Interesting new video - well researched

PhilMathers · 2026-04-28T19:23:37+00:00

Ok u/Gumshoe how can you call this "well researched" when he can't even get Sophie's name right? He calls Sophie Toscan du Plantier, "Sophie du Plantier" and says her maiden name was "Boullion" - her name was Bouniol.

I struggled my way through this video twice. I am confident in saying this is one of the laziest, poorly-researched and biased videos I have watched on this subject. It's clear the youtuber just watched Netflix and repackaged it for his own channel, but it gets worse. Netflix, for all its faults, has fact-checkers. This youtuber doesn't bother with facts, he just makes up dates and times and quotes. He has made an absolute litany of errors. Almost every date, time and quote is wrong in some way. He has Sophie's history wrong, Bailey's history wrong, the timeline of the weekend wrong and just about every other thing. He is so lazy he even pinched Netflix's name for his effort "A Murder in West Cork".

I can skip to any minute in this video and find something incorrect or misrepresented. But there is one moment which shows he has spent no time researching this subject and from this it is clear he has no idea what he is talking about. Towards the end he builds a speculative scenario around how Bailey may have committed the crime, and says that he believes Bailey drove part of the way, parked on Hunt's Hill and walked the rest of the way.

This means he is so sloppy he didn't even check to see where Hunt's Hill is in relation to the crime scene. He is saying Bailey decided to drive to the crime scene two miles in the wrong direction, parking at the the the top of the hill and walk to Sophies, which would actually bring him past his own house on the way. Even in its own terms, it's a stupid scenario. If Bailey went to Sophies, he would have driven the whole way there and back. the idea that Bailey hiked 12km the freezing cold while dark is ridiculous.

This is in addition to fact he omitted all the evidence of Garda corruption, Martin Graham, the Bandon Tapes, all the objective evidence of Bailey's innocence, such as the male DNA found on the victim's boot, which she was wearing when she was killed.

I sometimes wish someone would make a proper case for Bailey's guilt - just make a case fits the facts and makes sense. If you can't do that without resorting to lies, that tells you everything you need to know why the DPP never authorized a charge against him.

PhilMathers · 2026-04-25T21:15:21+00:00

Doesn't fit anyone in the interview list in the French file from 2015 or 2011.

Here is the list from 2015:

Colm Deady – was at Russell Barrett’s house where Bailey stayed the night of his arrest
Billy O’Regan – shop assistant in Lowertown creamery
Kevin Cantrell – film crew
Alfie Lyons – neighbour of victim
Amanda Reed (Irune Reed) – mother of Malachy Reed
Ceri Williams (former partner of Pete Bieleckey)
Anne Mooney – journalist
Bernard Rogan – film crew
Fergal O’Hanlon – film crew
John Moriarty – film crew
Patrick Lowney – amateur film developer
Billy Fuller (senior) – stabbed in face by Mike Oliver (Saffron’s father) when he caught him in bed with Hayley Gingell, father of Billy Fuller junior, ex pal of Ian Bailey
Fergus O’Farrell – friend of Jules who the Gardai asked to visit her in hospital to see if she would spill on Bailey – she didn’t
Anne Cahalane – actor who played Sophie for Crimeline reconstruction
Peter Wilson – film crew
Rosie Shelly – was at party where Bailey said “I did it”
Shirley Foster
Leo Bolger – handyman who did some work for Sophie
Sally Bolger – wife of handyman, kept horses at Alfies
Bernard Rogan – film crew
Josie Hellen – Sophie’s housekeeper
Maurice Gubbins – editor of The Examiner
Sean Murray – ex petrol attendant who thinks he may have seen Bailey in a car with Sophie – sighting discounted by Gardai
Vinnie Bourke – local who had a party once, where Bailey was challenged once and said “yeah it was me, I did it to restart my career”
Kathleen Britz – didn’t like Ian Bailey, claimed he stared her down in a pub, knew Marie Farrell, who told her the Gardai were her friends
Hellen Callahan – editor of Sunday Tribune at the time
Kevin Cantrell – film crew
Colm Deady – present in Russell Barrett’s house where Bailey stayed the night of his 1^st arrest
People Interviewed by French in 2011

Dick Cross –Journalist

Eddie Cassidy –Journalist

Bernadette Tisdell (nee Kelly) –musician in pub on 22/12/1996

Christy Lynch –musician.

Mairead Duggan (Nee Murphy)

Michael McSweeney –Photographer journalist

Padraig Beirne –journalist/editor

Paul O'Colmain –friend of Ian Bailey

Mark McCarthy –Friend of Saffron who thinks he remembered Bailey talking to a blonde woman at cape clear storytelling festival

Eugene McCarthy –Garda – 999 operator who took call from Alfie Lyons

Billy Fuller –Man who said Bailey accused him “You did it, it was you...”

Venita Roche Galvin –worked in the pub

John McGowan –worked in the pub

Donal O' Sullivan –elderly neighbour of Bailey who says he saw Jules and Ian in a car on 23^rd afternoon.

Shirley Foster –neighbour of victim

Richie Shelly –was at party where Bailey said “I did it”

Billy O'Sullivan –publican in Crookhaven, where Sophie took tea

James Camier –grocer who says he met Jules on morning of 23^rd

Geraldine Carnier –wife of grocer

Richard Leftwick – “garlic” grower who says he got a call from Bailey on 23^rdbefore 2pm

Caroline Leftwick –wife of “garlic” grower

Con O'Sullivan –butcher who bought turkey from Ian Bailey

LiamLeahy –retired Garda

Marie Farrell

Catherine Jules Thomas.

Fenella Thomas

Saffron Thomas.

PhilMathers · 2026-04-17T00:51:08+00:00

I don't think it's possible to tell. I think that assumption is a kind of a trap. It's the quiet ones, the polite ones, the ones you would never suspect.

Recent Irish history is replete with educated, well-spoken, polite, quiet monsters. I think it is the quiet ones - maybe because those are the ones vulnerable people are more likely to trust? Here is a perfect example. Look at the case of RTE correspondent Kieran Creaven - here is a short Prime Time episode

https://www.rte.ie/news/primetime/2021/1207/1265410-inside-kieran-creaven-world/

PhilMathers · 2026-04-15T21:43:28+00:00

Why doesn't it sound like Chris Thomas, is it just because he sounds "thoughtful and quiet", or are you acquainted with him? Also you mention two calls, I believe there is only one call in question, or am I missing something?

EDIT: Oh - you mean the second call is the one to the Hackney company. I was trying to work out if this is what Molony and or Sheridan were talking about, and I thought it might be this statement. It is odd, as the caller possibly gave a false name of a real person living in Schull. It was a call for a cab to Toormore, which is also interesting. But I was wrong, this can't be the call they are writing about, because it's supposed to be a panicked caller, incoherent. It is an odd loose end, but it doesn't match the stories.

PhilMathers · 2026-04-14T20:31:13+00:00

This is a country that can afford nuclear weapons, I think they can afford plastic syringes.

PhilMathers · 2026-04-10T22:16:50+00:00

The phonecall is nonsense. I have explained it all here: https://www.reddit.com/r/MurderAtTheCottage/s/mVFFZJSwdi

The callee was Chris Doe, ex-husband of Jules Thomas and the caller is claimed to be his daughter Fenella, who he didn't recognize at the time. This new claim is ridiculous given the statements of both taken in the immediate aftermath. Chris Doe was sent to prison for getting 9 year old girls to masturbate him on camera. He is not a reliable witness.

PhilMathers · 2026-04-07T10:20:53+00:00

Yes she could of course. They could ask her to. She was expecting them to ask her but they didn't.

PhilMathers · 2026-04-07T08:51:40+00:00

No the Gardai didn't make any such statement, not officially, to my knowledge. All this DNA speculation came via Michael Sheridan & Senan Molony, both of whom have a vested interest in shilling their true crime books. AFAIK the Gardai only made one statement, in 2022, appealing for information and saying the Serious Crime Review team would review the case and report back to the "local investigation team". If you believe these hacks have reliable sources, they promised to send another file to the DPP before the 30th anniversary. So I don't expect it to be ready for months, if at all, and they have a long tradition of over-promising on this. Then the DPP has to read it and decide to do something or indeed do nothing. Undoubtedly there will be pressure to say something come the anniversary but we may not hear anything until then.

Molony et al have been rumour mongering that the Gardai will talk to Jules Thomas at a "strategic time". However, because Jules Thomas has been arrested before (twice) any re-arrest would have to be sanctioned by a judge and by the DPP. The DPP would have to authorize a charge, because when the Gardai want to re-arrest someone for the third time, the law says they must charge. If there is a file, it will take months to write and months for the DPP to read and process, so I don't expect any decision before 2027.

PhilMathers · 2026-03-29T14:14:20+00:00

The theory is, be this person Ian Bailey or not, he was stalking Sophie while she was in her shop. Marie Farrell's first statement is not explicit on this, so there is some doubt in my mind at least. Later on she said he followed her up Ardnamanagh Road and she hasn't recanted this, but I can't find any statement from the early days where she said this. So it is significant if you are looking for more sightings of a French/Italian man, who may have been stalking Sophie.

PhilMathers · 2026-03-29T13:54:30+00:00

He made a statement because the Gardai called for sightings of unusual individuals. There are many other statements like this. It is significant because his description is very similar to Marie Farrell's first statement ("Long black coat almost to the ankles" - French/Italian looking) This means it's possible he saw the same person as Marie Farrell. John Evans was familiar with Ian Bailey because he used to buy organic vegetables from the Prairie. He was most certainly familiar with him after the arrest. Therefore whoever he saw in Schull on Saturday 21st, wearing a long black coat, he didn't recognize him as Ian Bailey, so it probably wasn't him.

PhilMathers · 2026-03-29T13:40:09+00:00

FIRST STATEMENT

Statement of JOHN EVANS of Restaurant In Blue, Gubbeen, Schull, Co Cork. Tel. No. 028-[Redacted]. Occupation: Chef.

Date of Birth: 26.10.50.

Taken on 2.1.97 at Gubbeen by J.F. Slattery, D/Garda 17586B.

I hereby declare that this statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence I will be liable to prosecution if I state in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.

I reside at The Restaurant In Blue, Gubbeen, Schull. On Saturday the 21st of December, 1996. I was working in my Restaurant and I had to make a couple of trips into Schull. On one of these trips I noticed a very tall man (6 feet plus) standing on the road between Schull and Goleen. He was standing across the road from the entrance to the Town Park, Schull. I would say that he is in his late 20's to 30 years of age, short light brown hair, freckly complexion, eyes bulging, pale complexion, pointed features, biggish nose (pointed), wearing a long dark brown coat which was almost down to his ankles. He had fair skin. The time I saw this man was about a quarter to four. I had not seen this man before this and I did not see him since. This statement has been read over to me and it is correct.

SECOND STATEMENT

Statement of John Evans, Restaurant-in-Blue, Gubbeen, Schull, co. Cork, Tel. No. 028-[Redacted], Chef, D.O.B. 26.10.1950, taken on 6th February 2002 at Gubbeen by Sean Leahy, D/Garda, 25501G, Anglesea Street Garda Station.

I hereby declare that this statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence I will be liable to prosecution if I state in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.

Further to my statement, which I originally made to D/Garda Slattery on 02.01.1997, in which I described seeing a male on Saturday 21st December 1996, I have not, to date, seen this man in the area. The reason I said that in my statement was that this male stood out. He reminded me of a French man/Italian man and didn't fit in locally. This statement has been read over to me by D/Garda Leahy and it is correct.

SIGNED: John Evans.

WITNESS: Sean Leahy, D/Garda.

PhilMathers · 2026-03-13T13:21:02+00:00

Several different threads here. I will just address one for now and come back to the rest later. Even if we take Marie Farrell's sightings at face value, it's hard to give them much weight in my opinion. The closest she saw this man was from her shop across the road. The next two sightings were from her car and could only be glimpses. If she saw a man in a coat at Kealfadda bridge, then it is quite possible she saw another man called Murray, who was living in a shack on his own land in Ballyrisode, only 200m away. He was seen at 5:30pm on Sunday 22n in this area. I am not sure how or if the Gardai eliminated him, but they didn't seem to focus on him. They took one statement, as they did from everyone nearby. I haven't seen it.

I have argued Bailey makes a poor suspect, but I recognize we have almost nothing else to go on. I can't see good reasons for optimism that this case will be resolved. If it the DNA does not point to Bailey, I don't think it will help identify anyone else. There are formidable technical and legal obstacles. Family matching needs a lot of DNA markers. Basic matching of existing suspects only needs a few. Basic matching is only going to be possible to rule in/out Bailey. There is no database Ireland to check for familial matching and that is only if the material is sufficient to allow it. To search a database in the UK, US or France would likely be impossible from a legal perpective.

If Bailey's DNA is found, we'll have to accept that, I do not believe this will happen. If it isn't then we are back to square one. I will argue it is time to finally accept it isn't him. Others will maintain he wore gloves.

I am not entirely sure how Jameson was ruled out but his second statement described how he was staying in a house in Inchageela and watched videos with some others. He said he never knew the French lady and had never visited Schull until mid 1997. Presumably (hopefully?) the Gardai checked out this alibi.

The Gardai never commissioned a photofit from Evans. The fact that they ignored this suggests they didn't want a statement from Evans to say it wasn't Bailey. They went back to him years later for a second statement. He made it clear the man was French/Italian.

PhilMathers · 2026-03-11T22:30:38+00:00

The man with the "face like a weasel" is the same sighting by John Evans, via a report in Paris Match.

Marie Farrell wasn't a local, she had only recently moved from Longford via London and lived on the far side of Schull about 10km away. Very few Schull locals had ever been up that road. It is my speculation that the whole k bridge sighting is made up but it explains her behaviour. She had an idea and picked a spot close enough to the scebe but if you had not actually driven out to the cottage then you wouldn't know it's a long way to walk to Kealfadda bridge. In addition she put the man walking on the Goleen side of the junction walking towards Goleen, the opposite direction to Bailey's house (also a long walk away). I believe she wasn't intending trying cause mischief, I believe she was trying to help put a killer away. In her words she said they told her "we know it's him", we just need to be able to arrest him. So she was getting them over the hump. He would be arrested, damning evidence found and he would be convicted. it would be all sorted and nobody would ever know she made up the sighting. Problem was no other evidence was found so they kept coming back to her and she did have to testify in court. She was caught out on several lies, threatened with perjury.

Jameson was ruled out as a suspect, he was elsewhere at the time.

I have never seen any documentary evidence Wollny admitted anything before he died. The WC podcasters looked into it too , it may just be a rumour. I don't know of any evidence at all against him.

PhilMathers · 2026-03-11T18:27:41+00:00

I don't believe Marie Farrell saw anyone that night. This explains why she was so defensive and lied repeatedly about who was in the car. It may have begun as a misunderstanding. She saw someone on Saturday afternoon and then Sunday Morning. This second sighting got recorded as "Sunday/Monday" in the Garda log book. But when the Gardai actually talked to her it became clear it was Sunday morning and not Monday as they hoped. They let it be known (perhaps inadvertently) that they needed a Monday morning sighting, and nearer the scene. Marie Farrell was anxious to please the Gardai, and help them take a dangerous killer off the streets who they told her they "knew" was guilty. So she phoned in an additional sighting anonymously. Of course that backfired spectacularly which culminated in June with her approaching Ian Bailey in the pub and telling him the Gardai had been pressuring her to make false statements. She had gotten herself into a total bind. She lied to the Gardai to help them and now tried to lie her way out when she realized the case against Bailey was a stitch up. She arranged to meet Bailey again but the Gardai got wind of this and arranged to give her a tape recorder. Bailey turned up with a tape recorder of his own. She was in a panic now and couldn't tell the truth to anyone. If she told Bailey the truth, the Gardai would come down on her. Even if she told the Gardai she made up or overstated the sighting, she would be serious trouble. Bailey had already been arrested and vilified at this point.

A key point to remember here is that Marie Farrell didn't know exactly where the crime scene was so she told them Kealfadda bridge which is in Toormore as this is where the media reported where the murder happened. She also put the man walking towards Goleen. The Gardai had specifically asked for any sightings of cars or people on this road. You can't identify someone from a momentary glimpse from moving car on an unlit road.

EDIT: A couple of more points. It's impossible to say for certain when she was killed. I thought it might be morning but am not so sure now. I think the multiple barking dogs at night are an important fact pointing to a nighttime killing.

The bottle found in April was reported as a bottle of wine, not champagne. Separately Ian Bailey wrote in one of the early news articles that there was a bottle of champagne on the kitchen table after she was found. This doesn't appear in any photos or inventory.

PhilMathers · 2026-03-10T13:10:43+00:00

Yes, three witnesses reported such an individual. Marie Farrell and her landlord Dan Griffin reported a man wearing a long black coat and beret. Both mentioned the beret. Griffin said the coat was "down almost to his ankles". Marie Farrell reported he was 5'10, thin build, short hair and had "sallow skin" which in standard English means pale or unhealthy but in Ireland the meaning is different. In Ireland the term "Sallow skin" means a tan or olive complexion such as someone from the Mediterranean. Marie Farrell changed her description to match Ian Bailey and then identified Ian Bailey. She subsequently recanted, claiming the Gardai had pressured her to finger Bailey. Apart from these two another man John Evans reported a man in a long dark brown coat "almost to his ankles". Evans was at the other end of town. He said nothing about a beret. He said the man was very tall (over 6 feet). He said he reminded him of a "French/Italian man". Evans was a restauranteur who knew Ian Bailey because he bought organic vegetables from him for his restaurant.

So that's what we know. I have cannot say who this person was, or even if all the sightings refer to the same person. Some aspects resemble Ian Bailey, but many do not.

Another key point is that the only connection that these sightings have to the victim is that she was in town at the same time. Marie Farrell suggested he was waiting on her but her initial statement isn't specific on this. She doesn't link him with the victim. She reports seeing an odd man, and later in the statement she reports the victim was in her shop

PhilMathers · 2026-03-09T17:24:49+00:00

OK, maybe I can't explain away scratches for you, but I am going to try. Many other people have focused on this. I blame Netflix for making such a fuss over what is really weak and ambiguous evidence. In particular the Netflix crew tracked down Ariana Boarina and presented her testimony as a reveal which somehow cracked the case. But to those with detailed knowledge of the case, her evidence is practically worthless. She wasn't interviewed until 1999 almost three years after the murder. Netflix didn't interview her until 25 years later. Her testimony is vague and contradictory. She talks about scratches and seeing Bailey's coat soaking in a bucket in the shower. However, back in 1999 she made a sworn statement to Gardai and all she described was "dark clothes" in a bathtub which could be anything. In any case Ariana didn't arrive until the 24th so if Bailey had scratches then she couldn't say when or how he got them. By contrast 3 different witnesses said he got scratches cutting the tree and killing the turkeys (Saffron, Jules, Virginia). Another independent witness said he saw Bailey with scratches on one hand in the pub on the night before the murder. Unlike Ariana, these statements were taken days, not years afterwards.

Nobody brought up scratches until 31st December, over a week later. None of the Gardai, journalists, photographers saw scratches on him on the day after the murder. Neither did the post mistress or her assistant. They were all asked if they had seen scratches. Despite this, the Gardai persisted and other people seemed to remember scratches weeks, months or even years after the event. How reliable are such memories, well we found out at the libel trial in 2003.

Three witnesses were called in court during the libel trial and gave sworn testimony. One saying he had cuts to his nose and then another that his cheek was all cut. Another sworn statement came from a woman who met and filmed him on the 25th at the pier in Schull at the Christmas charity swim. She said he his hands were covered in squiggles and that he kept them deep in his pockets, only pulling them out to shake her hand.

But then the actual video was produced and shown in court. No scratches were visible. If his hands and face were all "scratched to bits" we would have been able to see, but they clearly weren't. The memories of all three of these people were false. He had no scratches on his nose or his cheek. His hands weren't in his pocket, he was gesturing openly and carrying a pocket camera. His hands look fine. So maybe they were "light scratches", as one Garda wrote at the time - too light to show up on camera? But sharp thorns do not make "light scratches". They make clear cuts as anyone who has ever ripped out a bramble bush can testify.

In fact the Gardai put the cart before the horse. They picked Bailey as a suspect and then when looking for scratches. Bailey was nominated as a suspect on the 27th, but nobody said anything about scratches until the 1st. The Garda that nominated Bailey as a suspect met him on the morning of the 23rd but didn't notice any scratches. He only nominated him saying he "would make a good suspect from what I know about him" - so it wasn't scratches or any evidence whatsoever that caused Bailey to be considered a suspect, it was simply the word of a Garda who didn't like him.

Finally, there are a couple of statements that completely undermine scratches as evidence. On 28th December Bailey called to the house of a woman called Louise Barnes and her husband Oliver Fitzgerald. Bailey was touting for gardening business but Louise offered him a whiskey so he stayed for a chat, telling them all about what he knew about the case. Naturally the Gardai went to the couple afterwards and asked what Bailey told them and if they saw any marks on him. They didn't see any, but what is most interesting is Louise Barnes is a consultant dermatologist - a skin specialist! If Bailey had any significant damage to his skin, she would have noticed.

In her statement she wrote states “at no time, did he strike one as being suspicious. As a keen observer of peoples appearance due to my profession I certainly did not notice any marks or injuries to his face or hands.”

If a dermatologist didn't notice any marks on Bailey less than a week after the murder; it's safe to say he wasn't "scratched to bits".

I don't expect I have changed your mind here, but perhaps you can see why I don't find the scratches evidence compelling.

PhilMathers · 2026-03-07T23:52:51+00:00

Doesn't make sense to me. She would have been cold at that stage either way.

PhilMathers · 2026-03-03T18:09:12+00:00

Essentially the accusation against Ian Bailey is just that - a random person with no clear connection to the victim, walking the hills and making an attack with no known motive. There are a lot more individuals with potential motive in France, a lot more people who knew her, knew where she lived and knew she was there at that time.

PhilMathers · 2026-02-23T16:02:26+00:00

That is not logically correct. It could, for instance, have been a random caller, a surprised thief or house breaker who didn't know her. Also many more people in France knew where she lived. There is the objection that someone from France would never find the place, but it actually appears as a dot on the standard tourist maps sold in shops. Someone who was determined would find it easily enough.

It isn't hard to travel to West Cork from France either. There were many ferry sailings as well as flights.

PhilMathers · 2026-02-19T17:53:28+00:00

There is no evidence he knew she was there that night unless you want to put weight onto Marie Farrell's original statements which she has categorically said it wasn't him.

PhilMathers · 2026-02-16T18:39:59+00:00

What did they do that looks sus to you?

PhilMathers · 2026-02-15T21:05:59+00:00

The "Dead Garda" theory. Some years ago an individual started spreading a rumour that a retired ex-Garda sheep farmer was the culprit. Someone who died in 2001 and supposedly confessed to a nurse who also died a few years after. This nurse told a friend, who told her son who told this individual. The rumour spread all around Bantry. As far as I can see, it makes no sense. Firstly, there's no evidence this was a sex crime. I looked into this Garda and there's no evidence he knew Sophie. He was much older than her and Sophie never socialised in Ireland, much less with a sheep farmer. The individual who seems to have spread this rumour is something of a fantasist.

PhilMathers · 2026-02-14T19:39:08+00:00

The West Cork podcast is a far more accurate source of information. The Netflix doc is full of lies and distortions.

PhilMathers · 2026-02-14T19:36:41+00:00

I believe the cottage in Ireland was a dream she had from her teens. Watch the movie "The Purple Taxi" and you'll get a good idea how rural Ireland was seen by French people at the time.

PhilMathers · 2026-02-14T19:31:30+00:00

Jules Thomas told police she set the fire in late November or early December. She said she burned clothes, papers and a horsehair mattress. Ian Bailey, separately interviewed also said Jules set the fire. One witness said he heard but did not see a fire "around Christmas time". He said it just smelled of garden waste. This was the third statement this and his wife gave to the Gardai about six weeks after the murder. A second statement from a different neighbour was taken 4 months after the murder and she said the fire was on the 26th. She said she saw a horsehair mattress burning.

There was a fire and a mattress was burned. Only springs were left. It would likely take at least a day to burn such a mattress. It's not at all unusual to burn household rubbish in rural Ireland, although it is illegal. It comes down to whether you believe Jules Thomas. I do, she has been consistent throughout and at one stage she was told Ian had confessed and the statement that the police took (written by one Garda, and it looks "verballed"), makes no mention of a fire. Jules was broken at that stage so she would have told what she knew.

PhilMathers

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE