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?
‘It has now emerged that French prosecutors are set to make a fresh request to exhume the body of Mrs al-Hilli’s first husband, amid claims he may have been poisoned.’
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10963697/French-to-request-US-exhumation-in-al-Hilli-murder-case.html
Two most interesting guys who have lived in the fourth Weatherly/Thompson house.
Stunning results!
The first one definitely lived in their house with his family while the second one (an acciuntant with a criminal record) might have been just involved into one of the many Judith Weatherly companies. There were dozens of these letterbox companies registered in Judoth’s and Keith’s house. Companies who had no office but their house. This is a very nice house compared to their other estate.
Now about the first one:
That’s the address we are talking about:
http://m.trulia.com/homes/Louisiana/Marrero/sold/260733-1200-Westwood-Dr-Marrero-LA-70072
Fred Beauford sr. and jr. and family.
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/fred-beauford/53/939/689
You can also find him on facebook as “Fred M Beauford sr.”
He worked for Schlumberger Oilfield Services.
Schlumberger Oil basically is a French company. They were involved in the Deepwater Horizon desaster.
Today he’s a Christian prayer in his own church.
facebook quote: “My loves are God,My wife,children, and grandchildren Ashton, Travis and “Lil” Brandon, Gabrielle and my great parents, and siblings Church of God in Christ (COGIC)”
The second guy who is involved in the letterbox companies of Judit Weatherly-Kiraly and Keith Ritchie Kiraly is that guy:
Gregory D Duvieilh
https://opencorporates.com/officers/17745837
https://opencorporates.com/officers?q=GREGORY+D.+DUVIEILH
He is an accountant. He is registered in their house but i dont think that he is living there. His registration causes from a number of letterbox companies he was running with Mrs. Weatherly and with Mr.Kiraly from that house.
Gulf Holdings is only one of the many companies ….
However, that guy seems to have some deep links to the organised crime. Isnt he some kind of Meyer-Lansky?
Now think about that he was that close to Weatherly/Thompson.
You MUST read that article below. Then you will understand much more about the connections and work of that Thompson/Weatherly family. Please:
http://m.lvsun.com/news/2000/feb/08/santini-testifies/
Duvieilh is married to Donna Marie Boudreaux. Boudreaux is a wealthy and politically most influentual (originally French) family in New Orleans.
Plus – as a sidenote – that’s a daughter of Keith R Kiraly and Judy Weatherly:
Tiffany Lilliman
http://m.bestofneworleans.com/gambit/veterans-of-the-health-care-war/Content?oid=1250875
http://businessprofiles.com/details/andrew-martin-industries-inc/LA-30504710F/greg-duvieilh
http://blog.nola.com/times-picayune/2007/09/john_georges_entrepreneur_mean.html
Gregory Duvieilh is in fact Gregory Duvieilh Galliano. Galliano sounds better in Mafia movies, doesn’t it?
http://www.bizapedia.com/addresses/C-O-GREGORY-D-DUVIEILH-GALLIANO-LA-70354.html
Andrew Martin, Judith Weatherly, Keith Kiraly and Greg Duvieilh Galliano are partners in biz.
That makes the Thompson family look much better in a movie star light.
Goodness BB, that’s a lot to take in, you have been busy.
If this lot are CIA I don’t know how they ever had the time to indulge in all this wheeling & dealing.
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/01/13/louisiana.former.governor.released/
read the last paragraph of that cnn report and remember that Greg Duvieilh Galliano is the agent (= right hand) of Andrew Martin.
And then remember that Greg Duvieilh is registered in Judit Weatherly’s house although he doesnt live there.
I really hope that the DM will be able to find and to interview the dentist where Iqbal allegedly worked. There are only a few dentists in Marrero. It shouldnt be that difficult. Usually i would start with the dentist who is the current dentist of Mary Weatherly.
BB don’t forget aunt Judy Weatherly,
it is said she is the one with the poison dart theory
michael norton
I understand that the poison theory came from the Judy Weatherly/Keith Kiraly family with agent Greg Duvieilh Galliano. That is why i believe that the criminal casino/bribery story is – if not directly related – a hint about where they are coming from.
I wonder if Eric Maillaud and his compatriots have had time yet (six weeks and counting)
http://www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/news/uk-world/alps-murder-ex-soldier-found-dead-1.404201
to found out what weapon the Ex-Legionnair/parachutist/marksman/mountainman
was killed with and was the weapon he was killed with found in his flat and were the ex-Legonnaire’s the only fingerprints on that weapon, was his the onlt DNA on that weapon.
In six weeks have they yet had the full autopsy report.
Has the body been released to his family.
Has his name yet become known.
The list of deaths here is mounting, 4 in the first instance + Le Brun + The soldier + Jim Thomson.
Anyone else realised they are all abroad not in the UK, is this relevant ?
Katie, also Nicole Communal-Tournier.
Their very close neighbour was Jean Claude Deronzier,
marie of Doussard, ( fell of the local cliff)
President of Faverges and senior majistrate of the area,
his two sons are married to the two daughters of Mr.Communal-Tournier.
These two families live only a few hundred metres from each other,
would not local criminals be cognisant of these facts,
If I were a local villan, I’d steer well clear.
Mr.Communal-Tournier saw two villans at his gaff but five have now been apprehended.
I small a stitch up.
Remember also that William Brett Martin was also a neighbour to these families, WBM has been said to be the first on the scene, post incident at Chevaline.
Brett is remarkably well placed for all these incidents.
Michael I missed that story, a rather tenuous link to the AH murders though.
I was always convinced Brett Martin was an Mi5/6 overseer to the murders ,nothing has changed there for me.
There were just too many questions related to his actions.
@ James & strictly off-topic
Here’s one for Peter.
Off topic. Imagine this for a plot for a film.
A business man lures his business partner to an isolated factory.
He’s planning to “do him in”.
But he can’t do this himself, so he hires a hitman.
The hitman gets a bit fruity and wants more cash for “the job”.
This “reluctantly” gets agreed.
The day arrives.
The business man brings his business partner to the isolated factory….
….and the hitman shots everyone !
I’d have to weave a bit more “suspense” into it.
As I say, off topic, but not a bad film ?
It is a good idea, but you need a plot (with a beginning, a middle and a satisfying ending), you need characters with plausible motives that the viewer can empathize with, you need conflict between the characters, and you do indeed need plenty of suspense.
My basic idea for creating suspense would as follows: Businessman 1 (B1) only gradually realizes that hired hit man H is planning to kill both B2 and himself. When he does realize that, he obviously cannot go to the police, and he also cannot physically run away (cf. your idea of the setting being an isolated factory). Rather, his only chance of survival is to join forces with B2 against H. However, he cannot simply tell B2, “I paid H to kill you, but now he is trying to kill us both”, because he is afraid that B2 would then turn the tables on him and join forces with H. Instead, he must try to convince B2 that H is trying to kill both of them for some unfathomable reason. B2 is awfully slow to catch on, failing to grasp that H really is trying to kill both of them, until it is almost too late …
Now let’s try to flesh out this idea into a plot, just by way of example:
B1 and B2 are joint owners of a successful high-tech company. Young, brilliant B1 is the technical genius behind the company, whereas older, suave, cunning B2, a former stock broker, merely contributed some seed capital a long time ago. Although B2 has already recouped his initial investment a thousand times over, he has repeatedly refused B1’s demands to let B1 buy out his share. Rather, he continues hanging around, getting richer and richer on the back of B1’s genius, ordering B1 about and generally sticking his oar in at the company. That constitutes B1’s motive for wishing to get rid of B2.
B1 has an old buddy from his college days: H, who somehow never made it in life, is always short of money, has had some minor brushes with the law, and who keeps tapping B1 for money whenever he is in town. There is one thing in which he excels, however: He still is the great athlete that he used to be during his college days. One day, H stays at B1’s house, tapping him for money, explaining his need for money by telling B1 all about the dangerous mountaineering expedition that he has just come back from, during which he almost died several times.
Hearing about H’s brushes with death, how easily H could have died several times along the way, B1 has a brainwave: He is going to challenge B2 to a long week-end of amateur mountaineering, with H acting as their mountain guide. Owing to the macho rivalry between B1 and B2, who considers B1 a wimpy, immature nerd, B2 is certain to accept that pissing-contest challenge. H’s job will be to make sure that inexperienced climber B2 has an accident on that trip. In exchange for the promise of a sizable sum of money and a down payment, H agrees to the murderous plan.
The trio set off on their climbing trip. Quite soon, B1 notices that he himself is having rather more near-death experiences than he should have liked (a frayed rope here, a loose piton there). Also, H is showing strange signs of aggression towards B1, openly telling him how much he had always resented B1’s success, how humiliating it was for him to have to beg B1 for money all the time. H has never acted like this before. B1 is gradually becoming concerned for his own life, whereas B2 considers the tension between B1 and H highly amusing, and doesn’t have the faintest idea that the original intention of the trip had been to do him in. Increasingly desperate, B1 tries to convince B2 that H intends to kill both of them, and that their only chance of survival is to get away from H as soon as possible – whilst H would be easily capable of returning home by himself, B1 and B2 could only climb down the mountain together, mutually assisting each other.
At first, B2 laughs off the suggestion that H might intend to kill them both, then he becomes increasingly suspicious of B1: Has work-related stress driven B1 over the edge, does he plan to kill both H and B2 in a kind of insane suicide mission? B1 despairs: B2 just doesn’t get it.
Regarding the ending, the resolution of the conflict, I have two variants to offer:
(1) B2 belatedly realizes that B1 was right, that H is trying to kill them both. He thereupon single-handedly kills H, in the nasty, ruthless style that is his personal trademark. B1 helps him cover up the murder and, in his gratitude and relief, confesses that he had originally hired H to kill B2. The two shake hands and, reconciled, climb down the mountain together and live happily ever after. The final scene shows “heroic mountaineer” B1 being lionized at a cocktail party, a glass of bubbly in his hand, repeating verbatim his former friend H’s anecdotes about how very, very dangerous mountaineering can be.
(2) B2 doesn’t grasp the truth until it is too late. H kills both B1 and B2 and makes his way down the mountain on his own. A few days later, after he has been quizzed (and cleared) by detectives, and after he has been discharged from hospital (where he was treated for hypothermia and frostbite), he is seen to hug B1’s widow in a stormy embrace. The viewer is made to understand that H is her long-time secret lover, and that the whole scheme had been their idea all along, that they played B1 like a fiddle from the start. Now that B1 and B2 are both dead, she is set to inherit the entire company, and she and H are going to live together happily ever after.
___________________________
What do you think? I believe that the basic interpersonal dynamics could be made to work in any kind of secluded, isolated setting (e. g., on a yacht, or in a mountain chalet whilst a blizzard is raging outside), and that they could make quite a good film. Now all that you have to do is to write the screenplay 😉
I know I have come very late to this discussion but in the early days was it considered that all three in the car were shot between the eyes outside of the car, then placed in the car.
There seemed to be remarkably little blood in the car, Eric has said they were all shot between the eyes, well you could shoot a person between the eyes if you were kneeling/standing on the bonnet and shot through the windscreen, but how would you shoot the rear passengers through the eyes.
http://www.france24.com/en/20140219-french-prosecutors-interrogate-suspect-over-alps-murders/
Maillaud described the killer as “seasoned,” pointing out that he had reloaded three times during the attack and had finished off his victims with a bullet between the eyes.
@bluebird
12 Jul, 2014 – 1:07 pm
Excellent point .. I knew that the name Gauss resonated somehow.
This for example:
But Gauss’ mission was different, the researchers said. While Stuxnet targeted Iran’s nuclear facility, Gauss appeared to target banks in Lebanon, as well as users of Citibank and…
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/09/gauss-virus-stuxnet_n_1761107.html
Michael, few points there.
I have mentioned the marks on the bonnet of the car several times, they are spaced like two footprints would be, no explanation seems to have been given.
Secondly…the fact a child was under the skirts of mother surely shows they were in the car at the time.
Thirdly…I also had deep suspicions about getting that aim right from the outside the car, which is why I’ve also said he must have smashed a window to do that.
Also, would you not cower when seeing someone pointing a gun at you, the first thing one does is bury or bend to cover the head.
One woman may have been looking out, straight at him & he got lucky, but two people ?
http://www.parismatch.com/Actu/Faits-divers/Le-nouveau-mystere-de-la-tuerie-de-Chevaline-L-epouse-avait-un-ex-mari-mort-le-meme-jour-574246
“There was a perfectly legal divorce and without difficulty.”
We want to know the name of the Marrero dentist where Iqbal worked while she was “married” to Jim Thompson and we want to know the name of the 35 years old iraqi who is in custody in france.
Peter Allen (DM), can you hear us?
knowing that info would bring us a huge step further towards the truth.
Katie,
it has been suggested that almost no bullets were wasted, it has been suggested that all three persons in the car were shot three times, through the heart and between the eyes, so if nine bullets had gone through three persons in the car, the inside would be smothered in blood?
Hence me suggesting they could have been shot outside of the car and placed in the car postmortem
That would certainly explain why the car was left for 8 hours Michael, but not how the four year old was found hiding under her mothers skirts in the back of the car 8 hours later.
Of course we can only go on what we have been told & some of it just cannot be true .
‘She said: “The agent said the French found it very strange that they died within a few hours of each other. They said it was possible my brother might have been poisoned and asked if I had even considered having him exhumed. I said ‘No! Let him rest in peace’.
She added: “I really believe he died of a heart attack.
“But some strange things did happen during his marriage to Kelly [Mrs al-Hilli]. I suppose it could be a possibility.”
WHAT……..1say that again….. ………”But some strange things did happen during his marriage to Kelly [Mrs al-Hilli]. I suppose it could be a possibility.”’
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/alhilli-massacre-french-prosecutors-make-request-to-exhume-body-of-secret-husband-of-alps-murder-victim-iqbal-alhilli-9602818.htm
“Eric Maillaud, the French prosecutor leading the al-Hilli investigation, said: “A request for exhumation and an autopsy was refused because there wasn’t a good enough reason in the eyes of the US authorities”.
How true is that.
If it is… he’s damn serious (hence this “reveal”).
KS.
I don’t know what it signifies, but I certainly hope she has told the investigators everything.
Maybe ‘Kelly’ left the states in fear of something ?
quote Katie
“That would certainly explain why the car was left for eight hours”
Hi Katie, When you posted that, I did not twig what you meant.
Did you mean, after the shooting at Chevaline the police did not go in the BMW because there was so little blood apparent,
leading to a suspicion the persons had been shot outside of the vehicle?
Michael,
I meant, when the police arrived on the scene they found the bodies in the car, then they left for 8 hours saying they were waiting for forensics …… who arrived at midnight.
That’s when on opening the car they found the little girl alive.
We all thought that very odd, surely speed is imperative & work should have started right away ?
It does not take 8 hours to fly a team in from anywhere in France or even Geneva right next door…s to speak.
The quantity of blood was not discussed much at all., but you can see a certain amount alongside the car,which is again odd, because Mollier was not lying there, according to BM he moved him from in ‘front’ of the car. If I recall correctly.
“She added: “I really believe he died of a heart attack. But some strange things did happen during his marriage to Kelly [Mrs al-Hilli]. I suppose it could be a possibility.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/alhilli-massacre-french-prosecutors-make-request-to-exhume-body-of-secret-husband-of-alps-murder-victim-iqbal-alhilli-9602818.html
(I ask) What strange things?
Then again this article states EM only became aware of the JT death last week yet it says a previous request by him for an exhumation was turned down by the US authorities. This doesn’t make much sense either. And would the FBI suggest the possibility of poison without also requiring exhumation/investigation or after nearly two years?
Could with an explanation of all these apparent inconsistencies in addition to those already raised by BB. However if CIA involved bit less likely than a bird with teeth.
As already stated after two years highly unlikely any useful pathological information given the suggested absence of blunt trauma but who knows?
I would be surprized if less than a pint of blood was expurged per bullet wound, so nine bullets would expurge at least nine pints of blood and guts.
If all three Al Hilli shot in car, an awful lot of very evident blood and guts
would be splattered inside the BMW
sorry to repeat katie’s point but it comes from posting first and checking past ones after.
@ michael norton
@ Katie
Blood inside the car – The only high resolution pictures available to us are taken from the helicopter i.e. from a high angle. There is at least one that I have seen which clearly shows the right hand side of the drivers seat with a large blood stain at the top running most of the way down the seat.
Blood outside the car – Think about the timeline, SM was shot, run over then lay in front of the car for maybe 5 minutes. BM then arrived and moved him to the position alongside. There he lay for many hours and presumably bled out.
@Jon
Jon. I thought “Kenneth Sorensen” was banned ?
I would like to keep it that way.