Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed

The family will be upset at anything that challenges their view.

Since it is likely that Re-creation will be attacking the circumstantial evidence that some believe to be enough to convict, it may be appropriate at this time to drop in an example of how unsafe such evidence can be.

Peter Sullivan served 38 years for murder after being sentenced to life with a minimum term of 16 years.

He initially denied the attack, signed a confession (allegedly after being assaulted by police) and was convicted on the basis of this retracted admission, evidence around his whereabouts, and a since discredited bite mark matching his teeth.

Eyewitnesses said they saw him where clothing and a handbag belonging to the victim were found burned after her death. These eyewitnesses failed to identify him in an identity parade.

A neighbour said that Sullivan had borrowed a crowbar before the murder, police believed it could have been the weapon.

He supposedly bragged about the killing to another inmate while on remand, how convenient for the police eh?

They certainly wanted him to be guilty…however recent advances in testing revealed that Sullivan's DNA was not in the semen samples taken at the time, and are of an unknown DNA profile.

He was release after spending 38 years protesting his innocence.

I'd say by now they must have found DNA on Sophie's clothes at the FBI if there was any DNA at all to be found. Reason there is no news is there is probably nothing conclusive found, or someobody's DNA was found who is or was among Daniel's friends. The latter would be a bit of a hard hit for Pierre-Louis Baudey to digest because it would be proove that his father sent someobody from France to kill his mother. I'd also say, if they found Bailey's DNA or Alfie's or Finbarr's, we'd have known it by now.

Personally it's my good guess and chances are high that no DNA was found upon the FBI examination.

Guards still focussed on Bailey, does that surprise anybody here? No, thought not…

They were probably looking in the wrong place…again. 🤡

"no evidence pointing to Bailey at all to have him convicted"

GTF outta here. . . . You people wouldn't have convicted OJ Simpson ffs.

Bailey is as guilty as sin and, literally, got away with murder.

It's an opinion that's as plausible as any other surrounding this case, more plausible than opining that Bailey is definitely not the killer. The available facts and evidence, whilst not directly incriminating of him, would lend weight to the former opinion rather than the latter.

Grabs popcorn…

He left the bed he normally slept in and his house early in the morning just an hour or so before Sophie was murdered. The next day he was the first on the scene when informed that a murder had occurred. A scene so remote (no one knew where it was) that it was possible he was turning up to contaminate the scene before Harbison arrived.

He had cuts and bruises all over him and put it down to cutting down Xmas trees. When it was put to him by journalist Senan Molony that no one buys a Xmas tree on Xmas Eve he then changed his story to say he was killing a turkey instead.

The clothes he wore on the night of the murder "accidentally" ended up on fire the following day.

The man had a serious history of violence towards women - especially his partner Jules.

He had no alibi for the time of Sophie's murder.

In the end he got away with it because AGS were incompetent.

If he did it, it would be the most likely explanation.

I don't know how close he really was with Alfie? He may only have done some manual work for him every now and then. Also, why would he hike for one hour to Alfie's for just a couple of drinks, whilst he already had many before in the pub?

I see this the same way. There is absolutely no evidence.

The main issue I see is that there is no real long term connection between Sophie and Bailey as she was only for a very very short time in any given year at her cottage in Ireland.

It's far more likely the murderer was somebody who had some kind of longer connection to Sophie which at some point turned to a stronger difference of opinion which would have lead to a strong motive.

Remember, in the vast majority of murder cases murderer and victim are in some kind of relationship or connection to each other.

Other than a lust for beating up women when drunk, I don't see any motive for Bailey at all. He was also only known to have beaten up his partner Jules, never other women in the area.

My understanding is that Lyons didn't mix with others and there were only fleeting moments between Lyons and Bailey. They weren't friends.

Bailey went looking for sex I'd say and when Sophie didn't offer it he killed her. She ran from the house and he ran after her giving her an awful death.

You've already contradicted yourself.
"it was possible he was turning up to contaminate the scene before Harbison arrived."

How was he going to do that? The Guards were there, there was a cordon and there's no record of him being inside the cordon on the day of the murder or before Harbinson arrived.

You couldn't stand over any of that when challenged so now you've shifted the goal posts to another claim, that he was the first civilian on the scene.

Again, what is your source for any of these claims?

The DPP report looked at Bailey's arrival at the scene, looked at his account of the tree and turkeys and didn't find anything suspicious:

"Bailey’s explanation for the scratches is plausible, consistent and is supported by other direct and credible evidence."

The Guards lost track of the gate, however it was sent to the forensics lab and no forensics was found on it after that study incriminating Bailey. Briar samples were taken and studied. Nothing was found.
Sophie's boot was checked, and an unknown male DNA sample was found on it - not Bailey's.
So whatever the flaws in the Garda investigation, and there are many, they looked for forensics on Bailey and tested and found nothing. Which discredits the narrative of him being injured at the scene.

Being a thug does not make you guilty of murder. How many other thugs were there in West Cork?

The trial in France was a kangaroo court and an embarassment to French judicial system. No defence was presented and Marie Farrell's evidence was accepted as fact - evidence which doesn't stand up to scrutiny and she has withdrawn. Any finding by a court based on her evidence is completely unsafe and a recipe for a miscarriage of justice.

Well Bailey was hardly going to arrive on the scene himself nd call the guards ffs.

Tell me - Why do you think Bailey burnt the clothes (the following day) that he wore on the night of the murder?