WHEN DID GRÉGORY DIE ?
The Apple
We know that apple residue was found in Grégory’s stomach. Christine and Grégory arrive home around 5:00 p.m. Then Christine covered her son's head with a woolen beanie, gave him an apple and let him go outside to play for a few minutes. When Grégory ate his apple ? by playing with his toy cars, just before his kidnapping ? Can we thus define an approximate time of death thanks to this apple?
Of course, the exact digestion time varies depending on the individual, their metabolism, age and gender.
In addition, the digestion time will also vary depending on your state of health, an optimal digestive system or not, the mixture and order of foods, your level of fatigue. But there are still a number of foods that pass through your digestive tract "quickly" and others that stay there for a long time.
Foods are not digested at the same rate or in the same acidic or alkaline environments. The fruits have a rapid digestion. They pass quickly through the stomach and are therefore digested in the small intestine. Each food category has a different digestion time (from 10 min to several hours) and a specific digestion location. Unlike starches, proteins, dairy products and even vegetables, fruits are not digested by the stomach but by the small intestine, in 20 to 30 minutes.
How long does an apple stay in the stomach ?
I have done some research and found that the ingested pieces of an apple can be stirred and mixed with gastric juice in the stomach in 40 min (approximately).
We know the apple residue was still in Gregory's stomach.
This element tends to show that Grégory was killed quickly after his kidnapping, around 6 p.m. / 6:15 p.m. at the latest { if he ate the apple between 5 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. }
"Grégory is wearing a blue anorak and dark green velvet pants. His woolen beanie, striped in blue and white, is pulled down over his face. Ties trap the small victim, loose enough but tight enough to prevent her from breaking free. The body is not yet completely rigid. The local doctor, Doctor Petit, joined us. We slowly raise the cap. The child appears to us asleep, his eyes are closed and a light white foam, is flush with his lips and nostrils. The doctor estimates that the death dates back to about three hours, or around 6 pm."
Source : "The two Gregory cases", Étienne Sesmat.
October 16/7 pm : Jacqueline and Marcel Jacob are seen at the Aumontzey factory. For this, they had to leave Docelles around 6:30 pm / 6:35 pm at the latest, after throwing Grégory into the water. This rough estimate would mean that Grégory could have been killed, tied up and thrown in the water between 5:45 pm and 6:30 pm. (Remember, night fell at 5:43 pm).
However, even after dark, I’m amazed that no one saw anything until around 9:15 pm when his body was finally found. Moreover, if the dead little boy had been in cold water for nearly 3 hours, how could his body have given off a "slight heat" ?
"It’s possible that the child was held in a place of storage before the murderer(s) takes action", which explains why his body did not get discovered until 9 pm. Albert Villemin, who put his hand under his grandson's anorak after his draft in the torrential waters, indeed felt the "soft, unfrosted heat" of his skin."
Source : Synthesis on the family plot.
When did Grégory eat his apple ? Actually ... we don't know !
Gregory could have eaten his apple while playing in front of the house, or in the kidnapper's car, or later, in the killers' car or during his confinement ... more crucial questions and few answers.
The apple does not allow us to say with certainty when Gregory is dead.
Investigators have no more information on this than we do. They believe that
1) Grégory could have been killed after being poisoned with insulin and thrown still alive but unconscious in the river where he would have drowned.
Or possibility number 2) Grégory was poisoned or drugged and drowned but in a container or a bathtub in a place still undetermined today.
Body temperature should be considered one of the best indicators of postmortem delay only during the first 24 hours after death.
A human body is generally at a temperature of 37.2° C. After death, body temperature gradually decreases until it reaches ambiant temperature.
Many factors play an important role in cooling the body after death. Here are some examples :
The outside temperature (an apartment under the roof in summer or in a forest in winter).
Body temperature at the time of death (Ex. A person with hyperthermia at the time of death will have slow cooling while a person with hypothermia will have rapid cooling).
The weight / surface area of the body (Ex. An individual weighing 60 kilos and another weighing 140 kilos. Body cooling is slower as the weight of the individual is heavy).
The size of the individual (Ex. A child or adolescent will have a thermal decrease faster than an adult)
Protection of the body (Ex. A naked individual or an individual covered by warm clothes. The clothes play the role of thermal insulation and the cooling of the body will be delayed as much as their thickness will be)
Immediate environment (Ex. Rain, snow, heating, air conditioning, air movement, humidity etc.)
However, It’s more or less accepted that the body temperature drops on average one degree per hour. In reality, the temperature drop takes place in 3 phases :
The first phase can last from 30 min to 3 hours. During this period, the temperature decreases very little. This is why the technique of thermal decay of 1°C per hour has proved ineffective in dating a recent death dating back to less than three hours.
A second so-called intermediate phase of rapid decay: During this phase, the thermometric method of -1°C / hour is relevant.
A final phase called slow decrease: This is the phase where the body temperature gradually joins the ambient temperature.
Here too, impossible to say when Grégory died with precision. In all cases, his death was recent, a maximum of 3 hours.
We know that rigor mortis affects the muscles of the body and begins in the temporal / mandibular joint and the neck 3 hours after death. His body was supple and limp, his head still nodding and his legs swaying. His body, despite the coolness of the water, did not show rigor mortis.
The question is how long did Grégory stay in cold water? Indeed, it appears that Grégory was found shortly after being dropped into the water. This element tends to show that he was somewhere alive, conscious and then unconscious. On the other hand, I really don't know at what point in the evening Grégory could have died.
Conclusion and personal opinions
About insulin. Indeed, insulin may have been used to "numb" Gregory. Blood samples were insufficient to establish a complete toxicological workup. What we are sure of: no trace of alcohol is found in the blood ; no trace of adrenaline, symptomatic of fear, was found either ; in the stomach, forensic scientists note the presence of a small amount of water ; the lung sample will show that a small amount of water has been inhaled.
Grégory breathed in the water while he was unconscious; he did not fight his murderers, no defensive injuries or traces of violence from a brutal drowning. The child seems to have fallen asleep peacefully. The insulin hypothesis is very interesting and plausible.
But, did these people really know what effect insulin could have on a non-diabetic ? Did they know if the insulin could work quickly or not ? And if so, how did they come up with the idea of using insulin ? Where did they find the information ? How and where did they get this product ?
Regarding a possible blow to the head, I absolutely do not exclude this hypothesis. Before his kidnapping, Gregory had no bruising on the upper forehead. This injury could be the result of a sharp blow to his head. He could also have bumped into the frame of the car, for example, by putting his feet on it to jump out of the vehicle. For a child, it’s like a staircase in order to get out of the car with less difficulty. However, the location of the injury - high on the forehead, so close to the scalp - could indicate a blow from a taller individual, an adult.
The place where Grégory was held captive. Honestly, I don't have a personal conviction on this. I am in the dark ... the simplest solution is often the right one. Why not in a car ? His clothes weren't dirty. The water could have cleaned them but I doubt he was lying on the ground in a fishing hut to tie him up ; dirt would have been found on the white part of his woolen beanie for example or on his medium blue anorak. Gregory could then have been tied up in the trunk.
Were other people involved ? Was Gregory taken to the home of a relative, friend or acquaintance of the killers ? These people in question could be the owners of the suspicious Renault 5 seen near Chemin Tachet. I do not know.
Grégory's body was immersed in the very center of Docelles, next to the stationery. I have no doubts about it. Did the killers risk throwing Gregory into the water while he was still alive ? They probably thought that the insulin, or the water temperature, would finish him off. Or he'd drown anyway. But it's still a risk.
About vehicles. I strongly believe that the beige van seen near the couple on the afternoon (on a promontory with binoculars, in the direction of the Villemin house in Lépanges) could be Bernard Laroche's Citroën Ami 8.
A persistent rumor tends to affirm that the day after the moldings made on the tire impressions, B. Laroche would have burned the tires of his Citroën Ami 8. This would testify to suspicious behavior.
In reality, this element is not proven. It would have been easier for him to get rid of it in a landfill, and moreover, Laroche did not burn the tires of his Peugeot 305. During Jean-Marie's trial in 1993, the latter questioned Judge Lambert on this subject.
Jean-Marie Villemin himself asks Judge Lambert if he has done an expertise on the tires of Bernard Laroche's car (Incredible !): - No, said Jean-Michel Lambert. - Why ? - They were burnt. - Have you drawn up a report of the findings ? - No.
It is not impossible to think that, forced to account for his mistakes, the judge made up this story of burnt tires to clear himself. Obviously awkward "pirouette*" which, in passing, would reinforce the suspicions about Laroche.
*pirouette : Flippant way to elude the question.
However, Marcel could use the Citroën Ami 8. After all, investigators believe that the latter could have manipulated his nephew Bernard. If he manipulated him psychologically, Marcel was aware of his physical resemblance to Bernard and could have used it (and his car !) to cover his tracks ... and blame him. But I do not believe it. For me, Bernard participated voluntarily and found satisfaction in the death of Grégory and especially the despair of Jean-Marie, otherwise why take all these risks...
I do not know who owns the green Renault 5. The feeling that other people are involved in the crime and are deliberately obstructing the solution of this investigation ... [which bothers many people], is growing stronger in my mind.
Everyone is innocent. Bernard was innocent. Marcel and Jacqueline are innocent. They minimize their confrontations, discords and grudges. They all loved each other ... yet they evolved and lived in an atmosphere of oppressive hatred and frustration.
Someone killed this child.
This affair is haunting. We have so much information about the main protagonists and family history, but almost 40 years later, we are still in the dark about the circumstances of Grégory's death. And it’s very, very frustrating. I’m appalled that these people have been able to escape Justice in this way while EVERYTHING points in their direction.
As you will see by browsing my blog, I have always believed strongly in Bernard's guilt hypothesis. At the time, all the elements brought us back to him.
I strongly acquired and based my opinion in particular on the theoretical profile of the stalker crow defined by the first experts immersed in the case.
But I admit that it’s entirely plausible that, despite their impeccable skills and ethics, these women could have simply been wrong.
First of all, one thing remains undeniable. Bernard Laroche's writing has obvious similarities and few differences. I'm no expert of course, but anyone can see and notice this strange similarity.
So how do you explain / if Jacqueline is the writer crow / the important similarity between their respective handwriting? An unfortunate coincidence? Possible.
Indeed, an equivalent school education associated with a similar professional background could strongly explain this concordance.
The expertise in writing is not an exact science, often gives random and uncertain results, especially in a case like this where technicians committed had to pronounce themselves:
- on writings in typographical characters and therefore impersonal and easy to modify or imitate,
- on disguised writings,
- on very numerous comparison documents emanating from writers : coming from the same region, often of ages very close, belonging to the same social background, and having received the same educational background, which increased the risk of errors.
Then investigators focused on finding a man. Without further investigating the identity and role of a female accomplice.
Moreover, Ms. Berrichon S. and Ms. Jacquin K. were not given the opportunity to study Marcel and Jacqueline's samples since they had provided a verified alibi with the employer. In 1984, they were not yet under the radar of investigators, their samples were not subjected to expert analysis. We are talking about 37 years ago.
The field of writing expertise, the tools and methods used have evolved considerably since then.
I raised the possibility that these two renowned experts might have been wrong, but in fact their work could only be biaised. Basically we are talking about several crows and a family plot, not just one man.
The first mistake was to appoint Judge Lambert to lead the case. I do not wish to discredit him further, but he was inexperienced and in constant search of notoriety even if it meant breaking the secrecy of the instruction. It should be noted that media pressure weighed heavily on the start of the investigation. Let’s not forget the pressure of the hierarchical superiors wishing to absolutely resolve this sordid case.
Add the sadness of the victims and the weight of public opinion. The investigation was not sloppy but rushed. Initially, if Judge Lambert had been a little more conscientious about the proceedings, Bernard Laroche would not have been killed and the implication of Marcel and Jacqueline might have ended up being exposed. In all this mess, the gendarmes were on the right track but a chain of decisions, failed or botched acts, legal and police shenanigans, simply destroyed their work.
All of these people “worked” for their own personal benefit. For a question of money, ego, success, notoriety or recognition ...NOT FOR GRÉGORY.
Only Étienne Sesmat and his team members really wanted to bring justice to Grégory and his family.
So much time wasted and energy thrown in the trash. Unfortunately, we will not be making history again.
Finally, I want to mention something that deeply shocks me.
In each intervention or interview with Marie-Ange Laroche, her hatred towards Jean-Marie is still just as strong. She never mentions Grégory or empathizes with his parents' pain. She's not looking for the truth, she doesn't want the truth. Her only truth is the innocence of Bernard killed by an assassin blinded by hatred. I admit, I have no mercy on this lady. I feel sorry for her children who are also collateral victims.
The behavior of Marie-Ange Laroche even today, reveals that these people are still PRISONERS OF THEIR HATRED. The investigators raised the idea of a potential manipulation of Bernard by his uncle, an element which tends to exonerate him but which still implies his participation on the day of the crime. However, Marie-Ange does not admit this scenario, Bernard did nothing, period.
I would like to point out that she recovered the damages paid by Jean-Marie for the assassination of Bernard, in particular to raise his two young dependent children.
She was helped and supported by her family, in particular Lucien her brother, and sisters who often took care of Sébastien during her absence. I do not question the pain or the misfortune of her family, but Marie-Ange Laroche continues to pretend to be a victim, without ever wanting the truth, except a truth that suits her.
Comments