Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #21

[Dlk79]

What makes no sense to me is his willingness to discuss evidence that he won't reveal. It feels like spin to justify the position he has taken, rather than anything that benefits the inquiry.

My feeling from a PR perspective is HCW is already resorting to defensive measures to justify his lack of progress - which is exactly what i warned would happen from the start if he couldn't back up his big claims

That is not a good sign, or a good media strategy.

Exposure! The wider the appeal, the more people who see CB's face in the media, the higher the chances are of them finding a witness who can add something to their case.

I think it's a deliberate tactic, keeping CB in the spotlight. As each new story (like the BBC one yesterday) comes out, a few extra people become aware. In the 13 years since MM disappeared, there have been no end of suspects. But how many are the general public aware of? How many know the name Euclides Monteiro? Or Raymond Hewlett? How many can name the 4 suspects who the Met identified when OG was set up? All of these were widely reported in the press at the time but they just fizzled out when the things to report about them dried up.

None of them were exposed to the wider public like CB has been, and it is all because of HCW and the one comment he keeps repeating in various guises and various outlets. "We have the evidence to know CB has killed MM, we can't reveal what it is". It maintains the media interest, the intrigue, which is exactly what HCW needs if he is to get a new lead. Do you think we'd have gone through 21 threads and have CB's name and face still appearing in the press every week if HCW never mentioned this secret evidence, and would instead only comment that CB was simply being investigated and nothing more?

I disagree with you, I think it's a great media strategy. He's not really revealed anything new in the last 5 months, yet the stories and interest of CB in the press maintains and it's all really because of what he said, and continues to say. Some may not agree with the tactic, but you can't deny it's been effective in generating everyone's interest.

 

[Ardoch]

I agree

My feeling from a PR perspective is HCW is already resorting to defensive measures to justify his lack of progress - which is exactly what i warned would happen from the start if he couldn't back up his big claims.

IMO if he had real confidence in his case, he would give a few platitudes to the BBC and tell them he will talk to them next year.

Instead he feels the need to tell them how great his secret evidence is.

That is not a good sign, or a good media strategy.

Or the opposite?
If he has no confidence, why not just stay quiet? Giving interviews and making statements give more opportunity for people to say
"You said this..... on .....?
I understand your point though, it seems unusual. JMO

 

[Okapi]

What if: CB dies before a potential charge is brought against him?

How do things proceed, if at all, by the German LE? They say they KNOW that MM is dead, and that CB did it.
If CB passes away (for whatever reason, Covid, heart attack, suicide, natural causes etc).....are the German LE beholden to the parents to then produce their evidence, to bring them peace of mind etc?
Would the parents want/need to know?
Just curious. Thoughts please.

I've no idea from a legal standpoint, @Scorpiette. But no man is an island, I imagine there are other loose ends in this investigation.

 

[Okapi]

Exposure! The wider the appeal, the more people who see CB's face in the media, the higher the chances are of them finding a witness who can add something to their case.

I think it's a deliberate tactic, keeping CB in the spotlight. As each new story (like the BBC one yesterday) comes out, a few extra people become aware. In the 13 years since MM disappeared, there have been no end of suspects. But how many are the general public aware of? How many know the name Euclides Monteiro? Or Raymond Hewlett? How many can name the 4 suspects who the Met identified when OG was set up? All of these were widely reported in the press at the time but they just fizzled out when the things to report about them dried up.

None of them were exposed to the wider public like CB has been, and it is all because of HCW and the one comment he keeps repeating in various guises and various outlets. "We have the evidence to know CB has killed MM, we can't reveal what it is". It maintains the media interest, the intrigue, which is exactly what HCW needs if he is to get a new lead. Do you think we'd have gone through 21 threads and have CB's name and face still appearing in the press every week if HCW never mentioned this secret evidence, and would instead only comment that CB was simply being investigated and nothing more?

I disagree with you, I think it's a great media strategy. He's not really revealed anything new in the last 5 months, yet the stories and interest of CB in the press maintains and it's all really because of what he said, and continues to say. Some may not agree with the tactic, but you can't deny it's been effective in generating everyone's interest.

Good point. And this media drip is keeping expressly British interest in CB. I appreciate there were lots of Brits holidaying and residing in PdL, but I'm curious about the focus on specifically British tourists' photos and recollections. As compared to tourists from anywhere else. Just musing.

 

[mrjitty]

Exposure! The wider the appeal, the more people who see CB's face in the media, the higher the chances are of them finding a witness who can add something to their case.

I think it's a deliberate tactic, keeping CB in the spotlight. As each new story (like the BBC one yesterday) comes out, a few extra people become aware. In the 13 years since MM disappeared, there have been no end of suspects. But how many are the general public aware of? How many know the name Euclides Monteiro? Or Raymond Hewlett? How many can name the 4 suspects who the Met identified when OG was set up? All of these were widely reported in the press at the time but they just fizzled out when the things to report about them dried up.

None of them were exposed to the wider public like CB has been, and it is all because of HCW and the one comment he keeps repeating in various guises and various outlets. "We have the evidence to know CB has killed MM, we can't reveal what it is". It maintains the media interest, the intrigue, which is exactly what HCW needs if he is to get a new lead. Do you think we'd have gone through 21 threads and have CB's name and face still appearing in the press every week if HCW never mentioned this secret evidence, and would instead only comment that CB was simply being investigated and nothing more?

I disagree with you, I think it's a great media strategy. He's not really revealed anything new in the last 5 months, yet the stories and interest of CB in the press maintains and it's all really because of what he said, and continues to say. Some may not agree with the tactic, but you can't deny it's been effective in generating everyone's interest.

One can indeed argue that all coverage is good coverage, but also, we can use basic media analysis to examine tonality

In this BBC article, there is no appeal for information. Rather the first half of the article is devoted to talking about how strong the evidence is.

"You'd agree with me if only you knew what I knew" is defensive in tone, and no doubt a result of the questions the journalist asked.

This is why I don't believe HCW is doing a good job of shaping the coverage - especially with a critical mainstream outlet.

He is now resorting to sensationalism, in order to keep the narrative going.

 

[Newthoughts]

One can indeed argue that all coverage is good coverage, but also, we can use basic media analysis to examine tonality

In this BBC article, there is no appeal for information. Rather the first half of the article is devoted to talking about how strong the evidence is.

"You'd agree with me if only you knew what I knew" is defensive in tone, and no doubt a result of the questions the journalist asked.

This is why I don't believe HCW is doing a good job of shaping the coverage - especially with a critical mainstream outlet.

He is now resorting to sensationalism, in order to keep the narrative going.

Not really. To me it like old looks like outlets approach him and he gives variations of what he's said already. He hasn't really said anything sensational that I've heard at all. Fairly cryptic but not sensational. I bet it's disturbing CB wondering what it could be tho

 

[Dlk79]

One can indeed argue that all coverage is good coverage, but also, we can use basic media analysis to examine tonality

In this BBC article, there is no appeal for information. Rather the first half of the article is devoted to talking about how strong the evidence is.

"You'd agree with me if only you knew what I knew" is defensive in tone, and no doubt a result of the questions the journalist asked.

This is why I don't believe HCW is doing a good job of shaping the coverage - especially with a critical mainstream outlet.

He is now resorting to sensationalism, in order to keep the narrative going.

I agree with @Newthoughts post. It's nothing different to what he's said previously, a slight variation on the words used is all. I certainly don't see any sensationalism in it.

Plus, this is just one small excerpt from the interview that the BBC has decided to headline. More was discussed besides those two comments and we don't know what question was posed to him or the context of it. I've had a look to see if I can find a recording of the full interview but no luck as yet. I did manage to find part of it on the news on BBC Iplayer, but it only shows him saying those two comments that the BBC quoted in their article. Also, I should note that the answers he gives are in German, so these quotes in the BBC article are actually translated into English. So I'd issue caution in reading too much into the 'tone' of the exact words quoted.

My interpretation of what he meant was basically that if the public were to made aware of the evidence, they would understand why LE are so sure CB is guilty.

 

[Zuleika]

u

Not really. To me it like old looks like outlets approach him and he gives variations of what he's said already. He hasn't really said anything sensational that I've heard at all. Fairly cryptic but not sensational. I bet it's disturbing CB wondering what it could be tho

Will he be trying to remember everything he’s ever boasted about and or maybe things he’s kept secret ? My impression of him is changing all the time . I don’t think he’s clever enough to have abducted Madeleine without leaving a trace. I know people say he was only trapped by a hair in the rape case but not sure I believe that .

 

[tedtink]

u
Will he be trying to remember everything he’s ever boasted about and or maybe things he’s kept secret ? My impression of him is changing all the time . I don’t think he’s clever enough to have abducted Madeleine without leaving a trace. I know people say he was only trapped by a hair in the rape case but not sure I believe that .

ETD To remove misinformation.

The hair, (DNA) found at the scene was matched to CB years later.

"I don’t think he’s clever enough to have abducted Madeleine without leaving a trace"

Ascertaining 'cleverness' in anyone can be subjective. Are most criminals like rapists, child abductors, murderers educated to degree level or have a MSc in forensics?
He only needed to possess cunning and shrewdness, be reasonably aware of forensics and have had a stroke of luck, especially if he had been acting on impulse.
The majority of child abductions/murders are opportunistic in nature. Fantasy may play a part in that but, fantasising about abducting shouldn't be confused with 'planning'.

JMO

 

[Dlk79]

CB unmasked himself in the video after committing the brutally violent, sadistic and tortuous rape on the lady in PDL, which HB and MS witnessed, that also was part of the evidence.
The hair, (DNA) found at the scene was matched to CB years later.

That was a different video where CB unmasked himself. HB and MS never saw a recording of the DM rape in PDL, but what they described seeing (in terms of how CB was dressed and masked) matched the same MO of the DM case which is why their testimony was used at the trial.

There's a lot of confusing articles in the press about the video that HB and MS obtained and a lot of outlets I think just assumed one of the rapes on there was of DM. But you'll also see a lot articles which explain that she wasn't one of the victims in the video that they saw.

 

[tedtink]

That was a different video where CB unmasked himself. HB and MS never saw a recording of the DM rape in PDL, but what they described seeing (in terms of how CB was dressed and masked) matched the same MO of the DM case which is why their testimony was used at the trial.

There's a lot of confusing articles in the press about the video that HB and MS obtained and a lot of outlets I think just assumed one of the rapes on there was of DM. But you'll also see a lot articles which explain that she wasn't one of the victims in the video that they saw.

Yes of course - Thank you for correcting - it's important that you do.

 

[axelcruze]

I agree

My feeling from a PR perspective is HCW is already resorting to defensive measures to justify his lack of progress - which is exactly what i warned would happen from the start if he couldn't back up his big claims.

IMO if he had real confidence in his case, he would give a few platitudes to the BBC and tell them he will talk to them next year.

Instead he feels the need to tell them how great his secret evidence is.

That is not a good sign, or a good media strategy.

We don't know his strategy, why should he reveal his hand to the public? A few more months after 13 yrs will not matter because he's In a cell. The Brit Police are not in the loop perhaps because of the commercial link with media and mcanns, HCW does not want the same issues and probably does not trust Portuguese due to their failure to investigate pedos in the area. I think also that if they are trying to smoke someone out or need to locate a physical/virtual item as evidence, then they need be careful as it seems there is a 3rd party pedo/gangster at large

 

[axelcruze]

Yes! At least part of the jigsaw, of course!

And that kind of footage should exist, unfortuneatly! Either they got it already, or not. But if they do, who wants to admit then, that they do publish it? You want the SUN to publish it? Or "The Internet"? We had a Christchurch-like assassination almost one year ago been online in minutes after that evil act! Wanna see? No, you won't! It's nothing you would like to remember! Humans, innocent women and men had been killed by living their usual lives online. I've seen it and had to cry, although i'm a tough one, believe me! Reality is far beyond from a movie!

Shall HCW make public, what he has in a childs murder case and maybe including abuse before??? Be honest, who wants to see that evil sh#$t?

Maybe MM led them to more vile actions. A perp in prison doesn't need them to hurry, right?

Please excuse my directness, but everybody who is on tenterhooks in this case! Do you really demand a prosecuter to make public for example, that he has possible evidence of a man fu$@#g a three year old girl to death, for example??? And unfortuneatly that is the reality in the paedo world, that doesn't even keeps distance to babies!

JMO

Agree with this, I think unfortunately everything points towards a grim scenario hence why they are keeping stumm about details of evidence. The DarkWeb was a pretty scary place in 2007 like the wild west for sickos. Everyone knows this. The biggest mystery to me is how a fairly stupid person like CB was able to do this without any detection . Witness/CCTV/clothing/DNA/locations/credit card history? / Bank withdrawals / emails/ not to mention potential disposal of stuff etc .. his actions like petrol theft, park pedo , jumping bail are fairly silly

 

[Dlk79]

Yes of course - Thank you for correcting - it's important that you do.

Easy to forget with all that has been discussed. Here's 2 articles, from the same paper and by the same reporter. In the first he seems to imply that DM was on one of the videos, but he makes a point of saying in a later article that it wasn't her in the video.

"But, it was during that raid that they also took a video camera, on which they found sick recordings of Brueckner undertaking two rapes.

One of these recordings last year convicted Brueckner of the 2005 rape of DM, a 72-year-old American.

A combination of one of his hairs found at the scene, plus the testimony of Busching, led to Brueckner being handed a seven year sentence"
https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-...sic-festival-in-spains-andalucia-in-2008/amp/

"The German, who saw a series of videos of Brueckner raping and torturing women, helped to convict Brueckner of the attack on the 72-year-old, in Praia da Luz, in 2005.

He told the court in Braunschweig, Germany, how both videos – one the rape of an older woman (although not of DM) and one of a 15-year-old tied to a post – were kept at his Portugal home."
https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-...pain-could-be-linked-to-madeleine-snatch/amp/

 

[SuperdadV8]

Interesting IMO, if not already known.

P.J. POLICE FILES: KELSIE HARRIS WIFE OF MATTHEW FAZACKERLEY

 

[Anxala]

I realise it's just a snap shot of Portuguese readers, but after reading comments on Sexta@9 FB, anything MM related receives the most negative and dismissive comments, rather fed up with it all.
I have wondered whether that is the general consensus in Portugal and folk have just lost interest in the case.
There must be others across EU who feel the same too.

I'm sure there is a great deal of wholly unsurprising apathy about as far as this case is concerned, and amongst the Portuguese in particular who must be fed up to the back teeth of the tired and trite same old same old doing the media rounds once again. And who could blame them?

 

[SuperdadV8]

I'm sure there is a great deal of wholly unsurprising apathy about as far as this case is concerned, and amongst the Portuguese in particular who must be fed up to the back teeth of the tired and trite same old same old doing the media rounds once again. And who could blame them?

Who could blame them?

A child vanished in the area whilst their officials had been responsible and is missing for almost 14 years.

And more than blaming the parents and possibly mocking actually for the investigation responsible foreign police forces, maybe putting some stones in their way either, hasn't been heard of them since then.

I beg your pardon but yes, i would like to blame them, at least for narrow-mindedness! No offence so far!

 

[mrjitty]

I agree with @Newthoughts post. It's nothing different to what he's said previously, a slight variation on the words used is all. I certainly don't see any sensationalism in it.

Plus, this is just one small excerpt from the interview that the BBC has decided to headline. More was discussed besides those two comments and we don't know what question was posed to him or the context of it. I've had a look to see if I can find a recording of the full interview but no luck as yet. I did manage to find part of it on the news on BBC Iplayer, but it only shows him saying those two comments that the BBC quoted in their article. Also, I should note that the answers he gives are in German, so these quotes in the BBC article are actually translated into English. So I'd issue caution in reading too much into the 'tone' of the exact words quoted.

My interpretation of what he meant was basically that if the public were to made aware of the evidence, they would understand why LE are so sure CB is guilty.

Of course we disagree - media relations is about narrative, which of course the journalists control more than the speaker

So in this interview, he seeks no information but rather seeks to defend himself

But then what is the point of the interview in terms of the case?

This is precisely what I warned about - the media focus has become about HCW and no longer about seeking information

 

[Anxala]

Who could blame them?

A child vanished in the area whilst their officials had been responsible and is missing for almost 14 years.

And more than blaming the parents and possibly mocking actually for the investigation responsible foreign police forces, maybe putting some stones in their way either, hasn't been heard of them since then.

I beg your pardon but yes, i would like to blame them, at least for narrow-mindedness! No offence so far!

There's so much I could say to counter pretty much all of the above, but, not the place for it, so I'll just respectfully agree to disagree here and not pursue something that we clearly have very different perspectives on.

 

[tedtink]

I'm sure there is a great deal of wholly unsurprising apathy about as far as this case is concerned, and amongst the Portuguese in particular who must be fed up to the back teeth of the tired and trite same old same old doing the media rounds once again. And who could blame them?

Who could blame them?

A child vanished in the area whilst their officials had been responsible and is missing for almost 14 years.

And more than blaming the parents and possibly mocking actually for the investigation responsible foreign police forces, maybe putting some stones in their way either, hasn't been heard of them since then.

I beg your pardon but yes, i would like to blame them, at least for narrow-mindedness! No offence so far!

I'm sure HCW understands everyone's point of view, thus the relentless media 'nudging' to gain the responses/ evidence he needs, as I would imagine that most people just want to go about their daily lives now whether it be Portugal, Germany, UK, Spain.
I'm sure the general population is not as interested in the case as us, but if you were in Pdl/Portugal, or any other places mentioned by HCW around that time, I'm sure you would remember MM's disappearance and you might be digging out your old holiday snaps just in case.
I would be.