But if you as a prosecutor have evidence for a crime can you even hide it under the carpet? Legally speaking. Aren't you bound by law to investigate?
Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect #27
- Thread starter Taskforce88
- Start date
- Status
I think GA is making a lot of money out of this story. The more it goes on the better for him and the sales of his books. Imo
RichardKimble
Ah, but I may as well try and catch the wind.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2021
- Messages
- 2,638
- Reaction score
- 7,081
One would think its been run past lawyers including Channel five's if it goes to air.
Last edited:
RichardKimble
Ah, but I may as well try and catch the wind.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2021
- Messages
- 2,638
- Reaction score
- 7,081
He was given a name by SY, it would be remiss not to further investigate once his name was flagged on a data base, what makes Wolters so sure of Murder with out forensics but mere circumstantial one can only speculate, its weak what ever it is hence the appeal 20 odd months ago but what ever it is, 5 yrs on from when SY flagged him up (CB) its not enough to bring charges imo.
frank-cole
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2021
- Messages
- 408
- Reaction score
- 1,640
Intho
IMO It’s unlikely that MWT would have found a witness or somebody CB knew who hadn’t been thoroughly questioned & investigated by the BKA. It’s probably likely many journalists have approached the same people in the last 18 months. If indeed he did do the very unlikely & find a new witness, IMO it’s highly likely the BKA would question them. No witness could remain in the media spectrum & be void of the prosecutorial/defence system.
Credibility will come into play & early indications suggest this isn’t an alibi. It’s merely somebody who knew him at the time saying she can’t remember if she was with him or not. If it is more credible than what’s been reported then it’ll most likely form a part of the case for both the prosecution & defence.
It’s very easy for tabloids & documentary makers to find nuance or elaborate on unsubstantiated claims.
IMO the Germans have gotten much farther than anybody else on the case. They’re very systematic, strategising & relentlessly detailed. They wouldn’t have gone public in this way if they strategised that they could get the specific types of information they needed by working quietly.
Judging by HCW’s statements to the mirror, ‘it is now possible we could charge, we have that evidence now’, IMO it seems that they’ve received information that completes a prosecutorial pathway between their investigation & an arrest.
IMO it’s sensible to keep going through the remaining information they have, the more answers the better.
But unfortunately it was IMO, inevitable that documentaries, books, podcasts etc would start to question the narrative. 1 because the BKA have kept this crime public for so long. 2 because they see the potential for a large target audience, including those who have a preconceived agenda or those who choose not believe what the BKA are saying.
Just my thoughts .
IMO It’s unlikely that MWT would have found a witness or somebody CB knew who hadn’t been thoroughly questioned & investigated by the BKA. It’s probably likely many journalists have approached the same people in the last 18 months. If indeed he did do the very unlikely & find a new witness, IMO it’s highly likely the BKA would question them. No witness could remain in the media spectrum & be void of the prosecutorial/defence system.
Credibility will come into play & early indications suggest this isn’t an alibi. It’s merely somebody who knew him at the time saying she can’t remember if she was with him or not. If it is more credible than what’s been reported then it’ll most likely form a part of the case for both the prosecution & defence.
It’s very easy for tabloids & documentary makers to find nuance or elaborate on unsubstantiated claims.
IMO the Germans have gotten much farther than anybody else on the case. They’re very systematic, strategising & relentlessly detailed. They wouldn’t have gone public in this way if they strategised that they could get the specific types of information they needed by working quietly.
Judging by HCW’s statements to the mirror, ‘it is now possible we could charge, we have that evidence now’, IMO it seems that they’ve received information that completes a prosecutorial pathway between their investigation & an arrest.
IMO it’s sensible to keep going through the remaining information they have, the more answers the better.
But unfortunately it was IMO, inevitable that documentaries, books, podcasts etc would start to question the narrative. 1 because the BKA have kept this crime public for so long. 2 because they see the potential for a large target audience, including those who have a preconceived agenda or those who choose not believe what the BKA are saying.
Just my thoughts .
Dlk79
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 1,614
- Reaction score
- 9,984
There's no way you can know that the evidence is "weak", and what you claim certainly doesn't reflect what BKA have said on the matter. Back in Oct 2020 HCW described their evidence as "strong", just not strong enough for them to "guarantee a conviction". Guarantee is the key word.
This is a complex cold case, finding any sort of evidence against whoever did it is obviously going to be difficult after this amount of time. Even more difficult when you are relying on inter-agency cooperation to carry out your investigations. The amount of time this goes on is only significant if there are signs the investigation is waning. Based on the comments coming from HCW in October 2021, the evidence in the case appears to have advanced to the point they feel they could now charge but still see no rush while CB is detained. It makes sense that they want to get this case as watertight as possible.
“It is now possible that we could charge. We have that evidence now.
“But it’s not just about charging him – we want to charge him with the best body of evidence possible.
“When we still have questions, it would be nonsense to charge rather than wait for the answers that could strengthen our position.
“That’s why we said we’ll investigate as long as there are leads or information for us to pursue. I’m not saying that what we have is insufficient now. But he’s in prison, so we don’t have this pressure on us. We have time on our hands.”
“It could have gone better. Of course we hoped we’d get such good tip-offs that the investigation might have already ended. But the case is progressing.”
“We’ve found no evidence to clear Mr Brueckner of suspicion. Everything we’ve found fits in the picture. We’re perhaps halfway through.”
“What takes one week in Germany can take six months in Portugal. I think the interest in the case in Portugal is just not that big, because no Portuguese person is involved. Also it does not shine a particularly good light on the Portuguese police, as they had totally different suspects.
“I think they would prefer to be left in peace."
“The co-operation with Britain is certainly notably better.”
Prosecutor '100% convinced' suspect abducted and murdered Madeleine McCann
The last few lines are quite key IMO. How much time of the last few years have been wasted by half-arsed efforts from the Portuguese authorities? The truth is, the majority of them are hoping this case fails because it makes them look bad and they made their minds up long ago of what they think happened in 5A. Is this even part of the reason why BKA went public, to pressure PJ into taking it more seriously?
BKA managed to solve the DM rape using forensics the PJ had collected but not linked to anyone. It now appears there were fingerprints in the HB case matching CB which it also took the Germans to pick up on. How do we know for certain there aren't forensics in the MM files that might yield a link to CB? I recall BKA asking permission to re-test some of the samples with more modern techniques but PJ refused. Why? What happened with that in the end? How do we know that the reason BKA haven't found any forensic evidence is down to the fact they haven't been given proper access to interrogate and re-analyse the data?
Has anybody watched this?
RTL Aktuell, Freitag, 14.01. 18:45, RTL | Detail | TVButler.at
is this new/insignificant?
RTL Aktuell, Freitag, 14.01. 18:45, RTL | Detail | TVButler.at
is this new/insignificant?
Last edited:
tedtink
Blunderwoman
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2020
- Messages
- 3,841
- Reaction score
- 21,006
Like I said last week, I think this documentary is an FF and MWT 'collaboration'.
CB has probably told FF about the so called alibi, possibly the same alibi he gave in 2013.
The same alibi that FF checked out when he went to Portugal last year,
It'll be interesting to hear any direct quotes from CB, if any.
3 Hours long? Expect heavy padding.
JMO
CB has probably told FF about the so called alibi, possibly the same alibi he gave in 2013.
The same alibi that FF checked out when he went to Portugal last year,
It'll be interesting to hear any direct quotes from CB, if any.
3 Hours long? Expect heavy padding.
JMO
Last edited:
And possibly also with the collaboration of the two anti mccann twitter sleuths who were in correspondence with CB.
CB broke his ribs himself, the BKA have closed that investigation
Maddie-Verdächtiger soll Rippenbrüche selbst verschuldet haben - Braunschweiger Zeitung
Maddie-Verdächtiger soll Rippenbrüche selbst verschuldet haben - Braunschweiger Zeitung
that is perfect @tedtink
some interesting things:
1. people who knew CB, said that he never let the phone off his hand.
2. the girl who claims she spent almost every night with CB, has been questioned already for a long time - therefore, the BKA do not consider her a watertight alibi
So CB was looked at in the IG case,. He doesn't have an alibi for that day however,. They said said his phone didn't ping, so that's how they know his mobile number
3. BKA have said they will question CB last - FF said 'you can save time - CB will not make any statement.' So, this means that FF has told BKA don't even bother with questioning CB... jmo
4. if CB and FF present an alibi for that night, the investigation would stop. since they haven't done that, BKA think there is no real alibi.
from my understanding, CB does not need to be questioned for FF to present CB's alibi. and since FF already told BKA to save time by not questioning CB, since he will say nothing, there is no watertight alibi.
5. the parents will be the first to be informed when the BKA has "solid proof" ("stichfeste Beweise") (that MM is dead)- they don't have that yet.
Last edited:
Dlk79
Former Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2020
- Messages
- 1,614
- Reaction score
- 9,984
That old chestnut. ,"My client has nothing to hide, therefore we shall hide everything from you"!
what I am wondering is since CB or better MWT gives the possibility of CB not having had that phone that day, how was FF able -following CB's phone records- to show that CB was nowhere near the crime scene on that day? I guess most of CB's "friends" will have already confirmed that CB was using that phone number in May 2007. Which phone did FF track then?
This point has been covered many times now.
In many jurisdictions, including Germany and incidentally the UK, police cannot conduct interviews by ambush.
They have to disclose the basis for questioning to the suspect.
This is why the suspect will present his answers in an official interview, often in writing
There is no way to know what answers the suspect will provide without knowing the allegations against him
This is why CB would be foolish to go on the record now.
This is fairly basic stuff in any jurisdiction where the accused does not have a full right to silence like the US
Continuing to claim that CB should state his alibi to answer allegations made in the media by HCW is just not realistic
- Status