In the book “One night in France”, published on Wednesday, unpublished listening to suspects in the case of the murder of Thomas in Crépol are revealed. They would have guided the investigators in the footsteps of the alleged murderer.
Wednesday March 19 is coming out One night in France: anatomy of the news that has torn the country From Jean-Michel Décugis, Marc Leplongeon and Pauline Guéna. A work that looks back at a media news item: the murder of Thomas in Crépol, in November 2023. Overall, the book returns to the fact that this local drama, which occurred in the ball of a village, quickly found itself powered on the national scene. Debate on “the entertainment of France” on the political scene, resumed of the news by the fachosphere, flight of the identity of suspects on social networks … “The political prism and the media story distorted the sense of the death of Thomas”, believe the authors.
But in addition to the autopsy of this media-political-judicial fiasco, the work reveals listening to say the least disturbing of the suspects of the murder. Listening to his knowledge by the investigators, one of the suspects, himself accused of having given the fatal blow to the young Thomas, would have put the gendarmes on the track of the alleged murderer, reveals The Parisian. “Frérot, you understood, [les enquêteurs] went to the right track, “explains C. to his friend, who questions him:” Is it to the one I think? “And C. to answer:” Normally yes, you had to hear. Anyway, there is everyone who knows in novels. “In this exchange, C. would have ended up revealing the initial of the suspect:” the y “. A letter which could a priori correspond, according to the authors of the book, to the initial of the first name of one of the young already imprisoned.
“The condes, they will know who it is. They will find it”
Based on the facts, One night in France Defends the thesis that, and contrary to what could have been said in the media, young people in the so -called sensitive neighborhood would have come “to have fun” and not with the objective of fighting. The book thus sweeps the thesis of premeditated racist crime. “Nothing indicates, at this stage of the investigation, that they intended to make use of their knives, which they, moreover, have the habit of always having on them,” say the authors of the book. For them, the penknife would have been drawn by some by simple fear of losing the fight started by a trivial bun crêping on the dance floor. “They were rugby players Frérot, what do you want me to tell you? Big his grandmother, large, the guy he ate a boar before coming! (Sic) They were bigger and more numerous than us! […] They were rhaled [ivres ndlr.]Frérot, “reveals an indictment also placed on listening.
Among the suspects, most of them recognized their participation in the brawl, but none admitted to having wore the fatal blows or wanted to deliver the name of the murderer that all seem to have identified. “The condes, they will know who it is. They will find it. It is just necessary that the other who killed, he says that it is him,” says a listening suspect. The main interested party, incarcerated like the others, would however camp on his position, saying that he is innocent. And this, despite multiple photos showing him on D -day with a knife. The investigating judge should therefore be responsible, after the investigation, to retain against him alone, or not, the murder of Thomas.