The 'Grégory case', one of the best-known cases in the history of French criminology, can sometimes be difficult to understand due to several factors:
the language barrier, a different culture and a unique context.
A friend of mine asked me some very pertinent questions on this subject; I decided to share my opinion.
Is it a cultural thing ? Is it the machinations of this particular family? Does it have to do with geography and this region of France ? Or is it even more than all this ?
The 'Vosges' is a French department of the 'Grand Est' - Great East - region, located in the historical and cultural region of 'Lorraine'. They take their name from the Vosges mountains, which occupies a large part of its territory. Its capital is 'Épinal'.
The Vosges region is close to the German border. In 1871, following the 'Treaty of Frankfurt' of May 10, an additional convention signed in 'Berlin' and 'Paris' on July 21 and 23, annexed to the German Empire eighteen communes of the Vosges. The Vosges territories were returned to France at the 'Treaty of Versailles' in 1919 but remained attached to the 'Bas-Rhin' (border department with Germany).
By doing some research, especially on forums, I found mixed reviews. Some evoke a "German mentality coupled with French chauvinism". They also speak of "coldness and of certain still very traditional villages". However, others mention "absolute generosity and kindness".
Stereotypes about these 'northern regions' - in general - have always been anchored in the minds of French people: alcoholism, poverty, consanguinity. Being a native of the South myself, I know how tenacious the 'clichés' on this subject are. The only reality concerns poverty, which is very present in these French regions. I cannot deny that our mentalities are different. From my personal perspective and through my experiences, I know how superficial and materialistic 'Southerners' can be. In contrast, 'Northerners' favor the small pleasures of life. Of course, this is my personal opinion and we should not generalize; like everywhere in France (and in the world), you can meet exceptional people and real "ass*****".
In his book, Mr. Étienne Sesmat describes the people of the region with the popular nominal expression “têtes de lard”, [i.e. stubborn people]. He also mentions that they are used to dealing with their problems and conflicts "between them, without involving the cops". This is why the Villemin family didn't immediately alert the gendarmes, wishing to investigate on their own first. The Villemin-Jacob family is a modest family of factory workers. All of them grew up and lived in small villages.
To give you an example, in the 1980s, Aumontzey had approximately 450 inhabitants; Lepanges, around 1000.
We know that our protagonists belong to a very large family. They also worked in nearby factories. They met frequently and this proximity was sometimes heavy, driving a wedge between some ... or bringing others together. This family has gone through various traumatic episodes, suicide, death in childbirth, incest. We all have our family “secrets”. The family displays a certain pride and can appear abrupt, even boorish.
School education was not the priority. At that time, life revolved around the textile factory. [The mountainous region of the Vosges is a must in this field, where spinning and weaving mills have flourished for over 200 years.]
The family is 'ordinary', like most working-class families. They are hard workers and yearn for a better life, secretly or explicitly. They have often been denigrated by the media, constantly conveying false or distorted "information" to darken the context of the crime. The public thus imagined that the family was a bunch of savages with dubious morals. Violent and twisted in mind, marginalized people or social "misfits". All depicted on the same mold, intellectually limited, quite gruff, rude and brutal. While the description is true for some, many of them are as "civilized" as you and me.
Their way of speaking has been singled out more than once. Monique Villemin has been mocked many times, especially about her confusion with the word "premature" ["premeditated"]. Murielle Bolle too; [she was a 15 year old teenager with a grade level of a 10 yo.]
Most of the members of the family express themselves very well, with decent and "clean" French. Even today, you will find people whose opinion on this subject remains "stuck" in these grotesque "caricatures", proof of a primitive narrow-mindedness.
In this family, the siblings get along well. Negative feelings are exacerbated by the unhealthy jealousy of Michel Villemin. And by his amazing ability to argue with all the people who cross his path. The central element that poisons intra-family relationships is objectively Michel Villemin.
Between 81 & 84, our protagonists were particularly young, barely in their twenties.
We tend to forget it. Lack of immaturity is reflected in conflicts over money, success, or prestige. [The male stalker is extremely immature.] Women's rivalries are also strong on trivial matters. Children in adult bodies.
The suicide of Gaston Villemin (AV’s father) is a dramatic but common event. The secret about Jacky Villemin's paternity officially unveiled will be a heavy burden for him, much more than for Monique & Albert. At the time this event is shameful, but not singular.
Indeed, one of my uncles was born under the same circumstances.
About incest. All family circles are affected, rich or poor. Incestuous violence is not the prerogative of underprivileged families, nor specific to the 'Northern people'.
The family collects painful and very embarrassing events; they are particularly unlucky. But they are nothing fancy. The geographic and social context is trivial. Jealousy exists in many families. In these small villages of the Vosges where everyone knows each other, the secrets are well kept … Like an 'omerta' (or 'Law of silence'), from family to family. If the Grégory case fascinated the country, it is first and foremost a story of families.
Aumontzey is their cradle. The textile factory, which closed in 2004, employed 400 workers, almost as many as residents. No one wants to talk about this hatred, even thirty-seven years later.
"We don't know, we can't say anything: it's a family affair", apologizes Gérard, neighbor for more than forty years of the "always very nice" Marcel Jacob. "Why are you going to mind other people's business?" said another resident of Aumontzey.
"Nobody will tell you anything, warns an inhabitant of Granges. People talk about that, but not with just anyone. A wrong word in the wrong ear, it can take proportions ... That's why the cops get confused: here, to varying degrees, everyone is more or less a cousin."
The silence has lasted for almost 40 years and spans 3 generations. The death of a child under these conditions is heinous and extremely shameful. The fear of seeing their name thrown into the lion's den is also a primordial factor; indeed, Bernard Laroche & Christine Villemin suffered the opprobrium of an entire nation.
(The fear of reprisals too.)
The peculiarity of the case. A "crow" executed his threats and killed an innocent little boy in cold blood. Out of sheer revenge. Usually, these people never take action.
The people to blame are the killer (s) and those who keep quiet.
Lurking in the depths of a sick conscience, madness can grow over time only to explode suddenly. Jealousy, the desire for revenge and hatred, even grafted onto apparently trivial causes, are very strong levers of violence. However, we cannot associate the events preceding the crime and this senseless act with the whole family. Everyone is looking for a family mystery to justify this madness. This crime escapes us completely mainly because of the "futility" of the motive. We are "normal" human beings, we will never be able to understand how someone can end up killing a child [and even more in this context].
No other similar story can be found in the criminal history of our country. Usually, children killed for revenge are in the midst of a chaotic separation between their parents. This is what we call "a crime of passion".
[This type of murder is mainly perpetrated by men on their ex-wives. The murder is sometimes accompanied by the suicide of the perpetrator or, more rarely, the murder of the children.]
The Grégory case is unique. Anonymous threats are, most of the time, not very concrete.
They have only one purpose, to scare: an act of intimidation aimed to instill fear in the person concerned. The anonymous letter process is very popular in our society today, being a simple, fast, efficient and inexpensive way [to send a message to someone]. Moreover, the author still believes himself to be safe, [in anonymity], acting with impunity.
Since 1984, a very sinister spotlight has placed 'Lépanges-sur-Vologne' and the 'Vosges' at the heart of the storm. The Villemin family were particularly dragged through the mud but was n't the only one. Countless numbers of people have been affected and unfairly suspected or accused in this case. Many popular clichés about the region have spread through the ages; journalists peddled these same clichés, imbued with contempt and pseudo-superiority. All the crisp gossip that readers [of the magazines involved] are looking for.
They were inquisitive and shameless. They tried to disguise reality to sell paper, even if it meant lying. I quote Laurence Lacour, in 1984:
"[…] The Vosgians are turning in on themselves, restraining their chatter.
It's the 'Hollard' syndrome. (Albert's family, MA Laroche had directed the investigators on this lead).
Their fate, (like Roger Jacquel), photographed, slandered, frightened those who could speak. Witnesses keep silent for fear of trouble or reprisals. We are a bit of a nuisance to everyone, the investigation and the population. Our methods annoyed people."
Journalists and reporters quickly felt the wind turn (the expression denotes a change of situation), residents no longer wish to interact with them. They are largely responsible for the silence that persists among the population today.
The hope that someone will speak one day flies away. Indeed, even if these people have an opinion on the subject, they will never say it at the microphone of a journalist.
Most of the time, “they don't know anything”. One of the excuses for their silence is understandable but too "easy", [family]. The family is (already!) broken and some must "fear" the same scenario. However, what about Grégory? What about his parents? The important thing is to tell the truth. But for them, silence is their only way out. I think the grudges between these people are still going strong.
The protagonists are “bruts de décoffrage” as we would say in France. (An indelicate person, without tact.)
Their manners are rustic because they have been educated that way. And in very modest families. Some of them are smart and even cunning. They appreciate the wild and vast side of their region, the mountains, lakes and fir trees everywhere. The beautiful nature helps to cope with the factory and the harsh working conditions. The family has houses with gardens. They lead a small, simple and rural life.
The Bolle family, on the other hand, practice "archaic" methods. They are quite virulent and convey a negative image. They reinforce the stereotype of a "typical local family". Except for the conflicts between Marcel Jacob and Albert Villemin, the Jacob siblings are discreet. Everything was going very quickly, work, marriage, house, children. Yet many were still very immature.
The region has long been systematically associated with the murder of Grégory. And it must be heavy. Silence is omnipresent in the family, but multiple witnesses (family, neighbors or strangers) have testified and provided vital information. In the family & in the region, (and in Aumontzey, Docelles or Lépanges), many are good, hard-working, helpful people. They aren't all boorish, silly and mean or jealous, bitter and hateful. Not even crazy. They don't have a "Middle Ages" mentality.
I'm not trying to idealize the Villemin-Jacob family, but to be honest. They have flaws and are not angels. Michel is sometimes violent with his wife. Albert is moody, easily angry and was violent with Monique and their children. I have no words to describe Leon Jacob. Marcel Jacob is impulsive, verbally and physically violent. He and his wife seem enraged. They are vindictive. In addition, all of them have a striking personality (men and women).
They are particularly combative but also very resentful. Among the youngest, Michel & Ginette are jealous (like children) and very envious. Michel's susceptibility and fits of jealousy are extremely tiring for everyone. They are all still a little naive.
In general, they always have loud, disproportionate conflicts for stupid reasons. Their pride is very important, they don't like to feel weak or submissive to someone. To be in a position of inferiority. They are extremely stubborn in their convictions. Even today, some (Albert Villemin in particular) are convinced that Roger Jacquel is the culprit. Even with scientific proof, they might still be skeptical.
Finally, we must add that they are very kind and welcoming, many journalists had friendly relations with them. The investigators were very invested and emotionally involved. They had sympathy and sorrow for Jean-Marie & Christine. However, if you disappoint or betray them, they will close up like oysters and become suspicious. You won't get anything from them anymore. They rarely forgive.
Gregory's murder is bizarre and senseless, but it makes sense to his killers. These people flirt with madness. [Was it contagious?] This whole plot context is limited to a few individuals. It is important not to fall into the trap of systematic generalizations.
Marcel and Jacqueline seem integral to the actions of The Crow, but we're they involved in the murder ? Isn't that the primary question now ?
Very good question. Absolutely, now the only question to ask is "Who killed Grégory?".
Logically, investigators believe that the person who threatens to kill Grégory over the phone is necessarily his murderer. But is this really the case?
In a recent interview, Étienne Sesmat highlights the gap between the harassment that lasted almost 3 years and then, the brutal murder of Grégory, a year and a half after a total silence.
"I am an investigator. I try to base myself on facts. Before having a conviction, you make deductions and you come to conclusions. Me, I rely on what justice has determined. I know that the peculiarity of the facts in this Grégory case is that on the one hand, we have a long period of activity of one or more crows.
And then on the other hand, we have facts that take place in a very close and hasty way during the day of October 16. The whole paradox of this case is there, between this long past and then this singularity of the facts, on October 16, between 5 pm and 6 pm maximum."
Indeed, the brutality of the facts and the risks incurred evoke the madness of a single individual. The testimonies - more than twenty - mention a green car circulating or prowling in the village of Lépanges a few days before and the day of the crime. Investigators believe they have identified Bernard Laroche.
For someone who, according to them, "was not aware of the tragic fate of Grégory", his behavior remains very strange. In just a few days, his regular presence in Lépanges on his days off, around the home, the school and in the adjacent streets, seems almost obsessive. Bernard did everything to kidnap Grégory.
Suppose Marcel & Jacqueline are indeed the stalker crows. Did they really kill Grégory? Let’s go back to the 2 testimonies that seem to incriminate them: first, Mr. Cornillie.
1. Michel CORNILLIE declares to have noticed the presence in his café in Docelles of a man with a suspicious attitude - robot portrait N°3 - on October 16, 1984 between 4:35 p.m. 4:40 p.m. then from 5 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. The man in question kept glancing at the establishment clock.
Investigators speculate that this man could be Marcel Jacob. But, a customer, present at the same time, will not confirm the physical description given by Mr Cornillie ~ author of the last sketch and very similar to the 2.
Marcel Jacob and Bernard Laroche have some physical traits in common, but they are not twins. If you take a good look at them, you will find some differences.
At the time of the crime, Bernard had bushy hair and a mustache, which go beyond the corners of his lips. He also has sideburns on his cheeks (which he will shave).
Marcel is used to taking care of his appearance, with short hair and a straight mustache.
At Grégory’s funeral, 4 days after his death, he does not have the same hairstyle as Bernard. Has he cut his hair in the meantime? I think so, and by a hand of an amateur.
(Back then, I'm not sure the men in the family went to the barber or the hairdresser. First, the price. They didn't take as much care of themselves as the men today. And they all had more or less long or bushy, thick hair.)
His hair falls in locks in the middle of the forehead and his hairline is identical to Bernard.
(In the photo below, Marcel Jacob is in profile, his hair has grown back slightly and falls naturally to his forehead and to the right of his face. March 29, 1985, 5 months after this photo.) His mustache is less thick on the sketch supposed to represent him - but also reaches the corners of the lips.
Indeed, in a family photo, we can see that he could have 'bushy hair', sideburns, a mustache [and even a circle beard or a goatee]. Bernard Laroche is, this time, less neglected, (he has no sideburns and he maintains his mustache).
In addition, [we don't have the date], but the photo seems to match the period we're interested in (early 1980s); beside him, Bernard, Michel & Jacqueline don't look much younger. We may be a few years before the crime.
Bernard Laroche & Marcel Jacob
2. Jean-Pierre MICHEL 2:00 p.m. He sees a beige van with a man and a woman inside, on the dirt road on the edge of the forest, between Deycimont and Faing-Vairel. From this location, 3 houses are visible including the Villemin house.
They are dressed in a red top and black pants according to the witness. They wear something over their chest like a camera or binoculars. Jean-Pierre Michel sees this couple again around 4:45 p.m. on the road D44 in the direction of Docelles.
We have no physical description of these two people. It’s impossible to have more details so many years after the fact.
Some important "details" should be noted:
Two calls - from a woman singing - were recorded in July 1981 during the same night. A call is also recorded in September 82.
The raven woman mainly manifests herself on 8 dates, in a six month period between November 82 and May 83.
The 3 threatening letters were successively sent in March, April & May 83.
Why does this woman appear more than a year after the first calls? Why so late? And why suddenly, with such frequency?
This woman is essentially prolific during the year 83, i.e. a few months before the end of the anonymous harassment [- May 17, 1983]. Her appearance and her recurring role coincide with the threatening letters.
The crows seem, in a way, enjoying the last moments before the definitive end of the calls.
Moreover, in December 82 (Christmas): Marcel & Jacqueline Jacob had a heated argument with the Villemin family. We saw that the woman and her partner frantically harass the Villemin family by phone, shortly after this event, from January 26, 83 (and after 2 month of silence).
The phone tapping was installed in April 1983 at the personal homes of the victims. The last 2 calls from the black bird are made to the factory where Jean-Marie and Albert work respectively (April & May).
Swiss experts in "stylometry" have made their report on the death of little Grégory.
In conclusion of this 178-page report, experts assure that there is a "high probability" that the 24 letters of the crow come "according to stylometric criteria", from five different authors.
Unfortunately, we do not know if they identified these other 4 people. This could shed light on the true role of some.
While it seems obvious that we found our two-headed raven (over the phone), we must remain cautious about the results :
1) In stylometry. This technique aims to avoid plagiarism in literature by comparing dozens and dozens of pages. And there, we wait for it to deliver the name of the crow by comparing tiny writings: a love letter, a postcard.
I remain very skeptical about these recent evaluations.
2) Expertise in writing is not an exact science and its reliability has been inconclusive in this case. This perplexity is all the greater as the expertise is numerous to populate this voluminous judicial file.
Regarding Christine Villemin, there is no doubt that the experts were influenced by the hype about her. Her writing was sophisticated and totally different from our writer crow. In addition, the different results accusing first Christine Villemin & then Jacqueline Jacob, seem strangely to adapt to the convictions of Justice.
The first (3) experts who worked on the case, Mrs Berrichon-Sedeyn, Mrs Jacquin-Keller & Mr Denis Klein are the only ones who have not been influenced since no suspect had yet been named.
Indeed, about Bernard Laroche, the expertises were canceled and withdrawn from the file.
If we can hypothesize that the previous experts may have been wrong, the observation is the same for the current experts. The error is human. Let's stay cautious about all these expertises.
Christine and Jean-Marie Villemin's lawyer, François Saint-Pierre knows this well.
"We have read this report in stylometry which is technical and complex to understand," he reacts. We are therefore very careful about the analysis that must be made and the conclusions to be drawn from it."
Some are hoping for a near end. And claim that investigators have serious and corroborating evidence. Journalist Patricia Tourancheau speaks of "a bundle of presumptions". Indeed, if we are honest, only DNA is indisputable proof.
The study of writing has proven to be questionable; the methods used and the (working) conditions differ from one expert to another.
Stylometry is a field of analysis capable of some success, but not infallible.
The ambition of the Swiss company 'OrphAnalytics', which hopes to find the crow of the Grégory case with the only proof of five short letters, must get our attention for one reason: The shortening of the texts analyzed goes hand in hand with a decrease in the reliability of stylometry. A recent study with 19th century texts determined that 5,000 words was a prerequisite to ensure robust results.
But if the number of words available is not sufficient, the machine still continues to return a result, which it’s tempting to use. From what confidence level does the result of a stylometric analysis become reliable? And, in the case of a trial, is it really reliable enough?
The texts are very short, but Claude-Alain Roten (Swiss expert) believes that the criminal context makes it possible to push the limits: according to him, "When a message is sent in a criminal context, people try to hurt the victim. They will therefore put as much venom as possible on paper and they do not realize that they are giving a lot of themselves. This allows us to identify them in a text of about fifty characters."
In Switzerland, no police or prosecutor has yet used the services of OrphAnalytics. The Lausanne School of Criminal Sciences has confirmed the launch of a research program to test and quantify the reliability of studies in stylometry by the company. Stability, reliability of the results, this is what is expected of stylometry before it becomes a recognized tool for forensic science.
The former captain of the Épinal gendarmerie confided (Étienne Sesmat):
"The key figure - Bernard Laroche - in this case has disappeared."
"And justice says that it is most likely this person who took the child, says it and repeats it, but he has disappeared. So, from the start, we are in a kind of dead end."
"I don't think the murderer is still alive, but that is my personal opinion."
Thus, Étienne Sesmat reiterates his belief. For him, Bernard Laroche was the murderer.
"In his private diaries, Judge Simon paints a glowing portrait of Colonel Sesmat: "a man of great intellectual and moral rigor,". Étienne Sesmat comes from 'Saint-Cyr'.
This school sublimates the loyalty badge and the sense of commitment required of any soldier. On the battlefields of the Napoleonic wars, Saint-Cyrians marched, sabers clear, in front of their men and were killed first. In this man, reflection, prudence, respect for procedures are obvious, but once the decision has been taken, doubt is banished, and the defense towards and against all of the thesis is assured."
Michel Muller, Audicrim.
Étienne Sesmat had the opportunity to interact with Bernard Laroche and observe his erratic behavior.
He keeps a vivid memory of it and seems perplexed by his supposed "innocence" and "manipulation". For him, Bernard Laroche is not the man you see on screen. On this point, I can only approve. I understand Etienne Sesmat's doubt. His conviction is justified.
How did the (French) population experience the Grégory case ?
The population as well as the local elected officials fear the media rush around a case which has, in the past, tarnished the image of a department.
The latest twists and turns in the case of the death of little Grégory Villemin have led journalists to take the road to the Vologne valley in the 'Vosges'.
Here, in the streets of these villages where the tragedy was tied 37 years ago, the inhabitants do not hide their exasperation.
In 'Bruyères', where the police investigation began in 1984, the mayor and his deputy remember the articles “caricaturing” the population. "We made the Vosges look like what they were not," regrets Yves Bonjean. "We said they were average people, a little rough, while they are normal," he insists. His deputy Philippe Germain agrees: “The Vosges people are workers. Their friendship is deep and lasting, they are good people”.
This same weariness is perceptible in 'Docelles', this village where little Grégory was found tied up in the river: "I am not very optimistic about the resolution of this case but I hope that we talk about the Vosges in another way,” argues Christian Tarantola, the mayor. “You know, we are not obsessed with this case,” insists a local resident at his side. “We moved on here”.
Rehabilitating the image of the Vosges, others have done it. Worried about the reputation of the department, Philippe Seguin, then mayor of Épinal and deputy of the Vosges, lodged a complaint at the start of the case in 1984 after a report he deemed stigmatizing. "In the absence of a suspect, a culprit, an accused, we presented in truth this horrible case as the result of a sociological, socio-cultural context and that, we could not accept it", he had explained.
The return of journalists has worn out André Claudel, the former mayor of 'Lépanges-sur-Vologne',
where Grégory's parents lived. He was there in 1984 but no longer wants to speak. "He is tired of this story and the media," comments an elected official who knows him well. Already in 1985, the councilor attacked journalists. In a documentary, he said: “On the day of the (child's) funeral, the media (…) exaggerated I think. Because we took pictures and we made reports on the cemetery which really went beyond the limits which must be granted to the press”.
The inhabitants also express their exasperation: even if the traditionally warm welcome applies to everyone, it is not uncommon to be received with a sigh. In 'Granges-sur-Vologne', a small village of 2,200 inhabitants where Murielle Bolle lives, a 58-year-old civil servant feels he has made a big leap backwards. “We bring out the same bullshit, we start accusing each other, without really having any proof. I have the impression that we are trying to make more money with this story,” he blurted out. At the time of the drama, some editorial staff had agreed to buy exclusive photos or interviews at a high price.
In the valley of the Vologne, these practices from another time have however fed the fed up with the population: “As soon as you say that you live here, people immediately tell you about the Grégory case, it's painful to be constantly associated with this story.” No wonder the people of the valley today find it difficult to open up to journalists. In 'Lépanges-sur-Vologne', where little Grégory lived with his parents, no one speaks.
Two Normans who came to settle in the village confirm this to us: “We have just moved in and we quickly understood that we should not talk about the case. It is a taboo subject here. Good luck with your report!” They laugh. And when the inhabitants decide to testify, one rule is required: anonymity. “You don't give my name! Not even the name of my brand, otherwise I will be recognized,” warns a merchant. In these villages, everyone knows each other and the fear of reprisals is persistent. A shopkeeper from 'Bruyères' gives an explanation: “Some are afraid of the crow's return”.
If mistrust of the media predominates, residents continue to follow the latest developments in the case. “It's like a movie, I want to know the end of the story,” says this 37-year-old resident. “I am a bit addicted by the way. The evening when Murielle Bolle was to pass in front of the judge, I spent my evening in front of BFMTV to find out if she was going to be indicted”. “Of course people will tell you that they want to know the truth,” continues Yves Bonjean, the mayor of 'Bruyères'. “But we must let justice do its job. It is really necessary that the gendarmes find the culprit so that the book is closed once and for all.”
~
Comments