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

” Sophie didn’t scratch her killer “ . I thought that the scratches on Baileys hands were proof positive that he did it ??

Surely the Fiesta was examined at the time and nothing was found on it or in it ?
I wouldn’t be praising the Gardai for their efforts in this case but judging by some of the posts here , you would have to wonder how they solved any case until the advent of DNA !!!

The scratches are proof positive of nothing on their own. The family unit say they were there on the evening before the murder. It is a very specific thing to remember that there were scratches present on the evening of the 22nd when they were in his company throughout the Christmas period when the scratches were evident. Bailey went to the pub that night and played the bodhrán and nobody remembered seeing any scratches except a barman who remembered a mark on one hand, a description that isn`t reconcilable with what was evident on both hands after the murder. Just because he had scratches doesn`t mean Sophie scratched him. She had no DNA under her fingernails. The scratches would have come from the briars and they seem to have been similar (based on Garda drawings) to those that were present on Sophie`s arms in post mortem photos.

The Fiesta was examined after the murder, but that was when things were a bit more primitive. There`s a possibility, because of advances, that DNA might now be recovered from the block that was used by the killer and that would apply to the car too if it was still around. Sophie`s DNA in the Fiesta would be as damning as Bailey`s on the block. Unfortunately I doubt the Gardaí had the foresight to preserve the car, in part because they got it into their heads that he walked over there, based on Marie Farrells story.

The Gardaí were seriously incompetent in this case. That's true. That doesn't mean they were wrong in thinking it was Bailey. Their incompetence probably saved him from years in prison. We don't have a whole pile of evidence because of the botched investigation. What we do have points to Bailey with possible assistance from Jules.

The only alternatives we've heard are some mad conspiracies about drug barons, horny Gardaí or an incompetent hitman. Ludicrous stuff. And the only defence of Bailey appears to be some people sticking their fingers in their ears trying to ignore everything pointing at him.

Someone with a repeat history of violence/alcohol-related violence, to the point of an extended hospital stay for his wife, almost causing her permanent vision loss.

Living within 3-4km distance of the victim, arriving suspiciously early to the scene the next day. In an otherwise sparsely populated area, and putting his reason for arriving among the first to the scene down to chance.

He clearly was also a clinical definition narcissist. A trait which is statistically over-represented in homicide, and sexual homicide.

Rage episodes also being associated with this disorder. The murder details suggest rage killing.

And afaik narcissism is consistent with returning to the crime scene.

Physical strength/capability was also a factor in the crime, and again he also wouldnt be ruled out in that regard.

And someone above mentions Bailey (bad drunk and alcoholic that he was) went to the pub the night before.

If you cant see thats the perfect fit in terms of suspects then you need to tell me what is.

Ok, where's the evidence?

It wasnt a question of evidence. The question was about how suspect Bailey looks. And the answer is incredibly suspect.

Should we go back over why hes the most suspect looking f*cker since a toddler with an empty chocolate box, or a dog sat on a chair in front of a missing roast.

If there was evidence the thread would be closed by now. Do you think people come here looking to know about the mountain of evidence. Everyone familiar with the case already knows theres insufficient evidence. You announcing it on repeat doesnt help. Maybe offer something.

"It wasnt a question of evidence."

I stopped reading here. Please don't ever sit on a jury.

Is there anything in particular which makes you think it was a conspiracy?

Bootprint, fingerprints, fingermarks, tire marks, DNA profile. All evidence not from Sophie found at the scene. None of which points to Bailey. But you just ignore actual physical evidence, and give out about others ignoring your opinions and speculation.