Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #34

[Taskforce88]

A 43-year-old German prisoner who travelled around Portugal in a camper van is now the focus of Scotland Yard's investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

New suspect identified in Madeleine McCann case

List of case players by initials and their relationship to this discussion

Thread #1 Thread #2 Thread #3 Thread #4 Thread #5 Thread #6 Thread #7 Thread #8 Thread #9 Thread #10 Thread #11 Thread #12 Thread #13 Thread #14 Thread #15 Thread #16 Thread #17 Thread #18 Thread #19 Thread #20 Thread #21 Thread #22 Thread #23 Thread #24 Thread #25 Thread #26 Thread #27 Thread #28 Thread #29 Thread #30 Thread #31 Thread #32 Thread #33

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

This thread is dedicated to discussion of CB as the suspect in Madeleine's case.

The thread is NOT for rehashing anything to do with the McCanns who were formally cleared.

Members who persist in bringing up the suggestion or possibility of the McCanns being responsibile for their daughter's disappearance will have posts removed and may face a temporary or permanent loss of posting privileges.

 

[Sillybilly]

Please continue discussion here.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Several people have posted that omissions from HCW’s comments point to the fact that he has a photo of MM. in other words, he has a photo based on what he hasn’t said.

HCW has stated that he thinks she died shortly after she disappeared in Portugal and that CB killed her, in Portugal.

Now we’re discussing the the sale of MM to paedo rings in Morocco.

I don’t understand how some of the things HCW has said (or hasn’t said) give wait to what people believe yet some of the things he has clearly stated are dismissed.

Either you believe the guy or you don’t.

 

[misty48]

Several people have posted that omissions from HCW’s comments point to the fact that he has a photo of MM. in other words, he has a photo based on what he hasn’t said.

HCW has stated that he thinks she died shortly after she disappeared in Portugal and that CB killed her, in Portugal.

Now we’re discussing the the sale of MM to paedo rings in Morocco.

I don’t understand how some of the things HCW has said (or hasn’t said) give wait to what people believe yet some of the things he has clearly stated are dismissed.

Either you believe the guy or you don’t.

I'm not sure how you can come to any other conclusion, using HCW's words, than that BKA has a photo (or video) showing a dead Madeleine if the evidence is concrete.
HCW has said they don't know how Madeleine died.
HCW has said they don't know which day she died.
HCW was originally unsure which country she died in.
BKA has no body and no forensic evidence of death.
Witness testimonies do not appear to have provided the answers to any of those issues, neither have die Bücher presumably.
Whilst a picture (image) may paint 1000 words, only the photographer can verbally describe what it represents in a criminal court.
MOO

 

[Jenesaisquoi]

Oh god, misty. Looks so stark to see it written.

Digital image? Or print off of digital? Or film camera?

Have digital images always had geolocation available, or can that be somehow stripped and not available to LE?

If film camera, where would the prints have been developed?

If print out of digital, where would that have been done? Casting my mind back, I am sure I personally had access to computers before such easy access to my own printer.

 

[Mex]

Several people have posted that omissions from HCW’s comments point to the fact that he has a photo of MM. in other words, he has a photo based on what he hasn’t said.

HCW has stated that he thinks she died shortly after she disappeared in Portugal and that CB killed her, in Portugal.

Now we’re discussing the the sale of MM to paedo rings in Morocco.

I don’t understand how some of the things HCW has said (or hasn’t said) give wait to what people believe yet some of the things he has clearly stated are dismissed.

Either you believe the guy or you don’t.

I believe the evidence is there which justifies CB being the prime suspect in MM’s disappearance as far as SY and the BKA are concerned.

That compelling evidence exists, is further compounded by the fact that the PJ have made him an arguido.

This is a seriously important development. At one time concrete evidence was not required to do this, all that was needed was a policeman’s gut reaction or unsupported theory. This all changed with the introduction of changes to Portuguese law in September 2007.

As indicated here -

Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a Portuguese lawyer on the McCanns’ defence team, said that under Portugal’s new penal code, police must have more than just suspicions to make somebody an arguido.

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.

"Maybe that is why the investigation took the turn it did - why they were named arguidos eight days before the new laws came in," said Mr Pinto de Abreu.

His comments followed those of Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro, Portugal’s Attorney General, who recently admitted the McCanns may not have been made suspects under the new laws.

"At the time when the McCanns were made 'arguidos' the law did not demand justified suspicions. I do not know if they would be (arguidos) in light of the new Code," he said in an interview with the Portuguese magazine Visao.

Police 'rushed Madeleine McCann case'

www.telegraph.co.uk

__________________________________________________



This change in the law further substantiates the fact that evidence led to SY and BKA making CB their prime suspect, but it led to the PJ also declaring him to be prime suspect for them too. I think claiming “"strong indications" of the practice of a crime.” is indicative of that.

And on balance allows me to answer the question you ask in the affirmative.

__________________________________________________


On 3 May it will be 15 years since Madeleine was reported missing and under Portuguese law it would no longer be possible to declare someone a person of interest beyond this date. Declaring someone a person of interest is a necessary step to any criminal charges.

In its statement, though, Portugal's office of public prosecutions said the move was not driven by timing, but by "strong indications" of the practice of a crime.

Madeleine McCann: Christian Brueckner declared formal suspect - BBC News

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I'm not sure how you can come to any other conclusion, using HCW's words, than that BKA has a photo (or video) showing a dead Madeleine if the evidence is concrete.
HCW has said they don't know how Madeleine died.
HCW has said they don't know which day she died.
HCW was originally unsure which country she died in.
BKA has no body and no forensic evidence of death.
Witness testimonies do not appear to have provided the answers to any of those issues, neither have die Bücher presumably.
Whilst a picture (image) may paint 1000 words, only the photographer can verbally describe what it represents in a criminal court.
MOO

We’ve discussed this many times on the forum and it depends on the definition of ‘concrete’ in a German legal context.

Do the following meet the requirement of concrete in the above definition:

1. Witness statements
2. Phone records
3. Written documents
4. Digital communications
5. Prior relevant crimes

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Oh god, misty. Looks so stark to see it written.

Digital image? Or print off of digital? Or film camera?

Have digital images always had geolocation available, or can that be somehow stripped and not available to LE?

If film camera, where would the prints have been developed?

If print out of digital, where would that have been done? Casting my mind back, I am sure I personally had access to computers before such easy access to my own printer.

RSBM

The details on EXIF data can be found in the below link. IMO, if CB took photos of MM on a digital camera, the photos would have embedded EXIF data.

As I understand it, this data can be removed intentionally and/or lost as images are uploaded or downloaded from the internet.

If there is an image of MM deceased, it was likely a digital image and we can be fairly certain that it doesn’t have EXIF data attached because if it did HCW would be able to state with certainty the date, time and exact location the photo was taken.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I believe the evidence is there which justifies CB being the prime suspect in MM’s disappearance as far as SY and the BKA are concerned.

That compelling evidence exists, is further compounded by the fact that the PJ have made him an arguido.

This is a seriously important development. At one time concrete evidence was not required to do this, all that was needed was a policeman’s gut reaction or unsupported theory. This all changed with the introduction of changes to Portuguese law in September 2007.

As indicated here -

Carlos Pinto de Abreu, a Portuguese lawyer on the McCanns’ defence team, said that under Portugal’s new penal code, police must have more than just suspicions to make somebody an arguido.

"On September 15 a new procedural penal code was introduced making it necessary for there to be evidence against the citizen before they could be made an arguido.

"Before this date it wasn’t necessary. You could be made an arguido without actual evidence against you," he said.

"Maybe that is why the investigation took the turn it did - why they were named arguidos eight days before the new laws came in," said Mr Pinto de Abreu.

His comments followed those of Fernando Jose Pinto Monteiro, Portugal’s Attorney General, who recently admitted the McCanns may not have been made suspects under the new laws.

"At the time when the McCanns were made 'arguidos' the law did not demand justified suspicions. I do not know if they would be (arguidos) in light of the new Code," he said in an interview with the Portuguese magazine Visao.

Police 'rushed Madeleine McCann case'

www.telegraph.co.uk

__________________________________________________



This change in the law further substantiates the fact that evidence led to SY and BKA making CB their prime suspect, but it led to the PJ also declaring him to be prime suspect for them too. I think claiming “"strong indications" of the practice of a crime.” is indicative of that.

And on balance allows me to answer the question you ask in the affirmative.

__________________________________________________


On 3 May it will be 15 years since Madeleine was reported missing and under Portuguese law it would no longer be possible to declare someone a person of interest beyond this date. Declaring someone a person of interest is a necessary step to any criminal charges.

In its statement, though, Portugal's office of public prosecutions said the move was not driven by timing, but by "strong indications" of the practice of a crime.

Madeleine McCann: Christian Brueckner declared formal suspect - BBC News

I’m not arguing that there is evidence, I am arguing there is likely no photo evidence.

We know that HCW’s investigation has uncovered:

1. A phone call was made at 7:32pm 3 May 2007, it was from a number that had been used previously by CB and the call may or may not have been made by CB;

2. CB reregistered his Jaguar 4 May 2007;

3. CB has written online that he wants to commit child abuse and murder;

4. There very likely exists a document in which CB possibly details his criminal behaviour and/or desires;

5. CB has committed rapes against women;

6. CB has publicly exposed himself and masturbated in front of children - of of which he grabbed; while doing so.

There is also the statement from HB which is valid for the investigation but wasn’t uncovered by it. We have discussed the alleged tenth anniversary bar confession before and I believe that it is misreporting of HB’s witness statement. If you can find a source showing who this confession was to, please share it.

I agree this information indicates that CB could be the kind of person responsible for MM’s disappearance - it’s a good story and possibility.

But, all of the above could genuinely be coincidence and bs from a sad sicko trying to impress one of his older, criminal mates.

its statement, though, Portugal's office of public prosecutions said the move was not driven by timing, but by "strong indications" of the practice of a crime.

The above quote is interesting. The statement from the Portuguese prosecutors didn’t say,”… the move was not driven by timing” the BBC did. And, the Portuguese prosecutors knew that CB was being investigated as far back as 2019, yet they waited until 14 years and 11 months into a 15 year statute of limitations period before making him an arguido and we are expected to believe it wasn’t driven by timing - oh please, I’m definitely calling bs on that one!

If there was a photo, IMO, there would be a charge. If the evidence was as strong as HCW has suggested, there would be a charge. Going on the info we have, CB won’t be charged for the MM case IMO.

 

[Janosch]

IMO the most interesting words by HCW are:

"Sometimes you have the feeling that you know what happened, but you are not in the position of being able to prove it to charge someone.”

JC's book.

 

[Davieson]

RSBM

The details on EXIF data can be found in the below link. IMO, if CB took photos of MM on a digital camera, the photos would have embedded EXIF data.

As I understand it, this data can be removed intentionally and/or lost as images are uploaded or downloaded from the internet.

If there is an image of MM deceased, it was likely a digital image and we can be fairly certain that it doesn’t have EXIF data attached because if it did HCW would be able to state with certainty the date, time and exact location the photo was taken.

Even that may not be so, because non-phone digital cameras come with a factory setting for date/time and have to be reset by the user. This may or may not be done. Such cameras do not have a location feature.

 

[Mex]

I’m not arguing that there is evidence, I am arguing there is likely no photo evidence.

We know that HCW’s investigation has uncovered:

1. A phone call was made at 7:32pm 3 May 2007, it was from a number that had been used previously by CB and the call may or may not have been made by CB;

2. CB reregistered his Jaguar 4 May 2007;

3. CB has written online that he wants to commit child abuse and murder;

4. There very likely exists a document in which CB possibly details his criminal behaviour and/or desires;

5. CB has committed rapes against women;

6. CB has publicly exposed himself and masturbated in front of children - of of which he grabbed; while doing so.

There is also the statement from HB which is valid for the investigation but wasn’t uncovered by it. We have discussed the alleged tenth anniversary bar confession before and I believe that it is misreporting of HB’s witness statement. If you can find a source showing who this confession was to, please share it.

I agree this information indicates that CB could be the kind of person responsible for MM’s disappearance - it’s a good story and possibility.

But, all of the above could genuinely be coincidence and bs from a sad sicko trying to impress one of his older, criminal mates.


The above quote is interesting. The statement from the Portuguese prosecutors didn’t say,”… the move was not driven by timing” the BBC did. And, the Portuguese prosecutors knew that CB was being investigated as far back as 2019, yet they waited until 14 years and 11 months into a 15 year statute of limitations period before making him an arguido and we are expected to believe it wasn’t driven by timing - oh please, I’m definitely calling bs on that one!

If there was a photo, IMO, there would be a charge. If the evidence was as strong as HCW has suggested, there would be a charge. Going on the info we have, CB won’t be charged for the MM case IMO.

Misty48 has put up a cogent explanation of the difficulties associated with photographic evidence and the provenance thereof.

We are aware that such was used to convict CB and have a custodial sentence handed down to him in another of the interminable cases of which his guilt was proven.

We are aware that a hoard of evidence was found on a pen buried on one of his properties. The contents of which we can speculate about because they haven't been published in any detail. Which means we know nothing about them, but the investigators know it all.

Whether or not the contents comprise part of the evidence claimed by the prosecutors is speculation. But in my opinion it is a fair possibility and we do know visual media was part of the material found.
Misty48 has outlined the difficulties proving such evidence entails even to linking events, locus or participants.

 

[RichardKimble]

Re the photos, lets suppose for this argument that CB is or was found to be in possession of, means nothing if he downloaded from the web, Wolters is sure she's dead but what is clear is that he or the BKA can't link CB to that death .IMO.

 

[RichardKimble]

I'm not sure how you can come to any other conclusion, using HCW's words, than that BKA has a photo (or video) showing a dead Madeleine if the evidence is concrete.
HCW has said they don't know how Madeleine died.
HCW has said they don't know which day she died.
HCW was originally unsure which country she died in.
BKA has no body and no forensic evidence of death.
Witness testimonies do not appear to have provided the answers to any of those issues, neither have die Bücher presumably.
Whilst a picture (image) may paint 1000 words, only the photographer can verbally describe what it represents in a criminal court.
MOO

Using the criteria of what has not been said, he never mentioned dogs in 5a, should that be taken into account ?

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Misty48 has put up a cogent explanation of the difficulties associated with photographic evidence and the provenance thereof.

We are aware that such was used to convict CB and have a custodial sentence handed down to him in another of the interminable cases of which his guilt was proven.

We are aware that a hoard of evidence was found on a pen buried on one of his properties. The contents of which we can speculate about because they haven't been published in any detail. Which means we know nothing about them, but the investigators know it all.

Whether or not the contents comprise part of the evidence claimed by the prosecutors is speculation. But in my opinion it is a fair possibility and we do know visual media was part of the material found.
Misty48 has outlined the difficulties proving such evidence entails even to linking events, locus or participants.

@misty48 has suggested that the only evidence that meets the criteria of ‘concrete’ evidence from HCW’s perspective is a photo. They are wrong.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Re the photos, lets suppose for this argument that CB is or was found to be in possession of, means nothing if he downloaded from the web, Wolters is sure she's dead but what is clear is that he or the BKA can't link CB to that death .IMO.

I agree. If they could, there would very likely have been a charge.

 

[Davieson]

Re the photos, lets suppose for this argument that CB is or was found to be in possession of, means nothing if he downloaded from the web, Wolters is sure she's dead but what is clear is that he or the BKA can't link CB to that death .IMO.

However, Wolters is convinced not only that MM is dead, but that she was murdered by CB, though he doesn't seem to know where or when, so he must have some evidence that leads him to that conclusion.

 

[Mex]

Re the photos, lets suppose for this argument that CB is or was found to be in possession of, means nothing if he downloaded from the web, Wolters is sure she's dead but what is clear is that he or the BKA can't link CB to that death .IMO.

Thank you for your opinion, but I don't think it is as clear cut as you seem to believe.

You are not privy to the work which has been and continues to take place. The investigation knows probably as much as it is necessary to know and I believe they are convinced by it.

 

[RichardKimble]

Thank you for your opinion, but I don't think it is as clear cut as you seem to believe.

You are not privy to the work which has been and continues to take place. The investigation knows probably as much as it is necessary to know and I believe they are convinced by it.

I think my post highlights one of the reasons its not clear cut.