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>
http://ouiinfrance.com/2012/05/31/why-french-pharmacies-rule/
French phaacies are different.
Why have the public not been told categorically:
for whom Sylvain Mollier worked?
What jobs did he do?
From where did he depart on that last bicycle ride?
On which bicycle did he depart?
Was he carrying a gun?
Was he carrying cash?
How did he support himself and his two older boys?
What was the relationship of Patrice Menegaldo to the family Schutz?
What was the relationship of Patrice Menegaldo to the family Mollier?
Was Patrice Menegaldo murdered?
How many times had Sylvain Mollier been shot?
Where all recovered balls from the Slaughter of the Horses all
from the same gun?
Did William Brett martin move the bicycle of Sylvain Mollier?
Did William Brett Martin know Sylvain Mollier?
Did William Brett Martin know any of the family al-Hilli?
Did William Brett Martin know the
mysterious honourable businessman-parapentist-motorcyclist?
Was the wife of William Brett Martin sat in his house in Lathuile while the Slaughter of the Horses was occurring?
Mr Juicy…
I think that even with the “strong conviction” (and by that, I mean with the strongest evidence there could be….without an “iron clad confession from the murderer) as to what went on in that place, there could be in this case, it would always be open to debate.
There are several criminal cases (with conviction in place and perpetrators serving “full life” terms) where the “absolute facts” are not known (and there has been no admission from the convicted party(ies) of those horrific facts/details (here I am thinking of the child murderers Hindley and Brady).
In this case, I suspect the investigation team cannot say for certain, the order in which the bullets were fired. I think would be easier for them to determine “the initial volleys” and “secondary volleys” and “final volleys” and to speak in that way. But even then, I fear there would be “overlaps” which could lead to “inconsistencies”.
It is reported that “blood splatter patterns” where found on SAH that had come from SM. Nothing is noted with regard “how much” or the “location” on SAH these were found.
Even then, could there be an element of doubt as to “such material” being transferred from SM to SAH via WBM ?
Taking all the forensic evidence available, it is always the “best fit” and the “most logical conclusion” which will be put forward. But even then, it is only a “best guess” or “best interpretation” as to what happened.
Here we have “SAH in close proximity to SM” when the initial volley happened. Where that was, we don’t know (or indeed “if that was”, with regard the “transference of bloody matter in any other way”, which give rise to a “splatter pattern”).
Zaid might have had a motive, but he did not have means or opportunity. The notion that he hired a professional hit man who chased Saad and his family all the way from Claygate to the Martinet is only marginally less ludicrous than the idea that he somehow divined Saad’s intended holiday destination, used the Yellow Pages to find a deranged Ex-Legionnaire living nearby and contracted that person to kill Saad and family.
No, if he were involved, it would be much more indirectly. A quarrel such as the one between the two brothers would have led both of them to seek allies within their extended families. Both of them would have been bad-mouthing each other to relatives all over the place, arguing their respective cases, seeking moral and perhaps also practical support. We know that Saad bad-mouthed his brother quite extensively, even to neighbours with whom he had previously hardly exchanged more than greetings over the garden fence. It seems scarcely credible that Zaid would have suffered in dignified silence while Saad did this. Now, in a tight-knit Muslim family where family loyalty and mutual support are written large, such a feud and the attendant formation of factions within the family are a much more serious matter than in individualistic, atomistic Western families. Blood is often spilled over such matters, and the mere risk of such a feud leading to a permanent rift within the family may be regarded as sufficient reason to do something drastic about it.
In other words, even remote relatives of both the al-Hillis and the al-Saffars might have felt honour-bound to stop Saad (who appears to have been the worse offender in that regard) from splitting the entire extended family into two warring factions. I am thinking of the suit man here: a local(ish) man Saad himself may have called and asked for a meeting in order to enlist his support. Zaid would have been in a position to promise considerable financial inducements to a third party planning to talk (or knock) “some sense” into Saad. At the very least, he would be able to form an educated post-hoc guess about who might be responsible. In that case, the reason he sounds as if he is lying would be that he is, and the reason why he doesn’t want to be interviewed in France would not be that he fears incriminating himself, but rather whomever he suspects of perpetrating or instigating the murders.
A quick addendum: As the elder brother, Zaid would have been considered in a natural position of authority over his younger brother insofar as the extended families were concerned. Prima facie, Saad would have been considered the one who was misbehaving, undermining the natural order of things and imperilling family unity.
As my own family is part-Muslim, I have some first-hand experience of these family dynamics. For example, when my nephews came of age, the entire clan chipped in to help them buy fancy cars, even distant uncles whom they had never met in their entire lives. By the same token, when one of them announced his intention of binning his apprenticeship, those self-same uncles leaned quite heavily upon him for daring to disobey his parents and bringing dishonour upon the family. That’s how these things work: as long as you play by the rules, you can count upon the unconditional support even of near-strangers living in distant countries, but if you step out of line, they all turn against you. As I have said, in this case, Saad would have been seen as the one who had stepped out of line.
@Peter
A very interesting look into “family dynamics” from a Muslim perspective.
It makes the whole “melting pot debate on Prime Victim” even more complex.
Thanks for that !
(But seriously.. thanks for that).
I recall an uncle of Saad’s being interviewed in the newspapers (the Daily Mail I think). And he did have quite a knowledge of the SAH v ZAH inheritance affair….even though he was based in Iraq. Seems like, within the Al Hilli clan, much was known about these problems…privately.
To be fair to Tom Parry he writes this:
“I have a personal conviction, not necessarily one that is shared by all the investigators, that if he had wanted to harm his brother, then it was his brother alone that he would have wanted to kill, and not the children”, Monsieur Maillaud claimed. “The main reason for the hatred of Zaid is a culutural one; it is linked to their Muslim background, to the fact Zaid is the elder brother. For years, as he was getting old, Kadhim had entrusted Zaid with the management of his fortune and his inheritance, which is of course logical, and in keeping with Islamic tradition. When Saad discovered that Zaid was trying to get money out of their father while he was still alive Kadhim was told by Saad at this point that Zaid wanted to keep the money for himself. It was then that Khadim was convinced to write out a new Will, sharing everything equally. Of that, we are sure. That is why I am personally convinced Zaid must have felt insulted as the elder brother; it was his honour that was at stake. For me, the hate comes from that. I could be wrong though.”
Peter, I would bet Zaid has a good idea of what happened and who is to blame, Tom Parry writes Zaid was visited by French detectives recently, he still refuses to travel to France. Although, he has now taken a French lawyer, which is progress.
The burglary in Tumba is disturbing.
PARISMATCH
http://www.parismatch.com/Actu/Societe/Sylvain-Mollier-la-mort-au-tournant-161047
Il venait d’être papa pour la troisième fois. Sylvain Mollier, 45 ans, a croisé la mort à vélo mercredi après-midi.
.
.
Les collègues de Sylvain Mollier que notre journaliste a rencontrés ce matin à l’entreprise Cezus sont sous le choc. Ahuris par l’incroyable tragédie qui a frappé l’un des leurs. Père de trois enfants – le dernier est en juin -, le malheureux cycliste était «un homme sans histoire» de 45 ans, comme l’a décrit à Europe 1 Michel Chevallier, adjoint au maire d’Ugine.
Employé depuis vingt ans dans le secteur de la métallurgie – l’entreprise Cezus est une filiale d’Areva qui fabrique des alliages de zirconium pour les centrales nucléaires -, il était en congé paternité quand il a décidé de prendre la route de la Come d’Ire, sur la commune de Chevaline.
This sounds to me that soon after the Slaughter of the Horses, PARISMATCH,
dispatched a reporter to chat with the work mates of Sylvain Mollier at Cezus, Areva, where they make Zirconium rods for the Nuclear Industry of FRANCE.
Perhaps I am missing the point?
Lathuile, our authentic and charming village!
http://www.lathuile.fr/
Bienvenue à Lathuile !D’une superficie de 876 Hectares, entre 450 et 1640 m d’altitude et comptant un peu plus de 1000 habitants
Au cœur du Parc Naturel Régional du Massif des Bauges, dynamique et vivant.Véritable Balcon sur le Lac d’Annecy si beau, si proche et tellement reposant
Son calme, son authenticité, vous les apprécierez c’est évident
Ses forêts, ses montagnes, ses sentiers, ses gites, ses campings et monumentsLa qualité de son accueil, son fleurissement, son ancienne mine de charbon, son gite de Pontgibaud et son gite d’alpage accueillants
Ses célébrités de St François de Sales à Laure Belleville Miss France 1996 à 19 ans.Visiteurs d’un jour, d’un séjour plus long ou d’un instant,
Natif ou arrivant, Propriétaire, locataire, touriste ou artisan,
Ce site se veut surtout riche d’informations pratiques et vivant.Bienvenue sur la toile à Lathuile, notre village authentique et charmant.Le Maire,Hervé BOURNE
Doesn’t mention any murders?
My very humble apologies to the FRENCH state
things not so see through in England, either.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/chilcot-report-into-the-iraq-war-unlikely-to-be-published-for-another-year-10318410.html
The Chilcot report has taken six years and cost £10m but is “unlikely to be published for another year at least”, according to sources close to the inquiry.
The Independent on Sunday understands the inquiry is still asking the Cabinet Office to declassify documents, suggesting that the report into the Iraq war is still being written.
@ Katie 4th November 2013 10.34pm
Just after the “Sketch-E-FIT was released”
“Thanks Ricki,interesting about the GPA supplying the police, I have said before that a branch of the French police use white motorbikes with panniers, I’ve just shown the e-fit to someone who is very perceptive………his first reaction was ‘ he looks like a cop’ !!
You are right about an accent, I hadn’t got that far…….was it so obviously French it wasn’t worth mentioning by the witness or is this just more obfuscation by Maillaud & co ?
I am pretty sure the French know who done it…we don’t even know if this is an honest e-fit, but if EM didn’t want him to run surely that means they are watching the guy………….so why wait a year ?
Everything points to them just chucking out a few crumbs of info to make it look as though they are working on the case, when in truth they are simply going through the motions & have no intention of making an arrest.
One last thought, could the rider/assassin, have been intended to look like a courier , under the pretence of delivering the PP’s ……….and bullets ?
Off to bed now, night night.”
A very good idea Katie,
perhaps the motorcyclist was delivering the gun and bullets to Le Martinet.
Did the police ever find out the truth of the special-side-opening-helmet?
If the motorcyclist was seen above Le Martinet –
and if the shooter came down from above Le Martinet –
that makes very good thinking Katie.
Several bombs have gone off in Southern Sweden lately, yet this does not make the BBC?
Latest car bomb in Gothenburg on Friday, so far four dead.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/car-explodes-at-swedish-roundabout-killing-one/ar-BBl4qYp
http://www.rivieratimes.com/index.php/provence-cote-dazur-article/items/id-90-of-french-pharmacists-go-on-strike.html
Were the proposed changes to pharmacy regulations on the table back in 2012?
Pharmacies in France still close for 2 or 2.5 hours midday, before reopening for business until about 6 p.m. What a different world. No all-night service. No drive-thrus. No online orders? So very civilized.
So our Claire would have known a lot about everyone who made a purchase in her shop. Impossible to zip into a French pharmacy for an over-the-counter remedy. You must get the pharmacist to get it for you. A medical condition that needs discretion? Not in France. Talk to the pharmacist without the glass-walled private consultation room. What, no computerized labels with number codes to track drugs that might interact badly? No, not in France. It might be easier to make mistake if one is not careful, and easier to make a “mistake”.
Still remembering that Russian connected to the Litvinenko poisoning trial, who was living in the Haute-Savoie.
Has a single pharmacy in France ever been sued over a prescribing error, something that would seem impossible to track and prove.
Maybe Mollier was a proxy. Maybe he wasn’t a target after all. Shoot the messenger, as the saying goes.
@ Q do you mean somebody went into Pharmacie Schutz-Morange for laxative poweder and
Claire gave then stuff that made it worse?
Hence the lunatic lone wolf took out four adults in a bllod bath in revenge?
Bit extreeme.
No, MN, but that is an image I can’t get out of my head. Thanks a lot!
@ James…
Many thanks for your post about forensics – well noted.
I guess we can say that forensics is an art as well as a science and that interpreting the crime scene evidence is a matter of judgement, not something that can be decided in a black and white way. This case is particularly complex because there were multiple victims and many bullets. Your post brings all this out very clearly.
With so many variables, it seems likely that that the investigation team will not be able say for certain, or agree amongst themselves, which victim was hit first. They may therefore come up with several possible scenarios for the sequence of events.
From the earlier leaked report we can, I think, safely assume that one of the scenarios is that SM was hit first. Perhaps this is even considered the most likely scenario. We also know that he was shot in the back. I have assumed that he was shot in the back several times in the first volley, but if this is wrong, please correct me. I would very much like to know where the police think he was (and where the killer was) when the first shot(s) hit him, which they could perhaps deduce from the trajectory of the bullet and from blood spatter evidence. Again I expect that the answer to be that there is more than one possible scenario, but that’s OK: we just need to know at stage what can be included, and what can be excluded.
You mention the blood spatters transferred from SM to SAH. This is clearly an important piece of forensic evidence. It suggests various possibilities:
a. SM was first shot in the close vicinity of SAH; or
b. After SM was first shot some meters away from SAH, he then ran or staggered in the direction of SAH, collapsing close to him; or
c. After SM was first shot some meters away from SAH, he then ran or staggered in the direction of SAH, and was shot again before collapsing close to him.
Scenario (a) above is neutral concerning which victim was shot first and who was the prime target. Scenarios (b) and (c) point clearly to the idea that SM was shot first and was the prime target.
@ Peter …
Many thanks for these fascinating insights.
I agree that Zaid’s animosity towards Saad may have been caused by resentment that he had usurped his position as elder brother – and perhaps also by jealousy that Saad was loved more by the father as well as the mother.
If I understand correctly, your theory is that the murders were committed or commissioned for honour reasons by a member of the extended family of al-Hillis or al-Saffars, either to prevent Saad from further splitting the family, or to punish him from doing so. This could have been either with or without the knowledge or explicit approval of Zaid.
This is an interesting working hypothesis, which could be refined and strengthened by addressing the following points:
a. If the objective was to stop or punish Saad, as younger brother, for breaking the family honour code, why were his wife and mother in law also targeted? And why was his innocent young daughter also attacked?
b. If the attack was committed by or on behalf of a member of the extended family, close to or sympathetic with Zaid, how did that person know that the Al Hilli’s were going to be at that place at that time? (This is the same issue as the improbability that Zaid knew about his brother’s whereabouts, given that they were estranged and did not communicate.)
c. If the member of the extended family knew that the Al Hilli’s were going to be at that place at that time, it’s is likely to be because Saad told him, in the mistaken belief that this person was an ally or reliable intermediary. If that were the case, Saad must have been extremely naïve and trusting, and was deceived. Or could it be that Saad unwittingly let slip the information, either via his wife or mother in law? The evidence from neighbours is that before his departure Saad was nervous and on his guard, so his decision to travel to that particular campsite was a last minute one.
d. If this was purely an honour killing by a member of the extended family, with Saad as the main target, it would be easier to arrange to kill him in the UK, rather than in France. But the since the killing took place in France, it is reasonable to assume that the timing and choice of location were related to his planned visit to Geneva. This means that the killer (and Zaid too, if he was directly implicated) would have to have known of the planned visit. But as noted above, Saad did not communicate with his brother and would have been extremely cautious about communicating this to anyone else. Moreover, if the planned visit to Geneva was a crucial factor in the timing and location of the killing, this points to a motive related to money, not purely family honour.
e. Saad’s email exchanges with his neighbour reveal animosity towards his brother, but there is no hint of issues within the extended family. According to Maiilaud, some family members told the investigators that they thought that Zaid was responsible for the murders, but there is no suggestion of the possible involvement of members of the extended family.
I’d be interested in your thoughts on these points.
Mr Juicy
Re your above post.
One key point to keep in mind (possibility wise) is, whomever the intended victim was (if singular), then that horrific criminal act got way out of hand….which resulted in the murders of several people.
It is that point which infers there was a “hired hand” at work.
That person may have indeed been/is “familiar with handling weapons” and also “not phased by/capable of committing murder”…but was also (clearly) an “unknown quantity”.
In the case of the ex Legionnaire, Eric had….
1. Familiar with weapons
2. Capable of killing
3. Possible “unknown quantity” (in so much as, he did commit suicide).
If we disregard the ex Legionnaire, the above broad profile still fits the likely “hired hand” perpetrator (or indeed a “psychopathic random killer”).
A key problem of course (and as you have noted) is, how did the killer get in a position AHEAD of his “intended victim(s)”, where it was possible to perform an ambush IF neither SM or the SAH family were due to be at the Martinet ?
On “face value”, there has been no indication given that either SM or SAH had planned to be there.
It is said that SAH had asked (of the campsite staff) for “suggestions” of where to go. And had be told of this area. It appears that he had conducted a “sightseeing tour” of the villages there-abouts, before heading up to the Martinet.
Indeed, it would appear that he had taken the “top road” (passing the builders) and then turned back towards Chevaline along the “bottom road”, where upon the 15.17 photograph was taken (outside the “Flat Iron” barn).
From there, the SAH family had driven up the Combe D’Ire route to the Martinet.
It is said of SM that he had taken his bike that afternoon. This had been a “planned ride” in so much as 1. TS had previously discussed “other” routes with him and 2. CS had returned home inorder that he could/was able to take his bike out.
It is not known if SM had discussed a definitive/actual route with anyone.
However, the route he had taken is considered/noted (by others, including WBM and EM) that the Combe D’Ire is “unsuited” for a bike the like he was riding. But that does not mean SM considered it “unsuitable” (his uncle did state that SM was not unfamiliar with that route).
The view that SM was “lost”, as stated by EM, therefore must be treated with caution….especially if EM’s remarks are solely based on “the type of bike SM was riding Vs the route he had taken” and not that SM had “clearly and unequivocally” stated he would be taking a certain route (to whoever).
One major issue (the elephant in the room) is that EM did state “on the morning after, the afternoon before”, SM had been “collateral damage” (stating that he had been “lost”). Given that initial interviews with family and friends must have taken place by this time, I can only assume EM “knew” the route SM should have taken.
If (and that is a big IF) that assumption is correct, then there is a “cast” of subterfuge which can be placed upon the actions of SM (in that he “more than” deviated from his “talked about” route).
And that brings on another issue.
Not that “SM therefore must have lied about the route he would be taking”, but if he were the “sole intended victim”, how did the killer “know” SM would be at the martinet ?
You see, by assuming one thing (“SM had engaged in subterfuge”)….we immediately reach another dead end (“if so, how did the killer know where SM would be”).
From that…. you could even question the hypothesis that “this was an ambush”. And I am sure this has been “looked into” by the investigation team. Infact, with regard to SAH, this has indeed been investigated. The conclusion was, there was no one following his vehicle.
Sorry for the long post. Just trying to clarify the difficulties faced in evaluating the “who was the prime victim” question (without the bias of “who was shot first”).
@ Mr Juicy, 15 Jun, 2015 – 5:15 am
I am pleased to hear that you found my hypothesis interesting.
The term “honour killing” covers a multitude of sins, including many cases in which the term “honour” is used to sugar-coat baser motives such as avarice.
This may be one of those cases, as evident from the aftermath: In a prototypical honour killing, the perpetrator, who felt that his honour had been defiled, wants the community to know what he has done, that he has taken action in order to restore his own honour and that of his family. He is prepared to go to jail with his head held high, as it were. In a twist to that scenario, it is often the youngest son rather than the pater familias who will do the deed, because a very young man may expect lighter punishment than an older one. Either way, there is little or no attempt to evade detection and punishment, because the entire point of the exercise is to send a message to the community.
My tentative reply to your question a., why not only Saad but the others were attacked, is that the perpetrator wanted to avoid capture and punishment. He was known to all the adults – as distantly-related “uncle X from Geneva” – and any surviving adults could have identified him. That is the reason they all had to die, whilst Zeena, who was too young to have been able to do, so was spared. Zainab, who might or might not have been able to do so, received a savage blow on the head that was likely to induce retrograde amnesia. Given that this is a family of academics, many of them pharmacists, I don’t think that it is too much of a stretch to assume that the perpetrator could have known that such trauma would likely induce retrograde amnesia.
The extreme, drastic measures taken to avoid detection and punishment, which I take to include the murder of a random passer-by in the person of Sylvain Mollier, indicate that the motive for these murders was of such a nature that the killer did not expect a round of applause from his family or the wider community. The only person with a genuine, strictly honour-based motive for killing Saad – and Saad alone – would have been his brother anyway.
Yet all members of both the al-Hilli and al-Saffar clans would have had a powerful interest in stopping the feud between the two brothers before it caused a rift across the extended family. Conversely, Saad, who would have been prima facie considered as the one who was in the wrong in that conflict, would have wanted to argue his case with as many relatives as he could, before he found himself frozen out by the entire clan. Thus, to address your questions b. and c., I presume that Saad himself contacted that person and asked him for a meeting. Saad would not have done so if he had known that said person was firmly aligned with Zaid. Rather, he wanted to ensure that this person would side with him, or at least not condemn him without first having heard his, Saad’s, side of the story.
Evidently, the meeting with the suit man did not go as Saad had hoped for and the two parted angrily. It was only at this point, I contend, that the plan to kill Saad and everybody else who could identify the suit man was hastily conceived. “Honour” would at most have been a contributing factor in that decision; regarding your point d., I also believe that the main motive was probably money-related and had something to do with Saad’s (or Suhaila’s) planned visit to Geneva. At the same time, a misguided concept of honour probably keeps the killer sleeping soundly at night. I assume that the reason he has not cracked under the strain of what he has done is that the killer keeps telling himself that Saad was a wicked ingrate who had it coming because he had besmirched the memory of his own father, slandered his elder brother and threatened to tear the entire clan apart.
An afterthought: If we assume, as I do, that the killer is based within the region, the timing of the killings may have nothing to do with Saad’s intention to visit Geneva, but rather with his plan to return home shortly afterwards. For a killer living in the area, it would have been a matter of killing the family while they were still on his patch.
Here is a question
To which police station did Claire Schutz present herself after Sylvain Mollier
failed to return after his cycle trip?
As I have suggested before there are a few options in the run up to the last cycle ride of Sylvain Mollier.
We are expected to believe that at some point before his death, Sylvain took three years paternity leave from Cezus (Ugine).
We are expected to believe that Sylvain Mollier had a property within walking distance of Cezus, in Ugine.
We are told that his common law wife, Claire Schutz was the business owner / manager of Pharmacie Schutz-Morange, in near by Grignon.
We have not been told if Claire had a personal property in the area but we have been lead to beleive that she was living with Sylvain, in his property in Ugine?
On Wednesday, 5th September, 2012 Sylvain handed over the new born to Claire, then cycled off to Le Martinet but we have not specifically been told from where he left her.
If Sylvain was on three years paternity leave, this would mean he would be taking care of the new born son, whilst claire did he work,
otherwise it would be senseless to give up work without pay for Claire to also be away from her business.
So, if the only business that Claire had? was the Pharmacie Schutz-morange in Grignon, it would be most convienient if the new father /new mother / new baby |( a few weeks old)
were very close to each other.
The only way this could happen, (if Claire was to run her business),
would be if Sylvain and their baby were also in Grignon.
So, it would be the least surprizing option if this happened but Sylvain requested a break.
In this scenario he would have departed from the Pharmacie Schutz-Morange, this does not have to mean they were living above the shop.
It would be astonishing if Sylvain could look after a few weeks old baby for a long day, every day, completely on his own, if the baby was being breast fed, it could not work, this business was their future, she had to devote most of her time to it, yet as a first time, young mother, she would have been distraught, if the baby was not close by her, for most of the time.
Any other option than the one I have just put down would be unusual.
If we are expected to believe they lived in the house of Sylvain, within walking distance of Cezus in Ugine, this is where Sylvain a 45 year old man would look after a few weeks old baby on his own for ten hours a day, every day, with no other help, it is not credible.
Taking it that Sylvain Mollier left Ugine, his route is an interesting one.
To be honest, I never noticed it before !
From the round-a-bout at Ugine to the turn off at Doussard, it is ALL Cycle Lane. And some of it (especially behind the Sapeur Pompiers station at Faverges) is through rural land, well away from the roads.
https://goo.gl/maps/EvR5k
Then it’s just a case of skirting Dousssard, through Arnand and away on the Route du Moulin (passing the Al Hilli family having the picture taken) until you reach the Martinet.
I’m wouldn’t be surprised if anyone saw him at all. Or if he passed anyone on the cycle lane…they’d never have noticed. Just another cyclist, in cycling gear, on the cycle lane.
@ James 8.32am
Thanks for this. Helpfully illuminating as always.
First, I am not sure (with due respect to M.) that we should disregard the legionnaire. Although never “le suspect numéro un”, he has certainly been under suspicion, for the reasons elaborated by Maillaud, and – as you point out – the profile fits (Parry also believes this).
On your second point (“how did the killer know how and when to get into the ambush position?”) Maillaud is quoted in Parry’s book as saying that the al-Hilli family “ended up there by chance, perhaps by mistake, but in any case by chance” and that it was “Zainab who decided the itinerary for that afternoon.” Much energy has been expended in this and other forums to try to explain how his killer could have anticipated this chance event, or followed him there, but none carries much conviction, I feel. As you point out, the conclusion of the investigation team was that no one was following him.
But whereas Saad was a foreigner, with no previous pattern of visits to Le Martinet and other similar places in the area, Mollier was a local, whose movements and habits were better known and more predictable. It is therefore easier (or perhaps better to say “less difficult”) to construct theories to explain how a killer (particularly one connected with the families in one way or another) could have known where Mollier was likely to be. This has been attempted on this other forums, with somewhat greater success, I feel. And your post hints at ways in which this could be done.
On your third point (“the elephant in the room”): if (if) Mollier lied about the route he was going to take (and I think we can safely assume that this seasoned cyclist would not have got lost, unlike Saad could have done) then it would appear (and I think this is what you are implying) that he must have gone there deliberately. And since there is no other sensible reason why he would have deliberately taken his expensive velo up that pothill filled road UNLESS it was for a secret rendezvous, then we can deduce that he could have been lured to that place by his killer.
So I would agree with you that one can discuss “who was the prime victim” without going into the question of “who was shot first.” Based on what has emerged from the investigations, logic alone points to the likelihood that Mollier was the prime target. The fact that he was probably shot first reinforces this view.