Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect #32

[Tekno]

Can you summarise?

I can't find anything new in the local papers today

Despite global headlines to the contrary yesterday, a date had not yet been set for a hearing of the five charges that were levelled at the convicted pedophile, 46, in October last year. The chief prosecutor in the case has told the Olive Press it is 'merely an issue of jurisdiction' and the trial will 'certainly' still go ahead. <modsnip>

 

[RichardKimble]

EXCLUSIVE: Madeleine McCann suspect sex crimes trial will STILL go ahead - Olive Press News Spain

A SEX offences trial of Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner in Germany has not been cancelled. Despite global headlines to the contrary

www.theolivepress.es

Some new information here.

Can you summarise?

I can't find anything new in the local papers today

There seems to be a lot of police sources talk .

 

[RichardKimble]

About the supposed photo , direct quote attributed to Wolters Jan 2022.


German prosecutor Wolters said last year they were 100% sure that Brueckner was responsible but admitted all the evidence so far compiled was circumstantial

He said: 'It is circumstantial evidence – we have no scientific evidence..

'If we had a video of the act or a picture of Madeleine dead with Brueckner on camera, we wouldn't have had to make a public appeal. But we only have circumstantial evidence.'

But he also admitted prosecutors have no proof Madeleine is dead, any idea how she died and no evidence linking Brueckner to her alleged murder.

'We have no body and no DNA but we have other evidence. Based on the evidence we have, it leads to no other conclusion.

'I can't tell you on which basis we assume she is dead. But for us, there's no other possibility. There is no hope she is alive.'

Maddie suspect says he could NOT have snatched the three-year-old

Convicted rapist Christian Brueckner said his illegal activities on the Algarve in Portugal meant he would not have been out and about when the three-year-old went missing from her holiday villa.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[UK Girl]

There seems to be a lot of police sources talk .

the problem is the article that was about what happened in court is totally different to what HCW is saying in the Olive Press article.

 

[RichardKimble]

Some one else has popped up.

Former Madeleine McCann investigator slams German prosecutors for their handling of suspect Christian Brueckner, saying 'they don't have any solid evidence against him'​

An investigator hired by the missing toddler's family in 2007 said the court's decision shows that the prosecutors have 'no solid evidence' against Brueckner.

Former Madeleine McCann investigator slams German prosecutors

A former Madeleine McCann investigator has slammed German prosecutors for dismissing claims against the lead suspect in the disappearance of the British girl.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[frank-cole]

I don't want to think about the kind of people CB may have associated with - online or otherwise - and the material they may exchange. Luckily I don't have to think about it. But I can already think of problems with trying to use photos as evidence, and I'm not a top lawyer like FF. I'm not any kind of lawyer. FF will have lots of ammunition, if it is a photo that's being relied on. I know you only used that as a for example, and that may not be what HCW is relying on. But I remain unconvinced there is any such kind of evidence - if there was, in a case as high profile as this one, I can't see how it could have remained hidden for all this time.

I'm impressed by your faith in him, and respect it. I understand the wish to see a solution to MM's disappearance, of course. But it's judges the prosecutors have to convince, not the public. That's a completely different task imo I think if there are ever any charges re: MM once it gets to court the evidence HCW has so far been hinting at won't exist. It'll all be circumstantial (imo)

IMO, however weak or strong FF’s competence as a lawyer may, be he won’t be anywhere near as skilled or informed as the prosecutors he’ll comes up against. The challenge he faces is the evidence. It’s relatively easy and not particularly beneficial to win a legislative or technicality battle. It’s far more challenging when evidence is argued in court.

I genuinely think it’ll be impossible for CB to end up not being convicted of MM’s murder. It’s clearly a long road, but I think inevitably, the best he’ll do for CB is a deal. Confession & location of remains for a better prison.

Just MO

 

[UK Girl]

IMO, however weak or strong FF’s competence as a lawyer may, be he won’t be anywhere near as skilled or informed as the prosecutors he’ll comes up against. The challenge he faces is the evidence. It’s relatively easy and not particularly beneficial to win a legislative or technicality battle. It’s far more challenging when evidence is argued in court.

I genuinely think it’ll be impossible for CB to end up not being convicted of MM’s murder. It’s clearly a long road, but I think inevitably, the best he’ll do for CB is a deal. Confession & location of remains for a better prison.

Just MO

depending on whether they really do have the evidence to prove their case of course. Considering it apparently wasnt even set up in the right juridsiction doesnt fill me with confidence.

 

[Lyall0814]

IMO, however weak or strong FF’s competence as a lawyer may, be he won’t be anywhere near as skilled or informed as the prosecutors he’ll comes up against. The challenge he faces is the evidence. It’s relatively easy and not particularly beneficial to win a legislative or technicality battle. It’s far more challenging when evidence is argued in court.

I genuinely think it’ll be impossible for CB to end up not being convicted of MM’s murder. It’s clearly a long road, but I think inevitably, the best he’ll do for CB is a deal. Confession & location of remains for a better prison.

Just MO

FF wouldn't have to be skilled or informed himself, he'll have experts queuing up to give evidence in a case as high profile as this. The evidence will have to be very strong. I'm sure the prosecutors know whatever they have will be thoroughly examined. I think HCW was hoping much more would emerge after his appeal in 2020.

 

[Anxala]

For example; he had a photo of MM deceased on his device.

The problem with this as a possibility is that if such a pic existed, her parents would have had to be notified and given access to it. No way in the world could such a piece of evidence exist without them being privy to it, not least for ID purposes. And clearly, this has not happened, which also clearly suggests the clear improbability of such a piece of evidence existing, let alone it being a crucial part of HCW's many 'if you knew what I know' claims.

So many claims, so many months, so little substance and now, not even one single charge successfully under his belt.

And apart from anything else, if the case, Operation Grange would no longer be operating and receiving funding under a missing person remit.

 

[Dave55]

The problem with this as a possibility is that if such a pic existed, her parents would have had to be notified and given access to it. No way in the world could such a piece of evidence exist without them being privy to it, not least for ID purposes. And clearly, this has not happened, which also clearly suggests the clear improbability of such a piece of evidence existing, let alone it being a crucial part of HCW's many 'if you knew what I know' claims.

So many claims, so many months, so little substance and now, not even one single charge successfully under his belt.

And apart from anything else, if the case, Operation Grange would no longer be operating and receiving funding under a missing person remit.

A picture or probably a video fits in with everything Wolters has said...and it's not a given that he would have had to share it with the parents.

 

[Malleux]

The problem with this as a possibility is that if such a pic existed, her parents would have had to be notified and given access to it. No way in the world could such a piece of evidence exist without them being privy to it, not least for ID purposes. And clearly, this has not happened

How do you come to that conclusion?

Not trying to be being argumentative or owt, but hypothetically if such a photo did exist and it had been shown to the parents, wouldn't that kind of information be kept top secret from the public? Not only for the purpose of the case but in the parents' best interests?

 

[Davieson]

How do you come to that conclusion?

Not trying to be being argumentative or owt, but hypothetically if such a photo did exist and it had been shown to the parents, wouldn't that kind of information be kept top secret from the public? Not only for the purpose of the case but in the parents' best interests?

What do you see as the parents best interest ? As they are still pushing their Madeleine fund, may this not expose them to a charge of fraud ?

 

[UK Girl]

How do you come to that conclusion?

Not trying to be being argumentative or owt, but hypothetically if such a photo did exist and it had been shown to the parents, wouldn't that kind of information be kept top secret from the public? Not only for the purpose of the case but in the parents' best interests?

The parents still seem to have some faint hope that she is alive though and yes they are still collecting for the fund which would be wrong if they have proof that she is dead.

 

[Malleux]

What do you see as the parents best interest ? As they are still pushing their Madeleine fund, may this not expose them to a charge of fraud ?

What do you mean by "pushing" the fund?

I'm just saying - hypothetically - if the parents did actually know more than what has been let on in the press - important evidence which has to be kept secret for the trial - wouldn't it make sense they have to appear to continue as normal and not let on what they've been told about?

 

[Davieson]

What do you mean by "pushing" the fund?

I'm just saying - hypothetically - if the parents did actually know more than what has been let on in the press - important evidence which has to be kept secret for the trial - wouldn't it make sense they have to appear to continue as normal and not let on what they've been told about?

Promoting it via their Madeleine website.

 

[UK Girl]

What do you mean by "pushing" the fund?

I'm just saying - hypothetically - if the parents did actually know more than what has been let on in the press - important evidence which has to be kept secret for the trial - wouldn't it make sense they have to appear to continue as normal and not let on what they've been told about?

it would still be fraud taking money though surely? They could simply have taken the site down but have not done this.

 

[Malleux]

Promoting it via their Madeleine website. What do you mean by best interest?

Fair enough but even taking that on board, the evidence (even a photo of what looks to be MM deceased) might not be conclusive enough for them to abandon all hope. And going back to the original point about protecting the trial and the parents, how would it look if they did shut the fund down in light of this current investigation? Isn't that effectively them saying CB is guilty and they know it? That's what I mean by the parents interests. Such a move would lead the tabloids to have a field day speculating about what they'd been told about.

 

[UK Girl]

Fair enough but even taking that on board, the evidence (even a photo of what looks to be MM deceased) might not be conclusive enough for them to abandon all hope. And going back to the original point about protecting the trial and the parents, how would it look if they did shut the fund down in light of this current investigation? Isn't that effectively them saying CB is guilty and they know it? That's what I mean by the parents interests. Such a move would lead the tabloids to have a field day speculating about what they'd been told about.

but it would still be fraud though and come to that it would be wrong if Og were taking money if they 100% knew she was dead.

 

[Davieson]

Fair enough but even taking that on board, the evidence (even a photo of what looks to be MM deceased) might not be conclusive enough for them to abandon all hope. And going back to the original point about protecting the trial and the parents, how would it look if they did shut the fund down in light of this current investigation? Isn't that effectively them saying CB is guilty and they know it? That's what I mean by the parents interests. Such a move would lead the tabloids to have a field day speculating about what they'd been told about.

Not at all. Madeleine can be dead and CB innocent. As far as one can tell, no evidencial connection between the two has been demonstrated.

 

[frank-cole]

The problem with this as a possibility is that if such a pic existed, her parents would have had to be notified and given access to it. No way in the world could such a piece of evidence exist without them being privy to it, not least for ID purposes. And clearly, this has not happened, which also clearly suggests the clear improbability of such a piece of evidence existing, let alone it being a crucial part of HCW's many 'if you knew what I know' claims.

So many claims, so many months, so little substance and now, not even one single charge successfully under his belt.

And apart from anything else, if the case, Operation Grange would no longer be operating and receiving funding under a missing person remit.

I understand your point but I politely disagree for a number of reasons. We don’t know what the McCann’s have been told or have been shown, it’s only something we can speculate about. In their last statement they did acknowledge that ‘ a truly horrific crime has been committed. These things will remain.’ that would suggest that they have been made aware of some of the evidence. Simple logic draws the obvious conclusion if they hadn’t been given details they wouldn’t have made that comment. It could well be photographic. IMO that’s the most likely form of non-forensic material evidence they’ll have. HCW said that they wouldn’t have needed the public’s help if they had ‘a video of the act or a picture with the suspect on camera’ - that again points to the likeliness that they have something photographic or videod but it doesn’t feature victim & suspect. It also matches the suspects MO & fits the timing of the 2018 evidence they found, shortly before the crime was listed as ‘mord’ - murder. Amongst the items found were USB sticks containing pictures and videos.

The challenge IMO is closing the gap between confession - phone triangulation - material evidence. There lies a few opportunities for the defence to sow doubt. It’s not a stretch to conclude that the man who confessed to the crime, used his phone & was seen in the area, took the picture they found. However this again leave’s opportunity for a counter argument, hence the targeted approach to corroborate he was at the scene. Finding he called him is one of a number of ways they could do that. Incidentally they haven’t been vocal about finding the caller for some time. IMO it’s because they no longer require anybody to further corroborate he was in the area. There’d have been many tourist photos in circulation & some not. IMO there would have been a photo or video that exists with CB in the area that night. I wouldn’t be surprised if they found it.

Just my MO - thanks for the reply