Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect #27

Status
Not open for further replies.

Denis R Tandib

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
388
Reaction score
1,387
SY came to this conclusion because DCI Redwood discovered Dr Julian Totman was that man .



Julian Totman's wife Rachel, who lives with her husband in the West Country, has revealed that police had never contacted them.

She told The Sun "My husband had told the local police it could be him but we didn't hear anything for years.

'We always thought it was Julian who was seen by Jane Tanner. But the national police who investigated didn't get back to us and we don't know if our information was ever passed on"

I’m aware of Redwood’s view that Tannerman is Dr JT. Dr JT came forward during the initial investigation. Also, he was walking in the opposite direction to Tannerman ... we have covered this ad nauseam on previous threads. These details were always available.

OG commenced early in 2011. IMO, something happened, perhaps further questioning of the T9, between 2011 and 2013 that makes them think the abduction is after the Tannerman sighting and GM’s check. I think Dr JT is just a convenient reason for the public but not the real reason they arrived at this conclusion.
 

Denis R Tandib

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
388
Reaction score
1,387
Tannerman and Smithman? Even Smithman can be really ruled out?! Where is the "negative" description?

Redwood ruled out Tannerman based IMO on information that hasn’t been shared with the public. All we know for sure is that JT saw someone walking away from the scene of the crime carrying a child fitting MM’s description at approximately 9:15pm - within the possible window for abduction.

Nine people saw Smithman carrying a child fitting MM’s description, again within the abduction time window.

Based on what we know, both sightings should be ruled in. I would give Redwood credit that he has good reason for dismissing Tannerman and therefore we should think he is the less likely culprit but no way IMO can we rule out Smithman.

And yes, I know what MS has said in the media but if someone asked you to identify someone you saw 13 years ago for a few seconds, at night, could you?

I would prefer to rely on basic facts of the sightings vs actual identification of individuals ... MS doesn’t have a photographic memory and he has previously identified (with some certainty) GM as the person he saw.
 

Denis R Tandib

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
388
Reaction score
1,387
I think it was neither tannerman nor smithman. I am sure JT saw something not sure what. But I am doubtful about smithman. Didn’t Smith and his family came up later when Murat was a suspect? I heard they knew Murat ( just my assumption) maybe it was made up?
I think it was someone having his car parked near to the scene like all live scent ( gnr) dogs followed MM route to the car park.

The Smiths were frequent visitors to PDL and they new Robert Murat - they were able to conclusively rule him out as the person they saw.

I prefer the exit via car too ... the biggest problem with that is that there are very few witness statements relating to cars during the abduction window and certainly nothing about a Jag or VW WF.
 

Betty_Boop88

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
706
Reaction score
3,676
The Jag is my preference, solely because he changed ownership the next day and Jags seem to have been pretty common in the area at the time - Amaral himself had one. And nobody would suspect that someone getting out of/into a Jaguar was there to go on the rob etc.

In a busy tourist resort, would people have taken notice of cars? The hype at the time was of Smithman and Tannerman carrying a child, perhaps people were more focused on persons on foot, rather than in vehicles? JMO.
 

Lilly b

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
821
Reaction score
2,722
I’m not a sniffer dog expert and, along with many other options, it’s possible that MM took that route from 5A.

But, dogs don’t have opinions, they track a known scent in the direction/s the person who made the scent went. They can’t detect freshness and then make a conscious decision to follow only the freshest scent. They simply match the scent and track it until it no longer exists, be that ten metres or ten miles away, that’s why it makes sense to use sniffer dogs. It seems logical that if MM spent ten minutes playing and sitting in a particular area 12 hours ago, her scent would be stronger there than if she just walked through an area six hours ago.

If it makes sense to you that the dogs definitively selected MM’s exit route, no problem. I don’t think it’s how she left because I can’t accept that an abductor would increase their chances of being caught going an indirect route when there is an alternative direct route available.

The in direct route could of been taken, to avoid other people that was about, it's a possibility
 

Betty_Boop88

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2020
Messages
706
Reaction score
3,676
The in direct route could of been taken, to avoid other people that was about, it's a possibility

Also from the route on the map - would the McCann’s have had any reason to use that car park? Would they have had any use of the car park at all before she went missing? They were only there for a week and seem to have mostly hung around the resort, so no reason to have a hire car. There was already a car park right outside their apartment on the same side of the street, the resort was on the same side of the street as the apartment, they could just stick to that path to walk down to the beach, restaurants etc. Why cross the road to car park 6 with two infants in a pram and a young child, presumably with no car at the time?
 

JB1510

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2020
Messages
125
Reaction score
502
In the Dutch version of Crimewatch 2013 it's worth noting that ex DCI Redwood said the man CT saw was exiting ground floor apartment 5C, which was unoccupied that week, not 5B as we had previously been led to believe. 2 female holidaymakers (JJ & AW) coincidentally saw 2 unknown men on the balcony of 5C around lunchtime on 3/5/07.

Interesting seeing this clip . The part reconstruction of the events is what was originally shown on the aktenzeichen xy
appeal from October 2013. For some reason when CB was named as a suspect it vanished into thin air , I’ve no idea why . In the German & Dutch reconstruction the focus was more fixated on the two blonde guys seen hanging around the apartment it also showed a girl on roller skates witnessing one of the men . Is it possible that BKA were focusing on the second suspect possibly CP and were yet to locate him ? I think the roller skating girl was TS . It could be meaningless but just seems weird the aktenzeichen xy
got pulled there’s loads of old episodes still online but not MM .

In regards to potential witnesses , did the BKA sacrifice alerting SY or the PJ prior to naming CB as a suspect because the evidence they have is more damning ?

Usually you would contact witnesses to view a photo stack to see if they could id CB before he is publicly named , however there is the possibility that these people and/or SY or the PJ leak this info ? Having witnesses say the person they saw was CB after his photo wouldn’t be viable
in terms of prosecution?
 

RichardKimble

Active Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2021
Messages
238
Reaction score
121
LOL, we wouldn't be here. You said none of these match the description of CB. Unequivocally?! Couldn't none of these have led to more clues?
Even if not, it's odd that none of other sightings/testimony (at target timeline) did not lead or bring more info.
Unlikely to lead to have led to more clues,if any thing Redwood clouded the issue even more after his revelation moment , they are still on the find Madeleine page site.
 

RichardKimble

Active Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2021
Messages
238
Reaction score
121
I’m aware of Redwood’s view that Tannerman is Dr JT. Dr JT came forward during the initial investigation. Also, he was walking in the opposite direction to Tannerman ... we have covered this ad nauseam on previous threads. These details were always available.

OG commenced early in 2011. IMO, something happened, perhaps further questioning of the T9, between 2011 and 2013 that makes them think the abduction is after the Tannerman sighting and GM’s check. I think Dr JT is just a convenient reason for the public but not the real reason they arrived at this conclusion.

I think it should be clarified, Redwood never revealed who they are almost certain JT saw .
 

RichardKimble

Active Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2021
Messages
238
Reaction score
121
Redwood ruled out Tannerman based IMO on information that hasn’t been shared with the public. All we know for sure is that JT saw someone walking away from the scene of the crime carrying a child fitting MM’s description at approximately 9:15pm - within the possible window for abduction.

Nine people saw Smithman carrying a child fitting MM’s description, again within the abduction time window.

Based on what we know, both sightings should be ruled in. I would give Redwood credit that he has good reason for dismissing Tannerman and therefore we should think he is the less likely culprit but no way IMO can we rule out Smithman.

And yes, I know what MS has said in the media but if someone asked you to identify someone you saw 13 years ago for a few seconds, at night, could you?

I would prefer to rely on basic facts of the sightings vs actual identification of individuals ... MS doesn’t have a photographic memory and he has previously identified (with some certainty) GM as the person he saw.


Theres a article some where where MS is saying he does not recognise CB as the man he saw.
 

Hygge

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2021
Messages
57
Reaction score
312
I’m not a sniffer dog expert and, along with many other options, it’s possible that MM took that route from 5A.

But, dogs don’t have opinions, they track a known scent in the direction/s the person who made the scent went. They can’t detect freshness and then make a conscious decision to follow only the freshest scent. They simply match the scent and track it until it no longer exists, be that ten metres or ten miles away, that’s why it makes sense to use sniffer dogs. It seems logical that if MM spent ten minutes playing and sitting in a particular area 12 hours ago, her scent would be stronger there than if she just walked through an area six hours ago.

If it makes sense to you that the dogs definitively selected MM’s exit route, no problem. I don’t think it’s how she left because I can’t accept that an abductor would increase their chances of being caught going an indirect route when there is an alternative direct route available.
The abductor could have been disturbed. Possible that someone came up the street so he decided to walk the other direction and then uses the small path near the pool back to the carpark. Just a thought.
 

peanutJelly

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2020
Messages
608
Reaction score
2,451
Re the car park, it depends if any abduction was planned, or opportunistic. Also how reliable are sniffer dogs if a child is carried rather than being in direct contact with the ground and therefore shedding sent?
 

Sharkbite

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
481
Reaction score
2,275
Interesting seeing this clip . The part reconstruction of the events is what was originally shown on the aktenzeichen xy
appeal from October 2013. For some reason when CB was named as a suspect it vanished into thin air , I’ve no idea why . In the German & Dutch reconstruction the focus was more fixated on the two blonde guys seen hanging around the apartment it also showed a girl on roller skates witnessing one of the men . Is it possible that BKA were focusing on the second suspect possibly CP and were yet to locate him ? I think the roller skating girl was TS . It could be meaningless but just seems weird the aktenzeichen xy
got pulled there’s loads of old episodes still online but not MM .

In regards to potential witnesses , did the BKA sacrifice alerting SY or the PJ prior to naming CB as a suspect because the evidence they have is more damning ?

Usually you would contact witnesses to view a photo stack to see if they could id CB before he is publicly named , however there is the possibility that these people and/or SY or the PJ leak this info ? Having witnesses say the person they saw was CB after his photo wouldn’t be viable
in terms of prosecution?
Not sure why but I always think of CB and his green eyed friend from BSJ when the 2 blonde males on the balcony are mentioned. CP is/was very thin on top, but what hair he did have left was dark.
 

Denis R Tandib

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
388
Reaction score
1,387
Theres a article some where where MS is saying he does not recognise CB as the man he saw.

Yes I know, I even mentioned it in my post.

Given he has identified GM as the person he saw and then changed his mind, I don’t think that 13 years after the fact we can rely on him for a specific identification.

All we know for certain is that there was a slim man carrying a young girl and this person at just before 10pm, 3 May 2007. He has never come forward or been identified. And, that this person was not Robert Murat.

Everything else is possible IMO.
 

Denis R Tandib

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
388
Reaction score
1,387
The abductor could have been disturbed. Possible that someone came up the street so he decided to walk the other direction and then uses the small path near the pool back to the carpark. Just a thought.

Anything is of course possible.

It’s equally possible that the dogs took that particular route because MM’s scent was stronger in that direction, not because that was the last place she was but because that was where she had more physical contact with the ground or walls.

Trying to make an illogical escape route work because of the journey the dogs took (based on strength of scent, not recency or freshness or anything else) is an incorrect way to think IMO.

Again, IMO, the correct way to the think is what is the quickest route to safety for the abductor ... that’s very likely what the abductor was thinking and it’s supported by the fact that the abduction was successful.
 

Denis R Tandib

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2020
Messages
388
Reaction score
1,387
Not sure why but I always think of CB and his green eyed friend from BSJ when the 2 blonde males on the balcony are mentioned. CP is/was very thin on top, but what hair he did have left was dark.

I think MN looks like CT’s efit.
 

Attachments

  • 2EA0193D-C14E-4BB4-A75C-1A35DDF966D0.jpeg
    2EA0193D-C14E-4BB4-A75C-1A35DDF966D0.jpeg
    488.8 KB · Views: 25

RichardKimble

Active Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2021
Messages
238
Reaction score
121
Anything is of course possible.

It’s equally possible that the dogs took that particular route because MM’s scent was stronger in that direction, not because that was the last place she was but because that was where she had more physical contact with the ground or walls.

Trying to make an illogical escape route work because of the journey the dogs took (based on strength of scent, not recency or freshness or anything else) is an incorrect way to think IMO.

Again, IMO, the correct way to the think is what is the quickest route to safety for the abductor ... that’s very likely what the abductor was thinking and it’s supported by the fact that the abduction was successful.

Thats a working theory nothing more at this stage.
 

C.greek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
1,140
Reaction score
5,159
I think MN looks like CT’s efit.
Yes and I believe we have already discussed this. However what is more important in this is that in 2019 there were rumours MN might have been the perpetrator and many media outlets likened him to the efit BUT CT did not identify him then in MSM. Only in 2020 when HCW said they consider CB as a prime suspect did CT talk to MSM and said that this is the man she saw.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top