Murder of a little girl, what’s the evidence ?

The murder of a little girl is presented as false information by the defense and the acquitted, even though it was one of the acquitted who revealed the murder… The defense lawyers managed to make people believe that these confessions were only a lie to demonstrate that the judge believed anything, and that Daniel Legrand would have thought he could be released if he confessed to this crime.
However, numerous elements support the reality of this sordid crime. Here the evidence, directly from the 10,000+ pieces investigation file. Let’s investigate !

Here is the mail sent to France 3 TV channel and to Judge Burgaud (corrected automatic translation made, sorry for the poor design) on january 4th, 2002

Daniel was summoned by the judge on january 9 and says more… for example we learn that she was dark skin, something that was not told in the letter.

But there is more ! Daniel also spokeabout this crime at his psychologue in jail on nov 28th 2001. Here is a translation. The supposed lie invented from scratch to reveal the absurdity of the case seems to be much less credible…

What is interesting is that the added information by Daniel matches the new information given separately, without speaking together possibilities, by Myriam Badaoui : she talks about a dark skin girl (maghrebi/north african origins), about a blue jogging pants…

automatically translated Myriam Badaoui minutes

Original French Myriam Badaoui minutes

The Delay kids also revealed having been witnesses of the murder.

One of the daughter of the Lavier couple, acquitted, also talked about the murder.

extract from the report of one of the daughter of the Laviers, acquitted.

Also, there was a mention by Mourmand before his arrest, in front of his daughter, of the murder of a little girl at the Delay house.

Here is a translation into English of a Crapouille blog post about Daniel confessions. This shows Daniel’s record in terms of denunciations and proof of guilt.

Daniel Legrand, acquitted of Outreau, innocent of the facts with which he is accused for the period from 97 to 99?

It is time to restore some order to all the outrageous things read here and there in the press on the subject of the presumption of innocence of Daniel Legrand, especially as the press continues its propaganda of canonization of the person concerned and of his 12 acolytes.

Few went inside the 10 000 pieces files like Jacques Thomet, I therefore advise any citizen who wants to be honest to read this book before giving their opinion on this matter.

We cannot repeat the Outreau trial, and we cannot challenge the acquittals, but does that muzzle us or force us to be stupid?

We find Daniel Legrand in several uncomfortable situations, including a conviction for drug trafficking, but the one which got through the lines of the press and which is unknown to the general public is this intra-family sex abuse case where he and his father were denounced by cousins and nephews. (See pages 235 to 240 of Jacques Thomet’s book)

…/…“At the age of eight, Rudy L. claimed in front of his nanny that he had been sodomized by an uncle and two cousins, the Legrand, with their “fifi”. The version of the child martyr is partially confirmed by one of his sisters, Amélie L. 11 years old at the time, in front of her “auntie” (the person responsible in her foster family) who reported it to the police on the 29th. January 2002: “About a week ago, Amélie told me that she had gone to her room and that she had seen her cousin Daniel Jr., making dirt and caressing little children. “../…

…/…

She had first declared that she had bled from her behind “on the three Wednesdays when she went to her mother’s house../… “When Daniel Jr. (her cousin) was at home, he happened to touch my chest and the belly above the clothes…/…

In turn, Rudy L. drove the point home at the Boulogne police station on February 25, 2002, one month to the day after his first revelations about his rape by an uncle and three cousins, the Legrands.

He confirms his statements and instantly recognizes his predators in the police photos, designating them by their first and last names. This child never appeared at the Outreau assizes…/…

…/…That day, Daniel Legrand father grabbed me by the scruff of my back and by the collar. He laid me down on the dining room chair. The others held my arms and feet. They put their hand over my mouth to stop me from speaking. Grégoire Legrand pulled down my pants and my underwear. It was the father who raped me first. He stuck his fifi in my behind…/… The third was Daniel Legrand son…/…

In this case, two of those implicated by Rudy, Daniel Legrand father and son, were already in pre-trial detention on charges of rape of minors in the main Outreau case…

Eighteen months after the incriminated facts, the main child accuser admitted to the police his terror in the face of his tormentors…/…

For some reason, Jonathan Delay, one of the children who had filed a complaint against Daniel Legrand, was not called to testify on appeal in Paris in 2005 where Legrand was acquitted.

An acquittal does not mean that the accused is innocent !

There can be many reasons, such as pressure on the victims, lack of evidence (go prove who sodomized you 4 years later!) or even the shadow of a slight doubt which pushes the juror to prefer 100 guilty people at large than a single innocent person in prison!

Also one one might observe and wonder if the tear tattooed on Daniel’s face would not be a tribute to this little girl… Actually Daniel was 15 at the time and was probably also victim from sexual abuse sometime.