Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #35

[mrjitty]

I’m sorry you feel that way. I had no intention of striking a cord but on reflection I’m not surprised that I did so.

I stand by my opinion on the matter & I fully expect there’ll be some reluctance to accept a guilty verdict regardless of how irrefutable that evidence might me. But that reluctance will only come to people who subscribe the sort of theory Amaral profited from. In any case, if the evidence is strong enough for a conviction it’ll be far more substantial than any of the reasonings anybody has to the contrary. Which in turn will help people come to the rational conclusion. I don’t think all people will hypocritically remain subscribed to a theory when the evidence implicating CB is at a much higher threshold than that of which they judge other things.

I think some already anticipate how they’ll behave should there be a CB conviction. The reluctance will already be seeded & I fully expect to see that when the evidence, however strong it is, is made public.

Being that my opinion is very bold & it may frustrate people, I’ll now refrain from bringing this up on this thread.

I appreciate your response & wish you well.

This case is so conspiratorial down the years I think you'll never see at end to all the theories.

As for posters here, I get the impression most just want to see the evidence.

 

[mrjitty]

I’m sorry you feel that way. I had no intention of striking a cord but on reflection I’m not surprised that I did so.

I stand by my opinion on the matter & I fully expect there’ll be some reluctance to accept a guilty verdict regardless of how irrefutable that evidence might me. But that reluctance will only come to people who subscribe the sort of theory Amaral profited from. In any case, if the evidence is strong enough for a conviction it’ll be far more substantial than any of the reasonings anybody has to the contrary. Which in turn will help people come to the rational conclusion. I don’t think all people will hypocritically remain subscribed to a theory when the evidence implicating CB is at a much higher threshold than that of which they judge other things.

I think some already anticipate how they’ll behave should there be a CB conviction. The reluctance will already be seeded & I fully expect to see that when the evidence, however strong it is, is made public.

Being that my opinion is very bold & it may frustrate people, I’ll now refrain from bringing this up on this thread.

I appreciate your response & wish you well.

This case is so conspiratorial down the years I think you'll never see at end to all the theories.

As for posters here, I get the impression most just want to see the evidence.

 

[C.greek]

I agree with this.

I think we have to trust in the institutions. I just don't like the business of announcing guilt without charges. I've also never seen this before, and it would not be able to happen in the UK.

I was thinking of John Cannan in the Suzy Lamplugh case. As far as I know he was never charged but has remained their only prime suspect! they even had a press conference naming him as the murderer even though he was never charged

Police name man who 'killed Suzy Lamplugh'

www.telegraph.co.uk

 

[RichardKimble]

It’s the most powerful type of evidence!

Even then not enough, take the Lamplugh case, the police presented files twice to the CPS, obviously believing their circumstantial to be enough, knocked back with a CPS lawyer saying that the victim nor suspect could not be placed together also without a body not a realistic chance of a conviction .

Consider the two points above can either be said of the suspect and Madeleine, another case to consider is the April Jones murder, where indeed strong circumstantial is indeed powerful. in that case the girl was seen getting into a vehicle, was Madeleine ? April's DNA was found in the suspects house, has Madeleine DNA been found outwith 5a, ? fragments of bones identified to be of a small child were found in the suspects house, all circumstantial but with the suspect knocking her down with his vechile but not remembering where her body was.

IMO the above examples show the difficulties with out sightings, body or DNA in the Madeleine case and the position it's still in 16 yrs down the line.

 

[RichardKimble]

I was thinking of John Cannan in the Suzy Lamplugh case. As far as I know he was never charged but has remained their only prime suspect! they even had a press conference naming him as the murderer even though he was never charged

Police name man who 'killed Suzy Lamplugh'

www.telegraph.co.uk

yes also after this the CPS ruled he would not get a fair trial because of the adverse publicity, source, in the footsteps of killers ch4 on catch up.

 

[C.greek]

Yes!

In criminal law, the rule against propensity evidence/reasoning was one of the most fascinating areas of study for me.

Not sure how this works in real life though... why would CB be denied parole if there was no propensity evidence taken into consideration? I also don't understand how one cannot consider the profile and the previous crimes of an accused!

 

[C.greek]

yes also after this the CPS ruled he would not get a fair trial because of the adverse publicity, source, in the footsteps of killers ch4 on catch up.

yes because in the UK there is a jury, while in Germany there is not.

 

[RichardKimble]

Not sure how this works in real life though... why would CB be denied parole if there was no propensity evidence taken into consideration? I also don't understand how one cannot consider the profile and the previous crimes of an accused!

But how often do we hear after a trial that it can be revealed so and so had previous convictions, not prior to a trial.

 

[C.greek]

But how often do we hear after a trial that it can be revealed so and so had previous convictions, not prior to a trial.

we are talking about the German legal system here. there is no jury and therefore no bias should exist, right? also, this is evidence that is used during a trial!

 

[RichardKimble]

DBM quotes mixed up.

 

[Janosch]

we are talking about the German legal system here. there is no jury and therefore no bias should exist, right? also, this is evidence that is used during a trial!

"There is no jury and therefore no bias should exist, right?"

In many countries the judicial system is being questioned because of the so called "Lawfare". Democracy itself is also being under attack. And remember, the judges are human beings.

Also the press is not applying the principle of innocence.

I think HCW/BKA did no expect the press to publish the name and face of CB 24 hours after the June 3, 2020 appeal. That was a big mistake.

JMO.

 

[RichardKimble]

yes because in the UK there is a jury, while in Germany there is not.

How much publicity in Germany had CB received prior to 2020 ? How much is the case attracting there now ?

 

[frank-cole]

This case is so conspiratorial down the years I think you'll never see at end to all the theories.

As for posters here, I get the impression most just want to see the evidence.

I agree. I get that same impression, I think websleuths-ers will come to the rational conclusion based on the outcome.

 

[frank-cole]

This case is so conspiratorial down the years I think you'll never see at end to all the theories.

As for posters here, I get the impression most just want to see the evidence.

I agree. I get that same impression, I think websleuths-ers will come to the rational conclusion based on the outcome

 

[mrjitty]

Not sure how this works in real life though... why would CB be denied parole if there was no propensity evidence taken into consideration? I also don't understand how one cannot consider the profile and the previous crimes of an accused!

That is a different logic.

When a person has been tried and convicted of a string of offences, parole officers are entitled to consider the likelihood of reoffending i.e. crimes that haven't happened.

What @Janosch is describing is the dangers of saying this person did these previous crimes, therefore he is the type of person who would also have done the crime you are investigating, therefore he is more likely guilty.

It's a logical fallacy.

The HB case shows nicely where the boundaries lie - i.e where beyond a mere profile, you have striking similarities in the specific mode of offending.

Basically a profile is an investigative tool, not evidence.

 

[Mex]

This case is so conspiratorial down the years I think you'll never see at end to all the theories.

As for posters here, I get the impression most just want to see the evidence.

I agree and I don't if you can understand that.

There is definitely a narrative behind every missing child case but none has been as compromised by incompetence and fable making as this one has.

I cannot recall a similar situation before or after MM's disappearance where there was an expectation and indeed a demand to be kept informed every step of the way regarding confidential investigative material. (We've seen the lot from attempts at private prosecutions to attempts to have MM's death declared)

Like everyone else I would like to see this particular case successfully concluded and the mystery solved. But I really don't want to know anything about the evidence until it is presented in court.
My opinion

 

[Mex]

Not sure how this works in real life though... why would CB be denied parole if there was no propensity evidence taken into consideration? I also don't understand how one cannot consider the profile and the previous crimes of an accused!

All in the interests of a fair trial I think, past offences are not admissible as being prejudicial to the accused

 

[mrjitty]

I agree and I don't if you can understand that.

There is definitely a narrative behind every missing child case but none has been as compromised by incompetence and fable making as this one has.

I cannot recall a similar situation before or after MM's disappearance where there was an expectation and indeed a demand to be kept informed every step of the way regarding confidential investigative material. (We've seen the lot from attempts at private prosecutions to attempts to have MM's death declared)

Like everyone else I would like to see this particular case successfully concluded and the mystery solved. But I really don't want to know anything about the evidence until it is presented in court.
My opinion

I think the recent Bully case shows how quickly all the conspiracists go down the rabbit hole these days, stoked by traditional and non-traditional media.

 

[Lyall0814]

I agree and I don't if you can understand that.

There is definitely a narrative behind every missing child case but none has been as compromised by incompetence and fable making as this one has.

I cannot recall a similar situation before or after MM's disappearance where there was an expectation and indeed a demand to be kept informed every step of the way regarding confidential investigative material. (We've seen the lot from attempts at private prosecutions to attempts to have MM's death declared)

Like everyone else I would like to see this particular case successfully concluded and the mystery solved. But I really don't want to know anything about the evidence until it is presented in court.
My opinion

Odd thing to say on a site so closely associated with the JonBenet case. Imo. Nothing like what happened in that case over the years has ever happened in the MM case.

 

[Davieson]

I agree and I don't if you can understand that.

There is definitely a narrative behind every missing child case but none has been as compromised by incompetence and fable making as this one has.

I cannot recall a similar situation before or after MM's disappearance where there was an expectation and indeed a demand to be kept informed every step of the way regarding confidential investigative material. (We've seen the lot from attempts at private prosecutions to attempts to have MM's death declared)

Like everyone else I would like to see this particular case successfully concluded and the mystery solved. But I really don't want to know anything about the evidence until it is presented in court.
My opinion

I think part of the problem is that the media have gone all out over the MM case, constantly putting MM into the public eye and pushing any old rubbish in order to sell copy. In the beginning this was actively encouraged by the parents, though they only wanted publicity on their terms, but once the genie is out of the bottle its difficult to put it back in.