- Joined
- Jun 10, 2020
- Messages
- 617
- Reaction score
- 2,474
But then why not enough to press charges?I agree. To warrant someone in HCW's position to say what he has, with conviction, does suggest something major like a video or photographic evidence.
But then why not enough to press charges?I agree. To warrant someone in HCW's position to say what he has, with conviction, does suggest something major like a video or photographic evidence.
Unfortunately lots of children are abused and their parents are unawareBut then if someone had been in the apartment previously, they're really taking a chance that MM wouldn't have mentioned it (or partly) the next day.
If an abduction had been planned, could visiting the apartment on two occasions not potentially scupper it?
Also with days full of activities there was not much opportunity for conversation with family, and young children live very much in the presentOf course, I have children and grandchildren myself.
If a young child was on their own in an apartment and a stranger came in and spoke to them there's no saying if they would mention it to their parents or not. Even taking into consideration any possible "stories" the stranger might say to them. My point was that if it had been planned, I don't think that they would have taken that risk.
I don't necessarily agree either with the opportunistic scenario of the abduction being secondary to a burglary. IMO
FSS-GF-679 Emissao 2, Pagina 21.
286A/2007-CRL 16 & 16B Two blue curtains and one white curtain
286B/2007-CRL 1 One white section of a curtain
These curtains were analysed for traces of blood, semen and saliva, none of which were detected.
I wasn't necessarily thinking abuse; just the presence of a stranger in the apartment.Unfortunately lots of children are abused and their parents are unaware
I simply do not believe that OG, knowing that BKA confidently claim to know what happened to the child (and who did it, and even how), have just sat back and not requested BKA to share that concrete evidence. That would be ridiculous IMO.... said the force was working with German investigators but had not seen all of their evidence.
CB talked about MM in the chatroom.
Perhaps, during that conversation and the 'bragging' to HB, CB gave specific details away about events the evening of 3rd May, and LE have managed to confirm those details with pics and video's found at the box factory.
JMO
German paedophile 'wrote about Madeleine McCann abduction in web chat room'
But then if someone had been in the apartment previously, they're really taking a chance that MM wouldn't have mentioned it (or partly) the next day.
If an abduction had been planned, could visiting the apartment on two occasions not potentially scupper it?
Have you Googled random words , PJ files /bloodspot images /curtains / walls ?But please can anyone post an official source actually stating that the spots on the walls and on the curtain were blood? I can't find any such source in the files. Instead I find, for example:
When asked whether or not he has proof of CB being inside the apartment, HCW said he does have an answer, but is not going to say it, because to give the answer would prompt more questions.
What do you make of this? If instead he gave a straight answer what would it would be?
Would it be "Yes I have evidence he was in 5A"?
or "No I do not have evidence he was in 5A"?
Actually I now wonder if CB told HB or another associate that he was in the apartment on more than one occasion.
They probably have asked, but BKA have declined. I think the explanation given in the article is plausibly vague:I simply do not believe that OG, knowing that BKA confidently claim to know what happened to the child (and who did it, and even how), have just sat back and not requested BKA to share that concrete evidence. That would be ridiculous IMO.
The real situation IMO must surely be that BKA are actually sharing with OG, IMO.
You may be right, but IMO it is likely BKA are sharing their concrete information with OG, and presumably there is a sound investigational reason IMO why it is expedient to keep this under their hats.They probably have asked, but BKA have declined. I think the explanation given in the article is plausibly vague:
'Despite the close co-operation, she said she did not expect "every single piece of material to be shared with us".
"I'm sure they're sharing the relevant things at the relevant times with us," Dame Cressida said.'
These blood patterns don't appear to have been visible to the naked eye either? Am I correct in my thinking they don't feature in any investigation until after the blood dog sniffs them out then they're picked using luminol? Or were they seen earlier.From the PJfiles: Blood Spatter Images. Samples taken Aug1-Aug4 2007. This just does not work for death in 5a for me. Firstly, blood beneath the window sill where the sofa is usually placed. If the sofa was pulled out further than the wall and death occurred in the space between the 2, there would be more blood on the back of the sofa! The curtains must be open for the wall to have been spattered in that exact place, so the 5 blood spots on the curtains above the window sill indicates the window must have been spattered and cleaned afterwards. I just feel can a child fall that fast, that heavy to the ground from the sofa and blood can fly so high to the window but leaving only spot traces on the floor and not a puddle?? Let's say, in the aftermath of an accident, her medically trained parents could not save her - but placed her in the wardrobe closet instead! Yet no blood trace was left inside?? I'm not buying that. And none of that fits with this event occuring during abduction or burglary either. Unless of course, she was placed in the closet whilst he cleaned up! X
He looks like he has a scratch mark from his eye to his cheek, then yes seeing nose and cheek redness also.Somebody knows, if the origin of the blood splatters on the curtain and around and on the back of the sofa in the living room of 5A has ever been clarified?
Nose and cheek on this pic look more serious than like a typical sunburn to me...
View attachment 274195