Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #33

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
If they have her PJs &/or blanket fibres, I guess that is ‘concrete evidence’.

The dogs traced her to a car park down from OC near the supermarket (per MWT).
Would this be the route? Would Baptistas have been closed?
The dogs didn't go to the supermarket, they went to the car park opposite the secondary reception.
 
Google translate said the Germans have searched for the manta.

Manta can unravel the mystery of the disappearance of Maddie McCann​

German police tried to locate object in the search for Brückner.


Behind a paywall for me
See if this link works, if it's about the same thing hope this link is allowed
 
Behind a paywall for me
See if this link works, if it's about the same thing hope this link is allowed
And now I look theres many blanket stories about, just not really been brought up on here before
 
If they have her PJs &/or blanket fibres, I guess that is ‘concrete evidence’.

The dogs traced her to a car park down from OC near the supermarket (per MWT).
Would this be the route? Would Baptistas have been closed?
Yes Pixie, that would be forensic evidence
 
May last year.

'We DO have new evidence… but we did NOT find fibres in Madeleine McCann suspect's van': German prosecutor DENIES bombshell claim but says new clue points to Christian Brueckner​



 
I'd be sure he'd be convicted. The charges he'd be convicted on wouldn't really matter, he'd be - probably forever - the only person ever convicted in the MM case, whatever the charge.

As Dave says, because of his other behaviour, who'd believe him if he said 'it wasn't me, it was my mate'? If he'd been in the possession of such material and done nothing about it then he'd be an accessory wouldn't he? He'd have no defence imo

All hypothetical of course. I don't think any of us thinks any evidence like this has been found?
I think the charges really do matter actually. It’s for the prosecution to demonstrate that a specific crime has been committed not just some vague notion of being somehow involved. if such a hypothetical situation there would not be enough evidence to make charges of kidnap, abuse or murder stick, only perhaps the crimes of witholding evidence, failure to report a crime and possession of abuse material.
 
And now I look theres many blanket stories about, just not really been brought up on here before

At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team).

After the officers had been updated about facts relating to the disappearance, they tried to reconstruct the route the girl might have taken with the two tracker dogs.

For this purpose the dogs were given a blanket to sniff, provided by the parents, which had been used by Madeleine.

Beginning to follow the track using Rex, from the door of apartment 5 A (the place where the girl had been sleeping) he would always head in the direction of Block 4, leaving block 5 the dog would turn to the left, pass by a metal access door to a path existing between the apartments blocks to the leisure area (restaurant, pool and playground). Immediately another attempt at reconstruction was made using the dog Zarus, who, in general terms, ended up following the same route as Rex and having the same behaviour.
 
I notice in the two PJ file extracts, the "blanket" is referred to in Portuguese by two different names. One says cobertor, the other says manta. Are these interchangeable terms or can either have another meaning in Portuguese?

If you want to add another level of confusion to the mix, it's worth noting in Amaral's latest book he claims that it wasn't Madeleine's blanket the GNR dogs were given to sniff but the bath towel that had been used to dry her that evening. Make of that what you will. Clear as mud.
 
We shall see about that, Mex. I'm sure we can all think of high profile cases in which circumstantial cases are said to be strong by prosecution and media but which later turn out to have been weak. Juries are always under pressure to convict though.
There are no juries in German courts.
 
At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team).

After the officers had been updated about facts relating to the disappearance, they tried to reconstruct the route the girl might have taken with the two tracker dogs.

For this purpose the dogs were given a blanket to sniff, provided by the parents, which had been used by Madeleine.

Beginning to follow the track using Rex, from the door of apartment 5 A (the place where the girl had been sleeping) he would always head in the direction of Block 4, leaving block 5 the dog would turn to the left, pass by a metal access door to a path existing between the apartments blocks to the leisure area (restaurant, pool and playground). Immediately another attempt at reconstruction was made using the dog Zarus, who, in general terms, ended up following the same route as Rex and having the same behaviour.
Or was it a towel which they used? According to the actual handler;

He remembers that on the 4th of May of the current year, around 23H00, they attempted to tentatively identify and thus reconstruct the path taken by the missing minor. They gave the dogs a Turkish bath towel which was supposedly used by the child in question. This operation was realised by two different dogs.
 
I think the charges really do matter actually. It’s for the prosecution to demonstrate that a specific crime has been committed not just some vague notion of being somehow involved. if such a hypothetical situation there would not be enough evidence to make charges of kidnap, abuse or murder stick, only perhaps the crimes of witholding evidence, failure to report a crime and possession of abuse material.
Surely being convicted for anything in one of the most high profile unsolved cases would be enough? He'd be notorious and everyone would forever think he knew more than he admitted and probably was guilty of everything, alone.

I don't know how it works in Germany. In the UK he'd be charged with murder even if the prosecution couldn't prove exactly what happened to the victim or victims. They couldn't in the Soham case but Huntley was convicted for murder.

That might not happen in Germany though, I don't know. We're getting very hypothetical, Dudley.
 
There are no juries in German courts.
I know that but my old mate Arthur Conan Doyle says judges are often under the same pressure as juries. Or can be.

High profile cases are different aren't they? They shouldn't be but they are
 
At about 23.00 the extra teams that had been requested for reinforcement arrived (Officer Rosa with Oscar and Officer Martins with Fusco, both from the search and rescue unit and Officer Fernandes with Rex and Zarus from the tracking team).

After the officers had been updated about facts relating to the disappearance, they tried to reconstruct the route the girl might have taken with the two tracker dogs.

For this purpose the dogs were given a blanket to sniff, provided by the parents, which had been used by Madeleine.

Beginning to follow the track using Rex, from the door of apartment 5 A (the place where the girl had been sleeping) he would always head in the direction of Block 4, leaving block 5 the dog would turn to the left, pass by a metal access door to a path existing between the apartments blocks to the leisure area (restaurant, pool and playground). Immediately another attempt at reconstruction was made using the dog Zarus, who, in general terms, ended up following the same route as Rex and having the same behaviour.
The dogs when given Madeleine’s clothes signalled 5A and the empty 5J. Weird, huh?
 

Attachments

  • 59A0501D-FE45-4F9A-8FDC-84A2D854FFD9.jpeg
    59A0501D-FE45-4F9A-8FDC-84A2D854FFD9.jpeg
    280.1 KB · Views: 9
It sounds like there were two different GNR dog searches according to the files. One that took place in the early hours using MM's blanket which finished around 7am. Then another around 11pm on the 4th using her bath towel.
 
The dogs walked around the complex and all ended at carpark opposite the reception entrance
 

Attachments

  • IMG_8931.jpeg
    IMG_8931.jpeg
    91 KB · Views: 10
Surely being convicted for anything in one of the most high profile unsolved cases would be enough? He'd be notorious and everyone would forever think he knew more than he admitted and probably was guilty of everything, alone.

I don't know how it works in Germany. In the UK he'd be charged with murder even if the prosecution couldn't prove exactly what happened to the victim or victims. They couldn't in the Soham case but Huntley was convicted for murder.

That might not happen in Germany though, I don't know. We're getting very hypothetical, Dudley.
Huntley admitted contact with the girls and claimed they were killed “accidentally“. Of course if CB admitted contact with Madeleine then that would put a different complexion on things, however in the absence of any other evidence linking him directly he could always claim to have downloaded the video or been sold/given it by a.n. other and the prosecution would need concrete evidence that he’d actually filmed it himself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
2,253
Total visitors
2,328

Forum statistics

Threads
599,867
Messages
18,100,437
Members
230,942
Latest member
Patturelli
Back
Top