IAN BAILEY MASSIVE WANKER

Elephant in the room for me - you're a former journalist "getting framed" for a crime, wouldn't you dedicate your time & resources to investigating matters & hopefully determine the "real perpetrator" or at least help your defence by introducing an alternative suspect?

GUILTY AS NOT CHARGED

⁣I just watched the five-part series ⁣Murder at the Cottage: The Search for Justice for Sophie. The documentary was really well done however it was evident the whole investigation itself was shoddy at least from what the documentary conveyed. It leaves the viewer disappointed in the end. It kept pointing fingers at Ian Bailey during the whole documentary while at the same time implying it could have been someone else. It focused on his hands quite a bit saying that the scratches on them could not have happened by lopping branches off a tree and showed someone imitating doing it and that person didn't have scratches whereas Ian's were more consistent with being scratched by briars. It also focused on him admitting to various people he did it. It brought out he could have done it since he had a history of beating his partner and the pictures they showed of her were pretty graphic. I didn't feel all the leads were followed however and it was fishy how alot of evidence was covered up. Why was that? It was brought out that people had been paid to follow Ian around to get to know him and lie about what he said. Even the storekeeper originally stated that she had seen a strange man outside her store staring at Sophie and had followed her when she left also and that she saw someone other than Ian walking away from the direction of Sophies home when she was driving at night. She later stated she was paid by the police not to mention these things as they promised to help her husband who had some trouble with the law and also help her with other things. Why wasn't that looked into? Overall, I was very disapponted by the end of the documentary. I was leaning more towards Ian being guilty but I really felt other leads were not followed through and too much information covered up. By the end of it all I could think about was the whole police dept involved in this case should have been investigated which they weren't and even though I felt Ian was guilty the evidence for and against him was not airtight. It just left you with the question of could someone else be involved or more than one person and could they be walking around free.

The bridge comment was never fully explained. Weird. I don't believe the government and their "no, we didn't say that to Ian" bla bla bla. Government officals will lie and cover for themselves.

im from west cork & most ppl here believe ian is innocent .