Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed

Evidence of preplanning is what would be used to make that distinction though, not the other way around, and in this case it may be hard to sell to a jury. Could just be seen as an escalation, manslaughter.

Im saying the general narrative is that bailey had a number of drinks on night in question.

Was it not Jules who drove home from the pub?. It was also known around this time the guards previously had bailey on their radar for drink driving. So he certainly was used to that behaviour.

Yes he was up in middle of night...but the article was not finished the following day..it was another day or so before submitted if I recall. Maybe he had further few whiskeys at this time...while trying start article.... Again it's all unknown what he did or didn't consume..or effects on his abilities. But certainly at the time of year and given his general behaviour, he was a consistent drinker and regular in public houses. But the more of these elements drags further impossibilities into every discussion that he automatically knew he left no DNA at scene

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/crime/how-gardai-almost-arrested-ian-bailey-for-drink-driving-on-night-sophie-toscan-du-plantier-was-murdered/a1708479728.html

I struggle to understand what you think was the appropriate evidence to make Bailey prime suspect in the first week of the case. Before any of the witnesses or confessions, the scratches were not indicative. I mean why did they make him prime suspect do you think, was it justified at that time?

“There is zero evidence of planning as far as I can see.”

Yeah I agree- I mean, if this was pre-planned would you choose such an open/public area to leave the body? In fact would you kill her in the manner the evidence suggests? I think it’s far fetched to believe it was a pre planned murder- even more bizarre a pre planned murder made to look like a spontaneous event .

Surely you’d kill in the house itself- less chance of being seen, less chance of being heard- more time to make good your escape before body found.

I would disagree on this. I would see this as a planned murder, as the murderer would have to have known that Sophie was at her cottage. He also knew that she was there alone. He also knew that as long as Sophie was alive, she was a risk to him.

Of course there is no proof, but there are more indications pointing to a planned murder than an unplanned murder.

I disagree with this; to me it all looks much more like "taken by surprise" rather than pre-arranged.

If the stranger thought that the property was unoccupied, he got a nasty shock when this little woman emerged from what he thought was an empty house, and challenged him. "Who are you looking for? Why have you pushed open the gate of my field? Close it right now please!" etc etc

Drunken guys escalate fast into violence (look at the scenes outside the nightclubs of Leeson St - any night of the year)

The picture fits Ian Bailey — and thousands of others.

As I see it, there is nothing whatsoever in the known facts of this case to indicate any planning.

It is possible ( so much is possible) that Daniel engaged someone to kill Sophie and to make sure it didn't look like a planned hit. But even it the unlikely event that this was the case, there were so may other, less risky ways to have it done…she could have been thrown over one of the nearby cliffs, for example, which probably would have been regarded as an accidental fall.

On the other hand, it bears the hallmarks of a spontaeneous rage killing. I see no reason to think it was planned.

"As I see it, there is nothing whatsoever in the known facts of this case to indicate any planning."

A killer who leaves no trace of himself might indicate preplanning. A chief suspect who describes in writing his desire to murder and how he would do it might also be an indicator of preplanning.

Bailey in a beret? Any other reports of that? Seems very dubious.

Farrell got Baileys height / relative height completely wrong.

Remarkable neither Farrell nor Griffin has never laid eyes on Bailey, a distinctive character who was no recluse.

Could it be this guy?

https://www.reddit.com/r/MurderAtTheCottage/comments/1mdkza9/what_is_the_gardais_timeline_of_the_murder/

There was another fellow with a long black coat called Murray as far as I can remember, residing in Glanmire, Co. Cork who had some kind of a shack near Kilfadda bridge who was seen walking near Kealfadda bridge the Sunday evening of the murder at about 4.30 pm 'ish just as it was coming on dusk. END QUOTE

Note we can believe Marie Farrell's first statement, made on 27/12. This is where she says

I noticed a weird looking character across the road from my shop.  He was approx 5’10” in height, late 30’s, scruffy looking, long black coat, flat black beret, thin build, sallow skin, short hair.

We can trust this statement because it was corroborated by her landlord, Dan Griffin who said

He had a long black coat down almost to his ankles.  He had a black beret on his head.  He was walking fairly lively and I thought he was aged 35 to 40 years of age.  I had not seen him before and did not see him since.

Ian Bailey never wore a beret.

Think that's reasonable points you make there. There is just too much luck in it all to have no elements of planning.

The only one I fully can't grasp, is it's her first time travelling alone to cottage and on one of her rare visits and this happens..that still suggests to me someone knew she was going to be there...if all else was unplanned..

Yes, another good point.

Somebody must have known that she was not only at her cottage but she was alone. Meaning, not having a witness.

Even during bashing her head in, the way it was one, blood must have spilled in all directions. Even Harbinson stated that as far as I know. Please also consider that if the murderer was holding a cavity block, he would have been less than a meter away from Sophie's head. Getting no blood on himself would have been virtually impossible considering the brutal way she was murdered, - unless he covered her head with something before he started bashing.

So he must have at least arrived with gloves and some kind of cloth or plastic or the likes to cover Sophie's head whilst bashing her head.

This would strongly imply planning than not planning.

For sure a planned killing would involve effort to minimise the risk of leaving evidence behind. Forensic or otherwise.

But it may not have been necessary for the killer to know that Sophie was at home. He may have been at the premises for another reason.

Scenario 1:

Lets say that the assailant was someone who had legitimate reason to be at the gate. Then any fingerprints would be explainable as everyone who passed through would touch the gate.

Lets say it all started when Sophie was irritated by seeing this individual leaving the gate open ( it was an issue with her) and perhaps even attempting to prop it open with the block.

Lets say she hurriedly put her boots on and marched down the field to remonstrate with this person. This person took umbrage at this once a year visitor loudly complaining at him. Lets say insults were traded and he lost his temper and attacker her, picking up a nearby rock and striking her. She falls, bleeding heavily, he realises that he has gone too far and that he is in big, big trouble, in a moment of panic he decides that his only option is to kill her, drags her off the road and dumps her into the briars at the side to make way for his car and finished her off by dropping the block on her head.

Lastly, he checks the house for any possible witnesses, leaving a smear of Sophies blood on the door behind the handle.

Scenario 2.

As above but the killer is spotted by Sophie taking the block off the pumphouse (to retrieve drugs which have been hidden inside)

Either require far fewer assumptions than any planned attack.

Only in Scenario 2.

The killer would have had to live with the risk that Alfie or Shirley would be coming down the road any time, even at night, for whatever reason, even if the likelyhood is low. He would also have to bear in mind that someobody could be driving up to the houses at any time, say the Richardsons returning unexpected. The interesting thing is, that the location where Sophie was found couldn't be seen from Alfie and Shirley's nor from somebody approaching from the main road, is the location seemed at least back then hidden by brambles and briars.

Maybe also coincidence, but maybe also not.