Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #4

[Chiatos]

police wanting to know where he lived is interesting. do they need to match an image with a house the suspect lived in?

if there is any kind of photographic evidence, it cannot be in the suspect's known home on 3-4 may 2007, as he was living in his van. police know what that van looks like, as they have it.
it cannot be in either of his cars - as they have both of these too.

so if he did abduct MBM, where did he take her on 3 may? and where was any photography/ filming done? either he found a new home on 3rd may, or a third party's home is involved. or an empty home? abandoned home? hotel?

Apparently he lived nearby the resort at the time:

Madeleine McCann suspect's British ex quizzed by police over time in Algarve
And yes, for sure, he must have taken Maddie to some other place ....

 

[Edinlass]

Same with Ben Needham

This 100%. Another case which was not given the attention nor the funding every missing child deserves. Boils down to social class, in my opinion...

 

[LittleRose]

Same with Ben Needham

Makes you re-think inexpensive vacation sites like Portugal, Mexico, etc,

 

[Kikixxxx]

Snowflake generation. It shouldn’t be optional, I don’t know why anyone would object unless they had something to hide of course.

exactly!!!!

 

[Edinlass]

Makes you re-think inexpensive vacation sites like Portugal, Mexico, etc,

Absolutely

 

[Cherwell]

If the German police wished to tell us they had video or photographic evidence, they'd wouldn't need to wrap the information up in a riddle. It'd be a simple straightforward statement and then the news would break all over Europe within minutes of being announced.

"It's possible our suspect may have filmed something in connection to MM but we don't have evidence that he did."

I guarantee you he didn't say that sentence with a wink and a nod to the websleuths. No special emphasis on the word 'he' to imply someone else could've filmed it. No did-he-didn't-he poker face. No tapping his nose when he said "we don't".

They're saying in pretty black and white terms: Yes, he could've made a video. No, we don't have one.

As you say - IF.
IF they wanted to make it public at this point.

There is the chance MM was “ordered” but then became to hot to handle. The news at the time in and around portugal (I believe) was quite slow paced until the McCanns involved the British media.

The McCanns informed the UK media almost immediately.

 

[photographer4]

Just off topic, I’m amazed that trackers are now not fitting as standard on all new cars?
Apart from it making it easier to identify stolen vehicles, it would also prove the movements of it.

A tracker would show where the vehicle was yes, but not who was driving or occupying it. Nor would it show if say the driver were under duress. Besides which, there would probably be issues with privacy....

 

[sleuth-d-]

Jumping off the quoted post, I wondered, did Portugal have traffic cams at the time when MM went missing? Could they have his vehicle on a traffic cam from around the time of the abduction? I wonder too, were local businesses ever asked for security footage? Could they have seen him / his vehicle in footage maybe? That might be one thing they have. I agree though, wherever he went, it wasn't home, because they already know he was living in his van. So maybe he went to an associate's location?

no cctv in public places in portugal in 2007. only in petrol stations and other private locations.

further regarding location, police know about the place in foral. they know what the interiors there look like.

i still think it has to be photographic or video evidence...
as a third party account of 'a killing' would not be the 'strong evidence' that LE keep referring to having, imo.

 

[rebel123]

He stashed that UBS stick under some animal bones, it is possible that he's stashed other incriminating stuff in other locations. Hiding UBS stick under animal bones is 'primitive', maybe put there for someone to collect, but they failed to collect it.

 

[Armchair_Defective]

Jumping off the quoted post, I wondered, did Portugal have traffic cams at the time when MM went missing? Could they have his vehicle on a traffic cam from around the time of the abduction? I wonder too, were local businesses ever asked for security footage? Could they have seen him / his vehicle in footage maybe? That might be one thing they have. I agree though, wherever he went, it wasn't home, because they already know he was living in his van. So maybe he went to an associate's location?

You can go to a site where the files have been translated and you can search them, putting CCTV in the search brings up many pages of results.

www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk

 

[Olivia_Seafish]

Snowflake generation. It shouldn’t be optional, I don’t know why anyone would object unless they had something to hide of course.

There are many more reasons to object to surrendering your DNA to the state than 'having something to hide.' It's a huge and complex ethical issue which would divide good people right down the middle.

 

[LittleRose]

He stashed that UBS stick under some animal bones, it is possible that he's stashed other incriminating stuff in other locations. Hiding UBS stick under animal bones is 'primitive', maybe put there for someone to collect, but they failed to collect it.

Animal bones make me wonder about occult activity. Any more info on this?

 

[Edinlass]

There are many more reasons to object to surrendering your DNA to the state than 'having something to hide.' It's a huge and complex ethical issue which would divide good people right down the middle.

You object, I don’t.

 

[Armchair_Defective]

[/QUOTE]

Snowflake generation. It shouldn’t be optional, I don’t know why anyone would object unless they had something to hide of course.

Seriously off topic I think but there are civil liberty issues. There have been various cases all over the world where evidence has been planted or DNA could have exonerated someone but the police lied about it's existent even in very 'civilised' nations like the US and UK. Is every government and police force free of corruption? Do you know for sure your government can protect your data from hackers or won't sell it off to medical companies for profit? No.

 

[sleuth-d-]

He said he did it and appears to have described in detail how he did it. It's his confession coupled with the fact that he fits that seems to be giving the Germans confidence.

he hasn't said that. a third party has said he said it. in the pub. which is a little different. anyone can get drunk in the pub and say stupid things. that doesn't sound like solid evidence to me.

in this case, describing 'how you did it' in detail is meaningless, as LE cannot corroborate any of it.
any details would be meaningful if LE had some imagery to corroborate them.

 

[Owlpellet]

I think the German prosecutor’s strategy is brilliant. The media attention has to be crushing CB. Not only has he lost the (false) decent reputation which he worked hard to portray to some people, but he’s also fearing for his life. The ONLY people who can protect him right now are the police/prison system. And their ONLY incentive to protect him is if he cooperates.

Yes, they've basically signed his death warrant and offer his only protection.

That gives me some confidence that they must feel very, very sure.

 

[photographer4]

He stashed that UBS stick under some animal bones, it is possible that he's stashed other incriminating stuff in other locations. Hiding UBS stick under animal bones is 'primitive', maybe put there for someone to collect, but they failed to collect it.

Christian Brueckner is linked to FOURTH unsolved case | Daily Mail Online

The USB key got under the animal bones, somehow, yes, but... that is not to say that he placed them there intentionally, or that he did it at all (it could have been someone else). What condition was the USB key in when it was found? Was it protected say in a ziplock bag or just out in the open? I don't think we were told that by the media, were we? Under what circumstances was the key found? They found child abuse images on the key, so it had to have been reasonably well protected from the elements, and not just laying out in the open, right?

We were also not told anything else about how the device was found. EG: did they use electronic sniffing dogs at the site? If not, would that be worth doing now (go over each of his known residences / vehicles) with dogs trained to find any hidden electronic devices?

 

[Jealoushe]

If the German police wished to tell us they had video or photographic evidence, they'd wouldn't need to wrap the information up in a riddle. It'd be a simple straightforward statement and then the news would break all over Europe within minutes of being announced.

"It's possible our suspect may have filmed something in connection to MM but we don't have evidence that he did."

I guarantee you he didn't say that sentence with a wink and a nod to the websleuths. No special emphasis on the word 'he' to imply someone else could've filmed it. No did-he-didn't-he poker face. No tapping his nose when he said "we don't".

They're saying in pretty black and white terms: Yes, he could've made a video. No, we don't have one.

LE will often hide or lie about evidence they have, so it is entirely possible they dont want the public knowing there is video or photos to ensure the investigation is not ruined, especially if they are still currently working a case on something related, like say child abuse image websites or trafficking.

IMO it is impossible to say what the police have for evidence. Can't really say they have it or that they don't have it. They usually play their cards pretty close to their chest unless they are close to the smoking gun that will enable the case to go to trial.

 

[Olivia_Seafish]

he hasn't said that. a third party has said he said it. in the pub. which is a little different. anyone can get drunk in the pub and say stupid things. that doesn't sound like solid evidence to me.

in this case, describing 'how you did it' in detail is meaningless, as LE cannot corroborate any of it.
any details would be meaningful if LE had some imagery to corroborate it.

It isn't solid evidence, and we can reasonably preume it's the reason they're not pressing charges. But depending on the reliability of their informant, it's probably be their reason for believing what they do about MM and CB.

 

[JediJim]

I don’t think DNA will ever be taken from every birth or indeed anytime. There are too many Human Rights Laws and civil liberty groups that would oppose this.
In my opinion, surely it’s worth it though?
Here’s an example;
In the 80s, a girl called Melanie Road was murdered in Bath,UK. No one was caught until over 30 years later.
The murderer was a caught because many years later a family member was arrested for a non related offence. They got a DNA match and the man was caught and jailed.
He didn’t commit any further crimes that they’re aware of and had never been arrested before.
So yes, that’s why we should all be on the DNA database.