Germany/Portugal - Christian Brueckner, 27 @ time of 1st crime (2004), charged with sexual assault crimes, Praia de Rocha, Portugal. #2

[Anxala]

Having thought a little about the case so far, I think it will come down to single focus

It seems to be common cause that the rape of the american woman, and HaB rape now charged are committed by the same attacker. There are too many unusual signatures of the attack for them to be different people.

FF is saying, that therefore CB must be excluded from both, because he does not have the mark that HaB states the attacker has.

The problem is that CB was already convicted in the previous case, including via forensics, and in general there is a legal principle (at least in the UK and US) that the previous conviction are determinative of that issue and can't be relitigated. The previous court also found that the testimony of the two witnesses as regards the video they watched was reliable.

For this reason, even if HaB is wrong about the mark on the attacker - i think CB is quite likely to be convicted. It seems highly unlikely there is some other attacker out there who did the HaB rape but not the one CB is already convicted of.

Whether the Court can make a finding inconsistent with the previous verdict i do not know.

At the end of the day though, it seems this case won't tell us much about MM.

I'm sorry to labour the point (I questioned this before and was none the wiser after the explanations provided but didn't pursue it, thinking it must just be me, failing to see what seemed to be obvious to others) but I'm still not seeing the significance of the mark in the case of DM. I can see why FF would be pushing for wrong id in the HaB case but what relevance has this alleged mark got in the case of DM?

If anyone has an explanation that can be reduced down to something a five year old would understand, I'd really appreciate it. Sorry in advance for being possibly terminally dim.

Otherwise, agree that the MO is too similiar for the two rapes to involve two separate attackers.

 

[RichardKimble]

If this particular case is as clear cut as it appears, why was he not prosecuted at the time ?

Wasn't he extradited to Germany after this but not charged?

 

[Davieson]

Wasn't he extradited to Germany after this but not charged?

Would a Portuguese case not take precedent over an extradition request ?

 

[RichardKimble]

Would a Portuguese case not take precedent over an extradition requests

Job to know what was actually happening .

 

[mrjitty]

I'm sorry to labour the point (I questioned this before and was none the wiser after the explanations provided but didn't pursue it, thinking it must just be me, failing to see what seemed to be obvious to others) but I'm still not seeing the significance of the mark in the case of DM. I can see why FF would be pushing for wrong id in the HaB case but what relevance has this alleged mark got in the case of DM?

If anyone has an explanation that can be reduced down to something a five year old would understand, I'd really appreciate it. Sorry in advance for being possibly terminally dim.

Otherwise, agree that the MO is too similiar for the two rapes to involve two separate attackers.

It's not that they can re-litigate the DM case. Rather FF is saying, because of the mark that HaB saw, the guy who did both rapes must be a different offender.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

It's not that they can re-litigate the DM case. Rather FF is saying, because of the mark that HaB saw, the guy who did both rapes must be a different offender.

^I haven’t read this.

I think FF is saying that due to the MO, the BKA are convinced it is the same offender, as Anxala points out.

However, because the mark is key evidence in identifying the attacker in the HaB case, CB is ruled out of this crime.

Therefore, by virtue of the attacker being the same person, CB cannot have committed either crime.

He acknowledges that it’s unlikely a retrial in the DM case will be allowed but I don’t think that prevents him from arguing that CB was not responsible. He is expressing doubt on what he sees as the two key pieces of evidence in the HaB case: the MO and the scar. What else could the prosecution have - FF has seen the evidence.

 

[Anxala]

It's not that they can re-litigate the DM case. Rather FF is saying, because of the mark that HaB saw, the guy who did both rapes must be a different offender.

Thanks, yeah, I've finally gotten it. Just after I'd posted my appeal for clarity, FF's point and position finally clicked in.

Just to clarify for myself, his position is that if HaB is mistaken about CB, based on this mark/the absence of this mark, but the MO continues to point to the same perpetrator of both rapes, then it can't be CB and must be someone else entirely.

Right?

 

[mrjitty]

Thanks, yeah, I've finally gotten it. Just after I'd posted my appeal for clarity, FF's point and position finally clicked in.

Just to clarify for myself, his position is that if HaB is mistaken about CB, based on this mark/the absence of this mark, but the MO continues to point to the same perpetrator of both rapes, then it can't be CB and must be someone else entirely.

Right?

Correct.

It's a big problem for FF that CB has already been convicted of a rape with a very similar and unusual MO - because that verdict is Res Judicata. If the Court thinks both crimes were committed by the same person, then logically CB is guilty.

So FF is saying hang about, HaB clearly identified someone else - so there is a big mistake here and the 'real' offender must still be out there.

 

[mrjitty]

^I haven’t read this.

I think FF is saying that due to the MO, the BKA are convinced it is the same offender, as Anxala points out.

However, because the mark is key evidence in identifying the attacker in the HaB case, CB is ruled out of this crime.

Therefore, by virtue of the attacker being the same person, CB cannot have committed either crime.

He acknowledges that it’s unlikely a retrial in the DM case will be allowed but I don’t think that prevents him from arguing that CB was not responsible. He is expressing doubt on what he sees as the two key pieces of evidence in the HaB case: the MO and the scar. What else could the prosecution have - FF has seen the evidence.

The problem for FF is that the trial court must accept the verdict in the DM case, and seeing the MO is so unusual and similar, that means CB must be guilty, IMO.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

The problem for FF is that the trial court must accept the verdict in the DM case, and seeing the MO is so unusual and similar, that means CB must be guilty, IMO.

The description of the attackers is quite different in the two cases. If CB’s writing is to be believed. DM described a thick set, dark skinned man whereas HaB’s description fits CB except the scar.

 

[Jenesaisquoi]

When (month/year) were the DM and HB attacks? Could there be seasonal variation in the appearance of the attacker? Eg pasty-white ex-con vs tanned, outdoorsy person?

 

[RichardKimble]

When (month/year) were the DM and HB attacks? Could there be seasonal variation in the appearance of the attacker? Eg pasty-white ex-con vs tanned, outdoorsy person?

September for the DM case and according to the charges on page 1 of this thread June for HaB.

Hazel Behan (20 @ time/now 39) (in her home, June 16, 2004, Praia de Rocha on the Algarve coast, 10 miles from Praia de Luz, Portimao, Portugal) - *Christian Stefan Brückner (Bruekner) (27 @ time of 1st crime (2004)/45/now 46)

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brückner fled police in 1995

German had first conviction for child sexual abuse while a teenager and fled Germany for Portugal

www.theguardian.com

His most serious conviction was for a disturbing sexual attack on a woman at the other end of the age spectrum, however: the rape of a 72-year-old American woman whose flat was on the 1km route between his house and the beach which he walked every day. The attack took place on 2 September 2005, and according to court documents seen by the Guardian, it was planned in detail.

 

[RichardKimble]

I guess we'll hear more tomorrow.

 

[Mex]

If this particular case is as clear cut as it appears, why was he not prosecuted at the time ?

CB was subject to a European Arrest Warrant for a serious crime against a child when he was arrested for the alleged offence against children in the playground.

Is there a protocol of precedence amongst national police forces for serious offences against children by an habitual offender? Did the Portuguese authorities grant priority to German investigators or did the EAW being in force dictate that it would be dealt with before the Portuguese allegation was addressed. I simply do not know. But I think it pretty obvious that there was co-operation between both authorities to enable the charge against to be made in Germany along with the other offences CB is alleged to have committed in Portugal and for which he is on trial.
My opinion

 

[Mex]

The description of the attackers is quite different in the two cases. If CB’s writing is to be believed. DM described a thick set, dark skinned man whereas HaB’s description fits CB except the scar.

I didn't know that DM had given a description of her assailant. I thought she had been blindfolded throughout her ordeal.


For HB, the court will have to rule on the alleged surgery carried out on his thigh.

Snip
Following an attack on a woman he allegedly held a knife point, CB had a birthmark removed, evidence in court suggests.

The victim described the birthmark to officers who then allegedly found scarring in the spot.

It was claimed that the scar was found on an earlier scan of the convicted rapist.

"When CB was examined during his current imprisonment they found a scar where the birthmark should have been," a source told The Sun.

"They then went back through the records and found a body scan of CB done by German investigators.

"Crucially, photos of his entire body were taken and at that time he had a significant birthmark on his left upper thigh at hip level."

Madeleine McCann suspect 'had surgery to disguise identity' after alleged rape

The 47-year-old suspect is on trial for a series of sex offences between 2000 and 2017

www.gbnews.com

 

[UK Girl]

I assume we cant link to podcasts on here? As Jc has given one to a British show this week

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I didn't know that DM had given a description of her assailant. I thought she had been blindfolded throughout her ordeal.


For HB, the court will have to rule on the alleged surgery carried out on his thigh.

Snip
Following an attack on a woman he allegedly held a knife point, CB had a birthmark removed, evidence in court suggests.

The victim described the birthmark to officers who then allegedly found scarring in the spot.

It was claimed that the scar was found on an earlier scan of the convicted rapist.

"When CB was examined during his current imprisonment they found a scar where the birthmark should have been," a source told The Sun.

"They then went back through the records and found a body scan of CB done by German investigators.

"Crucially, photos of his entire body were taken and at that time he had a significant birthmark on his left upper thigh at hip level."

Madeleine McCann suspect 'had surgery to disguise identity' after alleged rape

The 47-year-old suspect is on trial for a series of sex offences between 2000 and 2017

www.gbnews.com

IIRC, it was CB’s letter to JR. He made reference to him not matching the description of the attacker and alluded to the single hair being planted.

 

[JB1510]

It’s from last Autumn but only recently uploaded and the second part was not followed up unfortunately which would have detailed CB activities.

I assume we cant link to podcasts on here? As Jc has given one to a British show this week

 

[Lilly b]

Looks like ms is up in court first today

 

[Niner]

Friday, March 1st:
*Trial continues (Day 3) (@ 9am CET) – Germany/Portugal - Hazel Behan (20 @ time/now 40) (in her home, June 16, 2004, Praia de Rocha on the Algarve coast, 10 miles from Praia de Luz, Portimao, Portugal) - *Christian Stefan Brückner (Bruekner) (27 @ time of 1st crime (2004)/45/now 47) charged (Oct. 11, 2022) with sexual assault (suspect held a knife & brutally raped her. The accused then tied & gagged the woman to a table & raped her again. He then whipped the victim on the back with a whip he had brought with him & finally forcibly performed oral sex with the victim. The accused filmed large parts of the events with a video camera he had brought with him). Braunschweig Regional District Court
Germany/Portugal – *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 - a 14 year old teenager (assaulted/hit the naked girl with a whip. Said to have brutally forced the girl to have oral sex. The accused also videotaped this act). Took place between Dec. 28, 2000 to April 8, 2006 on the Praia da Luz, Algarve coast, Portugal.
Germany/Portugal - *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 - an elderly woman 70-80 yrs old a Tour Rep (tied up & raped the victim in her holiday apt. He then hit the victim several times with a whip. The accused is said to have recorded the entire event with a video camera). Took place around the same time (between Dec. 28, 2000 to April 8, 2006) on the Praia de Luz, Algarve coast, Portugal.
Germany/Portugal – *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 - 10 year old German girl (Joana E.) (wearing only shoes & otherwise naked. He grabbed the child's wrist & began to perform masturbation movements on his naked penis). On Salema (Zalema) beach, near Praia de Luz, Portugal, April 7, 2007).
Germany/Portugal – *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 - 11 year old Portuguese girl (pulled down his trousers & underpants & made masturbation movements on his naked penis in order to sexually arouse himself, until the frightened girl ran to her father for help. The suspect was arrested on the spot by the Portuguese police). Exposed himself in playpark, São Bartolomeu de Messines, June 11, 2017).
Trial began on February 16, 2024. (And continued on 2/23, 3/1)
Trial dates: March 1, March 14, April 3, 5, 10, 12, 17, 19, 24, 25, May 2, 3 8, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 28, 29, June 4, 5 6, 25, 26 & June 27, 2024. Expected to last up to 3 months.
Presiding judge Dr. Engemann. Prosecutor Ute Lindermann. Defense attorneys Dr. Friedrich Fülscher, Philipp Marquort, Dennis Bock & Atilla Aykac.
Brueckner is currently serving a 7 year sentence for the 2005 rape on a pensioner. While he is still the main suspect in Madeleine case, these above cases will be tried first & he will be charged with Madeleine later (maybe!)
Case info & charges & Brueckner info from June 1, 2020 thru January 18, 2024 & Trial Day 1 (Feb. 16, 2024) reference post #396 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...imes-praia-de-rocha-portugal-2.704227/page-10
Jan. 18, 2024 Update: More than 40 witnesses have been called in to testify, including up to half a dozen ex-lovers of Brueckner & a string of old acquaintances & friends. The last scheduled witness is a specialist in forensic psychology, Dr Christian Riedemann, who will take to the stand on June 27, 2024.
Feb. 23, 2024 Trial Day 2: Defense opening statement by Friedrich Fülscher & Ute Lindemann opened the prosecution case. Brueckner as details of his alleged sex crimes were detailed for the first time by prosecutor.
After reading the charges, Brückner's team of defense lawyers requested that three more witnesses be invited to the 40 that had been scheduled so far. Page post #535: It's about Inga Gehricke (then 5), who attended a barbecue in a forest in 2015 Saxony-Anhalt disappeared. Why? Because the defense made a surprising request on the second day of the trial. Defender Dr. Friedrich Fülscher demanded in process, that evidence brought up by the prosecutor against Brückner must not be used. Specifically, it is about two Word files that were found on a USB stick of the accused. In the texts with the file names „ Mother-daughter story “ and „ Zofengeschichte “, the accused fantasizes about the kidnapping of children & rape. According to Fülscher, this evidence was secured during a „ fingered search measure “ on Brückner's property in Saxony-Anhalt – and was therefore worthless. Because there was no permit to search the property, the police tricked. According to police files, a neighbor was on 14. Walk with his dog on January 2016. This is said to have run through a hole in the fence on Brückner's property and dug it. The witness followed his dog & then noticed a piece of fabric protruding from the ground and a smell of decay. Then he called the police. The officials should then a. found a Lidl bag with a case. Inside: six USB sticks and two SD cards with texts, videos and child *advertiser censored* photos. Attorney Fülscher: „Utilization of the found files would violate the principles of a fair trial. “
For more info see posts #473 (article) on page 24 & #483 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...imes-praia-de-rocha-portugal-2.704227/page-25
Trial continues on Friday, March. 1, 2024. The first witnesses, a German woman, who became a close friend of Brueckner & a man, who lived for long periods in Spain & Portugal, are due to give evidence next Friday.