UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Brietta on May 08, 2022, 07:00:26 PM
-
Emily Brown
Published 08 May 2022
Former cold-case detective and crime scene investigator Steve Chancellor praised the work of the investigators over the last 15 years and commended the fact that 'no one has thrown their hands up and said, ‘This case can’t be solved".
“They have gone through the process up to the point of finding the vehicle, the site, and gone looking for something. That’s one of the biggest things I teach - you are never going to find something if you don’t look.
I’m very impressed that they have taken the time, gone out there and said ‘We’re not done'," Chancellor added.
https://www.ladbible.com/news/crime-scene-investigator-explains-how-police-may-crack-mccann-case-20220508
It has been a difficult and long time coming but at last investigators are agreed on the identity of a firm suspect in Madeleine's disappearance.
This has to be progress one would think.
-
I'm not saying he isn't. But I just can't quite bring myself to say that he is.
-
I'm not saying he isn't. But I just can't quite bring myself to say that he is.
He has been hiding in plain sight since 2007.
We can now put a name to him only by dint of the fact that investigators have spent many years looking for a perpetrator.
Not any perpetrator ~ but one with an appropriate profile and with that profile, supporting evidence.
‘How can you find a person when you are not looking for them?’”. Isabel Duarte
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7215353/Portuguese-police-ignored-Madeleine-McCann-leads.html
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8490.msg561165#msg561165
The question was asked in 2010 by the McCann lawyer when it was discovered that the Portuguese investigator assigned to Madeleine's case was filing information none of which he considered relevant to the case.
That information was released to become part of the search files.
It seems that the prerequisite that the case can be solved but only by those prepared to look took a very long time to sink in as far as Portugal was concerned.
-
He has been hiding in plain sight since 2007.
We can now put a name to him only by dint of the fact that investigators have spent many years looking for a perpetrator.
Not any perpetrator ~ but one with an appropriate profile and with that profile, supporting evidence.
‘How can you find a person when you are not looking for them?’”. Isabel Duarte
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7215353/Portuguese-police-ignored-Madeleine-McCann-leads.html
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8490.msg561165#msg561165
The question was asked in 2010 by the McCann lawyer when it was discovered that the Portuguese investigator assigned to Madeleine's case was filing information none of which he considered relevant to the case.
That information was released to become part of the search files.
It seems that the prerequisite that the case can be solved but only by those prepared to look took a very long time to sink in as far as Portugal was concerned.
Do we know if any of the information contained in those files did prove relevant?
-
The mess Portugal made of this hardly bears thinking of.
-
The mess Portugal made of this hardly bears thinking of.
It happened in Portugal and it has been long assumed that the answer would lie in Portugal. It has and it hasn't. It took the Germans to make the breakthrough and keep at it to build any sort of a case.
There seems to have been a general disinterest which had it not been so assiduously fostered might well have led to answers many years ago. The adage that if no-one bothers to look nothing will be found rings true and if so many prominent and well respected individuals such as Moita Flores spend their retirements banging a particular drum who can blame the people being influenced by them?
Analysis
by Alison Roberts, BBC Portugal correspondent
The Madeleine McCann case has been out of the news in Portugal for some time, and in the last few years almost all developments have emerged from the prosecutor's office in Germany.
This latest news has been widely reported, though in some cases not very prominently and with few details.
Virtually everyone in Portugal knows about the case, though, with many having for months if not years followed the ins and outs. Not only the various criminal investigations, but the civil case in which Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann sued - ultimately unsuccessfully - the former lead detective on the case, Gonçalo Amaral, after he published a book about it.
He had already attracted a lot of criticism, particularly from British tabloids, which raised some hackles in Portugal, since the Judicial Police, or PJ, is in fact one of the country's most respected institutions.
It's not clear whether or when the Portuguese authorities might charge this or any other suspect in the case.
While there are legal deadlines, the pandemic could be grounds for the courts to rule that more time is allowed.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61196071
-
The mess Portugal made of this hardly bears thinking of.
With attitudes such as that promoted by Flores et al prevailing over the years and being constantly revisited ~ is it any wonder they made such a mess of it all. When their theory didn't do a thing towards finding Madeleine in 2007 why on earth did they think revisiting it constantly would change things?
Didn't it ever occur to them to try a fresh approach which might have produced results?
McCann Investigator Claims To Know Where And How She Died
Jess Hardiman
Published, 17 March 2018
One criminalist has said that he has 'no doubt' that Kate and Gerry McCann's daughter died in the apartment.
Speaking to Portuguese website Flash!, Moita Flores - who was once involved with the Judiciary Police that conducted the initial search - said: "It was impossible to pass in that window with a child, Maddie died in that house."
He added: "The secret is in that group of people and in the parents who are influential people in the British government."
Flores is a Portuguese crime expert, researcher and writer, whose beliefs also mirror those of police chief Goncalo Amaral, the Daily Mail reports.
Flores continued: "With the 96,000 euros made available by the British government, they did a reconstitution in Praia da Luz, which is the only way to solve the case."
https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-mccann-investigator-claims-to-know-where-and-how-she-died-20180317
-
With attitudes such as that promoted by Flores et al prevailing over the years and being constantly revisited ~ is it any wonder they made such a mess of it all. When their theory didn't do a thing towards finding Madeleine in 2007 why on earth did they think revisiting it constantly would change things?
Didn't it ever occur to them to try a fresh approach which might have produced results?
McCann Investigator Claims To Know Where And How She Died
Jess Hardiman
Published, 17 March 2018
One criminalist has said that he has 'no doubt' that Kate and Gerry McCann's daughter died in the apartment.
Speaking to Portuguese website Flash!, Moita Flores - who was once involved with the Judiciary Police that conducted the initial search - said: "It was impossible to pass in that window with a child, Maddie died in that house."
He added: "The secret is in that group of people and in the parents who are influential people in the British government."
Flores is a Portuguese crime expert, researcher and writer, whose beliefs also mirror those of police chief Goncalo Amaral, the Daily Mail reports.
Flores continued: "With the 96,000 euros made available by the British government, they did a reconstitution in Praia da Luz, which is the only way to solve the case."
https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-mccann-investigator-claims-to-know-where-and-how-she-died-20180317
IMO, I hope when the time comes that they sue him.
-
He has been hiding in plain sight since 2007.
We can now put a name to him only by dint of the fact that investigators have spent many years looking for a perpetrator.
Not any perpetrator ~ but one with an appropriate profile and with that profile, supporting evidence.
‘How can you find a person when you are not looking for them?’”. Isabel Duarte
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7215353/Portuguese-police-ignored-Madeleine-McCann-leads.html
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8490.msg561165#msg561165
The question was asked in 2010 by the McCann lawyer when it was discovered that the Portuguese investigator assigned to Madeleine's case was filing information none of which he considered relevant to the case.
That information was released to become part of the search files.
It seems that the prerequisite that the case can be solved but only by those prepared to look took a very long time to sink in as far as Portugal was concerned.
Are you convinced they have the right person then?
-
Are you convinced they have the right person then?
Your question is meaningless bearing in mind the context of the thread title. Wherein the issue was raised about the inordinate stretch of the years it has taken to reach the stage of the slightest hope that investigators might at last be close to finding out what happened to Madeleine.
Only the evidence will determine who is responsible for this heinous crime and the difficulties thrown in the path of gathering that should never be underestimated for the gargantuan and almost impossible task the passage of the years has made of it.
Madeleine's case is that of a missing child who investigators chose to write off fifteen years ago and whose very active campaigns have ensured the disgrace that she was never properly looked for.
That is the starting point.
Is the German investigation the finishing point? Are we where we are today because they were able to work the case in total secrecy for a couple of years without spoilers being thrown into the mix?
That is what is worth a thought and not your deflection.
-
IMO, I hope when the time comes that they sue him.
'Solutions' which should have been ephemeral have since the beginning ruled how this missing child case was viewed in the land where it happened and where it was most likely to be resolved.
Individuals such as Moita Flores et al have milked the media for all it is worth based on respect for their previous contact with the Judicial Police but never on evidence for the simple reason there was none.
But all of it put together would appear to have moulded attitudes in Portugal which were detrimental to proper investigation and much of it led by those who were firmly associated with the initial investigation and whose interests do not lie in the developments as they are today.
-
'Solutions' which should have been ephemeral have since the beginning ruled how this missing child case was viewed in the land where it happened and where it was most likely to be resolved.
Individuals such as Moita Flores et al have milked the media for all it is worth based on respect for their previous contact with the Judicial Police but never on evidence for the simple reason there was none.
But all of it put together would appear to have moulded attitudes in Portugal which were detrimental to proper investigation and much of it led by those who were firmly associated with the initial investigation and whose interests do not lie in the developments as they are today.
Why were these supposedly much respected entities so vociferous in their pursuit of The McCanns when there was never any evidence against them?
The whole area was rife with paedophiles who were completely ignored.
And then suddenly, after fifteen years a paedophile is designated as an Arguido.
-
Are you convinced they have the right person then?
Well they must have, mustn't they? Unless Wolters is bluffing about the strength of his evidence, but you'd have to be barking mad to believe that.
-
Your question is meaningless bearing in mind the context of the thread title. Wherein the issue was raised about the inordinate stretch of the years it has taken to reach the stage of the slightest hope that investigators might at last be close to finding out what happened to Madeleine.
Only the evidence will determine who is responsible for this heinous crime and the difficulties thrown in the path of gathering that should never be underestimated for the gargantuan and almost impossible task the passage of the years has made of it.
Madeleine's case is that of a missing child who investigators chose to write off fifteen years ago and whose very active campaigns have ensured the disgrace that she was never properly looked for.
That is the starting point.
Is the German investigation the finishing point? Are we where we are today because they were able to work the case in total secrecy for a couple of years without spoilers being thrown into the mix?
That is what is worth a thought and not your deflection.
So you decided to ask a question which you aren't prepared to answer? If CB isn't the culprit then criticising the first investigation (again and again and again) isn't yet justified.
-
So you decided to ask a question which you aren't prepared to answer? If CB isn't the culprit then criticising the first investigation (again and again and again) isn't yet justified.
I think it most certainly is. If CB isn't the culprit it doesn't mean that the McCanns are, that's just idiotic. Three police forces with access to far more evidence than you will ever see have concluded it was a stranger abduction. The likelihood of them all being wrong and the ramshackle initial investigation and a few die hard sceptics being right is incredibly small. IMO.
-
So you decided to ask a question which you aren't prepared to answer? If CB isn't the culprit then criticising the first investigation (again and again and again) isn't yet justified.
It is justified for incompetence alone. If in fact it was just incompetence.
-
I think it most certainly is. If CB isn't the culprit it doesn't mean that the McCanns are, that's just idiotic. Three police forces with access to far more evidence than you will ever see have concluded it was a stranger abduction. The likelihood of them all being wrong and the ramshackle initial investigation and a few die hard sceptics being right is incredibly small. IMO.
How on earth could CB not be the culprit?
Wolters has conducted a very serious & extensive investigation, he is sure CB is the murderer of MM & has concrete evidence to back it up.
Do you think he is lying or just a total idiot?
Barking, honestly.
-
Why were these supposedly much respected entities so vociferous in their pursuit of The McCanns when there was never any evidence against them?
The whole area was rife with paedophiles who were completely ignored.
And then suddenly, after fifteen years a paedophile is designated as an Arguido.
It seems that until then Madelaine's case remained very much on the back burner in Portugal as the Statute of Limitations chugged inexorably closer.
I still don't quite know what to make of the volte face signified by the recent arguido development. No doubt time will tell though.
-
So you decided to ask a question which you aren't prepared to answer? If CB isn't the culprit then criticising the first investigation (again and again and again) isn't yet justified.
You are getting a bit muddled here.
Read your post again.
"So you decided to ask a question which you aren't prepared to answer?" How mind bogglingly obtuse is that statement!
Please desist from deflection and don't try to play word games with me because you really are not very good at it.
-
It is justified for incompetence alone. If in fact it was just incompetence.
Which police forces are perfect, in your opinion?
-
It seems that until then Madelaine's case remained very much on the back burner in Portugal as the Statute of Limitations chugged inexorably closer.
I still don't quite know what to make of the volte face signified by the recent arguido development. No doubt time will tell though.
I don't understand a Country which has a Statute of Limitations of fifteen years for the crime of murder.
-
Which police forces are perfect, in your opinion?
There is Perfect and then there is Not So Perfect. The PJ are way below Not So Perfect. The PJ and Amaral in particular actually make things up.
Dread Locks and Cartoons on a van when neither of these things were true.
-
I think it most certainly is. If CB isn't the culprit it doesn't mean that the McCanns are, that's just idiotic. Three police forces with access to far more evidence than you will ever see have concluded it was a stranger abduction. The likelihood of them all being wrong and the ramshackle initial investigation and a few die hard sceptics being right is incredibly small. IMO.
I think that post is spot on. For me the wonder of it all is the way in which refugees from that "ramshackle initial investigation and a few die hard sceptics" have managed to contribute to deflecting the aims of a missing child investigation for as long as it did.
Madeleine's case was dropped almost immediately by the Portuguese investigators in 2007 (the case co-ordinator's best seller tells us so) and was officially archived in 2018.
Effectively until the case was taken up by Scotland Yard in 2013 as a result of the campaigning and insistence of Kate and Gerry McCann there was no official investigation taking place into Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
Madeleine was denied the 'golden hours' prerequisite allotted to victims and the fact that fifteen years down the line that resistance prevails in some quarters must remain as one of the hallmarks of this particular missing child investigation.
-
There is Perfect and then there is Not So Perfect. The PJ are way below Not So Perfect. The PJ and Amaral in particular actually make things up.
Dread Locks and Cartoons on a van when neither of these things were true.
Is it any wonder it has taken fifteen years for investigators to have reached the point they are now at when such obvious misinformation from those closest to the action has exemplified the conduct of this case.
I would imagine that it is unheard of for an individual still enjoying some pretence of propriety to interfere with such vehemence in an active police investigation by promoting such obvious lies.
Amaral did not know his photoshopped image was going to be exposed for the lie it most definitely was. Acceptance of such proven deceit probably ranks as one of the most extraordinary outcomes of the many extraordinary aspects of this case.
-
Is it any wonder it has taken fifteen years for investigators to have reached the point they are now at when such obvious misinformation from those closest to the action has exemplified the conduct of this case.
I would imagine that it is unheard of for an individual still enjoying some pretence of propriety to interfere with such vehemence in an active police investigation by promoting such obvious lies.
Amaral did not know his photoshopped image was going to be exposed for the lie it most definitely was. Acceptance of such proven deceit probably ranks as one of the most extraordinary outcomes of the many extraordinary aspects of this case.
What? A dead end, you mean?
-
There is Perfect and then there is Not So Perfect. The PJ are way below Not So Perfect. The PJ and Amaral in particular actually make things up.
Dread Locks and Cartoons on a van when neither of these things were true.
The Portuguese are proud of the PJ, so it seems your opinions are not universally shared. In fact PJ bashing seems to be a McCann supporter trait, for obvious reasons.
-
The Portuguese are proud of the PJ, so it seems your opinions are not universally shared. In fact PJ bashing seems to be a McCann supporter trait, for obvious reasons.
It isn't difficult. The PJ mistakes are glaringly obvious.
-
It isn't difficult. The PJ mistakes are glaringly obvious.
Does this have any bearing on whether Madeleine's case is close to being solved? The Germans don't seem to have convinced you.
-
Does this have any bearing on whether Madeleine's case is close to being solved? The Germans don't seem to have convinced you.
They have, but they also haven't, you see, a bit of cognitive dissonance never hurt anybody.
-
Does this have any bearing on whether Madeleine's case is close to being solved? The Germans don't seem to have convinced you.
I like to see evidence, which doesn't seem to be one of your priorities.
But if you want a toss up between The McCanns and Brueckner there is no contest.
As for being close to being solved. I am sticking with Wolters for now, although I don't much care what Brueckner gets banged up for, while you appear to favour Rapists and Paedophiles.
-
I like to see evidence, which doesn't seem to be one of your priorities.
But if you want a toss up between The McCanns and Brueckner there is no contest.
As for being close to being solved. I am sticking with Wolters for now, although I don't much care what Brueckner gets banged up for, while you appear to favour Rapists and Paedophiles.
......and your evidence of abduction is?.....the evidence against Brueckner is?
It's because someone said so, isn't it.
-
Does this have any bearing on whether Madeleine's case is close to being solved? The Germans don't seem to have convinced you.
There has been a progression over the past fifteen years even if your preference is for ground hog day.
Who knows ~ if the PJ had carried out due process earlier in 2007 to the logical conclusion fresh eyes eventually reached there might have been time.
There was no evidence against the McCanns. There never had been any. Had that been accepted and other options followed we could have been at the stage we are at now of investigating Brueckner either to eliminate him or bring him to trial.
It isn't as if he didn't have a presence in the area and one iota of the time spent checking McCann phone data might have turned up a lot more which was actually pertinent to the case.
The fact the phone he was using actually had been recorded in the files but hadn't been checked out will probably emerge as one of the big fails of investigators.
-
I am beginning to weary of repeating the obvious, half of which some of these people don't even know.
This is the danger of hitching to a bandwagon half way through and with preconceived ideas and prejudices. Like Amaral. No wonder it as taken fifteen years.
Fortunately The German Justice System has an already convicted criminal in prison in Germany for crimes he committed in Portugal.
What does that say about The Portuguese Justice System?
-
......and your evidence of abduction is?.....the evidence against Brueckner is?
It's because someone said so, isn't it.
Your misinterpretation of the term is excruciatingly awful. But do keep it going, it epitomises exactly the attitudes which have resulted in Madeleine's case initially being almost ignored followed by subsequent investigations having to take up the reins of a horse which had been bolting ahead of them for years.
I think they have caught up now and might even be ahead of the game. Good on them!
-
Your misinterpretation of the term is excruciatingly awful. But do keep it going, it epitomises exactly the attitudes which have resulted in Madeleine's case initially being almost ignored followed by subsequent investigations having to take up the reins of a horse which had been bolting ahead of them for years.
I think they have caught up now and might even be ahead of the game. Good on them!
You think the PJ will be charging Brueckner soon?
Why isn't Wolters doing it?
-
I mean the MET aren't interested in charging Brueckner, Wolters can't, so I guess it's up to the police force you all hate to finish the job off now.
-
I mean the MET aren't interested in charging Brueckner, Wolters can't, so I guess it's up to the police force you all hate to finish the job off now.
You really are seriously deluded, you poor soul. You can hardly string a sentence together and none of your comments make any sense.
-
You really are seriously deluded, you poor soul. You can hardly string a sentence together and none of your comments make any sense.
Deluded? This coming from someone who believes Wolters has both solved the case, but also hasn't.
-
Deluded? This coming from someone who believes Wolters has both solved the case, but also hasn't.
You see what I mean? No sense. And no logic either.
-
You see what I mean? No sense. And no logic either.
Well yes, logic tells us Joana was abducted doesn't it.
Just like Maddie was.
-
Well yes, logic tells us Joana was abducted doesn't it.
Just like Maddie was.
It tells me that there is a possibility.
-
You really are seriously deluded, you poor soul. You can hardly string a sentence together and none of your comments make any sense.
but he will keep posting his gibberish all the while he's being given the time of day.
-
but he will keep posting his gibberish all the while he's being given the time of day.
I really don't know what to do with Spammy. A part of me feels sorry for him. But I do often ignore his nonsense. And I doubt that he is as awful as he would like us to think.
-
I really don't know what to do with Spammy. A part of me feels sorry for him. But I do often ignore his nonsense. And I doubt that he is as awful as he would like us to think.
I have a love/hate relationship with Spammy. So outragious are some of her ideas that she makes me laugh. She can be kinda droll.
I hate it when she runs down The Mccanns, and think of her as like Junior school age, then .... WHOOPS, up comes a good post well worthy of the forum.
And in certain areas she shows real compassion. Can't think why she so hates the Mccanns.
-
I am beginning to weary of repeating the obvious, half of which some of these people don't even know.
This is the danger of hitching to a bandwagon half way through and with preconceived ideas and prejudices. Like Amaral. No wonder it as taken fifteen years.
Fortunately The German Justice System has an already convicted criminal in prison in Germany for crimes he committed in Portugal.
What does that say about The Portuguese Justice System?
If what we have been told is true and I've no reason to doubt it, Brueckner will face other charges for crimes of a sexual nature long before he will ever have charges laid against him for crimes against Madeleine.
All the current crimes for which he is presently suspect were committed in Portugal and the only hope of justice being served is from the German Courts. The vicious torture and rape for which he is currently serving time in Germany was committed in Portugal but had to be tried in Germany.
Loud and clear it tells me that the Portuguese Justice System pays scant regard to crimes of a sexual nature carried out against women and children and in that regard is not fit for purpose.
It must be rather unique for a Sovereign Nation to be so dependent on another country to police crimes committed within it's borders as the only hope of justice for crime victims.
-
I have a love/hate relationship with Spammy. So outragious are some of her ideas that she makes me laugh. She can be kinda droll.
I hate it when she runs down The Mccanns, and think of her as like Junior school age, then .... WHOOPS, up comes a good post well worthy of the forum.
And in certain areas she shows real compassion. Can't think why she so hates the Mccanns.
@)(++(* she certainly is a very naughty little trollette that's for sure... 8(0(*
-
I like to see evidence, which doesn't seem to be one of your priorities.
But if you want a toss up between The McCanns and Brueckner there is no contest.
As for being close to being solved. I am sticking with Wolters for now, although I don't much care what Brueckner gets banged up for, while you appear to favour Rapists and Paedophiles.
That’s below you Eleanor. I’d expect that from Brietta but not you. I think G deserves an apology for your last comment. Thinking there is not enough evidence to convict a paedophile of a crime doesn’t mean that you ‘favour’ them.
-
If what we have been told is true and I've no reason to doubt it, Brueckner will face other charges for crimes of a sexual nature long before he will ever have charges laid against him for crimes against Madeleine.
All the current crimes for which he is presently suspect were committed in Portugal and the only hope of justice being served is from the German Courts. The vicious torture and rape for which he is currently serving time in Germany was committed in Portugal but had to be tried in Germany.
Loud and clear it tells me that the Portuguese Justice System pays scant regard to crimes of a sexual nature carried out against women and children and in that regard is not fit for purpose.
It must be rather unique for a Sovereign Nation to be so dependent on another country to police crimes committed within it's borders as the only hope of justice for crime victims.
Perhaps the U.K. should be sending their rape cases to Germany too as only 1.6% of reported rapes result in any sort of action.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/may/23/fewer-than-one-in-60-cases-lead-to-charge-in-england-and-wales
-
That’s below you Eleanor. I’d expect that from Brietta but not you. I think G deserves an apology for your last comment. Thinking there is not enough evidence to convict a paedophile of a crime doesn’t mean that you ‘favour’ them.
It does to an illogical mind.
-
Perhaps the U.K. should be sending their rape cases to Germany too as only 1.6% of reported rapes result in any sort of action.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/may/23/fewer-than-one-in-60-cases-lead-to-charge-in-england-and-wales
what’s the rate in Germany then?
-
That’s below you Eleanor. I’d expect that from Brietta but not you. I think G deserves an apology for your last comment. Thinking there is not enough evidence to convict a paedophile of a crime doesn’t mean that you ‘favour’ them.
Really? But that is not what I said. That is below you.
-
what’s the rate in Germany then?
No idea but isn’t that where failing states send their rape cases?
-
Really? But that is not what I said. That is below you.
This is what you said to me;
"you appear to favour Rapists and Paedophiles."
Explain yourself then.
-
Really? But that is not what I said. That is below you.
You did Eleanor.
-
It does to an illogical mind.
You don't even know what Logical means. You have been accusing The McCanns without evidence for some considerable time. This is a disgrace. What evidence do you have?
Don't take me on, Sweetie. I have tried not to belittle you too much. But I can if I so wish.
-
No idea but isn’t that where failing states send their rape cases?
That is such a laugh. It's a good job that I like you.
-
You don't even know what Logical means. You have been accusing The McCanns without evidence for some considerable time. This is a disgrace. What evidence do you have?
Don't take me on, Sweetie. I have tried not to belittle you too much. But I can if I so wish.
Right back atcha.
-
This is what you said to me;
"you appear to favour Rapists and Paedophiles."
Explain yourself then.
You afford Rapists and Paedophiles more rights to innocence than you afford to The McCanns.
-
No idea but isn’t that where failing states send their rape cases?
Said who?
-
You did Eleanor.
No I did not. I am an equal opportunities sort of person.
-
Right back atcha.
Really. Don't bank on it. I am much more tough than you will ever be. And better educated.
-
That is such a laugh. It's a good job that I like you.
it can’t be for her charm, wit and sweet nature, so I wonder what it is…
-
No I did not. I am an equal opportunities sort of person.
That’s why I’m so surprised.
-
it can’t be for her charm, wit and sweet nature, so I wonder what it is…
I’m an absolute sweetheart when you get to know me. Thankfully you never will.
-
Really. Don't bank on it. I am much more tough than you will ever be. And better educated.
Meanwhile, in the real world..... @)(++(*
-
I’m an absolute sweetheart when you get to know me. Thankfully you never will.
Indeed, I count my blessings every day.
-
It has so far taken fifteen years to come to this, while some of you hang on to something that is completely beyond me.
There has never been any evidence against The McCanns and never will be.
Whether or not Brueckner did this is by the by for now. But the fact that I have defended his right to innocence is such a joke when none of you offered the same to The McCanns.
There are times when I wonder what sort of people you are. Although fortunately this is not my problem.
-
it can’t be for her charm, wit and sweet nature, so I wonder what it is…
As it is, I like most people. It isn't in my soul to dislike anyone.
-
Meanwhile, in the real world..... @)(++(*
But you don't live in the real world. I know your world only too well.
-
Meanwhile, in the real world..... @)(++(*
Golly Gosh. And in hind sight, you think that this is funny?
-
I have a love/hate relationship with Spammy. So outragious are some of her ideas that she makes me laugh. She can be kinda droll.
I hate it when she runs down The Mccanns, and think of her as like Junior school age, then .... WHOOPS, up comes a good post well worthy of the forum.
And in certain areas she shows real compassion. Can't think why she so hates the Mccanns.
Aye, I'm not a bad guy really, just clinically insane, it runs in the family, my mother & aunt both developed dementia late in life so I've probably got that to look forward to, if I last long enough.
I can be compassionate, in the real world, I donate regularly to a small local cat rescue charity & in the last few weeks I kept seeing some poor homeless guy camped near my local shop, I've given him about £25 so far now.
I managed to restrain myself from giving him a right good kicking, like Helge Busching might have done.
-
Why are we where we are today over fifteen years down the line from the night Kate discovered that Madeleine was missing from her bed?
Well documented mistakes were made by the initial police investigators. None of whom had any experience within their ranks of working on child abduction cases. Unfortunately neither did they see the necessity of bringing someone in who did.
Why is there a contingent of diehards from the original botched investigation still insistent that a known and convicted sexual predator cannot possibly be envisaged as being responsible for stealing a child.
There is evidence enough against this sexual deviant to make him the prime suspect of three police forces. Some of which was in existence during the original investigation long before Madeleine's became a cold case.
-
Why are we where we are today over fifteen years down the line from the night Kate discovered that Madeleine was missing from her bed?
Well documented mistakes were made by the initial police investigators. None of whom had any experience within their ranks of working on child abduction cases. Unfortunately neither did they see the necessity of bringing someone in who did.
Why is there a contingent of diehards from the original botched investigation still insistent that a known and convicted sexual predator cannot possibly be envisaged as being responsible for stealing a child.
There is evidence enough against this sexual deviant to make him the prime suspect of three police forces. Some of which was in existence during the original investigation long before Madeleine's became a cold case.
Wolters isn't sure Brueckner actually abducted Maddie, he's only certain that he murdered her, apparently, & he presumes she was killed quite quickly.
But Brueckner was still hanging around the Algarve for at least a week after May 3rd, rather than skipping town pronto.
-
Wolters isn't sure Brueckner actually abducted Maddie, he's only certain that he murdered her, apparently, & he presumes she was killed quite quickly.
But Brueckner was still hanging around the Algarve for at least a week after May 3rd, rather than skipping town pronto.
There are reasons for the fact that it took fifteen years before Madeleine's case had any hope of resolution.
The man who wasn't in when the police came knocking at his door in May 2007 managed to keep a low profile until 2013 when a witness identified him after watching an appeal by Kate and Gerry.
Pity the police didn't keep following that up since you say he "was still hanging around the Algarve for at least a week after May 3rd".
He remained 'hiding in full sight' until another appeal by Kate and Gerry in 2017 flushed him out into the open although we only heard about him in 2021.
Seems nobody paid him any attention during his sojourns in the Algarve which seems to have been his favoured stamping ground for all sorts.
It is where he committed the heinous torture and rape he was jailed for. His victim didn't get justice in the Algarve. The Germans had to do that for her in a German court.
What a charmed life this well documented career criminal led in the Algarve. The INVISIBLE MAN for over fifteen years with a coterie of ex-police leaping to his defence in the Portuguese media when his cover was blown by a foreign police investigation.
-
There are reasons for the fact that it took fifteen years before Madeleine's case had any hope of resolution.
The man who wasn't in when the police came knocking at his door in May 2007 managed to keep a low profile until 2013 when a witness identified him after watching an appeal by Kate and Gerry.
Pity the police didn't keep following that up since you say he "was still hanging around the Algarve for at least a week after May 3rd".
He remained 'hiding in full sight' until another appeal by Kate and Gerry in 2017 flushed him out into the open although we only heard about him in 2021.
Seems nobody paid him any attention during his sojourns in the Algarve which seems to have been his favoured stamping ground for all sorts.
It is where he committed the heinous torture and rape he was jailed for. His victim didn't get justice in the Algarve. The Germans had to do that for her in a German court.
What a charmed life this well documented career criminal led in the Algarve. The INVISIBLE MAN for over fifteen years with a coterie of ex-police leaping to his defence in the Portuguese media when his cover was blown by a foreign police investigation.
Well they didn't really have good reason to suspect him of anything.
There was nothing immediately linking him to Madeleine's disappearance.
Maybe the crook he confessed to back in 2008 shouldn't have kept it to himself for 9 years.
-
Well they didn't really have good reason to suspect him of anything.
There was nothing immediately linking him to Madeleine's disappearance.
Maybe the crook he confessed to back in 2008 shouldn't have kept it to himself for 9 years.
I soooo agree. Then how was he to know that sharing information with the police sometimes didn't pay the expected dividends in 2008. Or how would he know what action was taken - or not.
I'm sure there was absolutely no reason for the police to be knocking at the door of a sex offender during a missing child inquiry.
This is what comes of collating information on the back of an envelope. Typewriters ~ word processors ~ and now computers: will the wonders of modern science never cease!!!!!!
-
I soooo agree. Then how was he to know that sharing information with the police sometimes didn't pay the expected dividends in 2008. Or how would he know what action was taken - or not.
I'm sure there was absolutely no reason for the police to be knocking at the door of a sex offender during a missing child inquiry.
This is what comes of collating information on the back of an envelope. Typewriters ~ word processors ~ and now computers: will the wonders of modern science never cease!!!!!!
Can we be certain he actually reported it to the police at the time?
It doesn't appear so.
-
Can we be certain he actually reported it to the police at the time?
It doesn't appear so.
I'm going with the Moorov Doctrine on that one.
-
I'm going with the Moorov Doctrine on that one.
Which is a) Scottish, b) requires more than one credible witness and c) seems to have time contraints. A bit tenuous in a case where a witness waited 9 years to come forward.
https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-64-issue-04/moorov-then-and-now/
-
Which is a) Scottish, b) requires more than one credible witness and c) seems to have time contraints. A bit tenuous in a case where a witness waited 9 years to come forward.
https://www.lawscot.org.uk/members/journal/issues/vol-64-issue-04/moorov-then-and-now/
You may have 'Googled' Moorov ~ but either you totally do not understand the concept or choose to misrepresent it. Nothing at all new there.
Basically it states that in the law of evidence in Scottish Law that corroboration can be found from two uncorroborated incidents closely related in time and nature.
Therefore proof can be found of the veracity of the witness in that a second witness affirms the same. That is, - that an incident was reported to the police at a date and time but ignored.
- that another witness statement relates the same procedural failure
I don't know if you contributed or not to recent threads on the forum where exactly this situation was discussed; but there is no doubt that Brueckner's friend was most certainly not alone in reporting to the police and never hearing about it again.
Which is why I cited Moorov. Very interesting you felt the need to attempt to rubbish it by turning the fact on its head.
Nine years does not come into it.
The witness stated that he gave the information to the police at the time. T'would be similar to the contact made to the police in similar circumstances in 2017. Only on this occasion the German police acted on the information and checked it out.
How different things might have been had the Portuguese acted in a similar fashion back in 2008 ~ but they didn't.
-
I wonder if these witnesses can remember when and where they went to speak to the police and which police force they spoke to?
-
I wonder if these witnesses can remember when and where they went to speak to the police and which police force they spoke to?
The point is - it doesn't really matter any more.
The time for action is long gone past now. Remember how the thread started. With the admonition that if one isn't looking one is highly unlikely to find.
Unfortunately that does seem to have been the norm as far as Madeleine McCann was concerned.
Even to the present day when legitimate investigation has led to the emergence of an individual that evidence suggests might have a case to answer and who is the prime suspect in Madeleine McCann's disappearance as a result.
The furore that has unleashed must be unprecedented as the suspect's "innocence" is defended to the hilt.
What crime did this little girl commit that it has taken over fifteen years to even touch on a resolution to her case?
Why is it that whatever the evidence against, there isn't a filthy pervert in the world who isn't vociferously defended while Madeleine is not? Has this been the true situation of fifteen years of official neglect, until evidence was given to the BKA which they actually followed through on which is why we are where we are today?
-
The point is - it doesn't really matter any more.
The time for action is long gone past now. Remember how the thread started. With the admonition that if one isn't looking one is highly unlikely to find.
Unfortunately that does seem to have been the norm as far as Madeleine McCann was concerned.
Even to the present day when legitimate investigation has led to the emergence of an individual that evidence suggests might have a case to answer and who is the prime suspect in Madeleine McCann's disappearance as a result.
The furore that has unleashed must be unprecedented as the suspect's "innocence" is defended to the hilt.
What crime did this little girl commit that it has taken over fifteen years to even touch on a resolution to her case?
Why is it that whatever the evidence against, there isn't a filthy pervert in the world who isn't vociferously defended while Madeleine is not? Has this been the true situation of fifteen years of official neglect, until evidence was given to the BKA which they actually followed through on which is why we are where we are today?
Wouldn't the time for defending her have been between 9pm & 10pm on May 3rd?
It's not much use defending her now if she's already dead, is it.
-
Wouldn't the time for defending her have been between 9pm & 10pm on May 3rd?
It's not much use defending her now if she's already dead, is it.
She is not dead. Why is everyone prepared to accept she is dead?
You do realise, don't you all, that if you keep saying it without any proof, she will become dead in the eyes of the World. And the search will cease.
Scotland Yard believe her to be missing. Note: NOT DEAD
I have reasons for believing her to be very much alive
Some very clever disinformation has been drip fed to us persuading people that Madeleine is dead. She is alive and either pregnant or has given birth (or maybe miscarried) from things that I have seen/deduced.
I seem to remember that Kate, her Mum, had carrying/birthing problems needing medical assistance
Every time someone on here, or elsewhere, says that Madeleine is dead puts another nail in the coffin of the search IMO
Please stop saying it.
-
Police close to charging Madeleine McCann No.1 suspect Christian B with sex crimes
Prosecutors handed files to Christian Brueckner's lawyer - the final step under German law before charges are brought. They do not include any evidence relating to Madeleine McCann's disappearance
ByMartin FrickerNews Reporter
19:05, 24 May 2022
Prosecutors have moved a step closer to charging Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner with new sex crimes.
They have handed their files to Brueckner’s lawyer, the final step under German law before charges are brought.
The paperwork includes evidence allegedly linking him to the rape of an Irish tour rep and indecent exposures.
German prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters told the Mirror the files were handed to Brueckner’s lawyer Friedrich Fulscher earlier this week. They do not include any evidence relating to Madeleine’s disappearance from her parents’ holiday flat in Praia da Luz in 2007.
Mr Wolters previously said investigators are sure Brueckner, 45, who lived in the resort, abducted the three-year-old.
Hazel Behan says she was raped in Praia de Rocha in June 2004.
She has waived her right to anonymity and said her masked attacker spoke English with a German accent.
The ordeal she described was similar to the rape Brueckner carried out on a pensioner in Praia da Luz in 2005, for which he is still in prison.
Files handed to Mr Fulscher also include evidence allegedly linking Brueckner to two indecent exposures to children in Portugal. Mr Wolters said: “The defence attorney must be given a reasonable amount of time to work through the files and to discuss them with his client.
“In view of the quite extensive files... Mr Fulscher will need a few weeks.”
Mr Fulscher now has a right of reply before any charges are filed.
Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry, of Rothley, Leics, say they hold out hope their daughter is still alive.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/police-close-charging-madeleine-mccann-27054128
-
EXCLUSIVE: Madeleine McCann suspect launches into Adolf Hitler rant in leaked prison letter
Rapist and paedophile Christian Brueckner, 45, has told German authorities to 'put up or shut up' after spending two years being labelled as the prime suspect in the Madeleine McCann case
Christian Brueckner denies any involvement in Madeleine McCann's disappearance
By Martin Fricker News Reporter
19:00, 20 Jul 2022
Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner has compared the German prosecutor investigating him to Adolf Hitler.
The 45-year-old rapist and paedophile hit out at Hans Christian Wolters in a ranting prison letter seen by the Mirror.
He told German authorities to “put up or shut up” after spending two years as the prime suspect in the case.
Brueckner, who denies any involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance, is serving a seven-year jail term for rape.
Mr Wolters has repeatedly said they have proof that Maddie was snatched by him in May 2007 and that she is dead.
But despite spending years investigating the German, they appear no closer to charging him with the crime.
Now Brueckner has gone on the offensive, challenging prosecutors to prove the claims they have made against him.
In a letter written in pencil, the convicted pervert said his life has been destroyed by “Hitler-like behaviour”.
He wrote: “I’m wondering why people still ask me where I was on 3 May 2007.
“It is not on me to present evidence. Ask the prosecutor in the same overkill way like it happens with me.
“Ask him why he destroyed the life of a human being by telling lies to the public in 2020.
“I can’t ask him. He is talking to me only by using the media.”
Likening Mr Wolters to Hitler, he added: “I can’t give any answer why a German prosecutor can act like that in the McCann case.
“The only answer I find for myself is that Hitler is still everywhere. The prosecutor has been sowing for two years now and he knows that there can’t be a return.”
Brueckner accused German authorities of trying to frame him for other crimes allegedly committed in Portugal. Prosecutors are believed to be weeks away from charging him with raping an Irish tour rep in the Algarve in 2004.
They also suspect him of involvement in two indecent exposure cases in Portugal involving children. Brueckner, who denies being responsible for any of the crimes, said of Mr Wolters: “The whole world is watching him. To cover the blame he starts more and more inquiries against me, all of them happened many years ago and far away from Germany.
“Witnesses are having bad memories already and they are easy to influence.
“I’ve spent the last few days reading files – 5,500 pages without any evidence for even one stolen bicycle. Nothing. I knew it would end like this.”
Brueckner also moaned about his conditions in Oldenburg Prison in northern Germany. He said: “It’s not even possible for me to buy even one pen. I’m in a special protected place (isolation) for more than four months.
“Locked up for 24 hours with no TV.”
He said in a previous letter: “I wasn’t kidnapping anybody and of course I wasn’t killing anybody.”
Portuguese officials made Brueckner an official suspect in May, almost 15 years on from Maddie’s disappearance.
He is currently in jail for the 2005 rape of a pensioner in Praia da Luz, the resort where Madeleine vanished from her family holiday apartment 15 years ago.
Parents Kate and Gerry McCann, from Rothley, Leics, still believe she is alive.
Mr Wolters has previously refused to comment on Brueckner’s prison letters.
Last year he told the Mirror that prosecutors have enough evidence to charge Brueckner with her murder, but as he is in jail for separate offences, they decided to continue their probe indefinitely.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-launches-adolf-27533856
-
Is this another letter to his penpal McFadden?
-
I have been wondering when the Hitler angle would raise it's ugly head, although coming from Brueckner is a surprise, considering the depths of his own depravity.
-
Confirms he has been served legal files... For the Behan case no doubt... Looks like things are moving.
-
EXCLUSIVE: Madeleine McCann suspect launches into Adolf Hitler rant in leaked prison letter
Rapist and paedophile Christian Brueckner, 45, has told German authorities to 'put up or shut up' after spending two years being labelled as the prime suspect in the Madeleine McCann case
Christian Brueckner denies any involvement in Madeleine McCann's disappearance
By Martin Fricker News Reporter
19:00, 20 Jul 2022
Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner has compared the German prosecutor investigating him to Adolf Hitler.
The 45-year-old rapist and paedophile hit out at Hans Christian Wolters in a ranting prison letter seen by the Mirror.
He told German authorities to “put up or shut up” after spending two years as the prime suspect in the case.
Brueckner, who denies any involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance, is serving a seven-year jail term for rape.
Mr Wolters has repeatedly said they have proof that Maddie was snatched by him in May 2007 and that she is dead.
But despite spending years investigating the German, they appear no closer to charging him with the crime.
Now Brueckner has gone on the offensive, challenging prosecutors to prove the claims they have made against him.
In a letter written in pencil, the convicted pervert said his life has been destroyed by “Hitler-like behaviour”.
He wrote: “I’m wondering why people still ask me where I was on 3 May 2007.
“It is not on me to present evidence. Ask the prosecutor in the same overkill way like it happens with me.
“Ask him why he destroyed the life of a human being by telling lies to the public in 2020.
“I can’t ask him. He is talking to me only by using the media.”
Likening Mr Wolters to Hitler, he added: “I can’t give any answer why a German prosecutor can act like that in the McCann case.
“The only answer I find for myself is that Hitler is still everywhere. The prosecutor has been sowing for two years now and he knows that there can’t be a return.”
Brueckner accused German authorities of trying to frame him for other crimes allegedly committed in Portugal. Prosecutors are believed to be weeks away from charging him with raping an Irish tour rep in the Algarve in 2004.
They also suspect him of involvement in two indecent exposure cases in Portugal involving children. Brueckner, who denies being responsible for any of the crimes, said of Mr Wolters: “The whole world is watching him. To cover the blame he starts more and more inquiries against me, all of them happened many years ago and far away from Germany.
“Witnesses are having bad memories already and they are easy to influence.
“I’ve spent the last few days reading files – 5,500 pages without any evidence for even one stolen bicycle. Nothing. I knew it would end like this.”
Brueckner also moaned about his conditions in Oldenburg Prison in northern Germany. He said: “It’s not even possible for me to buy even one pen. I’m in a special protected place (isolation) for more than four months.
“Locked up for 24 hours with no TV.”
He said in a previous letter: “I wasn’t kidnapping anybody and of course I wasn’t killing anybody.”
Portuguese officials made Brueckner an official suspect in May, almost 15 years on from Maddie’s disappearance.
He is currently in jail for the 2005 rape of a pensioner in Praia da Luz, the resort where Madeleine vanished from her family holiday apartment 15 years ago.
Parents Kate and Gerry McCann, from Rothley, Leics, still believe she is alive.
Mr Wolters has previously refused to comment on Brueckner’s prison letters.
Last year he told the Mirror that prosecutors have enough evidence to charge Brueckner with her murder, but as he is in jail for separate offences, they decided to continue their probe indefinitely.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-launches-adolf-27533856
"But despite spending years investigating the German, they appear no closer to charging him with the crime."
Wait, what?
I could have sworn Jon Clarke said charges against Brueckner would follow immediately after Wolters wraps up the other cases.
-
Confirms he has been served legal files... For the Behan case no doubt... Looks like things are moving.
Yeah, he's being charged with rape, he might even get convicted of rape.
In McCann/Brueckner desperation world, this means he'll be charged with murdering Maddie sometime shortly thereafter.
-
Wolters has indicated a connection between the Maddie case, the Behan case and the American rape and a successful conviction for the Behan case could help the Maddie case. We know the two rapes were filmed.. Another pointer to a video in the McCann case
-
I have been wondering when the Hitler angle would raise it's ugly head, although coming from Brueckner is a surprise, considering the depths of his own depravity.
Brueckner already mentioned my favourite political leader when he said he was now the worlds most famous German (Hitler was Austrian).
-
Wolters has indicated a connection between the Maddie case, the Behan case and the American rape[/b][/size] and a successful conviction for the Behan case could help the Maddie case. We know the two rapes were filmed.. Another pointer to a video in the McCann case
Oh, so now it's a video, not a photo?
Right, I suppose we can just imagine any old evidence really, when the need takes us.
-
So there's old Brueckner, sitting in jail, knowing full well he made that paedo photo/video/potato print painting of Maddie, & that Wolters has it firmly in his possession, along with all the other concrete evidence, & yet, rather than cowering or trying to explain anything away, he's blatantly ripping the prosecutor drawing cartoons mocking him & telling him to put up or shut up.
Confident abductor/murderer old Brueckner, isn't he.
Or, maybe it's just that he had absolutely nothing at all to do with Madeleine's disappearance, could be that couldn't it.
-
Is this another letter to his penpal McFadden?
He wrote: “I’m wondering why people still ask me where I was on 3 May 2007.
“It is not on me to present evidence. Ask the prosecutor in the same overkill way like it happens with me.
Seems there is absolutely no chance that he has an alibi for 3 May 2007. Else why not just say who or what that may be? simple enough one might think.
On the other hand - I believe there may have been some thought given to the possibility that the abductor may have had an accomplice which might be concentrating minds a bit.
-
He wrote: “I’m wondering why people still ask me where I was on 3 May 2007.
“It is not on me to present evidence. Ask the prosecutor in the same overkill way like it happens with me.
Seems there is absolutely no chance that he has an alibi for 3 May 2007. Else why not just say who or what that may be? simple enough one might think.
On the other hand - I believe there may have been some thought given to the possibility that the abductor may have had an accomplice which might be concentrating minds a bit.
Wolters can't prove Brueckner actually abducted Maddie, or, that Maddie was ever abducted in the first place, so bit of a moot point really.
-
I have been wondering when the Hitler angle would raise it's ugly head, although coming from Brueckner is a surprise, considering the depths of his own depravity.
Seems he's never heard of “Godwin’s Law”. But good to see from his tone that his cage is metaphorically being well and truly rattled.
-
He wrote: “I’m wondering why people still ask me where I was on 3 May 2007.
“It is not on me to present evidence. Ask the prosecutor in the same overkill way like it happens with me.
Seems there is absolutely no chance that he has an alibi for 3 May 2007. Else why not just say who or what that may be? simple enough one might think.
On the other hand - I believe there may have been some thought given to the possibility that the abductor may have had an accomplice which might be concentrating minds a bit.
Almost certainly No Alibi, although in itself it isn't that important. But what worries me is that Brueckner appears to have tried to set up a false Alibi.
-
Wolters can't prove Brueckner actually abducted Maddie, or, that Maddie was ever abducted in the first place, so bit of a moot point really.
Yes he can.. Wait and see..
-
Wolters can't prove Brueckner actually abducted Maddie, or, that Maddie was ever abducted in the first place, so bit of a moot point really.
Haven't you noticed how quiet it has been of late with only you and an ever dwindling band raising their heads above the parapet.
Anyone who has seen the evidence against Brueckner has been convinced by it, including the Policia Judiciaria.
The new evidence would confirm that Christian Brueckner - the main suspect of committing the abduction and then murdering the three-year-old girl - was responsible for her disappearance.
Last night, the Portuguese authorities confirmed that Brueckner had been declared a “formal suspect”.
https://www.infobae.com/en/2022/04/22/the-new-evidence-that-complicates-christian-brueckner-in-the-madeleine-mccann-case/
-
Almost certainly No Alibi, although in itself it isn't that important. But what worries me is that Brueckner appears to have tried to set up a false Alibi.
You think the girl who confirms Brueckner was with her in his van the same week Maddie disappeared was just saying that to help the murderer out?
I wonder why she'd want to do that?
-
Haven't you noticed how quiet it has been of late with only you and an ever dwindling band raising their heads above the parapet.
Anyone who has seen the evidence against Brueckner has been convinced by it, including the Policia Judiciaria.
The new evidence would confirm that Christian Brueckner - the main suspect of committing the abduction and then murdering the three-year-old girl - was responsible for her disappearance.
Last night, the Portuguese authorities confirmed that Brueckner had been declared a “formal suspect”.
https://www.infobae.com/en/2022/04/22/the-new-evidence-that-complicates-christian-brueckner-in-the-madeleine-mccann-case/
Well, isn't that just swell, good for them. Now, lets see them either put up or shut up, as my hero & I keep challenging them to, for the past two years.
Shouldn't be much longer now.....
-
You think the girl who confirms Brueckner was with her in his van the same week Maddie disappeared was just saying that to help the murderer out?
I wonder why she'd want to do that?
But she didn't confirm it.
-
But she didn't confirm it.
Not any precise time or date, but that week, at some points, she most certainly did.
Or, she lied to her husband, who then spread the lie to MWT, because she wanted to vouch for a rapist/paedophile/murderer, for some unspecified reason.
Sounds likely doesn't it.
-
Not any precise time or date, but that week, at some points, she most certainly did.
Or, she lied to her husband, who then spread the lie to MWT, because she wanted to vouch for a rapist/paedophile/murderer, for some unspecified reason.
Sounds likely doesn't it.
She did not confirm Brueckner's Alibi. Why did he try to use her? Sounds like a set up to me.
-
She did not confirm Brueckner's Alibi. Why did he try to use her? Sounds like a set up to me.
She confirmed he doesn't have an alibi
-
Was the Abduction planned in advance? Hence Brueckner's attempts to arrange an Alibi.
-
She did not confirm Brueckner's Alibi. Why did he try to use her? Sounds like a set up to me.
https://youtu.be/D0F_zO5TXqY?t=3456
This is a bizarre theory, she could straight up trash Brueckners alibi by saying she'd never spent time with him the week he claims, but she's not saying anything, except to her partner & him to MWT.
Personally, if a rapist/murderer/paedophile was claiming I was busy with them, when I definitely wasn't, I'd have a few choice words for them.
-
She confirmed he doesn't have an alibi
For the abduction no one can prove, that's a lot of use then.
-
Was the Abduction planned in advance? Hence Brueckner's attempts to arrange an Alibi.
What abduction?
-
https://youtu.be/D0F_zO5TXqY?t=3456
This is a bizarre theory, she could straight up trash Brueckners alibi by saying she'd never spent time with him the week he claims, but she's not saying anything, except to her partner & him to MWT.
Personally, if a rapist/murderer/paedophile was claiming I was busy with them, when I definitely wasn't, I'd have a few choice words for them.
She can't remember if she was with him.
https://youtu.be/D0F_zO5TXqY?t=3518
Busy meeting a lot of random men in campervans was she?
-
https://youtu.be/D0F_zO5TXqY?t=3456
This is a bizarre theory, she could straight up trash Brueckners alibi by saying she'd never spent time with him the week he claims, but she's not saying anything, except to her partner & him to MWT.
Personally, if a rapist/murderer/paedophile was claiming I was busy with them, when I definitely wasn't, I'd have a few choice words for them.
She had already spoken to Wolters
-
She can't remember if she was with him.
https://youtu.be/D0F_zO5TXqY?t=3518
Busy meeting a lot of random men in campervans was she?
She could well have decided not to Commit Perjury.
-
She had already spoken to Wolters
I know, so it's Wolters move now, only, not much happening is there, certainly nothing in the real world anyway.
-
She could well have decided not to Commit Perjury.
Or, maybe she did meet Brueckner in his van that week, can't be sure of any certain date, & Wolters can't prove Maddie was ever abducted in the first place.
I guess we'll find out soon enough, or perhaps not, as it appears to the Daily Mirror.
-
Or, maybe she did meet Brueckner in his van that week, can't be sure of any certain date, & Wolters can't prove Maddie was ever abducted in the first place.
I guess we'll find out soon enough, or perhaps not, as it appears to the Daily Mirror.
Just stop obfuscating. You were wrong.
-
Just stop obfuscating. You were wrong.
Oh I see, so she probably was meeting a lot of random men in campervans then, just couldn't quite remember Brueckners personality or anatomy.
Maybe that's what the physical exam was for then, Wolters will show her the photos, try to jog her memory, or not, as the case may be.
-
She can't remember.
What you have to ask yourself is, wouldn't you remember sleeping, or not, with a now world famous rapist, murderer & paedophile?
Maybe he was that bad in bed she had to supress any memory of it.
She'll wake up in a cold sweat in the witness box one day, realising it wasn't just a terrible nightmare after all.
-
Oh I see, so she probably was meeting a lot of random men in campervans then, just couldn't quite remember Brueckners personality or anatomy.
Maybe that's what the physical exam was for then, Wolters will show her the photos, try to jog her memory, or not, as the case may be.
You seem to be forgetting that BKA found digital evidence consisting of many images of the abuse of children some of which might have featured a perpetrator.
I wonder if the physical examination was less to do with the rape investigation and all to do with something else entirely.
-
You seem to be forgetting that BKA found digital evidence consisting of many images of the abuse of children some of which might have featured a perpetrator.
I wonder if the physical examination was less to do with the rape investigation and all to do with something else entirely.
No, I hadn't forgotten.
I seem to remember it being reported the police also found photos of Brueckner performing sex acts on himself. I like to remember that several times a week.
-
And cb has a cheek to call hans wolrer hitler!
-
Whats absolutely clear is the action against CB is moving forward.
CB says he is busy reading the evidence against him. From what HCW has said this is re the Behan case. HCW has also said this case has implications in the Maddie case.
Its clear things are moving forward
-
And cb has a cheek to call hans wolrer hitler!
Well, Brueckner is a petty thief, burglar, drug dealer, rapist etc
Doesn't really compare much to a genocidal racist dictator who sent his country to war with the rest of world.
Wolters does come across as rather authoritarian however, his word is thus, is the only true word & you must accept without evidence that what he says is true, so I kind of get the point Brueckner was making, albeit in the extreme.
-
Whats absolutely clear is the action against CB is moving forward.
CB says he is busy reading the evidence against him. From what HCW has said this is re the Behan case. HCW has also said this case has implications in the Maddie case.
Its clear things are moving forward
Down a dead end street head first into the brick wall at the end.
Wolters might nail Brueckner for a few rapes & molestations, So what? He won't be getting him convicted of abducting or murdering Maddie at all ever, that much is obvious.
-
I wonder why Brueckner, who went to great lengths & was ultimately successful in abducting & murdering Maddie, then decided he'd never abduct nor murder any more children thereafter?
Maybe just the one was enough for him, decided he didn't really like it, quit that kind of behaviour, then went back to selling knock of fags & robbing petrol.
-
I wonder why Brueckner, who went to great lengths & was ultimately successful in abducting & murdering Maddie, then decided he'd never abduct nor murder any more children thereafter?
Maybe just the one was enough for him, decided he didn't really like it, quit that kind of behaviour, then went back to selling knock of fags & robbing petrol.
But then, he was so utterly chuffed about his experience with Maddie that he squealed to Busching all about it, then boasted to a paedo undertaker in a chat room too.
How strange then, that his abducting murdering ways suddenly ceased to be immediately after May 2007?
Oh well, I'm sure there's a perfectly logical & plausible explanation for it.
-
I have been wondering when the Hitler angle would raise it's ugly head, although coming from Brueckner is a surprise, considering the depths of his own depravity.
Bet you never thought another German would raise it,
-
So he can't have pens but can pen letters, the blokes amazing in his ability, not least to have abducted Madeleine without any one knowing or leaving a trace.
-
Down a dead end street head first into the brick wall at the end.
Wolters might nail Brueckner for a few rapes & molestations, So what? He won't be getting him convicted of abducting or murdering Maddie at all ever, that much is obvious.
You seem to be under the illusion that your opinion is fact... Which makes you look a bit of a fool. The case is moving forward... We will have to wait to see what happens next.
-
Bet you never thought another German would raise it,
They weren't all bad.
Brueckner however, is the perfect example of depravity.
-
You seem to be under the illusion that your opinion is fact... Which makes you look a bit of a fool. The case is moving forward... We will have to wait to see what happens next.
No charges in relation to Maddie, that's what's going to happen, mate, but you'll never accept it.
In your world, charges will always be just beyond the horizon, after the next charge, or the next, or once Wolters identifies the distinctive wallpaper in the background of the photo/video & finds Maddie's body down the well nearby.
-
So he can't have pens but can pen letters, the blokes amazing in his ability, not least to have abducted Madeleine without any one knowing or leaving a trace.
He's got a pencil, & crayons, & ultimate confidence Wolters doesn't have any evidence.
I mean, it could well be that Brueckner is the master of one off, traceless child abductions & murders, or, maybe he just had nothing at all to do with Madeleine's disappearance, that seems more likely doesn't it, if we're being realistic.
-
No charges in relation to Maddie, that's what's going to happen, mate, but you'll never accept it.
In your world, charges will always be just beyond the horizon, after the next charge, or the next, or once Wolters identifies the distinctive wallpaper in the background of the photo/video & finds Maddie's body down the well nearby.
As I've said this morning you are just making yourself look foolish
-
He's got a pencil, & crayons, & ultimate confidence Wolters doesn't have any evidence.
I mean, it could well be that Brueckner is the master of one off, traceless child abductions & murders, or, maybe he just had nothing at all to do with Madeleine's disappearance, that seems more likely doesn't it, if we're being realistic.
Brueckner would have to have been raving mad to do it again. Mind you, I haven't discounted that possibility.
-
Brueckner would have to have been raving mad to do it again. Mind you, I haven't discounted that possibility.
Why?
It thrilled him so much he couldn't wait to boast to his mates about it & he got clean away.
Do you have any particular abductions & murders he might also committed in mind or was this just a hopeful blanket statement?
-
As I've said this morning you are just making yourself look foolish
This is projection on your part.
You're accepting something as fact with scant evidence to support it, but tick tick & all that, Wolters is going to prove me wrong any day now.
-
Why?
It thrilled him so much he couldn't wait to boast to his mates about it & he got clean away.
Do you have any particular abductions & murders he might also committed in mind or was this just a hopeful blanket statement?
I haven't discounted the possibility that he is raving mad.
-
This is projection on your part.
You're accepting something as fact with scant evidence to support it, but tick tick & all that, Wolters is going to prove me wrong any day now.
You were proven wrong about The Alibi.
-
You were proven wrong about The Alibi.
Until /or it gets to court no one will know what is right or wrong .
-
Well, Brueckner is a petty thief, burglar, drug dealer, rapist etc
Comparing hitler to hans wolters is an unbelievable statement lol, i can see where you are coming from why not do it again, but the amount of media attention. He also raped after 2007 so its possible he can be linked to several crimes. Extradited etc he is a career criminal. I think in a few weeks the hazel behan case of examining the thighs should be sorted soon.
Doesn't really compare much to a genocidal racist dictator who sent his country to war with the rest of world.
Wolters does come across as rather authoritarian however, his word is thus, is the only true word & you must accept without evidence that what he says is true, so I kind of get the point Brueckner was making, albeit in the extreme.
-
Until /or it gets to court no one will know what is right or wrong .
That will apply to much more than the alibi I think
-
Until /or it gets to court no one will know what is right or wrong .
The presumption of innocence trumps any allegations.
So, it's one nil to Brueckner, unless Wolters can prove otherwise, & he's not having much luck with that.
-
Comparing hitler to hans wolters is an unbelievable statement lol, i can see where you are coming from why not do it again, but the amount of media attention. He also raped after 2007 so its possible he can be linked to several crimes. Extradited etc he is a career criminal.
Wolters hasn't mentioned any though, certainly not any abductions & murders anyway.
Maybe he's saving them all up for later. Just get Hazel out of the way, then nail him for exposing himself on beaches & in playgrounds, then, somehow, as if by magic, through that process, Wolters will have accumulated sufficient evidence in relation to Maddie.
-
You were proven wrong about The Alibi.
Was I?
That girl just couldn't remember if she'd ever met world famous abductor & murderer Brueckner before?
Sounds likely doesn't it.
-
I haven't discounted the possibility that he is raving mad.
Raving mad, but also very efficient at traceless child abductions & murders, whilst filming them.
He is an interesting chap Brueckner, I'm looking forward to reading his book.
-
Was I?
That girl just couldn't remember if she'd ever met world famous abductor & murderer Brueckner before?
Sounds likely doesn't it.
She couldn't remember where he was that night. There is a difference.
-
She couldn't remember where he was that night. There is a difference.
.....and no one can prove, or present any tangible evidence that Maddie was actually abducted that night, by Brueckner or anyone else, so, Brueckner wins by default.
-
The presumption of innocence trumps any allegations.
So, it's one nil to Brueckner, unless Wolters can prove otherwise, & he's not having much luck with that.
The presumption of innocence does not trump any allegations
-
.....and no one can prove, or present any tangible evidence that Maddie was actually abducted that night, by Brueckner or anyone else, so, Brueckner wins by default.
Wolters says he can prove Maddie was abducted and murdered...you can choose not to believe him but you vsnt state as s fact he doesn't have proof
-
The presumption of innocence does not trump any allegations
Well he isn't being held on remand.
You seem to think if a prosecutor says so, then it's true.
Quite a bizarre position really but nevermind, I shouldn't really expect any different from people who are certain Maddie wad abducted just because the McCanns said so.
-
Wolters says he can prove Maddie was abducted and murdered...you can choose not to believe him but you vsnt state as s fact he doesn't have proof
Err yes I can.
It's called Hitchens law, that which is claimed without presentation of evidence can equally be dismissed without evidence.
If Wolters can say what he likes then so can I.
And if Mods here state as fact Maddie was abducted I have equal right to state that she wasn't.
-
Well he isn't being held on remand.
You seem to think if a prosecutor says so, then it's true.
Quite a bizarre position really but nevermind, I shouldn't really expect any different from people who are certain Maddie wad abducted just because the McCanns said so.
He doesn't have to be held On Remand. He's banged up In Solitary.
-
He doesn't have to be held On Remand. He's banged up In Solitary.
He still must be presumed innocent though, unless/until Wolters can prove otherwise, & Brueckner is supremely confident that wont be happening any time.
Which is quite surprising, considering he's supposed to have GoPro'd Madeleine's abduction & murder, doesn't have an alibi & knows full well Wolters has all the incriminating footage, along with all the other evidence against him.
It's interesting, he's either the most audacious one-off abductor/murderer I've ever heard about, or maybe he just didn't do it.
-
He still must be presumed innocent though, unless/until Wolters can prove otherwise, & Brueckner is supremely confident that wont be happening any time.
Which is quite surprising, considering he's supposed to have GoPro'd Madeleine's abduction & murder, doesn't have an alibi & knows full well Wolters has all the incriminating footage, along with all the other evidence against him.
It's interesting, he's either the most audacious one-off abductor/murderer I've ever heard about, or maybe he just didn't do it.
I have never said that Brueckner Did It. I just hope he never gets out. But someone will be hot on his tail if he ever does. He will never roam Europe unchecked again.
-
I have never said that Brueckner Did It. I just hope he never gets out. But someone will be hot on his tail if he ever does. He will never roam Europe unchecked again.
I doubt it. Police will have better things to do than keep long-term tabs on him.
-
I doubt it. Police will have better things to do than keep long-term tabs on him.
If his partial finger print really is on a knife at Hazel Behans, as Jon Clarke claims (although, you can understand why one might be a little sceptical about this, given that it comes from Jon Clarke), &/or, the birthmark matches, then he probably won't be out for another 7 years, plus a year or 2 for the playground exposures. I don't recall Hazel Behan mentioning that he filmed her ordeal though, but I stand to be corrected on that, if anyone knows any different.
So that's alright, 9 years gives Wolters plenty of time to find more definitive evidence Brueckner murdered Maddie than he currently has, which is pretty much nothing.
-
I doubt it. Police will have better things to do than keep long-term tabs on him.
Oh well. Never mind. More children sexually abused and more old women violently raped.
No wonder Wolters wants to keep him locked up.
-
.....and no one can prove, or present any tangible evidence that Maddie was actually abducted that night, by Brueckner or anyone else, so, Brueckner wins by default.
There was enough evidence to satisfy 3 National Police Forces that there was an abduction.
-
There was enough evidence to satisfy 3 National Police Forces that there was an abduction.
They just can't prove it actually happened, that's all, no biggie.
-
They just can't prove it actually happened, that's all, no biggie.
Maybe they can. How do you know otherwise?
SY might know where Madeleine actually is at this moment. They are not going to tell you and will wait until the right time to move
-
Err yes I can.
It's called Hitchens law, that which is claimed without presentation of evidence can equally be dismissed without evidence.
If Wolters can say what he likes then so can I.
And if Mods here state as fact Maddie was abducted I have equal right to state that she wasn't.
You can say what you like... It's of no consequence.
There's another rule of evidence.. It's called expert opinion.. It has value.. Yours doesnt
-
Maybe they can. How do you know otherwise?
SY might know where Madeleine actually is at this moment. They are not going to tell you and will wait until the right time to move
This is always a possibility.
But they have proved that Brueckner sexually abused young children and violently raped a 72 year old woman. This is vile.
-
Maybe they can. How do you know otherwise?
SY might know where Madeleine actually is at this moment. They are not going to tell you and will wait until the right time to move
Blimey, you think SY know Maddie is alive while Wolters is certain she's Dead?
Bit of a problem with their lines of communication if so.
This is what 14 million buys is It?
A disjointed & confused line of enquiry. Well, maybe I suppose, but it sounds rather absurd to me.
Could the 3 forces really be that incompetent?
-
Blimey, you think SY know Maddie is alive while Wolters is certain she's Dead?
Bit of a problem with their lines of communication if so.
This is what 14 million buys is It?
A disjointed & confused line of enquiry. Well, maybe I suppose, but it sounds rather absurd to me.
Could the 3 forces really be that incompetent?
We've had this crap before -
People know where Madeleine is and are watching. Just waiting until she's old enough to identify herself on Facebook - just waiting until she's 16 -just waiting until she's 18 etc.
Well she an adult now so what's stopping these people acting ?
IMO
The reason is because she's not out there, or at least not alive.
-
We've had this crap before -
People know where Madeleine is and are watching. Just waiting until she's old enough to identify herself on Facebook - just waiting until she's 16 -just waiting until she's 18 etc.
Well she an adult now so what's stopping these people acting ?
IMO
The reason is because she's not out there, or at least not alive.
Madeleine might not know who she is.
Joanna might think her mother sold her.
-
We've had this crap before -
People know where Madeleine is and are watching. Just waiting until she's old enough to identify herself on Facebook - just waiting until she's 16 -just waiting until she's 18 etc.
Well she an adult now so what's stopping these people acting ?
IMO
The reason is because she's not out there, or at least not alive.
Unashamedly, Amaral tells us in his book that from day one his focus was on Madeleine's parents. I think if the priorities are wrong and you don't look for a missing child the prospect of finding her are zero.
No wonder it took fifteen years of playing "catch-up" when the parents were put in the frame in the first instance and as Amaral has admitted, local paedophile predators ignored.
The 6 errors Madeleine McCann detectives made in the search for the missing youngster
Detective Colin Sutton claims some of the mistakes made by the Portuguese police could have hampered the investigation
Colin Sutton reveals the 6 mistakes the police made (Image: Daily Mirror)
By Paul Jollands
23:00, 21 Apr 2017UPDATED11:41, 2 May 2017
Portuguese police were accused of making a string of basic errors in the early days of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance.
They range from failing to properly seal off apartment 5A to pointing the finger of blame at her parents.
Colin Sutton says some of the Policia Judiciaria’s errors hampered the investigation.
But he also said Portuguese authorities received unwarranted criticism concerning other aspects of the massive probe.
Here the ex-Met detective confronts the biggest errors made by the PJ – and defends other decisions they took.
(1) The alarm was raised at 10.15pm, but first officers did not arrive in Praia da Luz until 11pm and the disappearance was not taken seriously enough
“This is an unacceptable delay, regardless of what they thought had happened to Madeleine,” says Colin.
“Even if they thought she had innocently wandered off, it should not have taken them 45 minutes to arrive.
“In a missing person case there is a judgment to be made about how it is treated. If it’s a 21-year-old who is missing after being out clubbing, you are not as worried as you would be about a missing three-year-old.
“I would like to think that any police officer who is told a three-year-old girl has gone missing will be instantly taking it extremely seriously.
“The question is do you treat it like a crime scene that needs to be preserved right from the start or is the most likely explanation that she wandered off? The Portuguese police were widely criticised for not sealing off the scene, making it a crime scene.
“But if there is a chance the missing girl could be wandering around lost in the immediate area, then that rightly takes priority. You are prioritising searching the immediate area rather than sealing off the scene.
“If there is sign of a violent struggle or forced entry then it would be different, but that wasn’t the case with Madeleine’s disappearance.
“If there was sign of forced entry, then your thinking starts going down the line of crime rather than just a missing person. But in the absence of any evidence your natural thought is she has wandered off.
“You think, ‘Let’s start looking for her’, rather than thinking of anything as sinister as abduction.
“That would have been the call for the uniformed officers who were first on the scene at the Ocean Club.
“Once she was not found in the immediate area then I would have asked the officers to look for evidence of a crime.
“I can well imagine that the Portuguese police’s initial thoughts were that they were going to find the little girl wandering around in her pyjamas no further than half a mile from the apartment.
“When the searches have proved fruitless I would want to talk to the parents.
“Very quickly there should have been the realisation that this was a crime rather than something more innocent. That should have been realised within 30 minutes, but in Madeleine’s case it clearly wasn’t realised all that quickly.
“It was not taken as seriously as it should have been.”
(2) Spanish border officials were not notified about her disappearance until the following day and roadblocks were not put in place
“Abduction across the border is very rare, so the temptation is not to push the buttons on border alerts because it’s not worth it.
“There is a reluctance in policing to ‘overreact’. In 95% of cases such as this, there is an innocent explanation.
“There is a reluctance to escalate things until you are certain they need to be escalated. For example the Metropolitan Police get 30,000 missing person reports every year. In 2012 it was reported that 30 children had gone missing in Portugal since Madeleine’s disappearance.”
(3) House-to-house inquiries were haphazard and in some cases did not happen at all
“House-to-house, or in this case apartment-to-apartment, inquiries should have happened straight away. It is a simple case of knocking on doors and asking the occupants if they saw anything.
“If you’re on holiday and see a three-year-old girl wandering outside in her pyjamas, the natural thing is to bring her inside and figure out where she is from.
“For all the police knew, Madeleine could have been inside one of those apartments. But it takes lots of resources to do that. Because it was a holiday complex, it was the equivalent of knocking on as many doors as an entire housing estate in the UK.
“That takes the kind of manpower that would not have been immediately available to the Portuguese police.”
(4) The limited CCTV footage from the local area was not checked
“There would not have been too much CCTV in Praia da Luz 10 years ago. There still isn’t now.
“Therefore it might not have been at the front of their minds to check whatever cameras were around. In the UK, securing CCTV is among the first things you do and proves crucial to every investigation.”
(5) Lack of information released to public from Portuguese police
“There was no publicising the case from the local police, which is unheard of back home.
“The public assistance in a case like Madeleine’s would have been huge because of the emotive subject - a missing three-year-old girl. It defies belief that they did not publish e-fits once they had them.
“Their lack of PR explains why the McCanns were so pro-active on that front. They were trying to fill the vacuum.”
(6) Forensic examinations of the McCann apartment were poor and no DNA tests were carried out on Madeleine’s toy Cuddle Cat
“In a case like this, you start by looking where Madeleine was when she was taken.
“She was in her bed, probably clutching her fluffy toy Cuddle Cat. So that’s where the forensics begins. The abductor would have had to pull back the duvet, probably physically remove Cuddle Cat from Madeleine’s arms.
"If the reports are true that no DNA tests were carried out on Cuddle Cat before Kate washed it, that’s astonishing.
“There were photographs of officers in their normal clothes, not even wearing gloves, doing fingerprints. It looks like they just didn’t do a good job.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/6-errors-madeleine-mccann-detectives-10272590
-
The limited number of The PJ on duty that night were off somewhere else looking into a fake burglary. I have to wonder who phoned in that fake report?
There was no burglary.
Amaral of course, was in a bar somewhere getting pissed.
-
The limited number of The PJ on duty that night were off somewhere else looking into a fake burglary. I have to wonder who phoned in that fake report?
There was no burglary.
Amaral of course, was in a bar somewhere getting pissed.
Wasn't that the GNR, not the PJ?
-
Wasn't that the GNR, not the PJ?
I don't think so. The GNR can't investigate a crime. Unless you know better. In which case why did The PJ turn up at all?
-
I don't think so. The GNR can't investigate a crime. Unless you know better. In which case why did The PJ turn up at all?
I'm not sure it really matters who the first responders were. Just a petty deflection from the fact that an alarm which might have taken resources away at a critical time in Luz and sending them ten miles away? to Odiaxere could have been of significance. Had it been treated as such at the time.
Interestingly the newspaper reporting the incident probably reveals yet another investigative failure regarding the phone dump the police had access to but with the exception of the McCann party and Murat and his associates, failed to use properly.
In the minutes after she was abducted a decade a go, local police in Portugal were reportedly diverted to the burglary about 10 miles from the Praia da Luz resort where the McCann family were holidaying.
The phone call to the Lagos police station, said to be from a Lisbon-based alarm systems company, was discovered in a new analysis of police phone records, The Sun reports.
The newspaper reports one of the few police cars available responded to the reported break-in in Odiaxere, northeast of Praia da Luz.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/mystery-phone-call-reporting-burglary-10278677
-
I don't think so. The GNR can't investigate a crime. Unless you know better. In which case why did The PJ turn up at all?
The GNR responded because that's who the Ocean Club telephoned. They arrived at 23.00. The GNR later called the PJ in, who came from Porto DIC.
-
The GNR responded because that's who the Ocean Club telephoned. They arrived at 23.00. The GNR later called the PJ in, who came from Porto DIC.
And the significance of this fifteen+ years down the line is ? ? ?
-
And the significance of this fifteen+ years down the line is ? ? ?
An untrue claim was made. The PJ weren't deflected away from PdL.
-
An untrue claim was made. The PJ weren't deflected away from PdL.
The claim made was that there was a report of a burglary which coincided with the abduction of a child. Are you OK with that?
-
An untrue claim was made. The PJ weren't deflected away from PdL.
The Portuguese police attended. I am still on track, here am I?
-
An untrue claim was made. The PJ weren't deflected away from PdL.
On arrival the apparently overstretched police found no burglary in progress. Is that alright by you?
This thread topic is "It has taken fifteen years ~ is Madeleine's case close to being solved?" In which way do your recent posts reflect what is presently going on with relation to your concerns about a false report regarding a false burglary fifteen years ago?
-
On arrival the apparently overstretched police found no burglary in progress. Is that alright by you?
This thread topic is "It has taken fifteen years ~ is Madeleine's case close to being solved?" In which way do your recent posts reflect what is presently going on with relation to your concerns about a false report regarding a false burglary fifteen years ago?
Well if you don't want facts, fine.
-
Well if you don't want facts, fine.
German police will not waste time on a different culturual missing child.
-
German police will not waste time on a different culturual missing child.
Any evidence there is actually an investigation going on , no sign of German plod in Luz, if there was I'm sure the world and its wife would know. They've convinced themselves she's dead.
-
Any evidence there is actually an investigation going on , no sign of German plod in Luz, if there was I'm sure the world and its wife would know. They've convinced themselves she's dead.
Your post reveals you are deeply mired in denial.
The precedent is there that the evidence is that no German presence is required in Portugal to pursue and investigate Portuguese crimes and prosecution of those crimes committed in Portugal.
-
Any evidence there is actually an investigation going on , no sign of German plod in Luz, if there was I'm sure the world and its wife would know. They've convinced themselves she's dead.
Brueckner didn't leave her in Luz, he hid her in the stash place in his VW then drove her to Germany, then murdered her.
-
Any evidence there is actually an investigation going on , no sign of German plod in Luz, if there was I'm sure the world and its wife would know. They've convinced themselves she's dead.
CB has confirmed he has received 5500 pages of evidence which must relate to an impending prosecution..., Behan rape no doubt. All ties in with what Wolters has said.. Behan first.. Then maddie
-
Your post reveals you are deeply mired in denial.
The precedent is there that the evidence is that no German presence is required in Portugal to pursue and investigate Portuguese crimes and prosecution of those crimes committed in Portugal.
OG set the precedent to investigate Portuguese crimes committed on Portuguese soil, so that argument is null and void.
-
OG set the precedent to investigate Portuguese crimes committed on Portuguese soil, so that argument is null and void.
The rape perpetrated in Pria da Luz in a villa very close to the Ocean Club is the investigation and prosecution to which I refer.
The ignorance displayed in your post regarding OG is quite profound and calls into question just how much you actually know about what has and is going on in Madeleine's case.
-
Brueckner didn't leave her in Luz, he hid her in the stash place in his VW then drove her to Germany, then murdered her.
Quite possibly somewhere along the way.
-
OG set the precedent to investigate Portuguese crimes committed on Portuguese soil, so that argument is null and void.
The Germans have already successfully prosecuted CB for a Portuguese crime
-
Quite possibly somewhere along the way.
Based on what? Wishful thinking?
-
Based on what? Wishful thinking?
It's a very long road and virtually impossible to search.
-
Brueckner didn't leave her in Luz, he hid her in the stash place in his VW then drove her to Germany, then murdered her.
If Brueckner is guilty of kidnapping Madeleine the thought is a horror and no occasion for levity. You demonstrate he had the means and the opportunity.
Pity the investigators at the time hadn't worked on that angle at the time. Truly hindsight is an exact science.
-
Brueckner didn't leave her in Luz, he hid her in the stash place in his VW then drove her to Germany, then murdered her.
But, but,but, May last year, very good source, the Sun.
NEW THEORY Madeleine McCann was killed in Portugal and NOT moved to Germany by suspect, police believe
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14972722/madeleine-mccann-killed-portugal-germany-christian-b-missing/
-
If Brueckner is guilty of kidnapping Madeleine the thought is a horror and no occasion for levity. You demonstrate he had the means and the opportunity.
Pity the investigators at the time hadn't worked on that angle at the time. Truly hindsight is an exact science.
If?
If Brueckner kidnapped Maddie?
So you have some doubt do you?
-
It's a very long road and virtually impossible to search.
And there's absolutely no evidence Brueckner drove the long road & disposed of Maddie.
So it's nothing but wishful thinking really. Mere speculation based on sod all.
-
And there's absolutely no evidence Brueckner drove the long road & disposed of Maddie.
So it's nothing but wishful thinking really. Mere speculation based on sod all.
You are speculating so why should not I.
-
You are speculating so why should not I.
It's libel, you're calling Brueckner a murderer.
-
It's libel, you're calling Brueckner a murderer.
No I am not. Your comprehension of The English Language leaves something to be desired.
My comprehension is excellent so let's have no more Libel of The McCanns from you.
-
No I am not. Your comprehension of The English Language leaves something to be desired.
My comprehension is excellent so let's have no more Libel of The McCanns from you.
Oh I see.
So saying Brueckner could have dumped Maddie isn't libel, but saying the McCanns could have done the same is?
Explain that one to me.
How is one libel & the other not?
-
Oh I see.
So saying Brueckner could have dumped Maddie isn't libel, but saying the McCanns could have done the same is?
Explain that one to me.
How is one libel & the other not?
Choose your words carefully.
-
How about answering the question ?
-
Choose your words carefully.
I did, which is why you can't answer the question.
-
How about answering the question ?
Choose your words carefully. My comments are merely speculation.
-
I did, which is why you can't answer the question.
Libel is such a complicated word these days. 15 years since maddie disappeared, mccanns received yhousands of libel comments. With cb hams wolters is claiming this, but remember GA thought he had full evidence and everything been released, however wolters has not released all evidence.
-
Oh I see.
So saying Brueckner could have dumped Maddie isn't libel, but saying the McCanns could have done the same is?
Explain that one to me.
How is one libel & the other not?
Which road and when and by what means?
-
Libel is such a complicated word these days. 15 years since maddie disappeared, mccanns received yhousands of libel comments. With cb hams wolters is claiming this, but remember GA thought he had full evidence and everything been released, however wolters has not released all evidence.
Does he even have any?
-
Which road and when and by what means?
Well, if I explained that you wouldn't like it.
But that still wouldn't answer my question.
-
How about answering the question ?
How about pondering on the question being asked concerning the fifteen year period between Madeleine's abduction and the present day events surrounding her case.
-
How about pondering on the question being asked concerning the fifteen year period between Madeleine's abduction and the present day events surrounding her case.
What abduction?
-
What abduction?
Recently we have discovered that the prime suspect for Madeleine's abduction, Brueckner, raped a woman. The crime was not prosecuted by the Portuguese police. It took a German investigation and a German trial to ascertain the facts and get justice for the victim of the torture and rape.
The Germans are now investigating the abduction of Madeleine McCann and it is to be hoped a prosecution will follow when all the other offences against women and children alleged to have been perpetrated by the same offender have been dealt with, not by the Portuguese justice system but by the German justice system.
Rather extraordinary that a Sovereign State appears to be operating in a vacuum of incompetence which renders it incapable of
(a) recognising crimes which have been committed
(b) taking appropriate action to allow citizens and visitors protection from crime and vile perpetrators
The incompetence of the Portuguese investigation in particular as it concerns what appears to be a one-man crime wave perhaps allows you to ask that question.
Fifteen years later or however long it takes, I would recommend you follow the general clean-up of crimes neglected by the Portuguese and taken on as a result by the BKA and German Prosecutors for your answer.
Particularly as Madeleine's abduction was one of those many investigations abandoned by the Portuguese as soon as it was possible for them so to do.
-
Recently we have discovered that the prime suspect for Madeleine's abduction, Brueckner, raped a woman. The crime was not prosecuted by the Portuguese police. It took a German investigation and a German trial to ascertain the facts and get justice for the victim of the torture and rape.
The Germans are now investigating the abduction of Madeleine McCann and it is to be hoped a prosecution will follow when all the other offences against women and children alleged to have been perpetrated by the same offender have been dealt with, not by the Portuguese justice system but by the German justice system.
Rather extraordinary that a Sovereign State appears to be operating in a vacuum of incompetence which renders it incapable of
(a) recognising crimes which have been committed
(b) taking appropriate action to allow citizens and visitors protection from crime and vile perpetrators
The incompetence of the Portuguese investigation in particular as it concerns what appears to be a one-man crime wave perhaps allows you to ask that question.
Fifteen years later or however long it takes, I would recommend you follow the general clean-up of crimes neglected by the Portuguese and taken on as a result by the BKA and German Prosecutors for your answer.
Particularly as Madeleine's abduction was one of those many investigations abandoned by the Portuguese as soon as it was possible for them so to do.
That's because there wasn't any credible evidence she was abducted, & there still isn't, which is why Brueckner isn't being chared.
-
That's because there wasn't any credible evidence she was abducted, & there still isn't, which is why Brueckner isn't being chared.
The Portuguese authorities did what we now know was their practice.
They botched active cases.
Then they closed them down.
This was done to Madeleine's case. As it was to all the other cases featuring this one vile predator ignored by the Portuguese but adopted by the BKA.
The evidence was and is there. The puzzlement is why the Portuguese didn't use it as the Germans are doing now in the hope of solving these cases and bringing justice to the victims.
-
That's because there wasn't any credible evidence she was abducted, & there still isn't, which is why Brueckner isn't being chared.
Lol.. You've gone from no evidence to no credible evidence after I corrected you. Whether the evidence is credible is not for you to decide... Have another go
-
It has certainly put to bed that no other Country can prosecute crimes committed in Portugal.
Germany even got Bruekner extradited from Italy for a Portuguese crime.
How Portugal made such a bog fest of these crimes remains a mystery to me.
-
Lol.. You've gone from no evidence to no credible evidence after I corrected you. Whether the evidence is credible is not for you to decide... Have another go
It bloody well is.
I'm not about to believe Wolters just because he said so, & since Brueckner isn't being charged, then Wolters 'evidence' obviously isn't credible.
-
Does anyone seriously believe that they are going to see this evidence? Especially any nasty stuff. No chance.
-
Does anyone seriously believe that they are going to see this evidence? Especially any nasty stuff. No chance.
What evidence?
Is there any?
-
It bloody well is.
I'm not about to believe Wolters just because he said so, & since Brueckner isn't being charged, then Wolters 'evidence' obviously isn't credible.
Whatever... Your opinions are of no importance
-
Does anyone seriously believe that they are going to see this evidence? Especially any nasty stuff. No chance.
Against CB in relation to Madeleine ?
-
Does anyone seriously believe that they are going to see this evidence? Especially any nasty stuff. No chance.
Are German Court procedures carried out in secret?
If not, then I'm sure the details will emerge - if it ever gets to court.
-
Does anyone seriously believe that they are going to see this evidence? Especially any nasty stuff. No chance.
Just noticed you’ve been reinstated as a mod Eleanor, I’m delighted to see it.
-
Lol.. You've gone from no evidence to no credible evidence after I corrected you. Whether the evidence is credible is not for you to decide... Have another go
The judge decides if the evidence is credible. If it isn't there's no trial. As yet no charges have been laid for any offence and none requested for the MM case.
-
The judge decides if the evidence is credible. If it isn't there's no trial. As yet no charges have been laid for any offence and none requested for the MM case.
You are supporting my post in reply to spam.. Perhaps you didn't realise
-
Just noticed you’ve been reinstated as a mod Eleanor, I’m delighted to see it.
Thank you. Although I have no idea for why. But onwards and upwards.
-
You are supporting my post in reply to spam.. Perhaps you didn't realise
Neither of you know what evidence (if any) exists and neither of you is qualified to assess it's worth imo. The difference between you is that you believe Wolters has useful evidence because he said so.
-
Neither of you know what evidence (if any) exists and neither of you is qualified to assess it's worth imo. The difference between you is that you believe Wolters has useful evidence because he said so.
Wolters said this, the McCanns said that, Abraham hit me with a whittle ball bat
-
Neither of you know what evidence (if any) exists and neither of you is qualified to assess it's worth imo. The difference between you is that you believe Wolters has useful evidence because he said so.
He's done a lot more than say he has evidence. He's stated clearly that his evidence shows CB murdered Maddie. None of the German investigation team have contradicted him. Both the UK and Portuguse investigations are working closely with him.. Portugal has named him as an arguido.. He doesn't have an alibi... His close friends say he's admitted it... And you think I believe Wolters because he says so... Lol
-
Wolters said this, the McCanns said that, Abraham hit me with a whittle ball bat
You might be advised to stop smoking that skunk... It's been shown to affect mental capacity
-
He's done a lot more than say he has evidence. He's stated clearly that his evidence shows CB murdered Maddie. None oof the German investigation team have contradicted him. Both the UK and Portuguse investigations are working closely with him.. Portugal has named him as an arguido.. He doesn't have an alibi... His close friends say he's admitted it... And you think I believe Wolters because he says so... Lol
Things are not looking good for Brueckner. Although I can't say I much care. But Wolters will keep him locked up one way or another.
-
You might be advised to stop smoking that skunk... It's been shown to affect mental capacity
Too late now I think.
-
Things are not looking good for Brueckner. Although I can't say I much care. But Wolters will keep him locked up one way or another.
CB thought he had got away with the rape in Luz... The Germans naiiled him where the pj failed miserably... Yet sceptics want to believe the PJ rubbish
-
He's done a lot more than say he has evidence. He's stated clearly that his evidence shows CB murdered Maddie. None of the German investigation team have contradicted him. Both the UK and Portuguse investigations are working closely with him.. Portugal has named him as an arguido.. He doesn't have an alibi... His close friends say he's admitted it... And you think I believe Wolters because he says so... Lol
Well, because he says so, & some flimsy weak ass inadmissible hearsay, but you forgot to mention the all important photo.
-
Well, because he says so, & some flimsy weak ass inadmissible hearsay, but you forgot to mention the all important photo.
Witness statements are not hearsay.... They are admissible
Another lesson in evidence for you
-
CB thought he had got away with the rape in Luz... The Germans naiiled him where the pj failed miserably... Yet sceptics want to believe the PJ rubbish
This is all ultimately down to The PJ. Fifteen years of utter incompetence and not so much as an apology, while Germany is left to clean up their mess.
-
Witness statements are not hearsay.... They are admissible
Another lesson in evidence for you
Busching just takes the stand & says 'Brueckner told me he murdered Maddie' that'll be enough for the judge. No doubting that. Shame he never told anyone what he did with the body. Maybe that'll come out in the Behan case.
-
Busching just takes the stand & says 'Brueckner told me he murdered Maddie' that'll be enough for the judge. No doubting that. Shame he never told anyone what he did with the body. Maybe that'll come out in the Behan case.
You claimed it was inadmissible... More junk from you
-
You claimed it was inadmissible... More junk from you
Well it's certainly not being admitted, is it, not any time in the foreseeable future.
-
He's done a lot more than say he has evidence. He's stated clearly that his evidence shows CB murdered Maddie. None of the German investigation team have contradicted him. Both the UK and Portuguse investigations are working closely with him.. Portugal has named him as an arguido.. He doesn't have an alibi... His close friends say he's admitted it... And you think I believe Wolters because he says so... Lol
Impressive claims all right. What he needs is a conviction though to really impress.
-
Impressive claims all right. What he needs is a conviction though to really impress.
Are they really though?
Brueckner told his mates he murdered Maddie & destroyed the evidence, but yet, he actually kept some photographic evidence, so he lied about that, or maybe it's just that he was lying about the whole thing & so there isn't even any photo.
-
Impressive claims all right. What he needs is a conviction though to really impress.
Amaral could have done with another one of those. Instead of which he got a conviction for perjury.
-
Impressive claims all right. What he needs is a conviction though to really impress.
Perhaps you or another sceptic can volunteer an explanation for why the Germans have spent years and millions of euros investigating Christian Brückner’s alleged crimes against Madeleine McCann if they have precisely no credible evidence against him? Why would they do that? For a laugh?
-
Perhaps you or another sceptic can volunteer an explanation for why the Germans have spent years and millions of euros investigating Christian Brückner’s alleged crimes against Madeleine McCann if they have precisely no credible evidence against him? Why would they do that? For a laugh?
Have they only been investigating him for the McCann case then?
How many man(or woman)hours & how much money have they actually expended specifically on the McCann case alone?
No way to know really is there.
But what we do know is their efforts aren't producing any results.
So, that tells us all we need to know about the 'evidence' really doesn't it.
But maybe tomorrow eh.
-
So because CB has not yet been charged with any further offences in the years since his last conviction, despite the millions of euros and thousands of man hours investigating him it means that there is no credible evidence he has committed any other crimes and the Germans are simply mad or bad hashtag twisted logic.
-
So because CB has not yet been charged with any further offences in the years since his last conviction, despite the millions of euros and thousands of man hours investigating him it means that there is no credible evidence he has committed any other crimes and the Germans are simply mad or bad hashtag twisted logic.
How much time and money have they actually expended though?
Do you have the exact figures to hand at all, or did you just pluck the millions & thousands idea out of thin air?
-
Does he even have any?
Possibly, but like i said not been released. People are eager to see what it is, i feel its a game of chess because they are investigating him for other crimes.
-
Possibly, but like i said not been released. People are eager to see what it is, i feel its a game of chess because they are investigating him for other crimes.
Then Brueckner is winning, because they don't seem to able to nail him for the string of murders he's committed.
They might get him for a few playground molestations & rapes though, I suppose they'll have to make do with that for now, until they can find any actual evidence of all the murdering he's been doing.
-
Then Brueckner is winning, because they don't seem to able to nail him for the string of murders he's committed.
They might get him for a few playground molestations & rapes though, I suppose they'll have to make do with that for now, until they can find any actual evidence of all the murdering he's been doing.
You are making an assumption that he doesn't have that evidence.. Unless he's lying and the whole BKS are supporting him.... He does
-
You are making an assumption that he doesn't have that evidence.. Unless he's lying and the whole BKS are supporting him.... He does
Well, he isn't being prosecuted for murder anytime in the foreseeable future, is he, so, you know, perhaps they don't have any credible evidence he's actually murderer, that's possible isn't it, certainly nothing that would stand up in court anyway. But, who knows, maybe try their luck again tomorrow.
-
Well, he isn't being prosecuted for murder anytime in the foreseeable future, is he, so, you know, perhaps they don't have any credible evidence he's actually murderer, that's possible isn't it, certainly nothing that would stand up in court anyway. But, who knows, maybe try their luck again tomorrow.
Maybe not anytime soon, but not all has beem released until then, we can judge the evidence if shown to public.
-
Well, he isn't being prosecuted for murder anytime in the foreseeable future, is he, so, you know, perhaps they don't have any credible evidence he's actually murderer, that's possible isn't it, certainly nothing that would stand up in court anyway. But, who knows, maybe try their luck again tomorrow.
Wolters has explained why he isn'tcharging CB at the moment and it's not because he doesn't have evidence thst wouldn't stand up in court
-
Maybe not anytime soon, but not all has beem released until then, we can judge the evidence if shown to public.
Or, a judge could judge the evidence, if it was shown to a judge, but Wolters is reluctant to do that right now, maybe later. There's always tomorrow.
-
Wolters has explained why he isn'tcharging CB at the moment and it's not because he doesn't have evidence thst wouldn't stand up in court
Well, that's what he says, but there's no way to be sure is there, until he puts his money where his mouth is, &he isn't doing that anytime, so maybe his evidence isn't all that great, or maybe he's going to uncover some credible evidence Brueckner murdered Maddie when he tries him for raping Behan, we can always imagine that might happen, I suppose, if we need something to cling to.
-
Or, a judge could judge the evidence, if it was shown to a judge, but Wolters is reluctant to do that right now, maybe later. There's always tomorrow.
Now that's a novel idea.
Not only is there tomorrow, but there's the day after and the day after that, stretching far into the future.
-
Now that's a novel idea.
Not only is there tomorrow, but there's the day after and the day after that, stretching far into the future.
As far as the eye can see, Wolters has looked that far & he can't see anything coming.
Brueckner is chomping at the bit to face trial for Maddie's murder, but he'll just have to be a little more patient won't he & have faith that Wolters will bring him to justice one day.
-
As far as the eye can see, Wolters has looked that far & he can't see anything coming.
Brueckner is chomping at the bit to face trial for Maddie's murder, but he'll just have to be a little more patient won't he & have faith that Wolters will bring him to justice one day.
Well he gave a big clue in his supposed letters, a bike, he carried Madeleine off on a bike and they missed it.
-
Now that's a novel idea.
Not only is there tomorrow, but there's the day after and the day after that, stretching far into the future.
Exactly, so in the meantime it's probably a good idea for people to stop behaving like impatient children and pipe down, imo.
-
Exactly, so in the meantime it's probably a good idea for people to stop behaving like impatient children and pipe down, imo.
Maybe stop giving me the ammo, then it wouldn't keep being fired back at you.
You could try sticking to the terms of your signature line I suppose, have you thought about that?
-
Maybe stop giving me the ammo, then it wouldn't keep being fired back at you.
You could try sticking to the terms of your signature line I suppose, have you thought about that?
The reality is he is building a case, take at face value if needed. I think we all do here. Will he be tried in portugal or germany? If charged, however do you think its rational and realistic that a foreign police force would spend time and money if they did not think their was something their. Op grange still has not released their files of certain things, a foreign police force certainly wont waste time on a foreign citizen in a different foreign country if they did not believe connections were there.
-
The reality is he is building a case, take at face value if needed. I think we all do here. Will he be tried in portugal or germany? If charged, however do you think its rational and realistic that a foreign police force would spend time and money if they did not think their was something their. Op grange still has not released their files of certain things, a foreign police force certainly wont waste time on a foreign citizen in a different foreign country if they did not believe connections were there.
So many question, So few answers.
-
The reality is he is building a case, take at face value if needed. I think we all do here. Will he be tried in portugal or germany? If charged, however do you think its rational and realistic that a foreign police force would spend time and money if they did not think their was something their. Op grange still has not released their files of certain things, a foreign police force certainly wont waste time on a foreign citizen in a different foreign country if they did not believe connections were there.
Exactly, well said
-
The reality is he is building a case, take at face value if needed. I think we all do here. Will he be tried in portugal or germany? If charged, however do you think its rational and realistic that a foreign police force would spend time and money if they did not think their was something their. Op grange still has not released their files of certain things, a foreign police force certainly wont waste time on a foreign citizen in a different foreign country if they did not believe connections were there.
Wolters has been building a case since 2017, apparently, but not just the Maddie case is it, Brueckner is a long term criminal, they've been investigating him for multiple crimes, but, the best they can pin on him are Hazel Behan & playground molestations. Not the Maddie case, they have 100% convincing concrete evidence & absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Brueckner murdered Maddie, but can't see him being charged with murdering Maddie anytime in the future. He's been sat in a cell for years so his crime spree has now halted.
His name has been splashed across mass media for the past two years, so barring criminals, anyone who had any information on him would likely have told the police by now.
Maybe they need a bit more time then & something will turn up, maybe they'll be able to link him to other crimes, there's nothing at the moment though is there.
The MET have been given a further 12 months funding for their investigation into Madeleine's disappearance, which is strange, considering it should be a murder investigation by now, maybe Wolters hasn't shared the concrete evidence with them. Maybe the MET, or the PJ will find the elusive final piece of evidence Wolters is lacking, even though he doesn't really need it, since he already has conclusive proof Brueckner murdered Maddie.
-
Well he gave a big clue in his supposed letters, a bike, he carried Madeleine off on a bike and they missed it.
He gave a very big clue.. Denied everything... Even the one where he was caught with his trousers round his ankles
-
He gave a very big clue.. Denied everything... Even the one where he was caught with his trousers round his ankles
Yeah, he's denying Maddie's abduction & murder, so he's more than likely lying about that.
No one can prove he his though, not yet at least, but maybe tomorrow.
-
Yeah, he's denying Maddie's abduction & murder, so he's more than likely lying about that.
No one can prove he his though, not yet at least, but maybe tomorrow.
Wolters may well be able to prove it
-
Wolters may well be able to prove it
Or, he may well not, & at the moment it appears he can't, unless you just believe in him, just need to have faith, in the absence of anything tangible.
-
Or, he may well not, & at the moment it appears he can't, unless you just believe in him, just need to have faith, in the absence of anything tangible.
Lol... Same old... Same old... Junk.. I'm not going to bother explaining why again
-
Lol... Same old... Same old... Junk.. I'm not going to bother explaining why again
Ok, well just get back to me when Brueckner is convicted for abducting & murdering Maddie won't you.
Shouldn't be much longer now.
-
Wolters has been building a case since 2017, apparently, but not just the Maddie case is it, Brueckner is a long term criminal, they've been investigating him for multiple crimes, but, the best they can pin on him are Hazel Behan & playground molestations. Not the Maddie case, they have 100% convincing concrete evidence & absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Brueckner murdered Maddie, but can't see him being charged with murdering Maddie anytime in the future. He's been sat in a cell for years so his crime spree has now halted.
His name has been splashed across mass media for the past two years, so barring criminals, anyone who had any information on him would likely have told the police by now.
Maybe they need a bit more time then & something will turn up, maybe they'll be able to link him to other crimes, there's nothing at the moment though is there.
The MET have been given a further 12 months funding for their investigation into Madeleine's disappearance, which is strange, considering it should be a murder investigation by now, maybe Wolters hasn't shared the concrete evidence with them. Maybe the MET, or the PJ will find the elusive final piece of evidence Wolters is lacking, even though he doesn't really need it, since he already has conclusive proof Brueckner murdered Maddie.
I can agree about the further funding, but what is funding fpr helping to understand witness statements against bruckner or anyone else?
I agree its been a lengthy process, however a big mistake apparently wolters said in 2013 sent a letter to bruckner regarding mm and he disappeared. Their is something there to be found and im sorry it aint gonna be the parents . Maybe not bruckner but could have involvement.
People criticise the mccanns when she was advised by a solicitor not to answer. Bruckner was also questioned and made no comment. No logical thought process there.
-
Ok, well just get back to me when Brueckner is convicted for abducting & murdering Maddie won't you.
Shouldn't be much longer now.
Same old.. Same old junk
-
I can agree about the further funding, but what is funding fpr helping to understand witness statements against bruckner or anyone else?
I agree its been a lengthy process, however a big mistake apparently wolters said in 2013 sent a letter to bruckner regarding mm and he disappeared. Their is something there to be found and im sorry it aint gonna be the parents . Maybe not bruckner but could have involvement.
People criticise the mccanns when she was advised by a solicitor not to answer. Bruckner was also questioned and made no comment. No logical thought process there.
Of course the parents won't be convicted. Why on earth would they, SY have conclusive proof Maddie was abducted in a criminal act by a stranger.
Wolters has 100% concrete evidence Brueckner murdered Maddie.
Why do you even doubt him?
-
Same old.. Same old junk
You keep replying to my posts though.
There must be a reason for that, why is that, you enjoy talking to me?
-
You keep replying to my posts though.
There must be a reason for that, why is that, you enjoy talking to me?
No.. I think you're a fool.. No end of a fool
-
No.. I think you're a fool.. No end of a fool
Personal insults, we're resorting to that now are we.
Are there any modorators working today?
Personally I happen to really like you.
-
Personal insults, we're resorting to that now are we.
Are there any modorators working today?
Personally I happen to really like you.
Tell you what petal.. I'll ban myself temporarily... Don't want to upset you
-
Tell you what petal.. I'll ban myself temporarily... Don't want to upset you
Maybe come back when Wolters reveals the concrete evidence, you shouldn't have to wait too long....
-
Personal insults, we're resorting to that now are we.
Are there any modorators working today?
Personally I happen to really like you.
Only watching sceptic posting's.
-
The reality is he is building a case, take at face value if needed. I think we all do here. Will he be tried in portugal or germany? If charged, however do you think its rational and realistic that a foreign police force would spend time and money if they did not think their was something their. Op grange still has not released their files of certain things, a foreign police force certainly wont waste time on a foreign citizen in a different foreign country if they did not believe connections were there.
He would be charged in Germany. The case is now out of the hands of Portugal and their incompetence.
Proving that it is possible to charge someone for a crime in a country where the crime wasn't committed.
Brueckner has already been convicted in Germany for a crime he committed in Portugal.
-
He would be charged in Germany. The case is now out of the hands of Portugal and their incompetence.
Proving that it is possible to charge someone for a crime in a country where the crime wasn't committed.
Brueckner has already been convicted in Germany for a crime he committed in Portugal.
If the case was out of the hands of the Portuguese then there would have been no legal requirement for them to have made CB an arguido at a minute before midnight. According to Portuguese law, the Statute of Limitations can only be extended if there is a reasonable prospect of the arguido being charged.
CB was charged in Germany, as a German citizen, for crimes he had committed in Portugal because a)he'd never been charged in Portugal in respect of any of those crimes & b)the Statute of Limitations in Portugal for those crimes had passed by the time he'd been identified as the probable offender.
Where Madeleine's case is concerned, he's the suspect/accused in 2 parallel investigations but hasn't yet been charged by either authority. Both authorities will need to apply to Italy for an EAW if they wish to bring charges in Madeleine#s case, since Italy is the last place he was a free man before his incarceration in Germany (for crimes in Germany). IMO this is how the "dirty tricks brigade" will attempt to undermine the BKA investigation and unfortunately I foresee a situation in which it may ultimately result in ECJ deciding which country CB should be tried in, notwithstanding Portugal's right to try him in absentia. CB also has the right to consent to be charged in Portugal rather than Germany. It's important to remember an EAW cannot be authorised in a case where a person has already been tried in another country for the same crime.
-
If the case was out of the hands of the Portuguese then there would have been no legal requirement for them to have made CB an arguido at a minute before midnight. According to Portuguese law, the Statute of Limitations can only be extended if there is a reasonable prospect of the arguido being charged.
CB was charged in Germany, as a German citizen, for crimes he had committed in Portugal because a)he'd never been charged in Portugal in respect of any of those crimes & b)the Statute of Limitations in Portugal for those crimes had passed by the time he'd been identified as the probable offender.
Where Madeleine's case is concerned, he's the suspect/accused in 2 parallel investigations but hasn't yet been charged by either authority. Both authorities will need to apply to Italy for an EAW if they wish to bring charges in Madeleine#s case, since Italy is the last place he was a free man before his incarceration in Germany (for crimes in Germany). IMO this is how the "dirty tricks brigade" will attempt to undermine the BKA investigation and unfortunately I foresee a situation in which it may ultimately result in ECJ deciding which country CB should be tried in, notwithstanding Portugal's right to try him in absentia. CB also has the right to consent to be charged in Portugal rather than Germany. It's important to remember an EAW cannot be authorised in a case where a person has already been tried in another country for the same crime.
A very complicated situation, Misty.
My opinion is that "the dirty tricks brigade" may well have initiated their proceedings as soon as they got a sniff of the progress and direction of the BKA investigation.
-
If the case was out of the hands of the Portuguese then there would have been no legal requirement for them to have made CB an arguido at a minute before midnight. According to Portuguese law, the Statute of Limitations can only be extended if there is a reasonable prospect of the arguido being charged.
CB was charged in Germany, as a German citizen, for crimes he had committed in Portugal because a)he'd never been charged in Portugal in respect of any of those crimes & b)the Statute of Limitations in Portugal for those crimes had passed by the time he'd been identified as the probable offender.
Where Madeleine's case is concerned, he's the suspect/accused in 2 parallel investigations but hasn't yet been charged by either authority. Both authorities will need to apply to Italy for an EAW if they wish to bring charges in Madeleine#s case, since Italy is the last place he was a free man before his incarceration in Germany (for crimes in Germany). IMO this is how the "dirty tricks brigade" will attempt to undermine the BKA investigation and unfortunately I foresee a situation in which it may ultimately result in ECJ deciding which country CB should be tried in, notwithstanding Portugal's right to try him in absentia. CB also has the right to consent to be charged in Portugal rather than Germany. It's important to remember an EAW cannot be authorised in a case where a person has already been tried in another country for the same crime.
If he can choose to have his case heard in Portugal then he doesn't have anything to worry about, they all still think the McCanns dunnit it there apparently.
-
If he can choose to have his case heard in Portugal then he doesn't have anything to worry about, they all still think the McCanns dunnit it there apparently.
I think a lot of Portuguese people have been given food for thought over the past couple of years.
What I found astonishing from Misty's post is that such a convicted perpetrator can elect in which jurisdiction to be tried for further crimes.
Mind you were I him, I would give serious thought to the fact that the protective custody he has in Germany might well ensure he lives to see a trial date.
I think there may well be vested interests in Portugal which have their own agenda on that one.
-
If the case was out of the hands of the Portuguese then there would have been no legal requirement for them to have made CB an arguido at a minute before midnight. According to Portuguese law, the Statute of Limitations can only be extended if there is a reasonable prospect of the arguido being charged.
CB was charged in Germany, as a German citizen, for crimes he had committed in Portugal because a)he'd never been charged in Portugal in respect of any of those crimes & b)the Statute of Limitations in Portugal for those crimes had passed by the time he'd been identified as the probable offender.
Where Madeleine's case is concerned, he's the suspect/accused in 2 parallel investigations but hasn't yet been charged by either authority. Both authorities will need to apply to Italy for an EAW if they wish to bring charges in Madeleine#s case, since Italy is the last place he was a free man before his incarceration in Germany (for crimes in Germany). IMO this is how the "dirty tricks brigade" will attempt to undermine the BKA investigation and unfortunately I foresee a situation in which it may ultimately result in ECJ deciding which country CB should be tried in, notwithstanding Portugal's right to try him in absentia. CB also has the right to consent to be charged in Portugal rather than Germany. It's important to remember an EAW cannot be authorised in a case where a person has already been tried in another country for the same crime.
They would need evidence to extradite him to Portugal. Might be why the BKA are keeping to themselves
-
They would need evidence to extradite him to Portugal. Might be why the BKA are keeping to themselves
I’ve no doubt politcs has a part to play in why this has not yet come to trial.
-
If the case was out of the hands of the Portuguese then there would have been no legal requirement for them to have made CB an arguido at a minute before midnight. According to Portuguese law, the Statute of Limitations can only be extended if there is a reasonable prospect of the arguido being charged.
CB was charged in Germany, as a German citizen, for crimes he had committed in Portugal because a)he'd never been charged in Portugal in respect of any of those crimes & b)the Statute of Limitations in Portugal for those crimes had passed by the time he'd been identified as the probable offender.
Where Madeleine's case is concerned, he's the suspect/accused in 2 parallel investigations but hasn't yet been charged by either authority. Both authorities will need to apply to Italy for an EAW if they wish to bring charges in Madeleine#s case, since Italy is the last place he was a free man before his incarceration in Germany (for crimes in Germany). IMO this is how the "dirty tricks brigade" will attempt to undermine the BKA investigation and unfortunately I foresee a situation in which it may ultimately result in ECJ deciding which country CB should be tried in, notwithstanding Portugal's right to try him in absentia. CB also has the right to consent to be charged in Portugal rather than Germany. It's important to remember an EAW cannot be authorised in a case where a person has already been tried in another country for the same crime.
Was cb an actual citizen of portugal, registered?
-
Was cb an actual citizen of portugal, registered?
Yes, he had a Carta de Condução, which is a driving licence issued to people legally resident in Portugal.
-
I can agree about the further funding, but what is funding fpr helping to understand witness statements against bruckner or anyone else?
I agree its been a lengthy process, however a big mistake apparently wolters said in 2013 sent a letter to bruckner regarding mm and he disappeared. Their is something there to be found and im sorry it aint gonna be the parents . Maybe not bruckner but could have involvement.
People criticise the mccanns when she was advised by a solicitor not to answer. Bruckner was also questioned and made no comment. No logical thought process there.
There never is a logical thought process when it comes to someone who The Sceptics support.
So often Sceptics get caught out when they thought they knew better;
-
They would need evidence to extradite him to Portugal. Might be why the BKA are keeping to themselves
PJ must have enough evidence to both make CB an arguido and convince the AttGen to extend the statute of limitations. The fact BKA have other evidence which they won't share with PJ at present is muddying the waters,
-
I think a lot of Portuguese people have been given food for thought over the past couple of years.
What I found astonishing from Misty's post is that such a convicted perpetrator can elect in which jurisdiction to be tried for further crimes.
Mind you were I him, I would give serious thought to the fact that the protective custody he has in Germany might well ensure he lives to see a trial date.
I think there may well be vested interests in Portugal which have their own agenda on that one.
That's a Catch22 for CB imo. He does have a right to a fair trial under whichever jurisdiction which offers the more lenient sentence for this particular crime.
-
I think a lot of Portuguese people have been given food for thought over the past couple of years.
What I found astonishing from Misty's post is that such a convicted perpetrator can elect in which jurisdiction to be tried for further crimes.
Mind you were I him, I would give serious thought to the fact that the protective custody he has in Germany might well ensure he lives to see a trial date.
I think there may well be vested interests in Portugal which have their own agenda on that one.
Exactly my thoughts, Brie.
I can't think why they haven't killed me (yet). Perhaps because the eye of Scotland Yard is on me, protecting me?
Perhaps because they know the person likely to order it, or do it ... and he knows that ?
-
PJ must have enough evidence to both make CB an arguido and convince the AttGen to extend the statute of limitations. The fact BKA have other evidence which they won't share with PJ at present is muddying the waters,
His criminal profile, he lived in Luz, he told his mates he murdered Maddie & they can't pin down exactly where he was on the night of May 3rd.
That would be enough.
eta:..and the photo of Maddie, mustn't forget that.
-
That's a Catch22 for CB imo. He does have a right to a fair trial under whichever jurisdiction which offers the more lenient sentence for this particular crime.
He's got to be questioned first let alone charged, talking about getting ahead of oneself.
-
He's got to be questioned first let alone charged, talking about getting ahead of oneself.
He did get questioned in Germany recently, he rrplied no comment. Its a game of chess.
-
He did get questioned in Germany recently, he replied no comment. Its a game of chess.
Brueckner is winning.
-
Brueckner is winning.
Do you think he is guilty because he was advised no comment by his solicitor just like the mccanns who on 2 occasions spoke as witness's?
-
Do you think he is guilty because he was advised no comment by his solicitor just like the mccanns who on 2 occasions spoke as witness's?
No, I'm certain he's not guilty because Maddie wasn't abducted in the first place.
-
If the case was out of the hands of the Portuguese then there would have been no legal requirement for them to have made CB an arguido at a minute before midnight. According to Portuguese law, the Statute of Limitations can only be extended if there is a reasonable prospect of the arguido being charged.
CB was charged in Germany, as a German citizen, for crimes he had committed in Portugal because a)he'd never been charged in Portugal in respect of any of those crimes & b)the Statute of Limitations in Portugal for those crimes had passed by the time he'd been identified as the probable offender.
Where Madeleine's case is concerned, he's the suspect/accused in 2 parallel investigations but hasn't yet been charged by either authority. Both authorities will need to apply to Italy for an EAW if they wish to bring charges in Madeleine#s case, since Italy is the last place he was a free man before his incarceration in Germany (for crimes in Germany). IMO this is how the "dirty tricks brigade" will attempt to undermine the BKA investigation and unfortunately I foresee a situation in which it may ultimately result in ECJ deciding which country CB should be tried in, notwithstanding Portugal's right to try him in absentia. CB also has the right to consent to be charged in Portugal rather than Germany. It's important to remember an EAW cannot be authorised in a case where a person has already been tried in another country for the same crime.
Anyone for whom an EAW is issued can consent, which makes it unnecessary for the country where they are situated to make the decision whether to hand them over or not. Whether it's as simple as CB agreeing to be surrendered to the Portuguese authorities rather than the German ones we don't know.
-
No, I'm certain he's not guilty because Maddie wasn't abducted in the first place.
Yeah thats fine, but bruckner was made an arguido just like the mccanns were and had every right not to answer questions as btuckner, but it gets brought up why would she not answer the questions. In bruckners case its fairly obvious that the mccanns have spoken to the pj, bruckner has not. If its about clearing your name its all he has to do and has no solid wintess. The only time he will talk is when he is charged until them he can play agame of chess.
-
Yeah thats fine, but bruckner was made an arguido just like the mccanns were and had every right not to answer questions as btuckner, but it gets brought up why would she not answer the questions. In bruckners case its fairly obvious that the mccanns have spoken to the pj, bruckner has not. If its about clearing your name its all he has to do and has no solid wintess. The only time he will talk is when he is charged until them he can play agame of chess.
Is it?
When did that happen?
I mean, apart from in 2007, have they spoken to them since, been interviewed again, when was that?
...and while we're at it, when were they interviewed by the BKA & the MET?
-
Is it?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/inside-madeleine-mccann-suspects-interview-26772964https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/inside-madeleine-mccann-suspects-interview-26772964https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/inside-madeleine-mccann-suspects-interview-26772964
When did that happen?
I mean, apart from in 2007, have they spoken to them since, been interviewed again, when was that?
...and while we're at it, when were they interviewed by the BKA & the MET?
-
Something wrong with that link ? Won't open for me.
-
Is it?
When did that happen?
I mean, apart from in 2007, have they spoken to them since, been interviewed again, when was that?
...and while we're at it, when were they interviewed by the BKA & the MET?
I doubt that has ever happened.
-
Something wrong with that link ? Won't open for me.
Google search bruckner questioned daily mirror, will show then.
-
I doubt that has ever happened.
Oh c'mon, it must have happened.
Kate must have sat describing them curtains blowing open to each police force separately, & on multiple occasions, & all the detectives present found the story utterly unquestionable.
-
Oh c'mon, it must have happened.
Kate must have sat describing them curtains blowing open to each police force separately, & on multiple occasions, & all the detectives present found the story utterly unquestionable.
How if they were not there either
-
I doubt that has ever happened.
Rowley in 2017 said they didn't (MET) saying that was all covered by the PJ in the first investigation.
-
Rowley in 2017 said they didn't (MET) saying that was all covered by the PJ in the first investigation.
Let's face it. No one tried harder than The PJ to find something questionable about The McCanns.
-
How if they were not there either
*%87 Who wasn't there ?
-
Let's face it. No one tried harder than The PJ to find something questionable about The McCanns.
There wasn't a lot they could do other than question them really, the trail went cold down Rua Escola.
-
Let's face it. No one tried harder than The PJ to find something questionable about The McCanns.
So it was a thorough investigation .
-
So it was a through investigation .
That yield no worthwhile evidence against the McCanns. By your logic this means they could not possibly have been involved in their child’s disappearance right?
-
That yield no worthwhile evidence against the McCanns. By your logic this means they could not possibly have been involved in their child’s disappearance right?
Right.
-
*%87 Who wasn't there ?
The police
-
So it was a thorough investigation .
Not really, 3 unidentified prints on inside some on the shutters but no prints were tested on putsode of window, so yeah not thorough, also the portuguese their was finding of their dna in the apartment. Bloody hell
-
Not really, 3 unidentified prints on inside some on the shutters but no prints were tested on putsode of window, so yeah not thorough, also the portuguese their was finding of their dna in the apartment. Bloody hell
Well one of the unidentified was not CB then .
-
Well one of the unidentified was not CB then .
Even if it had been Brueckner's no-one would have known for the simple reason the Portuguese did not look for what to them was in effect a missing local paedophile.
The problem of why we have had to wait for any progress to be made for over fifteen years is two fold.
Amaral tells us in his book he had decided overnight that he had solved the case; a claim from which he has never deviated from promoting.
Amaral has told us via the media that Brueckner was on police radar in 2007 but was never looked for after one abortive attempt.
Think about it carefully.
If you have absolutely decided on your perpetrator before seeing any evidence or even before visiting the crime scene, what importance do you attach to carrying out a thorough investigation.
If a local paedophile goes missing during an investigation into a missing child and you can't find him despite looking, why would you forget about him and stop looking for him.
I don't think either response was appropriate and it puzzles me how anyone could base a belief system on such obvious mismanagement.
-
Even if it had been Brueckner's no-one would have known for the simple reason the Portuguese did not look for what to them was in effect a missing local paedophile.
The problem of why we have had to wait for any progress to be made for over fifteen years is two fold.
Amaral tells us in his book he had decided overnight that he had solved the case; a claim from which he has never deviated from promoting.
Amaral has told us via the media that Brueckner was on police radar in 2007 but was never looked for after one abortive attempt.
Think about it carefully.
If you have absolutely decided on your perpetrator before seeing any evidence or even before visiting the crime scene, what importance do you attach to carrying out a thorough investigation.
If a local paedophile goes missing during an investigation into a missing child and you can't find him despite looking, why would you forget about him and stop looking for him.
I don't think either response was appropriate and it puzzles me how anyone could base a belief system on such obvious mismanagement.
Did he go missing? By all accounts he was drifter. Where was he supposed to be to your satisfaction at any particular time?
-
How could he go missing ? He wasn't subject to any restriction of movement order, was he?
I'm sure he knew where he was.
-
Did he go missing? By all accounts he was drifter. Where was he supposed to be to your satisfaction at any particular time?
Madeleine McCann: Police tried to quiz suspect in 2007 ‘but he wasn’t at home’
Portuguese detectives visited home of Christian Brueckner in Praia da Luz, says disgraced former official Goncalo Amaral
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/madeleine-mccann-police-tried-to-quiz-suspect-in-2007-but-he-wasn-t-at-home-a9582266.html
If a convicted paedophile cannot be located while a search is being conducted for a missing child I think he could well be described as being "missing".
If your attitude reflects that of the then investigators it seems not only one of the reasons why it took fifteen years to locate the guy they wanted to interview. The miracle being that he was able to be found at all at such a remove.
-
Madeleine McCann: Police tried to quiz suspect in 2007 ‘but he wasn’t at home’
Portuguese detectives visited home of Christian Brueckner in Praia da Luz, says disgraced former official Goncalo Amaral
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/madeleine-mccann-police-tried-to-quiz-suspect-in-2007-but-he-wasn-t-at-home-a9582266.html
If a convicted paedophile cannot be located while a search is being conducted for a missing child I think he could well be described as being "missing".
If your attitude reflects that of the then investigators it seems not only one of the reasons why it took fifteen years to locate the guy they wanted to interview. The miracle being that he was able to be found at all at such a remove.
It's a bit of a stretch, maybe he'd gone out to buy shopping or sell weed, no big deal anyway, Brueckner had already murdered Maddie by then.
-
How could he go missing ? He wasn't subject to any restriction of movement order, was he?
I'm sure he knew where he was.
Well he must have been somewhere, it doesn't really matter anyway, he'd already murdered Maddie by the time police looked for him, they've caught him now so no harm done really, catching him any earlier wouldn't bring Maddie back.
-
Well he must have been somewhere, it doesn't really matter anyway, he'd already murdered Maddie by the time police looked for him, they've caught him now so no harm done really, catching him any earlier wouldn't bring Maddie back.
I don't know which home they went to anyway. At the time he was of no fixed abode.
-
I don't know which home they went to anyway. At the time he was of no fixed abode.
The police didn’t try very hard to find him now, let’s be honest.
-
The police didn’t try very hard to find him now, let’s be honest.
Why would they? Drifters were a common feature of the area imo.
-
Why would they? Drifters were a common feature of the area imo.
I would have imagined they might have wanted to find out what had happened to a child missing in their jurisdiction and perhaps recover her which sometimes does happen when the child is looked for.
-
Why would they? Drifters were a common feature of the area imo.
Why wouldn’t they? They obviously thought he was someone they needed to talk to and as he was well known in the area it surely wouldn’t have been that difficult to track him down if they could have been bothered (which they clearly weren’t).
-
I don't know which home they went to anyway. At the time he was of no fixed abode.
I think the idea is that as soon as Maddie was reported missing the police should have beat a path directly to Brueckner's door, wherever that was.
But then, Jane Tanners sighting of the abductor didn't appear all that similar to Brueckner if you ask me, so maybe that's why they didn't.
Blame Jane really.
-
Why wouldn’t they? They obviously thought he was someone they needed to talk to and as he was well known in the area it surely wouldn’t have been that difficult to track him down if they could have been bothered (which they clearly weren’t).
Why?
Where was he then?
-
I forget, they also had Tasmin Silence's sighting of some ugly bloke wearing a leather jacket, & since Brueckner was the only ugly bloke in Luz who ever owned & wore a leather jacket, it should have been obvious it was him straight away really.
-
Why wouldn’t they? They obviously thought he was someone they needed to talk to and as he was well known in the area it surely wouldn’t have been that difficult to track him down if they could have been bothered (which they clearly weren’t).
His name wasn't mentioned by anyone in their statements. His record was for fuel theft, dealt with by the GNR. I can think of no reason why the PJ would be interested.
-
His name wasn't mentioned by anyone in their statements. His record was for fuel theft, dealt with by the GNR. I can think of no reason why the PJ would be interested.
Oh dear never mind, however according to the case co-ordinator they WERE interested enough in him to knock on his door, even though you can’t think of a reason why they did.
-
His name wasn't mentioned by anyone in their statements. His record was for fuel theft, dealt with by the GNR. I can think of no reason why the PJ would be interested.
He was a convicted child molester who was returned to Germany via the Portuguese court system. Of course the PJ wouldn't be interested in checking the records particularly when Amaral writes in his book about his solving of the case by identifying the perpetrators before his feet had touched the bedroom floor the morning after Madeleine's abduction.
-
He was a convicted child molester who was returned to Germany via the Portuguese court system. Of course the PJ wouldn't be interested in checking the records particularly when Amaral writes in his book about his solving of the case by identifying the perpetrators before his feet had touched the bedroom floor the morning after Madeleine's abduction.
What abduction?
-
What abduction?
Wake up at the back WS !!!
-
Wake up at the back WS !!!
Just taken Olanzapine & Zolpidem so not sure I'll be able to stay awake much longer, that'll be a relief for the forum.
Yum, I do love prescription sleeping pills. I tried persuading my doctor to prescribe me a whole months worth but he knows I'd probably just eat them all twice as fast.
-
Oh dear never mind, however according to the case co-ordinator they WERE interested enough in him to knock on his door, even though you can’t think of a reason why they did.
How come people believe him? All I ever hear is "He's a convicted liar"- until he says something it suits them to believe.
-
He was a convicted child molester who was returned to Germany via the Portuguese court system. Of course the PJ wouldn't be interested in checking the records particularly when Amaral writes in his book about his solving of the case by identifying the perpetrators before his feet had touched the bedroom floor the morning after Madeleine's abduction.
I don't know how things were arranged in Portugal, so I've no idea if the PJ would be involved with EAW's or if those records were available to them. Unlike some, I don't take these things for granted.
Do you have a page number for Amaral's disclosure that he identified the perps before he got out of bed on 4th?
-
How come people believe him? All I ever hear is "He's a convicted liar"- until he says something it suits them to believe.
Because in this instance his “lie” (if you want to call it that) actually makes him and his police force look more incompetent rather than less, and I can’t see why he would be telling us something that was a lie that reflected badly on him and his men. Even a liar occasionally tells the truth you know (and let’s not forget it works both ways - you both believe and disbelieve the McCann testimony when it suits you, so…)
-
I don't know how things were arranged in Portugal, so I've no idea if the PJ would be involved with EAW's or if those records were available to them. Unlike some, I don't take these things for granted.
Do you have a page number for Amaral's disclosure that he identified the perps before he got out of bed on 4th?
Not only do you take things for granted you get a lot wrong..imo ...As we shall see
-
Not only do you take things for granted you get a lot wrong..imo ...As we shall see
Maybe you can explain how EAW's are dealt with in Portugal; or do you also assume the PJ would be involved?
-
I wouldn't want to take on Germany when it comes to EAWs and Brueckner. Portugal had their chance with him and blew it.
-
I wouldn't want to take on Germany when it comes to EAWs and Brueckner. Portugal had their chance with him and blew it.
In the case of Madeleine McCann the Portuguese have the prior claim afaik.
-
I.n the case of Madeleine McCann the Portuguese have the prior claim afaik.
Such a pity that Portugal didn't use their prior claim when they had the chance.
Did Portugal not have a prior claim in The Rape Case? They even had DNA Evidence, if I recall correctly.
-
Such a pity that Portugal didn't use their prior claim when they had the chance.
Did Portugal not have a prior claim in The Rape Case? They even had DNA Evidence, if I recall correctly.
The statute of limitations for rape in Portugal is 10 years. They have extended the 15 year limit for murder by making CB an arguido.
-
Such a pity that Portugal didn't use their prior claim when they had the chance.
Did Portugal not have a prior claim in The Rape Case? They even had DNA Evidence, if I recall correctly.
They might have had DNA, but did they have a match at the time ?
I believe that may states have strict rules about when they can take DNA samples from people and how long they can keep the record for.
-
The statute of limitations for rape in Portugal is 10 years. They have extended the 15 year limit for murder by making CB an arguido.
How long is the Statute of Limitations for Rape in Germany? And how long for Murder?
Of course, it always helps if you can change The Rules when it suits you.
-
In the case of Madeleine McCann the Portuguese have the prior claim afaik.
What's that based on.. Pure speculation?
Would Portugal have sufficient evidence to extradite him from Germany... Or Italy. What evidence do you think they could have.. May be why Wolters hasn't shared
-
What's that based on.. Pure speculation?
Would Portugal have sufficient evidence to extradite him from Germany... Or Italy. What evidence do you think they could have.. May be why Wolters hasn't shared
It's based on jurisdiction. I don't know what evidence any of them have because they're not telling.
-
It's based on jurisdiction. I don't know what evidence any of them have because they're not telling.
Can you give The Forum one good reason for why Germany should not prosecute one of it's own citizens for crimes committed elsewhere when elsewhere did absolutely nothing to even investigate these crimes in a sensible manner?
-
It's based on jurisdiction. I don't know what evidence any of them have because they're not telling.
Germany have jurisdiction too.. Do you have a cite that Portugal's claim overides Germany's.. Or are you speculating/taking things for granted / making it up as you go along
-
Germany have jurisdiction too.. Do you have a cite that Portugal's claim overides Germany's.. Or are you speculating/taking things for granted / making it up as you go along
It's something that is subject to negotiation between the two states.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/jurisdiction
-
What's that based on.. Pure speculation?
Would Portugal have sufficient evidence to extradite him from Germany... Or Italy. What evidence do you think they could have.. May be why Wolters hasn't shared
Lets suppose CB did it (what ever it is ) has it crossed your mind that the PJ may have that piece that the BKA cannot make fit, lets not forget some time ago it was reported the PJ were searching well's.
-
Can you give The Forum one good reason for why Germany should not prosecute one of it's own citizens for crimes committed elsewhere when elsewhere did absolutely nothing to even investigate these crimes in a sensible manner?
Can the Germans declare Madeleine dead without a body or forensics ?
-
In the case of Madeleine McCann the Portuguese have the prior claim afaik.
Rubbish
-
Lets suppose CB did it (what ever it is ) has it crossed your mind that the PJ may have that piece that the BKA cannot make fit, lets not forget some time ago it was reported the PJ were searching well's.
That was NOTHING to do with Madeleine's disappearance, get with the programme!!!
-
That was NOTHING to do with Madeleine's disappearance, get with the programme!!!
What programme is that?
-
What programme is that?
I think you know what I'm talking about.
-
Well one of the unidentified was not CB then .
Not really because some of the prints were unifentifiable, meaning they were partial pri ts which would make it impossible to match to anyone.
On second thoughts, talking of jemmied window you not think it was possible an intruder/abductor left door open, curtains and the window open checking to see if anyone was coming in? Or walking around?
Why oh why were no prints taking on outside of window?
-
That was NOTHING to do with Madeleine's disappearance, get with the programme!!!
I'm not brainwashed into any programme .
-
I think you know what I'm talking about.
I've not got a clue.
-
I've not got a clue.
The truest thing you ever did write. @)(++(*
-
Why were these supposedly much respected entities so vociferous in their pursuit of The McCanns when there was never any evidence against them?
The whole area was rife with paedophiles who were completely ignored.
And then suddenly, after fifteen years a paedophile is designated as an Arguido.
This was published 13 years ago
Maddie case uncovers paedophile ring
January 19, 2009
Spanish private detectives investigating the 2007 disappearance of a British girl from a resort in Portugal uncovered an Internet paedophile ring, El Mundo reported in its online edition.
Police arrested 13 suspects as a result of the investigation by investigators from the Barcelona-based Metodo-3 agency, who had been hired by Gerry and Kate McCann to trace their daughter Madeleine, said the report.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The agency's investigators were hired six months after her disappearance.
Two months into their investigation, they received information
Although it turned out the information was not relevant to Madeleine, the agency tipped off Spanish police who subsequently arrested the suspects in a series of raids in December 2008.
As well as those arrested, police questioned another 10 people and seized a large quantity of computer equipment.
Approached by AFP, Metodo-3 was unable to confirm the report.
Spain has staged a series of operations against Internet child pornography in recent years, arresting more than 1,200 people over the last five years - of whom 408 were arrested in 2008 alone.
Madeleine McCann's parents have been funding a private investigation to try to find out what happened to their daughter.
The Portuguese authorities closed their probe into her disappearance in July 2008.
https://www.smh.com.au/world/maddie-case-uncovers-paedophile-ring-20090119-7kxe.html
The resistance to what seems to be the gigantic elephant in the room as far as the Portuguese investigators were concerned is more than extraordinary, it is simply bizarre.
Bearing in mind the then very recent and visible knowledge of the Casa Pia paedophile ring which had shocked Portugal and the world.
The much maligned Metodo3 group followed intelligence in their efforts to find Madeleine and although unsuccessful as far as she was concerned, were able to hopefully rescue other abused children.
To me that once the parents had been eliminated by dint of there being no evidence against them it would have been logical to take the next obvious step.
The PJ would have had more powers and resources to their command than private detectives could ever hope to have.
I think all the private detectives working for the McCanns did what they could. Pity the same cannot be said for the Policia Judiciaria.
-
So you decided to ask a question which you aren't prepared to answer? If CB isn't the culprit then criticising the first investigation (again and again and again) isn't yet justified.
You are just so wrong..
The first invetigastion was based on total ignorance Re the evidence..
The main evidence for the first investigation was the alerts by the cadaver dog..do you still not understand that the PJ we're totally wrong to think the alerts proved MM died in the apartment ..has it not sunk in yet
-
So you decided to ask a question which you aren't prepared to answer? If CB isn't the culprit then criticising the first investigation (again and again and again) isn't yet justified.
I also criticise Grime for taking around 12 years to clarify that Eddie did not have a 100% record...and was not a reliable cadaver dog..why did he wait 12 years...an absolute disgrace
-
I also criticise Grime for taking around 12 years to clarify that Eddie did not have a 100% record...and was not a reliable cadaver dog..why did he wait 12 years...an absolute disgrace
Cant believe people still think they were in 200 or 300 cases.
-
Cant believe people still think they were in 200 or 300 cases.
Everything can be misconstrued if it suits people to do so. Rather a silly waste of time in the long run, but still it goes on.
By the time Grime admitted these errors he was about to retire so it didn't matter to him anymore.
-
Cant believe people still think they were in 200 or 300 cases.
In real terms once the testing was complete and information delivered from the Birmingham laboratory to Portugal and properly understood, that was it as far as the police investigation was concerned. Time to follow other angles.
The general misunderstanding arises from the ensuing propaganda war fuelled by Amaral's book, Amaral's 'documentary', Amaral's incursions into the television studious pushing his and Cristovao's version of events and last but not least Levy's internet release of video recordings of Eddie barking his head off at the 'scent of death'.
I think all of that took nearly ten years to overcome and most definitely prolonged investigation into Madeleine's case; and now over fifteen years later hindsight, that perfect science, is indicating the real investigative errors made which stood between allowing a perpetrator to hide in full view and solving Madeleine's case.
-
In real terms once the testing was complete and information delivered from the Birmingham laboratory to Portugal and properly understood, that was it as far as the police investigation was concerned. Time to follow other angles.
The general misunderstanding arises from the ensuing propaganda war fuelled by Amaral's book, Amaral's 'documentary', Amaral's incursions into the television studious pushing his and Cristovao's version of events and last but not least Levy's internet release of video recordings of Eddie barking his head off at the 'scent of death'.
I think all of that took nearly ten years to overcome and most definitely prolonged investigation into Madeleine's case; and now over fifteen years later hindsight, that perfect science, is indicating the real investigative errors made which stood between allowing a perpetrator to hide in full view and solving Madeleine's case.
Cases. I've given this much thought, although nobody would notice.
Cases? Call outs? Jobs? Demos? What's the definition? Practices? Drills? Training? Tasks? Instances that garnered reward? Instances that didn't garner reward? Leaping out of the van?
Cases?
.........dogs, yeh.
Repitition and training to an intense level to ensure efficacy and adherence to standards.