Veater Ecosan: "The World About Us"

The LogoPhere Weekly, October 5, 2012

Quote of the Week

“After the idiot French cops left that little 4 year old girl, Zeena, hiding in the car for 8 hours, it is clear they are too dull to have

a hope in hell of solving this thing, just as they were too dull to solve Lady Di’s murder.” — The Gutter Grunt

The LogoPhere Weekly

(or whenever)

Takin’ the “BS” outa’ the BlogoSphere . . . Daily, Weekly, Monthly, or Whenever .

Vol. I, Wk. 53 October 5, 2012 ()()()()().

Vancouver, B.C. 10 ¢, cheap

The Unanswered Questions Surrounding

the Al Hilli Murders – by Tim Veater

Oct05.2012

he mystery surrounding the murder of four adults and the

near-fatal shooting of a little girl in a remote French forest

lay-by, raise many, as yet, unanswered questions.

Not only as to the obvious ones of who carried it out and why, but

also relating to the official governmental response, apparent

conflicting reports by those concerned and a failure on the part of

the press to adequately challenge and independently investigate.

Already the story has slipped from front page, via inside page, to

nowhere at all, which no doubt will please some. The Annecy

prosecutor has even suggested it will not be solved for a decade!

Eric Maillaud, admitted that French police are nowhere near

finding the killers, have no clear motive and no suspect.” Asked

when the crime might be solved, he responded: “We might have the

answers in two, three or ten years – it’s a painstaking procedure.”

This would appear to be a clear case of an official attempt to damp

down speculation and expectation.

If, as in the view of some, this was a very professional operation, it

raises far wider implications than the already serious murder of four

adults. If the public cannot be confident in state revelation and

transparency in such cases, it can only rely on an independent and

investigative press. So far the press has failed miserably; prepared

only to act as a conduit of official briefings; failing to question,

challenge or even point out the inconsistencies and get

explanations for them. It is something that is attempted below.

The French authorities suggested initially, it was

coincidental, impromptu, chance event – a robbery perhaps

that had gone wrong. I don’t believe any police or

government official could have genuinely held this view in

light of the circumstances, namely the “professional” head

shots; all killed; nothing stolen; the effective, unseen

get-away. Then further doubt was added as to whether the

cyclist or the Al Hilli’s were the intended target. However in

both scenarios it was suggested the second party was killed for

“being in the wrong place at the wrong time” thus skilfully

avoiding the possibility that both might have been, as this

would have wider implications of conspiracy.

As corollary to this, the way the obvious suggestion of

criminal or state backed assassination was avoided. John

O’Connor, former head of Scotland Yard’s Flying Squad, told

The Sunday Times “These murders were carried out by killers

with the precision and planning that comes with military

training, which normally points to a political assassination”.

The fact that this possibility has been obdurately avoided

puzzling and worrying as it suggests cover-up.

The time it took for the French police to discover four year

Zeena hidden and catatonic in the car – i.e. more than eight

hours. Perhaps the failure could initially be explained in

terms of not interfering with the crime scene, but eight hours

to make enquiries to discover there were two daughters on

the trip and one was still missing? Further what appears as a

rather amateurish approach to the crime scene with no

evidence of a finger tip search, of opening up to the press

before closing it off again for further investigation when it had

been contaminated. Aerial photographs show the boot door

open despite the doors reportedly being locked. In one aerial

photograph, tyre skid marks can be seen far to the right of the

BMW. A reporter on the scene stated that broken glass was

The LogoPhere Weekly, October 5, 2012

“fifteen” yards distant from the car, presumably because this

marks where the first shots were fired before the car reversed

into the bank? These facts have never been officially

referred to or properly discussed in the press. Why? A

reporter said that a motor bike track had been left in an

adjoining mountain track which presumably could have been

an alternative escape route? Given the on-going nature of

the enquiries, why was permission given to the family to bury

M. Mollier, rather than retain his body under refrigerated

conditions, in case it was needed for further inspection?

The flatly inaccurate and misleading information put out

initially by the French authorities that the emergency call

informing them of the incident was made by the British

cyclist, later identified as Brett Martin. In fact Mr. Martin

said he could get no signal on his mobile phone and that he

had to leave the scene and injured Zainab, to get help. The

call was eventually made by a French national, Phillipe

Didierjean. There is no way a Frenchman, speaking in

French from his own mobile phone could have been

confused with Englishman Mr. Martin, who clearly is not

fluent in French. This therefore must have been intentional

misinformation, perhaps to protect M. Didierjean who was

not even acknowledged for several days. Mr. Martin stated

that Mr. Mollier overtook him on his bike, yet was dead by

the time he reached the scene. Mr. Martin and Mr. Mollier

were apparently known to each other, being members of the

same French cycling club, yet there is no suggestion of

recognition in his statements, which to say the least, is

surprising.

It would appear from the reports, that the initial telephone

call to police was at 3.48 pm. Yet M. Didierjean says he met

Mr. Martin leaving the scene at about 4.10. pm. Given his

description of events, walking back to the scene with him

and checking it out, particularly Zainab who did not

respond, then walking back down the hill until he got

reception on his phone. This must have added at least

another fifteen minutes – say 4.25 pm – before he could

phone. How can this discrepancy be explained? Then what

of his two female companions and car? Did they drive up or

turn around and go back? Were they witnesses to the scene

or not?

Danielle Polittier(?) a local resident of Chevaline, more than

three kilometres distant, told the BBC that she heard 30

seconds of shooting. If her testimony is reliable, is it possible

Mr. Martin, unless he has a hearing impediment, could not

have heard it, being only moments away. Why does he say

he heard nothing? M. Didierjean not hearing the sound of

gunfire might be explained by virtue of the fact that he was

in a car with companions but what is Mr. Martin’s

explanation?

The conflicting information regarding number and types of

firearms, the number of shots to the victims and the number

of assailants. It was first reported that all the bullets came

from the same semi- automatic pistol, changed to two,

suggesting at least two killers, then back to one. There has

been no convincing explanation how so many bullets were

fired. A Czech made “Skorpion” was suggested. This is a very

old type of gun rather than more modern alternatives, of

which there are many.

Later, the Telegraph reported that it had learned "from

sources close to the investigation", that the four were shot

with a Luger P08, a highly-distinctive weapon, which was

standard issue to the Swiss Army. (It appears that this was a

9mm version – the 7.65 was in fact the PO4) But Browning ,

Glock. Mauser, Luger, Kel-Tec P-32, Beretta, Colt,

Springfield Armory, Mauser, Schnellfeuer, Borchardt,

Heckler & Koch, Kel-Tec all make models that would fit the

bill. The iconic “James Bond”Walther PPK was adopted by

MI5, MI6, Deutsch BND, French SDECE, Israel's Mossad and

a host of other secret operative units, and still used to this

day. The Beretta Model 70 and 71 was a favorite of the Israeli

Mossad and sky marshals, replaced by a 9mm Beretta in the

1970's apparently.

“Fifteen casings” were later changed to “twenty-five”.

Apparently ten of the used cartridges were found under the

car which accounts for the number increasing from 15 to 25

and a number were found inside the car, but the implications

have not been discussed.

Why the conflicting weapon evidence? Why was the

impression given that the weapon was probably old and

obsolete and the link with “Serb Paramilitaries”? It was stated

that three victims were shot in the head, later changed to all.

The French cyclist M. Mollier was said to be shot seven times,

including two head shots. This later changed to five.

Originally some were said to have been shot twice. A little

later the prosecutor stated all the adults had been shot

“several times”.

This is clearly confusing. Why was misleading information

put out until they were quite sure of the facts? No further

information regarding trajectory or injuries, which of course

will afford further clues as to what happened, has been issued.

Perhaps the French authorities should inform us definitively,

how many times the victims were shot and where; how many

guns of what possible types, were used; and explain why so

many different accounts have been made?

Much was made by Mr. Martin of the “green four wheel drive

and motor bike” but this raises more questions than it

answers. First, if Mr Mollier was shot only because he

witnessed events, why was Mr. Martin, another potential

witness, spared a similar fate? He must have arrived almost

immediately after the last shot was fired, as little Zainab was

still stumbling and the car wheels were still spinning. Unless

the assassin(s) escaped through the woods and used an

alternative route back, they must have passed him. Second,

precisely where and when did he see them? Statements vary

and include both overtaking him on the way up and passing

on the way down. Given the isolated nature of the location

and the narrowness of the road, and his extensive training as

a fighter pilot, he surely could not be uncertain or vague

The LogoPhere Weekly, October 5, 2012

about such a thing? However a vehicle coming down the four

kilometre road is flatly denied by M. Didierjean who was

driving up behind. He could not have been mistaken as he

would have needed to pull over. How can this conflicting

witness evidence be reconciled?

A similar conflict of testimony exists over the state of Zainab

and position of the bodies. Mr. Martin says she was covered

in blood, Mr. Didierjean states quite the opposite that no

blood or injuries were immediately obvious. Mr. Martin says

he moved her body away from the front of the car in case it

lurched forward, placing her in the recovery position. M.

Didierjean says when he arrived, Zainab was lying in front of

the car, by which time she was quite unconscious and did not

respond.

10.

No one has quite explained why Zainab was outside the car

when the attack took place, whilst the car doors were locked,

or why the front passenger seat was vacant? Nor has an

explanation been propounded why in such an expert

operation, the life of Zainab was spared. It surely cannot be

explained by virtue of running out of bullets as suggested?

The precise location and injuries of the French cyclist M.

Mollier are obviously critical. M. Didierjean reported that he

showed no injuries commensurate with falling off his bike. If

correct this would indicate he was shot whilst walking

presumably towards the car. Was the front seat vacated for

this purpose? Why have the papers not posed this question?

11.

Similarly amazingly little background to any of the known

participants has been published. Some sources state Mr.

Martin is the sole proprietor of a company with liabilities

three times its roughly £200,000 assets. Is this in fact correct

and what did this entail since he retired from his RAF post,

apparently involved in understanding aircraft armament

systems. Similarly, precisely what did M. Mollier’s work

entail working for the French nuclear technology

conglomerate, Areva? Mr. Al Hilli was apparently involved

in aircraft design and satellite technology. We do not know

what M. Didierjean does for a living but even so is it wholly

co-incidental that two victims and primary witness, had

connections with either aeronautics or nuclear technology?

It appears Mr. Martin left for Britain immediately after the

incident and the French authorities raised no objection to

this despite him being the principal witness. How did he get

back and was he given Government assistance to do so?

12.

A local Bricklayer-stonemason Laurent Fillion-Robin, 38,

witnessed Al Hilli’s red BMW pass, up Route de la Combe

d’Ire towards the car park between 2:30-3:00 PM. He also

says they were not being followed. We are told the crime is

reported at 3.48 pm despite the fact that M. Didierjean said

he did not even arrive until 4.10 and then had to return

down the hill to get reception on his phone. The police

reported they arrived about 4 pm, i.e. before M. Didierjean.

How is this possible? So who did phone the police or are all

the times given unreliable? Why have the papers not

pursued the time line to clarify it?

13.

Sylvie Lecouer, 49, coming back from grocery shopping at 4

pm or slightly after, was nearly run off the road by a speeding

Peugot 306. She described him as a “British” man (we don’t

quite know why) with black crew-cut hair and black polo

neck shirt driving in a panic. This car as far as we know has

not been traced or the driver come forward to be eliminated

from the investigation, which must raise suspicions. However

if he is a suspect, the question remains as to his involvement.

Could he have been a killer, an arranged contact or just a

terrified witness trying to get away? If he was part of a

conspiracy to kill, it would mean at least three persons were

involved, that is if Mr. Martin’s story about the motor bike

and green x4 wheel drive, are to be believed.

14.

A question also remains as to why Mr. Al Hilli went to that

remote location and took his family, yet it would appear,

giving no appearance of picnicking or walking. He was there

for about an hour before disaster struck. What could have

been the purpose other than for a rendez-vous? If so with

whom? With M. Mollier, Mr. Martin, his killers or someone

else?

15.

There have been published maps of the scene but these have

been generally very poor and no attempt has been made to

clearly define the alternative routes available and their

respective conditions and destinations, or how these relate to

the witness statements. They assume that only the metalled

road was used but of course this might not be the case.

16.

If neither car nor possessions were stolen we must assume

motive lies elsewhere. None of the three lines of enquiry

mentioned by the investigating officer include potential state

involvement. Indeed the official lines, of family feud over

disputed inheritance, or violent nephew have the appearance

of detracting from the possibility. However the statement

that the origins lie in the United Kingdom whilst deflecting

attention from France, also, perhaps accidentally, confirm

they know this to be a planned event, not a chance one as

was originally suggested. If planned it must have been

meticulously planned, for how else would the car have been

located in such a remote spot other than arrangement or

surveillance?

17.

Very little journalistic attention has been directed towards

the companies for which the victims and witnesses worked or

were associated. Why? They have remained opaque and

low-profile. Both Mr. Martin and Mr. Al Hilli were involved

in aircraft design, with either or both of the British and

European aircraft industries. Mr. Martin of course was an

ex-RAF pilot and was then involved in weapons systems and

"consultancy". His company Silver Fern (Sussex) Ltd., 55

Prices Gate, Exhibition Road, London SW72PN, founded in

2006, is classified at Companies House as, "Other

professional, scientific and technical activities not elsewhere

classified". Income is limited to about £21,000 pounds, despite

listed liabilities of over £600,000.

18.

Mr. Al Hilli worked for a company (Surrey Satellites

Technology Limited (SSTL) near Guildford) developing

satellite systems. He was part of a team involved in an

undisclosed project linked to European Aeronautic Defence

and Space. He also had his own company - "Shtech", an

aeronautical business, which he ran with his wife Iqbal and

which had sub-contracted with SSTL. It registered £8,330

profit in 2011. In the 1980's he had been employed at the

internationally-renowned Rutherford Appleton Research

Centre in Didcot, Oxon, where a colleague reported he

worked on a giant particle accelerator, which can make

radioactive material.

19.

Mr. Mollier worked for CEZUS located in Ugine, France.

This centre is dedicated to R&D on Zirconium alloys,

focusing on process and metallurgy. (A question remains

why the Daily Mail referred inaccurately to “a company

producing stainless steel products” instead of Areva’s Cezus

R&D zirconium products for the nuclear industry?) It is a

cornerstone of innovation and is known worldwide. It is part

of Areva, a nuclear multinational, which is also involved

with uranium enrichment and high-tech metallurgy in the

nuclear industry. It also has ties with Eurodif. During the

reign of the Shah, Iran acquired a 10% stake in Eurodif. In

2011 the Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC)

awarded six contracts, including to Areva, relating to the

supply of natural uranium concentrates, conversion and

enrichment services, worth some $3 billion for the Barakah

nuclear power plant planned to start generating in 2017.

What are the chances of so many concurrencies in one

iconic crime scene, at a location that recalls Britain's own

nuclear programme called “Chevaline”?

20.

It was reported that within hours a party of "military" types

had arrived from the British Embassy. Is this highly unusual

response, if in fact true, and why has the press not asked for

confirmation? Did they assist the removal of Mr. Martin

back to Britain?

The French and British authorities must be in possession of a

wealth of information from both covert and investigative sources

that they are not revealing. We must assume they are in full

possession of all of Mr Al Hilli's telephone and computer

communications, via GCHQ. As someone who was directly

monitored in 2003 (indeed according to a neighbours account,

physically followed) and involved with the defence industries and

Iraq, can hardly have been expected to have been dropped from

surveillance completely. Police are in possession of his mobile

phones and computers which must have afforded detailed

information on his contacts immediately prior to his murder. And

how about Mr Mollier's and Mr Martin's phones? What, if

anything, do they reveal? Surely they cannot have been

overlooked? Not only so but they must have details via the

telephone companies, of all calls and locations of mobile phones in

the vicinity of Chevaline on the day in question, including

chillingly the killers, unless they were so professional as not to carry

them. How can Mr. Maillaud say there are “no leads”, unless to

intentionally misinform?

That this was a professionally executed operation, cannot be

doubted. The use and accuracy of semi-automatic weapons and the

The LogoPhere Weekly, October 5, 2012

way the killers “have disappeared off the map”, cannot be

co-incidental. Mr. Al Hilli maintained contacts with Iraq and was

a practising Shiite. He was vocal in his condemnation of Israel and

the United States on the internet. He evidenced raised anxiety

over his home and camping location. He went on his European trip

precisely when his children should have been returning to school,

all of which points to a purpose beyond purely recreation. Two

head shots is militaristic and deadly certain. If a state is implicated,

the question is which state would wish these individuals dead and

why? Oh and finally, why is this question NOT being posed by

Western Governments, specifically in Britain and France, or

media?

Governments involved in assassination, and there have been recent

high-profile cases, rely on the fact that the public and media will

gradually lose interest and that other world and local events will

eventually bury the story. It is to be hoped that insofar as we still

retain independent institutions and press, this particularly brutal

story will not receive the same fate, for in the end, a truthful

examination and investigation of crime, however caused and

wherever it may lead, is the only guarantee of our own security and

freedom; the only thing that distinguishes our democratic political

system and a despotic, totalitarian one.

Veater Ecosan: "The World About Us"

Sunday, 11 July 2021

No comments:

Post a Comment