sian morris
Member
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2020
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction score
- 85
Robert Black also had girls' swimming costumes in his van.
Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect #30
- Thread starter Taskforce88
- Start date
New Posts
-
-
GA GA - Katherine Higgenbotham, adult, Tybee Island, 16 Aug 2024
- Latest: truthfinder2019
-
- Status
onemoremiletogo
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2019
- Messages
- 494
- Reaction score
- 905
Thanks for all the effort on putting a lot of detail in writing. But this alibi story is totally ridiculous. Pathetic. Completely vague. I cannot even believe how MWT exposes himself to this absurd trying to sell this nothing. Money...I thought it might be worth documenting exactly what was said about CB's 'alibi' during the course of the MWT documentary so it's down in black and white for those who haven't watched it or just want to recap. The stories in the Press have been grossly confused and don't reflect what was actually said altogether. Below are some brief transcript extracts, covering the sections of the doc where MWT talks about the alibi. I'll try to keep the sarcasm to an absolute minimum.
So... after failing to impress HCW with the results of his enquiries and just when it seemed like he'd hit a dead end, MWT miraculously receives an out-of-the-blue phonecall from "a source close to Christian B"! Thankfully the cameras were rolling so we got to see MWT taking this 'bombshell' phonecall in real time, against the dramatic backdrop of a city-at-night shot. Nice.
MWT (speaking to someone on phone): "We've got someone saying that night they were with him...? But why hasn't this come out...?"
MWT (to camera following phone call, giddy as a schoolgirl): "I can't quite believe what I've been told, that on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, Christian B was with a woman, outside of Praia da Luz, and spent the night with her. And if that's true, he can't have been involved in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann!".
Later:
MWT (piece to camera): "A source close to Christian B has told me that he believes he has an alibi for the night of Madeleine’s disappearance. He says, for a 2 week period he was seeing an 18 year old girl in Carvoeiro, 25 miles away from Praia da Luz. Christian B is saying he was seeing a young girl who was on holiday with her parents in this town, and around 8 o'clock most nights, he would arrive in his campervan, she would come out of the apartment and she would sleep in the campervan with him until the early hours of the morning and then he would leave to go home. That is his alibi!"
MWT (writing on calendar for dramatic effect): "He [CB] is saying, that during the period of 2 weeks prior to the 10th of May, he was with a young girl most evenings... He is saying that on the 10th of May he took this young girl to the airport because she was leaving the country. Whilst she was there, she was stopped for carrying pepper spray. There is a document which puts that date connected to her, with her name at the airport. But Christian B is not mentioned in the police record, so it cannot verify his location. But there's more, on the 9th of May he is saying he got stopped with her, in his campervan at a police checkpoint and they took a photograph of both him and her."
Later:
After MWT fails to find any record of this traffic stop from the Portuguese police, he then supposedly 'tracks down' and speaks to the 'alibi's' partner off camera before returning.
MWT (piece to camera): "I've spoke to her partner who has told me that during May 2007, she was in Portugal. He describes it. I showed him a document that says she was in Portugal, Faro on 10th May 2007 and he said you've got good information. And I said, well thats 7 days after Madeleine disappeared and I asked him, was she with him that night [the 3rd]? And he basically says, she can't be sure, it was 15 years ago, she cannot remember. But he does say, from her account she was there in May 2007.... I'm excited because I'm now filling in those little missing pieces of the jigsaw puzzle that nobody else has got! It's not rubbish, it's not a fabrication, perhaps he is telling the truth!"
Later:
MWT says the prison won't allow him to interview CB in person and so he writes to CB again asking him to write back with verifiable facts about where he was around the time Madeleine disappeared.
MWT then receives a letter from CB [4 whole pages, MWT will have you know]! Luckily once again, the cameras were rolling to catch this cracking bit of unfolding drama.
MWT (looking at CB's letter and relaying what is written): "So he [CB] says, he goes to jail and comes out in December 2006. And from that point on, he does not return back to Praia da Luz. He says from February 2007, he started dealing drugs to people around the beach [Barranco]... He says I was selling drugs on a large scale, I'd made trips back and forth to Spain, 6 or so times, bringing drugs back, Marijuana, making a good living."
MWT (cotinuing with the letter, addressing the 'alibi'): He [CB] says that the week including the period of time that Madeleine went missing, he met up with a girl, let's call her 'the alibi', and he spent time with her overnight. He would drive up to Carvoeiro, he would park up there, she would come out of the apartment where she was for a week, staying with her parents. They'd spend time together in his campervan. She would go home a few hours later, and he would stay until around 10 o'clock in the morning and then he would drive back to the beach area."
MWT (continued in voiceover segment): "Crucially, Christian B still doesn't remember if he was with his claimed alibi on the evening Madeleine McCann disappeared and his alibi only covers the hours of midnight to 2am when he says they were together. But Madeleine was taken 2 to 3 hours earlier."
Now, is it me or did that 'alibi' seem to change just a little bit over the course of the programme?To accept the alibi as MWT sells it... CB was seeing this woman for a week-long fortnight, May 3rd to the 10th. The "source close to CB" says the pair were together on the 3rd, except neither CB or the 'alibi' can actually remember it. What they do remember though is CB used to drive to her place in Carvoeiro "most nights" and arrive there in his campervan around 8pm. She must have then left him hanging outside for around 4 hours before popping in to his Campervan for a cuddle around midnight. She then spends the night with him (all the way until 2am) before going home. At which point, CB then leaves to go home too, only now it is 10am in the morning after staying in Carvoeiro all night. Whatever days he was with her, one thing CB is sure about is that this 'alibi' definitely does not cover him for the time period that Madeleine went missing, so it's not actually any alibi at all... hope that's all cleared up.
Ok, done with the sarcasm now. There was one "absolute" statement CB made there which might be significant though. His claim is that after coming out of prison at the end of 2006, he never once returned to Praia da Luz. If that can be proven to be untrue, it would put a serious dent in the credibility of his account. If the BKA have a witness who believes they saw him hanging around the OC before the crime (as has been reported in the Press) or any other witnesses can place him in PDL, that could become quite significant at any trial. It also implies that his defence probably intend to deny he was using the -680 phone number at 8pm on the 3rd. And since he's currently denying ever going back to PDL after prison, you'd also have to assume the account he gave police back in 2013 also said the same. All of which might partly explain why tracing the -683 caller is seen as so important to the Prosecutors, since placing him on the call would effectively prove CB deliberately lied about his movements when he was officially summoned for questioning 9 years ago.
kadman
Whittling Time
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2022
- Messages
- 155
- Reaction score
- 489
I've just come across this information about a retrospective change to the metadata laws in Portugal which is going to make it rather more difficult to place a suspect at a specific time & place of a crime. Coincidentally, these changes were announced around the same time as Portugal imposed arguido status on CB, a move which I am still treating with a large degree of cynicism. Will this change mean that any metadata BKA have found on a Portuguese mobile phone will not be valid in any European country's court?
www.portugalresident.com
*snipped*
"This has all come about because a European directive from 2006 (encouraging the storage of metadata for the ‘exclusive purpose of investigation, detection and repression of serious crimes’) was vetoed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), in 2014."
www.portugalresident.com
Thousands of criminal cases poised to collapse
Thousands of criminal cases poised to collapse: ‘Bombshell metadata ruling’ threatens to bring down 14 years of criminal investigation
www.portugalresident.com
"This has all come about because a European directive from 2006 (encouraging the storage of metadata for the ‘exclusive purpose of investigation, detection and repression of serious crimes’) was vetoed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), in 2014."
Metadata ‘bombshell’: Constitutional judges play hardball
Metadata ‘bombshell’: Constitutional judges play hardball: Appeal lodged by Attorney General “lacks legitimacy”
www.portugalresident.com
Pixie Child
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2020
- Messages
- 460
- Reaction score
- 1,311
Yes. The European Court of Justice ruled in April in an Irish case that metadata can not be stored by telecom companies for the purpose of police investigations, therefore can’t be used by the Prosecution at trial.I've just come across this information about a retrospective change to the metadata laws in Portugal which is going to make it rather more difficult to place a suspect at a specific time & place of a crime. Coincidentally, these changes were announced around the same time as Portugal imposed arguido status on CB, a move which I am still treating with a large degree of cynicism. Will this change mean that any metadata BKA have found on a Portuguese mobile phone will not be valid in any European country's court?
*snipped*Thousands of criminal cases poised to collapse
Thousands of criminal cases poised to collapse: ‘Bombshell metadata ruling’ threatens to bring down 14 years of criminal investigation
"This has all come about because a European directive from 2006 (encouraging the storage of metadata for the ‘exclusive purpose of investigation, detection and repression of serious crimes’) was vetoed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), in 2014."
Metadata ‘bombshell’: Constitutional judges play hardball
Metadata ‘bombshell’: Constitutional judges play hardball: Appeal lodged by Attorney General “lacks legitimacy”
Dwyer: EU ban on metadata retention confirmed by CJEU
Judgment will have ‘significant impact’ on criminal probes
www.lawsociety.ie
RichardKimble
Ah, but I may as well try and catch the wind.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2021
- Messages
- 3,206
- Reaction score
- 9,227
Difference being Black was caught in the act of abduction.
Dlk79
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 1,614
- Reaction score
- 9,984
From the article, it states -I've just come across this information about a retrospective change to the metadata laws in Portugal which is going to make it rather more difficult to place a suspect at a specific time & place of a crime. Coincidentally, these changes were announced around the same time as Portugal imposed arguido status on CB, a move which I am still treating with a large degree of cynicism. Will this change mean that any metadata BKA have found on a Portuguese mobile phone will not be valid in any European country's court?
*snipped*Thousands of criminal cases poised to collapse
Thousands of criminal cases poised to collapse: ‘Bombshell metadata ruling’ threatens to bring down 14 years of criminal investigation
"This has all come about because a European directive from 2006 (encouraging the storage of metadata for the ‘exclusive purpose of investigation, detection and repression of serious crimes’) was vetoed by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), in 2014."
Metadata ‘bombshell’: Constitutional judges play hardball
Metadata ‘bombshell’: Constitutional judges play hardball: Appeal lodged by Attorney General “lacks legitimacy”
Constitutional Court judges have blown a hole in 14 years of criminal investigation by ruling that police cannot have access to suspects’ call or internet histories.
The decision – which has even left constitutionalists aghast – is all the more devastating by being retroactive to 2008.
The reason it states 2008 is because that's when Portugal implemented a new law incorporating Directive No 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament into their own law. See article 4 in the below link which dictates what information data communications companies are required to store for the purpose of allowing law enforcement to access if they need to (it is parts of article 4 that has recently been deemed unconstitutional as a result of what it incorporated from the 2006 directive).
Law 32/2008 of 17 July
Transposes to the national legal order Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006, on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks.
It is the 2006 EU directive that has been vetoed but since Portugal did not implement the new allowances for data retention set out in the 2006 directive into law until 2008, presumably the rules being followed in 2007 were within the previously allowed framework and therefore unaffected by this latest ruling. Since the PDL call data dump took place prior to the 2008 law coming into effect, I presume all the data collected is still permissible as evidence in court.
From my reading of it, it is not saying that Police can no longer use metadata as evidence in criminal cases per se. The issue is specifically about the legality of the 2006 directive and due to the fact Portugal directly incorporated some of those principles into their own law in 2008. Since that directive was subsequently vetoed, it means the new law Portugal introduced is effectively unlawful and therefore needs to be re-drafted to set out the rules around data retention and its permissible use by LE.
That's how I interpret it anyway, perhaps @mrjitty can clarify?
Last edited:
tedtink
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2020
- Messages
- 3,951
- Reaction score
- 21,818
This is my concern. CB hasn't been tried yet and imo it is the law which has been changed retrospectively without reference to the historical date of a crime (I stand to be corrected). IMO it is possible that not only the phone pings/time/location history in Portugal could be inadmissible evidence for the prosecution but also the metadata from any images/videos featuring Madeleine BKA may have located.Yes. The European Court of Justice ruled in April in an Irish case that metadata can not be stored by telecom companies for the purpose of police investigations, therefore can’t be used by the Prosecution at trial.
Dwyer: EU ban on metadata retention confirmed by CJEU
Judgment will have ‘significant impact’ on criminal probes
Pixie Child
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2020
- Messages
- 460
- Reaction score
- 1,311
It seems like an issue that could come up at trial and a Judge could exclude that evidence, leaving BKA with nothing.
It’s also possible that BKA could argue that this metadata was limited to a small targeted area (Luz, 1 tower) where a crime had occurred; the crime was potentially still in progress at the time that the metadata was seized and was limited in time.
I think what the Court really wants is Court oversight of Police before they seize metadata. I don’t know if PJ sought a warrant to seize the metadata. I seem to recall British Police handling this aspect.
Graham Dwyer Appeal: CJEU Rules General Retention of Data to Prevent Serious Crime Unlawful
Knowledge briefing by leading Irish law firm McCann FitzGerald LLP about how the general indiscriminate retention of traffic and location data for the purposes of preventing serious crime is inconsistent with EU Law.
SuperdadV8
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2020
- Messages
- 2,406
- Reaction score
- 11,352
The decision of the European Court of Justice has no relevance according to the alleged CB ./. MM connection. According to the ECJ, any kind of preventive data preservation will stay forbidden at all.
In the MM case, the phone cell data has been saved, because the child went missing. It has nothing to do with preventive data preservation.
Trivento
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2020
- Messages
- 579
- Reaction score
- 2,172
Analyst: Madeleine McCann investigators gave suspect 'all the time in the world' to destroy evidence | CNN
15 years ago, 3-year-old Madeleine McCann disappeared. In April 2022, Portuguese authorities named a formal suspect in the case. With fresh reporting from Germany and the UK, CNN's Randi Kaye unfolds what we know about the prime suspect and when we can expect charges to be filed against him in...
In above link a short clip from recent CNN "special report " episode...
Full item not available yet in Europe it seems ...perhaps someone in US has seen..?
Last edited:
Last I heard, he was on a 5 year sabbatical
Yep, or at least until there are actual developments in the case.
Sharkbite
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2020
- Messages
- 534
- Reaction score
- 2,542
I think the main point in this short clip is that apparently when interviewed in 2013 CB stated that he was not in Portugal on May 03 2007. Mark T. Hofmann is the "analyst" in the clip.Analyst: Madeleine McCann investigators gave suspect 'all the time in the world' to destroy evidence | CNN
15 years ago, 3-year-old Madeleine McCann disappeared. In April 2022, Portuguese authorities named a formal suspect in the case. With fresh reporting from Germany and the UK, CNN's Randi Kaye unfolds what we know about the prime suspect and when we can expect charges to be filed against him in...edition.cnn.com
In above link a short clip from recent CNN "special report " episode...
Full item not available yet in Europe it seems ...perhaps someone in US has seen..?
Last edited:
That would be very interesting if true...
The difficulty is knowing what is true and what isn't.
That is why CB will have a hard time persuading judges that he is credible. There is no way he would have been abroad at that time and sleeping with a teenager simultaneously in Portugal as per his written testimony to journalists. Schrodinger's cat has its limitations...and CB is neither Schrödinger nor a cat
Dlk79
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 1,614
- Reaction score
- 9,984
I don't know whether this CNN report is accurate, that CB told the police in 2013 that he wasn't in Portugal when MM went missing, but it does appear that possibility was still being touted less than a year ago by CB's defence. The person to whom CB wrote a letter (the one that recently appeared in the Daily Mail about his teeth) is in extensive contact with CB's lawyer FF and she discussed CB's supposed 'alibi' on the 21/08/21 HiDeHo podcast.
At 14:50 in the podcast she says:
"Now, I have spoken, and I can't be dropping names, but I have spoken to some people close to the investigation. Very, very close, closer than you would imagine, maybe even..., I don't want to get into that... I will send you copies of what I have. Um, that, um, the person that I spoke with told me actually, there's proof that Christian was not even in Portugal at that time. So, and that's what they were searching to confirm. So, and I believe that, I really believe that Christian Brueckner was not in Portugal at that time."
So, if the CNN clip is accurate, it might make sense that his defence were initially looking into whether the 'original story' he gave back in 2013 was... 'viable'.
By October tough, she was tweeting a completely different version of events that her 'source close to CB' had now given her. Funnily enough, it was the same version that MWT promoted in his doc, that he also got from a secret 'source close to CB'
- That CB was in Portugal at the time but he had an alibi in the form of a 'fling' for the 3rd of May......except we later found out, neither of them are actually prepared to commit to that, as they apparently don't remember.
The whole thing just stinks to high heaven IMO.
Anxala
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2020
- Messages
- 1,554
- Reaction score
- 6,849
But it's not true so why is it even being posited as a possibility that warrants any further discussion on here? Is it just boredom in the absence of progress?
CB's own lawyer, FF, has confirmed that CB was not just in Portugal on the eve of 3rd May 2007 but also in the general vicinity of PdL. Can we not just take that as a given? Here, in FF's own words -
Of course I was referring to whether he claimed to have been abroad in his 2013 police interview. This was the first time someone said what CB claimed in 2013 and this IS significant as it seriously affects his credibilityBut it's not true so why is it even being posited as a possibility that warrants any further discussion on here? Is it just boredom in the absence of progress?
CB's own lawyer, FF, has confirmed that CB was not just in Portugal on the eve of 3rd May 2007 but also in the general vicinity of PdL. Can we not just take that as a given? Here, in FF's own words -
- Status