New German suspect in Madeleine McCann mystery disappearance.

[barrier]

The goading more so. 

In the words frome Sheena Easton," for your eye's only"

[Carana]

OK.. please stop biting each other, it is boring.

Please tell me, if you speak Portuguese what is the story about this CB's ex GF Nicole F, why is the German prosecutor not mentioning her and Sandra Ferguson seem to think she is the mastermind?

Also NF's son mentions something like she was a shopaholic and her and CB shared 100 000 EURO, she got more and CB less, why is this?

Why did she leave her foster son miles away and told police to pick him up?

From what I can gather, he's concentrating on the Madeleine investigation and - for the moment - doesn't have any particular reason to think that she may have been an accomplice.

Sandra seems to be coming at it from a different angle: exploring a variety of crimes that took place around that time (most of which don't seem to have been thoroughly investigated - my view) and trying to see if there are any connections.

[G-Unit]

I think it is in reality... You were asking yourself... What is the evidence for CBs presence in the apartment.

It's possible that this mystery could be solved.  Sceptics it seems don't accept that because of all the evidence they believe points to the parents... They would have to accept they were wrong and consign grime and his dogs to the bin

If the Germans had evidence placing CB in 5A they wouldn't need to try to place him in Luz via the phone call.

[Mr Gray]

If the Germans had evidence placing CB in 5A they wouldn't need to try to place him in Luz via the phone call.

In your opinion and I think you continually confuse evidence with proof. Lets say they have evidence ...but not proof he was in 5a. Then further evidence  may provide proof. I think you seriously underestimate Wolters

[Carana]

If the Germans had evidence placing CB in 5A they wouldn't need to try to place him in Luz via the phone call.

That might depend on the sequence of whatever evidence they may have received / identified.

[G-Unit]

In your opinion and I think you continually confuse evidence with proof. Lets say they have evidence ...but not proof he was in 5a. Then further evidence  may provide proof. I think you seriously underestimate Wolters

A fingerprint would place CB at the scene, but I don't think they found any. Mitochondrial DNA suggests a presence, but doesn't prove it. For example the hair found in the Burgau apartment with the same Mitochondrial DNA as Jane Tanner was not proof that she was there. Would a call to her mobile phone in Burgau have helped to prove she was in the apartment? No it wouldn't.

In my opinion you are overestimating Wolters.

[Mr Gray]

A fingerprint would place CB at the scene, but I don't think they found any. Mitochondrial DNA suggests a presence, but doesn't prove it. For example the hair found in the Burgau apartment with the same Mitochondrial DNA as Jane Tanner was not proof that she was there. Would a call to her mobile phone in Burgau have helped to prove she was in the apartment? No it wouldn't.

In my opinion you are overestimating Wolters.

I have other ideas. The Germans solved the rape case so they deserve credit for that.
I have no reason to doubt what Wolters has said...if you have please share. we will know soon enough who is right.


I think sceptics such as yourself cant look at the evidence with an open mind. Like Mark S...and he admitted this...he cant accept it because it contradicts the dogs and other so called evidence he believes.

[barrier]

I have other ideas. The Germans solved the rape case so they deserve credit for that.
I have no reason to doubt what Wolters has said...if you have please share. we will know soon enough who is right.


I think sceptics such as yourself cant look at the evidence with an open mind. Like Mark S...and he admitted this...he cant accept it because it contradicts the dogs and other so called evidence he believes.

If Wolters can't go to court,then what?

[Mr Gray]

If Wolters can't go to court,then what?

I think theres very little doubt he can....we can cross that bridge if it arises..

[Anthro]

I have other ideas. The Germans solved the rape case so they deserve credit for that.
I have no reason to doubt what Wolters has said...if you have please share. we will know soon enough who is right.


I think sceptics such as yourself cant look at the evidence with an open mind. Like Mark S...and he admitted this...he cant accept it because it contradicts the dogs and other so called evidence he believes.

Mr Wolters also told Sandra that he cannot answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ and to just trust him when he says they have more evidence.

[kizzy]

In your opinion and I think you continually confuse evidence with proof. Lets say they have evidence ...but not proof he was in 5a. Then further evidence  may provide proof. I think you seriously underestimate Wolters

Seriously underestimated HCW. ..how,...it seems he is on a fishing expedition only brining out sprats

[Mr Gray]

Seriously underestimated HCW. ..how,...it seems he is on a fishing expedition only brining out sprats

I think some people are going to look more than a bit silly in a month ir so.
All those who have supported amarals version of events..

Amaral himself and his entire team.. Poulton... Mark S.. Pat Brown.. All professionals... Then some posters here... All on CMOMM... Etc etc..
And then how will Grime explain his, alerts.. Interesting times ahead

[Brietta]

From what I can gather, he's concentrating on the Madeleine investigation and - for the moment - doesn't have any particular reason to think that she may have been an accomplice.

Sandra seems to be coming at it from a different angle: exploring a variety of crimes that took place around that time (most of which don't seem to have been thoroughly investigated - my view) and trying to see if there are any connections.

I agree with that, Carana.

Two different approaches to the same end I think.  Both are professional investigators but perhaps with slightly different priorities.  Sandra Felgueiras has to use facts to make hers as interesting a story as possible while Hans Christian Wolters  uses unembellished facts to gather evidence which will stand the test in court.

I like Sandra's style and think she may be able to egg the pudding in a way which would be superfluous for Hans Christian's purpose.

I think Sandra is bravely putting everything on the line in the interest of JUSTICE.  It amazes me that people who have paid lip service to the notion for many years have so much negativity regarding those who in one way or another are attempting to deliver it based on facts and evidence.

Takes all kinds I suppose.

[kizzy]

I think some people are going to look more than a bit silly in a month ir so.
All those who have supported amarals version of events..

Amaral himself and his entire team.. Poulton... Mark S.. Pat Brown.. All professionals... Then some posters here... All on CMOMM... Etc etc..
And then how will Grime explain his, alerts.. Interesting times ahead

How would grime explain his alerts a few days later if Maddie had been found...

he would have had more of a problem with that.....so why are interesting times ahead ..only to you.

 

What you are making yourself look silly with is... continuing to say anyone is led by GA version of events.

I would say most of the reasons including myself  believe there was no abduction purely on the mccs behaviour from day one.

[Mr Gray]

How would grime explain his alerts a few days later if Maddie had been found...

he would have had more of a problem with that.....so why are interesting times ahead ..only to you.

 

What you are making yourself look silly with is... continuing to say anyone is led by GA version of events.

I would say most of the reasons including myself  believe there was no abduction purely on the mccs behaviour from day one.

So your  evidence is purely the mccanns behavior ...lol