Chiatos
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2014
- Messages
- 1,902
- Reaction score
- 6,165
Is there any explanation why Leandro Silva's DNA analysis would have cost 10.000 Euros whereas that of Carlos Alberto apparently did not?
Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #26
- Thread starter Taskforce88
- Start date
- Status
Dlk79
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 1,614
- Reaction score
- 9,984
One of the very many unanswered questions in this case. Seriously, the more you read, the less anything makes sense. Lies, misreporting, changing stories, blatant contradictions, police cover ups and investigative failures... the list goes in and on. Anyone who thinks the Tapas statements are messy needs to look into the various accounts in this case. Mind blowing.
But back to your question, I haven't seen any explanation for this in the reports but I have some theories. I believe Leandro's DNA would have been on file, the same as his half-brother because apparently the whole family were all swabbed. I know in some forensic tests they do, they can narrow the result to a family bloodline and things like that so perhaps that was what happened here and Leandro was also a suspect. Similar to the results they found in the boot of the hire car in the MM case. They found an incomplete sample that contained a number of DNA markers to indicate it "could" have belonged to MM, but equally, it could also have belonged to one of her two siblings. So perhaps the testing in the US used more advanced (and expensive) technology that could further pinpoint an individual?
Additionally/alternatively, perhaps PJ didn't carry out the full testing to prove the sample was actually sperm. Again, if you recall from the MM case, the saliva sample found on the bed was initially reported/suspected to have been semen. Preliminary forensic tests can identify DNA matter to determine that its origin is a bodily fluid but not necessarily which fluid it is. Further tests are required for that, which are more time-cosuming and costly. So it's possible that PJ never bothered to do them since they already had confessions to her murder, albeit ones that were beaten out of their suspects.
Dlk79
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 1,614
- Reaction score
- 9,984
Yes, that account is quite interesting. And it's worth noting that CB was working at a bar in Lagos (where this unknown person's account supposedly came from) at this time. There are mentions in other forums of "germans" but linking the forums here is not permitted and the original news article links where they discuss it are all dead, can't find the stories in the archives either.
In the article linked below, it mentions that PJ were initially working on the thesis that Joana was sold to a "German couple" so presumably they must have had some intel to suggest this as a possibility? And this was well before either the mother or uncle admitted that they had tried to sell her to foreigners.
Initially, the Judiciary Police of Portimão admitted that it was possible that the mother had sold her to a German couple, so, contrary to what they should have done, it did not research the places where the child lived, having only searched them, badly , ten days later.
From the beginning, the investigations went wrong. The thesis of the sale of the child having been abandoned, the PJ raised the hypothesis that the victim's body had been crushed in a "scrap bin", owned by Joana's stepfather's mother, and, on December 12, that it could have been shredded and, then fed to some pigs.
PONTE DO SOR: ONDE ESTÁ JOANA CIPRIANO?
As an aside, it appears that the pig-pen story didn't actually form part of the pair's coerced "confessions". It was just a convenient theory that the PJ put forward that allowed them to not have to find the body. The judge at the initial trial stated there was absolutely zero evidence to support this theory. Pigs cannot digest hair or teeth (and usually leave some traces of bone) but despite PJ trawling the pig-pen, no trace of anything belonging to Joana was found.
I also managed to find some more info about the black car that was sighted in the town on the day Joana went missing. It's not the original news articles that were reporting on it, but it's mentioned twice in the Supreme Court Appeal that took place in 2009. Neither time does it refer to the car being a limousine though, so it would seem there might be some mistranslation or misunderstanding in the initial reports about what the locals had seen. It would appear it was just a fancy black car.
The Supreme court Appeal judgement can be read here. It's quite long and the translation into english using Google is not the best but some people might find it interesting.
Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça
Anyway, regarding the car, the first time it is mentioned is in Leandro's (Joana's step-father) statement:
The police always refused to investigate the many rumors that had been circulating by word of mouth in Figueira that the girl had been tempted to buy by criminals, invoking a high-capacity black car that circulated on the 12th before the BB (Joana) disappeared.
I'm unsure of what the exact translation should be of the car. In Portuguese it is described as:
"um carro preto de alta cilindrada"
When I try to translate that in google, it gives several alternative translations. One is 'high-capacity', another is 'high-end', another is 'high-displacement' and another is 'high cylinder volume'. CB's Jag would seem to fit any of those criteria though. Can any Portuguese speakers confirm their interpretation of how this passage should translate into English?
"A polícia sempre se recusou a investigar os muitos rumores que andavam de boca em boca na Figueira de que a menina teria sido tentada comprar por criminosos, invocando um carro preto de alta cilindrada que circulou nesse dia 12"
The second time the car is mentioned is in one of the accounts Joao (the uncle) made when he claimed that his sister had sold Joana. (She disputes this version and states that her brother went to meet with the traffickers to carry out the transaction. In any case, there may be 'some' element of truth in the account of the car, albeit missing out the part that he arranged and oversaw Joana's sale).
The deponent (Joao) then tells a version of the events that is basically based on the following: CC (Joao) never tried to sell his niece to anyone, but the night she (Joana) disappeared, his sister (Leonor) told her to go to the door because there was a car to take there by the church. the daughter, who she had sold to a couple of foreigners. He says that he saw the car (black, medium-sized and of an unknown brand), saw his niece getting into the car and that it took off. He never saw his niece again and his sister never spoke to him about her again.
Both the mother and the uncle have given a few different accounts over the years so it's difficult to know what to believe. Many of the original statements that were used in the initial trial were later refuted and discredited. Not just theirs but other people's too, including Leandro's "account" which actually helped convict the pair even though he's said throughout and to this day he does not believe the pair were guilty of Joana's murder. Leandro claimed he never made such statements but was forced under duress to sign the accounts the PJ had typed up. Leonor and Joao say the same about their statements.
Joao first claimed Leonor had sold Joana and he wasn't involved. Then Leonor claimed she had agreed to sell Joana but that it was Joao's idea and he handled the exchange. She says that Joao told her the exchange went wrong though becuase the trafickers didn't have the money and Joao ended up killing Joana because she would have told everyone what had happened. Joao then supposedly signed a statement acknowledging that he had tried to sell Joana but didn't give any further detail than that. He later stated he didn't make that statement. Both of them, following their releases from prison have stated that they believe Joana is still alive, suggesting that the sale did actually go ahead as planned. One theory is that Joao lied to his sister about killing Joana in order to keep the money from the traffickers to himself.
Last edited:
Dlk79
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 1,614
- Reaction score
- 9,984
For anyone interested, this is the statement Leonor gave when she apparently "came clean" about the events that took place on the 12th. This is as reported in the Supreme Court appeal.
For reference:
AA = Leonor
BB = Joana
CC = Joao
II = Amaral
FF and GG = Leonor's younger children
HH = Leonor's mother-in-law
Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça
January 15, 2009, the Appellant decided to report - for the first time free of any form of coercion - everything she knew about the disappearance of her daughter BB. As a result, it gave rise to the declaration/confession attached in the original annex, which she dated and signed on all pages (number of eight). The content of this document is as follows:
"Declaration
I undersigned AA, inmate No. 34 of the Prison of Odemira, today, January 15, 2009, I confess and swear that this is all the truth I know about the disappearance of my daughter BB:
- That my brother CC convinced me the day he arrived at my house in Figueira (at dawn on September 12, 2004) that I couldn't afford to take care of three children, that they would be miserable like me. , no future and no money and no studies. That he knew a couple who couldn't have children and that he remembered that they could be a new family for at least BB, as FF and GG were very young and everyone would be suspicious if any of them disappeared. BB could say it had been kidnapped.
That BB would be well delivered, to a family that would give it everything, as they had money. That he knew them and assured them they were trustworthy, that they would never hurt BB, that they just wanted to have a daughter they couldn't have. That BB would be taken abroad, and that I would never be able to see her in person again, but that they would do their best to catch up with me about her and even send me some pictures of her when she was older. That he (CC) was my brother and that I could trust him, as he would also want the best for BB. That they had to invent a story for BB's disappearance, because by law I couldn't give BB as a foster child to this couple in this way, because the law of Portugal didn't allow it. But let me not worry, as BB would be very well treated and it would be the best for her future. At first I refused, but he insisted so much that he managed to make me believe that what he said was actually the best thing for my children. That I was going to receive financial help to be able to raise my two youngest children (FF and GG) well. That everything would go well, he would talk to BB explaining what was going to happen. Everything was already arranged. I believed and trusted my brother CC. He arrived on the 12th already for that purpose. I never met any of these people he told me would take BB abroad. But he always assured me that they were trustworthy and that he will put his hands on fire for these people. All agreed for the 20 hours (8 o'clock).
Then he asked me to pick up BB shortly after 6 pm at my mother-in-law HH's house. I went, I took BB home and in front of me he told her that she was going to have a nice surprise that day, as they were going on a great trip. BB was happy, wanted to know more, but he didn't tell her many details, which she would find out later. My youngest children were playing but they didn't hear anything, because even though they were in the room they were far away. At 8:00 pm I sent BB to make those purchases from the Pastelaria. As soon as BB left, CC put several of their clothes in a plastic bag, not returning either with the bag or with BB. I knew he would deliver the BB to this couple as soon as she got home from shopping, but without going inside. The CC told him that we both had to make believe that BB had been kidnapped by strangers. It wasn't until an hour and a half later that I saw CC again, but he arrived with no money, the money he said the couple would give me to help my younger children. I asked him what had happened. At first he didn't answer me, he just said that everything had gone well. Only then did I see blood on the bottom of his pants. I was alarmed. I asked about BB.Then he told me that things had not gone well. That the "guys" (quote) didn't have the money. That BB already knew everything, that he had told her that she was going to spend a vacation in Spain with a couple of friends.
That she later listened to the argument he (CC) had with the "guys" and realized that "she would go for good". That they didn't take her because he didn't give her because the money didn't exist. Who sent the "guys" away and then the BB started saying she was going to tell everything. That he slapped her.
Which she protested even more. That he gave her another one, but she wouldn't be silent. That he lost control and that the girl died. That the body was hidden for him to dispose of later. I panicked. But he told me that it was useless, that if they listened to me we would both go to jail, because we were both in that. I yelled at him that I didn't kill BB, he replied that if I didn't kill her at least he wanted to sell her. After a big argument, I agreed not to say anything. He later told me that he had buried the body "up there in the hills of Figueira". I was afraid. I cried a lot for my daughter. I prayed for her. I know I didn't kill her. But I was afraid that I would be arrested for trying to sell BB. I only wanted the best for her. But people might not understand. I've decided since then that I've never gone through any of this, and who would always say that he didn't know anything, just as the murderer my brother said he would. I could no longer bring BB back. When I was beaten by the Judiciary Police, which it is true that I was as I said in the Court of Faro, I signed what they wanted me to sign, I didn't even read what it was. I never said anything, I just said what they wanted, what they wrote, that I only later learned what it was. I didn't kill BB. Mr. II knows this, so why did he have me spanked? Why? Why am I arrested for the murder of my daughter BB? Why? I didn't kill her! It was my brother's monster, CC, who killed her. The police know this...
Why did you arrest me? I was wrong, I trusted CC's monster, I regret what I did, but I only wanted the best for my children, for BB. Forgive me BB. My dear, my angel, hence Heaven, my dear BB, forgive me.
Odemira, January 15, 2009
AA'''
The appeal was thrown out by the court because such an appeal can only be granted if there is "new" evidence. Because the facts presented were known by Leonor at the time, the evidence was not "new". There were other bits of evidence too which were also deemed to be not "new" or weren't relevant enough. Effectively, they said it was her own fault for not giving this account during her initial trial and so the murder sentence had to stand. Her argument was that her lawyer had told her to remain silent at trial (and in reality, she probably hoped she wouldn't need to come clean if she were acquitted anyway). In any case, it was reported the appeal judge did actually believe that Leonor was not guilty of Joana's murder but by the letter of the law, her appeal was not valid. To add insult to injury, she was also then convicted of perjury for lying in the initial trial by not mentioning that she had attempted to sell Joana.
Also, if her account is true, it would appear that this plan to sell Joana was somewhat last minute. Joao only proposed it that morning. Could it be that the person(s) offering to buy Joana were outsiders that he met at the cockle festival the night before? Possibly CB (...and even HB maybe, was he the curly-haired man in the German camper, would certainly help explain why CB felt comfortable confessing to him about MM in 2008)? I find it unlikley Joao, a drug-addicted convict and renowned lowlife, happened to know (intimately as he claimed) a lovely, rich, foreign couple who were simply unable to conceive. And he's hardly likely to tell his sister the buyer was some dodgy German bloke(s).
I just wonder if BKA have ever approached Joao to interview him as part of their investigation into CB? If they had, I can imagine they would not want that known. It wouldn't sit well with their PJ counterparts (who they need cooperation from over the MM case) if there was a suggestion they'd got the whole Joana case wrong and CB was somehow involved.
For reference:
AA = Leonor
BB = Joana
CC = Joao
II = Amaral
FF and GG = Leonor's younger children
HH = Leonor's mother-in-law
Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça
January 15, 2009, the Appellant decided to report - for the first time free of any form of coercion - everything she knew about the disappearance of her daughter BB. As a result, it gave rise to the declaration/confession attached in the original annex, which she dated and signed on all pages (number of eight). The content of this document is as follows:
"Declaration
I undersigned AA, inmate No. 34 of the Prison of Odemira, today, January 15, 2009, I confess and swear that this is all the truth I know about the disappearance of my daughter BB:
- That my brother CC convinced me the day he arrived at my house in Figueira (at dawn on September 12, 2004) that I couldn't afford to take care of three children, that they would be miserable like me. , no future and no money and no studies. That he knew a couple who couldn't have children and that he remembered that they could be a new family for at least BB, as FF and GG were very young and everyone would be suspicious if any of them disappeared. BB could say it had been kidnapped.
That BB would be well delivered, to a family that would give it everything, as they had money. That he knew them and assured them they were trustworthy, that they would never hurt BB, that they just wanted to have a daughter they couldn't have. That BB would be taken abroad, and that I would never be able to see her in person again, but that they would do their best to catch up with me about her and even send me some pictures of her when she was older. That he (CC) was my brother and that I could trust him, as he would also want the best for BB. That they had to invent a story for BB's disappearance, because by law I couldn't give BB as a foster child to this couple in this way, because the law of Portugal didn't allow it. But let me not worry, as BB would be very well treated and it would be the best for her future. At first I refused, but he insisted so much that he managed to make me believe that what he said was actually the best thing for my children. That I was going to receive financial help to be able to raise my two youngest children (FF and GG) well. That everything would go well, he would talk to BB explaining what was going to happen. Everything was already arranged. I believed and trusted my brother CC. He arrived on the 12th already for that purpose. I never met any of these people he told me would take BB abroad. But he always assured me that they were trustworthy and that he will put his hands on fire for these people. All agreed for the 20 hours (8 o'clock).
Then he asked me to pick up BB shortly after 6 pm at my mother-in-law HH's house. I went, I took BB home and in front of me he told her that she was going to have a nice surprise that day, as they were going on a great trip. BB was happy, wanted to know more, but he didn't tell her many details, which she would find out later. My youngest children were playing but they didn't hear anything, because even though they were in the room they were far away. At 8:00 pm I sent BB to make those purchases from the Pastelaria. As soon as BB left, CC put several of their clothes in a plastic bag, not returning either with the bag or with BB. I knew he would deliver the BB to this couple as soon as she got home from shopping, but without going inside. The CC told him that we both had to make believe that BB had been kidnapped by strangers. It wasn't until an hour and a half later that I saw CC again, but he arrived with no money, the money he said the couple would give me to help my younger children. I asked him what had happened. At first he didn't answer me, he just said that everything had gone well. Only then did I see blood on the bottom of his pants. I was alarmed. I asked about BB.Then he told me that things had not gone well. That the "guys" (quote) didn't have the money. That BB already knew everything, that he had told her that she was going to spend a vacation in Spain with a couple of friends.
That she later listened to the argument he (CC) had with the "guys" and realized that "she would go for good". That they didn't take her because he didn't give her because the money didn't exist. Who sent the "guys" away and then the BB started saying she was going to tell everything. That he slapped her.
Which she protested even more. That he gave her another one, but she wouldn't be silent. That he lost control and that the girl died. That the body was hidden for him to dispose of later. I panicked. But he told me that it was useless, that if they listened to me we would both go to jail, because we were both in that. I yelled at him that I didn't kill BB, he replied that if I didn't kill her at least he wanted to sell her. After a big argument, I agreed not to say anything. He later told me that he had buried the body "up there in the hills of Figueira". I was afraid. I cried a lot for my daughter. I prayed for her. I know I didn't kill her. But I was afraid that I would be arrested for trying to sell BB. I only wanted the best for her. But people might not understand. I've decided since then that I've never gone through any of this, and who would always say that he didn't know anything, just as the murderer my brother said he would. I could no longer bring BB back. When I was beaten by the Judiciary Police, which it is true that I was as I said in the Court of Faro, I signed what they wanted me to sign, I didn't even read what it was. I never said anything, I just said what they wanted, what they wrote, that I only later learned what it was. I didn't kill BB. Mr. II knows this, so why did he have me spanked? Why? Why am I arrested for the murder of my daughter BB? Why? I didn't kill her! It was my brother's monster, CC, who killed her. The police know this...
Why did you arrest me? I was wrong, I trusted CC's monster, I regret what I did, but I only wanted the best for my children, for BB. Forgive me BB. My dear, my angel, hence Heaven, my dear BB, forgive me.
Odemira, January 15, 2009
AA'''
The appeal was thrown out by the court because such an appeal can only be granted if there is "new" evidence. Because the facts presented were known by Leonor at the time, the evidence was not "new". There were other bits of evidence too which were also deemed to be not "new" or weren't relevant enough. Effectively, they said it was her own fault for not giving this account during her initial trial and so the murder sentence had to stand. Her argument was that her lawyer had told her to remain silent at trial (and in reality, she probably hoped she wouldn't need to come clean if she were acquitted anyway). In any case, it was reported the appeal judge did actually believe that Leonor was not guilty of Joana's murder but by the letter of the law, her appeal was not valid. To add insult to injury, she was also then convicted of perjury for lying in the initial trial by not mentioning that she had attempted to sell Joana.
Also, if her account is true, it would appear that this plan to sell Joana was somewhat last minute. Joao only proposed it that morning. Could it be that the person(s) offering to buy Joana were outsiders that he met at the cockle festival the night before? Possibly CB (...and even HB maybe, was he the curly-haired man in the German camper, would certainly help explain why CB felt comfortable confessing to him about MM in 2008)? I find it unlikley Joao, a drug-addicted convict and renowned lowlife, happened to know (intimately as he claimed) a lovely, rich, foreign couple who were simply unable to conceive. And he's hardly likely to tell his sister the buyer was some dodgy German bloke(s).
I just wonder if BKA have ever approached Joao to interview him as part of their investigation into CB? If they had, I can imagine they would not want that known. It wouldn't sit well with their PJ counterparts (who they need cooperation from over the MM case) if there was a suggestion they'd got the whole Joana case wrong and CB was somehow involved.
Last edited:
onemoremiletogo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2019
- Messages
- 494
- Reaction score
- 904
I'm not finding a specific portuguese law that eventually regulates or defines engine displacement ranges.
But roughly, it's sometimes found "alta cilindrada" as "above 2500 cc".
In relation to the interpretation of the passage above, I'm not seeing it as better than you have already posted above.
JC's case it's too weird and disfunctional. In case it could relates, in some extent, to MM (through CB), that would be the 2 in 1 humiliation for PJ, exacerbated at infinity after so long.
Last edited:
Just on this aspect - obviously other criminal justice systems (e.g.the UK) don't allow you to come out with a new version of "what really happened" and advance that as fresh evidence justifying a new trial. Fresh evidence for a new trial is typically a very high standard (for obvious reasons) - exculpatory DNA evidence is an example of something that has been accepted.
Why I agree the JC investigation is a hot mess, I don't for one second believe this new version either. I am not sure about the mother's guilt, but i suspect one of the family for that one.
I never really followed the JC case, but reading the last few posts made me incredibly sad. What this poor girl had to go through in her short life! By the sounds of it, she was failed firstly by the people that was supposed to care for her, and secondly by an incompetent police investigation. No child deserves this. MOO
Dlk79
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 1,614
- Reaction score
- 9,984
Thanks for confirming. So basically they just mean it had a large engine. That description presumably determined by the noise the witnesses heard the engine making as it drove around the village. Which certainly fits with CB's Jag.
'If' CB was part of some ring, I can imagine this would be his type of role. The dispensable lackey, earning a few quid to be the one taking the biggest risk.
I still find it strange why PJ never really followed up on the tip off about the Belgian ring. The following article covered it at the time.
Maddie: We warned Portuguese, say vice squad
Officers working for CO14, a specialised vice unit within the Metropolitan Police, wrote to their Portuguese counterparts in March warning them they had intelligence that the three-year-old had been kidnapped to order by a Belgian gang.
The Policia Judiciaria then contacted Interpol and asked them to investigate further. But just weeks later Portuguese police chiefs shelved the line of inquiry, claiming it lacked credibility.
Private detectives working for Kate and Gerry McCann are now urgently examining the information to see if any more could have been done to check out the anonymous tip-off.
An email sent by John Shord of the Metropolitan’s Vice and Clubs Unit in March to Leicestershire Police – who were coordinating the UK end of the Madeleine case – read: “Intelligence suggests that a paedophile ring in Belgium made an order for a young girl three days before Madeleine McCann was taken.
“Somebody connected to this group saw Maddie, took a photograph of her and sent it to Belgium.
“The purchaser agreed that the girl was suitable and Maddie was taken.”
Interpol contacted its departments in London, Belgium, Germany and Finland to gather more information about European paedophile gangs.
But detective Paulo Rebelo, head of the Madeleine inquiry, ruled that all but the German intelligence showed “lack of credibility”.
That final comment doesn't make any sense to me. Firstly, what does he mean by "lack of credibility"? Is he referring to the agencies? The anonymous tipster? The actual information provided by the various agencies? The scenario itself? If he'd said there was a lack of "evidence" or "leads", I could understand but "credibility"...?
Secondly, he seems to indicate that the "German" intelligence was credible. In which case, what was justification for not following the lead up?
Last edited:
onemoremiletogo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2019
- Messages
- 494
- Reaction score
- 904
Quite extensive but quite inocuous and, in fact, no clear understanding about that tip off .
O meu nome é Maddie. Tiraram-me das minhas férias
Comprada por rede de pedófilos?
Há poucos meses, mais concretamente a 22 de Abril, Paulo Rebelo, o homem que substituiu Gonçalo Amaral na liderança da investigação, envia um fax ao Gabinete Nacional da Interpol. "Três dias antes do desaparecimento de Madeleine, uma rede pedófila da Bélgica terá efectuado um pedido de uma menina. Alguém com ligações àquela rede pedófila terá visto Madeleine e ter-lhe-á tirado uma fotografia que terá enviado para a Bélgica. O comprador terá concordado que a menina era o que se pretendia e Maddie foi então raptada."
Rebelo explica que a informação em causa é "do tipo intelligence" - confidencial - e solicita ao GNI que colabore no sentido de apurar junto das autoridades policiais belgas se recolheram todos os dados considerados pertinentes sobre este assunto.
A leitura do processo não permite contudo apurar o destino dado ao pedido de Rebelo. De resto, muitas das trocas de informação entre polícias de diferentes países sobre condenados por agressão sexual e pedófilos foram retiradas do processo judicial antes de o documento ser tornado público. Objectivo, explica-se: "Preservar a intimidade de pessoas que nada tinham a ver com este caso." Ainda assim, a possibilidade de o desaparecimento de Maddie poder estar associado a um acto cometido por pedófilos é mencionada algumas vezes.
I get that there have been hundreds of sightings, but if you had mm with you and the world knows she's missing, I think you would bit slightly discreet, at least, not saying not be seen, but discreet as much as you can be, in the days, weeks and months after
Zuleika
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2020
- Messages
- 320
- Reaction score
- 666
7h
Could it tie in with the above ?
I'm remembering Michael Shrimpton QC ( known for his conspiracy theories however) talking in an interview , ...." of course everyone knows Madeleine McCann was taken for a German politician "
Could it tie in with the above ?
Dlk79
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 1,614
- Reaction score
- 9,984
No idea, but it's not the only time a paedo-ring abduction scenario was dismissed by PJ. An investigative journalist, who had previously worked on infiltrating various paedophile rings and child abduction cases, received a tip-off about MM from an associate and spoke to PJ about it in June 2007. I believe he suggested that the ultimate buyer 'might' have been a politician or someone in power.
PressReader.com - Digital Newspaper & Magazine Subscriptions
Antonio Toscano, 36, insisted the four-year-old was snatched by a mysterious criminal mastermind who belongs to an international paedophile ring.
He claims the shadowy figure, himself a convicted paedophile, snatched Madeleine to order on the instructions of two other people.
Toscano insists he knows the full name of the pervert – nicknamed The Frenchman – and has tried to pass on the information to senior officers investigating Madeleine’s disappearance. He says he has still not been questioned by Portuguese police 12 days after he first alerted them.
... yesterday Toscano told the Daily Express how he began investigating The Frenchman after receiving a tip-off from a mutual associate a week after Madeleine was taken from her family’s holiday apartment in the Algarve.
The caller told him he had bumped into the man in Seville, Spain, just a two-hour drive from the Portuguese border, a week before Madeleine was snatched in Praia da Luz on May 3.
The man told him he was heading to the Algarve to meet friends.
Toscano revealed he first met The Frenchman in January 2003 while carrying out an undercover investigation on behalf of a private client. He told how they met at a private house close to the French border in Germany after infiltrating a European paedophile network. He said he was driven to the address in a vehicle with blacked-out windows.
The Frenchman offered to sell him for £6,000 an illegal 10-minute video of children between the ages of five and 12 being raped and tortured.
He did not buy the horror movie but returned to the property 10 days later when the man showed him a 30-minute video of children from all around the world being abused.
Toscano said he made his excuses and left. He said: “I was invited to a meeting with him posing as someone who wanted to buy child *advertiser censored* videos. As soon as I met him I did not like him. He tried to sell me the most vile illegal *advertiser censored*. He was very cold. I found him creepy.
“But he is meticulous and very businesslike. He is known as someone who never leaves a trace.
“Madeleine is not the first child he has taken to order. I don’t think he will have delivered her to the people who hired him yet. He would normally lie low for one to two months until all the fuss dies down. That is why I think Madeleine is still alive.
“He kidnaps to order. People pay him up to £200,000 to obtain a child. It could be people in power, politicians – anyone who could afford to pay this sort of money.”
In another article:
A source tells the Express: “He was hired by two other people to abduct Madeleine, who had been identified some time before she disappeared, possibly in the UK. He was doing this on the orders of others.”
Anorak News | Madeleine McCann’s Wearside Jack And Toscano’s Suspect
This is his eventual interview transcript in the PJ files.
P.J. POLICE FILES: ANTONIO TUSCANO MARQUEZ
Interestingly, there is no mention here about a ring being involved, or that the abduction was ordered by 2 people, or that MM had been identifed as the target in advance. Equally, AT doesn't explain in the articles where he came by that info either. PJ confirmed that AT was interviewed for 2 hours, yet the statement in their files is very brief, so it feels like a lot of stuff he might have said has been omitted or played down.
It doesn't appear that PJ ever really followed up on this lead. In the following article, the suspect himself refutes the claim, saying he was in France on the 3rd, but makes no mention as to whether he was in the Algarve prior to that to meet with "friends". In the article (and others), it's also confirmed that PJ dismissed AT's claims for not being "very strong". But this all happened around the same time they were making Murat their chief suspect so it makes sense that that this angle would not have interested them at the time.
Hunt for Madeleine: family friends confront prime suspect
I've no idea how reliable/credible AT's information is/was but he claimed to have been involved in 15 missing child cases and helped find the child alive in 14 of them. His account could possibly even be linked to the same tip that came through the Met vice squad a year later about the Belgian ring. The abduction to order scenario (with MM chosen in advance) sounds quite similar and the ring involved based in that same geographical area.
Which one?
Dlk79
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 1,614
- Reaction score
- 9,984
Like I said, I don't know how credible AT is, there's not a lot of info about him, which I guess you'd expect given the nature of his work. But there are similarities to the scenario he describes to the Belgian ring tip off, and BA was himself in Belgium in the days following MM's abduction according to his own alibi.
AT says he received an initial tip off that BA had headed into the Algarve shortly before MM's disappearance. From that he began his own investigations, presumably enquiring with other "underground" associates which apparently led him to further info that there was an instruction from 2 other people to abduct MM specifically. From this information (and apparently knowing BA had done this kind of thing before) he concluded that he thought BA was the one who took MM.
BA subsequently claimed to have an alibi for the 3rd placing him in Paris, saying that it could be corroborated by a judge, bailiffs and court clerks. So presumably he was in court that day for something. He stated he was then in Belgium for the 2 following days (in Brussels and then Namur but he doesn't say for what reason) before returning to Paris on the 6th to vote in the elections. PJ abandoned the lead around this point.
But I suppose where AT may have been wrong is that although BA was perhaps part of the ring and involved in the organisation/arrangement of the abduction, he might have had another "associate" or two in the Algrarve actually carry out the "horrible job'".
All speculation of course.
AT says he received an initial tip off that BA had headed into the Algarve shortly before MM's disappearance. From that he began his own investigations, presumably enquiring with other "underground" associates which apparently led him to further info that there was an instruction from 2 other people to abduct MM specifically. From this information (and apparently knowing BA had done this kind of thing before) he concluded that he thought BA was the one who took MM.
BA subsequently claimed to have an alibi for the 3rd placing him in Paris, saying that it could be corroborated by a judge, bailiffs and court clerks. So presumably he was in court that day for something. He stated he was then in Belgium for the 2 following days (in Brussels and then Namur but he doesn't say for what reason) before returning to Paris on the 6th to vote in the elections. PJ abandoned the lead around this point.
But I suppose where AT may have been wrong is that although BA was perhaps part of the ring and involved in the organisation/arrangement of the abduction, he might have had another "associate" or two in the Algrarve actually carry out the "horrible job'".
All speculation of course.
Last edited:
If BKA had such info and evidence about CB, i.e. being part of a ring, wouldn't they have already acted and arrested some others? They said he acted alone (but of course this does not imply that he was not acting on behalf of someone else) and his criminal activity regarding kids seems to be a 'lonely'pre-occupation. Since many rings have been exposed lately, if CB was part of one, wouldn't they have pressed such charges on him as well?
Tekno
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2020
- Messages
- 414
- Reaction score
- 1,454
Perhaps C. Kruse’s arrest in Paraguay will reveal more about CB’s (possible) involvement with a ring.
- Status