Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed

To clarify, in the picture of the front door lock, do you mean that the door is not locked at the point the picture is taken? Therefore either Sophie wasn't locked out at all, or alternatively the gardai unlocked the door before they took the picture.

Interesting, I had been under the impression they had to wait for Josie to open the house up with the keys, can't remember where I heard that, but it sounds like the house may not have been locked shut at all then?

I've always puzzled over that "poker" comment. In some tellings, the poker is missing: in other versions, it is a hatchet for firewood.

Were BOTH such items missing? Mrs Hellen knew the house well: she'd know what was normally there, and where things were kept.

Whichever it was, the fact that it (or they) have never been recovered does certainly imply a connection with the crime.

I can't guess what happened; possibly Sophie took a weapon with her to confront an intruder. If things got ugly, it could have been used against her. This is always a risk when a woman takes a weapon when facing an aggressive man!

If this item was used in the actual attack, where is it now? Million-dollar question!

I'd have chucked it into the sea, off a cliff - but I've never murdered anyone :-)

A lot - according to the barman on duty that night. Six pints and, just before closing, a large whiskey downed in one go.

Doesn't sound like Bailey though, does it? That element of pre-planning. Alcohol is an emboldener. People under the influence lose their inhibitions. Ian chances his arm and fancies his chances with Sophie.

In terms of her injuries, which were extensive and all over, what does the evidence say? Does it point to one person or more that come person as the perpetrator?

Harbison doesn't note the presence of multiple perpetrators, I think he doesn't speak about it at all so perhaps he would have mentioned if he thought it was a possibility. He does call out that Sophie has numerous defensive wounds, and she seems to have put up a fight, so to me that would seem that she was capable of defending herself, which would indicate only one person attacking imo. With two people you would think one would be holding, and the other attacking.

The rest of the evidence doesn't really point to any additional person either as far as I can tell. Having said that, would it be possible for one person to attack, and the other not participate at all (This is what people would say who think Jules was with Bailey), or perhaps for a two-phase attack one person attacked in a rage, and the other was the one to decide to kill, no witnesses etc.? Possible, but I don't think you could tell either way from the evidence or autopsy in either instance.

To note also weather they could see lights or not per Odyssey, it's highly unlikely, I'm pointing out how would IB or anyone know someone was or wasnt staying with her..without element of preplanning.

It's strange to me last person that would definitely know was Daniel per phone but Alfie and Shirley may have known also.

The one person that DEFINITELY must have known was the housekeeper, Mrs Hellen.

At least I presume she must have been told how many people would be staying at the house when she went there to open up, turn on heating, and put milk in fridge etc (or whatever the usual routine to make the house ready for occupation)

She may have mentioned it to her family, too, I suppose.

Well I don't think it's unreasonable for that one element of pre planning to know it's her first time travelling alone, and she will be alone in house on that weekend... The rest could be unplanned.

There is no factual proof either way. I am always surprised that about those who continue to insist it was unplanned.

However whoever visited Sophie that night/morning went there for a specific reason he didn't go there for a chinwag and a natter.

The reason is unclear, but apparently a phone call wasn't enough. It had to be in person. This would imply it was important. So what was so important? We don't know.

One strong guess is that the killer wanted to refrain Sophie from doing something, or convince her in any other way. Even if Sophie agreed, this would also imply that if Sophie changed her mind later on, her mere existence of Sophie would always have been a risk to the killer.

So he started to make plans. When was she alone? When was she at her cottage? At what time am I least been seen or noticed?

These are my deductions.

Even if it was unplanned rage, it's hard to consider where this rage would have come from? Visiting a house in a remote part of Ireland for one week? And even less?

Even if it was an argument among neighbours? An opened or closed gate would have to be tolerated no matter, if it's just for one week. Anybody would have accepted an unliked neighbour for one week given there were months in between….

A rage due to sexual rejection? A bit unlikely to wait for possibly many months for a sexual encounter with a woman who was so rarely at this address?

The sexual motive for Bailey seems to be a rather persistent idea which doesn't go away.

Did Bailey make a pass or come on to women in the pub? ( And I am sure, he spent a lot of time in pubs)

Did Bailey ever attempt rape or rape a woman?

Did Bailey ever touch a woman inapproriately?

Did Bailey ever cheat on Jules?

Was Bailey involved in a brawl or any other kind of pub fight or affray?

None of these things happened, as far as I know, and you can correct me if I am wrong.

But still the only motive for Bailey seems to be sexual and rage. Why?

Him beating up Jules only happened in the confines of his own home but never towards others.

I am aware there is no proof either way, but a sexual motive for Bailey seems unlikely.

It would be a good explanation as well. Only objection would be the car Sophie parked outside indicating somebody is home. Anybody looking for a remote house to break into would have probably have picked the Richardson's.

However like all the others, there is no proof for or against. It's possible it happened, there is even a good likelyhood, but then again, it could also not.