The mainstream media for the most part has moved on. But there are a few more gleanings to be had, of perhaps the most interesting comes from the Daily Mirror, which labels al-Hilli an extremist on the grounds that he was against the war in Iraq, disapproved of the behaviour of Israel and had doubts over 9/11 – which makes a great deal of the population “extremist”. But the Mirror has the only mainstream mention I can find of the possibility that Mossad carried out the killings. Given Mr al-Hilli’s profession, the fact he is a Shia, the fact he had visited Iran, and the fact that Israel heas been assassinating scientists connected to Iran’s nuclear programme, this has to be a possibility. There are of course other possibilities, but to ignore that one is ludicrous.
Which leads me to the argument of Daily Mail crime reporter, Stephen Wright, that the French police should concentrate on the idea that this was a killing by a random Alpine madman or racist bigot. Perfectly possible, of course, and the anti-Muslim killings in Marseille might be as much a precedent as Mossad killings of scientists. But why the lone madman idea should be the preferred investigation, Mr Wright does not explain. What I did find interesting from a man who has visited many crime scenes are his repeated insinuations that the French authorities are not really trying very hard to find who the killers were, for example:
the crime scene would have been sealed off for a minimum of seven to ten days, to allow detailed forensic searches for DNA, fibres, tyre marks and shoe prints to take place.
Nearby bushes and vegetation would have been searched for any discarded food and cigarette butts left by the killer, not to mention the murder weapon.
But from what I saw at the end of last week, no such searches had taken place and potentially vital evidence could have been missed. House to house inquiries in the local area had yet to be completed and police had not made specific public appeals for information about the crime. No reward had been put up for information about the shootings.
Behind the scenes, what other short cuts have been taken? Have police seized data identifying all mobile phones being used in the vicinity of the murders that day?
The idea that the French authorities – who are quite as capable as any other of solving cases – are not really trying very hard is an interesting one.
Which leads me to this part of a remarkable article from the Daily Telegraph, which if true points us back towards a hit squad and discounts the ides that there was only one gun:
Claims that only one gun was used to kill everybody is likely to be disproved by full ballistics test results which are out in October.
While the 25 spent bullet cartridges found at the scene are all of the same kind, they could in fact have come from a number of weapons of the same make.
This throws up the possibility of a well-equipped, highly-trained gang circling the car and then opening fire.
Both children were left alive by the killers, who had clinically pumped bullets into everybody else, including five into Mr Mollier.
Zainab was found staggering around outside the car by Brett Martin, a British former RAF serviceman who cycled by moments after the attack, but he saw nobody except the schoolgirl.
Her sister, Zeena, was found unscathed and hiding in the car eight hours later.
Both sisters are now back in Britain, and are believed to have been reunited at a secret location near London.
There are of course a number of hit squad options, both governmental and private, which might well involve iraqi or Iranian interests – on both of which the mainstream media have been very happy to speculate while almost unanimously ignoring Israel.
But what interests me is why the Daily Telegraph choose, in the face of all the evidence, to minimise the horrific nature of the attack by stating that “Both children were left alive by the killers”? Zainab was not left alive by design, she was shot in the chest and her skull was stove in, which presumably was a pretty serious attempt to kill a seven year-old child. The other girl might very well have succeeded in hiding from the killers under her mother’s skirts, as she hid from the first rescuers, and then for eight hours from the police.
The Telegraph article claims to be informed by sources close to the investigation. So they believe it was a group of people, and feel motivated to absolve those people from child-killing. Now what could the Daily Telegraph be thinking?
@Ricki
http://www.aquantima.com/ATeam_2.html
strange regisgtered address
Baha Abu Assi
Consultant
Katie,
Frederic Brun was a real guy from Ugine. There is a guest book on a website selling mineral stones and esotherique stuff where he had posted two messages. This all fits to his relaxation/massage/beauty business very well. However, you are right bthat there would be no reason why such a guy who meets a lot of people in that environment would not work for intelligence services as an information box. People are talking a lot during massages and relaxation, particularly when those are perhaps people from Areva who are talking about their jobs during a so called “relaxation massage”. Frederick Brun is a member of a real Jewish family. Some of his ancestors were in Auschwitz.
http://www.nataraj-artisanat.com/service-guestbook.html
@Bluebird = that’s Frederique, female.
Ricki –
Mesbah Ihsan started a new FB page recently
http://www.facebook.com/mesbah.abuassi
Not sure what to make of the original FB message to RIP al-hilli
Good find, felix.
Two things are astonishing regarding Mesbah Ihsan:
1) Member of the Royal Aeronautic Society
2) Managing the installation and implementation of the latest manufacturing enterprise solutions with various international clients.
+++++
However, I am suspicious about recent comments on facebook and other boards. Intelligence doesn’t stop working and they might try to lead private investigators into one ways. They are pros and experts. We are amateurs, though not all of us are stupid ones.
Im going to message him on FB
@felix
I can’t understand that message.
http://www.koifaire.com/rhone-alpes/manzoni,alain-69015.html
“merci fred?”
Do they nickname girls like that in France?
The thing is that I found those massage/relaxation centres registered for the name of Frederic Brun but there are sometimes links to Frederique Brun on inofficial sites regarding those relaxation centres. Might it be – just as a rhetoric question – that Peter is right and he was more than gay and he called himself Frederique in public while his official (registered) name was Frederic? Just a guess. However, Frederique and Frederic Brun both being in the massage/relaxation business in the same city is a bit odd, isn’t it?
….. did we see messages of condolence though BB,I couldn’t see anything about the dead man’s work ?
@felix
the aquantima.com website is odd. It exists since 2011 but it does not offer any sane content. There is not even a capture in the wayback machine of that website.
The WHOIS records are obviously fake. I don’t know whether or not the name of the registrant its fake, though it does not help a lot since you’d have to guess who it is. there are too many.
http://www.linkedin.com/search/fpsearch?fname=Ibrahim&lname=Ashraf&pplSearchOrigin=SEO_SN&trk=SEO_SN&csrfToken=guest_token&domainCountryName=
@Bluebird
she seems to be a teacher at a school in Ugine
http://www.ledauphine.com/savoie/2012/01/25/la-ritournelle-et-l-ecole-zulberti-au-foyer-des-gentianes
OK Felix, here we go:
http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=13490310&pid=159519209&authType=name&authToken=W7vW&trk=pbmap
Ashram Ibrahim was Project Manager for Airbus in 2008.
Now he works for aquantima (the weird website) and aquantima obviously is a company for the “Epicor ERP” management software.
@felix
I don’t doubt that she exists. However, are girls called “Fred” in France as their nickname? Could a teacher work besides her work in the relaxation/massage business? Perhaps in France everything is possible, even her boss could be coincidantelly a Frederic Brun? I simply don’t get it. I have links of Frederique Brun to the massage/recreation centres that are registered for Frederic Brun and I have a message of a apparent friend who is running another massage/relaxation business, who calls “teacher” Frederique Brun nicked as a “Fred”.
@ James 15 Oct, 2012 – 12:22 pm
For a “quiet carpark” that no one goes to. The place was as busy as hell that afternoon.
On a detailed tourist map of the region (*please* don’t make me search for the link), there were some statistics collated by the local Tourism Bureau: Even *off-season*, an average of over 2500 cyclists and hikers travel along the Passage du Lac d’Annecy every day. Granted, they didn’t say how and where they counted that traffic, but with about 11 daylight hours in September, that equates to an arithmetic average of 227 persons per hour. Furthermore, we know that 5 September was a fine, sunny day with maximum temperatures of 24 °C
http://www.tutiempo.net/en/Climate/ANNECY_MEYTHET/09-2012/74940.htm
Thus, even though that lay-by may not be the most heavily frequented spot in the area, on a fine, sunny afternoon, I would expect a minimum of twenty cyclists and hikers per hour to pass that spot on a sunny afternoon. Whichever figure you guesstimate, it boils down to somebody passing by every few minutes.
For somebody in that place to take the time to reload several times, peppering the AHs’ BMW with bullets, is quite a crazy thing to do (unless there were lookouts all over the place, but then people who have that kind of backup don’t use vintage Lugers). Likewise, the killer(s)’ unobserved escape must have been extremely sketchy, more due to dumb luck than careful planning.
@Peter
so why are there no other witnesses coming from either direction? Silenced? It never happened? Area sealed off from both ends before it happened? Empty car park at the time? people do park cars and wander off.. that’s what they are for, give or take the odd alleged massacre.
@ Blue the Brun crash is a mystery, as is Fred/frederic/frederique
I can’t see that Linkedin link – not in it.
@Blue
ah, got it now
http://uk.linkedin.com/in/mrashrafibrahim
@ Felix
There were witnesses appearing on the scene every few minutes, precisely as I suggested: First SM, then WBM, then Didierjean & Co. If WBM had cycled a little faster, he would have been killed, too.
The direction of traffic will vary with the time of day, and I suppose 15:30 or so was still “outbound” time, with most people heading out from the direction of Chevaline.
@peter
perhaps the amount of cyclist isn’t such a riddle. Usually when I walk or hike mountains, I would start very early on that day because I want to be back before dawn. I guess that the majority will start climing at 7am or 8am and pass that location before noon. When did the shooting happen? 3:30pm?
That’s why Mollier starting to climb that mountain at approx. 2:30 pm is certainly not usual because you would usually start in the morning. How would he be back home 2 hours later as his girlfriend expected to? It’s a huge way to go up to the hill from that spot.
If there were an average of 2500 per day, then approximately 95% would have passed that location by 1pm latest.
“Katie
14 Oct, 2012 – 10:49 pm” ref Caroline Dickenson murder, I remember it well. I worked with her poor dad and was there when the police arrived to break the shocking news. Solving the crime was partly down to his dogged persistence and not a little to luck. I tend to agree with your assessment of the police efforts. They were subject to as much criticism there as here. I will post a little piece I wrote regarding their efforts over the Al Hilli incident that appear to me to fall into the category of incompetence at the very least. Regards, Tim.
I doubt so many cyclists passes so frequently. Remember there are many different roads for them to take.
It is anyway something that should be corroborated before you just accept this more than 200 figure pr. hour by for example asking cyclists in the area or talking to people who have been there, for example all those journalist and photographers who saw the crime scene.
AL HILLI KILLINGS: FORTY QUESTIONS FOR THE FRENCH PRESIDENT
by Tim Veater.
There can’t be many crimes that get a joint statement of intent from both President (of France) and Prime Minister (of Great Britain) but the Al Hilli/Mollier murders did. I wonder how, after nearly six weeks, Mssrs. Hollande and Cameron are thinking now and what they are being briefed by their security experts? Oh to be a fly on the wall of the Élysée Palace and 10 Downing Street! One thing for sure, it is not the same information that has been fed to the public via the press. This has strenuously avoided any suggestion of professional assassination or State involvement – a view expressed by experienced ex-police and ex-army commentators based upon method used.
Serious and barbaric as the crime was, the implications of it could be even more serious. Why? Because first, the reasons for the action – the motive – must be of the highest order, involving either big money, important trade or defence secrets, matters of State Security or International Relations. Second it would mean that an assassination cell was operating in the heart of Europe, either with the assent and connivance of the sovereign state in which it took place, or it was incapable of stopping it. Suggestions of complicity or impotence are not happy adjectives with which a new Head of State would wish to be tarred. Third, a question is raised as to whether the examples of incompetence, conflicting information, unexplained questions and failure to use the media to best effect, are actually examples of “cock-up” or “cover-up”? If, as has been suggested, only Big Crime or Sovereign States have the resources and ability to carry out such acts, “Which one?” is the undoubted next “elephant question in the room”.
On both sides of the Channel, there has been a virtual black-out on progress, other than the opinion of the Annecy Prosecutor, Eric Maillaud, who appears to have become the “face” of the investigation, that it could take up to “ten years”. This approach was met with amazement by British police sources who in a classic example of British understatement, described it as “unhelpful”. British police and media have also rightly expressed surprise at the way the French investigation has proceeded. Can Francois Hollande be satisfied? Does he not realise it is the competence of French policing and counter-terrorism that is on trial here, as well as more conventional crime solving? Yes indeed the “state-stakes” are high.
No one doubts that a criminal investigation is much harder than “Hawaii Five-O “, as Mr Maillaud helpfully pointed out, nor that “truth can be stranger than fiction”. “This is because”, Mark Twain said, “fiction has to make sense”. Making sense of a crime scene is what detective work is all about and what could be more senseless than four adults being shot through the head, depriving at least five children of their parents and others of their family and friends? Chillingly, someone obviously thought didn’t agree. To make sense of what appears senseless, first requires a methodical, detailed and documented, approach to the crime scene and witnesses. In such circumstances as this, no detail is too insignificant to be included and there should be no contamination or alteration, other for saving life or securing safety, until this has been completed. Such is the power of modern science in relation to fibres and fluids, DNA, fingerprints and ballistics, securing the site from adventicious contamination is of the highest importance.
For these reasons it is very hard to explain why aerial photographs show numerous personnel on site, whilst white clad officers are still carrying out their work; or why the press and public were allowed on the site on the 7th September, two days after the murders, but before significant evidence such as blood, items of clothing, blood stained objects, dressings, glass and bullets had been removed. Why has there been no indication that a fingertip search was carried out and no effort made to outline position of car, bike and bodies, or take detailed prints of visible car tyre tracks? Nor is it easy to understand the eight hour delay in discovering four year old Zeena, whilst waiting for a team from Paris, when specialist were available at Lyons. The absence of photo-fits or photographs – the latest being of a family photo on the grounds it is “morbid” – defy logic. Why no details of the vehicles as part of a national appeal and now the suggestion that the green SUV could have been a forestry asset which after six weeks would be easily checked. Why, given the speed of reporting – probably no more than 15 minutes – were road blocks not set up? Why the delay of five weeks to set up a telephone line? Why the early private burial of Mr Mollier and why allow Mr Martin to leave the country so soon after the event? Why the failure to identify any of the suspect vehicles? Why did so many of the findings and opinions later have to be changed or corrected? None of this inspires confidence in the French investigation, compounded by what appears to be a certain reticence to put the record straight or provide a definitive record of facts. Unambiguous answers to the following would be a good start.
@ Bluebird
It’s perfectly normal to go for a bike ride after lunch, particularly if (as I think SM was doing) you are working a half-day job. Not all of the cyclists in that area will be tourists, free to go out whenever they like. Off-season, many or most will be locals, who have regular jobs. If you are a cyclist, you must know that, on weekdays, late afternoon and early evening are the peak times.
If WBM had cycled a little faster, he would have been killed, too.
RAOFL
@Tim
It isn’t incompetence – it’s management of the facts from the start,(Maillaud on the receiving end from the off) and when you suppress or bend the truth early on, subsequent corrections and additions become more unbelievable. Do you not think why we haven’t seen Brett Martin since his one and only show, and won’t ever again??
“Forty Questions”
1. Were the Al Hillis, M. Mollier or Mr Martin, known to, or under the surveillance of, the French Secret Service?
2. Why, if as was initially suggested, this was bungled robbery or gangland killing, was it necessary to send teams from Paris and for the British Embassy to do the same?
3. At what time and by whom was the initial call to the emergency services made?
4. Why did the police say, incorrectly, it was Mr Martin?
5. At what time precisely did the fireman(men), doctor and gendarme arrive and how did they know where to go?
6. At what time was Zainab al Hilli removed to hospital?
7. Was/is there mobile telephone reception at the murder site?
8. Where did Didierjean phone from and at what time?
9. Why was the existence of Didierjean not revealed for four (?) days after the event?
10. Why was the probability of Zeena being in the car not inferred from enquiries and a search carried out much earlier?
11. On whose instructions was the decision made to send a forensic team from Paris rather than from Lyons, before the identity of the occupants was known?
12. At what stage and under what conditions were Martin and Didierjean interviewed? Was it recorded or a signed witness statement?
13. Were the two female companions similarly interviewed and did they corroborate Didierjean’s recollection?
14. Were fingerprints and DNA samples taken from Didierjean and others on the scene for the purposes of elimination?
15. Were tests carried out on particularly Martin’s clothing and hands for blood or gun powder?
16. Was Martin’s push bike or Didierjean’s car checked or retained?
17. What happened to Mollier’s bike?
18. What were the post-mortem injuries and trajectories on the victims?
19. How many bullets hit the car and person from which firing position?
20. Why were only fifteen bullets reported, later changed to twenty-five?
21. Of the twenty five, how many caused injury to the person and where were the remainder?
22. Why did the police change their opinion on the number and type of weapon used?
23. Why was no attempt made to outline the exact position of Mollier, Zainab and the bike before they were moved?
24. Why was the blood stained earth, rock and other items not bagged up and retained for laboratory examination?
25. On the same point why was the press allowed on the site whilst these and other items that could have been significant, were still there?
26. Was a systematic search carried out of lay-by and environs?
27. Why were so many personnel on site when white coated investigators were doing their work?
28. Why was Zainab outside the car when the doors were reportedly locked?
29. At what stage, and by whom was the rear tail-gate opened?
30. Were plaster casts/ photographs/ measurements taken of the tyre marks clearly visible at the other end of the lay-by and used to narrow down the model of vehicle that caused them?
31. Why was glass not collected from about fifteen metres from the car and elsewhere?
32. Were all the spent cartridges on the ground located and why were they still there when the press were admitted?
33. At precisely what location was Martin overtaken by Mollier?
34. At precisely what locations was Martin passed by green SUV and motorbike in both directions?
35. Why was not more precise description of the SUV obtained and circulated as an aid to finding it?
36. Why was there no attempt to set up road blocks or at least surveillance, given the recency of the crime?
37. Why were photographs or identi-kit likenesses not issued as soon as possible?
38. Why did the description of the SUV change with time?
39. Why were attempts using police computer records so unsuccessful in identifying either the SUV or Peugeot 306?
40. Why was Martin allowed to return to the UK when as a principal witness his input could have been valuable even if the police had satisfied themselves he wasn’t in anyway implicated?
No doubt others can think of far more questions, as yet unanswered, and I suppose it would be a lot to expect to get answers to all of them but we can surely expect some. However, if I were President Maillaud, and had given a public commitment to doing everything possible to solve the crime, knowing the credibility of France’s law enforcement was at stake, I sure would want an answer to ALL of them and more.END.
With regards to where the helicopter landed it is very likely a little further down the road – immediately after the hairpin bend, where the road broadens and there are actually two parking spots. You can see this place in the pah-pah-pah video, because all the police cars and vans parked there, and it was most likely also there the journalists parked – remember they had to walk the last bit.
I can post a screenshot from the video on Icke if sufficient interest manifest itself,- showing this place with the broader road, where it is perfectly possible to land an helicopter.
I have pointed out many flaws in the time line relating to the first call to the emergency services. It is important. It is suspicious. And it hasn’t been explained. No one in the press seems prepared to pose the question to the French Authorities and get an answer. We need to know why? The first call was logged at 3.48 pm. The police said it was by Mr Martin but it wasn’t. By his own account, corroborated by Mr Didierjean, he could get no signal on his mobile phone. Mr Didierjean did not arrive until 4.10 pm and then with Martin went back to the scene, before coming down the hill and phoning, so this must have been about 4.25 pm. The BIG question therefore is , who did make the 3.48 pm call, enabling first firemen (!) and doctor to attend “about four o’clock”?
Now a second and related issue. No one other than Martin, Didierjean, seven year old Zainab, four year old Zeena and possibly Mr Didierjean’s two female companions, were aware of the attack prior to police arriving. We can discount Zainab and Zeena for obvious reasons. The two female companions have never been officially mentioned so we must assume only Mr Martin and Mr Didierjean were actively there. So if mobile telephone reception was not available at the Combe d’Ire lay-by at 3.48 pm, the question arises not only who made the call, but where was it made from? These facts lead ineluctably to the conclusion that either there was another witness to the events, unaccounted for, who was able to get to a land line or place where there was mobile phone reception, or it was the killers themselves, or their controllers, who made the call! If there is any other logical explanation, I should be pleased to hear it.
Hello Tim, thanks for noticing my comment, what a weird tragedy that was , every time I pass the building I think of that poor girl. I’m glad the parents didn’t stop pushing for a result.
Rumours around here for the longest time were that it was a local copper, once again we see it was not the French police who caught him but the Spanish I believe !
The French police are like so many here, just plain lazy,they just do a minimal job without commitment, the police station even closes for their precious lunch….. 2 hours !
Sorry but my little article leading up to the “forty questions” is being moderated before it appears if it does. If it doesn’t, this and other stuff can probably be found at http://something-stinks.com/WordPress/?page_id=232
@ Tim V
Where did you pick up that nugget that Didierjean did not arrive before 16:10? In the accounts that I have read, for example {http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9535383/France-shooting-new-witness-describes-horror-of-murder-scene.html}, the timeline is quite consistent: Didierjean meets WBM, they briefly go back to the crime scene together, D. makes the call at 15:48.
Tim wrote:
Didier had a better phone and/or connection than Brett