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

Amazing that this new info regarding the distinctive individual knock has only come out after Shirley and Alfies death

I don't think it's remarkable that Alfie and Shirley heard nothing during the night. You would need to know what exactly preceded the fatal blows that killed her at the gate. If she had an altercation with her killer up at the house and, in fear of her life, managed to flee down the lane with Mr X in pursuit then that would have been a terrifying moment for her and you might expect her to call out or scream in that event. Maybe she felt she wouldn't be heard regardless.

Alternatively, if the initial interaction with the killer took place at or near the spot where her body was discovered she was likely just stunned into submission by the first blow. It can sometimes take a lot to rouse someone from a deep sleep. The sound of raised voices at a distance of one hundred metres would not necessarily do so.

You referenced the misinformation on your posts few pages back. So I've responded to that already. Go have a look and dig out misinformation

Because they can hear a knock that has not been mentioned for 30 years but not a violent assault. Makes perfect sense, oh wait.

If Sophie was running from her home and attacker would she not have run towards neighbours rather than away.

A point that has indeed been noticed before.

If you were being attacked on your own doorstep, you most surely would call out for the neighbours who are only a short distance away, or if you escaped you'd run there and bang on the door. Help, help!

The murder took place down at the open gate into the lane. That has to have been where the attack happened. It is possible that Alfie and Shirley, asleep at their house, just didn't hear the row,

In fairness it is hard to think logically when under stress. Sophies instinct was to run when under attack and probably didn't think of what direction she ran in - she just had to get away.

Now it may be significant that she didn't run to her nearest neighbors home for whatever reason but possibly she didn't get time to think logically.

But yes her best chance of safety should have been to run towards her neighbors screaming. The chance of neighbours being alerted may have scared off her attacker.

This is ridiculous. How can I either defend myself or acknowledge my error if you`re not going to specify what it was? Don`t make accusations if you can`t back them up.

I don’t see any evidence Sophie ran at all, if she was attacked at the gate area and died by the gate, it would indicate that she was knocked down and then unconscious within seconds.

There is minimal other blood away from the gate area really.

Objection your Honour….

There was multiple blood splatters on the gate (which was in the opened position), and heavy blood loss on the ground beside the concrete block (one would assume her head was laid in this location as she bled out), but there was also evidence that she had become caught up in the briers too (scratches to the body, clothing ripped by thorns etc..)

To me, this would indicate a struggle to escape her killer.

Did the original assault begin by the gate? Did the first strike by a rock draw blood and daze Sophie momentarily? Did she touch her head, see the blood and stagger backwards reaching out to the gate to support herself?

Although stunned, did she realize what was happening and try to make a run for it, only to lose her balance and fall into the briers? Was a stunned Sophie then dragged from the briers by her assailant, and further battered by the heavier concrete block until she met her demise?

I think there is plenty of evidence to suggest the assault was not started and ended in the exact same location, I would suggest Sophie put up a fight but was too dazed to outwit / outrun her attacker.

No I didn't. You didn't read the Moloney piece at all.

Ah right. So you think that Shirley`s door is 300 meters from her bed. OK then. Big house. Big big house.

It's very simple. You said there was misinformation, I'm just asking you what you are referring to?. I'm not making any accusations, unfortunately you are the one that is making them.

Tell me where there is misinformation is all I was asking. These are cornerstones of case and unless you have information to contrary please post them.

-Case is near 30 years unsolved

-We do not know the time of death

-We do not know did the killer walk or drive.

-We don't know of any murder weapon or have none in evidence albeit block/stones at site.

-We have no DNA at scene. Presently there is reference to unknown male DNA not Ian B but still under review.

-We had 50 suspects and the 1, how and why was that arrived it, and would it change much today with cold case review team.

-All other information surrounding the case, how do you know what is misinformation and what's correct.

The post mortem report describes extensive injuries to Sophie's hands: her fingers were damaged. This suggests a desperate fight to save herself. She was conscious at least long enough to try and fight back. God rest the poor lady.

"fairly easy to assume all three are mistaken"

No it isn`t. In typical conspiracy theory fashion you are zoning in on peripheral fluff and completely ignoring the big picture.