Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #21

[Anxala]

I am sure their lawyers encouraged them not to take part.

For sure. But their statements and rogatories are still there for all to see in all their really confused and defensive and contradictory and self-serving colours, and no amount of not taking part can pull a 'Oh well, end of holiday, drink taken' convenient curtain over that.

Personally, I think they'd all have been better off stepping back from their own subjective career concerns and coming clean and admitting to 'lapses in memory' and 'lapses in child checks' and doing the reconstruction as it actually happened on that evening.

Had they done that, we wouldn't, 13 years later, still be questioning who went where when, who saw what, who did what check, who went in where, who listened at doors, who listened at windows, what position windows were at, what angle doors were at, what bogeyman tannerman crecheman actually existed as an actual physical concrete fact on that evening.

No wonder FF is happy to let HCW lead the way.

 

[tedtink]

For sure. But their statements and rogatories are still there for all to see in all their really confused and defensive and contradictory and self-serving colours, and no amount of not taking part can pull a 'Oh well, end of holiday, drink taken' curtain over that.

Personally, I think they'd all have been better off stepping back from their own subjective career concerns and coming clean and admitting to 'lapses in memory' and 'lapses in child checks' and doing the reconstruction as it actually happened on that evening.

Had they done that, we wouldn't, 13 years later, still be questioning who went where, when, saw what, did what check, went in, listened in, windows, doors, angles, tannerman, crecheman, timelines.

No wonder FF is happy to let HCW lead the way.

IMO all this PJ Files/ KM's book/ all TV interviews has to be considered by the prosecutor too and not just any evidence they have on CB.
No wonder it's taking such a long time to bolster a case against CB in the face of the past evidence.

 

[tedtink]

For sure. But their statements and rogatories are still there for all to see in all their really confused and defensive and contradictory and self-serving colours, and no amount of not taking part can pull a 'Oh well, end of holiday, drink taken' convenient curtain over that.

Personally, I think they'd all have been better off stepping back from their own subjective career concerns and coming clean and admitting to 'lapses in memory' and 'lapses in child checks' and doing the reconstruction as it actually happened on that evening.

Had they done that, we wouldn't, 13 years later, still be questioning who went where when, who saw what, who did what check, who went in where, who listened at doors, who listened at windows, what position windows were at, what angle doors were at, what bogeyman tannerman crecheman actually existed as an actual physical concrete fact on that evening.

No wonder FF is happy to let HCW lead the way.

Whilst I don't think it has helped, I think they behaved in the same way many others would have, faced with a situation like that. I would have wanted to subtly defend myself too after having my child taken and then being accused of killing her myself all whilst being played out in the world media and online. That's just human nature. Fight or flight.

JMO

 

[tedtink]

I agree.
As for Tannerman - I think JT did see Dr Tot but her memory could have 'reversed' the direction he was walking.
As we know, memory is malleable and after she realised MM had gone, it's probable and highly conceivable that her 'memory' altered that image she had in her mind of Totman in order to 'fit' an abduction - albeit unconsciously.
I have searched online press articles to see if Totman ever mentioned the exact time that he picked his daughter up from the creche and I've searched for creche records for signing out times etc but not part of the original investigation so no luck.
The time would be really helpful info in order to confirm that part of the Tapas timeline.
Info that LE will surely have.

JMO

I'll give an example of that too.
Years ago my friend witnessed an altercation where a Policeman was apprehending a youth who was getting really violent.
It resulted in a Resisting Arrest charge or something like that.
My friend witnessed the altercation and at the time, we were laughing as she told me that the policeman had looked like our old science teacher, who, at school, had a very distinctive handlebar moustache, a bald head and glasses. We really hadn't liked the teacher much as he used to throw the black board rubber at the pupils.
She gave her witness statement which had included a description of the Policeman - not only did the Policeman turn out to have a full head of hair - he had never wore glasses in his life!
So she had projected some of our science teachers physical characteristics and traits onto the Policeman simply because his moustache was the same. She'd also taken a dislike of the Policeman as she'd thought he used unreasonable force.
Needless to say, she wasn't a credible witness.

 

[tedtink]

DBM

 

[snowpea666]

Murdered ? Where has it been said that Madeleine’s parents did that? Be careful of using that term . The conclusion was that she had a accident resulting in her death and the parents concealed her body .

 

[Zuleika]

snowpea 666 . Murdered was the word used in that post when I responded .
It was later edited .

 

[tedtink]

snowpea 666 . Murdered was the word used in that post when I responded .
It was later edited .

I have a great respect for pedants!

Did you know - If you hit 'reply' you can quote the post that you want to reply to directly?

 

[Loobyloo]

@Loobyloo
We?
Are you a member of the Tapa's 7

Of course not, that's why I was confused when the OP wrote 'we'll all have been identified as suspects'. I wondered what they meant.

 

[peanutJelly]

Yeah, I agree with your KM observation.

FF has already said........

“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. My client did not commit this crime.”

You could say that he was being provocative by trying to force the prosecutors hand, but if he intends to rely on the T9 timeline if this goes to trial, he can ill afford to attempt to destroy T9 witness credibility imo.

I suppose we don't have much here from the prosecutors so I'm sure it'll take more twists and turns.

If you g back to all the witness statements, not just the tapas group, then you can see the incongruity with the overall timeline . My feelings remain that FF will rely on the obviously incongruent tapas timings when compared to other eye witness timings to prove CB (or anyone else) could have had time to do this. As others have said, in no way am I saying any of the group are implicated, just that their timings in their statements don’t match any of the other witness timings so throw shade on validity overall

 

[tedtink]

If you g back to all the witness statements, not just the tapas group, then you can see the incongruity with the overall timeline . My feelings remain that FF will rely on the obviously incongruent tapas timings when compared to other eye witness timings to prove CB (or anyone else) could have had time to do this. As others have said, in no way am I saying any of the group are implicated, just that their timings in their statements don’t match any of the other witness timings so throw shade on validity overall

Why would FF want to prove CB had time to do it?
If anything he'll use the original T9 statements and say there was no time that CB could have done it or that there was only a 90 second window.
If FF opens up a longer window in the T9 statements, then that could be a bit of an own goal imo.
Like I said, we don't know what FF or BKA has, or if it will even go to trial, so just speculation atm.
JMO.

 

[peanutJelly]

Why would FF want to prove CB had time to do it?
If anything he'll exploit the original statements and say there was no time that CB could have done it.

If you refer back to the whole timeline from other witness statements you will see what he will try do. According to other independent witnesses the alarm was raised earlier

 

[tedtink]

If you refer back to the whole timeline from other witness statements you will see what he will try do. According to other independent witnesses the alarm was raised earlier

And this is where JT's siting may be crucial.
I'm sure Totman would have signed an exit when he picked up his daughter from the creche and would have told LE what time he picked her up.
FF won't be aware of that info.

But I see what your saying, especially after all the talk of PJ's so called Trump Card.


P.J. POLICE FILES: RICARDO ALEXANDRE DA LUZ OLIVEIRA STATEMENT

JMO

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN WARNING:

Bumping my Admin Note from the Opening Posts of this thread:

Read all Opening Posts and post accordingly.

This thread is for discussion of CB as the suspect. It is not to rehash all old info unless you can specifically tie it to CB as the suspect.

The next member to suggest the parents had involvement in or are somehow responsible for Madeleine's disappearance will be permanently banned from this discussion.

 

[Newthoughts]

UK LE believe Tannerman to be crecheman but Smithman has never come forward - is examining a decent map of that sighting useful to find to see where he was in relation to OC and where he could be going. Also where that is in relation to his dwellings and photographed locations of his van that sleuthers identified earlier on.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

UK LE believe Tannerman to be crecheman but Smithman has never come forward - is examining a decent map of that sighting useful to find to see where he was in relation to OC and where he could be going. Also where that is in relation to his dwellings and photographed locations of his van that sleuthers identified earlier on.

I have posted about this before, I’m sure I’m not the only one but I did upload a few maps from Google. The sighting was on the corner of R. da Escola Primaria (Primary School Rd) and R. de 25 Abril (25 April Rd).

From what I can recall, Smithman is heading down Escola Primaria on the left hand side of the road, the Smith family are heading up a flight of stairs more or less opposite the entrance to Escola Primaria, as they cross over 25 de Abril, they cross paths with Smithman. The Smiths, nine of them are staggered in smaller groups, so they pass him at seperate times.

After passing him, the Smiths are unaware which direction he goes it. From the statements it seems more natural that Smithman heads down the stairs or turns left down 25 Abril - if he heads in an easterly (left) direction both options head to the beach via the back of the church and there is a car park there. If he goes west (right) at the bottom of the stairs, he traces the cliff edge and there are several lay-bys at the side of the road.

There are things of interest along this route l like the Ocean Club staff accomodation, the building where argument where the two men were arguing and if Smithman turned left on 25 de Abril, the next driveway is to the place where SM was living (his parents apartment) which is the back of 4 R. 1 de Maio.

As you mention, Smithman remains unidentified, I think it’s a very important sighting.

 

[Zuleika]

I have a great respect for pedants!

Did you know - If you hit 'reply' you can quote the post that you want to reply to directly?

As a newbie ,no I didn’t .Thanks for this

 

[Newthoughts]

I have posted about this before, I’m sure I’m not the only one but I did upload a few maps from Google. The sighting was on the corner of R. da Escola Primaria (Primary School Rd) and R. de 25 Abril (25 April Rd).

From what I can recall, Smithman is heading down Escola Primaria on the left hand side of the road, the Smith family are heading up a flight of stairs more or less opposite the entrance to Escola Primaria, as they cross over 25 de Abril, they cross paths with Smithman. The Smiths, nine of them are staggered in smaller groups, so they pass him at seperate times.

After passing him, the Smiths are unaware which direction he goes it. From the statements it seems more natural that Smithman heads down the stairs or turns left down 25 Abril - if he heads in an easterly (left) direction both options head to the beach via the back of the church and there is a car park there. If he goes west (right) at the bottom of the stairs, he traces the cliff edge and there are several lay-bys at the side of the road.

There are things of interest along this route l like the Ocean Club staff accomodation, the building where argument where the two men were arguing and if Smithman turned left on 25 de Abril, the next driveway is to the place where SM was living (his parents apartment) which is the back of 4 R. 1 de Maio.

As you mention, Smithman remains unidentified, I think it’s a very important sighting.

I also think it's a very, very important sighting. Especially with the addition of your info on lay-bys or car parks.

Adults carrying sleeping (or overtired screaming) children are quite a common sight in holiday areas. If I were CB I'd be figuring how much detail you'd notice about a man carrying a child in dim lighting compared with a vehicle. Not a lot as the Smithman sightings show. Whereas with vehicles you'd quite often get idea of make, colour etc.

If I were CB I'd figure far better to park somewhere discreet and take a chance on being largely ignored.

I don't think CB is part of any people smuggling organised crime gang but as a teacher I've had to sit through enough distressing keeping children safe training sessions to know that ordinary Paedophiles find each other and can work together. So others in that area could be involved.

 

[tedtink]

I also think it's a very, very important sighting. Especially with the addition of your info on lay-bys or car parks.

Adults carrying sleeping (or overtired screaming) children are quite a common sight in holiday areas. If I were CB I'd be figuring how much detail you'd notice about a man carrying a child in dim lighting compared with a vehicle. Not a lot as the Smithman sightings show. Whereas with vehicles you'd quite often get idea of make, colour etc.

If I were CB I'd figure far better to park somewhere discreet and take a chance on being largely ignored.

I don't think CB is part of any people smuggling organised crime gang but as a teacher I've had to sit through enough distressing keeping children safe training sessions to know that ordinary Paedophiles find each other and can work together. So others in that area could be involved.

I think if it had been a planned abduction, the perp would not walk that far with a child unless he was really, really stupid.

The burglary theory would fit, I suppose, especially if the perp had parked up in the centre of the village, then walked around PDL casing out any potential apartments or homes that were ripe for burglary.

 

[Newthoughts]

I think if it had been a planned abduction, the perp would not walk that far with a child unless he was really, really stupid.

The burglary theory would fit, I suppose, especially if the perp had parked up in the centre of the village, then walked around PDL casing out any potential apartments or homes that were ripe for burglary.

That would make me think the opposite. IMO a burglar would park close. Lots to carry coupled with fact it's a minor crime. No LE is really going to push the boat out interviewing people for a few cameras, cash and passports belonging to people that don't live there. Insured replaceable things you'd have to load into something to carry. Whereas a missing child or a child you've decided to abuse in their room is going to attract lots of attention.

I think a man carrying a child is less obvious than a man carrying a bag of stuff