Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #20

[Newthoughts]

I don't quite understand how all this questioning came about, and yes indeed trying to find now whether GM lied seems to me to be feeding these conspiracy theories that FF openly follows.

There is no conspiracy theory - the man had just had the shock of his life and would be being questioned by police about events leading up to it when, if it were me, I'd be expecting them to be looking for her asap.

From relaxed evening out when, let's fact it none of us are looking at our watches and recording what happens to being expected to recount those events whilst being in the middle of your worse nightmare.

There is no conspiracy, no assumption of guilt just a wondering how accurate anyone could be in those circumstances because the timings suddenly appear more important and the main suspect could get off because of it.

 

[C.greek]

Is there a link so I can find out who FF is please?

It's CB's lawyer

 

[C.greek]

There is no conspiracy theory - the man had just had the shock of his life and would be being questioned by police about events leading up to it when, if it were me, I'd be expecting them to be looking for her asap.

From relaxed evening out when, let's fact it none of us are looking at our watches and recording what happens to being expected to recount those events whilst being in the middle of your worse nightmare.

There is no conspiracy, no assumption of guilt just a wondering how accurate anyone could be in those circumstances because the timings suddenly appear more important and the main suspect could get off because of it.

Unfortunately such questioning of whether GM indeed saw her (thus doubting his statements and elaborations of his feelings when recollecting his last sighting ever of his daughter) do stem from conspiracy theories from the thousands of people who believe the parents to be guilty, that FF is openly endorsing and are feeding back to these conspiracy theories. I am NOT accusing anyone in this forum of that and I am not doubting the motivation behind it by websleuthers. I am though afraid that we are all inadvertently falling in FF's 'trap' to bring back the anti-MC conspiracies into full play.

 

[redplanet]

Unfortunately, I wouldn't say it is easily resolved. SY have never addressed how Mr Totman would have been walking the opposite direction to what JT stated. The logic of him being attributed as the man JT saw was that he carried his sleeping daughter home from the night creche that night. But since he was staying in the same block as the Tapas group, and the night creche was in the direction that JT says the man was walking, there is enough to doubt whether he really was that person she saw.

The fact SY have not addressed this anomaly suggests to me that perhaps they believe JT is mistaken in her recollection of what she actually saw, and that the man was walking the other way. It's enough for FF to throw doubt upon the whole thing in any case. There's also the issue that Mr Totman knew the McCann group, having played tennis with them. And with them having stayed in the same complex all week, FF could say that surely JT would have recognised the fellow holidaymaker if it was actually him.

Then again, such an argument could throw up the possibility that in that case the man could have been CB, so not sure whether it helps FF all that much.

Just a minor detail: Mr T and his family was staying in Block 4, to the west of Block 5.
Other witnesses staying in block 4 included Mrs W, JJ and her sister, and JW(chat).

 

[redplanet]

Unfortunately, I wouldn't say it is easily resolved. SY have never addressed how Mr Totman would have been walking the opposite direction to what JT stated. The logic of him being attributed as the man JT saw was that he carried his sleeping daughter home from the night creche that night. But since he was staying in the same block as the Tapas group, and the night creche was in the direction that JT says the man was walking, there is enough to doubt whether he really was that person she saw.

The fact SY have not addressed this anomaly suggests to me that perhaps they believe JT is mistaken in her recollection of what she actually saw, and that the man was walking the other way. It's enough for FF to throw doubt upon the whole thing in any case. There's also the issue that Mr Totman knew the McCann group, having played tennis with them. And with them having stayed in the same complex all week, FF could say that surely JT would have recognised the fellow holidaymaker if it was actually him.

Then again, such an argument could throw up the possibility that in that case the man could have been CB, so not sure whether it helps FF all that much.

Dr T and wife have more recently spoken to the press. IMO they had been trying to tell UK police since 2007 but were ignored for many years until eventually AR listened.
Why did Madeleine McCann cops waste years investigating GP sighting?

 

[snowpea666]

I don't quite understand how all this questioning came about, and yes indeed trying to find now whether GM lied seems to me to be feeding these conspiracy theories that FF openly follows.

Its not about whether GM lied, its about being 100% in the facts of the time frame, the first timeline was a bit wrong, so can we be sure the second is correct to the min? GM changed his statement then neither KM or GM could really get the door locked/open and keys being needed correct, I for one as I think we are all saying, we are not feeding conspiracy theories only maybe trying to say under such circumstances, shock, trauma, denial, guilt and wine, it would be easy to mix things up a bit, I think all of us are really heart sorry for G &K, but the only Victim in all this is a little girl who is prob no longer with us, and if it means the Mc and friends have to go and give evidence 100 times it would be worth it to get a conviction and for them as a family to find peace, dont think for one min the overly pompous FF will think twice about wrapping the Mc up in cotton wool, he will rip them apart, or at least try

 

[Dlk79]

Dr T and wife have more recently spoken to the press. IMO they had been trying to tell UK police since 2007 but were ignored for many years until eventually AR listened.
Why did Madeleine McCann cops waste years investigating GP sighting?

I don't see any evidence there they tried to tell UK police anything other than what it claims in the misleading headline. They said they told the initial investigators back in 2007 that it may have been him that JT saw but they never heard anything back. Who else did they tell about it?

As for being ignored, that's probably a bit harsh. They were likely ruled out on the basis his movements did not match what JT saw. i.e. he was heading back to block 4 of the Ocean club with his daughter, not away from it like the man JT described. The fact the Ocean club had a night creche means it would be pretty common for parents to have been carrying their children home at night so it was probably viewed as a coincidence that he was just another person carrying a child that night.

Mr Totman would have had to walked past 5A that night to get to his apartment, sure, and I can see why they told police it might be him who was seen. But it still might not have been, there's nothing conclusive to say so, despite what AR has asserted. IMO if it was him, then JT can't have seen what she claimed, at least not the correct direction anyway. Either that or there's something we've not been told about Mr Totman's movements.

 

[mrjitty]

I don't see any evidence there they tried to tell UK police anything other than what it claims in the misleading headline. They said they told the initial investigators back in 2007 that it may have been him that JT saw but they never heard anything back. Who else did they tell about it?

As for being ignored, that's probably a bit harsh. They were likely ruled out on the basis his movements did not match what JT saw. i.e. he was heading back to block 4 of the Ocean club with his daughter, not away from it like the man JT described. The fact the Ocean club had a night creche means it would be pretty common for parents to have been carrying their children home at night so it was probably viewed as a coincidence that he was just another person carrying a child that night.

Mr Totman would have had to walked past 5A that night to get to his apartment, sure, and I can see why they told police it might be him who was seen. But it still might not have been, there's nothing conclusive to say so, despite what AR has asserted. IMO if it was him, then JT can't have seen what she claimed, at least not the correct direction anyway. Either that or there's something we've not been told about Mr Totman's movements.

Good post

This would be a nightmare at trial

 

[haden]

That was the point of my original post

If this trial was happening in the UK, i think the prosecutor would need to call the parents as they are the only ones who can provide direct evidence that MM was indeed in 5A and then missing with the relevant timing. So then they can be x-ed

In germany - I am not sure how it works.

Could we kindly ask you to stop discussing MMs parents within the context of this thread?
If you like to discuss their position I am sure there are other threads outside of this topic.

 

[MENDEL]

Who decides what can be discussed here, Sir/Madam?

 

[haden]

Who decides what can be discussed here, Sir/Madam?

I believe that discussing the parents in a possible court case within this topic is 1) off topic and 2) not allowed on this forum as it breaches their privacy and also 3) it is touching a conspiracy theory
If I am wrong then please forgive me.
I would kindly ask a moderator to clarify it.

 

[Victoria Chambers]

Could we kindly ask you to stop discussing MMs parents within the context of this thread?
If you like to discuss their position I am sure there are other threads outside of this topic.

Everybody here involved in this discussion are well aware of the McCanns status. They are victims in all of this and any discussing of their timeline is purely in relation to what we do know with regards to suspect CB and the timing and distance between his phone pings. Please, to make out we are violating the rules will end with the thread being closed. People in here have worked hard in relation to what we now know of CB- the suspect.

 

[Victoria Chambers]

I believe that discussing the parents in a possible court case within this topic is 1) off topic and 2) not allowed on this forum as it breaches their privacy and also 3) it is touching a conspiracy theory
If I am wrong then please forgive me.
I would kindly ask a moderator to clarify it.

Also, we are discussing information from the files that the McCanns fought to have released. There is no invasion of privacy or conspiracy theory. We clearly know that MM was abducted and her parents are entirely innocent

 

[mrjitty]

I thought it might be helpful to summarise the on the record statements made by CB's defence lawyer FF which appear to summarise how he intends to present a defence. He has spoken in both english and german media, but the Sun article below captures the main thrust of the various articles

I think there are three strategies he is working on, to raise reasonable doubt. Depending on what evidence HCW has, I will expect FF to run all of these.

1. Abduction by CB doesn't fit the timeline - (the 90 second window claim)

[Fulscher] claims he has looked at Christian's mobile records, and worked out potential times and distances to the holiday apartment the McCann family were staying at on the night the toddler disappeared. “If the witness statements are correct, there was a time window of one minute and 30 seconds in which the child could have been abducted.

2. Competing theories by rival police forces

Speaking exclusively to The Sun Mr Fulscher said: ''It is no secret that the Portuguese have a different theory of what happened to the German BKA (federal police).

"The German prosecution could put an end to this theory when they finally put their cards on the table.

''This would be fair to the suspect and for the parents - both sides could judge for themselves how robust they consider the evidence to be.''

3. Existence of other suspects who can't be ruled out.

He added: "If you knew the Portuguese investigation file as I do, there was more than one perpetrator in Portugal at that time who had a corresponding [criminal] history.''

Maddie suspect’s lawyer demands cops reveal ‘concrete evidence’ of murder

Clearly we want to be able to discuss FF's strategy in a robust but respectful way.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

As has been stated before, this thread is about CB, NOT about the McCanns.

Members may discuss what CB's defence lawyer is saying in MSM but may not go back to speculating and rehashing everything that has already been discussed about the McCanns and the Tapas 7.

Once a trial is underway and it becomes known what CB's defence team is presenting, members may then discuss the defence position.

 

[mrjitty]

Thank you for the clarification!

 

[C.greek]

I thought it might be helpful to summarise the on the record statements made by CB's defence lawyer FF which appear to summarise how he intends to present a defence. He has spoken in both english and german media, but the Sun article below captures the main thrust of the various articles

I think there are three strategies he is working on, to raise reasonable doubt. Depending on what evidence HCW has, I will expect FF to run all of these.

1. Abduction by CB doesn't fit the timeline - (the 90 second window claim)


2. Competing theories by rival police forces


3. Existence of other suspects who can't be ruled out.


Maddie suspect’s lawyer demands cops reveal ‘concrete evidence’ of murder

Clearly we want to be able to discuss FF's strategy in a robust but respectful way.

That's helpful. Thanks mrjitty. However, I am unsure about the 'competing theories by rival police forces' bit. As far as i understand, GA has been dismissed from the police force due to his theories and his absolutely devastating involvement in the MM case(and other cases) . Is the conspiracy theories presented in the sm, the theories of the portuguese police force?

 

[C.greek]

ADMIN NOTE:

As has been stated before, this thread is about CB, NOT about the McCanns.

Members may discuss what CB's defence lawyer is saying in MSM but may not go back to speculating and rehashing everything that has already been discussed about the McCanns and the Tapas 7.

Once a trial is underway and it becomes known what CB's defence team is presenting, members may then discuss the defence position.

Thank you for this clarification. I am happy for my posts to be deleted! And we can now all go back to discussing CB!

 

[mrjitty]

That's helpful. Thanks mrjitty. However, I am unsure about the 'competing theories by rival police forces' bit.

Snipped for focus on what FF has said.

I think it is highly likely FF has had an off the record conference with PJ. I mean it is simply an obvious thing for any lawyer to do when your client is publicly accused of a crime domestic to Portugal. You talk to BKA in germany and you talk to PJ. This is also what the media do.

Now of course PJ might not be any more forthcoming than BKA, but as counsel you are likely to be able to get at least some basic info off the record. e.g does PJ have an active investigation? is CB an active suspect etc. Depending on the law in Portugal, he may even be able to request some historical stuff held on his client....

I have no idea personally what the status of the PJ investigation is. Last I knew, they archived their investigation, but I believe since then they had at least a liaison team that assisted the Met

All very murky I am afraid

 

[mrjitty]

PJ appear to be remarkably coy on the subject - but this would appear to confirm they have an active co-operation / liaison on CB

Also it implies that the Met have been focussed on different suspects until now

Worth mentioning HCW appeared to criticize PJ in his public comments back in June

Mr Farinha said: 'If the suspicions about this man were so obvious, he would have been the subject of requests made by the British, which were always authorised by Portugal, but those requests about him were never made. He added in his interview with Lusa: 'If the PJ is being accused of giving Brueckner a lack of priority, the same could be said of the Metropolitan Police.

'In theory everything could have been different but in 2007 and in 2012 we didn't known what we knew in 2017.'

He also described this week's fresh appeal as an initiative of the German police, who were 'convinced it could lead to additional information coming in from the Germany community.'

But appearing to hint that the evidence the three police forces have at the moment may not be enough to bring charges and a successful prosecution, he was quoted as saying: 'Suspicions about the German national have grown but unfortunately they are not enough to make him an arguido and formally accuse him.'

The interview ABC carried with the unnamed PJ officer was written by the paper's Lisbon correspondent.

German 'prime suspect' in Maddie McCann case Christian Brueckner is INNOCENT, says Portuguese police | Daily Mail Online

​