New suspect in Madeleine McCann case

[Zable]

It all seems to have slipped under the radar again doesn't it??

Lol, The Sun doesn't seem to want it to go there. My guess is they'll keep flogging it until at least there's a ruling on whether or not Christian B gets parole on his drug trafficking sentence. Thought to happen mid- July. And, if he's successful at the European Court of Justice, his rape conviction might get quashed.

 

[Zable]

What makes sense is that Christian B, is a known sex offender with past charges for offenses against young girls.

Really? I thought there was just the one for molestation when 17, for which he received a 2-year suspended sentence.

 

[Alexis]

How do you suppose Christian B got in and out of the apartment @Alexis, and when?

I really wouldn't know, not being involved in the case, not being a policeman. I go by what I read from various reports. He probably wont be tried on it as they cant produce concrete evidence, or possibly they even have evidence that wouldn't be admissible in court as it was obtained in a questionable manner. I cant speculate.

It's just a lot more likely that the known rapist, burger, drug dealer, sex offender living in the area at the time, who has molested a 6 year old girl did it, than to believe or say that the McCann's killed their own daughter and managed to fool 3 police forces. Saying they were on a swingers sex holiday with their friends and just brought their 3 kids along for the ride isn't just foolish and sick, it's toxic and disgusting really. These are all people not just names.

 

[Alexis]

Really? I thought there was just the one for molestation when 17, for which he received a 2-year suspended sentence.

You are being pedantic. He molested a 6 year old.

 

[Zable]

The Portuguese police bungled so much in the investigation

Care to give specifics?

 

[Alexis]

Care to give specifics?

Not really. I don't want to get into this with you. You believe your conspiracy theories and I haven't the energy to battle that.

 

[Zable]

You are being pedantic

Because you exaggerate.

 

[Alexis]

Because you exaggerate.

He's a paedophile. That was my point.

 

[Zable]

Hmm. Didn't a German police officer claim Maddie was shot in her Luz holiday apartment?

 

[Alexis]

Hmm. Didn't a German police officer claim Maddie was shot in her Luz holiday apartment?

Why don't you go on a fact finding mission? Take as long as you like. Don't hurry back.

 

[Zable]

Just pointing out idiotic beliefs don't stop with conspiracy theorists.

theories by eejits online claiming that the McCann's were in Portugal on a swinging holiday and brought their three young children along for shits and giggles are, well, idiotic.

As idiotic as Gerry McCaan for saying "f**k off, I'm not here to enjoy myself" in response to David Payne saying "Cheer up Gerry, we're on holiday."
This was while being transported from the airport to the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz at the start of their stay.

Are the Drs Gaspars, friends of the McCaans, idiots for filing a police report and backing statement about their suspicions of Dr D. Payne within a fortnight after they learnt of Madeleine's disappearance? I don't think so. Yet it took British police 5 months to give Portugal's PJ this info.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/Gaspar.htm

 

[Alexis]

I'm not participating in this. Good luck with the discussion on here.

 

[Zable]

The Portuguese police bungled so much in the investigation and have been uncooperative.

They didn't want to draw attention to what was happening under their noses.

I go by what I read from various reports.

These are all people not just names.

I'm not participating in this.

How I wish that high road of yours was the thinking Tony Parsons employed back in the day (Oct 29th, 2007) when he editorialised for the Daily Mirror in a tone which continues to resonate with the majority of the mongrel media and their readers.

He wrote in the updated version of April 24th, 2015:

OH, UP YOURS, SENOR

Portugal's ambassador to Britain, Senor Antonio Santana Carlos, says that the Madeleine McCann case has seriously damaged relations between the two countries. Well, whose fault is that?

It is the fault of the spectacularly stupid, cruel Portuguese police. I have never much cared for the convention of calling cops "pigs" or "filth", but I am happy to make an exception.

They have tried to cover their humiliation at coming nowhere close to finding that stolen child by fitting up her parents.

The decline in relations is also the fault of the appalling Portuguese media, happy to print any piece of poisonous trash spoon-fed to them by "police sources" treating the abduction of a small child as light entertainment.

And the Portuguese public must also take their share of the blame. The sight of locals jeering at Kate McCann as she went in for questioning [not initially but after her husband was declared -- asked to be made?? -- arguido] made me feel as though these leering bumpkins were not from another country, but another planet.

And the good ambassador can also be blamed for the decline in relations.

When he should be exercising a little diplomacy, he huffs and he puffs about the McCanns' tragic decision to leave their children sleeping alone on the night Madeleine was stolen.

"In Portugal we have the concept of a nuclear family," sniffs Senor Carlos. "That the families all live together."

They made a mistake, ambassador. Their lives have been wrecked. That is punishment enough, without your asinine, unwanted comments.

And I would respectfully suggest that in future, if you can't say something constructive about the disappearance of little Madeleine, then you just keep your stupid, sardine-munching mouth shut.

Source: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/oh-up-yours-senor-516864​

 

[Zable]

The jillhavern.forumotion.net site has a pic of Ex-Met Murder DCI Colin Sutton, crediting him with the quote: "The most likely scenario is that Madeleine was stolen to order by slave traders and smuggled into Africa for a rich family who wanted a white child."

Possibly the quote came from here https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-was-snatched-rich-10282798 .....but I don't know about the "the most likely scenario" part, to be fair to Mr Sutton.

Here's why...

Armchair Detective, No Hiding Place! has some yt vids featuring Sutton. In part 1, Occam's Razor, after chit-chatting about Sutton's book Manhunt, Sutton mentions (circa the 10min, 20secs mark, or a bit further on) going to PdL with a newspaper where he discussed the possible scenarios of the MM case with the reporter.

CS: I didn't give any preference or prominence to any one of those above the other because as far as I was concerned I wasn't there to give my opinion but to give the kind of the police officer/detective POV as to what sort of things you'd be looking at as a possibility, and when the piece was written in the paper everything I talked about is there -- but there is one particular one which is in great big letters in the middle and little boxes around it...

AD: (Interjecting) ...child trafficking...

Sutton then says if he had to rank the possibilities that one would be at the bottom or near the bottom.

Sutton earlier mentions another interview & editing by an Australian news media, which had led to him being reported as 'saying' the opposite of what he'd actually said.

Later in the chat with AD, Sutton inadvertently gives a clue where his thoughts lie on an issue concerning the McCaan parents. He also answers a channel subscriber's question about the work of the Portuguese police (GNR, the 'first responders' who were working on the basis of a child wondering off so didn't think to treat the apartment as a crime scene or asking for borders to be sealed + the PJ.)

 

[Zable]

Colin Sutton is the guy The News of the World, back in the day, claimed would be in charge of Ops Grange when it launched.

Here's Colin's blogpost about Ops Grange:

Tuesday, 9 May 2017
Madeleine McCann and Operation Grange

At the outset I should say that I don't know what happened to Madeleine McCann. All the evidence available to me – and there is more and deeper information available to the public on this than any case I have looked at – does not convince me of any theory or scenario being proved. Soon, in the coming months when my other projects are less busy, I hope to take a proper analytical look at it all and come up with some conclusions. But as things stand my position is that I don't know.

Having said all that, there are aspects of the case which trouble me already and the main one is what the Metropolitan Police set out to do in Operation Grange. My brush with that investigation – and I call it that because I was never actually involved with it – has been the subject of a fair bit of comment, embellishment and misunderstanding. So it is right I think that I set out clearly what happened and what did not.

On Sunday 9th May 2010 the News of the World published a story which suggested that the Met was going to reinvestigate Madeleine’s disappearance and that I would be asked to lead it. This was news to me on both counts. Nobody from the Met had, or indeed ever did, make such a request of me.

The only official news I heard about the reinvestigation was a week or two later when I heard that the idea of such a reinvestigation had been shelved for the time being in the wake of the change of Government. You will recall the note by former Chief Secretary to the Treasury Liam Byrne, apologising to his successor that there was no money left. The rumour in the Met was that, unless and until the Government were prepared to fund it, we would not undertake such an expensive operation which, as desirable as it might have been, was not really something on which Londoners should see their Council Tax spent.

However, before this, just a few days after the NotW story I did receive a call from a senior officer in the Met whom I knew quite well. This officer told me I would do better to avoid the McCann investigation if it did happen, because "You wouldn't be happy leading an investigation where you were told what you could look at and what you could not".

That is the totality of the advice I received. It was made clear that this was an ‘unofficial’ call and that it was made in my interest – so that I might not end up taking on a task which would ultimately frustrate me. As such I never pressed the caller for more information, nor will I ever be in a position to disclose who the officer was.

I was familiar enough with the reporting of the McCann case in the media to understand that there was a widespread reluctance to talk of any scenario which did not involve an abduction and in which no blame or complicity was to be attributed to the parents and their friends. This struck me as odd but, in those days, quite frankly I was busy enough with he investigations I was involved in without undertaking any 'off the books' look at what had gone on in Praia de Luz. I had assumed that there was good reason for this; that those who had been involved had satisfied themselves that was the case.

I retired after 30 years service in early 2011. At the time I retired there had been no decision made to mount the Met operation. As I embarked upon a new career writing and commenting I looked at the case a little, sufficiently enough to provide sensible assistance to the media when they asked me. This was, though, always around police procedures and techniques. Nobody ever asked me what I thought might have happened, only what the police were doing, why and what they might do next.

Last year Sky asked me to a meeting to discuss what a ten-year anniversary film might achieve. I explained that I would be willing to take part but that my position was one where I was as sceptical of the accepted (abduction) theory as I was of any other. I said I would also like to make the point that Operation Grange was so restricted from the start as to be destined to fail. In support of this I presented the original Grange terms of reference and told them of the advice I had received in the phone call.

To their credit (and, actually, to my surprise) they accepted that this was a valid point of view to hold and one which should be presented in their film. Within the limitations and constraints of legal matters, the editing process and the need to present a rounded story, I think the Sky film was pretty good. It is certainly the most balanced mainstream report I have seen and one with which I am entirely happy to be associated. I also think it represented my views well.

I am neither an anti nor a pro – of the McCanns or the media or the police. I felt, feel indeed, that the limitations which seem to have been imposed on Operation Grange were worthy of being publicised and would inform the debate. I am not necessarily advocating that it be started afresh, just that it is understood what it was and what it tried to do.

I do though think that a point worthy of reinforcing is that a proper, conclusive and reasoned elimination or implication of Kate and Gerry McCann would have been in everyone's interest, most of all theirs. That would have been my first objective had I been leading Operation Grange and so that is the biggest issue I have with how that investigation proceeded. To eliminate or implicate those closest to the child in this type of case is not only the documented best investigative practice but is common sense. Had Grange done this then everything would be a lot clearer. I have no idea why this was not done but I am satisfied on what has been said by the Met and what is available that it was not.

I want to continue to raise and discuss issues around Madeleine’s disappearance when it is appropriate to do so. I am mindful that, to maintain credibility and access to meaningful platforms that I will need to do so in a considered, reasoned and evidenced way. If I don't offer support to theories and assumptions it doesn't mean I don't understand or believe them, just that I don't think it is appropriate to adopt them or comment upon them at the moment.

Finally a paragraph on me. I am nowhere near naïve enough to have thought that I could become involved in this debate without suffering some abuse and denigration. While it is water from a duck’s back I won't expose myself to it unnecessarily. Hence I won't take part in discussions on the various forums and I am likely to block those on Twitter who can’t be reasonable and polite. Like us all I am far from perfect but I did give many years of service to the community – as do thousands of others – and during that time I was lucky enough to achieve some results of which I will always be proud. My expertise and reputation is well-regarded by the media and I have no need to raise my profile; I turn away as much media work as I accept. I am not writing a book on Madeleine McCann and I have no motivation other than that which has been with me for many, many years – to get to the truth. So I will continue to tweet about the case (@colinsutton) and when people raise good questions I will try to respond quickly.

colin@cs-i.co.uk

Source: http://colinsutton.blogspot.com/2017/05/madeleine-mccann-and-operation-grange_9.html?m=1

 

[Zable]

I think the Sky film was pretty good. It is certainly the most balanced mainstream report I have seen and one with which I am entirely happy to be associated. I also think it represented my views well.

In this 2017 "film" or documentary, Martin Brunt of Sky News meets with several people, including South African 'tracker' Daniel Kruger (around the 3 min mark), who returns Madeleine's hairbrush. .....

The day it aired, May 3rd, Joana Morais asked on her blog site words to the effect if Mr Kruger had Madeleine's hairbrush, then whose hairbrush did Britain's FSS (Forensic Science Service Ltd) have to conduct tests on?

Her post and the comments that followed were eye-opening. They added to the mystifying circumstances. .... Kruger was deliberate with his words: "The truth will stand and the lie will die" and Blunt well knew what he was getting at, IMO.

https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2017/05/so-whose-hairbrush-was-sent-to.html?m=1

 

[Zable]

Colin Sutton also appears in Sonia Poulton's McCaan-related documentaries.

Here's one:

Here's another:

 

[Zable]

I don't understand this business about placing Christian B "at the scene". Does anyone?

Per The Sun's headline: Christian B made the phone call. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.th...madeleine-mccann-phone-call-praia-da-luz/amp/

Per its 1st para: the phone he used connected to the mast owned by the resort complex .

Per one of the later paras in the same Sun news report:

Portugese media reported the number Christian B was called from (+351) 916 510 683 was registered to a man called Diogo Silva, which is a common name in Portugal.​

Per earlier reporting in The Sun (June 4th 2020):

Among the bombshell findings is a 30-minute phonecall the suspect took just one hour before the three-year-old is feared to have been snatched from her bed. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11777248/madeleine-mccann-suspect-campervan-evidence/​

Just which man placed the damn call? Which man was in the vicinity of the Oc ean Club?

Never mind that The Sun claims Christian B was directly outside the Ocean Club; the real questions are:

(a) What did the Australian 60 minutes interviewer mean by "at the scene" -- the public roads and alleyways around and through the resort; or the grounds of the Ocean Club, which in some spots require a guest card to access; or in the McCaan apartment, the crime scene?

(b) What did Mr Wolters have in mind when he responded "yes" to her question?

The Sun also claims "The content of the call is unclear." Interesting. Did either man record the call he was making or answering?

 

[Zable]

I have issues with the way the Oz 60 minutes programme was edited and put together, including images, but that's for another time.

Right now I'm more concerned about the international reporting based off it.
Below I give the Daily Star's report based on that Oz 60 minutes programme. Compare and contrast with The Sun's reporting. Why did The Sun publish a false narrative about who made the phone call? From whom did it source that report -- or to whom did it sell that report, because there's the same report in NZ.

Madeleine McCann suspect 'just yards away from her an hour before she vanished'

Convicted German paedophile Christian Brueckner's mobile reportedly pinged on a phone mast at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, the Portuguese town where the McCanns were holidaying at the time

By Jerry Lawton

22:22, 30 JUN 2020

The prime suspect in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann has been described as just yards away from her an hour before she vanished.

German prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters has told for the first time how convicted child abuser Christian Brueckner’s mobile pinged on a phone mast at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

Maddie, who was days from turning four, disappeared from her family’s apartment at the club that night.

Until now, police had only revealed Brueckner, 43, got a call on his mobile at 7.32pm on May 3, 2007, while he was somewhere in the area.

But Mr Wolters told Australian TV show 60 Minutes the half-hour chat was transmitted through the Ocean Club’s mast.

He said: "We know the phone number used by our suspect was connecting and the mast belongs to the Ocean Club."

Asked if that meant they could place Brueckner at the scene, he replied: "Yes, we think so."

He added: "We have enough evidence to say our suspect killed Madeleine.

"But I’m not able to tell all the details”

He said German police learned Maddie was dead "sometime over the last two years".

Brueckner has two child sex convictions and is in jail in Germany for drug offences.

He is also appealing a seven-year term for raping a woman of 72 in Praia da Luz in 2005. Through his lawyers, he has denied involvement in Madeleine's death.

This week, a video showed inside "Brueckner's secret lair" where 8,000 pictures and videos were discovered by police.​

Chilling footage shows the remains of a deserted factory in Germany where he was supposedly living.

The huge haul of pictures and videos are reported to include "strong evidence to the disappearance of Madeleine".

Police uncovered the cache on USB flash drives buried alongside Brueckner's dead dog at the rubbish-filled site in the village of Neuwegersleben, Saxony-Anhalt.

Speaking on Australia's 60 Minute programme, German prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters said he couldn't say whether or not Madeleine was featured in the images.

Source: https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-just-yards-22280327​

 

[Zable]

From The Sun's report if 29th June, 2020:
Prosecutors claim they have traced the phone used by their prime suspect and found it connected to the mast owned by the resort complex where the McCann's were staying.

The Sun report is referring to the Australian 60 Minutes programme on Christian B.

An excerpt from that programme:

60minA: Maddie was abducted between 9 and 10pm. Prosecutor Wolter's team discovered that during that same time, a mobile phone linked to Christian Bruckner was used in the immediate area of her hotel room.

[Zable's note: Crap. The Ocean Club wasn't/isn't a hotel. Madeleine was in a room in one of the Waterside Apartments, in block 5; with an open-air car park out front, nestled in the intersection of a T-junction, with an alleyway along the rear of the block. On the other side of the alleyway was the walled off tennis courts, swimming pool, and general Tapas area where her parents were eating. ....As for the time of the phone call... Per the Met's news portal http://news.met.police.uk/news/operation-grange-update-and-appeal-403826 ...."The first number is +351 912 730 680. Extensive enquiries have led investigators to believe the suspect was using this number and received a call, starting at 7.32pm and finishing at 8.02pm on 3 May 2007. This call was received in the area of Praia da Luz." ~ DCI Mark Cranwell, Operation Grange]

Wolters: We know that the phone number which was used by our suspect on the 3rd May, 2007 was connecting to the mast which belongs to the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz.

60minA: So what you are saying to me is that you can place Christian Bruckner at the scene?

Wolters: Yes, we think so.​

Why would the mast belong to the Ocean Club does anyone know?

In 2007, the Ocean Club wasn't in the business of providing telecommunications services. Unless, it was leasing bandwidth from one or more of the national telcos for use of its staff and holidaying guests. But would it need to own a dedicated mast for that? Or, is the OC owning/having a mast belonging to it a mistaken understanding?

Per the PJ's files, the 4 telcos from whom it obtained phone records & call traffic info, including roaming calls, in 2007 were Portugal Telecom and the 3 national mobile phone operators TMN, Vodaphone and Optimus. No mention of the records relating "to the mast belonging to the Ocean Club" that I could spot.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MOBILE_PHONE_ANALYSIS.htm

The records provided to the PJ had info on phone numbers, date, time, duration of calls. This was info from folk who had contracts with their service provider, ie, registered users. The PJ didn't have names of those who used pay-as-you-go phones.

These 3 national mobile phone operators would have had their own masts (with antennas) scattered around Luz, each antenna likely covering an area of several kilometres. The antennas of the different operators possibly overlapped coverage.

In those days, if without GPS, to locate the place where a cell phone was used, triangulation techniques were most often brought to bear on the pings - sorta handshakes - between the phone and antennas on the masts. ...As was more recently done to the cellphone of the co-pilot of missing flight MH370.

Whether or not that's how German regional prosecutors were able to hit pay dirt when they put Christian B's phone number into Scotland Yard's database is anyone's guess. ....Presumably, SY's database had info from the PJ's Madeleine McCaan files, such as this one:
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DELETED_CALLS.htm 8 Excerpt from info at that link: None of the telecom records show triangulation co-ordinates but are limited to identifying the single primary antenna on which calls were registered.

....Here's the thing though. Hundreds of people who lived in Luz used their cellphones on May 3rd, 2007. Not all for nefarious reasons. Per the Oz 60 minutes programme, Christian B lived just over a kilometre away from the (arguably sprawling) Ocean Club, which was integrated with Luz's village, ie, one part here, another part there. ....Given that, isn't it very possible that Christian B was living in an area covered by the very same antennas of one or more mobile phone operators that also covered some or all parts of the Ocean Club Resort? That would place Christian B -- and every one else in Luz, Lagos who was living under the same coverage -- "at the scene". So, easy enough for Prosecutor Wolters to say "Yes, we think so."

Sheesh.

Someone please tell me the German prosecutors do have more incriminating "at the scene" evidence than that.

That the Ocean Club did, indeed, have its own dedicated mast with limited coverage; and that Christian B's cellphone did ping for 30 minutes on that very mast. Which it could not have done had he/his cellphone been at home or elsewhere in Luz.

All that being said, if the Ocean Club having its own mast is truth, I wonder how the antennas on the OC mast screened out or blocked out or somehow distinguished between who was on its property/premises and who wasn't? Eg, between Mrs Fenn living in her own apartment and the holidaying Tapas 9 staying in OC-leased apartments in the very same block? Or between all them in their apartments and passers-by "just yards away" outside in the public roads and alleyways?

But if the mast in question didn't belong to the OC.... t'was a mistaken understanding....

Perhaps, the national telcos had a way of further sub-dividing antenna coverage, and in a way that showed Christian B's phone could not possibly have been at home or elsewhere. Was his phone, in fact, triangulated by one or more of their masts, and did they indeed place him in "the immediate area" of the Waterside Gardens apartments aka Maddie's "hotel room"?