The known facts and the speculations featuring Brueckner, the prime suspect

[Vertigo Swirl]

Sounds to me as if they probably took Grange's word for that - they think it's stranger abduction without actual proof.

IMO

You think the German police are complete fools then?  That figures...

[Vertigo Swirl]

Easy for them to say without the slightest shred of proof.

Another one who doesn't understand the difference between evidence and proof.

[Mr Gray]

I presume by 'Germans' you mean Wolters? I agree with posters on websleuths that he probably isn't in charge of the case, he's just a spokesman, and one who dealt really badly with the media too.

Looks like you are starting to catch up with me. I said over 4 months ago Wolters was a spokesman.
Your presumption is wrong... Its clear to me the German investigation have proof beyond reasonable doubt MM is dead and that she was abducted by a paedophile

[G-Unit]

It took you 5 days to come up with this reply to break the forum silence? For shame! 

If he's done so very badly, and is merely a mouthpiece why hasn't he been sacked by the Germans?  Any ideas?

I thought people might be interested in the opinions expressed on websleuths; they seem to get quoted a lot here. I think the reaction of the (mostly UK) media took the Germans completely by surprise. They could hardly sack Wolters after appointing him to interact with the media. That was their mistake, not his. He was out of his depth imo.

[G-Unit]

Looks like you are starting to catch up with me. I said over 4 months ago Wolters was a spokesman.
Your presumption is wrong... Its clear to me the German investigation have proof beyond reasonable doubt MM is dead and that she was abducted by a paedophile

I must have missed that post, sorry. Mostly you have seemed to portray him as the man in charge imo.

[Mr Gray]

I must have missed that post, sorry. Mostly you have seemed to portray him as the man in charge imo.

If you search.. Wolters spokesman... You will find several from Sept 21. I've said constantly Wolters is the spokesman.

So if what he was saying was merely his opinion and not that of the BKK I'm sure we would have heard some dissent from the BKK. He is speaking for the investigation

[Brietta]

I thought people might be interested in the opinions expressed on websleuths; they seem to get quoted a lot here. I think the reaction of the (mostly UK) media took the Germans completely by surprise. They could hardly sack Wolters after appointing him to interact with the media. That was their mistake, not his. He was out of his depth imo.

My impression of Websleuths is that there are native German contributors posting regularly who can give us facts as well as informed opinion.

I think you will end up finding in the fulness of time that Wolters is anything but "out of his depth".

[Vertigo Swirl]

I thought people might be interested in the opinions expressed on websleuths; they seem to get quoted a lot here. I think the reaction of the (mostly UK) media took the Germans completely by surprise. They could hardly sack Wolters after appointing him to interact with the media. That was their mistake, not his. He was out of his depth imo.

I’m very surprised you’re interested in the Websleuths discussion as the general consensus seems to be that CB is involved and the Germans have got it right. You must find that very grating..  And of course they could sack Wolters, if he had broken the law or overstepped the mark. 

[G-Unit]

I’m very surprised you’re interested in the Websleuths discussion as the general consensus seems to be that CB is involved and the Germans have got it right. You must find that very grating..  And of course they could sack Wolters, if he had broken the law or overstepped the mark.

I'm not really interested, only insofar as posts on there have been affecting posts on here.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I'm not really interested, only insofar as posts on there have been affecting posts on here.

There hadn’t been a post on this forum for five days until you made your observation about what they’re saying on websleuths.  It seems it’s all going on over there, and dying a death here.   I wonder why..?

[Vertigo Swirl]

To answer my own question, perhaps it's because there's just too many sensible, thoughtful, logical posts like this one over on Websleuths - I've already posted it once before and it was resolutely ignored by the HCK/BKA sceptics on this forum.  It would be good to hear their replies to these questions but something tells me not to hold my breath...

“I don't believe for one moment though that all they have is a phone ping and a 'profile that fits'. When you consider all the actions the BKA have taken, I think it's important to ask - Why?

Why would the BKA involve themselves in this hot potato of a case, if they had no real evidence other than what we've been told about so far?

Why put themselves in the spotlight of a media frenzy and risk ridicule and libel suits by publicly proclaiming CB's guilt if they had nothing of any real substance to back it up?

Why would they spend over 4 years investigating this lead if all they have got is hearsay and a phone ping which doesn't even place the phone at the crime scene or during the crime window?

Why would they spend all this money and waste their limited resources on a case where the victim isn't German, the crime took place in another country and they have no responsibility to investigate it?

Why wouldn't they just hand over the evidence they've got to PJ and SY and let them deal with it unless they were pretty confident they could get a conviction?

Why have they taken this unprecedented approach of publicly accusing someone of murder without charging them, in a country where privacy laws are extremely strict and further...

...Why would that approach have been sanctioned at a higher level if there wasn't already strong indicative evidence to warrant such a bold action?


Any claims that they are just on some tenuous fishing expedition... or they are fitting up a patsy... or that they have no real evidence... or that they are just plain incompetent..... none of these stand up to any kind of proper logic or scrutiny when considering the above questions.

IMO, they had enough evidence to convince them of CB's guilt but not quite enough to assure a conviction. With no forensics linking him to the crime scene and no body, you can see why they might have a problem in that regard. But they certainly have a lot more than what we know about so far IMO.

And from HCW's comments in October, he says they do "now" have enough to charge CB. I've seen nothing so far to contradict that not being the case and therefore, they must have some pretty strong evidence to back up their claims. JMO”

[Brietta]

There hadn’t been a post on this forum for five days until you made your observation about what they’re saying on websleuths.  It seems it’s all going on over there, and dying a death here.   I wonder why..?

There is meaningful and polite discussion taking place on Websleuths which has continued over the five days when we have been moribund.

I think that proves there is still plenty of scope to investigate the many faceted aspects of Madeleine's case.  For example over the last five days quite a bit of of German protocols and hierarchies of which we are in complete ignorance

Davel used logic to work out what Wolter's place is in the sphere of things; correctly as was confirmed by WS posters who took the bother to carry out some real research.

Which raises the question of which forum was ahead of the game to begin with.

[Brietta]

I'm not really interested, only insofar as posts on there have been affecting posts on here.

What is your objection to locating well sourced information for discussion from a source which owns the mantle once possessed by this forum for accuracy and integrity?

[Angelo222]

To answer my own question, perhaps it's because there's just too many sensible, thoughtful, logical posts like this one over on Websleuths - I've already posted it once before and it was resolutely ignored by the HCK/BKA sceptics on this forum.  It would be good to hear their replies to these questions but something tells me not to hold my breath...

The very simple answer is two words... Glory Hunters.

The truth is that the Germans have nothing. No evidence of anything really connecting Bruckner with Madeleine McCann. Even Madeleine's parents don't believe a word that comes out of their mouths.

They thought that someone would come out of the ether and finger Bruckner with damning evidence but it never happened. Now they are stuck with a story which will never be proven one way or the other.

[G-Unit]

There is meaningful and polite discussion taking place on Websleuths which has continued over the five days when we have been moribund.

I think that proves there is still plenty of scope to investigate the many faceted aspects of Madeleine's case.  For example over the last five days quite a bit of of German protocols and hierarchies of which we are in complete ignorance

Davel used logic to work out what Wolter's place is in the sphere of things; correctly as was confirmed by WS posters who took the bother to carry out some real research.

Which raises the question of which forum was ahead of the game to begin with.

I can only congratulate their moderators who ensure that discussions are polite.