Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed

Excerpts from the diaries were read out in the 2003 libel case.

If you don`t want the reply, then stop asking the question.

"Those words are not an indication of anything unless you want them to be."

Minimally they are the words of a very disturbing mind. It`s a strange way to kill, stubbing someone out like a cigarette. Then your neighbour down the road gets murdered in a similar manner and it is later established that not only were you talking about going over there on the night in question, but you actually got out of your bed and disappeared for several hours.

Three years is a few, not several.

Looks like 1993 to me in the original entry. Just out of interest, why are you so anxious to put distance between the diary entry and the murder? I don`t see that as significant at all.

It absolutely doesn't matter if there was a bonfire at the Studio and one at the Prairie every day of December, seen by every passerby. That doesn't prove that someone committed a murder!

It only shows that they had the means to dispose of things by burning. Same as anyone else who had a bonfire, or even a kitchen range, or a Bin service.

Showing that someone had access to a way of destroying evidence does NOT place them at the scene of the crime or establish any connection whatever between that person and either the scene of a crime or the victim of a crime. Of course the Guards hoped to find incriminating evidence - more power to them, say I. I'd believe the accusation if they had found one drop of blood. But they found none.

Shirley Foster brought three bags of rubbish to the dump right after the murder was discovered. We have no idea what was in those bags. Equally suspicious, in my view. Did the guards sift through every bin-bag with a teaspoon? Did they trawl through the dump?

If they didn't, they should have.

She was out driving with a man she has steadfastly refused to identify. If she saw anything or anyone, this person in her car could be a corroborating witness.

She claimed that when she first rang in, she was only trying to help - but she needed to hide this man's identity for privacy.

(Fair enough, if it was a clandestine romance or something of the kind)

But she claimed to have seen a quite short man acting strangely at Kealfadda bridge. The guards seized on this report and tried to persuade her that she had seen the much taller Ian Bailey. They badgered her and pressured her. to agree that it could have been him…it was dark, a fleeting glimpse uphill etc etc - but she later retracted this and insisted that she never identified the man as Bailey. She became muddled and indignant; but her FIRST report is likely to have been the most reliable and the least influenced by police pressure.

Did her husband have a reputation for violence? I'd like to see a source for this. It still seems wildly unlikely that he would murder Sophie Toscan du Plantier though - for what reason? (A romantic approach rejected? There's just no trace of any such thing)

@seth b can I ask on this. If he was potentially violent MF husband, would it not have left Marie in very vulnerable position eitherway that she had indicated she was out with man..then husband would surely have been putting her under pressure regardless, and possibly had Marie going through further episodes of violence..and had he ever tried himself to get a name of man from her..

Also .could under any form of detention process that Marie Farrell would have to confess or could she have been seen to be withholding vital evidence for potential a case to go forward to trial. Could she be not have been jailed at the time for not saying name?

Its my belief that if Marie Farrell ever reveals the true identity of her companion, a great deal of light may be shed on this whole puzzle.

In the exhibit list which was sent to France ahead of the trial, there was no mention of any items recovered from the fire.

"You wrongly corrected my post…"

Well I humbly apologize if I did. The date on the entry looks like July 1993 to me.

"To make the leap that these are desires to kill is making a huge assumption."

It isn`t. He also admitted in there that he felt the urge to kill Jules as he assaulted her. He called himself an animal on two feet.

"I`ve seen people on here write about how they`d wanted to kill their kids or their OH."

Did they go into the gory detail of how they`d do it?

"taking the comment out of context would require gardai to put them on a watchlist of potential murderers."

He was already on that watchlist before they got the diary. I`ve taken nothing out context either. Bailey was clearly a violent man who had murderous urges.

No.

And, given the context, ie. the desperation on the part of the Gardai to present any tenuous, threadbare, half-arsed, scrap of "circumstantial" evidence in support of their, frankly, absurd case, this omission was, in itself, telling.

Its yet another non issue.

But when you are trying to build a case, against a person who, clearly, had nothing to do with the crime, I suppose such grasping at straws is to be expected.

In a strange way, its possible to have a degree of sympathy for these Gardai, who, having dug themselves into such a deep hole, had to resort to such pathetic, transparent, hopeless, attempts to frame an innocent man.

Ok..where did I say the guards were wrong? You only respond to posts that's disagreeing with you..

I never said they were wrong..but they did not apply the correct principles on how cases should be dealt with. That's just my opinion. There seems to be lack of direction and focus on AGS in this case...and all energies are towards trying point the case in direction of one person..where there is no evidence to really support that.

Your constantly banging on through your posts of fires and he was violent and what he wrote in his diaries..he said she said. You would be perfect for french trial. Just go follow that up..it leads to all this hearsay crap in complete file. In other words nothing. Your posts are load of balony.

You just don't want keep the open mind that it could be someone else..you hate the fact that you have nothing on IB.

Ever seen someone do it by stepping on it ?