Death of Sophie Toscan du Plantier

[Pcdunn]

Hmm. Sounds to me as if the Irish police don't consider this case all that "cold"??

[MrBarnett]

According to the Irish Independent:

The Gardaí have always regarded the murder as a live investigation, despite Mr Bailey repeatedly writing to Garda Commissioner Drew Harris, to demand a cold case review that he hopes would clear his name.


And yet the Independent and various other media have also frequently used the term ‘cold case’. So what point were they trying to make?

[MrBarnett]

Things are moving:

https://m.independent.ie/irish-news/news/sophie-toscan-du-plantier-death-probe-moves-to-fresh-witness-interviews-amid-suggestions-gardai-may-revive-immunity-provisions-in-the-case-41560292.html

[MrBarnett]

Thanks, E., thats a useful summary, but there’s not a lot of substance there. Given the complete incompetence of the police, you have to wonder how reliable any DNA evidence might be. Where has this bottle been for 25 years? It’s quite telling that they lost the farm gate smeared with blood but retained a bottle without considering that it might hold DNA evidence until now.

Incompetence doesn’t really cover it. As you say, Bailey left Thomas in bed in the small hours, but because Sophie’s body wasn’t examined for 24 hours, the time of death is unknown.

And when we hear of the police paying a criminal in drugs to get information from Bailey and consider Marie Farrell’s motivation for changing her mind, the possibility of the police having reached the conclusion that Bailey was guilty before having real evidence against him and fitting him up has to be real.

I wasn’t aware there were three drunken confessions. I’ll have to watch the films again and do some googling. This really is a fascinating case.

[erobitha]

Was man B the one whom the Irish police allegedly paid in drugs and money to get information out of Bailey while they were in a cell together?

https://www.southernstar.ie/news/a-s...murder-4233025

You are mixing up two different witnesses. The one referenced in this article 'Man B' was imprisoned for the rape of his own daughter. So yes, his credibility is questionable. The wine bottle does exist and the police have it. Man B definitely did share a cell with Bailey and the two struck up a friendship. The witness paid in "drugs and money" was a local man.

I have said throughout that Police ineptness led to Bailey being a free man, but there really was no wide-ranging conspiracy to 'fit him up'. It's a story he loves to spin when the pressure comes back on him. I believe Jim Sheridan has fallen for the "little guy versus the state" narrative Bailey has constructed. It has appeal to certain liberal media types who feel they are the last barriers of defence against human injustice. It's an honourable viewpoint, but the facts are this:

• Bailey knew she was French before Eddie Cassidy knew
• Bailey knew she was not sexually assaulted before such details were made public
• Bailey often visited Alfie Lyons to buy weed, and knew of Sophie having met her the previous summer at nearby festival and having been introduced by Alfie Lyons when Bailey was doing work in his garden
• Bailey had cuts on his arms and head the day after her murder but not before as seen by witnesses
• Bailey was missing from his bed with Jules Thomas in the early hours of the morning in question. His excuse was he was writing an article that had a tight deadline. We never did get to know for which paper this was for or what was the deadline
• Bailey had been charged for physical assault against Jules Thomas and was known to have been physically abusive to her when drunk on numerous occasions
• He confessed on three separate occasions when drunk and each time blamed it on "irony"

Still not enough for a safe conviction on the above alone, but there are no other suspects right now or even then that have come even close to Bailey. As I have said, advancements in DNA technology may finally get the closure Sophie's family deserve.

[MrBarnett]

Was man B the one whom the Irish police allegedly paid in drugs and money to get information out of Bailey while they were in a cell together?

https://www.southernstar.ie/news/a-s...murder-4233025

[MrBarnett]

Thee was a wine bottle which was recovered near the scene but not at it. It could have only been left by the killer. There were other items which are not publicly known.

As for the French court it ranks higher in judicial fairness than Ireland, so I’m not sure where the assumption comes from that somehow the Irish courts would not have accepted certain evidence. It never had the luxury of reaching a court thanks to the DPP. He is free only on a technicality which is Ireland does not recognise convictions in absentia. It’s why he never went to France - his lawyers knew he would get cover.

Ireland has one last shot to put its house in order or it will go through the ECJ and the local law will be over-ruled by the EU.

There are reams of evidence that were available to the French courts which were made available to the Irish police - who did not (as far as I’m aware) decide to make use of any of it.

Mairead Farrell is a liar and her testimony either way should never have been considered I agree.

The only person who could have left the bottle was the killer? That’s interesting. How so?

[MrBarnett]

I watched the documentaries a while back and already some of the details are a bit hazy. As far as I remember, the French prosecution presented largely hearsay evidence. Bailey allegedly told a neighbour’s teenaged son, “I went up there with a rock and bashed her f***ing brains in," and the boy’s mother appeared in court in Paris to repeat what her son had told her 23 (?) years previously. Bailey claims he told the boy that other people were saying he had “bashed her brains in.”

It’s little wonder that Ireland has rejected French attempts to have Bailey extradited.

I think Marie Farrell’s ID of Bailey outside her shop and at Kealfadda bridge was the strongest evidence the French prosecution presented. But she has since recanted, saying the Irish police pressured her to ID Bailey. As a result, she is totally discredited as a witness. I doubt she’d even be called as a prosecution witness at an Irish trial

[erobitha]

There might be DNA evidence from somewhere other than the crime scene I suppose, from the cottage, perhaps, or Sophie’s car. If Bailey was allowed access to the crime scene, any DNA evidence taken from there must be unsafe. And bearing in mind the police seem to have mislaid the blood-smeared gate, what reliance could be placed on any chain of evidence?

The French conviction was based on little or no evidence that would stand up in an Irish court of law. I think I’m right in saying the prosecution presented Marie Farrell’s original evidence without mentioning that she had subsequently retracted it.

Thee was a wine bottle which was recovered near the scene but not at it. It could have only been left by the killer. There were other items which are not publicly known.

As for the French court it ranks higher in judicial fairness than Ireland, so I’m not sure where the assumption comes from that somehow the Irish courts would not have accepted certain evidence. It never had the luxury of reaching a court thanks to the DPP. He is free only on a technicality which is Ireland does not recognise convictions in absentia. It’s why he never went to France - his lawyers knew he would get cover.

Ireland has one last shot to put its house in order or it will go through the ECJ and the local law will be over-ruled by the EU.

There are reams of evidence that were available to the French courts which were made available to the Irish police - who did not (as far as I’m aware) decide to make use of any of it.

Mairead Farrell is a liar and her testimony either way should never have been considered I agree.

[MrBarnett]

Depends on what DNA was gathered and from which source and when. Bit premature to call it compromised. Although it would not shock me that would be a Bailey defence strategy.

The reality is the police made a pigs ear of the whole thing back then.

He is already convicted of this crime in France. If their court of law was happy enough with the evidence presented then I am inclined to believe a strong case has been made to prove his guilt. They have had access to files and information the Irish system has not had and have offered to share it.

There might be DNA evidence from somewhere other than the crime scene I suppose, from the cottage, perhaps, or Sophie’s car. If Bailey was allowed access to the crime scene, any DNA evidence taken from there must be unsafe. And bearing in mind the police seem to have mislaid the blood-smeared gate, what reliance could be placed on any chain of evidence?

The French conviction was based on little or no evidence that would stand up in an Irish court of law. I think I’m right in saying the prosecution presented Marie Farrell’s original evidence without mentioning that she had subsequently retracted it.

[erobitha]

Yes, that’s what forums like this are for.

If this is true, any DNA evidence would be compromised.

https://www.corkbeo.ie/news/local-ne...-body-22516347

Depends on what DNA was gathered and from which source and when. Bit premature to call it compromised. Although it would not shock me that would be a Bailey defence strategy.

The reality is the police made a pigs ear of the whole thing back then.

He is already convicted of this crime in France. If their court of law was happy enough with the evidence presented then I am inclined to believe a strong case has been made to prove his guilt. They have had access to files and information the Irish system has not had and have offered to share it.

[MrBarnett]

As I said before, there could be a DNA breakthrough that ultimately puts it beyond doubt.

Until then it’s merely conjecture on forums like this.

Yes, that’s what forums like this are for.

If this is true, any DNA evidence would be compromised.

https://www.corkbeo.ie/news/local-news/killer-returned-kneel-over-body-22516347

[erobitha]

I’ve no idea how good an investigator Sheridan is. He’s followed the case for decades and has personally interviewed Bailey, Thomas, Marie Farrell, the various Gardai etc. He no doubt finds Bailey as objectionable as most who have had any contact with him, but perhaps he’s able to consider things more objectively.

Sophie’s family want Bailey brought to justice. Sheridan’s point is that they seem uninterested in considering any other suspect.

There’s no doubt that Bailey is a very unpleasant person, but does that make him the killer? Why wouldn’t he interject into online conversations about a subject that is so crucial to him?

As I said before, there could be a DNA breakthrough that ultimately puts it beyond doubt.

Until then it’s merely conjecture on forums like this.

[MrBarnett]

I think Jim will later look back on this as not his finest hour. Great filmmaker, but does not make him a great investigator. The story is sometimes more compelling than the truth.

Sophie's family want justice. Why would not they not do all they can to try and help continue to raise the case profile if it helps get the killer arrested?

There is no hidden 'Mr Big' or shadowy foreigner. It was Bailey.

I’ve no idea how good an investigator Sheridan is. He’s followed the case for decades and has personally interviewed Bailey, Thomas, Marie Farrell, the various Gardai etc. He no doubt finds Bailey as objectionable as most who have had any contact with him, but perhaps he’s able to consider things more objectively.

Sophie’s family want Bailey brought to justice. Sheridan’s point is that they seem uninterested in considering any other suspect.

There’s no doubt that Bailey is a very unpleasant person, but does that make him the killer? Why wouldn’t he interject into online conversations about a subject that is so crucial to him?

[erobitha]

This rather threw me. Apparently Jim Sheridan believes Bailey is innocent and has been framed.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.t...e-husband/amp/

I think Jim will later look back on this as not his finest hour. Great filmmaker, but does not make him a great investigator. The story is sometimes more compelling than the truth.

Sophie's family want justice. Why would not they not do all they can to try and help continue to raise the case profile if it helps get the killer arrested?

There is no hidden 'Mr Big' or shadowy foreigner. It was Bailey.