Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect #31

[enquirer6]

Where the money is concerned, the McCanns only ever wanted it to fund the search for their missing and abducted daughter.

They will probably reason that it is (now) better spent rotting away the liver and lungs of the man who accused them in endless rounds of cigarettes and alcohol.

 

[Davieson]

Where the money is concerned, the McCanns only ever wanted it to fund the search for their missing and abducted daughter.

They will probably reason that it is (now) better spent rotting away the liver and lungs of the man who accused them in endless rounds of cigarettes and alcohol.

Just as long as they pay their debts where owing.

 

[RichardKimble]

Always worth visiting old stories, wasn't CB alleged to have worked at the OC. Can't be too many prime suspects or maybe there can. . One wonders how it got from a gang to alone wolf.
Jan 2014.

Madeleine McCann: Three burglars are prime suspects in hunt for missing girl as police trawl phone records

Scotland Yard believes Maddie was snatched by a panicked gang who accidentally woke her in the family’s apartment and took her with them

www.mirror.co.uk

Scotland Yard, which refused to comment, also ruled out Portuguese officers’ prime suspect – a man who had worked at the resort where the McCanns, of Rothley, Leics, stayed.

 

[Megnut]

To convict the person responsible for the disapearance of MM, they don't have to be able to prove how he came into possession of her. Surely it would bolster the case but IMO it's not required. If they can prove that he was in possession of her at any time and clearly the threshold for against her will is then met, he could be convicted for her murder, if a case can be made connecting him, her and poor survivability.

Perhaps LE has a very credible witness to a photograph of the same. Actual photograph missing, witness compelling.

Enough to convict? (Sadly) maybe not.

Enough to solve the mystery? I believe so.

JMO

 

[enquirer6]

Just as long as they pay their debts where owing.

So you don't think courts should bear a measure of responsibility for screwing up in their judgements, particularly that accuse?

You probably don't.

 

[Davieson]

So you don't think courts should bear a measure of responsibility for screwing up in their judgements, particularly that accuse?

You probably don't.

Of course not. The screw-up. as you put it, is just your opinion.
The court decisions are quite clear even if you don't agree with them.
Consequently costs imposed have to be paid.

 

[Anxala]

Still no update/word from HCW? His 2-3 weeks are more than up. Sept is coming to a close.

 

[G-Unit]

So you don't think courts should bear a measure of responsibility for screwing up in their judgements, particularly that accuse?

You probably don't.

The court which got it wrong was the court of the first instance.

 

[Anxala]

I think it will be a measure of Wolters reliability.
If he is unable to proceed with the rape charge, then to my mind his chances of getting charges laid over Madeleine are diminished.

He's already warned us that we mustn't raise our hopes regarding these other 5 alleged sex charges against CB:

'Regarding all allegations except Maddie, we will issue a press release in about 2-3 weeks,' he added. 'It may well go in the direction of an indictment.'

Which means it may well equally not go in the direction of an indictment.

 

[Davieson]

The court which got it wrong was the court of the first instance.

Certainly the multiple judges who reviewed the first decision thought so and ultimately that's what counts.

Internet opinion, while entertaining is ultimately worthless.

 

[Anxala]

More importantly, in my original post I was wondering if there is an option where CB is involved in the case bug is not the abductee or murderer.

An interesting avenue although one laden with unopened cans of quivering worms.

 

[Dave55]

Certainly the multiple judges who reviewed the first decision thought so and ultimately that's what counts.

Internet opinion, while entertaining is ultimately worthless.

The ECHR verdict was based on the ruling that Amaral had sufficient facts to support his claim. If the cadaver definitely alerted to cadaver as the Portuguese courts regarded as a proven fact... Then Amaral was entitled to base his theory on that... The fact that it isn't a fact is irrelevant.. The ECHR don't question the facts.. They accept what the national courts have said

 

[Davieson]

The ECHR verdict was based on the ruling that Amaral had sufficient facts to support his claim. If the cadaver definitely alerted to cadaver as the Portuguese courts regarded as a proven fact... Then Amaral was entitled to base his theory on that... The fact that it isn't a fact is irrelevant.. The ECHR don't question the facts.. They accept what the national courts have said

All the ECHR is interested in are Human Rights and were they violated. In this case they decided they weren't.

 

[Dave55]

All the ECHR is interested in are Human Rights and were they violated. In this case they decided they weren't.

Their decision was based on the facts available. They decided Amaral's claims were sufficiently based on facts... The alerts by the cadaver dog. If you accept the alert to cadaver as a proven fact..... The McCanns are guilty.. But it's not a proven fact. Justice has not been served

 

[Lilly b]

Off topic. But here is a case we're man found guilty, no body found, and confessed to someone he had murdered her

Samantha Terese KNIGHT

 

[Denis R Tandib]

An interesting avenue although one laden with unopened cans of quivering worms.

It could explain a few things. CB is the kind of person who could find his way into the middle of something. He knew people and the area and flew under the radar of the law. It’s a possibility IMO.

 

[mrjitty]

Their decision was based on the facts available. They decided Amaral's claims were sufficiently based on facts... The alerts by the cadaver dog. If you accept the alert to cadaver as a proven fact..... The McCanns are guilty.. But it's not a proven fact. Justice has not been served

I see it as more nuanced.

The existence of the alerts was a fact. The interpretation of the alerts and other evidence was open to opinion and expertise of those involved. The Court at first instance did not go behind those opinions and no evidence was presented to call the content of the investigation into question.

e.g. we have seen on here claims that impugn the dog handler - but this is not evidence that was presented to the court.

 

[mrjitty]

He's already warned us that we mustn't raise our hopes regarding these other 5 alleged sex charges against CB:



Which means it may well equally not go in the direction of an indictment.

What happened about that extradition exclusive?

 

[mrjitty]

The court which got it wrong was the court of the first instance.

And it's important what they were wrong about!

It was quite a narrow legal issue, to do with whether a former public servant, in the role of investigator, was prohibited from speaking.

 

[enquirer6]

And it's important what they were wrong about!

It was quite a narrow legal issue, to do with whether a former public servant, in the role of investigator, was prohibited from speaking.

It ought to have been a wider issue about whether anyone, at any time, ever, should be allowed to spout outright lies that lower reputation and profit from them.

The answer to that ought to be a resounding no.

But, seemingly, the answer is yes.

It's exactly what Amaral has done, aided and abetted by a freelance English dog-handler on the make who fleeced (presumably) the Portuguese tax-payer of a thousand euros a day (with all his other expenses on top) for the time he spent in Portugal.