Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect #32

[RichardKimble]

“Was I or my vehicle clearly seen near the crime scene on the night of the crime? Are there DNA traces of me at the crime scene?"

“Are there DNA traces of the injured party in my vehicle? Are there any other traces of the damaged party in my possession? Photos? And, not to forget, is there a dead body?"

In CB's letter, the retrospective check of that "perfect" plan and evidence destroyed afterwards?!

The first point is the most telling IMO and no one can put him there. In 2013 Operation Grange DCI Redwood talked of a revelation moment in moving the alleged abduction time up to circa 10pm, it was thought previously that JT had seen a potential abductor at circa 9-15 pm, SY all but dismissed this. The person seen at circa 10pm was carrying a child fitting a description close to that of Madeleine McCann, the JT sighting did not, neither of the two persons seen carrying a child fits a description of CB, when CB's name/picture became public the person who saw the 10pm child carrier is reported to have said he does not recognise that man as CB. This man carrying the child at circa 10pm is the key and always as been imo.

 

[Davieson]

Still no DNA result as yet. One might have thought it would have been done by now. These test don't take very long these days.

Wonder what Wolters thinks of this, as most of his investigation goes down the drain if this woman proves to be MM.

 

[enquirer6]

Still no DNA result as yet. One might have thought it would have been done by now. These test don't take very long these days.

Wonder what Wolters thinks of this, as most of his investigation goes down the drain if this woman proves to be MM.

Amaral's investigation would like-wise go down the drain.

 

[Davieson]

Amaral's investigation would like-wise go down the drain.

Of course, but is that relevant? His investigation ceased 15 years ago. Wolters' is still active.

 

[mrjitty]

Amaral wrote a book directly accusing the McCanns, but not of murder, which is what the enquiry he nominally headed did accuse them of.

Was that right?

To me this shows the dangers being repeated here.

The parents were made suspects via an official process, but details were made available via leaks - and then that evidence wasn't reliable enough to stand up charges, so you end up with accusations from the state, but no criminal process.

Same thing has so far been repeated here.

I worry this kind of power can easily be misused. e.g say Prosecutors accused an activist german media org of receiving sanctioned Russian funding, but then never subsequently bought charges.

You may say this is farfetched, but it actually happened in the Wirecard case. The FT in London published articles accusing Wirecard of fraud (which turned out to be true). Wirecard ran to German prosecutors and claimed (with no real evidence) that FT journos were colluding with short sellers. Because Wirecard was a trusted german company, the authorities opened a public investigation into the FT

So essentially the FT and the key journalists were smeared by the Finance prosecutors office based on false accusations.

This is why, IMO, prosecutors should not do this. If they want to accuse people in public, based on evidence, they should file charges.

Just noting: Amaral did not work for the state when he wrote his book.

 

[Woodburnbay]

According to the BKA there's evidence to show he is...depends wether you think wolters would make such s statement if he didn't have it....or perhaps you think there's so much evidence against the parents CB couldn't be invikved

Would the parents be called to provide evidence at a trial? I am unaware of German Law.

 

[Woodburnbay]

Of course, but is that relevant? His investigation ceased 15 years ago. Wolters' is still active.

How long will it be though that all investigation become inactive.

 

[Davieson]

Would the parents be called to provide evidence at a trial? I am unaware of German Law.

Were their original statements , on which the abduction is based, made under oath ?
I'd have thought that a prosecutor would need sworn statements to establish that, but maybe not ?

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Amaral wrote a book directly accusing the McCanns, but not of murder, which is what the enquiry he nominally headed did accuse them of.

Was that right?

GA has given his reasons for why he has accused the McCanns. Anyone who reads what he has written can then form their own opinion.

As MrJ points out, when he wrote the book he was no longer involved in the investigation.

IMO, this is different to what HCW has done with CB which is to assert his guilt publicly during an ongoing investigation without providing and reason - which he can’t. He should have stayed away from some of the comments he has made.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

The first point is the most telling IMO and no one can put him there. In 2013 Operation Grange DCI Redwood talked of a revelation moment in moving the alleged abduction time up to circa 10pm, it was thought previously that JT had seen a potential abductor at circa 9-15 pm, SY all but dismissed this. The person seen at circa 10pm was carrying a child fitting a description close to that of Madeleine McCann, the JT sighting did not, neither of the two persons seen carrying a child fits a description of CB, when CB's name/picture became public the person who saw the 10pm child carrier is reported to have said he does not recognise that man as CB. This man carrying the child at circa 10pm is the key and always as been imo.

I agree. But could Smith sighting give any clue?

 

[RichardKimble]

I agree. But could Smith sighting give any clue?

Hard to tell, the digs and subsequent interviews were after this in 2014, did OG ever say they've identified smithman and ruled him out ? but in all the photo fits released it can't be said any resemble CB imo , its known what he looked like with the video of him around the time of the alleged abduction.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

Hard to tell, the digs and subsequent interviews were after this in 2014, did OG ever say they've identified smithman and ruled him out ? but in all the photo fits released it can't be said any resemble CB imo , its known what he looked like with the video of him around the time of the alleged abduction.

Yes, and maybe some speculation. Not sure what is in fact true or not...

The alleged sighting occurred less than 300m from the Ocean Club Resort and the man was heading towards the beach just 150m away.
The Smith family later alerted police, claiming the girl was barefoot and wearing pyjamas.

Then, just two other reports without any linking point but...

...but that year the mutilated body of 24-year-old Monika Pawlak was found stuffed into two blue plastic bags in the Ihme river, four days after she was last seen alive
...A source called Aberie, who used to be friends with Brueckner, said he confessed he had "accidently killed" his ex girlfriend Monika Pawlak.
...Police records show convicted drug dealer Brueckner, was, in the months after the murder, 'listed in relation to the homicide of a prostitute'.

and,

The letter, dated May 8, reportedly was accompanied by a bizarre drawing of two prosecutors ordering "filet forensics" at a restaurant.

 

[RichardKimble]

Yes, and maybe some speculation. Not sure what is in fact true or not...

The alleged sighting occurred less than 300m from the Ocean Club Resort and the man was heading towards the beach just 150m away.
The Smith family later alerted police, claiming the girl was barefoot and wearing pyjamas.

Then, just two other reports without any linking point but...

...but that year the mutilated body of 24-year-old Monika Pawlak was found stuffed into two blue plastic bags in the Ihme river, four days after she was last seen alive
...A source called Aberie, who used to be friends with Brueckner, said he confessed he had "accidently killed" his ex girlfriend Monika Pawlak.
...Police records show convicted drug dealer Brueckner, was, in the months after the murder, 'listed in relation to the homicide of a prostitute'.

and,

The letter, dated May 8, reportedly was accompanied by a bizarre drawing of two prosecutors ordering "filet forensics" at a restaurant.

Seems he likes to confess alot, but when its examined it obviously falls short.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

Seems he likes to confess alot, but when its examined it obviously falls short.

Perhaps 'cause he may be really effective in destroying the evidence.

 

[sandy_80]

Still no DNA result as yet. One might have thought it would have been done by now. These test don't take very long these days.

Wonder what Wolters thinks of this, as most of his investigation goes down the drain if this woman proves to be MM.

i cant beilve anyone is considering this nutcase seriously
its like princess anastasia imposters all over again

 

[RichardKimble]

Perhaps 'cause he may be really effective in destroying the evidence.

Yet he records rapes and doesn't destroy, leaves an alleged partial print, all before 2007, but not arrested and charged way beyond that, gets caught exposing himself, not that smart is he ?

 

[enquirer6]

GA has given his reasons for why he has accused the McCanns. Anyone who reads what he has written can then form their own opinion.

As MrJ points out, when he wrote the book he was no longer involved in the investigation.

IMO, this is different to what HCW has done with CB which is to assert his guilt publicly during an ongoing investigation without providing and reason - which he can’t. He should have stayed away from some of the comments he has made.

According to GA in his book, Mark Harrison turned the investigation into one for a little girl "hidden" (Amaral's exact word) somewhere close to apartment 5a and insinuated that the McCanns might be the culprit.

In fact, Harrison was instructed by Amaral's boss the (now late) Encarnacidio to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered and buried.

Harrison did so, ruling out burial and making plain he had no real idea what happened to Madeleine.

But he thought it most likely that if Madeleine is dead (Harrison really didn't know) her remains were thrown into the sea.

ETA: Amaral, apparently, didn't understand that the investigation he (nominally) 'headed became, from before the British arrived, a murder investigation.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

Yet he records rapes and doesn't destroy, leaves an alleged partial print, all before 2007, but not arrested and charged way beyond that, gets caught exposing himself, not that smart is he ?

Yes, in fact...not smart but maybe too "lucky" in some occasions. In any case, the rapes seemed to be meticulously planned. And almost with no trace...

 

[misty48]

“Was I or my vehicle clearly seen near the crime scene on the night of the crime? Are there DNA traces of me at the crime scene?"

“Are there DNA traces of the injured party in my vehicle? Are there any other traces of the damaged party in my possession? Photos? And, not to forget, is there a dead body?"

In CB's letter, the retrospective check of that "perfect" plan and evidence destroyed afterwards?!

Why was CB making a distinction between a damaged/injured child and a dead body?

 

[Anxala]

Call me old fashioned but to me this quote is alarming for rule of law.

There is absolutely no need or justification for the prosecutors' office to be saying this. If the prosecutor can go around claiming people are guilty of offences based on secret evidence they are not allowed to know about, you quickly get into a Kafka situation which makes me worried this approach would be misused.

Why didn't he just say we hold evidence sufficient to justify these steps, and I can't comment further.

There's nothing remotely old-fashioned about being alarmed - personally, I'd go with appalled - at such an egregious legal breach of an individual's basic human right to be seen as innocent until proven guilty.