The previous thread was overloading WordPress due to the number of comments. This thread has been opened to replace it.
Allowed HTML - you can use:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>
If we posit that TS is in league with X and that TS had suggested SM’s originally-planned route to him, then, having been spotted, X would have had another compelling reason to kill SM on that very day, no matter what: after he had seen X lurking in some isolated spot along a route suggested to him by TS, SM would surely have worked out that this had been no mere coincidence, that TS and X were conspiring against him with murderous intent.
Something from the weekend:-
Moi (pontificating) blah blah blah, I see the cyclepath as a kinda conveyer belt, like in airports. Once he started down it, he was delivered to blah blah blah.
!Moi It’s not a conveyer belt, it’s a f*****g catwalk!
Moi Ohhh, yeah. . .
This is my take
I have no problem with SM target I really cannot see a respectable family of pharmacists being involved they are old enough and wise enough to let nature take it’s course if they had doubts about the relationship .
There may be a ? over PM as we know little about his relationship with SM and he has a bit of history but even that looks like self protection with good reason as the other guy was murdered .
We have not found anything that would get SM murdered any more than SAH other than possible love interests and I expect the police would be all over that if they found it.
I would bet TS tells the truth and EM confuses the truth as he has been the one with an agenda to hide things and spin a yarn or two.
One of the reasons I threw the towel in was because it not possible to trust EM on his track record with his phone call lies ,PD’s PB’s blah blah ufo’s 10 years to solve Zainab dead or alive ,not knowing how IBH died ,magic bullets and I am not at all convinced by the Zeena tale either.
I reckon the only information that is worth looking at is the small window pre EM and while we are on that subject the top of the road above the hairpin was considered to be the crime scene early on I never played close enough attention at the time to see why that was I just assumed the press had got it wrong,was anyone paying attention ?
I know in the distant past it was discussed whether the crime scene had been relocated to the lay by, the old posters will remember I expect.
Perhaps it would be worth back checking that.
Another thought I had was as GG had the savvy to get the hell out who told the police he was there ?
@Max
” In short … I don’t trust TS:) ”
That’s a start. But then:
Can we trust CS?
Can we trust LR?
Can we trust ZAH?
Can we trust PM?
Can we trust LMD?
Can we trust ONF1?
Can we trust ONF2?
Can we trust WBM?
Can we trust EM?
I could add into the mix can we trust the journo’s?
In fact three years have gone by and we cannot be sure of anything. Pink is our white knight: why not throw the towel in if there is no certain certainty?
Still seven years to go but to what avail?
@Peter
Thanks for your clever thoughts. Since TV left us you’ve been the best here. But you have nothing to build on either. How long can one happily speculate in vain?
Not necessarily a perfect crime but certainly a perfect miscarriage of investigation!
We’ll see if there is yet another episode.
@Peter
With you all the way.
And your last paragraph (on the penultimate post) is certainly away of looking at “why the killer struck…at that point”. Maybe SM saw X and maybe he thought it was odd (clothing worn, gloves on, gun in hand… whatever).
Who was the “primary target” ? I don’t know.
Was it SM. Was it SAH. Was it both. Was it neither (random or someone else).
The fact that SM was initially ruled out is/was a cause for concern, because it was on very “weak” terms (“the wrong place….etc”).
Clearly he was ruled back in again (the arrest of local(s) people of interest), but nothing was uncovered.
…and yet, did Mollier get “ruled in” again as “Prime Victim” merely because nothing was found to substantiate Al Hilli being the victim ?
Eric went “one way” …and then “the other”.
Whichever way we look at this, statements like “the answer lies in the U.K.”) are very strong. They must have been made after considerable judgement. Considerable reasoning. Was part of that. Had the team become fixated with Al Hilli (and neglected Mollier for “reasons” which to them seemed “beyond doubt” ?)
I am trying to keep an open mind. I still don’t rule out “lone wolves” (although that is plural !) or “mistaken identity”. It happens after all.
The next episode could be
when the killers of Nicole Communal-Tournier are brought to court.
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.ledauphine.com/haute-savoie/2014/04/18/l-arme-du-crime-repechee-dans-l-isere&prev=search
the five locals have been held for over fifteen months now,
what’s the hold up?
Right next to Le FLASHBACK and the Ugine-Faverges cycle track
seems to be thriving timber concerns, whole trees brought in and converted into planks.
I wonder if these sites are in the domain of the husband of Nicole Communal-Tournier?
Pink
I don’t know who told the police but the GG himself told the press shortly after the murders (probably the next day).
He seemed guileless in the interview, however almost three years of following this nightmare have left me somewhat cynical. Someone posted recently that that was pretty well what they would have done if they wanted to appear squeeky.
I understand your point about pre-EM information but I think on this side of the channel there was a slightly longer ‘window’ before people were told to STFU.
For example reporters for The Daily Mail had the neighbour describing the surveilance of the Oaken Lane home from his drive. Fast forward two-and-a-bit years and Parry gets the metaphorical bums rush.
Somewhere inbetween everybody with anything interesting to say gets squelched. Parry suggests that people have been told not to release photos, emails, IM chat logs etc etc.
Clearly, this ‘shutdown’ did not come into effect immediately as the TV documentaries demonstrate and it seems a bit reactionary and arbitrary in nature rather than a systematic and coherent plan. I guess that different parties may be involved. Photographs of the children may have, quite rightly, been covered by court injuction(s) for example.
GOODINPARTS
what is your take on the recent STFU court case in Annecy
aparently all undertaken by the “family” of the dead Sylvain Mollier
strong note, not by the family of the al-Hilli.
@Peter
Tell you what, put it another way.
Say some dude hid himself away to “get” Mollier.
Say he knew where he went “every other day” on his bike ride.
Say that person got there….and did the deed.
No conspiracy. No one else involved. Just “mano mano” (but with a gun).
Say after… people “closed down”. Said nada.
Say they sought their “own solution”.
Say it suited some of the people that Mollier was dead.
All perfectly plausible.
No great conspiracy.
No “police” involved.
All things settled.
That does happen, right ?
There are communities that do work in that way ?
It’s just a thought. The “conspiracy” comes “after the event”.
MN
Firstly, one has to respect the legal framework in other juristictions to our own. Even the french.
I can understand that having decided upon a course of action, that is for whatever reason to minimise their media exposure, the family have to continue to enforce it.
And to be honest the BMTV pictures were well out of order and in my view the best argument going for their continuing position.
However the legal letters to the local paper for merely reporting that a memorial service had been held seemed somewhat coercive to me. It seemed like a chilling effect strategy to me.
An open question, as far as I am concerned, relates to why would his former employer fund the legal team? What business does his former employer have in expending money to ‘defend his reputation’ as it has been strangely described, if his death has no connection whatsoever to his employment or to his employer?
The only explanation I could come up with was, as I have suggested to you previously, that someone was trying to make ammends. . .
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/not-forgetting-the-al-hillis-continued/comment-page-12/#comment-532665
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/not-forgetting-the-al-hillis-continued/comment-page-12/#comment-532738
@GIP
I did wonder if GG had told the police himself when they did the house to house,I just wondered if anyone knew in case it was because one of the parties has seen him .
I don’t know what to make of the investigation early on there was some sort of half hearted attempt at line people could call I think they had a few calls .
There were no pictures so how was anyone supposed to know if they had seen anything in the wider world, they just showed some around the local area as far as I know.
If anyone did know anything who would they tell they have not exactly offered communication points even Mr motorbiker seems to have missed he was most wanted .
I do wonder that the family of SM have not kicked more ass ,Zaid I can understand as he has been on the sharp end and is reluctant to go to France as would I be in his shoes .
The MC “must have” been to a “flying school” near by….
…and yet, not a word ! No one there said a thing.
The Police found him. All by themselves.
Perhaps if this was Belfast (back in the day) or even the East End of London. But France ! Surely not !
Zainab has said she saw
– A 4×4
– One bad man
How come she missed seeing SM and MC?
My guess is that the 4×4 is the ONF2 green Jeep 4×4
The ‘one bad man’ was perhaps X when he was shooting at the stuck BMW, killing the SAH’s
So, how come Zainab didn’t see the MC (X) and SM
Remember that SAH took Zaianb by the arm to run to the car. It indicates that
– SAH saw/heard(?) some kind of danger coming
– SAH still had the time to take Zainab by the arm and run to the car
Now, suppose SM had indeed biked beyond Martinet. And bumped into MC (X). And now both came down, with MC hunting SM. Maybe even firing a few (max 3) rounds.
Maybe SAH saw/heard this ‘circus’ racing down, and maybe he saw that some crazy X was hunting SM … so SAH tried to get away. Zainab, already on the other side of the car wouldn’t have seen MC and SM.
MC did succeed in shooting SM in the back. SM fell on the ground, got up, was shot again, and feel on the ground just as SAH was reversing over him.
X somehow felt the need to wipe the SAH’s after they got stuck (otherwise they would have escaped)
– – –
Crazy scenario, I know. But I felt the need to submit it anyway
Max
My guess is that the green 4×4 is ONF3
In my ‘neutral’ scenario Zainab likely would not have seen the MC that crossed WBM because it would have only been on the main track for a short time (note that if this is indeed the case then WBM effectively becomes GG’s alibi, especially the slow riding part).
You make excellent points about SAH sensing the danger coming and pulling Zainab to the car.
This precursor ‘commotion’ is one of the factlets that keeps the ‘SM as primary target’ in play for me.
Personally I think that Zainab took one of the first few shots and went down (SAH may have thought she was dead) SAH himself must have taken another of the first few shots.
Thus if I am correct in this, Zainab having been being shot, maybe unconscious or in shock, there is no surprise that she does not recall a cyclist.
So, who is left to be X ?
Well there is ONF3 . . . and the X3/5 seen by ONF1 (and just possibly another mobylette).
How many ONF staff were in the ONF3 fourgon? Could one have been dropped off at say the second or third hairpin because he felt like a nice stroll back along la combette?
Who is to say?
If you were local and harboured suspicions but wanted yourself and your family to continue to live a grief free life, would you say anything?
Pink
Yes, I remember the gendarmes held a press conference to launch a public appeal for information. Some enterprising journo checked and found that the appeal response telephone line given out had not in fact been connected up.
Please call with info when we get round to activating the number given!
Don’t get me started about the wasted opportunities for media appeals.
@Max
ZAH said (via EM) she saw
4×4.
One bad man.
And no one at the car park.
ONF2 said (via Eric) they saw
SM
And no one else
And and “no bodies”.
I’d love to hit the “smiley face” button (but this case is tragic). But you get what I mean.
Smiley Face !
James
Not to mention all the digital photos and video shot by the parapentistes that day.
James
ONF2 only saw SM (not WBM because he had not yet started up the combe)
Soooo, you need ONF3 to be the large vehicle seen by WBM
It cannot have been the RHD BMW 4×4 because EM specificly states that this was only seen on the combe by ONF1
Thus Zainab likely saw ONF3 as well.
More trouble in FRANCE SHELL
Fire on a petrochemical site in Berre-l’Étang: the thesis of a “malicious act” privileged
http://www.ledauphine.com/france-monde/2015/07/14/incendie-sur-un-site-chimique-a-berre-l-etang-le-plan-orsec-declenche
They do seem to have a lot of fires in FRANCE
http://www.europe1.fr/faits-divers/bouches-du-rhone-incendie-sur-un-site-pretrochimique-a-berre-letang-1367530
Around 3 am, two explosions were heard on the petrochemical site located near the pond Berre and Marseille-Marignane airport, for reasons still unknown. “Two tanks, 500 meters apart from each other and filled with chemicals, are affected,” said a source close to the investigation.
I wonder if a comparison with the United Kingdom and France could be done to see
if we have a comparable number of fires?
05/09/2012 Slaughter of the Horses
I still think that Sylvain Mollier was up the combe to do business with one of the adults of the family al-Hilli.
I do not have a prefered al-Hilli adult in mind.
I think the slaughter happened to stop the transaction.
If the above is true, there may not have been a need for a “spotter” of the Ugine -Faverges
cycle track.
I strongly suspect espionage
However if the al-Hilli adult was Saad, why did he not cycle from his campsite along the cycle track and just the two of them meet, surely that would have been appropriate.
So, I am moving towards one or both of the women as targets,
together with Sylvain.
GIP
Those “flyers” all have helmet cams now-a-days.
Our guy (MC) probably didn’t. He’s not even “media savvy”. He doesn’t even read the local news (or watch tele !).
But… if ONF2 didn’t see WBM (or SAH) because WBM hadn’t started up the Combe D’Ire, are you saying you believe ONF2 drove “all the way down” the route and “exited at the bottom” ?
I believe (and what do I know) that ONF2 “turned off” the route before reaching WBM (or SAH).
Why ? Well, because of the “timings” (and the MC).
If ONF2 “turned around” the MC, then it would stand to reason ONF2 and the MC were in “close proximity” to each other along that route down…until ONF2 “turned off”.
I mean, it could be the ONF2 unit moved the MC back to the car park and then continued down the route, leaving the MC at (or around) the car park.
Then “later” the MC set off (hence the sighting by WBM).
The movements of the ONF2 unit and the MC are “unclear” (at best). I think we’re being kept in the dark on that !
Re the sighting by ZAH of the “4×4”.
It would seem logical (is there any logic left in this case !) for that vehicle to be the one also sighting by WBM.
When WBM saw it, it was moving downhill.
WBM had already been passed by SAH by then.
Seems logical (that word again !) for that vehicle to be moving as it passed SAH. That would make it a “memorable event” for ZAH. They would have had to “negotiate” each other when passing (or at least “pass each other at a slower than previous speed”).
Plus… the indications are that it was not the “mystery” BMW X5/3.
Which brings me back round to your point.
Do you believe that ONF2 drove down the route “completely” and exited it, before WBM entered it ? Or do you believe ONF2 “turned off” the route.
If ONF2 “completely” the route fully… then the “WBM/ZAH” (“ONF3”) vehicle would have been “the nearest “ONF” vehicle to the car park” at the time of the shootings. AND that the MC had “loitered” somewhere after ONF2 turned him around at the hairpins. That would be odd ?
Whereas, if ONF2 and the MC were in “close proximity” to each other when descending…after SM passed them (ONF2 and MC), the ONF2 unit could have turned off. Thus never seeing WBM or SAH (who were en route, but lower down).
Hope that makes sense !
MN
OK so do you think it had to be an isolated meet because with both women being muslim they could not publicly meet up with some random male so it had to appear like a random encounter?
Forget the muslim stuff, whatever went on is way beyond that.