The Remit of SY

[G-Unit]

I was trying to come up with some quip about German Records. I failed & couldn't think of anything funny to say, but here's "Das Model by Kraftwerk" anyway, enjoy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEnx9xS79Lc

I lived in Germany in the 1970's. They had no hit records of their own, but were very fond of;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0VTAvYg98E

German songs and singers don't seem to have international appeal.

[Vertigo Swirl]

He's the only German whose thoughts are on record.

Do you think the German police are not in accord with HCW?  What do you think they’ve been investigating all these years then?

[Wonderfulspam]

Do you think the German police are not in accord with HCW?  What do you think they’ve been investigating all these years then?

Christian Brueckner & his life of sex crimes, hence the reason he's been charged with 5 offences.

He won't be getting charged with murdering Maddie anytime soon though, because Wolters was exagerating the strength of the evidence.
We know the evidence against him.

He would talk in great detail to Busching about the case.

He told an undertaker paedo guy in a chat room that he murdered Maddie & destroyed the evidence.

He received a half hour phone call.

That is the totality of Wolters evidence, hence why the evidence won't be seeing the inside of a court room.

[G-Unit]

Christian Brueckner & his life of sex crimes, hence the reason he's been charged with 5 offences.

He won't be getting charged with murdering Maddie anytime soon though, because Wolters was exagerating the strength of the evidence.
We know the evidence against him.

He would talk in great detail to Busching about the case.

He told an undertaker paedo guy in a chat room that he murdered Maddie & destroyed the evidence.

He received a half hour phone call.

That is the totality of Wolters evidence, hence why the evidence won't be seeing the inside of a court room.

There are charges pending against Brueckner but I'm not sure if they will all lead to convictions. I doubt any new information will come in now. By linking him to Madeleine's disappearance world wide publicity resulted, so if they don't have what they need now they're unlikely to get more imo.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Anyone who claims to know the full extent of the police’s evidence against Brückner wrt to Madeleine’s disappearance is IMO quite delusional.   Anyone who believes the German authorities has allowed one of their prosecutors to deliberately mislead the entire world for the last two years about the extent of that evidence purely in order to secure additional evidence for other lesser crimes is also similarly delusional imo.

[Wonderfulspam]

Anyone who claims to know the full extent of the police’s evidence against Brückner wrt to Madeleine’s disappearance is IMO quite delusional.   Anyone who believes the German authorities has allowed one of their prosecutors to deliberately mislead the entire world for the last two years about the extent of that evidence purely in order to secure additional evidence for other lesser crimes is also similarly delusional imo.

Well, if I'm wrong, then get back to me when Wolters reveals the concrete evidence & Brueckner is prosecuted, won't you dearie.
Shouldn't be much longer now.

[Wonderfulspam]

Even Mr Gray has given up telling us in capital letters that Wolters has CONCRETE EVIDENCE. Others still haven't caught up yet.

[Wonderfulspam]

There are charges pending against Brueckner but I'm not sure if they will all lead to convictions. I doubt any new information will come in now. By linking him to Madeleine's disappearance world wide publicity resulted, so if they don't have what they need now they're unlikely to get more imo.

They already had enough evidence to charge over 2 years ago, Wolters said so. They want to charge CB with the best body of evidence apparently.
Wolters has even said that if Brueckner knew the evidence against him he could change his story.
So, that's how weak the evidence is, that if Brueckner said 'it wasn't me gov' Wolters would be scuppered.
Real solid stuff isn't It!

[G-Unit]

Anyone who claims to know the full extent of the police’s evidence against Brückner wrt to Madeleine’s disappearance is IMO quite delusional.   Anyone who believes the German authorities has allowed one of their prosecutors to deliberately mislead the entire world for the last two years about the extent of that evidence purely in order to secure additional evidence for other lesser crimes is also similarly delusional imo.

Having faith in the police isn't a bad thing but they can only work with evidence and when they have enough to charge that's what they do. They have investigated Brueckner since his associate first came forward in 2017. No matter what they have they haven't taken that step. Wolters has ceased making claims now, too. I'm sure they went public in the hope that they could connect him to Madeleine's disappearance but have had to settle for issuing charges unconnected with that.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Having faith in the police isn't a bad thing but they can only work with evidence and when they have enough to charge that's what they do. They have investigated Brueckner since his associate first came forward in 2017. No matter what they have they haven't taken that step. Wolters has ceased making claims now, too. I'm sure they went public in the hope that they could connect him to Madeleine's disappearance but have had to settle for issuing charges unconnected with that.

I think you’ve got that slightly wrong.  They already had evidence to connect him to Madeleine’s disappearance and were appealing for more in the hope that they could build a watertight case against him.   We don’t know what additional evidence they received as a result of their appeal but we do know that some crimes never go to court because the evidence while overwhelming on a circumstantial basis, simply isn’t enough to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.  I don’t have faith in the police, I am simply giving them the benefit of the doubt at this stage, rather than pretending I know precisely what the situation is wrt to the investigation.  Is there anything wrong with that approach in your view?

[Wonderfulspam]

I think you’ve got that slightly wrong.  They already had evidence to connect him to Madeleine’s disappearance and were appealing for more in the hope that they could build a watertight case against him.   We don’t know what additional evidence they received as a result of their appeal but we do know that some crimes never go to court because the evidence while overwhelming on a circumstantial basis, simply isn’t enough to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.  I don’t have faith in the police, I am simply giving them the benefit of the doubt at this stage, rather than pretending I know precisely what the situation is wrt to the investigation.  Is there anything wrong with that approach in your view?

What do you suppose the concrete evidence against Brueckner is then?

Whatever it is, it hasn't convinced the MET, despite being so overwhelmingly convincing that if WE knew what it was, we'd be in no doubt.

[Wonderfulspam]

What do you suppose the concrete evidence against Brueckner is then?

Whatever it is, it hasn't convinced the MET, despite being so overwhelmingly convincing that if WE knew what it was, we'd be in no doubt.

Ahhh, but Wolters can't share all the concrete evidence with the MET, it might damage the case! So I've been previously informed by the sages here.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I lived in Germany in the 1970's. They had no hit records of their own, but were very fond of;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0VTAvYg98E

German songs and singers don't seem to have international appeal.

Apart from Boney M, Milli Vanilli, Rammstein, Scorpions, all the Krautrock bands, loads of dance acts, and let’s not forget Nena and the Goombay Dance Band.  Oh and Falco. 

[G-Unit]

I think you’ve got that slightly wrong.  They already had evidence to connect him to Madeleine’s disappearance and were appealing for more in the hope that they could build a watertight case against him.   We don’t know what additional evidence they received as a result of their appeal but we do know that some crimes never go to court because the evidence while overwhelming on a circumstantial basis, simply isn’t enough to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.  I don’t have faith in the police, I am simply giving them the benefit of the doubt at this stage, rather than pretending I know precisely what the situation is wrt to the investigation.  Is there anything wrong with that approach in your view?

Giving Wolters the benefit of the doubt suggests you are still clinging to the hope that he will deliver. Suggesting that he only has circumstancial evidence contradicts what he has claimed. To me, that's an argument which will be used to suggest that the perpetrator was found but won't face justice. You need to consider the possibilty that it's because he wasn't involved.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Giving Wolters the benefit of the doubt suggests you are still clinging to the hope that he will deliver. Suggesting that he only has circumstancial evidence contradicts what he has claimed. To me, that's an argument which will be used to suggest that the perpetrator was found but won't face justice. You need to consider the possibilty that it's because he wasn't involved.

Perhaps you don’t understand what the phrase means.

the benefit of the doubt
noun phrase
: the state of accepting something/someone as honest or deserving of trust even though there are doubts.

I have obviously considered the possibility that CB was not involved.  What makes you think I am certain that he was?