Update oct 20, 2018
Or maybe X5 was X. The ‘one bad man’. While MC2 (the Col de Cherel motorbiker) was the backup ‘sandwich’ man to catch SM if he would have advanced further up the hill towards Col de Cherel. In any case, the killing was imho about SM, and the gunman/men knew (by info from CS) that SM would be cycling up to Martinet and possibly beyond, so that is why both X5 (the 4×4 seen by WBM) and MC2 (the motorbiker seen by WBM) ended up being there. So maybe X5/Badman shot SM (and the SAH family) and drove down, as seen by WBM. A bit later MC2 coming down from Col de Cherel as backup/sandwich saw the massacre scene at Martinet, concluded it ‘was good’ (SM was dead) and also drove down, as seen by WBM. As to be read below, I have put forward that the brain behind this was CS. And maybe MC2 was in fact CS. … The main reason for this was to explain why LR phoned SM at 15h32. This call was ‘waved away’ as unimportant, yet to me it is the ‘key’ to explaining/understanding this murder … Just read more about this below:)
Update oct 19, 2018
Tonight I was going through some old pictures. Found this one and realized that there is an imprint of a car to be seen (arrow). The picture must have been made on the day of the murders, maybe only a few hours after the murders took place. Say 19h-20h. The imprint/shadow of the car is pretty much gone (wiped?) the next day. Anyway, this imprint imho indicates a car must have been parked there for a longer period, maybe even one hour or more, so it could induce this effect. We know WBM saw one car coming down. Which car? This car?
There are 3 cars to explain. ONF1, ONF2 and the notorious X5/X3 ONF1 saw driving up. If the imprint belongs to either ONF1 or ONF2, it would proof ONF1 and/or ONF2 are lying because afaik they never said they had parked there. Let’s assume both ONF1 and ONF2 speak the truth. Then the imprint belongs to the notorious X5. What goes up (X5) must come down. So the X5 went up, was seen by ONF1, parked at Martinet (arrow), stayed some time. The Lyon MC and ONF2 passed Martinet on their way down but probably had no recollection of seeing this X5 parked at Martinet. After that, X5 went down … WBM only saw the last of the 3 cars, namely X5. WBM later saw a motorbike coming down, this was not the Lyon MC. Nope this has to be the MC2 motorbiker seen crossing Col de Cherel (timestamp wrongly reported by Janin)
Why would X5 go to Martinet? He went there because SM was going to Martinet (doing his cycling tour). But why did X5 leave before SM was shot (and the other murders)? Because X5 was not the killer, he was a carrier. So, what did X5 carry? Not the killer as passenger, because ONF1 only reported seeing 1 person in the X5. No, X5 carried the Luger (plus the message that SM was arriving) for MC2. X5 handed the Luger to MC2. MC2 is the killer. MC2 knew SM was going to Martinet, so MC2 went to Martinet over Col de Cherel and ordered X5 to bring the Luger plus message ‘SM is on his way’ to Martinet. Why so difficult? Because there could be no mobile (traceable) communication. So, X5 handed over the gun to MC2 and went down himself. MC2 waited for SM to arrive, but messed up the killing because SAH and family disturbed the scene. Now they all had to die. In my view, MC2=CS=X (see my earlier posts on this)
(orange arrow indicates the imprint of the notorious X5)
Update aug 24, 2017
Update jun 2, 2017
My definite final analyses of the Chevaline massacre. The girl did it.
#Chevaline LR babysitting. LR 15h32 call ‘Where is CS?’. CS was at Martinet, killing SM. LR realizes CS=X, covers 4 CS. WBM saw CS on motor.
Source: https://twitter.com/deadzone61/status/870056074409365505
Notes:
The notorius Lyon motorbiker is not X. I think there is another motorbiker. The one which the english biker saw coming down just before he arrived at the murder scene. This motorbiker was not our man from Lyon, but it was the girl.
Remember that there was a motorbiker seen on Col de Cherel? Ok, the said timing doesn’t fit. But maybe our farmer at the Col de Cherel got the times mixed up.
I think that motorbiker was the girl, coming from Grignon, going over Col de Cherel to Combe d’Ire/Martinet, counter clock wise so she would bump into Mollier.
Remember also that the girl, by her own admision, was not at home all day. She said ‘I went home so that Mollier could go biking’. In other words, the girl was outside. At Grignon maybe?
Of course, that is her story. That she came home so that Mollier could go biking. And that she stayed home with the baby. The baby becoming her rock solid alibi. Btw, was there any witness to this? That she came home at said time?
Now … remember the ex-wife’s 15h32 phonecall to Mollier. How strange. How utterly macabre that she phoned Mollier at the exact moment he was shot. And her explanation? ‘Oh, just nothing, just about the kids’
I don’t believe it. She phoned alright, but with another reason. She asked Mollier, ‘Where is the girl?’
Why? Why would she ask, ‘Where is the girl?’ … Because the ex-wife was babysitting for Mollier and was waiting for the girl to come back. But the girl was ‘delayed’. Delayed because … she was at Martinet, waiting for Mollier. To kill Mollier.
Of course we know things turned out bad. The al-Hilli’s arrived on the scene and became witnesses of the murder, and therefor had to be shot too. Which the girl did. After she finished off the al-Hilli’s she put some final bullets into Mollier (‘You bastard’).
Then she went home on her motorbike, but was seen by the english biker. Arriving home, the ex-wife must have guessed what had happened or maybe the girl told her. They ‘decided to team up’, very probably with money changing hands from the girl to the ex-wife. What other option did the girl have but to pay off the ex-wife?
Anyway, the ex-wife maintains her 15h32 story ‘About the kids’ and of course hides that she was babysitting. And with that the girl can maintain her rock solid ‘baby alibi’
What’s more to say? How can you crack this?
Maybe the Luger. Who knows. And did the ex-wife have an alibi for 14h-16h?
Cheers,
Max
My previous final analysis. Also good, but not as good as the final one above:)
Update nov 2, 2016
My final analyses of the Chevaline massacre. The ‘Granny’ did it.
I denote all actors with initials. I give my analyses in shorthand style, painting the key things with few words. Figure out the complete picture yourself. I’m not a novelist. I don’t want to write a 120 paged volume on the matter.
The ‘Granny’ did it
The ‘Granny’ (GSM) is the evil genius behind this thing, the ‘disposing of SM’. GSM organized the logistics, X was the friend in deed. Not supposed to be a massacre though. But Zainab and/or SAH disturbed X and SM (SM was already there! X held him at gunpoint) by the riverside. SM used this disturbance to try to escape from X, hence this is why he was shot in the back. Meanwhile SAH, on sensing the weird situation (SM and X) tried to escape, to no avail. The car got stuck and X terminated the SAH family because of being witnesses. SM’s ex, LR is in. She must be. She phoned SM at 15h32 when he already was at Martinet (held at gunpoint by X). LR knows, probably paid off by GSM.
GSM’s motive? SM simply was ‘unwanted’.
This is my final theory based on the facts as I know them. It maximizes the fit of pieces, while minimizing the left-overs (e.g. SAH visitor at the campsite).
PM, the legionnaire, probably is innocent, but his suicide shows how extreme the social pressure is. A force behind that social pressure probably is GSM. She saw in PM the perfect scapegoat. But she didn’t voice this directly though, that would alert the investigators.
More thoughts …
Anyway, Zainab said there was nobody when they arrived (iirc). This would be compatible with X and SM being near the river side, out of view. X wanted to kill-by-fake-accident SM, dump SM in the river, and throw the bike in the river later. If SM’s body would be found, maybe days later, who would think of a murder? Nobody, because nobody but X and the GSM party knew were SM was. Of course, when asked about the matter, GSM and X would state the didn’t know SM was biking around Combe d’Ire. He would be reported missing but nobody would find him until much later. That was the plan. The police would think of an fatal accident … nobody would come up with SM being murdered. Not your average gendarme anyway. The perfect crime.
Good plan, until SAH and Zainab stumbled on the scene going near the river side. SM, using the confusion, tried to escape from X. SM got to the road, then ran away over the parking. X also crawled up to the road, and shot the running SM in the back. SM fell on the ground, exactly in the trajectory of the reversing (reverse-break-reverse pattern) BMW of SAH. The BMW dragged SM to the other side of the parking where finally the BMW got stuck. The rest is history.
So, it was the killer combo GSM-X. And who knows, once a killer, twice a killer? Maybe the GSM-X combo helped the other PM in 2007 by killing off CM. Team GSM-X was a team back in 2007 and again in 2012. Removing CM (danger to PM and thus GSM) and SM (danger to CS and thus GSM). The symmetry 2007=CM<–PM<=GSM=>CS–>SM=2012 is striking.
More thoughts …
The situation was this:
– SM arrived (before SAH) at parking Martinet
– X was already there (prepped for kill-by-fake-accident SM)
– X held SM at gunpoint with the ol’ Luger P06
– X wanted to ‘dump’ SM in the river (fake accident)
– X forces SM to the riverbed (behind barrier)
– Bike is at barrier (probably to be dumped in the river as well)– SAH arrives
– Nobody to see (but the bike)
– SAH and Zainab get out
– Zainab wanders to side of the parking, near the river
– SAH goes to the barrier/bike
– SAH ‘disturbs’ X and SM– SM takes the opportunity to try to escape
– SM ‘fights’ X
– SAH sees this (SM and X fighting, Luger P06 and all)
– SAH takes Zainab by the hand and runs to BMW– SM manages to get to the parking, and tries to run away
– X also climbs up from the river bed to the parking (barrier)
– X, standing near the barrier, shoots SM in the back– SAH meanwhile tries to escape in BMW (reversing)
– SAH runs over the, now downed, body of SM
– SAH drags SM, and gets stuck on the other side of the parking
– X kills witnesssesMain point is that SM was the target … but not to be shot, because a shot-dead SM would imply a ‘murder’, and this is not what GSM wanted. GSM wanted a ‘fatal accident’. A Luger sufficed to hold SM at gunpoint (explaining away the strange choice of weapon)
Plz do remember that CS, and thus GSM/TS, is/are instrumental in SM being at parking Martinet in the first place! This is fact. TS ‘adviced’ Martinet as a bike destination to SM (fact), and CS came back home early so that SM could go biking (fact). This was all ‘logistics’ planned stuff by GSM. Who knew the situation around Martinet? Answer: TS. GSM made sure X was already at Martinet. X being on foot. All prepped ‘logistics’. It makes sense. And the murder has the simplest of motives. It was a matter of GSM versus SM. The ‘disposing of’ SM.
The simplest explanations are often the best.
More thoughts …
I’m not saying SM was to be ‘drowned’, but more like ‘fallen into the riverbed, head on rock (Schumi) thingy’. If they would find SM, lying in the riverbed, with a head wound, who would think of murder? Nobody, unless there was to be a very paranoid gendarme. This gendarme would have to make the quantum leap ‘Hey this is not an accident but a murder case’ … but why would he do that?
GSM, TS, CS, etc had perfect alibi’s. Unless TS=X, which I think is the case. Then TS does not have an alibi other than the one provided by GSM.
Anyway, the situation took an unexpected and unwanted turn. The ‘massacre’. But GSM was lucky because even with SM shot, most eyes were on SAH. EM declaring, within 2 days that ‘the answer was to be found in the UK’.
Turn back to the kill-by-fake-accident plan. X would have make it to look like an accident. So, I think X wanted to dump the bike in the river next to SM. Of course, with the massacre at hand, X didn’t do that now, because a bike in the riverbed would be near proof (Columbo style) that SM was the target.
And who knows, maybe the bike was already near the riverbed(!) … But once SM escaped from X and was shot down by X and SAH was shot as well, X, to mask the ‘SM=Target’ thingy, had to pull the bike out of the riverbed and dump it on the parking, near the barrier.
This is what EM said, he said ‘It looked like the bike was thrown into a corner’
WBM stated ‘I saw the bike on the side’
The bike was ‘odd’. Yesterday night, I wondered about the pump. The airpump was lying on the ground somewhere. Where did this airpump come from. From SM’s pocket? Or was it attached to the bike?
~ Max
To continue discussing TCK in a public forum, I suggest CM. Just follow the link … CM public forum on TCK
Deadzone61 
@Lynda
Yes of course, the fact that ED was arrested also fills in details, though it also confounds the certainty of others. So: white, French (with a local accent?), dark/brown eyes, larger build (but not certain – bulky jacket?), bearded/goatee. C’est un motard!
Katie, Marilyn closed up shop, because she’d had enough, there were underlying niggles, she was editing her last book, writing a cook book, and other personal matters.
Nothing sinister at all !
Oui, Shadwell, c’est un motard !
@Katie
There is a video somewhere showing people laying down flowers at the lay-by. Since I don’t believe it had any value for the investigation I never saved it. I guess it was people from Doussard, Arnand or Chevaline.
@Shadwell
Yes, you are right, we have no idea what the Al-Hillis did, except spending time on the camp site, from their arrival until that fateful Wednesday.
Katie, a little gift for you, this is a quote from the Facebook Page of Laurent Blanchard, M6 journalist:
Dated 6th September:
Chevaline (74). Le procureur et une ambulance sont arrivés sur place vers 0h30.. étrange….
Followed by:
Tuerie de Chevaline / Haute-Savoie : une deuxième fillette retrouvée vivante dans la voiture sous le corps des victimes.
The comments after this are worth a read, the first one posted at 03:38.
You’ve lost me there Lynda, you mean the ambulance arrived at 12-30 but surely the bodies were taken by the hearse & Zeena by helicopter ?
As it happens, I find it strange too, why turn up at the dead of night when they thought everyone was dead , when they could have worked in daylight a matter of 4/5 later ?
But what do I know about how the French work,in the UK a tent would have been placed over the scene & work would have started immediately.
Katie, Maillaud and the ambulance turned up at 00:30 (am) on Thursday, 6th March, because the child was found in the car, in the minutes/ the hour before that.
These are comments from the early hours of Thursday 6th September, I assume you are Katie from CM, who questioned when the child was removed from the car. If you’re not then it will make no sense to you, as Blanchard comments, it was strange an ambulance and the Prosecutor should arrive at half past midnight, but of course it was because the child had been found alive.
Blanchard comments were as such a ‘live feed’.
Colonel Vinneman has admitted that he was told to freeze the scene.
It is 18months today, same day and date …. I’ll pause to think of the five children caught up in this massacre.
Yes that’s me ,Lynda. But if you have read CM, you will know I found it hard to believe,but if Blanchard was camped up at the site & was a live witness then I assume it must be true.
It would be good to know who was near the car in the dark hours leading up to midnight if the police had all been told not to disturb the scene,how far away were they ?
So forensics arrive, open the car door at midnight , Zeena is wide awake & smiling…Maillaud gets a phone call & arrives at 12-30 with the ambulance…..he must live close by, one assume he was in bed when receiving the call.
ALERT!:
Belgian programme on Chevaline: http://www.rtbf.be/tv/laune/programme-tv/detail_devoir-d-enquete?uid=410816060668&idschedule=4f46e3722b138838df694cc5c2648e5c
Watch here: http://www.rtbf.be/tv/laune/programme-tv
By the way, the programme is in French.
Looks like a re-run of something made fairly soon after the shootings – talking about a Skorpion pistol and dark coloured Pajero.
It was simply bullsh**!
Agreed Lars, I gave up . I don’t know why they bothered.
Katie, wherever he was, it proves he was no longer at the scene. I would have thought that many vehicles remained in the clearing where we see them on the following days aerial photos. Between the arrival of the first responders, after 16:00 and night falling there were a few hours of relative calm.
Here is my thought about Zeena not being found sooner:
There was no child seat in the rear, Zainab had a booster seat in the front, apparently, so without further info only one child with them.
Her mother pushed her down to hide, or she was already there, BFM TV said that she was also covered by her mother’s ‘polaire’, you and I would probably refer to this as a ‘fleece’.
There is something I feel backs up that Zeena wasn’t visible, you need to go back to Fillion-Robin, the builder, he recounts a girl in the front passenger seat, a man who saluted him in thanks for moving what was in the way and two women in the back.
Maybe Zeena was used to being told to duck down, as of course she should have been strapped in, a bit of a game.
If during the incident her mother had told her to hide, we are talking about a child of four, she would possibly stay down until her mother told her otherwise, not all children disobey their parents, she may even have ‘copied’ her parents stillness.
There is an awful fact to state, had she then soiled herself, the smell would not be distinguishable from the bodily fluids from her parents that inevitably seep out after death and muscle function ceases.
@Lars
Thanks Lars, good spot. I guess they re-ran the piece in the light of the ED arrest. Things have moved on a bit since that was made though, I think. Speaking of which, I think I read in one of the recent pieces that the whole industrial espionage theory has been dropped for want of any evidence.
On the other hand, it may have been dropped at the point where somebody on the inquiry team asked “why would French nuclear giant AREVA be interested in getting information about satellites surveying developing nations with dubious regimes? Oh. Er, right….”
(One for the CM fans, there)
Shadwell. The CM group have been all around the world trying to connect just about every crime past & present to this one. ;-)
I still believe the truth being stranger than fiction, that the truth is closer to home, like connected to old grudges in Iraq.
Lynda
I do wonder why, if Blanchard was doing a live feed, why it took him nearly 3 hours to post such dramatic information about Zeena.
Katie, I didn’t pick up when he posted the info, only the first comment at 03:38 from Lionel Lloris, maybe I need to go back to the comments, regardless the time and dates can’t be altered by the poster, can they ?
What it does mean is that the child was removed from the car in the very early hours of Thursday morning, spending the ‘eight hours’ inside the car. This was after it was determined via the campsite that they had two children, I’m sure there must have been a team working on phone calls to ascertain where they were staying.
Shadwell, what we do know about Saads journey is that he travelled from Dover to Calais by ‘night’ ferry, 29/30th August, he then drove to Rouen, maybe someone else can fill in these details, they are more recent, there was another place name given where they stayed overnight. I wondered if they’d gone to see his property in the Bordeaux region, doesn’t appear they did or at least we don’t have information that they did.
Katie, Blanchard posted the update at 02:31, which appears to be 01:31 French time, otherwise the post about Maillauds arrival was half an hour before he did at 00:04 !
Complicated or what ?
So, I make that less than half an hour before the press were aware the child had been found.
Thanks Lynda, so that ties up the sequence of events.
To be fair. The CM group did try.
There were “problems” but they did try
Then it has turned into “CSI Mars”. Hey Ho !
Enough of that.
Are we any further on ?
The “second visit” hypothesis is of interest. Can we confirm ?
James, the ‘double trip’ scenario depends on ONF1 being or not being 100% it was an X5. Or better said, ONF1 being 100% sure it was NOT a BMW 525 Touring 2004 (SAH)
We simply do not know how sure ONF1 is. But we know there had to be at least 2 hours between him (ONF1) seeing this X5 and him hearing about the killings and realizing he saw that X5 (and MC) … so … to use the words of WBM ‘Was he primed to get all the details of this car (X5)?’ … and why would he be primed? Because he is a car nutter perhaps.
Personally I find the ‘double trip’ scenario very elegant. I prefer it over the ‘there was an X5’.
Katie, the sequence of events yes, Maillaud and ambulance arriving at halfpast midnight, yes – I may be out by an hour as to when the press were aware, nevertheless the child was found around midnight.
Morning Lynda, yes I accept that now. The word ‘motionless’ is still at odds with a four year old though , she was either very obedient,tired or not in any way a curious child. I’d go for tired & that she slept of most of the eight hours.
Hi James, agreed.
Max, I think the double visit is a strong possibility , I have done that many times when knowing I have to be at an unfamiliar location for the an appointment.
Katie, maybe when her parents fell silent, she copied them and thought they were asleep, so she settled down and did the same, maybe fear didn’t come into it as much as she knew not to disturb her parents, although the motionless aspect is a long time – I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt to Maillaud et al, that she was hidden in the car. Anything otherwise would seem too fanciful, they’d have been better off saying she had wandered off and was found in the woods, than admit they didn’t spot her in the unopened car, from a public relations point of view.
The double visit, I agree there is the possibility, it depends how sure ONF1 is of the car he saw, last year on a radio interview, Vinneman/Maillaud said it could be an X5 or X3, which tends to suggest not 100% sure, of course the stand out on a BMW is the front grill – colour not sure, tree canopy, ONF1 wearing sunglasses, he had them pushed onto a balding/shaved head in the Panorama interview, looked about 40ish and slim.
Le Parisien journalist mocked Panorama for their ‘new’ witness, he was to most of us because we’d not heard him before, whereas Jean Marc Ducos knew of him since day one according to his Twitter feed.
I’ve found many names of people working in Les Bauges on a list, mostly ONF/ONCFS/PNR Bauges, and a few individuals. Also references to the ‘spotting’ of wolves, where and by whom.
According to sources there will be a new French documentary around March the 16th. After yesterday’s disappointment with the Belgian “documentary” we can only hope they have done a better job. I will tell you when I know more about this programme.
Max
Makes sense.
ONF1 appears to be “clear” it was a four wheel drive vehicle (but this is a “witness before the event”)
If “how your saying what your saying” turns out to be true, then it appears to be Mollier that was the trigger.
The MC up the hill.
SAH up the hill.
SAH down the hill.
SAH back up the hill
And then Mollier arrives….. and the rest “we know”.
So we move to why did SAH return up the hill ?
That question could be answered by his children.
So why have Le French et the English not “thrown any light” on this (if this is what happened).
It in fact it makes the whole situation more “mysterious”
On one hand we have “the trigger being Mollier”.
And on the other hand we have “something possibly completely different”
I’ll add
First reports I recall always confused me.
I was going to work that morning (the 6th) and was with a colleague.
As we prepared to leave the hotel the news was on the TV.
The report I recall said that the family were “British” and in a “BMW 4×4”.
When I caught up with the news sometime later (that day or the next) I saw that it was a “BMW Touring”.
It may appear “minor”, but….. was it a reporting mistake ?
Or did the report just pick up on what he had been told (from person to person) coming from the ONF1 guy.
Now the ONF1 guy says he saw “for sure” a BMW 4×4.
There is no other people mentioned as being in that vehicle.
So we (I) believe he “made it up”.
But if he didn’t.
If he just “changed” the car…because “he had to”, then this throws the whole thing “up in the air” again.
If he is “made” to stick to his original story…. we then have two cars….and not “one and the same” BMW.
James,
With or without the ‘double trip’ … it stays complicated. EM/BV have kinda confirmed that ONF2 went over Martinet and did not see SAH/SM (or ‘cadavers’ as EM said). This means that ONF2 was well off Martinet and Combe d’Ire before SAH/SM (and WBM) entered. And ONF1 even before that!
This makes MC hanging around Martinet for at least 30, maybe as much as 45 minutes(!)
(*) Q: For what? For who? And Why relocate to 2-hairpins-up? And be ‘redirected’ back? And somehow be able to stay at Martinet when ONF2 went home??
I’ll coin another expression. The ‘WBM desert’
The WBM desert = the time between 15h17 and 15h45
This timespan we ONLY have WBM’s words. WORDS! One of the most important things WBM says is that he saw MC coming down. By this WBM effectively makes MC=X … But there still is all the Q’s (see (*))
I toy with the idea that WBM is making up MC. MC exists … sure, because ONF1 and ONF2 saw him. But perhaps MC was long gone … only WBM puts him back at Martinet. … How?
Suppose WBM was all this time in hiding at Martinet, waiting for his target (prolly SM). WBM would have seen the parade ONF1, ONF2, MC, SAH (twice perhaps) and finally SM. WBM comes forward, shoots SM, and kills witnesses SAH. Now he puts the blame on MC.
The only weak point here is that MC easily could have come forward. But he didn’t. Reason unknown. (suppose MC is at the bottom of Lake Annecy … lol:)
But … remember, it is MC who can confirm WBM’s story, and nobody else
Anyway, just a thought. But the WBM desert exists. Nobody saw WBM, but WBM saw everybody. Only ‘everybody’ is dead (SAH, SM) or gone (MC) … Or unfindable (X5)
Right, we still have Lathuile. Solve Lathuile, and perhaps get Chevaline for free. Lathuile rings a bell? Sure:)
Max, don’t you think it odd, the WBM, tended the injured & dead before getting to the car to switch off the engine ?
It was as though he knew that car with ‘racing engine’ was not going to move. I find that bizarre, surely the first thing you would do would be to alert the driver that there were people lying on the ground ?
He didn’t, this to me indicates he ‘knew’ that car was not going to move, How did he know if he was not involved or didn’t know the driver was dead ?
He had no fear of being run down when he checked Zainab & Mollier. Why ?
Why didn’t he unlock the car after smashing the window, Saad was slumped over the wheel so his head wounds would not have been visible [?] so he could have been alive but there’s no mention or thought of checking his pulse …by him [or the police] as he had done with Mollier.
Why did he assume everyone was dead….because he knew of the plan for these people & knew an professional assassin would have done a good job , or that HE had?
Mmm what’s the why for bm?
I really would not know what i would do, or if i could remember what i did. shock i guess…
max you are right about mc. If mc=x, he was waiting.
so who did know sah or sm would go up that road and has a why?
Its abvious police looked at zaid, a lot of money is a good why. What do we know about sm?
Le Magazine du Monde on Eric D. :
http://www.lemonde.fr/le-magazine/article/2014/03/07/le-coupable-ideal_4378707_1616923.html
For those that ddin’t see Non-Elucide of the 5th January or find spoken French difficult to follow, here is a link to a precis of the programme, 29 pages, but they are short and concise:
http://telescoop.tv/browse/392431/non-elucide.html
Lynda, thanks a lot for posting that link to non-Elucide. Indeed us non-fluent french speakers are at a serious disadvantage with regard to the accounts by the press. Some of us may be on top of the English accounts but miss the subtleties present in the french ones, resulting in not a few ‘lost in translation” interpretations..
Also Katie’s question above is a good one. i am sure max et al back in MZT days went over these kind of questions early on, but I’d love to hear some speculations that would help explain WBM’s somewhat strange sequence of actions, as recounted by him. You can see my own on CM, though admittedly that’s all they are – speculations.
Plus I have a question of my own – one that several of us asked on CM, but no good answer has emerged, as of yet. This has to do with the testimony of ONF1 on Panorama program. Clearly his account could not have been cleared with or condoned by maillaut et al. It’s completely against protocol for an official (forestry worker) to give testimony to reporters, especially one that really complicated the official story line big time. How come we haven’t heard then of any disciplining of this ONF individual or at least angry words from the French police? they were irate enough to let us know so about the pictures released of the dead SM, but not a seemingly unauthorized testimony by a forestry worker?
I am just asking for help here from more good minds – don’t mean to cause any inter-blog trouble or anything.
PS max, it was really good of you to start this forum. Personally I was sorry MZT was taken off the net airs – there were always good discussions there, whether i agreed with any one scenario or another. Also lots of good tid-bits from the French side of the investigation as well as details some of us may have missed. For what it’s worth, I think that marilyn keeping that blog open for as long as she had, plus participating in it, were a worthy endeavor, no matter my own rather minor and short lived contributions.
Another thing I see, is not a reversing arc, when you look at that lay-by in full from a height, you can discern a full circle. AH came in from the left went to the right of the carpark where Max has him placed,but around in a circle when exiting,stopped THEN reversed in a panic, maybe because something/one was blocking his way or did he see someone coming up the hill ?
So, was it when the firing began he started the engine went forward hard left into the circle ,when reaching the other side,reversed into the spot we all know.
Maybe Max can work out if that would bring the arc tracks into line., I think it does.
Must get to bed. Night night.
@Marlin
My own speculation is that the gendarmerie as a matter of fact condoned the ONF1 interview, or to be more precise, organized and supported it. Based partly on the reasons you yourself give (he wouldn’t dare to do it otherwise), partly because the British team wouldn’t know where to find him. No information about his identity has ever been released as far as I know. Nobody has been allowed to interview him except BBC as far as I know. The only ones that could inform BBC about his existence and where to find him are Maillaud et al.
Why they chose to let him appear on a British instead of a French documentary, I can only guess. Perhaps it was less risky, few locals who could identify him, are prone to watch a British documentary.
So far Maillaud et al, or “the Mollier family”, has been much more touchy concerning things published in France or even locally than abroad.
We’ll have to wait a week or so for the next French documentary and see if he will appear there.
Max…..
Yes, I see what you mean. It provides a “hmmmmm” moment.
Well “argued” may I point out. And it does provide cause for thought.
So let us debate the “WBM” angle.
No MC. And an “already” altered” ONF1 story. Leaves us with the “unknown” ONF2 and the “robot” to concur with WBM ?
WBM v SM ? But we “have” ONF1 and 2 ?
ONF ‘s being “friends of friends”. That leaves WBM
No 4×4. No MC. Then we have “collusion” ? ONF teams and WBM ?
From a certain (MC) perspective, all statements look weird. Think about this:
– ONF1 gave use: MC arrives at Martinet
– ONF2 gave us: MC’s face and helmet (the ‘portrait robot’)
– WBM gave us: MC=X
So while MC killed 4 adults in cold blood, he ‘paraded’ in front of ONF1, ONF2 and WBM, like he didn’t even care. Was MC so sure of himself? What about witnesses?
After all, MC killed 1 to 3 witnesses (depending on who was the target). But what for? ONF1, ONF2 and WBM are witnesses too! They saw as much of MC as did SM/SAH
If I would go for the numbers, I’d say that MC targeted SAH (killing 3) … but MC going to 2-hairpins-up prior to the killing, and meeting ONF2 doesn’t make sense(*)! So … SM has to be the target. But if SM was the target, why kill witnesses SAH? Surely SAH was not more special than ONF1, ONF2 or WBM??
…
Now, suppose it is all one big lie to cover up the SM killing. Suppose there is no MC:)
There is X, but no MC:
– ONF1 invented the MC at martinet (the killing place)
– ONF2 gave him a face and a special helmet (*) (and made him go to 2-hairpins-up so they could ‘talk’ to him)
– WBM closed the deal by making MC=X (by ‘seeing’ him coming from Martinet just after the killing)
– (and if the is no ‘double trip’) ONF1 threw in a nice X5 for good measure
Now the investigators break their teeth on trying to find the unfindable X5, and the unfindable MC. Perhaps the investigators could doubt one witness, but not all 3 together. That would be too much. ONF1, ONF2 and WBM and X as 1 team to take out SM?? Lol, even I find that hard to believe. Yet it is compatible with what we know.
And of course there is no direct link between ONF1/ONF2/WBM and SM (let alone SAH) because it is X who has the direct link, and ONF1, ONF2 and WBM are only supporting team members. I think you have to look more in the direction of my other ‘pet case’ namely Lathuile
*** and so ends a nice saturday night write up :) ***
Max, that was a really good point about MC seemingly caring not a hoot about being seen by 2 ONFs (one with face ID), yet here he is presumably killing a whole bunch of people for being witnesses.
Frankly, I don’t think there is a choice but to consider at least one of the ONFs – especially ONF2, potentially a guilty party. But if they are what’s with ONF1 giving that incriminating testimony (incriminating for ONF2)? and were any of the ONFs really ONFs?
Just think of the timings again: ONF1 says he encountered the X5 at 3:20 about 1 km up the Combe d’Ire, if i recall correctly. But he did not see WBM( or does not admit to seeing him) or SM. Yet, if he really didn’t see either bicyclist, that means they were just starting up the climb (which WBM says takes about 30 minutes – as he stated several times over originally). So if neither WBM, nor SM are seen by ONF1 even as late as 3:22PM (my estimate how long it might take a car to get all the way down to the turn), then how on earth would SM be up at the martinet by 3:40PM (per panorama), just in time to get killed? or, if we believe SM was a really fast bicyclist (18 minutes to get to martinet) but WBM takes – per his own account 30 minutes, how does the latter get there by 3:45PM (again per the panorama program, which saw fit to move the timings 5-10 minutes ahead)? Really tight timing one would say, and that before accounting for SAH, who was also not seen by ONF1 (Unless he confused the grey-silver X5 with the maroon BMW. A bit hard to believe, but we’ll let that go for a moment).
All that not to even mention that the 3:48PM call becomes impossible to make for Phillip Bossy, as he claimed earlier.
But there’s worse! if WBM is on the Combe d’IRe between, say 3:22 and 3:45PM and sees a green 4×4 coming down (which we can now assume was ONF2) followed by the “escorted” MC, with SM about 5-10 minutes ahead of him, it gets really difficult to not have ONF1 go by the martinet just as the killings were happening, or a minute before or 2 minutes after. Yes, everyone could miss everyone else by a minute here or there but the entire story is becoming a saga of weirdly perfect timings (to the minute) and improbable coincidences. Plus we never heard ONF1 mention encountering either SM or WBM on his way down. What a mess!
Unfortunately, if we open up the possibility of deliberate cover-up by all involved, things don’t get much easier, timing-wise, in which case, even I, the more conspiratorial-minded, must conclude it was one heck of a lousy cover-up. If you are right Max, and they had to invent MC, invent X5, may be invent ONF1 or ONF2, that’s lots of inventions. Surely there are easier ways to concoct a cover-up fairy tale?
Max, for clarity on Deadzone, is this correct ?
ONF1 – sole driver
– sees MC at Le Martinet, says it was preparing to leave, rider all in black, black and white bike
– interviewed on Panorama (blurred) – Jean-Marc Ducos, Le Parisien has known about witness since day one
– sees X3/X5 just below Le Martinet.
ONF2 – driver and passenger
– see MC two hairpins up, 10 minutes after ONF1
– directs MC back in direction of Le Martinet MC travels INFRONT (EM, Press Conference relating to Eric D.)
– pass through Le Martinet where they don’t see any ‘cadavres’ (EM, Press Conference relating to Eric D.)
– at some point lose sight of MC (Non-Elucide)
– supplied the ‘portrait-robot’
Time stamp for sighting of X3/X5 between 15:15 and 15:30 (Ministre de l’interior communique)
Time stamp for sighting of MC 15:15 and 15:40 (Ministre de l’interior communique)
Colonel Benoit Vinneman – stated X3/X5 seen on the ‘premier tier’ of Combe d’Ire
Nb: The Combe d’Ire is the entire valley.
Max, assuming Panorama ONF1 gave the right place where he came across the X3/X5, you have identified it as can be seen on the side-bar of this webpage, some 350 metres below Le Martinet.
Crimewatch put a 15:20 timestamp on the vehicle, not backed up by official communiques, nor as can be seen is the placing of the sighting, shame as this causes confusion.
Lynda,
They seem to be correct, yes. And all the WBM stuff to add. And add the SAH 14h40 (Laurent) and 15h17 (rt du Moulin)
What you have is … a mess and the ONLY thing I did was … X5=SAH
Then I constructed a timeline (not perfect yet) where ONF1 and ONF2 are much earlier. To asnwer Marlin …
Marlin,
Yes, it is a play of minutes. But the X5=SAH (see my answer to Lynda above) and placing ONF1/2 earlier, get everything in line … with everybody speaking the truth (always nice)
All,
So … it is not Max who wants X5=SAH, no, X5=SAH because it simply fits better
(If I make a puzzle, and I want it to be a dragon, but all the pieces are of an elephant … I can turn and twist the pieces forever, but it will never become a dragon … so, if there is no X5, but it was SAH all the time, then we can turn and twist the pieces forever, but it will never produce the X5 … I think we have turned and twisted pieces for a very long time already:)
Rough timeline with X5=SAH
Lynda,
I doubt that ‘Angry Bird’ Ducos did know about ONF1 from day 1. There is no trace of ONF1 in his articles anyhow as far as I know. If he now claims that he know about ONF1 from day one (does he?), why should we believe him?
I can’t remember that we have any reliable source for how many persons there were in ONF2’s car. Do you?
Lars, it was on Ducos Twitter feed just before and after the Panorama airing. Either way, Maillaud said they had details of the X3/X5 within hours, presumably from the only witness ONF1 (BV, EM). Ducos was possibly envious that the interview was given to BBC and not to him, in the Press and the programmes he likes to portray himself as the inside expert.
ONF2, now you’re making me think, pretty sure it was stated two ONF were in the vehicle, ‘they’, so more than one – hey wouldn’t it be funny if there were three or four, of course ‘they’ could be singular as well !
Weather too beautiful to be inside, lunch on the terrace, first this year !
La présence d’un mystérieux motard sur les lieux du crime était connue de longue date des enquêteurs, grâce à des témoignages d’agents de l’Office national des forêts (ONF). – Le Monde.fr
Le motard, qui s’était aventuré sur un sentier forestier interdit d’accès, avait aussi été reconduit sur le chemin de la combe d’Ire par des agents de l’ONF qui avaient pu «apercevoir le visage du conducteur lorsqu’il [avait] levé la visière de son casque», avait ajouté Eric Maillaud. – 20minutes.fr
More than one ….. ‘des agents’, again it could be a turn of phrase, I think ONF1 on Panorama, said ‘they were coming off the mountain’.
On the basis that the majority of ONF vehicles don’t have a rear seat, I looked that up, the rear being used to carry equipment and often caged off in case they have to carry injured animals. Can we see inside the 4×4 parked outside Roland D.’s house ?
@Lynda
IIRC from the Panorama doc, ONF1 said he passed MC at le Martinet as MC appeared to be waiting in the road to turn into the parking area. Also, in the recent press conference I’m pretty sure EM said MC “roulait” above le Martinet when he encountered ONF2. I have a partial recording of the presser; I’ll have another look when I get a chance, though this may have been an answer to a later question
Shadwell, the comment about leaving Le Martinet was in a French press report, I assure you I haven’t made it up ;-) Maybe they did ! It was in quotes so gave the impression that ONF1 had said this. The problem with the recent press conference is that it was difficult to hear the questions being asked by the journalistic throng, I didn’t record it, I was watching it as it happened on my TV. BFM TV to be precise.
I have often questioned whether the MC was actually moving when ‘stopped’ by ONF2 (as we call them today), unfortunately it has never been clear, maybe he thought he’d not get caught circulating where he shouldn’t, it is irrelevant since he was shooed away back down towards Le Martinet, ONF2 following him, as stated by EM in the Eric D. Press Conference, Non-Elucide stating they lost sight of MC – doesn’t say where.
Should MC be the culprit he could have pulled off on any number of tracks, then returned to Le Martinet, above, below to the side, he had been compromised, his plan not able to be played out calmly, that could apply whomever was the target – my only conclusion is that something went very wrong that day, I’ve said so many times.
Foolish humans! You underestimate the will of the Martian people. Your foolish foolishness knows no bounds, much like our lust for revenge.
Our unquenchable thirst for vengance will never be slaked!
T H I S I S T H E P O S T I N G O F T H E M Y S T E R O N S !
You dismiss the ‘Martian piste’ at your peril. The answer is out of this world.
Some might say that I am rash posting this, they may well be right. But I feel bound, nay compelled, by precident to narrate what has gone before and gloat over your inevitable impending immolation.
For you see, even if you tell the world the truth, no one will believe you!
The last plan was unstoppable. We had suborned the entire French ‘elite’ with only minor resistance. In fact half of them willingly offered themselves to us!
Then, strangely, nothing actually happened.
After much (literal) soul searching it appears that the minds of their leaders are little different to those of their peons. That is, weak-willed, vainglorious, obsessed with sex, wine, food and the avoidance of work.
We still nominally control the French Maximum Leader, who informs us that he is working ceaselessly for our final victory, when in fact he is shamelessly whizzing around his capital on a scooter chasing nubile human females!
But I digress. We hatched a new plan. . . .
The FiveEyedOne detected a prospective target, a hardworking and blameless human, codenamed KleptoBait, who usefully hoarded data from his work on satellites.
We intended to use him to crack the crypto of your Galileo Satellites and hack your Disaster Satellite System, which sounded useful for interplanetary vengeance.
Earth would be at our mercy, of which we have none!
To take KleptoBait we whispered to one of our French aerospace collaborators that he had a ‘leak’ that needed ‘plugging’ or the lizards would be all over him like a rash.
He must have had an allergy to lizards, for he moved faster than we thought possible for a Frenchman.
Too fast in fact, for MagicLightCircleMachine was down for maintenance.
As to the next plan. . . unless you surrender we shall relinquish our residual control over the French.
We mean it.
Remember, they are indestructable. Holland’s chat-up line is already “Will you be my Josephine?”
Oh and CSI Mars is a fantastic series, totally realistic . . . in every episode the perp turns out to be an evil earthling who came to despoil our beloved planet!
MagicLightCircleMachine – you’ve made my day ! Round of applause for that Mysteron !!!
I bow down to your ultimate knowledge, is CSI Mars available in a box set ?
@Max
Ask and ye shall receive. I asked….and you provided.
Bossy “hasn’t said” he saw the MC.
And ONF1 said the “4×4” must have “gone over the mountains”.
The “sighting” of the MC is by three “unlinked” people. Therefore “there was an MC”.
That’s the “take home message”.
And the MC departed down the Combe D’Ire and “did not pass” (or sneaked by) the builders.
Like you say “the MC only exists BECAUSE the forest workers ARE NOT linked to WBM”.
That is the ONLY reason.
IF they “are linked”….then “this” is going to be blown wide open !
IS WBM linked to two forest units (three people) that we know nothing of ???
The “rumour mill” will certainly “crank” up then.
The emergency call would have been “brilliantly” delayed……if it were not for Bossy.
But there WAS Bossy.
So (if so) how was X to eacape. And how did X escape…. if we play with this “unknown” theory ?
PS. RIP the crew and pax of Flight MH370 which went down in the South China Sea area.
A “four bar” with many hours on the clock. A “solid” aircraft. Good flying conditions for the sector.
I hope that this terrible incident has unfortunately something to do with one or other of those factors mentioned and nothing to do with “security and aircraft safety”.
James, the MC wasn’t seen going up or down according to Colonel Vinneman, so it turned off, that surely means he’d done quite a good reccy of the area or knew it like ‘the back of his hand’ – I know which I’d choose.
I agree about the recent event, seems that the Thai didn’t compare passports to the lost/stolen database, I’m sure you must know where the security lapses are easy target. Just awful.
@James
I just wondered if you had a view on that new incident, crash or whatever. Strange that they were not able to send a emergency message, isn’t it?
Lynda,
Brett Martin said he saw a MC going down towards Chevaline, didn’t he?
Haha Lars – there was no sighting of the MC further down the road or in Chevaline or route du Moulin, apparently, isn’t that what Vinneman was implying ? Or have I made a ‘faux pas’, wouldn’t be the first would it ;-)
Afterall it was apparently seen arriving at Le Martinet by ONF1 or already there when he passed by, I assume WBM is telling the truth, he also saw the MC a short time before his arrival at Le Martinet, ONF2 lost sight of it. To play about here, if WBM initially thought MC was the gunman, why be afraid that someone was still in the woods ? I just don’t think at that moment he would have assumed the MC was the killer.
You can all think what ever suits you.
I think a MC was there, whether he is our X, I’m not convinced, ONF in hindsight think he is and I’d go so far as to say they know who he is – they nor he have said a word since and he certainly hasn’t been back to the Combe d’Ire. Their description is a bit right and a bit wrong, so as if the guy is found they won’t be too far off the truth.
There is a fabulous exit about 1km from Le Martinet, check out Google Maps, especially the Streetview, I can’t imagine why they updated to include all of the route and side routes in and around Chevaline, NOT !
Bossy says he didn’t pass anyone and the third cyclist, the retired tourist says he saw nothing suspicious, although what that means I leave to everyone elses perception.
I’m with Magic – it was the Martians that done it !
Everyone is looking for a fault in the story, a liar, someone telling stories, I have a feeling that the killer isn’t even in our sights.
All,
To cut it short, with all the known facts together, the basic problem is the X5, and the other standing problem is the 15h17 picture (rte du Moulin) in relation with the 14h40ish sighting of SAH by Laurent Fillon. The rest we can take for granted (I do)
The problem is:
1. ONF1 sticks to his X5 (confirmed BBC)
2. Laurent is pretty sure of his 14h40ish sighting of happy family SAH (confirmed TB)
3. 15h17 pictures don’t lie (Shadwell/Max analyses prolly indicate picture as valid)
The fun things is that:
A. if you want to solve 2 and 3, you might end up with the ‘double trip’ idea which could answer 1
B. but if you start with 1, and pose ‘X5=SAH’, 2 and 3 come out as effect
C. but if you want to keep all 3, you have an impossible puzzle
(note that everybody goes for option C:)
Way back at MZT I already deviced the ‘B idea’ … and I sort of ‘predicted’ the route du Moulin. You can understand my ‘Yessss’ feeling when 10 months later BFMTV pops out the 15h17 SAH picture on … Route du Moulin:)
http://www.marilynztomlins.com/articles/chevaline-shooting-saad-al-hilli-sylvain-mollier-part-7/#comment-13093
Max 6-23-2013 at 01:34:35
Must be the wine again, but here is another thought which could work with some tweaking.
AH went to ‘Martinet’ TWICE(!)
(remember the masons 14:40, and our ‘double back’ thingies) http://www.lejdd.fr/Societe/Faits-divers/Actualite/Le-scenario-minute-par-minute-de-la-tuerie-de-Chevaline-555890
Around 14:40 AH went up to Martinet, via the ‘masons’, but as there was not much to see/do at Martinet they went down again, this time perhaps via rue du Moulin, and arrived in Arnand 1515 and made the pictures.
Now, AH or Zainab or another realizes they have left something at Martinet. I dunno, perhaps a toy or whatever.
They drive back to Martinet and arrive 15:30
… etc, etc, etc, bla, bla, bla.
So what is the point?
The point is that the RHD BMW spotted by ONF might be AH afterall (with a little time tweaking), and thus … there is NO X5(!!)
3 indications that this might have happened:
1. the 1440 masons reference
2. the short time from 1515 to 1530 (explained as this time AH knew the way and drive straight back up to martinet)
3. if there was a X5 … where did it go, as it seems to have vapourized into thin air
…
That is Cabernet Sauvignon for you;)
– M
Yes you did Max, yes you did ! And I pondered not a double trip but a turn at the harpin….. Whatever time Laurent saw the car he could not know where it went afterwards. So I too had a little cheer when I found the photo house on route du Moulin.
I’m not convinced they twisted their way to pass the Bewicks after this photo.
Yes Lynda, I know you proposed the ‘turn at the hairpin’ … which for the 14h40 versus 1517 sightings is an equally possible suggestion. Although, to me, it sounds weird. SAH got ‘Martinet’ as an interesting location from the campmanager. It is weird if they drove passed Laurent and then at the last turn decide NOT to go to Martinet, take pictures and turn again and then decide to go to Martinet after all
And your ‘turn at hairpin’ does NOT explain away the X5 … which can be both a plus because you are then in line with ONF1, or a con, because the X5 is still one big mystery (EM/BV)
But, true, the ‘double trip’ needs to be confirmed by ONF1 as a possibility. Unless of course Zainab remembers something. Wouldn’t it be fun if she at some moment casually mentions
My dad had to go back because he forgot his cap
(Hmmm, I do remember reading that Zainab told that her father ‘wanted’ to go there … I really should find that snippet. Anybody who knows what snippet I mean?)
Lars – thought of your post about another docu, Dominique Rizet is presenting ‘Faites entrer l’accusé’ tonight, on the TV right now, next weeks programme doesn’t say it is about Chevaline. France 2 by the way, it would figure if he was presenting a programme afterall he’s the ‘accused’ over the leaked photos…..
Max, read the synposis from Non-Elucide, I posted above, supposedly covers the events of the day and the why they ended up in Chevaline.
I always wondered if when the women in the car saw the ‘Dangerous Road’ sign, they persuaded Saad not to continue, then Saad and Zainab persuaded them otherwise.
Is that road particularly ‘dangerous’, no it isn’t in spring, summer and early autumn, the sign is there all year and yes I would say it is dangerous when it snows. It’s a narrow road, if any of you have ever driven into the Alps, that is dangerous when there are sheer, unprotected drops from the roads, Combe d’Ire, narrow yes, abide by the max of 30kms yes, truly dangerous, not more so than many country roads in France.
Lynda,
I don’t know if you made a ‘faux pas’, but either you or Vinnemann, or both, is then not trusting Brett Martin’s testimony. Brett Martin said in the BBC interview that he met a MC going down towards Chevaline (and he never saw it again). He has reiterated that information several times, and added that it had big panniers and went very slowly.
If you look at my timeline graph or one of those published by Max, you can see that it is impossible for Brett Martin to first meet the MC and then the car, because that would place the car at the crime scene after the MC and the car would have seen the ‘cadavers’. If that happened it would be a good ‘alibi’ for the MC anyhow.
The only viable assumption, if the MC shall be the killer/a suspect, is thus that Brett Martin first met the car and then the MC.
Vinnemann and you have to choose, either you believe Brett Martin, and then there was a MC going down towards Chevaline, or you don’t believe him, and it opens up a lot of possibilities.
If Vinnemann wants the MC to be a suspect he has to believe that Brett Martin first met the car and then the MC.
(In the Panorama doc Brett Martin added that he probably also was overtaken by Al-Hilli).
Lynda, forgot say that I don’t know yet who has produced the new documentary. Co.uld be BFMTV
Lars,
Re (In the Panorama doc Brett Martin added that he probably also was overtaken by Al-Hilli).
I now think this was the ONLY car WBM ever saw, and I now think WBM always has said it like this. I think it is a ‘lost in translation’
But I am still open for this. If ANYONE can point to a source (or ask WBM himself) that WBM saw: 1 car up, 1 car down and 1 MC down … then PLZ LET ME KNOW:)
Off topic…but in answer to Lars and Lynda.
Goodness only knows what happened up there (South China Sea) thus far.
I don’t have a view on it at all.
The “triple 7” is a very good aircraft (WBM was a “four bar” on them).
Communication wise, I am surprised they could not call “pan pan pan”, which suggests a “catastrophic” event OR the crew being distracted by an event onboard (as in a “minor” issue…..resulting in a major incident. And a crash (like AF477)).
But I doubt the PIC (pilot In Command) would allow that to happen. Too much time “behind the wheel”.
Although that could still be the case.
Without knowing ANY of the facts (only what has been “presented”) it is too early to even speculate.
I fly “private” so it is different for me, but I am helping a colleague with a matter at the moment with regard to an “unauthorised” loading of a bag (by handlers). My friend works for a normal “airline”.
From our view this event should not (but does) take place. All to often.
The National Enforcement Body of this particular country does not seem to be taking this “systemic event” seriously.
Nor does the Flight Ops VP. Or the Security VP. So the matter has “climbed to new heights”.
As it is in Europe, I have the EC involved (and by the looks of it the Ombudsman overseeing the Commission).
If this Triple 7 crash comes down to an event such as that….then this matter get propelled forward rapidly.
However (and worryingly) a pax travelling on “fake” passports is also an “all to common” event.
Since “9/11” the perception is that “security” has improved.
Yet, alas, this isn’t the case. It hasn’t “improved” (see Lockerbie. And the bag likely was “put on” at LHR)
So, if this “accident” turns out to be “terrorist” related…the airline industry is in for a “wake up call”. It is long overdue.
But to me….it “sounds like” it probably will be “mechanical”. Whilst that is “bad”. It is “better” because then the “airlines” will scare me less than they do.
Ever wondered “why” the “billionaires” use private jets ?
It’s not only for “convenience” and to look “cool”….. there are “serious considerations” as to why they fly in a “GV”.
PS….
There is speculation that some of the relations of the pax that have died where able to call their friends and family.
I hold no store in that. I know people have called me when “delayed” and still on the airliner.
The “call” does “ring out” (not to me) and is unanswered (I would not be able to answer it) it isn’t a “call” as such.
Why that happens, I have no idea. But it does happen. Since I “fly” alot, I can confirm it isn’t “odd”.
Sorry for the long off topic post.
But the subject matter is close to my heart.
Thanks.
Max
WBM said (in his first interview) he recalled “a vehicle passing him” (no direction given) AND LATER that he saw a “large vehicle” coming down the hill but didn’t pay “much attention to it”.
Firstly people thought it was ONE vehicle. Then that he was indicating the existence of TWO different vehicles.
Later in his other interview it became “apparent” it was two vehicles.
The initial one being (although not confirmed to be) Al Hilli.
Q. How “vague” would someone need to be ?
If you know what Al Hillis car looked like. And you know what an ONF vehicle looks like. And you “know” what an “indescribable” motorbike looks like…… then how “real” is “vague” ?
WAIT A MINUTE !
Martin was going to “cycle down the hill” to get a telephone signal ?
He’d already seen the destruction at the Martinet.
And had (whilst at the Martinet) thought “am I going to get shot by a sniper”.
Previously he’d passed a “slow moving” motorcyclist coming from the Martinet.
Did he NOT think that the motorcyclist could have been the killer ?
This is “speculation” of the highest order.
But “where” would you think that Martin could get help ?
The village below (the direction the motorcyclist went) OR a farm beyond the car park ?
That’s inconsistent ?
@Lynda, James
just wondering if the lead “Col de Chérel” has been fully exploited, evidently this is part of the storytelling as a possible way to escape Combe d’Ire and Martinet, after all a white motobike was spotted there around 4 p.m that day by truthful farmer (and a 4/4?)…
http://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/tuerie-de-chevaline-la-mysterieuse-moto-aux-grandes-sacoches-18-10-2012-2243921.php
About WBM and the vehicles. It remains unclear. I have never seen any report/video in which WBM mentions 3 vehicles. It is always just 2. The car (probably 4×4) and the MC
First: EM says about WBM, 1 mc and 1 car
Later: In the BBC inteview WBM mentions 1 car, 1 mc
Later: In Panorama WBM mentions 1 mc and 1 car (prolly SAH)
It is true that EM says the car (4×4 vert) was coming DOWN
But in BBC interview WBM says he was ‘passed’ by a car. It is Symmonds who add the ‘down’ bit
WBM in Panaroma says he saw a car going UP
Now … either WBM saw 2 cars, or something (DOWN/UP) got lost in translation, or WBM simply and openly tweak DOWN into UP
So the questions to WBM are simple:
Q: How many cars did you see?
(and if he says 1)
Q: Did that car come down (EM) or go up (Panorama)?
IF however WBM says he saw 2 cars THEN the car coming down imho must be the X5
2 problems:
1. EM says only ONF1 saw the X5
2. This X5 was NOT seen by ONF2 so the X5 had to be in hiding beyond Martinet at the moment ONF2 passed
You could argue that WBM saw an ONF
1 problem:
That ONF should have seen SAH and SM. No reports of this
My conclusion: WBM only saw 1 car. This was going up, and was SAH
EM talking about the car (4×4). 7m30 into the video
http://www.wat.tv/video/tuerie-chevaline-conference-58w93_2exyh_.html#t=448
Max, the X5 timestamp sighting officially as 15:15 to 15:30, the LR to SM phone call 15:32, as SM was still cycling (?), the reports of ‘explosions’ around 15:30 (must be a bit later because of the phone call), could it be that an X5 did go up, swung around and left ?
Doesn’t this mean that the X5 was not at Le Martinet at the time of the shootings, after 15:32 ?
Of course, it doesn’t explain what it was doing there ?
Lars, the MC – of course WBM said he saw it, coming down, I consider what Vinneman said to mean after that, it wasn’t seen leaving the Combe, does that make sense ?
Cat, Janin the farmer on Col-de-Cherel says he saw a MC travelling in the direction of Le Martinet around 16:00, by his statements, and through his mumbling he appears to say it went back down, maybe someone else can help you with that.
As for the road, it is passable with a 4×4, deteriorates a couple of kilometres after Le Martinet remains like that until it gets past the Col, there are loads of photos on the net and this can be clearly seen on Google Maps/Earth and Bing.
The distance between Le Martinet and Precherel on the otherside, can’t quite remember, but could be as much as 20kms, maybe it is 10kms, but it is quite a distance and all that track is unauthorised for ‘engines’ – so wouldn’t be exactly a discreet way of leaving Combe d’Ire.
Max…
My “understanding” OR rather “what I am led to what I should believe” is that WBM was passed by SAH going up.
And then by ONF2 coming down (and then the MC).
Lynda quite rightly points out that the official time stamp for the “mystery” 4×4 is 15.15 to 15.30 AND moreover that this was recorded as being ON the Combe D’Ire (direction not known)
ONF1’s “piece to camera” rules him OUT of providing this information on the grounds the timing he gave !
But rules him IN on the grounds he says he saw it !
He therefore is “inconsistent” with himself !!!!!
Further…. if for the sake of argument WBM saw ONF1 (and ONF1 has “forgot to mention” that he saw SAH, SM and WBM for some very bizarre reason), he has managed to put a floodlight on ONF2 !
Two people “sat” well within “ear shot” of the events at the Martinet AND whose presence would be known to the MC which they had an “exchange” with.
I’m sticking to X5=SAH. Because it is simple and accounts for everything. The rest of the world may continue to hunt the X5, I will buy beer for all (at deadzone) if the X5 turns up:)
Anyway, reviewing the BBC Panorama, I notice that EM mentions that it was ‘odd’ that SM would take his racing bike to Martinet, as the road is bumpy. So, even EM admits that at least the type of bike is somewhat out of place.
Now I add that SM overtook WBM in Chevaline. And if SM would have come from Ugine I would have expected SM taking route du Moulin. But with SM in Chevaline it looks like he was coming from the other direction (a.o the Lathuile direction)
I hold the scenario that SM went with his bike to a ‘meeting’ (getsomething/meetsomeone) but was redirected to Martinet, and shot on arrival. In 2012 we could not have a clue how to fill in this scenario, but enter nov 11, 2013. The killing of Nicole in Lathuile (1 week after the ‘portrait robot’) and suddenly we have a possible clue. Filling in as follows:
Scenario: SM had a meeting in Lathuile. On arrival he was redirected by R to Martinet. SM hurried to Martinet. (LR called SM). SM arrived at Martinet and was shot dead (5 bullets). Premeditated, because X was waiting in ambush (for over 30 minutes).
The motive must be strong enough to hold all parts/elements together. Those ‘in the know’ do not talk. Blackmail has been suggested. A good suggestion, because if the blackmailer (SM) is killed, who is going to complain?
Lynda,
It makes a lot of sense.
I just want to make the situation clear, or as clear as possible. Vinnemann wasn’t especially clear in his statement. He should have said that the MC wasn’t seen in Chevaline or Arnand.
We have so many conflicting statements, or at least superficially conflicting statements, in this case, therefore it is, especially for newcomers , important to try and be as precise as possible. And I would hope that it could include Maillaud and Vinnemann also. ;)
@James,
Thanks, for your thoughts on the airplane incident. I think we can allow us some small digressions, as long as they don’t take over the discussion. It is a subject also close to my heart.
As you say it is much to early to speculate. I must say that I am a bit surprised by all these terrorist speculations. I would first think about a technical problem. I am also surprised by the speculations that the plane turned around, without sending any kind of message. I have a hard time imagining such a scenario.
(this comment might be outdated any second ;)
Thanks Lynda, true worth to be investigated further, at least for the whitish motobike with paniers, scary driving as he said, difficult to consider purely coincidental in time and location, such a loaded superbike gaming on the spot around late 16h that day…and if this on/off road crosser (BM-GS, or?)…went coming back from Martinet and further up Chérel after trying to avoid driving down Combe d’Ire, too populated at this moment…
I’m not 100% sure, Cat, I think Maillaud said the MC seen on the Col had been excluded, afterall it can’t be the same one as seen at Le Martinet and by WBM, there just isn’t enough time, could it have been involved, maybe, could it have been there to pick up the gunman if he was on foot maybe, then had to return the way he came empty handed because the sirens could be heard in the distance and he knew why.
Of course that is complete speculation on my part !
Lars, yes agreed, specifics are needed.
Have a good day, weather too glorious to be inside.
@James and Cat
I don’t believe that Col de Cherel was an alternative for anyone.
James, to go to Col de Cherel from Martinet is a hard climb, to go to Chevaline is downwards. The coverage for mobile phones are very questionable in the direction of the Col. If there was no coverage at Martinet (questionable) it would definitely get better the closer to Chevaline you get. So Brett Martin chose the right direction if he intended to get help.
Cat, if you chose to go over Col de Cherel you had to pass by the farmer Janin’s house. There is no vegetation at all there. Nothing to hide behind. Janin could hardly miss that car, especially if he was outside the house.
fine, then Chérel track excluded for the moment (though a white motobike viewed up there at some point), nothing new from my side but a feeling, we now have ONF saying MC was posted near lay-by after turning back from two hairpins with ONF2 following, and BM saying MC was going down slowly, then he vanished deep in Bauges forest and also a 4/4 or two (apparently – for us- locals keep silence on him and on speed cars going down (except a small Peugeot), Bossy and women, builders, inhabitants, etc,) as James and Lynda said earlier that’all!
but still some crumbs for searching a 4/4 and a biker (local…) & one special helmet (local…), as he was surely part of the “live” scene at Martinet, with also possibly BM arriving meanwhile (for a specific task or just strolling along, “en ballade” ?), let’s say, all in all, a string pushed too tight will break, when?
@Max
Blackmail? But who could he have been blackmailing? Well… Unfortunately, precedent suggests that if blackmail was suspected in relation to Chevaline, the inquiry would quickly stall.
shadwell,
Tell me, what has Local EridD in common with a RHD BMW X5?
@Max
Er… don’t know.
While I’m here though and as today seems to be a day for digression, there’s a fair bit of stuff in the press at the moment about the scandals blowing up around Sarkozy of late. Gaddafi, Bettencourt, Teleshopping: all good stuff for anyone interested in more general French intrigue.
Lars, if the TV documentary is from BFM TV, I’m sure Dominique Rizet will be involved afterall he is the frontman concerning the recent ‘leaked’ photographs that has resulted in a complaint being placed against the Channel.
I wonder if they’ll ask far more questions regarding the enquiry than have been posed before – would make for interesting viewing.
Katie, I just read your comment about WBM’s actions, I have to admit tht I am unable to say one way or another how I would react in the circumstances, I’m not sure my first thought would be too push in the already shattered drivers side window to cut the engine, I suppose I’d be more tempted to see if the child I’d seen stumbling was alright, afterthat, I have thankfully never been in that situation , also hope never to be.
As Max and I have written above, from details regarding the end of a phone call from Sylvains ex-wife Lydie timestamped at 15:32, he was still alive and apparently hadn’t reached Le Martinet, whether that is true we’ll never know, the one thing I have trouble with is the revving engine, I can accept it might occur for a few minutes but not 10 or more.
To me, this places the shooting nearer 15:35 give or take, the MC seen by WBM – now how far from Le Martinet was that ? I really don’t recall, I know a later time has been attributed and the ‘witnesses’ who heard the ‘explosions’ have said that they didn’t look at their watch, hey ho – round in circles we go.
Randomly I started thinking about the arrival of SM at Le Martinet from his perspective.
It seemed to me (in light of the new information re MC1 having black eyes and assuming MC1 = X) that SM could have easily initially assumed that SAH and X were working together. He would assume that he (SM) was the target because he would assume that they were both in the car that had just passed him up the Combe.
So far, so what? But maybe there was an additional reason he would fear some vaguely levantine men with guns. Maybe, as a seducteur, he had been involved with one or more muslim women and had very real concerns about his past (and their families) catching up with him. Or maybe a french woman with a possessive muslim boyfriend.
Would any such assumptions alter his behaviour? Given that I think he chose fight over flight, the answer would be “yes” from my perspective.
Overall I don’t think it particularly likely, but hey, we are several sigmas out already.
Rashomon, the ‘black eyes’ have now become brown – let’s settle on dark eyes. If you are looking for dark eyed men in France, good luck ! They don’t have to be of ethnic origin, it is the Latin influence, it is the Normans and more latterly the Germans that intoduced blueisheyes. If we’re all honest isn’t Europe a melting pot ?
Those in Texas , New York, China and Timbukto will no doubt have their thoughts on this scenario, I have greater respect for those that know France and those that have at least holidayed in Europe ! It ain’t the US of A….
As Shadwell and I commented, if the MC sketch was of someone with the appearance of being Arab or Eastern, why arrest Eric D. French, white, male …..
He certainly has lost weight since his younger days and up a ladder, maybe more so since his dubious exit from the Municipal Police.
Just look at the sketch again, if we are to believe the ONF agents were the compilers, the man has a visible iris – beyond that, they spoke to him, we don’t know if he replied.
Maybe it is all a conspiracy and Saad was planning on passing info to whomever, I have no greater insight than all the other ‘plebs’ that contribute to the online ‘saga’ – no matter what language.
Lynda, of course we don’t know, but imagine you saw a body lying in a country road & a car racing toward it, what would be your first reaction ?
I bet you would signal the car to stop .
Likewise with BM. he ‘says’ the engine was revving, well because he saw wheels spinning [?] he did not know if it would be coming forward, surely, seeing that one would definitely think someone was operating the gears & accelerator?
We know… dead men do not rev engines, but BM didn’t know or should not have known at that point that AH was dead……..
By the position of Zainab’s body ,which he said he was attending, if the car had moved forward it would have run over him & her .
So the question remains, why did he not try to stop/alert the driver first ?………..I say, because he already ‘knew’ the driver of that car was dead & so there was no fear of being run over.
This means he has to be a suspect.
By suspect I do not mean killer, I mean BM was the stooge,the clean up & propaganda guy……………remember, RAF hero, nerves of steel , film scene…… From the very beginning he was given an easy ride with the authorities, English & French.
I also think that somewhere along the line he was the one who contacted the British embassy to say, ‘job done’.
Lars.
It is too early to say anything.
The “terrorism” angle comes from what appears to be the a/c reaching FL350 and then a catastrophic event occurred.
I believe Roll Royce in Derby (their Trent monitoring facility) are providing information to the investigation (as per).
Nothing much else to add really. (only that it would appear that “RR Trent” didn’t receive any in-flight engine error codes).
I believe MAS “crash” (in the end) will prove to be a damn site easier that the Martinet puzzle.
Yes James, it probably will be a lot easier. It is hard to disappear completely these days. At least for an airplane.
I have seen that they have at last deployed some well equiped airplanes in the search. I have seen too many photos of men staring out of airplane windows and doors.
I have also heard that the Americans have looked at their satelite images but have not seen any trace of an explosion. But I guess a plane can also be implode or just break up in pieces.
@shadwell
Re @Max. Er… don’t know.
Exactly!
EricD … assumed MC and a very LOCAL guy … does not at all match with a RHD/UK X5. It is a little miracle that EM/BV even made a local move, with that mysterious UK X5 around.
Suppose Eric really turned out to be MC (and X) and he was asked:
Q: Eric, who/what was the X5?
E: There was no X5
(investigators are baffled)
E: It was that stupid UK guy. He and his family came but didn’t like the place. When he left, he f**** forgot his cap. That idiot came back some time later to get that cap, just when I wanted to take out SM. In the end … you know, I simply took them all out. Bloody tourists.
Katie, I respect your opinion that Brett Martin was somehow involved, it is’t mine.
I have no doubt that from the off Brett Martin and the ONF workers were all suspects, although not said publicly, that would be plain logic, the declaration of BM being a ‘hero’ could even have been a ruse at the time, to make the man too sure of himself.
I don’t know if I’ve said it here before, had Brett Martin been a permanent resident in France in his house in Lathuile, I’d give greater thought to him being ‘undercover’. The property is a holiday home, it was being prepared to officially rent out, bought some two years before the event.
So, conveniently he was at his home in Lathuile when someone sprung him into action to ‘off’ a family….. of course I could be completely misjudging the situation.
Max, the photo of Eric D. in Le Monde article is plain weird, eerie – he has lost a great deal of weight since his days in the Municipal Police, worry does that.
Lynda, my very first reaction when seeing BM was = SAS.
Either retired or active. Trained ,fit , deadpan, cool headed, his word was accepted as true.
So much points to him being key to this mystery … but I hasten to add, only because he was following orders not for personal reasons.
Funny how we see different things in different people ! Personally I can say with all honesty that I have never knowingly met someone from the SAS, so I have absolutely no idea how they might behave.
I’m not into that sort of stuff on TV, films or books !
Maybe, you are right, then why hasn’t a nice easy explanation been put in the public arena, it probably has, Zaid, who has been released from bail conditions, but remains a ‘suspect’ according to Maillaud – with your observation that could be the ‘get out of jail free’ card that the French Authorities are holding.
Zaid was judged by many to be responsible because of his attitude in the Panorama interview, and many called him a psychopath, I don’t know him or BM so I can’t judge their underlying pesonalities.
Why the spectactular arrest of a white, French male by the name of Eric D. ?
Another mystery to add to the pile.
Logically it would not be Zaid who committed this crime & Maillaud must be more than stupid if he thought he was. I saw that as a bluff.
If Zaid wanted to kill for money he would not have left two children alive…who are beneficiaries.
Whilst I believe Zaid does know a great deal more than he’s said,I do not think he had anything to do with the murders, he’s scared to speak because he could be next in line if he does.
This is almost certainly to do with the will yes,but not the money of today,but more to do with the loss of assets in Iraq ,why they fell out with Saddam & who gained from the sequestered assets.
They didn’t flee Iraq willingly. Yet the French have refused to go there [understandably ] to investigate the story.
There’s much to silence both for governments & a certain wealthy individual [ Iraqi] living in the UK…if I’m right,it stretches all the way up to the French government & on to Obama.
When Kadhim died it’s possible all this history was unearthed .
When Saad said ‘ he had done something stupid [ possibly tried to blackmail ] & had some important papers, I believe this was it.
This was a crime to silence all who knew what Saad had found out.
All possible . Governments are ruthless as we saw with David Kelly.
Katie, BM didn’t look so ‘trained, fit’ in his BBC interview, he admits he was making an effort on the climb …. the Triathlon guy, the man he was, if I recall correctly was a photo from 2006 (?). As for ‘dead pan’, cool headed’ – he is an ex-pilot, as James would put it a ‘four bar’, I would hope he would be, don’t we all admire our flight pilots, often applauding after he/she gets us safely to our destination.
Just coming at it from a different angle, he was described as being in a panic when he met Bossy about 200 metres from the scene (Non-Elucide), Bossy went into the shadows on screen, whereas he showed his face to camera in one of the UK programmes.
I found of a photo of Philippe Bossy, months before, who works as a Mountain Guide and runs conferences about his exploits and from Le Tour de France.
Katie, with your last comment – I’m out, sorry.
If that makes me foolish, naive, then so be it, I just don’t approach everything from the angle of a cover-up.
Good to read your opinion and speculation, have a good day – much to do and it’s almost lunchtime !
OK,Lynda.
All I will add is that, families do not get randomly killed in a remote spot, on whim of some gun collector.
The whole crime was cleverly thought through & executed well.
From the start Maillaud wanted & still wants it to be Zaid, poor guy he would have been in prison had he not had the sense in refusing to travel. His comment about ‘powerful people’ in France knowing what happened, was spot on.
Enjoy your lunch.
@Lynda
Le Tour de France? What, yet another cyclist?
Shadwell, he was with the Tour (followed it, like a reporter) one year and presented a conference about it, maybe the word better used would be a ‘presentation’ at a residence for the elderly. I did post all this on MZT, a long time ago. The man looked like Bossy from the TV and the name attributed to the ‘conferencier’ was Philippe Bossy, his age on another website tied up as well.
I suppose he cycles if he was that interested in following the Tour, no guarantee though.
Katie, I have to respond to “His comment about ‘powerful people’ in France knowing what happened, was spot on.” Knowing that he, Zaid, has questioned whether Mollier was the target, I thought the comment could relate to the Schutz family, Genevieve Schutz-Morange being the sister of the infamous Pierre Morange as the ‘powerful’. We were told at one time that he was running the ‘show’, and instructing the family to keep quiet, he could well be the one behind the latest turn of events regarding the complaint placed against BFM TV.
I don’t think it is as cut and dried as you write, I have seen nothing to prove one way or the other, with respect.
Maybe it isn’t Lynda, but the people I’m talking about were all caught up in the French Elf/Aquitaine bribery scandal in which the Iraqi I’m talking about was/is appealing,
French MP’s & oil execs are accused, two already jailed.
It’s a long trail but if you want to spare the time, here’s some interesting reading.
https://wikileaks.org/wiki/Debunking_the_Carter_Ruck_defence_of_British-Iraqi_billionaire_Nadhmi_Auchi
Remember Kadhim Al Hilli was well up in the Ba’athist party but fell out with them….over what we don’t know, but they were a very respected family
PS,
I’ve always been more interested in motive more than method, people are thinking too parochial, was it just a fluke there was an Irqi conference taking place that week in nearby Geneva ?
I suggest that’s why AH made a sudden decision to get to France & that a fictitious reunion /meeting with someone who was attending that conference, was ‘set up’ for him.
Now I shall go into the garden & do some work. ;-)
@Lynda
To be fair to PM, he has been the victim of some unfortunate press insinuation in the past so a desire to shield family members from media attention is perhaps understandable.
PM? Not the PM, of the 2007 ‘killed with 18 knife stabs’ CM case? Uncle of CS, designer of the ‘wall’:)
Shadwell,
I think PM also has earned his reputation well on his own.
Katie, I’m not being deliberately awkward, I have glanced at what you’ve posted – implicating Saad in such things, a few questions come to mind, I am intrigued as to whether you came to the conclusion yourself or if you were influenced/convinced by anothers thoughts.
As I undertand, Saad was a child, under 18 when he settled in the UK ?
The family had holidayed around Lake Annecy before, maybe May 2011 ?
During their stay this time they’d not been to Geneva ?
What were the dates of the ‘Iraqi Conference’ and why was it in Geneva ?
Why choose Le Martinet, there has to be other ways to wipe out a family and not create waves, I’m sure you’ll answer they wanted to create waves, but who is they and why ?
My own thoughts,Lynda. I just searched for historic Iraqi connections.
The man’s name = X came up with a court case , one of his friends a Syrian called Rezco was Obama’s main fund raiser but the additional money for O’s house came from the UK Iraqi who has been banned form the US but has large building projects there & wants to get back in.
There’s loads of it on the net,even though he’s had most of it ‘scrubbed’.
I worked backwards to Kadhims will & what was possibly found with it, IE historic events & found the Ba’ath party linked them at the same time & X was Saddam’s right hand man when properties were nationalised = stolen, also his senior arms dealer. They also arrived in the UK only a year apart, now this X is a billionaire, where did that money come from initially ?
I think Zaid being the elder wanted to shut his brother up because he seems the more stoic not the hothead Saad appears to be.
Oddly we checked it out at the time & I was sure the conference was the same week but here it says the 19th September;
http://www.iraqinews.com/features/iraqi-human-rights-denies-reports-over-failure-of-geneva-conference/#axzz2vgZOffXJ
http://www.globalresearch.ca/boycott-and-chaos-at-the-united-nations-in-geneva-who-committed-war-crimes/5307071
As Saad holidays in the region it would make sense to suggest meeting him there….and so close to Geneva
No, I don’t think he made it to the bank,but we assumed for a while they were on their way there in connection to his fathers account , which is why he had taken papers & passports & then also being dressed smartly.