Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread #27

[Estelle]

Maddie case: Widow's suspect accuses PJ of searching for a scapegoat
2 November 2013

No personal effects or other goods were stolen from Apartment 5A

The former partner of the man that the PJ suspects of having abducted Maddie accuses the Police of searching for a «scapegoat». And guarantees that the Cape-Verdean, who died in 2009, was «incapable of touching a child».

«They have spoken about so many people already, it is disgusting that they are now trying to set up a dead man as a scapegoat», deplores the woman, who does not wish for her name to be divulged. The former partner of the suspect, in his forties, was surprised last week when she was notified to be heard by the PJ, in Lagos, in the scope of the inquest that has meanwhile been reopened. A female officer told her that they were investigating the man with whom she had lived with until 2009, the year in which the suspect died in a work accident, with a tractor in Bragança [North of Portugal].

«After four years have gone by since he died in a tragic way, they appear and they imply that he is being investigated for being referenced in the process relative to the girl's disappearance. He didn't even work at the Ocean Club when that happened. They asked me questions upon questions: when did he work there, when did he stopped working there... But so much time has passed that I had to make an effort to be precise.»

Read more in the printed edition.

Sol, November 1, 2013 | Paper edition to follow as soon as possible (joanamoraisblogspot)

 

[~n/t~]

They were like Maddies were they not?

Yes they were

 

[Donjeta]

I'm confused (yes again:blushing. How do we know the pyjamas were only tested after 6 years? I think LE has them and were tested at the time when egg man came forward to say he was the guy Tanner saw

I'm just going by what was reported.

I don't think we ever heard an exact date when this man came forward but it was certainly implied that it took him six years to clear himself as a suspect and it was a relatively new development that happened during the British police investigating.

A British father considered the prime suspect in the Madeleine McCann kidnapping for six years blew open the case after coming forward to police with his child's distinctive frilly pyjamas.
The mystery man's involvement was ruled out after detectives realised he was taking his own two-year-old daughter home from a crèche and had not snatched Maddie.
He even agreed to be pictured in the clothes he wore in Praia da Luz, on May 3, 2007, to prove he was the man in the police sketch previously seen as key to cracking the case.
His two-year-old's pink pyjamas, which were described by one of the McCann's closest friends, were also brought to Scotland Yard to help prove his innocence.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ather-mistaken-key-suspect.html#ixzz2jUM6ObK2
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Crimewatch UK - October 2013 Madeleine Mccann Special - YouTube
At 22 minutes or so AR talking about this says the British police spoke to the family and it's being discussed as new and important information that changed the timeline after 6 years.


(I don't know why, really, wasn't it always possible that this sighting was somebody else?)

 

[CHERIE.T]

Why are some post showing up slower than others? Hummm

 

[~n/t~]

I still think TM could still be a plausible suspect. For one he had previous for another crime, secondly he was heroin addict so had a clear motive for burglary, three his cell phone pings place him at the location of the complex.

His so called friend even has him down as a heroin addict which by itself is not an indication of guilt, but it does give credence to developing a motive for going back to old haunt in order to commit a crime.

There are many cases historically where the perp has a previous record of criminal activity, look at the Tia Sharpe case, these people are often on the edge of society for various personal as well as social economic reasons, some people in the UK class them as scrotes (as in scrotum sack), which is an unsavoury term for someone who is fairly dodgy and is also associated with recreational and habitual drug use, as well as petty theft. IMO from what we've been told he fits the bill.

Of course not every person of this type would go on to commit murder or be desperate enough to kidnap a child, but the potential to commit more serious crime is more likely than a regular person because of the factors I've already stated.

Then again his wife could be completely correct about him and he's been made a scapegoat?

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

Wonder why LE will not comment if he's their main suspect?

-----------
Portuguese police have declined to comment on the Correio da Manha report.



Read more: http://www.theweek.co.uk/crime/made...s-suspicious-behaviour-children#ixzz2jUQIQIRo

 

[~n/t~]

I'm just going by what was reported.

I don't think we ever heard an exact date when this man came forward but it was certainly implied that it took him six years to clear himself as a suspect and it was a relatively new development that happened during the British police investigating.




Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ather-mistaken-key-suspect.html#ixzz2jUM6ObK2
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Crimewatch UK - October 2013 Madeleine Mccann Special - YouTube
At 22 minutes or so AR talking about this says the British police spoke to the family and it's being discussed as new and important information that changed the timeline after 6 years.


(I don't know why, really, wasn't it always possible that this sighting was somebody else?)

So he only came forward after 6 years? Gosh I was so convinced he was ruled out years ago. :scared:

WTH? Did he not realize he was the guy with his kid? How many fathers carried their children to and from the crèche that same night? In pyjamas.

 

[~n/t~]

Why are some post showing up slower than others? Hummm

I sometimes experience lagging on this board.

 

[Donjeta]

So he only came forward after 6 years? Gosh I was so convinced he was ruled out years ago. :scared:

WTH? Did he not realize he was the guy with his kid? How many fathers carried their children to and from the crèche that same night? In pyjamas.

I dunno but it seems to me like he always thought it could be him that JT saw but decided that he didn't want to get involved in the investigation at the time and would just rather keep his family out of it, thank you very much. Perhaps it felt safer to talk to the British police or he finally wanted bragging rights that he had made the front pages.

If his name had been in the PJ files that were released there probably would be a number of online conspiracy theories about how he said he was carrying his daughter but in reality he switched girls and it was just a smoke screen for abducting Madeleine.

 

[~n/t~]

I dunno but it seems to me like he always thought it could be him that JT saw but decided that he didn't want to get involved in the investigation at the time and would just rather keep his family out of it, thank you very much. Perhaps it felt safer to talk to the British police or he finally wanted bragging rights that he had made the front pages.

If his name had been in the PJ files that were released there probably would be a number of online conspiracy theories about how he said he was carrying his daughter but in reality he switched girls and it was just a smoke screen for abducting Madeleine.

Oh dear. Now I'm back to this guy's odd behaviour. Wouldn't anyone want to be ruled out immediately if innocent? Just come forward and say hey that was me this is my daughter and here are the pyjamas she was wearing.

I would guess the crèche has a record of him dropping off his daughter or picking her up?

 

[Donjeta]

Oh dear. Now I'm back to this guy's odd behaviour. Wouldn't anyone want to be ruled out immediately if innocent? Just come forward and say hey that was me this is my daughter and here are the pyjamas she was wearing.

I would guess the crèche has a record of him dropping off his daughter or picking her up?

I imagine that's how they tracked him down. In the above video, AR mentioned a night creche that had 11 children from 8 families and one of the families they talked to was this one.

 

[~n/t~]

I imagine that's how they tracked him down. In the above video, AR mentioned a night creche that had 11 children from 8 families and one of the families they talked to was this one.

Now I understand why there was that whole discussion about the dirty pyjamas and questioning why this guy kept them for 6 years (allegedly)

Thanks for the clarification. You're the best. :tyou:

 

[Morag]

Sometime over the past week or so, since this case 'reheated', I read a statement from Amaral that they had located and ruled out the man from the Tanner sighting early on. He also said something about the McCanns have not fooled him and he will catch them.

I'll continue looking and provide a link when I can.

It certainly seems likely that checking out creche records would have been among the first things done in order to rule in/out that guy.

 

[Donjeta]

Probably not the one you're looking for but here's a recent interview in which Amaral
talks about the Smith sighting.

Portuguese cop: Met has finally caught up on McCann - YouTube

 

[goldengirl57]

Sometime over the past week or so, since this case 'reheated', I read a statement from Amaral that they had located and ruled out the man from the Tanner sighting early on. He also said something about the McCanns have not fooled him and he will catch them.

I'll continue looking and provide a link when I can.

It certainly seems likely that checking out creche records would have been among the first things done in order to rule in/out that guy.

This was an interview with Amaral in 2008. They never took the sighting by JT seriously.

24 July 2008


Correio da Manh㠖 As the case investigator, what is your thesis?

Gonçalo Amaral – The little girl died in the apartment. Everything is in the book, which is faithful to the investigation until September: it reflects the understanding of the Portuguese and the English police and of the Public Ministry. For all of us, until then, the concealment of the cadaver, the simulation of abduction and the exposure or abandonment were proved.

What led you to indict the McCanns over all of those crimes?

It all starts with an abduction theory that is forced by the parents. And the abduction is based on two facts: one is Jane Tanner's testimony that says she saw a man passing in front of the apartment, carrying a child; the other is the bedroom window, which, according to Kate, was open when it should have been closed. It was proved that none of that happened.

How was it proved?

Jane Tanner is not credible: she identifies and recognizes different people. She starts with Murat, later on someone else is mentioned, according to the drawing done by a witness, and she already says that is the person, completely different from Robert Murat.

Jane Tanner's testimony drove the abduction theory.

In order to advance into that direction, it would be necessary to give her credit: there was no other indicium of the abduction. And the issue of the bedroom window, where Maddie and her siblings slept, is vital. It leads to simulation. This means, whether or not it was open when Jane says that she saw the man carrying the child. The little girl’s mother, Kate, is the only person that mentions the open window.

 

[Ellmau]

Why would someone burgle holiday apartments most people actually only bring their clothes, and perhaps a camera. There is a safe for passports etc. So what would there be to burgle?

Cash. Lots of people take foreign (local) currency on their holiday, and they don't always remember to put it in the safe either.

 

[goldengirl57]

Cash. Lots of people take foreign (local) currency on their holiday, and they don't always remember to put it in the safe either.

In all my holidays never left cash in a room no way lol....but I understand what you are saying. ALTHOUGH there was nothing taken from 5A.

 

[Pisces Cloud]

I respect your opinion as I do with all other members opinions. As we know, Murat was ruled out and is not a suspect in this case. Even the McCanns apologized for implicating him. He was a nosy neighbour who wanted to know what was going on and that's what made him suspicious. The efit that Tanner produced which is no longer valid didn't even look like Murat. As for SM, his only involvement was his connection with Murat. He was considered a witness in the case and not a suspect. Unfortunately someone didn't like him and set his car on fire.
http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/03/mccannscase-sergey-malinka-admits-to.html

I don't think anyone can be ruled out until someone is charged and convicted. I haven't seen anything officially stated that SM or RM couldn't have been involved or anything concrete to show why not. The McCanns aren't being classed as suspects now, either, but people aren't going to stop questioning some of their behaviour and inconsistencies. All any of us can do is theorise, because the crime hasn't been solved and so no-one but the perpetrator/s know what happened that night.

 

[Fierljepper]

In all my holidays never left cash in a room no way lol....but I understand what you are saying. ALTHOUGH there was nothing taken from 5A.

But they did leave a pile of passports wide in the open in their bedroom (see photo evidence from the PJ). This to me is another indication that the parents were totally relaxed that night and did not even consider a possible break in.

I travel around world for business a lot and I would never leave my passport behind in my hotel room and if I have to, it always goes into a safe as does my wallet, iPad and laptop.

 

[SapphireSteel]

But they did leave a pile of passports wide in the open in their bedroom (see photo evidence from the PJ). This to me is another indication that the parents were totally relaxed that night and did not even consider a possible break in.

I travel around world for business a lot and I would never leave my passport behind in my hotel room and if I have to, it always goes into a safe as does my wallet, iPad and laptop.

No one "expects" a break in.

Folks secure their valuables, leave their house and lock the doors and hope for the best.

Except in this case where the McCann (allegedly more intelligent than the rest of us put together) skipped off night after night leaving their (arguably) most precious possessions alone and completely unprotected.

This does not make sense no matter how you look at it.

 

[SapphireSteel]

As far as the pro McCann cry that the Tapas 9 barely knew each other -

These people had spent at least 5 hours per night "dining" together.

Five hours per night x six nights of holiday = 36+ hours all looking at each other across the same table.

Didn't know each other well? Please. I have friends for decades who I can dine with, guess what it only takes an hour then we go for a walk or to the movies or home to someone's house for coffee.

Five or six hours across from the same faces night after night is not the behaviour of virtual strangers.