Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

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

1131132134136137186

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,736 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    Around Christmas time is exactly the start of foxes mating season.

    I'm a foxwatcher (love them!!) and those dark frosty nights are just when I would be on the lookout.

    I don't see them too often at this season - they seem to be quite private about their sexlife - but you can often hear them; foxes have an impressive range of vocalisations - screams, wails, hisses, squealing, chattering - and that distinctive alarm call which is unmistakeable once heard; like a repeating siren.

    The banshee screech is likely to be a vixen calling for some male attention.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blvBBdvCgN8



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    You're a vulpiphile so. Foxes stink at mating time, could have set the dogs off.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 344 ✭✭bjsc


    I think it's not so much the dna aspect but that a large chunk of the Garda theory is based on the fact that he didn't have the scratches in the pub on the Sunday night and he did have them by the Monday.

    If there are statements to say he did have them on the Sunday then it would remove a big plank from their case.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,774 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    The scratches theory is such crap.

    I've already mentioned how my family had some land planted with conifers and it was quite possible to get scratches when working with them. Quite often the scratches would take time to swell up and then die back down to nothing. It was actually normal to not even notice them really.

    Secondly, if Bailey did get the scratches whilst committing the brutal murder, why was none of his DNA, none of his hairs or any other forensic fragments not left at the scene? Now if you think that maybe he was wearing gloves which protected him from leaving his DNA then how would he have gotten the scratches?

    Lastly, if AGS thought the scratches were important to their case, why did none of them think of getting a few photos of those scratches? I understand that cameras weren't as common or popular as they are not but you did still have disposable cameras available quite cheaply. Instead they seem tonhave gotten one of their kids to draw something, just to further highlight their approach to this case.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,141 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    And to continue with the gloves angle... it was December, he could have worn gloves and long sleeve shirt when out and about and no one would have seen the scratches. Instead, seems like zero attempt made to conceal them.

    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Registered Users Posts: 924 ✭✭✭Gussie Scrotch


    Bridget,

    Thanks for all your contributions, you have breathed new life into this debate.

    I have a question: If Bailey had been scratched by the briars at sophie's gate, how likely is it that he would have left DNA traces on the thorns?

    Secondly, if he had had contact with the briars, wouldn't it be likely that fibres from his clothing would also be left on the thorns?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,472 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Have to say The Phoenix magazine makes some great points- it’s a huge article but worth making a cuppa for


    “This only partially explains the media’s refusal to properly investigate the French woman’s murder and Garda efforts to shoehorn Bailey into the frame. More specifically, the DPP explained in its document that gardaí had issued lurid warnings to both the DPP and the local community that Ian Bailey would kill again unless arrested; that he would attack witnesses living close to him; and that these dangers could only be averted by charging Bailey with murder.

    The DPP went on to say: “There has been a consistent flow of information to the media in relation to the investigation into the killing… Once Ian Bailey was believed by the public particularly in the local area to be responsible for the murder the fear thereby engendered was bound to create a climate in which witnesses became suggestible.”


    https://www.thephoenix.ie/article/profile-ian-bailey/



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,472 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Phoenix magazine referenced and linked above says this- so DPP report has it

    “Much was made then and more recently of the scratches seen on Bailey’s arms in the days surrounding the murder. Senan Moloney’s recent special in the Irish Independent said Bailey’s scratches were witnessed after the murder. The DPP document referred to witnesses – some close to and supportive of Bailey, others not so – who saw the scratches before the murder and who said they knew they were incurred by killing turkeys and felling a Christmas tree.”



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭head82


    Wow! There's so much in that article that I could highlight but this in particular struck me the most:

    "Aware of their clout at a high level, the family’s lawyer, Alan Spilliaert told the Sunday Times Irish edition in 2013 that Ireland had been a beneficiary of EU financial largesse and that if we wanted a better bail-out deal then Ireland should extradite Bailey."

    The mere suggestion that Ireland should hand over an innocent man.. yes, innocent! As in, not found guilty of any crime in his home country.. in exchange for a better financial bailout (essentially political blackmail), is just shocking!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    Didn't Jules, Saffy and Virginia all state they saw the scratches on Sunday after cutting down the XMas tree?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 344 ✭✭bjsc




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 344 ✭✭bjsc


    The Guards only sampled a few samples of blood and briars. The main problem would seem to be that Sophie had bled so heavily that any alien DNA would probably be masked by her own blood.

    It is entirely possible that the perpetrator's clothing would have caught on the briars but, as far as I can see, no fibres were recovered.



  • Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 40,774 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    It was political blackmail but you do need to bear in mind that the family and the French investigators had been told since early in the investigation that it was Bailey and presumably AGS also told them that they had evidence of his guilt because they also sent this evidence to the DPP (repeatedly!) with a view to having Bailey charged and tried for murder.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,141 ✭✭✭OscarMIlde


    There was a poster on boards who personally knew Alfie and said he gave up work due to ill health and that he struggled with breathing and even gentle exertion. Given he seems to have been a baker, that is a profession linked to COPD due to continuous inflammation of the lungs from aspirating fine dust. Likely this is why he was quickly ruled out as a serious suspect as he lacked the physical fitness to carry out a brutal assault.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    Yes, she was at Shirley's retirement BBQ a year or so before the murder. She said Bailey gatecrashed the party and spent the afternoon trying to impress her. A blow-hole, she called him.

    Sophie was at her cottage at the time but she wasn't at the party. When she returned from a drive with her guest at the time Alfie pointed her out to his guests, and muttered she was a moaning pain in the ass or words to that effect. Bailey showed no interest in Sophie.

    A quote from an old post of hers; The link didn't work.

    The morning Sophie's body was found my then mother in law told me a terrible thing had happened and Shirley had found the body of that French woman who lived next door. She had just gotten a phone call from I assume Alfie. Our concern was for Shirley. Who was by all accounts in bits.

    Although we saw them as usual over the holidays in the in-law's house we didn't talk to them about the murder as tbh it would have been crass to bring it up if they didn't. And they didn't.

    Next mention I remember was early in the new year when father in law said his brother had been asked to give a statement about the party in Aug. Someone had given the AGS a list of people who were there but it wasn't correct or complete. My suspicion is IB gave the list.

    Father in law went to guards, explained it was him not his brother and all they were interested in was did IB mention Sophie. He told them to talk to me.

    He then told me to expect a call as the guards suspected IB and would be asking me about the party. I said who the f is Ian Bailey?

    Turned out to be the tall bloke I had been talking to for hours. If I ever knew his name I had forgotten it.

    There was shock all round that IB was the prime suspect, including Alfie and Shirley. No one could figure out what motive he would have.

    ...................

    Look, my impression was Bailey wasn't well liked but also wasn't the worst. A blowhole braggard drunk who could also be witty and charming. I think he fancied himself as an Oliver Reed type. But people were genuinely shocked that he was in the frame. The suspicion- based on no real evidence- was that it was connected to Sophie's life in France.

    Alfie was a cranky sod, and one of the few people who tolerated IB. Shirley wasn't that fond of him. I can't see either of them lying to protect him, but neither can I see either of them lying to drop him in it.

    They wanted the murderer caught so they could get on with their retirement plans in peace.

    A bit about Alfie here;


    Post edited by chooseusername on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,472 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    “WTF is IB? “

    That would be me too- I could be talking to someone at a party and forget their name in an instant - head like a sieve when it comes to names - I’d say that person would have happily sweared she never met a man called Ian Bailey unless it was pointed out to her😀



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    This was a view from the kitchen window; (sometime before the murder)




  • Registered Users Posts: 33 OnTheCorner


    So you will only engage with people who agree with you? That’s really helpful.



  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭Mackinac


    Thank you! A clear line of sight to the stone barn.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    Yes, the back door is to the left immediately outside that window, just out of sight.

    The lane to Alfie's house is up on the right beyond that ditch, it rises sharply from where Sophie parked her car, So access to the Alfie's shed and the field beyond was along that path by the oil tank that you see there, or in through Sophie's gate from the lane and up across her lawn in front of her house.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,272 ✭✭✭saabsaab




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭head82


    Fairly certain I read earlier in the thread that sheep-dip was stored in the shed. I don't think it was Alfies. I think he allowed Leo Bolger or another neighbour to store it there.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,272 ✭✭✭saabsaab




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭head82


    Alfie owned it. Although there was some confusion when Sophie initially purchased the cottage and believed it was part of her property. She was a bit miffed about it but I believe her son subsequently purchased the shed/land.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,272 ✭✭✭saabsaab




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 333 ✭✭head82


    No. She would have had no say in the matter at the time. It was only after her death that her son purchased the site.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,736 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    She wasn't in a position to; she had to allow access to the shed because it belonged to her neighbour, Mr Lyons.

    Seems it was also used by a couple of others, with Lyons' permission. This meant that whenever Sophie was at the house, she might see people crossing her land to get to it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    The sheep dip I believe was Finbarr Hellen's, which was odd as Alfie and Hellens didn't get on. Garda had to sort out some issue between them once.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,272 ✭✭✭saabsaab




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,141 ✭✭✭✭odyssey06


    "To follow knowledge like a sinking star..." (Tennyson's Ulysses)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    She may have thought that access was restricted to just Alfie, which may have been the case, I don't know what kind of agreement they had. There is no right-of-way or easment marked on the landregistry map. She wouldn't be happy with every Tom, Dick and Harry passing close to her house, that's for sure.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    I believe it was to do with fencing and Alfie's dogs worrying Hellen's animals. I'll see if I can find where I read it.

    Josie Hellen was quick to point the finger at Alfie as the person who used Sophie's bathroom.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    For what it's worth, I believe Alfie had nothing to do with the murder of Sophie. He probably had his suspicions of who did, but he kept them to himself, and who would blame him?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,472 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Ans certainly I’m not accusing anyone alive or dead…..of murder either ,

    But certainly there were wider issues going on in 1997 than just one Mr. Ian Bailey ESQ

    Neighbourhood disputes- certainly

    Known prowlers- yes.

    Trouble at home-well she was on the divorce path and her husband didn’t exactly exert himself after the murder now did he?


    If the above at least weren’t investigated properly and thoroughly then there will always be doubt - it’s as plain as that, whilst of course, maintaining the innocence of all concerned throughout such an investigation - but eh, where’s the investigation?.. is likely the question many will ask in years to come



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,736 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    If Sophie was standing there cutting a slice of bread, what did she see through this window?

    If it was still dark, she may have seen lights; on the little laneway or at the shed.

    If it was already daylight (less likely) she might have seen a person or people going to and fro, or AT the shed..

    Did whatever she saw cause her to put on boots and go out for a look-see or to tackle someone? To eject a wandering goat or horse?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,736 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    And I have another question, which @bjsc may be able to answer;

    What is the reasoning behind the Guards' belief that there was a chase; from the house, across the back field, down to the main driveway entrance - and I think I remember that the gate across this entrance was found open. (When neighbour Shirley went to drive down to town and found the body)

    Is there any evidence for the "chase" theory? A trail from house to field entrance? Signs of a struggle - anything?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 344 ✭✭bjsc


    There are two separate areas of Sophie's blood (apart from the actual scene by the gate). The first is the smear on the back door which appears to have been caused by someone either closing or opening the door. The second is a single drop on a small stone just inside the field gateway. Other than that there is nothing between the house and the body and no disturbance in or around the house. Either or both blood stains could have been caused by Sophie herself or by her assailant who was contaminated with her blood.



  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭Mackinac


    That knife and bread in the kitchen just seem odd to me.

    It’s possible she was standing cutting the bread and saw someone at the stone house and she went out taking the knife with her.

    However, it looks like all the breakfast dishes have been washed as if breakfast was finished - the coffee pot, mug and cereal bowl.

    Or the bread wasn’t being sliced and the knife and bread are staged.

    Maybe the blood smear in the door was left by someone returning the knife?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,736 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    As well as the blunt-force trauma, I believe the body bore faint traces of skin abrasion from something "striated" (eg like a comb or saw)

    I'm pretty sure that even the most amateur detective would have tried matching up these marks against the bread-knife!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭Mackinac


    Everyone was preoccupied with the missing hatchet though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    Interesting that no bread was found in the stomach.

    What would also be interesting is the contents of the rubbish bins, especially the one outside the back door, maybe @bjsc might have information on that?

    From the autopsy report;

    “The Neck

    13. An area of diagonal abrasion on and to the left of the midline of the neck at the front, up to 3/4in. wide and 1 1/2in. long. In this abraded area there were several fine parallel linear abrasions up to nine in number. These resembled slightly the imprint of a "Doc Marten" boot but could have been inflicted by some serrated object passing across the skin of the neck. Slightly similar marks were seen on the skin above the left eyebrow and below the left cheek bone, though these looked more like the mark of a rough serrated object passing over the surface of the skin where there was bone close beneath it.”



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,472 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Doubt the knife was involved in the assault - even back then they would have had the technology to analyse that knife for near invisible blood stains which would have remained after a frantic washing - that and the kitchen sink would have had remnants of blood traces



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,472 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    Horrible reading it in B&W isn’t it? An awful pity the remains and the crime scene haven’t given up their secrets after 27 years



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,472 ✭✭✭Oscar_Madison


    I posted earlier in the thread around having faith in the current investigation team putting their hands up around past mistakes of the previous team - having listened to the Garda Commissioner this week making disparaging remarks about a serving guard who was totally cleared of any wrong doing over a bicycle no one wanted, I don’t hold out any hope that this investigation team will admit to any past wrong doing - the culture was rotten in the past - it’s a different type of rot these days but it’s still rotten - fear and cover your arse along with never admit mistakes is now the culture



  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭Mackinac


    I don’t think the knife was tested, can anyone confirm if this is the case?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭Mackinac


    Indeed - no bread found to have been eaten and the washed dishes make it look like breakfast was done and finished with. That makes the whole bread and knife set up look really odd to me.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,736 ✭✭✭Day Lewin


    Well, not necessarily. You eat your granola, you drink your coffee, you wash up the dishes and then you go to tidy up and put away the bread that you cut but didn't eat. You glance out the window...

    and you see WHAT? or who?

    Something unusual, maybe; if it was a normal everyday thing you wouldn't go rushing out. But then??



  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭Mackinac


    At first glance I looked at that scene and thought she was standing at the counter cutting the bread and saw someone coming from or to the stone out house and went out to them. If it were me in a kitchen with counter space as small as that, if you were finished breakfast, you’d put all the food away and then do the dishes rather than try to work around all that pile of bread. All the dishes have been done. It could be that she fancied some bread after tidying up breakfast but where’s the plate for the bread, the butter or jam? Everywhere looks neat and tidied and then there’s this big lump of bread and a knife sitting there. The more I look it seems out of place for something that initially shouldn’t look out of place.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,949 ✭✭✭chooseusername


    But whatever bread was cut from the loaf- it looks like a half slice off the bottom to me- is nowhere to be seen.



  • Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭Mackinac


    The knife is slightly under the bread which is odd too. That’s a lot of bread for one person over a couple of days-though maybe the housekeeper left the Keating’s Sliced Pan and brown soda I suppose.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement