TCK: Forum (public)

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)

martinet_sm3proc2

(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.

tck_granny2x

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 witnessses

Main 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

4,749 thoughts on “TCK: Forum (public)”

  1. @Marlin,

    I thank you for the invitation to participate in your initiative. I am sorry but I must however decline. I am too busy with ‘my own’ investigation and when I ever get any time to write anything publicly about Chevaline I will do so here at Max’ blog.

    I am in contrast to you rather optimistic that the Chevaline killings will eventually be solved (if the killer will be convicted is another question), even though Maillaud et al will do everything they can to avoid this and close the case as fast as possible.

    I have no objections if you will include ideas/facts/scenarios from the MZT-blog or this blog (if Max has no objections). I welcome any initiave to throw a light on these killings, so I sincerely wish you luck.

    ./Lars

  2. @Marlin,

    I see matters like Lars. I have to decline, more for practical matters, namely that I have simply not time enough to burn:) I have already created the deadzone blog as a follow-up for MZT. I made made that specifically a ‘zero effort’ setup. I will channel my own thoughts on Chevaline through this (deadzone) blog, and perhaps also distribute them through twitter. I have no time for yet more editorial work.

    But, of course, you are free to refer to thoughts, scenario’s etc as they are published on this (deadzone) blog. If accompanied with the correct credits then I can see no problem.

    I still feel very strongly for the ‘double trip’ scenario, so the more people people get to know that scenario the bigger the chance that it will tip the X5 into non-existence (if ONF1 is grilled on the matter, btw I suggest Gerrie Nel as the one doing the grilling;), and thus free the way for an ‘strictly local’ solution to the Chevaline mystery where Sylvain Mollier was the target.

    Maintaining the X5 means the UK piste’s can not be closed, which in turn is the best excuse for everybody, including EM and BV to not to have to look into the LOCAL side of the matter. Zaid is imho right.

    When questioned about the X5, both EM and BV say this X5 is still a mystery … why don’t they say ‘Perhaps it does not exist’ and go from there.

    Do I really have to assume that I am the only one coming up with a solution for the X5 mystery?

    ONF1 did see a BMW with the driver on the right
    ONF1 later thought ‘how did this car escape (over the mountains)?’
    ONF1’s answer to his own question was ‘It must have been a 4×4, an X5’

    And that is what ONF1 reported having seen: A BWM X5

    But it is in part just a case of wishful thinking. Because in reality it wasn’t a 4×4 escaping over the mountains, but it was SAH on his first visit to Martinet. He saw driver SAH, and he overlooked little Zainab and the people in the back:)

  3. Btw, I looked up some pre 2012 interviews of Pistorius. He had a quite normal voice. How on earth is it possible that his voice is so changed? Well, perhaps because it is acted. I’m in the process of listening through the full length sessions of the last week. At one time OP was asked to speak louder. Funnily enough his voice became a bit more ‘normal’ (like it used to be) … before it fell back into the ‘whine’ tone again (as if he realized he had to put up the right voice)

  4. A thought I just had early on when the builders were being reported they said they were alerted to the BMW because they thought it was the house owners arriving ,the house owners are english ,what if they had an appointment with Saad for something and said ,hey the builders have not finished at the house yet carry on up the road to the top of CDI and we will meet you there with a bottle of vino and some cakes ,their car was spotted on streetview recently what was it ?

  5. Pink, a BMW hatchback at a guess and dark blue.

    Saad didn’t drink alcohol, he followed a Muslim life, although ‘Westernised’, irrelevant really.

    But, yes it would figure that the front grill of the ‘two’ cars would be very similar, hence the thought from Fillion-Robin that it was the Bewicks, Fillion-Robin said he was behind with the extension, it was some extension almost doubled the size of the original house.

  8. Thanks Lynda and Lars not really light enough in colour to be a match ,it just struck me as a way to get SAH and family to CDI without any special planning they would be driving that way anyway and it could have been for any reason a meeting to pay for something , collect something just seemed kinda neat if you get my gist.

  9. I have to say, I did like the performance of prosecutor Gerrie Nel in his cross-examination of Oscar Pistorius. Nel’s attention for detail was excellent. I enjoyed every second of his cross-examination.

  13. Lars, a funny thing is that in France there is no such thing as ‘Good Friday’ as a religious holiday, I trust that EM has the culprits in this case and that it can be either implicated or separated completely from the event at Le Martinet, strange that he decides to hold a Press Conference, probably wants to boast about the ‘success’.

    Max knows I didn’t think the Lathuile and Chevaline murders were linked, we’ll see, I would like to be wrong.

  14. You know me, I like far out shots. Here is one regarding Pistorius. If true it proofs he is guilty beyond doubt;)

    Reeva’s jeans were found inside out. According to Gerrie Nel it indicates Reeva was about to leave but Pistorious said it indicates exactly the opposite. And indeed I found the remark of the, otherwise excellent Nel, rather strange.

    But the jeans are special. Because it was Pistorious drawing attention to the jeans in the first place. Pistorious said he wanted to use the jeans to cover the blue led in the, according to him, otherwise pitch black bedroom (after he closed the curtains). Also, that ‘blue led’ part was rather weird. But the whole blue-led/jeans remained without proper explanation.

    So, I started to think about these 2 things. I like puzzles. And I came up with the following:

    – Pistorious and Reeva had an argument/fight
    – Reeva was about to leave
    – Pistorious, out of control, shot dead Reeva in the toilet
    – Now Pistorious had a big problem. How to cover up?
    – He invented the burglar story
    – AND he hide that Reeva was about to leave
    – He did that by turning Reeva’s jeans inside out
    – To make sure this inside out jeans was noticed, Pistorious mentioned the blue led thing
    – In cross-examination Pistorious got his chance to ‘explain’ that the jeans proof that Reeva was not planning to leave

    Sure, a small detail in Pistorious cover up, but still (in this scenario) he did turn the jeans inside out on purpose. But …. Pistorious, in doing so might have made a terrible mistake. As follows:

    – Pistorious shot Reeva
    – He then went to the balcony to call for ‘help’ (and in his cover story checks if Reeva was in the bedroom)
    – He then also turned the jeans inside out (to hide that Reeva wanted to leave)

    BUT he might have had traces of gunpowder on his hands (he had just fired the gun and might not have cleaned his hands) …

    Perhaps those traces of gunpowder are still in the jeans. If so, Pistorious hangs!

  15. Lynda, you might wanna reed the link to Claude Antoine’s interview.
    He said the area in chevaline is known for petty crime. Im sure police will investigate if there is a connection to all crimes with guns in the area.

  17. Thanks, Julie, it is one that we saw on MZT many months ago, and Claude Antoine being a retired Gendarme should know, shouldn’t he ? This of course is quite different to others who say that there had never been poblems in the area.

    Of course not long before Le Martinet event a woman was found dead in the woods, appears to have been from a drugs overdose, she was found laying beside her car/van with her dog, a ‘marginal’ who’d set up home there.

    Will be interesting to see what the Press Conference reveals, it looks as if EM is already distancing the Lathuile and Chevaline murders…..

  18. More to read about the Lathuile murder today. But both articles are beyond paywalls :

    Lathuile – Six mois après le meurtre de Nicole Communal-Tournier, cinq suspects ont été arrêtés et incarcérés Meurtre du camping : c’est l’argent qui était visé
    http://www.ledauphine.com/haute-savoie/2014/04/17/meurtre-du-camping-c-est-l-argent-qui-etait-vise

    Meurtre au camping L’Idéal : cinq personnes arrêtées et mises en examen
    http://www.lessorsavoyard.fr/Actualite/ p. 34

  19. Ok … still a few hours to toy with my story before EM possibly blows my ‘inventions’ to pieces:)

    So … here is what happened:

    – SM hassles the Lathuile beauties
    – SM became a nuisance to JP because of the upcoming marriage
    – SM has to go
    – JP contacts some ‘known’ guys from the region (X) to do the honors. ‘Kill SM’ is the order
    – JP sets up a lure and redirects SM to Martinet
    – X waits at Martinet
    – X kills SM … and SAH and the massacre is known to half of western Europe. Not the plan
    – Fast forward 1 year
    – The robot portrait is published (of X!)
    – X and group revisit JP to warn him (and NCT) to keep calm
    – Tensions rise and somehow NCT is shot
    – JP can’t tell and coughs up a story about masked burglars

    – Through incredible luck EM finds the killers of NCT

    – JP is now cornered!!!
    – If X talks, JP falls and drags Chevaline with him

    Yup, the video says that for once, EM was lucky. Well the guy needed some luck. Who knows EM is more lucky than he could imagine, and perhaps it will resolve Chevaline too:)

    Story and video: http://alpes.france3.fr/2014/04/16/en-marge-de-la-tuerie-de-chevaline-le-meurtre-de-lathuile-en-passe-d-etre-resolu-460463.html

    translated in french

    Ok … encore quelques heures à jouer avec mon histoire avant EM souffle éventuellement mes «inventions» de pièces :)

    Alors … voici ce qui s’est passé :

    – SM emmerder les beautés Lathuile
    – SM est devenu une nuisance pour JP raison de la prochaine mariage
    – SM doit aller
    – Contacts de JP certains gars «connu» de la région (X) pour faire les honneurs . ‘Kill SM’ est à l’ordre
    – JP redirige SM à Martinet
    – X attend à Martinet
    – X tue SM … et SAH et le massacre est connu à la moitié de l’Europe . Pas le plan
    – Fast forward 1 an
    – Le portrait robot est publié ( de X ! )
    – X et le groupe revisite JP lui ( et NCT ) avertissent de garder son calme
    – La tension monte et en quelque sorte NCT est tué
    – JP ne peut pas dire et toux une histoire avec des cambrioleurs masqués
    – Par une chance incroyable EM retrouve les assassins de NCT
    – JP est maintenant acculé !
    – Si X pourparlers , JP tombe et entraîne avec lui Chevaline

    Yup , la vidéo dit que pour une fois , EM a été chanceux . Eh bien, le gars avait besoin un peu de chance . Qui sait EM est plus chanceux que ce qu’il pouvait imaginer , et c’est peut-être aura résoudre Chevaline trop :)

  22. Sorry Max, Anon was me as you guessed, must be the holidays making internet connection very poor, if you read the Twitter feed it says the first arrests were made in February, I wonder if it was around the time of Eric D’s arrest ?

    Interestingly the leader is known to the C-T’s, what an awful turn of events for the family and the local community, he also committed similar crimes (robbery) in 1996 and 2011, so highly unlikely that it is the guy with his own company in Doussard.

    I suppose no-one is about to name the culprit since the Eric D debacle, it will be months before it goes to court.

  23. Yes Lynda, you are right about the february thing. I wanted to say this earlier but I do recollect that a journo said that apart from EricD and this other guy, there were more people considered/tracked by the police (in respect to Chevaline). We never heard of those other people, but now 5 people pop up in the Lathuile case. So, is there a cross-over between Chavaline and Lathuile? As I understand from the tweets, there is NOT … but the timely coincidence between this Lathuile group and the EricD bunch is remarkable:)

  24. All the #lathuile tweets from https://twitter.com/LeMessagerfr

    (newest tweet at the top)

    l’instigateur était connu pour des faits de vols en 1996 mais aussi en 2011

    première vague d’interpellation en février, la seconde il y a quelques jours. Des traces ADN ont été retrouvées sur une des armes

    les individus étaient cagoulés, gantés, et interdiction de parler pour ne pas se faire reconnaître

    4 personnels territoriaux intégrés dans l’équipe d’enquête pour mener les investigations sur le terrain local

    groupe d’enquête anti cambriolage surveillance active sur des individus avait identifié une partie de l’équipe

    le procès n’aura pas lieu avant plusieurs mois

    liens de connaissance entre les 2 jeunes d’Ugine et du Doussardien

    instigateur du projet est âge de 40 ans, charpentier et habite Doussard, il était un familier des gérants.

    l’enquête permettra de connaître le rôle de chacun sur l’affaire mais aussi sur d’autres affaires de vols en bande organisée

    aveux ont pu être faits par certains, d’autres ont été moins diserts

    récupération des armes plus tard dans un fleuve, 2 vagues d’interpellation avec de gros moyens de gendarmerie

    décharge de plomb fatal pour la gérante. Les individus se débarrasseront du véhicule en le brûlant

    les individus prennent la fuite. Celui qui détient le fusil descend l’escalier, prend peur et tire coup direction porte appart

    un devait neutralisé la gérante et les 2 autres le gérant qui était à l’étage mais rien ne se passera comme prévu

    forcé une première porte. Un est reste en bas faire le guet

    3 des individus partis de Gilly sur Isère, ont récupéré les 2 autres sur la route, passage à l’acte vers 1 h du matin

    le projet était de séquestrer les gérants du camping

    véhicule volé a été utilisé pour le vol, armes utilisées: fusil à pompe et un Barretta 9 mm

    2 frères originaires d’Albertville se sont joints au projet ensuite

    projet de cambriolage arrivé assez tôt dès l’été, un proche de la famille s’est rapproché de deux jeunes d’Ugine

    Début de la conf de presse sur le meurtre au camping de #Lathuile pic.twitter.com/PE1Gu4iVZv

  26. Just so as we don’t get into any trouble on here, the carpenter in Doussard that has a very nice website, posted on Facebook on the 10th April, as the suspect in the Lathuile murder was arrested in February I very much doubt it is him !

    Just as a warning, fellow sleuths.

  29. Sorry if i’m not up to date, but in what way do you think the Lathuile-case is related to the Al Hilli-case?

  30. @Recognito,

    Two murders (4+1 dead), shootings, near in time (14 months) and place (6km).

  31. Recognito, Max view on that is only a few posts back.
    I dont know if there is a connection. Only thing we all know is; nothing special happens in the area, besides petty crime. And now 2 shootings.
    People are pistol whipped and shot in both cases. Robbery has no connection and if SM was target, with sah and family as colleteral, it is local. No idea about the why, just an option as many.

  32. Lars and Julie – Thanks. I’ve now read the earlier posts.

    But robbery seems to be the reason in the Lathuile-case, as mentioned in the link from the press-conference above!

  33. I will concede;)

    Lathuile was a robbery gone wrong

    Let’s see if Chevaline, in the end, turns out to be as mundane as Lathuile. I put my cards on ‘A killing gone wrong’

    (I will admit, I’m slightly disappointed … I had hopes for a grand scale local web of intrigues … but in the end ‘the man in the bar’ did it)

  34. A bit like the ‘butler did it’, I still think for all the intrigue there will be a mundane explanation, even if that is a jealous lover, way back on MZT I wrote that something went very wrong that day, I also think only one man was involved and that is why he is difficult to trace, he’ll need to make a mistake to be caught.

    That is where EM will need some luck, if you have a secret, it is only a secret if you alone know it, one other person and it isn’t a secret any longer ….

    What has struck me in watching the goings on in the two cases, Chevaline and Lathuile, is how much information is on the web that is accessible to all and you know what they say, a little knowledge is dangerous.

  35. @ Max

    From memory, EM stated that he had a total of eight suspects under observation when Eric D was arrested. To date I have not seen any reference to the other seven being either arrested or eliminated from enquiries.

    The Eric D arrest debacle and the media feeding frenzy may have made EM more cautious.

    P.S. EM subsequently stated (in the Sunday times) that he had a number of “close but not family” associates of Saad’s brother also under observation.

  36. Rashomon, I think he also said that there were people in Spain who are under observation too.

    I just wonder if it is because he can’t let go of the Al-Hilli piste, or to show that all pistes remain open contrary to what he’s said before.

    I think the accusations fired at the French by Zaid will have hurt a great deal.

  37. @Lynda

    I must have missed the reference to Spain. Do you recall when/where this was?

    I wonder if EM is drip feeding info in order to meet the monthly ‘progress’ requirement i.e. to keep the investigation open.

    For reference folks – below is the text from my post sumarising the Sunday Times article:-

    @ All

    There is a short article in todays Sunday Times (main section – page 29) headed “Alps shooting police look ‘closer to brother’ The author is @johnfollain

    Best not post the article for copyright reasons, so key points:-

    1) People under surveillance in both UK and France (<5 people)
    2) EM intends to take some of these peeps into custody (inc in the UK)
    3) Those concerned in UK are 'close to brother… but not family'
    4) MI6 via telephone at Xmas 'we know who (Saad) is. . .he worked with satellites'

    Mmmmm, sounds like someone is beating about the bush, hoping a suspect is going to lose their nerve and make a mistake (see my post above).

    I am sure that most old-timers here can guess the most likely candidate for 'close to brother… but not family'

    The MI6 quotes are devoid of interest. The key point is whether it was MI6 or MI5 on the phone.

    Was any of this in an open press conference?
    Is this more off-the-record wink-wink for your article stuff?

  38. Rashomon, being a very old timer on here and MZT, I didn’t get this at all !

    ‘most likely candidate for ‘close to brother… but not family’ ‘

    Do you recall the date of the article ? Would that be the first Christmas or the second after the murders ?

    Do all British/Iraqi citizens have a file with MI5/6 ? Maybe they do and maybe they are lways on a watch list, because if so then Zaid and his mother and father must have been as well.

    I wonder if Lars knows whether this would apply in Sweden ?

  39. @Lynda

    The ST article was recent – approx couple of weeks after EM released ED – I shall dig out the exact date for you later.

    We know from the Daily Mail (I think) that a neighbour had a surveilance team sitting on their drive watching the Al-Hilli residence in the run up to the Gulf War. So, presumably there was a file at that time, but in that timeframe it could also have been his mother or father who had piqued their interest.

    Which Christmas did EM had a telecon with our security services? – I don’t know – presumably last Christmas – it is a bit worrying to think that it took EM over a year to have such a conversation.

    As to the ‘most likely candidate’ – I don’t want to expand on the EM quote in the ST for both legal reasons and moral reasons. Briefly, I consider that EM has treated Zaid in a particularly shabby way. Now, with these quotes in the Sunday Times, he has also thrown everybody close to Zaid under a bus.

    I was shocked that the ST even printed it. I did a quick look and couldn’t find another UK broadsheet that followed their lead. Which may tell us something.

  41. 4 articles on Chevaline and Lathuile in L’Essor Savoyard 24 April:
    1) Etonnante série d’affaires macabres sur les bords du lac d’Annecy
    2) Le procureur devenu médiatique malgré lui
    3) Des événements potentiellement nuisibles pour le tourisme
    4) Meurtre de la gérante du camping : l’instigateur du cambriolage était un familier des lieux

  42. Hello World !

    A few months ago I had to say on MZt that : “The bicycle was under the car”

    Excuse my stubbornness

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8IPfSETZmcDSEhGSXZsZTQtU0k/edit?usp=sharing

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8IPfSETZmcDV0pqb2xlUkRHUDg/edit?usp=sharing

    If my idea is correct, why the police hide the true about the bicycle ?.

    I am thinking, thinking … and I think perhaps this bicycle under the car is not the SM’s bicycle, is a bicycle of another man …

  46. @Lars

    This morning when I went to the work I crossed a cyclist and on the radio spent this music

    and I remembered SM and Lars :

    Lights will guide to home
    And ignite your bones
    And I will try, to fix you

    Les lumières(feux) guideront à la maison
    Et enflammez vos os
    Et j’essayerai, vous fixer(vous réparer)

    Have a Good Day

  48. I have left a message for him to pop in Lars ,they are all plane hunting over at CM.

  50. Hey Lars

    Just “hunting” for MH370. Damn strange goings on there.

    What can I (attempt) to do for you ?

  51. Hey James,
    Yes I understood that you were occupied by MH370.
    I have sent you an email have you received it?

  52. Hey Lars

    Got it. It didn’t go straight through to “inbox”, but have it now.

    There is a French section on that service. Checked it but it doesn’t have that channel.
    That channel is owned by NBC Universal. No idea if it can be access via them ? Doubtful I think.

  54. Hi James,

    Is it possible to put in one line what the (current) most likely scenario is of what happened to MH370?

    (because I’m amazed that people can puzzle over MH370 with even less ‘data points’ (clues) as with e.g. Chevaline:)

  55. Regarding Chevaline, I have come up with a new idea. The sighting of the motorbiker (MC) by ONF2 at ‘2 hairpins up’ (above Martinet)

    To me it seems like MC was trying to make a phone call, because of the ‘no signal’ situation at Martinet

    This is a better explanation than my previous solutions, namely, relocation the SM ambush, or escaping AFTER the killing. The latter is not possible because the sighting is timed BEFORE the killing

    Very probably MC did NOT make a phone call, otherwise EM/BV probably would have traced this. It is likely that MC also at 2-hairpins-up did NOT have a signal. Perhaps he wanted to try even higher ground, but then ONF2 stumbled down and redirected MC back to Martinet and further.

    …. anyway, this ‘MC tries to phone at 2-hairpins-up’ is for me another building block. Together with the 14h40/15h17/SAH/doublevisit/No-X5 building block

  56. Max

    Yes, I think that there is a good chance that you are correct about MC trying to get a better signal upslope.

    A long time ago I managed to find a coverage map for that cell online. (I think the operator was Orange) At the time I was trying to work out whether the report by BM of no cellphone coverage at the scene was plausible.

    The coverage map indicated that reception was marginal at best at the scene – effectively confirming the report by BM in my mind.

    However, in reviewing the map I remember noticing that the coverage improved markedly up the sides of the valley. Particularly so on the Le Martinet side of the valley because (to my amateur eye) the valley ‘kinks’ a little bit, so the line-of-sight to the cell tower may be better.

    One point I would note is that MC may not have been making an actual phone call, it could have been text or a voice app like skype or whatsapp. So I don’t know whether the operator logs would do deep packet inspection sufficient to resolve that. Also, MC could have been using another radio system e.g. TETRAPOL but I guess that the cellphone coverage map (which is probably mostly a prediction from a computer model) would be a ‘good enough’ surrogate for other systems after allowing for cell tower height.

    Unfortunately this was some time ago and on a previous PC, so I don’t know if I managed to back up any screenshot or a link.

    So anyway, a random robber (like Mr Muscle) acting alone would not be contacting anyone would he?

    Communiction implies co-ordination.

  57. @Rashomon and all,

    (reprinted from private)

    Anyway, I just thought of a variant of the rendezvous scenario. Remember that it was Eugene who did put me on the ‘rendezvous’ track … and I’m still on this:)

    Using the same 3 building blocks:
    1. SAH’s double visit (no X5!) based on 14h40 Fillon and 15h17 last picture
    2. MC/X at 2-hairpins-up for a phone call attempt based on ONF2 sighting
    3. Everybody (ONF1, ONF2, WBM, PB) speaks the truth

    The variant is: There was to be a rendezvous between SAH, MC/X and Y … but SM intervened. In this case SM is the good guy

    (note: in the ‘normal’ scenario, SM=Y, and there is a rendezvous between SAH, MC/X and SM)

    SM and Y (and possibly MC) are connected through work (Ugitech) or something. MC and Y have a ‘deal’ with SAH. Industrial espionage (or whatever … look I was not at all into this, but I’m building a variant scenario;)

    What happened was that SM found out about the plans of Y (who is possibly his/a friend). SM said to Y ‘Are you stupid? This risky deal … etc, bla, bla, bla’

    But apparently MC and Y went ahead and they scheduled a rendezvous with SAH at Martinet (so a rendezvous with SAH, MC and Y)

    Now, SM somehow found out about this rendezvous and went to Y. SM could, or could not find Y … but anyway, SM found out about Martinet and went to Martinet to prevent the deal and to say (as a good guy) that everybody should stop with this stupid deal.

    SM arrived at Martinet. MC, who saw SM arriving, directly knew that SM had now blown his (MC and Y) deal with SAH. MC was furious, and just went into overdrive. So MC (who had brought a gun, just in case) drew the gun and shot SM, and then (had to) shoot SAH too

    Perhaps Y was present? Who knows.

    The good thing about this scenario is that, in a way, SM is collateral. And that he did ‘disturb’ something … but that there also was a very definite reason for MC/X to shoot him (first)

    The MC phone call attempt at 2-haipins-up could have been to Y

    Perhaps it was even more professional like:

    – MC and SAH (first visit) rendezvous at Martinet 14h50 (seen by Fillon 14h40)
    – MC checks SAH and decides the deal is on
    – MC signals Y to come to Martinet, and tells SAH to be back at 15h30 to close the deal
    – SAH is off for some sightseeing and returns 15h30 (indicated by last picture rout du Moulin 15h17)
    – MC stays around, goes to 2-hairpins-up for some phone call attempt

    But at 15h30 it is not Y who arrives … but SM. MC is furious, goes ballistic, and kills all

  58. @Rashomon

    I’m no expert on communication but iirc I have read that sms messages travel inside the ping packet (hence the short length of iirc 144). If it is easier to read this msg from the logs, if at all possible, I don’t know. Maybe the message is encrypted … again idk. A talk probably shows up in the log, but the content of the talk itself very probably is not recorded … e.g. hence the vagueness surrounding the LR to SM phone call

    Anyway, we do know ED supposedly ‘pinged’ a nearby cell tower, hence his arrest (the ‘ping’ being one of the factors)

    Of course ED walks, his arrest seemingly going nowhere. Still, one might wonder. ED said he was in Annecy-le-Vieux around 14h00 (supposedly at a gas station). I can’t see it ‘ping’ the Doussard cell tower from as far as Annecy-le-Vieux. But I have to assume the police acted on a ‘ping’ not only by location (Doussard) but also by time (around 15h00). Hence the ‘he was in the neighbourhood’ idea.

    These 2 things together make it seem like ED traveled from 14h00 Annecy-le-Vieux to 15h00 Doussard … at least that I think has happened.

    But ED walks, so I guess the police found out he was not MC. Perhaps the ED arrest was a complete missfire, and the police extrapolated some ED ‘ping’ into a too wild guess.

  59. 28 degrees today where I live, warmer than Spain and France! Has to be noticed when it happens! ;)

  60. Hello World !

    I have a new “portrait-robot”, but this time in song !

    “Il portait des culottes, des bottes de moto
    Un blouson de cuir noir avec un aigle sur le dos
    Sa moto qui partait comme un boulet de canon
    Semait la terreur dans toute la région…”

    Goodnight :)

  61. I have a simple question for you all. A route puzzle. The ‘Last picture – Fillon’ anomalie

    – 15h17 was the last picture on route du Moulin (A)
    – *hhmm SAH passed Fillion (B)
    – 15h35 SAH was at Martinet

    If you want to discard SAH doing a double visit to Martinet it follows that:

    – *hhmm must be something like 15h25
    – SAH drove DOWN to direction Arnand, twice left, and UP again towards Chevaline http://goo.gl/maps/DwJ02

    So … what about this route and what about the 14h40 (45 minutes of target!!) that Fillon (mason) supposedly has stated?

  62. Why did the killing take place at parking Martinet?

    (MC=MotorCycle, X=Killer)

    The logic is that MC/X returned(!) to Martinet after being redirected away from Martinet by the ONF. And MC/X shot people dead on Martinet. Now, MC/X could have done that everywhere, e.g. on route Combe d’Ire, or whatever. So …

    Q: Why did MC/X go back(!) to Martinet to do his killing?

    A: Obviously because Martinet itself (the location) is special.

    Q: Why was Martinet special?

    A: Because it was the destination of the victim(s) of MC/X

    Q: But … MC/X could have killed his victim(s) anywhere on the route to Martinet, e.g. Route Forestiere??

    A: Not, if MC/X intended to kill multiple parties

    Q: Multiple parties?

    A: Yes, SM + SAH … (kill two birds with one stone)

    A: Only at Martinet where both SM and SAH present! (and as soon as both were present, MC/X came forward. Fact!)

    A: So, there must have been some sort of rendezvous

    Q: But SM was ‘lost’ and SAH was ‘sightseeing’??

    A: The idea of a secret is that is it secret. Both wouldn’t say ‘Hey all, I’m off to a secret meeting’ :)

  63. @Max

    A hypothesis before I go to sleep, it is that the family stops to “My Hom´Estetique by C” and then to use the “chemin du moulin”. Ou vise-versa.

    Goodnight.

  64. Key is….

    Where was Mollier going ?

    1. To him the route is known.
    And yet he is riding an expensive cycle.

    2. So where after The Martinet
    Impossible to continue.
    He would have to return.
    That hill climb was such a test ? Big enough to risk to his bike ?

    Martin said he thought Mollier was lying down. Taking a rest.
    Why would he think that ?
    Did Mollier climb rapidly ahead of Martin ?
    He would have looked the Pro Cyclist to Martin with his bike and his gear. What associated recall did Martin have to assume Mollier was so shattered he had to take a rest. A rest in an unusual position.

  65. I have changed my angle on the killing. I’m now focusing on the following problem/fact as described in my previous posts:

    – MC/X returned to Martinet to do the killing (fact!)
    – MC/X did not kill ONF1, did not kill ONF2, did not kill WBM
    – but … as said above, MC/X returned to kill SM and SAH at Martinet

    At least one of the victims must have had Martinet as destination, otherwise MC/X returning to Martinet makes no sense

    A. SM was ‘lost’
    B. SAH was ‘sightseeing’

    But MC/X knew at least one of them had Martinet as destination. This means that at least one of those options (A and B) must be wrong, but I tend to think that both are wrong. Both SAH and SM had Martinet as destination.

    If SAH going to Martinet resolves in the double visit (explaining the 14h40/Fillon, 15h17/Lastpicture, SAH=X5) then it is clear that SAH had Martinet as destination. As, in that case, SAH was not shot on his first visit, then it seems like MC/X waited for SM as well.

    And, well … the REALITY is that MC/X killed SM and SAH at Martinet … this is a fact! :)

    I have to guess the ‘Man in suit’ at the campsite somehow made SAH go to Martinet.

    Why did SAH bring his family to Martinet? … Emmmm, if SAH was doing shady busy, why did he take his family on holiday? Going on holiday, but taking all data stuff and phoning like crazy, etc. doesn’t seem to be the relaxing holiday. SO perhaps SAH took a short cut, and thought he could please his family with a sightseeing trip AND do the harmless deal on that same trip. In other words, SAH might have taken too much risk in going to Martinet.

    The moment SAH saw MC/X he knew there was something wrong. He was already running before shots were fired (Statement Zeena iirc) … and SAH nearly got away … and it looks like SAH was so desperate that it seems he even was prepared to leave Zainab behind (the unimaginable thing for a father to do)

    SAH saw MC/X and knew it was instant trouble. How can a simple tourist be so prepared for an attack?

  66. James,

    Not exactly impossible to continue, but perhaps risky with that expensive bicycle.
    I have changed my mind a couple of times regarding Mollier’s route that day. Nowadays I find it most probable that he had an errand on Route Forestiere that afternoon, and thus deviated from his normal route.

    Maybe we will get some news from D. Rizet et al in the French documentary on Friday. We can always hope at least.

  67. The bike was a 5000 Euro gift from CS to SM. Makes me think ‘What am I doing wrong?’. I have to be happy with a new pair of socks from my beloved wife, but not SM, nope, he takes his expensive present on a bumpy road and gets shot.

    Suppose it wasn’t a gift, but they only said it was a gift to mask that in reality SM bought the bike himself. The question would arise … from what money source?

    True, 5000 euro’s for a good bike is ok, esp. if it is your hobby … but as a ‘gift’? I have a 3000 euro bike myself, but the thing is, I paid it from my own salary. I can’t imagine my wife offering this, and if she did I would say ‘Look sweety, keep your hard earned money, give me a kiss, a pair of new socks and a bottle of wine’ … and that would be it:)

  68. Martin says he saw one 4×4 pass heading down.
    ONF1 says he saw a RHD 4×4 on the route…and believes that vehicle did not travel down the Combe D Ire (it must have taken the cross country route….he says).

    Therefore the vehicle Martin saw must have been the only other vehicle that was known to ONF1. This would be ONF2.

    Given that Martin had already been passed by Al Hilli who was heading up the hill, ONF2 would have had to have also passed Al Hilli and SM at some point (at the car park or between there and when he passed Martin).

    What ONF2 saw is crucial.

    Why then is it that ONF1 is allowed to sate that ONF2 saw the MC (and even spoke to him) yet nothing else with regard to what they saw (or didn’t ) is known ?

    This goes to the root of the matter.
    For example, did the MC hear/see Al Hilli approach the car park…and move away from them (and therefore into ONF2).

    Forget what happened next, merely think “why would the MC move away from them). The MC would have understood that a car would not attempt to go further than the car park).
    However a cyclist might ? Maybe a cyclist was going to do just that.
    Like Lars said…. It is not impossible for a racing cycle to continue along that route, however unlikely it maybe .

    A reason for the attack on the Al hill family may then be…. The MC had no options but to attack SM at the car park.

    The MC had been moved back to that position by ONF2. And it was too late for him to move back beyond the car park after the ONF vehicle had gone as his target had now arrived on scene.

  69. …and with that in mind, I believe that

    1. The MC moved from the car park to a position beyond that place by the arrival of one of the deceased parties.
    That move may have been forced or intentional.

    2. The attack at the car park which was instigated likely by the MC was forced upon him by the actions of the ONF2 team.

    From that you can run TWO scenarios.
    And the answer to that may be in who ONF2 saw at or closest to the car park when they past through it.

    But ONF2 doesn’t speak !

  70. James,

    https://twitter.com/jeanmarcduc

    Jean-Marc Ducos told me that this 4×4 coming down as seen by WBM was identified. Supposedly a Citroen (Visa Fourgon?). He told me he had mentioned it in one of his articles. But I couldn’t find it. I have asked JMD for this article. The question is still pending … but I work on the hypothesis that JMD is right and that this 4×4 is accounted for. This 4×4 would indeed be a fifth car (SAH, ONF1, ONF2, Citroen, X5)

    There are doubts about the X5. Which is normal because it is yet to be accounted for.

    I account for the X5 by assuming SAH went to Martinet twice (which resolves 14h40/15h17 Fillon/LastPicture and explains X5) … but this in turn MUST mean that SAH had a meeting OR it was a ‘cuddly toy’ which turned the SAH’s into the unluckiest people on earth.

    It is possible that nobody but me is able to crack the X5 riddle … because nobody but me will believe that ONF1 could have mistaken SAH for an X5. Well, ONF1 is human? Humans make mistakes:) So …. put a gun to ONF1’s head and ask ‘Are you really really really sure that it was an X5 … or could it have been a regular BMW like Saads?’

    There are 2 sets of front tyre imprints visible. In my view they both belong to SAH’s BMW, going/parking at Martinet twice

  72. James,
    I agree with you on both points.

    It is not certain that the murder was planned to take place at Martinet. The killer could have intended to use a more secluded place further up the road. The tarmac road continues for about 2 km pass Martinet.

    Yes, ONF2’s testimony is crucial. They could brake or make alibis for the other players. But as you say they don’t speak. I hope we will be able to force them out of their hiding in the future.

  76. Max

    I have moved closer to your perspective on the X5 being in fact Saad’s BMW.

    Looking at some local (UK) X5 models and the photos on the wiki page for the X5 :-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_X5

    I think that I personally could mistake the first generation X5 (the E53 model) for a ramdom mid range beemer estate if I
    were in, say, a van coming down a hill and thus looking down onto the BMW’s bonnet from a higher perspective than
    normal. . .

    However I don’t think I could make the same mistake with the second generation X5 (the E70 model).

    One concern I have is that this witness (ONF1) has been described as something of a ‘motor enthusiast’ who has also
    spoken to the media, seemingly confident in his testimony. I suppose his ‘expertise’ could be tested under similar lighting
    conditions etc. In fact I would hope that this was done as part of the reconstructions.

    What could be a distinguishing test would be to have ONF1 in a reconstruction with an X5 followed by Saad’s BMW
    specifically looking at the ride height and thus the visibility of the face of the X5 driver.

    Note that Saad’s BMW was used for towing a caravan and thus the rear shocks may have been adjusted accordingly.
    Possibly this could give a more ‘XFivey look’ when not under load.

    Then there is his description of the X5 driver which could have been Saad – maybe the white patches of hair looked like
    bald patches under those lighting conditions.

  77. Re the point of the X5 being confused with the 5 Series Touring.

    Whether or not this is so, the fact that the MSM reported that the British people involved in the incident were driving a BMW 4×4 could indicate that the initial “eye witnesses” believe that this was indeed the case.

    Having recently been involved (onlooker) to a serious incident which resulted in the loss of a life, I can say that the media interview all comers …regardless of the “facts”.

    And theses facts may indeed be correct at the time of “going to press”.

    The issue then would be….was there ever a BMW 4×4 ? Or was it the vehicle of Al Hilli that was seen.

    …..at which point the story told/believed by ONF1 becomes debatable.
    More so if we then have a “5th” vehicle.

  78. Bacchus,
    I understand what you are hinting at.
    I hope the gendarmerie will now stop dreaming about travelling abroad and start investigating Ugine instead.

  80. Be aware that if things take a local turn, we still have the following issues:

    – 3 SAH adults dead (collateral??)
    – X carrying 20+ bullets (to only kill SM?)
    – The 14h40-Fillon/15h17-Lastpicture anomalie
    – The notorious X5
    – If X5=SAH (to resolve the previous 2 points) then why did SAH go to Martinet twice?
    – The ‘man in suit’ at campsite on the day before the killing
    – The missing SAH passports
    – The LR to SM phone call, minutes before SM was killed
    – Why was SM going to Martinet? If SM=target then how did X know??
    – MC at 2-hairpins-up. Why?
    – EricD/Lathuile? Any connection, or not at all?

    So, our Ugine suicide man might me a crack in the wall. But it will be interesting to see how it breaks down, and what scenario surfaces … because all details have to get a place in the final picture

    Good luck hunting:)

  85. @Bacchus
    The bike in your third Google drive pic looks to be the same as in pic 1 – there you can also see the owner (I guess) crouched down by the back wheel looking under the bike. The bike in pic 2 looks pretty distinctive. I’m not sure either of these bikes would readily take panniers.

    Is the X bike not thought to be something more Harley-ish? That was always the thing that amused me about ED’s “I haven’t got a Harley” comment. Maybe not, but he did have one that was pretending to be.

    How credible is this Karl Zero chap as a documentary maker? Perhaps I’m making 5, but with so few developments in a long time and more than a year since this chap was interviewed, his death and a new documentary in the same week appears… interesting? Was he contacted by the programme makers?

  86. Anymore news with regard to the “violent suicide” of the ex Legionnaire ?

    Maybe Shadwell is making “5”. Maybe. Then again maybe not.
    Does the documentary touch more on local issues, than on issues further afield ?

  87. @Max

    “The missing SAH passports….”

    We should add, missing passports not contained within the locked vehicle.

    In their possession and removed “at the time” of the incident ?
    Not in their possession at the time of the incident (but then where ?) ?

  88. @Shadwell

    Sorry, but I not understand part of all you say (translation), but this photo is HOT, because it is canceled by le dauphiné.

  89. @Bacchus,

    I understood directly what you meant. I have also seen the photo in Le Dauphine.

  90. @Shadwell & James,

    I have no more news on the documentary. I guess it mostly will be a rehash of old ‘pistes’. But since Dominique Rizet participates, the journalist who published the photos of the crime scene and Al-Hilli on BFMTV, he might have some new cards/photos up his sleave.

    Most wanted is of course an interview with ONF2.

    How credible is Karl Zero? I don’t know. But first of all he is the presenter not necessarily the researcher. Two experienced investigative journalist have participated, one is Rizet.
    I have seen a number of ‘Karl Zero’s Faits’, they are available on YouTube and Dailymotion, and I find them quite ok.

  91. Perhaps a bit optimistic to hope that Rizet will have new photos after the mauling he got last time. There’s been no hyping of having new info as far as I can tell so I guess it’s going to be another plod through the old pistes. In which case I can only suppose the death of the chap yesterday is no more than an unfortunate coincidence.

  92. Suppose the Ugine man was murdered (because of his connection to Chevaline). Why would the 7 page note talk about Chevaline? In other words, why would the killer X use Chevaline to mask Chevaline?

    This is what X thought:

    – X kills Ugine man
    – X knows Ugine man was questioned about Chevaline (Mollier connection and guns, and military type, etc.)
    – X knows that police will look again into Ugine man in connection with Chevaline
    – X thinks … ‘Perhaps police will find out if they look hard enough’
    – So X anticipates this and already puts in Chevaline to tweak Ugine man into ‘feeling bad about being seen as a suspect’
    – And X hopes the police will buy that
    – So, X hopes that police concludes that Ugine man felt bad about everything + bad about being suspect in Chevaline (which he wasn’t)

    But why did X kill the Ugine man?

    – Probably because the Ugine man became a risk

    From there follows that the Ugine man knew too much, and is now silenced by masking the murder as a suicide (in the hope the police won’t dig deep enough to find out). And from this it follows that SM really is a central piece (and not a collateral)

  93. Still hoping to track down video of the q&a section of the 19/2 press conference. Looked again at my recording but it is cut off after EM’s statement. I’m pretty sure EM stated that MC was moving up the road when he met the ONF which, for me, would be a strong indicator that SM was the intended target.

  94. … though that assumes that the either AHs or SM were targeted specifically.

    Post mortem on the Ugine chap tomorrow IIRC.

Comments are closed.