Old thread seems to be permanently locked. It will be interesting if anything can come of this at last.
Threadbanned Posters:
And you accused me of misinformation. Wow.
It would still be possible to find out the cars owned at the time for those on the wider list.
Again similarly to Bailey, it's a bit cart before the horse to speculate about a garda. I think that rumour came from it being a red registration plate? It would have been simple to ask the question of all the suspects, what car do you drive etc.? Blue ford fiesta was fairly common, did any of the suspects drive one, a decent chance? Another easily followed upon lead. Who knows if they did ask, perhaps there was a list of the cars driven in the first 9 pages of the jobs book….
Who exactly was it that saw the car and where did they see it? (I've seen it referred to but never anything definite about it)
It was a blue Ford Fiesta which was reported as being driven dangerously fast. The speculation was that it was an unmarked Garda vehicle.
Contamination still requires a reason. DNA isn't just floating around in the air from everybody landing all over the place. It's very difficult for almost anyone to explain away DNA. People on here are quick to point out that if Bailey's DNA is found then he's guilty, but seem to then hold everyone else to a lesser standard. You would think that the gardai would have already had retrieved in interviews and statements, ahead of the original DNA testing, anyone's explanation for how theirs may have gotten there, if it was an innocent situation.
Josie is about the only person who would have a reason to have DNA on Sophie's clothes, and she already described as such. Alfie made a particular point about not touching the body, and also the door. The gardai said nobody touched the body until forensics. Nobody else's DNA should be on there, unless they have already provided a reason for it to be imo.
It would be interesting to know whether a vehicle of that description (blue ford fiesta I believe), was owned by any of the suspects. You would hope the gardai at least did a cursory assessment of the immediate area to see if there was one owned. I imagine those records would still be available today. Much like many other questions they perhaps just didn't follow up on at all.
Yeah it would actually have been one of the first places to start you would imagine - it would come under “anything unusual that morning?” heading
Regards getting “away unnoticed , probably even in broad daylight”. This wasn’t a quick attack, I too have been wondering how could the perpetrator be sure that they wouldn’t be caught (seen or heard) by the neighbours or those farming the land? Even more so if they did return to the cottage (thinking of the blood stain by the handle on the door).
Let us not forget that a car was seen driving fast, away from that area in the early morning of the 23rd
I'd still like to know a bit more about that vehicle and who was driving it.
All of those possible scenarios you posit are open to being ruled out, in my opinion. Bailey could have done all of the things that you think likely he did not do that morning. Motive is unclear but it beggars belief that he would not, at least, know of Sophie, where she lived and when she visited. I think it likely he had some sort of relationship with her, even if the extent of that was having been introduced to her at some point and, subsequently, meeting her or speaking to her on one or two occasions. I don't think the possibility of him being recognised loitering around Sophie's at an odd hour would have even entered his head because the chances of that even happening were remote. Let's face it, a woman was bludgeoned to death and not one of the very few souls living nearby saw or, more importantly, heard anything that suggested what had taken place yards from their own doorsteps. So, the prospect of being caught in the act was not an inhibiting factor for the killer. He knew he would get away unnoticed, probably even in broad daylight.
My understanding is that the family, whilst standing by the verdict of the French courts, believe that there are still many unanswered questions.
Contamination (touch DNA) on clothes or the brick could be explained - a brick being used to prop a gate open for example, the housekeeper confirmed she was familiar with dressing gown as she put it away from time to time after visits.
I imagine the resources and knowledge of the FBI are vast in comparison to Irelands forensic laboratory - whilst respected, it will obviously have limitations when compared to the FBI.
If Baileys is found then certainly it’s game over for me - if it’s a neighbour, then I think the location of that DNA and nature of it, will be critical - whilst some neighbours DNA might be explained in her house, I don’t see cross contamination happening on her night clothes -and certainly not on the brick either - that’s beyond reasonable doubt to me unless it can be proven that that person built a wall or something with those bricks
It was a surprisingly balanced article, which is a rare sight to see. It is interesting that they are using the FBI, not really sure why. Perhaps it is conflict of interest concerns, or perhaps it is the ability to keep everything completely secret, and they are concerned about leaks. Alternatively since there are so many items being tested, there could just be far more resources and equipment available with the FBI. I would think so.
They are testing the boot too it seems, so we almost certainly will see another flag of the unknown DNA, which in and of itself would be an amazing result. If we see multiple hits of that same DNA it would be an immediate line of enquiry I would think, assuming they do consider anyone else but Bailey.
Bridget Chappuis talks a lot of sense in that article
Yeah I thought that was an extraordinary statement to make- I read it as a complete whitewash of the serious questions Gardai need to answer about this case, starting with the vast sums of money they’ve likely spent pursuing one individual with not a shred of credible evidence to put to a jury after nearly 30 years
I don't know if @bjsc can comment on here if the family are still focused on Bailey- It sounds like it.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14297243/Family-Sophie-Toscan-du-Plantier-reveal-police-wrong-murder-inquiry-hunt-killer.html
Given the remarks from the now Taoiseach, there will be nothing constructive coming from the Dail!
https://www.irishtimes.com/crime-law/2024/09/13/ian-baileys-solicitor-criticises-feral-attack-on-his-client-by-micheal-martin/
Not directly answering the question but with new DNA techniques, you have a better chance of placing someone at the scene but it, on its own, doesn't prove that the owner is responsible for the crime but, in many cases there is no plausible explanation for it being there.
In terms of Sophies case, the current testing by the FBI may or may not reveal the killer. If it does, three scenarios are possible that I can think of:
If newspaper reports following Baileys death are true, and that Gardai are intending to ultimately send yet another file to the DPP on Bailey, unless this latest FBI forensic review uncovers a smoking gun of some kind linking Bailey, then I think we need serious answers through a Dail committee hearing or something. I’d suggest a tribunal, only for the fact that we’d be waiting 10 years for the report, and in the meantime, the usual senior barristers will make millions from it and the findings will either be redacted due to sensitive information or inconclusive due to so many original investigating Gardai no longer around.
Regarding cold cases that have been solved by advancing DNA techniques. Does anyone know if cold cases are more likely to be solved when new DNA evidence found belongs to a killer who was a complete stranger rather than someone known to the victim?
I’d have more respect for them, if even at this late stage, they put their hand up and said we made serious mistakes.
I’m not asking them to say Bailey shouldn’t have been a suspect- only that they closed down the direction of the murder investigation way too early and have likely missed many clues that could have sent them in alternative directions
and with jobs books pages missing from that crucial period it may be impossible to determine what was discounted and the basis on which it was discounted.
There was evidence which is known, that could only have been excluded because a satisfactory explanation was provided (e.g. tire tracks, fingerprints, alibis, maybe even the boot print). Presumably there was more that never saw the public eye, which could have pointed to others.
The problem is we now know how much a shambles the initial investigators were, that any exclusions that happened in the first few days and weeks were almost certainly half-assed and improper.
I really don’t understand how and why the Gardai have held out for so long focusing nearly exclusively on Bailey given the so called evidence we’ve seen via DPP reports . It means that anyone who provided any other clues not related to Bailey in the early months of this investigation were likely told to go away.
Based on what we've been able to access there is a strong indication that target fixation kept Bailey as the lead suspect. Now, I may be wrong in that view but there is nothing else publically available to explain why Bailey is the chief suspect. It happened in other high profile murder cases in or around those times. In the months prior to Sophie's murder we had a hit & run wrongly classified as a murder and suspects arrested. We had Joanne Hayes and her family accused of murder along with coerced statements. We had Una Lynskey's murderer get away with the crime along with a follow up revenge murder happen because the gardai ignored all the evidence provided to them - they had a suspect and concocted the evidence to suit their own incorrect theory.
Indeed- so many years later and myths half truths rumours and lies all get swept up as fact. I really can’t be sure he did midnight rambles either but I’m willing to walk that theory in the interests of trying to understand just why Bailey has had such a focus, not from the public, but the investigating Gardai .
I think we’ve shown above that such activity is unlikely and a motive for murder non existent
In the article posted above there was a retired I think it said FBI guy or some retired police anyway. mentioned it was important that this cold case review does just that, and not simply as a vehicle to try and pursue new evidence against Bailey - the Gardai need to go where the evidence brings them. I’ve never seen the evidence bringing me to Baileys door - and believe me I’ve tried. Not one poster, not one documentary has made me even think for one minute it was Bailey.
This scenario doesn't convince me either, but it is on theory I could still think of, since the wandering at night was brought up. And he did wander around at night, and howling at the moon or similar has also been reported about Bailey. Whether that's all true, I don't know.
I know there are sexually motivated murders - without any sexual contact -but they’re rare and the scale of the oddballs who have done such murders are on a different planet altogether from Bailey - I just wouldn’t subscribe to Bailey doing what you describe above….just for that reason. Going to Sophie’s house, to scare her by howling? It makes no sense -I know her death is also senseless anyway- but that scenario just doesn’t convince me or sway me in any way. But then again I’m skeptical anyway that Bailey was involved so I’d need more convincing
but what if they did leave a trace and it was explained away because the person was known to Sophie?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
