Highest earning criminal legal aid practice
1 Like
I see buttimer regularly strolling up Sundays well towards the city most mornings, doesnât seem an overly pompous or odd character,
Yes I can tell this by the way he walks
1 Like
Any impression as to his buttock-tension?
That was superb listening.
Firmly clenched!!
1 Like
The west cork podcast was interesting but there wasnt enough evidence to convince me of his innocence or guilt either way.
The guards jumped on him as lead suspect and tried too hard to pin it, the interaction with the english soldier was mental, but maybe he did it and theres no evidence? The fact that his dna wasnât found on her doesnât prove anything if he just beat her to death with an unrecovered object. The period of time absent from his partner, marks on his hands, the english people who swore blind he told them a french woman had been murdered before that was released to the press? All circumstantial but enough to suspect him.
Heâs clearly a complete prick with the accounts of the savage beatings he gave his partner.
1 Like
Bailey is presumably on the legal aid for the criminal stuff. The real fees racked up were on the civil case. 64 days in the High Court to get bucked on a Statute of Limitations issue with a full order of costs against.
Willhelm in the Bowl?
2 Likes
Buttimer is well able to charge. The sharp end of the Irish legal elite are a self filling trough and snout club.
FFS, hundreds of posts and nowhere near solving this. @Smark, get in here and sort this one out.
1 Like
The German serial killer angle was the only interesting post, Iâd like to hear more on that.
1 Like
It sounds like the lead up to the punchline of a Paddy Irishman joke.
The lads make a convincing case that Bailey was stitched up here, that he was an oddball narcissist guilty of beating his own wife and whose face didnât fit in the community, but not enough evidence by half to convict him of this. It seems likely he was being stitched up to cover for someone in authority. If itâs true that nextflix are on the case then itâll make a for a very very interesting watch.
5 Likes
Have you not been asked to contribute?
This is a bit longwinded so bear with me. There are a number of things that I find it hard to reconcile about Bailey which lead me to thinking that it is impossible to rule him out. He didnât have an alibi and has told many lies throughout the course of the investigation. No one loves a conspiracy as much as me involving cover ups etc but that would have had have to mean that too many people were complicit, who had no ties to the area and would have had no real motive to do so. I think that scenario is simply unrealistic. Detective Gilligan was from Dublin and O Dwyer was from Kerry and it is a stretch to think that they were covering up for someone else. There is undoubtedly massive malpractice and gross incompetence from guards of the day which is inexcusable even when taking into account the fact that they never had to deal with a homicide before. There is no evidence to suggest that they were trying to railroad Bailey from the start. The initial investigation ranged from guards quizzing family members including ex-husband. They requested that the family look for scratches and scrapes on arms of anyone at her memorial service. They looked at possible feuds over her 13 acres of land as this was not a strange occurrence in the locality. They had a list of 6 suspects locally. So they were not out to get Ian Bailey from the start. What lead to Ian Bailey being front and centre of the investigation was his own actions along with testimony of the fruitcake that is Marie Farrell. This woman had zero credibility and it is impossible to decipher if there is any truth, some truth or no truth in what she said. So best to rule out her accounts entirely. But she did precipitate a chain of events where the guards became fixated on Bailey through her accounts. It is then a certainty that they tried to ram the whole investigation to make it look like Bailey did it.
So while Bailey could never see justice be carried out properly and would never have got a fair trial, that in itself is not enough to say he didnât do it. Bailey put it on record himself about a foreign connection in relation to the murder. He wrote articles about how Daniel her husband had financial problems as a result of movies that flopped at box office. He was trying to control the narrative from the start.
So with Bailey then. What do we know about his actions from 22nd December to in and around Christmas day.
He drank heavily night before 23rd and ended up crashing on the sofa of a house in the locality. He had left this house but returned back to ask could he spend the night. There is undoubtedly a missing few hours there. When asked about his whereabouts on 22nd Bailey said he was at home which was false. The owners of the house â The Murphyâs told the guards that he had come back and spent the night with them. Bailey subsequently went back to the police and in his own words corrected the record of his whereabouts on that night but not before he learned that Murphyâs had told police where he had been and not before Bailey in a very agitated state had asked the Murphyâs what they told the police. This shows that he didnât have his story straight from an early stage. He became fixated on the aftermath of the murder and getting his story straight. Every good story has a start, middle and an end. His oversight was the former.
Bailey according to himself learned of the murder of a foreign national around the 1.40pm on 23rd December. She had been found at 10.30 by Alf Lyons wife. He had got a call from someone from the examiner newspaper who he did a bit of freelance work with informing him of the murder. He listened to 2 O Clock news where he gleaned a little bit more about the murder and POSSIBILITY that the victim was French. He had done a bit of gardening work for Alf Lyons â (STDPâs neighbour ) previously where according to himself he learned of the fact that there was a French woman living up the lane and she came over from France every now and again. His house was 10 mins drive from STDPâs house but yet he was able to arrive there at 2.20pm after watching the news, gathering his camera equipment, and stopping by post office where he supposedly had a conversation with Alf Lyons wife (who found the body) and she told him the specific site. She refutes this ever happening and didnât talk to Bailey until he was turning in off the main road and making his way to the murder site. She mentioned he only stopped because she beckoned him to. To think that Bailey was able to join the dots that quickly and logistically go to murder site is not credible. Also some months after the murder there was a couple with whom Ian Bailey had an appointment on the 23rd December. The couples name were the leftwicks. They said they got a call at 12 noon from Ian Bailey to cancel that engagement as a murder of an attractive French woman who holidayed in Ireland every now and again had taken place and he was to report on it. How was he to knowâŚ
There were 2 witnesses who mentioned to guards that they saw a bonfire outside the studio of Baileys on a Christmas morning walk. He denies this happening and this account is corroborated by his partner Jules Thomas. She might have been unaware as it was a 100 yards from main house but shoes and buttons from items of clothing were found along with mattress springs etc. Nothing that could be used of evidence but actions that do not make him very credible and if he did have blood splattered clothes it was one way of taking care of them. Christmas morning is an odd time to have a fire so maybe he was tying up loose ends before going to the pier where there was a ritual Christmas morning dip where swimmers and local bystanders would see him. He didnât partake in this himself but watched on. Business as usualâŚ
He did have a black sarcastic humour and did âadmitâ killing her which was taken at face value and could not be taken as an admission of guilt. But he did give a 14 year old a life home where he said he was doing fine until he âbashed her head in with a rockâ. The skull fracture from being hit with a rock was cause of STDP death but he wasnât to know this at the time. He confronted a Pat Sullivan in his house and turned the tables on him accusing him of committing the murder. While that in itself doesnât tell us anything Bailey let slip âyou saw her tight arse in spar and went up there to see what you could getâ projecting what he in fact saw and into his minds eye at that time and also pointing towards the fact that he was in Schull that day when she was, and was fully aware of who she this woman was.
The scrape marks on his hands were got supposedly from cutting down a spruce tree and he had a mark on his forehead which he supposedly got from a Turkey, I have handled 1000âs of spruce trees in my life time and have never got welts or scrape marks. He was supposedly playing a bodhran at a session in local pub couple of nights before but his hands were not visible but in any case you could see why guards and detectives were highly dubious of him.
When Bailey and Jules Thomas were arrested they were both questioned individually. Jules Thomas said that she woke up in the middle of the night and noticed he was not in bed. She did not wake again until the following morning when he brought her coffee. His coat and clothes were resting on a cane chair outside the room before he went to bed. He then recollected that he had in fact got up in the middle of the night to write an article for a newspaper. He stated that he never left the main house but his type writer was down in the studio 100 yards from the house so he would have had to make his way down there at some stage. It is not beyond bounds of possibility that he would have walked the 36 minute journey to STDP house. When asked if he was accustomed to taking midnight strolls his response was ânot particularly noâ. Numerous witnesses have from taxi drivers to breadmen have seen sightings of him on midnight strolls. There is an overlapping window of time where Bailey has no alibi and has given contradictory evidence about his movements and when STDP was killed. He had a considerable amount to drink and in all probability did not write an article. Jules Thomas never mentioned this article in her original statement.
So in summary I donât buy the line that a now deceased local guard did it who was consumed by alcohol and that there were others trying to cover it up for him. The guards did not show much professional integrity and were stupid but surely not willing to risk it all to cover up for a loose cannon. What would they have had to gain by doing this?? This is hear say and local gossip perpetuated by a psychopath in Gemma O Doherty. She made reference to 2 wine glasses. STDP family said this meant nothing as she probably used both herself. She rang her husband Daniel at 10.30 that night which doesnât sound like someone who was entertaining someone. He missed her call and called back later. Sometimes if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it is a fucking duck. Bailey had a history of domestic violence and prone to outbursts of rage. The attack was opportunist and frenzied and he had 3 reported incidents of domestic violence against his partner and his ex-wife said he was very violent as well. STDP mentioned to a friend that she was meeting a poet while over in Ireland. Maybe Bailey was this poet albeit a very poor one â only he did not know that. It was his pride and joy and she may have belittled it or having faced rejection and left heartbroken from his previous marriage did not appreciate being rejected by STDP again. He probably met her the night before in the missing few hours where he woke up at Murphys and the night didnât go as he had envisaged. This may have flipped him after a heavy night on the drink and lead to her demise.
This is by far the most likely outcome of all the scenarios I have seen mentioned.
Bailey is a compulsive liar. When he was given a gift of a type writer from Ian Montague a person he admired greatly but who shunned Bailey subsequently, the type writer was found strewn in the back garden with all the keys bashed in as if by a hammer. Bailey says this was now a garden sculpture. This anecdote sums up Bailey in a nutshell insofar as people were trying to help him over course of his life but he was his own worst enemy, he is a violent person as depicted by the smashing of the keys who is able to mask it with a love of the arts and speaking the queens English. He is able to think on the spot but ultimately he is a liar. Not only is he a liar but he is a complete narcissist who will get himself into a frame of mind whereby he will believe his own lies and create a siege mentality where he is the real victim. He is also controlling. He tried to control the narrative from the moment he turned up at the scene, by talking to witnesses like the Murphyâs, leftwicks, Jacksons and many more. He spoke to detectives without a solicitor having been advised to get one but he was cock sure of himself that he was of superior intellect to his inquisitors and ultimately tripped himself up time and again. He denies ever meeting or talking with STDP when multiple witnesses point to the contrary. Every witness statement of which there are many is met with the same retort by Bailey, âthat is nonsenseâ, âthey must be mistakenâ. Sometimes the obvious answer is the answer and Bailey committed the murder.
23 Likes
Thanks for that. It was an interesting read. My issues have always been along those lines. I simply couldnât see the gardai covering up an innocent lady getting her head smashed in with a rock to protect a mysterious alcoholic colleague. Even if they tried, it wouldnât hold under scrutiny. Itâs always seemed equally likely to me that they went after the correct culprit, but with the finesse of an enraged seal.
There seems just as much evidence against Bailey as against other recent high profile accused people found guilty.
I donât hold that the French legal system is any much worse than ours or anywhere else either.
Bullet points please
1 Like
Serious question. If there was such a cock up made of the investigation how can you be sure he didnât do it?
Yeah my thoughts exactly. It is just too far fetched. Bandon tapes did not incriminate anyone or allude to a high profile figure in an Garda Suiochana being involved and they didnât even know they were being recorded. Baileyâs personality reminds me a lot of OJ Simpson. They both probably got away with murder and are enjoying the notoriety. They both give off a sense that âwell if I did do itâŚWhy/What/Howâ. Bailey when the West Cork podcast was happening wanted to stage manage the whole thing. Any witness in the case got a visit from Bailey.
What I didnât include above was that on the night of the murder Bailey and Jules Thomas stopped at Hunts Hill which is an overlook site and there were points along it where the 3 houses across the bay could be seen including STDP. This is well documented in the report by the DPP. Why they stopped is anyones guess. Maybe he did it under the premise that he needed to go for a slash somewhere after the drink or maybe he wanted to see was there any activity going on across the bay. In any case it seems clear that he was well aware of her and not in an obscure âI wouldnât know her if she passed my on the streetâ kind of way which he purported to police around that time. Witnesses had seen them together but according to Bailey they are all mistaken. If it hadnât been for Dr John Harbisons birthday who was the state pathologist of the time there would have been a clearer time line. This was a key piece in establishing a timeline. Phone records were a massive stumbling block as well. He was just lucky he committed the crime in the remotest part of Ireland on what was a particularly harsh winter.
On a totally unrelated note one of the key witnesses has since moved out of Schull and to a place in North Leinster where she has since tried to take a court case against a GAA club because she thought the local GAA lotto was rigged.
You are definitely somebody who wrote 3,500 word posts about Tipperary matches on the GAA Discussion Board circa 2000-2003
Iâve given that post a like due to it broadly affirming my confirmation bias in that it provides reassurance that my gut feeling about Bailey being the perpetrator may be right, without me having to go the trouble of actually researching the case
1 Like