Unsolved Madeleine McCann * Current Trial of Main Suspect Christian Brueckner

[BonzaRam]

It was dated 6th May

Police within Operation Grange itself had concerns . why? Because in 2013 there was a media article release from police in which they stated that

"They suspect the abductor took a blue sports bag from the unit the night of abduction".

Most people conclude that supports an abduction. No it doesn't. The truth was GM had said he never owned a blue bag. So what the police were saying was they dispute it's existence contrary to GM. They were obliged to link it to an abduction comment because otherwise they would be outside their remit of Operation Grange .The corollary to that is why would they dispute it with GM if they thought he was honest? So the article was directly questioning GM honesty.

Ahhh yes the sports bag , I am curious to how the police would be privy to what was there before they were. If GM denies it exists then who saw it and where to claim it does?

Have you got a link to the letter with a date on it? The only date i can see is on the Op Grange reply which is a generic auto reply. So yes the reply went to a pmacleod on the 6th May but that doesn't prove when the letter was written.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Ahhh yes the sports bag , I am curious to how the police would be privy to what was there before they were. If GM denies it exists then who saw it and where to claim it does?

Have you got a link to the letter with a date on it? The only date i can see is on the Op Grange reply which is a generic auto reply. So yes the reply went to a pmacleod on the 6th May but that doesn't prove when the letter was written.

To my knowledge there isn't any definitive testimony refuting it's existence. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

GM and KM both had regular tennis lessons and played many games..it would have been seen by multiple people. There is a picture of single blue bag in the main bedroom wardrobe. We are led to believe that KM had a bag but GM didn't? What utter rubbish. He played tennis more than she did. Imo they had twin bags and one went missing

 

[Kurve]

To my knowledge there isn't any definitive testimony refuting it's existence. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

GM and KM both had regular tennis lessons and played many games..it would have been seen by multiple people. There is a picture of single blue bag in the main bedroom wardrobe. We are led to believe that KM had a bag but GM didn't? What utter rubbish. He played tennis more than she did. Imo they had twin bags and one went missing

Why would they need two bags for tennis gear when they're on a holiday in Portugal? It's so unnecessary to be ridiculous.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Why would they need two bags for tennis gear when they're on a holiday in Portugal? It's so unnecessary to be ridiculous.

If you say. Not a major factor either way. David Payne statement in 2008 says he had one. It was photographed in wardrobe. He says he didn't own one.....but there is proof he did. He therefore lied.

More important is why it went missing.

 

[Sweeetleftfoot]

IMO if you're seeing a young child wearing make-up, and immediately thinking 'oh that's sexual' it says a lot about your attitude.

I'd guess that almost 100% of young girls have dived in to mum's makeup box and jewellery.

As far as I can tell, there's almost nothing that would convince you of the parents being innocent.

Because it’s just a hard pill to swallow to read the PJ files and think that there’s not more to the parents story.

The parents are confirmed liars, and have changed the narrative to fit there story on more than one occasion.

There’s too many inconsistencies and odd behaviour to. Just ignore. Granted little points but all the little points add up to something bigger.

Behaviours I find odd with the McCanns( it’s been a while since I’ve done a deep dive so I could be rusty )

.Kate McCanns uncle on video stating the find was to pay for the McCanns legal fees ( she is missing why the need for legal representation ?)

. Kate washing all the clothes and the curtains in the apartment after the disappearance.

. Kate openly stating they didn’t search for maddie the night she went missing

. Kate and Gerry deleting numerous phone calls and text messages for what reason ?

. They lied about the shutters being jimmied, once that was debunked Gerry had to change his statement to state that they left the door unlocked as to allow an entrance for the phantom abductor.

. Gerry lying about wanting the dogs involved, Gerry suggested sniffer dogs to help search. But it was another detective maybe mark harrison if my memory is right that introduced the cadaver and blood dogs.

. The McCanns dismissal of the dog evidence, surely your first thought would be ok something happened here let’s investigate but no they rubbished the dogs and said their unreliable.

. Not accepting the offer of mark perlin to do a conclusive dna test.

. Gerry calling a legal counsel the day after maddie disappeared

. David Payne ringing a child abuse crisis hotline the day after maddie disappeared.

. I also find it very far fetched that all the adults who on average consumed a bottle of wine each at dinner, would be doing regular checks despite leaving watches and mobiles at. The apartments.

. The strong smell
Of bleach noted by the police on arrival

. The strong odour emitting from the McCanns rental
Car. Which was explained away. That they had rotten meat and dirty nappies. There’s bins in the resort just put the stuff in the bins how did it get left in there so long to cause such a smell ?


. The removal
Of the carpet in the back of the rental car and given a thorough clean.

. The resort they were staying in had a free babysitting service.

. The supposed
Last photo was never given to the police until 3 weeks later after Gerry had returned to the uk.

When maddie first went missing they used photos at least 6 months old.

. No DNA found of maddie in the apartment. As the McCanns claim all 3 kids used the same toothbrush.


This only off the top of my head there’s heaps of other inconsistencies. And oddities.

Just my opinion but I can’t see them as being anything other than guilty.

 

[faible]

Because it’s just a hard pill to swallow to read the PJ files and think that there’s not more to the parents story.

The parents are confirmed liars, and have changed the narrative to fit there story on more than one occasion.

There’s too many inconsistencies and odd behaviour to. Just ignore. Granted little points but all the little points add up to something bigger.

Behaviours I find odd with the McCanns( it’s been a while since I’ve done a deep dive so I could be rusty )

.Kate McCanns uncle on video stating the find was to pay for the McCanns legal fees ( she is missing why the need for legal representation ?)

. Kate washing all the clothes and the curtains in the apartment after the disappearance.

. Kate openly stating they didn’t search for maddie the night she went missing

. Kate and Gerry deleting numerous phone calls and text messages for what reason ?

. They lied about the shutters being jimmied, once that was debunked Gerry had to change his statement to state that they left the door unlocked as to allow an entrance for the phantom abductor.

. Gerry lying about wanting the dogs involved, Gerry suggested sniffer dogs to help search. But it was another detective maybe mark harrison if my memory is right that introduced the cadaver and blood dogs.

. The McCanns dismissal of the dog evidence, surely your first thought would be ok something happened here let’s investigate but no they rubbished the dogs and said their unreliable.

. Not accepting the offer of mark perlin to do a conclusive dna test.

. Gerry calling a legal counsel the day after maddie disappeared

. David Payne ringing a child abuse crisis hotline the day after maddie disappeared.

. I also find it very far fetched that all the adults who on average consumed a bottle of wine each at dinner, would be doing regular checks despite leaving watches and mobiles at. The apartments.

. The strong smell
Of bleach noted by the police on arrival

. The strong odour emitting from the McCanns rental
Car. Which was explained away. That they had rotten meat and dirty nappies. There’s bins in the resort just put the stuff in the bins how did it get left in there so long to cause such a smell ?


. The removal
Of the carpet in the back of the rental car and given a thorough clean.

. The resort they were staying in had a free babysitting service.

. The supposed
Last photo was never given to the police until 3 weeks later after Gerry had returned to the uk.

When maddie first went missing they used photos at least 6 months old.

. No DNA found of maddie in the apartment. As the McCanns claim all 3 kids used the same toothbrush.


This only off the top of my head there’s heaps of other inconsistencies. And oddities.

Just my opinion but I can’t see them as being anything other than guilty.

'Nothing more' versus 'not behaving perfectly' versus 'murdered their daughter, hid the body successfully from the world, convinced their friends to be 'in on it' and no one has ever cracked and spilled the beans'.

I suspect in any other case this high profile, this long-running, with this much pressure, you'd find many inconsistencies too.

People like ARB who are so deeply rooted to the 'McCann's are guilty' outcome (despite his protestations it's bleedingly obvious that's what he believes and that there's almost nothing that will sway his opinion, and this isn't the only case he's been like this with) that every single instance of inconsistency over 21 years is twisted to validate their thoughts.

You only have to see his protestations around Brueckner - he hasn't (been known to have) killed before, therefore it's impossible for him to kill now. But he doesn't apply to same standard to the McCann's who haven't been known to have killed before but have killed their daughter and successfully covered it up for 21 years, roped their friends in to the coverup, and somehow also roped the British Government in to the coverup, for <reasons that cannot be defined>, all of whom have never cracked and spilled the beans in that entire time despite the immense media pressure and there being no real reason for anyone to cover for them.

 

[jason_recliner]

Just my opinion but I can’t see them as being anything other than guilty.

They must be criminal masterminds. Not only have they evaded arrest for over a decade but they have also raised funds and actively lobbied more than one police force to keep investigating while doing so! What a masterful psy-op!!!

 

[Sweeetleftfoot]

They must be criminal masterminds. No only have they evaded arrest for over a decade but they have also raised funds and actively lobbied more than one police force to keep investigating while doing so! What a masterful psy-op!!!

They have evaded arrest because They decided to go the abduction route, refused to look into the parents at all. Millions upon million wasted.

 

[BomberManU]

'Nothing more' versus 'not behaving perfectly' versus 'murdered their daughter, hid the body successfully from the world, convinced their friends to be 'in on it' and no one has ever cracked and spilled the beans'.

I suspect in any other case this high profile, this long-running, with this much pressure, you'd find many inconsistencies too.

People like ARB who are so deeply rooted to the 'McCann's are guilty' outcome (despite his protestations it's bleedingly obvious that's what he believes and that there's almost nothing that will sway his opinion, and this isn't the only case he's been like this with) that every single instance of inconsistency over 21 years is twisted to validate their thoughts.

You only have to see his protestations around Brueckner - he hasn't (been known to have) killed before, therefore it's impossible for him to kill now. But he doesn't apply to same standard to the McCann's who haven't been known to have killed before but have killed their daughter and successfully covered it up for 21 years, roped their friends in to the coverup, and somehow also roped the British Government in to the coverup, for <reasons that cannot be defined>, all of whom have never cracked and spilled the beans in that entire time despite the immense media pressure and there being no real reason for anyone to cover for them.

Yeah, there's no way the entire travelling group would keep quiet this long, someone's conscience would get the better of them.
Been a while since I read up on this case, but are there any theories pointing to the McCann's that don't involve the others knowing and helping to cover up? (I don't think they did it, just curious)

 

[Sweeetleftfoot]

'Nothing more' versus 'not behaving perfectly' versus 'murdered their daughter, hid the body successfully from the world, convinced their friends to be 'in on it' and no one has ever cracked and spilled the beans'.

I suspect in any other case this high profile, this long-running, with this much pressure, you'd find many inconsistencies too.

People like ARB who are so deeply rooted to the 'McCann's are guilty' outcome (despite his protestations it's bleedingly obvious that's what he believes and that there's almost nothing that will sway his opinion, and this isn't the only case he's been like this with) that every single instance of inconsistency over 21 years is twisted to validate their thoughts.

You only have to see his protestations around Brueckner - he hasn't (been known to have) killed before, therefore it's impossible for him to kill now. But he doesn't apply to same standard to the McCann's who haven't been known to have killed before but have killed their daughter and successfully covered it up for 21 years, roped their friends in to the coverup, and somehow also roped the British Government in to the coverup, for <reasons that cannot be defined>, all of whom have never cracked and spilled the beans in that entire time despite the immense media pressure and there being no real reason for anyone to cover for them.

The British government have not investigated the McCanns, they have simply gone the abduction route and that’s where the money has been pumped.

Look how many people knew about Harvey Weinstein before it all
Came out, same with jimmy saville. Covers up exist for a reason.

We know nothing of the McCanns and their friends, I’d say they were pretty close considering alll the adult males took turns bathing each others children.

Just because we don’t know the reason doesn’t mean a coverup doesn’t exist.

All options should be on the table, and imo more of it points to the parents. Then a random abductor who was so clean and calculated left no forensic evidence but forgot to delete an email.

 

[Kurve]

If you say. Not a major factor either way. David Payne statement in 2008 says he had one. It was photographed in wardrobe. He says he didn't own one.....but there is proof he did. He therefore lied.

More important is why it went missing.

Who's to say it was HIS bag? It's A bag if there's a photo of it.

 

[faible]

The British government have not investigated the McCanns, they have simply gone the abduction route and that’s where the money has been pumped.

Look how many people knew about Harvey Weinstein before it all
Came out, same with jimmy saville. Covers up exist for a reason.

We know nothing of the McCanns and their friends, I’d say they were pretty close considering alll the adult males took turns bathing each others children.

Just because we don’t know the reason doesn’t mean a coverup doesn’t exist.

All options should be on the table, and imo more of it points to the parents. Then a random abductor who was so clean and calculated left no forensic evidence but forgot to delete an email.

There were rumours about Saville for decades. There were rumours about Epstein for decades.

These people were far more powerful than two random British doctors with no wealth, power, or apparent connections to anything or anyone.

Where's the motivation for the British Government to cover for the McCann's? Why would their friends cover for them.

I've bathed the kids of a sibling, and I most certainly wouldn't cover for them murdering those kids. Let alone someone who was 'only' a friend.

RE: the bolded, I'd say that shows a pretty concerning outlook on your behalf if that's where your mind is going.

'All options on the table' and the perspective of people like ARB - and apparently, you - that twist every single instance to somehow end up as 'the McCann's are guilty' are very different things.

Plenty of criminals come and go without leaving forensic evidence on-site, I don't think it's a slam dunk argument that an abduction didn't happen. 3 year olds aren't that heavy, not sure how much time you've spent around toddlers but they also sleep pretty heavily and are used to be lugged around while sleeping.

 

[Sweeetleftfoot]

There were rumours about Saville for decades. There were rumours about Epstein for decades.

These people were far more powerful than two random British doctors with no wealth, power, or apparent connections to anything or anyone.

Where's the motivation for the British Government to cover for the McCann's? Why would their friends cover for them.

I've bathed the kids of a sibling, and I most certainly wouldn't cover for them murdering those kids. Let alone someone who was 'only' a friend.

RE: the bolded, I'd say that shows a pretty concerning outlook on your behalf if that's where your mind is going.

'All options on the table' and the perspective of people like ARB - and apparently, you - that twist every single instance to somehow end up as 'the McCann's are guilty' are very different things.

Plenty of criminals come and go without leaving forensic evidence on-site, I don't think it's a slam dunk argument that an abduction didn't happen. 3 year olds aren't that heavy, not sure how much time you've spent around toddlers but they also sleep pretty heavily and are used to be lugged around while sleeping.

Why is it the pro
McCanns always refer to it as murder ? I never said anything about murder.

When did I say British police covered it up ? I simply said the McCanns have never been investigated by the British police and that’s a fact. What investigation starts without covering all options ?



one thing I know for sure and I’m sure would agree if my child was genuinely missing The first thing I wouldn’t do is lie to police.

I’m not twisting anything I simply stated facts about the case that I have a hard time believing.

I’d love to know of other cases where the first thought of innocent people was to lie.

 

[faible]

As I said:

twist every single instance to somehow end up as 'the McCann's are guilty' are very different things.

one thing I know for sure and I’m sure would agree if my child was genuinely missing The first thing I wouldn’t do is lie to police.

I’m not twisting anything I simply stated facts about the case that I have a hard time believing.

I’d love to know of other cases where the first thought of innocent people was to lie.

I'm not pro-McCann. If they did it, they did it. If they didn't, they didn't. That you immediately leap to use that term shows where you're at. It's a team sport now. Team Pro-McCann is your opposition.

Being 'open' to things means actually being open to it, not twisting every single scenario that you come across, or behaviour that wasn't a picture perfect example of how you think someone should behave in a highly stressful emotionally charged situation, under pressure from international police and with the global media watching, in to 'guilty'.

Innocent people lie all the time. Innocent people behave oddly all the time. Innocent people have confessed to crimes they didn't even commit. People do not behave in a single, predictable fashion, for a myriad of reasons, in stressful and unusual situations.

 

[johnymac1]

I've transitioned through a few theories. I revisited the statements of the two Tapas guys that "listened from the door" Yes they probably did some checks. But they failed to see Maddie on the night.
But what it the door was locked or prevented from opening ?. Other statements focus heavily on the window. Does the bedroom window have something to do with an accidental death?

I still doubt there was an intruder in the apartment.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I've transitioned through a few theories. I revisited the statements of the two Tapas guys that "listened from the door" Yes they probably did some checks. But they failed to see Maddie on the night.
But what it the door was locked or prevented from opening ?. Other statements focus heavily on the window. Does the bedroom window have something to do with an accidental death?

I still doubt there was an intruder in the apartment.

Interesting JM. I'll give some thoughts to this.

 

[Kurve]

I've transitioned through a few theories. I revisited the statements of the two Tapas guys that "listened from the door" Yes they probably did some checks. But they failed to see Maddie on the night.
But what it the door was locked or prevented from opening ?. Other statements focus heavily on the window. Does the bedroom window have something to do with an accidental death?

I still doubt there was an intruder in the apartment.

That apartment had been burlged before.

The way it was situated, on a ground-floor location, access to roads front and side, secluded entrance and partial tree cover made it a perfect target.

If Madeleine had gone missing from an apartment four storeys up in the middle of a block, I'd be more inclined to thinking someone on the inside was involved, not necessarily the parents if it makes it more likely but someone working in there or on that floor.

It doesn't make any sense this far down the track when German investigators have a prime suspect to keep going for the McCanns.

 

[BonzaRam]

To my knowledge there isn't any definitive testimony refuting it's existence. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

GM and KM both had regular tennis lessons and played many games..it would have been seen by multiple people. There is a picture of single blue bag in the main bedroom wardrobe. We are led to believe that KM had a bag but GM didn't? What utter rubbish. He played tennis more than she did. Imo they had twin bags and one went missing

To your knowledge is there any definitive proof the supposed 2nd bag existed apart from speculating it would have been seen by many people or that GM and KM would have had matching bags if the bag in the wardrobe was in fact KMs tennis bag. and if so why haven't more people come forward to claim they sighted it?

Seeing a bag in a video after MM went missing does not imply the bag is missing, nor does it imply the McCann's where into matching items (excluding the twins of course).

If you say. Not a major factor either way. David Payne statement in 2008 says he had one. It was photographed in wardrobe. He says he didn't own one.....but there is proof he did. He therefore lied.

More important is why it went missing.

Was there a name tag on the bag in the video, was the type of bag in the video in dispute? Unless it can be proven that that bag was specifically Gerry's then how you claim he lied? David Payne? the last person to see MM alive?....hmmmm geez we could speculate about that.

More important is is there really a missing bag. so far all I have seen on this mystery bag is a lot of speculation. A hypothesis at best, which is basically an unproven theory.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

To your knowledge is there any definitive proof the supposed 2nd bag existed apart from speculating it would have been seen by many people or that GM and KM would have had matching bags if the bag in the wardrobe was in fact KMs tennis bag. and if so why haven't more people come forward to claim they sighted it?

Seeing a bag in a video after MM went missing does not imply the bag is missing, nor does it imply the McCann's where into matching items (excluding the twins of course).


Was there a name tag on the bag in the video, was the type of bag in the video in dispute? Unless it can be proven that that bag was specifically Gerry's then how you claim he lied? David Payne? the last person to see MM alive?....hmmmm geez we could speculate about that.

More important is is there really a missing bag. so far all I have seen on this mystery bag is a lot of speculation. A hypothesis at best, which is basically an unproven theory.

There is no definitive proof of a second bag. There was a bag in photo in their wardrobe and also referred to by David Payne statement April 2008 so a first bag existed, we know for certain. The suggestion of second bag was me to offer a reasonable explanation..UK police incited a media clip circa 2013 (from recollection) in which they said that the bag existed and went missing that night despite GM saying he didn't own one. Looking for people coming in with information saying it was critical to the investigation .. I think I've linked that here much earlier. They were trying to find the bag and were suggesting it was taken by the 'abductor'.....so clearly they had concluded it existed too.

Nothing incriminating comes from it being missing but a lie by GM ( if there was only one not two ) is one consciousness of guilt fact and incriminating. There are many others.

If it was used the question is ....what for?
Payne said it was a sports bag not a tennis bag and wasn't large. It didn't/ couldn't hold a child's body. But it was used for some purpose that necessitated it going missing. Bloody clothes? Drugs? Are the most logical explanations. If he owned one (we know he did) then he'd have to explain why it went missing. He doesn't say that. Instead he says he didn't own one.

 

[BonzaRam]

There is no definitive proof of a second bag. There was a bag in photo in their wardrobe and also referred to by David Payne statement April 2008 so a first bag existed, we know for certain. The suggestion of second bag was me to offer a reasonable explanation..UK police incited a media clip circa 2013 (from recollection) in which they said that the bag existed and went missing that night despite GM saying he didn't own one. Looking for people coming in with information saying it was critical to the investigation .. I think I've linked that here much earlier. They were trying to find the bag and were suggesting it was taken by the 'abductor'.....so clearly they had concluded it existed too.

Nothing incriminating comes from it being missing but a lie by GM ( if there was only one not two ) is one consciousness of guilt fact and incriminating. There are many others.

If it was used the question is ....what for?
Payne said it was a sports bag not a tennis bag and wasn't large. It didn't/ couldn't hold a child's body. But it was used for some purpose that necessitated it going missing. Bloody clothes? Drugs? Are the most logical explanations. If he owned one (we know he did) then he'd have to explain why it went missing. He doesn't say that. Instead he says he didn't own one.

"There is no definitive proof of a second bag. " and that is all that needs to be said.

"There was a bag in photo in their wardrobe and also referred to by David Payne statement April 2008"
He was not to referring to the bag in the wardrobe, he compared a possible rucksack to his own kit bag from his squash playing days.

P.J. POLICE FILES: DAVID PAYNE ROGATORY

That link is to David Payne's 2008 interview transcript. No where in it does he refer to it as a sports bag but several times calls it a rucksack and even then he is not sure if they even had one them. The part where he mentions colors is the tennis clothing he is describing and blue is never mentioned... so we can eliminate the David Payne statement in regards to the mystery bag.

"They were trying to find the bag and were suggesting it was taken by the 'abductor'.....so clearly they had concluded it existed too."
Being that it is claimed they only investigated along the abduction line then that is a safe assumption that a mystery bag, a blue sports bag evidently, may have been used by the abductor.
Without knowing where exactly the concept of this bag existing originated from, as in what evidence lead them to believe this bag exists, and who actually owned it (it would seem they believe the abductor used it which could imply the abductor also owned it) we still cannot be sure it even exists.

Pretty sure a skilled burglar would take with them something to carry what they steal in?

 

[jason_recliner]

"There is no definitive proof of a second bag. " and that is all that needs to be said.

THIS.

Thank you.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

"There is no definitive proof of a second bag. " and that is all that needs to be said.

"There was a bag in photo in their wardrobe and also referred to by David Payne statement April 2008"
He was not to referring to the bag in the wardrobe, he compared a possible rucksack to his own kit bag from his squash playing days.

P.J. POLICE FILES: DAVID PAYNE ROGATORY

That link is to David Payne's 2008 interview transcript. No where in it does he refer to it as a sports bag but several times calls it a rucksack and even then he is not sure if they even had one them. The part where he mentions colors is the tennis clothing he is describing and blue is never mentioned... so we can eliminate the David Payne statement in regards to the mystery bag.

"They were trying to find the bag and were suggesting it was taken by the 'abductor'.....so clearly they had concluded it existed too."
Being that it is claimed they only investigated along the abduction line then that is a safe assumption that a mystery bag, a blue sports bag evidently, may have been used by the abductor.
Without knowing where exactly the concept of this bag existing originated from, as in what evidence lead them to believe this bag exists, and who actually owned it (it would seem they believe the abductor used it which could imply the abductor also owned it) we still cannot be sure it even exists.

Pretty sure a skilled burglar would take with them something to carry what they steal in?

Issues around the bag are minor in nature.

THIS.

Thank you.

A photo isn't proof? Mmmmmmm interesting. Perhaps it was an optical illusion then

Proving the existence of the bag of whatever nature doesn't advance the case. It's existence and now disappearance simply means it was thrown away. We don't know why. We can offer conjecture as to why but none are evidence so is a dead end from my perspective..

 

[Angry Red Bull]

"There is no definitive proof of a second bag. " and that is all that needs to be said.

"There was a bag in photo in their wardrobe and also referred to by David Payne statement April 2008"
He was not to referring to the bag in the wardrobe, he compared a possible rucksack to his own kit bag from his squash playing days.

P.J. POLICE FILES: DAVID PAYNE ROGATORY

That link is to David Payne's 2008 interview transcript. No where in it does he refer to it as a sports bag but several times calls it a rucksack and even then he is not sure if they even had one them. The part where he mentions colors is the tennis clothing he is describing and blue is never mentioned... so we can eliminate the David Payne statement in regards to the mystery bag.

"They were trying to find the bag and were suggesting it was taken by the 'abductor'.....so clearly they had concluded it existed too."
Being that it is claimed they only investigated along the abduction line then that is a safe assumption that a mystery bag, a blue sports bag evidently, may have been used by the abductor.
Without knowing where exactly the concept of this bag existing originated from, as in what evidence lead them to believe this bag exists, and who actually owned it (it would seem they believe the abductor used it which could imply the abductor also owned it) we still cannot be sure it even exists.

Pretty sure a skilled burglar would take with them something to carry what they steal in?

A skilled burglar wouldn't leave the bag. They'd take it and if they did no one would be the wiser.

Dead end in solving the problem/ case

 

[faible]

A skilled burglar wouldn't leave the bag.

Note: this is opinion, not a statement of fact as the poster presents it.