Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect #32

Status
Not open for further replies.
Expresso from Portugal: "Asked about the reasons for the delay, Wolters declined to provide details, arguing that he does not want to “share the results or the current state of the investigation”. But sources close to the process say that the delay is due to the fact that there are still "steps" in progress in several countries". Namely to hear several witnesses?! Why this will take so long?! or just a hand full of nothing?!
I saw this here in Portugal in Expresso from 4th March 2023. On 3rd March in Correio da Manhã, the same info, also saying PJ is helping BKA. But no specific details.
 
What date was that article?

With respect to the Boys Town material, Europol sends intelligence packets to each country. The priority will be to identify living children and for each country to prosecute their perpetrators.

BKA has prosecuted (& convicted) the top 4. They will obviously also be looking at CB - material uploaded and and his communications with others. These ‘others’ may need to be identified and prosecuted by other countries.
Sorry I've replied to you but over my own previous post above.
 
I saw this here in Portugal in Expresso from 4th March 2023. On 3rd March in Correio da Manhã, the same info, also saying PJ is helping BKA. But no specific details.

Wolters might be referring to men he conversed with online who need to be identified & prosecuted.

Or he might be referring to Operation Desert Light. Europol is taking down a super cartel of drug traffickers. (We didn’t hear much about CB’s drug trafficking contacts.)

PJ could also just be formally interviewing witnesses re the other charges. I wonder if they spoke to the guys who got the videos/video camera.
 

Quite a noticeable necklace CB wears in this image .. wonder if that has ever matched the memories of sightings from witnesses around the times of his alleged crimes ?
Sharp observation.

Sometimes, a series of small pieces of evidence, none, in its own right, sufficient to convict, can, cumulatively, add up to a damning case for conviction.

Peter Voisey was convicted of abducting a little girl from the bath of her ground-floor flat while the whole family was in.

There was a very weak DNA link to Voisey, but not, on its own, enough to convict. Police took a footprint of a shoe from the wet floor of the bathroom that exactly matched the footprint of a pair of shoes Voisey owned. DNA triangulation of Voisey's phone placed him in the area of the abduction at the time it occurred.

Finally the evidence of the little girl abducted who (thank goodness!) survived her ordeal was never revealed, but was crucial to Voisey's conviction. For example, she might have been able to describe details of the interior of the vehicle he whisked her away in, that matched the description of Voisey's car.

 
Sharp observation.

Sometimes, a series of small pieces of evidence, none, in its own right, sufficient to convict, can, cumulatively, add up to a damning case for conviction.

Peter Voisey was convicted of abducting a little girl from the bath of her ground-floor flat while the whole family was in.

There was a very weak DNA link to Voisey, but not, on its own, enough to convict. Police took a footprint of a shoe from the wet floor of the bathroom that exactly matched the footprint of a pair of shoes Voisey owned. DNA triangulation of Voisey's phone placed him in the area of the abduction at the time it occurred.

Finally the evidence of the little girl abducted who (thank goodness!) survived her ordeal was never revealed, but was crucial to Voisey's conviction. For example, she might have been able to describe details of the interior of the vehicle he whisked her away in, that matched the description of Voisey's car.

I don't think any of that is going to apply in this case.
No forensic evidence for one thing.
 
I don't think any of that is going to apply in this case.
No forensic evidence for one thing.
We can say, for sure, about Brueckner, that if someone not him 'did' for Madeleine, Brueckner would have regarded that as a 'missed opportunity'.
 
Sharp observation.

Sometimes, a series of small pieces of evidence, none, in its own right, sufficient to convict, can, cumulatively, add up to a damning case for conviction.

Peter Voisey was convicted of abducting a little girl from the bath of her ground-floor flat while the whole family was in.

There was a very weak DNA link to Voisey, but not, on its own, enough to convict. Police took a footprint of a shoe from the wet floor of the bathroom that exactly matched the footprint of a pair of shoes Voisey owned. DNA triangulation of Voisey's phone placed him in the area of the abduction at the time it occurred.

Finally the evidence of the little girl abducted who (thank goodness!) survived her ordeal was never revealed, but was crucial to Voisey's conviction. For example, she might have been able to describe details of the interior of the vehicle he whisked her away in, that matched the description of Voisey's car.

Exactly. It will be the cumulative effect of the eye witnesses (potentially Tranmer, the Jensen sisters & the girl who saw the spotty man); the phone data; the history of burgling & assault; the confessions to friends; the coded online communications & journal.

(Just noticed that Fenn had an attempted burglary the week before.)
 
We can say, for sure, about Brueckner, that if someone not him 'did' for Madeleine, Brueckner would have regarded that as a 'missed opportunity'.
He probably needed investigating for sure, but in 2013 when questioned has a witness he obviously never brought suspicion on himself. IMO because of evidence from the informant's which helped in the case against the American ladies rape case and the informants describing which they have supposedly seen on tape of other abuses , Wolters literally takes their word that CB told them he did for Madeleine, IMO again with out a body there will not be a realistic chance of a conviction against any suspect or any other.
 
He probably needed investigating for sure, but in 2013 when questioned has a witness he obviously never brought suspicion on himself. IMO because of evidence from the informant's which helped in the case against the American ladies rape case and the informants describing which they have supposedly seen on tape of other abuses , Wolters literally takes their word that CB told them he did for Madeleine, IMO again with out a body there will not be a realistic chance of a conviction against any suspect or any other.
We will see...or not.
As Pixie referred above, cumulative effect, the other charges, modus operandi, circunstantial evidences that may corroborate each other (testimonies vs. CB's autobiographic texts?!, sex chats, etc), phone call in Luz that night, the unability to negate them or bring alibis...too much coincidences...and IMO the additional (even if not enough) evidence that BKA should still have. Maybe "not so weak" than what we can imagine?! Not sure if even without a body they will be really not able to charge.
 
What MO, there is no evidence of a break in , there is nothing linking CB to other murders that Wolters as ever alluded to. There's alleged film showing CB abusing the women with charges to follow, nothing of the sort in the Madeleine case.

This from 2021, could be charged next year meaning 2022, its 2023 with no sign of a question let alone a charge.


Mr Wolters said they have no idea how she died and no DNA or photo evidence linking the German sex offender to the alleged murder.
 
What MO, there is no evidence of a break in , there is nothing linking CB to other murders that Wolters as ever alluded to. There's alleged film showing CB abusing the women with charges to follow, nothing of the sort in the Madeleine case.

This from 2021, could be charged next year meaning 2022, its 2023 with no sign of a question let alone a charge.


Mr Wolters said they have no idea how she died and no DNA or photo evidence linking the German sex offender to the alleged murder.
I think they will be relying on the comms with Panikspatz66 to prove he killed her - because that is what he was recommending to PS.

It’s possible that the entire relationship with PS was online and therefore captured. IIRC, PS referred to ‘MM’ so there will likely be prior convos. PS can give evidence about what he understood.
 
I think they will be relying on the comms with Panikspatz66 to prove he killed her - because that is what he was recommending to PS.

It’s possible that the entire relationship with PS was online and therefore captured. IIRC, PS referred to ‘MM’ so there will likely be prior convos. PS can give evidence about what he understood.
Ok lets run with that just for the course of this discussion, lets say he told PS he buried her in his property hence the digs (if indeed it was looking for Madeleines remains), this intelligence was false because no trace was found, how likely is the supposed tale he told PS, was also false.

Edit to add, reports said as part of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine.


The police have not revealed what it is they are hoping to find. But a spokeswoman for state prosecutors in Braunschweig who are leading the investigation and working alongside Germany’s federal criminal police confirmed that the search was taking place as part of its investigation into the disappearance Madeleine in Portugal in 2007.

 
Last edited:
Ok lets run with that just for the course of this discussion, lets say he told PS he buried her in his property hence the digs (if indeed it was looking for Madeleines remains), this intelligence was false because no trace was found, how likely is the supposed tale he told PS, was also false.

Edit to add, reports said as part of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine.


The police have not revealed what it is they are hoping to find. But a spokeswoman for state prosecutors in Braunschweig who are leading the investigation and working alongside Germany’s federal criminal police confirmed that the search was taking place as part of its investigation into the disappearance Madeleine in Portugal in 2007.

Regardless of what PS might say, once he was identified as a suspect, you would expect that all the properties connected to him would be searched for all types of evidence.

HCW told this journalist that CB was commissioned by a paedophile ring so there may be additional comms that make it clear.

 

Attachments

  • 3ADB521E-75A8-43CB-96F9-54063AFEC667.jpeg
    3ADB521E-75A8-43CB-96F9-54063AFEC667.jpeg
    115.7 KB · Views: 14
is it even possible to solve a case after so long, with early investigation being worthless and no body ? like how
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
184
Guests online
1,336
Total visitors
1,520

Forum statistics

Threads
591,802
Messages
17,959,116
Members
228,607
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top