Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed. **Threadbans lifted - see OP**

Sophie rarely used the back door when entering or leaving the house. There was a rubbish bin just outside the back door that Shirley Foster reckoned would have been knocked over by anyone using the back door.

Speaking of rubbish, was it searched?

He - I believe - was suspect 1. He was an oddball who lived the other side of the hill behind Sophie's house.

It’s possible she wasn’t up long. Being winter and before getting fully dressed for the day she put on her dressing gown to keep warm. After granola for breakfast she may have wanted some bread. Whilst standing cutting the bread she sees someone out the window at the little stone barn. With the knife in her hand she goes out to them and catches up with them at the gate.

Gardai damned if they do, damned if they don't. If they don't approach the body they are criticised. If they approach the body and get their shoe prints everywhere they are also criticised. There's no winning with some people. Overall they did the best they could with a few mistakes.

Regards a local doctor establishing a time of death, on a cold winter morning with temperatures almost at freezing, this wouldn't have been straightforward.

In this picture you can see the vintage French hot water bottle on the floor beside the bed. Had Sophie gotten out of bed in the night it would probably still have been under the covers. I know I always put mine on the floor when I get up in the morning.

Complete and utter rubbish - not one word of that post is in anyway reflective of the expected capability of the medical and law enforcement bodies of 1997- not one word- there were massive and fundamental errors made in the first hours of the investigation - that’s totally obvious to anyone familiar with this case

I never commented on any of that dialogue - nice try - you seem to be continually on the offensive on this thread - defending your belief of Baileys guilt- defending the Gardai despite even the DPP practically laughing them out of their office - I wouldn’t dream of engaging with you on a point by point argument -you’d just post misinformation and send the thread into circles - not a chance.

So you're not going to list out the errors?

You made a big show about errors but now won't engage?

Regards the DPP report its an utter shambles. The first 3 pages and page 1 in particular is full of holes and contradictions many of which I went through yesterday.

There are others. To give one example the DPP makes not a single mention of the cut to Baileys head or scalp in his 44 page report despite Bailey frequently commenting on it down through the years and describing it as a wound from a turkey.

Yet the DPP completely ignored this wound and doesn't even reference it!

He also discounted on page 2 the first person witness account of someone saying Bailey told them he met Sophie and finds its not convincing evidence they met!

There are other contradictions on the first page that would be laughed out of a circuit court as proof of innocence in a drink driving case! Yet the DPP gets away with this "proof of innocence".

Its completely amateurish stuff from him.

Need your opinion people. Excuse poor quality but this is a part of one of the first pictures taken on 23rd. I can't show you all of it as it contains the body.

What I'm curious about is this. Does anyone think that the object at the base of the gatepost could be the second breeze block that was missing from the pumping station. Or am I just letting my imagination run away with me ?

Also I'm assuming the tyre marks on the gravel in picture 1 are Shirley's but if so whose are those on the l/h verge. Seen more clearly in picture - they end just above Sophie's head (which I've cropped out of the picture)

And that’s why I won’t go point to point with you- you’re totally disputing an independent office who TWICE refused to send this case forward.

You’d argue black is white if it helped your case so no, I won’t be drawn on my opinion with you which is something I’m absolutely entitled to make on this forum - it’s not the politics forum - I don’t have to justify everything I say

The one in the mud on the verge seems small enough, strange to pull in that close ot the verge and not the middle. Someone avoiding something or taking the opening fast?

Of course I am disputing him.

You're allowed dispute the gardai, but the DPP is off limits? It doesn't work that way. No one is above criticism if they make mistakes.

Here's an old map;

Just over one km, A lot closer than Bailey.

Thanks, I understand your point of view and you are entitled to it for sure, but don't agree. I would say it is possible Bailey could have been convicted if he had gone before a jury though, he was his own worst enemy. I don't believe he was guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, but he could have been convicted. He convinced countless number of people he was guilty already, what's another 12 (or even less if it didn't have to be unanimous) 😀

I would concede that Yvonne Ungerer's evidence could reasonably been addressed, if it was available to the DPP.