On December 14, a few days following the events, the investigating judge of Arlon had placed under arrest warrant a resident of Virton, Steve Chevalier, 34, for murder, arson of a building occupied at night and theft money and personal effects belonging to the victim. The investigation carried out by the SER of Gaume with the support of the PFJ of Luxembourg had made it possible to identify fairly quickly this accused, who had confessed.
But the motive has remained relatively vague until today because if on the one hand the lawyers of Steve Chevalier seemed to speak ten days ago of a violent reaction from Chevalier who would not have supported the sexual advances of Dominique Meyer – known for his solicitations on social networks – it appears that money is also at the heart of this affair. And that Steve Chevalier had come to steal from Meyer on the evening of December 12. The investigating judge even retained the charge of assassination (murder with premeditation).
Charged with “murder to facilitate theft”
The other new element in this case is the emergence of a second suspect, who would have helped Steve Chevalier to carry out his punitive expedition to the home of Dominique Meyer.
The Gaume investigators and those of the PJF had already questioned a person just following the events, on December 12, but this suspect had been released by the examining magistrate Ms. Devaux. But it appears that another individual was placed under arrest warrant by the investigating judge last Thursday. According to our information, this new accused is none other than Yves Chevalier, also from Virton, and older brother of Steve Chevalier.
Yves Chevalier, father of young children and holder of a job, has never hit the headlines until now, apart from a few minor thefts in the past. Why did he want to do his brother a favor by accompanying him that evening to Dominique Meyer’s in Virton?
Yves Chevalier placed under electronic surveillance
This Tuesday followingnoon, the council chamber confirmed the detention of Yves Chevalier, but under the modality of electronic surveillance.
The Luxembourg public prosecutor’s office appealed once morest this decision.