You do understand that courts get it wrong sometimes, don’t you?
With regard to Brueckner, if there was DNA to link him to the crime then that’s what convicted him, not some people trafficking lowlife with the credibility of Boris Johnson.
It’s sad that you still don’t understand so let me try one last time.
1) an old lady is raped in PdL, bound and tortured.
2) the only evidence found is an unidentified hair.
3) years later Busching describes to police seeing a couple of rapes on a video that he says were committed by CB in the Algarve and also that he is responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance. He describes, torture, victim being tied up etc
4) police check out unsolved rapes in the Algarve and discover similarities between what Busching describes and the rape of the old lady in PdL
5) A DNA profile of the previously unidentified hair matches with the person Busching says committed the other rapes he saw on the video.
6) Bingo! The police have potentially identified the woman’s rapist.
7) CB is chargrd and convicted based largely on this information
8) Had Busching never pointed the finger at CB it’s unlikely the rape would ever have been reinvestigated and the hair tested against his profile
9) Bushcing’s evidence was credible and helped solve thr crime.
Understand now?
