Wasn’t it stated in the original appeal? The article below states: “The day after Madeleine vanished in 2007, the suspect transferred the Jaguar to someone else's name.”
www.bbc.com
No direct quote though, from what Hexe says though in their post, re-registration is not a simple process it seems unlike in the uk, where it can be done with a click of a mouse or use of a phone now.Wasn’t it stated in the original appeal? The article below states: “The day after Madeleine vanished in 2007, the suspect transferred the Jaguar to someone else's name.”
Madeleine McCann: New suspect also investigated over missing German girl - reports - BBC News
The man was investigated over the disappearance of a five-year-old girl in 2015, German media reports.
Great post. We don't know what is going on in the background but we do know HCW is still in a job, no legal action has been brought against the Braunschweig office over his comments and there is no sign of them backing down over their claims.
After three years of people saying this it's perfectly understandable why some criticise the investigation. It's been three years now.
Which is fair enough, but when a prosecutor tries telling us through the power of the media if you knew what I knew you'd think the same then does not back that up, then what else can one do but criticise .
Three yrs of publicity, six since being alerted to CB , again it would seem .
People are entitled to hold that view if they wish, personally I think the case is a little more complicated and shouldn't be judged on the time elapsed since we became aware of the prime suspect.
With out a body and a clear sighting of any suspect then it was and will always remain a complicated case imo.
Opinion is all any of us have until they actually charge him. Until then everything the prosecutors and their allies have said is just opinion, it's not fact.
My point was that I think when Braunschweig Prosecutors made the appeal in June 2020 the reregistering of the Jag 4 May was included in the appeal. I could be wrong but I thought it was part of the info they shared.
How does anything change in terms of opinion if they charge him? The evidence is the evidence, that's a fact, not an opinion. Based on that evidence, the prosecutors are confident they have the right man. That's what they've said. Nobody is obliged to believe that assertion and that wasn't what my criticism was about. The problem is some people are equating the time elapsed since the appeal with a botched investigation. That's nonsense IMO, this was always going to be a hard case to take to court without the body.
^Bold, it goes both ways, people want to support the investigation without knowing the evidence they have too.
And that is absolutely right and fair. That's not what I was criticising though.
Bold^ Well the time and the fact that HCW has cried wolf and backtracked. He has said they have evidence to charge CB. In October 2021 he said the would charge him in the new year - it didn’t happen. Yes, it’s a hard case but much of the criticism is fair IMO. Whatever HCW has, we can be certain it’s not a smoking gun.
Instead of generalising then, perhaps reference what you are taking issue with.
How has he backtracked? In Oct 21 he was referring to the threshold to lay charges and said at the time it would be nonsense to charge when they had time on their side to potentially gather more evidence.
I see where you're coming from, it only asked about info on the Jag mentioning it was re-registered the day after, DCI Cranwell went on about a transient lifestyle in his camper van, on another point after looking back at that, the beeb reported CB was one of the 600 OG originally looked at .
I think this is a problem of ethics and human rights. No person (even a known serial offender) should be exposed publicly as the kidnapper and killer of a child without a court rule.
