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?
Bleb
9 Jul, 2013 – 2:41 pm I agree “Lars’ “piste police” theory”, is pretty thin as a theory,
I do not doubt the possibility of corrupt French policemen. There have been numerous examples of such, but would it withstand the whole weight of two government investigations? Not a chance.
It also fails in lots of logical tests. For example why there? The police would surely have lots of better locations and opportunities that wouldn’t have required such long access and escape routes that render identification most likely. If there, why not make it look like an accident? Easy enough with cyclist. (Only a few days ago two more were killed on the A30 sadly)
Does he really think such a local crime could be kept under wraps? That policemen involved could have suborned the whole regiment? That police systems themselves would not have given the game away?
If it was a local police matter we must assume the target was SM. What could be the motivation for such an extreme act? And why involve innocent tourists in the violence unless as camouflage?
Renegade unprincipled ex-soldiers or policemen, working to the orders of others for substantial reward might be a goer. The Shultz family connections certainly lead to political power and documented suspicious death so it cannot be wholly ruled out, but not in terms that Lars has postulated it, i.e. “a little local disagreement”.
Why would you break the window of a car
…if you could just open it ?
1. It’s locked ?
2. It’s unlocked, but obstructed ?
The rear driver side wheel was deflated. Seen on the French TV showing that side of the car and it’s rear, when on the tow truck.
And the eldest girl was “outside the locked car” !
But what could obstruct a car door ?
A log ?
A rock ?
A bike ?
A dead person ?
Someone once said, if Saad had to defend himself, what did he have ?
A car !
Thinking out loud again.
In Martin’s interview, did he ever say “I tried the door and it was locked” or did he just get to the “the door was locked so I broke the window”.
We already know Martin most likely saw the 4×4 and noted it was a UK plated vehicle (likely twice). So what about “the car accident” that the rider ahead looked like he’d been involved in ?
Tim V, 3:01 PM. Real Scorcher, that requiem is. yet another point of agreement?
You going metaphysical now, Tim V? like Newton in his last years (why newton, of all people? because he came to mind, that’s why. Plus he was English).
I can see why we were having problems with MZT – it’s the coffee vs tea drinkers! must be it (it’s worse BTW, than cat vs dog people. not seeing which I am…bit of everything I suppose, but more one than another).
Speaking of meta, surprised you didn’t pick on my comment about MZT blog going all self-referential, Which is kind of funny when you combine that with your hall of mirrors (you meant to say “inside’ the hall, no?) and even more so with copyrights. Can one copyright a particular reflection? a series of reflections?
Speaking of which I am sure that our game players are a bit pissed seeing all our pistes. They no doubt believe they have come up with the best piste of them all, and there it is, no credit can be collected, much less monetary compensation for powers of creativity (it’s all in a day’s work, the Bosses say, as they unroll Bossy).
@James comment 9 Jul, 2013 – 5:21 pm
The ‘obstruction’ could be inside the car. In this case SAH could be slumped against the driverside door and window.
Either respect for the deceased or wish to not disturb a crime scene could have led WBM to conclude that the best course of action would be to open a hole in an already crazed window, reach in and turn off the ignition.
The alternative, assuming that the door would open, would have been to risk SAH tumbling to the ground.
His actions in that context seem minimally invasive.
Anyway, off to enjoy the sun for a few hours, back later.
GiP
I could be that. He could have been hard up against the door.
It’s just another “strange” thing.
Once i had the side window of my car crashed by a burglar. Since then i know tgat the remaining glass in that smashed window is extremely sharp.
Did he turn off the ignition from the drivers side window or from the other side? From whatever side you’d do that, you would have to be extremely careful and sporty. Just touch the remaining glass only a little bit and it’ll cut your skin. Martin was a cyclist and his dress was most likely a sleeveless one. He must have been extremely lucky for not cutting his skin while doing that.
I would have opened the car door because i didnt see any big holes in the side windows. Did you?
Anyway, i had some deep and bleeding cuts on my hand and arm when i accidentally touched the remaining glass in the broken side window. I would never go close to a broken car glass again without covering my hand and arm first. This is extremely thick and sharp.
@Bleb 2:41PM Tim V 3:32 PM On that piste police. i agree the motive is rather thin, though no thinner perhaps than some other motives that have been suggested which kind of fly in the face of human psychology. What i noted was the mention of all the murder cases around France where some police (including ex and/or including victims)) was connected. That actually may not be so surprising, since the word “police’ conjures violence – could be that on a metaphysical level there’s some lingering attraction.
other than metaphysically, the scenario doesn’t hold much water. No more than the piste “cuddly toy” where SAH goes to the martinet twice. As if once was not enough!
So, I will psychologize again – please bear with me…it’s back to the human collective:
The group shows signs of having had a trauma to its system, one that was painstakingly built over time and multiple threads. The trauma is all about the BMW not leaving those tracks. Sure, one can say it may not be the killer(s) car but clearly, deep down everyone believes it was, no matter what interpretations are put out to undermine that possibility. I know that they all know, from the passion of denials I know. Somewhere somehow, there being another car makes the “nutter” just too flimsy.
So having a bit of the carpet pulled from underneath there’s some scrambling going on. to reinterpret, recast, come up with new motives. Even insist on motives (as max kept asking me and you too Tim V). Why? because when the scene of the crime strongly points to a ‘conspiracy” on some level (where conspiracy = more than 1, ie, bye bye lone nutter), yet such was discounted and poo=poo’ed from day one, it leaves the speculator crowd vulnerable. As in, once the door is opened to a conspiracy, any number might walk in, including some suggested on this blog. Already Qui was bringing up the nuclear angle again, and Eugene seems to have gone to ‘the other side” (ie, closer to what some of us here believe). Keep that door open for much longer and the gremlins will creep in. So, the ‘group” will naturally try to restore the myths into which so much effort has gone:
One tries to close the door again – it’s probably just an emergency vehicle! must be, believing not a word of it, meeting silence;
from another: the car park was empty when SAH arrived! how do we know? why, Zainab said, didn’t she, quoting dear old Maillaut. So that means the”other’ car came up (or down) in a hurry.
Oops, but what about Sylvain and his blood on SAH and Zainab’s shoes? oh no! there was a meeting going on after all! so let’s just ignore this part.
Ok, let’s go to motives quick, quick – back to the comfort zone, the story telling part
So much better than grapling with the implications that there is now a high probability that there WAS another car at the martinet, a car which made a violent, sudden manoeuver possibly/likely as shooting was going on. And that immediately leads to a “two-man” team at least – a shooter and a driver.
Problem is, once that possibility is admitted into conscioussness, it betrays a certain purposefulness, hence no nutter.
Cognitive dissonance must be tough on the psyche. no wonder it’s off to copyright-land. then blog down as furious attempts are made no doubt to recast, give time out for recollection. Or copyrighting.
You shook ’em good, Tim V!
Something that occurred to me:
While we are awaiting new developments (remember, French are still at a deficit – desperately trying to even the score still), why can’t we (those of us so inclined) start our own summary, based on material we gathered in this blog?
I know I made a head-start on something like this for my own benefit, categorized into the “known knowns”, the “known unknowns” and the “unknown knowns”. Which BTW led to the “unknowables”!). Since I am taking some time off today, I could give it a start. I had in mind a collection of facts first, then more dubious facts, then speculative facts.
For example, much of what WBM said fits into “unknown knowns”, ie, we kind of know, since he said it, but we have no corroboration other than his words. That gets a bit tricky, I know, since we can’t discount everything he said.
In the “unknown knowns’ category I will put the 4×4 car at the martinet. Such a car was there, since the tracks speak to it, so that’s a known known. But when exactly and whose exactly is an unknown. By definition 9since if we knew that we might know the killers, no?).
i wonder if anyone else is up for such an exercise. I think it may be useful….but yes, time consuming..and people may not be all that interested, given that none of us seem to have a fiction book of derring fo and crime-most-foul in mind.
Comments?
OK, there is one motivation for such a summary:
A gift for Craig, for when he recovers.
And just in case a silly copyright battle unfurls.
He – and his mods – deserve something for keeping these threads open, tweeking the memory when needed and just providing a space for people to gather and muse as they might. Which beats shaking fists at the PTBs.
Marlin
To me the detailed pages of ‘facts’ seems to be like building a house of cards the height of a skyscraper when we are dubious to believe that the ground floor is nothing more than a fairytale.
Either WBM in the interview had never been to Martinet or his view of the Al-Hilli-s BMW doesnt match the photos from the helicopter. The position of the BMW is hardly in the position of an accident.
If the Al-Hilli’s did arrive at the 1st campsite, I still think the most likely scenario is that their replacements arrived at the 2nd campsite.
Was the whole scene created with the BMW being lowered into position?
The complete lack of photos of the victims and almost non-existent history of their lives on the internet.
Why would Sylvain Mollier only be allowed a temporary burial and how convenient to avoid prying eyes.
From the Oaken Lane garden and the interview with the postman I still believe that Saad lived alone most of the time.
Were the 2 campsite bookings made in advance? Did St Jorioz say they planned to leave after just 2 nights so the general public didnt think what a terrible campsite it must be.
By collating correctly all that is known was that to try and help Eric not contradict his own ‘facts’ any further.
So what “say” you had to break the window ?
To turn off the ignition as the wheels were spinning.
That sounds okay.
But the girl is outside the locked car ? That’s odd.
Maybe the window was already broken ?
If there wasn’t an obstruction (and the door WAS unlocked) would you poke your arm through the broken glass to turn the engine off ?
BlueBird wouldn’t.
Could it be reached is the logical question I guess.
BUT there is ONE thing which could explain it……
Get ready !
The killer “we are told” used a semi auto pistol.
He fired 21 shots (well 25 down to 21).
If we take 21 shots, then that 3 clips.
QUESTION. Where would you carry 3 clips ?
ANSWER in you concealed shoulder holster.
They (some) have two clip holders on the opposite side to the pistol. And of course on in the pistol itself.
Now the “smashed window”.
How about a sawn off shot gun blast ?
Now ask WHY ?
If the killer was there to meet Saad Al Hilli. And him alone. The killer would only need ONE weapon.
He could simply “blast” his target.
No doubt he would also take “back up” and that may likely be a semi auto pistol, which he carries in an under jacket shoulder holster (with an added 2 clips).
That day he had to use the “back up”.
But this CAN NOT be mentioned…as that would mean THREE things.
1 The killer was professional enough to carry a “back up”.
2 Saad alone was the target.
3 The meeting was likely pre arranged.
So we have “the locked car” regardless if the wheels are spinning.
And the smashed window.
The wheels spinning is a “nice” stroke of luck.
The reason. If the killer had only killed Saad, EVEN if it was done with a shot gun blast, it may have not made BIG news (with or without his wheels spinning).
BUT because it did make BIG news, “they” then couldn’t say “two weapons were used. A sawn off shot gun and a semi automatic pistol” that would stink of “who was Saad Al Hilli” ?????
Marlin
9 Jul, 2013 – 7:16 pm Your earlier piece quite amusing and may indeed be right. As to knowns and unknowns territory some thoughts for what they are worth.
“Unknown unknowns” are things that we cannot be expected to know without further information/intelligence or may never be known (like the criminals responsible for Chevaline?). E.g. the the inner workings of the minds of the participants. In some circles it is thought that a good beating or water boarding is an effective method of accessing these. The jury’s out on that one.
“Unknowns” are those things that are currently not known, shall we say by us, but potentially might become known given more information. For example until a new witness comes forward or a new fact is revealed by police or other sources. The location of SM’s bike was an “unknown” until rather surprisingly an “unchopped” photograph emerges.
“Knowns” are things we think we know but this in assurance that we do. For example everyone “knew” WBM had made the first call until he denied it. Then we “knew” he hadn’t and some one called Didierjean had. Except he turns into Bossy so we actually didn’t “know” that either.
So basically what we “know” is what we are told until it contradicts other “known” things and we have to make a judgement based on reason, which is the more reliable “known”.
Sources can be graded for reliability. So someone with a vested interest in lying would certainly be treated with greater caution than from someone with nothing to gain. Someone level headed over a fantasist ; first hand experience over hearsay; a person with all their faculties over a disabled person; recent over distant memory and so on makes for more “knowable” information.
As regards Chevaline I have graded the information in my mind depending on how reliable the source appears to be. Normally a Public Prosecutor would have a high level of credibility. However the vacillation, inaccuracies, bias, mistakes, admission of defeat and secrecy have seriously dented trust in what he has said. Pure science should be more reliable but even this, as with the DNA, has proved doubtful.
Photographs and video are not beyond modification as we have seen with Woolwich but they appear to be reliable in the case of Chevaline. In the case of everything else we have to rely on corroboration. In my mind three people all saying they heard shots at 3.30 makes it something we “know” with a high probability. We can feel fairly confident the car was where the photographs say it was.
The evidence of the first witnesses Martin and Bossy (now) is more problematic. They cannot both be speaking the whole truth because on a number of points they disagree. In the end it depends on who we trust more and which account better fits the facts (as we understand them to be)
There you are Marlin – clear as mud.
@Marlin – list of “facts”
I think Straw put it best:
“… like building a house of cards the height of a skyscraper when we are dubious to believe that the ground floor is nothing more than a fairytale. …”
Bleb.
Add in to that….
The “facts” are merely ” presented data” and boy are we in a different place altogether.
How to make the perfect New York City omelet….first find a New York City hen !
Or put it another way. If “Eric” told me it was raining, I would glance out of the window, just to check !
So back to “the smashed window” ?
A shot gun blast ? A lone target that wasn’t alone ?
That puts me back to the 6th of September. What was the motive.
Another non-story emerges linked to early warning that the investigators are giving up having achieved …. absolutely nothing (as planned?)
“Harriet Alexander in Annecy and Jason Lewis, Investigations Editor
8:30AM BST 16 Sep 2012
Sources close to the investigation have disclosed that Saad al-Hilli, a British engineer, his wife, mother in law and a French cyclist, were shot with a Luger P08, a highly-distnctive weapon which was standard issue to the Swiss Army.
The disclosure raises the possibility that the killer is connected to the areas as the scene of the crime is less than 40 miles from Switzerland.
It comes as The Sunday Telegraph has learned that the French investigation on the ground is being “scaled back” with many of the 120 officers originally on the case returning to normal duties.
French sources said that by last night only 40 gendarmes remained on the case, with many of the Parisian detectives having returned to their base Rosny-sous-Bois in the capital.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/9545251/Gun-in-Annecy-killing-may-be-connected-to-the-region.html
Oh, from the same article, the “grey BMWx5” has apparently reverted to a “black Mitsubishi Pajero” but this time with BRITISH number plates!!!!!!!!!! You really couldn’t make this stuff up could you?
QUOTE: “There was also confusion after reports in France that police are looking for a black Mitsubishi Pajero with British number plates in relation to shooting were denied by officers.”
@James
My objections to your “shotgun theory” would be:
1) That if the killer was professional enough to have a backup weapon and he/she had been hired/ordered to only kill SAH and had just done that with a shotgun blast to the head then their job was done and they would leave, only using their backup weapon if they felt their escape was seriously threatened.
2) If SAH was the sole target why kill him in France?
APOLOGIES PEOPLE. LOOKS LIKE I’VE BEEN MUGGED BY GOOGLE SEARCH ENGINE WHICH HAS STRANGELY AUTOMATICALLY THROWN UP THIS ARTICLE AS NEW. I WAS STUPID ENOUGH TO THINK THIS WAS RELIABLE. IN FACT IT IS AN OLD ONE. A VERY OLD ONE DATING FROM 16 SEPT 2012! The page however has today’s date on it. Very strange that this should come to me today from such an old article?
So the inferences I drew from it are quite wrong. Interesting reference to the British plated Pajero all the same, a detail I think I had forgotten.
This bit jogs the memory too:
“Local officials were forced to wait until the Institute for Criminal Investigations for the National Gendarmerie arrived from their base in a Paris suburb.
Rivalries between the gendarmes and the police, a separate force, appear to have prevented them from calling in expertise from the National Institute for Scientific Policing, based near Lyon, only a 90 minute drive away – because that is a police rather than gendarme division.
In Britain detectives and forensic teams would have immediately gone to work, rather than “freezing” the scene.
“From the senior investigators point of view, the crime scene provides the best opportunity for evidence,” said retired Detective Superintendent Robert Bridgestock, who led 26 murder inquiries during a 30 year career at West Yorkshire Police.
“You would order a meticulous examination of the vehicle and the surrounding area. You would seal it off until such time as you had secure every scrap of evidence.
“More often than not there will be something, however small, or insignificant it may seem, that will lead you to him.”
There has also been surprise at the speed with which the forensic examination of the scene ended. Although the day after the murder, the area was still cordoned off, there was no visible tent erected to protect the crime scene from the elements – something that would be standard in Britain, and the family’s burgundy BMW was removed within 24 hours of the shooting.
There was also surprise that on Friday afternoon — 48 hours after the crime had taken place, the road up to the murder scene was reopened.
Tyre marks still visible showed the car reversed at speed, and television pictures showed bloodied pebbles and discarded bullet casings. Broken glass was left on the gravel — whether from this crime or a previous incident — and an ancient car radio, its wires yanked out, was still lying on the bank.”
I have looked at that picture in the article for hours, trying to work out what is happening in the bottom left hand corner. The man in white gear is definately holding something in his left hand, and the standing back cop appears to be just steadying or preventing the blue object from lifting off. there was obviously someting there of great interest. other phots show the boss man walking away from the same spot. but nothing appears to remain on the ground and the blue object that appears to have shape and form has disappeared completely. does anyone else have a clue whats going on there? i give up. off to bed me.
Bleb.
1. True.
2. True. (Or… maybe the killer was on a mileage allowance !)
Everything in this “saga” is just very strange.
And the “released data” has been contra to itself from the start.
The girl outside the locked car ???
The we can’t give a description of the car….but for 6 months we’ve been secretly looking for a 4×4 BMW with U.K plates ???
And then the French catch all of “we can actually SAY anything, because in France we have strong privacy laws”.
Straw44berry –
I, for one, haven’t given up on the “extraction” theory. Of some or all. Yes, there are those issues with the children that we have gone over before. But now that I think of it, what have we really got to rule this out?
1. Too many people would be involved – well, not really. If one thinks about it.
2. Who were the people that were buried in the UK? – well we don’t really know, do we? oh yes, we have one FB to vouch for the dead, but is he reliable? shall we count the ways?
3. Why so far and so complicated? – well may be in the UK too many would know things
4. the children, who are alive are the sticking point. But then they are the sticking point in any scenario, aren’t they?
yes, i know Tim V shot down this theory several times over, then poured hot coal over it. But, but — his rejections were not iron clad (sorry Tim V) and i was left forever wondering.
Just as you had been.
just as james is
james who is willing to ask any and all questions – may be we should listen to his questions, (even if we can’t quite buy into the answers**)?
__
** sorry james. that shotgun, you know…. a bit a lot, no? how about we try for two of the same Lugers instead? not impossible, right? oh yes, did the police twit something about ‘all shot with one gun”? yes, they surely did, but then they do twit much… like birds they do.
@Tim, Marlin
The known knowns ~ there is only one: there are some pics on the internet of a BMW in a forest car park somewhere.
AFAIAC, everything is else is potentially a Fairytale.
An aside (warning: much meta!): so I went looking for some old clips and articles, and looked through a few comments on MZT among others. the early days – the 9/6 thread sure is interesting – everyone was willing to consider everything. So many open minds. Marilyn too. her summary of that date with the updates is quite good i thought. Some really nice recaps.
So much effort has gone into these threads. So many suggestions. Most of the commentators still remaining were quite on board on any number of conspiracies and all kind of scenarios. Quite open minded, from what i could tell. Hardly anyone suggested it was the BMW that made that crazy arc, reversing into never never land.
Yet, at some point, sometime around March 2013, things really turned around and the lone nutter entered the equation, There to remain, stuck like a sign post. And little by little the steadfast commenters were corralled into the acceptable “piste nutcase” or “piste Mollier the bad boy”. With the BMW doing the turn turn turn…and cosnpiracies banished…
And on CM? not so much. in fact at about that time, starting in Jan/Feb2013, we all (I was already commenting by then, me thinks) veered off into various other directions. kind of all over the place, perhaps? the antithesis of MZT?
Interesting, that. One blog ends up focusing on pinpoint, laser sharp in its convictions (well, up until the last two threads). Another blog goes way off focus, casting nets as far as they’ll go.
Curious dynamics.
So, here is one key: NR. A favorite of mine. Now seemingly lost to CM for reasons unknown. may be just bored. yet not really acquired by anyone else. But there – from the beginning….everywhere…
I meant the Sep 8 thread – the second one with over 2000 comments.
Marlin….
Its an aviation thing.
Always ask question, non are stupid.
Never assume you know….that’s when you get problems.
Like they say, “there are no daft questions…daft answers maybe, but no daft questions”.
re the “shot gun” blast.
However crazy it may seem, if you put it out there…then someone may have a “light bulb moment”…or just say “hah, because….”
Whereas in other places, they have “the facts”….and they stick to them “regardless”.
And “one degree off” at the start, 50 miles later makes a BIG difference !
I’ll keep firing my “stupid” questions !
Coming back to my Gladio/stay behind theory.
Watch other similar crimes and their history and you’re going to say: WOW! They lied at us!
Let’s face the German “Döner Killings” by a right wing Nazi group from Thüringen. Two policemen (a woman and a guy) were shot, too. The woman died and the police guy heavily injured. He cannot remember. Besides that, they killed 9 Turkish businessmen who lived in Germany, one after another, particularly Kurds.
Due to an unexpected event, they (the NAZI group) were uncovered. Now that they are at court, we know that they got money and IDs from the German BND (that is the German MI5). So far thats the shortened story.
But now lets look at the guns used and the original (fake) police reports:
When the police woman was killed, the police report said that they found bullets if
1) a 9mm Luger and
2) a 7.62 mm Tokarev
That was the police report given to the media!
Today, as a matter of fact, the court reveals that they found a 7.65mm Ceska83 when they arrested the NAZI terrorists and that this is the gun with whom the Turks and the police woman were killed.
So then, they originally lied with the Luger and with the Tokarev. Why?
That Ceska was deluvered to Switzerland only (Solothurn) and there were only 24 items of that series. Therefore this is a very significant gun.
So then, why did they lie?
Gladio/stay behind liars?
Possibly.
Without any doubts the media received deliberate wrong “evidence” by police.
How sure can we be about a Luger and about 21 bullets then? How sure can we be regarding Sylvain? Was he killed or was he the killer now living with new name and ID somewhere else, e.g. in Martinique?
Original german text:
Wie erklärt sich diese Ungereimtheit, daß es aus polizeilichen Unterlagen zum Polizistenmord in Heilbronn hieß, daß am Tatort Hülsen und Projektile zweier verschiedener Waffen, nämlich im Kaliber neun Millimeter Luger und 7,62 Millimeter Tokarev gefunden worden seien, bei der nun gefundenen Mordwaffe es sich aber um eine Pistole des Typs Ceska 83, Kaliber 7,65 Millimeter handeln soll, die der tschechische Hersteller ausschließlich in den Kanton Solothurn geliefert habe und von deren speziellen Serie es lediglich 24 Stück gibt?
My experience of MZT, brief as it was, at least two things were definitely frowned on by the leading members.
One, was any criticism of EM. People seemed to contort themselves to accommodate every change of opinion, every theory however unsupported by evidence.
Another appeared to be any discussion of the life of SM or any possible reason why he may have been targeted? After I had made some observations I was quickly advised by MZT that given his fate, the feelings of the extended family should be respected by not talking about it. This had never been an issue as far as I am aware for the Al Hilli’s strangely, other than the refusal to publish the Arnaud photograph(s).
It also replicates EM’s attitude to SM and the extraordinary secrecy surrounding him. What could be the reason for MZT’s sycophancy?
Mochyn69
10 Jul, 2013 – 10:55 am
AFAIAC = “As far as I can see”? (AFAICS?)
Otherwise you may well have a point.
James
10 Jul, 2013 – 11:57 am I am with you on “stupid questions”. Stupid questions may result in surprising answers. It is why blogs that endeavour to impose restraints, other than in relation to good taste, on questions, debate and unpopular hypothesis, undermine the valuable philosophy of the internet and free expression – to do what mainstream media fails to do.
As regards to the use of a shotgun rather than a semi automatic pistol, my experience suggests, given the spread of shot, no glass would have been left in the driver’s door.
The image at http://www.rmc.fr/images/article/710232.jpg appears to support the view of a single bullet (at least) plus a large rectangular hole that would accord with a fist through a crazed window as per WBM’s account.
If there WAS at least one bullet there, given the time window, it makes it almost impossible for a shotgun to have been used as well.