Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #42

[Davieson]

Yes - the difference between the comments that they could charge & the comments they couldn’t is the trial. It’s a very basic thing to notice & understand.

The judge not allowing any of the digital evidence writes it off in the MM case. They now have to seek out new ways to gather as much of the original content as possible. The written accounts at the box factory are now gone, therefore stories like the one about ‘MaidAnnelie’ are no longer of use to them. But given his habit of sharing things with other pests & that they already have some email duplicates of the box factory evidence I am guessing there’s a good chance he’s done it more.

There will forever be l’resistance, irrespective of what happens with CB. But imo the evidence they’ll have is far beyond a matter of opinion. Imo MM’s grieving family will get the answers & the case from a ‘who-done-it’ perspective, is closed. However justice may not be done because of the factors mentioned.

I think the details of the evidence will be released at some point. It may spoil a few parties but I think it’s important that they provide that closure even if they don’t reach an arrest threshold.

If what you claim is true, then its a lost opportunity that they didn't charge CB with MM offences back in 2020, instead of going for a string of lesser charges.

 

[Anxala]

The thing that gets me is what German police felt capable of confirming to Madeleine's parents that she was dead. That speaks of a degree of certainly that a nearby traffic camera sighting would not provide.

No. They didn't do that. They never confirmed anything. What they did was suggest MM was dead based on what they believed the evidence they said they were in possession of implied.

Her parents and OG continue with the 'missing person' rather than 'dead person' narrative. That tells us that nothing convincing let alone BARD has been provided to either the parents or OG.

And it raises the huge question about the BKA's claims. That if they had BARD proof that MM was dead, her parents would most definitely have been privy to that evidence. And if they had been, MM would no longer be considered as a missing person by either them or OG.

These are the facts.

 

[frank-cole]

If what you claim is true, then its a lost opportunity that they didn't charge CB with MM offences back in 2020, instead of going for a string of lesser charges.

Perhaps. But changing the order doesn’t change the MM evidence. It was a calculated risk which would have provided an advantage. If they had a crystal ball & a Time Machine I think they’d change their strategy.

“If the glove don’t fit acquit”.

Got him off but didn’t unkill his ex-wife.

 

[RandyMcDonald]

No. They didn't do that. They never confirmed anything. What they did was suggest MM was dead based on what they believed the evidence they said they were in possession of implied.

Her parents and OG continue with the 'missing person' rather than 'dead person' narrative. That tells us that nothing convincing let alone BARD has been provided to either the parents or OG.

And it raises the huge question about the BKA's claims. That if they had BARD proof that MM was dead, her parents would most definitely have been privy to that evidence. And if they had been, MM would no longer be considered as a missing person by either them or OG.

These are the facts.

Is it a matter of her parents not having been given that evidence or not believing in it?

 

[Hexe]

Is it a matter of her parents not having been given that evidence or not believing in it?

The McCanns flatly denied being ever given any evidence of Maddie's death. The MET flatly denied ever passing such a letter from German authorities to the McCanns. It is not a matter of (dis)belief.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

If what you claim is true, then it’s a lost opportunity that they didn't charge CB with MM offences back in 2020, instead of going for a string of lesser charges.

If they had evidence to charge for MM, they would have done so. HCW cried wolf.

It makes zero sense that they would take less serious but still very serious rape cases to trial to ‘test’ the evidence. Like it doesn’t matter if HaB’s case failed and double jeopardy meant he could never face trial again.

Let’s review the trial: the evidence was as convincing as President Trumps sun tan.

The absence of a charge in the MM case means the absence of credible evidence. The absence of credible evidence means it is possible, likely even, that he didn’t kill her.

 

[frank-cole]

Is it a matter of her parents not having been given that evidence or not believing in it?

Great question.

Impossible to answer with certainty.
Because the McCann’s don’t give a running commentary on what they’ve been told. Things may have changed or they may still not know.

I think we could all reach & story-tell with matter of fact conclusions. But such matters are actually more of a coin toss.

My opinion

 

[frank-cole]

If they had evidence to charge for MM, they would have done so. HCW cried wolf.

It makes zero sense that they would take less serious but still very serious rape cases to trial to ‘test’ the evidence. Like it doesn’t matter if HaB’s case failed and double jeopardy meant he could never face trial again.

Let’s review the trial: the evidence was as convincing as President Trumps sun tan.

The absence of a charge in the MM case means the absence of credible evidence. The absence of credible evidence means it is possible, likely even, that he didn’t kill her.

HCW is a prosecutor not the ‘bad guy’.

There’s a strong argument that the evidence in the previous trial was absent because the judge wouldn’t allow it. She dismissed all digital evidence (nightmare for truth seekers)
Unless it was a cgi of an identifiable feature (scar) in the location Hazel said it would be…. And so on.
Does that mean there was an absence of evidence? Or does it mean there was an absence of evidence that could be used for a conviction?

It may well be that because they can’t use the box factory evidence they tell everyone what all of it is. Box factory evidence reveals have happened once, therefore likely nothing to prevent it happening again.
If that happens I think that’ll be the most challenging obstacle to create a counter narrative around. But that said, if it happens I’ll be absolutely fascinated to read what that counter narrative would be.

My opinion

 

[Davieson]

Is it a matter of her parents not having been given that evidence or not believing in it?

Short of certified remains being found, I doubt the McCanns will ever publically accept that she is dead.

 

[RichardKimble]

It could be argued that if (and its a big if) there was evidence in the illegal search of CBs factory that implicated him in MMs abduction and according to the BKA murder ( no other LE claims this) then knowing it can't be used then nothing prevents them from releasing it, imo it doesn't exist.

 

[Davieson]

It could be argued that if (and its a big if) there was evidence in the illegal search of CBs factory that implicated him in MMs abduction and according to the BKA murder ( no other LE claims this) then knowing it can't be used then nothing prevents them from releasing it, imo it doesn't exist.

The problem with that is that outside of a court it cannot be verified. Even if published, it could be claimed that it was false.

 

[frank-cole]

It could be argued that if (and its a big if) there was evidence in the illegal search of CBs factory that implicated him in MMs abduction and according to the BKA murder ( no other LE claims this) then knowing it can't be used then nothing prevents them from releasing it, imo it doesn't exist.

I expect that it’s highly likely. I appreciate that you entertained that scenario. Albeit in your opinion the evidence is/was non existent.

Would it surprise you if they do actually have digital proof?
Focussing on the common character assassinations of HCW, one of the elements are claims & suggestions that he is a dishonest man. If they have the digital proof, would you agree that those blind claims about his/the prosecution’s dishonesty were actually always false?

 

[frank-cole]

The problem with that is that outside of a court it cannot be verified. Even if published, it could be claimed that it was false.

I disagree. Inadmissible evidence can be verified. Evidence isn’t changed by unknown physics if an admissibility argument goes one way or the other. Though this is how conspiracies are born.

If a person didn’t get a C in O-level math it doesn’t mean that person can’t do math.

 

[frank-cole]

Short of certified remains being found, I doubt the McCanns will ever publically accept that she is dead.

Good point. It’s very difficult to put oneself in the shoes of people who are & who’ve been in a situation that (hopefully) you, I & the majority of others cannot relate to.
We’ll only know if they make comment on it.

 

[RichardKimble]

I expect that it’s highly likely. I appreciate that you entertained that scenario. Albeit in your opinion the evidence is/was non existent.

Would it surprise you if they do actually have digital proof?
Focussing on the common character assassinations of HCW, one of the elements are claims & suggestions that he is a dishonest man. If they have the digital proof, would you agree that those blind claims about his/the prosecution were actually always false?

He's never claimed there's digital proof, it's speculated by idle hands ( the devil's tools) I'd venture if such a thing were claimed then it was those that claimed videos of CB assaulting women existed, but no proof was provided.

I don't see HCW as dishonest, misguided by evidence proclaimed by quite clearly unreliable witnesses ,more like.

Let's not forget no investigation led to CB, alleged former friends /accomplishes led them to CB, the BKA aren't going to admit they got it wrong, it'll be quietly put to sleep.All opinion.

If one looks at the recent BBC piece and YouTube article it can clearly be seen the news article copied almost word for word news from 2024 when HCW claimed "he is the only suspect" ,HCW had said nothing new for months.

 

[frank-cole]

He's never claimed there's digital proof, it's speculated by idle hands ( the devil's tools) I'd venture if such a thing were claimed then it was those that claimed videos of CB assaulting women existed, but no proof was provided.

I don't see HCW as dishonest, misguided by evidence proclaimed by quite clearly unreliable witnesses ,more like.

Let's not forget no investigation led to CB, alleged former friends /accomplishes led them to CB, the BKA aren't going to admit they got it wrong, it'll be quietly put to sleep.All opinion.

If one looks at the recent BBC piece and YouTube article it can clearly be seen the news article copied almost word for word news from 2024 when HCW claimed "he is the only suspect" ,HCW had said nothing new for months.

It’s very unfortunate that the digital evidence was dismissed in the recent trial. For truth seekers it’s a tough one to take. We don’t know about everything that they had.

If indeed they do have digital proof of murder, would you guys be able to accept that some of your preconceptions about HCW/the prosecution had actually always been wrong?

 

[Davieson]

It’s very unfortunate that the digital evidence was dismissed in the recent trial. For truth seekers it’s a tough one to take. We don’t know about everything that they had.

If indeed they do have digital proof of murder, would you guys be able to accept that some of your preconceptions about HCW/the prosecution had actually always been wrong?

Lets see what transpires

 

[frank-cole]

Lets see what transpires

Agree. if so I will be fascinated by reactions to such a revelation. I understand why there is caution in committing to answering this specific hypothetical. If one anticipates it’s possible, one can’t adapt then if one commits now.

 

[RichardKimble]

Agree. if so I will be fascinated by reactions to such a revelation. I understand why there is caution in committing to answering this specific hypothetical. If one anticipates it’s possible, one can’t adapt then if one commits now.

Two of the cases against CB in the trial last year were based on hypothetical tapes, criminal cases should be witnesses backed by hard evidence.

The case of CB and MM is on running sand,
CB lived in and around Luz, so what so did others, CBs phone number was used in Luz on the night of the 3rd, so what so were others, CB had past sex crimes so what so did others, 600 at one stage investigated according to OG.Last and certainly not least is the misplaced log in the woodpile, no evidence any stranger entered 5a on the night MM was alleged to have been abducted.

A drunken off the cuff remark of she did not scream certainly does not a killer make, what was the context of that alleged actual statement?

 

[lebvidox]

Two of the cases against CB in the trial last year were based on hypothetical tapes, criminal cases should be witnesses backed by hard evidence.

The case of CB and MM is on running sand,
CB lived in and around Luz, so what so did others, CBs phone number was used in Luz on the night of the 3rd, so what so were others, CB had past sex crimes so what so did others, 600 at one stage investigated according to OG.Last and certainly not least is the misplaced log in the woodpile, no evidence any stranger entered 5a on the night MM was alleged to have been abducted.

A drunken off the cuff remark of she did not scream certainly does not a killer make, what was the context of that alleged actual statement?

Agree. There's often not a shortage of a violent sex criminal in the radio of any town or city, let alone in a boarders-open continent in the case of E.U. citizens. CB's crimes and M.O. are all over the place - anything could be built around this suspect. None of it suggests a skilled criminal with connection to 'international rings', or whatever this means. And it's curious how whenever a suspect is paraded to the media, a bunch of sketchy people that knew them for years show up to say something that this person allegedly told them once in a drunken party.

At this point, anyone should be able to look at this for what it is. Many things can be true: CB can be a creep and a sex criminal that should not be allowed to walk free for previous offenses; the German police have nothing substantial to tie him to Madeleine McCann's case; the lead German spokesperson could be convinced of this conclusion but also out to make a name for himself etc etc.

It's been YEARS since this guy was 'revealed' to the world. The authorities can not, at this point, build a case against him regarding MM. No digging around Algarve has changed this so far.