Bianchi

Bianchi is a criminal associate of Albert Falconi and a suspected leader of the Corsican gang. His part in the events surrounding Louise Laboine links an attempted theft to a larger fraud: the conspirators needed Louise’s identity to reach money hidden in the United States, and their effort to take her handbag ended in her death. The account of his actions comes through Albert’s statements and Maigret’s reconstruction, rather than through a direct account from Bianchi himself.

Criminal Reputation and Associations

Albert identifies Bianchi as a pal to whom he showed the letter concerning the money. Maigret recognizes the name and places Bianchi within a wider criminal network: Bianchi was suspected of leading the Corsican gang and was associated with Big Jeanne. Maigret had arrested him at least ten times, but had succeeded in getting him jailed only once, for five years. The contrast between repeated arrests and a single imprisonment gives Bianchi a history with the police without establishing that he was in custody during the events in question.

His relationship with Albert is practically consequential, not merely social. Albert turns to Bianchi after seeing the letter, and Bianchi’s presence at Pickwick’s Bar places him inside the effort to act on it. The available account does not give Bianchi’s own explanation or describe the full history of their partnership; it shows him through the decisions attributed to the two men and the criminal resources they expect to use.

The Plan for Louise’s Identity

The letter points toward money held in the United States, with Lukasek as the person from whom it could be collected. Maigret reasons that Bianchi could not send an unknown person to claim it: Lukasek would expect instructions and demand proof of the claimant’s identity. Louise’s identity card therefore becomes the essential object in the plan. The intention was to secure it and arrange a passport for a female accomplice who could impersonate Louise and collect the money in her place.

This scheme makes the attempted theft more than a grab for cash or property. Louise herself is the necessary credential: the conspirators need her identity while intending to substitute another woman for her. Maigret describes the men as professionals who sought to avoid unnecessary risks, but the plan still depended on obtaining Louise’s bag and its contents. Its careful design and its reliance on a violent, improvised encounter stand in sharp contrast.

Pickwick’s Bar and the Attempted Theft

Maigret tests Albert’s account of Louise’s visit to Pickwick’s against what is known about her circumstances. Albert initially treats her as though she were an ordinary customer at his bar, but Maigret argues that she would have felt out of place among the established drinkers, conscious of her second-hand dress and reluctant to draw attention to herself. Albert admits that she did not drink there. Maigret also rejects the suggestion that she went downstairs to read the letter, reasoning that she would have been unlikely to make her way through the crowded bar.

The postmortem supplies another discrepancy. The report recorded alcohol in Louise’s stomach, but Maigret points out that it was rum, not the gin and vermouth of a martini. Albert had named a martini when asked what she drank. The distinction helps Maigret expose the assumptions behind Albert’s story; it also supports the larger reconstruction that Louise had not behaved like the bar’s usual customers. Albert confirms that Bianchi was at Pickwick’s, connecting him to the moment when the conspirators had access to Louise and the letter.

Fatal Outcome and Maigret’s Reconstruction

Maigret’s account is that Bianchi and Albert intended to seize Louise’s handbag, probably as part of their plan to obtain her identity card. They drove past her first; Bianchi got out of the car as she came level with it. The street was deserted. The thin chain around Louise’s wrist, twisted around the bag, thwarted the simple snatch: she fell, resisted, and tried to call for help. Bianchi then assaulted her fatally. The intended theft thus became the immediate cause of her death, though the evidence does not suggest that killing her was the original purpose of the plan.

Other details of the investigation help explain how Maigret reaches that reconstruction without independently identifying Bianchi from each clue. Louise’s blue dress and silver high-heeled shoe initially suggested the appearance of a Montmartre bar girl, but the circumstances at the scene led Maigret to conclude that she had been killed elsewhere. Dr. Paul reported that she had suffered several heavy blows and had clutched dark wool; that finding indicated a struggle, but the supplied account does not establish that the wool belonged to Bianchi. The physical evidence describes the crime, while Albert’s disclosures and the inconsistencies Maigret uncovers connect Bianchi to it.

Bianchi’s importance rests on the convergence of those lines of evidence: his criminal reputation, his involvement with Albert, his presence at Pickwick’s, and Albert’s account of the attempted robbery. Maigret’s reasoning turns on small distinctions—what Louise drank, how she would have felt in the bar, and why the identity card mattered. Together they reveal the larger scheme behind the attack and Bianchi’s place in it, while preserving a distinction between what the investigation establishes about the crime and what it can specifically prove about every detail of his role.