Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread #27

[~n/t~]

I agree with you.. you cannot really accuse anyone this way, especially if they are dead and cannot speak for themselves.

But since his phone was in the area at critical times, he should be investigated. Fully.
I wonder if the police can get his other phone records after 6 years has passed, not sure what the phone companies are obliged to do with the data in EU and for how long.

I think they probably have all his phone records.

 

[goldengirl57]

I agree with you.. you cannot really accuse anyone this way, especially if they are dead and cannot speak for themselves.

But since his phone was in the area at critical times, he should be investigated. Fully.
I wonder if the police can get his other phone records after 6 years has passed, not sure what the phone companies are obliged to do with the data in EU and for how long.

Trouble is he lived 15 minutes away and his brother lived right by PDL so he had every right to be in the area.

NOW IF HE LIVED hours away and his mobile phone pinged i would sit up on that bit of information.

i am sure the PJ had investigated all this way back when...smoke and mirrors comes to mind for some weird reason...

 

[goldengirl57]

The tractor guy and the maintenance guy.
I was curious if any of these two were the husband of the cook lady who was ill the day after the abduction.

Because the police has recently requestioned the maintenance guy and now there is the story about the tractor guy.

I am wondering if the police is making any connection between them due to the same surname? That's all.

Well good point Haden, i wondered if this guy was sacked too...perhaps they have the wrong guy lol....my maintenance theory......

 

[haden]

I think they probably have all his phone records.

Then they don't need to question his widow so harshly. She said the police asked all sorts of questions which she had hardship to answer.

If they have pings of his phone in the days to follow then they just trace his routes.

 

[Cherwell]

Not in all cases. Laci Peterson's body washed up approx 4 months after she disappeared. Her remains were identified...not by teeth compared to an xray,because her head was missing. She was identified by DNA.
Reference police one.com April 8, 2003

I don't think anyone was claiming that the victim's own DNA would be destroyed by water - just that any incriminating traces of the perpetrator would be unlikely to survive.

 

[~n/t~]

I don't think anyone was claiming that the victim's own DNA would be destroyed by water - just that any incriminating traces of the perpetrator would be unlikely to survive.

Thank you. I was going to reply to the post. That is exactly what I meant.

 

[~n/t~]

Then they don't need to question his widow so harshly. She said the police asked all sorts of questions which she had hardship to answer.

If they have pings of his phone in the days to follow then they just trace his routes.

They always question family members regardless of evidence they may have.

 

[CHERIE.T]

Yes i know in the article this morning they had to mention Murat didnt they lol.

This poor guy going about his business is killed by a tractor accident, and now he is a pedophlie, killer, mass burglar, so on and so forth.

He cant deny any of it can he, so an easy person to target.

I cannot for the life of me understand how come the PJ said they were doing all the secretly and yet we know more then they do.

They couldnt get Hewlett for it, now they have conveniently found another dead patsy.

Surely they would have known he had used his phone in PDL on the 3rd May etc....

ALSO it was talked about before with ex employee seeking revenge when somone emailed Prince Charles.

Everyone is just concentrating on all this now lol.

So he did a burglary years ago when he was young, he was pardoned and was allowed into Portugal and lived a life of working for his family.

Now he is a wanted killer..........because his mobile phone pinged in PDL 15 minutes away from his house.

bbm
Everything about this case has been discussed before.lol
All discussion and views are welcome according to our mods.

 

[Cherwell]

From what I understand the reason why the tabloid picked up on him is that he was also placed at the club around the time Madeleine went missing through pings, wasn't he?

I wasn't talking about the tractor man. I was referring to the hypothetical abductor proposed by Fierljepper (it doesn't need to be the "disgruntled ex-employee"). Haden had suggested that this person's phone would be detected. See here. That is what I responded to when I said he might not have been carrying a phone. (Or she!)

 

[~n/t~]

umm I thought it was confirmed years ago that Maddies pjs were pink.

Those are not maddie's

 

[Cherwell]

umm I thought it was confirmed years ago that Maddies pjs were pink.

Does it matter? Whoever it was that JT saw (and it clearly wasn't Madeleine), she wouldn't have got an accurate impression of the colours as she was seeing everything after dark under street lighting.

 

[nursebeeme]

Just a FYI. If there are ***** in the link we are not allowed to post the article.

just bumping this up. Yes, if a link shows up as ***** it cannot be linked here

 

[Veidt]

Then they don't need to question his widow so harshly. She said the police asked all sorts of questions which she had hardship to answer.

If they have pings of his phone in the days to follow then they just trace his routes.

I disagree. I do NOT think he did this but if the PJ wants to rule him out of course they're going to question his family and would be questioning him too if he was alive. The phone location proves he was in the area - it doesn't tell us why.

As far as I know phone pings don't give people a detailed map. It's possible to calculate the general area but it won't tell you if he was outside the house, inside in the living room or inside in the kids' room or just walking his dog.

:twocents:

 

[Veidt]

does it matter? nice answer :facepalm:
it matters to me or else I wouldn't have asked.
colors matter ///// why were the sketches of man carrying child pink hued.

The top part of the PJs in the pic look pink to me? The bottoms look blue with pink flowers although in all fairness the shirt would have stood out more IMO.

Who do the PJs in the pic belong to? Sorry if that's old info but I don't know.

 

[~n/t~]

The top part of the PJs in the pic look pink to me? The bottoms look blue with pink flowers although in all fairness the shirt would have stood out more IMO.

Who do the PJs in the pic belong to? Sorry if that's old info but I don't know.

To the little girl in the tanner sighting. Dad was ruled out.

 

[Cherwell]

Does it matter? Whoever it was that JT saw (and it clearly wasn't Madeleine), she wouldn't have got an accurate impression of the colours as she was seeing everything after dark under street lighting.

delete this///I deleted mine

My post made a sound point about the colours as seen under street lighting. Why should I delete it?

 

[Veidt]

To the little girl in the tanner sighting. Dad was ruled out.

Thank you - so I'm assuming the little girl in that sighting definitely wasn't Madeleine if they had her PJs for testing?

 

[~n/t~]

Thank you - so I'm assuming the little girl in that sighting definitely wasn't Madeleine if they had her PJs for testing?

Correct

 

[CHERIE.T]

The top part of the PJs in the pic look pink to me? The bottoms look blue with pink flowers although in all fairness the shirt would have stood out more IMO.

Who do the PJs in the pic belong to? Sorry if that's old info but I don't know.

The crèche man's child. The man is not a suspect. I apologize, I deleted my question it obviously was below average.:truce:
opps late again

 

[haden]

The crèche man's child. The man is not a suspect. I apologize, I deleted my question it obviously was below average.:truce:

Oh please don't feel like that! IMO it is better to question than to not question!

:hug: