Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #21

[Trivento]

How would he have carried another sleeping child back to Block 4 with his arms already full? JT didn't see his wife with him.

Like I said earlier..so many questions in this case...unless you're the person directly involved..or police with full info..others can only speculate really...bit like with what actually happened to MM herself as things stand so far

 

[Dlk79]

On a more random note, anyone know why we're getting to page 71 of thread #21? Normally after about 55 pages the mods move us on a thread number.......

 

[redplanet]

They are talking about a different sighting there regarding the bare-chested men, something that happened earlier in the day prior to JJ's sighting. From the article -

The second e-fit is of a man who was seen on the afternoon that Madeleine disappeared at around 4pm.

He was coming from an empty apartment two down, 5C, and he walked off towards the main road.
(My obs: This is the JJ sighting)

"We’re really keen to understand who that was.

“That links back to a sighting at 2.30pm where two men who were bare-chested wearing swimming trunks and with blonde hair were seen by two witnesses.”

This sighting at 2.30pm is from someone else, be interested to know who though and where it was exactly.

Although confusingly there is this in Crimewatch 2013:
(clothing of 2 men on balcony 5C)
@25:11-25:23

 

[redplanet]

Interesting point. He had a 3yr old daughter who he claims to have carried back from the night creche, but where was his 4yr old son? If they were both there, you'd assume both parents would go to collect them, or the elder child would walk alongside Mr Totman as he brought the pair back. I guess the assumption is that only the daughter went to the creche that night and the son had stayed with the parents? Or he did two trips?

On Tue night May 1st JTo and wife had a 2+1 reservation at Tapas therefore 1 child was presumably at dinner and 1 at creche so that night also might possibly have involved walking with a child towards creche at collection time.

 

[Dlk79]

On Tue night May 1st JTo and wife had a 2+1 reservation at Tapas therefore 1 child was presumably at dinner and 1 at creche so that night also might possibly have involved walking with a child towards creche at collection time.

Why would you do that though? If you are already at the resort with the one child, why would you take them away from there to collect another child from the creche?

 

[redplanet]

Why would you do that though? If you are already at the resort with the one child, why would you take them away from there to collect another child from the creche?

All 3 locations are part of the resort IMO. In that Tue night situation, some parents might chose the most efficient logistics, some might chose to go together via creche IMO.
Advancing again to Thu evening, do you think both JTo children were at evening creche?

 

[Okapi]

Have now found an Express article with Mr.Balinger talking about works on Rue Direta...200 yards away...but on Netflix doc JC seems to be talking about something right outside 5A...am guessing now he was talking about Rue Direta works while demonstrating size of works standing outside 5A which was causing the confusion to me I think.

"Drainage work was taking place to pipes in the town around the time and deep holes were dotted around the town. Some of the drains were filled in and covered over a day after Madeleine went missing. Some locals believe the toddler either wandered out of her room in search of her parents and tumbled into one of the pits, others think whoever attempted to abduct her may have panicked and dumped her body into one of the holes in an attempt to cover their tracks and then absconded."


What it’s like to holiday at the beach resort where Madeleine McCann went missing

 

[Newthoughts]

As there is some vagueness in CT statement about which exact gate am now wondering if she perhaps saw someone operating a baby gate which requires the use of two hands normally , so is chance was one of parents doing that I guess , perhaps checking it was adjusted correctly , maybe at stairs of 5B..?

I was under the impression that it the fixed external gate she was referring to.

She says he opened and shut it carefully more than once and looked up and down the road. It was furtive enough for her to note it as unusual. It was in a significant location. The description - 13 years before CB was mentioned - fits him.

 

[redplanet]

Near the top of this report is photofit of gate-man seen by CT
Madeleine witness says Christian B IS man she saw near apartment

 

[mrjitty]

The arguments here make no sense -

A friend said: “Any police force or prosecuting chief should not be boasting... but should be remaining silent as in the case of the Met Police

Why? What have the Met police achieved in this investigation to highlight them as a good example of how to conduct this case. They've had millions in funding and achieved absolutely nothing.

“They should... not be suggesting that members of the public would be reaching the same conclusion as they do about the suspect if they knew the evidence they had. It is beyond bizarre and not very helpful to the investigation.”

Why shouldn't they? What problem is it causing the investigation exactly? Just sounds like a nonsense comment IMO without any reason, aside from emotional opinion.

“If Mr Wolters has got any significant evidence we cannot understand why the key suspect is not being questioned."

Then you haven't been listening. It isn't as simple as that, once they go down that avenue, all cards are on the table. And why do that when you haven't quite got everything you need to convict, but still have the time and opportunity to gather more evidence?

“If they think he is a red herring and had no involvement they should say so, instead of playing games, because the real culprit could be out there and escaping any scrutiny.”

The most bizarre statement of all. Gives the impression this 'source' wants/believes CB to be innocent. They don't like where this is going yet what proof do they have that CB isn't guilty? Why make this comment, don't they want the correct man to face justice? Also, they assert earlier that HCW should just be silent and get on with the investigation, but now they assert that he should speak out to say if CB is a red herring. It's all just very odd. Would love to know the 'source' of this. They sound like an absolute buffoon.

The real story here is why the family would be briefing against HCW

Are they frustrated with lack of information despite all the publicity? Tends to suggest they are not in the loop which I have always found odd.

 

[Newthoughts]

The real story here is why the family would be briefing against HCW

Are they frustrated with lack of information despite all the publicity? Tends to suggest they are not in the loop which I have always found odd.

Or that they really do not want to accept what happened. They've had 13 years of holding false hopes imo. I think every other person assumed the poor child was dead after about 3 days. And to a monster like CB?

 

[redplanet]

"... they were blond and one had curly hair. One was stockier than the other ..."
British witnesses: 'We saw two blond men on balcony next to Madeleine apartment' | Daily Mail Online

 

[Dlk79]

The real story here is why the family would be briefing against HCW

Are they frustrated with lack of information despite all the publicity? Tends to suggest they are not in the loop which I have always found odd.

I suspect they are still miffed at not being told what evidence the investigation has uncovered. With all due respect to the McCann's though, they can't be trusted to keep it to themselves. From the very start, they and their friends have sought to use the media for what they think is best, and sought to manipulate the investigations in the direction they want. They did it back when the PJ were investigating, going to the Press with details that were supposed to be kept secret under law.

And how many stories over the years have we seen from "sources close to the McCanns"? They're leakier than a bottomless bucket. That's probably why HCW has told them nothing, he doesn't want the evidence revealed to the world in the Mirror the following day.

 

[mrjitty]

I suspect they are still miffed at not being told what evidence the investigation has uncovered. With all due respect to the McCann's though, they can't be trusted to keep it to themselves. From the very start, they and their friends have sought to use the media for what they think is best, and sought to manipulate the investigations in the direction they want. They did it back when the PJ were investigating, going to the Press with details that were supposed to be kept secret under law.

And how many stories over the years have we seen from "sources close to the McCanns"? They're leakier than a bottomless bucket. That's probably why HCW has told them nothing, he doesn't want the evidence revealed to the world in the Mirror the following day.

Agreed.

sources close to the MCs / a pal of the MCs etc - they should just go on the record or put a cork in it.

 

[Dlk79]

"... they were blond and one had curly hair. One was stockier than the other ..."
British witnesses: 'We saw two blond men on balcony next to Madeleine apartment' | Daily Mail Online

CB's hair is wavy, might be described by some as curly I suppose? Wouldn't really describe CB as stocky though. The only known acquaintance I can think of who might match that description is HB? No idea what hair colour he had back then though. It would certainly explain how HB knows so much about CB's involvement though. Just conjecture.

 

[Dlk79]

All 3 locations are part of the resort IMO. In that Tue night situation, some parents might chose the most efficient logistics, some might chose to go together via creche IMO.
Advancing again to Thu evening, do you think both JTo children were at evening creche?

Hard to say but my inclination would be that it was just the girl there. The Totmans weren't booked in the Tapas on the Thursday, and they only mention picking up the 3yr old girl from the creche. And they only mention JT going. I'd have presumed the 4yr old boy stayed with the Mother while he did this. I just can't see the logic of carrying a sleeping child from the apartment block they were staying, to pick up another child from the creche.

 

[Dlk79]

Just noticed in the Totman article, they also mention the JW sighting of the pock-marked man and give her (and her husband's) full name... except that's not actually her real first name, typical tabloid error.
Why did Madeleine McCann cops waste years investigating GP sighting?

Her actual name can be found near the bottom of another article though regarding the sighting of a 'gipsy' woman.
Riddle of Madeleine McCann and 'the fat gipsy women' | Daily Mail Online

 

[tedtink]

Hard to say but my inclination would be that it was just the girl there. The Totmans weren't booked in the Tapas on the Thursday, and they only mention picking up the 3yr old girl from the creche. And they only mention JT going. I'd have presumed the 4yr old boy stayed with the Mother while he did this. I just can't see the logic of carrying a sleeping child from the apartment block they were staying, to pick up another child from the creche.

Another suggestion is that JT did see Totman walking from West to East but could have, after all the panic shock and confusion, unconsciously placed an 'imaginary child' in his arms.
Maybe she'd seen him carrying a child on a previous occasion.
It's not unusual for our minds to take components of what we've seen on other occasions and weave it into a distorted image or memory.
IMO looking for a rational explanation to Tannerman will be inconclusive and I think Redwood suggested the same when he said 'we're almost certain' that Totman wasn't the abductor.
I think that's why Totman is still on MC's website.

 

[Newthoughts]

I suspect they are still miffed at not being told what evidence the investigation has uncovered. With all due respect to the McCann's though, they can't be trusted to keep it to themselves. From the very start, they and their friends have sought to use the media for what they think is best, and sought to manipulate the investigations in the direction they want. They did it back when the PJ were investigating, going to the Press with details that were supposed to be kept secret under law.

And how many stories over the years have we seen from "sources close to the McCanns"? They're leakier than a bottomless bucket. That's probably why HCW has told them nothing, he doesn't want the evidence revealed to the world in the Mirror the following day.

I agree. I think the experts know best and it's best to just let them get on with the job.

 

[Scorpiette]

The arguments here make no sense -

A friend said: “Any police force or prosecuting chief should not be boasting... but should be remaining silent as in the case of the Met Police

Why? What have the Met police achieved in this investigation to highlight them as a good example of how to conduct this case. They've had millions in funding and achieved absolutely nothing.

“They should... not be suggesting that members of the public would be reaching the same conclusion as they do about the suspect if they knew the evidence they had. It is beyond bizarre and not very helpful to the investigation.”

Why shouldn't they? What problem is it causing the investigation exactly? Just sounds like a nonsense comment IMO without any reason, aside from emotional opinion.

“If Mr Wolters has got any significant evidence we cannot understand why the key suspect is not being questioned."

Then you haven't been listening. It isn't as simple as that, once they go down that avenue, all cards are on the table. And why do that when you haven't quite got everything you need to convict, but still have the time and opportunity to gather more evidence?

“If they think he is a red herring and had no involvement they should say so, instead of playing games, because the real culprit could be out there and escaping any scrutiny.”

The most bizarre statement of all. Gives the impression this 'source' wants/believes CB to be innocent. They don't like where this is going yet what proof do they have that CB isn't guilty? Why make this comment, don't they want the correct man to face justice? Also, they assert earlier that HCW should just be silent and get on with the investigation, but now they assert that he should speak out to say if CB is a red herring. It's all just very odd. Would love to know the 'source' of this. They sound like an absolute buffoon.

Absolutely agree with your observations made. Very odd.