Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect #28

[SuperdadV8]

The "new" guy from Paraguay runs his own website.

According to the content, he left germany and went to portugal in 2013. The history of his gallery begins in 11/2013.

AFAIK this is the time of CB's first subpoena related to the MM case. Could be coincidence, but could be something as well....

I meant Paraguay, not Portugal. My bad!

Too many "P's" in this case!

 

[C.greek]

I meant Paraguay, not Portugal. My bad!

Too many "P's" in this case!

And too many languages to master! German, English, Portuguese, Greek, Spanish and who knows, soon maybe also French ... am I forgetting any?

 

[SuperdadV8]

And too many languages to master! German, English, Portuguese, Greek, Spanish and who knows, soon maybe also French ... am I forgetting any?

Esperanto maybe?

 

[Dlk79]

He did originally say that but IIRC he, at a later point in the investigation when questioned about this, gave a slightly more hesitant and rather more ambiguous answer.

I remember this because I made ^your above point on an earlier thread and the conversation evolved with a link to a conversation where HCW wasn't quite so clear cut in his 'acted alone, we're not looking for anyone else' response.

So yes, everything still as clear as mud.

Well remembered. HCW never went as far as to say the BKA "believe" CB worked alone. This was a misquote in the media based on a comment he made to Sandra Felguieras during a Sexta as 9 interview. He was being probed about whether NF could have been involved in MM and when asked "so for you, CB acted alone?" he gave a rather unconvincing comment of "as far as we know". The press then took this as a definitive assertion that the BKA believed he "worked alone".

Yet, when asked the same exact question a few weeks later, during a different interview, he refuses to comment (despite answering many other probing questions in that same interview). It's almost as though he was rattled in that SF interview, possibly still reeling from the question about the phone number possibly belonging to NF, and felt he needed to make that comment to divert attention away from her. And then realised he needed to keep mute on this aspect for later interviews. He has never mentioned it ( the possibility of CB working alone) since. In fact, in the JC interview he went as far to intimate it wouldn't "surprise" him if other people were involved.

We discussed these inconsistent assertions here:

Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #26

In light of the recent revelations/accusations about NF during the Sat.1 doc, the other theory I proposed about NF in the above post seems ever more plausible too IMO.

 

[SuperdadV8]

Well remembered. HCW never went as far as to say the BKA "believe" CB worked alone. This was a misquote in the media based on a comment he made to Sandra Felguieras during a Sexta as 9 interview. He was being probed about whether NF could have been involved in MM and when asked "so for you, CB acted alone?" he gave a rather unconvincing comment of "as far as we know". The press then took this as a definitive assertion that the BKA believed he "worked alone".

Yet, when asked the same exact question a few weeks later, during a different interview, he refuses to comment (despite answering many other probing questions in that same interview). It's almost as though he was rattled in that SF interview, possibly still reeling from the question about the phone number possibly belonging to NF, and felt he needed to make that comment to divert attention away from her. And then realised he needed to keep mute on this aspect for later interviews. He has never mentioned it ( the possibility of CB working alone) since. In fact, in the JC interview he went as far to intimate it wouldn't "surprise" him if other people were involved.

We discussed these inconsistent assertions here:

Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #26

In light of the recent revelations/accusations about NF during the Sat.1 doc, the other theory I proposed about NF in the above post seems ever more plausible too IMO.

I got a feeling in some way, that if NF would be crucial to the case, we all wouldn't be aware that she is existing.

Maybe she ist just a single part of the jigsaw, but not a solution.

 

[C.greek]

I got a feeling in some way, that if NF would be crucial to the case, we all wouldn't be aware that she is existing.

Maybe she ist just a single part of the jigsaw, but not a solution.

I would agree with that. But of course it wasn't HCW who mentioned her existence. He has just not refuted it.

And the fact that she has indeed given that interview makes me think she is not a key witness. Even though I am not entirely sure whether key witnesses wouldn't be allowed to speak to the media?

 

[peanutJelly]

Well remembered. HCW never went as far as to say the BKA "believe" CB worked alone. This was a misquote in the media based on a comment he made to Sandra Felguieras during a Sexta as 9 interview. He was being probed about whether NF could have been involved in MM and when asked "so for you, CB acted alone?" he gave a rather unconvincing comment of "as far as we know". The press then took this as a definitive assertion that the BKA believed he "worked alone".

Yet, when asked the same exact question a few weeks later, during a different interview, he refuses to comment (despite answering many other probing questions in that same interview). It's almost as though he was rattled in that SF interview, possibly still reeling from the question about the phone number possibly belonging to NF, and felt he needed to make that comment to divert attention away from her. And then realised he needed to keep mute on this aspect for later interviews. He has never mentioned it ( the possibility of CB working alone) since. In fact, in the JC interview he went as far to intimate it wouldn't "surprise" him if other people were involved.

We discussed these inconsistent assertions here:

Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #26

In light of the recent revelations/accusations about NF during the Sat.1 doc, the other theory I proposed about NF in the above post seems ever more plausible too IMO.

Yes, and with you here!! I’ve long had doubts about NF and have always thought that if CB wanted to keep MM alive for some time after abduction, a female presence with experience of childcare would help. I’m interested to hear the evidence of death on 3rd, I wonder if it was later than this

 

[tedtink]

Well remembered. HCW never went as far as to say the BKA "believe" CB worked alone. This was a misquote in the media based on a comment he made to Sandra Felguieras during a Sexta as 9 interview. He was being probed about whether NF could have been involved in MM and when asked "so for you, CB acted alone?" he gave a rather unconvincing comment of "as far as we know". The press then took this as a definitive assertion that the BKA believed he "worked alone".

Yet, when asked the same exact question a few weeks later, during a different interview, he refuses to comment (despite answering many other probing questions in that same interview). It's almost as though he was rattled in that SF interview, possibly still reeling from the question about the phone number possibly belonging to NF, and felt he needed to make that comment to divert attention away from her. And then realised he needed to keep mute on this aspect for later interviews. He has never mentioned it ( the possibility of CB working alone) since. In fact, in the JC interview he went as far to intimate it wouldn't "surprise" him if other people were involved.

We discussed these inconsistent assertions here:

Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #26

In light of the recent revelations/accusations about NF during the Sat.1 doc, the other theory I proposed about NF in the above post seems ever more plausible too IMO.

Hmmm. So perhaps the DM article on NF a day or so before the Sat1 doc could have been a strategic drop by the Prosecutor?

‘I have nothing to do with the disappearance and am not involved in the case. I was his lover, not his accomplice.’

HCW does like to keep us guessing.

Madeleine McCann suspect was 'obsessed by pre-pubescent girls' says his ex-girlfriend | Daily Mail Online

 

[C.greek]

Hmmm. So perhaps the DM article on NF a day or so before the Sat1 doc could have been a strategic drop?

‘I have nothing to do with the disappearance and am not involved in the case. I was his lover, not his accomplice.’

HCW does like to keep us guessing.

Madeleine McCann suspect was 'obsessed by pre-pubescent girls' says his ex-girlfriend | Daily Mail Online

Strategic drop from whom?
Remember that the DM interview was given a while ago and NF gave her okay to publish parts of it which are actually damning for CB -like his preference for young pre-pubescent girls- when she knew about the SAT1 doc.

ETA Do we think the BKA know for a fact that the other phone belonged to NF? It does appear so from the nothing new comment from HCW. Is she under police protection? She could know where the body is but I don't want to think she was involved in the abduction and murder of MM.

 

[tedtink]

Strategic drop from whom?
Remember that the DM interview was given a while ago and NF gave her okay to publish parts of it which are actually damning for CB -like his preference for young pre-pubescent girls- when she knew about the SAT1 doc.

HCW knew the contents of the doc before the broadcast.
If NF is a main witness and HCW knows the other caller was her it makes sense to release the article just before the doc airs with NF denying any involvement.
I could be reading far too much into this, but JR couldn't get anywhere near NF, neither could JC, so how on earth would she have known what the doc was about to reveal about her?
Only HCW would have known that as JR passed all findings to him beforehand.


JMO.

 

[C.greek]

HCW knew the contents of the doc before the broadcast.
If NF is a main witness and HCW knows the other caller was her it makes sense to release the article just before the doc airs with NF denying any involvement.
I could be reading far too much into this, but JR couldn't get anywhere near NF so how on earth would she have known what the doc was about to reveal about her?
Only HCW would have known that as JR passed all findings to him.
JMO.

That's a good thought! And the article does mention that she wants to clear her name from what is being heard about her in the media, so this must be a reference to the doc... the timing is important... was it one day before the doc's airing?

Speaking out to reject lurid social media claims linking her to Madeleine’s disappearance on May 3, 2007, the ex-care worker said: ‘I have nothing to do with the disappearance and am not involved in the case. I was his lover, not his accomplice.’

 

[tedtink]

That's a good thought! And the article does mention that she wants to clear her name from what is being heard about her in the media, so this must be a reference to the doc... the timing is important... was it one day before the doc's airing?

It was the Mail on Sunday 29.1.22

 

[C.greek]

It was the Mail on Sunday 29.1.22

Updated 30.01.22.

That must be the reason for timing the interview publication.

 

[Betty_Boop88]

Also note her reason for not letting the interview go to print at the time. Abul Taher’s explanation from p363 of JC’s book:

“Speaking of the unpublished interview with Abul Taher of the Mail on Sunday, he said: ‘I helped set up an interview … for her to come clean and tell the truth. The paper gave her a fair offer and she even signed a contract. She was actually photographed and gave the interview, although she was very careful what she said, insisting she was not Christian’s girlfriend and hardly knew him. I knew it was untrue. ‘But then she suddenly changed her mind and backtracked. It was very odd and I don’t understand why. It would have helped to clear her name. She claimed the interview would put her daughters at risk and endanger her life.”

The first bit in bold seems a bit of a contradiction, seeing as she admitted in the printed article that she was “his lover, not his accomplice” - perhaps she called them up to change her story knowing what was about to be said about her in the doc?
And if we go with the original story she gave where she distanced herself from him - before deciding to pull the plug on it altogether - who was she afraid of? I doubt Joe Public in Germany actually give enough of a toss to target her. So was she insinuating that CB has people on the outside that would?

 

[Megnut]

I just want to put a word of concern in here, for MM's family, those who knew and loved her, those who came to love her, and everyone here. If LE has photos or video confirming her death or showing unsustainable injuries, we are all going to break. It is one thing to sleuth and hypothesize, but the facts of this case, I fear, are going to be on a level we'll wish we could unknow.

Some people are simply devoid of soul. No humanity at all, yet they walk among us. Destroying people is an elixir they drink for sport.

For all the MMs out there, I wish we could wind back time and give them a safe world to grow up in.

Eager for resolution, terrified of the same.

JMO

 

[C.greek]

I just want to put a word of concern in here, for MM's family, those who knew and loved her, those who came to love her, and everyone here. If LE has photos or video confirming her death or showing unsustainable injuries, we are all going to break. It is one thing to sleuth and hypothesize, but the facts of this case, I fear, are going to be on a level we'll wish we could unknow.

Some people are simply devoid of soul. No humanity at all, yet they walk among us. Destroying people is an elixir they drink for sport.

For all the MMs out there, I wish we could wind back time and give them a safe world to grow up in.

Eager for resolution, terrified of the same.

JMO

Very well said. Most of the times I am trying to distance myself from the thoughts of what could have happened to MM and her family. I am trying to not think it is real. And sometimes i understand some of the anti-MC supporters who would rather MM have died a more peaceful death in other hands than a dangerous child abuser. But when reality hits, it is unfathomable. What vile people exist out there. Jmo

 

[C.greek]

Also note her reason for not letting the interview go to print at the time. Abul Taher’s explanation from p363 of JC’s book:

“Speaking of the unpublished interview with Abul Taher of the Mail on Sunday, he said: ‘I helped set up an interview … for her to come clean and tell the truth. The paper gave her a fair offer and she even signed a contract. She was actually photographed and gave the interview, although she was very careful what she said, insisting she was not Christian’s girlfriend and hardly knew him. I knew it was untrue. ‘But then she suddenly changed her mind and backtracked. It was very odd and I don’t understand why. It would have helped to clear her name. She claimed the interview would put her daughters at risk and endanger her life.”

The first bit in bold seems a bit of a contradiction, seeing as she admitted in the printed article that she was “his lover, not his accomplice” - perhaps she called them up to change her story knowing what was about to be said about her in the doc?
And if we go with the original story she gave where she distanced herself from him - before deciding to pull the plug on it altogether - who was she afraid of? I doubt Joe Public in Germany actually give enough of a toss to target her. So was she insinuating that CB has people on the outside that would?

Yes this is a bit strange... who called her back to tell her about the doc? Why did she decide to change her original stance? Had this change happened in the meantime and we are just not privy of this? And of course she could have been afraid of CB at the time of the interview because he could be out of jail soon. Later it transpired that he is staying in jail for a good few more years. This appears to be a different interview, where she admits they were lovers, admits to not giving him an alibi for the night...

 

[Anxala]

Also note her reason for not letting the interview go to print at the time. Abul Taher’s explanation from p363 of JC’s book:

“Speaking of the unpublished interview with Abul Taher of the Mail on Sunday, he said: ‘I helped set up an interview … for her to come clean and tell the truth. The paper gave her a fair offer and she even signed a contract. She was actually photographed and gave the interview, although she was very careful what she said, insisting she was not Christian’s girlfriend and hardly knew him. I knew it was untrue. ‘But then she suddenly changed her mind and backtracked. It was very odd and I don’t understand why. It would have helped to clear her name. She claimed the interview would put her daughters at risk and endanger her life.”

She might have been afraid of 'public opinion' repercussions? We know how harsh and out of control social media can be.

If I'd been in a relationship with CB at the time, I know I'd, years later when his depraved criminal history and sadistic nature became common knowledge, be frantically trying to distance myself from my involvement with him. It could be just that.

I just don't see her as significant in this investigation.

 

[C.greek]

She might have been afraid of 'public opinion' repercussions? We know how harsh and out of control social media can be.

If I'd been in a relationship with CB at the time, I know I'd, years later when his depraved criminal history and sadistic nature became common knowledge, be frantically trying to distance myself from my involvement with him. It could be just that.

I just don't see her as significant in this investigation.

I would imagine if a sane woman was in a relationship with someone who told them they like the bodies of pre-pubescent girls, they would have either gone to the police or at least dump them. But more to the point, NF has been interviewed 3 times already. There are two at least people who say that the other number belonged to her. She said CB was spending his time around the 3rd of May at Foral with her. I would think she is significant enough, maybe not an accomplice but even that we don't know.

ETA. His two other gfs whom he beat up went to the police or at least were open to be interviewed as witnesses. They did not want to distance themselves from him because they were afraid of the social media outcry and why should they? They have done nothing wrong apart from dating him. They do not wish to be identified - and that is absolutely logical. (Even though one of them unfortunately has been). But they wanted to help the investigation. NF is not the same. She has her own dodgy past to think of.

Jmo

 

[SuperdadV8]

Link needs some time to load, but it's kind of "funny" imo.

Shooting the police right into the mouth is a result of being confused, because the police abused the own daughter (and he looked away for years???) and by the way, the right to remain silent is the end of the story.

That's kind of the same twisted line of argumentation, CB uses imo. Same kind of "mastermind".

Laws have been written down and are broken day by day, whats usual. But if a perp get's in trouble, he refers to laws that have been made to protect himself!

I would laugh, if it wouldn't be serious enough.

Deutscher war verwirrt, als er auf Polizisten schoss - Wochenblatt