April 26, 2014 By Joseph P. Farrell

No sooner had I completed last Thursday's News and Views from the Nefarium on the death of Chinese banking regulator Li Jinhua, and the Belgian banker, his wife, and nine-year old nephew, than I received from many people the breaking news that yet another banker, this time in France, had jumped to her death in Paris. The story was reported, once again, by Zero Hedge:

52 Year Old French banker jumps to her death in Paris after questioning her superiors

There's not much to go on here, and that raises my suspicion meters into the red zone. The article makes clear that as of April 24 (Thursday), Mme. Lydia X's surname was being withheld, presumably while French authorities had time to notify her family. But there are other curious omissions from the story. We are not told, for example, what department of the bank (Bred-Banque-Populaire) Mme Lydia X was employed in. The article does state, in its garbled translation from the French, that Mme X decided to jump apparently after "questioning her superiors." Then, the bank(we are "informed"), states that Mme Lydia X had been in therapy for years.

Frankly, when I read that, I was sickened, for apparently there is no depth of sleaze to which the financial class will not stoop in order to deflect attention away from a story that only seems to grow, with each new week seeming to add yet more curious "suicides" and "mysterious deaths" and even Mafia-style murders of bankers who suddenly decide to talk a walk out the window, a flight from a roof, or to throw themselves in front of a train, or who have a sudden urge to use a nail gun on their skulls.

There's little getting around the implications here: (1) why was Mme Lydia X in therapy to begin with? That issue could either be highly relevant, or highly irrelevant, to the case. Was she in therapy because of job-related issues? or something purely personal? Again, the bank's sleaze factor here is a matter of concern, for if it knew she was in therapy, it likely had some idea as to why. So why withhold that information? Fear of lawsuits? or something else? Fear of lawsuits for divulging too much seems to be out of the picture, since the bank took the step of revealing the highly personal information about her therapy in the first place. Again, my suspicion meter goes into the red zone.

Then there's the sequence of events: (1) a banker consults her superiors, then (2) suddenly decides to take a walk out of a high rise window. The clear implication is that the two are causally related. So we're left, in my opinion, with the following two basic scenarios, both of which are speculative. One: Mme Lydia X consulted her superiors regarding some aspect of bank or wider financial policy, or perhaps brought information to them that she had discovered. In any case, the answers or responses of her superiors so unnerved her, or frightened her, that she immediately decided to end it all, and walk out the window.   Two: Mme Lydia X consulted her superiors regarding some aspect of bank or wider financial policy, or perhaps brought information to them that she had discovered. Her superiors immediately took action to silence Mme X by assisting her out the high rise window.

There's a context that should not be forgotten, for Mme X's window walk occurred mere days after the murder of the Belgian banker, his wife, and nine-year old nephew. In his case, he too worked for a French bank, in fact, for the largest French bank, the powerful BNP Paribas. So within mere days, the banker deaths have now spread to two French banks.

For once, I will leave the high octane speculations to the reader. For my part, I continue to suspect that the "death-by-nailgun" case of Richard Talley may hold an important key or clue to the puzzle.

See you on the flip side...