Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect #29

[mrjitty]

S

ETA: I think the McCanns do know, or at least have have been given the overall gist of the evidence that the BKA have. That's purely my personal opinion though. I think they've been told certain things about why the BKA believe CB is responsible. But in order to protect their privacy and press intrusion while this is ongoing the authorities are alluding to them being kept in the dark. JMO.

RSBM

I'd be amazed if they hadn't been told at least something.

 

[mrjitty]

Is it usual for victims to be told what evidence police have against suspects ?

It's usual for liaison to keep the victims updated as to the state of the investigation, if not the specific evidence

I've always believed if they could prove the child was dead, they would brief the victims. Others disagree.

 

[Dlk79]

RSBM

I'd be amazed if they hadn't been told at least something.

There were reports shortly after the Appeal was announced indicating the McCanns had already been told certain details beforehand.

The meeting at the McCanns' house in Rothley, Leicestershire, is understood to have taken place several days before Met Police revealed details about the suspect who is in jail for raping an American pensioner.

The UK officers told them there was no concrete proof that Maddie was dead, despite the fears of the German police.

A family friend said: "It was the conversation they always needed to have but have always feared.

"They were told everything from the points of view of all three forces - British, German and Portuguese. It was a very emotional meeting and lots of tears later shed."

The suspect refuses to co-operate with police and, as yet, they do not have enough evidence to charge him.

A source close to the German police investigation said: "The suspect is saying nothing to officers so Kate and Gerry could be left in limbo for months, which is agonising for them."

It is understood German police were shown photos or video of Maddie's body or given a graphic account of how she died.

The McCann friend said: "Kate and Gerry wanted to know every single detail no matter how painful and harrowing.

"They have been told everything but sworn to secrecy and were told not to share any news, even with close family."

Madeleine McCann: How police broke news to parents they think Maddie is dead

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Some good queries there.

The first thing I'd say though is that "circumstantial evidence" does not equate to inadequate evidence. We don't know exactly what evidence the BKA has. But it seems to be things that are mainly related to the after events of 5A.

In which case, having further circumstantial evidence that also links CB to the abduction scene itself could be critical to building the case against him. The comment HCW made early on about wanting to take away any excuse that CB could claim it was a girlfriend using the phone is highly significant IMO. Placing him in the vicinity appears to be a key factor, even though that fact in isolation is not incriminating in itself. It is the culmination of evidence that is important in establishing the sequence of what may have happened that night.

As you say, we have also discussed the photo/video angle in depth. IMO it is very significant that HCW has several times said he cannot "confirm or deny" that they have something in this regard. Even though he freely admits other aspects of evidence that they don't have.

Some of my previous thoughts and observations of HCW's comments here:

Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #26

Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #26

ETA: I think the McCanns do know, or at least have have been given the overall gist of the evidence that the BKA have. That's purely my personal opinion though. I think they've been told certain things about why the BKA believe CB is responsible. But in order to protect their privacy and press intrusion while this is ongoing the authorities are alluding to them being kept in the dark. JMO.

So it’s likely they know the exact location and it can be seen in an image or video.

But needing to place the phone in CB’s hand 3 May must mean they know exactly when it happened too? HCW is only talking about MM’s murder, not her abduction. So doesn’t it mean that to prove CB’s guilt they know location and time and they need CB there?

Does this mean it’s very likely she died the night 3 May?

 

[Dlk79]

So it’s likely they know the exact location and it can be seen in an image or video.

But needing to place the phone in CB’s hand 3 May must mean they know exactly when it happened too? HCW is only talking about MM’s murder, not her abduction. So doesn’t it mean that to prove CB’s guilt they know location and time and they need CB there?

Does this mean it’s very likely she died the night 3 May?

What I mean is that IMO, one of the key missing links for the BKA (other than the body obviously) was definitively placing CB in PDL around the time MM disappeared. I think the evidence they had was mainly related to the murder aspect rather than the events around her being taken from 5A.

In the omny.fm podcast, HCW was asked whether it was "100% certain" that CB was in PDL on the 3rd and gave an intriguing response.

"I cannot say this in percent. We have some evidence that he killed MM, but I'm not able to say on which day exactly."

'Madeleine is Dead' - They've Taken Her - Omny.fm

To me, it sounds like he's saying because of the evidence they have that CB killed MM, it is reasonable/logical to assume that he was in PDL on the 3rd to have taken her in the first place. His phone ping being further evidence pointing to that scenario.

The other aspect of what HCW says though indicates that their evidence CB killed MM does not provide them with a definitive date or time that it happened. So one possibility is that they have a photo or video of what appears to be MM deceased, that they can somehow link to CB. But there is no way to prove that it was taken on the 3rd. Or, even if there is EXIF data, and say this data shows the photo was taken on the 4th for example, it still doesn't prove when exactly she died since it only shows the aftermath, not the "event" itself.

Assuming they did have something like that, CB could of course try claiming that, while the photo/video was in his possession, it came from another person. If there is no proof that he was anywhere near 5A, a Judge might be persuaded by that claim. Which is why I think definitively placing him in PDL on the 3rd as well, becomes more important to the prosecution case. Especially if he's tried to claim previously that he was somewhere else at the time.

 

[snowpea666]

Completely agree. Child molesters never have an easy life in prison. I doubt the documentaries would have changed his prison life too much. He would have already been at the very bottom of the prisoner hierarchy. It all reads like a manipulative psychopath having a tantrum. He sent letters to German tabloids after he got convicted for Diane’s horrific assault. They didn’t run those stories, but as we’ve seen, Madeleine McCann stories sell, which is why they’re running these stories. He has a history of whinging & trying to dupe the media into following his nonsense. Ultimately the prison found nothing to take further. IMO if CB wasn’t the sole prime suspect in the MM case, he’d be seen as somebody who deserves the hell he lives in & that he’ll forever be a danger to society. There seems to be a fair amount of compassion for him (on twitter). IMO that’s solely because he is a perceived obstacle between them & their crusade against the McCann’s. He’s had a very lenient cluster of sentences & one would hope that any legal system would recognise the pattern of offending & continued risk to the public. But if they go case by case he’ll always have the potential to be free to commit other serious crimes, as he always has done.

Absolutely 100% agree

 

[snowpea666]

I appreciate that but, as MrJ says below -


Which is what I'm asking/wondering about: What consideration if any was given to the likely repercussions that such a public claim in June 2020 would generate if it appeared that no significant progress had been made eg. 21mths down the line?

Was the judge persuaded that the appeal would swiftly produce the missing bits that were, if we're to believe HCW, all that lay between finalising the BKA's investigation and an official charge against CB, and that it would all be done and dusted in a matter of months?

Surely no judge would have given the green light to naming a suspect without also an assurance that business would be conclusively done within a specific timeframe? The optics are not good here in March 2022.

I think most timings over the last couple of years don't really mean much due to Covid, nothing could really be done within a specific timeframe.

 

[Anxala]

I think the McCanns do know, or at least have have been given the overall gist of the evidence that the BKA have. That's purely my personal opinion though. I think they've been told certain things about why the BKA believe CB is responsible. But in order to protect their privacy and press intrusion while this is ongoing the authorities are alluding to them being kept in the dark. JMO.

It's unimaginable to me that they would not have been put in the BKA picture if, as we're speculating, the BKA has evidence/imagery that leaves no doubt as to MM's 'missing person' status. But if they have been, why then did the McCanns deny it publicly? Because they did.

Parents of Madeleine McCann deny receiving letter from investigators saying there is 'proof' of her death

 

[Davieson]

All they said was that they didn't receive a letter from the Germans,which may be true.

 

[Lilly b]

All they said was that they didn't receive a letter from the Germans,which may be true.

I think it's all because they are sworn to secrecy, and rightly so , imo

 

[Denis R Tandib]

The other aspect of what HCW says though indicates that their evidence CB killed MM does not provide them with a definitive date or time that it happened. So one possibility is that they have a photo or video of what appears to be MM deceased, that they can somehow link to CB. But there is no way to prove that it was taken on the 3rd. Or, even if there is EXIF data, and say this data shows the photo was taken on the 4th for example, it still doesn't prove when exactly she died since it only shows the aftermath, not the "event" itself.

I guess what I am trying to reconcile is why do they need to have CB in PDL 3 May unless it is needed to support other evidence.

Let’s say EXIF data showed a deceased MM 5 May, it really wouldn’t be important if CB were in PDL on the third.

I think there must be other pieces like HB’s statement which could suggest CB took and killed MM 3 May and then they have a photo at a known location (say the farmhouse) showing a deceased MM … just as a possibility.

 

[Dlk79]

It's unimaginable to me that they would not have been put in the BKA picture if, as we're speculating, the BKA has evidence/imagery that leaves no doubt as to MM's 'missing person' status. But if they have been, why then did the McCanns deny it publicly? Because they did.

Parents of Madeleine McCann deny receiving letter from investigators saying there is 'proof' of her death

That's not what they were saying. They were having a go at the media and what the media was reporting about the content of this letter. The Met confirmed there was a letter and that the letter was passed to the McCanns (this is also acknowledged on their website). But what the McCanns specific gripe was about, is that the Press were saying the letter contained a statement from the Germans that 'there was proof that MM was dead'.

The press attributed these statements to HCW but he later clarified that he has never commented on the content of the letter and would not do so. So it seems the Press made their own mind up about what they thought was said in the letter, and that's what the McCanns got annoyed about.

I don't think the McCanns have been given all the BKA evidence details, same goes for the Met.

 

[Lilly b]

I guess what I am trying to reconcile is why do they need to have CB in PDL 3 May unless it is needed to support other evidence.

Let’s say EXIF data showed a deceased MM 5 May, it really wouldn’t be important if CB were in PDL on the third.

I think there must be other pieces like HB’s statement which could suggest CB took and killed MM 3 May and then they have a photo at a known location (say the farmhouse) showing a deceased MM … just as a possibility.

So if he wasn't in pdl on the 3rd that could suggest he had an accomplice, but from his confessions to various people, no one else has been named,. That's only a suggestion to what you say

 

[Trivento]

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....end-100-certain-madeleine-mccann-26615559.amp

A new article featuring C.Post...

 

[RichardKimble]

I think it's all because they are sworn to secrecy, and rightly so , imo

Yet in alleged exclusives to brit newspapers, possible witness's are babbling away , it doesn't make sense.
See above post by Trivento.

 

[Dlk79]

Yet in alleged exclusives to brit newspapers, possible witness's are babbling away , it doesn't make sense.
See above post by Trivento.

And what has the McCanns being sworn to secrecy about information the BKA have told them got to do with ex-friends giving their opinions on CB? It's you who is not making sense.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

So if he wasn't in pdl on the 3rd that could suggest he had an accomplice, but from his confessions to various people, no one else has been named,. That's only a suggestion to what you say

I’m not doing a good job of explaining myself.

Dlk79 has given IMO a very good argument that the BKA have a photo of MM deceased, in a known location, but with nothing that connects it to CB. This is based on HCW’s comments.

This scenario could have played out at any time after the abduction. However, if seems very important to the BKA case that they have CB in PDL on 3 May.

So to me they must know that the time of death and the photo in PDL (if it indeed exists) must be known and must be very close to 3 May or it wouldn’t be important to put the phone in CB’s hand that night.

Does that make sense?

 

[DrQ]

Unfortunately, much of this case does not make sense. The only thing I am certain of is that the family and all of the law enforcement involved want it solved. With the complexity of law enforcement from several countries with some different rules, finding the dots to connect has not been easy. It's difficult to imagine exactly what the GP have since they said they are missing forensic evidence. In the interview the prosecutor on one hand seemed confident that CB is the right suspect but on the other hand not so much. Was it by chance that she was taken? Had someone been watching or planned to rob and get out? Was she actually asleep or awakened by the intruder? Why take just her? Many times the pedophiles keep their mouth shut. If they talk, once the threshold is crossed... there is no turning back. IMO I do think this case can be solved. Someone knows something and/or saw something. His friend seems shifty and covered for him in the past. He might know more than he is saying. As long as they keep on the case they have a chance to solve it. I can't even begin to imagine what this poor family has been going through.

 

[Dlk79]

I’m not doing a good job of explaining myself.

Dlk79 has given IMO a very good argument that the BKA have a photo of MM deceased, in a known location, but with nothing that connects it to CB. This is based on HCW’s comments.

This scenario could have played out at any time after the abduction. However, if seems very important to the BKA case that they have CB in PDL on 3 May.

So to me they must know that the time of death and the photo in PDL (if it indeed exists) must be known and must be very close to 3 May or it wouldn’t be important to put the phone in CB’s hand that night.

Does that make sense?

I think it more comes down to placing the suspect at the crime scene Denis. This is a critical and fundamental aspect to any criminal case. Let's assume for example that when CB was questioned back in 2013 he claimed to be in his motorhome, outside NF's house in Foral on the 3rd. Based on the testimony we've seen so far, there is no way for the BKA to disprove that's untrue.

Yes, it could be possible that CB murdered MM but wasn't the person who took her from 5A. But the Prosecutors will be expected to fill in these gaps. If their main evidence is a photo that doesn't show CB in it, they need to be able to add further evidence to tie CB to the crime. Putting him at the crime scene would be the number 1 priority if they have no evidence that someone else carried out the abduction. If that makes sense to what you're querying?

 

[Lilly b]

Yet in alleged exclusives to brit newspapers, possible witness's are babbling away , it doesn't make sense.
See above post by Trivento.

I was referring to the parents