Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed

@tibruit what's your explanation then, instead of poking holes, have you got a better one? I don't think the gardai even explained it.

https://www.odonohoearchive.com/i-have-never-felt-terror-like-it-the-murder-of-sophie-toscan-du-plantier/

it reads here:

33: It is worth noting that Dr Harbison did not rule out movement of the body in his Post Mortem report: ‘The generally haphazard layers of the abrasions on the back did not suggest that the body had been dragged over a rough surface by the feet or arms, because there were no consistent vertical markings on the back. Nevertheless fine parallel lines could be seen above the level of these two inter-scapular abrasions suggesting some movement in a head to foot or vice-versa direction.’  Dr Harbison also noted scratches on the left and right buttocks of the body. It might be asked if the body could have been moved to allow a car to exit.

The forensic analysis of the car was I believe done in February 1997, or 6 weeks after the murder (open to correction). Most people would agree that was ample time for a clean of the car, especially if you were forensically aware (DPP's description of Bailey).

1. The murderer would have a very good idea if they left blood at the scene. There's no evidence of Sophie scratching the murderer, no dna under her fingernails. Its entirely possible the murderer also got tangled in the briars but no evidence of their blood on briars was found. Its possible Sophie struck the murderer (possibly with a poker or something) but this poker or similar was never found, so that evidence was removed by the murderer. Aside from possibly a wound/nick from a poker, theres no evidence thr murderer left any blood at the scene.
2. More importantly Bailey knew he was going to be asked to provide samples as a major suspect. He didn't need a crystal ball to know this. His.offer of samples was an empty gesture which the DPP swallowed and which people like Oddessy continue to swallow. It was as meaningless as Richard Satchwell offering to do a lie detector test.
3. Bailey was forensically aware, having reported on crime scenes in the UK and elsewhere. Even the DPP admitted this. This potentially could have led to the use of gloves on the night.
4. There is very strong evidence given the lack of ANY forensic evidence left by the murderer that the murderer was forensically aware, ranging from preparation to clean up. The return to the house after the murder could well have been to recover the poker by the way.

But he also picked up fellow reporter the following day. It would still have been very steep timeline if bailey used that car and had it sufficiently cleaned before he had Jules and reporter back in it.Jules would know if say for example her car was cleaned more that before or had that odour. It's normal thing to notice.

The blood trace found on the outside of the door was identified (tentatively) as probably a match for Sophie's own blood.

It is not possible to clean a car so as to remove all trace of blood. There are chemicals that can detect the traces for years, even after cleaning; if you or I had murdered someone brutally, finally dropping a breeze block on them and causing a pool of blood, our shoes at the very least would have traces where we stood on it. Bailey's car was examined for blood, as far as I know - I'm not sure how many other cars were also.

This is probably off topic, but what always comes to mind is why there wasn't any foreign DNA found underneath Sophie's fingernails is the 1974 moive "The Internecine Project". In one scene the killer puts deliberately foreign DNA underneath the victims fingernails after killing her whilst she was taking a shower. Not impossible to think that that took place as well.

As to the rest of the statements, I still strongly believe that the killing was planned. If it would have been unplanned there would have automatically been too many moments and possibilities where the killer would have depended on sheer luck for not leaving any traces, DNA or fingerprints, or even risk of being seen.

Also, if the killer was forensically aware, he would have made sure that no or very little blood get's onto him, and one of the most effective ways of doing that is covering Sophie's head whilst bashing. Otherwise the killer would have been really covered in blood, one thing the killer couldn't risk.

One way of solving this crime would sure have been examining all the relevant cars. Was the car of the Guard in Bantry ever examined? Or that other car owned by some woman who lent it to somebody that car with the apparent fake licensplates which was once mentioned? Or that rental car which was returned? All Ford Fiestas as far as I know. If Sophie's blood was in it, whoever owned, drove or rented that car would have "some serious explaining" to do….

He could probably have had the car professionally cleaned? Not in Cork, but further away, say Dublin. Nobody would remember and a day / two day trip to Dublin is certainly worth it if the killer wants to have the car really free of any traces. Would Jules have allowed for Bailey to drive the car that night? After so many drinks in the pub? It's probably the better choice to dispose of blood stained clothes rather than cleaning the car anyway. Also, alcohol would wear of, if one is physically exercising, which a one hour hike would have meant for Bailey. And would Bailey risk a one hour hike back, even in darkness having blood stains all over him?

“If the murderer did not shed blood then why the hell would Bailey fear having his blood found at the scene? When he KNEW better than anyone he didn't shed blood?”

But he did- the scratch marks all along his hands and arms 😀

Ya see, ye can’t have it all ways- if you put Bailey forward as the murderer then you’re in the camp of “Bailey received the scratches from this attack, likely the briars and not from cutting down trees/murdering turkeys!”

So if Bailey did do it- instead of being confident he wouldn’t be found out via DNA- he would actually have been petrified - of course he would have known that left DNA behind had he scratched himself extensively on the briars- and likely very small droplets of blood too.

So which is it- Bailey killed Sophie and got his injuries throughout the attack? Or Bailey wasn’t there and got his injuries from cutting down Christmas trees- and therefore had no reason to fear a DNA test.

Looking at some of the pictures of the scene, it looks like there is a fence in this spot (number 2), which would have extended about the length of the later wall. I presume that Shirley would have had to run around this fence rather than try to clamber over

“She may have been grabbed in her doorway by her killer and dragged outside,”

Given that you have stated Bailey murdered her- and given the motive put forward by the Gardai is sexual- it’s far more likely she would have been “dragged” inside the house- not outside

Yes... according to DPP report:

The Gardaí attribute a sexual motive to Bailey allegedly going to Sophie Toscan du Plantier’s house in the early hours of the morning before she was murdered. They say that he killed her because she rebutted his sexual advance... In fact there is no evidence of a sexual motive in this case. References in the Garda Report to a sexual motive are pure speculation.

Well there's no evidence for a lot of what the Gardai say about the case… so that's par for the course.

What about shedding blood from all those scratches he was supposed to have as a result of tangling with the briars while committing the murder?

@csirl

Unable to quote your post for some reason.

I think you are being slighly facetious when you say Bailey didn't have blood on him while reporting the next day. Only the dumbest murderer in history would show up the next day covered in blood.

Re blood in the car, we simply don't know how much blood made it onto the murderer, it could have been significant, or, it could have been a few drops which dried quickly.

@tinytobe

The majority of murders are preplanned.

A lot of of unplanned "murders" are treated as manslaughter by the courts, eg self defence.

So yes there's a good chance Sophie's murder was preplanned.