Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed

But knowing somebody personally or knowing of someone's presence also doesn't prove murder either way. Lot's of people sadly think so, - I am not suggesting you do.

Even if Bailey met her in the pub every night, bought her beers trying to get her drunk and make a pass at her, it would still not prove murder.

Lot's of people don't get that either.

I think this is not a great statement at Peter Flynt. Firstly there can as much evidence in any criminal case and secondly the vast majority do not think IB killed Sophie simply due to lack of actual that same important evidence to place him at scene and we haven't had that opportunity to see how vast majority have opinion on it...

Firstly you will see from your reading of the case and many posters here that there is lots of evidence. But the ultimate problem I have learned is the sole focus of AGS and file submitted to DPP focuses on one person. The multiple potential suspects and scenarios put forward on this thread and in various other places protrays many others who have criminal backgrounds..no alibis on night in question..have prior convictions and or have been acting strange or had retracted statements etc. Ultimately I do respect AGS and their efforts and like anything I see the approach they took with bailey...but bandon tapes leaves me at crossroads..as it indicates..get someone on hook for this crime quickly....this never happened before in this area for 100 years..and was gaining international attention..and in way it's our lack of professionalism and incompetence and thus ultimately French I'm sure seen this weakness in our evidence but were happy take it and rework it to close it out. Dare we say it could have French connection...just get a conviction . And i do think..I'd be same if I held that position of authority..id want end to it .and I'd present the bailey file too..to DPP. Because we follow like lambs ..but it's about getting justice for someone and we all get desperate to get someone for it...

You have to see how this case was done from start to finish...every day I think it's bailey and every other day I think it's not. In end it makes no difference. We now have cold case review team..are they going to take new approach and we have upgraded DNA Analysis...we have nothing left...if nothing shows up we have nothing.

Well I'm indicating I respect AGS as organisation in general , I'm not here to bash them they do good work, but I can see how force not equipped for someone in over 100 years can leave them incompetent and unprofessional. And there seems to be just a serious focus on one individual but real issue I have is why given we cant find any of that evidence to back it up.

“Even sending the clothes for DNA testing to the FBI won't get them very far. The DNA on the clothes could be anybody's unrelated to the murder.”

It “could”- but it would certainly be a step forward and could potentially open a new line of enquiry.
The challenge of course is time and death - many people mentioned in these threads over the years as potential suspects have long since died; some of them merely months after the murder. The chance of investigating fully these other lines of enquiry are long gone

It was speculated that Bailey was facing arrest and questioning around the time of his death - if this is true, then Gardai must have had some significant new evidence to put to him.

Hopefully we will at some point, gain the DPPs insight into whether or not, a prosecution might have been feasible - but in the UK, this doesn’t happen where the suspect is deceased- I don’t know what the legal position is in Ireland - we may never know the full extent of evidence against Bailey no less if Gardai believe someone other than Bailey committed this crime.

People's memory fade, others passed away. You can't really cross examine anybody, ask any question. What did you do then and there, nearly 30 years ago? How do you remember? - Anybody would be lucky to get just the year right.

Thus only DNA would be the safest bet.

I would under normal circumstances believe that the police would keep certain evidence out of tactical reasons from the public. However in this case, I don't think the police ever considered that. I don't think they focused on others as strongly as Bailey or if they really had any credible evidence to consider Bailey more than others. ( setting aside bad mouthing or possible verbal confessions by some he knew , false or coerced witness statements, scratches on his hand which chan't be traced to the murder site…)

DNA on Sophie's clothes could potentially be from anybody and doesn't mean that they've gotten there during and only while she was murdered. Suppose she hugged somebody? or came any other way close to this person, and this person is totally unrelated to the crime, even has a solid alibi. It's hard to say and we all don't know. Yes I'd agree it's worth going after this line of enquiry, but I don't think it'll go very far.

I think the cold case has only been started in an atempt to formally apologise for the completely botched up investigation, to try to apologise to Sophie's family in France for not finding a killer and possibly wrongly implicating Bailey.

Bailey surely could have done it, he had no alibi, he had the time to do it, he had the studio to clean up afterwards, but he had no motive I could ever think of. And then there is the fact that he drank a lot that night, would have stumbled to her house, maybe she opened him the door, maybe not, and leaving no traces at all. Sexual motive, I simply don't see at all no matter how much I think about it and the police ruled out rape or attempted rape as well.

I personally speculate the murder wasn't about sex at all and neither do I consider rage as she was far to short at her cottage for any rage to build up. I personally speculate it was about preventing Sophie from doing something or preventing from something involving Sophie to happen and catching Sophie alone with a high degree of certainty.

Once they’re in an evidence bag there probably as “sterile” as any other evidence from that time - a man in the uk was found guilty of rape and murder last week, 60 years after committing the crime , with evidence coming from the clothes of the victim .

The problem in this case is, there doesn’t appear to be ANY DNA evidence of any kind

My understanding of that case is that the culprit was not someone identified at the time, who had no connection to the victim that could explain touch transfer DNA evidence. Plus in that case, there were bodily fluids to sample rather than touch transfer skin cells.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgk3jyl5prvo

This article summarises some of the issues with touch transfer DNA.

Modern technologies can now detect and analyze DNA from samples comprised of only 16 cells. But due to the touch-transfer properties of DNA, determining how those cells reached the surface on which they were found is impossible. Tiny amounts of touch-transferred DNA have placed people at locations they had never visited and implicated people for crimes they did not commit. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/marinamedvin/2018/09/20/framed-by-your-own-cells-how-dna-evidence-imprisons-the-innocent/

With the lack of professionalism by the AGS it would seem very plausible what you're describing.

I've read about this rape case, however rape is easier to prove beyond reasonable doubt, if semen and DNA is found in the vagina and the female is showing injuries of fending off some physical attack. Judge and jury would have a field day.

However that's not the case in this murder.

One thing the AGS could have done strategically is looking for potential DNA around the pump house. The cavity block was coverd by something functioning as a make shift roof or so. It's possible the killer may have injured himself whilst grabbing the cavity block, - it's something that would to a very high degree only have happened shortly before the murder, - thus it would be very strong DNA evidence, that is if it was found.

All specualtion, but it's worth a certain line of enquiry.

Yes. I have always been of that belief myself.

Sorry, should've been more specific - I mean to rule out Bailey as being the source of the sample.

Just to be clear though - the sample does not match Baileys at a DNA sequence level. Nor did it match any of Sophie's blood relatives.

Getting someone else’s blood (assuming it is blood) on your shoe is not an everyday occurance let’s face it- your own child who fell or got a nose bleed are two very specific reasons why an adult would get someone else’s blood on their shoe in the normal course of their day to day life.

It would require a very clear cut reason for the owner of this blood to be excluded from investigation into her death