Because she was abducted
Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #41
- Thread starter Taskforce88
- Start date
That was not proven yet.
There is no reason to prove that. A 3 year old went missing, was not found, all people around her were dismissed from the investigation as being responsible for her disappearance, hence she was abducted. We can discuss whether CB abducted her or if there is anyone else who could have done it but having again a discussion about whether she was abducted seems boring. I don't think there is anything more to discuss about that jmo
If you mean JT then the man she saw was just a holidaymaker carrying his own child.
Madeleine McCann police spent years trying to ID man GP said was him
Well, this is a fact based forum, therefore the hypotheses, even the most probable ones, should not be presented as if they are proven facts. That's all I wanted to say.
I doubt the judges will agree with you.
The facts are that MM is missing and CB is under police suspicion of being responsible for whatever happened to her.
Most of the evidence against CB which warrants his status as prime suspect in child murder is not yet in the public domain.
What was a dead case is now a very live one.
My opinion
If we waited for ‘proof’ of everything before we posted, they’d be no point to Websleuths.
That’d be like waiting for every trial to be completed and having all known ‘facts’ on the table before we even discussed a case.
That’d be like waiting for every trial to be completed and having all known ‘facts’ on the table before we even discussed a case.
When Dr.T came forward to say that he had long thought he might have been the man seen by JT coming from the direction of the room from which MM vanished.
The immediate outcome of his statement that he was carrying his child home was
- vindication for JT
- after years of opprobrium directed at her there was at last proof positive that she had indeed seen a man carrying a pyjama clad female child directly outside apartment 5A
Last edited:
Quite. The thread title alone says 'suspect'. As in, someone suspected of carrying out a crime but about whom there's as yet no proof that he actually committed that crime.
It's perfectly reasonable, in the absence of a charge, a trial and a conviction, to continue to view CB as a suspect and discuss him accordingly.
Facts are dependent upon proof.
Last edited:
I never said we should not discuss CB as a suspect. I said we should not state as a fact something that has nit been proven to be a fact. That's all.
And I was and am100% agreeing with you.
CB remains a suspect with all the legal 'caveats' that suspects of a crime are entitled to, not least innocence until proven otherwise.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2021
- Messages
- 911
- Reaction score
- 2,689
Yes. Time of day, location & how busy it was are all obvious factors.
If only the cctv from the nearby hotel would have been secured quickly. That may well have provided the answer to this.
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2021
- Messages
- 911
- Reaction score
- 2,689
That’s why I like websleuths because it’s not a circular echo chamber & irrespective of the efforts, discussion about the suspect cannot be curtailed. Hence no need to run around justifying
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2021
- Messages
- 911
- Reaction score
- 2,689
CB prime suspect - fact. Hence the sleuthing.
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2020
- Messages
- 2,258
- Reaction score
- 4,061
RH almost certainly drowned. JC was a local, sad circumstances but I don’t think we can conclude anything about that.
These cases were thrown into the limelight by the prosecutors to build the public case against CB.
They are unfortunate but random acts.
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2020
- Messages
- 2,258
- Reaction score
- 4,061
And it’s far far more uncommon for them to be abducted.
If we’re sleuthing, we should be looking at clues and how they connect.
Stating that there were prowlers and CB is a prowler therefore he is related to the disappearance of MM is nonsense.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2018
- Messages
- 16,722
- Reaction score
- 277,692
I trust there is a nexus. Something that connects CB to MM. I don't know what it is but IMO it exists. Is it enough to convict? Apparently maybe not but it was enough IMO to put him on the radar, and that is enough to begin an investigation into him. No body cases are won and lost on circumstantial evidence all the time.
LE might be one thread away from a blanket- enough to charge him. I do think there was an expectation of a guilty verdict and a new sentence for CB, keeping him safely incarcerated while LE continued to investigate CB in relation to MM's disappearance.
I don't know that anyone is saying that because CB is a pedophile and may have a desire to keep a little, that makes him guilty of abducting MM. It's not that at all. It's the "x" variable which links them, of which we can only speculate. I trust it exists and that it forms the basis to investigate him, and it appears that they haven't been able to rule him out.
So LE has a connection and he has a history. Prowling, SA, video and photo -graphy. He was in the area, he is a petty thief not unfamiliar with the area/resort, and he has the very proclivities to match up.
2018 or so a man entered a home, murdered the two parents, absconded with the 13 year old he'd seen ONE TIME at the school bus, passed responding police with her in his trunk. Left no evidence, besides bullet casings. No DNA, no cctv, no cellphone.
He was not on their radar until the child rescued herself. Then lo and behold, with a name now, LE could fill in the facts that previously evaded them. No internet presence, had started a new job which he quit on like the first or second day. Rare case with a surviving victim, but the same theory holds here IMO. Once CB comes to light now his life is open to scrutiny.
Another case, a ring camera captures the victim and assailant enter her home. He leaves. No video ever of her leaving but she was indeed murdered inside and one tooth fragment remained, in the assailant's family's fire pit. We are left to speculate how and when she was removed from the house. We just don't know, except to know she somehow did. He is serving LWOP +156 years.
There may well be precious little 1st degree evidence that anyone stepped in or near 5a, doesn't mean it didn't happen. A future jury may put great stock in a single piece or convincing jumble of circumstantial evidence lining CB and MM and might be satisfied to his guilt, despite ambiguity on the how.
Finding MM's remains would likely bring forward huge pieces to the mosaic but it's possible her remains are irretrievable, which may itself be another checked box for this suspect.
IMO no one is fitting him up. He came under scrutiny and he fits.
JMO
LE might be one thread away from a blanket- enough to charge him. I do think there was an expectation of a guilty verdict and a new sentence for CB, keeping him safely incarcerated while LE continued to investigate CB in relation to MM's disappearance.
I don't know that anyone is saying that because CB is a pedophile and may have a desire to keep a little, that makes him guilty of abducting MM. It's not that at all. It's the "x" variable which links them, of which we can only speculate. I trust it exists and that it forms the basis to investigate him, and it appears that they haven't been able to rule him out.
So LE has a connection and he has a history. Prowling, SA, video and photo -graphy. He was in the area, he is a petty thief not unfamiliar with the area/resort, and he has the very proclivities to match up.
2018 or so a man entered a home, murdered the two parents, absconded with the 13 year old he'd seen ONE TIME at the school bus, passed responding police with her in his trunk. Left no evidence, besides bullet casings. No DNA, no cctv, no cellphone.
He was not on their radar until the child rescued herself. Then lo and behold, with a name now, LE could fill in the facts that previously evaded them. No internet presence, had started a new job which he quit on like the first or second day. Rare case with a surviving victim, but the same theory holds here IMO. Once CB comes to light now his life is open to scrutiny.
Another case, a ring camera captures the victim and assailant enter her home. He leaves. No video ever of her leaving but she was indeed murdered inside and one tooth fragment remained, in the assailant's family's fire pit. We are left to speculate how and when she was removed from the house. We just don't know, except to know she somehow did. He is serving LWOP +156 years.
There may well be precious little 1st degree evidence that anyone stepped in or near 5a, doesn't mean it didn't happen. A future jury may put great stock in a single piece or convincing jumble of circumstantial evidence lining CB and MM and might be satisfied to his guilt, despite ambiguity on the how.
Finding MM's remains would likely bring forward huge pieces to the mosaic but it's possible her remains are irretrievable, which may itself be another checked box for this suspect.
IMO no one is fitting him up. He came under scrutiny and he fits.
JMO
It would probably have picked up the man who passed the Smiths on the road.
It would have confirmed the timeline of when the family returned to the hotel.
It was a monumental slip up as far as the police were concerned that it was not checked sooner than it was. Given how few CCTV sites there were in Luz.
Perhaps they would have dealt with that one before it completed its erasure loop with more urgency, had they known about the Smith sighting.
The delay in reporting it of nearly a fortnight put the investigators and thus the investigation on the back foot.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
Online statistics
- Members online
- 132
- Guests online
- 472
- Total visitors
- 604