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
T
T
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.
1.
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.
2.
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.
3.
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
Copyright © 2012 Tim Veater
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?
4.
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.
5.
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?
6.
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?
7.
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?
8.
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
Copyright © 2012 Tim Veater
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?
9.
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
Copyright © 2012 Tim Veater
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.
Copyright © 2012 Tim Veater
