Old thread seems to be permanently locked. It will be interesting if anything can come of this at last.
Threadbanned Posters:
Well it wouldn’t be enough on its own anyway. If a piece of paper was found signed and dated by Ian Bailey confessing to the murder, the Gardai would still have to prove it.
I was guessing that's what you've meant.
I was only dragging it out to a ridiculous and absurd level.
wouldn’t matter if they had a video of him confessing it would be written off as dark humour like all the other confessions
Even if they did, and even if they believed every word, they still can't charge a person or prosecute in the courts if there is no corroborative evidence whatsoever. And in this case, there isn't.
I could turn up at a Garda station and claim that I had done this: showing my holly-scratched hands as evidence.
No witnesses, no fingerprints, no bloodstains except my own….
there's just no proof! Not even the "Beyond reasonable doubt" level.
Not enough!
All those “other confessions” were hearsay.
It seems that AGS still have nothing connecting Bailey to the murder following what presumably was a thorough trail through his diaries, papers, notebooks and recordings collected from his home after his death…
https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/ian-bailey-left-no-evidence-36456490.amp
They have nothing on him as there is nothing on him. Simple as that.
No surprises there - he knew he could be re-arrested at any stage so his possessions would have been gone through with a fine tooth comb - there was never going to be anything found - either because he had no involvement in the first place or that he simply didn’t write about or save anything that would connect him to the murder- a complete waste of Garda time yet again in my view - I don’t care how much they insist on pressing on with this case with Bailey at the centre, they missed the boat on a proper investigation many years ago - harping on about Bailey 30 years on doesn’t change that
Another article in indo about new memorial and the new panicked phonecall
From the article;
“It was clear the caller was distressed. There was no real conversation, but panicked ramblings and I said, ‘What could I do?’,” the man said. He said he thought the person could be drunk and the call ended.The identified caller gave early statements to gardaí that contained major contradictions and anomalies. At one point she was arrested and questioned about these differences and discrepancies.Years later she complained to gardaí that she was being intimidated by Ian Bailey, long the chief suspect in the murder, until his death almost two years ago.The woman who allegedly placed the call has yet to be interviewed by the cold case team about the new statement.She is connected to another person whom gardaí plan to eventually question.”
Not really. That's more he said she said..In the three cases the person(s) involved were and still are available to cross question.
"Is generally inadmissible because the original speaker isn't under oath and available for cross-examination, making it unreliable. For example, "My mother told me she saw the accused" is hearsay; the mother must testify directly to be cross-examined. However, if the statement's purpose isn't to prove its truth (e.g., proving someone can speak by saying "he said 'ice cream'"),"
"The identified caller gave early statements to gardaí that contained major contradictions and anomalies. At one point she was arrested and questioned about these differences and discrepancies.
Years later she complained to gardaí that she was being intimidated by Ian Bailey, long the chief suspect in the murder, until his death almost two years ago."
It seems this would have to be Jules, or is this referring to Marie Farrell, but was she ever arrested? I can't make sense of it at all, but these statements are independent of the actual phone call itself.
As for the phone call itself, the hackney driver was in bed with the flu, and now recollecting nearly 30 years later, the whole thing seems to be some delirious dream.
It's hard to believe that any murderer in history would be able to evade dropping some clue of guilt when almost everything they ever said, or wrote, or place they have been, has been scrutinised for 25+ years. In addition being a drunk who basically never shuts up. Just doesn't seem plausible.
That's all true.
If you want to get clean away with murder of a woman alone in a remote location you better shut up, lay low, or quietly slip away, back to England, France or the likes and do some proper planning before, - unless you want to rely on sheer luck and coincidence.
Luck and coincidence are rarely at your side.
Based just on that, I never thought Bailey could ever have done it.
You’re right MF was never arrested.
It’s Senan Molony, still flogging the dead horse or dead poet angle
Yours thoughts, match those of many locally.
If this lady is indeed "Connected to someone who the Guards hope to eventually question" then it can't be Jules; even though she was well connected to Ian Bailey, the latter was already questioned by police many a time; and the Guards do know that he is now dead RIP and can never be interviewed again.
I see some parallels, in terms of the authorities rushing to judgement, between this case and the Jonbenet Ramsey murder case in the US around the same time. In both cases, the authorities jumped to conclusions. DNA evidence later exonerated the parents but the police and the media dragged their names through the mud.
The way Bailey was named as a suspect without a trial going ahead seems very different from how cases have been handled since then.
Well your quote is Michael Sheridan in the Times and this new one is Senan Molony.
Neither of em a beacon of truth.
They know they feiced up - it’s an inconvenient truth that they don’t wish to admit to right now - maybe in 70 years time they might say, “oh that case? Yeah we royally feiced that one up”
Until this sort of update is broadcast on RTE TV news, I don’t think it’s particularly credible - I’d pay more attention to a post written here on this thread to be fair than some of the so called journalists writing this trash - if a true breakthrough ever happens in this case it will be headline news all over- we won’t have to debate the credibility of the source
No former neighbours of Sophie Toscan du Plantier have ever been publicly identified as having moved abroad. So who we talking about here?
I remember that case of Jonbenet Ramsey well. I think it was only down to an older and more senior officer that teh parents were exonerated.
There are not too many neighbours around. Shirley moved back to England, and the house was sold. It's possible that the Richardsons still own the house, but it was a holiday home to them as well. Getting on with age, holiday homes are often difficult to maintain, especially when remote. Karl Heinz Wollney, not exactly a neighbour, moved back to Germany soon after. Not sure, if marriage having fallen apart was the reason and the move was longer planned?
Rainbow coalition ministers still alive should be asked to give evidence to an inquiry into the handling of this case.
Seperately, the 2018 GSOC report said that a number of Gardai involved in the case refused to cooperate with their investigation of the case.
Not only was the gate destroyed, but other physical evidence, including a coat and a wine bottle found in the field months later, went missing too.
One piece of evidence going missing might be called an accident. Two might be called just carelessness. But what is three?
Guilty or not, I think it's a credit to the Irish judges that they refused to dignify a botched investigation.
In the report, GSOC says its deliberations had been hampered by the refusal of a number of garda detectives involved in the case to co-operate with them and the fact that some of the gardaí who investigated the murder have since retired or died.
wasnt the person who got the call male?
Shirley Foster lives in Schull. Wolney died by suicide soon after moving to Germany.
@rightmove, Michael Sheridan in his Times piece says the witness was from West Cork, so not necessarily a neighbour of Sophie’s. I would imagine plenty people from the area would have moved abroad in the last 30 years that we wouldn’t know about.
Is the best outcome now for Sophie's family not a judicial review or an inquest into the initial investigation? This cold case review seems to be a waste of time and resources. The initial investigation was so flawed that the chances of solving this murder are infinitesimal and are diminishing even further with the passage of time.
The ex-wife of Karl Heinz Wolney, moved back to Europe when she left him. But I think that was before the murder and she wasn't in Ireland on the night it happened.
The Gardaí have interviewed her.
And I still think that KHW needs to be investigated in regard to this matter. Even if only to finally eliminate him from the inquiry.
What ever happened to the Ungerer wife, I think she was much younger than the husband, and was foreign also. Perhaps moved abroad later.
I'm still puzzled as to why this call would have been dismissed by those investigating Sophie's murder back in the day and why it now (according to two journos) is an important lead - was it just more incompetence back then to miss something some glaringly important or are the journos simply sensationalising a nothing-burger?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://www.boards.ie/applications/dashboard/design/images/banned.png)
