Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #20

[Dlk79]

I'm starting to come to the thinking that CB was already in the apartment during one of either GM or MOs checks. Bear with me on this.

HCW was asked in the recent interview about whether they had any evidence placing CB in 5A. His comment was that he could not say, since either answer would invite a thousand more questions. At the time, this seemed a reasonable thing to say, but thinking back on it, would saying "no" really invited many questions other than the obvious "what do you have then"?

I think everyone assumed they had no such evidence anyway given the importance they are placing on finding the mystery caller. And if they had evidence of CB being in 5A, it would make placing him on that call a moot point you'd think. But then, it depends on what that evidence is. And like HCWs comments on the possible video, I'm begininning to think they maybe do have something.

It led me thinking to another comment HCW made, early on in the investigation. He said that CB had knowledge of the crime that only the suspect/abductor could know. For them to know CB had that knowledge, CB must have told someone a detail about the crime. Most likely it was something said in the confession to HB. But when you consider what this detail could be, the options are limited. For "only" the abductor to know, it needs to be some piece of information that is not in the public domain. It also needs to be something LE can actually confirm took place.

Given that there is no trace of MM beyond 5A, it would surely have to be something that happened within 5A. But again, there seems to be nothing relating to the actual abduction sequence that LE could verify, since nobody saw what took place. All the available evidence led the original investigation team to doubt that an abduction even happened. MM effectively vanished without a trace.

The only sound theory I can come up with is that CB was in the apartment during either GM or MOs check, and that CB has told HB a detail about what one of them did while he was in there. An act that was not mentioned in any of their statements, possibly because it was such a minor or irrelevant detail. It could be something as inane as them pouring a glass of water or whistling a tune to themselves while CB watched/listened from a hiding place. It is something though that LE could have potentially verified as being true via some discreet questioning of the involved witness.

It seems more plausible than other options discussed previously such as CB talking about a birthmark. I can easily imagine CB boasting about hiding right under their nose while they did x, y or z. I can't really imagine why he would go to the detail of mentioning a birthmark to HB. It also doesn't really fit with "knowledge of the crime" (he could have seen a birthmark in a video from someone else), plus other people would have known about a birthmark.

I could be wrong, but it makes sense of HCW comments, as well as many other aspects of what's gone on and how FF has gone about his defence. It places CB in the apartment but unfortunately, it's possibly not robust enough evidence for a trial. The defence will claim (and are claiming) that HB is a liar and could dismiss this knowledge of what happened in 5A as coming from another source. FF could also challenge the original witness testimony and ask why the detail was never mentioned in their previous statements. If however, LE could combine HBs testimony with a seperate witness placing CB at the scene via the phone call, that becomes extremely compelling when put in front of a judge. And it would make a lot of sense as to why they are placing so much importance on tying CB to that call.

All JMO, feel free to challenge.

 

[they'll get you]

MADELEINE McCann cops need a breakthrough in the next ten weeks or the case against prime suspect Christian B could “evaporate”.

Maddie cops need huge breakthrough by Jan or Christian B case could ‘evaporate’

 

[they'll get you]

An attorney for the man suspected of [URL='https://nypost.com/2020/09/26/prosecutor-madeleine-mccann-body-not-needed-for-arraignment/']kidnapping British toddler Madeleine McCann is demanding that prosecutors share concrete evidence or throw out the case — and police are privately admitting they desperately need a breakthrough in the 13-year-old case.
[/URL]
https://nypost.com/2020/10/17/lawyer-for-madeleine-mccann-suspect-demands-concrete-evidence/

 

[redplanet]

What if he is already in the apartment and a checker arrives and he hides somewhere in the apartment until the checker has departed. His first knowledge that a checker is arriving would be when he hears the lounge sliding door being slid open or maybe when he hears footsteps going up the exterior steps towards that sliding door. So, whichever room he is in, he has only a few seconds to quickly hide. If he has earlier pressed record on a video camera, he is unlikely to have time to hit stop.

 

[Dlk79]

What if he is already in the apartment and a checker arrives and he hides somewhere in the apartment until the checker has departed. His first knowledge that a checker is arriving would be when he hears the lounge sliding door being slid open or maybe when he hears footsteps going up the exterior steps towards that sliding door. So, whichever room he is in, he has only a few seconds to quickly hide. If he has earlier pressed record on a video camera, he is unlikely to have time to hit stop.

That's along my line of thinking also, though I doubt a video camera was involved at this point. The patio doors had large curtains across them which I would expect to have been drawn closed for the evening. It would mean that upon hearing a door opening, an intruder would have a few seconds before the incoming person could see anything in the apartment.

I keep going back to GM stating about MM's bedroom door being further open than they had left it. Could it be that CB was in the bedroom at that time (having entered the property through the patio doors himself minutes earlier) and he quickly hid behind the door when GM arrived?

 

[SuperdadV8]

If that timeline is reliable, there should be enough time to snatch the little girl.

Timeline: the day Madeleine McCann disappeared

But let's ne honest, the times should vary by some minutes, if you ask me. Who does that kind of time table on the last day of vacation, workout, first glass of wine by 8 pm and after that a cheerful evening with friends . I would never.

Does anybody know, if there is time delay between Rothley and PDL in around may? Same or different longitudes?

I can remember a scene from the netflix documentary, when GM told on what time he phoned a pastor for assistance and KM rebuked him in front of the camera, due to the time he told. It's easy, to have a wrong feeling of concrete timings IMO.

So maybe we have a time window of at least one hour, where the child could have gone missing. Probably through a window next to a parking lot?! That should be done in seconds, maybe using a big bag or something.

According to the linked timeline we should have two door movements. One around (estimated) 9 pm with a "unmoved" MM, the other about 9.30 pm without checking her presence. So maybe yes, a slim perp could have been hidden behind the door at around 9 pm. Why not?!

The second door movement could have been done to leave the hiding place and take the child?!

Would be interesting, on what time sundown at PDL has happened on may 3rd 2007. Hard to think that a abducter would take the child if it wasn't already dark outside.

 

[Victoria Chambers]

I think if MM was targeted, the abductor would have made his move in line with the adults checking and leaving. Rather than just turn up and enter in the knowledge of him being disturbed at any minute. If he knew their routine he would have used the time in between checks IMO. I am certain a member of staff did say they saw a man wearing sunglasses loitering within a building - but since the apartments have their entry/exit points leading straight outdoors as opposed to opening onto a corridor, I dont quite see how somebody loitered in a building?! X

 

[redplanet]

That's along my line of thinking also, though I doubt a video camera was involved at this point. The patio doors had large curtains across them which I would expect to have been drawn closed for the evening. It would mean that upon hearing a door opening, an intruder would have a few seconds before the incoming person could see anything in the apartment.

I keep going back to GM stating about MM's bedroom door being further open than they had left it. Could it be that CB was in the bedroom at that time (having entered the property through the patio doors himself minutes earlier) and he quickly hid behind the door when GM arrived?

A checker (MO/GM/KM) on arriving opens the street gate, walks up the outdoor steps, opens the childgate. Whether those 3 actions are audible inside I do not know. Next the checker slides open the lounge door, this IMO is audible in every room. Next the checker pushes aside the curtain just inside the door and can see into the apartment. Can see parts of lounge and diner and kitchen and hall and can see doorway of child bedroom. There is only one light on: a small table lamp in the lounge.

 

[mrjitty]

I'm starting to come to the thinking that CB was already in the apartment during one of either GM or MOs checks. Bear with me on this.

HCW was asked in the recent interview about whether they had any evidence placing CB in 5A. His comment was that he could not say, since either answer would invite a thousand more questions. At the time, this seemed a reasonable thing to say, but thinking back on it, would saying "no" really invited many questions other than the obvious "what do you have then"?

I think everyone assumed they had no such evidence anyway given the importance they are placing on finding the mystery caller. And if they had evidence of CB being in 5A, it would make placing him on that call a moot point you'd think. But then, it depends on what that evidence is. And like HCWs comments on the possible video, I'm begininning to think they maybe do have something.

It led me thinking to another comment HCW made, early on in the investigation. He said that CB had knowledge of the crime that only the suspect/abductor could know. For them to know CB had that knowledge, CB must have told someone a detail about the crime. Most likely it was something said in the confession to HB. But when you consider what this detail could be, the options are limited. For "only" the abductor to know, it needs to be some piece of information that is not in the public domain. It also needs to be something LE can actually confirm took place.

Given that there is no trace of MM beyond 5A, it would surely have to be something that happened within 5A. But again, there seems to be nothing relating to the actual abduction sequence that LE could verify, since nobody saw what took place. All the available evidence led the original investigation team to doubt that an abduction even happened. MM effectively vanished without a trace.

The only sound theory I can come up with is that CB was in the apartment during either GM or MOs check, and that CB has told HB a detail about what one of them did while he was in there. An act that was not mentioned in any of their statements, possibly because it was such a minor or irrelevant detail. It could be something as inane as them pouring a glass of water or whistling a tune to themselves while CB watched/listened from a hiding place. It is something though that LE could have potentially verified as being true via some discreet questioning of the involved witness.

It seems more plausible than other options discussed previously such as CB talking about a birthmark. I can easily imagine CB boasting about hiding right under their nose while they did x, y or z. I can't really imagine why he would go to the detail of mentioning a birthmark to HB. It also doesn't really fit with "knowledge of the crime" (he could have seen a birthmark in a video from someone else), plus other people would have known about a birthmark.

I could be wrong, but it makes sense of HCW comments, as well as many other aspects of what's gone on and how FF has gone about his defence. It places CB in the apartment but unfortunately, it's possibly not robust enough evidence for a trial. The defence will claim (and are claiming) that HB is a liar and could dismiss this knowledge of what happened in 5A as coming from another source. FF could also challenge the original witness testimony and ask why the detail was never mentioned in their previous statements. If however, LE could combine HBs testimony with a seperate witness placing CB at the scene via the phone call, that becomes extremely compelling when put in front of a judge. And it would make a lot of sense as to why they are placing so much importance on tying CB to that call.

All JMO, feel free to challenge.

Nice post.

I think whatever HCW believes exists, it is something that short circuits all the case folklore. it could be a photo from earlier in the day, a trophy - anything.

But my belief is HCW does not have the physical evidence - that is what he is looking for. I suspect he believes something existed, and he has heard of it recounted by HB

 

[redplanet]

On whether the street-gate makes noise, we have one indirect bit of info. Mrs F's niece describes a man earlier that day closing a nearby street-gate very carefully to avoid it making noise. Same design gate.

 

[redplanet]

Another interesting observation about sound. If the intruder was in the apartment hiding during GM check, next the intruder would possibly be able to hear the conversation just outside the street-gate (JW statement).

 

[Victoria Chambers]

You know the apartment next door to the McCanns sat empty. I've often wondered wether a staff member with access to all the keys, could have actually granted the abductor access to that apartment. He would have a perfect view of the Tapas bar and the comings and goings that night along with the added ability to watch and wait unnoticed. X

 

[snowpea666]

That's along my line of thinking also, though I doubt a video camera was involved at this point. The patio doors had large curtains across them which I would expect to have been drawn closed for the evening. It would mean that upon hearing a door opening, an intruder would have a few seconds before the incoming person could see anything in the apartment.

I keep going back to GM stating about MM's bedroom door being further open than they had left it. Could it be that CB was in the bedroom at that time (having entered the property through the patio doors himself minutes earlier) and he quickly hid behind the door when GM arrived?

Or behind the sofa ???

 

[SuperdadV8]

Never read the BKA-appeal that carefully, but it contains two interesting statements, that would fit some theories made in here:

BKA - Fahndung nach Personen - Verschwinden der Madeleine McCANN am 03.05.2007 in Praia da Luz / Portugal – Zeugen gesucht


"Im Rahmen der Aufklärung der Tatumstände geht es insbesondere um die Feststellung des tatsächlichen Aufenthaltsortes des Beschuldigten zum mutmaßlichen Tatzeitpunkt, der zwischen 21:10 Uhr und 22:00 Uhr am Tattag liegt."

"In the context of the investigation of the circumstances of the offence, the aim is in particular to establish the actual whereabouts of the accused at the alleged time of the offence, which is between 21:10 and 22:00 on the day of the offence."

So yes, they need to pin CB on OC Apartment 5A or close to it! And another thing:

"Weiterhin besteht Anlass zur Annahme, dass es neben dem Täter selbst noch weitere Personen gibt, welche über konkretes Wissen zum möglichen Tathergang und ggf. Ablageort der Leiche verfügen. Diese Personen bitten wir ausdrücklich, sich zu melden und ihr Wissen mitzuteilen."

Furthermore, there is reason to believe that in addition to the perpetrator himself, there are other persons who have concrete knowledge about the possible course of events and, if necessary, the location of the corpse. We expressly ask these persons to come forward and share their knowledge.

So it seems, that either CB has already told someone about snatching and killing MM in the past (HB?), or there is footage of something, that can't be linked to CB BARD (shared on darkweb an chatted about?!). Maybe due to some kind of disguise, but in possession of CB or others that had contact with him. But then they would need CB at OC at the time MM was taken, to have got enough for an arrest warrant.

If they can't pin him at OC, but have got footage of a disguised perp torturing MM, the DM case (or future cases) could be the last key, maybe due to a similar modus operandi in the ordeal. Therefore, the sentence has to be valid first and the appeal on german highest court hasn't been finally processed yet.

That could fit the announcment of no further announcements from the prosecuters office until next year either.

 

[Newthoughts]

I'm starting to come to the thinking that CB was already in the apartment during one of either GM or MOs checks. Bear with me on this.

HCW was asked in the recent interview about whether they had any evidence placing CB in 5A. His comment was that he could not say, since either answer would invite a thousand more questions. At the time, this seemed a reasonable thing to say, but thinking back on it, would saying "no" really invited many questions other than the obvious "what do you have then"?

I think everyone assumed they had no such evidence anyway given the importance they are placing on finding the mystery caller. And if they had evidence of CB being in 5A, it would make placing him on that call a moot point you'd think. But then, it depends on what that evidence is. And like HCWs comments on the possible video, I'm begininning to think they maybe do have something.

It led me thinking to another comment HCW made, early on in the investigation. He said that CB had knowledge of the crime that only the suspect/abductor could know. For them to know CB had that knowledge, CB must have told someone a detail about the crime. Most likely it was something said in the confession to HB. But when you consider what this detail could be, the options are limited. For "only" the abductor to know, it needs to be some piece of information that is not in the public domain. It also needs to be something LE can actually confirm took place.

Given that there is no trace of MM beyond 5A, it would surely have to be something that happened within 5A. But again, there seems to be nothing relating to the actual abduction sequence that LE could verify, since nobody saw what took place. All the available evidence led the original investigation team to doubt that an abduction even happened. MM effectively vanished without a trace.

The only sound theory I can come up with is that CB was in the apartment during either GM or MOs check, and that CB has told HB a detail about what one of them did while he was in there. An act that was not mentioned in any of their statements, possibly because it was such a minor or irrelevant detail. It could be something as inane as them pouring a glass of water or whistling a tune to themselves while CB watched/listened from a hiding place. It is something though that LE could have potentially verified as being true via some discreet questioning of the involved witness.

It seems more plausible than other options discussed previously such as CB talking about a birthmark. I can easily imagine CB boasting about hiding right under their nose while they did x, y or z. I can't really imagine why he would go to the detail of mentioning a birthmark to HB. It also doesn't really fit with "knowledge of the crime" (he could have seen a birthmark in a video from someone else), plus other people would have known about a birthmark.

I could be wrong, but it makes sense of HCW comments, as well as many other aspects of what's gone on and how FF has gone about his defence. It places CB in the apartment but unfortunately, it's possibly not robust enough evidence for a trial. The defence will claim (and are claiming) that HB is a liar and could dismiss this knowledge of what happened in 5A as coming from another source. FF could also challenge the original witness testimony and ask why the detail was never mentioned in their previous statements. If however, LE could combine HBs testimony with a seperate witness placing CB at the scene via the phone call, that becomes extremely compelling when put in front of a judge. And it would make a lot of sense as to why they are placing so much importance on tying CB to that call.

All JMO, feel free to challenge.

I think that's good assumption

Details of missing child would be circulated including what she was wearing - because they are important clues. If, for example, her pyjamas had been found - the public would need to be aware to report it

The world's media has given details of the flat, the fact nothing was missing etc.

So what else could only the abductor know that isn't already in the public domain?

 

[redplanet]

I think if MM was targeted, the abductor would have made his move in line with the adults checking and leaving. Rather than just turn up and enter in the knowledge of him being disturbed at any minute. If he knew their routine he would have used the time in between checks IMO. I am certain a member of staff did say they saw a man wearing sunglasses loitering within a building - but since the apartments have their entry/exit points leading straight outdoors as opposed to opening onto a corridor, I dont quite see how somebody loitered in a building?! X

The ground-floor communal stairwell was visible to checkers MO and ROB and JT during their checks (but not visible to GM and KM during their checks). Because the checks were done through the main doors of 5B and 5D, which are in/near that stairwell area.

 

[redplanet]

You know the apartment next door to the McCanns sat empty. I've often wondered wether a staff member with access to all the keys, could have actually granted the abductor access to that apartment. He would have a perfect view of the Tapas bar and the comings and goings that night along with the added ability to watch and wait unnoticed. X

Next-door is 5B where stayed the O family. I think you mean next-door-but-one 5C, where no-one was staying, this is the probable location of the 2 blond men seen by JJ and sister, also of the gate closing man seen by CT.

 

[Chiatos]

An experienced burglar/CB would act the soonest possible after the parents would have left for dinner and everyone seated at the table. Should a check to the apartment impede the burglar to act then he would postpone to immediately after that check.

The MCs left round 20:35. They were the first to arrive at the TB.

The last ones arrived at 20:50. This meant that it would be soon time to carry out a check, therefore not wise to sneak into the apartment now.

The next and first check was at 21:05 at the back, at the window(s). Immediately after GM carried out his check entering from the door(s).

Right after this check would have been the right time to pounce. IMO Tannerman could have been the abductor.

(But I'm still wondering about those 90 secs)

 

[SuperdadV8]

According to that article, CB seemed to have had a talk about MM at a internet chat and PJ knew that since 2019.

That would fit MWT's statements about CB chatting with another peado and could be the link to exclusive perp-knowledge.

Neues im Fall Maddie McCann: Das wissen wir über den Tatverdächtigen Christian B. (43)

"Der portugiesische Polizeibeamte, der die Ermittlungen zum Fall Maddie über einen langen Zeitraum leitete, sagte bereits im letzten Jahr, dass die Ermittlungen sich auf einen Deutschen konzentrierten. Er habe in einem Internetchat mit jemand anderem über Maddie gesprochen."

"The Portuguese police officer, who led the investigation into the Maddie case for a long time, said last year that the investigation was focused on a German. He spoke to someone else about Maddie in an internet chat."

 

[C.greek]

According to that article, CB seemed to have had a talk about MM at a internet chat and PJ knew that since 2019.

That would fit MWT's statements about CB chatting with another peado and could be the link to exclusive perp-knowledge.

Neues im Fall Maddie McCann: Das wissen wir über den Tatverdächtigen Christian B. (43)

"Der portugiesische Polizeibeamte, der die Ermittlungen zum Fall Maddie über einen langen Zeitraum leitete, sagte bereits im letzten Jahr, dass die Ermittlungen sich auf einen Deutschen konzentrierten. Er habe in einem Internetchat mit jemand anderem über Maddie gesprochen."

"The Portuguese police officer, who led the investigation into the Maddie case for a long time, said last year that the investigation was focused on a German. He spoke to someone else about Maddie in an internet chat."

Could that be counted as 'material evidence'?