Sources : "The two grégory cases", Étienne Sesmat
"The family plot", Patricia Tourancheau
"The pyre of the innocent", Laurence Lacour
SUNDAY, OCTOBER 14 :
Michel (and Ginette) arrive at Jean-Marie & Christine's home without warning. The latter have not been to Lépanges for more than two months. On this date, work on the extension of the house has just started. Jean-Marie talks about his recent projects and his latest acquisitions such as his new leather sofa and the expansion of the house.
Investigators believe that this event was the trigger for Grégory's murder. I believe so too.
Did Michel hasten to phone Bernard to tell him the latest news? We know that they saw each other on Monday and Tuesday following the visit to Jean-Marie in Lépanges (the day before and the day of the crime). I think Bernard was made aware as early as Sunday evening (Michel must have been dying to have some crisp gossip about the chef) or by Monday at the latest. Marcel and Jacqueline, in the wake. Everything was very fast, the proof, Grégory was kidnapped and killed 2 days later.
Kidnapping place : http://www.justicepourgregory.com/photos/18-photos-des-lieux-de-l-enl%C3%A8vement-l%C3%A9panges-sur-vologne.html
MONDAY, OCTOBER 15 :
Bernard Laroche works at night, between 9 p.m. and 6 a.m.
Marcel and Jacqueline Jacob work the afternoon from 1:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Michel Deruder noticed the day before the crime, in front of Grégory's school, around 11:30 a.m. then at 1:20 p.m. and a third time around 5 p.m. near Jean-Marie Villemin's house, (near a dump, with a shotgun), a man with a round face, drooping mustaches, big sideburns, driving in a green car. 1*
Investigators believe - for several reasons - that the man in question is Bernard.
First of all, his working hours allowed him to move around freely during the day and thus monitor the surroundings of the Villemin house.
The physical description fits with Bernard. He owned a green car. He also had a weapon.
On Monday October 15 (afternoon), Bernard and Michel saw each other. They said they had chopped wood together and had a drink. They went to pick up their sons from school (still together).
It is important to specify that, that day, Marie-Ange Laroche was on sick leave. She was not working and may have been in their family home in Aumontzey.
The questions that arise: Has she noticed the comings and goings of her husband? What pretext did he give her? Did she know about the plot around this child?
Gregory didn't go out to play on October 15th. In fact, he had been ill for two weeks and had not been allowed to go out since.
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16 :
1:00 p.m. : Bernard gets up. Marcel & Jacqueline start their working day.
During his testimony, Bernard says he got up around 1:00 p.m. and that he helped his Aunt Louisette to chop wood until 3:00 p.m.
1* The same guy hangs out again around 1:20 p.m. around the school in Lépanges, according to Michel Deruder who will draw the robot portrait (PR2) of this stranger with a big mustache and sideburns: he looks like two drops of water to Bernard.
As soon as this sketch of the wanted man is broadcast in "L’Est Républicain", Bernard Laroche will shave off his long sideburns. The investigators deduce that the kidnapping of the child was premeditated and then materialized in favor of an "opportunity": on October 16 between 5:05 p.m. and 5:30 p.m., when Grégory, who had been ill for several days, finally had the permission to play as usual in front of the house "with the little cars which he amused himself to make turn around the pile of sand and the built-up areas". This "method of approach involves having time during the day to look out" and probably working at night. As was notably the case with Laroche.
Around 2:00 p.m. : A witness sees a man and a woman in red pullovers at the top of Deycimont, next to their van, on a promontory where "the view is clear on three houses of Lépanges including that of Jean-Marie Villemin". This tandem has a camera or more likely binoculars.
Investigators suspect that these two people are Marcel & Jacqueline.
Actually, Marcel and Jacqueline were working from 1:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. They said they were present at a union meeting which took place in the afternoon between 1:30 p.m. and 5 p.m..
Investigators went to interview the former owner and several workers at the factory where Jacqueline and Marcel Jacob worked.
On October 16, 1984, the couple were in afternoon hours, a schedule that was apparently totally incompatible with their presence, at the end of the afternoon, near the Vologne, where Grégory's body was found.
BUT: The place for workers' meetings was outside, right in front of the factory. In addition, they were both delegates ; so, very active in the fight for the improvement of working conditions.
In the performance of their duties, delegates may, during delegation hours, travel outside the company. Impossible to be certain: the former manager explains that two employees could reverse their schedules, if the foreman gave his approval.
Two former supervisors recalled that there was no "time clock" at the factory, but books of hours in which delays and absences were recorded. Untraceable documents, three decades after the fact. All that remains is the report of the union meeting that was held that day in a room opposite the factory. A document provided by Marcel Jacob. Did the couple return to their posts after the meeting they attended? Jacqueline Jacob, who ran a spinning machine, had to be replaced during her absence. Marcel Jacob, on the other hand, was an adjuster: he supervised the operation of machines.
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".
3:50 p.m. : Bernard will be seen by a truck driver in Granges-sur-Vologne. The tachograph will act as hourly proof.
4:00 p.m. : He then went to see his cousin Michel Villemin before leaving him around 4:30 p.m.
Around 4:20 p.m. : Michel Deruder saw the same individual again (1* PR2/Bernard L.), an hour before the disappearance of the child, walking down the church street, the one that leads to the home of Christine and Jean-Marie Villemin.
4:30 p.m. : At 4.30 p.m. Bernard said he went to his work colleague's house, Jean-Pierre Zonca, with whom he had to buy wine on sale at the Champion supermarket in Laval-sur-Vologne. But this friend, still according to Bernard, was not there.
JP Zonca will testify that this is in fact a missed appointment, which was not set precisely on this date.
“After waiting in vain for him, he finally came to his house but did not find him. Jean-Pierre Zonca, whom we will call on once again, will maintain his positions: this meeting was not precisely fixed and the details provided by Bernard Laroche do not confirm his visit. Laroche had mentioned during his interrogation that the key to the house was left on the front door. Which, according to Zonca, proves nothing because he always leaves this key in the lock."
"The two Grégory cases", Étienne Sesmat.
Similarly, Zonca is not at all convinced that Laroche returned home or came to his home in Granges sur Vologne after leaving Michel Villemin at 4.30 p.m.
Which would mean that between 4:30 p.m. and 5:30 p.m., Laroche has no alibi ... and even after between 6:35 p.m. and 8:45 p.m. Murielle being the only witness of her presence at Louisette's. Parenthesis closed, finding no one at home, Bernard returned to Louisette's house around 5:25 p.m. and found his sister-in-law Murielle Bolle there, arriving from her high school in Bruyères and watching television (Murielle had said the opposite; Bernard was watching television with his son "sitting on his legs" when she came home from high school by bus).15 or 20 minutes later he left with his son Sébastien to Laval-sur-Vologne (Champion) where he arrived around 6 p.m. to buy 150 bottles of wine.
4:35 p.m. / 4:40 p.m. : The Docelles café owner "noticed the nervous behavior of a consumer he didn't know".
Investigators believe this man is Marcel Jacob.
4:45 p.m. : The suspicious couple lurking in the corner in a van is seen again on the CD44 at the exit of Deycimont in the direction of Docelles, the vehicle by the side of the road and them along the path.
Around 4:55 / 5:00 p.m. : Bernard arrives at school to pick up Murielle (Bruyères High school). Then direction Lépanges-sur-Vologne.
5:00 p.m. / 5:15 p.m. : The Docelles café owner notices the same man for the second time. The man in question kept staring at the establishment clock.
Michel Cornillie has noticed the presence in his café in Docelles of a man with a suspicious attitude - Sketch Number 3.
Note that this robot portrait (3) is identical to the previous one except that the man sports a thinner mustache. Marcel and Bernard had a similar physique.
If Bernard is on his way to pick up Murielle and then kidnap Grégory, the man could be Marcel Jacob.
Between 5:12 p.m. & 5:17 p.m. : Abduction of Grégory. 5:16 p.m. is the time estimated by Jean-Marie Villemin according to the testimonies of the various neighbors. I think his estimate is correct.
First stop at the post office to drop off the letter.
Around 5:15 p.m. or 5:20 p.m., the witness Jean Descy was traveling on the departmental 44 near Docelles and in the direction of Épinal when he saw a green and unoccupied Renault 5 parked on the right of the road near a path called the Tachet path, allowing access to the Vologne without being seen.
Around 5:25 p.m. : Supposed departure of Bernard at the supermarket in Laval.
Second stop. Grégory gets out of the car and leaves with Bernard. The latter came back alone - Murielle's statements. Undefined time of absence.
5:27 p.m. or 5:32 p.m. : Phone call to Michel Villemin. The crow cries out for revenge. At this moment, I think that Grégory is still alive. The killers have just met Bernard and are holding Grégory.
The phone rings in Michel Villemin's house in Aumontzey. The crow.
In his hoarse, breathless voice as if he had run or smoked too much, in which the Vosges accent shines through, he announces in a more nervous tone than usual: "I am calling you because there is no answer at the other side, (at the home of Albert and Monique Villemin, the parents of Jean-Marie).
The youngest of the sons, Lionel Villemin will not confirm. He claimed during his hearing with Judge Simon on January 20, 1988 that he had heard the ringing bell at his parents, while he was playing outside with his friend Savas Alici (the latter does not remember it). But Lionel had said the opposite on October 19, 1984. Three days after the murder his memory has not failed.
On this subject the debate is still open. Did this call exist? Let's be clear, I do not think that the crow called Albert and Monique's house. On the other hand, if he contacted Michel, he had a role to play and he was waiting for “the green light” (ie the kidnapping of Gregory) to warn the rest of his family. We know he did not immediately delivered all of the information the crow supposedly revealed.
Jean-Marie and Albert searched around the house. Gregory's father refused to believe in the kidnapping of his child by this / these threatening crows, which had been missing for a year and a half. Understandably, there is a huge gap between uttering death threats and killing a child. Obviously, he did not make the connection with the river already mentioned by the crow in a phone call. Jean-Marie then asked Michel for details and the latter finally spoke of "drowning".
I find the choice of Michel as the "messenger" not very judicious. In particular because of his ambiguous feelings towards Jean-Marie and his “fraternal” friendship with Bernard. And also in relation to his difficulty in managing his emotions.
Did Michel know that Grégory was going to be killed? I think Michel has been manipulated. He was an easily influenced mind.
A contrario, investigators believe it may have been Bernard who was manipulated. And that he did not know the fatal fate reserved for Grégory. Unlike them, I think Bernard knew it and took some satisfaction from it. I emphasize that it was Bernard who openly took all the risks despite his recent professional success. Despite the existence of his family and especially his son. He has stopped at nothing at any time. He didn't even back up - literally or figuratively - when he passed Mrs. Claudon and Mr. Colin in the car, able to identify them, Murielle and him.
Do you think he would have gone to all this trouble and taken all these risks to then bring Grégory back alive? Bernard gives me the feeling that he was ready to go to jail and take responsibility. All that mattered was the destruction of Jean-Marie. Moreover, Bernard never confessed and Murielle retracted. The analyzes in writing were canceled by procedural flaw due to the blunders of Judge Lambert. At the time, there was no evidence against him on the record. Three months of detention and he was free (Ms. Claudon's testimony will come later, we know that she was under fire threats on her property).
Coming back to Michel, remember that after the murder his life went from bad to worse. His frustration, anger and pain never abated.
His wife Ginette was forced to leave with their two children, Daniel and Christelle, as Michel's crises were unbearable. He tried to burn down his own house with his family inside. This man was sick and in great pain. Michel then suffered from cancer which ultimately killed him at the age of 54.
I'm not saying he's not guilty, but it is clear that he never showed signs of satisfaction or relief over the murder of his nephew. And yet we know that he did not know how to control himself on this subject ... He clearly displayed his satisfaction, his victory ... when an event made him feel "stronger" and therefore "less weak" on his own eyes and even more importantly, in the eyes of everyone.
For example when he learns that Jacky is not Albert's son. Gregory's sudden death brought nothing to his life, if not more misfortune. Michel had a real inferiority complex, nothing in his life that could ever satisfy him in the long run. It’s obvious that he hurt himself and those close to him.
He often blew on the embers and escalated tensions by revealing crisp details about his brother. Rekindling grudges. Michel thus had the impression of being part of a clan, of a family, he could speak freely with these people who also hated Jean-Marie and Albert (mainly). For him, it was all just a game and a way to feel supported and respected. How wrong he was! How much they used and took advantage of his weaknesses! Michel was clearly an idiot who felt he was loved and esteemed by these people, but he was just a pawn.
I clearly think that Michel was in the secret. But I also think he panicked when he realized that the plan to kidnap and kill Gregory was really coming true. And that he might be in trouble. Imagining and experiencing a concrete and unusual - almost surreal - situation are two totally different things.
5:43 p.m. : Night is falling.
Around 6:00 p.m. : Bernard arrives at the Champion supermarket where he buys his wine. The cashier remembers him and his son Sébastien. Bernard had two caddies to transport the quantity of wine purchased.
Then he went to Bruyères, - Café Renaissance -, usually closed that day, to collect the money won in a horse racing bet. The PMU boss didn't give him the money until 6:10 p.m.
6:30 p.m. : On his return around 6.30 p.m., Bernard had passed Albert Villemin's car driven by Michel Villemin in Laveline-Devant-Bruyères (they were going to Jean-Marie and Christine in search of Grégory). He then dropped off Sébastien at Louisette's so that he could unload his wine at home.
Around 7:00 p.m. : Bernard had come back to eat at Louisette's house.
A man, perfectly remembers seeing Jacqueline and Marcel Jacob at the factory on October 16, 1984. Daniel L., was on a team with them that day. He remembers it, because around 7 p.m., the foreman asked them to find flashlights, to help find the missing child. If he does not remember that the couple actually participated in the research, he is categorical: "I am not going to tell you nonsense, they were there."
Around 8:00 p.m. : Then Bernard went home to bed his son,
and left for work at 8:45 p.m.
9:00 p.m. : Bernard begins his night's work. Marcel & Jacqueline, them, end their service.
Around 9:15 p.m. :
Little Grégory is found dead in the cold waters of the river, - Docelles.
For more pictures about the site and its surroundings : http://www.justicepourgregory.com/photos/19-photos-des-lieux-de-la-découverte-du-corps-docelles.html
The place of Gregory's "deposit" to other people remains unclear
In her first revelations, Murielle Bolle did not know the village where Bernard parked in a square then got off with Grégory and took him away holding him by the hand: “She only deduces the name of this town when she will discover in the newspaper that Grégory is found dead in Docelles”, underline the gendarmes. But she did not see a river nearby and, during the reenactment, did not recognize the place behind the Docelles fire station, a stone's throw from the Vologne. Nevertheless, this "privileged place", so named in the procedure, "can correspond to a place of exchange of the child", because "traces of tires and shoes of woman" were discovered here, in the shelter.
Taking advantage of Maurice Simon's presence in the Vosges, a man asks to meet him.
Jean Descy, 61, painter and decorator from the Paris region, owns a second home a few kilometers from Lépanges-sur-Vologne. He wishes to share some information that may be interesting for the investigation.
On October 16, 1984, around 5:15 p.m. or 5:20 p.m., he was traveling on the departmental 44 near Docelles and in the direction of Épinal when he saw a green and unoccupied Renault 5 parked on the right of the road near the a path called « the Tachet path », allowing access to the river without being seen.
Four days later, on October 20, the day of Gregory’s funeral, after the ceremony, Jean Descy saw the car again, parked almost in the same place below a bridge. Intrigued by the presence of this vehicle in this deserted place, he slows down and says, pointing to a friend in a joking tone: - Here, here is the crime car!
At that moment, he sees four or five people, a couple and young people of about fifteen, of whom he gives a very specific description, get into the vehicle and leave in a hurry. Jean Descy then drives in a Volkswagen "combi" equipped with a high CB antenna that can be confused with a police vehicle. A little later, he thought he recognized the man of the couple pictured in an article in L’Est Républicain dealing with Grégory's death.
Although troubled, the decorator leaves for Paris, telling himself that the investigation will surely be successful. But "in April, May 19", after the death of Bernard Laroche, he decided to go to the central administration of the judicial police to give a detailed statement, supported by sketches. He is informed that the Nancy SRPJ will contact him, which will never be done.
Maurice Simon had this testimony checked point by point, all of the references to which were found to be correct, in particular a shed located at the end of "Chemin Tachet" where the child could have been kidnapped before being thrown into the water at night. When questioned, the central administration of the judicial police said that it did not keep track of the hearing of witness Descy. But he kept the business card of Commissioner Gravet who had received it, who confirms in a letter to his superiors "having alerted the SRPJ of Nancy [...] so that he is able to proceed to the hearing of this witness as agreed with the person concerned”.
No SRPJ police officer will remember the contact or the report supposedly sent to Nancy. The investigation will identify some eighty-five green Renault 5s in the department, including a few in close and remote surroundings of the Villemins, but three years later all of their owners will have solid alibis.
We will also show Jean Descy the record of Grégory's funeral, but he will not recognize the people seen there that day. His testimony, perhaps trivial, perhaps important, but difficult to verify three years later, will be revealed by Le Figaro magazine in February 1988. The day after the publication of the newspaper, Jean Descy's apartment, whose address was not disclosed in the article, will be ravaged by fire and his initials JD painted black on the door of his building. The man has since died of cancer. This episode proves, once again, that the SRPJ has ruled out anything that could interfere in its investigation exclusively against Grégory's mother. It is also related to the threats which the Claudon family say they were subjected to shortly after the crime. Other apparently important leads and almost all accessible in the first weeks after the crime will thus be lost, for lack of having been exploited in their time.
The Jacobs also had "an uncertain schedule" on October 16, 1984, officially at the Aumontzey textile factory from 1 pm to 9 pm. But, so long after, "it's impossible to know if a worker has been replaced or changed shifts occasionally that day" to work in the morning from 5 a.m. to 1 p.m. According to the summary report, "the operation of the spinning mill does not allow checks on the movements of personnel", and their alibi is therefore not concrete. If the Jacobs hadn't been to the factory, investigators suggest they could have formed this duo on the loose who retrieve the little hostage from Bernard Laroche. It is "possible" that the child was sequestered in "a place of storage" before "his / her murderer (s) take action", which "allows to explain that his body did not have been discovered before 9 pm,”. Albert Villemin, who put his hand under his grandson's anorak after his draft in the torrential waters of the Vologne, indeed felt the "soft, unfrosted heat" of his skin. Before his discovery, during the search for the missing child, the grandfather immediately thought of a place where Grégory could have been held, tied up, then thrown into the water, and led a gendarme to a shed in Prey, along the Vologne at the exit of Lépanges, where there was "binder twine and newspapers". It is not known how Albert knew this shed or if other members of his family frequented it on fishing trips in the river. At the time, Judge Lambert and the gendarmes did not exploit this possible place of confinement and did not take any photos.
Comments