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

Give me a break - it was obvious the so called “expert” was assuming they knew each other - the scenario you’re describing there is a complete loner who will have very obvious psychological issues that will prevent them from interacting in normal day to day life - Bailey got a law degree post Sophie’s murder - you don’t get one of those being a complete loo-lah

It would be criminally irresponsible to rule out the importance of unidentified male DNA found on the clothing of a murder victim.

DNA on a shoe?

I'm looking at my old runners right now, and trying to imagine how any male fluid of any kind could have got onto them.

Lying beside my husband's shoes inside the back door? Possibly at the gym where somebody's sweat might have….no, I'm sure that never happened, I'm never that near to a sweaty exerciser.

On the plane and the passenger beside her coughed all over them?

But these were Sophie's old shoes that were left at the cottage and used as impromptu casual footwear, according to someone who stayed there, if I recall. Not likely to have been coughed or sneezed on by anyone. Her husband, boyfriend and family have been ruled out - this DNA is unidentified.

Possibly someone who was AT the cottage had reason to handle them - say, a fellow mending the pipes might have had to pick them up to move them out of the way (imagining wildly here)

Oh yes. This DNA really does need to be amplified and if at all possible, identified.

Irrelevant? I think not.

A test will be administered later today - 75% pass mark 😀

Yeah it was good alright - maybe I missed it but is there anyway for them to determine more about the “male” sample - potential nationality for example?

Bailey couldn't resist the limelight.

Assuming that he was innocent of the crime, and knew 100% there was nothing ever going to link him to the crime sceme.. I suggest that Bailey played on this gift from the Gods, and milked it for every last drop he could get..

1. Suddenly, Bailey is hot property in the world of media reporting, he is the go to man at the crime scene (No more gutting fish and doing handy man garden chores for beer money)
2. Bailey knows he is innocent - he knows he cant be tied to the murder (simply wasn't him) - Hence he strides around town with his head held high, and pounding the bodhran at night to the amazment of onlookers.
3. The national & international news agency's are all over the place - His name is resounding across Europe and further afield. This is his ticket to the big time.
4. As popular opinion started to ramp up Bailey as the chief suspect, Bailey seen this as an insurance policy. Once his name had been tarnished by enough news agency's, he'd pull the trigger and sue the lot of them.
5. With nothing but weak circumstantial shananigans against him, and the patsy Marie Farrell being groomed by the Gards, Bailey had to keep himself relevant to the investigation - Hence always stirring up the pot with his soundbytes .etc..

Bailey was a nasty piece of work. i suggest that he felt a lot of self hatred towards himself? He seen himself as a rising journalist that was going places, instead he was doing mundane jobs for the locals for some beer money.

However, Bailey was clever, he wasn't going to miss an opportunity like this. At the time of the murder, Detective Dyer was the main man, a man not blessed with brains by any standard.. And I have no doubt Bailey could play him like a violin, and did so accordingly.

Bailey stayed around because he could smell the money. And being a nasty piece of work, it didn't matter if it was made off the back of a dead french mother.

There are many who think that journalism is a squalid trade. They make a living from news, often bad news: people seem to be willing to pay more for gory details!

Then again, if you're a hack journo who finds yourself right next door to the scene of a murder, who could resist writing about it? You'd hurry over there, notebook and camera at the ready.

"Our man on the spot"…it was a sweet spot indeed, for a few short weeks.

Pschology opinions are not evidence and are not used in Irish courts. A psychologist is also NOT a psychiatrist and so cannot diagnose someone as having a pscyhiatric condition. Anyway, how could this guy even give an opinion without ever meeting Bailey?

I would have thought such knowledge is very useful in terms of creating a profile of the killer when unknown- but that’s where it ends - neither a psychologist nor psychiatrist can make the leap from a potential psychological profile of a killer to the realm of “the profile matches, ergo Bailey is the killer”- but that’s what appears to be happening here.

I would tend to agree it’s a local too - while Bailey should remain a suspect I do think the person who committed suicide a few months later having said he did a “terrible thing” or words to that effect is, in my mind, someone who should have been front and center for investigation. He’s still totally innocent in the eyes of the law and indeed the public, but it’s such a strange thing to happen it has to be properly and fully investigated.

I’m not convinced it was a neighbour and a row over a gate being left open - the level of violence was just too great - an assault yes, but not murder.

whilst it could be some druggie dealer caught rapid, again such people would generally not wish to stick around and I don’t think they would kill a member of the public so viciously -maybe today they would but I don’t think so in this case.

I’ve never gone for the massive conspiracies of a contract killing etc - but the husband not appearing in Ireland to bring home his wife’s remains, especially considering his wealth, does justifiably in my view, leave him open to scrutiny .

What I don’t want to see is a “it was probably Bailey” outcome for this review - I treasure our justice system bad and all as it can be sometimes, but all concerned deserve better than that after nearly 30 years

And it’s why “it’s probably Bailey” is just not good enough at this stage

But that's what AGS will do. They will only serve their own interests as usual. It's not about justice for them, it's about politics.

I don’t know so I’ll bow to your better knowledge of him - but it’s probably immaterial - essentially he’s addressing the killer of his daughter - as a father, he’d obviously be listening carefully to what the official policing body of a European country has to say - - in this case Ireland and the Gardai- I guess we’d do similar if in that position - but speaking personally, no matter how reassured I might be with their words to me, if the evidence didn’t stack up I’d always have some doubt that they had the right person

To be fair, even without listening to the Gardaí it had been reported that he confessed/bragged about murdering her while drunk on multiple occasions and played it off as dark humor. The family thinking it was him is not surprising or even misguided. The prick kept himself in the frame the entire time. He may not have been guilty of the murder but he was far from innocent. People thinking or saying he did it, is seemingly in keeping with what he wanted.

Who cares what a couple of people playing speculative psychology think? It gets us no closer to answering the question who who killed Sophie. It's a load of speculative nonsense.

interesting that you use his private diaries as some sort of indication of guilt, when it would have been the perfect opportunity for him to actually just have written about the crime itself.

We don’t need a certified psychologist/psychiatrist to get an understanding of his nature. He was arrested for beating the crap out of Jules, even before the murder, he could have killed her if a punch landed in the wrong place, or she fell awkward etc. This is the reality of the prick that was Ian Bailey. This is the reality that one needs to consider when looking at the case as a whole.