Germany/Portugal - Christian Brueckner, 27 @ time of 1st crime (2004), charged with sexual assault crimes, Praia de Rocha, Portugal. #5

[Mex]

Whatever the back history of investigations, the evidence available was inadequate to achieve conviction.

The proof of the pudding may be if the the appeal court allows the prosecution another trial with judges presiding who understand evidence and the rules involved in its interpretation.

Seldom does it happen that a man with a known unhealthy interest in children is apprehended by an off duty police officer in the process of exhibiting himself to children in a playground with his trousers round his ankles. AND THE PRESIDING JUDGE CONCLUDES THE ''EVIDENCE WAS INADEQUATE TO ACHEIVE CONVICTION''.

Something terribly wrong there; and the fault lies not with the arresting officers, not with investigators, not with the children nor the adults who gave evidence but with a judge who demanded a young girl simulated the act of masturbation in front of a crowded courtroom and in front of a male defence team.
The presiding judge allowed unspeakable lack of care for witnesses in her court room. While all the while denigrating the ordeal of court and the quality of of the witnesses and of the evidence they gave.
My opinion

 

[mrjitty]

Despite the very tiresome and logic-deficient noise on here that continues to try and suggest otherwise, all anyone who's followed this case over the years clearly wants is a conclusion and a conviction, and will be 100% hoping for a charge and a trial.

It's IMO the end of the road unless that happens. And that would be tragic. I'm sure we can all agree on that.

Agreed Anxala!

I want HCW to can it with the out of court accusations and charge his case!

 

[RichardKimble]

Agreed Anxala!

I want HCW to can it with the out of court accusations and charge his case!

It's gonna be a long wait,imo.

 

[Davieson]

It's gonna be a long wait,imo.

It already has been.
7 years since they first picked up on him, courtesy of some snitch, and still nowhere.
Makes you wonder if they have the right person. Well it makes me wonder anyway.

 

[Mex]

It already has been.
7 years since they first picked up on him, courtesy of some snitch, and still nowhere.
Makes you wonder if they have the right person. Well it makes me wonder anyway.

That surely is a new interpretention of events where respondents to police appeals made on behalf of missing children are referred to as ‘‘Some Snitch’’

Unfortunately there was no immediate response regarding the initial subject of the appeal but it did result in one rape survivor having the satisfaction of seeing her case solved and the perpetrator removed to a place where he could not present a danger to women and children for the next few years.

It also led to some cold cases getting their day in court although the actual time allowed for that was relatively short lived from February to October 2024.

So to revisit the repercussions following on from the initial follow through from the activation of the European Arrest Warrant under which he was initially arrested after four years on the run we have

• a successful trial for drug offences committed in Germany​
• a successful trial relating to sexual offences carried out against a minor in Germany​
• a successful trial solving an horrific aggravated torture and rape of an older women which was perpetrated in Portugal​

All carried out by the same criminal who proved to be CB -- and what can't be denied about him is his undoubted versatility when if comes to law breaking.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

It already has been.
7 years since they first picked up on him, courtesy of some snitch, and still nowhere.
Makes you wonder if they have the right person. Well it makes me wonder anyway.

Don't get me wrong, but IMO you are just trying to get re-reaction here and spice up the discussion (in the absence of more information).
IMO hard to believe that, deep down, you REALLY think that way, but it's, of course, your opinion. Here, for the records.

 

[Davieson]

Don't get me wrong, but IMO you are just trying to get re-reaction here and spice up the discussion (in the absence of more information).
IMO hard to believe that, deep down, you REALLY think that way, but it's, of course, your opinion. Here, for the records.

When I see some evidence that strongly links CB to MM then I'll reconsider my opinion. So far I've seen none.

 

[Anxala]

Don't get me wrong, but IMO you are just trying to get re-reaction here and spice up the discussion (in the absence of more information).
IMO hard to believe that, deep down, you REALLY think that way, but it's, of course, your opinion. Here, for the records.

I find it equally hard to believe that so many people so readily accept HCW's claim that CB abducted and murdered MM despite no known evidence to date to back that belief up. For me, that's way more unsettling than @Davieson 's perfectly reasonable scepticism in the light of the way this accusation has played out. Four years and rising and nothing to show for it.

There's nothing remotely controversial or exceptional about someone wanting convincing/credible evidence before coming to an objective conclusion. If we ever get a charge and trial and see the evidence, then that will be the rational time to voice an opinion, as opposed to having an immovable one, like yours, based on nothing other than your own personal opinion.

That you think a sceptical position must be deliberate and designed solely to 'spice up the discussion' is the much more worrying thing here.

Can you really not see how that reflects so poorly back on your own evidence-deficient stance?

 

[Mex]

I find it equally hard to believe that so many people so readily accept HCW's claim that CB abducted and murdered MM despite no known evidence to date to back that belief up. For me, that's way more unsettling than @Davieson 's perfectly reasonable scepticism in the light of the way this accusation has played out. Four years and rising and nothing to show for it.

There's nothing remotely controversial or exceptional about someone wanting convincing/credible evidence before coming to a conclusion. If we ever get a charge and trial and see the evidence, then that will be the rational time to voice an opinion, as opposed to having an immovable one based on nothing other than personal opinion.

That you think that position must be designed solely to 'spice up the discussion' is the much more worrying thing here.

There is no police force anywhere in the world which shares confidential information with bloggers et al while evidence is still in the process of being gathered to build a case.
My opinion

 

[RichardKimble]

Something new coming up?
Not sure GB news is the most reliable.

German prosecutor ‘more sure than ever’ Christian Brueckner murdered Madeleine McCann ‘no alibi’

Hans Christian Wolters claimed German police are 'more sure now' that Christian Brueckner murdered Madeleine

www.gbnews.com

Speaking in a new BBC Panorama documentary, 'Prime Suspect: Who Took Madeleine McCann?', Wolters said Brueckner is currently their "one suspect" in the case.
 FF has this to say.

In response to Wolters' claims made in the program, Brueckner's lawyer Friedrich Fulscher has hit back at German police.

Fulscher told the BBC: "The public prosecutor's office keeps putting itself in the public eye and saying we have the right person here and that my client is the murderer of Madeleine McCann.

"And he repeats this like a mantra and thus shapes public opinion.

"And this public opinion will become a huge problem, because I am of the opinion that Christian Brueckner can probably no longer expect a fair trial in this country."

 

[RichardKimble]

FF is right, the court of public opinion by some has CB guilty.

 

[Davieson]

HCW is sure doing his best to undermine his own credibility, shooting off his mouth without providing any evidence to back it up. Just another talking head.

 

[RichardKimble]

Hmmm, not sure on the title by GB news, there was one on the been last year titled the same which is No longer availible.

Prime Suspect: Who Took Madeleine McCann?​

BBC One - Panorama, Prime Suspect: Who Took Madeleine McCann?

Richard Bilton seeks to find out more about the man suspected of killing Madeleine McCann.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Davieson]

Hmmm, not sure on the title by GB news, there was one on the been last year titled the same which is No longer availible.

Prime Suspect: Who Took Madeleine McCann?​

BBC One - Panorama, Prime Suspect: Who Took Madeleine McCann?

Richard Bilton seeks to find out more about the man suspected of killing Madeleine McCann.

www.bbc.co.uk

The BBC is notorious for repeats.

 

[RichardKimble]

The BBC is notorious for repeats.

I think it's a rehash, 60 minutes had HCW speaking about no alibi back earlier in the year, like I said GB news isn't very good.interview is in the link.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

I find it equally hard to believe that so many people so readily accept HCW's claim that CB abducted and murdered MM despite no known evidence to date to back that belief up. For me, that's way more unsettling than @Davieson 's perfectly reasonable scepticism in the light of the way this accusation has played out. Four years and rising and nothing to show for it.

There's nothing remotely controversial or exceptional about someone wanting convincing/credible evidence before coming to an objective conclusion. If we ever get a charge and trial and see the evidence, then that will be the rational time to voice an opinion, as opposed to having an immovable one, like yours, based on nothing other than your own personal opinion.

That you think a sceptical position must be deliberate and designed solely to 'spice up the discussion' is the much more worrying thing here.

Can you really not see how that reflects so poorly back on your own evidence-deficient stance?

It would be repetitive to list here again the countless "mere" coincidences, nor CB's profile and "curriculum", the specific context of BKA's appeal, etc., that makes me think that CB is the right man. It has already been extensively discussed here.

No, I don't find any drama in thinking that being skeptical about CB (even more thinking that it could have been someone else, who then?!) is implausible, but, as I wrote, I understand that it is also, of course, an opinion, although I think has no chance of being right.

Again and again, if they have strong evidence to prove BARD is a different thing.
Again and again, we (public) don't have to know everything they have. HCW is not here to respond to the impatience and rush of the spectators.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

HCW is sure doing his best to undermine his own credibility, shooting off his mouth without providing any evidence to back it up. Just another talking head.

If so, he has been holding up for more than 4 years...Maybe not that bad for a talking head having nothing palpable. Maybe the opposite that says the opposite.

 

[RichardKimble]

Something new coming up?
Not sure GB news is the most reliable.

German prosecutor ‘more sure than ever’ Christian Brueckner murdered Madeleine McCann ‘no alibi’

Hans Christian Wolters claimed German police are 'more sure now' that Christian Brueckner murdered Madeleine

www.gbnews.com

Speaking in a new BBC Panorama documentary, 'Prime Suspect: Who Took Madeleine McCann?', Wolters said Brueckner is currently their "one suspect" in the case.
 FF has this to say.

In response to Wolters' claims made in the program, Brueckner's lawyer Friedrich Fulscher has hit back at German police.

Fulscher told the BBC: "The public prosecutor's office keeps putting itself in the public eye and saying we have the right person here and that my client is the murderer of Madeleine McCann.

"And he repeats this like a mantra and thus shapes public opinion.

"And this public opinion will become a huge problem, because I am of the opinion that Christian Brueckner can probably no longer expect a fair trial in this country."

My bad it's from last November, but in reality the story is the same , 12 months on despite the claims, no charges in the offing.

 

[Davieson]

It would be repetitive to list here again the countless "mere" coincidences, nor CB's profile and "curriculum", the specific context of BKA's appeal, etc., that makes me think that CB is the right man. It has already been extensively discussed here.

No, I don't find any drama in thinking that being skeptical about CB (even more thinking that it could have been someone else, who then?!) is implausible, but, as I wrote, I understand that it is also, of course, an opinion, although I think has no chance of being right.

Again and again, if they have strong evidence to prove BARD is a different thing.
Again and again, we (public) don't have to know everything they have. HCW is not here to respond to the impatience and rush of the spectators.

Taking on board you last sentence, the problem I have is that I see no evidence of abduction, paedophilia, or murder.
They are only opinions, the first 2 emanating from McCann and the third presumably from the Germans.

 

[Mex]

Taking on board you last sentence, the problem I have is that I see no evidence of abduction, paedophilia, or murder.
They are only opinions, the first 2 emanating from McCann and the third presumably from the Germans.

And therein lies the rub.

The latest trial undergone by CB made no reference to abduction. It made no reference to murder.

Neither crime was on the charge sheet.

CB was accused of serious sexual crimes in a trial which was presided over by a judge wearing the same blinkers indicted by your post.

One does not know if it is a point of law to try a person for crimes not yet indicted after throwing out the legitimate charges, but it certainly represents a novel concept.
My opinion