Old thread seems to be permanently locked. It will be interesting if anything can come of this at last.
Threadbanned Posters:
You completely misrepresented it as if it was something I said, when it was literally stated in the post I directly quoted. Are you denying the poster said it in the post I quoted? Simple question.
And then said they won't name names.
But I don't see any post where they state they do not have "alternative suspects in mind" ? This is your own interpretation, but not something I can see stated on the thread anywhere.
Not sure why you have to dress up your arguments by putting words in other poster's mouths.
Have you been reading the thread at all this morning ?
Bjsc has seemingly clarified her position and does not have alternative suspects in mind
It would be sufficient for her to state that she has a definite suspect/s in mind without going any further
Let's be crystal clear on something. It is not "odyssey says". You are inexplicably ignoring this post where it is literally stated by the actual poster, and I have in fact in an earlier reply to you today included a link to the actual post. And still in this post you seem to feign ignorance of its origins? Come off it.
Post #5773 10-03-2024 8:37pm
given the known facts, there are more viable suspects than Bailey. Particularly if you allow for the possibility of a morning killing.
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121876629#Comment_121876629
Bjsc merely said a morning murder was a possibility in her first posts anyway
So it appears posters are getting carried away on the false assumption that it is likely a morning murder and not Bailey
I don't believe bjsc is stating any of the above
Happy for her to correct me if wrong
It merely appears that she is stating the obvious: could have been morning and could have been someone except bailey
I think it is stronger than that. If the murder happened in the morning, at the gate, in an unplanned assault it would be highly unlikely that Ian Bailey had anything to do with it.
It is completely contrary to the Garda narrative against Bailey which despite twenty seven years of trying has not even met the threshold for a viable prosecution.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
I'd suggest the truth to the murder therefore more likely lies with someone other than Ian Bailey.
Ok well this doesn't tie in with what odyssey was arguing earlier
It appears you're now not stating that there are more viable suspects than bailey merely that he may not be the killer which goes without saying obviously
There's a clear difference there
And the other thing about naming names is that if Ian Bailey wasn't the killer then the real murderer or members of their family are still out there and they, potentially, have a lot to lose. I have made no secret of my identity and have no wish to put myself at risk.
I'm not sure how much more I can tell you. I've said what I think about time of death. I've said where I think the assault happened. I've said that most murders are born out of anger. I've said that I don't think it was planned and that it's highly unlikely, given the location, that it was a passing encounter.
I'm not sure how much more there is other than naming names and that I will not do.
So what are the alternative suspect/ theories that odyssey says you've stated are more likely than Bailey?
Some theory without naming names
My personal view is that the entirety of the assault took place by the gate. But this does not preclude the initial contact between Sophie and her murderer from having happened at the house. There is no evidence of any physical altercation having taken place in the house. There was blood on the outside of the back door and on the handle. The blood on the door was Sophie's but scientists were unable to obtain a profile from the blood on the handle. The blood on the door, coupled with the blood on the handle, tends to indicate the action of pulling the door closed. Certainly it was closed and latched when Gardae arrived.
Other than Sophie's disappointed about the little barn there is no evidence of any land dispute. In his statement Leo Bolger talks about the suggestion that he wanted to buy Sophie's house but denies that this was the case as it didn't have enough land.
Sophie appears to be on excellent terms with the Hellen family although relations with Alfie and Shirley appear to be polite rather than friendly.
I'm assuming that bjsc was referring to a land or other neighbour dispute when she referred to other suspects
Im possibly wrong on that . Happy to be corrected if so
Yes, that and the initial encounter did it happen at gate or house
Either would bring clarity to the discussion
The Garda theory is that the initial encounter occurred at the house
I wouldn't be naming names either, including of people deceased. Bailey's name has been out in the open for years, and mostly people are discussing facts about him. He was a self confessed prime suspect, so its reasonable to discuss his guilt or otherwise and there's plenty of facts to discuss, both in his favour and against.
Regards other suspects, bjsc mentioned establishing a routine for Sophie. Its also possible the murderer had a routine. Without naming names for legal reasons, you'd wonder if someone was in that area frequently for one reason or another at the time of the murder, which could well have been at morning time.
Forensically it was impossible to establish a time of death, so its been left to circumstantial evidence to establish one and bjsc has made a very good argument for a morning death, possibly anytime between dawn and a few minutes before she was discovered.
You'd have to say the difference between a middle or the night death and a morning death is huge for the case.
It's pretty much what I said here odyssey
Point proven I'm not going round in circles with U on this
That's a long way away from what you originally said, so you are disagreeing with yourself, or were not clear enough. You've already edited your post and changed the meaning of the post I replied to. I'll leave you to continue arguing with yourself.
You're pretty much agreeing with me but you can't see it
More viable suspects in a morning killing points to the local dispute theory
That leaves bailey and the local dispute as the main theories
Bailey remains the most likely as the case file points to him
Which is what I said
Alfie is dead, as are several others involved in the case. And in many if not most such discussions, it has been presented not as a I think Alfie did it but here is how easy it is to make a case against someone with circumstantial evidence.
But people are naming Alfie Lyons and Shirley Foster here as a suspect for years.
It is stated here:
What I have said is that, given the known facts, there are more viable suspects than Bailey. Particularly if you allow for the possibility of a morning killing.
I don't see how that can be spun as leaving Bailey as the most likely suspect. More viable suspects e.g. Person or Person(s) unknown are therefore most likely.
I overlooked that statement but am happy to be corrected if true
Bjsc has stated she won't be implicating anyone personally which is fair enough
However bjsc would have to provide some clarity on that statement for it to hold water
In the meantime the 2 main theories are still the local gate dispute and the prime suspect bailey
The mods won't allow anyone including @bjsc to name alleged suspects for libel reasons as it would be both stupid and prejudicial
That's what I was trying to ask bjsc.
If they thought there were more viable suspects tell us who and why.
But they are not going to be doing that.
So you're citing the poster as an expert when it suits you e.g. "the stranger killer and the hired hitman theories are not likely to have occurred."
But when they state there are more viable suspects you disregard that because ... reasons... because it contradicts the opinion you have of Bailey regardless.
That is an entirely self-contradictory argument.
As usual I have no idea what point you are trying to make ?
Who are these more viable suspects ?
Is this a comment bjsc made ?
If the alternative suspects are not named or the statement clarified the comment doesn't stand up to scrutiny
What the poster actually said: "there are more viable suspects than Bailey"
Did bjsc ever surmise that the Bailey theory is likely to have occurred? I don't remember reading anything to that effect.
How that, in your opinion, leaves Bailey as the likely murderer makes zero sense.
There are many cases in the crime annals where serious violence has been inflicted on the victim, without any long or real knowledge of them, so there is no basis to make that as a statement of fact.
It would help if there was some clarity on whether the initial encounter occured at the house or the gate
For the Bailey theory to be correct the first encounter would reasonably have occured at the house
The access dispute /local disagreement may likely have occurred at the gate
Bjsc has surmised that the stranger killer and the hired hitman theories are not likely to have occured
That reasonably leaves the prime suspect Bailey as the likely murderer
After that the most likely correct theory is the local dispute over access etc.
This was an anger fuelled killing by someone who knew or 'knew of' Sophie
"The photo posted before this one, clearly shows fencing & fence posts ready to be installed.. Was this a source of disharmony?"
Those fence posts lying on the lawn were not there on the morning of the 23rd.
That photo was taken some time after the murder, the ditches had been cut back by the Gardaí and the posts were probably pulled out of the ditch.
"The keys were inside, so it was hardly Sophie (realistically). Sophie's blood was found on the door "
The blood was found on the back door, the keys were inside the front door.
I'd say you are right about disharmony around the area and the hate and rage in the killing.
Wouldn't you have to know someone to hate them that much?
Look at the extreme violence inflicted during the cocked up assassination attempt in Dublin over Christmas. That's not to say it was an assassin, just that yes they can make mistakes, and criminals can inflict huge amount of violence if they deem they have been 'provoked'.
I wouldn't be reading too much into the killer leaving no evidence
. There may have been some Garda incompetence in evidence gathering. The killer may have worn gloves.
![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)
