Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #35

[Denis R Tandib]

not sure they would be so focused on opening 8 holes without a pattern if they did not have that link from intel... I think they were looking for something very specific...

I think the eight holes were dug in those spots based on either dogs signalling or more like ground penetrating radar. The intel probably gave the general location.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

No but he claims to be suffering terribly because of all the unfair accusations. Imagine for a moment he does have a cast iron alibi for 3rd May 2007 and knows it. What sort of a sick game would he he be playing by allowing all these accusations to fester in the media? Do you think he might have one but is just enjoying the attention so won’t play it unless formally charged? That sounds too far fetched to me.

It’s interesting that you think CB should provide an alibi for a crime he has been accused of in the media but not officially charged for and thereby given the legal protection if he had been charged.

Why don’t you have the same thoughts about the prosecution? If they have the evidence to charge - which they claim they do - why not charge him and then test his alibi if he has one.

IMO, HCW has made the claim, it’s up to him to act first.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

They don't want to test alibis or game-changing.
They say they have relevant evidence but not sufficient.
They want to charge beyond all reasonable doubt. It's what they are looking for.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

They don't want to test alibis or game-changing.
They say they have relevant evidence but not sufficient.
They want to charge beyond all reasonable doubt. It's what they are looking for.

Okay, so why do people keep posting the suggestion that CB should provide an alibi?

Regarding the bold, HCW said the below 9 October 2012 - 18 months ago.

“We’re confident we have the man who took and killed her. It is now possible that we could charge. We have that evidence now.”

I want to see an end to the MM case but I want to see the right person convicted. Based on what HCW has said and the way the investigation has unfolded, I am doubtful he get obtain a guilty verdict. If that’s the case, why should I believe that CB committed the crime?

 

[Mex]

It’s interesting that you think CB should provide an alibi for a crime he has been accused of in the media but not officially charged for and thereby given the legal protection if he had been charged.

Why don’t you have the same thoughts about the prosecution? If they have the evidence to charge - which they claim they do - why not charge him and then test his alibi if he has one.

IMO, HCW has made the claim, it’s up to him to act first.

I really don't think it works like that.

I think you are overlooking the fact that there are five serious cases in the pipeline with everything in place to proceed.

The prosecution are keen to do just that. The defence are keen to keep them hanging.

My opinion is that logic dictates these cases are started and resolved before it is possible to proceed with MM's. There are apparently four sets of lawyers fighting tooth and nail to prevent progress just as they are presently doing with the five outstanding cases.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

Okay, so why do people keep posting the suggestion that CB should provide an alibi?

Regarding the bold, HCW said the below 9 October 2012 - 18 months ago.

“We’re confident we have the man who took and killed her. It is now possible that we could charge. We have that evidence now.”

I want to see an end to the MM case but I want to see the right person convicted. Based on what HCW has said and the way the investigation has unfolded, I am doubtful he get obtain a guilty verdict. If that’s the case, why should I believe that CB committed the crime?

Not should, but could. If he had one...Anyway, he was accused of a crime in the media.

IMO they should have substantial evidence but they want to go with "101%" sure.
HCW also said: “it’s not just about charging him – we want to charge him with the best body of evidence possible. When we still have questions, it would be nonsense to charge rather than wait for the answers that could strengthen our position. That’s why we said we’ll investigate as long as there are leads or information for us to pursue.”

I also have my doubts but still believe in a breakthrough. Or, maybe more difficult, in a CB's confession...
Honestly, do you really believe that might not be him? Too much (even if not the final proof) on him...

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Not should, but could. If he had one...Anyway, he was accused of a crime in the media.

IMO they should have substantial evidence but they want to go with "101%" sure.
HCW also said: “it’s not just about charging him – we want to charge him with the best body of evidence possible. When we still have questions, it would be nonsense to charge rather than wait for the answers that could strengthen our position. That’s why we said we’ll investigate as long as there are leads or information for us to pursue.”

I also have my doubts but still believe in a breakthrough. Or, maybe more difficult, in a CB's confession...
Honestly, do you really believe that might not be him? Too much (even if not the final proof) on him...

YES! Without any reservation I have doubts CB might not responsible for MM’s disappearance.

It would behove you or anyone else that thinks otherwise to go back in time to late 2007. At that time, it was reported that MM’s blood and cadaver odour were found in 5A and the McCanns were made formal suspects.

Until I see someone convicted, I’m sceptical of everything related to this case.

 

[Okapi]

YES! Without any reservation I have doubts CB might not responsible for MM’s disappearance.

It would behove you or anyone else that thinks otherwise to go back in time to late 2007. At that time, it was reported that MM’s blood and cadaver odour were found in 5A and the McCanns were made formal suspects.

Until I see someone convicted, I’m sceptical of everything related to this case.

Forgive me, there are so many years of twists and turns…hands up I haven’t kept notes and I’m reacquainting myself with the investigation.

Were the cadaver alerts ever explained in the previous investigations, or indeed acknowledged in this one?

 

[Janosch]

I really don't think it works like that.

I think you are overlooking the fact that there are five serious cases in the pipeline with everything in place to proceed.

The prosecution are keen to do just that. The defence are keen to keep them hanging.

My opinion is that logic dictates these cases are started and resolved before it is possible to proceed with MM's. There are apparently four sets of lawyers fighting tooth and nail to prevent progress just as they are presently doing with the five outstanding cases.

Those five cases, in case CB found guilty in any of those, will serve to strengthen the MM's case prosecution?

If so, it will be a logic fallacious. Each case must be considered separately. CB could have commited a lot of crimes, and not the one we are discussing here.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Forgive me, there are so many years of twists and turns…hands up I haven’t kept notes and I’m reacquainting myself with the investigation.

Were the cadaver alerts ever explained in the previous investigations, or indeed acknowledged in this one?

Hi Okapi, welcome back.

I wasn’t suggesting that the dog alerts from the original investigation were correct or not. Other would argue differently to me but, IMO, where the dogs alerted, traces of blood - which could be a match to MM - were found. There are explanations for this that came after the fact, like MM had a nose bleed. We’re there ever official explanations, I’m not sure. I would encourage you to do your own research - it’s been a very contentious issue here over the last year or so.

My point was more that in 2007, the media reported information That seemed to provide strong evidence (certainly stronger than what has been reported about CB) that the McCanns were involved in MM’s disappearance. They never faced any charges and to my knowledge are no longer being investigated.

Even though this happened, in this same case, people seem certain CB is the culprit - he himself is certain he will never be charged.

 

[Lyall0814]

I don't understand why you think the prosecution and the defence need to trust each other. Both sides are trying to win the case within the law and no doubt they trust each other to do so to the best of their ability.

I appreciate that there has been some disquiet expressed about on the record statements from the BKA spokesman. I don't think that constitutes constantly leaking though.

Defence needs to have trust if they're going to reveal confidential information that it isn't going to appear in a Nick Pisa article a few days later, and I think it's impossible for them to have that trust. When HCW originally appealed for information in June 2020 the media within one day had enough material to fill hour-long documentaries. One day! Where do you think it all came from?

 

[Okapi]

Hi Okapi, welcome back.

I wasn’t suggesting that the dog alerts from the original investigation were correct or not. Other would argue differently to me but, IMO, where the dogs alerted, traces of blood - which could be a match to MM - were found. There are explanations for this that came after the fact, like MM had a nose bleed. We’re there ever official explanations, I’m not sure. I would encourage you to do your own research - it’s been a very contentious issue here over the last year or so.

My point was more that in 2007, the media reported information That seemed to provide strong evidence (certainly stronger than what has been reported about CB) that the McCanns were involved in MM’s disappearance. They never faced any charges and to my knowledge are no longer being investigated.

Even though this happened, in this same case, people seem certain CB is the culprit - he himself is certain he will never be charged.

No worries thank you, Denis, I will have a squiz.

I do remember heated discussions on WS about whether MM died in the apartment at the hands of the intruder, and was then removed, which would account for the cadaver alerts. And there was definitely no consensus!

 

[Consider Dudley]

It’s interesting that you think CB should provide an alibi for a crime he has been accused of in the media but not officially charged for and thereby given the legal protection if he had been charged.

Why don’t you have the same thoughts about the prosecution? If they have the evidence to charge - which they claim they do - why not charge him and then test his alibi if he has one.

IMO, HCW has made the claim, it’s up to him to act first.

Because I wasn’t discussing the rights and wrongs of HCW’s actions, I was pointing out the very obvious (to me) course of action anyone in CB’s position would take were they (in their view) being unfairly accused over a prolon period in the media and able to categorically refute such allegations with a cast iron alibi. I’m bemused that anyone here seriously entertains the idea that he has such a thing and is just biding his time, quite frankly.

 

[enquirer6]

Hi Okapi, welcome back.

I wasn’t suggesting that the dog alerts from the original investigation were correct or not. Other would argue differently to me but, IMO, where the dogs alerted, traces of blood - which could be a match to MM - were found. There are explanations for this that came after the fact, like MM had a nose bleed. We’re there ever official explanations, I’m not sure. I would encourage you to do your own research - it’s been a very contentious issue here over the last year or so.

My point was more that in 2007, the media reported information That seemed to provide strong evidence (certainly stronger than what has been reported about CB) that the McCanns were involved in MM’s disappearance. They never faced any charges and to my knowledge are no longer being investigated.

Even though this happened, in this same case, people seem certain CB is the culprit - he himself is certain he will never be charged.

There's no denying Eddie alerted, accurately, to Gerry's blood on the ignition key of the Renault Scenic.

But if I push that fact, I'll probably be back on gardening leave again ......

 

[Lyall0814]

Let it lie The topic is a black hole.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Because I wasn’t discussing the rights and wrongs of HCW’s actions, I was pointing out the very obvious (to me) course of action anyone in CB’s position would take were they (in their view) being unfairly accused over a prolon period in the media and able to categorically refute such allegations with a cast iron alibi. I’m bemused that anyone here seriously entertains the idea that he has such a thing and is just biding his time, quite frankly.

Obvious perhaps but the best legal course of action, certainly not.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Let it lie The topic is a black hole.

Amen.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Incorrect post.

 

[Consider Dudley]

Obvious perhaps but the best legal course of action, certainly not.

Explain why not. What does CB lose by divulging his cast iron alibi that means he was nowhere near Apartment 5 a on the night of 3rd May 2007? It’s blatantly obvious he doesn’t have one imo.

 

[C.greek]

IMO, logic would dictate that if the evidence in the MM case is as strong as in the other cases, he would have been charged.

Let’s not forget that on 11 May 2022, when asked how the MM investigation was progressing, HCW said;

"in principle, complete, and over the next few days his lawyer will be able to examine the files. I don't know what the result will be. We will have to hear what his lawyer says. We need to wait and see the extent of the charges we will bring."

You and others keep saying that the five other charges are connected to the MM case. Conversely, on 13 October 2022, HCW stated:

“In principle, none. Whether Christian B. has anything to do with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann or not is to be judged completely independently of the current charges."

Why don’t you believe what he says?

Also, why would it surprise you that his defence counsel is trying to prevent any of the cases going to trial?

I am not basing my view on anything other than the contradicting information that HCW has provided. From this, he had evidence to charge and was going to charge 18 months ago, and the others cases are unrelated to the MM case.

Doubting his case against CB is very logical.

Could you link your sources please? Where he said what?