New German suspect in Madeleine McCann mystery disappearance.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

He has said he has strong evidence maddie si dead and CB murdered her...he isnt saying he has proof. If he doesnt have that evidence CB could sue him and potentially see him jailed. CB must be very confidnt

So if what you say is true and there is no legal protection for public officials that are appealing for information concerning a serious crime, that makes what HCW said to be extremely foolish, naïve and reckless. He has put himself in an extremely vulnerable position. Is this the man you are pinning your hopes on?
Why would anyone take such a risky approach, we are talking about personal liberty. Can you imagine HCW doing a 2 year stretch, I am not sure he is prison material. Then after release surely not straight back to his old job but instead down to the job centre every 2 weeks. His risk assessment here has gone very wrong.

[The General]

He has said he has strong evidence maddie si dead and CB murdered her...he isnt saying he has proof. If he doesnt have that evidence CB could sue him and potentially see him jailed. CB must be very confidnt

I thought we established last week that the polizei were exempt when in the throes of an active investigation?
Did you miss the Telex?

[Mr Gray]

I thought we established last week that the polizei were exempt when in the throes of an active investigation?
Did you miss the Telex?

false alarm...they have limited privelege. I dont see it in any way covers...the evidence shows our susspect murdered MM

[faithlilly]

false alarm...they have limited privelege. I dont see it in any way covers...the evidence shows our susspect murdered MM

No thank you for my cite?

[Icanhandlethetruth]

false alarm...they have limited privelege. I dont see it in any way covers...the evidence shows our susspect murdered MM

Please provide a cite for public prosecutors in Germany have limited privilege.

[Mr Gray]

Please provide a cite for public prosecutors in Germany have limited privilege.

Do you think they can say anything they like

[The General]

Do you think they can say anything they like

Why not, HCW does. He's riffin like Eminem, droppin names and takin numbers:
I don't smile, I don't frown, get too up or get too down by the news
CB was here, so were you, you came and went, I stuck around da Luz
Still here now, stop me how? Your opinion's like a broken calculator
That **** doesn't count, CB's in the frame, nor fortune or fame
Concrete evidence, not proof but enough
Gonna let him stew in stir, interrogate when I'm buff

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Do you think they can say anything they like

If you provide the cite I can then read it and then get back to you with an answer.

[Mr Gray]

Please provide a cite for public prosecutors in Germany have limited privilege.

I would think it will be the same as in the UK and we've been through it before



the defence of absolute privilege protects statements which can fairly be said to be part of the process of investigating a crime or possible crime,

[Icanhandlethetruth]

I would think it will be the same as in the UK and we've been through it before



the defence of absolute privilege protects statements which can fairly be said to be part of the process of investigating a crime or possible crime,

So what was all this guff

This is interesting... im sure wolters understands German law....

Whoever asserts or disseminates a fact about another person which is suitable for degrading that person or negatively affecting public opinion about that person, unless this fact can be proved to be true, incurs a penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or a fine and, if the offence was committed publicly or by disseminating material (section 11 (3)), a penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine.


so Wolters is risking prison if he doesnt have the evidence...not 50 p a week as the General suggested

How does that relate to the legal defence of absolute privilege?

[faithlilly]

So what was all this guff

This is interesting... im sure wolters understands German law....

Whoever asserts or disseminates a fact about another person which is suitable for degrading that person or negatively affecting public opinion about that person, unless this fact can be proved to be true, incurs a penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or a fine and, if the offence was committed publicly or by disseminating material (section 11 (3)), a penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine.


so Wolters is risking prison if he doesnt have the evidence...not 50 p a week as the General suggested

How does that relate to the legal defence of absolute privilege?

I think he’s tangled himself up a bit...and not for the first time.

[Mr Gray]

So what was all this guff

This is interesting... im sure wolters understands German law....

Whoever asserts or disseminates a fact about another person which is suitable for degrading that person or negatively affecting public opinion about that person, unless this fact can be proved to be true, incurs a penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or a fine and, if the offence was committed publicly or by disseminating material (section 11 (3)), a penalty of imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine.


so Wolters is risking prison if he doesnt have the evidence...not 50 p a week as the General suggested

How does that relate to the legal defence of absolute privilege?

Cite that Wolters statements are covered by absolute privelige rather than qualified privelige

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Cite that Wolters statements are covered by absolute privelige rather than qualified privelige

Please provide me the cite I requested earlier and I will respond to your request. First in first out.
If you don't have the cite please add "in my opinion". You can't pass opinion as fact.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

I would think it will be the same as in the UK and we've been through it before



the defence of absolute privilege protects statements which can fairly be said to be part of the process of investigating a crime or possible crime,

And how do these 2 statements from you within the last hour make sense, one says they have limited privilege the other says absolute privilege covers them. Which is it limited or absolute?

“false alarm...they have limited privelege. I dont see it in any way covers...the evidence shows our susspect murdered MM”

“I would think it will be the same as in the UK and we've been through it before
the defence of absolute privilege protects statements which can fairly be said to be part of the process of investigating a crime or possible crime,”

[Mr Gray]

And how do these 2 statements from you within the last hour make sense, one says they have limited privilege the other says absolute privilege covers them. Which is it limited or absolute?

“false alarm...they have limited privelege. I dont see it in any way covers...the evidence shows our susspect murdered MM”

“I would think it will be the same as in the UK and we've been through it before
the defence of absolute privilege protects statements which can fairly be said to be part of the process of investigating a crime or possible crime,”

Both those statements are compatible with each other. In some circumstances the police have absolute privelige... In others qualified