Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #37

[Lyall0814]

I continue to think we may not be privy to all of the details, nor do I think we have any stake in how information will or should be shared. I still think we’ll find out a lot of the facts though.

In the absence of a jury & the lure of double jeopardy, I do think it’s obvious that German prosecutors & German judges assess evidence diligently & do so on the basis of all of the facts.

I think if we took ‘CB’ & ‘MM case’ out of the equation standards would lower & conclusions or assumptions would change.

Just out of interest. Do you accept the verdict in the Cipriano case?

I don't know enough about what happened in the trial in the Cipriano case. Do you accept the verdict? It's interesting that you seem happy enough with the prospect of a less than fully transparent MM-related trial in Germany, but I'm guessing you maybe weren't happy with the way that trial in Portugal was conducted? The Portuguese police didn't convict, the judiciary did.

 

[Mex]

IMO he may have planned it previously by careful attention to details and their easy routine.

Agreed. The apartment could have been observed easily and their routines noted. I don't think an intruder would have entered without being prepared.

 

[Lyall0814]

I think we tend to forget how dense the tree foliage was at the time and the overhanging nature of the branches. There was only one street light which was situated beside the trees, so the car park could have been very dark.
I think after dark it would have been quite difficult to see anyone who didn't want to be seen.

It wasn't too dark for JT to see someone though of course.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

I think we tend to forget how dense the tree foliage was at the time and the overhanging nature of the branches. There was only one street light which was situated beside the trees, so the car park could have been very dark.
I think after dark it would have been quite difficult to see anyone who didn't want to be seen.

Not so sure, and also not sure if he risked being seen as well as his van/car. On the other hand, also a risk walking and carrying MM through the streets...merge into the crowd to dilute attention (Smithman?!) but risking being noted by acquaintances (or was him "disguised"?)

 

[Mex]

It wasn't too dark for JT to see someone though of course.

You are perfectly correct.

The child carrier JT witnessed was not obscured by foliage in any way, crossing the open road at a T junction.

Any available street lighting outside blocks five and six would have illuminated him as would lighting on the pavement behind him.

One might say he was actually in the tungsten halogen spotlight. So JT really did have a good view of him.
My opinion

 

[Lyall0814]

You are perfectly correct.

The child carrier JT witnessed was not obscured by foliage in any way, crossing the open road at a T junction.

Any available street lighting outside blocks five and six would have illuminated him as would lighting on the pavement behind him.

One might say he was actually in the tungsten halogen spotlight. So JT really did have a good view of him.
My opinion

But whoever she saw clearly wasn't worried about being seen, that's all I mean.

 

[Mex]

Not so sure, and also not sure if he risked being seen as well as his van/car. On the other hand, also a risk walking and carrying MM through the streets...merge into the crowd to dilute attention (Smithman?!) but risking being noted by acquaintances (or was him "disguised"?)

If he was prepared to lift a child he might have disguised himself - wig at least. Although this is where I think it would have been useful to have a female accomplice to pass the child through the window to him.
My opinion

 

[RichardKimble]

But whoever she saw clearly wasn't worried about being seen, that's all I mean.

A British holidaymaker going about his lawful business, why would he be worried, what's not to believe about OG ruling him out.

 

[Mex]

But whoever she saw clearly wasn't worried about being seen, that's all I mean.

Why would he have changed his gait or his direction of travel. Any unusual reaction to being seen might only have alerted the observer that his actions were illicit and suspicious.
As it was it only took seconds for that sighting to pass and only in retrospect was its significance realised.
My opinion

 

[Lyall0814]

A British holidaymaker going about his lawful business, why would he be worried, what's not to believe about OG ruling him out.

I don't know but Mex clearly thinks the usually brilliant Op Grange made a mistake

 

[onemoremiletogo]

But whoever she saw clearly wasn't worried about being seen, that's all I mean.

As I wrote above, I'm not sure. As shows, IMO, his questions in his letters, as retrospective checklist to pass unnoticed.

 

[Mex]

A British holidaymaker going about his lawful business, why would he be worried, what's not to believe about OG ruling him out.

Absolutely. Mind you the question does arise that returning from the creche carrying his daughter on a direct route home to block 4 - why is it he was walking in the wrong direction?

 

[Lyall0814]

Absolutely. Mind you the question does arise that returning from the creche carrying his daughter on a direct route home to block 4 - why is it he was walking in the wrong direction?

Don't worry about that. DCI Redwood didn't.

 

[RichardKimble]

If the intention was to cause confusion with the raised shutter and the open window it was one of the most successful ploys ever because it has done nothing but cause distraction from the word go.

I couldn't agree more

What open window, this is where it could get messy for the BKA if they go the route of abduction, crime scene photos show it closed.An easy defence.

 

[RichardKimble]

Absolutely. Mind you the question does arise that returning from the creche carrying his daughter on a direct route home to block 4 - why is it he was walking in the wrong direction?

Matters not, it obvious even if he's not who JT saw, he never saw anything suspicious, timeline moved to circa 10pm.

 

[Mex]

I don't know but Mex clearly thinks the usually brilliant Op Grange made a mistake

Investigators always make mistakes. They would not be human otherwise. They also don't publicise issues they don't have to particularly in the midst of an active investigation.
My opinion

 

[Mex]

Don't worry about that. DCI Redwood didn't.

Do you seriously think that the DCI was unaware of the direction of travel from the night creche to block4. Cos I don't.

 

[Lyall0814]

Investigators always make mistakes. They would not be human otherwise. They also don't publicise issues they don't have to particularly in the midst of an active investigation.
My opinion

Very true, and British police don't ever have to explain their decisions (unless parliament asks them one day - a very unlikely prospect imo). Frustrating isn't it.

 

[Mex]

What open window, this is where it could get messy for the BKA if they go the route of abduction, crime scene photos show it closed.An easy defence.

Is it a concern for BKA? They claim evidence of murder ~ if it comes to trial they need only to prove that.

 

[Lyall0814]

Do you seriously think that the DCI was unaware of the direction of travel from the night creche to block4. Cos I don't.

I think they just wanted to be able to give those efits as much publicity as possible. So they had to say the 10pm sighting was the important one.