Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #3

[otto]

This might be the Irish person mentioned upthread as one of the victims the police were looking for
Rape victim asks Madeleine McCann detectives to review her case | Madeleine McCann | The Guardian

That sounds like a very definite connection to the 2005 rape of the 72 year old, right down to the machete style knife.

It's very concerning that these attacks happened so often in the area, to young and old, and yet investigators accused the parents when they publicized the disappearance of Madeleine. They should have been making connections to the string of similar crimes in the area a long time ago.

 

[Ardoch]

seems like yet another contradiction.
the evidence is strong enough to say the girl is dead. strong enough to accuse a specific individual of murder...
but not strong enough to arrest anyone.

I haven't followed the MM case too closely but I'd hazard a guess that this might be as close as they've been. Which may mean that they could still get closer.

 

[Kikixxxx]

I think it means they have video evidence of the murder, and they know who the victim is. What they may not yet know, and may never know, is who committed the murder. I think they know that CB abducted MM. They may be able to see her and the means of murder (eg: hands strangling her, her being shot etc), but not who actually committed the murder. It think this is why they were asking for people who's loyalties may have changed over the years to come forward, as well as people who were familiar with the inside of residences he has lived at.

Or maybe there’s a video of a little girl being abused, that they’ve seen and suspect it’s Madeline but can’t see for sure. maybe her face isnt fully in it, And then he’s told someone on a chat room about all the stuff he done in the video and then killed her afterwards by ______. And so they’ve thought well we know all the first stuff he said was true cause we can see it, so it’s likely he’s telling the truth in the way he murdered her too? i can see why that would make them pretty sure shes dead but not hard evidence at the same time

 

[Kikixxxx]

That sounds like a very definite connection to the 2005 rape of the 72 year old, right down to the machete style knife.

It's very concerning that these attacks happened so often in the area, to young and old, and yet investigators accused the parents when they publicized the disappearance of Madeleine. They should have been making connections to the string of similar crimes in the area a long time ago.

yeah and it matches up with the bag of exotic clothes found in his house, does anyone know if any weapons were found? any mention of the chains or machetes? ill have to go back and look at what was found. if he was wearing a leotard and tights how did he rape her, he must of removed them at some point so i dont know how he left no evidence or what was the point of wearing them in the first place? and apparently he left the apartment wearing the same stuff. really really odd. i'm picturing a very weird sight.

 

[FrankHoney]

Regarding the belief she is dead, without being certain she is dead.

If the perp did create images/videos of her being harmed, (as would fit with the other crimes reported in connection,) then it seems to me the simplest explanation is that they may have images of a girl who looks to probably be Madeleine, harmed to a point it is unclear whether she survived. Or perhaps looked to have needed medical attention that they are presuming wasn’t forthcoming. And the quality of this evidence perhaps leaves room for just enough doubt as to the identity of the perp and the child. The disguises the perp is alleged to wear seem ridiculous, albeit effective, if they obscure enough for anyone to look at the images and not be able to say for sure it’s him.

All reports suggest he has form for recording extremely violent and depraved sex attacks and using bizarre costumes, so I’m trying to work on that basis.

MOO.

 

[Deleted member 268067]

yeah and it matches up with the bag of exotic clothes found in his house, does anyone know if any weapons were found? any mention of the chains or machetes? ill have to go back and look at what was found. if he was wearing a leotard and tights how did he rape her, he must of removed them at some point so i dont know how he left no evidence or what was the point of wearing them in the first place? and apparently he left the apartment wearing the same stuff. really really odd. i'm picturing a very weird sight.

Yes leaving like that is odd - I assume he parked up right outside. Can we do the whole aerial satellite thing for that night?

 

[Ardoch]

Regarding the belief she is dead, without being certain she is dead.

If the perp did create images/videos of her being harmed, (as would fit with the other crimes reported in connection,) then it seems to me the simplest explanation is that they may have images of a girl who looks to probably be Madeleine, harmed to a point it is unclear whether she survived. Or perhaps looked to have needed medical attention that they are presuming wasn’t forthcoming. And the quality of this evidence perhaps leaves room for just enough doubt as to the identity of the perp and the child. The disguises the perp is alleged to wear seem ridiculous, albeit effective, if they obscure enough for anyone to look at the images and not be able to say for sure it’s him.

All reports suggest he has form for recording extremely violent and depraved sex attacks and using bizarre costumes, so I’m trying to work on that basis.

MOO.

I wonder where the location might have been because the police seem to be asking for that information?
Was it revealed if the farmhouse was empty at the time?

 

[Emma909]

seems like yet another contradiction.
the evidence is strong enough to say the girl is dead. strong enough to accuse a specific individual of murder...
but not strong enough to arrest anyone.

Maybe the the murder suspect is dead?

 

[Kiranerys]

That sounds like a very definite connection to the 2005 rape of the 72 year old, right down to the machete style knife.

It's very concerning that these attacks happened so often in the area, to young and old, and yet investigators accused the parents when they publicized the disappearance of Madeleine. They should have been making connections to the string of similar crimes in the area a long time ago.

Remember the mayor in Jaws?

 

[Sorryaboutthat123]

I think it means they have video evidence of the murder, and they know who the victim is. What they may not yet know, and may never know, is who committed the murder. I think they know that CB abducted MM. They may be able to see her and the means of murder (eg: hands strangling her, her being shot etc), but not who actually committed the murder. It think this is why they were asking for people who's loyalties may have changed over the years to come forward, as well as people who were familiar with the inside of residences he has lived at.

If they know it’s MM, then surely this would be shared with UK police who are still maintaining missing persons. It doesn’t make sense

 

[Mrs Marple]

Remember the mayor in Jaws?

This. The whole place was riddled. Maybe still. It's put me right off l can tell you

 

[Kiranerys]

yeah and it matches up with the bag of exotic clothes found in his house, does anyone know if any weapons were found? any mention of the chains or machetes? ill have to go back and look at what was found. if he was wearing a leotard and tights how did he rape her, he must of removed them at some point so i dont know how he left no evidence or what was the point of wearing them in the first place? and apparently he left the apartment wearing the same stuff. really really odd. i'm picturing a very weird sight.

Maybe they were adapted for easy access?

 

[Deleted member 268067]

I wonder where the location might have been because the police seem to be asking for that information?
Was it revealed if the farmhouse was empty at the time?

I’m not sure they know for sure. They are very keen to hear from people that can identify his houses from the inside.

 

[Anxala]

seems like yet another contradiction.
the evidence is strong enough to say the girl is dead. strong enough to accuse a specific individual of murder...
but not strong enough to arrest anyone.

This is my problem too. I'll leave it at that.

 

[Ardoch]

"We have evidence against the accused which leads us to believe that he really killed Madeleine but this evidence is not strong enough at the moment to take him to court."
-------------
"One has to be honest and remain open to the possibility that our investigation could end without a charge, that it ends like the others have. .....
We are optimistic it will be different for us but for that we need more information."

Madeleine inquiry 'could end' without more clues

 

[Armchair_Defective]

Does anyone else have any ideas how the new suspect would fit into the established timeline?

9.15 is when Gerry says he did his check, stood in the small bedroom and 'sensed' someone behind the door. At 9.20 Jane Tanner says she came up to the apartments to check her own and saw Gerry heading back. Looking towards the apartments she also sees a man with a child on the road ( who was identified in 2013 so not an abductor)
Next at 9.30 Matthew Oldfield does a check but just 'listens' at the door of the bedroom and says he thought Madeliene was in bed but didn't see her as it was dark. His friend Russel O'Brien also went to do a check at this time.
Then Kate goes to the apartment at 9.55, finds her child missing and runs back to the
restaurant.

If you take Matthew Oldfields 'non sighting' of Maddie to mean she had gone from her bed by that time it could mean CB had got inside 5A between 9.15 and 9.30 and took Madeliene from her bed at least. Just 15 minutes in which Jane, Gerry and Oldfield and O'Brien don't see him when they are outside or hear any commotion. Matthew Oldfield also thinks the bedroom window shutters were open on his check at 9.30 where he didn't see Maddie under the window. At this time he's either hiding in the apartment or has got out with Madeleine.
The man Jane Tanner saw at around 9.15 -9.20 who Met Police identified presumably didn't see an abductor and he was on the road at the back of the apartments.
I find it very hard to believe this timeline. It means no-one saw him in the street in that 15 minute window. and he was possibly hiding in the small apartment when both Gerry and Oldfield were doing their checks. So he hides from 2 fathers in a small apartment?
There were also other witnesses, holiday makers who were even eating on a balcony overlooking the back of the apartments who saw and heard nothing.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

It could be anybody. The man holding her hand looks scruffy, true, but tht doesn't prove an

And I'm pretty sure we should not be posting random pics of children on here, especially with crappy, unreliable, unchecked sources such as 'Facebook' and 'blogs'. My friend's daughter looks very like Madeleine. Perhaps I should post her face all over here and see how long it takes to go viral.

Some of you have been here long enough to know better. Not aimed at you @Cherwell, obvs.

 

[Dlk79]

"We have evidence against the accused which leads us to believe that he really killed Madeleine but this evidence is not strong enough at the moment to take him to court."
-------------
"One has to be honest and remain open to the possibility that our investigation could end without a charge, that it ends like the others have. .....
We are optimistic it will be different for us but for that we need more information."

Madeleine inquiry 'could end' without more clues

Given the differing assertions by the German police and Scotland Yard, I get the feeling the German side is more to be believed. The UK side is not contradicting any specific assertions and I feel it is more a diplomatic statement than a pragmatic one.

I suspect the German authorities have either a video, which appears to be of MM but does not quite identify CB in it and/or corroborated witness testimony from other individuals with similar lurid interests as to CB's involvement in the abduction/murder.

 

[Deleted member 268067]

I think by now it’s video. The video has a masked perpetrator and an as yet unidentified child. Presumably it was sent anonymously by someone with half a conscience.

In his confession at the bar, CB has detailed some aspect of the abuse that is supported by the video with some detail as to what happened to her afterwards.

We know he has form for child abuse, a desire to abduct, local knowledge, propensity for break ins, a fondness of video and is always well disguised.

Police are desperate to marry physical features of the house seen on the video with those of where CB has lived as that will provide compelling evidence.

 

[Dlk79]

Does anyone else have any ideas how the new suspect would fit into the established timeline?

9.15 is when Gerry says he did his check, stood in the small bedroom and 'sensed' someone behind the door. At 9.20 Jane Tanner says she came up to the apartments to check her own and saw Gerry heading back. Looking towards the apartments she also sees a man with a child on the road ( who was identified in 2013 so not an abductor)
Next at 9.30 Matthew Oldfield does a check but just 'listens' at the door of the bedroom and says he thought Madeliene was in bed but didn't see her as it was dark. His friend Russel O'Brien also went to do a check at this time.
Then Kate goes to the apartment at 9.55, finds her child missing and runs back to the
restaurant.

If you take Matthew Oldfields 'non sighting' of Maddie to mean she had gone from her bed by that time it could mean CB had got inside 5A between 9.15 and 9.30 and took Madeliene from her bed at least. Just 15 minutes in which Jane, Gerry and Oldfield and O'Brien don't see him when they are outside or hear any commotion. Matthew Oldfield also thinks the bedroom window shutters were open on his check at 9.30 where he didn't see Maddie under the window. At this time he's either hiding in the apartment or has got out with Madeleine.
The man Jane Tanner saw at around 9.15 -9.20 who Met Police identified presumably didn't see an abductor and he was on the road at the back of the apartments.
I find it very hard to believe this timeline. It means no-one saw him in the street in that 15 minute window. and he was possibly hiding in the small apartment when both Gerry and Oldfield were doing their checks. So he hides from 2 fathers in a small apartment?
There were also other witnesses, holiday makers who were even eating on a balcony overlooking the back of the apartments who saw and heard nothing.

The problem is we don't quite know what evidence we can trust. My thinking was the abduction took place sometime after Gerry's check and before Kate's. The moving door issue leads me to thinking it was sometime around Gerry's visit. For the door to have moved again by the time Oldfield did his check, it seems either the window was open to move it or someone opened it again after Gerry left amd was in there at the tim. Or, if Gerry didn't actually set eyes on MM (I know he says he did, but I'm just thinking what if...) when he did his check then it opens the window from any time from when they left the apartment around 8.30.