Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #38

[Denis R Tandib]

Can CB be ruled out now in the opinion of those of you who are doubtful about his involvement and if so why?

Where in the world is guilt assumed and innocence required to be proven? Why can he be ruled in?

 

[Denis R Tandib]

MWT...judging by his program and the alibi he had tried to test his "more knowledge" should be of great use...
FF is left alone with technicalities.

I'm not sure about that. It's not FF's first rodeo.

Consider what he said in the media when suggesting his client was innocent. IMO, there was a clever subtext to his comments, which he is using to caution the prosecution.

He mentioned comparing the timeline generated by the witness statements with CB's phone records. He says he can prove CB was too far from the OC during the available abduction window to be responsible for abducting MM.

So, the prosecutors have the problem of trying to undo the contentious timeline created by nine people or accepting that CB has a firm alibi for the only time MM can be abducted.

IMO, it's an elegant tactical move and indicates how FF would approach a purely circumstantial case, which he is confident he is up against.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

I'm not sure about that. It's not FF's first rodeo.

Consider what he said in the media when suggesting his client was innocent. IMO, there was a clever subtext to his comments, which he is using to caution the prosecution.

He mentioned comparing the timeline generated by the witness statements with CB's phone records. He says he can prove CB was too far from the OC during the available abduction window to be responsible for abducting MM.

So, the prosecutors have the problem of trying to undo the contentious timeline created by nine people or accepting that CB has a firm alibi for the only time MM can be abducted.

IMO, it's an elegant tactical move and indicates how FF would approach a purely circumstantial case, which he is confident he is up against.

Oh I see FF also says and says...

BBM, he can say what he want but, again, IMO, that is a poor exercise trying vague "counter-maths" and technicalities. Again, won't he get any real better than this from his "innocent" client? Will he have to go through this useless exercise?

Again, l'm not seeing BKA brings a charge which could be easily and immediately challenged by eventual micro-timing actions within that time window. Would they expose to that?! If charge comes, it has to be above and beyond that weak exercise.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

IMO, the German prosecutors presented a sensationalised version of their case to the public and led us to believe a charge was imminent. They have used the media to tell a story that they have a suspect who is the correct type of offender for this crime. They have proclaimed his guilt without presenting their evidence or testing it in court. The Arade Dam search continued this strategy: designed to convince as much as investigate.

The only reason the investigators and prosecutors haven't received the wrath of the media is because of the history of the case; please compare it to the treatment of the Portuguese investigators before any of their work or theories were published - the inconsistency is remarkable.

IMO, how the case has unfolded is a failure of epic proportions. I feel as though the prosecutors have been unprofessional at best and deceitful at worst. I am critical of their work and make no apologies for it.

You are severely criticizing BKA investigation work. Just on MM's case, I assume.
Regarding its substract, so compare and to bring remarkable consistency, what could you say then about the original portuguese investigation work...

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Oh I see FF also says and says...

BBM, he can say what he want but, again, IMO, that is a poor exercise trying vague "counter-maths" and technicalities. Again, won't he get any real better than this from his "innocent" client? Will he have to go through this useless exercise?

Again, l'm not seeing BKA brings a charge which could be easily and immediately challenged by eventual micro-timing actions within that time window. Would they expose to that?! If charge comes, it has to be above and beyond that weak exercise.

The bit you emboldened is not the point. FF is not getting into minor technicalities or "counter-maths" (what does that even mean?); he is using this point to eliminate the possibility of a charge of abduction against his client based on circumstantial evidence - IMO, doing it well.

If abduction can be struck off the charge sheet, then it leaves the prosecutors pursuing a no-body murder case where they cannot or, because of the inherent problems in doing so, don't want even to try to prove the suspect abducted the victim.

The Mission Impossible theme tune should start playing for HCW and company to try and get a murder conviction in that scenario.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

You are severely criticizing BKA investigation work. Just on MM's case, I assume.
Regarding its substract, so compare and to bring remarkable consistency, what could you say then about the original portuguese investigation work...

It failed to find anyone guilty of the crime.

I think it was severely challenged from the start by the media intrusion. I think there was a lack of cooperation and unnecessary criticism from key witnesses throughout the investigation. In hindsight, failing to adequately secure the crime scene was a significant mistake.

I think these points and the lack of evidence of an abduction make for a difficult case - something proved by the initial investigation and the three that have followed it.

A key difference between the original and the current investigation is that the PJ's media coverage was involuntary from the beginning, and the BKA through HCW seems to be a strategy to convince the public of their suspect's guilt.

ETA: My comments relate to MM's case and the prosecutors. However, failing to foresee the jurisdiction issue in the five other cases does not engender much confidence in their competence either.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

The bit you emboldened is not the point. FF is not getting into minor technicalities or "counter-maths" (what does that even mean?); he is using this point to eliminate the possibility of a charge of abduction against his client based on circumstantial evidence - IMO, doing it well.

If abduction can be struck off the charge sheet, then it leaves the prosecutors pursuing a no-body murder case where they cannot or, because of the inherent problems in doing so, don't want even to try to prove the suspect abducted the victim.

The Mission Impossible theme tune should start playing for HCW and company to try and get a murder conviction in that scenario.

The point I highlighted was to refer that as HCW says and says, FF also says and says...doubts on what he would be able to plant as "alibi". He has to be careful with that...and it may always be "suddenly" destroyed (e.g. content of phone call is known).
Anyway, I have originally thought that if charge comes it would be on murder (may be even "easier" based on material evidence they say they have) but it would be even more "surgical" if it comes on abduction.
But I still think, if no other people of interest come forward, they may be counting, at limit, to get his confession.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

It failed to find anyone guilty of the crime.

I think it was severely challenged from the start by the media intrusion. I think there was a lack of cooperation and unnecessary criticism from key witnesses throughout the investigation. In hindsight, failing to adequately secure the crime scene was a significant mistake.

I think these points and the lack of evidence of an abduction make for a difficult case - something proved by the initial investigation and the three that have followed it.

A key difference between the original and the current investigation is that the PJ's media coverage was involuntary from the beginning, and the BKA through HCW seems to be a strategy to convince the public of their suspect's guilt.

ETA: My comments relate to MM's case and the prosecutors. However, failing to foresee the jurisdiction issue in the five other cases does not engender much confidence in their competence either.

IMO PJ produced multiple errors, and they were (ir)responsible for the circus and totally unprepared from the beginning to not say worse. I was in Lagos that month and I don't even want to remember how messed up it was. But it's already back there.

In relation to other cases, I'm not aware of technical details but would be surprised if they will not progress meanwhile and CB is not convicted in all of them.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

The point I highlighted was to refer that as HCW says and says, FF also says and says...doubts on what he would be able to plant as "alibi". He has to be careful with that...and it may always be "suddenly" destroyed (e.g. content of phone call is known).
Anyway, I have originally thought that if charge comes it would be on murder (may be even "easier" based on material evidence they say they have) but it would be even more "surgical" if it comes on abduction.
But I still think, if no other people of interest come forward, they may be counting, at a limit, to get his confession.

That's fair enough. You've been consistent on the confession point. I don't think it will come. In the other five cases, if they go to court, he would need to be convicted of at least two rapes to receive a sentence of over 15 years (at a guess). Even then, he might get out after ten years and is still only mid-fifties. If he confesses to the murder of MM, this sentence would be added to other convictions, and he would be over 70 by the time he is released - there is no incentive for him to confess.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

IMO PJ produced multiple errors, and they were (ir)responsible for the circus and totally unprepared from the beginning to not say worse. I was in Lagos that month and I don't even want to remember how messed up it was. But it's already back there.

In relation to other cases, I'm not aware of technical details but would be surprised if they will not progress meanwhile and CB is not convicted in all of them.

Some metropolitan police forces well versed in media liaison and strategy might fare better but it's hard to say if any regional police force could be prepared for the media onslaught the PJ were subjected to from 4 May 2007.

We'll see but I think the no-identifiable victim rapes are a tall order. There is a good chance with HaB if there are forensics and the public exposures/assaults are a no-brainer IMO.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

That's fair enough. You've been consistent on the confession point. I don't think it will come. In the other five cases, if they go to court, he would need to be convicted of at least two rapes to receive a sentence of over 15 years (at a guess). Even then, he might get out after ten years and is still only mid-fifties. If he confesses to the murder of MM, this sentence would be added to other convictions, and he would be over 70 by the time he is released - there is no incentive for him to confess.

Not sure if Germany allows him to get out that "easily". He had already a request rejected for the actual conviction the court has said it believes that the convict will commit further offences if released.
CB did what he really wanted for too many years but now he is and will be kept in. It will be hard for him to get parole.

I say confession "just if in despair" and if for better prison conditions (even if always in solitary confinement).

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Not sure if Germany allows him to get out that "easily". He had already a request rejected for the actual conviction the court has said it believes that the convict will commit further offences if released.
CB did what he really wanted for too many years but now he is and will be kept in. It will be hard for him to get parole.

I say confession "just if in despair" and if for better prison conditions (even if always in solitary confinement).

I make my claim based on internet research. In Germany, a typical sentence for murder is 15 years. Only severe offences would carry a higher penalty. Again, typically, prisoners are eligible for parole after serving two-thirds of their sentence. Whichever way you dice it, 50 to 60 years of age is a better outcome for CB than 70 to life.

As a relatively young man, the reoffending argument is obviously quite strong. However, parole might be reconsidered after 10 to 15 years of prison time with good behaviour.

With a childhood abandonment, years of physical abuse and significant prison time under his belt, I think CB will have coping mechanisms preventing him from confessing out of despair. He is a transactional thinker: what can I get, what will I lose? He has nothing to gain by confessing.

All MO.

 

[Mex]

What evidence is there that CB was in Luz, HCW admits anyone could have been using the number/ phone registered to CB, see the Ch5 docu posted earlier from 49 minutes in.

I'm not too sure that the Ch5 documentary is an appropriate forum to weigh against the years of work put into the case by the police. And reveals the paucity the of contention made in support of CB one of which was promoting his non-existent alibi.
Snip
But investigative journalist, MWT said there was a "massive problem" with this theory and appeared to disagree with claims against CB.
He said: "As a result of my investigation I can tell you very clearly that neither can they place him using that phone outside the apartment on the evening...they can't even place him using that phone in the days and weeks prior to that."

The documentary will also look into an alibi for the suspect.

Everything you need to know about the new Madeleine McCann documentary

It is had been 15 years since Madeleine McCann's disappearance

www.walesonline.co.uk

We watched this documentary at the time of broadcast and for me it didn't pass the grade even as a murder/mystery entertainment. The MWT presumption to know better than police investigators is quite risible.

 

[Mex]

Personally I'm not so sure about MWT

Neither MWT nor FF have access to the volume of evidence the police have and both are biased in the views they are promoting.

The journalist has a living to make so the more controversial he can make his work the better - although I doubt the Ch5 documentary was a career enhancing moment for him.

The lawyer's client is CB and as such he will promote CB's case to the utmost. But he is on record as not trusting his client with his daughter.

Maddie McCann: Prime suspect's lawyer says 'I'd never let him near my kids'​

The lawyer of CBr, the prime suspect in the disappearance of MM, has admitted he wouldn't trust his client to ever be around his children.

CB's lawyer, FF, told the Mirror if he had a daughter, he would never let him "babysit" her.

Despite CB claiming his innocence in the MM case, FF told the Mirror "I'd let him look after my dogs but I wouldn't let him look after my children or my daughter - if I had them.

"He could be my dog sitter, yes, but because of his record I would not let him look after my own daughter."

Maddie McCann: Prime suspect's lawyer's chilling admission

As police try to nail Brueckner for McCann's murder, his own lawyer has weighed in.

www.nzherald.co.nz

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I'm not too sure that the Ch5 documentary is an appropriate forum to weigh against the years of work put into the case by the police. And reveals the paucity the of contention made in support of CB one of which was promoting his non-existent alibi.
Snip
But investigative journalist, MWT said there was a "massive problem" with this theory and appeared to disagree with claims against CB.
He said: "As a result of my investigation I can tell you very clearly that neither can they place him using that phone outside the apartment on the evening...they can't even place him using that phone in the days and weeks prior to that."

The documentary will also look into an alibi for the suspect.

Everything you need to know about the new Madeleine McCann documentary

It is had been 15 years since Madeleine McCann's disappearance

www.walesonline.co.uk

We watched this documentary at the time of broadcast and for me it didn't pass the grade even as a murder/mystery entertainment. The MWT presumption to know better than police investigators is quite risible.

I don't care for MWT much either, but his investigation does not interest me. It's the interviews that, IMO, provide us with some insight.

His interview with HCW clearly substantiates that they cannot confirm that CB had the phone or the exact location where the call was made - he narrows it down to "... a large area... " More like a pea shooter than a silver bullet!

We've covered the alibi many times before. The response is the same; just like KM invoked her right to remain silent without being charged, so has CB. No one knows if he has an alibi, and we will only find out if he has one in the unlikely scenario as that he is charged.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Neither MWT nor FF have access to the volume of evidence the police have and both are biased in the views they are promoting.

The journalist has a living to make so the more controversial he can make his work the better - although I doubt the Ch5 documentary was a career enhancing moment for him.

The lawyer's client is CB and as such he will promote CB's case to the utmost. But he is on record as not trusting his client with his daughter.

Maddie McCann: Prime suspect's lawyer says 'I'd never let him near my kids'​

The lawyer of CBr, the prime suspect in the disappearance of MM, has admitted he wouldn't trust his client to ever be around his children.

CB's lawyer, FF, told the Mirror if he had a daughter, he would never let him "babysit" her.

Despite CB claiming his innocence in the MM case, FF told the Mirror "I'd let him look after my dogs but I wouldn't let him look after my children or my daughter - if I had them.

"He could be my dog sitter, yes, but because of his record I would not let him look after my own daughter."

Maddie McCann: Prime suspect's lawyer's chilling admission

As police try to nail Brueckner for McCann's murder, his own lawyer has weighed in.

www.nzherald.co.nz

I'm sure CB will be relieved to know that his lawyer has common sense.

What is your point with this post?

 

[Mex]

There is a difference between supporting CB’s innocence and questioning his guilt.

As they say, talk is cheap but that’s all we have from the prosecutor. Your choice to believe it; miy choice to be sceptical.

Your opinion is yours and you are perfectly entitled to it.

My opinion is not really mine. Rather it is based on the many, many hours spent by the international police keeping filth off our streets and out of our homes as part of their job to protect women and children.

I respect the presumption of innocence and I rely on the evidence worked on by law enforcement to protect the innocent from the guilty decided by due process.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Your opinion is yours and you are perfectly entitled to it.

My opinion is not really mine. Rather it is based on the many, many hours spent by the international police keeping filth off our streets and out of our homes as part of their job to protect women and children.

I respect the presumption of innocence and I rely on the evidence worked on by law enforcement to protect the innocent from the guilty decided by due process.

That's part of their job.

Another part of it is to prove BARD that they have the correct offender, not proclaim guilt in the media before trial - that is not due process, it's a publicity campaign.

If your point is that you want to see the correct criminal/s convicted for MM's disappearance, then I agree with you entirely.

 

[Mex]

IMO, the German prosecutors presented a sensationalised version of their case to the public and led us to believe a charge was imminent. They have used the media to tell a story that they have a suspect who is the correct type of offender for this crime. They have proclaimed his guilt without presenting their evidence or testing it in court. The Arade Dam search continued this strategy: designed to convince as much as investigate.

The only reason the investigators and prosecutors haven't received the wrath of the media is because of the history of the case; please compare it to the treatment of the Portuguese investigators before any of their work or theories were published - the inconsistency is remarkable.

IMO, how the case has unfolded is a failure of epic proportions. I feel as though the prosecutors have been unprofessional at best and deceitful at worst. I am critical of their work and make no apologies for it.

Thank you for that enlightening statement to which I can only add comment thanking the powers that be for the attributes which allowed German law enforcement to have kept a man (and no doubt many others just like him) off the streets and thus safeguarding women and children from his crimes.

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner is denied parole and branded a 'danger to society'​

CB is currently serving seven years in jail for raping a pensioner in Praia da Luz and had become eligible for parole after serving half of his sentence, taking into account time spent on remand.

But the Mirror reports that the panel are thought to have found a high risk of reoffending, concluding that his 'social prognosis' meant he had to stay locked up in Kiel, north Germany.

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner claims he was with woman

German national Christian Brueckner, 45, insists he was having sex with a woman in his camper van when three-year-old Madeleine McCann disappeared in Praia da Luz, Portugal, in 2007.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Mex]

I don't care for MWT much either, but his investigation does not interest me. It's the interviews that, IMO, provide us with some insight.

His interview with HCW clearly substantiates that they cannot confirm that CB had the phone or the exact location where the call was made - he narrows it down to "... a large area... " More like a pea shooter than a silver bullet!

We've covered the alibi many times before. The response is the same; just like KM invoked her right to remain silent without being charged, so has CB. No one knows if he has an alibi, and we will only find out if he has one in the unlikely scenario as that he is charged.

The alibi is an irrelevance. It does not exist.

Reading back on your posts you have failed to grasp the elementary and fatal error made by the first Portuguese investigators who tried to fit the evidence to their theory. Since their theory was insupportable - they were doomed to failure. It is possible missing MM paid the price for that investigative failure.

The current German led initiative has been evidence led right from the beginning.
That is self explanatory and requires no further embellishment except for the fact the evidence points to no-one other than CB which has made him the only suspect.
My opinion