The presumption of innocence has nothing to say about eliminating suspects; it's about the treatment of suspects by the Judiciary. The Portuguese Judiciary didn't breach their suspect's right to the presumption of innocence, but I'm not so sure about a certain member of the German Judiciary in his pronoucements about CB. CB's lawyer feels his right to a fair trial may have been compromised if that trial takes place in Bruanchweig.
The point you have sidestepped is that neither the McCanns or Murat were ever charged with any offences making McCann, McCann and Murat as white as the driven snow as far as the law was concerned.
In Amaral's case when he went through the process of being an arguido, there was evidence to enable charges to be brought against him. He was tried and convicted. His appeal against conviction was not upheld. Making him a convicted criminal.
The subtle nuance for Brueckner is that he is already a convicted criminal serving time. He has been charged with five other crimes which will be tried when a jurisdiction is decided. He remains arguido in Madeleine's case and will be charged or not depending on the evidence.
No rush though. He's got five other trials to work his way through and at present delay seems to be suiting the defence case.
Oh not forgetting that funding for the continuance of the SY investigation of Madeleine's case doesn't appear to be a problem.