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?
@Straw
Photo of Zaid:
Where is that? Western Scotland? Diving school?
Someone comments on that photo from Baghdad, Ahmed Abd Monym, who has lots of academic friends there, and in the ex-pat community
One friend is Faris Al-Hilli, whose wife lives in Jordan.
Perhaps Faris himself does.
http://www.facebook.com/faris.alhilli
Is this the same cousin whom the People Newspaper, Nick Doman, September 9, found for an online quote?? Both pharmacists
{http://www.people.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/2012/09/09/orphaned-zeena-al-hilli-reunited-with-family-102039-23924523/}
His cousin Faris al-Hilli, who teaches at the College of Pharmacy in Jordan, posted a message online saying: “I hope that God will have mercy on his soul and the law will bring the people responsible for his murder to justice.”
Kathy, that’s the first I’ve heard of any sisters .
According to a still tentative scenario, the conclusions of the police ballistics on the killing of Chevaline (Haute-Savoie)in which four people were killed on September 5, indicate that the cyclist Sylvain Mollier was clearly affected immediately by the first volley of shots.
The killer then surprised Saad Al-Hilli, the British engineer who was touring the Combe d’Ire with his family. And according to the first expert reports, he was outside the car with his eldest daughter, Zainab. The father then returned fast to the BMW break to try to escape.
Examination of the soles of the victims, in fact, confirmed that Saad was right outside. His daughter was found injured outside lying in front of the vehicle. But retreating too quickly, Saadstumbled against a slope and the rear axle of the wagon got stuck. The killer then shot Saad Al-Hilli, when he was already back at the wheel of his car before targeting his wife Iqbal and his stepmother, Suhaila, both sitting in the back. The police do not know in what order the family was executed. The murderer then returned tofinish off the cyclist who was writhing in agony because the shooting angles are different according to the bursts.
Certainly, the police are now convinced that there was only one shooter at Chevaline. A very mobile individual at the crime scene, “disorderly behavior”, according to the investigators, “going from one person to another and back on either turn to finish them off.” An attitude of “not consistent with the profile of a professional killer,” the police still think.
LeParisien.fr
Tim, if as we are led to believe the will is a 50/50 split, then neither brother could do anything without the others signature.
BUT.
I have a feeling that Zaid could have been cut out of the will & is attempting to contest it because if everything is jointly owned it needs two signatures to release both property & bank accounts.
Yes if they jointly owned the house at Claygate Zaid could force the sale by appeal…..that can be the only reason for a caveat.
Felix,
Its in South Africa and he left a comment about the holiday saying he is from Iraq.
http://www.africantours.travel/client-testimonials
I dont know for sure that its him but it certainly could be and there is a family resemblance
@Tim V
19 Oct, 2012 – 4:14 pm
I think that is right.
I have long argued on here that SM is key, given his support for an ostensibly militant left wing political party, Solidarite et progres, the French wing of the LaRouche organisation. The Swedish branch of LaRouche, which has since 2007 been headed by one Hussein Askary (anyone know anything about him?), was originally fingered, apparently erroneously, for the murder of Olof Palme, but it was long insinuated to be a front for the CIA, with the object of labelling US deserters from Vietnam who sought refuge in Sweden, as left wingers.
Where does this take us? Subterfuge? Double cross??
Re the Swiss bank account, it doesn’t help that we’ve had conflicting reports.
Some have said that the bank account was previously the fathers. A couple I have seen however stated that the bank account was not the fathers and was Saad’s. In one report it stated that the bank account was jointly held between Saad and Ikbal.
Since we have two varying accounts as to this Swiss bank mullarkey heaven knows which of the two are the correct versions…or even if either of them are.
@Katie
19 Oct, 2012 – 4:45 pm
I’ve tried to mention this to you before.
If the house is already jointly owned by SAH and his brother it will be outside the estate of their late father so not directly the reason for the caveat.
It is also useful to get some idea of SAH’s state of mind. This is a man of fifty-three I believe, who although living in Britain since his teens, we may assume, had retained deep cultural and religious links with his ancestral homeland of Iraq. It is inconceivable that he and his wider family, would not have followed the tempestuous events there closely, or been able to form a partisan view, even if careful not to express it. It is not unreasonable to assume he was no great supporter of Saddam, particularly after the family’s forced exile and his treatment of Shias generally and Marsh Arabs in particular. Yet he must have been conflicted over the two American led invasions and intervening sanctions that killed half a million children, it has been estimated. Nor could he be unaware of the targeted assassination of at least five hundred academics and scientists, amongst perhaps at least twenty thousand others (note I have excluded those violently killed up to 2003) that has happened in Iraq between 2003 and 2012. He was Iraqi. He was Shia. He had highly specialized technological skills. He had become increasingly disenchanted with American and Israeli policy and had made his opinions widely known. Even if he was not pro-Iranian, or a potential Iranian asset, it must have been very clear to him that he was a potential target of whoever had killed his Iranian brethren. In a sense, his greatest protection was his British citizenship, granted incidentally only months before the second invasion in 2002. Even then it is reported he was monitored very closely by Special Branch, if the neighbour can be believed. Once on MI6’s books, given the current climate, it is unlikely he had been taken off them. Indeed the opposite is highly likely. He may well have been a British MI5/6 asset, and who knows, this might have been the price of his Citizenship approval? In any event all the signs are there that he was particularly jittery before leaving for France. He expressed fears to his neighbour; he changes his house locks (conveniently explained away with the “family feud” story); he had a stun gun at home; he wore a bullet proof jacket it was said. Then there is the arrival of the mother-in-law to join them, obviously unknown to Zeena from Maillaud’s account; their unpublicised journey missing school start and not even telling them; carrying estate documents and passports; moving camping sites; frequent comings and going and unfamiliar meetings; not to mention ending up in an inaccessible location that can only be realistically explained in terms of rendez-vous. Nor should one overlook the fact that in terms of electronic communication, this was no novice. He was very aware of all the surveillance and electronic methods and possibilities. In fact he was state of the art. Is therefore surprising that the location was where it was, and is it not likely he had had carried out reconnaissance and research to ensure that it was as electronically “dead” as possible? But why if he felt under threat, did he keep his wife and family close? Maybe it was because he thought they were safer with him, or that they provided a holiday alibi, or that this was all part of a family relocation – although I find this last unlikely. What, leave house and job and British safety on a whim? I don’t think so.
So, if SM was as Le Parisien reports clearly hit immediately by the first volley of shots, it was his arrival on the scene that kicked off the whole incident.
As Anders I think it was said long ago,someone wanted him very dead.
Unless they mistook him for RAF man ..
The Claygate House
-from several reports combined I thought Saad felt guilty that it was left entirely to him and that is why 2/3 years ago he was trying to do the £800,000 property deal in Iraq and I assumed that money was going to given to Zaid as his share. Property prices have slumped from the peak of £1.5M for Claygate. Maybe this money in the Swiss bank A/c was once to go to Zaid until the falling out between them -if that isnt merely made up for the press and how to solve this neatly.
@Tim V
19 Oct, 2012 – 5:04 pm
I concur.
Strawberry, maybe there was a verbal (or otherwise) understanding, that Saad got the Claygate house and Zaid would later get his inheritance from other property or cash once the father died?
Somewhere along the line this perhaps hasn’t suited the brothers hence the dispute once the father passed away. Perhaps the estate was worth more..or less..than it was in 2003.
As already mentioned the Claygate home’s value probably differs today, compared to it value in 2003.
@katie, straw and dopey
All very interesting, I dare say, but what are you three doing sliding the forum back towards the inheritance dispute at the moment the French press report SM was hit first in the shooting!?
@Mochyn: Good point. It feels like spinning in circles.
I haven’t seen anyone picking up the story about Sylvain Mollier being hit first. Please post links when and if this happens. From quoting other reporters, the media now ignore them,
@ Katie
No this was the case that I knew about – NOT al Hilli! Crossed wires!
Oh, Ok Kathy thanks, I thought I’d missed something. 🙂
M & Q, I always thought Mollier was hit first, he was afterall walking away was he not,shot in the back ?
That surely was when AH rammed the car into reverse hoping to flee as he saw what was happening ?
Mollier shot first ,the car sprayed with bullets & then the close quarter shots into the car .
@ Mochyn
Solidarite et progres has quite a sinister reputation and operates almost like a cult with at least one murder tentatively linked to it.
M.
RE: the Claygate house, we don’t know if that sharing was a verbal agreement or actually tied up legally.
Clearly if it was in the fathers name, it wasn’t.
Thanks “Olifant19 Oct, 2012 – 11:30” and “amMochyn69 19 Oct, 2012 – 4:52 pm”. The timings are obviously critical in fixing who was where and when. The 3.48 time for a call has been held so firm there must be substance in it. The problem is we have so many different stories around it. The most obvious being the Martin made the call. The trouble is he denies it or at least says he couldn’t get reception. We have Maillaud saying Martin made the call AFTER he had left the hill. Then we have both reports that Didierjean made the call and your quote that he claims it for himself. The trouble with this is that by all accounts the earliest he met Martin was 4.01 and more likely 4.10 and even if he had been able to get reception and phoned immediately they met before running up the hill to inspect the scene himself, this is still about 15 minutes after the 3.48 time recorded. Martin himself relates he did not TRY to phone after all his actions that must have taken 15 minutes. In other words if the 3.48 time is kosher and made by Didierjean not Martin, it pushes Martin’s arrival time back to AT LEAST 3.30 not 3.45. This in turn would mean he arrives either immediately behind or even in front of the Al Hilli’s! In any event if he arrived after as he said Al Hilli’s MUST have overtaken him not to mention the complications of Mollier and Green 4×4 passing him and being out of there by the time he arrived. Sorry to keep flogging the point but it has lots of implications.
M69 – If anyone has been shot which I still doubt then I thought he was shot whilst he was talking to Saad by the drivers door from the thick bushes on that side of the car.
The UK press hasnt run the story yet and the translation from French is so ambiguous I am still to believe the gist of it.
The explanation is ALMOST like shooting by numbers bullet 1 comes out of the gun followed by bullet 2 and when they are moved from the bodies have the numbers still on them.
Now to the latest forensic results as reported by parisien via “ammoching69”. I have always suggested that if the various mock-ups on the web and Martin’s evidence can be relied upon, Mollier must have been off his bike and roughly adjacent to the the driver’s door when he was shot. This is highly suggestive that the two were having a conversation. This could have been innocent but a serious bike rider is unlikely to dismount for a casual chat with a complete stranger in a car, or indeed for a pedestrian to do any more than nod or wave to a passing cyclist. The fact that Mollier’s body ends up in front of the BMW is explained partly by Al hilli frantically reversing where he ended up several yards back and partly by the fact that Martin says he moves the body. The Parisien report that it can be inferred from his shoes that he was outside at the time of the attack is not of itself persuasive as he might have got out and got back in. If however Mollier’s blood or DNA was found on him it would be. In any event he would have to move pretty smartish if he had been outside with Mollier without being caught by the same bullets. He would have to dash away from the killer, open his door under fire, start the car, engage reverse gear and travel back, all before the killer came along side. And the only rational explanation for travelling back rather than forward to strike the gun man or escape would be a vehicle blocking his way? Whether little Zainab was outside with him or managed to get out of the car when the shooting began or subsequently, her bullet wound seems more likely to have been caused by a stray bullet than an aimed one though of course the head injury must have been intentionally inflicted.
How about this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html
TimV -so BM was on security detail looking after the family his job failed he reports it in and British security phone 999/112.
I dont think Maillaud is going to say the call came from British intelligence in Geneva but I do think that is most likely with the scarce facts we have
BBC went first:-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20009542
Zainab could pull holes in this story by repeating ‘why?’ as often as she likes.
Is SAH was the only one with anything on the soles of his shoes, when these family photos barely 30 mins earlier I assume that the others used their hover boards.
@Straw44berry
19 Oct, 2012 – 7:01 pm
Thanks for that. Remember you read it first on CM thanks to Pink!
no I was only wondering if the British press could be bothered. Thanks Pink