Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #19

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hard to tell, but assuming those are capital letters it might be psychiatric leave [PSIQ.].
Portuguese hotel skivvies in the Algarve are unlikely to get pyschiatric leave, haha unlikely now nevermind 07.
 
"Baixo P Sir" ?
Could this be an abbreviated placename - his location from 2-10 May? Google translate says baixo/baixa is 'low', whereas 'on leave' is 'de licença'.

ETA: Or it could indicate 'psychologically low' ie depressed (& off work for that reason, even if there wasn't official sick leave for mental health issues).
 
Last edited:
Here it is at last (I thought it would be easier):

An old employee of the Ocean Club had the number in his diary and revealed who it belonged to, a then 30-year-old German who lived nearby and didn’t have a known profession.
Madeleine McCann suspect 'may have been tipped off' about family’s dinner plans

So the evidence that the number was CB and thus placing him in PdL that earlier that evening, is basically this note in a diary?

No wonder they need the other person on the call.
 
In the portuguese handwritten note for employee PK please can anyone identify the 2nd word inside the brackets? So that I can complete the missing word in this tentative translation "tapas cook (on ---- leave from 02 to 10 May)
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P4/04_VOLUME_IVa_Page_851.jpg
ZuMe1H0.jpg

I think it says:
cozinheiro 'Tapas' (Baixo/Baxia PhR, desde 02 a 10 Maj 07)
What does PhR mean?
 
Last edited:
So the evidence that the number was CB and thus placing him in PdL that earlier that evening, is basically this note in a diary?

No wonder they need the other person on the call.
I think that CB's 'admissions' and 'confessions' of his involvement to his friends are the basic evidence.
His phone number (being kept in a diary) makes it possible to place him in that location and at that time.
 
I think that CB's 'admissions' and 'confessions' of his involvement to his friends are the basic evidence.
His phone number (being kept in a diary) makes it possible to place him in that location and at that time.

I'd be interested in the evidentiary questions around that. You'd likely need to produce the exhibit and the witness to state it. Which is why I am guessing they rather need the witness from the 30 min call
 
So the evidence that the number was CB and thus placing him in PdL that earlier that evening, is basically this note in a diary?

No wonder they need the other person on the call.

They would need it anyway. A mobile location alone isn't enough evidence of owner's location. If I leave home and forget my mobile it doesn't mean I stayed home. If I forget my mobile in my friend's car and he travels 100Km it doesn't mean I traveled that distance. If I lend my mobile someone and later call her in my number it doesn't mean I was there where she answered.
 
RM?
The fourth man cannot be identified for legal reasons but he, too, vehemently protests his innocence and is said to be sick and tired of unwarranted police interest in him.
RM won a libel case against 10 newspapers in 2008.
Robert Murat wins libel case in McCann probe

As I said before, MM's case is as yet unsettled. Until it's tried in a court of law no one may claim their pristine innocence.

Andrei Romanovich Chikatilo was cleared a few times before being sentenced to death.
 
I'd be interested in the evidentiary questions around that. You'd likely need to produce the exhibit and the witness to state it. Which is why I am guessing they rather need the witness from the 30 min call
I agree. CB’s number was in the ‘diary’ of the German former Ocean Club employee. The call to CB’s phone was a number other than this person’s. PK’s number at the time ends with 695.
 
They would need it anyway. A mobile location alone isn't enough evidence of owner's location. If I leave home and forget my mobile it doesn't mean I stayed home. If I forget my mobile in my friend's car and he travels 100Km it doesn't mean I traveled that distance. If I lend my mobile someone and later call her in my number it doesn't mean I was there where she answered.

The other difficulty, is unless the call was related to the crime, why would the caller remember what day it was, or the content?
 
The other difficulty, is unless the call was related to the crime, why would the caller remember what day it was, or the content?

I hope people won't remember a call only can if it's related to a crime...
 
I hope people won't remember a call only can if it's related to a crime...

The problem is, if you ask me "did you call this person on this number at this time 13 years ago" - there is no way I can testify to that, unless I have some way to place it based on other events. There would need to be something very specific to place the call.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
69
Guests online
1,784
Total visitors
1,853

Forum statistics

Threads
602,342
Messages
18,139,344
Members
231,352
Latest member
8xbet81bet
Back
Top