Joanna Parrish: Devastated family of British student murdered in France to see justice three decades after her death
In a quiet graveyard in Gloucestershire, the only sounds are the bells ringing at the top of the hour, and the birds in the trees.
You look over the fence and see the River Severn, and the hills of the valley in the distance.
It is a beautiful, peaceful spot, but it is also a place linked to crime, violence and decades of anguish.
Joanna Parrish is buried here, her gravestone written in English and French.
She was murdered 33 years ago hundreds of miles away, in the French city of Auxerre.
Joanna was 20 years old, a university student teaching in France as part of her degree.
She went missing and then, not long after, her body was found in the River Yonne.
Nobody has ever been convicted of her murder, but we know who did it.
A serial killer called Michel Fourniret, who was already in prison for seven murders, admitted to killing Joanna five years ago, but died before he could be put on trial.
But now, after decades of despair and tragic errors, justice may be within sight.
Because Fourniret did not act alone.
Joanna Parrish was 20 years old when she went missing
He was helped in his murders by his wife, Monique Olivier, who lured girls and young women and allowed them to be attacked, raped and murdered by Fourniret.
She is still alive, now aged 74 and serving a 28-year sentence for complicity in the murders.
She once confessed to seeing Fourniret murder a young woman in Auxerre – clearly Joanna – but then retracted that statement.
Now, though, she is about to go on trial for being an accomplice in three further murders, including that of Joanna.
It has taken a third of a century, but perhaps justice is finally going to be delivered, for Joanna and for the parents who have spent decades searching for a form of closure.
Lives changed forever
At home in Gloucestershire, Pauline Murrell tends to her pet budgie and offers us a cup of tea.
From the sofa, her former husband, Roger Parrish, asks for a coffee.
The pair have been divorced for decades, but are still evidently close, caring and friendly. They finish each other’s sentences.
Joanna’s parents, Pauline and Roger, said their daughter was a ‘kind, bright and smart person’
Their lives changed, instantly and horribly, when they were told that their daughter had been murdered.
“It’s impossible to take in,” says Pauline. “They said she was found in the water, and I was staring out of a window and I simply couldn’t take it in. I couldn’t cry for six months.
“Then I got the post-mortem report and I opened it on a Sunday morning, and I wasn’t able to get out of bed.”
Roger wipes away a tear, the memories still so haunting. “She deserved a long and happy, fulfilled life. She worked hard and she deserved it. She was helpful, part of the community. People still remember her. She did well.”
Pauline’s last phone call with her had ended with a declaration of love from the parents to their daughter. It is a memory that offers some solace.
The devastation of grief was followed by frustration about the police investigation.
Roger and Pauline heard little from the French authorities. Instead, they went to France themselves and started asking questions, looking for information and demanding more effort.
And then came the arrest of Fourniret, and the pieces began to fall into place.
As it slowly became apparent that his wife had helped him, so Roger and Pauline became convinced that he had killed their daughter.
“Jo was a kind person,” says Roger, “but she was also bright and smart.
“She was not likely to have trusted a man who was by himself.
“When we found out that there was a female accomplice, I remember thinking that we had never thought of that. Why would we have done? But right from that moment, I thought, ‘this is it – this is the person’.”
But still the police could not put together the evidence to link Fourniret with Joanna’s murder.
In fact, they had bungled the investigation, mishandling the crime scene and mislaying crucial forensic evidence.
French police ‘lost some really important evidence’
Bernie Kinsella was a detective who worked as a liaison between British and French police.
He discovered an investigation that struggled to link multiple crimes, or to manage its resources. He’s still in touch with Roger and Pauline.
“The French lost some really important evidence,” he told me. “The semen sample from the original rape had just been lost, which is unthinkable in terms of any major investigation like that.
“Losing an exhibit like that is a glaring error, so that had a massive impact on their ability to investigate this properly.”
Desperate, Pauline even took the step of writing to Monique Olivier.
“I remember just saying that, from one mother to another mother, I wanted to know what happened. Her lawyers said it was a trick, that it wasn’t proper, and I was upset about that.
“It wasn’t a trick. It was heartfelt.
“It’s just such a horrible, horrible thing. I can’t imagine that any mother would be able to live with themselves.
“And now she’s pushing the victim bit, but I certainly don’t consider her the victim.” Her voice echoes with contempt.
Olivier has always suggested that she was coerced and intimidated by Fourniret, a claim that has been roundly dismissed by prosecutors.
When she was first convicted, in 2008, the court concluded that, far from being easily influenced, she was highly intelligent and capable.
The convictions of Olivier and Fourniret did not bring justice for Joanna. Olivier had originally made a statement linking her husband to the murder, but she then withdrew it.
The case went quiet and was eventually closed.
But in 2018, 28 years after he killed her, Fourniret admitted to the murder.
A court case beckoned before being delayed by the pandemic. Then, to the frustration of Roger and Pauline, Fourniret died.
“When he died, it wasn’t a great surprise because we knew he’d been ill, but we did feel cheated. I wanted to face him in court and that was taken away.
“We’re glad that he died. The world is a better place without a person like that but, at the same time, we would have wanted to face him – to look him in the eye.”
‘Trial is the last hurdle’
Now they have another chance. Both parents will be travelling to Nanterre, just outside Paris, for the trial.
“We probably look on it as the last hurdle,” says Roger. “It’s been a long time. It’s over 30 years so we’re glad it’s taking place.
“Until it’s over, we can’t get to whatever will be the next stage of our lives.”
Pauline adds: “I keep saying that it’s not going to bring her back.
“It’s almost as if you feel that once it’s over, everything will go back to normal. But it’ll never be like that.”
“No, it won’t be,” says Roger, nodding, holding his head.
“But it will stop us having to think all the time about what we are going to do next, what’s the next step, what are we going to do.
“Hopefully, that will be it – that it will clear our heads a little bit. We’ll never forget Jo. She’ll always be there.”
Roger and Pauline are warm, charming people, whose lives have been blighted in the most horrendous way.
If Olivier is convicted, it will surely bring some kind of closure.
But you wonder – after waiting so long for something so important, can it ever really be enough?
World
US announces it will increase steps to limit revenue of Venezuelan president Maduro – as he begins third term
The US has announced it has increased its reward for information leading to the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.
In a statement on Friday, the US treasury said up to $25m is being offered for information leading to the arrest of Mr Maduro and his named interior minister Diosdado Cabello.
Up to $15m is also being offered for information on the incoming defence minister Vladimir Padrino. Further sanctions have also been introduced against the South American country’s state-owned oil company and airline.
The reward was announced as Mr Maduro was sworn in for a third successive term as the Venezuelan president, following a disputed election win last year.
Sanctions from the US, UK and EU came as Maduro was sworn in for a third term as president. Pic: Reuters
Elvis Amoroso, head of the National Electoral Council, said at the time Mr Maduro had secured 51% of the vote, beating his opponent Edmundo Gonzalez, who won 44%.
But while Venezuela’s electoral authority and top court declared him the winner, tallies confirming Mr Maduro’s win were never released. The country’s opposition also insists that ballot box level tallies show Mr Gonzalez won in a landslide.
Nationwide protests broke out over the dispute, with a brawl erupting in the capital Caracas when dozens of police in riot gear blocked the demonstrations and officers used tear gas to disperse them.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
From July 2024: Protests after Venezuela election results
More than 2,000 demonstrators were arrested, and Mr Gonzalez fled to Spain to seek asylum in September.
While being sworn in at the national assembly, Mr Maduro said: “May this new presidential term be a period of peace, of prosperity, of equality and the new democracy.”
He also accused the opposition of attempting to turn the inauguration into a “world war,” adding: “I have not been made president by the government of the United States, nor by the pro-imperialist governments of Latin America.”
Lammy: Election ‘neither free nor fair’
The UK and EU have also introduced new sanctions against Venezuelan officials – including the president of Venezuela’s supreme court Caryslia Beatriz Rodriguez Rodriguez and the director of its criminal investigations department Asdrubal Jose Brito Hernandez.
Foreign Secretary David Lammy said Mr Maduro’s “claim to power is fraudulent” and that last year’s election “was neither free nor fair”.
“The UK will not stand by as Maduro continues to oppress, undermine democracy, and commit appalling human rights violations,” he added.
Read more:
Opposition dreams crushed by Maduro’s ‘system’
Venezuela arrests six over ‘assassination plot’
Mr Maduro and his government have always rejected international sanctions as illegitimate measures that amount to an “economic war” designed to cripple Venezuela.
Those targeted by the UK’s sanctions will face travel bans and asset freezes, preventing them from entering the country and holding funds or economic resources.
World
Donald Trump says he’s ‘totally innocent’ and thanks judge moments before no-penalty sentence in hush money case
Donald Trump has been handed a no-penalty sentence following his conviction in the Stormy Daniels hush money case.
The incoming US president has received an unconditional discharge – meaning he will not face jail time, probation or a fine.
Manhattan Judge Juan M Merchan could have jailed him for up to four years.
The sentencing in Manhattan comes just 10 days before the 78-year-old is due to be inaugurated as US president for a second time on 20 January.
Trump appeared at the hearing by video link and addressed the court before he was sentenced, telling the judge the case had been a “very terrible experience” for him.
He claimed it was handled inappropriately and by someone connected with his political opponents – referring to Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg.
As it happened:
Trump sentenced in Manhattan court
Trump said: “It was done to damage my reputation so I would lose the election.
“This has been a political witch hunt.
“I am totally innocent. I did nothing wrong.”
Concluding his statement, he said: “I was treated very unfairly and I thank you very much.”
The judge then told the court it was up to him to “decide what is a just conclusion with a verdict of guilty”.
He said: “Never before has this court been presented with such a unique and remarkable set of circumstances.
“This has been a truly extraordinary case.”
He added that the “trial was a bit of a paradox” because “once the doors closed it was not unique”.
Pic: Reuters
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass had earlier argued in court that Trump “engaged in a campaign to undermine the rule of law” during the trial.
“He’s been unrelenting in his attacks against this court, prosecutors and their family,” Mr Steinglass said.
“His dangerous rhetoric and unconstitutional conduct has been a direct attack on the rule of law and he has publicly threatened to retaliate against the prosecutors.”
Mr Steinglass said this behaviour was “designed to have a chilling effect and to intimidate”.
It comes after the US Supreme Court rejected a last-ditch attempt by Trump to delay sentencing in the case on Thursday.
Trump’s lawyers argued that evidence used during the trial violated last summer’s Supreme Court ruling giving Trump broad immunity from prosecution over acts he took as president.
Read more
A guide to Trump’s inauguration
Trump refuses to rule out military force over Panama Canal
Trump appeared via videolink with his attorney Todd Blanche. Pic: Reuters
Trump’s hush money conviction in May 2024 means he will become the first person convicted of a felony to assume the US presidency.
He was found guilty in New York of 34 counts of falsifying business records relating to payments made to Ms Daniels, an adult film actor, before he won the 2016 US election.
Prosecutors claimed he had paid her $130,000 (£105,300) in hush money to not reveal details of what Ms Daniels said was a sexual relationship in 2006.
Trump has denied any liaison with Ms Daniels or any wrongdoing.
The trial made headlines around the world but the details of the case or Trump’s conviction didn’t deter American voters from picking him as president for a second time.
Trump appears in court during his trial. Pic: AP
What is an unconditional discharge?
Under New York state law, an unconditional discharge is a sentence imposed “without imprisonment, fine or probation supervision”.
The sentence is handed down when a judge is “of the opinion that no proper purpose would be served by imposing any condition upon the defendant’s release”, according to the law.
It means Trump’s hush money case has been resolved without any punishment that could interfere with his return to the White House.
Unconditional discharges have been handed down in previous cases where, like Trump, people have been convicted of falsifying business records.
They have also been applied in relation to low-level offences such as speeding, trespassing and marijuana-related convictions.
World
Family of Leicester City chairman killed in football stadium helicopter crash sue manufacturer for £2bn
Leicester City’s owners have launched a landmark lawsuit against a helicopter manufacturer following the club chairman’s death in a crash in 2018.
Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha’s family are suing Italian company Leonardo SpA for £2.15bn after the 60-year-old chairman and four others were killed when their helicopter crashed just outside the King Power Stadium in October 2018.
The lawsuit is the largest fatal accident claim in English history, according to the family’s lawyers. They are asking for compensation for the loss of earnings and other damages, as a result of the billionaire’s death.
The legal action comes more than six years after the fatal crash and as an inquest into the death of the 60-year-old chairman and his fellow passengers is set to begin on Monday.
Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha celebrating after Leicester City won the Premier League in 2016. Pic: AP
Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s son Khun Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha, who took over as the club’s chairman, said: “My family feels the loss of my father as much today as we ever have done.
“That my own children, and their cousins will never know their grandfather compounds our suffering… My father trusted Leonardo when he bought that helicopter but the conclusions of the report into his death show that his trust was fatally misplaced. I hold them wholly responsible for his death.”
The late Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s company, King Power, was earning more than £2.5bn in revenue per year, according to his family’s lawyers. The lawsuit claims “that success was driven by Khun Vichai’s vision, drive, relationships, entrepreneurism, ingenuity and reputation.”
“All of this was lost with his death,” it adds.
The fatal crash took place shortly after the helicopter took off from Leicester’s ground following a 1-1 draw against West Ham on 27 October 2018.
The aircraft landed on a concrete step and four of the five occupants survived the initial impact, but all subsequently died in the fuel fire that engulfed the helicopter within a minute.
Thousands of tributes were left outside the ground in the wake of the tragedy. Pic: James Wilson/Sportimage
The other victims were two of Mr Srivaddhanaprabha’s staff, Nursara Suknamai and Kaveporn Punpare, pilot Eric Swaffer and Mr Swaffer’s girlfriend Izabela Roza Lechowicz, a fellow pilot.
Investigators found the pilot’s pedals became disconnected from the tail rotor – resulting in the aircraft making a sharp right turn which was “impossible” to control, before the helicopter spun quickly, approximately five times.
More from Sky News:
Police search for missing sisters
UK gas storage levels ‘concerningly low’
The Air Accidents Investigation Branch described this as “a catastrophic failure” and concluded the pilot was unable to prevent the crash.
The lawsuit alleges the crash was the result of ‘multiple failures’ in Leonardo’s design process. It also alleges that the manufacturer failed to warn customers or regulators about the risk.
Sky News has contacted helicopter manufacturer Leonardo for comment.
-
Sports2 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports9 months agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports1 year agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports3 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike
-
Business2 years agoBank of England’s extraordinary response to government policy is almost unthinkable | Ed Conway