Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed

Let's get real here..

If there was one speck evidence relating to Bailey found during the DNA testing, it would have been broadcasted on every Irish media platform available - Have no doubt about that.

The fact that it hasn't speaks volumes.

Even the Irish Premier suggested that Bailey got away with murder…

This case has been scrutinized beyond belief, still no evidence that puts Bailey at the scene..

Very few people knew Sophie was travelling to Ireland for a few days. Bar the cleaner, it was her fellow countrymen that knew, take that as you like, but they are the facts.

So another anniversary of her death passes and no progress - see you at end of 2026 so.

I wouldn't ever trust Nick Foster and his book about this case. Nick Foster isn't of any relevance to ever solving this case, and so is Sheridan. They can only ask the same question we've all been asking and not having answered.

as im sure you will have noticed while perusing this thread there is little in the way of hard evidence in this case.

other than the slim hope of some dna. which in itself may prove nothing/have no connection.

not much is happening in the public realm as regard this case it seems/afaik.

but if you've reached a dead-end and fancy a last resort to poke at you can always try having a discussion about the offender profile with an ai, such as grok or chatgpt.

i found the results interesting, if entirely predictable. but if doing so be sure to ask the ai to not just relay prior conclusions back to you, but rather to dig into the case itself and use its processing power to come up with a profile.

you can probably guess who the profile will fit. just dont say it in here or you'll be met with the stunning news that there's no physical proof.

The answer to the question is most likely money exchanging hands behind the backs of others….

No, it can't. That was never the point.

You can look outside of the case, see if it fits any established pattern associated with other similar crimes. "AI" is good for this.

But thats only if you've struck a dead end. Like for example if you've been going around in boring circles for months.

Think of it as an optional extra. There if you ever fancy a change from the same old record.

https://chatgpt.com/

Theres roughly as much point in asking ai about the case as there is talking about it here, or anywhere else online.

You don't have to assume anyone. It will just give you a computer based estimate of the profile of the offender.

For example it might come back as a local man with narcissistic and misogynistic mentality and a history of substance and domestive abuse. Thereafter you could treat that information as informative. Take it or leave it. The result may interest you, or not.

And then you can go back to waiting on any real developments in the case. Should they ever happen.

Sure whats the harm?

You dont have to be happy with what it says. Or treat it as a professional.

Plenty of halluncination and makey up **** in forums too.

If online forum posts are good enough for you to look at then ai probably is too.

I dunno…I've always wondered about "profiling"

Freely admit I know nothing about it!

But, for example, when there's some high-profile case in the headlines - a child abduction, say: then you sometimes see press releases saying that the police have called in a renowned "Profiler" - I think they are criminal psychologists.

This expert then examines the facts of the case and deduces from them a "profile" of the criminal - let's say, for a fictitious example, "This was done by a middle-aged male who is solitary, has a professional job, sexually repressed…." well, you get the idea.

I suppose it doesn't take a professional profiler to figure out that a violent crime was done by a violent man, or that a crime of sexual deviancy was done by a pervert.

But I would be interested to know how many of the professional guesses turned out to be correct! (In cases where the criminal did get prosecuted - and found guilty.) What percentage of the "profiles" were actually useful? How many were no better than educated guesses?

Thinking this over: every time a criminal is found guilty, there will be more info produced, for the profilers to add to their databases. So possibly they get better and better over time.

I repeat that I don't know much, but it's all very interesting.

FBI, ATF, NCA, RCMP, Europol, Interpol, all invest quite a bit in criminal profiling. With dozens of universitites across US and Europe teaching related degrees.

If you hit a brick wall on a case like this, and are interested, then why not look into what an ai would conclude when acting as a profiler. Or you can ask it to reference similar cases and quote the conclusions of qualified human profilers.

And if after all that you disagree with the (mostly) unbiased machine you can just switch it off and go back to waiting for developments reported by the press. Dont cost nothin.

No hit.

Theres a Maurice Sweeney noted, a travel agent.

Strangely enough I dont think the RCMP have investigated this case. Although there was some unofficial post-investigation work by retired FBI profiler Jim Clemente and behavioral analyst Laura Richards.

Their conclusions lining up quite well with psychiatrist Dr Jean Michel Masson, psychologist Kathy Regreny. And with the prompted non-reference conclusions of grok and chatgpt.