Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #39

[Denis R Tandib]

It may not prove anything but it is surely relevant. If his badness was purely down to being a burglar and a drug dealer then IMO that makes him a less likely candidate for the abduction, rape and murder of a child than someone with a track record which also includes violent sexual crime and child molestation. I mentioned "the perfect patsy" because in the eyes of some he ticks all the boxes, and some of those boxes are the crimes I highlighted but which you appeared to prefer to gloss over by use of just the one word to describe him, ie: "bad".

So what’s CB’s motive in the MM case? I think it’s a stretch to say because of his past record he abducted a child from a holiday apartment to molest and be violent towards.

Whatever bad includes, CB covers it but that in and of itself doesn’t mean he has anything to do with MM.

 

[Davieson]

And if he was tried and found guilty of Madeleine's abduction and murder I assume there would be no doubt at all in anyone's minds that he was the perpetrator?

I thought that was implicit in my reply to Denis. I always accept the verdicts of courts until they have been overturned by a higher court

 

[Denis R Tandib]

IMO that's a disingenuous reading of the facts. When a child goes missing from their bed in the middle of the night never to be seen again and their parents have been ruled out, as has woke and wandered, then that doesn't leave many other explanations. Of course she could have been taken by someone with a fixation on little girls that wasn't sexual, to be kept alive for and played with like a dolly such as happened to the girl abducted from a tent in Australia, so granted that is a possibility though highly unlikely IMO as Madeleine would now be an adult and probably her abductor would have lost interest in her by now.

There’s no evidence of an abduction so something must be wrong because she didn’t evaporate.

 

[Consider Dudley]

So what’s CB’s motive in the MM case? I think it’s a stretch to say because of his past record he abducted a child from a holiday apartment to molest and be violent towards.

Whatever bad includes, CB covers it but that in and of itself doesn’t mean he has anything to do with MM.

we can only speculate but IMO it's pretty obvious what the motivation was in CB's case. It's the same motivation that leads any sexual abuser/rapist with a history of sex crimes against young girls to take a small child. I don't think it's a stretch at all, and nor do many of the professionals involved directly or indirectly in this case. Of course, it still doesn't prove anything, only hard evidence does that, I agree.

 

[Consider Dudley]

There’s no evidence of an abduction so something must be wrong because she didn’t evaporate.

I don't understand this comment, sorry.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I don't understand this comment, sorry.

No problem.

There is no evidence that MM was abducted from 5A - neither GA or his successor believed an abduction occurred.

If MM’s parents have nothing to do with it (I don’t think they have been exculpated) and she didn’t walk out of there, what explanation is there?

 

[Consider Dudley]

No problem.

There is no evidence that MM was abducted from 5A - neither GA or his successor believed an abduction occurred.

If MM’s parents have nothing to do with it (I don’t think they have been exculpated) and she didn’t walk out of there, what explanation is there?

Isn't it obvious? If her parents didn't do it and she didn't walk out of there (both explanations firmly dismissed by the Met and the German prosecutor) then that only leaves one other possible explanation (unless you subscribe to supernatural or outerworldly explanations).

 

[Davieson]

Isn't it obvious? If her parents didn't do it and she didn't walk out of there (both explanations firmly dismissed by the Met and the German prosecutor) then that only leaves one other possible explanation (unless you subscribe to supernatural or outerworldly explanations).

The problem is that it's all supposition with no actual evidence
Police have their professional opinion but its never been put to the test.
Only a trial will do that.

 

[Mex]

Maybe things just haven't panned out as prosecutors/police intended. The essential evidence wasn't there as they expected and they are still scratting around in the hope that something will turn. IMO

Or they may be biding their time until the jurisdiction issue is resolved.

 

[Mex]

I don't consider it speculation to say that prosecutors haven't got the evidence they want and hoped for.
If they had, their investigation would be closed and charges forthcoming.
All this talk about getting the other charges out of the way first is just bunkum. The other charges have only come first because they haven't sufficient to stand up in court as regards MM
IMO

It is illogical to proceed to indict and prosecute until the jurisdiction is known.
My opinion

 

[mrjitty]

What if the central premise results in an incorrect conclusion? So far to me it looks like this:

1. CB is a bad man
2. A phone number used by CB at some point in the past was used on 3 May
3. A car owned by CB was reregistered by AB on 4 May
4. CB has allegedly confessed to abducting and murdering MM
5. CB is being investigated for these crimes

Conclusion
CB killed and murdered MM.

I don’t think this passes muster but I can see why people think it might.

What I wonder about, especially after the crazy 'coincidence' in the Delphi case of an active catfisher / sex offender being discovered from the victims phone data but then apparently not having anything to do with the murder, is whether they've been handed the perfect suspect who has put himself in the gun

Now that we have seen Helge B's Spiegel interview, IMO the confession is a hell of a lot less than I expected. But on the other hand, given the other crimes he reported, you can see why law enforcement were hot on it. They swiftly got a conviction on a brutal rape. They found some circumstantial evidence which increases suspicion. Maybe they found a confession, and stolen goods from OC? (speculative)

But somehow, after 3 years and now 6, they still don't have a case they felt they can charge.

So is that because the evidence they need simply can't be found anymore?

Or is it because their theory of the case is somehow wrong?

Or did something go wrong with their case? (HCW said they had the evidence to charge)

At some point, it gets hard to maintain everything is well with the investigation.

 

[mrjitty]

Going back to the appeal in 2020, this obviously never bore fruit.

Furthermore, there is reason to assume that there are other persons, apart from the sus- pect, who have concrete knowledge of the course of the crime and maybe also of the place where the body was left. We explicitly ask these persons to contact us and provide information.

This is quite critical IMO.

I wonder why this is, and why HCW does not know who these people are?

I do wonder if the evidence HCW has, is a detailed description of how it all went down, so he knows what happened, but cannot prove it. I read about another case where this happened. The perp told some details to an associate, but as it wasn't on a wire, and as the info was not enough to locate the body, they could not charge, The case was only resolved when a different associate told police years later where the disposal site was.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

What I wonder about, especially after the crazy 'coincidence' in the Delphi case of an active catfisher / sex offender being discovered from the victims phone data but then apparently not having anything to do with the murder, is whether they've been handed the perfect suspect who has put himself in the gun

Now that we have seen Helge B's Spiegel interview, IMO the confession is a hell of a lot less than I expected. But on the other hand, given the other crimes he reported, you can see why law enforcement were hot on it. They swiftly got a conviction on a brutal rape. They found some circumstantial evidence which increases suspicion. Maybe they found a confession, and stolen goods from OC? (speculative)

But somehow, after 3 years and now 6, they still don't have a case they felt they can charge.

So is that because the evidence they need simply can't be found anymore?

Or is it because their theory of the case is somehow wrong?

Or did something go wrong with their case? (HCW said they had the evidence to charge)

At some point, it gets hard to maintain everything is well with the investigation.

BIB, they had evidence of CSA images and probably other stuff from the box factory in 2016. Then HeB comes into the frame with the confession and rape information. Then the phone number is s hit, then the Jag. It builds into something compelling.

But if HeB or CB are making up the confession, everything else crumbles. But, HCW has already claimed they have the man who murdered MM.

In this scenario, it’s a big mess. IMO it’s quite plausible.

 

[Lyall0814]

BIB, they had evidence of CSA images and probably other stuff from the box factory in 2016. Then HeB comes into the frame with the confession and rape information. Then the phone number is s hit, then the Jag. It builds into something compelling.

But if HeB or CB are making up the confession, everything else crumbles. But, HCW has already claimed they have the man who murdered MM.

In this scenario, it’s a big mess. IMO it’s quite plausible.

Imo investigators and prosecutors in any country can convince themselves anything is true in extraordinary circumstances. The Germans wouldn't be the first and they won't be the last.

 

[mrjitty]

Has wandered been ruled out?

To me it is surely possible she left the apartment and was then abducted?

IMO it is unlikely however

 

[Consider Dudley]

Has wandered been ruled out?

To me it is surely possible she left the apartment and was then abducted?

IMO it is unlikely however

I guess that question can only be answered in relation to who is doing the ruling out. You may not have ruled it out but it would appear that most certainly the Met investigating her disappearance have done so.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Has wandered been ruled out?

To me it is surely possible she left the apartment and was then abducted?

IMO it is unlikely however

I think all the assertions of what has officially been ruled out are untrue.

IMO, this is absolutely correct until someone is tried and convicted - no options should be taken off the table.
<modsnip: off topic>

 

[Anxala]

This is quite critical IMO.

I wonder why this is, and why HCW does not know who these people are?

I do wonder if the evidence HCW has, is a detailed description of how it all went down, so he knows what happened, but cannot prove it. I read about another case where this happened. The perp told some details to an associate, but as it wasn't on a wire, and as the info was not enough to locate the body, they could not charge, The case was only resolved when a different associate told police years later where the disposal site was.

^ Who or where would he have gotten that from though? Are you thinking another witness, one we know nothing about, who the BKA is keeping on the downlow in the event of a charge/trial ever happening?

Unless of course it came from CB's own writings in his Das Buchs, parts 1 and 2...

 

[Davieson]

<modsnip: quoted post was removed> The Germans can only look at stranger abduction scenario involving a German citizen. Anything else would be outside their remit. They have no interest in MM outside of the possibility of a German suspect being responsible and they will never have looked at other possibilities.
IMO

 

[Consider Dudley]

The Germans can only look at stranger abduction scenario involving a German citizen. Anything else would be outside their remit. They have no interest in MM outside of the possibility of a German suspect being responsible and they will never have looked at other possibilities.
IMO

They will have done all they can to rule him out of involvement and presumably been unable to.