Cold Case Review of Sophie Tuscan du Plantier murder to proceed (Threadbans in OP)

Is there evidence of him burning clothing and footwear in the days following the murder?

Maybe Bailey was the sharp tool all along….

Bottom line…

It's over 30yrs later, and not one scrap of evidence has ever been uncovered that ties Bailey to the crime scene.

Not one!

Ah humour. Always a good deflector when faced with uncomfortable reality.

Ah humour. Always a good way to puncture a concept detached from reality.

I missed this post yesterday.

"What else would you call a Detective being directly involved in Farrell obtaining council land for 1000."

It isn`t bribery, and that`s even if it was true to begin with. Furthermore it would have to have happened in the few weeks after the murder and before Farrell identified Bailey. You can`t bribe someone to do something for you if they`ve already done it.

"Farrell benefitted from implicating Bailey."

There is no evidence for this claim whatsoever. Like so many at the time Farrell benefitted from investing in property.

"Farrell said that Fitzgerald had introduced her and Chris to Callanan and that Fitzgerald said Callanan owed him a favour"

Your difficulties begin with "Farrell said…" It isn`t corroborated by other evidence, unlike her original identification of Bailey as the loiterer outside her shop and the hitcher on the Airhill Road, which is. Furthermore her claim was made within the context of her ridiculous withdrawal of her identification of Bailey as the man she saw outside her shop, on the Airhill Road and at Kealfada. It is further undermined by her former employee who testified in the case against the state that Farrell said she would be getting some of the money that would be awarded to Bailey. Farrell`s own testimony was laughed out of the courtroom and Bailey lost.

This is just the usual conspiracy theory nonsense that has prevailed on the Du Plantier murder threads for years now.

You see you would have been grand if you just left it sitting at Martin Graham which could be interpreted to be a bribe even though it was clearly about discovering the truth and not about miscarrying justice. But you had to go and include Farrell and suggest that she falsely identified Bailey for financial gain even though your supposed briber made no material contribution to your bribee.

"It is for continued co-operation"

You`re gas. So now that you`ve realized that what you claimed was a bribe couldn`t have occurred in the short timeframe before Farrell identified Bailey and so therefore couldn`t be a bribe, you widen the goal posts with the woolly and rather vague "continued co-operation".

"Can you explain why the detective did it then?"

I don`t know that he did anything, but even if he did, as far as I am aware, at that time these people were friends who socialized together.

"Ah so now it is a "conspiracy""

Only in your imagination. It`s your theory.

Not eventually. I acknowledged that back in post #14092.

Within the context of the recent discussion I highlighted what I said in post #14092. More generally I would have stated on these threads years ago that the Graham incident was illegal and the garda involved should have been subject to the rigors of the law. But feel free to pat yourself on the back if it makes you feel better and relieves some of the embarrassment of your Farrell bribe debacle.

Love your response to the question "can you explain why the detective did it then."

"" I don't know that he did anything"". This is brilliant response. Which detective in case does this refer too. I don't know did any of them do anything. Lol. Well wait now.. We have missing pages from job book.. A missing gate.. Large field gate.. It was of no evendential value.

We have sketches of scratches from hands of prime suspect.. He will kill again.. We will get more sketches. We have some reminents of burned fire.. May have been clothes or boots burned in that fire. Oh yes we have black coat.. Possibly two black coats. One might be belong to another detective…but it fills up evidence room. Now some of the other evidence bags were also left open but sure look its OK..Great work.. I don't know did the detectives do anything else…there is lot in here.

We took loads of statements, now amended some of them chopped them up.. Sure look we had to make them believeable for DPP. We will ask a few local people to help out case.. Strengthen it up.. I know a women.. I'll meet her at hotel she might change her statement.. Another guy, we can give bit of hash too.. There's loads of there from recent arrests.

To quote you yes I dont know did they do anything but even if he did as far as am aware.. These people were friends and socialized together... Marie having few drinks with detectives in hotel.. And few drinks with Graham bit of hash..he said he would meet Bailey..

So any sign of the big breakthrough from the cold case review then?

Yeah but apparently all that is a conspiracy 🤣

As always in these situations, conflicts of interest generally create an impression of impropriety. The gardai in this case were carrying on in numerous situations which could be construed as inappropriate, and to a layperson can appear as a bribe. However most of the time it is not bribery per se, and has an element of covering their own ass built into it.

So I guess I'm saying you could both be right.

What allegation have I made that was untrue?

Or at least deal with members calling others idiots.