GUILTY Denmark - Kim Wall, 30, Copenhagen, 10 Aug 2017

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #1,201
Showing those films. Just inhumane - only thinking about time.
People don´t matter anymore.

KW´s parents probably chose to be there today because only witnesses were scheduled.

:(

Yeah, somehow it seems that the prosecutor goes all in. I mean that he just want to make sure that the judges understand what type of person PM is.
But man....its soo soo disgusting and creepy!

And it shows that is not just yesterday he got those creepy interests. It has been like that for a long time, it seems.
 
  • #1,202
So why is he a witness????


Correction - there is more. They never watched violent videos together.

Yeah, I update the same post if its not too long, so that the context doesnt slip away.
 
  • #1,203
They now discuss the defense's desire to convene a witness from the Police's National Cyber ​​Crime Center (NC3).
The defense wishes to convene the witness to document that anything other than creepy execution videos were found on the hard disks and computers that are secured in the case.

The prosecutor now say that they dont deny that there are other things from Peter Madsen's everyday life, on the hard drives .
"But just like in an addict, we will of course only show what is relevant to the accusation in the case," the prosecutor said.

The referee interrupts the discussion and now says that the last witness of the day has arrived at the hall.
It is Jens Falkenberg, a friend of Peter Madsen.

The judge asks if it is true that the witness has been present in the court room during the first hearing of the case.
She asks because it is forbidden for the witness to be in the room with a case they are testifying in, before they are called.
- That's right, says the witness, who also says he became aware of it and called the police and said he had "stepped in the spinach".

The witness is nevertheless allowed to give an explanation.
The defense starts with the interrogation as it is their witness.
The witness tells that he has known Peter Madsen for 12 years.

"I had seen him on the submarine once and thought," That's what I want to do, "says the witness.
"Fate would that I met him again the next day, and then we became friends," the witness said.

The witness is educated in IT, but helped build Peter Madsen's submarines.
"When they were building Kraka (Peter's second submarine), I helped with a little bit of effort," said the witness.
- Kraka was built on Refshale Island. It was absolutely amazing. And we got the idea of ​​building an even bigger, says the witness.
So you did join when the nautilus was built?
- Yes, the witness says.

The witness calls PM the day Peter Madsen had bought the tube to Nautilus, which would later become the central part of the submarine.
"So you had some technical skills," said the lawyer.
- Well, it's also using arms and legs and getting some iron plates, says the witness, telling her that he was part of the work with Nautilus.

- Have you been out and sailing with Nautilus, asks the defense attorney.
- Yes, some. I think a 30 times, the witness says.
"Peter, of course, has been out a whole lot more," said the witness.

The witness tells him that he was on and off in the workshop.
"Was Peter a regular rider when you sailed?" Asks the defender.
- I do not want to say that. There was a relaxed atmosphere. We seldom sailed from land with a goal, says the witness.

- How often did you come to the workshop and Nautilus from the summer of last year, asks the defense attorney.
"We resumed the work on the submarine this spring, and there I was there every day in the workshop," said the witness, who last was at nautilus and the workshop approx. two weeks before it disappeared on 10 August.

Did you make some little things on Nautilus?
- Yes, I made a skirt in the engine room - that's a plate that had to cover a wheel on the engine. It was on Peter's initiative because we talked that it would be dangerous with that wheel because a belt or some clothes could cling, says the witness.

The witness says that he should also make a table top in the submarine.
"It was made of wood," said the witness, who thought he had finished all the work near a frame that was supposed to be on the table.
- What about some shelves. Did Peter talk about some shelves, asks the defender.
"Yes, I think Peter would like to make some shelves for life jackets or food and so on," the witness said.

"And what should they be made of, asks the defense attorney.
"No, but I think it would be marine veneer, that is, plywood," said the witness.

- Could you take a saw down to make shelves, asks the defense attorney.
- No, it would be easier to do it over at the submarine.
"But was the measurement off or would they fit?" Asks the defense attorney.
"I do not know exactly," said the witness.

"But I understood that you had not started with those shelves," asks the defense attorney.
"No, I did not," said the witness.
- Peter told you everything he would have done in the submarine, asks the defender.
- Far from, the witness says.

The witness also say that Peter Madsen got spontaneous ideas about what should be done in the submarine.

Peter Madsen follows the witness's explanation from his place next to his defense attorney. He is coming with inputs.

The defense attorney now asks about how to draw an area in the water that has been sought.
"The short answer is that you use tools that you can put in the seabed and span a" grid "in between, so you can mark where you have dived, the witness says.
The defender also asks if you would usually bring heavy things that could tarn a rope where to go diving.
The witness confirms.
- Especially in Denmark where the water is cloudy, the witness says.

The witness also says that he does not remember if Peter Madsen and him had talked about that they were just looking for an area in the water around the submarine.

Now, the defense is finished with the hearing of the witness, and prosecutor Jakob Buch-Jepsen takes over.

- You have told that you had done some woodwork on the submarine at Peter's request. Did you always do the woodwork on the submarine, asks the prosecutor.
"Well, there's very little woodwork on a submarine," the witness said.
- Was there any specific agreement about that you should come and make these shelves as we have spoken asking the prosecutor.
"No," said the witness.

- Have you ever used a fukssvans (saw) from the workshop?
"I've probably used it as an angle, and so I've used the workshop's round saw," said the witness.

The prosecutor now shows a picture of a very rusty saw with orange shaft found on the bottom of the Øresund.
Have you seen such one at the workshop?
"Yes, I think there was such an orange shaft," said the witness.

- Have you ever seen it on the submarine, asks the prosecutor.
"No," said the witness.
"And all the woodwork that you have made, you have done outside the submarine, asks the prosecutor.
- Yes, the witness says.

- When were you last in the submarine?
"I'll think it's been three to four weeks before all this happened," said the witness.
- Have you left any loose wood down there, asks the prosecutor.
"No, I think I've done everything outside the submarine, so I then took it afterwards to the submarine," the witness said.

- Do you have any explanation as to why Peter Madsen should have taken such a saw with him to the submarine on August 10, asks the prosecutor.
"No," said the witness.

The prosecutor now shows the over half-meter long screwdriver, which is part of the case.
- Do you know the tools of the workshop, ask the prosecutor.
"Yes, I have, but I have never seen such one in the workshop," the witness said.

- Could you use it as a soil spear, asks the prosecutor.
"Yes, that would be ideal for that," said the witness.

"And if you use it to that, ask the prosecutor, it would be necessary to cut it more pointy."
- No, I do not think so. It can easily be planted into the seabed, as it is, says the witness.

The prosecutor now shows a picture of the green water hose found in the submarine.
The witness can not say decisively whether it has always been in the submarine or not.
The prosecutor also displays images of pipe pieces and images of the straps found in the submarine.
"I have not seen the pipes, but there were a lot of straps. I have not seen them right there, says the witness.

The prosecutor now displays pictures from the submarine's canteen. Under the ankle height benches are some straps attached.
- Have you seen them there, asks the prosecutor.
- No, not in the canteen. I have seen them in the engine room, where they held some cans in place, says the witness.

- Have you ever seen the ladder in the submarine be detached?
- Yes, the witness says.
"And was it tightened in the canteen with the straps," the prosecutor asks.
"No, I do not remember," said the witness

The witness tells the court that there were often tools on board Nautilus. It was sometimes much and sometims less depending if you were mounting something in the submarine.
There could also be tools when they were out and sailing.

The prosecutor now documents that the witness to the police has said that it was not normal that there was a tool on the submarine.
- That's right, I've said that. There were often tools on board, but it was typical in case of mounting.
"Was it taken back when you were done?" Asks the defense attorney.
"I do not know," said the witness

"Are you familiar with Peter Madsen's third explanation in the case of under-pressure in the submarine, which meant that the hatches could not be opened, asks the prosecutor.
- Very little. But it makes sense that opening the hatches must be very difficult if there is oppression, says the witness.
"If there is vacuum in the submarine, I could imagine that you can not get it up," said the witness.

- What if you're in the submarine, the prosecutor asks.
"Then you can do that," said the witness.

- What if you are outside the submarine, asks the prosecutor.
"I can imagine that it would be completely impossible," said the witness.

Now the prosecutor has finished his interrogation and the defense has additional questions.
She will know if the witness is fully aware of Peter Madsen's latest explanation.
He is not, he says.

"And you're not so technologically educated that we can ask for valves and so," said the witness.
"Well, I should have a rich technical background, but I do not have that with Nautilus," said the witness.

The defense ends its hearing of the witness, and Jens Falkenberg therefore leaves the room.

It was the last witness of the day.
 
  • #1,204
Well, the prosecutor turned that witness's evidence in his favour without difficulty. Another example of PM using things which actually happened, only not quite how he pretends - shelf-making on the submarine.

The other stuff is so dreadful I haven't even read it fully but thank you for your heroic efforts to keep us all informed, L_I.

An earlier point - the witness who took that photo we all saw earlier in this thread, which was in heartbreaking contrast to what was to happen next, was presumably brought by the defence to show that everything was peaceful and happy so PM wouldn't have gone on to commit unspeakable crimes against Kim Wall.

In that NY Daily News article yesterday there was a reference to a Wired article, probably the one we all read but I really can't bear to go back and find it. Anyway:
[FONT=&quot]'One woman who knew Madsen told Wired last month that he had texted her in the days before the alleged killing, saying that he had planned a murder in the submarine, where they would bring a friend and “would suddenly change the mood and begin cutting her up.”[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]She told the magazine that she did not take the idea seriously.'

I'm afraid this was the change of mood idea in practice. But as yet, I don't think it's been mentioned in evidence.[/FONT]
 
  • #1,205
Well, the prosecutor turned that witness's evidence in his favour without difficulty. Another example of PM using things which actually happened, only not quite how he pretends - shelf-making on the submarine.

The other stuff is so dreadful I haven't even read it fully but thank you for your heroic efforts to keep us all informed, L_I.

An earlier point - the witness who took that photo we all saw earlier in this thread, which was in heartbreaking contrast to what was to happen next, was presumably brought by the defence to show that everything was peaceful and happy so PM wouldn't have gone on to commit unspeakable crimes against Kim Wall.

In that NY Daily News article yesterday there was a reference to a Wired article, probably the one we all read but I really can't bear to go back and find it. Anyway:
[FONT="]'One woman who knew Madsen told [URL="https://www.wired.com/story/final-terrible-voyage-nautilus/"]Wired[/URL] last month that he had texted her in the days before the alleged killing, saying that he had planned a murder in the submarine, where they would bring a friend and “would suddenly change the mood and begin cutting her up.”[/FONT]
[FONT="]She told the magazine that she did not take the idea seriously.'

I'm afraid this was the change of mood idea in practice. But as yet, I don't think it's been mentioned in evidence.[/FONT]

Yeah the prosecutor did a good job. I think he actually turned several of the defense-witnesses to his advantage. Clever guy.

I really now believe that the defense-lawyer doesnt have anything to come up with, She desperately tries to put a rosy look on PM, as he is such a nice guy, even that we are almost drowning in info about how big a creep he is. But what can she do...?
I dont think her tries to discredit some witnesses would help either, or I hope it wont.
 
  • #1,206
If i understand well all that has been said, the alleged accident would have happened when the submarine was on the surface and there would also have been a certain time before the hull was filled with fumes.

Two questions:

- Kim Wall had never been on a submarine before, let alone this one. How would she know how to stop the engine? during a panic situation? when PM was outside and she could not hear him because of the noise?

- If it all happened the way PM claimed, then why did KW stop sending messages and why didn't KW send an alarm message to her boyfriend & family? Help! Locked in! No air!


:thinking:

KW could not have helped herself, I believe.

Its a good question about why she didnt call for help when she was trapped there. I wish the prosecutor would ask someone that. We do know though, that she was probably not trapped at all. But I would love to hear PM's answer to that anyway.
 
  • #1,207
All in all, I think that today shows that the defense doesnt have anything to come up with. There were absolutely nothing that could turn the case around, IMO.
Yes there were people that confirmed that it IS possible to get that under-pressure and let gasses go into the sub, but we know that forensics hasnt found any signs of that at all so why would the defense-lawyer try to deny the forensics results? It doesnt make sense.

The witnesses didnt really agree on how nice PM was. Some was admitting that he could go bananas if something didnt go his way and others said that he always was nice and polite, so its not really usable at all.

Several times a defense witness were throwing themselfes in to the hand of the prosecutor.

I just didnt like the movies to be shown when the parents was there. Not very sensible.
 
  • #1,208
Yeah the prosecutor did a good job. I think he actually turned several of the defense-witnesses to his advantage. Clever guy.

I really now believe that the defense-lawyer doesnt have anything to come up with, She desperately tries to put a rosy look on PM, as he is such a nice guy, even that we are almost drowning in info about how big a creep he is. But what can she do...?
I dont think her tries to discredit some witnesses would help either, or I hope it wont.

It is an uphill battle for her, for sure, and it gets steeper and steeper.

The witnesses who, at a distance, saw them sail and described the atmosphere between KW and PM as good, is desperately weak.
She has few witnesses - those were a big bulk of them.

------------------------------------------

I am used to true crime - has been an interest of mine for years, but this case gets to me big time.
In a way it has shattered my world. Probably because suddenly I find myself in the situation of knowing (not well, but knowing) one of the worst murderers I have ever heard of.
Makes me wonder about other people I know - what goes on beneath the surface?

Most "popular" 🤬🤬🤬🤬 on the internet has to do with abuse of women and children, how about that!
How many of your friends and even family enjoy watching such things?
What a sad world!
 
  • #1,209
It is an uphill battle for her, for sure, and it gets steeper and steeper.

The witnesses who, at a distance, saw them sail and described the atmosphere between KW and PM as good, is desperately weak.
She has few witnesses - those were a big bulk of them.

------------------------------------------

I am used to true crime - has been an interest of mine for years, but this case gets to me big time.
In a way it has shattered my world. Probably because suddenly I find myself in the situation of knowing (not well, but knowing) one of the worst murderers I have ever heard of.
Makes me wonder about other people I know - what goes on beneath the surface?

Most "popular" 🤬🤬🤬🤬 on the internet has to do with abuse of women and children, how about that!
How many of your friends and even family enjoy watching such things?
What a sad world!

I think this case is beyond my limits. I have thought that I wasnt so soft, but to be honest I find it hard to stop thinking of this poor girl and what she has been going through. And her parents....its simply awful.
I have been reading here for many years, also before it became websleuth, where there was something called "crime-TV" I think.
I have been following cases with horrible details, but this case beats them all I think.

I understand your feelings about have known a murder like this. I also once knew a guy that became double-killer, and its impossible to know who to avoid and when it is dangerous. We just have to say that it must be destiny or something if we dont get into a situation where we can risk our lives.
 
  • #1,210
I think this case is beyond my limits. I have thought that I wasnt so soft, but to be honest I find it hard to stop thinking of this poor girl and what she has been going through. And her parents....its simply awful.
I have been reading here for many years, also before it became websleuth, where there was something called "crime-TV" I think.
I have been following cases with horrible details, but this case beats them all I think.

I understand your feelings about have known a murder like this. I also once knew a guy that became double-killer, and its impossible to know who to avoid and when it is dangerous. We just have to say that it must be destiny or something if we dont get into a situation where we can risk our lives.

I actually think this interest in true crime to a degree teaches you what to look out for and what to avoid.
For instance, I never forget John Douglas´ (former FBI profiler) simple advice: Never get in the car, just don´t.
 
  • #1,211
I have to say :tyou: Logical_Inference for posting what's going on in court! Very much appreciated.

And I came up with 5 witnesses for Pros, and 5 for Defense. Is this the first day of defense witnesses? Or do I have to go back and look.... :)
 
  • #1,212
I have to say :tyou: Logical_Inference for posting what's going on in court! Very much appreciated.

And I came up with 5 witnesses for Pros, and 5 for Defense. Is this the first day of defense witnesses? Or do I have to go back and look.... :)

Apparently it is the first day with defense-witnesses. They do let the defense-lawyer start with questions when its her witneses, and that has never happened before today.
 
  • #1,213
It is difficult to know what to say after all this evidence.

Re the sub, what I got from the evidence today is that the engines only operate on the surface when exhaust gases can vent to air. The talk was of the air (oxygen) being sucked out of the air in the sub when the engine is running. Now this would end up suffocating someone left inside through lack of oxygen, which is consistent with how Kim died. (She was suffocated or had her throat cut was the medical evidence) Most people who have testified about the engine running seem aware of this fact so it boils down to whether he did it deliberately or not in my mind. They must prove intent.
 
  • #1,214
  • #1,215
It is difficult to know what to say after all this evidence.

Re the sub, what I got from the evidence today is that the engines only operate on the surface when exhaust gases can vent to air. The talk was of the air (oxygen) being sucked out of the air in the sub when the engine is running. Now this would end up suffocating someone left inside through lack of oxygen, which is consistent with how Kim died. (She was suffocated or had her throat cut was the medical evidence) Most people who have testified about the engine running seem aware of this fact so it boils down to whether he did it deliberately or not in my mind. They must prove intent.

I saw someone quote this article in this forum last week (also repeated in a lot of other articles)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5531645/Kim-Wall-possibly-gagged-death-trial-hears.html

Today, the medical examiner said it was an unlikely scenario as 'the air seems not to have been able to leave the lungs, which is not the case with lack of oxygen or inhalation of gases.'
 
  • #1,216
  • #1,217
Disgusting.
 
  • #1,218
  • #1,219
Will PM try to escape the court before the trial?

PM has, according to several witnesses, expressed a wish for a glorius ending with him fleeing and a huge police-chase in the best OJ simpson style.
In court he is followed by 2 prisoner-guards, but he is not in handcuffs, so he can walk around freely.
There is not a huge security-team that guards the entrance and the area around the court, as there is on high-profile trials.

Now, there has been some strange happenings during the last few days of the trial.
One day, in a short break, he left his chair and went to a chair in the court-room that was facing the wall, and sat there starring into the wall.
Would that be a way to see if he could calculate an escape-route using that chair or measuring the distance between windows or so?

Another day, in a break, he rushed towards the back-room, went in and out again to end up where he started. Could that be a way to see if he was able to get the 2 prisoner-guards on a suitable distance so he could escape?

Would someone help him, if so? Maybe Deidre would have a car ready for him if he managed to get out? Or maybe even his lawyer would let him out in a weak moment?

Maybe there will be more happenings during the rest of the days, because he's best chance to flee is in court. It takes a lot more to plan an escape from the prison.

Or maybe I just have watched too many movies.....


I cant translate today, unfortuntely. Hopefully someone else can, or maybe the twitter-person updates a lot.
 
  • #1,220
http://cphpost.dk/news/peter-madsen...nto-forensics-and-ends-with-the-dark-net.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42701315

The first link is day 3 showing the forensics. Thought it may be good to recap.

The second article states prosecutors have charged PM with suffocating or strangling Kim Wall, yet the medical examiner states strangling or having her throat cut so I am not sure prosecutors have it right if the ME says oxygen was prevented from leaving her lungs.

The prosecutors have charged PM with murder. I don't think they have to be certain how it was done. Incidentally the second article (BBC) actually says:
'Prosecutors accuse him of having planned the crime, either suffocating her or cutting her throat.'

Evidence was given that typical signs of strangling were not present. We all know, especially after yesterday's hideous stuff, what the alternative might be.
It is crucial, though, to ruling out PM's story if the forensic/medical evidence says there were no exhaust gases in her lungs, as well as the oxygen point (not that I fully understand this) - and that was said on Friday. This summary of part of Day 3's evidence comes from The Week, using Copenhagen Post and The Local:

'Madsen insists that Wall’s death was an accident. He has also admitted to dismembering her body and stabbing it after her death, despite having originally told rescuers that he had dropped her ashore alive hours earlier.
Coroner Christina Jacobsen told the Copenhagen district court there was “no conclusive evidence to prove the cause of death beyond doubt” due to the amount of time the body was submerged in water, the Copenhagen Post writes.
However, Jacobsen added: “What we think happened is that the airways were totally or partially cut off. That would be due to either strangulation, throat cutting or drowning.”
On the first day of his trial on 8 March, Madsen claimed that Wall had died when the air pressure “suddenly dropped and toxic fumes filled his vessel” while he was up on deck, The Localwrites.
But an autopsy report on Wall’s lungs concluded there were “no signs of exhaust gases in the tissue”.'

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
131
Guests online
3,269
Total visitors
3,400

Forum statistics

Threads
632,633
Messages
18,629,477
Members
243,231
Latest member
Irena21D
Back
Top