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>
James
Yes, yes you do.
Which is why EM has focused all his effort onto this, what with the full scale media appeal… no, wait… er… um…
And his little friend J-M D has the audacity to blame the Brits for not co-operating !
I reakon the French knew who did it on day one.
reckon
And I expect they knew exactly how many motorcyclists were up the combe.
And I expect Sylvain’s employers knew what he was up to.
GIP
The point being (something you mentioned) the “lurching car”.
Lurching backwards ? Or lurching forwards ?
The marks on the car suggest backwards, but the reverse was “long” and “at power”.
A car under “whatever” power the deceased Saad was able to apply….would it “lurch” violently ?
The car is either 1. Trying to get off the bank or 2. pushing against the bank.
WBM decided to moved SM….then turn the car off.
The opposite sequence would mean “SM remains were he was”.
I was thinking (and talking) to colleagues about the FlyDubai crash.
I was trained in “old school” flying. So called “hand flying”.
Push forward with your “throttle hand” on the levels, with the same hand disengage Auto Throttles (you don’t want them stopping you later), moving the same hand back, check the Speed Brakes are stowed.
Your other hand, pulls up to 15 degrees….and stays there for as long as possible.
Forget the speed (your throttles are open) fly Angle of Attack.
As in “call out my altitude, don’t bother telling me the speed”.
The trick is….. deal with the “danger that is there” (the aircraft is trimmed for “nose up pitch” on landing.
You need to “re trim” (as you will….get into problems), but that isn’t the “immediate” task at hand.
WBM would have faced “the immediate danger”.
The BMW will run over the victim that maybe still alive……deal with that.
A car in reverse, stuck “into” a bank, will always go in reverse.
A car in a forward gear, facing an open carpark….. could go anywhere.
It’s the “possibility” that Al Hilli was “trying to effect his escape from the bank”, that says “hang on… the gunman is concentrating on the other person” that gets me.
James
The key post is here
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/not-forgetting-the-al-hillis-continued/comment-page-204/#comment-585384
but the start of the discussion was two pages back here
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/not-forgetting-the-al-hillis-continued/comment-page-203/#comment-584886
Potentially the BMW level control system and/or active suspension could get into a feedback loop with the climb/dropback of the slope, hit resonance then then run-away.
Think aeroelastic flutter but actively driven.
To someone arriving it could appear that the car were lurching back and forward or even side to side. At first sight it would be difficult to tell what was happening or even if the driver were doing this intentionally.
At leisure the mud/dust spray on the rear passenge doors tells you that it was in reverse.
I don’t see any real issue with this. You guys are always getting confused and shutting the wrong engine down, you know the one that is still working. Why is that?
My interest is in how long it took to dig itself in like that. I am sure that the gendarmes did not bother themselves with testing that out. They probably intended to then spent 6 months trying to fill in a health and safety assessment.
GIP
….I like the humour. As in, people do shut the “bad” engine down (when it’s really the good engine)… because they thought “wrong”. They “think” they’re flying the “classic” model, when they’re flying the “newer one”.
Hence, you always have to “re think the think”.
We humans are “shit” at flying… unless they realise they are “shit” and “think”.
Mud splatters on the “forward” panels, do indeed suggest a “lurching rearwards”.
But that means SAH was killed when his car was in reverse.
Either before he hit the bank….or whilst trying to escape (but before he changed gear).
That’s “sharp shooting”. Or “lucky for the killer shooting”. Or…. it wasn’t in reverse, but stuck “on” the bank.
I can only assume the eldest daughter was in the car….and the “direction of fire” was not concentrated on SAH.
ONF2 states “he saw SM riding up” but “did not see the BMW”.
That infers ONF2 either 1. turned off the route down OR 2. there is a greater time difference.
Human logic says “it was Number 1”. And so it maybe.
SAH arrives at the car park first. We “know” this from statements.
I assume that the attack was quick…and started when SM arrived.
The direction was aimed at SM
Al Hilli nearly made an escape.
SM appears “highly likely” to be the target.
I suspect that SAH was already incapacitated by the time the BMW hit that bank whilst reversing, because the impact must have been sufficiently hard for it to force open the door of the boot (I don’t see any other reason for that door to be open). If that be true, he must have lost consciousness with his foot on the gas. Either way, quite apart from the mud spatters showing that it was in reverse, the car being in a forward gear could not account for that “lurching” motion. A car stuck in first does not lurch, it just digs in more deeply. By contrast, the BMW in reverse trying to climb up that slope, alternately gaining traction on the shallow part and losing it on the steeper part of the slope, would have caused a violent up-and-down, back-and-forth lurching motion.
Even if WBM had figured out that the BMW was not in any real danger of going anywhere, that lurching motion must have looked quite unsafe, and I can see why he would have wanted to stop it.
Peter
I seem to recall that the BMFTV pictures do not appear to show the boot open. They were taken well before the main overhead pictures that we all know so well. By then the bodies had been removed and forensic investigators were active.
P.S.
I hate flying (unless I am driving). And then I have to check the “PNF” can fly !
James, I’ve followed your logic, that the evidence points to Sylvain being the target.
James
You posted
Remember that my hash-up theory has in reality ONF2 meeting LMC at
approx 15:12 and ONF1 passing through Le Martinet at approx 15:25 though they
both claim the reverse !
See below at 15:20 – ONF2 cross SM then pass the old mill going down, exiting the combe.
Here is a draft timeline – Motorcycle Hash version two.
15:12 – ONF2 meet LMC then both start their descent
15:19 – SM passes the old mill going up – ditto LMC but going down
15:20 – ONF2 cross SM then pass the old mill going down, exiting the combe
15:21 – WBM passes the old mill going up
15:22 – SAH passes the old mill going up
15:25 – ONF1 spots PMC* whilst passing though Le Martinet and drives down
15:28 – ONF1 crosses SAH (the 4×4 seen by Zainab)
15:29 – ONF1 crosses SM
15:30 – ONF1 crosses WBM (the 4×4 seen by WBM)
15:31 – SAH arrives at Le Martinet
15:32 – ONF1 passes the old mill going down, exiting the combe
(*) PMC is Pannier Motor Cycle dressed in black
Taken from my post :-
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/not-forgetting-the-al-hillis-continued/comment-page-203/#comment-584861
MN …. Yes
GIP…. I get what you’re saying. It fits with what is “known”, BUT therein lies the problem.
The problem is, we simply don’t have enough information (official, correct information).
For example, in your scenario, the accounts of WBM and ONF1 must “somehow” tally/match.
And
1. ONF1 must say he passed two cyclist. Now we don’t know if he has said this (he may well have)
2. And ONF1 must “accept” that he mistakenly identified the “wrong make of BMW” climbing the hill.
Now “both” those points could be true.
Infact, to take your scenario “one step further”, it was the BBC Panorama programme that stated (paraphrased), “this forestry worker passed through the car park MOMENTS BEFORE the attack took place”.
Maybe this is “flowery reporting” by the programme maker? Maybe it is correct? We don’t know.
It is unclear (as far as I am aware, “never stated”) if ONF1 and ONF2 were working together that morning/early afternoon. Only that they were departing “at approx the same time” and “using the same route”.
The conclusion is, they BOTH saw the same motorcyclist. BUT not at the same time.
First ONF1. Then ONF2. The fact that it was OR wasn’t the same motorcyclist should now be “known” by Eric.
But it has never been “made clear” to the general public.
To line up “the holes in the cheese”, we have to know “who saw whom”, “what time that was” and “what route did they take. And I don’t think we’re getting that information.
For example….
WBM saw a 4×4 coming down (ONF2 ?) and a motorcyclist (Lyon biker ?).
That sounds reasonable…..
BUT the ONF2 unit says “he only saw SM as he was climbing” and nothing else.
No mention of SAH (throwing out ZAH sighting ?)
No mention of the second cyclist WBM (so the 4×4 wasn’t ONF2).
Hence, your theory “has legs” (in terms of the “sequence”).
When was there the last mention of their apparent murderer, William Hershkowitz who did the dirty work as a Mossad apprentice from America, only to stop when he saw how brutal it was; went back to Eilat where he suffered nightmares and disputes with coworkers; and finally killed his troublesome job handler?
Or has he simply been forgotten in all this hypocrisy?
Oui says
April 12, 2013 at 2:38 AM
Richard, not meant to be off-topic, but have you blogged about the US citizen from Poughkeepsie William Hershkowitz who was killed/committed suicide in commando raid in Eilat in October 2012. He was described by his friends as “one of the sweetest, most kind and giving individuals I’ve ever met. Everyone from Poughkeepsie is shocked to hear this.” Willie was 24 years old and participated in a Oranim program. Did he already serve in the IDF or was he trained by Mossad? Many oddities in this incident. In a news article from Sweden, Hershkowitz may have been involved in the killing of the al-Hilli family in Chevaline, Haut-Savoie in France a month earlier.
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2013/4/10/16265/2575
William Hershkowitz could well match the E-FIT-SKETCH, provided one takes off its helmet, shaves off the goatee and beard, and uses an up-to-date photo of Hershkowitz.
The French police have apparently ruled him out as he had conveniently been killed before an E-FIT-SKETCH was made.
GIP
Point 2.
The other thing that does “fit” is the fact the Lyon biker didn’t come forward.
He didn’t (as he claims) see anything.
Like your scenario. It does make alot of sense.
A biker is faster than a 4×4. He departs the route even before SM arrives at it.
Only sees SM, as he is the first one to arrive at the Combe D’Ire climb.
ONF1 is mistaken when he says he saw a “BMW 4×4” (although his description is somewhat detailed !).
But the “fact” he saw SM and WBM isn’t mentioned (Eric doesn’t want to release that ?).
WBM and ZAH both sight the ONF1 coming down.
And the PMC* is sighted by ONF1 (parked) and WBM (descending after the killings took place).
Conclusion (if any of that is correct) is….. MASSIVE police cock up !
1. The police were searching for a 4×4 BMW (and there isn’t one).
2. The police were searching for one biker (when there were two).
It also throws up the question, was “PMC involved” ?
He would have seen/passed SM and SAH….but hadn’t come forward (was he seen by ZAH)
One “bizarre thing” struck me. The delayed release of the biker seen by ONF2. The police must have been “looking for him”, but may have felt “he has nothing to do with the investigation”.
After Panorama released the info that “a biker had spoken to an ONF unit”, they were forced to release the photofit/robot. Otherwise, they’d have to release what they know….as in “we think it wasnt him BECAUSE…”
Hash-up, James, hash-up if you please!
Conclusion (if any of that is correct and you so</em. know it is) is….. MASSIVE police hash up !
Phew, anyway we have to hurry now and go to the library where that Monsieur Wreckless is preparing the dénouement.
So question for the floor:-
Does Eric know?
I thought William Brett Martin claimed as W.B.M. was riding up the combe, a very slow motorcyclist rode down the combe,
I had the impression this unnerved W.B.M.
But one or two years later the FRENCH authorities had tracked down L.M.C. he did not see W.B.M.
so either or both of them could have been economical with the actualité
or
there was more than one motorcyclist
Twelve months ago 2015-03-04
http://www.france24.com/en/20150304-france-nuclear-giant-areva-announces-billions-losses
Nuclear manufacturer Areva has announced a 4.8 billion euro loss for 2014, more than its entire market value, plunging the powerful French nuclear industry into turmoil.
The French government said Wednesday it’s working closely with Areva to restructure and secure financing, and would “take its responsibility as a shareholder” in future decisions about its direction. French news media reported it might merge with utility Eléctricité de France.
Areva reported Wednesday 1 billion euros in losses on three major nuclear projects in Finland and France, among other losses.
The company has suffered years of losses linked to those projects and wariness toward nuclear energy since the 2011 Fukushima accident.
Areva supplies nuclear plants around the world. The industry employs 220,000 people in France, more dependent on atomic power than any other country.
I wonder if things have got better or worse for Cezus – Areva – the apparent employers of Sylvain Mollier
who had money to throw around keping the press quite on what Sylvain was getting up to up the combe on 05/09/2012.
GIP….
…that seems to be the question.
Surely, he “must” ?
I mean, I can imagine the chaos at first. Then the need to “cast the net wide”. But “logic” must have hit home ?
James
I would like to think so but there seems to have been no ‘correction’ of the course of the investigation.
Is now the strategie of the investigation to not go-public in order not to alert the ONF crew. Presumably the gendarmes are now scrunched up in the back of vans parked all over Arnand watching them closely.
If so I don’t think that they will find much as I cannot see that the reversal of sightings was deliberately concocted by the ONF in order to hide some kind of involvement in the killings. I think they hashed it up rather than hatched it up.
I think that no-one really wants to be the one on-camera announcing it at a press conference unless they can find another secret husband to go with it !
On balance I do not think Eric actually knows but some in the gendarmerie presumably have a pretty good idea and that may inform the thinking of those officers who vigorously doubt the existence of the X5.
I expect, there was more than one motorcyclist.
I expect within a few days, the FRENCH investigators had come to understand there was more than one motorcyclist.
I expect they imparted this knowledge to Eric Maillaud.
However, it may have taken them some time to make sense of this.
Was the motorcyclist who was spoken to by the ONF with the special side-opening helmet, the same person as the later identified ( but still without a public name or face) LMC who apparently claimed never to have owned of used a special side-opening helmet and not to have seen William Brett Martin?
If we can agree with LMC that he was in no way involved, that he has never owned or used a special side-opening helmet,
he did not see or pass W.B.M. then there is a theory to be made:
we have never been allowed to know the identity of LMC, also we have not been allowed to see the likeness of LMC.
Therefore we are confused as to does LMC resemble the E-FIT-SKETCH issued 13 months after
the Slaughter of the Horses. Bare in mind Eric Maillaud has been purposefully VAGUE, why would that be?
Now let us say LMC does not resemble the E-FIT-SKETCH
If the likeness conveyed in the E-FIT-SKETCH is a reasonable impression of the special side-opening helmet wearing motorcyclist spoken with by the ONF person on the day, we must assume the person spoken to by the ONF is NOT LMC.
This would mean LMC is innocent and ERIC is still looking for the special side-opening helmet wearing motorcyclist who spoke that day with the ONF person and who slowly rode down the combe passing William Brett Martin
and this motorcyclist has not come forward.
If this theory is right, I expect LMC was identified very much earlier that the French authorities have let on, the hunt is still on for the motorcycle killer, who resembles the E-FIT-SKETCH
I assume you are referring to me who has never even been diagnosed with any mental problems, much less institutionalized for them.
Instead of casting personal insults, just answer my question.
en passant …
http://www.france24.com/en/20100518-ali-vakili-rad-perfect-murder-imperfect-getaway-shapour-bakhtiar
Shapour Bakhjoar, thje Shah’s last Prime Minister who tried to manage the country after the Shah and Queen had left, was a very marked man by Khomeini for fear that he would somehow manage another return by the new Shah while the al-Hillis et al. were nobodies, just convenient tools for the ambitious Mossad.
Clashes broke out on the streets of FRANCE on Thursday during fresh demonstrations over labour reforms as workers and students protested against planned changes to labour legislation.
http://www.france24.com/en/20160331-france-braces-strike-protests-labour-reforms-el-khomri
Are the peasants revolting?
The Paris police press office told Sputnik the cause of the explosion “was a house fire.”
https://www.rt.com/news/338004-explosion-paris-reports-evacuation/
Huge gas explosion in Paris
Terrorists are seeking atomic materials to kill “as many people as they possibly could,” British Prime Minister David Cameron warned world leaders at the Nuclear Security Summit (NSS) in Washington on Thursday.
At a time when Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) are thought to have designs on a so-called dirty bomb – a conventional explosive with radioactive material placed in densely populated areas – the PM said terrorists will use “whatever materials they can get their hands on.”
Cameron emphasized why he believed this is such a key issue now.
“We know that the terrorists we face today would like to kill as many people as they possibly could.
https://www.rt.com/uk/338021-terrorism-nuclear-dirty-bomb/
So if David Cameron thinks Global Terrorists want to staeal nuclear material from Britain to use as a terror weapon, why is the idiot so keen on getting EDF/AREVA to construct the Worlds largest Nuclear facility in Somerset, surely more Nuclear sites, will increase the chances of the wrong people getting hold of the stuff?
A strong explosion on the ground floor of a building of the 6th arrondissement took place on Friday afternoon. This would be a domestic accident. There are 17 injured, one seriously, among residents and firefighters.
A large explosion was heard on Friday noon in the 6th arrondissement of Paris. A “small stove” is the cause of the explosion that caused a fire. Soon, pictures circulating on social networks showed the roof of a building completely torn. The blast ripped through a portion of the upper floors. A security perimeter was established by police.
A first review reported five wounded but it has risen in the day, increasing to 17 injured, one seriously, a firefighter blown by the blast.
Some furniture, shelves and mostly rubble heaps were thrown into the street. At 14:30, heavy smoke continued to clear the building, especially the first floor windows. A strong smell of burning hung in the neighborhood, scene of a ballet ambulances, fire engines and civil security. “Since the building was blown, the entire structure is weakened. We must ensure that the building does not collapse and be sure that no victim is left or is buried, “according to the spokesman for firefighters, Gabriel Plus. Dogs still looking for potential victims under the rubble.
http://www.ledauphine.com/france-monde/2016/04/01/explosion-de-gaz-a-paris-cinq-blesses
So if they can use dogs to sniff people out in Paris:
were dogs used at Le Martinet to sniff out the shootist and the route he left by?
https://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.franceinfo.fr/fil-info/article/importante-explosion-dans-le-6eme-arrondissement-de-paris-vraisemblablement-d-origine-accidentelle-779025&prev=search
If a dozen firefighters have been injured, they must have already been called in ( unless they live there)
This is not likely just to be a house fire.
I expect that a small fire was started, then the fire station was called, then the person disconnected a gas pipe and left an ignition device, the object being to cause a huge explosion and harming firefighters.
“Blast is believed to have been caused by a severed gas pipe”
I wonder how that happened?
Eleven firefighters injured, one seriously.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3518874/Streets-evacuated-explosion-heard-central-Paris.html
Immediately it is said by the FRENCH not to be suspicious, how do they know within a few hours that it is not suspicious?
Because they do it every day of the week, studying actual sites and gas explosions, rather than sitting on the sofa using Google, maybe? Just a possibility, obviously.
Interesting that Obama shortly afterwards expressed concern about what Isis chemists were likely doing in the Mosul University lab,
Sounds very suspicious to me, especially since it shows that French authorities cannot protect their own citizens in the center of Paris.
Still, don’t see much relationship with what happened to the al-Hillis et al, except showing that the French authorities are completely in the pocket of its perpetrators, the Mossad and its ambitious candidate, William Hershkowitz.
Yesterday I visited Windsor Castle, the police had their fingers on the triggers of machine guns – never seen that before.
1,000 more armed police on British streets to counter Paris-style attack
The ‘significant’ boost to counter-terror resources comes after a government review into the capabilities of Britain’s police to respond to terror attacks. They examined ‘complex’ attacks such as the shooting at the offices of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and the gun and bomb attacks in Paris in November.
Cameron revealed the bolstered security measures at a summit of world leaders in Washington, led by US President Barack Obama.
Aujourd’hui aux alentours de midi, les sapeurs pompiers du centre de secours Colombier ont sauvé la vie de trois personnes en les évacuants de leur immeuble par les échelles suite à l’explosion d’un appartement situé au 6eme étage.
Il est environ 11h00 lorsque les secours sont appelés pour un feu d’appartement dans un immeuble du 6eme arrondissement.
Alors qu’ils sont en train de réaliser l’extinction d’un premier appartement situé au rez-de-chaussée, une violente déflagration se fait ressentir dans l’immeuble qui se situe juste à côté. Le souffle est si fort qu’il éventre le bâtiment sur plusieurs étages et projette des débris sur des dizaines de mètres aux alentours. Les équipes présentes sur place prennent rapidement conscience de l’ampleur du sinistre. De nombreux engins sont alors appelés en renfort. Très rapidement, un périmètre de sécurité est dressé tout autour de l’immeuble.
Cinq lances dont une sur échelle seront nécessaires pour éteindre l’incendie. L’intervention sera de longue durée, la structure ayant été fragilisée et menaçant de s’effondrer à tous moment.
Le bilan fait état de 17 blessés dont 11 soldats du feu.
http://www.pompiersparis.fr/actualites/interventions/explosion-dans-un-immeuble-3-personnes-sauvees
A local man, Sylvan Mollier, 45, lay dead beside the car. His body had been dragged from where he was originally attacked and his arms arranged by his sides, presumably by the murderer.?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/special-report-what-links-diana-s-death-to-the-murders-in-annecy-a-french-judicial-process-that-lets-8223361.html
I have no idea if sniffer dogs were brought to Le martinet after the “Slaughter of the Horses” incident
but if they had been, the dogs would have been able to follow the trail of the assassin from the body of Sylvain Mollier off the mountain.
This would have provided some clues.
“I counted them all out, and I counted them all back”
With a single point of control that was as as good as it gets. Unfortunately one cannot say that about the motorcycle accounting problem we seem to have inherited.
Take Janin for example. He of the malleable testimony and outspoken wife. The consensus interpretation of the story he finally settled on is that he saw an MC come from Savoie over the Col past him into Haute-Savoie heading down towards the Combe d’Ire. However, according to him, it did not descend all the way to Le Martinet but rather turned around and returned back past him to Savoie and anonymity.
The rider did not come forward, it has never been found.
Aside from the timing. Janin’s statement seems pretty unequivocal but I have my doubts. Sure, he has a good field of view but that does not extend down to Le Martinet. Still he seems to think it didn’t get there.
Could he have seen an MC heading towards Le Martinet then another pretty similar one heading away from the combe back towards him?
That is, one up and one down.
Sounds far-fetched? We have already seen that the ONF crew and the gendarmes seem to have conflated two different motorcycles. One has been accounted for but the sighting by ONF1 (at approx 15:25 by my estimate) has not.
Amazingly, his description of the MC he saw, broadly fits Janin’s description.
What gives? Did a ‘confused’ ONF1 confabulate an earlier sighting of that MC which would take his sighting off the table? Has his testimony been so distorted that it is now untrusted?
The gendarmes have not found the ONF1 MC, they have not found Janin’s MC and they have not found WBM’s MC and they do not seem to care.
Seems like being a firefighter in FRANCE these days is a dangerous and frightening occupation, they have my admiration.
GIRONDE Five tankers explode, two injured firefighters
A fire Sunday on the website of a company specializing in the transportation of hazardous materials, north of Bordeaux (Gironde), caused the explosion of five tanker trucks. Two firefighters were slightly injured, said the prefecture of the Gironde.
The fire started before 7 am in a tanker parked on a storage parking lot of the Trans CD. The vehicle exploded, and metal scrap metal were projected to the outside of society, some ending up in gardens of homes. Only two firefighters were slightly injured during surgery, knee and ear.
Following this first explosion, several tankers, among the hundred that was stored on the parking lot, also caught fire and a second stronger explosion involving four trucks then occurred. The tanks were empty but probably contained residual gases, says South West.
85 fire trucks and eleven water lance were sent on site and the mobile cell chemical response. The causes of the accident are not known. The investigation was entrusted to the Departmental Directorate of Public Security (DDSP), affirming “not yet know if the origin is accidental or intentional.”
http://www.ledauphine.com/france-monde/2016/04/03/deux-explosions-dans-une-zone-industrielle-pres-de-bordeaux
Rearranging the deckchairs on the sinking Titanic of the FRENCH NUCLEAR INDUSTRIES
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/C-Areva-CEA-and-EDF-create-consultative-body-0104165.html
AREVA, EDF and the French Alternative Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) have launched a tripartite consultative body to “best confront the profound changes currently under way in the highly-competitive nuclear sector”.
They will have meetings four times a year and swap caps, that should sort it?
Although we have come to realize that there were multiple ( more than one) motorcycles up the combe that day,
we probably will not be able to take it much further than knowing we the public are being treated like mushrooms.
However if we also now realize that Sylvain Mollier was the initial /main target, we may be able to take things a bit further.
Why did Sylvain at a moments notice, tell Claire to leave her business in Grignon ( main source of their present and future income) and return to take charge of the infant, so Sylvain could go out on his cycle.
He had urgent business to attend.
Why was his “employer” so keen that the media should not poke into his activities?
and so on.
MN
If you want to do something useful you could trawl through the initial french reports which reported the family having suggested a route and SM diverging from it. One of the reports included details of the route he was supposed to have taken.
I suspect that it has been taken down but it would be interesting to see exactly how his route diverged (ie slightly or in a different direction). This may illuminate or falsify your hypothesis.
Who shot down MH370?
No one – it was remote controlled to land at Diego Garcia
Apparently ONF1 reported the X5 within hours but failed to report or de-emphasised the motorcycle.
It also appears that ONF2 reported the motorcycle we know as LMC approx three days after their sighting above place Martinet.
Did ONF1 contact ONF2, specifically to talk about the motorcycle? /strong>
“They told me they had passed the motorbike I had passed at place Martinet, two bends further up.”
One possibility is that ONF1 was subconciously concerned that the MC he had
crossed was local, that it was one he really should have recognised.
He may have felt he got a lucky break, his colleagues, the ONF2 pair actually spoke to a motorcycle rider above place Martinet, got a fair look at him and didn’t recognise him.
Huzzah! – ONF1 could go to bed a happy man. They could make their report. He
wouldn’t have to worry about becoming a pariah for grassing up a local.
If someone was at the AMICALE DES SAPEURS POMPIERS DU GRAND ARC GRIGNON
adjacent to the PHARMACIE SCHUTZ MORANGE
they might well be on talking terms with Claire and Sylvain and be aware of some of their toings and goings,
so much so that as Claire was unexpectedly urgently called to take charge of her baby,
a motorcycle could be dispatched from Grignon over the mountain to intercept Sylvain Mollier on his route up the combe of Ire.
BREAKING
FRENCH M.P.’s vote to make paying for sex illegal?
Michael – what has this to do to do with the topic?
Shelock
I remember you followed this from the early days, would you care to cast your eye over my recent ramblings. They needs knowledgeable review and critique. Thanks.
Read-in from Peter’s post below
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2012/09/not-forgetting-the-al-hillis-continued/comment-page-203/#comment-584412
GIP
Don’t understand what exactly you expect me to do/answer?
Re timeline: I have to leave it to others – to me there are too many ifs. Even to M. Clouseau think he doesn’t tell us all he knows. And what this is- we don’t know. So far, all is pure speculation.
Re ONF1 or 2: Maybe they talked about it the next day? It’s tricky to speculate it happened on the phone right afterwards ….. may be-may be not. Even here: we don’t know anything exactly.
“They” only let us know what they want to want to let us know, right? Pitty it is
Be it for the girls left behind.
Shelock – nothing but if you glance at my previous post
you will see it has to do with The Slaughter of the Horses.
I remark that you’re quite often “off topic”.
Sometimes its annoying if you’re short of time and have to read all this stuff that doesn’t belong either to the Al Hillis or MH 370
Don’t get me wrong
xxx
Shelock
“Re ONF1 or 2: Maybe they talked about it the next day? It’s tricky to speculate it happened on the phone right afterwards ….. may be-may be not. Even here: we don’t know anything exactly.”
Good point, they certainly talked, but it could have been the next day as you suggest. I have searched, but cannot now find a reference to a telephone call made after work on the evening of the murders.
Spookily, google now adds the following footnote to the results:-
“Some results may have been removed under data protection law in Europe.”
When I search for something innocuous, no footnote!
Cruelsome as it is !!
You’re right it’s getting harder and harder to find information on a certain topic. So often its behind a paywall or as you tell- removed for certain reasons.
So far, I can’t remember having heard anything about such a phonecall.
Same for the 4×4 you mentioned to have been seen by Zainab.
All I can remember is that she’d told about “one baddy”. Are you sure she mentioned a 4×4?
Can’t imagine a girl of that age could decide whether a 4×4 or not. May be a SUV – okay, but all-wheel-drive in general? That sounds unreal.
My 5 cents
I am still rather concerned that the shooting of Nicole Communal-Tournier in Lathuile
a week after rthe release of the E-FIT-SKETCH
is being airbrushed out of existence.
How can five persons commit such a terrible crime, be locked up for two years without being named and not apparently come to court
or have they dealt with eXtra judicially?
Shelock
Sorry, didn’t mean to intentionally mislead. I cannot remember the exact phrasing, possibly it was something like ‘large vehicle’ rather than specificly a four-wheel-drive.
She was also said not to remember seeing the cyclist (SM).
GIP
I think the phone call between the two ONF units (although we’re talking about 3 people !) was mentioned in the BBC Panorama programme. I think.
From it, I concluded that the ONF units “knew” the other/each other was in the area at the time.
I also concluded (rightly or wrongly) that they were working together, in that area.
The last point is “speculation” (as is the first, come to think of it !).
When that call happened (I suspect it did actually happen), no one knows.
That hour. That night. The next day. Who knows.
Is it “safe” to assume, the two units DID NOT end up at the same place IMMEDIATELY AFTER the shootings ?
Contact between the two units (to “whom ever” from ONF2) was made by telephone.
They “could have” arrived at the same “yard” at different times…and departed homewards at different times.
They “could have” arrived at the same “yard” and met….but knew nothing of what had just happened.
The fact is…. contact was made (with regard to the murders), by telephone.
And that means “information” was exchanged.
The “most logical” information to be exchanged would be concerning “the biker”.
“We stopped a biker…did you see him to ?”
“I saw a biker at the carpark, did you see one ?” “Yeah, we stopped him”
And so on. We don’t know what was said. How it was said. To whom it was said first.
Assuming ONF2 is “key”.
They give the most detailed information about the rider (they spoke with him afterall).
I assume the biker could (at least) recall being stopped.
So those two “parties” come together. They are “one”.
From that point….we have to assume that the biker SAW the first ONF unit (ONF1) and RECALLS at least driving down the route “slowly” (if not “also passing SM, SAH and WBM).
And that’s the problem (or the clue).
Eric says “The biker is not involved AND doesn’t recall much from that day”.
Now “that” has to be a lie (from Eric), or Eric is being “economical” with the truth !
If the biker that was stopped by ONF2 is the same chap that passes WBM, then he HAS TO HAVE also passed SM (seen by ONF2), passed SAH (ahead of WBM) and WBM (his own statement).
James
Normally I would quip “We have confirmation!” however since I was already using one of your posts (see below the break) in support of my memory things could get a bit recursive. I shall re-view the panorama program over the weekend – (thanks for the link Pink).
My recollection is that ONF1 contacted ONF2 that evening. My theory is that their erroneous assumption that they had seen the same MC ten minutes apart led to the reversal of their positions on the timeline.
Respectfully I have to disagree with your following statement:-
“From that point….we have to assume that the biker SAW the first ONF unit (ONF1) and RECALLS at least driving down the route “slowly” (if not “also passing SM, SAH and WBM). “
I am pretty sure that the biker (LMC) did not see ONF1 at place Martinet and was not the MC seen by WBM. Because, in my reversed ONF sightings timeline the ONF2 sighting of LMC above place Martinet occurs first at approx 15:12 (the biker LMC is shooed down the combe).
Then approx 10 minutes later at say 15:25 ONF1 passes through place Martinet. ONF1 cannot have seen LMC at place Martinet because LMC had been shooed down the combe 10 minutes earlier with ONF2 following him.
I think ONF1 did see a MC at some stage though not necessarily at place Martinet. I think that this sighting was what led him to contact ONF2 because what he saw, retrospectively scared him shitless.
Eric M. states that the biker (LMC) effectively did what was asked of him by ONF2, that is to drive down. ONF2 followed him but lost sight of him. The biker (LMC) does not have to recall much from that day, just that he did what he was told and did not turn around or hide or whatever.
The phone records and the CCTV pictures that led to his discovery should confirm his story. In fact one can infer that they do so, otherwise he would have had the PM treatment.
In summary, I am sure that the biker that was stopped by ONF2 is not the same chap that passes WBM.
———————————————————————————————————————————-
I have not found the original source yet. However I have found a reference in a post on Deadzone 61 by James dated August 29, 2014 at 13:58 The key line is as follows:-
“His call to the ONF2 with regard the MC (it’s in his interview).”
The link is below – it really is worth a read.
https://deadzone61.wordpress.com/tck-forum-public/comment-page-13/#comment-7766
I think it is likely that there were more than a single motorcycle and more than a single motorcyclist at Le Martinet,
at the relevant time,
on that day 05/09/2012.
I expect the police came to understand there were more than one motorcyclist within the first few days following
“The Slaughter of the Horses” and we ought to assume that they consequently imparted that information to the prosecutor
because it is stunningly relevant.
If there were more than one motorcyclist and the “found” LMC was in no way involved,
it seems probable that one or more “unfound” motorcyclists
were involved in The Slaughter of the Horses.
What would we of interest, is the E-FIT-SKETCH of LMC of of a different motorcyclist?
What would be of interest – is the E-FIT-SKETCH of LMC or of a different motorcyclist?
I recall a confusing few days, when Eric Devouassoux was in court at the same time as the knowledge of LMC was being put out. I suspect Eric Maillaud allowed these two bits of information to hit the public at the same time,
so as “To Confuse”
So does the E-FIT-SKETCH
only resemble Eric Devouassoux or does it also resemble one of the other motorcyclists?
@GIP One thing that struck me that Linda said was this and I thought why would they be asleep they were not young the murder was early afternoon,so did no one tell LR what had happened untill much later that night seems unlikely given they all know each other .
https://deadzone61.wordpress.com/tck-forum-public/comment-page-14/#comments
Lynda says:
August 31, 2014 at 15:16
“Bacchus, those damned Gremlins ! Turns out the call to SM was from his ex-wife, not his current partner CS, the former having re-married. They live in Marthod with the two older Mollier boys, which is where they were when she woke them on the evening of the 5th September to tell them their father was dead, probably a knee jerk reaction as it would have been better to leave it until the morning when the adults had absorbed the terrible news.
Strangely, the discovery of the telephone call was through examination of the call traffic and not by admittance, maybe LR didn’t want to tell FR or CS that she’d made contact that fateful afternoon …. which is a bit odd as they are so very friendly.”
Pink
Yes, I was perplexed by LD’s action myself. Letting them have their last good night of sleep for some time seemed sensible to me.
It could have been a “knee jerk reaction” as Lynda suggested however there could have been additional factors that we do not have visibility of. These days ‘the kids’ apparently have an aladdins cave of electronics in their bedrooms, televisions, computers, these so-called ‘smart telephones’ and whatnot.
So it seems possible that LD was concerned that one or other of her children would find out themselves. I seem to recall that the eldest had seen a report on the TV and had speculated that it could be his dad. The other concern would be that they would have messages or texts from their friends waiting for them when they woke up. I certainly would understand her wishing to tell them herself in person, rather than them find out from another source.
At a guess, I would say that she waited until she had confirmation that the dead man was SM before she told her children. I think it probable that someone did give her an indication earlier but that she did not get confirmation until much later that night.
The discovery of the telephone call is ‘interesting’. I tend to agree with Lynda that “maybe LR didn’t want to tell FR or CS that she’d made contact that fateful afternoon”. My guess would be FR.
GIP
I get what you mean (at least I think I do) so just a couple of questions.
Is there actually an “official” timeline ? One which is directly attributed to the French police and/or Eric ?
One that states the sequence of the sighting of “a single motorcyclist” (if at all it is that).
Or did we just “arrive” at ONF1 (first) and ONF2 (second) ?
The Panorama programme is also “confusing”. It bills ONF1 a “the last person at the car park” (or sentiment to that effect).
Going back to the ONF units (and sequence).
If ONF2 stopped and turned back LMC, then as you say, neither ONF2 nor LMC saw “anything”.
The ONF2 unit merely says they “saw SM”, but we don’t actually know where that was. SM was the first to begin the climb, so it could have been anywhere (…and possibly “at the bottom of the climb”).
Being that ONF2 has now departed the scene/route, he neither sees SAH or WBM.
And that’s what he/they say ! Perfect.
So that leaves ONF1.
And as you say, it’s likely that he is in fact “the last” person up there !
So… the biker HE sees….is the same biker that WBM sees ?
And then, the “4×4” that SAH daughter saw, could be ONF1 ?
The “large vehicle” seen by WBM, could be ONF1 ?
And the biker seen by WBM and SM (being the same) is most likely the killer (and is unknown).
….and likely arrived from the Col ?
Does that sound about right ??
James
That does sounds about right. There are a number of miror variations including options you yourself suggested e.g. what ONF1 actually saw and when. You suggested that ONF1 did not actually see a MC at le Martinet. I am open to that idea.
It really comes down to whether the sighting reversal was an honest mistake or whether one or other of the ONF crew needed to move the timing of their descent down the combe and somehow persuaded or gulled the others to go along. Lets say the ONF2 pair bagsied the 15:25 timeslot, if ONF1 were 10 minutes behind them that would place ONF1 at place Martinet at 15:35 which would be in the thick of it.
However a quick witted ONF1 could suddenly ‘remember’ that he too saw a motorcycle, in fact he saw it further down, so he must have seen it earlier, 10 minutes earlier in fact.
Right now I think it started off as a misunderstanding that proved useful to one or other of the ONF and they are now all stuck with it. My best guess is that ONF1 did in see a motorcycle, probably a trail bike, somewhere on his descent. This sighting may have troubled him, thus the discussion with ONF2 during which ONF1 suddenly ‘remembered’ that the motorcycle he saw must have been the same one that ONF2 had seen above place Martinet.
Personally, I think that the slow moving MC seen by WBM was involved and the rider was either the killer escaping or a look-out who was parked up and moved off when he spotted WBM. There remains a small possibility it was a trailbike rider crossing the valley but that possibility should have been confirmed or excluded by now by the gendarmes. We would have heard EM blabbing about it if the WBM sighting were the teenager.
You made other points/questions but I am out of time right now. I shall get to them later.
GIP Realistically I would say the minute she heard she would ring his phone again .
Pink
Yes I agree. However the call(s) would probably not even get through (connection failure) because of the lack of reception at place Martinet.
Calls to CS at home would go unanswered. If CS was with the gendarmes they may have instructed her not to answer her mobile.
Maybe it is just a quirk of my thinking but I would want to be sure before speaking to the kids.
GIP
Yeah, I am clearer on what you’re saying.
It makes alot of sense.
By that I mean, there are possibilities that “anything” could have happened.
But I am intrigued by the points you have made. Very much so.
From a stand point of other scenarios made, I could never “get” how ONF2 missed so many “things”.
An answer could be, the way you put it.
Simply “he wasn’t there to see them”. The Greek fella with the sharp implement strikes again !
Or put another way… if we (Eric) rule out LMC….
….then they concur with ONF2’s statement.
Makes the whole thing “tighter”, but still “bizarre” (but rules out several things).
So, from your perspective (which is logical), we look at “two” things.
The route/journey/sightings/and what not of ONF1
and the route/journey/sightings/and what not of WBM
Things (I feel I’m playing “catch up” here) make sense. Why didn’t the police release the “photo fit”.
Answer, they already knew it wasn’t important !
Oddly, it puts the whole thing into a different perspective.
This is very interesting (if I/m getting it right).
James
“Things (I feel I’m playing “catch up” here) make sense. Why didn’t the police release the “photo fit”.
Answer, they already knew it wasn’t important !
Oddly, it puts the whole thing into a different perspective.
This is very interesting (if I/m getting it right).”
The actions taken by the investigators since LMC was found were to attempt to trace every Swiss P06 and also to go and have a nice quiet chat with every resident of Chevaline, on the basis that someone was understood to be ‘living in fear’.
I asked myself these questions:-
Why haven’t they reiterated the X5 appeal?
Why haven’t they re-launched the MC appeal focused on ONF1s and WBM’s description(s)?
One at the top. One at the bottom…..
And they both saw the (a) motorcyclist (likely he same untraced one).
GIP
If ONF2 and LMC are ruled out (on the grounds that they had previously departed the area), then what is left is ONF1 at the top of the route and WBM at the bottom of the route.
But ONF1 speaks only of sighting “a motorcyclist at The Martinet” and the “BMW X5 climbing”.
He surely must have also seen (in no particular order)….
SM = Who was sighted “previously” by ONF2 somewhere en route and climbing.
WBM = Was this his “large vehicle coming down”, IF that wasn’t the Citroen van.
SAH = The “BMW X5” + ZAH “large vehicle passing”, IF that wasn’t the Citroen van.
One thing that has always struck me (in WBM’s later statements) was the fact he noted (highlighted even) the motorcycle was being driven slowly. Very slowly.
Maybe the MC was riding “very slowly” because he knew there was a vehicle already ahead of him. A large vehicle heading down hill along that “single track” could be easily caught up to by a “moderately moving” motorcycle.
If that was the case, then the “logical” vehicle/person that was seen by the MC, would be ONF1.
James
In my mind the whole J-MD Citroen van thing was a mistake arising from the gendarmes having turned 10-minutes-later into dogma. Thus if there were a sighting that conflicted with that dogma, the easiest way out was to posit another vehicle.
You wrote:-
“Maybe the MC was riding “very slowly” because he knew there was a vehicle already ahead of him. A large vehicle heading down hill along that “single track” could be easily caught up to by a “moderately moving” motorcycle.”
That would depend on your view of the 15:30 to 15:48 section of the timeline. EM states that WBM saw a motorcycle descending just before, during or just after the shots were being fired. Using a generous interpretation of the word ‘just’ and assuming the sighting was ‘before’ then you could be right. That would mean that the rider seen by WBM was not the shooter. So, could be a look-out or maybe the ado.
You could be correct but my intuition is pulling me the other way, placing the sighting ‘just after’ the shooting. The timing is such that in my mind the MC could be the shooter, a look-out or just possibly the ado.
To be the actual shooter, the MC rider would have to be really focused, shoot everyone, leave riding fast, then slow down on sighting WBM. That seems a bit contrived to me, so I am still thinking about it.
Obviously, the gendarmes may not have told the media about the cards they have up their sleeve, so we may not be playing with a full deck.
James
Just catching up with some points from your April 10, 2016 at 15:12 post.
Is there actually an “official” timeline ? – I don’t think there is a complete timeline issued by EM – but the 10 minutes later mantra seems to be cannon.
I.E. that the MC was seen and spoken to by his colleagues 10 minutes later above place Martinet.
I wasn’t aware that the Panorama programme referenced ONF1 as “the last person at the car park” (or sentiment to that effect). I shall have a look. I am part way through atm searching for a reference to an evening phone call.
You wrote:-
“So that leaves ONF1.
And as you say, it’s likely that he is in fact “the last” person up there !
So… the biker HE sees….is the same biker that WBM sees ?
And then, the “4×4” that SAH daughter saw, could be ONF1 ?
The “large vehicle” seen by WBM, could be ONF1 ?
And the biker seen by WBM and SM (being the same) is most likely the killer (and is unknown). “
I would add that the BMW that ONF1 saw was SAH.
That is core to my reasoning. It removes the ‘wrong order’ sighting by WBM. Remember that he sees a large vehicle followed by a motorcycle coming down. Per the cannon timeline he should have seen the motorcycle followed by a large vehicle coming down (i.e. LMC followed by ONF2 after they shooed him down the combe). But that wasn’t what he observed.
GIP
You may be indeed onto something. It makes sense.
Part One
ONF2 stops and speaks to LMC.
They move down the Combe D’Ire. And are away.
ONF2 sights SM on the route. Most likely at the bottom.
Part Two
ONF1 sights the MC(X) at The Martinet
Moving down the Combe D’Ire ONF1 sights SAH in his BMW, believes it is a BMW X5.
Part Three
WBM and ONF1 cross paths. WBM recalls the ONF1 unit as “a large vehicle”.
WBM and MC(X) cross paths. The MC(X) is moving at a pace designed to avoid catching up with ONF1.
Conclusion. All is still bizarre.
WBM is “vague” about sighting ONF1 in his interviews.
ONF1 is determined to say the BMW he saw was 4×4 (even giving a detailed account of the driver).
The police seen adamant about not revealing the “two bikers” story.
James
Eric M impicitly revealed the “two bikers” story a long while ago when he discussed the impossible motorcycle. It was clear that they could not reconcile the three descriptions they had (or four if you count Janin) with any single production motorcycle, thus there was more than one.
But you are correct that post-LMC-discovery there has been a deafening silence on the subject, whereas one would have thought his discovery, interrogation and elimination would have pared things down, enabling them to focus on the key elements.
Talking about their subsequent actions, here is the comment I made upthead:-
The actions taken by the investigators since LMC was found were to attempt to trace every Swiss P06 and also to go and have a nice quiet chat with every resident of Chevaline, on the basis that someone was understood to be ‘living in fear’.
I asked myself these questions:-
Why haven’t they reiterated the X5 appeal?
Why haven’t they re-launched the MC appeal focused on ONF1s and WBM’s description(s)?