Timeline May 3rd

[sadie]

Yes, but not the OC tennis courts.

Yep, looks like you have got it.  Actually there is one tennis court and one, I think its called, multipurpose court.

It is about 40 metres north of where the leading Smith was.  IIRC that was Martin Smith and wife.  Please correct me if I have that name wrong.   I always wondered if the man carrying Madeleine took refuge with a helper in there?  I have always thought that it was likely that the actual lifter was someone female that Madeleine knew and trusted, possibly a nanny..

I want to make it clear that Amy Teirney is no more likely in my thoughts than any of the other female staff there.   I think all the nannies lived there … and anyway I know that I could be wrong about it being a nanny.

It goes on the back burner with other stuff that  feel worth keeping.

~~~~~~~~~~

I have always thought that the person carrying Madeleine was let down by the get away driver, who failed to turn up.   In my opinion, the getaway vehicle was parked on the little car parking area immediately opposite the Tapas reception.   I think that the driver of the getaway vehicle took fright when he saw Gerry chatting with Jez on his drive past route … and then saw Jane walking up the road to where Tannerman suddenly appeared.  I think he whizzed off in the opposite direction leaving the person who carried Madeleine in the lurch.

Now who have we come across recently who always runs for it when he smells trouble for himself ?   
I am probably wrong on that one, but he fits the Bill, so on the back burner with him, just in case.   All IMO

[Anthro]

The phone box isn't far from the apartments where the nannies lived. Maybe Amy used the phone box to phone home because it was cheaper than using her mobile. She may even have been able to reverse the charges.

I wonder why she didn’t mention the calls in both her statements.

[G-Unit]

I wonder why she didn’t mention the calls in both her statements.

I don't suppose she thought they were relevant.

[Miss Taken Identity]

" I have always thought that the person carrying Madeleine was let down by the get away driver, who failed to turn up.   In my opinion, the getaway vehicle was parked on the little car parking area immediately opposite the Tapas reception.   I think that the driver of the getaway vehicle took fright when he saw Gerry chatting with Jez on his drive past route … and then saw Jane walking up the road to where Tannerman suddenly appeared.  I think he whizzed off in the opposite direction leaving the person who carried Madeleine in the lurch."

what time do place the 'abduction' and do you suspect it was smithman?

The reason I ask is it couldn't have been Tannerman  as Gerry was in the apartment and claims he saw sleeping MBM a few minutes before.

No one saw CB's van in PDL between 7pm and 9.ish this is  the time scale as given by T9. well sort of kind of.

[Robittybob1]

... snip ...

No one saw CB's van in PDL between 7pm and 9.ish this is  the time scale as given by T9. well sort of kind of.

How do you know this?  After all these years would anyone remember an old van passing by?

[barrier]

How do you know this?  After all these years would anyone remember an old van passing by?

Its what OG are appealing info on,in hope or desperation?

[Brietta]

Its what OG are appealing info on,in hope or desperation?

Why do you think they shouldn't be 'desperate' to get some resolution to thirteen year old case on every occasion a chance for resolution presents itself.

The question I'm asking myself is why wasn't Amaral looking for the two tone camper van covered with distinctive cartoon graffiti that he saw fit to mention recently in his criticism of the German investigation.

Should have been easy enough to spot to check out its status back in 2007.

[G-Unit]

Why do you think they shouldn't be 'desperate' to get some resolution to thirteen year old case on every occasion a chance for resolution presents itself.

The question I'm asking myself is why wasn't Amaral looking for the two tone camper van covered with distinctive cartoon graffiti that he saw fit to mention recently in his criticism of the German investigation.

Should have been easy enough to spot to check out its status back in 2007.

First ask yourself why the PJ would have been looking for the van. Afaik it wasn't associated with any crimes or any criminals. 

[barrier]

Why do you think they shouldn't be 'desperate' to get some resolution to thirteen year old case on every occasion a chance for resolution presents itself.

The question I'm asking myself is why wasn't Amaral looking for the two tone camper van covered with distinctive cartoon graffiti that he saw fit to mention recently in his criticism of the German investigation.

Should have been easy enough to spot to check out its status back in 2007.

With the way the case has been dissected here and elsewhere, there's nothing to suggest any vehicle was used, nothing was flagged up about this van.The van is of interest because 13 yrs down the line a suspect has turned up who surprise surprise owned a vehicle that had not been flagged.Tanner nor Smith's saw a van,if they did it didn't register so he wasn't parked any where close by or if it was how the devil is it supposed to jog some one's memory 13 yrs down the line if in no way at the time it was deemed suspicious.

Still its a timeline thread no doubt some one can pinpoint the moment of opportunity to spirit Madeleine away to said van.

[Brietta]

With the way the case has been dissected here and elsewhere, there's nothing to suggest any vehicle was used, nothing was flagged up about this van.The van is of interest because 13 yrs down the line a suspect has turned up who surprise surprise owned a vehicle that had not been flagged.Tanner nor Smith's saw a van,if they did it didn't register so he wasn't parked any where close by or if it was how the devil is it supposed to jog some one's memory 13 yrs down the line if in no way at the time it was deemed suspicious.

Still its a timeline thread no doubt some one can pinpoint the moment of opportunity to spirit Madeleine away to said van.

Perhaps someone will be kind enough to get round to Brueckner to ask him what his timeline was for the week of Madeleine's disappearance and after.
For certain he seems to have slipped through the net back in 2007 when it really did matter.

Amaral acknowledged Brueckner was a known paedophile ... him - and was it a hundred? others ... and Amaral has also confirmed the Portuguese police 'knocked' at his door but he wasn't in.

He never disclosed why it didn't occur to them to check up on the whereabouts of a known paedophile to quiz him about his timeline.  Probably too caught up in "the badly told story" he was concocting for the media and for inclusion in his book.

[The General]

Perhaps someone will be kind enough to get round to Brueckner to ask him what his timeline was for the week of Madeleine's disappearance and after.
For certain he seems to have slipped through the net back in 2007 when it really did matter.

Amaral acknowledged Brueckner was a known paedophile ... him - and was it a hundred? others ... and Amaral has also confirmed the Portuguese police 'knocked' at his door but he wasn't in.

He never disclosed why it didn't occur to them to check up on the whereabouts of a known paedophile to quiz him about his timeline.  Probably too caught up in "the badly told story" he was concocting for the media and for inclusion in his book.

The German police haven't even been arsed to interview him, so don't start with that.

[Mr Gray]

The German police haven't even been arsed to interview him, so don't start with that.

I have explained several times why the Germans haven't interviewed him

[Vertigo Swirl]

The German police haven't even been arsed to interview him, so don't start with that.

Oh right, it’s laziness that has prevented the Germans from interviewing him is it? 

[Brietta]

The German police haven't even been arsed to interview him, so don't start with that.

At the moment there is no requirement for them to do so as far as Madeleine's case is concerned,  They will in all likelihood have him until January as a result of his drug offences ... we shall find out about that later on when the German courts decide if he is a flight risk or not.

It is also looking as though he will have to serve his time for the vicious torture and rape he perpetrated, if the Advocate General's opinion that his 2019 conviction for it was lawful is accepted by the European Court of Justice.
Again we shall just have to wait and see.

It doesn't alter the fact that Brueckner was a viable suspect with firm connections to Luz who was not interviewed back in 2007 about his timeline by the Portuguese police.
Amaral now claims knowledge of him I think in an attempt to smear the German investigation without stopping for a second to work out how that information actually reflects on his own botched efforts.

Brueckner had a timeline covering the events ... it's just the Portuguese police under Amaral's direction couldn't be be bothered to find him to ask him what it might have been.

[The General]

I have explained several times why the Germans haven't interviewed him

Yeh, yeh, the lamest excuse in criminal investigation history - '....oooh, we don't want him to know what evidence we've got'. What's the point in that? Everyone who is familiar with the case know that HCW has also stated that this 'evidence' isn't enough to even think about putting it before the prosecutor.
As I've said before, if he did do it, he absolutely knows what they've got and what they're looking for - it's not rocket surgery (or cardiac, even). Besides, if you put out a public appeal for information on about a phone number and a couple of vehicles - guess what - some of the 'evidence' is about a phone number and some vehicles.
If it was even remotely 'concrete' they would arrest him, interview him and give him the squeeze for as long as they possibly could.