Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #35

[Denis R Tandib]

“Was I or my vehicle clearly seen near the crime scene on the night of the crime?
Are there DNA traces of me at the crime scene?
Are there DNA traces of the injured party in my vehicle?
Are there any other traces of the damaged party in my possession?
Photos?
And, not to forget, is there a dead body?"

Leaving an "invisible" trail...
The plan and the "disposal checklist"?!
The way CB wrote this letter..."Did I forget anything?!"

There are a few anomalies with the way this list of questions is written IMO.

It could give clues to how certain he is on certain facts. For example, he isn’t sure if someone saw him or his car 3 May but it’s likely he doesn’t think anyone who knew him saw him that evening… he could be Smithman.

The first question about DNA could show that he wasn’t ever in 5A, could this mean an accomplice handed MM to him at the window - I think he is sure there is no forensic evidence linking him to 5A.

Similarly, and from the first question, he has some confidence that the VW T3 and the Jag cannot link him to the crime. Did he use a different car, an accomplices car, leave on foot or was she removed in a large bag or something. The investigators could be barking up the wrong tree with the cars based on this.

In the fourth question, the word ‘any’ is all encompassing, I don’t think he kept any mementos of MM and he is sure there is nothing physical that can connect him to MM.

The fifth question is very interesting. One word ‘Photos’. Compared to the other questions, there is far less conviction on this one. That he included it, I think shows that he doesn’t think they have one but the way in which it’s asked is kind of uncertain.

The last question he is very sure about. Either, he knows they haven’t looked in the right spot or he knows it can’t be found. I wonder if he would write this the same way after the search at Arade.

This could just be German phrasing coming through in English or I’m finding faces in the clouds but it could show something.

All just an opinion and obviously if CB did commit the crime.

 

[Mex]

April 2019 is over a year before the Germans went public. I reckon you're making something out of nothing - how many people heard Saunokonoko's podcast series? Not many compared to those who saw the front pages of nearly all of the newspapers on June 5 2020. Eight of them had it on the front page. Massive publicity, when the Aussie podcast only made a stir amongst obsessives like us. (And the podcast interview didn't name CB of course)

Sorry to keep on about GA and his role in the release of CB's identity. My opinion is that this is pivotal to the way in which this was portrayed as soon as it was recognised that a valid suspect was being investigated for the first time. Make of that what you will but I know what I think.

It also makes a nonsense of the stick being given to HCW for indiscretion when rather than being responsible for it I think investigators had to think on their feet about how to minimise the damage caused by the premature release of information. Particularly coming from a person who had no legitimate locus in the case.

This being the MM case the press pack found their way to an obscure pod cast in the Antipodes. But being the press pack, what did they do? They got it wrong! They found their way to the wrong paedophile! Causing GA to break cover yet again to point them in the right direction.

Former Madeleine McCann policeman says wrong paedophile linked with her disappearance
Former Portuguese police chief GA previously claimed a German paedophile is the prime suspect - but says speculation he was referring to strangler Martin Ney is wrong

By Gerard Couzens News Correspondent

30 Nov 2019
***
GA sparked speculation that Ney, from Hamburg, was the prime suspect when he said investigators were focusing on a German paedophile in prison.

He didn't name Ney, but many believed he was referring to the killer, 49, who was jailed for life in 2012 for abducting and murdering three children between 1992 and 2001.

Now GA, the original lead investigator in the MM case, has fuelled new speculation about his identity by telling a Spanish TV programme: “A paedophile who is German and serving life for killing children has been spoken about.

“What I know is that the suspect is not him, it’s another man. He’s also in prison in Germany. He’s also a paedophile.

Former Madeleine McCann cop says wrong paedophile linked with her disappearance

Former Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral previously claimed a German paedophile is the prime suspect - but says speculation he was referring to strangler Martin Ney is wrong

www.mirror.co.uk

The inevitable happened and on June 3 2020 police identified CB as their prime suspect.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

There are a few anomalies with the way this list of questions is written IMO.

It could give clues to how certain he is on certain facts. For example, he isn’t sure if someone saw him or his car 3 May but it’s likely he doesn’t think anyone who knew him saw him that evening… he could be Smithman.

The first question about DNA could show that he wasn’t ever in 5A, could this mean an accomplice handed MM to him at the window - I think he is sure there is no forensic evidence linking him to 5A.

Similarly, and from the first question, he has some confidence that the VW T3 and the Jag cannot link him to the crime. Did he use a different car, an accomplices car, leave on foot or was she removed in a large bag or something. The investigators could be barking up the wrong tree with the cars based on this.

In the fourth question, the word ‘any’ is all encompassing, I don’t think he kept any mementos of MM and he is sure there is nothing physical that can connect him to MM.

The fifth question is very interesting. One word ‘Photos’. Compared to the other questions, there is far less conviction on this one. That he included it, I think shows that he doesn’t think they have one but the way in which it’s asked is kind of uncertain.

The last question he is very sure about. Either, he knows they haven’t looked in the right spot or he knows it can’t be found. I wonder if he would write this the same way after the search at Arade.

This could just be German phrasing coming through in English or I’m finding faces in the clouds but it could show something.

All just an opinion and obviously if CB did commit the crime.

Among the good points you mentioned:
- he could be Smithman, so he walked a considerable distance to the car?! (link to 1st question: it still could be the VW - he just mentioned "near the crime scene"...)
- 2nd, 3rd and 4th questions: I see more as "I was there but I avoided or I'm sure to have cleaned up/disposed all traces"
- 5th question - photo: fully aligned with you, uncertain! He knows he had millions..."but have I really deleted/"buried" all these or this one?" IMO, his depraved and sadist desire to film/photograph his sex crimes/tortures, and keep them as treasures, will end up helping to frame him.
- last question: yes, he is sure. IMO, it can no longer (no way) be found. That's why IMO, BKA will need a confession...

All this, obviously (in oposition), if CB commited the crime.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Sorry to keep on about GA and his role in the release of CB's identity. My opinion is that this is pivotal to the way in which this was portrayed as soon as it was recognised that a valid suspect was being investigated for the first time. Make of that what you will but I know what I think.

It also makes a nonsense of the stick being given to HCW for indiscretion when rather than being responsible for it I think investigators had to think on their feet about how to minimise the damage caused by the premature release of information. Particularly coming from a person who had no legitimate locus in the case.

This being the MM case the press pack found their way to an obscure pod cast in the Antipodes. But being the press pack, what did they do? They got it wrong! They found their way to the wrong paedophile! Causing GA to break cover yet again to point them in the right direction.

Former Madeleine McCann policeman says wrong paedophile linked with her disappearance
Former Portuguese police chief GA previously claimed a German paedophile is the prime suspect - but says speculation he was referring to strangler Martin Ney is wrong

By Gerard Couzens News Correspondent

30 Nov 2019
***
GA sparked speculation that Ney, from Hamburg, was the prime suspect when he said investigators were focusing on a German paedophile in prison.

He didn't name Ney, but many believed he was referring to the killer, 49, who was jailed for life in 2012 for abducting and murdering three children between 1992 and 2001.

Now GA, the original lead investigator in the MM case, has fuelled new speculation about his identity by telling a Spanish TV programme: “A paedophile who is German and serving life for killing children has been spoken about.

“What I know is that the suspect is not him, it’s another man. He’s also in prison in Germany. He’s also a paedophile.

Former Madeleine McCann cop says wrong paedophile linked with her disappearance

Former Portuguese police chief Goncalo Amaral previously claimed a German paedophile is the prime suspect - but says speculation he was referring to strangler Martin Ney is wrong

www.mirror.co.uk

The inevitable happened and on June 3 2020 police identified CB as their prime suspect.

I disagree. Without the appeal, GA’s comments would have faded into the myriad other reports of potential suspects. I think the BKA and HCW know this. They went public to obtain the evidence they needed to charge CB; nothing to do with GA.

All just the opinion of some guy on the internet.

 

[Malleux]

I disagree. Without the appeal, GA’s comments would have faded into the myriad other reports of potential suspects. I think the BKA and HCW know this. They went public to obtain the evidence they needed to charge CB; nothing to do with GA.

All just the opinion of some guy on the internet.

I think GA is a despicable person and an absolute idiot. But I agree with this statement. JMO.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Among the good points you mentioned:
- he could be Smithman, so he walked a considerable distance to the car?! (link to 1st question: it still could be the VW - he just mentioned "near the crime scene"...)
- 2nd, 3rd and 4th questions: I see more as "I was there but I avoided or I'm sure to have cleaned up/disposed all traces"
- 5th question - photo: fully aligned with you, uncertain! He knows he had millions..."but have I really deleted/"buried" all these or this one?" IMO, his depraved and sadist desire to film/photograph his sex crimes/tortures, and keep them as treasures, will end up helping to frame him.
- last question: yes, he is sure. IMO, it can no longer (no way) be found. That's why IMO, BKA will need a confession...

All this, obviously (in oposition), if CB commited the crime.

With the second and third questions, I think it needs to be kept in mind that he was convicted based on DNA evidence in the DM case - a case in which he was very careful.

If he is saying no DNA evidence in 5A it’s because he’s certain there isn’t any. This isn’t because he was hovering with one hand while carrying MM in the other. All MO.

 

[misty48]

With the second and third questions, I think it needs to be kept in mind that he was convicted based on DNA evidence in the DM case - a case in which he was very careful.

If he is saying no DNA evidence in 5A it’s because he’s certain there isn’t any. This isn’t because he was hovering with one hand while carrying MM in the other. All MO.

Is he sure because his team of lawyers have read (and understood) the FSS results contained in PJ files, none of which can be matched to his own DNA?
How can he be sure BKA (not PJ) have no hairs pertaining to Madeleine which they can "plant" in his belongings?
Excerpts from one of his letters October 2020

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Is he sure because his team of lawyers have read (and understood) the FSS results contained in PJ files, none of which can be matched to his own DNA?
How can he be sure BKA (not PJ) have no hairs pertaining to Madeleine which they can "plant" in his belongings?
Excerpts from one of his letters October 2020

If I'm not mistaken, there are a lot of unidentified hairs found in 5A. Do you know if the PJ had CB's DNA profile at the time? More importantly, do you know that the BKA (Who does have his DNA profile) haven't checked against any of the unidentified hairs? I don't think he can be certain that his DNA isn't in 5A unless he was never in it.

Sorry, but I can't read the letter excerpts in your post, they are too small to read.

 

[misty48]

If I'm not mistaken, there are a lot of unidentified hairs found in 5A. Do you know if the PJ had CB's DNA profile at the time? More importantly, do you know that the BKA (Who does have his DNA profile) haven't checked against any of the unidentified hairs? I don't think he can be certain that his DNA isn't in 5A unless he was never in it.

Sorry, but I can't read the letter excerpts in your post, they are too small to read.

CB had been imprisoned in April 2006 so I presume his DNA was routinely on file at the time. If he wasn't ever a suspect in the Madeleine case PJ wouldn't have been permitted to cross-check at that time. He was arrested again in June 2017 at the playground incident in Portugal so I would also presume DNA was taken at that time and was still on file when BKA launched their investigation.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

CB had been imprisoned in April 2006 so I presume his DNA was routinely on file at the time. If he wasn't ever a suspect in the Madeleine case PJ wouldn't have been permitted to cross-check at that time. He was arrested again in June 2017 at the playground incident in Portugal so I would also presume DNA was taken at that time and was still on file when BKA launched their investigation.

It’s hard to know for sure but I wouldn’t think his DNA was collected in 2006 for diesel theft. Wouldn’t LE need to have a reason to do so?

All we know for sure is that at the time of the DM trial, they had his DNA. We also know from the files that there was a lot of unidentified DNA in 5A.

I don’t think we can say for certain that he knows his DNA wasn’t in 5A… unless of course he wasn’t in there.

 

[misty48]

It’s hard to know for sure but I wouldn’t think his DNA was collected in 2006 for diesel theft. Wouldn’t LE need to have a reason to do so?

All we know for sure is that at the time of the DM trial, they had his DNA. We also know from the files that there was a lot of unidentified DNA in 5A.

I don’t think we can say for certain that he knows his DNA wasn’t in 5A… unless of course he wasn’t in there.

He was imprisoned in 2006 so I think they would have taken a DNA sample. (arrestable offence)
CB didn't know there was a trace of his DNA (hair) in DM villa and went to great lengths to offer an alternative explanation as to how it got there.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

He was imprisoned in 2006 so I think they would have taken a DNA sample. (arrestable offence)
CB didn't know there was a trace of his DNA (hair) in DM villa and went to great lengths to offer an alternative explanation as to how it got there.

Yes, he did. What I’m saying though is that the irrefutable connection between CB and DM is a hair which wasn’t matched until 11-13 years after the attack took place.

By your logic, if Portuguese LE took CB’s DNA in 2006 and they were routinely collecting DNA at this time (presumably for unresolved crimes) why didn’t they match CB to DM only a year after the offence occurred?

CB could only be matched to the MM offence by DNA if a) he was a suspect and b) if a LE had his DNA profile, and c) if there was evidence left in 5A.

IMO, an and b weren’t satisfied until around 2017. So even if c was tested after this time and proved to be a match, there is no way CB could know that because he hasn’t been charged so hasn’t seen the evidence.

Going back to the original point, I think CB could assume they have no DNA of his in 5A and make the same assumption about his cars but he could only be 100% certain if he was never in 5A and MM was never in the VW or Jag.

 

[Okapi]

There are a few anomalies with the way this list of questions is written IMO.

It could give clues to how certain he is on certain facts. For example, he isn’t sure if someone saw him or his car 3 May but it’s likely he doesn’t think anyone who knew him saw him that evening… he could be Smithman.

The first question about DNA could show that he wasn’t ever in 5A, could this mean an accomplice handed MM to him at the window - I think he is sure there is no forensic evidence linking him to 5A.

Similarly, and from the first question, he has some confidence that the VW T3 and the Jag cannot link him to the crime. Did he use a different car, an accomplices car, leave on foot or was she removed in a large bag or something. The investigators could be barking up the wrong tree with the cars based on this.

In the fourth question, the word ‘any’ is all encompassing, I don’t think he kept any mementos of MM and he is sure there is nothing physical that can connect him to MM.

The fifth question is very interesting. One word ‘Photos’. Compared to the other questions, there is far less conviction on this one. That he included it, I think shows that he doesn’t think they have one but the way in which it’s asked is kind of uncertain.

The last question he is very sure about. Either, he knows they haven’t looked in the right spot or he knows it can’t be found. I wonder if he would write this the same way after the search at Arade.

This could just be German phrasing coming through in English or I’m finding faces in the clouds but it could show something.

All just an opinion and obviously if CB did commit the crime.

BBM. If we infer that CB is certain no body will be found, I’m going to forklift another animal into the conversation, sorry lol

He reportedly said in the past that a body could be disposed of by pigs. Is it possible that he relied on the wild boars of Portugal? They are widespread in areas of dense forest and water sources for drinking and bathing. They will eat carrion. I’m posting a recent link about their distribution but it appears they were widespread in the 2000s too.

Do Pigs Eat Humans? (Answered) - Wildlife Informer

Apologies ETA this link:

Wild Boar, a menace moving south

Wild boar, a somewhat dangerous species within the Algarve’s rich biodiversity, is making more of a nuisance of itself closer to the coast this year because of inland wildfires. Families of wild boar have been reported enjoying themselves on popular beaches, including Quarteira, Albandeira and...

algarvedailynews.com

Portugal’s wild boar population “completely out of control” thanks to pandemic - Portugal Resident

There are a few anomalies with the way this list of questions is written IMO.

It could give clues to how certain he is on certain facts. For example, he isn’t sure if someone saw him or his car 3 May but it’s likely he doesn’t think anyone who knew him saw him that evening… he could be Smithman.

The first question about DNA could show that he wasn’t ever in 5A, could this mean an accomplice handed MM to him at the window - I think he is sure there is no forensic evidence linking him to 5A.

Similarly, and from the first question, he has some confidence that the VW T3 and the Jag cannot link him to the crime. Did he use a different car, an accomplices car, leave on foot or was she removed in a large bag or something. The investigators could be barking up the wrong tree with the cars based on this.

In the fourth question, the word ‘any’ is all encompassing, I don’t think he kept any mementos of MM and he is sure there is nothing physical that can connect him to MM.

The fifth question is very interesting. One word ‘Photos’. Compared to the other questions, there is far less conviction on this one. That he included it, I think shows that he doesn’t think they have one but the way in which it’s asked is kind of uncertain.

The last question he is very sure about. Either, he knows they haven’t looked in the right spot or he knows it can’t be found. I wonder if he would write this the same way after the search at Arade.

This could just be German phrasing coming through in English or I’m finding faces in the clouds but it could show something.

All just an opinion and obviously if CB did commit the crime.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

BBM. If we infer that CB is certain no body will be found, I’m going to forklift another animal into the conversation, sorry lol

He reportedly said in the past that a body could be disposed of by pigs. Is it possible that he relied on the wild boars of Portugal? They are widespread in areas of dense forest and water sources for drinking and bathing. They will eat carrion. I’m posting a recent link about their distribution but it appears they were widespread in the 2000s too.

Do Pigs Eat Humans? (Answered) - Wildlife Informer

Apologies ETA this link:

Wild Boar, a menace moving south

Wild boar, a somewhat dangerous species within the Algarve’s rich biodiversity, is making more of a nuisance of itself closer to the coast this year because of inland wildfires. Families of wild boar have been reported enjoying themselves on popular beaches, including Quarteira, Albandeira and...

algarvedailynews.com

Portugal’s wild boar population “completely out of control” thanks to pandemic - Portugal Resident

Well, I guess anything is possible. I once went wild pig hunting in the Australian (Or Antipodean, as some would say) outback. That’s not for the faint hearted. I’m certain they would eat carrion and tbh, they would eat humans alive given half a chance. Before anyone reports me to PETA, I didn’t kill any pigs, we chased them but they turned around and chased us and the dogs away - they’re scary!

In all seriousness, I don’t think it’s the most reliable way to dispose of human remains.

 

[mrjitty]

Another thing, I think too much is being made of HCW not talking about "abduction", and only "murder". It doesn't necessarily mean they don't know or aren't sure CB was the one who did the abduction. They are simply targetting the greater charge and this is quite common in cases like this. Take the DM rape case as an example. The perpetrator committed several crimes including breaking & entering, assault and robbery. Yet the only charge they pursued was of "rape". The other elements of the crime were taken into account in the sentencing. Doing it this way allows the prosecutors to only have to focus on "proving" the most serious crime.

RSBM

Yes - the prosecution only charges the offences it can prove.

For instance if the victim were found buried at the box factory, a court can simply infer CB came into the possession of the victim somehow - it is not necessary to prove how, as it is implicit in the known facts

 

[mrjitty]

Yes. Sounds remarkably like the point I made just before that you failed to acknowledge. Oh well...

Sorry - i only read the first part of the post - i replied to it now

My main point was, per HCW, if prosecutors are working on charging for murder, at an unknown place and time, alibi could be helpful to the defence at trial, but doesn't go to the evidence he is likely to be confronted with.

Especially if they have more phone records, and have interviews with associates who might provide an alibi, even a mistake in recollection could harm the defence. Especially given this all happened 16 years ago.

Having been a witness myself in a fraud investigation, I gave a voluntary interview to police, but certainly NOT without all my contemporaneous notes and business records for the simple reason that in the years gone past, I simply could not remember all the key days and times without being able to consult such records that did exist.

It would have been insanely dumb to sit with the fraud investigator and try to answer questions while only he had all the records. That is how I would have gone from a potential witness to an actual suspect.

There is potentially value in any defence providing so called alibi evidence pre trial, but in these circumstances with CB likely to be interrogated at the final step, I feel FF might simply wait for the trial, and give the answers to the Judges directly.

 

[mrjitty]

Yes, he did. What I’m saying though is that the irrefutable connection between CB and DM is a hair which wasn’t matched until 11-13 years after the attack took place.

By your logic, if Portuguese LE took CB’s DNA in 2006 and they were routinely collecting DNA at this time (presumably for unresolved crimes) why didn’t they match CB to DM only a year after the offence occurred?

CB could only be matched to the MM offence by DNA if a) he was a suspect and b) if a LE had his DNA profile, and c) if there was evidence left in 5A.

IMO, an and b weren’t satisfied until around 2017. So even if c was tested after this time and proved to be a match, there is no way CB could know that because he hasn’t been charged so hasn’t seen the evidence.

Going back to the original point, I think CB could assume they have no DNA of his in 5A and make the same assumption about his cars but he could only be 100% certain if he was never in 5A and MM was never in the VW or Jag.

As a general aside on the topic of DNA matching for historical crimes, I read an in-depth about this in the US, where an astonishing amount of old rape kits are not even processed. I am sorry I cannot remember the link now - it is in a previous thread.

When an initiative started processing the kits, they were able to close a number of cold cases because the attacker had since been imprisoned for other offences.

Short version, thanks to bureaucratic and resourcing failures, it is not the case that these things get efficiently matched until someone takes a close look at the case

 

[RichardKimble]

Yes, but CB was made public (photo and name) on June 4, 2020, by the press. Why was so easy for the press to find that info?

Until then wasn't the suspicion Ney was who GA was referring to.

 

[Janosch]

If I'm not mistaken, there are a lot of unidentified hairs found in 5A. Do you know if the PJ had CB's DNA profile at the time? More importantly, do you know that the BKA (Who does have his DNA profile) haven't checked against any of the unidentified hairs? I don't think he can be certain that his DNA isn't in 5A unless he was never in it.

Sorry, but I can't read the letter excerpts in your post, they are too small to read.

The unidentified hairs found in 5A are rootless, so nuclear DNA is not possible to obtain from them.
In the case of DM they had a hair with root.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

The unidentified hairs found in 5A are rootless, so nuclear DNA is not possible to obtain from them.

Are you saying then that every hair with a root found in 5A has been matched to someone via DNA? That wasn’t my understanding.