Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #36

[Denis R Tandib]

Maybe he did but who knows what goes on in their opaque justice system. It's opaque!

Clearly HCW can say what he wants with caveats like it’s his personal opinion. How someone who knows confidential information relating to the investigation can say things like this in the media is unfair.

I think the most logical answer to the question as to why FF hasn’t made a complaint is because he can’t, i.e. the German legal system allows prosecutors to make such claims and the defence arguing it is a waste of time.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

IMO if regardless of what district it started, if the evidence files were strong & extensive then Fulscher would have tried this on this jurisdiction card. There’s probably an argument CB lived or didn’t live in many places, he’s a transient which IMO gives Fulscher the opportunity to challenge the jurisdiction regardless. IMO if Magdeburg had strong evidence, he’d have done the same thing. I think the goal is to keep delaying because the prosecution have an airtight case & Fulscher can’t find any holes in it.

Jon Clarke said in his book that HCW told him some things about how CB’s defence was being paid for but HCW requested he didn’t write about it. Unfortunately there are a lot of sad immature weirdos that exist in some of these spiteful conspiracy clubs. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if these losers were crowdfunding & therefore giving the defence some of the money.

Come on Frank, you are using an implausible conspiracy theory to argue that a conspiracy theorists are paying CB’s legal bills - this is almost certainly untrue IMO.

I am also of the opinion that it’s unlikely a Jeffery Epsteinesque character is funding his fees. I don’t see how it would be in such a persons best interests to continue a connection to CB, even if he did have information on them.

I think the answer could be less mysterious. Could it be a fund based which supports the fairness of trials like the Innocence Project or one funded by the legal industry in Germany, perhaps in conjunction with public funding and a portion of the fees covered by JS and FF, or some combination of these?

ETA: does CB still own the box factory? Could he get finance against that to cover a portion of his legal fees?

 

[Denis R Tandib]

The file number from the prosecution seems to be interesting.

".....52790/18"

So the prosecutors opened the investigation file against CB already in 2018. So far so good. HCW told already in 2020, to have reached the conclusion of CB being guilty for MM's death "within the last two years".

Now they charge CB using the 2018 number for 5 crimes, but excluded the MM allegations. It indicates, they investigated a whole complex, they got aware of in 2018 and classified all the possible crimes into one single complex.

That again indicates, that none of the crimes CB has been charged of with, came up to light AFTER the 2020 public inquiry, because if it had, it would carry a ..../20, ..../21 or /...22 file number.

So if i put one and one together, all these crimes excluding MM had been investigated before 2020 already und must be linked to each other in some way, again, before 2020.

According to the fact, that the wording of three rape charges included quotes like "....and recorded the deed on a videocamera." and "....yet unknown victim.", i'm convinced that there is a lot of footage still existing. Footage that probably links CB to little MM as well.

ETA:

Now it makes sense. The MM case should have another file number, with a .../19, .../20 on it. They got aware of CB related MM AFTER they started to investigate the 5 crimes, CB has been charged of.

In this relation it is interesting as well, that CB has been investigated in the Inga case very intensively in 2019 (again?), although they found his vile material at Neuwegersleben in 2016 already.

So it's pretty likely, the allegations against CB according to MM could be the result of intel, that came up to light around 2019/2020.

OR ....they had all the info about MM from 2018 as well, but just separated the murder case from the charged sex crimes. That again would indicate, that there is footage of Maddie in CB's "collection".

Didn’t HB only come forward after the public appeal? She is on record making statements as such.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Great point.

IMO the concrete evidence came during the 2018 apartment search

I’m not saying that this isn’t true but this apartment is AB’s home. This means:

1. CB left footage or photos on MM here;
2. CB left here in an acrimonious split with AB, he was thrown out;
3. The evidence was left here for 10 years;
4. In this time AB neither found, viewed nor threw out this evidence;
5. CB seemingly made no effort to recover this evidence.

I just find it unlikely that AB wouldn’t have thrown out his former lodger’s stuff who he kicked out for being a drug dealer.

 

[Mex]

Clearly HCW can say what he wants with caveats like it’s his personal opinion. How someone who knows confidential information relating to the investigation can say things like this in the media is unfair.

I think the most logical answer to the question as to why FF hasn’t made a complaint is because he can’t, i.e. the German legal system allows prosecutors to make such claims and the defence arguing it is a waste of time.

Do you think this is a procedural issue akin to that being used by FF which is delaying the trial for the five indictments against CB?

I can see why there is an opinion that HCW might have overstepped the mark. But would he be allowed as a prosecutor to express a personal opinion about for example, murder. I don't think he would.
CNN says
"Last month, Portuguese and German officials named CB, who is German but lived in the Algarve between 1995 and 2007, as an official suspect.
It was in 2020 that prosecutors first said that they suspected CB – who due to German privacy laws they refer to as Christian B – had been involved in Madeleine’s disappearance. They said at the time they believed the child was dead."
___________________________________

The offending statement which is an opinion but not a personal one since it explains the the direction the investigation has taken, seems to be as follows ...
___________________________________

(CNN) - A German prosecutor has said he is “sure” that MM – the British girl who disappeared from a resort in Portugal in 2007 at the age of three – was killed by suspect CB.

HCW, who is investigating the case, told Portuguese broadcaster CMTV on Tuesday that investigators had found “new evidence” that connects CB, who is a convicted rapist and child sex abuser, to the child’s disappearance. CB is yet to be charged.

“The investigation is still going, and I think we found some new facts, some new evidence, not forensic evidences, but some evidence,” HCW told the broadcaster.

“We are sure he is the murderer of MM,” he said.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/05/europe/new-evidence-madeleine-mccann-intl-gbr/index.html

I would say definitely not expression of a personal opinion but information on the progress of the investigation which although honest could perhaps have been worded slightly differently. Which could well have been cause for complaint by FF.

 

[Mex]

Come on Frank, you are using an implausible conspiracy theory to argue that a conspiracy theorists are paying CB’s legal bills - this is almost certainly untrue IMO.

I am also of the opinion that it’s unlikely a Jeffery Epsteinesque character is funding his fees. I don’t see how it would be in such a persons best interests to continue a connection to CB, even if he did have information on them.

I think the answer could be less mysterious. Could it be a fund based which supports the fairness of trials like the Innocence Project or one funded by the legal industry in Germany, perhaps in conjunction with public funding and a portion of the fees covered by JS and FF, or some combination of these?

ETA: does CB still own the box factory? Could he get finance against that to cover a portion of his legal fees?

If the legal fees are being lifted by a body such as you mention set up for the purpose, why don't we know that? They are being singularly opaque about it.

 

[Mex]

Didn’t HB only come forward after the public appeal? She is on record making statements as such.

I believe that is the case.
But what would be the impediment to adding her file at a later date to the four already being investigated?

 

[misty48]

If the legal fees re being lifted by a body such as you mention set up for the purpose, why don't we know that? They are being singularly opaque about it.

Is the real reason CB is writing to anyone and everyone in the media because he doesn't trust any of his lawyers to act in his best interests rather than someone else's?

 

[misty48]

I’m not saying that this isn’t true but this apartment is AB’s home. This means:

1. CB left footage or photos on MM here;
2. CB left here in an acrimonious split with AB, he was thrown out;
3. The evidence was left here for 10 years;
4. In this time AB neither found, viewed nor threw out this evidence;
5. CB seemingly made no effort to recover this evidence.

I just find it unlikely that AB wouldn’t have thrown out his former lodger’s stuff who he kicked out for being a drug dealer.

Many people's attics don't get cleared out until they move house or die. As long as the cannabis was removed from his premises then maybe he didn't have a reason to examine CB's remaining personal items.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Do you think this is a procedural issue akin to that being used by FF which is delaying the trial for the five indictments against CB?

I can see why there is an opinion that HCW might have overstepped the mark. But would he be allowed as a prosecutor to express a personal opinion about for example, murder. I don't think he would.
CNN says
"Last month, Portuguese and German officials named CB, who is German but lived in the Algarve between 1995 and 2007, as an official suspect.
It was in 2020 that prosecutors first said that they suspected CB – who due to German privacy laws they refer to as Christian B – had been involved in Madeleine’s disappearance. They said at the time they believed the child was dead."
___________________________________

The offending statement which is an opinion but not a personal one since it explains the the direction the investigation has taken, seems to be as follows ...
___________________________________

(CNN) - A German prosecutor has said he is “sure” that MM – the British girl who disappeared from a resort in Portugal in 2007 at the age of three – was killed by suspect CB.

HCW, who is investigating the case, told Portuguese broadcaster CMTV on Tuesday that investigators had found “new evidence” that connects CB, who is a convicted rapist and child sex abuser, to the child’s disappearance. CB is yet to be charged.

“The investigation is still going, and I think we found some new facts, some new evidence, not forensic evidences, but some evidence,” HCW told the broadcaster.

“We are sure he is the murderer of MM,” he said.

https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/05/europe/new-evidence-madeleine-mccann-intl-gbr/index.html

I would say definitely not expression of a personal opinion but information on the progress of the investigation which although honest could perhaps have been worded slightly differently. Which could well have been cause for complaint by FF.

I’ve stated before that I think the media strategy used by the prosecutors is strategic to create a narrative about CB that he is someone who could be responsible for MM’s disappearance.

As to the actual wording, HCW has said everything possible to suggest CB is guilty without explicitly saying it. Given he has done so without concern for consequence, my point was that German law allows him to do so, so it is futile for FF to complain about it as you suggest up thread.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I believe that is the case.
But what would be the impediment to adding her file at a later date to the four already being investigated?

Because @SuperdadV8 was suggesting that the investigations into all five cases other MM had been completed prior to 2018 - this cannot be true.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

If the legal fees are being lifted by a body such as you mention set up for the purpose, why don't we know that? They are being singularly opaque about

I don’t think they are being opaque. When FF asked who was paying his fees, he said that he couldn’t give that information - that’s clear. This could be that the funds are provided on the basis of anonymity as part of the structural set-up of the fund.

This may not be true but my thoughts are that the financing of CB’s legal fees are probably more straightforward than a consortium of wealthy paedophiles that CB has dirt on or a network of anti-McCann conspiracists running a crowd funding group.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Many people's attics don't get cleared out until they move house or die. As long as the cannabis was removed from his premises then maybe he didn't have a reason to examine CB's remaining personal items.

Yes but we are saying that CB left very damning evidence of the world’s most famous missing person in this particular attic and likely never tried to retrieve it.

Additionally, AB never cleared it out. Never let anyone else stay there, or if they did, they didn’t find the evidence.

It doesn’t fit the narrative of someone who keeps video trophies of their crimes, and/or used them for access to dark web sharing sites.

 

[Mex]

Because @SuperdadV8 was suggesting that the investigations into all five cases other MM had been completed prior to 2018 - this cannot be true.

If you read what he actually said it was "So the prosecutors opened the investigation file against CB already in 2018."
No mention of closure although I think the implication may be that they were still working through them and since HB's case met the criteria it was added as part of the ongoing investigation file 2018.

 

[misty48]

Yes but we are saying that CB left very damning evidence of the world’s most famous missing person in this particular attic and likely never tried to retrieve it.

Additionally, AB never cleared it out. Never let anyone else stay there, or if they did, they didn’t find the evidence.

It doesn’t fit the narrative of someone who keeps video trophies of their crimes, and/or used them for access to dark web sharing sites.

I agree with your comments to a certain extent. However, if the USB's were encrypted and required user authentication then AB wouldn't have been able access them anyway. Possibly CB thought AB would have disposed of all the belongings left behind and there was no risk. The original data probably was/is on the dark web somewhere.

 

[Mex]

I don’t think they are being opaque. When FF asked who was paying his fees, he said that he couldn’t give that information - that’s clear. This could be that the funds are provided on the basis of anonymity as part of the structural set-up of the fund.

This may not be true but my thoughts are that the financing of CB’s legal fees are probably more straightforward than a consortium of wealthy paedophiles that CB has dirt on or a network of anti-McCann conspiracists running a crowd funding group.

I have not made any claims such as you suggest in your last paragraph although I do not disagree with them per se.

To what fund do you refer? Even philanthropic organisations must be regulated for tax and money laundering purposes etc. Is anyone exempt from that financial regulation?

There are obvious reasons for the forces of law and order to be opaque. But I cannot think of any reason to hide the identity of financiers who as you have suggested are set up to provide the means of access to a fair trial in a country which seems to excel in doing just that.

Are there really four law firms involved? Seems excessive to me.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

If you read what he actually said it was "So the prosecutors opened the investigation file against CB already in 2018."
No mention of closure although I think the implication may be that they were still working through them and since HB's case met the criteria it was added as part of the ongoing investigation file 2018.

I think what he was saying was clear with this:

Now they charge CB using the 2018 number for 5 crimes, but excluded the MM allegations. It indicates, they investigated a whole complex, they got aware of in 2018 and classified all the possible crimes into one single complex.

And:

That again indicates, that none of the crimes CB has been charged of with, came up to light AFTER the 2020 public inquiry, because if it had, it would carry a ..../20, ..../21 or /...22 file number.

And:

So if i put one and one together, all these crimes excluding MM had been investigated before 2020 already und must be linked to each other in some way, again, before 2020.

If HB didn’t come forward until 2020, the five cases cannot pre date 2020.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I agree with your comments to a certain extent. However, if the USB's were encrypted and required user authentication then AB wouldn't have been able access them anyway. Possibly CB thought AB would have disposed of all the belongings left behind and there was no risk. The original data probably was/is on the dark web somewhere.

Okay but we are talking about a guy who wore a head to toe spandex suit to prevent leaving any DNA at the crime scene.

But the same guy leaves videos of the actual crimes at a house he was kicked out of? And, they are still there a decade later for the BKA to pick up.

Like I said initially, possible but unlikely IMO.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I have not made any claims such as you suggest in your last paragraph although I do not disagree with them per se.

To what fund do you refer? Even philanthropic organisations must be regulated for tax and money laundering purposes etc. Is anyone exempt from that financial regulation?

There are obvious reasons for the forces of law and order to be opaque. But I cannot think of any reason to hide the identity of financiers who as you have suggested are set up to provide the means of access to a fair trial in a country which seems to excel in doing just that.

Are there really four law firms involved? Seems excessive to me.

I don’t know if a specific fund but in a country like Germany with no doubt a strong legal industry, I’m confident they exist.

My point was a simple one, that there is likely an honest answer to who is paying CB’s legal fees rather than a nefarious one and I don’t have an interest in debating it further.

 

[misty48]

Okay but we are talking about a guy who wore a head to toe spandex suit to prevent leaving any DNA at the crime scene.

But the same guy leaves videos of the actual crimes at a house he was kicked out of? And, they are still there a decade later for the BKA to pick up.

Like I said initially, possible but unlikely IMO.

It did strike me as strange too, given his penchant for burying data devices but perhaps there is a reasonable explanation for CB not having retrieved his potentially incrimiating belongings from AB. If an USB stick containing solely CSA images and a picture of MM, was recovered from AB's premises, how would ownership be determined? My (confused) mind is linking that to the transfer of CB's Jag registration on 4th May and the implications for AB.