Lately there was a video released on YouTube on Chateau de Amerois, it is disinforming a bit so I'll try to correct it.
4:40 and 8:00 is not Chateau de Amerois. It is Chateau de Sautou which belonged to serial killer Fourniret. Interestingly it is on French side of border only 16-18 km from Chateau de Amerois. Sautou surroundings were actually checked by the police for bodies/skeletons. Fourniret and Dutroux both operated in 80s and 90s and they both had their wives helping them in crime. North west of those two is Chateau de Chimay where X2 witness allegedly was present and also not far in north is Charleroi which was Dutroux place. Chateau de Amerois is however indirectly linked to X testimonies through Solvay family.
There you have distance from Chateau de Chimay (if I got the right one) to Chateau de Amerois:
https://archive.is/2om3n/9bc19a2a6919d8 ... 54a560.jpg
Chateau de Chimay:
https://goo.gl/maps/CnizntK46xLNZKfd6
Chateau de Amerois:
https://goo.gl/maps/DPqndjNBJAgkjDWQ8
Chateau de Sautou:
https://goo.gl/maps/N5p9TVtm3reK45cz8
Charleroi city:
https://goo.gl/maps/31HTyGgxfkPg8Xx36
Do you see how close these locations are to each other? And all crimes and alleged crimes of these pedophilic monsters happened in 80s/90s:
https://archive.is/CsjzF/b37f2615573150 ... a2dcee.jpg
From bottom to top: Amerois -> Sautou -> Chimay -> Charleroi
Chateau de Sautou info:
https://www.alamy.com/french-serial-kil ... 90487.html
French serial killer Michel Fourniret 's former castle Chateau de Sautou near Donchery in the French Ardennes, France on October 28, 2020 where he buried at least two of his victims in the late 1980s. On 3 July 2004, a team of French and Belgian police recovered the bodies of two of Fourniret's victims near the chateau.
https://www.gettyimages.com.au/photos/chateau-du-sautou
Getty photos, you have it all, police, creepy castle Sautou owned by pedo murderer Fourniret who didnt work alone and did those things in same timeline as Dutroux and same timeline as alleged happenings in Chateau de Chimay (which is north west from Sautou castle) and Amerois ( which is 16-18 km from Sautou)
His castle territory was searched by police later on as well, Google translate
https://www.lavoixdunord.fr/904810/arti ... le-corps-d
Michel Fourniret: second day of excavations at the Château du Sautou, the body of Estelle Mouzin not found
For the second day in a row, excavations are underway on a former property of Michel Fourniret to try to find the body of Estelle Mouzin.
The excavations continued on Tuesday, still without result, in the wood surrounding the castle of Sautou (Ardennes), former property of Michel Fourniret where the serial killer indicated that he was able to bury the body of Estelle Mouzin, who disappeared in 2003.
For the second consecutive day, in cold and rainy weather, significant resources were committed by the examining magistrate Sabine Kheris - including two 20-tonne diggers, a drone, soldiers, an archaeologist, metal detectors - to explore an area of 3 ha in the vast woods of the property, located a few km from the Belgian border.
“We are almost halfway through the identified field”
" It's done very scientifically, square meter by square meter ," said Me Didier Seban, lawyer for Eric Mouzin, Estelle's father, to the press. “ We are at almost half of the land identified which has been verified, there is still the other half so hope does not weaken. We hope that she will reveal her secrets and allow Estelle's body to be returned to her family .
Welcoming the “ accuracy ” of the research and “ a desire not to miss anything which is exceptional ”, he also recalled that the method used “ takes a lot of time ”, in particular because of the “ very extensive perimeter ”.
“ Slice of land by slice of land, we hope, we watch, we wait. We are not at the end of these excavations for the moment and all the means are put (...) everyone is very invested and looks in the same direction , ”added Me Corinne Herrmann, the other lawyer of 'Eric Mouzin.
Areas indicated by Michel Fourniret
These excavations, which should last all week, are taking place " in places that Michel Fourniret indicated on the spot, at the end of the hearing " during his trip at the end of October with his ex-wife Monique Olivier, " who have never been explored " and which are located " not very far from the castle ", said Me Seban on Monday. In June, investigators trying to shed light on the disappearance of the then 9-year-old girl had already explored the scene, without result.
Now 78 years old, the "Monster of the Ardennes", sentenced to life imprisonment for the murders of seven young women or teenage girls between 1987 and 2001, had finally confessed in March his responsibility in this case. It is on this 15 ha property located in the commune of Donchery that the bodies of two young victims had already been found in 2004. Michel Fourniret lived there from 1989 to 1991 and continued to go there regularly until his arrest in 2003.
It is here:
https://goo.gl/maps/3CJE7VAQvxH9Z5iu8
Video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrZL9dRSlMw
The case:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappear ... lle_Mouzin
2020 investigations
Excavations were planned in 2020 at two sites in the Ardennes.[12][13]
On 23 January 2020, Michel Fourniret, in front of judge Sabine Khéris, asserted that his memory "got the better of him" but that he had to be "considered guilty" of Estelle Mouzin's disappearance. "I urge you to treat me as guilty," Michel Fourniret said. In order to verify whether his confession held true, Monique Olivier, Fourniret's ex-wife, had to be re-interrogated. According to Olivier, Fourniret was the man responsible for the kidnapping and murder of Estelle Mouzin.
On 24 January 2020, Olivier confirmed to the investigating judge Sabine Khéris that it was indeed her (and not Fourniret) who had phoned the home of Michel Fourniret's son on 9 January 2003, the day of the girl's disappearance, and that the girl presented the profile her husband was looking for. She added that Michel Fourniret had made reconnaissance sightings in the days preceding the abduction, and that one evening he returned from his hunt stating that he had spotted "a beautiful little target".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Fourniret
On 11 December 1987, Fourniret and Olivier drove, in separate vehicles, to Auxerre. Seeing 17-year-old Isabelle Laville – whom the couple had seen a day or two earlier and were targeting – walking home from school, Olivier stopped to ask Laville to join her in the car and give her directions, which Laville agreed to do. Driving down the road, Olivier reached the spot where Fourniret was standing with his car, pretending it had broken down. After Olivier, as planned, pretended to offer him a lift, he got into her car. Fourniret choked Laville with a piece of rope, before Olivier sedated her with Rohypnol. The couple brought the girl to their home in Saint-Cyr-les-Colons, where Fourniret raped and strangled her. They threw Laville's body down a disused well in Bussy-en-Othe.[15][16] Her remains were recovered from the well on 11 July 2006.[17]
In March 1988, Fourniret was contacted by 30-year-old Farida Hammiche — the wife of Jean-Pierre Hellegouarch, an imprisoned bank robber with whom Fourniret had shared a cell prior to the latter's release in October 1987 — who asked Fourniret to help her unearth a haul from a cemetery in Fontenay-en-Parisis, which had been stolen by members of the Gang des postiches. After Fourniret and Hammiche managed to retrieve the haul, which consisted of gold ingots and coins, Hammiche gave Fourniret a share worth 500,000 francs for helping her dig it up and hiding it in her apartment in Vitry-sur-Seine. On 12 April, aiming to steal Hammiche's share, Fourniret and Olivier lured Hammiche out of her home and drove her to Clairefontaine-en-Yvelines, where she was strangled and her body buried, before the couple broke into her home and stole the haul. They used the money they made from it to buy a château called the Château du Sautou in Donchery. Hammiche's body was never found.[18]
By August, Olivier was pregnant with Fourniret's baby. On 3 August, the couple drove to a supermarket in Châlons-sur-Marne (now Châlons-en-Champagne), and encountered 20-year-old Fabienne Leroy in the car park. With Olivier feigning illness, the couple asked Leroy to join them in their car and give them directions to a doctor's surgery. After Leroy got in, the couple drove to a forest near the military camp of Mourmelon-le-Grand. Fourniret ordered Olivier to look at Leroy's hymen to see if it was still intact, but Olivier refused. After raping Leroy, Fourniret shot her in the chest.[19][20][21]
In January 1989, Fourniret met 21-year-old Jeanne-Marie Desramault on the evening train to Charleville-Mézières. The two conversed before arriving in Charleville, where Desramault was staying at a convent. Desramault met Fourniret and Olivier, who had assumed false identities, at the train station again on 18 March, and the couple invited Desramault to come to their house in Floing – an offer she accepted – and Fourniret promised he would drive her home afterwards. After they got to Floing, Fourniret asked Desramault if she was a virgin, and she told him she was not and that she had a boyfriend. Enraged, he attacked her. She fought back as he attempted to rape her, and as she attempted to escape, the couple gagged her with adhesive bandages before Fourniret strangled her. Fourniret and Olivier drove to Donchery and buried Desramault's body in the garden of the Château du Sautou.[22][23][24]
Fourniret and Olivier married in July 1989.[25] On the afternoon of 20 December, they drove across the Franco-Belgian border to Saint-Servais, Namur, with their one-year-old son. Fourniret saw 12-year-old Elisabeth Brichet walk to a friend's house, and waited outside for her until she left to walk the short distance home just before 7 pm. He asked her to give him directions to a doctor's surgery for his son. She agreed to do so, and the couple drove back to Floing with her. When Fourniret undressed the girl, he saw that she was menstruating, so Olivier cleaned Brichet's genitals. The next day, the couple took Brichet to the château, where Fourniret strangled her after a failed attempt to suffocate her with a plastic bag. Her body was buried in the garden of the château, near to that of Jeanne-Marie Desramault.[26][27][28] There were a number of reported sightings of Brichet, in Belgium and abroad, in the years following her disappearance, and a number of people were suspected by police of abducting her, including another serial killer, Marc Dutroux.[29][30] After Dutroux's arrest in 1996, Brichet's mother Marie-Noëlle Bouzet helped to organise the White March in honour of Belgium's missing and murdered children.[31] The remains of Brichet and Desramault were exhumed from the gardens of the Château du Sautou on 3 July 2004, after Fourniret and Olivier confessed to the killings.[32]
The final known murder Fourniret committed with Olivier's help took place on 21 November 1990 near France's western coast. The couple drove to a shopping centre in Rezé after leaving court in Nantes, where they had been convicted of burglary. They saw Natacha Danais, a 13-year-old local girl, walking through the car park towards her home, having been sent to fetch her mother's forgotten purse. The couple lured Danais into the van, asking her for directions. After driving to a secluded area near the coast, Fourniret stabbed Danais twice in the chest with a screwdriver and strangled her before leaving her body on the beach.[33][34] Later investigation suggested that the girl's body was raped after the murder.[35] Eight days later, Jean Groix, a neighbour of Danais's family, was arrested after a white van belonging to him matched the description of the van that Danais' sister had seen her get into from across the shopping centre's car park at the time she disappeared. Groix was found to be lodging suspected members of the ETA in his home; police suspected that Danais had found out about this and that he killed her for that reason. Two months later, Groix committed suicide in his prison cell. He was reported to have been unable to bear the burden of having been accused of murder.[36][37][38]
The Fourniret family moved to Sart-Custinne, Gedinne, Belgium, in the early 1990s. Fourniret admitted that he committed two more murders in France between 2000 and 2001, his first in nine-and-a-half-years. He drove alone across the Franco-Belgian border to Charleville-Mézières on 16 May 2000 and lured 18-year-old Céline Saison, who was on her way home from school, into his van in the late afternoon. Driving with her back to Belgium, he raped her before strangling her with a rope and dumping her body in a forest in Sugny, Vresse-sur-Semois.[39] Saison's skeletal remains were discovered there by mushroom pickers on 22 July 2000.[40]
On 5 May 2001, Fourniret drove back to Sedan and met Mananya Thumpong, a 13-year-old girl of Thai origin whom he had met and given a lift home a few weeks earlier, outside the local library. He invited her to come to his house and play with his son. Accepting this offer, Thumpong climbed into the van and was driven to Nollevaux, Paliseul, where Fourniret strangled her.[41][42][43] Thumpong's remains were found on 1 March 2002, having been devoured almost entirely by wild animals.[44][45]
This sicko cooperated with his lover just like Marc Dutroux did:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Dutroux
Dutroux's accomplices included his wife, Michelle Martin, Michel Lelièvre, Michel Nihoul, and Bernard Weinstein. Martin was convicted and sentenced to thirty years in prison, while Lelièvre was sentenced to twenty-five years. Nihoul, "a Brussels businessman, pub-owner and familiar face at sex parties,"[3] was initially tried as an accomplice to the kidnappings but was acquitted due to insufficient evidence; he was instead convicted of involvement in a gang that participated in human and drug trafficking, and was sentenced to five years in prison.[4] Weinstein was never tried, as he was murdered by Dutroux.
And there you have locations where Dutroux mostly operated ->
Marc Dutroux owned seven houses, four of which he used for his kidnappings:
The house on the Route de Philippeville 128 in Marcinelle is most often cited in the media. All victims were held captive here in the basement and bedroom. The municipality of Charleroi seized ownership of this house, because of what happened there and the bad state of the house. There are plans to create an open space with a memorial site here. In the Belgian procedure of compulsory purchase, an owner has a last right to visit a house. Therefore, Dutroux visited this house on 10 September 2009, under heavy police guard.[105] Demolition of this house started at June 6, 2022. A commemorative garden will be built in its place.[106]
A house in Jumet, that has since been demolished. The remains of An Marchal and Eefje Lambrecks were found buried in the garden of this house. Bernard Weinstein lived in this house for a while. A small monument is placed at this location.
A house in Marchienne-au-Pont. Julie Lejeune and Mélissa Russo were held captive here for a short while after their kidnapping.
A house in Sars-la-Buissière. The bodies of Lejeune, Russo and Weinstein were found buried in the garden. The house was bought by the municipality of Lobbes in the first months of 2009. It is planned to make a park with a monument commemorating Dutroux's victims here.
Most of these around Charleroi, one close to border with France and that is Sars-la-Buissiere.
Here you have how they look when mapped together with Chateau de Chimay, Chateau de Amerois and Chateau de Sautou:
https://archive.is/6Ysu2/5e4a2cfd6e5e09 ... 5057e5.png
And Dutroux locations specifically links:
Sars-la-Buissiere:
https://goo.gl/maps/hVtDomQUBKZoqYrc8
Marchienne-au-Pont:
https://goo.gl/maps/jZ6ZbssyMZnKxuVw8
Jumet:
https://goo.gl/maps/WpUj2bxhqzjz1KY46
Route de Philippeville 128, Marcinelle:
https://goo.gl/maps/EU371bk3du6oWWi48
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding Chateau de Chimay best info we get here:
https://ia801803.us.archive.org/14/item ... p-2007.pdf
https://archive.is/4Appi/86ea6c0eb5c205 ... d4a4b0.png
https://archive.is/1TDfc/b6e60a8b22b290 ... 643762.png
https://archive.is/MGUWM/ce47eb4446e152 ... 57f128.png
https://archive.is/ZcQ46/359b869a8e1224 ... af8c08.png
Few additional in form of quotes:
Merode brothers
Source(s):
*) X2 (two Merode brothers were present at a party with some of the
worst alleged child rapists/killers: Oliver Castiaux, Baron de Bonvoisin,
the Prince and Princess de Chimay, and Count d'Ursel. Details of the
party were not mentioned in the leaked summary of X2's testimony);
*) Nathalie W. (Prince Alexander was present at Satanic black mass where
116/192
children were raped and tortured);
And
Prince Philippe
de Riquet
b. 1948 Source(s): X2 (Described being present at Chateau de Chimay when she
heard young children screaming outside in the woods. They were being
hunted. X2 also described a meeting she was taken to where Baron de
Bonvoisin, Count d'Ursel, Oliver Castiaux, two brothers of the de Merode
family, and the Prince and Princess of Chimay were present.)
Philippe de Riquet is the 22nd Prince of Chimay since 1980, heading one
of the eight families that are still members of the Blue Salon. President
and resident of Chateau de Chimay, which is surrounded by 130 ha. or
321 acres of private land. Hunts on young children have been organized
in the woods surrounding this castle, according to X2's testimonies.
Chateau de Chimay is in south-central Belgium, close to the French
border and about 80 kilometers west of Chateau des Amerois. Member
of Cercle de Wallonië, together with many elite members of Belgian
Society. Created the Chimay International Baroque Singing Competition
in 1991. Another obscure noble in general.
The Chimay family is closely related to the de Croy family, of which one
branch is also in the Blue Salon. The House of Croy was an international
family of European mediatized nobility which held a seat in the Imperial
Diet from 1486, and was elevated to the rank of Imperial Princes in 1594.
Among the more illustrious members of the House of Croÿ were two
bishops-dukes of Cambrai; two cardinals (one being also the Archbishop
of Toledo and another being the Archbishop of Rouen); five bishops; one
Prince of Masovia; one Grand-Bouteiller, Grand-Maitre and Marshal of
France; one Grand Equerry of the King of Spain; several imperial field
marshals and twenty generals; a couple of governors of the Netherlands;
one Russian Field-Marshal; numerous ambassadors and senators in
France, Austria, B
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regarding Chateau de Amerois:
Again I will use this source based on ISGP research because it is great:
https://archive.is/GzqGf/14655e07ce37a0 ... bc7534.png
Solvay family
The major industrial family from Belgium, on par with many of the
banking fortunes. Indirectly but repeatedly linked to child abuse of the XDossiers, Count Yann de Meeus, etc. through accusations against:
Francoise Dehaye: quality control manager at Solvay.
Rene Dechef: seemingly a gamekeeper or woodsman of Domaine
de La Hulpe, owned by the Solvay family.
Etienne Davignon: director Solvay and from a family that has
intermarried with the Solvays.
Charles De Selliers De Moranville: has a family that has
intermarried with the Solvays and a family member, Guy, that
served as a Solvay director.
Baron Daniel Janssen (Count Yann): chair Solvay S.A. 1986-1998
and close to globalists as Etienne Davignon.
Questionable ritual child abuse claims about Chateau de Amerois,
owned by the Solvay family.
Chateau de Amerois claims:
Note of caution: with such notorious manipulative Gendarmerie/police
debunkers as Eddy Verhaeghen and Cerefino Alvarez involved, together
with evangelical conspiracy researchers as Fritz Springmeier and the
Dutch Robin de Ruiter, this story has been rendered pretty much
completely useless. Still, it shouldn't be discarded out of hand.
PV 100.403, January 14, 1997 (Eddy Verhaeghen):"Letter of a retired
Gendarme officer (Mignon). In early April 1996, he sheltered a Mexican
priest. The priest's Dutch friend came to see him. The Dutchman
mentioned the castle of Amerois as a place where satanic and
pedophilic evenings take place during which children are sacrificed.
This information was given to him by an American from NATO who
went back to the USA. This American participated in one of these
evenings and had been disgusted by it. The priest left to Mexico and
had telephone contact with the families Lejeune-Russo. Priest = Dizan
Vasquez. Dutchman = Robin de Ruiter. Commandant Schmidt was
informed on April 23-24, 1996. Maybe a connection with the hunting
parties described by X1 [not to mention the other X witnesses].""
PV 150.048, February 12, 1997 (Baudouin Dernicourt):"Interview of
Rene Mignon (20/02/38). He wrote to the Capt. Baulard to inform him
of sacrifices of children in Chateau des Amerois. His wife and him
knew a Spanish missionary working in Uganda. They paid a visit to
him in Uganda where they met a Mexican priest. In April 1996, this
Mexican priest has been sheltered some days at his place. The priest's
Dutch friend came to see him [there]. This Dutchman spoke of Chateau
des Amerois close to Bouillon that belongs to the Solvay family. The
Dutchman said to know a man who held a post in NATO. This [NATO]
man explained to the Dutchman to have been invited to an evening in
Chateau des Amerois during which children were sacrificed. At the
time, he gave the facts to Commandant Schmit. The facts would date
1994-1995. Three Americans would have participated in this kind of
feasts, but probably not together. Fritz Springmeier would have
inquired into these facts and written a book. In this book the Chateau
des Amerois is termed 'Mothers of Darkness castle in Belgium'. The
manager of the castle is Devogelaer (061/46.71.36). It is impossible to
see the castle from the VP [gate?] - it is very well guarded (dogs). The
Dutchman is willing to testify anonymously. The Dutchman confirmed
the facts by telephone, but doesn't want to make himself known."
PV 150.311, February 19, 1997 (Eddy Verhaeghen):"Information:
Chateau Amerois. Dutchman = R. de Ruiter from Almere. He writes to
say that he doesn't know anything besides that his info comes from
Springmeier. The info of this person would come from elder Satanists.
He mentions "the top 13 Illuminati bloodlines" that make the satanic
families the most powerful on earth and "the Illuminati formula uses
to create an undetectable mind controlled slave [sic]" that goes about
the programming and deprogramming of the victims. Fritz Springmeier
of Oregon City (USA)."
PV 150.931, April 30, 1997 (Cerefino Alvarez):"Information Chateau
d'Amerois. Telephone contact with Father Vasquez (Mexico), the
"Dutchman." Reception of the video cassette of Springmeier,
confirmation of seeing this video, Springmeier mentions the Chateau
d'Amerois as being a place where sacrifices of children would be
carried out in accordance with satanic rituals."
Now it seems that there are indirect ties of Solvay family to X Dossiers, Baron de Meeus, so them owning Chateau de Amerois and alleged abuse happening there as well should not be ruled out completely, especially when given how close Chateau de Amerois
IS to Chateau de Sautou and given all other locations just few dozen kilometers from these two, and all of those locations have similar stories with similar accusations with all of them with abuse/alleged abuse happening during same/similar timeline - 80s/90s.
Now from all I have gathered here it seems that from least credible to most credible allegations (when it connects to leads that would get us to perspective of seeing bigger network) of child abuse here would be:
Allegations of abuse at Chateau de Amerois (I don't see direct connections to X-Dossiers, however there is a close proximity in time and location to Chateau de Sautou ( but we would need to prove further connections of Fourniret to widespread operation), there are also indirect ties of Solvay family (owners of Amerois) to X Dossiers, de Meeus list - all of which are interesting.
->
Allegation of abuse at Chateau de Chimay (It's much better than with Amerois, we have X2 connected to that place and many direct as well as indirect ties)
->
Allegations of abuse in Chateau de Sautou (It is absolutely mindblowing that only 16-18 km of wild dark forests away from Chateau de Amerois police was/is actually looking for bodies of dead children killed by a pedophile who just like Dutroux did not act alone but cooperated with his wife. Crazy. But we need to gather more information on potential connections if there are any. The connections I have now are: proximity of location (not that far from Dutroux operation areas and very close to Amerois (
it really is crazy)) and time - 80s and 90s all those things in all those mentioned places in this article allegedly happened back then.
->
Allegations of abuse in Charleroi and elsewhere by Marc Dutroux, Michelle Martin, Michel Lelievre, Michel Nihoul, and Bernard Weinstein - this is by far the most mindblowing case with most proof for widespread network of child abuse and even "ritualistic" (even beyond alleged Abrasax Sect there were testimonies like that of Regina Louf but she suggested it was to make victims confused) aspects and cover up.
However there is one interesting connection that I have found but it seems that it could be a part of disinformation. Here it is:
https://isgp-studies.com/belgian-x-doss ... he-accused
Jean-Paul Raemaekers
b. 1949
Source(s):
*) X1 (knew him from the network);
*) X4 (knew him from the network. A picture of her as a child might have been found in the collection of Raemaekers, although follow-up "research" was inconclusive)
Convicted for robbing his employer, an insurance company, in 1979. Convicted for fraud and extortion in 1980. His driver's license was taken away for life after he was responsible for a deadly traffic accident. Went to France in 1981, but had to flee back in 1986 after the police was looking for him there. Set up fake companies (including small banks and investment firms) and foundations all the time, which sometimes dealt with children. Literally always massively exaggerated his own credentials. Acted as a parent to a 13 year old girl in 1986 (for a year), which he had taken over from her mother. When the child later claimed Raemaekers had raped her, it was enough for the the mother to claim "she makes it up" to have the case thrown out. In the late 1980s, he owned a Jaguar and two Porsches. As a violent paedophile he was convicted in 1989 and 1995. After he was released in 1991 the doctor who had to guide him back into society was never told that Raemaekers was a paedophile. Raemaekers went on raping kids almost immediately. In 1993, he was caught after a scam he pulled in which he robbed the shareholders of his fake firm. He fled to Rotterdam in the Netherlands and bought a sex bar. When he was arrested, detectives found approximately 4000 videotapes in his apartment (a very underreported fact). Only 2000 of these tapes were sent to the BOB. Allegedly because of a lack of storage space, these were ordered destroyed in February 1995 (finally done in June 1996), one day after Raemaekers had lost his chance to appeal against his sentence. The other 2000 or so videos were stashed in a warehouse in Anderlecht of judicial expert Andre Fourneau, something which most investigators were not aware of. Allegedly because of a lack of storage space, Fourneau wanted to get rid of these videos and sent the collection to the curator of the PEFL auction in Molenbeek (Brussels). On December 7, 1995, PEFL auctioned 779 videos of Raemaekers' collection. Someone bought them all up (in three parts) for 750 euros, a price which some were a bit surprised about. On March 12, 1997, the BOB retrieved the remaining 797 videos at Fourneau. Nothing unusual was found on these tapes. Examining magistrate Jean-Claude Van Espen, who once worked at the same law firm as Nihoul and Bouty and was involved in sabotaging the X-investigations, headed the investigation into the PEFL affair. The videos that ended up with the BOB were investigated, at least to some extent. On some of them young Asian girls were raped. On others girls from eastern Europe. Some of the tapes showed Raemaekers raping several children from his old neighborhood, who had never spoken out about these facts. He had the same habit as pimps like Tony to blame everything that went on wrong on the girls, which would have severely impacted their confidence and self-esteem. Raemaekers briefly spoke about having supplied kids to paedophile parties with important officials in neighborhoods in and around Brussels (in line with info about Tony, Dutroux, Nihoul and other pimps). During his 1995 trial: "- Why did you tape those [rape] scenes? - You could earn a lot of money doing that. You could also exchange those videos. - With who? - That happened within a large paedophile network that is active in Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany. I myself was only a small link. - Who were the others? - I do not wish to testify about that." This was later followed with: "If I speak then this country will explode." Psychiatrists wrote that Raemaekers suffered from theatricality, mythomania, megalomania, paranoia, hysteria, narcism, extreme impulsiveness, and lack of any form of fear (which definitely was true; Raemaekers was an extreme liar). When he got the last word on his trial on January 25, 1995, he tearfully claimed that he was sorry for all the things he had done (which he absolutely wasn't). Then he went on to say: "I am the patsy [definitely the wrong word] who now goes to jail, while the bigwigs remain free... [wants to read up a list of accomplices, but is stopped as it is a public hearing]... Alright, I will present the names to the qualified authorities later on. Then I still want to close this speech with the announcement that I kept a number of videotapes in a safe place which can prove that I am right. In addition I left a testimony of 150 pages with a notary. These will be given to the justice department as soon as something happens to me." The paper he gave to the authorities included the names of one magistrate in Brussels and 4 of his creditors (so, not very much and not very reliable). After his sentencing, Raemaekers made statements to BOB officers that Nancy and Nelly (young girls who visited Raemaekers' house to play with his daughters; Nelly was diagnosed with DID/MPS), like most other victims of the network, were rented out by their mother. That he didn't mention her involvement was "part of the deal". On February 1, 1995, the BOB officers found out that on the account of Raemaekers in the Vorst prison a number of anonymous deposits had been made. After a brief investigation at least some of these deposits were found out to have been made by the mother of Nancy and Nelly. Raemaekers was questioned by the BOB about these deposits on February 20, 1995, and explained that this money was hush money from anonymous pedophiles or from parents who had supplied him with their children. About the mother of Nancy and Nelly, Raemaekers claimed that she rented out her children for 250 euros per hour to a number of pedophiles. Raemaekers also gave the names of some of these pedophiles. He himself claimed to have received about 10,000 euros in hush money. Around this time the controversial Brussels police commissioner Georges Marnette (alleged child rapist) decided to become involved. Raemaekers provided his evidence through Jean-Paul Dumont to Marnette. PV 115.417, October 19, 1996: "Raemaekers interview - Period of 20/02 to 15/03/95. At the time of the investigation of the BSR 3/SRC, Raemaekers had signaled to his lawyers that he was going to give information on networks of child molesters. Lawyers = JP Dumont, Marc Depaus and Geuninkx. Dumont wanted to entrust the investigation to the judicial police [in which Marnette is commissioner in Brussels] to screen the information. Dumont intervened with Marnette who is "his good friend". Marnette sent two men to the jail to audition Raemaekers on this topic. Lawyer Depaus came with them. The evidence had to be provided to the judicial police via Depaus after having been filtered by Dumont." In 1996, when his relationship with the BOB was fine again, Raemaekers said: "Nevertheless, back then, two investigators of the judicial police had come [without leaving a trace of their visit]. They were sent by the Brussels commissioner Georges Marnette. He is a good friend of Jean-Paul Dumont. It was Dumont who forbid me to have any contact with the gendarmerie. I would only give my information to the GP, but only after this was filtered and checked by Dumont." Another reason that has been mentioned, in this case by Marc Depaus, is that Raemaekers tried to arrange a lessening of his sentence in return for information with the BOB. After this failed, Raemaekers, through Dumont, in February-March 1995, decided to cease cooperation with the BOB and only work with the judicial police of Marnette instead. Marc Depaus, a young lawyer who had been appointed by his (law) master Dumont to this case, withdrew from the Raemaekers case after he saw that this game was to big for him. Depaus stated: "I found out that he [Raemaekers] had contacts with unidentified persons who didn't leave a trace of their visits." Depaus explained that Raemaekers already in his first talks with him explained that he would start naming high level people if he was given a severe sentence. According to Depaus, Dumont was very interested in the Raemaekers case, was always available, and appeared to be the only one Raemaekers fully trusted. Depaus: "I use the term 'hornet's nest' because the case seemed simple at the beginning. Raemaekers was in the possession of a certain amount of information and wanted to negotiate about that. The first demarche consisted of checking the feasibility and modalities of those negotiations. After my visit to examining magistrate Vandermeersch [turned down the possibility of working with the BOB] I began asking myself the question how much support the investigators had from their hierarchy. On the other hand it turned out that there was a rivalry within this police service and at the end I found out that Raemaekers had contacts with unidentified persons who didn't leave a trace of their visits. All these elements made me realize that I was playing a game of which I didn't even know half of the rules. It is in that context that I withdrew... I don't know if the judicial police was chosen by master Dumont because of his close contacts with commissioner Marnette, but it is true that master Dumont and commissioner Marnette have known each other for a long time... Yes, I know that these documents [about child abuse by prominent individuals, videos included) exist. If the negotiations would have been successful, it was the intention that I would guarantee their recovery, but at this moment I do not know where they are located." It turned out that Raemaekers had expected that the 'dark side' in the justice department, knowing who he was, would come to his aid. In his own words: "After my arrest people send me signals. They would have me medically confined. That way I would be out in a year or so. I cannot explain why it went so wrong and I was sentenced to life [15 years or so in reality]. All evidence pointing to the people I worked for, which was found in 1993, had already been removed during the investigation." Later in 1995, Raemaekers was sent to the prison in Bergen, among detainees the most terrible prison in Belgium. The prison was overpopulated and dirty, and Raemaekers heard stories there about pedophiles being tortured to death. He also claimed to have been witness to a food poisoning, which was labeled a suicide. During his stay in the prison Raemaekers took large amounts of sedative drugs to tune out as much as possible. He felt betrayed. At some point in 1996, Raemaekers was transferred to the prison in Namen. Raemaekers became quite well known in this prison for spending a relatively large amount of money and doing all kinds of business which nobody really knew the details. What also intrigued people inside and outside the prison was that Raemaekers, since late 1995, had a lawyer which he didn't have to pay for: Jean-Marie Flagothier. Flagothier, an expert in Military Law, used to be a member of the Brabantse Reserve Officieren (BROC), which included the son of Paul Vanden Boeynants and was tied to the Gladio/Stay-Behind affair. To the media Flagothier claimed that he had been able to remove Raemaekers from Dumont's sphere of influence. Others claimed that Flagothier and Dumont were on the same side and were manipulating Raemaekers with some unknown purpose in mind. In early August 1996, just before the Dutroux affair, Raemaekers got a new cell-mate, Serge Loriaux. Raemaekers introduced himself as Alexandre de Saligny, bank director. Loriaux later recounted a conversation between him and Raemaekers at the time the Dutroux affair broke out on August 13: "- What do you think of this? - Pfff. - It leaves you cold? - What people don't get excited about... To me it seems the most normal thing in the world. - Alexandre, the country is exploding. - All hypocrites. You know, in Belgium there are families who are willing to sell their children for 200 or 300 thousand franks. Then you can do with them whatever you want. They've been offered to me more than once." Loriaux: "He continually told me that the tapes the police had shown to his wife were nothing compared to the tapes he claims to possess. He told me that on these tapes paedophile scenes could be seen with important Belgian personalities. He said that if these tapes ended up in the hands of the Justice Department this would create an enormous shock. Judging from his words there even were ministers involved... There's also stuff in between there that is of such a nature that it can give him a second sentence to life-long hard labor." Loriaux gave this information during a BOB interview on September 21, 1996, PV 114.110. Raemaekers had even suggested to Loriaux that when he was released he could use Raemaekers' house in Peru and start painting there (Loriaux officially was a painter and heavily in debt). Raemaekers also asked him if he could pick up some videos once out of jail. After Loriaux had been separated from Raemaekers in the aftermath of the Dutroux affair, he suggested to the BOB officers to be placed back with Raemaekers in one jail and work as an informant. The BOB officers were enthusiast, but the management of the prison blocked the proposal. After the Dutroux broke loose, Marnette voluntarily went to Neufchateau to help (read: manipulate) with the investigation. The first thing that Marnette did was take with him a picture from Raemaekers' collection and claim that it was probably Dutroux who could be seen in this picture. It turned out to be a complete fraud, and Marnette's proposal to personally interview Raemaekers was rejected. The picture was shown to Raemaekers at some point who also claimed that the man in the picture (who spoke Dutch, a language Dutroux doesn't know at all) was well known person within the network, but was not Dutroux. Raemaekers referred to the video from which Marnette's "Dutroux" picture was taken as an "oldie". These were usually 8mm films who were later on transferred to VHS. This material was still circulated within the networks, but was usually only bought and traded by the less well-to-do pedophiles. Raemaekers claimed he had never met Dutroux. A BOB officer later commented: "The motive behind it was clear. Just as more than a year before, in March 1995, he wanted to gain control over Raemaekers, preferably by interviewing him himself. Why we don't know. But when you see what Marnette did a short time later with Elio Di Rupo, then at the very least we have a strong suspicion." On September 12, 13 an 15, 1996, a number of articles appeared which detailed how the investigation into Nihoul was sabotaged (Marnette played a role in Nihoul's investigation), how the Justice Department had a renewed interest in Jean-Paul Raemaekers, how Marnette had been pushed out of the investigation and how during a break-in by Jean-Paul Dumont an audio tape with some of Raemaekers' statements had been stolen. There appeared to be no specific reason why articles about Raemaekers had to appear at this point in time, and a number of BOB officers suspected that Marnette had been behind these reports, largely through journalist Gilbert Dupont, suspected to have been a close friend of Marnette. It soon turned out that no tape had been stolen by Dumont. The reports also falsely claimed that Dumont would have rejected to legally assist Raemaekers, because he had done this through Marc Depaus while he himself had been heavily involved in the Raemaekers' case from behind the scenes. In a report BOB officers wrote: "This probably were the last interferences of commissioner Marnette, before his leave on vacation... All these elements confirm our earlier conclusions: Raemaekers hinders, and it is possible that one is trying to intimidate him [including through the newspapers]." During his September 7 and September 15 BOB interviews, during which time the strange news articles appeared, Raemaekers spoke in detail about a 1992 sex orgy in Villa de Meise, and how about a dozen men of some standing were involved in a sex orgy with five under aged children. Besides Jean-Paul Dumont, he didn't know the men very well, but remembered that they owned Jaguars, BMWs and Mercedesses. One car had a license plate of the Lion's Club. Raemaekers gave many details about this villa and even drew a layout. He told that these kind of parties were regularly organized, but he had been surprised with this one, because no women attended. The villa returned in testimonies of a number of other witnesses. Things changed on October 9, 1996. In the early afternoon, Raemaekers called up his BOB interviewers, apparently in a panic, and told how a close associate of Dumont came by and told him he would be killed if he didn't keep his mouth shut. When Raemaekers' interviewers, Danny Lesciauskas and Serge Winkel, visited him just three hours later, Raemaekers apparently was not that troubled anymore with these death threats, and began talking (rambling) about his new cell mate, Guy Focant, who had been locked up with Raemaekers 5 days earlier. Focant had recently been investigated by Neufchateau, because a victim from his home town had claimed that he had seen Nihoul twice in the small local network of Focant. Unfortunately, like most other victims of Focant's network, this witness was mentally handicapped and his testimony carried no weight (applied as a novice to a monastery a few weeks after his testimony) . According to investigators involved in the Focant case, Focant was known to have been in contact with a few elderly pedophiles and corresponded with gays around the world through mail. No evidence of a large child abuse network was found. According to Raemaekers, Focant had told him that he had kidnapped children for Nihoul. Over the next several weeks, Raemaekers volunteered to act as an informant to Winkel and Lesciauskas about his talks with Focant. He gave no more information about his own experiences. On October 19, 1996, in PV 115.442, Raemaekers first claimed that Focant had told him that Elio Di Rupo and Jean-Pierre Grafe were involved in the child abuse networks, and how these two were trying to protect Focant and others. On October 22, Focant and Raemaekers were joined by Francis Debuisson, a paedophile from Meux, a small village near Namen, who had rented out his own two sons. Raemaekers studied the pictures Debuisson had brought with him and on November 1 told a story to his interviewers about how he knew that Dumont in 1992 had picked up some boys from a house in Meux. He "remembered" that this person had the surname Debuisson and gave a description of this person's house (which he of course had seen on Debuisson's pictures). Lesciauskas and Winkel reacted very excited to these revelations of Raemaekers, as Francis Debuisson, to which the evidence obviously lead, indeed turned out to be a paedophile. Unfortunately, Winkel and Lesciauskas forgot to check in which cell Debuisson had been locked up. When Raemaekers in later weeks freely talked about his cell mate Francis Debuisson the investigators still didn't ask any questions. They continued to miss opportunity after opportunity to unmask Raemaekers. Raemaekers also gave Debuisson his lawyer, Jean-Marie Flagothier. In November, Raemaekers began to relate how Focant was relieved that the digs in Jumet were stopped (Focant allegedly reacted to the news with: "What a bunch of idiots, they didn't went deep enough") and how he had claimed that Jean-Michel Nihoul killed Elizabeth Brichet (a girl that disappeared in 1989 and was found on July 3, 2004 on the domain of Chateau de Sautou, after a confession of Michel Fourniret). These digs in Jumet had begun in early October after Lelievre briefly mentioned some story about Dutroux digging for coal. August 17, 1996, PV 100.221, small note in Lelievre interrogation: "Dutroux is digging at J. Destree street [in suburb of Charleroi]. He digs deep, because he said to have found coal [relatively close to surface]." Others, like Michelle Martin, confirmed Dutroux's interest in coal and somehow the old coal mine in Jumet, a district of Charleroi, became a possible location where Dutroux might have buried some of his victims. After several weeks of digging nothing was found and this aspect of the investigation was closed down. That is, until Raemaekers brought up the topic again. Raemaekers, November 15, 1996, PV 117.123: "I then found out that she was dead, but that her death was the result of a job that went bad. Her body is located in Belgium, more precisely in a mine. Because of the fact that the previous day it had been said on Bel RTL [Call RTL] that the digs were undertaken in a mine [Jumet] and that they have been stopped, I concluded that it exactly was that mine entrance where she must have been buried, but that the investigators didn't dug deep enough... During the conversation I noticed that it was odd that the little Ken had never been found, while his sister was found drowned. He [Focant] immediately answered: "Yes, he is buried with Elizabeth". I asked, in the absence of Debuisson, if he knew about other kidnapped children in the Netherlands. He affirmed this to me, but without going in details." Raemaekers, November 23, 1996, PV 117.125: "On November 15 I learned that the bodies are located close to the location of the last digs... In fact, in an effort to learn more I said that the searches were done in the Charleroi region. Guy Focant then answered that I was mistaken and that that was happening in Jumet... He talked about a mine entrance with an elevator through which the minors used to descend. Thereafter he gave a description of the location where the bodies were by drawing a small layout on a piece of paper, which I then redrew in my agenda from my memory." Raemaekers gave a whole bunch of other information to his interviewers, to Winkel and Lesciauskas and later to BOB officers in Brussels. Because of this information the digs in Jumet were restarted on December 12, 1996, and interestingly would continue with the full support of the media, the same media that ridiculed the X-witnesses. On December 14, Debuisson also was finally asked some questions about Focant by the judicial police in Brussels. Although very reluctant to give any information, the interrogators managed to extract the following testimony from him: "He [Focant] explained that one, to find them, had to dig several feet further, beyond the collapse. He also said that the detection devices of that British policeman John Benett were useless, as the ground was to fatty because of the coal. Focant said that he was sure that the bodies of Elizabeth Brichet and Ken Heyrman were located in Jumet, together with those of other children he didn't mention the name of... I have not heard him say that he went to hide bodies himself... At a certain moment I also heard him say that he had never been in Jumet. Yeah, that was a bit strange indeed. But how could I know that what was said in that cell was of any importance to the investigation? To me it seemed more like small talk to counter the boredom." The digs in Jumet went on for months without anything being found. Criticism rose and on May 5, 1997, Raemaekers, Focant and Debuisson (who was living at home again with his two sons) were taken on site. Raemaekers began dancing around and shouted that this was the location where the children were buried. Focant explained that he had never been here and that he had no idea that this whole dig was based on his alleged confessions to Raemaekers. Debuisson said he had never been here and that he never took anything serious that was said by Raemaekers and Focant in his cell, and he still didn't. Further statements from Focant and Raemaekers also completely contradicted each other. May 13, 1997, press notification of Guy Focant: "During my stay in the same cell as Raemaekers this person, bizarrely enough, was continually taken away to be questioned. He said that he helped the investigators to dismantle a network of pedophiles that operated in the highest circles of society... I didn't worry about the exact and detailed questions he asked me about the coal mine in Jumet. He also asked those questions to a guard who lived in this region... Raemaekers keeps making false accusations, like I would have told him certain things. I have been asked thousands of questions. What can I tell, as this is the first time I saw a coal mine?... In the mean time, and for reasons I am not aware of, the digs in Jumet continue based on false accusations. In all likelihood the money has been wasted and my life is in danger." The digs in Jumet were finally cancelled on May 27, 1997. The media never talked about this event as possibly being one of the red herrings to discredit talk about large high level paedophile networks. Raemaekers (voluntary & militant) lawyer, Jean-Marie Flagothier, is suspected by some to have played a crucial role in this affair. Claude Jasselette, the cell mate of Raemaekers in late 1996 and early 1997, explained (April 14, 1997, to GP in Namen): "The lawyer of Raemaekers certainly is part of the scheme... The only time in the consulting room that I was given the chance to meet a lawyer it was Flagothier. In the presence of Raemaekers, which is totally illegal. It is therefore that I can say that master Flaghotier orally as well as by letter provides intelligence to Raemaekers. I also would like to state that Raemaekers sees his lawyer weekly and practically always returns with documents, photocopies and intelligence concerning all his allegations. He diligently writes this information in his small blue notepad." Dumont and Marnette appear to have also been involved in this manipulation. Besides the continuous involvement of these two alleged pedophiles with Raemaekers, one of the strongest pieces of evidence is the media campaign against Elio Di Rupo and Jean-Pierre Grafe, which started on November 16, a month after Raemaekers had begun accusing Elio Di Rupo and Jean-Pierre Grafe in his testimonies. While Raemaekers was testifying about these two men, Marnette was manipulating Oliver Trusgnach into claiming that he was abused as a minor by these same two men. This testimony was then conveniently leaked to press, at the same time that De Baets and his team were forced to participate in this bogus investigation. This resulted in Trusgnach being discredited, to some extent De Baets also, and hopefully would result in a more sceptical reception of the X witnesses by the general public, if their story ever came out. An anonymous BOB officer commented: "The motive behind it was clear [why Marnette wanted to link Raemaekers to the Dutroux case]. Just as more than a year before, in March 1995, he wanted to gain control over Raemaekers, preferably by interviewing him himself. Why we don't know. But when you see what Marnette did a short time later with Elio Di Rupo, then at the very least we have a strong suspicion." Connerotte and De Baets have both spoken out that the investigation was heavily manipulated and that there was an effort to discredit the X witnesses. They specifically mentioned Abrasax, Jumet and the Di Rupo cases. Connerotte was not interested in pursuing Raemaekers' claims about Focant, which started on October 9, to any extent. This immediately changed after Langlois took over from him on October 14. December 3, 2002, Annemie Bulte for Humo, 'War in Neufchateau: examining magistrate Connerotte speaks about the Dutroux dossier for the first time' (Connerotte): "I regularly and much earlier complained about those terrible circumstances in which I had to work in the Dutroux case... How could one, single, understaffed examining judge work through such heaps of information and separate the important things from the unimportant?... I experienced those circumstances as a form of pressure... I definitely did not consider it impossible that I was being manipulated. We continually received information about all kinds of bizarre leads. Those then received a lot of media attention, but to us meant nothing but time loss... Just think about the Abrasax case and the digs in Jumet. If I remember correctly, the first leads in those two cases were already put under my nose in the very beginning of the investigation. Afterwards precisely Abrasax and Jumet were used by the media as an argument to say that the whole investigation was manipulated and pointed towards false leads [by low level pedophiles as Raemaekers and "believing" investigators]. I experienced the same thing in the Cools case, in which the police began to manipulate and was wholeheartedly supported by the media." Interview with Patrick De Baets, Humo, September 28, 1999 and October 5, 1999, 'Marc Dutroux and Michel Nihoul: the sabotage of an investigation': "I think that there was a higher plan. The population had to get the message: "There's a witch hunt going on in this country, the investigation is derailing, they've gone crazy in Neufchateau. Let's stop going after Nihoul." And even more important was the finger pointing to the politicians: "You again were probably responsible! Chasing politicians, bringing down bigwigs, that's the hobby of men such as De Baets. So now close the ranks as soon possible."... And why were we brought into that ludicrous Di Rupo investigation? Because we were working on the well-known X-witnesses. By discrediting me and my team through the Di Rupo case, one actually wanted to discredit the testimonies of the Xs... Again, take examining magistrate Van Espen: he walked in very tight shoes, because Nihoul had fingered him to members the 23th brigade of the judicial police as the person who always stood ready to protect him and his friends as legal trouble was around the corner... And all of a sudden Regina Louf pointed to individuals who Van Espen knew only all too well. This could severely compromise him. So Van Espen also benefited from us being discredited in the Di Ripo case." Even Gregory Antipine, Marnette's sidekick in the Trusgnach manipulation, told an investigating committee that he believed Marnette had been manipulating. Some time thereafter Antipine committed suicide.
