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?
James
6 Jul, 2013 – 11:46 pm
OK – just out of interest how many multiple murders where all the victims were shot (twice) in the head, involving a 4×4 plus motor-cyclist, can you think of?
Bleb.
His arrest was for failing (or ignoring) a scheduled “questioning” request. I believe by the French.
And to be honest, after hearing what the French said they wanted to do, I would take my chances with an arrest in the U.K.
That said I believe that The French “may not have a clue” as to the people in the car or the motorcyclist….
BUT if they issued a scheduled questioning session with Zaid …and he ignored it, then they had no option but to arrest him.
They can not seen to be ignored in the way they were.
I also think that Zaid did not decide to “not go” on a whim. He would have sort legal advice on his position. Understanding his position, he probably took the “safest” course of action.
I recall murder investigations in the U.K. where they “picked up” the wrong person. And that person faced “long” questioning…with extensions. In the end, they were released (and hounded by the Press) only to be “cleared” when the real killer was picked up.
Who knows, I could be wrong.
The thing we should note about the arrest of ZAH, on the serious grounds of “Conspiracy to commit murder”, after about nine months of intensive investigation by two large teams of detectives, has not resulted in a CHARGE.
A brutal multiple murder and the “principal and only suspect” immediately released on police bail? With ZAH in England when the events took place “conspiracy” must involve others. So why no arrests of at least some of the others?
No charge? No court appearance? No request for extra time? No held on remand? What pray does this add up to? This is not a minor burglary after all.
Tim
Not many !
But I can think of many which involved a lone gunman OR guman a pax riding on a single motorbike.
There was one but a week later in Marseilles. Gunman on a motorbike.
The IRA were famed for using that method. Wasn’t that female journalist killed in that way.
South America. They use that method all the time.
And Italy.
Tim
12.43.
Does it add up to “it wasn’t him” ?
With a “group” it would be they arrest at least “a few” in “dawn raids”. You would want to put pressure on “the gang” after all ?
But here. One arrest. One release. Nada.
Oddly I was in that neck of the woods a short while ago.
Spoke to some Brits from Annecy.
Not about anything, just passing the time of day.
I asked what they thought of the place….
“Lovely” came the reply…but “full of Russians” unquote.
I have no idea what they are talking about, but it would appear new money is coming into that area.
@Tim V
7 Jul, 2013 – 12:43 am
“No charge? No court appearance? No request for extra time? No held on remand? What pray does this add up to? This is not a minor burglary after all.”
http://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/societe/justice/tuerie-de-chevaline-zaid-al-hilli-remis-en-liberte-a-londres_1261059.html
Zaid al-Hilli, who was arrested Monday and placed in custody in London as part of the investigation into the massacre that killed four people in Chevaline in September 2012, was released shortly after 8:00 p.m. Tuesday, announced the AFP the prosecutor in Annecy, Eric Maillaud .
Zaid al-Hilli , 54, was released with a “judicial review, which requires a number of obligations,” he added, without elaborating, the prosecutor. He said that his release means that there is “no serious charges against him.” “The investigation is ongoing,” he concluded.
James @ 7 Jul, 2013 – 12:36 am
Hmm, I don’t think that failing to attending a French police interview request breaks any English laws. The stated reason for his arrest is:
“suspicion of conspiracy to commit murder”.
I’m not suggesting ZAH is involved with the murders. I’m just trying to follows the logic of your “2nd BMW” theory. Why if the police suspect this (2nd BMW = intended victim) to be the case would they also suspect, and hound ZAH?
Seems a bit unlikely that ZAH would be conspiring with criminals to murder unknown(s) in France and his own brother gets killed by mistake in a case of mistaken identity. For this reason I don’t think the French police can really think the 2nd BMW was the intended victim(s).
However I can offer no explanation as to why it took so long for the police to make the 2nd BMW public. Unless of course the investigation is deliberately trying not to get to the truth.
It is also worth remembering that ZAH remains arrested and has been released on bail which may have imposed conditions on him, and that under English law this can continue indefinitely.
… can continue indefinitely without any charge being made.
Tim V, james, Q, Bluebird, NR and all (sorry if i couldn’t list all names):
FYI: I just put a comment on MZT questioning the basis for M’s plan to ‘copyright’ Lars’ summary of the Chevalin principals including known photos as appeared in the papers. I have seen virtually every bit of the information here posted by many people over time, minus perhaps two specific details about Suhaila al Saffar (and her PhD in Biology). In fact, i think between DI and CM there has been afar vaster treasure trove of information collected about the principals as well as the witnesses.So i just don’t get it how it is possible to “copyright’ publically available information that anyone – with the inclination and time – can find.
Now, that being said, lars’ summary is an excellent exercise in record keeping as i said before. I do indeed wish and have many times in the past wished that we could have done the same with the incredibly interesting and valuable information amassed on this blog.
So what is it that can be copyrighted? I don’t know what the law says in France but elsewhere that I am familiar with, I know it involves property developed privately – can be an idea, a concept, a piece of art, a story line or a “look and feel”, which is common in software development. In one example, Tim V may wish to copyright his interpretation of the car tracks at the martinet, as being N OT of SAH’s BMW. Bluebird may be able to copyright his scenario of Gladio involvement. And i may be able to patent the concept of a “game’ between the british and french agencies, including some interesting insights about the rules of said game. Q and NR and Pink brought in lots of insightful concepts that may or may not tie to chevaline. And I believe that Anders77 (RIP), coupled with Feret, Straw44berry and a bit from yours truly may wish to patent the concept of “Extraction”. james may be able to copyright his newly evolving concept of the “wrong car”. On MZT, lars is moving towards a very creative “police angle” tying all kind of killings together – will make a good book, no doubt, and he should perhaps seek copyright protection on that.
As an aside, the cost is not very high for seeking copyright of any one set of ideas (though the clearer the better). Whether it’s worth the trouble is anyone’s guess. I am throwing this out here, because I know, that, as a group, we haven’t been very diligent in getting good summaries together or in record keeping. Just recently Tim V came up with a Pierre Molier, a freemason, but alas, BB was on that ground before 9as he/she was on almost any other ground, so prolific the bird is).
Everyone’s comments on this matter are welcome. My fear is that as there are people out there that have put in lots of work and hours going over and over the Chevaline events and still others who did much painstaking work to uncover information and or lay it out, it is only natural to expect that there will be those who will seek ways to “monetize” and/or accreditize their efforts. Possibly through legal means. And that can mean that the discussions everywhere are about to move into another level and some uncharted waters.
As an aside, sorry i was unable to interject on the discussion these past two days. No excuse of work this time – just some nice vacation (including from the nets). Assuredly, it was not for lack of things to say (such a lack one could only wish for). Later. Perhaps.
Marlin, Bleb and Pink.
I’ll fire off three quick ones !
Marlin.
I guess you can copyright “work” as such.
My “thing” is to get to the bottom of this horrific murder.
The “internet” would seem a great place to do that. A free flowing medium for the exchange of ideas.
No one can speak for the agendas of other people or how they see the “internet”.
On “agendas”, I note that some bands are publishing their music for “free”. The more people listen to their work, the better the odds that people will go to see them when they “tour”.
That’s how they are seeing the internet move forward and “evolve”. I think it’s a smart idea. Not “harking back” to the old days of….
If you’re interested in that subject you should read “Free: The Future of a Radical Price” by Chris Anderson (CEO of Wired).
It’s free of course. And a really good book. The “future” infact.
Pink
Zaid al-Hilli , 54, was released with a “judicial review, which requires a number of obligations,” he added, without elaborating, the prosecutor. He said that his release means that there is “no serious charges against him.” “The investigation is ongoing,” he concluded
What does that mean ! Eric got it wrong ?
I am wondering “IF” the U.K. police had been advised that Zaid would not be going to France (for the reasons mentioned earlier) and once he “failed to attend” (the deadline had passed), he was then (and likely rather agreeably) arrested by the U.K. police.
Bleb
I believe that if a person was to assist in providing “much needed” information to the police, then it is deemed as “helping the police with their enquiries”. If they refuse to do this, then they may be placed “under arrest”, taken to a police station and questioned.
You can of course be “de-arrested”. Or if the police want the “option” of further questions, then I guess they can impose “police bail”.
I think that “system” may work in favour of Zaid as he can refuse requests to travel to France completely….as there may be travel restrictions placed upon him ! I don’t know.
James
7 Jul, 2013 – 12:43 am ZAH was arrested for “CONSPIRACY”. Conspiracy = MORE THAN ONE!
Although I suppose he could have employed just a man on a motorcycle and it could still be conspiracy. Perhaps he watched too much Bourne?
Marlin
7 Jul, 2013 – 4:39 am – ref. that Lars “Copyright” story it’s too silly for words. Does he expect a sub every time someone refers to a “fact” in the public domain or that it will require his permission? Apart from anything else, can you copyright errors? The last time I saw it I noticed many. Just one, he says: ” Ammunition: calibre 7,65 mm, around 21-25 bullets used, Sylvain Mollier shot 5-7 times, the other victims 2 times”. On the basis of press reports, this untrue. Then he says, “Emergency call: first registered call 15:48 made by Philippe Didierjean/Bossy” very much a controversial claim and very conveniently skating over the fact that for days the official story was that WBM had made it! And this is only the first six lines! I understand MZT is a “fiction writer”. She seems to have attracted a group of like minds.
James
7 Jul, 2013 – 9:53 am – I will repeat the point I made before (Copyright TimV!) that once the decision was made to ARREST ZAH he would have been CAUTIONED. As I guess everybody knows, this informs the suspect he need not say anything. This will last as long as the bail lasts up to a charge being laid or he is exonerated. In other words he is now formally beyond French interrogation as far as I can see unless presumably he returned to France and was arrested there.
Incidentally Marlin
7 Jul, 2013 – 4:39 am as to the copyright issue Lars may be interested to learn he may already be breaching copyright himself! Months ago Dennis at Logo-phere made a very impressive tabulated fact file that is still accessible as far as I know.
It can be found here: http://something-stinks.com/Chevaline%20Murders/Chevaline%20Home.htm
Oh, and to continue the Copyright nonsense I hereby lay claim to being the first and only person to challenge the 3.48 call – so there!
@Marlin
7 Jul, 2013 – 4:39 am
re: copyright
Marilyn is right and she’s wrong.
Blog copyright is a minefield within a single jurisdiction such as the US which has the general exemption of ‘fair use’, and in an international context, who knows how a court might decide the issue.
I have referred the good souls over on MZT to a seemingly relevant case here:
http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2011/01/who-said-france-does-not-have-fair-use
Anyway, it seems the NSA owns everything anyway, so what the hell???
“CASH OF AMMUNITION LEFT AT SCENE”
Thought you might like to see this one MZT posted, which is novel and interesting if true. No-one has spotted it before as far as know. Of course it may be gobbledegook.
Looking for info about the Xavier Baligant shooting and its forthcoming 2nd anniversary – July 19 – I came across this Crime Library piece about the Chevaline shooting. It was written in November last year, but I don’t think we’ve come across it before. Quoting an interview Prosecutor Maillaud gave the French radio station, Europe Numero 1 , they say: Eric Maullaud, a French prosecutor, said that the fact that the Alps killer left behind a large cache of ammunition near the murder scene indicated that he is not a professional killer and that he more fits the profile of a ‘gun nut’. – See more at: http://www.marilynztomlins.com/articles/chevaline-shooting-saad-al-hilli-sylvain-mollier-part-10/comment-page-17/#comment-13848
Sorry to leave off the “e” as in “Cashe”. I thought it was copyrighted.
I’m “copyrighting” the name “Tim V” !
If anyone wishes to use that name henceforth, contact my dad.
The caches….
One Doussard
One between Doussard and Chevaline
…but not in the centre of Arnand. In a hamlet called Marceau.
One in Chevaline.
One on the route Combe D’Ire at the waterfall.
Time wise, if they were in Arnand (15.15) and at The Martinet (15.30)… then they couldn’t have stopped at Chevaline to look for that cache ?
They may have planned to look for that one on their return ?
Or they weren’t looking for caches at all ?
“I can not finish without mentioning the year 2012, beyond acts of violence, violent apprehension and robberies that remain in the fight against crime our preferred target was marked, strongly marked by a particularly large number court cases of primary importance:
– The international trafficking of drugs, especially in the spring of Thonon les Bains
– The avalanche of Mount cursed and died in the spring of Bonneville, who reminded us that the ascent of Mont Blanc did not remain safely
– The murder of several members of a family by one of his children in the spring Bozel dA ‘lbertville,
– The so-called massacre Chevaline in Annecy,”
http://www.annoncesdelaseine.fr/index.php/2013/01/17/cour-d%E2%80%99appel-de-chambery-audience-solennelle-de-rentree-11-janvier-2013/
That phraseology grabbed my attention. Does it indicate a certain French attitude?
Tim V
1. Your using my copyright’d name ! I now own “Tim V” the brand.
2. Don’t forget the numerous (10/15) police officers that were arrested in the southern port town “flea pit”…for corruption.
They were taking “down” the drugs dealers alright. But for their own profit !
It is alleged !
Off-topic. Andy Murray wins first set!!! (Apologies)
James – “Oh my son! My son!”
I’ll have to ask MZT whether that’s legal or not. I’ll come back to you if I can get through to her. (I’m not holding my breath)
James
7 Jul, 2013 – 3:13 pm that was meant for you.
Tim.
I’ll allow you to use “Tim V” from now on !
But only on “The Web”.
Trouble is, I said I now own “Tim V” but as my VPS is based in another country….and I live in another country AND am a resident of a further country due to employment…..
I don’t know what law to sue you under !!!!!
I’ll copyright the term “WBM” instead !
“The Court seems to aim at establishing a proportionality test between the restrictions of copyright and the functionality required to obtain a quick research of information. Yet, it clearly made the interests of the search engine prevail over the interests of the rights holders who must therefore “tolerate” the restrictions on their monopoly for Google’s sake. It is remarkable that unlike the decision of first instance, the Court of Appeal did not rely on the alleged gratuity of Google services. That is to say, for the French judges, there is no point at sharing the profit of the search engine with the rights holders even if such profit is derived from uses of protected work without their consent.”
http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2011/01/who-said-france-does-not-have-fair-use
(I am grateful to Mochyn69 for flagging the ref. up.)
MZT back to the drawing board possibly?
No idea about these things….
But I think you’ll find “entering into a public blog” does kinda make “your work” published and not “completed” a bit of a “non starter” with regard to copyright protection.
I would guess you need to “complete” your work, then make sure it can be subjected to “copyright”, then and only then “publish it”.