Old thread seems to be permanently locked. It will be interesting if anything can come of this at last.
Threadbanned Posters:
What poster said that?
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.
“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.
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.
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 Marie may have made up the story about Sophie browsing in her shop?
Wouldn’t surprise me.
“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?
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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
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
Thanks re Studio & Praire but still no mention of search of Fiesta or whether it was forensically searched, EG luminol sprayed, swabs taken etc
I see you edited your post, you should have checked the timing before rushing to post
Sorry about quality. It's a screenshot from my laptop.
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/
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.
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..
Garda Ombudsman report, includes calls from Marie Farrell
Do you have any proof or evidence the bags removed from the car were NOT searched?
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.
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
It does not take long to search a car, a minute or two at most.
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?
Sorry, I may be missing something but misleading, how?
So she rang in to report a stranger outside her shop, not that the stranger was following Sophie, or that Sophie was in her shop?
Very strange if so.
I know, I've seen it. But saying "There's a photo of the rubbish bags outside the car" is misleading.
Reports all state she rang guards on December 25th with information she thought would help in their investigation obviously the investigation was Sophies murder
So you have no source. Nor did the poster who stated it as a fact have one.
What exactly would finger printing of his car tell anyone?
And a simple cleaning or wipe down of his car would easily remove any evidence.
So again, if people want to allege Baileys car was forensically examined they need to provide actual details of when it was examined, as timing is everything.
So the neighbours who discovered the body and called it in while supposedly having a car full of incriminating evidence are suspects? You might want to think about the logic on that one!
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
