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>
Shot in the throat,
isn’t that what you traditionally do to stop people ratting and make ratting something that others are discouraged from doing.
As a complete co-incidence, guess who was the local M.P. then,
go on, have a guess.
18/06/2012 – ? : réélu Député (au 2e tour avec 59,60 % des voix, 2e meilleur résultat des Yvelines)
I just don’t buy into the fact that a ex soldier could blow his head of (unstable or not) on the basis that he was “once” questioned “as a witness”, (quote Eric) in a mass murder.
I don’t buy that.
Someone is either “severing a connection” or “creating a patsy”. Either way, it looks like “conspiracy”.
James
Your four points
1. Generally agree.
2. Take a good look at the front passenger side window in the photos. If she had been inside the car as it did the second half of the reverse arc, even curled up in the footwell, she would have been covered by glass shards from the windows. I think we would have heard of this this from Eric by now.
3. The white mark on the roof led me on a merry dance, including a gunshot from over the car, as you posit. However it is not there on the earliest photograph, one of those the subject of the recent court case.
Given its roundness and colouration my guess would be that a bird did not respect the integrity of the crime scene. Alternately, someone did suggest it could have been a protective ‘cover’ for evidence such as a fingerprint (to protect it from overnight condensation) in which case it was applied late. My money is on bird poop.
I would like to believe he did not leave her behind. Given that SAH’s first action apparently was to grab her and tell her to get back to the car, she should have had time to do so.
However there are possible reasons she did not do so including running into the woods in panic or the impact of the shot she took to her shoulder. The hydrodynamic shock could have rendered her unconscious, SAH may have thought she was dead, as she so nearly was.
If she had been partially in the car at the start of the reverse arc with the door partially open, the aerodynamic and inertial forces would have pulled the door open, possibly throwing her out as the car hit the prone cyclist.
I reckon you need to be buying Tom Parry fats !
Iqbal was still married to Jim when she wed Saad the divorce was finalised some TWO MONTHS after her second marriage
Isn’t bigamy an offence in England ?
The marriage is void would it affect her British Passport ?
Her children illegitimate, anyone know if under Islamic rules they are entitled to inherit ?
FAST ! Sorry
BFM-TV and Dominique Rizet jailed for posting pictures of the killing of Chevaline
Le Monde.fr avec AFP | 05/29/2015 at 4:13 p.m. • Updated 29.05.2015 at 16:51
The criminal court of Annecy (Haute Savoie) condemned on Friday 29 May, the editorial director of BFM-TV, Hervé Béroud, and journalist Dominique Rizet to pay fines of 10,000 euros each. A sentence for posting on the air pictures of the killing of Chevaline. Also prosecuted for publishing these pictures, the publication director of the Parisian, Jean Hornain, was acquitted.
Mr. and Mr. Béroud Rizet were convicted of helping to violate the confidentiality of investigations. They have instead been acquitted of the offenses of infringement of the integrity of a corpse and unlawful reproduction of a crime scene.
The three offending pictures showed the whole family before the shooting and scenes of the crime of the killing of Chevaline. It showed the victims’ car and the body of Sylvain Mollier, probable collateral victim during the quadruple murder.
Broadcast exclusively to the antenna of the first news channel of France, photographs were presented and commented by Dominique Rizet. A complaint was then filed by the lawyers of the family of Sylvain Mollier.
Read: Slaughter of horses: a complaint against BFM-TV
On 5 September 2012, Saad Al-Hilli, 50, Iraqi-born British engineer, his wife, aged 47, and her stepmother, aged 74, had been killed by several bullets in their car on a small forest road near Chevaline.
One of the girls of the Al-Hilli couple had been seriously injured while the second, hidden under the legs of his mother, was miraculously unscathed. Sylvain Mollier, he had been shot several times.
En savoir plus sur http://www.lemonde.fr/actualite-medias/article/2015/05/29/bfm-tv-et-dominique-rizet-condamnes-pour-avoir-diffuse-des-photos-de-la-tuerie-de-chevaline_4643635_3236.html#4XUIlr824T1TrYzz.99
Thanks James (29/05 6.29pm). That’s very clear.
1. Parking the Vehicle. Reasons for parking at the far end / corner of the parking area could be:
a. It would provide a greater degree of privacy for his daughter to use the bushes (if indeed that was the reason for the stop);
b. It could have been an impulsive, last second decision to stop there, by which time the vehicle would be closer to the far end of the parking area;
c. Another vehicle / person(s) could already have been at the lower end of the carpark: in that case Saad would have chosen to park at the other end.
d. None of the above – simply Saad’s spontaneous choice (as you suggest). People make different choices: personally, in Saad’s position, I would have reversed, so that I was facing the road, or stopped the car parallel to the road. But perhaps that’s just me being paranoid (just as I would never choose to sit in a restaurant with my back to the room).
2. Saad’s attempt to escape (your point 1). The track marks of his vehicle formed an arc on the ground of the parking area, suggesting that he reversed at great speed. One supposes that he was in a state of extreme fear and panic, because:
a. He had just witnessed the shooting of Mollier; or
b. He had just been shot; or
c. Both of the above.
Like you, I think he had just witnessed the shooting of Mollier. He may also have been injured.
3. Was Mollier run over and dragged? I think it is now accepted as fact (but correct me if I am wrong) that the reversing car ran over Mollier and dragged him to the other end of the parking area. This would explain the proximity of Mollier’s body to the car when the scene was discovered. I believe that the state of the body confirmed that he had indeed been run over and dragged. And it also seems probable that Mollier was lying on the ground and incapacitated when Saad reversed. If he had been standing, or still capable of movement, he would have tried to avoid the moving car, or would have bounced off it. The “run over and dragged” scenario, which the post mortem examination should be able to verify, strongly suggests to me that Mollier was the first victim.
4. Was the car in reverse gear / forward gear? My understanding has been that the car was in reverse gear, with Saad’s foot still on the accelerator.
5. Did the young girl escape from the vehicle after it was halted by the bank? This seems plausible (although Good in Parts’ comments on this point are also plausible). Thus:
a. This was the first and only time she exited the vehicle; or
b. She was outside the vehicle, when the drama started, entered it before Saad began to reverse, and exited again when the car was halted by the bank.
Michael
By “lone nutter” I mean a psychopath, acting alone, who killed Mollier and then the Al Hilli family because they all happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. In other words, the deceased were victims of a random act by someone who could be a serial killer, and who could be still at large in the region. I call that the “default” theory, in the absence of any evidence pointing decisively to the fact that Mollier was killed because he was Mollier (as I don’t think Al Hilli or his family were the prime target).
To disprove the “default” theory, we need evidence to show:
a. A relationship, direct or indirect, between the killer and Mollier;
b. A motive for killing Mollier;
c. A conspiracy to kill Mollier;
d. Evidence of a cover up.
You raise some intriguing questions: how would you fit these, in a precise and specific way, into any of the above?
A reconstruction of events at the crime scene points to Mollier being the first victim, and the number of bullets shot into him suggests that the killer wanted to make sure he was dead. On the other hand, if Mollier was deliberately targeted, how did the killer know he could ambush him at that exact spot?
As noted in a previous comment, I find the veil of discretion surrounding the Mollier family, compared with the meticulous dissection of the lives of the Al Hilli family, very odd. And there are things about the story of W.B.M which are not fully convincing at a “gut instinct” level. I am therefore completely open to alternatively theories, but without evidence pointing firmly one way or the other, the “default” option still looks the least unlikely.
If a lone nutter done it.
Why would the prosecutor wait 14 months before releasing the sketch of the suspected motorcyclist/slaughterer?
Why was Nicole Communal-Tournier, a very close neighbour of William Brett Martin, in Lathuile,
shot/murdered by FIVE persons, just days after the release of the sketch?
It has been said by Bluebird that Nicole’s husband, Jean-Paul Communal-Tournier was a relative of Sylvain Mollier.
http://www.libramemoria.com/avis/le-dauphine/haute-savoie/2013/11/16/avis-nicole-communal-tournier
Why did Brun ( the watcher) ride his car down a combe to his death, whilst sitting alone in the back seat, days after the Slaughter of the Horses?
Why was the eX-Legionnaire aquaintance of the Families Mollie / Schutz found shot dead in his apartment?
Why has it not been made clear which bicycle Sylvain Mollier was riding that day?
Why has it not been made clear what job/s Sylvain was actually engaged in?
The obvious obfuscation by Eric Maillaud, his evassiveness and his preconception that Mollier was a passing cyclist and not an intened victim beggars belief,
it smacks of not wanting to find the TRUTH?
There is a possibility that Sylvain Mollier was a passing cyclist.
He would have to have been on a mountain bike, he could then have been cyling up the combe, overtaking Brett Martin ( difficult if Brett was on a road bike) passing Le Martinet, then continuing through the Massive and back to Grignon.
If, Sylvain, as Eric says was a passing cyclist, he would have to have been on a mountain bike, if he was on a road bike worth multiple thousands of Euros, then he was not a passing cyclist.
Hence the importance of knowing what bicycle Sylvain was riding that day.
GIP
The thing is, the roof rail (damaged and detached) never gets a mention in the media or by Eric.
Therefore, it must be “important”.
For example… if Al Hilli WAS NOT shot first, NOR when he was initially struck by a bullet, it WAS NOT at point blank range and he (and his daughter) were able to make it to their vehicle where upon he was able to attempt a “full on” escape….it would be extremely difficult to say “Al Hilli was the primary target”.
It could be inferred that “Al Hilli and Mollier were stood together and AT THAT POINT the gunman struck….because BOTH were the target”.
That would be a “logical” leap of faith. The gunman did not wait for Al Hilli to return to his parked car (remember, Eric said the killer emerged from the woodland…and so would have had to pass the parked car that Al Hilli would surely return to) but took both men on.
And therein lies the problem.
A lone assassin, takes on two targets. Look how close one came to escaping.
If two gunmen were involved in the attack, then I could go with that possibility, but just one gunman. There are just too many possibilities for things to go wrong. Say Al Hilli was meeting Mollier and remained in his car, with the vehicle pointing down the road.
For me, it would seem that this was the action of either a “lone nut” or someone who was there to attack Mollier.
But for Mollier to be the “primary target”, there are significant hurdles to overcome. Who knew he would be there ? Who knew what time he would arrive ?
Eric has said that Mollier was “lost”.
Was this conclusion arrived at solely because Claire and her father said “he told us he was going to be somewhere else”. I find it beyond belief that Mollier was “lost”. He may of course changed his mind and simply decided to ride up the Combe D’Ire for no other reason that “it was there”.
But of course, this has not been explained to us. We are simply left with “he was lost…and that’s that”. Pretty flimsy reasoning methinks.
Sometimes, Prosecutors / pathologists / coroners get cause of death wrong
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-32922567
Juicy
a. A relationship, direct or indirect, between the killer and Mollier;
b. A motive for killing Mollier;
c. A conspiracy to kill Mollier;
d. Evidence of a cover up.
Just addressing point A
The relationship between Mollier and the gunman may only exist “indirectly”. That is to say, the gunman may have merely been hired.
Therefore a relation between Mollier and the gunman’s employer needs to be established. Without knowing the former, establishing the latter will be impossible.
Of course a possible “mistaken identity” could have also occurred. One bike rider looks pretty much like another. Remember there were two cyclist on that toad heading towards the Martinet.
But the “lone nut default theory” does have legs.
The car park is “away from the general public”, but is an area that has visitors during daylight hours….it is therefore a source of “random targets”. It provides cover for concealment during a wait there and also when arriving (by foot) and when departing (by foot). Given that an unsuspecting victim had been shot, the concealment also provides an opportunity for a body to be hidden (allowing for a timely but unhurried escape).
And there is also a “history” of “random shooting” in (South Eastern) France. At least two murders have taken place in recent years which so far have resulted in “zero” arrests. However, whilst both have involved firearms, I believe that in at least one case a rifle was used (although I am unsure of the facts).
Right at the start of this investigation, Eric Maillaud said he thought it likely that these execution style deaths would have been done by more than one killer.
We have been told that at least 25 shots had been fired.
We have been told of the type of weapon.
Have the forensics ever categorically stated that only one weapon was used?
“But the “lone nut default theory” does have legs.”
Exactly, Mister James. They are everywhere in FRANCE, hiding in the woods. It is the only theory that makes sense and answers all the questions.
“Her children illegitimate, anyone know if under Islamic rules they are entitled to inherit ?”
Good point, Mister M. But since Ikbal and her second husband both were British, presumably it is the law of the land that would apply to the inheritance, unless their will stated otherwise. It would be a different story in FRANCE, where I reckon bastards have equal rights that cannot be denied.
“a. He had just witnessed the shooting of Mollier; or
b. He had just been shot; or
c. Both of the above.”
Good reasoning, Mister Juicy. And it would make no difference to a crazy Frenchman. Saad was too much of a family man to even dream of leaving his beloved daughter behind.
Saad and Iqbal were not legally married, she was not divorced from Jim, so she didn’t have a second husband
Did she apply for British citizenship due to her “husband” being British ?
Could it be invoked because she lied ? When did Saad find out she wasn’t his wife ?
Your very own Police force at a joint press conference said something like “the only thing we are sure of is the Luger P06”
Check out WBM’s description of the cyclist and bike that passed him
Frederic Brun was in the back of a car being driven by his brother he and the friend in the front passenger seat were able to get out before the car went over the edge
The Lathuile guys were given up by the ringleader who showed the investigators where the gun used had been thrown in a river – most likely because no deaths were expected – he thought there was money on the premises
Where is Bluebirds link proving the Communal-Tourniers are related to Mollier and how distant, from what I see in these FRENCH villages it is nothing unusual
Quote from Eric Maillaud about the news media just convicted in the court of Annecy
“I think the word ethics is still in the dictionary”
http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.arretsurimages.net/breves/2015-05-30/Tuerie-de-Chevaline-Beroud-et-Rizet-BFMTV-condamnes-id18952&prev=search
Hervé Béroud
and Dominique Rizet
are highly respected Journos.
A sad day for seeking the TRUTH in FRANCE.
What they seem to have in that part of France is
The Prosecutor wants to be in sole command, if he solves it he will be star.
He does not want anybody out thinking him.
Well pardon me for imagining that he does not give the impression that he is solving anything, just clouding the waters.
Surely it is the purpose of serious crime journos to think things through and offer their ideas,
as to motive, circumstance, timelines and most important of all
is there a cover up happening.
If the journos are restricted in these matters by the FRENCH judiciary,
we might think that a cover up is happening.
Michael
Taking your questions seriatim:
(1) Why would the prosecutor wait 14 months before releasing the sketch of the suspected motorcyclist? I can think of at least two reasons:
a. Tunnel Vision. French prosecutors were convinced for many months that the key to the mystery lay across the Channel (and, to be fair, so were many contributors to this Discussion Board at that time). This obsession with “The English Connection” meant that they would tend to overlook or dismiss clues in their own back yard;
b. Guile. Publishing the sketch would have taken the heat off other possible suspects. So the timing of the release would need to take account of other aspects of the investigation.
(2) The murder of Nicole Communal-Tournier? The five perpetrators have been arrested, I believe (but not yet been put on trial?). Anyway, this bears all the hallmarks of a burglary gone wrong, not a targeted killing. Of course it is possible that the burglars were looking for the zirconium samples passed to Nicole for safe keeping by her relative Sylvain via W.B.M. But I would rather go with the view that they were after the cashbox.
(3) Death of Brun the Watcher? No idea about this. Unfortunately this Discussion has no search function, so I cannot check the background.
(4) Death of Patrice Menegaldo. No one knows for sure whether it was murder or suicide. I would go with suicide, unless there is evidence to show it was murder. Still a possible suspect, in my view. He seems to straddle the “lone nutter” and “knows Mollier” categories. Motive? Unclear, unless he killed at random.
(5) Sylvain Mollier’s bicycle. Excellent question. But W.B.M testified that it was a mountain bike. Of course it is strange that he would have been riding such an expensive bike over such poor terrain, but what is the alternative thesis?
(6) Sylvain Mollier’s job. From what I have read, there is no reason to suppose that he was directly involved in sensitive work. But as an employee, he could have been used by someone else as a “mule”.
Finally, you accuse Eric Maillaud of obfuscation and evasiveness. I agree that, since September 2012, the messages coming from Eric have been confusing and at time contradictory. But I suggest that this reflects the bewilderingly complex nature of the case, with its proliferation of red herrings. Eric’s thinking has obviously evolved over time, so it would be unfair to hold him accountable today for things he may have said in 2012.
Commenting on James’ comment (30/05 11.01am to GIP:
(1) Does anyone still believe that Al Hilli was the primary target? This would have required, on the one hand,
a. great skill in tracking him to that remote spot and knowing that he would stop and exit the car at that precise moment; and on the other,
b. great incompetence, in shooting first at Mollier, and nearly allowing Al Hilli to escape.
(2) Were both al Hillli and Mollier the target? This implies that that the killer set out intentionally to kill them both. But there is no evidence of any link between the two men, nor any evidence of a prearranged rendezvous. Thus no reason to believe that they were joint targets and it is pure supposition that they were standing together at the precise moment when the killer struck.
(3) “Eric said that the killer emerged from the woodland.” How on earth would Eric know? “Eric said that Mollier was lost.” Again, pure hypothesizing. But regardless of whether Mollier was or was not lost, he could have been the victim of a random killing. Alternatively he could have been cycling to a prearranged meeting, but there is no evidence of this.
(4) For all these reasons, the “lone nutter” thesis remains the front runner (in a very poor field). But new shards of evidence could rapidly overturn this view.
Thanks, M (30/05 2.02pm), for filling in some gaps for me.
(1) Marital relationship of Saad and Iqbal: interesting stuff, but I would guess that none of this is central to the killings.
(2) WBM’s description of the cyclist who overtook him. Yes, this is of great importance, together with precise timing of events, according to WBM’s testimony.
(3) Frederic Brun. Sounds like a tragic accident. (Sorry Michael.)
(4) The Lathuile guys. Sounds like cock up, not conspiracy.
(5) Tourniers / Mollier relationship. Fully agree.
Please clarify: at any point did we discuss the possibility of the girls being spared for reasons other than a kind-hearted killer or running out of time?
I was reviewing an unsolved murder in which the police released a composite sketch of a POI years later. No one in comments sections of news media found it helpful. Many said it could have been drawn by a child. Speculation suggested the police did not have any leads in the cold case, but released an unhelpful sketch simply to keep discussion going. Who knows? In contrast to the portrait-robot, it was slightly better than a stick man. It was also strange because media reported a single male killer, and no women at the crime scene. The sketch was of a woman, and no sketch of the male killer has ever been released.
BTW, the cold case with the badly-drawn composite sketch released years after it could possibly be useful is also very complex. The victim was connected through friends to an international drug smuggling operation, although she did not participate. The drug-running operation appears to be very profitable to this date, despite drug busts in the $250G range. One of the newer participants was gunned down in broad daylight earlier this week. “Complex” is an adjective often used by investigators in describing murders related to international drug cartels. Watch for this word and see if you notice the pattern.
Complex was used at the earliest and continued by a cousin of Saad and Zaid, Hussein.
Zainab and Zeena are illegitimate, WIKI offers this
“In Islamic law, only relatives with a legitimate blood relationship to the deceased are entitled to inherit. Thus, illegitimate children and adopted children have no shares in inheritance”
Who would decide which law to apply, Charia or British Common Law, Iqbals status is brought into question if Saad knew he was complicit in the bigamy, maybe it was only the Home Office/Immigration staking out number 26 to determine it wasn’t a fake marriage, as it turns out she had form.
Why the rush ?
Tom Parry describes Iqbal “She feared driving, she didn’t go shopping, she didn’t take the kids to nursery because she was so terrified someone might speak to her”
Could explain the postman not knowing she was living there – Postnatal Depression ?
Thank you, M.
If Iqbal did enter the country via an invalid marriage, would she and the girls be at risk for deportation? Where would she and they be deported to? What about the passports in the al-Hilli vehicle? How many citizenships did she have, for pity’s sake? Could the citizenship of children born on British soil, but out of an illegal or invalid marriage, be revoked? What would have become of Iqbal’s immigration status? How did Iqbal enter Britain — under a student visa or via the marriage? If she did not meet the terms of a student visa, this is grounds for removal. But what of children born after a student visa expired? Enforcement of immigration rules has been ramped up elsewhere, due to a swell in illegal migration. Does this explain the sudden holiday at the start of the school year? Please refresh my memory on Saad’s various assorted citizenships and immigration status at the time of the shootings. Whatever became of all those passports that the al-Hilli group used to travel between various countries? Multiple citizenships? This angle still bothers me.
Although it is impossible to soundly dismiss any possibilities until the person(s) responsible for this mass murder is/are convicted, I wonder about approaching this from the angle of a list of names of who we know is connected to those murdered at Chevaline? This list has grown recently.
Let’s see, Pierre Morange is connected to Sylvain Mollier’s conjointe. The ex-head of the DCRI, Bernard Squarcini, is connected to Pierre Morange and to Sarkozy. (A reminder of Squarcini’s connections to the Merah case:
http://www.lefigaro.fr/flash-actu/2012/08/24/97001-20120824FILWWW00392-merah-audition-de-l-ex-chef-de-la-dcri.php)
Then there is Eric, and the common surname with Stan Maillaud, who disappeared on September 22, 2012. Many here thought his appearance was similar to Eric. Did we ever find evidence that the two are related? If not, should this angle be moved to the bottom of the list? https://gloria.tv/?media=369615
Obviously, we have Patrice Menagaldo, with his connection to Sylvain Mollier.
Etc.
It is entirely possible that this mass murder was purely the random act of a stranger, whose motive is unknown. Most murders, but not all murders, are committed by people who are known to the victim in some way. Serial killers and mass murderers, assassins and hitmen are a different matter.
Did Eric or the British investigators come out and say, “This was a targeted act”? Police elsewhere are usually quick to reassure the public that they are not at risk, if the police believe this to be true. This usually applies to things like murders of known criminals involved in the drug trade. I do not recall Eric saying that the public is not at risk, or that this was a targeted crime.
The connections are many and reach to the elite in France and elsewhere. It’s so complex.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jun/03/iraq-asylum-seekers-forced-deportation
I wish we knew if something like this happened to the al-Hillis.
France seems an odd choice as a place to evade deportation, given France’s record with Iraqi deportees.
Why don’t we know which passports were used BT those in the al-Hilli party to enter France?
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/venezuela-says-it-deported-alleged-french-agent/
The French government does employ spies/assassins, according to this 2012 article. This one was deported, but to where?
Q.
Re “the girls being spared”
I remember a suggestion here, or on MZT, that Zainab was pistol-whipped primarily to prevent her retaining clear memories of the killing rather than as an attempt to kill her.
However the line from EM seems to be that the beating was severe. Fragments of the checkered wooden grip from the Luger were apparently found in her hair or scalp. Such a frenzied attack would imply at the very least a lack of concern for her survival
However intent is difficult to discern given that the killer probably was wired on adrenaline or some other drug. I suppose that it would be difficult to hit a hysterical child with a precisely calibrated tap sufficient to render her unconcious, yet not inflict permanent damage.
She took one shot to the shoulder, the other victims got shot multiple times. I guess by now that the gendarmes analysis of events should indicate whether she was shot in the confusion or deliberately targeted.
As for Zeena, I don’t think that the killer knew she was there. Which is interesting in itself given that she apparently ‘drove’ the BMW up the combe on SAH’s lap. This implies to me that the killer did not see the BMW arriving.