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?
I have been looking at links and saw a comment by a local on one page mentioning the murder and saying about EM :
“3) the Proc (like a DA) who is communicating about all this is a class A 1 sleazy clueless xxx, everybody hates him and cringes.”
@Marlin
Good posts I don’t have time to digest right now (need sleep)I will come back to them I just wanted to let you know I have noted.
Some fascinating thoughts there Marlin and I’ve only read the first one so far. I have a few thoughts to add re. WBM. I’ll be baaaaack.
WBM…ex BA
Now doing training as part of Boeing at EGKK for Siver Fern.
And Fx.
What’s he doing in France ?
The house he rented out….did it have broadband ?
But he also knows the failure rate is high in that game.
And that training is of most importance.
Many would say “I can do that”….but a prof four bars ????
BA and RAF would have taught him you need training to do that.
What does he do. Ride his bike.
Not on a Sunday. Mid week !
Hey. I love relaxing. Because I get paid to relax.
In fact my boss requires I relax.
relaxing is VERY boring though.
Our man isn’t Fx dealing ! He’s still working. Why ?
Because at BA he’ll be on the “old contract”. And that’s good.
Unless he retired early !
Trying to think of the “re dun” at BA.
He’d have his rating I guess….but
Musings !
Why did he say “ex RAF” when he was actually “ex BA” ?
Why the airforce. What relevance had that to do with it ????
NR
John Didier’s brother is Eric Didier and his sister in law is Tracy Didier, both frim Phoenix/Glendale Arizona. They do not need to tell this because we already have evidence about who they are. Obituaries are always most helpful.
I agree that on a small boat the girl must have heard something. Unless she was drugged.
Annette was tied up mafia style so that she strangled herself while drowning. When somebody carries 200 lbs of weights onto a small boat, then i would realise that when i was travelling on the same boat.
The whole story stinks. A girl her age would not just sit in a boat doing nothing while her mother is missing. She would cry for help on a busy small river like that one.
Except when she either killed both of them what i would dismiss as being unlikely, or else when she was drugged and/or traumatized.
@Marlin: The issue of speaking French well or not is a recurring one in stories involving intelligence agencies. We have Fred Humphries, the shirtless FBI agent, who managed to become proficient with his high school French in Ontario to distinguish between Algerian and Quebec accents. Then we have a certain air force colonel, also educated in Ontario, who had to go to language school as an officer to learn how to speak French, even though he had lived in the nation’s capital (bilingual) for years and had attended an exclusive private high school in Ontario. Despite his poor grasp of the language, he could pronounce “Marie France” perfectly. I should say that the latter is not known to be connected to any intelligence agencies.
“I agree that on a small boat the girl must have heard something. Unless she was drugged” (BlueBird).
Hmmm ! I thought that. But not about being on a boat.
Shooting. Screaming. Thrown around. Pushing. Glass smashing. Sirens. Searchin (I assumed they actully opened a door to check ?).
And then you don’t move for 8 hours.
Dentist by their profession, have some first aid skills.
And by their training, have also worked with a cadaver.
So why was the person with the most medical training strapped into the rear of the BMW ?
Must be because they had not happened upon a shooting. Hence Mrs Al Hilli being strapped into the car (so the police say).
So if Mr Al hilli had been out of the car and then (ran) back in the car….( as the police claim) it would be safe to assume that they had not just arrived ?
With Mrs Al Hilli belted in, then they would have to be leaving the area ? (who sits in a parked car with their seat belt on…and with a five year old child !)
The shootings could not have started when Al Hilli arrived…as he would not have left his vehicle.
He could of course been positioning his car (and in reverse) when the shooting started…and Mollier arrived.
But then that would mean he did not have time to be out of the car …and get back in it again (to mistakenly select reverse gear).
Therefore if he was leaving…WBM not mentioning SAH passing him and LFR being correct about the time he saw Al Hilli…then the police are lying about the Arnand pics. But why ?
IF that is the case, SAH leaving as Mollier arrives…and the lone nutter steps out (!) and kills everyone….then the only conclusion has to be (as in he did not attack Al Hilli when he arrived at the carpark “ambush” style) that Mollier was the Prime Target ? He tiggered the shootings.
It’s not much of a “conspiracy theory”…but a crime of (I was going to write “passion”, however with so much destruction, it is hardly that) Hired Killers looking/awaiting Mollier.
Marlin
7 Feb, 2013 – 9:23 pm I was going to bed but then I made the fatal mistake (oh those fatal mistakes) to read this so can’t resist replying. If we were all in a room with computers and blackboard we could resolve many of the issues we pose just by going back to sources. As it is few of us are persistent or methodical enough to do so so we fail to nail the sequencing completely such as a precise timeline before AND after the event.
I have to say in your brainstorming you have raised very interesting and genuinely novel points that I haven’t seen discussed before. For example was WBM fluent in French or not? Ihave to agree that if he was a British SS asset it is inconceivable he would have been posted to France without being so. From this it is a small step to undermining PD’s credibility entirely. I think I am right in saying that PD does not even emerge until AFTER WBM has made his statement, but it is the former who includes him in the storyline in the SKy half of the interview so we cannot claim PD is wholely a creation to fill the obvious gap when WBM denies phoning.
Nor has anyone to my knowledge discussed your interesting points that WBM might have been there as interpreter between SM and SAH. Again it is something I quite overlooked. (Isn’t it amazing how something new can crop up after all this time which justifies us keeping at it) The point is I think it is clearly indicated on several counts if not proved, that SAH and Mollier WERE meeting. I have always struggled with an explanation why they should meet but never asked the obvious question (obvious of course when someone thinks of it) “How did they communicate?” We don’t know whether SM could speak English – his close aquaintances obviously do – but let us assume with his background he couldn’t or am I being too predictable? However if he couldn’t it raises your “obvious” question, if he could it is predictive in a different direction. I am conscious of the fact that EM adamant that they were not meeting, would have jumped on the inability to communicate as justifying his position, if he couldn’t, which might suggest that he could. (If you see what I mean) Then again we would have to rule out SAH fluency in French before we could say definitively they couldn’t communicate and would need an interpreter and so on. But the concept is an interesting one even if we can’t resolve it.
Then there is WBM’s role again. British Intelligence has never confirmed he was their agent or asset but there are so many pointers that way that I for one am fairly convinced. The complete absence of background on the man in the press and his disappearance subsequently, the location of his office, the way he was “painted” as the hero by the French contrary to what might be expected or concluded by investigation. Then note the subtle change after he doesnt play ball on the 3.48 call. Now through PD he becomes a panicing incoherent wreck covered in blood afraid of returning to the crime scene and anxious to leave it! Quite a subtly different image is portrayed. Is it saying “Two of us can play this game fella”.
So back to British SS or not? What he says he does – which may be accurate or not – would only be done by someone with a brief and obligation. Searching and moving a dead body at a crime scene can only be explained that way, particularly as we know both by virtue of him being dead and location, Mollier was in no danger, the reason he gives for doing what he did. Then there is the extrordinary way he was treated after the event. No one it appears thinks to stop and speak to this party of blood stained individuals only yards from the crime scene. No mention of taking clothing, swabs or DNA samples. The way he was allowed to leave the country. In everything it suggests the French, at least up to his interview, treated him as “one of us”. Then again no mention WHY he had to return to Britain immediately after (heavily suggestive of de-brief) let alone allowed to do so, and how he travelled. Did he really drive all that way, AND back again in only three (3) days? Or did he have a little discrete help by the British Government by way of air travel. Have you ever tried to get the British Embassy to pay for air tickets for a British citizen alive or dead? As soon as we conclude WBM was a MI5/6 asset, an assignation involving national security is confirmed and the official story unravels.
Oh there is more, but I think that’s enough for one post don’t you except to say that I agree with you as I have sought to prove over the weeks, that WBM certainly arrived as close to the events as make no difference to your suggestion that he might have actually been present at the same time and spared not by chance but by design. Even if not I do not believe he could not have heard the shots, or mistaken the leaving vehicles as anything other than the killers. Now project on to him the thinking. Would he have advanced onto the scene if he knew a shooting incident was taking place, unless he also was sure the killers had gone? Was his a clean-up role from the first, or was he acting to protect either the victims or his employers and what was he looking for on Mollier?
Then to add to the confusion as to what WBM is said to have seen and done, take these three statements by JOHN LICHFIELD in an Independent Special report dated PARIS WEDNESDAY 24 OCTOBER 2012.
Entitled: ” What links Diana’s death to the murders in Annecy? A French judicial process that lets conspiracy theories flourish.Inconvenient facts highlight the media fiction swirling around dark mystery of the Annecy murders”
Note this is by a respected senior reporter with French government contacts over a long period and 49 days after the event itself – so time for the facts to settle and opinions to firm.
“A local man, Sylvan Mollier, 45, lay dead beside the car. His body had been dragged from where he was originally attacked and his arms arranged by his sides, presumably by the murderer.”
This is inexplicable given the fact that Martin had admitted moving the body. Is it inferring then that Martin WAS the murder or is it suggesting that Martin was lying and was not the last person to move the body? In either event if this official version is accurate it would place Martin at the scene at the time of the murder.
“The British cyclist, Brett Martin, a retired RAF pilot, had been overtaken by the local cyclist, Mr Mollier, on the steep, winding climb to the lay-by a few minutes earlier.”
Here the story is “minutes before”. Elsewhere it is “moments before”. This in no way could be construed as later stated passing “as they left Chevaline” or another version that he “saw him in front” as they passed through the village. Neither conform to his TV statement (which pre-dates this article) that he passed “on the way up”. It appears the French source is again placing Martin at the scene at the time of the murder here.
“The British cyclist, Mr Martin, saw a green truck and motorcycle descending the bumpy road from the murder scene. The truck is believed to have belonged the forestry commission. There are eye-witness reports that a motorcyclist was behaving oddly on a remote road nearby that afternoon.”
This one is interesting because Martin’s description of “Green 4×4” has been changed to “truck”. Not much difference you may think but again a subtle and significant one. No way can a Mitsubishi Pajero be described as a “truck”. Notice it is used to support the contention this was a genuine forestry vehicle and by implication unassociated with the crime. Instead focus is on the bike and rider which becomes Maillaud’s preferred option presumably and implausibly linked to the “lone insane gunman” as confirmed by the next paragraph.
“Although all possible explanations remain open, there have been hints in the French media – not confirmed by Mr Maillaud – that the investigation is shifting towards the possibility that the murderer was a “lone wolf” or psychopath.”
Oh yes of course. Why didn’t we think of it before? A “Lone Wolf” in protected wolf reserve. (Well we did actually)
That was at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/special-report-what-links-dianas-death-to-the-murders-in-annecy-a-french-judicial-process-that-lets-conspiracy-theories-flourish-8223361.html btw in case you want to look it up.
You can ee how a story develops. By need not design.
Where the Al Hilli family on day trip to the Valley of Ire ?
YES. They even took photos in a local village !
Did WBM hear shooting ?
NO. He would have not gone to the carpark otherwise !
Was Mollier “lost” ?
YES. He was on a new route….and riding a racing bike !
Who raised the alarm ?
WBM.
No sorry. WBM could not get a signal, so departed the area.
PD called the rescue services.
Is WBM a “person of interest” ?
NO. He’s a hero. He raised the alarm. Sorry. He gave First Aid !
What was the weapon used in these killings ?
No Comment.
What lines of investigation do you have open ?
It was nothing to do with Msr Mollier.
How is the investigation going ?
In 10 years we’ll have cracked the case.
A fecking joke !
Tim V…
Martin in his TV interview says “ahead”.
The “MSM” say “passed”.
Who’s right ! God knows. Is he telling the truth ! I don’t know.
But Martin states “ahead”. Never “passed”.
I went looking to find the date at which WBM gave his interview and found this account:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2202635/French-Alps-shootings-British-cyclist-speaks-horror-discovering-bodies-family-shot-dead.html
Three comments:
1. Interview was apparently on Sep 13, about 8 days after the killings. This article refers to Zaibnab ‘recovering at a hospital”. But much later in another account I recall reading that she was moved back to England after a week (need to find that account – later). So my little suspicion here is getting some traction – WBM interview takes place closely after the brits “secured” the girl who must have been by then under their jurisdiction. That frees WBM to tell his tale, in which batters on the french account as much as he can get away with..
2. More amazingly – have I ever seen before these pictures of WBM running and biking? a fit man, for sure. Looks every bit like the agent that he is. Why can’t I recall seeing this photos before? must be i was careless and didn’t read the different accounts. these were apparently only in this account. Notice the gloves he is wearing, too.
3. In his account he claims to have moved SM’s body – as we have heard before. That BTW outraged EM (see link in my next comment).
Now what was I said before/ it’s sometimes really useful to go back over the old accounts especially as one is trying to square away with new questions. get some sleep all you hard working britishers. There’s more work to do I think in threading this little needle.
here’s one other link from the 17th of october. I bring this one up as it refers to the account in Le Parisien that mentions a few interesting tid bits:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9621670/French-cyclist-was-prime-target-in-Alps-massacre.html
1. The ASSAILANT dragged SM around “in an arc’ and laid him “next to the car” with arms folded. not a mention that it could have been WBM that done that,
2. mentions that SM could have been shot first, followed by “vehement” denial by EM that they know anything about the order in which individuals were shot.
Speculation: this leak was NOT authorized by Eric. But someone somewhere decided to let it rip.
3. refers several times to EM being very irate at these disclosures.
4. mentions the speculation in le parisien about the irrational lone gunman who was so confused(!) and disorganized that he shot SM first, shot some others next, then returned to the first SM, and shot him some more. not a mention that this could have indicated vengefulness.
yes, I know you have all seen this but I am on a plumbing operation here. I think words used are important.
James, 2:29 AM – fecking joke indeed – you put it funny.
My addition (rendition):
The one assumption I am NOT making is that ANY of the disclosures by police or other investigators are meant to either edify the public or to help move the investigation along. There is not a single piece of information coming out of EM that is in any way helpful – every bit he ever said is strictly for meant for “managing perception”.
EM may well be a sleaze-ball, as this one commenter said mentioned by Pink above, In his own way, but I don’t think he is incompetent if we redefine his role to ‘cover-up artist” or “PR manager”. He has actually done OK getting that story about the “lone psychotic, tourist-hating gunman” planted in the papers. has also done his very best to keep pointing fingers at England for the place where the motives lie. never mind that the two suggestions are in total conflict with each other. After all, the goal was not to clarify but to obfuscate, so in that he was not entirely unsuccessful.
Alas, our poor EM ran out of arrows to shoot at pesky media bots, so is now quietly “withdrawing” to the background, on his way to being a wall flower, one among many. Feeling the pressure no doubt of being left out there to hang WITHOUT ANY support from across the channel. Plus them Brits got the girl, Zainab, now in a nice safe house, so are content to continue to play their diffident, scowly “passive aggressive” role, even as poor EM was left to dangle, growing ever more petulant, until the stress got to him and he decided to take a little break.
That being said, I do have a really funny feeling that we are observed here on this blog. Does anyone else get the occasional impression that they are playing to a gallery? is my imagination too fertile? or is it my logic that’s getting ahead of itself? or is it just an unfortunate bout of self importance syndrom?
Tim V, I do think that in our various meandering ways we are somehow converging on something, though I am not sure what – yet.Like you say, were we all in a room with access to computers and a board, some paths would become clearer for sure – even with the very little we know. Still, I think that when we get too close (look at james’ post!) it could be time to stop. Don’t ask me why i say that -some kind of a strange inkling. In particular, I continue to have this really weird feeling about the john Didier case suddenly hitting the airwaves. I have asked before – how come that with all the many good detectives around, the expert conspiracy buffs, none have noticed (that i know of – please correct if wrong) this story earlier back around Sep 5-6, which is when accounts of it were trickling out? cases in canada and the US and everywhere else were brought up and not this one?
Felix – you broke this case out, I believe. What do you make of the fact that the very-puzzling John Didier murder-suicide was not discussed before on this or DK or TMZ sites, when it was amply addressed in the papers on the very days that the Chevaline case first broke out. People I recall scoured for every bit of strange news. Why not this one? or rather let me ask – were those accounts actually there at the time?
Various cars ?
Friday, Feb 08 2013 6AM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2199670/Saad-Al-Hilli-shooting-French-Alps-Was-hitman-Each-British-victims-shot-TWICE-cyclist-witness-FIVE-times.html#axzz2KHVEObU3
Lt-Col Vinnemann said that the Briton had seen ‘various cars leaving the scene including a 4×4’.
It has also emerged that he told police that – before arriving at the murder scene – he saw a green 4×4 and a motorbike speeding towards it.
A detective said: ‘He has a keen sense of observation. This could help us greatly,’ the source told French channel M6. It is the first time that the possibility of the assassins using a motorbike has been raised.
Now a young woman who was also in the area has told police that she saw a ‘white Peugeot 206 or 306’ a few minutes later, along the same road and heading towards the village of Horses.
She said it was being driven extremely fast by ‘a man in a black shirt’ who had to swerve suddenly to avoid hitting her own car.
Peugeot makes 4x4s in both the 206 and 306 range, leading to the possibility that both witnesses saw the same Peugeot, and it was being used as a getaway car by a man involved in the killings.
Prosecutor Eric Maillaud said the ordeal of what the RAF man had witnessed had left him in ‘a great deal of shock’. He added: ‘He should be congratulated on his swift actions.’
Mr Mollier, 45, was a father of three from nearby Ugine. He was on paternity leave from his job at a company producing stainless steel products.
His wife alerted police when he failed to return home from his bike ride. Prosecutor Maillaud said: ‘It would appear he was in the wrong place at the wrong time.’
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2199670/Saad-Al-Hilli-shooting-French-Alps-Was-hitman-Each-British-victims-shot-TWICE-cyclist-witness-FIVE-times.html#ixzz2KHWx4PDf
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
OK, the last link for my little series. This one mentions Zainab as being “whisked away” (funny choice of words) on Friday morning, presumably that’s Sep 14.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/14/alps-shootings-survivor-return-uk
This article mentions nothing about the interview by Brett Martin, which must have hit the news shortly after.
So yes, it looks like Zainab was already ‘secured” before WBM interview is released (though it may have been taped earlier). In fact, one event seems rather too close on the heels of another – almost coincident, making me think it’s not really a coincidence. The choice of words indicates that she was effectively “removed” from French control (which perhaps could not be entirely trusted) to a “safe” location somewhere in England.
Words matter.
And WBM can safely puke all over the pre-prepared French cover-up story. Which he proceeded to do – without being totally obvious about it. Now that I think of it, it was kind of artful – just enough to mess up the cover-up and show displeasure to those who need to know it’s a serious “screw-up”. Yet not so much disclosure that an international incident is created and strife between intelligence agencies becomes clear to the whole world.
4:01 pm meet BM
Posted on 09/11/2012,
http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/les-confidences-d-un-temoin-du-drame-de-chevaline-11-09-2012-2159640.php
This Wednesday, September 5, Philip D., age 41, had planned to go hiking with two friends in the Bauges on this side he did not know yet. They planned to spend the night in a mountain hut. But then they rode quietly in the forest road car of the Combe d’Ire, on the heights of the village of Horses, close to the place called the Martinet, they saw arise shortly before 4:01 p.m. crazed cyclist, first witness of the massacre that killed Saad al-Hilli, his wife, the mother of the latter, as well as Sylvain Mollier, a family bike.
Ce mercredi 5 septembre, Philippe D., 41 ans, avait prévu de faire une randonnée en compagnie de deux amies dans le massif des Bauges, sur ce versant qu’il ne connaissait pas encore.
……
Bad french.
“This man, panicked, was coming down the road, remembers Philippe, still agitated. He explained easily in bad French that there was a drama a little higher.
Il m’a expliqué difficilement dans un mauvais français qu’il y avait eu un drame un peu plus haut.
…..
Saw nothing.
“The arrival of the emergency reassured. Philip and his two friends were immediately taken to the police station where their testimony is first recorded as British cyclist, a former Royal Air Force. During the ascent of the forest road, the hiker has “heard nothing and cross person, no car, no bike, “he insists. But he thinks that the person or persons who committed the murder were “able to escape by the road called Mill”, a small winding path that leads directly onto the road.
Philippe et ses deux amies sont aussitôt conduits à la gendarmerie où leur premier témoignage est enregistré, tout comme le cycliste britannique, ancien de la Royal Air Force. Lors de l’ascension de la route forestière, le randonneur n’a « rien entendu et croisé personne, ni voiture, ni moto », insiste-il.
Still no time but one dispute I noticed by the officials was the disagreement as to whether SAH was shot in back before regaining the car would that be the ballistics report?
Early on I found reference by a paper to SAH being shot outside the car and people queried me on it and I rechecked and found it was carefully worded and I could have misunderstood so I thought maybe I was wrong .
It then came up in the official reports that one thought he was shot outside the car and another disagreed so now I think the reporter must have had “a source”
Last post for now time to work.
Good job Marlin keep it up.
@ Marlin, Pink, Tim V, et al
A while back, on MZT, a new poster had a new idea. That BM was the intended target and SM mistaken for him. The new point was that the British, with the two televised BM interviews, were giving the finger to the assassinating agency, “You got the wrong one, dummies.”
I still disagree with the consensus on here, about many things which just dont sit right in my mind.
Certainly facts are placed into this story and believed, and I have struggled to see why they are important.
I dont believe the following:-
a) The photos outside the house in Doussard being timed at 3.15pm on the day of the murders.
b) Laurent Fillion-Robin’s witness statement
c) Brett Martin’s timeline and discrepancies with SM (agreed with everyone)
What if, with the meeting planned for that day with SM, the Al-Hilli’s stopped in Lathuille at
215 F impasse Francois Decoux Lathuile,74210,Haute Savoie France
to collect their security, Brett Martin for the meet. They even put BMs own bike on the roof of the BMW for him to return home after the planned extraction.
At which point Zainab sits in the middle of the back seat and Zeena moves to the floor.
LFR is important in saying that Zainab is in the front seat and no bike is on the roof(if asked). With that information it is hard to consider a meeting was planned between the parties.
That along with the photos were intended to be enough to cover the ‘meet’ unfortunately the downside of the press showing the family photos far outweighs giving up ‘faces’ for the people involved.
I still believe the Al-Hilli’s are all carrying on with their new lives whilst reading about us discussing their previous ones.
Well I for one am very happy for them.
Symbolism: The UK Rainbow Codes. Bit re Germans giving away clue to operation of device by code naming it Wotan.
Britain had Masonics selecting code names: “Blue Rosette – short-case nuclear weapon bomb casing…”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rainbow_Codes
Did we ever learn why there were no aerial pics of Martinet prior to the ones with the transporter for the BMW. Fog or restricted air-space? Why only the very few pics credited to:
Roland Hoskins – Martinet BMW aerial
Doug Seeburg / The Sun – Martinet BMW aerial
SIPA Press – Martinet BMW aerial
Same ones used by media world wide. No French or Swiss news helicopters. No video either so it’s unlikely any of the above used a regular news helicopter, which are equipped with mounted video cameras. Where did the British photogs get their helicopter – fly from UK or charter locally.
It’s not like the French are squeamish about showing corpses, as the local papers did with the Corsican murders.
@ Felix, Bluebird + Off Topic – Didier/Norfolk
“The body of Ms Creegan’s partner – named locally as John Didier (41) – was found the next day, also in the river. Police are investigating the possibility that he may have taken an overdose before drowning. It is reported that Didier had family links to the U.S.A. and worked for the National Health Service. Reportedly, he once worked as an IT analyst at the St Charles’ Hospital in Kensington.”
http://forourdaughters.co.uk/index.php/tag/homicide-of-woman/page/2/
An overdose? This dude was really determined to remain dead. Where did they get this from? The police found empty pill vials or syringes? Or was it juicy gossip from friends and neighbours, who already implied he was a slacker who stayed in the house all day, while Annette provided for him?
The last name coincidence of Annette Creegan and Dale Cregan, now on trial for the gun/grenade murders of two police plus the two Shorts – gang rivals. He was so scared of what the Short gang would do to him he finally turned himself in to police, after hiding in plain sight for 6 weeks in his hood. You think maybe the Short gang mistakenly thought Annette was related to Dale?
James
8 Feb, 2013 – 2:34 am thanks for this and I agree he does say that in the TV interview but multiple reports say Mollier passed him at some point varying from the village to just “minutes” or “moments” before he arrived at the scene. The last example below even attempted to combine the two! Then again for Mollier to be ahead the only three options are that Mollier overtook him; that he was keeping up with him; or he was gaining on him.
“Mollier had cycled passed Martin, from Sussex, England, earlier on the road.” http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/13/13844556-heads-with-bullet-holes-ex-pilot-who-found-multiple-murder-victims-in-alps-tells-of-horror?lite
“I had seen the cyclist ahead of me much earlier so I thought he was just having a rest.” http://www.thejournal.ie/alps-shooting-witness-594371-Sep2012/
“He was also overtaken by French cyclist Sylvain Mollier, whose body he also discovered lying on the road close to the spot where the Al-Hilli’s’s bullet ridden BMW car was found.” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/9529413/France-shooting-Police-hunt-4×4-driver.html
“The British cyclist, Brett Martin, a retired RAF pilot, had been overtaken by the local cyclist, Mr Mollier, on the steep, winding climb to the lay-by a few minutes earlier.” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/special-report-what-links-dianas-death-to-the-murders-in-annecy-a-french-judicial-process-that-lets-conspiracy-theories-flourish-8223361.html
France’s Le Monde newspaper said British cyclist William Brett Martin had been overtaken by cyclist Mr Mollier just outside the village of Chevaline – less than four minutes ride from the scene. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9640691/French-Alps-al-Hilli-murderer-was-lone-psychopath.html
(Strange one this from the Telegraph from the 29th October, 2012. It suggests the overtaking took place soon after Chevaline which Martin said took a further 30 mins to Martinet, yet suggests only 4 mins from the scene. In other words it contains both extremes of the story that are mutually exclusive!)
James
8 Feb, 2013 – 1:33 am and previous, I just wish you weren’t quite so delphic in your reasoning as I find it very difficult to follow sometimes. As to this one Mollier apparently was placed back next to his bike for some reason. Martin says he moves him. The French source suggests it was the murderer that moved him. His final location is only indicated by all the early media illustrations that uniformly place him next to his bicycle on the drivers side, when he know it must be his blood on the passenger side. We assume they do so on the back of French police sources but they all show him “sprawled” whereas the French sources again suggest he lay neatly with arms by his side, so the graphics or police sources cannot be relied upon in relation to the final resting place of Mollier.
As to your speculation about what happened at the car park, if we believe what the French have said and interpreting the arial photos, SAH must have reversed into the layby but definately NOT from the tyre marks as they wanted us to believe. Consequently we can confidently conclude there was no sense of panic or danger when he parked. This tends to be supported by the fact that he allowed his daughter outside with him. If as the Forensic Scientists (perhaps more credible than Maillaud) state they can prove SAH and Zainab were outside and physically next to Mollier when he was shot and that he was shot first, the only conclusion we can come to is that the Al Hillis were there as Mollier arrived, got off his bike which he lay to the RH side of the car (unless of course someone repositioned that as well not admitted or suggested by anyone) walked over to them BEFORE any semblance of an attack took place. There is clear evidence that they had momentary warning. Why? Because apparently was shot in the back, presumably because he attempted to run away, and SAH had enough time to make it, albeit wounded, to the driver’s seat – not an easy operation whilst being shot at as the windscreen bullet marks attest. Zainab is clearly not a primary target or she would have been dispatched early on. Mollier is brought down on the passenger side and appears to crawl from the staining before the head shots probably after all car passengers have been killed. As he was the only one to bleed profusely and in quantity, the blood stains on the passenger side MUST be his.
@ Marlin
8 Feb, 2013 – 4:23 am “1. The ASSAILANT dragged SM around “in an arc’ and laid him “next to the car” with arms folded. not a mention that it could have been WBM that done that,” Amazingly after all this time, this precise wording is new to me. I refer to “in an arc” bit. Now the question is are they suggesting Mollier’s final resting place is where the blood stains indicate (passenger side) and he was dragged there from the other side indicated in the artists’ impressions, or vice versa? You will have noted my observations about their suggestion that the “murderer” placed him there when they already know WBM has admitted to moving him. I suggest this is more of the inter agency sparring and threatening. “If you pull the plug on us we can point the finger at your man as the murderer remember.” or along those lines.
As to the photos which I have seen before, I agree this is no “wilting violet” – a point I made months ago – and a very different image to the very reticent, modest one presented in the TV interview I think you will agree. This is a big, strong, fit, muscular guy who can no doubt handle himself. Nor as I have suggested previously would he be likely to let another cyclist (ie Mollier) get the better of him up that slope. Further Mollier must have known he was behind. How does that work out for the psychology of a clandestine meeting? Wouldn’t Mollier have least delayed the meeting if he knew the British cyclist was right behind him. That he went ahead with the meeting would tend to indicate it held no fear would it not? Was he expecting WBM to join them? Had SM been dispatched to ensure all was safe for WBM’s arrival?
This is another starnge one Pink
8 Feb, 2013 – 5:18 am that I highlighted many moons ago. “Cars” in the plural though WBM makes no mention of them in his TV interview. We have the SUV passing him on the way up, on the way back, a motor bike “passing” him ie leaving down the hill, so it can’t be the opne reported around 4 pm, the green 4×4, the white Peugeot 206, the Forestry “truck” that Maillaud claimed passed him on his way up. No one has nailed whether these are one and the same or different. And if we believe Maillaud the the green SUV or truck or whatever has been traced and is kosher what “vehicles” have we left? I agree Marlin this is confusion for a purpose.
Pink
8 Feb, 2013 – 6:01 am “Shortly before 4.01 pm” Very strange wording – precise but imprecise. Very fishy. Why 4.01?????????? Why not just 4????? It also conflicts with the first reports that they were approaching Chevaline at 4.10 pm.
Tim V
…and that is the problem !
The French investigation team won’t say anything.
And if they do, should we blieve them ?
The Press can serve as a “bureau of misinformaton” for “others”…
or they seldom let facts get in the way of a good story.
And WBM ! Is his story “true” or “false” ? Or “half, half” ?
His he under instruction. If so, from whom ?
All we have (and it’s a toss up if you “trust” this) is a series of photographs of the crime scene…..
The BIG question there is, would the French police allow those pictures to be publihed with there “privacy” laws in place ?
Did the pilot and photographer get a “caution” ?
Or were they “allowed” to fly over the crime scene ??
So we don’t have alot at all !