Should the Germans Have Dropped Their Investigation By Now?

[Robittybob1]

In which case they could forensiclly link him,Wolters admits to no forensics.

It might be a matter of thinking outside of the box.  Come up with something new, from what he has got.

[Eleanor]

That is rather an obscure answer isn't it?  It has come down to HCW possibly having photos.

We already know that this is a possibility, Rob.  We don't need to discuss them.

And just in case anyone is in any doubt, I'm not having it.

[The General]

It might be a matter of thinking outside of the box.  Come up with something new, from what he has got.

He's got photographs or video (via HDD storage devices or cameras) that he believes depict the dead body of MM.
But apart from maybe the environment and articles in and around the scene, there's a tenuous link to CB - may be a camera was found with the dog.
So EXIF data has not proved to be useful, bearing in mind they have the world's best analysts at their disposal.
In addition, by definition, there can't be any physical link to CB, such as prints / DNA, or he'd be charged by now.

So it could be the actual camera, which has a degree of separation from him, or a HDD.
But if either had pictures or video of both a crime scene and CB that would be enough for a link - unless they're sitting on this evidence to charge him with other offences.

[Eleanor]

What were you actually thinking?

That Moles can be a fairly innocuous means of identification.

[jassi]

He's got photographs or video (via HDD storage devices or cameras) that he believes depict the dead body of MM.
But apart from maybe the environment and articles in and around the scene, there's a tenuous link to CB - may be a camera was found with the dog.
So EXIF data has not proved to be useful, bearing in mind they have the world's best analysts at their disposal.
In addition, by definition, there can't be any physical link to CB, such as prints / DNA, or he'd be charged by now.

So it could be the actual camera, which has a degree of separation from him, or a HDD.
But if either had pictures or video of both a crime scene and CB that would be enough for a link - unless they're sitting on this evidence to charge him with other offences.

It is said that the videos discovered had all been downloaded from the internet, so no connection there.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8654423/Madeleine-McCann-prime-suspect-secret-stash-391-child-porn-photos-68-videos.html

[Mr Gray]

How did you go from what G-unit says in http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11870.msg636215#msg636215 to discussing "possible abuse" beats me.

I think  alot beats you rob. I was almost unwilling to mention it because Ive done some research and I know where it leads...and its very unpleasant

[The General]

It is said that the videos discovered had all been downloaded from the internet, so no connection there.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8654423/Madeleine-McCann-prime-suspect-secret-stash-391-child-porn-photos-68-videos.html

Thanks for that Sceptic 4.
So I assume they would have been through these images comprehensively.
Therefore this cannot be the evidence.

Let's keep going with the process of elimination.

[Eleanor]

I think  alot beats you rob. I was almost unwilling to mention it because Ive done some research and I know where it leads...and its very unpleasant

You are definitely not wrong about this.  But I believe that Rob genuinely can't see it.

[Mr Gray]

He's got photographs or video (via HDD storage devices or cameras) that he believes depict the dead body of MM.
But apart from maybe the environment and articles in and around the scene, there's a tenuous link to CB - may be a camera was found with the dog.
So EXIF data has not proved to be useful, bearing in mind they have the world's best analysts at their disposal.
In addition, by definition, there can't be any physical link to CB, such as prints / DNA, or he'd be charged by now.

So it could be the actual camera, which has a degree of separation from him, or a HDD.
But if either had pictures or video of both a crime scene and CB that would be enough for a link - unless they're sitting on this evidence to charge him with other offences.

From what he has said it isnt the dead body. In  a similar case the perps face was pixellated so absolute ID not possible...thats about as far as I would like to go having read details of a recent case that looks similar

[Mr Gray]

Thanks for that Sceptic 4.
So I assume they would have been through these images comprehensively.
Therefore this cannot be the evidence.

Let's keep going with the process of elimination.

why cant it be the evidence

[The General]

why cant it be the evidence

Because they would have used it by now. They wouldn't have just busted him for child porn possession.
Good question though.

[Mr Gray]

Because they would have used it by now. They wouldn't have just busted him for child porn possession.
Good question though.

I can see scenarios where that would not be the case

[jassi]

From this same article - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8654423/Madeleine-McCann-prime-suspect-secret-stash-391-child-porn-photos-68-videos.html
According to the document, the abuse of the five-year-old took place on June 16, 2013, in Braunschweig at around the same time that Brueckner came on to the radar of German investigators as a suspect in the disappearance of Madeleine.

Yet it was only mid 2020 that they their appeal for information, so it sounds to me as if they had hit a wall in their investigation and that they haven't progressed any further.

[The General]

I can see scenarios where that would not be the case

Please provide two.

[The General]

From this same article - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8654423/Madeleine-McCann-prime-suspect-secret-stash-391-child-porn-photos-68-videos.html
According to the document, the abuse of the five-year-old took place on June 16, 2013, in Braunschweig at around the same time that Brueckner came on to the radar of German investigators as a suspect in the disappearance of Madeleine.

Yet it was only mid 2020 that they their appeal for information, so it sounds to me as if they had hit a wall in their investigation and that they haven't progressed any further.

I think you're right. Whatever evidence they currently have, which depicts the murder of MM in some way, is not ticking enough boxes to link him - legally.
If they could have found the caller they could strengthen the case as a minimum, or the caller could implicate him.