Unsolved Madeleine McCann - New Leads Being Reported

[owen87]

People say and do things under enormous stress that doesn't always have to make sense.

I couldn't do it. Id be broken

Funny how he manages to give himself leeway for being a mess but Kate and Gerry aren't allowed the same.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

The information conflicts on the minimum time after death a dog can detect scent. On a very small person it's going to be well over an hour if not twenty four.

You're up the creek.

Yes it does I'm aware of that. The 2 hr is the recommended minimum time but it depends upon conditions....heat humidity air-conditioning. It's even been said that occassionally a dog MAY check scent within minutes but that's unusual. I can't change timeline to suit what I know about dog evidence. But the 2 hrs is indicative. I've never bothered to check climate but it would be start of summer I guess. Did the rooms have ac or just fans? Not sure there either.

Amarale I think resolved (mostly because he couldn't discount Tapas 9! Testimony) that death occurred late afternoon before dinner started. I struggle with that. How would parents go to dinner to effect a charade??? Hard to believe but not impossible.

 

[Kurve]

Given I'm treated and (getting tired of it) with disrespect I'm not going to bother to post it. Someone will only mock me

Nobody's picking on you, this thread has been here for years often closing as it doesn't survive once the anti-McCann crew lob in from the UK. They're absolutely feral.

We require balance in here.

New information has been coming through that tends to take some of the heat off the McCanns with previously strident, prominent anti-McCann commentators softening their language. As any new information comes through, we need to take it into consideration.

And adjust thinking, if possible.

 

[Kurve]

Amarale I think resolved (mostly because he couldn't discount Tapas 9! Testimony) that death occurred late afternoon before dinner started. I struggle with that. How would parents go to dinner to effect a charade??? Hard to believe but not impossible.

Amarale goes too far, he's going to blow himself up soon.

Figuratively speaking.

 

[Kurve]

Yes it does I'm aware of that. The 2 hr is the recommended minimum time but it depends upon conditions....heat humidity air-conditioning. It's even been said that occassionally a dog MAY check scent within minutes but that's unusual. I can't change timeline to suit what I know about dog evidence. But the 2 hrs is indicative. I've never bothered to check climate but it would be start of summer I guess. Did the rooms have ac or just fans? Not sure there either.

It doesn't make a great deal of difference imo with a child so little but she went missing in the middle of a Portugal Spring, the summer doesn't start until the end of June with average low temps of 11C or in the 50s farenheit.

 

[jason_recliner]

3 fully grown now.

The behaviour is abberrant.. I NEVER left my kids alone and went to dinner. They did. There is evidence too that earlier they didn't bother to return the whole night til 11. Found the article reference again that they were told to go home on 1st by staff because MM was crying for 75 mins. Given I'm treated and (getting tired of it) with disrespect I'm not going to bother to post it. Someone will only mock me

Ok. If you made a mistake, maybe drank too much, and as a result one of your children died what would you do? Would you call the police and deal with the tragedy, and inevitable consequences? Or would you fake an abduction and with false motivations lobby two governments for the next 15 years and hope it never comes back to you?

 

[Kurve]

3 fully grown now.

The behaviour is abberrant.. I NEVER left my kids alone and went to dinner. They did. There is evidence too that earlier they didn't bother to return the whole night til 11. Found the article reference again that they were told to go home on 1st by staff because MM was crying for 75 mins. Given I'm treated and (getting tired of it) with disrespect I'm not going to bother to post it. Someone will only mock me

If you have the article, link it in thanks.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Amarale goes too far, he's going to blow himself up soon.

Figuratively speaking.

I've been one of the top contributors of the CB information. The facts though to the extent are in dispute has bearing on CB if that comes alive

Ok. If you made a mistake, maybe drank too much, and as a result one of your children died what would you do? Would you call the police and deal with the tragedy, and inevitable consequences? Or would you fake an abduction and with false motivations lobby two governments for the next 15 years and hope it never comes back to you?

These people are Doctors. If there is contributory negligence and charges their whole careers are at stake. For many it's very OCD to achieve at that level I'd imagine. Double edged sword they wouldn't want to risk it. It's a factor that has a place at the table. It's wrong. But in a moment of panic it's possible.

 

[Kurve]

But in a moment of panic it's possible.

They weren't panicking until they realised Madeleine was missing, all accounts have Kate as hysterical and Gerry frantic.

Prior to that they were having dinner, chatting not just with the Tapas crowd but having casual conversations in the street with other guests who confirm nothing seemed amiss in their demeanour.

You seem to allow near impossible possibilities to condemn the McCanns but brush a convicted child sex offender, career criminal, rapist, child pornographer and torturer who actually worked at the resort right off when it's him who had the means, the opportunity and the motive.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

They weren't panicking until they realised Madeleine was missing, all accounts have Kate as hysterical and Gerry frantic.

Prior to that they were having dinner, chatting not just with the Tapas crowd but having casual conversations in the street with other guests who confirm nothing seemed amiss in their demeanour.

You seem to allow near impossible possibilities to condemn the McCanns but brush a convicted child sex offender, career criminal, rapist, child pornographer and torturer who actually worked at the resort right off when it's him who had the means, the opportunity and the motive.

Yes the behaviour is inconsistent with earlier knowledge .That CW chat at just after 9 was uneventful and casual agreed. Indicative of lack of guilty knowledge at that time.

I don't want to put them in. My assessment of the evidence does. At same time it imo excludes CB because they become mutually exclusive outcomes in nature.

My analysis is the only one I know of that logically links all dog evidence. Moving the lounge and why. Sedation and why. Fall. The second shelf use for vital signs. KM clothes and Cuddle toy and why. The sliding door handle Cross contamination. The flower bed pause and why. The dinner finish time.change. The boot and car keys cross contamination.

If I move away to the easier option of CB then I am still left to explain 9 indications harmlessly. I can't. Is there no cadavar at all despite 9 indications?

 

[jason_recliner]

ARB there's no reasoning with you, just as there's no reasoning with the WT FP did it crowd. I hope when CB is found guilty you can let it go, and when FF and FM are found innocent you can also give them peace. Take care.

 

[Kurve]

Brueckner's been linked to and being investigated for the murder of a 13yo boy in Frankfurt as well. It was a horrible crime.

Tristan looks similar to Renee, similar to Madeleine.





Renee Hasse who disappeared from a beach on the Algarve, only 25kms from the resort where Madeleine disappeared. Brueckner moved there first in 1995 and was working in the resorts.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

ARB there's no reasoning with you, just as there's no reasoning with the WT FP did it crowd. I hope when CB is found guilty you can let it go, and when FF and FM are found innocent you can also give them peace. Take care.

If it gets to charges we will have evidence and that evidence will be publicly available for CB. I don't 'hold' to something. I simply have analysis and convictions regarding my subjective truth. Easy to let my thoughts about KM and GM go because it will be displaced with authoritative evidence if it is and part of that process it is hoped will explain the anomalies

As regards WT and FPs that mystery is in some senses more problematic. How and Why? There are a number of possibilities some that don't involve FPs at all and are favoured by me.

People are affected by both. Importantly those people include MM and WT both of whom deserve justice whatever shape it takes and whomever is implicated.

 

[owen87]

my subjective truth

 

[Kurve]

Reports of a blonde man seen acting suspiciously around the resort and the McCann's apartment. This wiki is really good.

Witness statements​

In statements to the PJ, witnesses described men behaving oddly near apartment 5A in the days before the disappearance and on the day itself. Scotland Yard came to believe that these men may have been engaged in reconnaissance for an abduction or burglary. There had been a fourfold increase in burglaries between January and May 2007, including two in the McCanns' block in the seventeen days before the disappearance, during which burglars had entered through windows.[51][114]

An "ugly" blond-haired man was seen on 2 May across the road from 5A, apparently watching it; he had also been seen on 29 April near the Ocean Club. On 30 April the granddaughter of 5A's former owners saw a blond-haired man leaning against a wall behind the apartments, and saw him again on 2 May near the tapas restaurant, looking at 5A. She described him as Caucasian, mid-30s, with short cropped hair, and "ugly" with spots.[119][120] On or before the day of the disappearance, a man was seen staring at the McCanns' block, where a white van was parked.[120] In the late afternoon of 3 May, a girl on the balcony of the apartment above 5A saw a man leave through the gate below, as though he had come out of a ground-floor apartment; what caught her attention was that he looked around before shutting the gate quietly, with both hands.[121] At 14:30 two blond-haired men were seen on the balcony of 5C, an empty apartment two doors from 5A. At 16:00–17:00 a blond-haired man was seen near 5A. At 18:00 the same or another blond-haired man was seen in the stairwell of the McCanns' block. At 23:00, after the disappearance, two blond-haired men were seen in a nearby street speaking in raised voices. When they realized they had been noticed, they reportedly lowered their voices and walked away.[122]

Disappearance of Madeleine McCann - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Kurve]

False information was being leaked by the PJ in Portugal.

McCanns made arguidos​

Lowe's email was translated into Portuguese on 4 September 2007. The next day, according to Kate, the PJ proposed that, if she were to admit that Madeleine had died in an accident in the apartment and that she had hidden the body, she might only serve a two-year sentence. Her husband would not be charged and would be free to leave.[160] Both parents were given arguido status on 7 September,[161] and were advised by their lawyer not to answer questions. The PJ told Gerry that Madeleine's DNA had been found in the car boot and behind the sofa in apartment 5A.[162] Gerry did respond to questions, but Kate declined to reply to 48 questions she was asked during an eleven-hour interview.[163]

The DNA evidence was a "100 percent match", journalists in Portugal were told.[164] British tabloid headlines included "Corpse in McCann Car" (London Evening Standard, 16 October 2007), while the Daily Star reported that a "clump of Maddie's hair" had been found in the car.[165] The leaks came directly from Portuguese police, according to testimony in 2012 from Jerry Lawton, a Daily Star reporter, to the Leveson Inquiry.[d] Matt Baggott of the Leicestershire Police told the inquiry that, because the Portuguese were in charge of the case, he had made a decision not to correct reporters; his force's priority, he said, was to maintain a good relationship with the PJ with a view to finding Madeleine.[167][e]

 

[Kurve]

Jon Clarke from the Olive Press is interviewed through a podcast series 'The Chief Suspect' that focuses on Christian Bruecker. This is real interesting, particularly Episode 6. Brueckner's criminal history in Portugal is shadowy, detail appears to have disappeared but his record reflects a lot of minor crimes.

Minor crimes at that time in Portugal could include child abuse. He had a court appearance in Lisbon in 2006, charged on paper with the trivial offence of 'insolence' which is failing to transfer a vehicle registration from Germany to Portugal. At this court case though, there's a whole range of legal luminaries and big wigs appearing including a professor which indicates, there's a bit more going on in that court than an appearance for failing to transfer registration.

It's suggested the answer to this, is that Christian Brueckner while it's ascertained had links to the local police, may have actually been a police informant for the PJ.

Google Podcasts

With Google Podcasts, you can find and listen to the world's podcasts for free.

podcasts.google.com

 

[Angry Red Bull]

False information was being leaked by the PJ in Portugal.

McCanns made arguidos​

Lowe's email was translated into Portuguese on 4 September 2007. The next day, according to Kate, the PJ proposed that, if she were to admit that Madeleine had died in an accident in the apartment and that she had hidden the body, she might only serve a two-year sentence. Her husband would not be charged and would be free to leave.[160] Both parents were given arguido status on 7 September,[161] and were advised by their lawyer not to answer questions. The PJ told Gerry that Madeleine's DNA had been found in the car boot and behind the sofa in apartment 5A.[162] Gerry did respond to questions, but Kate declined to reply to 48 questions she was asked during an eleven-hour interview.[163]

The DNA evidence was a "100 percent match", journalists in Portugal were told.[164] British tabloid headlines included "Corpse in McCann Car" (London Evening Standard, 16 October 2007), while the Daily Star reported that a "clump of Maddie's hair" had been found in the car.[165] The leaks came directly from Portuguese police, according to testimony in 2012 from Jerry Lawton, a Daily Star reporter, to the Leveson Inquiry.[d] Matt Baggott of the Leicestershire Police told the inquiry that, because the Portuguese were in charge of the case, he had made a decision not to correct reporters; his force's priority, he said, was to maintain a good relationship with the PJ with a view to finding Madeleine.[167][e]

You insinuate that there was intentional falsities by The PJ to somehow convict the McCanns. That's not the truth at all. What happened was that there was a preliminary report sent by UK and that the person interpreting the report into Portuguese did so referring to initial summary and referring to 100% match. At 15 of 19 is considered a match. But he failed to add the catch that it was mixed. The detailed report that followed made it clearer and the error was detected. There was no misfeasance by PJ relating to it.

Was he a PJ informant? Did they facilitate him escaping a traffic infringement? Don't know but the possibility is there. CB was also very clear that he made himself inconspicuous in town to keep a low profile with police. Informant work is part of ordinary policing work and not indicative that PJ would sacrifice an investigation of a childs disappearance to preserve an informants status.

The only misfeasance in the whole case is by UK authorities that structured Operation Grange so they were ONLY allowed to investigate potential abductors not being McCann. Why would it be necessary to hamstring your own investigative choices in that manner? Only investigation in all of history that cant look at a particular POI. Even though there is strong forensic evidence advocating their involvement and the PJ files conclude their involvement

I should add that when Amarale was sent packing for creating a diplomatic incident the investigator who followed him later closed the case and in his final report submitted......."there was an accidental death and that McCanns were responsible for hiding the body afterwards. There was a recommendation for detention but by that stage they had returned to UK" That is the conclusion made.

There have been two unsuccessful charges in USA cases which have been run with cadavar evidence to implicate the people. Maybe the defence ran with the argument it was packaged pork? I highly doubt it. They didn't have 9 indications nor intersection with blood dog indications nor a DNA match 15 of 19 though polluted by being mixed. Yet charges were raised and run. Let's not kid ourselves that the dog evidence is anything less than extremely incriminating.

Jason Recliner I hope that you can let CB exoneration go when ultimately the case fails to resolve with guilt or even charges.

Kurve these cases are not about who is more deserving to be convicted. I don't support CB other than the evidence points to him not being involved. The principle of mutually exclusive events

 

[Kurve]

You insinuate that there was intentional falsities by The PJ to somehow convict the McCanns.

There was intentional falsities. We all know the police use media straegy through their investigations, I'm offering proof that the Portuguese did it as well which was next level, leaking information to the British press that wasn't accurate. This was examined and revealed through the Leveson Inquiry. The person who was doing all the direct leaking out of Portugal was subsequently named, it wasn't Amaral but he was working within the investigation.

Was he a PJ informant? Did they facilitate him escaping a traffic infringement? Don't know but the possibility is there. CB was also very clear that he made himself inconspicuous in town to keep a low profile with police. Informant work is part of ordinary policing work and not indicative that PJ would sacrifice an investigation of a childs disappearance to preserve an informants status.

Point is, it's thought the case wasn't about a traffic infringement. Listen to the podcast.

I should add that when Amarale was sent packing for creating a diplomatic incident the investigator who followed him later closed the case and in his final report submitted......."there was an accidental death and that McCanns were responsible for hiding the body afterwards. There was a recommendation for arrest but by that stage they had returned to UK" That is the conclusion made.

Where did you get that information from? Looks like more nonsense.

Inquiry closed (21 July 2008)​

On 21 July 2008 the Portuguese Attorney General, Fernando José Pinto Monteiro, announced that there was no evidence to link the McCanns or Robert Murat to Madeleine's disappearance. Their arguido status was lifted and the case was closed.[8][9] On 4 August, Portugal's Ministério Público released seventeen case files containing 11,233 pages on CD-ROM to the media, including 2,550 pages of sightings.[190][f] The files included a 58-page prosecutors' report, which concluded: "No element of proof whatsoever was found which allows us to form any lucid, sensible, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances."[192] In 2009 Portugal released a further 2,000 pages.[193]

Kurve these cases are not about who is more deserving to be convicted.

Yes it is. Someone was responsible for her going missing with the Germans attempting to build a brief on Brueckner.

 

[Kurve]

the Daily Star reported that a "clump of Maddie's hair" had been found in the car.[165]

Angry Red Bull

You referred to this in an earlier post suggesting it was evidence Maddie's rotting corpse had been in the boot of the hire car shedding clumps of wet matted hair. Looks like that article had to be pulled as bad information leaked out of Portugal.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I had listened to the podcast before. Not much I haven't listened to or read relating to McCann and CB. The podcast is utter rubbish. That was my initial evaluation and hasn't changed. Click bait. Zero substance.

The proof will be in the decision or not to charge and or the guilt if they do. They will never find CB guilty of that offence imo. If they charge him his defence only need refer to the original investigative report of PJ and the inherent probabilities of an accidental death and the case folds. Has to

I just find it staggering that so many are hoodwinked into the CB nonsense.

That's before you even get to the UK Detective who has advocated his innocence

 

[Kurve]

I had listened to the podcast before. Not much I haven't listened to or read relating to McCann and CB. The podcast is utter rubbish. That was my initial evaluation and hasn't changed. Click bait. Zero substance.

Yet you don't appear to have been aware of the Leveson Inquiry.

The proof will be in the decision or not to charge and or the guilt if they do. They will never find CB guilty of that offence imo. If they charge him his defence only need refer to the original investigative report of PJ and the inherent probabilities of an accidental death and the case folds. Has to

It won't mean Brueckner isn't responsible if they fail to charge but if they do, the PJs original reports if they indicate an accident, won't have a hope of credibility in the German court when the Attorney General and the prosecutors in Portugal have had the last word. Portugal's also got Brueckner currently in the frame as arguido.

On 21 July 2008 the Portuguese Attorney General, Fernando José Pinto Monteiro, announced that there was no evidence to link the McCanns or Robert Murat to Madeleine's disappearance. Their arguido status was lifted and the case was closed.[8][9] On 4 August, Portugal's Ministério Público released seventeen case files containing 11,233 pages on CD-ROM to the media, including 2,550 pages of sightings.[190][f] The files included a 58-page prosecutors' report, which concluded: "No element of proof whatsoever was found which allows us to form any lucid, sensible, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances."[192]

I just find it staggering that so many are hoodwinked into the CB nonsense.

Here's a thought, maybe it's you been hoodwinked?

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Yet you don't appear to have been aware of the Leveson Inquiry.



It won't mean Brueckner isn't responsible if they fail to charge but if they do, the PJs original reports if they indicate an accident, won't have a hope of credibility in the German court when the Attorney General and the prosecutors in Portugal have had the last word. Portugal's also got Brueckner currently in the frame as arguido.

On 21 July 2008 the Portuguese Attorney General, Fernando José Pinto Monteiro, announced that there was no evidence to link the McCanns or Robert Murat to Madeleine's disappearance. Their arguido status was lifted and the case was closed.[8][9] On 4 August, Portugal's Ministério Público released seventeen case files containing 11,233 pages on CD-ROM to the media, including 2,550 pages of sightings.[190][f] The files included a 58-page prosecutors' report, which concluded: "No element of proof whatsoever was found which allows us to form any lucid, sensible, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances."[192]



Here's a thought, maybe it's you been hoodwinked?

That appears to be consensus thinking here YET here we are more than two years later and my comments still on mark they won't charge him and if they do its quickly dismissed.

You are already hedging that he may still be guilty even if not charged. The 'evidence' is so robust that "he didn't get charged but it doesn't mean he didn't do it". I'd just be a little circumspect saying that aloud for legal reasons but each to their own

Good old Christian can say what he does because a defence to defamation is it was a necessary incident of the legal process you did. You won't have that defence

 

[Kurve]

That appears to be consensus thinking here YET here we are more than two years later and my comments still on mark they won't charge him and if they do its quickly dismissed.

You are already hedging that he may still be guilty even if not charged. The 'evidence' is so robust that "he didn't get charged but it doesn't mean he didn't do it". I'd just be a little circumspect saying that aloud for legal reasons but each to their own

Good old Christian can say what he does because a defence to defamation is it was a necessary incident of the legal process you did. You won't have that defence

Imagine, trying to intimidate someone with that nonsense.

Two years building a brief of evidence on Brueckner against fifteen years trying to build one against the McCanns with some still at it, going nowhere.

 

[jason_recliner]

If CB is innocent and is not charged then of course I can let it go. I don't know that he did it, only that the authorities believe he did. All I know is that the McCanns didn't do it.