On October 16, 1984, at 9:15 p.m., the lifeless body of little Grégory Villemin, bound hand and foot, was found in the icy waters of the river 'La Vologne', in Docelles, in the Vosges, six kilometers from his home in Lépanges.
Four hours earlier, the child was still playing on a gravel pile, in front of the family home.
October 17, 1984. An anonymous letter claims the crime. “I hope you die of grief, Chief. It is not your money that can give you back your son. Here is my revenge, poor idiot!". This letter was posted in Lépanges-sur-Vologne, the day of the murder, before the lifting of 5:15 p.m. (according to the postmark).
We then learn that this crow had been harassing the Villemin couple for three years.
October 18, 1984. The test of dictations.
For several days, some 140 members or relatives of the Villemin family will indulge in the pages of writing (in particular by copying the last message of the raven) under the control of the gendarmes. The goal ? Find out who is the raven and therefore the killer of Grégory Villemin.
At the same time, the investigation by the gendarmes continues, in particular with the molding of traces found on the banks of the Vologne.
October 20, 1984. The funeral of Grégory Villemin.
Grégory’s funeral is celebrated in the church of Lépanges and the burial then takes place in the cemetery of the small town. Christine yells : “Grégory darling, come back! No, I do not want ! Why did they do this to you ?"
Many journalists and curious attend the ceremony. The gendarmes too: they take many pictures, hoping that the crow is in the crowd.
October 22, 1984. A first robot portrait unveiled.
Investigators are releasing a composite of a man supposedly seen prowling the evening of the crime around the Lépanges post office: 40 years old, 1m80, strong build, glasses, shoulder-length brown hair. The man was then very quickly exonerated.
October 25, 1984. The first reconstitution.
The Bruyères gendarmes carry out a reconstitution with a mannequin.
After several tests, they conclude that the child was not thrown into the water between Deycimont and Docelles, where tire marks and a woman's heel had been found the day after the crime but in the center of the village, very close to where he was found.
October 26, 1984. A second composite portrait.
A man spontaneously presents himself to the Bruyères gendarmerie: it is him that the first composite portrait designates, wrongly. He has no difficulty in exonerating himself.
A second robot portrait based on the testimony of Mr Cornillie (Docelles) was immediately released.
October 30, 1984. Experts and graphologists meet at the gendarmerie.
Meeting at the Nancy gendarmerie between the main persons in charge of the investigation, the expert in writing who began to analyze the dictations and a Parisian graphologist whose first appearance in the case.
The expert says his early work leads her to believe that the raven could be Bernard Laroche, cousin of Jean-Marie, but asks for more time to make her conclusions definitive.
October 31, 1984. Bernard Laroche arrested for the first time.
The gendarmes ignored the cautionary advice of the graphologists and immediately arrested Bernard Laroche at his home in Aumontzey and Marie-Ange (his wife) at his factory in Gérardmer.
The couple were released the following afternoon as both were able to provide an alibi for the time of the crime.
November 2, 1984 The testimony of Murielle Bolle.
Heard on October 31 and November 1, 1984, Murielle Bolle delivers a first version:
On October 16, 1984, the day of the crime, at 5 p.m., leaving college, she took the school bus as usual and arrived at 5:25 p.m. in Aumontzey at Louisette's home, where Bernard was. Laroche who, ten minutes later, would have gone to buy wine at the Champion store in Laval-sur-Vologne.
Heard a third time on November 2 by the Bruyères gendarmerie brigade, which faces certain contradictions, the teenager assures that she lied.
"When I left school, I headed for the bus (…) I was called by my brother-in-law Bernard Laroche. When I get in his car, I sit in the front seat. Sébastien (Editor's note: Bernard Laroche's son) is seated at the back (...) In Lépanges, he stopped. Me and Sébastien stayed in the car. Bernard left the car without giving any explanation. When he returned, he was accompanied by a little boy, of the same age as Sébastien, whom I did not know (…) He made him get into the car (…) We stopped again at Lépanges, briefly (…) We drove for five minutes. Arrived in this village, Bernard went down with the little one. I did not leave the vehicle. I cannot tell you how long he was away. One thing is certain, Bernard returned alone. Then we left for Aumontzey. When we arrived, it must have been 5:30 pm, we went to Louisette's place. Bernard stayed for about five minutes and then left. He told me he was going to buy wine in Laval-sur-Vologne."
It was then 1:30 p.m. on November 2, when Murielle Bolle was taken into police custody.
During the rest of her auditions, she gives some details. In Lépanges, the car climbed a big hill (Editor's note: like the one that leads to the Villemin house); in Docelles, Bernard Laroche would have parked his car in a place (Editor's note: along the Barba stream, a tributary of the Vologne and a privileged place for the body to be launched, there is a place); when leaving the car with the child, he would have called him by his first name (Grégory); the child had a beanie.
Murielle Bolle specifies that she understood that Bernard Laroche "was the perpetrator of the crime when the next day, at Aunt Louisette's", she saw "the photo of Grégory on the newspaper. "I didn't say anything in the days after the tragedy because I was afraid to talk about it. I lied so that my brother-in-law and my sister wouldn't be bothered. I thought about it and thought it was better to tell the truth because it was a thing too bad to hide. I am relieved to have said everything about this matter."
November 5, 1984. Bernard Laroche arrested and charged.
On the morning of Monday November 5, Murielle Bolle confirms her statements in the office of Jean-Michel Lambert, the investigating judge. "If I didn't mention it earlier, it's because I was a little afraid of Bernard," she slips. She adds that the gendarmes were "nice" to her. To her father, she slips: "It's going well, the gendarmes, they're my friends. There is no problem."
On the strength of these confessions, judge Jean-Michel Lambert indicted Bernard Laroche. He was immediately imprisoned in Charles-III prison in Nancy where the other inmates threatened him: “To death, Laroche !"
November 6, 1984. Murielle Bolle retracts.
What happened on the evening of November 5, 1984? More than thirty years later, the doubt remains.
While she had confirmed her version to the gendarmes and the judge several times, Murielle Bolle retracted on November 6, after the arrest of Bernard Laroche. Some testimonies (such as the testimony of a cousin or the memories of a neighbor) evoke, more than thirty years later, family pressures, even violence.
Accompanied by her mother, she returns to her previous version in the judge's office.
"The gendarmes told me that my brother-in-law was the crow, that he said the same as what I said, that if I didn't tell the judge that, I would be complicit in the murder of little Grégory. They also threatened to send me to a reformatory."
November 9, 1984. The confrontation between Bernard Laroche and Murielle Bolle.
Bernard Laroche is confronted in Judge Lambert's office in Murielle who confirms his retraction. The lawyers immediately requested his provisional release. It will be refused for three reasons: possible imminent arrest of the co-perpetrators of the crime, need to await the conclusions of the experts, safety of the accused himself.
November 22, 1984. Christine Villemin seen in front of the post office?
Christine Villemin is confronted in Judge Lambert's office with four work colleagues who claim to have seen her on October 16 when leaving the factory a little before 5 p.m., heading towards the Lépanges post office, stopping in front of and dropping off there. one or more letters.
Grégory’s mother maintains that they were wrong and saw her, in fact, the day before.
February 4, 1985. Bernard laroche is released.
The judge, against the advice of the public prosecutor, frees Bernard Laroche. But he remains charged with murder. That day, in front of journalists, Jean-Marie Villemin announces his intention to kill him after leaving work. Marie-Ange Laroche then asks, for her husband, the protection of the gendarmerie which refuses it to her (but it must be said that the gendarmerie was no longer in charge of the file at that time).
February 18, 1985. The Nancy SRPJ in charge of the case.
Judge Lambert seized the judicial police of Nancy and received in his office Pierre Richard, deputy director of the criminal affairs office at the PJ, who personally took the case in hand, and Gérard Andrieu, director of the SRPJ in Nancy.
March 29, 1985. Bernard Laroche assassinated.
Jean-Marie Villemin does not believe in the innocence of his cousin. He decides to take justice into his own hands and shoots Bernard Laroche down. He constitutes himself a prisoner.
The next day, he was charged with murder and imprisoned. Marie-Ange Laroche will subsequently obtain the condemnation of the State for not having prevented the announced death of her husband. Bernard Laroche's funeral took place on April 2, 1985.
June 13, 1985. Captain Sesmat transferred.
He had been one of the gendarmes most involved in the affair as early as October 1984. Captain Sesmat, until then based in the Vosges, is transferred "at his request" to Berlin.
June 20, 1985. Reenactment of the murder of Bernard Laroche.
Large security forces were deployed to reconstitute the murder of Bernard Laroche in front of his pavilion in Aumontzey.
Despite impressive police service, the fear of further revenge is so strong that Jean-Marie Villemin wears a bulletproof vest.
July 5, 1985. Christine Villemin charged and imprisoned.
Judge Lambert charges Christine Villemin with murder and places her under a committal warrant.
The dependent elements are a new graphological study designating her as the crow, as well as cords identical to those having tied Grégory found in the cellar of the family home. Co-workers say they saw her at the post office in Lépanges precisely the day and time the crow mailed the letter.
July 16, 1985. Christine Villemin released.
Although 6 months pregnant, Christine Villemin has started a hunger strike from Metz-Queuleu prison. Her husband (he was transferred from Saverne to Nancy) also stopped eating.
Finally, the indictment chamber of Nancy, noting the insufficiency of the grounds for remand in custody, frees her. But at the same time he confirms the order of indictment which will then be annulled by the court of cassation.
Her case radically divides the actors in the case, between those who are convinced of her innocence and those who consider her guilty.
July 17, 1985. The text by Marguerite Duras in 'Liberation'.
Marguerite Duras publishes a controversial column “Sublime, necessarily sublime Christine V.” in the newspaper 'Liberation'. It points to the criminal guilt of Christine Villemin.
The article is preceded by a warning, "The transgression of writing", written by Serge July which recalls the freedom inherent in the artist's writing.
September 30, 1986. Birth of Julien Villemin.
Christine Villemin gives birth at 10:10 pm to a baby Julien Jean-Marie Gilbert at the maternity hospital in Lunéville (Meurthe-et-Moselle).
October 22, 19. Confrontation and reenactment.
New and interminable general confrontation in Judge Lambert's office. Eight days later, a reenactment at the heights of Lépanges is organized. For five hours, the various witnesses rehearsed their versions of the 30 minutes during which the child disappeared. Christine Villemin refused to do the gestures she denies making.
September 11, 1986. Judge Lambert is dismissed from the case.
Christine Villemin’s case is referred to the indictment chamber of the Nancy Court of Appeal. After 23 months of instruction, Jean-Michel Lambert takes over.
December 9, 1986. Christine Villemin sent back to the criminal court.
Nancy Court of Appeal sends Christine Villemin to the Assize Court for the murder of Grégory. Already on July 22, 1986, Jean-Marie Villemin had been sent back to the criminal court, but this time for the murder of Bernard Laroche.
March 17, 1987. The disoriented survey in Dijon.
The Paris Court of Cassation cancels Christine Villemin's referral to the Assize and orders the case to be disoriented.
The Dijon Court of Appeal resumes the investigation. It ordered additional information, successively led by President Simon until 1990, then by his successor President Martin.
November 17, 1987. A new reconstitution.
A reconstituti is carried out to try to determine the exact place where the child was thrown in the Vologne. A mannequin is used.
This staging raises more questions than it answers.
December 24, 1987. Jean-Marie Villemin released.
The fifth request from Jean-Marie Villemin will be the right one. Grégory's father is released on Christmas Eve. Placed under judicial control, he was placed under house arrest in Essonne.
February 3, 1993. Dismissal for Christine Villemin.
The Dijon Court of Appeal pronounces a dismissal in favor of Christine Villemin for
"Total absence of charges", a first in criminal law. Usually a dismissal is issued for sufficient lack of evidence or evidence, the dismissal therefore appears as a real rehabilitation.
The court also reveals that charges "very serious" still weigh on Bernard Laroche.
December 16, 1993. Jean-Marie Villemin sentenced for the murder of Bernard Laroche.
Jean-Marie Villemin is sentenced to 5 years imprisonment by the Dijon Assize Court, including one suspended sentence, for the assassination of Bernard Laroche.
As he served part of his sentence while in preventive detention, he was released two weeks after the verdict was announced.
April 19, 2000. The investigation reopened with the search for DNA.
At the request of Grégory's parents, the investigation is reopened and hope is revived by the analysis of the DNA present on a half-stamp of a letter posted in 1983 and which could have preserved the saliva of the "crow. ".
But the analyzes do not give anything, the experts declaring at the time the DNA unusable. The proceedings ended with a dismissal on April 11, 2001.
May 2002. The State condemned (1).
The Versailles Court of Appeal condemns the State to pay 63,000 euros to Marie-Ange Laroche and Murielle Bolle in compensation for "inability to fulfill its mission" and underlines a "total lack in the control and in the conduct of the investigation and the instruction". These criticisms extend to the additional instruction carried out from 1987.
The conflict court seized by the two people, had rendered a judgment on October 19, 1998. The widow could then request compensation from the State because of the lack of protection for Bernard Laroche.
June 2004. The State condemned (2).
The State is condemned to pay 35,000 euros to each of Grégory's parents for dysfunction of justice.
September 7, 2006. The doubts of Colonel Sesmat.
Twenty-two years after the murder of little Grégory, Colonel Sesmat wrote a book, "Les deux Affaires Grégory" in which he reconsidered his quest for truth and the excesses of the investigation.
October 25, 2006. Murielle Bolle calls for the investigation to be reopened.
Murielle Bolle's lawyers demand the reopening of the investigation. The Dijon public prosecutor will reject this request on January 9, 2007, considering that there is no new element allowing this reopening.
October 28, 2006. "The Villemin Case" in mini-series.
France 3 broadcasts the six episodes of "The Villemin Affair" recounting the murder of Grégory, the investigation and the legal proceedings.
The programming was delayed due to legal complaints and the lawyers of Marie-Ange Laroche and those of Murielle Bolle are suing Patrick de Carolis and the France 3 channel for defamation before the Nanterre tribunal de grande instance.
The channel will be condemned in April 2009. Arte, which will rebroadcast this mini-series two years later will also be attacked and ordered to pay 15,000 euros to Marie-Ange Laroche and 20,000 euros for legal costs. The magistrates considered that "the directors necessarily lead the viewer to think (...) that little Grégory spent his last minutes of life in Bernard Laroche's car".
July 9, 2008. New DNA expertise.
Seized by the Villemin couple, the Attorney General of the Dijon Court of Appeal requests the reopening of the investigation for a new DNA search.
Jean-Marie Beney, explained how he had been convinced by the request of the parents of little Grégory, filed in August 2007." The lawyers filed a private expert report and produced by a Swiss specialist. This specialist belongs to the Lausanne Scientific Police Institute. On the following December 3, the Dijon Court of Appeal ordered the investigation to be reopened.
October 22, 2009. Two DNA profiles on the stamp and the letter.
The expertise, carried out by the Lyon laboratory Biomnis (ex-Mérieux), revealed the presence of two distinct profiles, a male and a female, on a stamp and a letter from the crow.
Finally, the DNA analyzes made on the letter from the raven sent to the Villemin give nothing. Indeed, the traces identified do not correspond to any of the 150 protagonists of the case.
In 2010-2011, six new analyzes were ordered but once again, justice failed even though the widow of Bernard Laroche had affirmed that she would not oppose the exhumation of her husband if it was necessary. Marie-Ange Laroche also announces her intention to become a civil party when her book comes out on November 3, 2009. Her request will be rejected.
January 19, 2010. The testimony of Michel Villemin.
Married to Ginette Villemin, the brother of Jean-Marie and uncle of Grégory, a time suspected of being the crow, also wishes to become a civil party. Seriously ill, he gives himself up to the Republican East in an interview. He died two months later, in March 2010.
October 20, 2010. Justice orders “last chance” expertises.
Almost six months after noting that the comparisons between the DNA traces discovered on certain seals and the genetic fingerprints of 150 protagonists of the case had not yielded anything, the investigating chamber of the court of appeal of Dijon ordered new measures :
search for DNA at the heart of the cords that hampered Grégory's body,
search for a possible 'foulage' (relief on a page due to the pressure of writing) on the letter
the letter received by the parents on October 17, 1984,
analysis of a hair found on the child's pants,
expertise of the voice recordings of the raven (s).
January 16, 2012. Analyzes that yield no results.
The analysis of the long hair found on Grégory's pants and that of the heart of the cords having served to hinder the child gave "negative" results, according to the attorney general of the court of appeal of Dijon, Jean-Marie Beney , specifying that no DNA could be "extracted" on the cords.
The comparison between the DNA found on the hair and that of the protagonists of the case also gave nothing, he added. The Attorney General, Jean-Marie Beney announces that "it was not possible to extract DNA from the knot of the cords". The hair, meanwhile, revealed mitochondrial DNA that could not be linked to anyone.
January 31, 2012. Marie-Ange Laroche sentenced for defamation.
Marie-Ange Laroche, the widow of Bernard Laroche (a time suspected of the assassination of little Grégory Villemin) was sentenced to a suspended fine of 1,000 euros for defaming Étienne Sesmat, the first investigator in the case.
August 31, 2012. Still more research.
Me Thierry Moser, lawyer for the Villemin spouses, declares to the press that the expertise of the voice of the crow, preserved on audio cassettes now digitized, will now be possible:
"The gendarmes of the IRCGN (criminal research institute of the national gendarmerie), after consulting the technicians, replied that the expertise can be attempted despite the difficulties of feasibility." The new investigation consisting in comparing the voice of the crow with the recordings made by journalists during reportage.
A few days later, on September 26, at the request of Grégory's parents, the Dijon Court of Appeal authorized two new DNA searches on clothing, shoes and cords.
April 24, 2013. Powerless science.
The Attorney General of the Dijon Court of Appeal, Jean-Marie Beney, announces that the new DNA surveys carried out on Grégory's clothes and cords do not allow the DNA of any of the protagonists in the case to be identified, likewise, the analysis of audio recordings, while it does reveal the voices of a man and a woman, does not allow a precise person to be identified either.
The prosecutor adds that there is "always a hope insofar as the file is not closed. But from a scientific point of view, hope is fading".
September 8, 2014. Judge Lambert writes a book.
At 62, Judge Lambert will soon retire. he was then already publishing his eleventh work, "How many injustices am I guilty of?".
For the first time, in an interview with Est Républicain, he evokes the Grégory case and affirms that Bernard Laroche cannot be guilty.
At the microphone of France Inter, he explains: "If we reconstruct the schedule that would have made him the murderer, we realize that it does not hold."
October 16, 2014. 30 years of investigation.
Thirty years later, the Vosges, weary of so many caricatures, still suffer from this whirlwind around this assassination, amplified by the macabre overflight of a raven still free, like the murderer of little Grégory. Unless it's the same ...
August 26, 2016. All data entered into software.
The tracks of the DNA and the voice of the raven proving to be unusable, the investigators decide to take an interest in the hundreds of testimonies collected throughout the investigation as well as all the material elements. It takes several weeks to get everything into the Anacrim software.
"This software does treatment. It is not a miraculous washing machine that brings out the name of the accused," explains Noël Picot, gendarme from Vosges.
Indeed, Analyst Notebook makes it possible to materialize the existing links and the inconsistencies between multiple entities present in a procedure. "What we mean by entities are people, their schedule, vehicles, objects, telephone numbers ...", explains Gendarme Picot who then dissects these links and puts them in order, under written form, to the survey director who is responsible for studying this work of reflections and hypotheses.
May 27, 2017. A summary of over 500 pages.
The gendarmes give the president of the instruction chamber a summary of all the data entered in Anacrim.
More than 500 pages from which the investigators draw a scenario: Bernard Laroche kidnapper and murderer of Grégory with the more or less active complicity of Murielle Bolle by "jealousy of the professional, financial and family success of the Villemin couple."
A first hypothesis quickly corrected because the behavior of Laroche after October 16, 1984 does not stick with that of an assassin. In this second version, "Bernard Laroche's guilty intention would have been limited to kidnapping" while the accomplices of "the galaxy of the envious" revolve around.
For investigators, Ginette Villemin is "unquestionably jealous of the Villemin family". The Jacob couple would have taken advantage of the "gossip" launched by Michel and his wife Ginette "to organize the harassment carried out by the crow".
Their conclusion is clear: "On October 16, 1984, Marcel and Jacqueline Jacob were able to appease their hatred for the Villemin by carrying out the assassination of little Grégory Villemin."
End of May 2017. A mysterious message in the church register.
This is undoubtedly one of the elements which will relaunch the case a few days later and which will not be revealed until June 28, the very day of the arrest of Murielle Bolle.
A message was found at the end of May, by a parishioner giving catechism lessons, on the church register.
Dated May 13, 2008, a few words are inscribed: "It is indeed Bernard L. who killed Grégory, I was with him. Murielle Bolle."
Contradictory DNA expertises will not provide certainty and there is still doubt: hoax or not?
June 14, 2017. New arrests: the investigation relaunched to everyone's surprise.
Surprise and huge media impact in the middle of the day, three arrests and two hearings in the Grégory case, 32 years after the facts.
In detail, three people were taken into custody:
- Marcel Jacob, 72 years old, brother of Monique Villemin (Grégory's grandmother) and uncle of Jean-Marie Villemin.
- Jacqueline Jacob, 73, was reportedly arrested at the same time as her husband in their house in Aumontzey.
- Ginette Villemin (Leconte), wife of Michel Villemin (deceased in 2010). She will be released the next day without any charges being brought against her.
Two other people were heard at their home, the parents of Jean-Marie Villemin and grandparents of Grégory: Albert and Monique Villemin.
Even several decades after the fact, the enthusiasm and curiosity of the public remain intact, as the hearings of the programs devoted to the revival of the affair prove it. In the Vosges, journalists from the national media are arriving in large numbers.
During the hearings, it is a family picture "too" idyllic for the investigators which is drawn up by the questioned.
For Monique Villemin, her children "got along well" and Bernard Laroche "was like my seventh child". Family reunions? "Everything was going very well." Her husband won't be much more talkative: "If I knew something, I would have said it."
The Jacob couple also chose to evoke a family without problems: "Sometimes, we met together to eat but not often, no, we were not apart from the family", affirms Marcel while Jacqueline keeps the silence on many issues.
June 16, 2017. Marcel and Jacqueline Jacob indicted.
After 48 hours in police custody, the Jacob couple is indicted for "kidnapping and forcible confinement followed by death".
During his press conference, the prosecutor gives several details on the reasons for this decision, the day after a first communication.
"These two indicted persons are subject to provisional imprisonment, in order to prevent any fraudulent consultation between the various protagonists."
In the proceedings, Marcel Jacob conceals his antagonisms with Grégory's parents. In 1982, during an argument, Marcel Jacob said to Jean-Marie Villemin 'I do not shake the hand of a chef', a term that can be found in the letters, in a certain number of the elements which are incriminated." "Gregory was kidnapped, held for a while. The people who participated in this act of kidnapping are the perpetrators of this crime. According to certain statements, Bernard Laroche would have participated in the kidnapping. "The raven is formed by two people: a man and a woman."
June 19, 2017. Ginette Villemin testifies after being in police custody.
Little Grégory's aunt, Jean-Marie Villemin's sister-in-law, had been arrested and placed in custody in Dijon at the same time as the Jacob couple.
Released and without any charge against her, she testifies and affirms that she no longer believes in Justice.
June 20, 2017. The Jacob couple released.
After being indicted and placed in detention for four days "to prevent fraudulent consultation" and "pressure which would be likely to impair the effectiveness of the investigations" according to the public prosecutor, the Jacob couple are released, under judicial supervision.
The general prosecutor's office had asked for the couple to be kept in detention, in order to protect the investigations and avoid exchanges between the spouses.
Marcel Jacob's lawyer explains the details of the court decision: "The two spouses will not return to their homes in the Vosges, but will be placed in two different homes and at secret addresses for a satisfactory judicial review. They also have the absolute ban on communicating with the media at the risk of pre-trial detention which could then be immediately re-ordered."
June 28, 2017. Murielle Bolle arrested.
In the Vosges, some feel the same frenzy as in 1984. Cameras are out again and journalists are questioning the neighborhood as if to repeat the investigation 30 years later.
This June 28, the photographers turn to the house of Murielle Bolle. Arrested in the early morning, the one who had accused and then exonerated Bernard Laroche is auditioned within the framework of a police custody within the squadron of the mobile gendarmerie of 'Saint-Etienne-lès-Remiremont'.
The next day, Murielle Bolle was transferred to Dijon where she was indicted for kidnapping a 15-year-old minor followed by death and placed in detention.
The accused denies any involvement in the assassination of little Grégory through her lawyer Me Teissonnière who speaks of "a canvas of gossip, lies".
'L'Est Républicain' looks back on the different elements presented to Murielle Bolle during her hearing. Among these, the testimony of a cousin, who came to the police after the arrest of the Jacob couple and who claims that the teenager was beaten by her family to recant.
This cousin is not the only one to assert his presence during the violence against Murielle Bolle. A neighbor who also remembers the evening of November 5: "It was violent. The whole family was there. We could hear Murielle complaining. Poor kid, it was terrible. I then came home for fear of being seen."
There are also the confidences of this nurse (who died in 2014) made in 2007 during a telephone conversation and transcribed by the gendarmes in 2016. She says she attended this violent evening. "I intervened a bit because it's true that they went there with a little bit of everything they could get their hands on." But what intrigues the investigators are the confidences that Murielle Bolle would have made to her, at the beginning of 1988 in the cemetery of Jussarupt (88). "And I say, uh, you didn't take the bus that night Murielle? So she started to cry. She said: no! But Bernard, Bernard, Bernard! Ben, I said: yes ! But why did you retract? " At that point, Murielle Bolle would have given her this answer: "I received some roustes." The nurse then tries to make her spit it out: "I tell him: yes, I saw it, but hey, it's too bad!" The technique flops. Murielle Bolle closes: "Anyway, I can say, it's over."
Questioned by investigators, Murielle Bolle denied being in the car with her sister's husband.
Her first version delivered to the gendarmes then to judge Lambert, before retracting? "I don't know", "I didn't say that", "I've never been there", "it was the gendarmes who typed everything."
She seems to have no recollection of the family reunion which took place just after the arrest of Bernard Laroche, in the Bolle pavilion, in Laveline-devant-Bruyères. Faced with the testimony of another of her sisters, she simply repeats: "I don't remember. I was not hit", "the rouste is not true."
July 4, 2017. Murielle Bolle kept in detention.
The observers were betting on a release with very strict judicial control, as was the case for the Jacob spouses but, after a hearing at the Dijon Court of Appeal, Murielle Bolle is well kept in detention.
A decision due to a simple accommodation problem according to her lawyer: "The only one that we have proposed, in fact, is in Alsace, with a member of the family. A member of the family whose name, moreover, is appeared in the file. As there will soon be hearings and confrontations, the investigating chamber wanted, in my opinion, to avoid any consultation."
That same day, we learn that Marie-Ange Laroche, whom everyone thinks she will soon be auditioned for, was the victim of discomfort.
July 6, 2017. Murielle Bolle goes on hunger strike.
Incarcerated for more than a week in the Dijon remand center, Murielle Bolle begins a hunger strike.
"She is threatened with death, she is in solitary confinement but she cannot take it any longer. She is living a nightmare! She claims her innocence", explains her lawyer who finds her very depressed.
Murielle Bolle will finally end her hunger strike on July 11.
July 11, 2017. The suicide of Judge Lambert.
His body was discovered by a neighbor on the evening of July 11.
Judge Jean-Michel Lambert is found dead, in his office in 'Le Mans', a plastic bag tied on his head.
A parallel is quickly realized with an extract from his latest book. In it, one of the characters, Professor Chabert, kills himself "to save his honor". His body is "discovered by a colleague, his head covered with a plastic bag, an empty whiskey bottle at the foot of the chair". These are precisely the circumstances of Judge Lambert's death. The autopsy carried out the next day confirms the suicide thesis.
July 12, 2017. Judge Simon's notebooks unveiled.
Some say they may have played a role in Judge Lambert's suicide.
The secret diaries of Maurice Simon, the magistrate who succeeded him in the Grégory case, provide incredible behind-the-scenes testimony to this terrible criminal case.
In the excerpts published, he returns in particular to his face to face with Murielle Bolle in 1989: "It will be a five-hour fight during which I will deploy all the intellectual resources of which I am capable to break the stubborn resistance of the young Murielle who will be on the verge of breaking down but will always recover in extremis because she is obviously terrified by the accounts she will have to render to her family."
These private diaries had been communicated to the courts at the beginning of 2016.
July 19, 2017. Judge Lambert's letter to a journalist from 'L' Est Républicain'.
"I have decided to kill myself because I know that I will no longer have the strength to fight in the last test that awaits me," wrote the judge. “This umpteenth '' rebound '' is infamous (...) The grinding machine has started to destroy or damage the lives of several innocent people, to respond to the desire for revenge of some spirits wounded in their pride or in the honor of their bodies. Some of my colleagues have followed suit with abominable bad faith."
“I proclaim one last time that Bernard Laroche is innocent (…) Since 1987, we have completely disregarded the work of the SRPJ in Nancy (…) The events since last June are normally doomed to failure (…) In order not to lose the face, we will then look for a scapegoat. Suffice to say that it is all found ... (...) I refuse to play this role. If I have failed sometimes, however I have a perfectly clear conscience (...) You will never know the truth because you refuse to see the truth (...) I prefer to ring the end of the game for me. As I am old, I no longer have the strength to fight. I have fulfilled my Destiny."
July 20, 2017. The funeral of Judge Lambert.
July 28, 2017. Murielle Bolle confronted with her cousin.
Three hours of confrontations where everyone remained in their positions according to the lawyers and the Attorney General who each improvised press points on the steps of the Dijon Court of Appeal.
The prosecutor insisted on the "credibility" of the testimony of the cousin who would have passed a crucial test there. Her cousin's lawyer, Mr. Tymoczko, who was unable to attend the confrontation as his client was only a witness, is on the same page. "He reiterated all of his statements and gave details that show his knowledge of the Bolle family," he said.
What formally dispute the defenders of Murielle Bolle: "She does not remember him. She did not recognize him and spoke to him", specifies Me Ballorin. Her client didn’t crack. On the contrary. She maintained that she had nothing to do with the death of little Gregory and never suffered violence from her family on November 5, 1984, to reconsider her accusations against her brother-in-law Bernard Laroche.
A few days later, 'L'Est Républicain', returns in detail to this afternoon when Murielle Bolle assured not to know Patrick F. and not to have received blows. "- Do you recognize your cousin?" "- No, not at all. I don't remember him and even the name doesn't ring a bell." "I wasn't hit by my parents or my sister." The confrontation especially allowed Murielle Bolle to reaffirm her innocence and that of Bernard Laroche: "I am innocent. I did not participate in the death of Grégory, nor Bernard either. Bernard was there (at his aunt Louisette's house) when I got home from school by bus."
But what emerges from this day, it is also the doubt around the date of the supposed "rouste" to which the cousin testifies: this one maintained that Murielle had been "lynched" by her family so that she retracts and returns to her accusations against Bernard Laroche, her brother-in-law. He quickly added a caveat: "but I don't remember the day, November 5 or 6", 1984. Problem: it can only be on the 5th.
Shortly after the confrontation, Murielle Bolle had a panic attack. A doctor called to her bedside deemed his condition sufficiently worrying that special surveillance should be put in place in prison to prevent a suicide attempt.
August 4, 2017. Murielle Bolle released.
The general prosecutor wanted to keep Murielle Bolle in prison and had announced it. "I took written requisitions to oppose the request for release, essentially for the needs of the investigation and the effectiveness of future acts", insofar as Ms. Bolle "was the subject pressure," said Attorney General Jean-Jacques Bosc.
Despite this, after 36 days behind bars, the investigating chamber of the court of appeal decided to release Murielle Bolle but with strict judicial control: she must "check in" twice a week at the gendarmerie and a ban on speaking to the media. "If we see her face on television, she goes back to prison. We appeal to everyone's responsibility," warned Me Teissonnière, her lawyer.
We just know that if she was able to go out, it was thanks to an inhabitant of Nièvre, former mayor of a small town, who offered to accommodate her. A few days later, the latter testifies: when she arrived, "she was tired. I didn't ask her any questions." Murielle Bolle therefore lives recluse "in an apartment of 55 m², 2 bedrooms, living room, bathroom and parquet floor, without vis-à-vis with a view of the countryside", describes her host who adds "I don't care what the people think of me! "
Last November, we learned that Murielle Bolle's daily life was punctuated by TV and card games in particular.
September 27, 2017. Controversies over appraisals.
While Murielle Bolle's lawyers announce that they will request the annulment of their client's indictment, a new controversy erupts concerning the latter's psychological expertise, made public. "For us, this document is incredibly poorly intellectual," replied Me Ballorin. The defense speaks of "amateurism".
The document concludes with a "tendency to the stubbornness" and evokes a "major event, traumatic, which occurred in the life of the interested party between 13.4 and 16.2 years" thanks to the test of the tree. He also evokes the rejection of history-geography at school by Murielle Bolle, indicating that "classically, we recognize that children who reject this subject have been confronted with stories in their family."
A few days later, it was a handwriting expertise that made people talk about it: that of Jacqueline Jacob. For the experts, the great-aunt of Grégory Villemin is the author of two anonymous letters of 1983. Moreover, according to this expertise, the letter claiming the assassination in 1984 would have been written by someone who had access "to the same batch of envelopes "as those used by Jacqueline Jacob. A link would therefore exist between Jacqueline Jacob and the killer. Unsurprisingly, his lawyers denounce "a tissue of nonsense" and recall that seven writing experts had designated Christine Villemin, the mother of little Gregory, as the author of the letter demanding the assassination of her son.
October 4, 2017. Marcel Jacob's alibi.
For Marcel Jacob's lawyer, "the case is over". Stéphane Giurana reveals to the Republican East how he found a determining element for his client: he shows that Marcel Jacob's alibi at the time of the assassination of little Grégory was "verified by the gendarmes". The suspect was therefore, according to this piece of the file, "at his job from 1:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at the Walter Seitz factory in Aumontzey."
Why this oversight? Have current investigators missed this "detail"? It is certain, on the other hand, that the gendarmes of the Research Section (SR) focused on the testimonies, also old, of the person in charge of the personnel of the factory, Walter Seitz, and two foremen. When questioned in March 1989, the latter confided that workers could be clandestinely absent from the company but that this was extremely rare during the day. The current gendarmes deduce from this that Marcel Jacob's alibi is "uncertain" that he could quit his job discreetly.
Paradoxically, their colleagues at the time came to a diametrically opposed conclusion. “The schedule of each of the spouses (Jacob) was checked and would correspond to what they said. For me, the investigations carried out on this couple did not justify going further into these people and I do not know what the magistrate decided next ", declared, last December, one of the investigators of 1989.
At the same time, we learn that Jacqueline Jacob refused to be examined by an expert psychologist. Her lawyers will speak a few days later of an "unassailable alibi". On the day of little Gregory's death, October 16, 1984, she said she was working with her husband at the Aumontzey weaving industry. More precisely, she participated, always with her husband, in a union meeting.
October 27, 2017. Judicial review of the Jacob couple maintained.
At 5.30 pm, the lawyers announced that "there are no more possible disputes" on the innocence of Marcel Jacob. "Marcel Jacob was indeed at work from 4 pm to 9 pm on the day of Gregory's death", "his alibi is indisputable". The defense gave a list of ten witnesses to the investigating judge during this hearing.
Six hours of hearing which only concerned a specific part of the case, explains Attorney General Jean-Jacques Bosc: "Marcel Jacob will be heard again. Today, we have, in fact, addressed as the aspect of his presence at the factory as well as his relation with certain protagonists."
December 5, 2017. A crow threatens the Attorney General of Dijon.
The letter was received in August, shortly after Judge Lambert's suicide, but it was not learned until December 5.
Dijon magistrates refused to change the judicial control to which Marcel and Jacqueline Jacob have been subject since June 20. Marcel's lawyer, Stéphane Giuranna, had pleaded two days earlier for an adjustment of the judicial review in order to allow his client to return to the Vosges. Me Alexandre Bouthier, one of Jacqueline's counsel, had squarely called for the hand-up, that is to say the end of the judicial review.
A decision that comes as no surprise, as the couple are scheduled to be heard by the investigating judge in November.
November 8, 2017. 26 unidentified DNA out of the 373 samples taken during the investigation.
A few days after revealing the exorbitant cost of the numerous DNA analyzes carried out in this affair, 'L'Est Républicain' revealed another figure: 26 unidentified DNAs were found on the various documents in the file (including 15 male). Elements just waiting to "match".
November 7, 2017. Jacqueline Jacob heard on the merits of the case.
His lawyers speak of an "unassailable alibi". On the day of little Gregory's death, October 16, 1984, she said she was working with her husband at the Aumontzey weaving industry. More precisely, she participated, always with her husband, in a union meeting. For the first time in five months, Jacqueline Jacob is heard on November 17 before the examining magistrate. For two and a half hours, this 73-year-old woman, known to be difficult, agreed to explain herself. And her lawyer, Me Frédéric Berna, confirms his defense in front of microphones and cameras.
Three days later, the judicial control of Jacqueline Jacob was relaxed and the latter was authorized to return to the Vosges.
What are the elements on which Jacqueline Jacob was questioned?
The possibility of being absent from the factory. Impossible according to Jacqueline Jacob. Not really according to the former owner of the company Walter-Seitz and the daughter of the couple Jacob, who assures us that she "always heard that we could take time off as we wanted in their work".
A mysterious letter left by Jacqueline Jacob to her husband in 1991, when she leaves with her lover. "I'm leaving you to go with Roger and this time with no hope of returning because, you and Valerie, you forced me to come back under duress." A constraint related to a heavy secret?
December 4, 2017. The first audition of Marcel Jacob.
A full day of interrogation. Supervised by his two lawyers, Me Stéphane Giuranna and Me Laure Iogna-Prat, Marcel Jacob faced the magistrate Claire Barbier.
December 5, 2017. A crow threatens the Attorney General of Dijon.
The letter was received in August, shortly after Judge Lambert's suicide, but it was not learned until December 5.
The faults are original. The courier therefore promises the Attorney General to end up in "a bag". It was written using a "normograph", this type of rule allowing letters or symbols to be drawn without betraying the author, impossible to identify by a graphologist. One thing is certain, the DNA found on the letter is unknown to investigators.
On December 20, the judicial control of Marcel Jacob was relaxed: Justice allowed him to return to the Vosges and also lifted the ban on contact with his wife. Two days later, it is under the eyes of the photographers that the reunion between Jacqueline and Marcel Jacob takes place in Autmonzey, after six months of separation.
January 24, 2018. Murielle Bolle is not allowed to go home.
The Dijon Court of Appeal refuses, unsurprisingly according to her lawyer, the request for the lifting of judicial control of Murielle Bolle. The latter has still not been heard again by the investigating judge for six months but continues to make the headlines of some newspapers. The JDD, for example, revealed, a few days before, excerpts from wiretapping with her husband.
January 2018: release of three books on the case.
At the end of January, several books are coming out on the Grégory case and especially on the relaunch of the affair.
Denis Robert followed the case for 'Libération' from 1984 to 2000. He wrote "I killed the chief's son". First published in 2006 and very quickly banned, his book takes up his Libération articles, the one titled 'Les Mémoires d´un rat' and appeared in 1988 in 'Rolling Stone', as well as a paper published in 'The Guardian'.
He also gives his opinion on the relaunch of the investigation last June. He explains why he went back to the case: "what was the trigger was to see that, after the suicide of Judge Lambert who seized me, affected me, was re-developing, on social networks, including among journalists, the thesis of the mother infanticide."
Patricia Tourancheau released "Grégory, The family plot" at the start of the year. Long responsible for the police-justice service of 'Libération', the journalist now works for 'L'Obs', 'GQ Magazine', but also and above all for the information site 'les jours.fr', for which, since June and the three indictments by Murielle Bolle and the Jacob couple, she writes a fascinating series on the Grégory case.
In her book, she "tried to take a step back. I went back to the elements of the past by going back and forth between the present and the past. I also found witnesses that I interviewed, I I accessed elements of the investigation file (in particular Judge Simon's private diaries) and I tried to rebuild the story from a distance," she explains. Above all, she was able to question Laurence Lacour, author of the reference book on the subject "Le Bûcher des innocents".
Gérard Welzer, lawyer for Bernard Laroche and still today for Marie-Ange Laroche, has also published a book: "The Grégory affair or the curse of Vologne".
There too, the events of June 2017 were a trigger: "At one point, the right things have to be written. As a lawyer, and out of respect for Bernard Laroche and his family, I would be making a mistake if I did not rectify what does not correspond to the truth. My goal is not to attack anyone but to fight the received ideas and to take stock of this case", he explained when leaving the work.
March 7, 2018. Murielle Bolle's custody in 1984 declared valid.
Murielle Bolle's lawyers believe that the custody of their client on November 2 and 3, 1984, during which she overwhelmed Bernard Laroche, is unconstitutional. A request pleaded in early February in Dijon via a QPC (priority question of constitutionality):
For the two lawyers of Murielle Bolle, the custody of their client must be canceled because she should have been entitled to a lawyer, should have benefited from the right to silence, even though no text of the time provided for it. Mr. Ballorin: "For us, the texts currently in force have brought the law back to where it should have been at the time, given our constitutional values."
A month later, on March 7, the verdict was delivered: the Dijon magistrates decided not to send the priority question of constitutionality to the Court of Cassation.
March 2018. Two new legal expertises.
Psychology and stylometry. Two kinds of expertise and new hopes on the side of the investigation.
Psychology first with the report of the expertise carried out on Jacqueline Jacob. The latter had refused for the first time in the fall of 2017. "If it was to send her to draw trees and deduce that she would have suffered a trauma between the age of 26.8 and 47.5 years, like what was done for Murielle Bolle, I believe that this is not really of interest, " commented Mr. Frédéric Berna.
An expertise finally carried out in February 2018. “Her trees are defensive and exhibit regulated, structured thought habits,” writes Michel Lecamp. Beyond these tree stories, he paints a portrait of Jacqueline Jacob very close to the "smooth" and "submissive" woman described by a psychiatrist during a previous examination. "She controls her emotions and is generally phlegmatic," notes the psychologist.
Regarding the facts with which she is accused, she denies any involvement in the crime of Vologne. "Little Grégory, I didn't know him. I've never seen him," explains Jacqueline Jacob.
The stylometry then with new requests from the examining magistrate on the anonymous writings and calls of the crow. While the comparison in handwriting focuses on the analysis of full and fine lines, stylometry, on the other hand, can be used to attribute a text to an author based on the linguistic (semantics and syntax) and statistical study. It analyzes the content of sentences, expressions and even punctuation.
"Our method makes it possible to determine the author of a text by comparing the style of this document with that of other productions of the signatory", you can read on the site of the Swiss company which will carry out these analyzes. But what can we expect from this new expertise? Stylometry, a completely new technique in France in judicial investigations, is it reliable? Difficult to answer.
April 25, 2018. Murielle Bolle authorized to return to the Vosges.
The investigative chamber of the Dijon Court of Appeal partially lifted the judicial review of Murielle Bolle, under house arrest in Nièvre since August 4.
The magistrates of Dijon authorized Murielle Bolle to return to live in the Vosges. Only two obligations remain: prohibition of contact with the press but also prohibition of all contact with various protagonists of the case.
May 16, 2018. The indictments of husband and wife Jacob and Murielle Bolle are canceled.
Umpteenth twist since the relaunch of the case with the cancellation of the indictments pronounced in 2017. Reason? The Dijon investigative chamber considers that Murielle Bolle and the Jacob spouses could not be indicted by Judge Barbier alone, but that it was up to the three magistrates of the investigating chamber, in full, to proceed to This act. The judicial controls which weighed on the three indicted were simultaneously lifted by the magistrates.
This is a "very nice victory" for Me Christophe Ballorin, Murielle Bolle's lawyer. A satisfaction which is not total for the defender who always asks that the police custody of November 2 and 3, 1984 (during which she had implicated Bernard Laroche in the kidnapping of Grégory) be also canceled. An appeal in cassation is therefore lodged three days later.
The Attorney General of the Court of Appeal, Jean-Jacques Bosc, decides not to challenge this decision in cassation.
June 13, 2018. Jean-Jacques Bosc, Attorney General of Dijon, gives an exclusive interview with 'L'Est Républicain'.
"The investigation will continue." This is one of Jean-Jacques Bosc's messages to journalists.
One year after the relaunch of the investigation, the prosecutor general of Dijon mentions in particular the annulment of the indictments : "The annulment relates to the form, not to the substance. At no time does the investigating chamber said, in his judgment of May 16, that the combined charges are insufficient." and affirms that he will ask that the three people be "put back" in examination.
He also mentioned the difficulty of having physical evidence and the Jacob's alibis ("Could they be absent? There are hearings that say so. The debate is therefore open.")
January 16, 2020. New twist in the Grégory case. The Paris Court of Appeal annulled Murielle Bolle's 1984 police custody.
The Grégory case has still not revealed all its secrets, but a new decision could relaunch the investigation.
Some of her statements can still be used.
Indeed, despite this cancellation, justice keeps Murielle Bolle's statements before Judge Lambert. She confirmed her accusations against her brother-in-law Bernard Laroche who, according to her, would have kidnapped little Grégory. Just before police custody, the young woman also gave a credible version of the kidnapping: these statements are not canceled.
January 2021. Justice accepts new DNA expertise.
The investigative chamber of the Dijon Court of Appeal accepted new requests for expertise from the Villemin spouses. The latter are now basing their hopes on the so-called kinship DNA technique.
April 2021. A new piece in the file, 36 years later.
A stylometry report aimed at identifying one or more crows who wrote anonymous letters has been added to the investigation file of the Grégory Villemin case, the murder of which remains unresolved. It would name with "a high probability" Jacqueline Jacob, the child's great-aunt, as the author of the letter sent on the day of the murder. Commissioned in 2017 from a Swiss company, this work is based in particular on the analysis of writing style and syntax in order to be able to identify the author of a text. "I confirm the entry of this stylometric expertise into the file," said Friday, April 23, Thierry Pocquet du Haut-Jussé, the Attorney General.
In conclusion of this report, experts assure that there is a "high probability" that the 24 letters of the crow come from five different authors, reveals "20 Minutes". A result which feeds the thesis which would henceforth be favored by the investigators of a murder perpetrated by "a team". Among these five crows, they spotted "a style highly similar" to that used by Jacqueline Jacob, said the prosecutor. Experts estimate that at least seven of the twenty-four letters bear her signature, including the letter addressed to little Gregory's father on October 16. Despite everything, François Saint-Pierre, the lawyer for the Villemin family, remains cautious, the October 16 letter having been attributed to four different crows since the murder. "We have read this report in stylometry which is technical and complex to understand. We are therefore very careful about the analysis that must be made and the conclusions to be drawn from it."
Comments