He could be a one time downloader of CHILD PORN.
It could have been NEAL that was the downloader.
He could be a regular subscriber to this site.
He could be a member of the grab a child/film yourself having sex with them club.
We have not seen any evidence or testimony to this effect in court.
Since the first man in the RING was arrested Jan 27, I would think the police had evidence, or the group in Sweden had the information to give that could have identified any of these possibilities. Since they didn't bring them out in court, one must assume such did not exist.
I still say the fact that the POLICE had a search warrant searching for ROPES/CHAINS, etc means they thought they had one of these CHILD PORN RING guys. Instead of 'finding' a suspect, they were pointed at a suspect, and when he didn't have the 'goods', too bad. Enough trace evidence was found to make him look suspicious, so it was decided he should hang to ease the conscience of the community and help the reelection bids of a local politician.
Afterwards, police actually found the 2nd CHILD PORN RING guy they wanted. Got him right after the time Danielle might have actually been killed, or dumped at Dehesa Rd.
Nice of them and the media to keep it quiet.
At this point I disagree. To try and connect him to an "alledged" child porn ring would be irresponsible not to mention grounds for appeal. The defense would only be able to introduce what they could prove directly.
I said: " It's not unusual to look for ropes and chains when searching for a kidnapping victim is it??? "
You said: "Your statement above would be correct. It is not the statement I made."
My point was that it should have been standard operating procedure...to look for those items which would therefore show that that your theory wouldn't be necessarily proven by that search.
On the other hand, the possibility that they wanted to rule that "out" that he was connected to the ring seems very logical, especially considering that they found 'child' porn.