Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed

Chris , Jim and Will? A lot of room for error I'd say. Why would anyone want to call him?

This is Chris Thomas' statement. If you compare it to Michael Sheridan's article it could well be what he is referring to. The date is out by one day but the gist of it is the same. Sheridan says that the "witness" originally thought it was a wrong number.

But you're at an absolute dead end, absolutely scraping a barrel.

At that point the opinions of such professionals are at least better than anything else you've got. When a another 2 professionals come to a similar finding, thats defintinely better than the barrel scrapings on offer.

Then when 2 ai's set to form independent conclusions come to a similar conclusion again, in both cases. Well this is 24 carat gold compared to anything else on offer.

In the course of a developing case with new concrete revelations granted maybe it wouldn't be worth so much. But when you look at what else in on offer in this thread … I mean get real you're going nowhere fast. Just going round in circles of pointlessness.

I dont recall mentioning any names.

Just pointing out that several sources come up with a similar offender profile.

Local male, substance user, grandiose, narcissist with history of violence towards women. etc etc. rage killing.

If offender/crime profiling is worth anything (and several high profile law agencies seem to think it is) then there is something of a consensus about what the perpetrator of this crime was like.

In a thread bereft of any progress whatsoever why not consider that.

ohhh because ai is imperfect. ohhh you dont know how ai works.

ok then dont use it, go back to spinning your wheel. Let me know if you get anywhere.

You stated, "it can't really be crap when you're using the overarching established facts of the case", so who else are you referring to?

"You've no reliable data upon which to create a profile FFS!"

Yes you do FFS!

• Crime Scene Organization.
• Victimology.
• MO and signature.
• Post offence behaviour.

are just some.

Interpersonal coherence.

Significance of time and place.

Forensic awareness.

Criminal characteristics.

Criminal career.

are others. You can examine many macro factors all of which are known beyond debate. They offer something, something at least as worthy as the pitiful offerings in here for months and years.

"There has been no update so let's make stuff up that points towards Bailey".

I'm so invested in it not being Bailey that auto-deny anything that might point towards him. Also Im impartial.

lol, the data the ai is using in one example is limited to the babblings of a bunch of ass hats.

the data in the other example includes all the accessible information on the internet.

hahaha. how can you not see the difference. theres no 'despite' about it.

the first example is gibberish. garbage in garbage out.

the second example includes academic references. high quality in high quality out.

despite indeed. 🙄

Mod - warned for breach of forum charter

"Local male, substance user, grandiose, narcissist with history of violence towards women. etc etc. rage killing. "

Clear enough; although you don't really need the awesome powers of Artificial Intelligence to figure this one out: Sherlock Holmes could have come to the same conclusions a hundred years ago.

It's a description that fits Ian Bailey, — and at least half a dozen others; including one we will call KW and at least one member of the Garda Siochana.

Brilliant deductions, Hal.

PS I am less sure about "Local": what exactly points to the criminal being local?

Just in relation to this posting whilst it's interesting and has lots of relevance it doesn't examine or make comparison angles which possibly is down to lack of investigation techniques used in original investigation that we can't utilize.

For example profiling goes out window, if you take In some regions of Europe, the figure for women killed by intimate partners or family members can be as high as 63%. So if we take Daniel TP we know he wasn't involved and yes doesn't fit the profiling, but we don't know his underlying themes, his financial situation, his string of partners, what about the circles he was operating in, the likely that crime follows high profile people just in different ways.

So if we can feed information on potential traits of all potential suspects or suspects circles, it's opens up very different profiling if there is such a process or merit in what I'm saying.

It's not beyond realms of all possibilities that it was outsider , not local but fitting the profiling that you mentioned earlier and having zero connection to victim but was instructed accordingly. Yes everything is far fetched.

We don't really need AI to produce a likely profile, but in any case in Ireland the profile of homicide perpetrators goes something along these lines (https://www.womensaid.ie/get-informed/campaigns-and-partnerships/femicide-watch/):

1. Intimate/Domestic partner 50%. (Daniel, Bruno, any local intimate partners unknown)

2. Associated with the victim 40% (Neighbours, regular workmen etc. any business partners, maybe barman and Ungerers etc.)

3. Strangers or passing knowledge 10% (Bailey, Wolney, other local oddballs, random stranger, random break-in etc.)

There is a reason that the gardai heavily pursued the idea that Bailey knew Sophie, because it is 4-5 times more likely that the perpetrator did know her, and it is extremely rare for a perpetrator not to know the victim.

In murder investigations usually you go down this list, and try to strike off each person based on likelihood, and ultimately you will get to the murderer. Aside from Bruno there's no real released information about how the gardai struck people off from what I can see. And in the case of many suspects they were struck off within days, or even hours of the murder.

I see the level you have sunk to and have no wish to join you there.

Yes that's very relevant as well thanks for posting. The idea even in this case Is bailey still only being in 10% category in this example and rightly so where neighbours and general workmen for example are in 40% and yet we have no reasoning why all or how 50/40% were eliminated by AGS. It's seriously sticks out that we have nothing so will remain with randomer 10% and it really is random 30 years on.

And we still don't know who WAS the last person to see Sophie alive (I mean, earlier in the day before the night she was killed).

Sophie made numerous phone calls on the night of 22nd December e.g. Josephine Hellen just before 10pm and then Daniel said he spoke to her sometime between 11pm and midnight.