Marcel and Jacqueline Jacob were recently accused of planning Grégory’s murder through a conspiracy, (2017). The Jacob's were married on October 16, 1965, nineteen years to the day before the disappearance of their little nephew and pass for a "fusional couple" in the corner, inseparable. So far, they had never been worried in the case and have gone completely under the media radar. But now, the judge Claire Barbier and the gendarmes of Dijon suspect to incarnate the two-headed crow.
Since the acceleration of the investigation in ’17, the scenario of a family plot has taken shape, going far beyond Bernard Laroche and affecting other members of the family. And especially the couple Jacqueline and Marcel Jacob.
Marcel Jacob :
“The expertise of Grégory's great-uncle, heard again on Monday by the investigating judge, reveals a man "immature and easily influenced" but devoid of any "psychiatric pathology".” “Without deciding on his possible guilt - this is not his role -, the expert notes a man who speaks "in simple but correct language". His IQ is evaluated at 73 and is in the lower average of men. "His analytical and synthesis skills are poor," notes the psychologist who diagnosed him at the 'La Chartreuse' hospital center (Dijon).”
“He is an "immature, sometimes childish" and "impressionable" man. Grégory's great-uncle would need "to be guided by the other" and would have "a need to receive affection".” “These are the main character traits that emerge from Marcel Jacob's psychological expertise: his great dependence on the love of others and his frustration at the idea of being abandoned. Marked by the death of his mother whom he venerated, the man cannot bear to be far from his wife Jacqueline Jacob.” “He seeks fusion with the other, to maintain the dual union with the maternal imago [the unconscious image], the wife finally taking over from the mother in this position", analyzes the expert in his report.
“According to the psychologist, Jacqueline Jacob - the only woman in her life - condenses "all her emotional investment". The septuagenarian, who describes himself as "faithful", explained having passed the sponge on the former gaps of his wife. Jacqueline Jacob had indeed gone to live in the 90s with a man with whom the couple practiced sex before returning to the home in two stages. An episode that intrigues the gendarmes since she said she was "forced" in a letter found during a search. Investigators have since speculated that Marcel Jacob blackmailed his wife by threatening to divulge a common secret.”
“Since then, for Marcel Jacob, their relationship is now in good shape. “She asked my forgiveness," he said to the expert, adding that their extra-marital experience was "bullshit" that he regretted. At the mention of his daughter, the septuagenarian burst into tears. He has not seen her since 1991, except during a chance meeting in a Vosges store. Valérie Jacob had cut short the bridges with them, reproaching them for their practice of swinging. "He says he is frustrated with the affection of his daughter and his grandchildren, and there again his sensitivity is revealed by evoking this theme", observes the psychologist in his report.”
Jacqueline Jacob:
She had refused the first time to go to the expert psychologist. Little Grégory's great-aunt finally gave in to the exercise.
“The expert describes Jacqueline Jacob as "cooperative, well organized in her mind". An intelligent woman, who avoids talking about the facts, refusing to raise the slightest hypothesis about the death of Grégory. While expressing regret: that Jean-Marie Villemin killed Bernard Laroche. “We said to ourselves, he should have waited for the truth. I'm not saying that he prevented us from knowing it, I don't know, but we're still bothered after 32 years", she said.
“She controls her emotions and is generally phlegmatic," notes the psychologist.
“Why do you think are you accused? Questions the psychologist “It's Anacrime. Great software that soiled us for something we didn't do", replies Grégory's great aunt, who also says that she was extremely surprised when the gendarmes came to her house to arrest her and place her in jail.”
Valérie, their only daughter, was 10 years old when, in 1978, her parents left the working class spinning mill and moved into the house they had built, on land bought at a discount from Marcel Laroche, father of Bernard, high on the hill. The house of the Villemin's grandparents, Monique and Albert, is located opposite below, 800m as the crow flies.
The family conspiracy hypothesis is now favored, a battery of questions related to "family stories" is asked to each of this trio. According to the girl, the parents went especially in "the family on the side of [her] mother, therefore Thuriot". Her father "discussed with Michel since they worked together".
On the other hand, her parents "frequented" Bernard Laroche and "often went to his house", who lived in the nearest house on the same path to the coast, 50 m away: "My father and Bernard loved each other like two brothers. He was the son of his sister and in addition, they did not have much difference. He had more of a relationship with Bernard than he could have with his older brothers". The family conspiracy hypothesis is now privileged, the gendarmes question Valérie Jacob on the conflictual relations between her parents and the Villemins : The investigation was able to demonstrate that for a number of years, Marcel and Jacqueline had vowed a certain hatred towards the Villemin family and more particularly towards Albert. Valérie Jacob remains honest: "I never really felt that. In front of me, they never displayed negative feelings towards them."
In the first part, we evoked the different events opposing the Jacobs to the Villemin family. Especially Albert and Marcel. Another uproar in 1972 will cause a rupture. Albert: "Since that day we have distanced ourselves [...]". At the time, Léon Jacob was still alive and these conflicts revolved around the same subject: Albert’s chaotic family past. Marcel, like his father, constantly criticized him for being responsible for the misfortunes that affected his family.
When Albert married Monique, Marcel was only 8 years old at the time. The last of the siblings grew up in this hateful atmosphere centered on Albert, his brother-in-law. It seems consistent that the latter harbored similar hatred relatively early, no doubt fueled by the words of his relatives. Albert was never welcome, and family dinners in his presence systematically provoked conflicts, verbal algarades and physical confrontation.
In terms of education, Valérie Jacob portrays a mother who is hardly affectionate and selfish, domineering and authoritarian.
She complains about having to do household chores at home. “I was considered, somewhere, as a 'bonniche' " - This very familiar word for a domestic worker is derogatory and contemptuous. She says she once took "a beating" from her father after lying to them about going out with her boyfriend. "I thought he was going to kill me. Apart from this event, I cannot say that I was abused. The next morning, he came back to see me crying like a kid. He must have realized what he had done."
"I don't know who was behind it, at least my father showed more difficulty talking about it, (sex partners). In society my mother did not hide at all the ascendancy that she could have over my father. "
"Jacqueline was the dominant. It was she who was in charge. She had forced my father to go out on bikes every week, among other things."
In addition, Marcel Jacob was close to his big sister Monique.
"She is my close sister, when I was little, she took care of me and I often turned to her."
Indeed, according to the testimonies, Marcel is an impulsive and a brawling man, a "big mouth" sometimes violent, very dependent on his wife. Jacqueline is a "dominant" woman, who "managed" her husband and "kept the accounts" at home.
These two are undeniably hateful, especially towards Albert.
Altercation Christmas 1982,
I quote Jacqueline: "You are just like your father Jean-Marie !" ; "The Villemin sons you are all scumbags like your father ".
We can see that these words are significant: Indeed it is mainly Albert who is at the heart of their resentment accumulated through the dissensions that appeared a few years ago.
At that time, these two families made sure to avoid each other for 10 years, each leading their life. Marcel is a staunch militant "cégétiste" concerned about the working conditions of factory workers, often abused by employers. This is the main reason for his disdain for supervisors.
The crow is jealous and envious of Jean-Marie's professional and personal success. Envious of his status - one of the guy’s obsessions, - of his material goods, money and family unit. “Your oak dining room is beautiful; your wallpaper too; you earn so much money".
Here Marcel seems to find his situation "illegitimate" by his inexperience and his youth: "You are only a creeper who has no hair on his chest".
In other words, "You are just a kid who crawls in front of his superiors". Unthinkable that one of Albert's sons could have acquired a position of responsibility by his only qualities. Jean-Marie is necessarily "a fayot" / "a bean"; Person who is zealous to be "seen well" by a superior.
Indeed, Jean-Marie passes for a traitor who has "forgotten" his origins, he says he belongs to "the left" but does not spit on an improvement in his lifestyle.
The drama takes place in a particular political context: the left government - associated with the middle class - has gone astray and is nicknamed "the left caviar". The term left caviar (or salon left) designates, in France and Quebec, personalities considered to be distant from the working class but claiming to be from the left. It should be compared to the term bourgeois-bohemian and the expression "Having the heart on the left, but the wallet on the right". Marcel Jacob is barely older than Jacky (8 years apart), Bernard, Michel (almost 10 years) and Jean-Marie (13 years apart). However, Marcel Jacob evolved with different expectations, specific to his age. I mean: When the latter were still children (about ten years old) with concerns for children, Marcel Jacob married and started his life.
At the time, Marcel Jacob had adult conflicts with their father Albert. He often played the role of protector or watchman when Monique came to her parents' house, with her children, fleeing Albert's anger. This attitude will further aggravate his already inglorious image ... and will seal the opinion of the Jacobs.
Apart from the altercation that appeared at the end of 1982, no other testimony has come to affirm that Marcel was animated by a fierce hatred specifically towards Jean-Marie. The sentence attributed to Marcel: "I do not shake hands with a boss" is a provocation, Marcel seeks physical contact; for him, the dignity of a man is won with punches. Even more in front of his wife who encourages him. This is the reason why he rushes to provoke a second time, his nephew outside his parents' home "Go out if you are a man!"
This is essential to keep in mind that Jean-Marie is the real target of the black bird.
As has been recalled, if there was added the existence of a woman crow whose operating mode seems to have been to move a certain number of people, and the motivation to have rather targeted Mr. Albert Villemin, it seems acquired that the threatening crow, animated by an atrocious hatred, had for real target only Jean-Marie Villemin, whom he envied.
The latter having had the telephone installed at his home only in July 1981, the first anonymous calls, in early 1981, were therefore addressed to Mr. Albert Villemin and Mrs. Monique Villemin, who were proud of their son's success. Bernard Laroche had the phone in January 1981. This is clear that the crow regularly appeared from April 1981, i.e. at a time when Jean-Marie Villemin moved into his house in LÉPANGES, and had just been promoted.
The crow was targeting Jean-Marie and seemed to harbor personal grudges against him.
Albert Villemin: "I always said that Jean-Marie was the target. We were incidental. Ultimately, it was Jean-Marie that had to be destroyed or worried in our spirit".
Monique Villemin: "Yes, it was after Jean-Marie that he had it. Besides, I said it to Jean-Marie, I said to him: "Be careful. Don't leave Christine alone. When Christine had decided to sleep with her mother when Jean-Marie worked at night, we were more peaceful."
- Memory in favor of Christine Blaise.
First and undoubtedly the most revealing "clue" is the (epidermal) hatred of Marcel and Jacqueline towards their brother-in-law Albert. Several stormy episodes confirm their resentment, this is indisputable; mainly when they were younger (the last conflict between them dates back to 1972).
Marcel and Jacqueline will express their contempt in 1982 (Christmas) in front of Jean-Marie, Albert and Gilbert Villemin.
"With experience, we realize that people who write anonymous letters are very often discreet. Writing an anonymous letter is a way of expressing what they cannot say orally" concluded Suzanne Schmitt - Honorary expert in documents and writings.
Everyone in the family circle knows Marcel's opinion on Albert (substantially identical to the opinion of his father Leon), several attended the different "fights" between the two men. In the village and in the family, this man is known for "not being afraid of anything". Impulsive and sometimes brutal, he does not seem to lack of courage. He is "noisy" and stands out with his outbursts of anger. Of course I do not rule out a loss of composure. But this event takes place at a time when the harassment has intensified - Albert complained to the gendarmerie a few weeks earlier, in early December 1982; so, this is the worst time to focus suspicion on him.
Illegitimate daughter also, Jacqueline was recognized by the new husband of her mother, André Thuriot, nicknamed "De Gaulle" because of his high stature. Criminal analysts draw a parallel between her family position and that of the "bastard" Jacky: "We understand then that she can potentially blame Albert Villemin who does not get along with his son" of whom he is not the biological father and to the point that this kid grew up until the age of 5 with his grandparents Jacob, Adeline and Léon.
Their reasoning is very interesting. Indeed, The woman crow, unlike the man with a "hoarse voice", did not make specific threats, did not allude to past family events and did not demonstrate by the content of her calls, the expiable hatred that the crow harbored for Jean-Marie, but liked to move doctor, nurse, firefighters, undertaker ... at Albert's, who seemed, more than his son, to be the target of this woman.
However, it is important to remember that the crows deliberately attack the couple Jacky and Liliane.
Actually, from the start, the crow used Jacky, Liliane and her father Roger (and their bad relationship with the Villemins) as a screen to muddy the waters. As we have seen, they were suspected very quickly. In addition, despite the evidence of their innocence - Gilbert is present with his wife during a call from this man to Jacky's home; they too have adopted the same method (recording calls) by a tape recorder - the family will remain convinced of their responsibility. (In 2017, when Albert is questioned in the context of the new revelations of the investigation, he will persist towards the track of her daughter-in-law Liliane, even raising suspicions about her godfather Serge Jacquel).
The raven's clever shenanigans and their obstinacy in believing in the guilt of Jacky, Liliane and Roger will allow the crow to act freely for more than two years.
The couple began receiving anonymous calls in the middle of 1981. Brief calls, silences, groans, a female voice at first, and then a hoarse, male voice. A few mocking words: "You're cuckold" without knowing if they were addressed to Liliane or Jacky.
In 1982. One night the bell kept ringing: "I'll piss you off all night" salivated the other in the earpiece. Jacky and Liliane live a ordeal similar to the other members of the Villemin family - by the way, they ignore Jacky's situation, and if Jacky and Liliane do not talk about it, this is because they live apart and feel excluded. In his heart, Jacky remains the "bastard", he suffered from Michel's aggressive reaction when the secret was exposed and always felt unloved by Albert. Jacky feels like his son Éric is suffering from the same rejection.
Why, does Jacqueline let her husband act with such cruelty, if she feels concerned or upset by the exclusion of Jacky, unloved by Albert?
Despite their denials in the face of accusations from everyone (notably Albert, absolutely sure of Liliane's involvement), no one wants to believe them. So whether they have evidence or not, nothing will change their certainties. In any case, no need to harass Jacky and Liliane to such a level. The crow is doing a very good job by making their situation worse, by sowing clues in their direction during his calls ...
Very strong ties were forged during childhood between Bernard Laroche, his uncle Marcel Jacob and his cousin Jacky Villemin, who were excluded, shelved to escape the wrath of Albert. Jacky was particularly appreciated because he was not the biological son of Albert. Why would Marcel have stalked, threatened, insulted, discredited Jacky and openly accused his wife Liliane? Sadism?
The assumption that Jacqueline may have blamed Albert's behavior towards Jacky in relation to her own personal experience is entirely plausible. However, this does not explain the hostility and threats to which Jacky and Liliane are the victims.
The two couples Bernard / Marie-Ange & Jacky / Liliane do not see each other regularly but Jacky and Bernard were almost raised together in the Jacob farm, under the eyes of the patriarch Léon and the grandmother, Adeline. They like to make a belote (cards game) on occasion. Bernard and Jacky therefore grew up in this atmosphere, under the weight of the same secrets, in particular the incest committed by Leon. A sign of this shared past, he was present the day Jacky learned that he was a "bastard". Their closeness has faded over time, especially since Jacky's marriage to Liliane. Bernard envies the solidity of their couple.
Thibaut Solano.
The crow experiences emotional frustration and regularly tries to sow discord in couples, "you're cuckold."
Jean-Marie and Christine learned why "Bernard and Marie-Ange sulked, each at one end of the table".
In 1983, according to Ginette, Marie-Ange wanted a second child and Bernard would have refused: "No, because you weren't able to make me a normal one."
Bernard is a womanizer and does not seem to have any remorse. The first time he tries to seduce Ginette, when Michel learns of it, he reacts virulently and decides to cut off all contact with Bernard. Bernard will apologize, claiming to have "slipped" because he had drunk too much. This is entirely believable, but nothing explains the next two attempts, perfectly aware at the time that he was "playing with fire" and that he risked losing Michel.
We can then wonder, did he really care about losing his "friend"? His attitude looks like betrayal. Bernard is therefore systematically rejected by the wives of Jacky, Jean-Marie and Michel. Bernard is not a Casanova, he is clearly unhappy in his marriage.
On the side of Marcel and Jacqueline, they appear as "a fusional couple", inseparable. At the time of the facts, there was no indication that they had experienced relationship issues. We know that they practiced libertinism with a couple, Roger and Marie-Claire G.
Jacqueline left Marcel and their daughter Valérie to live with her new lover Roger in 1990, she returned to the marital home thanks to the intervention of their daughter, then left a second time in 1991 to also return shortly after. Marcel was mad with rage, apparently deeply sad (according to Valérie). Marcel Jacob’s psychological expertise has shown that he venerated his wife, like his mother Adeline Jacob, who died in 1975 when he was 30 years old. Jacqueline Jacob is considered "whimsical, a bit proud and resentful", "dominant with her husband" who seems to depend on his wife. But in the years that interest us, between ’81-‘84, no element supports any disagreement or discord within their couple. However, libertinism could be a way to spice up their relationship, to break their routine ... without corroborating or establishing with certainty any relationship problem.
On December 12, 1989, Marcel Jacob appeared at the Dijon courthouse before President Maurice Simon without Jacqueline Jacob. The high magistrate who, already, suspects the spouses Jacob, draws up a report of non-appearance of the wife. Victim of a heart attack a few weeks later, he will never be able to question Jacqueline Jacob.
However, she was questioned by the successor of judge Simon, Jean-Paul Martin, in December 1991. She worked to erase any animosity, sometimes violent, between Marcel Jacob and Albert Villemin: "no conflict whatsoever 1"; "My husband never held a grudge against Albert Villemin and his children 2"; "He was never surprised or even shocked by the promotion of Jean-Marie Villemin to the position of foreman 3". In this audition at the end of 1991, she tried to appear to be very distant from the stories targeting the Villemins: "I know absolutely nothing about the manifestations of the crow 4". Or again: "I must tell you that my husband and I followed the Grégory case from afar and that we never tried to interfere in it 5" .
All of these allegations are false : 1. Several family members have witnessed episodes of extreme tension between Albert and Marcel. She minimizes the conflicts. 2. Her statement contradicts the words exchanged during the altercation at Christmas 1982. 3. When Michel announced to his uncle Marcel - in the locker room of the Aumontzey factory - that Jean-Marie had been promoted to the rank of foreman, he was very surprised. He seemed to doubt his skills. 4. This is completely wrong. Marcel Jacob will say in 2017, "I thought it might be a request for ransom or to annoy them ... in relation to the phone calls they had". Here we have evidence that they were aware of the situation and the content of anonymous calls before the crime. 5. We can see Marcel with Bernard’s lawyer, Me Prompt. Then in the company of Marie-Ange Laroche or Murielle Bolle. In addition, a cardboard file containing 37 press articles related to the hearings where Grégory's father was tried for the murder of Bernard - entitled "The Vologne trial" - was found at their home. It seems obvious that they were inquiring about the progress of the investigation. It wouldn't necessarily be suspicious if they didn't deny it. Let’s now look at Marcel and Jacqueline’s interview (2017). Marcel is more willing to speak, Jacqueline "remains silent as advised by her lawyer". In the book 'La machination infernale', Patricia Tourancheau specifies: "the entourage of the spouses Jacob considered Marcel as being easily influenced and under the thumb of his wife who has a very harsh character." On October 16, 1984, Marcel Jacob maintains that he began his work at 1 p.m. and then participated in a CGT union meeting - General Confederation of Labor - from 2 p.m. until 4:45 p.m., as evidenced by the document kept." And after ? Question the gendarmes, Grégory Villemin was kidnapped between 5:05 pm and 5:30 pm": "Usually, we would have a drink in the works council room" but that day, he "cannot remember" how long it may have lasted. Marcel Jacob said he then resumed his job as supervisor of machine adjusters.
Marcel Jacob and his wife Jacqueline were staff representatives. Whatever the mandate exercised, the staff representative freely uses his/her credit hours and remains master of his schedule during his hours of delegation. They have freedom of movement:
- in the company during delegation hours or outside working hours,
- outside the company, during delegation hours.
In the afternoon of October 16, Jacqueline and Marcel Jacob had the opportunity to slip away discreetly, without arousing suspicion. The latest investigations have established that workers at the Walter Seitz factory can shift their schedules; the former manager said that two employees could reverse their schedules, or be replaced on a machine if the supervisor gave his approval. Two former supervisors remember that there was no clock at the factory, but time books where delays and absences were recorded. Documents not found, three decades after the facts. Even if the worker did not have delegate status, he could still be absent, which means that all the alibis of the employees working at Walter Seitz are relative. Among them, the alibis of the delegates - during the period of delegation - are therefore more than fragile. Logically, Marcel and Jacqueline Jacob were replaced until (at least) 4.45pm. and even beyond since it is impossible to predict the end of a union meeting. They can last longer. The Jacob's were replaced for an indefinite period and their return to work depended only on themselves and was not planned. During delegation hours, they could leave their posts for an hour without anyone noticing - or leaving a written record. It’s physically impossible to know if they returned to work at 4:45 p.m. or a little later.
According to Alain D., former supervisor of the spinning mill, he could therefore, theoretically, be absent, "one or two hours of time, for example, not much more either". A man, on the other hand, remembers perfectly having seen Jacqueline and Marcel Jacob at the factory, this October 16, 1984. Daniel L., worked as a team with them that day. He remembers it, because at around 7 p.m. the foreman asked them to find torch lights to help find the missing child. If he does not remember that the couple actually participated in the research, he is formal: "I will not tell you nonsense, they were there."
Asked about his "reaction to knowledge of the facts",
Marcel Jacob: "I said to myself:" They want a ransom or bothering them ... [in relation to the phone calls they had] ".
The gendarmes: "A 4 year old child from one of your nephews disappears, people are looking for him and you are going home. Why did you not participate in the research? "
Answer:" I was not asked, I don't want to mingle in things like that, things that were none of my business."
Here Marcel Jacob seems to lack empathy. He is clumsy in his words, he seems detached and implicitly distances himself from events. His answer remains vague. He evokes a request for ransom and specifies "or to annoy them": How can he immediately make the link between anonymous phone calls and the disappearance of Grégory - in October 84 we are 1 year and a half after the end of harassment -? He transfers his responsibility to others and contradicts himself, he is interested in the case as evidenced by his documents on the trial of Jean-Marie Villemin.
The gendarmes asked him if he was not helping because he was "cold with the Villemin family". "Oh no, not at all," replied the suspect, "we didn't see each other often but..."
The gendarme should have insisted, urged him to finish his sentence: "but what?" Followed by: "How many times did you see them in the year before the crime and on what dates? "
"Or maybe your non-participation was due to the fact that you knew what had happened?"
Marcel Jacob gets angry: "You have nothing else to find ?! Tell me right away that I'm a murderer ... I told Judge Simon that if I had known a little bit to identify the one who had done the harm, I would have gone to the gendarmes right away; I could never have lived with that."
Relevant question. However, Marcel Jacob, who has been silent for three decades, has no reason to confess without indisputable proof. This sentence of the gendarme, far from putting him in difficulty, offers him a royal exit door. He understood that the investigators had nothing new to add to their evidence.
Finally, Marcel blames the investigators of his situation: At the very end of the interrogation, at 11 pm, Marcel Jacob wishes to add "spontaneously": "I have nothing to do with this story, it's shameful!"
I will not go further, Marcel's answers are irrelevant and those of Jacqueline, non-existent.
Comments