also it was Shirley who accidently drove through the crime scene and parked past the gate. This was understandable as there is a bend just before the gate and she would not have seen the body until she was almost on it.
“So on the evidence of the last photo the car was not driven back over the crime scene again when Shirley returned from the shop as some have alleged?”
Have you just realised this now?
It’s been obvious since the crime scene photos were first published years ago.
Realised what now? I'm not the one whose been saying the car was driven back over the crime scene, that was another poster. Turns out they were wrong. Yet another myth busted.
What poster said that?
Probably JP Twomey so as the cap man in the photo has grey hair and Smith had black hair at the time
Another later picture here
https://www.irishtimes.com/resizer/QsLAMjdwFT5MQHzXnEi3AeTa4lc=/1600x0/filters:format(jpg):quality(70)/cloudfront-eu-central-1.images.arcpublishing.com/irishtimes/OTESPFD7TOG6SAITA2AGIUAARM.jpg
Ok I found the post. The poster said in response to someone saying the car was driven through the crime scene..."And did again". Will give them the benefit of doubt and assume they meant drove it further down the road, rather than back up the road again.
But the car wasn't allowed be driven over the specific crimescene where Sophie was found, Shirley did that accidently due to the body being hidden by a bend.
Anything inside the cordon was the crime scene.
I'm not sure I'd go that far but it certainly seems that, at that stage, IF Sophie was in the shop Marie attached no significance to it and certainly didn't link the man to her. Even in her first formal statement, taken on 27th Dec, she seems to mention Sophie almost as an afterthought.
Just looking at the crime scene, below the gate is a paved road, so there's not really going to be tyre marks there and if there were impossible to know if fresh. I can't really see what impact driving the car further down the road would have, especially as a number of people would have been over the scene by then, neighbours, doctor, gardai etc. Anything noticeable would have been spotted before the car was moved. There's a narrative that by moving the car further down the road the crime scene was contaminated or ruined and this is simply not true. The most important part of the scene was around the gate area, and Shirley had already accidently and unavoidably driven through that.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
