Brueckner charged with sexual offences in cases unrelated to Madeleine

[Eleanor]

Frankly, I don't care whether Busching received lenient treatment or payment  for his information or not - we know it's a tactic police use, but usually to solve a crime they are investigating and desperate to solve themselves.  I don't think the Greek police stood to gain much from incentivising Busching to invent a cock and bull story about a missing English child who never even set foot in their own country, in the vague hope that one day they may, just possibly, receive some credit for their part in the crime being solved.

No, I'm more interested in getting explanations to the following questions from those who believe Busching invented all the claims he has made re: Bruckner.

Firstly - why Bruckner?  What did he do to deserve to be treated in this way by his old mate?
Secondly - at what point did Busching rope in Seyferth to back up his invented stories about the rape and about Madeleine and why?
Thirdly - why did Seyferth go along with the deception?  What was in it for him?
Fourthly - why did Seyferth (having gone along with the deception) then given an account of the rape which differed to that which Busching had allegedly invented, and why bad mouth him at a later date to the press ("he'd do anything for the money")?
Fifthly - how, having allegedly falsely accused Bruckner of committing rapes, was a hair matching Bruckner's found at the scene of a rape which bore many of the hallmarks of the rapes as described by B & S on the videos?  Was it pure coincidence?  Did they somehow manage to plant the hair there so that years later they could dob their old mate in it? 

I'm sure more questions will occur to me in time, but those will do for now.

The Hair was retained by Portugal.  It was a match to Brueckner.  That is the end of that one.  Plead what they may.

There was a psychopathic monster wandering unchecked out there.  He is now very firmly locked up.  Anyone who actively defends him is very nearly as sick as he is.

[Wonderfulspam]

The Hair was retained by Portugal.  It was a match to Brueckner.  That is the end of that one.  Plead what they may.

There was a psychopathic monster wandering unchecked out there.  He is now very firmly locked up.  Anyone who actively defends him is very nearly as sick as he is.

Well, I don't care what you think. I still prefer Brueckner to the McCanns.

[Venturi Swirl]

Another question - why is it hard to believe that a man who we know for certain has chatted on the internet with another paedophile about his desire to capture, imprison, rape and kill "something small" might also confess to his part in one of the most famous missing children cases that took place in the locale where he was living at the time?  He may of course have been bullshitting, but how is Busching to know that for certain one way or the other?   How would Busching have known about this conversation in 2017 when he told the police about Bruckner's confession? 

[Brietta]

So he was arrested for trafficking in 2011, but failed to turn up to face the charges and left for France (probably). He returned to Greece for a holiday in 2015, was re-arrested and sentenced to seven years and five months in prison. So he was wanted in Greece for four years.

I wonder why he was imprisoned in Chania in April 2015? Was this a different case? Interestingly the UK press were reporting that Op Grange detectives were in Bulgaria in 2017 looking for a woman. Was this connected? Maybe they weren't looking for a woman connected to the Ocean Club, but for one connected to Busching.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4843610/madeleine-mccann-woman-in-purple-bulgaria/

👀👀OOOoooh ... you are a one, aintcha!  Choosing to highlight the efficiency of the Greek police and legal system.  While painstakingly airbrushing the incompetence of the Portuguese from history.

It appears that the innocent until proven guilty offender in Greece was picked up on returning four years down the line to be arrested, tried and sentenced (no doubt consideration being given to the fact that he had broken a legal undertaking four years earlier to appear in court.  "Contempt" or something similar.)

We know Brueckner was extradited from Italy to Germany where he was to stand trial accused of a horrible, aggravated rape for which he was subsequently convicted.

But we also know that in 2007 Brueckner was on Portuguese police radar in the McCann inquiry.

Helge Busching was on Greek police radar and he stayed there for four years until he reappeared on holiday to Greece which led to him being picked up to have his day in court.
Conversely Brueckner came and went through Portugal as often as it suited him for fifteen and was never picked up.

[Brietta]

Frankly, I don't care whether Busching received lenient treatment or payment  for his information or not - we know it's a tactic police use, but usually to solve a crime they are investigating and desperate to solve themselves.  I don't think the Greek police stood to gain much from incentivising Busching to invent a cock and bull story about a missing English child who never even set foot in their own country, in the vague hope that one day they may, just possibly, receive some credit for their part in the crime being solved.

No, I'm more interested in getting explanations to the following questions from those who believe Busching invented all the claims he has made re: Bruckner.

Firstly - why Bruckner?  What did he do to deserve to be treated in this way by his old mate?
Secondly - at what point did Busching rope in Seyferth to back up his invented stories about the rape and about Madeleine and why?
Thirdly - why did Seyferth go along with the deception?  What was in it for him?
Fourthly - why did Seyferth (having gone along with the deception) then given an account of the rape which differed to that which Busching had allegedly invented, and why bad mouth him at a later date to the press ("he'd do anything for the money")?
Fifthly - how, having allegedly falsely accused Bruckner of committing rapes, was a hair matching Bruckner's found at the scene of a rape which bore many of the hallmarks of the rapes as described by B & S on the videos?  Was it pure coincidence?  Did they somehow manage to plant the hair there so that years later they could dob their old mate in it? 

I'm sure more questions will occur to me in time, but those will do for now.

In response to your "Fourthly" question ~
I don’t know anything about the different evidence given about the rapes.  But my thoughts are “did they describe the same outrage.  Or did they describe two or even three or more different rapes”.
We know that Brueckner had an MO which included photographing and filming his assaults.

"Fifthly" do you think the cat was in on it?

[Brietta]

The Hair was retained by Portugal.  It was a match to Brueckner.  That is the end of that one.  Plead what they may.

There was a psychopathic monster wandering unchecked out there.  He is now very firmly locked up.  Anyone who actively defends him is very nearly as sick as he is.

I've got to agree with that, adding only that we don't know the half of it and we probably never will.

[Brietta]

Another question - why is it hard to believe that a man who we know for certain has chatted on the internet with another paedophile about his desire to capture, imprison, rape and kill "something small" might also confess to his part in one of the most famous missing children cases that took place in the locale where he was living at the time?  He may of course have been bullshitting, but how is Busching to know that for certain one way or the other?   How would Busching have known about this conversation in 2017 when he told the police about Bruckner's confession?

There were some thoughts regarding whether or not Brueckner sometimes had an accomplice.  Maybe he was testing the water with some of his friends to see if they were up for it.  I think this might be something other witnesses have brought to the German investigation.  His undertaker friend is one that springs to mind.

[Anthro]

Exactly….as far as you know. How far is that?

You will be surprised.

[faithlilly]

What gets me is the assumed naivety of the belief that investigators are primed to accept uncorroborated statements without checking and comparing with all the other evidence available to them in the case they are working.

Nothing is ever accepted at face value.  Checks and balances would have been carried out on the information held by Helge Busching and its credibility assessed.

To think and say otherwise is extremely desperate and naive.

The big mystery is the motivation of some.  Very obvious lies about dreadlocks and cartoons are deemed irrefutable when announced to the media by one criminal - but evidence given privately to the police by another who is not seeking publicity and notoriety is immediately pounced on for ridicule.  All because the lie at the heart of their belief system is challenged and demolished.

How do you check out a claim that someone said something to someone on a certain day?

[faithlilly]

👀👀OOOoooh ... you are a one, aintcha!  Choosing to highlight the efficiency of the Greek police and legal system.  While painstakingly airbrushing the incompetence of the Portuguese from history.

It appears that the innocent until proven guilty offender in Greece was picked up on returning four years down the line to be arrested, tried and sentenced (no doubt consideration being given to the fact that he had broken a legal undertaking four years earlier to appear in court.  "Contempt" or something similar.)

We know Brueckner was extradited from Italy to Germany where he was to stand trial accused of a horrible, aggravated rape for which he was subsequently convicted.

But we also know that in 2007 Brueckner was on Portuguese police radar in the McCann inquiry.

Helge Busching was on Greek police radar and he stayed there for four years until he reappeared on holiday to Greece which led to him being picked up to have his day in court.
Conversely Brueckner came and went through Portugal as often as it suited him for fifteen and was never picked up.

Do you mean the ‘innocent until proven guilty’ Brueckner?

[Venturi Swirl]

How do you check out a claim that someone said something to someone on a certain day?

It’s quite simple.  Busching makes a claim that he and another were involved in discovery of the rape tape and so the police interview the other guy to see if the story and other claims made pan out.  If they don’t then guy’s a bullshitter, if they do then they have a certain amount of credibility.  Throw in a loose rapist’s hair and bingo, his claims look even more reliable. Any more questions?  Oh wait, you weren’t talking to me