Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed

Who do you think would sign up to be available 24/7 to be sent anywhere in the country at short notice?
From the limited pool of people with the years of experience capable of carrying out the job?

It's not sustainable and would be a recipe for burn out and resignation.

The failing is with the State initially for having no provision for alternates and with the Guards on the scene who refused Harbison's request.

I believe there is no provision such that a repeat of the Harbison scenario would not occur, but I don't think anyone has ever been properly held to account for the decisions around moving of the body. We don't do accountability in this country really.

As far as I can recall, Harbison wasnt employed as a full time pathologist. He worked in academia and voluteered* for the role.

*when I mean volunteered, I think he responded to a request for someone to do the role on an occasional basis (rather than for no pay).

Yes, I am "blaming the State Pathologist's office for not being able to drop everything going on and dealing with a murder". I would have expected a murder to take precedence. However, the State Pathologist's office at the time pretty much consisted of only Harbison as a 'boots on the ground' employee.

I have also acknowledged the failings of the State in providing assistants to the one State pathologist and I've not ignored your point on the refusal of the local Gardai in responding accordingly with Harbisons request and whoever did needs to answer for that decision.

I've noticed over time a lot of defense of Harbison. As if his decisions were justified, perhaps they were and I'm just uninformed. Has he been used as a 'scapegoat'.. am i missing something?

"So he never has a holiday? He can't have a good time and get drunk? You haven't thought that through."

I'll just leave that above comment hanging there as I don't know how to respond to it.

Wait!! I've just thought of something. As my great uncle Ben once said.. "With great power comes great responsibility". (Apologies for the facetiousness but I think it was apt in this instance).

I've never suggested it was his decision to leave her body in the open. However, it was his inability/unwillingness to respond to the crime scene when requested that resulted in the unnecessary lengthy exposure to the elements. He may have called for her body to be removed to a secure enclosure.. Cork University Hospital.. but for some unknown reason, that request was ignored.

OK, I am by far no expert on this, but as far as I have been reading there isn't much evidence in this case.

There are only two certainties: The police had apparently motive to actively pervert the course of the investigation, and Sophie's husband gotten and saved a lot of money due to Sophie's death.

These are simply facts in the case from what I've been reading about this and they are too hard to ignore or explain away as "just accidents".

For instance, since when is it acceptable for a police force to give drugs to a former British soldier to get close to Bailey to get him to speak or confess? Since when is it acceptable for a police force to coerce a witness ? These things didn't happen by accident or lack of experience, they happened obviously by design.

So the police used drugs and coercion to get somewhere, or at least they thought so. Only criminals use drugs and coercion ! - and this was not in a dictatorship or some other autocracy but in an EU country. ( In any other EU country any police officer acting or behaving this way would have lost his job, even his pension )

Or the husband of Sophie in France. We do know that he was already having a relationship with his next future wife to be, whom he married shortly after the murder, - pregnancy came soon after. He also received a life insurance payout upon Sophie's death and there was no cost of a divorce for him, one which might have also dragged on in legal issues as well. Also since when would a court in an EU country convict for murder on just hearsay evidence and withdrawn witness statements upon coercion?

So for Daniel Toscan du Plantier, the wife he obviously no longer loved was conveniently gone, didn't even bother traveling to Ireland, avoided police questioning, he conveniently received a life insurance payout, even the cottage must have been in his ownership as well and nobody notices anything? His finances were also never looked at.

It's not an uncommon motive at all for a husband killing his wife or having her killed for, wealth, money and the cost of divorce.

What does stand out here and is even stinking to high heaven by the little information I have and the reading I have done is that both the police in Ireland as well as the courts in France had clear intention to deliberately pervert this murder case into another direction, and they both found a man as a scapegoat not even having evidence.

I'd say it's all a bit too obvious. The answers either are to be found with the Irish police or with Sophie's apparently influential husband.

I am not in Ireland, nor am I Irish. I've only been reading about the case.

What is however very very obvious to me, is that both at an Irish end, and at a French end, there is a strong effort which was made to pervert the course of the investigation and justice in order to implicate a man against whom there is no evidence.

I've read lot's of negative things about the Bandon as well as the Bantry police station, same as about Daniel Toscan du Plantier and the French judicial system.

The only thing I see with certainty and beyond dispute is a corrupt and coercive police force on the Irish end, and on the French end an influential business man with lot's of money to gain or to lose, a marriage which is over, and a questionable court decision.

This all looks like big motive from all sides: A failed marriage, a wife no longer loved, a costly divorce, a life insurance, a cottage, a corrupt police force and a woman alone and an unwelcome or unpleasant Englishman as the perfect suspect to be framed.

It would seem very much both Sophie and Mr. Bailey were all victim in this game, one gotten killed, one gotten framed.

And the other ones would be laughing: Police officers in Ireland keeping their job, going after the corruption, not losing job or pension, and a Frenchman, getting married to wife number 3, a life insurance payout and a cottage in Ireland.

No job losses, no disciplinary procedures, no questions or inquiries into personal finances, nothing.

You may certainly correct me, but this is what simply stands out in this case.

Not just having a drink. He could have a health issue, a family crisis, a holiday abroad.

The whole setup was simply inadequate for an EC/EU country in the 1990s. We were not that badly off. Nothing done about an obvious issue until the horse had bolted.

And I believe it was a factor in putting pressure on the investigation to 'get a result'.

As I've previously acknowledged, it was a bureaucratic failing.. State Pathologists Office in not providing sufficient assistants (for whatever reason, funding or lack of qualified personnel which I understand Harbison battled for).. that contributed to the embarrassing delayed response to a major crime scene.
Having said that, if there has to be only one qualified person for such an important and well recompensed position, typical time off work entitlements cannot be expected to apply. The very nature of the job does not allow for it.
Short off being unavailable due to an illness, injury or personal family issue etc., celebrating a birthday is at the very least a questionable excuse!

I would hate to be that individual to have to explain to the family of a murder victim the reason for the body left exposed to the elements for more than a day was due to the States one and only pathologist could not attend because the crime occurred on the day of his birthday!
(Harbisons ignored request for the body to be removed to CUH is another failing to add to the already long list).

It is well known that Ian Bailey was going around intimidating witnesses (mainly women). It seems like a pretty odd thing to do to contact the Gardaí, give statements and then retract them all. The body was not almost naked either.

We don't know if Harbison agreed to those terms do we- as in being ready for work 24/7, 52 weeks per year. That's no time for holidays, social life, family emergencies etc. I cant see anybody agreeing to those terms being honest. I expect Harbison was annoyed with the situation and put his own terms in place that there would be times when he would not be available.

If you are a reasonable person you would have to accept that to put that pressure on an individual is way too much.

Im puzzled why you continue to blame Harbison.