Murderpedia has thousands of hours of work behind it. To keep creating
new content, we kindly appreciate any donation you can give to help
the Murderpedia project stay alive. We have many
plans and enthusiasm
to keep expanding and making Murderpedia a better site, but we really
need your help for this. Thank you very much in advance.
A 66-year-old man has been
sentenced to life in prison by a French court for murdering seven
girls and young women.
Michel Fourniret, dubbed the "Ogre of the Ardennes",
had admitted kidnapping and killing his victims between 1987 and 2001.
It is one of France's biggest serial killing cases in
decades.
The court in Charleville-Mezieres also gave his wife
Monique Olivier a life sentence for complicity. She helped trap the
victims.
Olivier, 59, must serve at least 28 years of her
prison term, the court said.
The seven victims - most of whom were raped - were
aged between 12 and 22. They were shot, strangled, or stabbed to death.
Most were killed in the Ardennes region of northern
France and in Belgium.
Fourniret would spot a potential victim while driving
and stop to ask for directions, then persuade them to get into his car.
His wife's presence in the vehicle was designed to
help reassure the victim, according to the prosecution.
Fourniret was arrested in Belgium in 2003 after an
attempt to kidnap a 13-year-old girl, who managed to run away.
Correspondents say the court proceedings failed to
unlock Fourniret's personality and motives.
Although he admitted the murders, he refused to co-operate
further during the two-month trial.
Marie-Jeanne Laville, the mother of 17-year-old Isabelle who was
raped and killed in 1987, told AFP news agency she was "very satisfied"
with the verdict.
"I can breathe again," she said.
Fourniret - who in court described himself as "an extremely dangerous
individual" - said he would not appeal against his sentence.
He is suspected of kidnapping, raping and murdering British teaching
assistant Joanna Parrish, 20, in 1990 while she was working in the
French town of Auxerre.
He is also being investigated over the kidnap and murder of Marie-Angele
Domece, a 19-year-old disabled woman from France.
He denies involvement in either woman's death.
But Roger Parrish and Pauline Sewell, Joanna Parrish's parents,
issued a statement after the verdict was announced.
"This is not the final chapter in our quest for justice for Joanna;
we must wait to see if Fourniret is to be charged in connection with
her death," they said.
Fourniret denies killing Parrish, but Olivier has
described the murder in Burgundy of a young woman bearing a resemblance
to Parrish. She met her killer after placing an advertisement for
English language teaching and babysitting in a magazine. Fourniret often
consulted advertisements for babysitters. He will be investigated for
her murder after the trial.
In her chilling confession to police, Olivier, who
speaks with a stammer, has described a “habitual scenario” of driving
around in the countryside, “hunting for virgins”. She acted as a decoy
to gain the confidence of the victims.
Fourniret would sometimes ask her to examine girls
before raping them to make sure that they were virgins.
The couple met when Fourniret advertised for a pen
pal after being imprisoned in 1984 for sexual assaults in the Paris
region.
They began a long correspondence and she fell under
his sway, lovingly addressing him as “my beast” or as “Shere Khan”,
after the tiger in Kipling’s Jungle Book. He called her “Natouchka”.
According to The Pact of the Fournirets, a book by
two journalists that appeared last week, Fourniret offered to help
Olivier, a former care worker, to get even with two exhusbands, whom she
claimed had abused her, as soon as he got out of prison. In exchange she
agreed to help him find virgins, or what Fourniret referred to as
“membranes on legs”.
When he was freed in 1987, Olivier was waiting in her
green Peugeot estate. Fourniret never kept his part of the bargain by
killing her former husbands. Less than two months after his release,
however, Olivier made what she described as her first offering to her “beast”.
Isabelle Laville was a timid 17-year-old who was
undergoing psychotherapy. Olivier said she had selected her because she
looked like a younger version of herself: her husband wanted to imagine
that he was deflowering Olivier.
When the car drew up alongside Laville, Olivier asked
for directions. She persuaded the girl to get in and direct her.
Waiting down the road with a jerry can was Fourniret,
posing as a motorist who had broken down and needed a lift. Olivier
stopped the car and let him in.
As they drove off, Fourniret, sitting in the back,
put a rope around Laville’s neck and told her she was his prisoner. The
girl was given an overdose of sleeping pills on the way back to the
couple’s home.
When they got there, Olivier had sex with Fourniret
when he found that he was unable to rape the victim. Fourniret then
strangled Laville. In 2006 he led police to her remains in a disused
well.
Olivier said that she had not known Fourniret was
going to kill Laville. Whatever the case, the murder seems only to have
cemented their relationship.
In 1988, a heavily pregnant Olivier approached
Fabienne Leroy, a 20-year-old student, telling her that she urgently
needed to get to a doctor.
Leroy got into the car. This time Fourniret was
driving.
He drove to a field and pulled Leroy out of the car
at gunpoint. He raped and shot her after Olivier had subjected her to an
intimate examination. Leroy’s body was found in the field the next day.
Several more murders followed the same pattern.
Fourniret’s mother had once worked as a servant in a
chateau and psychologists believe that this was one of the reasons he
bought a chateau in the Ardennes with funds stolen from one of his
former prison cellmates.
The couple lived in one sparsely furnished corner of
the vast property. Fourniret buried some of the bodies in the grounds.
In one case the couple were believed to have used
little Sélim as bait, telling their victim that they were looking for a
doctor for their child. On other occasions they left the child with a
babysitter when going off on “virgin-hunting” weekends.
Even if Olivier did not always accompany Fourniret on
his expeditions, he made a point of telling her about his adventures
when he got home. “I went hunting,” was how he would put it, or, “I
obtained satisfaction.”
In 2003, however, Fourniret slipped up. A 13-year-old
girl whom he had kidnapped in Belgium managed to escape from his van
when he stopped at a petrol station.
She was rescued by a passing motorist who took down
Fourniret’s registration number. He was arrested. Several human hairs
were found in the van, one of them belonging to Mananya Thumpong, 13,
whose remains had been found in a forest in 2001.
When Olivier decided to talk, Fourniret soon went
back on his denials. He led police to various bodies, conducting
excavations in the grounds of his chateau in a bulletproof jacket.
The trial is expected to last up to two months, after
which Fourniret, if found guilty, will spend the rest of his life behind
bars. And France expects no less a prison sentence for his “ogress”.
Olivier remembers that Fourniret, from the back seat,
soon passed a cord around Laville’s neck, and both agree they drugged
their captive during the drive back to their house in St Cyr-les-Colons,
where Olivier admits stimulating Fourniret with oral sex when he found
himself physically unable to rape Laville. It was upon Fourniret’s
indications that, in July last year, Laville’s remains were recovered
from the bottom of a now disused 30-metre well in countryside north of
Auxerre. Fourniret and Olivier said they found the well by accident.
“They are liars!” said Alain Behr, the Laville family lawyer.
“They constantly manipulate, playing between truth
and lies. The well was within a closed brick transformer building – he
could not have known what was in there.” Behr’s point, confirmed by a
retired local farmer who told me even he had no idea a well was there,
is that Fourniret had prepared the site beforehand. Just 11 miles from
the well, on the main road back to Auxerre, lies the village of Monéteau,
where Joanna Parrish’s body was discovered.
A third-year languages undergraduate at Leeds
University, Joanna was posted as a teaching assistant to the Lycée
Jacques Amyot in Auxerre. In early May 1990, two weeks before she was
due to return home, the 20-year-old placed three adverts in a local
weekly freesheet, Le 89; one was to sell an electric plate, another
offered private English tuition, and the other, baby-sitting services.
By May 10, a man who has never been identified had called to ask her to
give English lessons to his young teenage son. “She mentioned it on the
telephone that night,” recalls Silvia Baldassari, a German-language
assistant and flatmate of Joanna’s, who had by then returned to Austria.
“She said they agreed to meet in the town centre.” She and Joanna’s
friend, Janet Davis, remember the man said he lived just outside the
town.
Davis was with Joanna when she left the lycée on
Wednesday, May 16, between 6.30pm and 7pm for her appointment. At 9am
the next morning, Joanna’s body, naked except for her jewellery and
watch, was found floating face down in the River Yonne at Monéteau, a
village five miles north of Auxerre. In March 2006, just over a year
after Olivier’s confession to Joanna’s murder, Roger Parrish and Pauline
Sewell travelled from their homes in Gloucestershire to the town of
Charleville-Mézières in the Ardennes. There they met for the first time
with the two French examining magistrates leading the investigations
into all the suspected crimes of Michel Fourniret and Monique Olivier,
including the murder of Joanna. With them was Bernard Kinsella.
Fourniret and Olivier had by then been extradited to France, and the
French prosecuting authorities were pressing to bring the pair swiftly
to trial for the seven murders on the charge sheet in 2004. But
Fourniret still denied murdering either Joanna Parrish or Marie-Angèle
Domece, and without his help both cases were stalled. His wife,
meanwhile, had by then also accused Fourniret of killing several baby-sitters
they employed in the early 1990s at their home in Sart-Custinne. Belgian
investigators say a statement by another baby-sitter employed by the
couple there supports Olivier’s story. During the March 30 meeting, the
magistrates Pascal Préaubert and Anne Devigne told Roger Parrish and
Pauline Sewell that they were convinced that Fourniret and Olivier had
murdered their daughter. “It was an awesome moment,” remembers Parrish.
“They were absolutely categorical, without any
hesitation.” Maybe the most important evidence was an observation from
the 1990 postmortem on Joanna that had never before been the focus of
investigation: tiny pinprick marks were found on the inside of one of
her elbows. Exactly the same marks were found on the body of the 20-year-old
student Fabienne Leroy, whom Fourniret and Olivier have confessed to
kidnapping and shooting dead near Châlons-en-Champagne, in northeast
France, in 1988. During his description of Leroy’s murder, Fourniret (who
has never had access to the secret details of the 1988 postmortem)
explained without prompting that he had tried but failed to inject air
into her blood supply – an unusual and particularly sadistic murder
method. During the three-hour meeting, the magistrates agreed to
Kinsella’s offer of British forensic help, giving their approval for
evidence kept since the postmortem to be sent for analysis at Dr Dark’s
laboratories in the UK – the first collaboration of its kind between
France and Britain, excepting the Princess Diana inquiry. But to place
the couple under formal investigation for Parrish’s murder, the
magistrates were required to request a Belgian high court to
retroactively join the case to the terms of their extradition.
Incredibly, those terms, established in late 2005, several months after
Olivier’s confession, did not include the suspicion that they murdered
Parrish. The Sunday Times has now learnt that Olivier had by then even
given a second statement entirely confirming her February confession and
specifically naming Joanna Parrish as the victim. But today, more than a
year later, Michel Fourniret and Monique Olivier have still not been
formally placed under investigation for the murder. Last month they were
finally sent or trial, planned for later this year, on the seven other
counts of murder.
The half-hearted investigation, in which there has
never been any public appeal for information, has still not established
two crucial points: whether Fourniret and Olivier could have been in
Auxerre at the time that Joanna Parrish was murdered, nor how Fourniret
could have known of her advert in the local paper.
In 1988 the couple set up home in the Ardennes town
of Floing, 170 miles from Auxerre, while keeping, unoccupied, the house
in St Cyr-les-Colons. According to Olivier’s statement about Joanna’s
murder, she and Fourniret travelled to Auxerre under the pretence of
picking up furniture from their Burgundy house. The Sunday Times has
learnt that it was in the spring of 1990 that they moved from their
bungalow in the town to the nearby Château de Sautou, bought in 1989
with stolen loot from bank raids. A former neighbour and friend of the
couple in Floing recalled how they often left on trips of several days
during this period. In her statement, Olivier said they abducted Joanna
after a failed attempt during the same period to seize another young
woman in Auxerre. If this was in fact the previous week, it was
precisely when Joanna’s advert appeared in the freesheet Le 89, which
records show was at that time delivered throughout the Auxerre region,
including St Cyr-les-Colons. Joanna’s advertisement offering English
lessons appeared on the same page as her other one offering a baby-sitting
service. Belgian investigators have established that the couple used
newspaper ads to recruit baby-sitters. On August, 14, 1990, three months
after Joanna Parrish’s murder, a young female motorist (whose name has
been withheld) came across Fourniret’s stationary van, parked as if
broken down, along a road in countryside near Reims, eastern France.
When she asked Fourniret if he needed help, he bluntly replied that he
wanted to sodomise her – an act the postmortem concluded Joanna had
endured. The incident was recorded at the local police station she fled
to, where a blasé Fourniret followed her and offered excuses. He was
released with a caution – and four months later murdered Natacha Danais
in Nantes.
Last December, Prosecutor Nachbar met the families of
seven of Fourniret and Olivier’s alleged victims. They would indeed be
tried for these crimes, but Nachbar told the families that he had no
intention of trying the couple for the murder of Joanna, nor any of the
other crimes they had not confessed to – simply because they could take
years to solve.
That decision meant that the already twice-postponed
trial could proceed without further delays. The magistrates’ promise to
Joanna’s parents last year to place Fourniret and Olivier under formal
investigation for her murder was broken almost as soon as it was made.
“Fourniret will be judged only for those crimes he’s been happy to help
with, a master of ceremonies at his own trial and with all thanks to the
prosecutor’s office in Charleville-Mézières,” protests Parrish and
Sewell’s Paris lawyer, Didier Seban.
“I fear Joanna has been sacrificed a second time.”
Nachbar, who will lead the prosecution case at the trial – arguably the
most media-hyped of any in recent French criminal history – rejects the
accusation. “The evidence for formally placing them under investigation
is insufficient at present,” he claims. “I understand why Joanna’s
parents are angry, but we can’t rush things.” It wasn’t until earlier
this month, more than a year after the French magistrates first agreed
to send evidence in the case to Britain for advanced DNA examination by
Dr Dark, that Det Supt Kinsella finally received their written
authorisation to begin the operation.
It came days after Fourniret and Olivier were
committed for trial. Dark says the first results from low-copy-number
analysis could be had within weeks of the evidence arriving in Britain,
expected later this month. “We’re very hopeful of getting something that
identifies the offender,” Dark commented from his laboratory in Chepstow,
Monmouthshire. If DNA from Fourniret or Olivier was found, it would be
unthinkable that their trial would not be delayed to include charges for
Joanna’s murder. But now there are fears that some of the evidence,
scattered across several locations in France, may be lost. “I understand
that the French cannot account for the most crucial exhibits – the 1993
slide of semen and the scrapings found under Jo’s fingernails,” said
Roger Parrish. “In the interests of retaining my sanity, I am hoping
that cannot be true.” Kinsella refuses to comment on the state of the
evidence or the handling of the case across the Channel. “We are very
pleased to assist the French,” he said. “There are no foregone
conclusions; the single important thing is to deliver justice to
Joanna’s family.” Despite the circumstantial evidence stacked against
Fourniret, Joanna’s parents are only too aware that another surprise may
be waiting. “We’re ready for that, the truth is all we want,” Mr Parrish
says. He and Sewell believe this is the greatest opportunity since 1990
of solving their daughter’s murder. By all accounts, it is also the last.