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

[SATA]

Betina Hald Engmark now asks for the powerful straps that have also been found on board the Nautilus.
- You have asked the prosecutor for that too. Are there any people sitting there normally or? "Asks the lawyer.
- I have a ladder that can be divided into two parts and you can place it inside the bathroom so it's out of the way. And it has been practice that we sometimes did it and then tucked it tight with those straps, "says Peter Madsen.

Images of the submarine are now displayed from the inside. Here are the blue straps in the submarine. They are sitting on the bars at the benches in the submarine.

"They have stuck so they could be used a second time," says Peter Madsen.
"On this picture they are out in the hallway, but they must have moved. It must be in connection with the fact that they have been filled with water that they have moved, says Peter Madsen.


Betina Hald Engmark will now come up with the more technical things about taking Nautilus.
"It matters to the case and this accident," said the lawyer.
"But that's not something I can do in five minutes," she said, referring to the court being scheduled to last until 15.30 today.​

 

[SATA]

It is now being discussed whether there is time to review the technical issues today.

Betina Hald Engmark explains that she has about two hours left of her interrogation of Peter Madsen. It is therefore discussed whether she can reach those questions another day.​

 

[SATA]

It is now being discussed whether there is time to review the technical issues today.

​

Betina Hald Engmark explains that she has about two hours left of her interrogation of Peter Madsen. It is therefore discussed whether she can reach those questions another day.

Three witnesses have asked for closed doors.
Seems that will be granted, due to the intimate nature of the relationships with PM.

Interrogation of PM over for today.

Press can protest the closed doors.​

 

[SATA]

Press does protest.

The chairman stated that the court will just retreat for a moment to decide on the issue of closed or open doors.

 

[SATA]

The name of one witness may not be published.
Closed doors still being discussed.

 

[SATA]

They decided:

"We have discussed the question and decided that the part of the hearing where this witness will give an explanation will be kept for closed doors," says Anette Burkø.The closed doors are done for the sake of the witness, the judge explains."Should the witness give an explanation in the public, it would violate the witness," the judge said.

And so the hearing ends today. The last two hours of the lawyer's hearing of Peter Madsen have instead been moved to the afternoon of 28 March.​

End of trial day.

 

[Moll]

Many thanks to L_I and SATA for all their work today.

 

[SATA]

Many thanks to L_I and SATA for all their work today.

NP - just hope it wasn´t too confusing.

 

[Legally Bland]

Many thanks to L_I and SATA for all their work today.

I second that.

 

[SATA]

I don´t know what you got out of Betina Hald´s line of questioning, but to me it sounded like she was preparing the judges for testimonies from former lovers and co-workers.
Trying to paint them as sexually adventurous - much, MUCH more than PM (yeah, right!) + smearing the snuff videos off on one of his lovers and on his former associates in Copenhagen Suborbitals (my friend included).

I don´t think she was successful. The picture I am left with of PM is that he was and is even more deranged than I thought leading up to the murders.

I would like to hear more about this trip to Spain. I hope the prosecutor will ask about that tomorrow.

 

[Niner]

If I may ask - who is Betina Hald? PM's lawyer?

TIA!

and thank you ALL for the updates of what's going on in this trial!

 

[SATA]

If I may ask - who is Betina Hald? PM's lawyer?

TIA!

and thank you ALL for the updates of what's going on in this trial!

Yes.

Whoa, just hearing from this morning´s interrogation which I didn´t see.
Judge had to stop Peter Madsen and tell him that the prosecutor was there to ask PM questions, not PM asking the prosecutor questions!

 

[SATA]

Yes.

Whoa, just hearing from this morning´s interrogation which I didn´t see.
Judge had to stop Peter Madsen and tell him that the prosecutor was there to ask PM questions, not PM asking the prosecutor questions!

It is clear Peter Madsen has some issue with the prosecutor more than him just, well, prosecuting him.

The lawyer represents something that bugs PM. He is a male of the same generation, he finished an academic education, something PM never could.
He probably hates "Jacob", as he keeps calling him, with a passion for that alone.

 

[ZaZara]

He couldn´t promise not to have relations to women who were at the workshop and now the talk falls on Deirdre King who worked there.
They had an on and off relationship.
That became problematic to his wife.

They broke up for a period of time, and PM offered to Deirdre to move in with him.
He muses: perhaps she is the wife I never got but should have had (he is such a tool!!!!!)

RSBM & BBM


This beggars belief. Why is he talking about this? What is the point?

Did he read the interview with Deirdre?

The man is in court, he stands accused of a horrible murder, now is not the time to start recording a romantic video message!


Deirde dear, Peter misses you. He wants to marry you. Or maybe not. He has changed his mind! Or maybe neither. You were the one after all, just like you always thought. So sorry it never happened in the past and in the future it problably never will happen either. But still. He's quite a catch.


IMHO he is playing games with everyone, the prosecutor, his female friends, the reporter friend of Kim Wall who wrote him that letter.

I wonder how he will react to the testimony of Ditte Dyreborg.

56-year-old Ditte Dyreborg is considered one of the country's leading technical experts in submarines, and therefore she has been summoned as a witness in the trial against Peter Madsen.

According to BT, she has produced a report entitled "Report on investigation of underwater engineering aspects, etc. after the possible lowering of UC3 Nautilus "at the request of the Copenhagen Police, and in the wake of technical inquiries she puts into doubt Peter Madsen's own explanation, which he issued during a police hearing on 14 October.

https://www.seoghoer.dk/nyheder/ditte-kan-blive-raket-madsens-vaerste-mareridt

If PM still cannot stand the split from Copenhagen Suborbitals.... what must it be like to be confronted with 'one of the country's leading technical experts in submarines' when PM himself is supposed to be the one?


:thinking:

 

[Logical_Inference]

Betina Hald asking if Deirdre had been on the submarine.
Peter Madsen says he has to be careful here, because he does not remember if they were intimate on the sub.
BH: that was not what I was asking, I asked if she had sailed with him on subm.

PM: I don´t remember, perhaps with other people.

Peter Madsen tells that he had an appointment sailing out with Deirdre on the submarine the day after the trip with Kim Wall.

As I remember then PM did have an appointment with someone to go to Bornholm the next day, and it was not Deidre. I think it was his friend and co-builder, if I remember right.
He cancelled the trip to Bornholm shortly before he went out with KW.
So he must be lying here.

 

[Logical_Inference]

It seems to me that the defense-lawyer is trying to paint a picture of him as a perfect and normal male that just happened to meet kinky women all the time. Like there is a wealth of kinky women out there. Its almost apparently impossible to meet normal women....lol
Okay I know its probably meant as a counter-attack to the prosecutors picture of him as a male that only liked the dark web.

But its like she is over-doing it somehow. She focus too much on that nicer picture of him, and that would probably be sensibly if there were a jury, but there isnt.
If I was a lawyer, which I am not, I would focus some more on the forensic evidence instead. She herself was the one that at the first court-meeting complained about that the prosecutor seemed to talk to the public and not the judges, and now she seems to do that herself.

I dont know how much a positive presentation of the offender will work, when there is a result of a mental-health-check like the one PM has gotten. To me it seems that her points is a waste of time.

 

[Niner]

Just in case some forgot....

Thursday, March 22nd:
*Trial continues (Day 3) - Denmark - Kim Isabel Wall (30) (Aug. 10, 2017) - Peter Langkjær Madsen (46) charged with premeditated murder in addition to dismemberment & sexual relations other than intercourse of a particularly dangerous nature & indecent handling of a corpse. Pled not guilty. Trial continues
March 22 - Witnesses
March 23 - Witnesses
March 26 - Witnesses
March 27 - Witnesses
March 28 - Witnesses (afternoon reserved for lawyer's questions of PM, postponed from March 21)
April 3 - Witnesses
April 4 - Documentation
April 5 - Reserve Day
April 23 - Procedures
April 25 - Verdict
37 witnesses will take the stand during case, 29 from the prosecution and 8 from the defense.

 

[Logical_Inference]

Today it is the forensic that is going to be questioned.
It will be interesting to see what the defense-lawyer has to say to that.
I would love to follow the live-blog, but I am out until this afternoon, but here is the live-blog link (in danish unfortunately)
https://ekstrabladet.dk/112/live-peter-madsen-i-retten-i-dag-skal-retsmedicineren-vidne/7088383

They can already now see that there isnt as many people as audience and journalists as in the other 2 courtmeetings, but apparently its quite normal that as the trial progresses, the less people shows up.
Hopefully there will be some foreign journalists that will tweet some.

 

[Satchie]

It seems to me that the defense-lawyer is trying to paint a picture of him as a perfect and normal male that just happened to meet kinky women all the time. Like there is a wealth of kinky women out there. Its almost apparently impossible to meet normal women....lol

RSBM

If this case were being tried in North America, I can't imagine a defense lawyer allowing her client to ramble along about himself in this way. It would be seen as very likely to self-incriminate, and even more importantly, to turn the trial away from assessing the prosecution evidence, and towards assessing the character, lifestyle, trustworthiness of the defendant.

To chat about all the affairs he's having, describing certain women as sexually boring, others as wild, will Danish judges and jury members really take such a relaxed, 'you lucky dog you' attitude, as he seems to expect?

 

[Logical_Inference]

RSBM

If this case were being tried in North America, I can't imagine a defense lawyer allowing her client to ramble along about himself in this way. It would be seen as very likely to self-incriminate, and even more importantly, to turn the trial away from assessing the prosecution evidence, and towards assessing the character, lifestyle, trustworthiness of the defendant.

To chat about all the affairs he's having, describing certain women as sexually boring, others as wild, will Danish judges and jury members really take such a relaxed, 'you lucky dog you' attitude, as he seems to expect?

I hope not, and thats why I am puzzled why the lawyer focussed so much on that.
I read in an article a few days ago an expert said that its not really important what he say. Apparently its just a right he has, as the same right to not say anything.
I would expect a jury to be more interested in what he says, than a judge.

I am not sure how experienced the lawyer really is, except from that we know she never had a murder-case before.
I have this feeling of that he chose her because he knew her already and that he believes that he can control her, which may be very true.