Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect #29

Status
Not open for further replies.

SuperdadV8

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2020
Messages
2,144
Reaction score
10,102
I have watched the interview and ....
OK ....

Well .....

So .....

Hold on to your chair ....

MWT is actually telling us that CB does not have an alibi.
Well done MWT!

But he told us, that somebody probably spent every night with CB.

Like many family members did with other family members, who abducted and killed other people.

So....
 

frank-cole

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2021
Messages
75
Reaction score
494

MWT interview on This Morning.

Admissions from MWT:
- The 'alibi' doesn't know whether she was with CB on the 3rd.
- The airport incident with the mace happened on the 10th.
- The police stop was apparently on a different occasion, sometime between MM's disappearance and the 'alibi' flying home but they don't know which day it actually was.
- MWT's claim that only 1 person has attributed the phone number to CB seems to be based on the people who have come forward since the appeal and not based on the BKA evidence that led them to that conclusion in the first place.

There was a level of excitement (trolls on twitter) that is alibi was a solid ‘defence alibi’ & that she hadn’t been questioned by the BKA. But it actually isn’t an alibi & the witness is the same person who was quoted in the tabloids in January. Jon Clarke was absolutely right (episode 8 of the MMU podcast)
I thought that MWT seemed uncomfortable (on British TV today) when being asked about this ‘alibi’ & challenged on the ‘alibi’ not actually being with him on the night.

IMO this witness testimony probably works more for the prosecution than the defence. When this witness testimony is described it sounds like they were with him all the time that week (until 19th) ‘apart’ from the night that Madeleine went missing.
 

Dlk79

Former Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2020
Messages
1,608
Reaction score
9,980
I have watched the interview and ....
OK ....

Well .....

So .....

Hold on to your chair ....

MWT is actually telling us that CB does not have an alibi.
Well done MWT!
Quite. And yet MWT is "sure" he didn't do it. His reasoning for that... his fling didn't notice anything suspicious about him...

We are talking about a 17 year old girl (at the time) remembering the behaviour of a 30 year old man, who was seeing her for one week, 15 years ago. She had never met him before to know what he was normally like and bearing in mind his recent prison assessment concluded he showed psychopathic traits, how exactly does such a person 'act' following a murder? If their behaviour did change, how noticeable would it be? This is a man who had already been convicted for child sex offences by that point and had carried out the DM rape 2 years earlier. I bet she didn't get that vibe from him either.

It also seems MWT didn't even speak to this woman directly, but rather he got a second hand account from her current partner. The BKA on the other hand have questioned her twice and don't share Mark's opinion.

One thing that was interesting is MWT says they were together for the week "from the 3rd" to the 10th, he doesn't mention any dates before the 3rd... but yet she isn't sure if she was with him on the 3rd... So how do they know that was the period they were together? If it's because that's the date she went on holiday, surely she'd remember whether she met and slept with him on the first day of her holiday? If she was there before the 3rd, how did MWT arrive at the conclusion that is the date their fling started if she can't remember seeing him that day?
 

Lilly b

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2020
Messages
828
Reaction score
2,739
I have watched the interview and ....
OK ....

Well .....

So .....

Hold on to your chair ....

MWT is actually telling us that CB does not have an alibi.
Well done MWT!

Bit wierd really as it's been public they was burner phones, so even if only 1 person came forward to say it was CB phone, so what
 

SuperdadV8

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2020
Messages
2,144
Reaction score
10,102
can you imagine how many DNA/fingerprints/fibres they would have to process and identify? [in May 2007 for example CB was sleeping with at least 3 different women in a week's time...]

newest MSM reports say results from forensic analysis of the VW van were expected in April 2022. Since there appeared to be no good cooperation early on between Portugal and Germany, it wouldn't surprise me if only recently the van was shipped to Germany...

Now i really do think you are right Greek, and they found something around autumn of the last year. Maybe it really took some time to research all the traces in one of his vehicles.

This happened in september '21:

Kate McCann returns to work 14 years after Maddy went missing

This happened in october '21:

German prosecutors confident they have the man who kidnapped and killed Madeleine McCann

The rest, closing down OG, PJ keeping CB as an arguido and the McC's last truly heartbreaking post, touching to tears, is history.

Such a sad story....:(
 

tedtink

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Messages
3,426
Reaction score
19,218
Quite. And yet MWT is "sure" he didn't do it. His reasoning for that... his fling didn't notice anything suspicious about him...

We are talking about a 17 year old girl (at the time) remembering the behaviour of a 30 year old man, who was seeing her for one week, 15 years ago. She had never met him before to know what he was normally like and bearing in mind his recent prison assessment concluded he showed psychopathic traits, how exactly does such a person 'act' following a murder? If their behaviour did change, how noticeable would it be? This is a man who had already been convicted for child sex offences by that point and had carried out the DM rape 2 years earlier. I bet she didn't get that vibe from him either.

It also seems MWT didn't even speak to this woman directly, but rather he got a second hand account from her current partner. The BKA on the other hand have questioned her twice and don't share Mark's opinion.

One thing that was interesting is MWT says they were together for the week "from the 3rd" to the 10th, he doesn't mention any dates before the 3rd... but yet she isn't sure if she was with him on the 3rd... So how do they know that was the period they were together? If it's because that's the date she went on holiday, surely she'd remember whether she met and slept with him on the first day of her holiday? If she was there before the 3rd, how did MWT arrive at the conclusion that is the date their fling started if she can't remember seeing him that day?

Good insight thanks.

Can't say it's not 'shocking' though, it's absolutely shocking tbh.
 

C.greek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
1,202
Reaction score
5,441
Now i really do think you are right Greek, and they found something around autumn of the last year. Maybe it really took some time to research all the traces in one of his vehicles.

This happened in september '21:

Kate McCann returns to work 14 years after Maddy went missing

This happened in october '21:

German prosecutors confident they have the man who kidnapped and killed Madeleine McCann

The rest, closing down OG, PJ keeping CB as an arguido and the McC's last truly heartbreaking post, touching to tears, is history.

Such a sad story....:(

from your link above

Wolters continued to say that the prosecutors do not have any scientific evidence, and everything they have at this point is circumstantial.

"It is circumstantial evidence - we have no scientific evidence," Wolters said. "If we had a video of the act or a picture of Madeleine dead with Brueckner on camera, we wouldn't have had to make a public appeal. But we only have circumstantial evidence.

"We have no body and no DNA but we have other evidence. Based on the evidence we have, it leads to no other conclusion. I can't tell you on which basis we assume she is dead. But for us, there's no other possibility. There is no hope she is alive."


what if they have a fibre of her pjs? this is not DNA, and not scientific per se. I think they already knew in autumn 2021 that something of MM had been traced in the VW van - now they rechecked it possibly... as they would need lots of time to process their findings and corroborate their evidence. and what if the van was not taken to Germany as initially reported but seized by Portuguese police and the PJ insisted they carry out the analysis? which happened fully now? (and this is where SF gets her information from?). I am waiting for a comment by GA... Did he mention anything like that in his book? like planting evidence, as CB stipulates in his letters to IM?
 

C.greek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
1,202
Reaction score
5,441
Quite. And yet MWT is "sure" he didn't do it. His reasoning for that... his fling didn't notice anything suspicious about him...

We are talking about a 17 year old girl (at the time) remembering the behaviour of a 30 year old man, who was seeing her for one week, 15 years ago. She had never met him before to know what he was normally like and bearing in mind his recent prison assessment concluded he showed psychopathic traits, how exactly does such a person 'act' following a murder? If their behaviour did change, how noticeable would it be? This is a man who had already been convicted for child sex offences by that point and had carried out the DM rape 2 years earlier. I bet she didn't get that vibe from him either.

It also seems MWT didn't even speak to this woman directly, but rather he got a second hand account from her current partner. The BKA on the other hand have questioned her twice and don't share Mark's opinion.

One thing that was interesting is MWT says they were together for the week "from the 3rd" to the 10th, he doesn't mention any dates before the 3rd... but yet she isn't sure if she was with him on the 3rd... So how do they know that was the period they were together? If it's because that's the date she went on holiday, surely she'd remember whether she met and slept with him on the first day of her holiday? If she was there before the 3rd, how did MWT arrive at the conclusion that is the date their fling started if she can't remember seeing him that day?

and not only that - but hasn't MWT learned by now that the most horrific killers and abusers are those beyond suspicion?? I am astonished by his naivety ...
 

Davieson

Active Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2022
Messages
126
Reaction score
81
from your link above

Wolters continued to say that the prosecutors do not have any scientific evidence, and everything they have at this point is circumstantial.

"It is circumstantial evidence - we have no scientific evidence," Wolters said. "If we had a video of the act or a picture of Madeleine dead with Brueckner on camera, we wouldn't have had to make a public appeal. But we only have circumstantial evidence.

"We have no body and no DNA but we have other evidence. Based on the evidence we have, it leads to no other conclusion. I can't tell you on which basis we assume she is dead. But for us, there's no other possibility. There is no hope she is alive."


what if they have a fibre of her pjs?
this is not DNA, and not scientific per se. I think they already knew in autumn 2021 that something of MM had been traced in the VW van - now they rechecked it possibly... as they would need lots of time to process their findings and corroborate their evidence. and what if the van was not taken to Germany as initially reported but seized by Portuguese police and the PJ insisted they carry out the analysis? which happened fully now? (and this is where SF gets her information from?). I am waiting for a comment by GA... Did he mention anything like that in his book? like planting evidence, as CB stipulates in his letters to IM?

How would they know ? They might be able to match to similar material, but not be able to state categorically that they belonged to her pajamas unless it also had traces of her DNA.
 

SuperdadV8

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2020
Messages
2,144
Reaction score
10,102
from your link above

Wolters continued to say that the prosecutors do not have any scientific evidence, and everything they have at this point is circumstantial.

"It is circumstantial evidence - we have no scientific evidence," Wolters said. "If we had a video of the act or a picture of Madeleine dead with Brueckner on camera, we wouldn't have had to make a public appeal. But we only have circumstantial evidence.

"We have no body and no DNA but we have other evidence. Based on the evidence we have, it leads to no other conclusion. I can't tell you on which basis we assume she is dead. But for us, there's no other possibility. There is no hope she is alive."


what if they have a fibre of her pjs? this is not DNA, and not scientific per se. I think they already knew in autumn 2021 that something of MM had been traced in the VW van - now they rechecked it possibly... as they would need lots of time to process their findings and corroborate their evidence. and what if the van was not taken to Germany as initially reported but seized by Portuguese police and the PJ insisted they carry out the analysis? which happened fully now? (and this is where SF gets her information from?). I am waiting for a comment by GA... Did he mention anything like that in his book? like planting evidence, as CB stipulates in his letters to IM?

My thoughts as well. Maybe no DNA from Maddie in the van, but maybe a fibre from a vehicle on a sheet or something. So many possibilites that would fit the "circumstancial" evidence.

Or just the possibility of a lie, not to reveal what they have or older comments of HCW the tabloids used for the article, although HCW didn't mentioned it later in 2021.

To me, the "circumstancial evidence" according to the behavior of the McC's and the prosecutors point to the possibility, that both know what the german prosecutors may have found.
 

C.greek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
1,202
Reaction score
5,441
My thoughts as well. Maybe no DNA from Maddie in the van, but maybe a fibre from a vehicle on a sheet or something. So many possibilites that would fit the "circumstancial" evidence.

Or just the possibility of a lie, not to reveal what they have or older comments of HCW the tabloids used for the article, although HCW didn't mentioned it later in 2021.

To me, the "circumstancial evidence" according to the behavior of the McC's and the prosecutors point to the possibility, that both know what the german prosecutors may have found.


the McCs I think are fully aware of what the BKA has...this is clearer in their last message to mark the 15th anniversary of MM's disappearance.
 

C.greek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
1,202
Reaction score
5,441
How would they know ? They might be able to match to similar material, but not be able to state categorically that they belonged to her pajamas unless it also had traces of her DNA.
the parents might have been made aware.
 

C.greek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
1,202
Reaction score
5,441
Do you know at what time tonight SF's SÁBADO programme -disclosing what has been found in the van- will be broadcast?
9pm local time?

ETA I read somewhere it will be at 9.30pm Lisbon time.
 
Last edited:

C.greek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2020
Messages
1,202
Reaction score
5,441
22 April 2022

Wolters is also investigating Brueckner on suspicion of the rape of a young Irish woman in the same area in 2004.
He said he expected to make further announcements in May. "We have found some more evidence in other cases in Portugal, the rape of the Irish woman and other cases of abuse," he said.
"We have intensified our investigation there*, and results are foreseeable."
Brueckner's lawyer, Friedrich Fuelscher, declined to comment on the case, saying that the move by Portuguese authorities was merely to halt the statute of limitations.
British police declined on Friday to make a statement on the case but McCann's parents said they were being kept informed of developments.

*there, meaning Portugal?

German prosecutor on McCann case says naming of suspect is legal formality
 

misty48

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2016
Messages
384
Reaction score
1,012
Quite. And yet MWT is "sure" he didn't do it. His reasoning for that... his fling didn't notice anything suspicious about him...

We are talking about a 17 year old girl (at the time) remembering the behaviour of a 30 year old man, who was seeing her for one week, 15 years ago. She had never met him before to know what he was normally like and bearing in mind his recent prison assessment concluded he showed psychopathic traits, how exactly does such a person 'act' following a murder? If their behaviour did change, how noticeable would it be? This is a man who had already been convicted for child sex offences by that point and had carried out the DM rape 2 years earlier. I bet she didn't get that vibe from him either.

It also seems MWT didn't even speak to this woman directly, but rather he got a second hand account from her current partner. The BKA on the other hand have questioned her twice and don't share Mark's opinion.

One thing that was interesting is MWT says they were together for the week "from the 3rd" to the 10th, he doesn't mention any dates before the 3rd... but yet she isn't sure if she was with him on the 3rd... So how do they know that was the period they were together? If it's because that's the date she went on holiday, surely she'd remember whether she met and slept with him on the first day of her holiday? If she was there before the 3rd, how did MWT arrive at the conclusion that is the date their fling started if she can't remember seeing him that day?

It was reported that BKA found a photo of the German girl lying in the van. You could interpret that in 2 different ways.
IMO the photo of the girl may well have been found on one of the SD cards/USBs found buried at the box factory. Any background detail may well match something on a possible photo of Madeleine also stored on the same memory device. The German girl would also have been able to confirm who took the photo of her.
Defence could not then argue that a possible photo of Madeleine showing a very similar background was taken in another vehicle not belonging to CB. That's quite strong circumstantial evidence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top