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

[The General]

Translated.

Maddie case: TV documentary meaningless for investigations
BRAUNSCHWEIG. The broadcaster SAT.1 had announced new evidence as a result of investigative research. Prosecutor reacts: "Nothing new was presented." New traces in the maddie case had promised the television channel SAT.1 on Monday evening in an investigative documentary about the case of three-year-old Madeleine McCann, who disappeared from a holiday resort in Portugal in 2007. After the broadcast, disillusionment sets in. "After the full-bodied praises of the television station, we expected the documentary with great interest," explains Christian Wolters, spokesman for the responsible Braunschweig public prosecutor's office, on request. His conclusion, however, is: "Nothing new was presented. The broadcast therefore has virtually no significance for our investigations." The presumption that the broadcaster's research would not contain any significant news had been confirmed.

The station had advertised that his research had already caused an international sensation. Work in hotel complex was known to investigators That the suspectEd German, who is currently serving a seven-year prison sentence for the rape of a 72-year-old, had once worked in the hotel complex in the resort of Praia da Luz, from which Maddie disappeared, according to a witness quoted in the program, is not a new indication for the investigating authority. "That is well known," says Wolters, but there is no temporal connection with the disappearance of the little British woman.

During the period of the crime, however, the mobile phone of the German emigrant, who had a criminal record for sexual, property and drug offences, is said to have been located within the radius of the hotel complex. Thus, the Federal Criminal Police Office and braunschweig public prosecutor's office had already gone public in 2020 in their call for witnesses. The question: Who had spoken to the suspect on the phone that evening? SAT.1 speculates about whether it could have been an acquaintance of the suspect (already questioned by the BKA). However, this does not express itself to the reporters. Suspect: "Perfect crime or innocent" In addition to the preparation already publicly in the known facts, was quoted from a correspondence of the reporter with the murder suspect in the case of Maddie, in which he sees himself, among other things, as a victim of false reporting. He also writes:

Either it was the perfect crime – or he was innocent. However, according to the journalist's summary, he did not provide a credible alibi in the letters. On the suspect's accusation that the public prosecutor's office does not let him speak, Wolters says: "The accused can comment at any time directly or through his defense lawyer. This has not happened so far."

Imagine HCW's face when some tin pot producer of a half-baked documentary waltzes in to his office and presents 'sensational' new evidence that will crack it wide open. Three years of investigation down das Klosett. Imagine the embarrassment, having some TV crank finish the job.
Clearly this wasn't the case, as they're considering an airing date for the latest in a long line of fluff pieces; nonsense. Isolate brain and open eyes. Disposable telly flotsam.

[Brietta]

Imagine HCW's face when some tin pot producer of a half-baked documentary waltzes in to his office and presents 'sensational' new evidence that will crack it wide open. Three years of investigation down das Klosett. Imagine the embarrassment, having some TV crank finish the job.
Clearly this wasn't the case, as they're considering an airing date for the latest in a long line of fluff pieces; nonsense. Isolate brain and open eyes. Disposable telly flotsam.

The trick with being a member of a discussion forum is that one is supposed to read other members' posts and reply accordingly.
Keeps the discussion flowing don'cha know.  Making it up as you go along tends to knock things askew and I am sure that never is your intention.

Allow me to refer you to one I made earlier which might point you in the correct direction rather than embarking on a little deflective discussion with yourself.
 
NO NEW EVIDENCE
Maddie Case: TV documentary meaningless for investigations

01.02.2022

BRAUNSCHWEIG. The broadcaster SAT.1 had announced new evidence as a result of investigative research. Prosecutor reacts: "Nothing new was presented."

https://www.braunschweiger-zeitung.de/braunschweig/article234458631/Fall-Maddie-Fernseh-Doku-fuer-Ermittlungen-bedeutungslos.html

[jassi]

 "Nothing new was presented."

I am put in mind of Mandy Rice-Davis's word's - 'he would say that'

Wolters isn't going to admit that a mere journalist has anything new to offer -even if he had.

IMO

[barrier]

The trick with being a member of a discussion forum is that one is supposed to read other members' posts and reply accordingly.
Keeps the discussion flowing don'cha know.  Making it up as you go along tends to knock things askew and I am sure that never is your intention.

Allow me to refer you to one I made earlier which might point you in the correct direction rather than embarking on a little deflective discussion with yourself.
 
NO NEW EVIDENCE
Maddie Case: TV documentary meaningless for investigations

01.02.2022

BRAUNSCHWEIG. The broadcaster SAT.1 had announced new evidence as a result of investigative research. Prosecutor reacts: "Nothing new was presented."

https://www.braunschweiger-zeitung.de/braunschweig/article234458631/Fall-Maddie-Fernseh-Doku-fuer-Ermittlungen-bedeutungslos.html

Which is a fat lot of good behind a paywall.

[Venturi Swirl]

It may not have told HCW anything he didn’t already know but my take away from this documentary that I didn’t know before is that a) he used to do work at the OC b) his phone pings do indeed put his phone within 5 minutes of thenOC on the night of the disappearance c) he definitely doesn’t have an alibi fo the night in question, at least not one that has been hitherto confirmed.

[The General]

The trick with being a member of a discussion forum is that one is supposed to read other members' posts and reply accordingly.
Keeps the discussion flowing don'cha know. Making it up as you go along tends to knock things askew and I am sure that never is your intention.

Allow me to refer you to one I made earlier which might point you in the correct direction rather than embarking on a little deflective discussion with yourself.
 
NO NEW EVIDENCE
Maddie Case: TV documentary meaningless for investigations

01.02.2022

BRAUNSCHWEIG. The broadcaster SAT.1 had announced new evidence as a result of investigative research. Prosecutor reacts: "Nothing new was presented."

https://www.braunschweiger-zeitung.de/braunschweig/article234458631/Fall-Maddie-Fernseh-Doku-fuer-Ermittlungen-bedeutungslos.html

You should try it yourself. In plain English for a change, instead of unwittingly imitating Edward Lear.

As for the point you failed to make, I TOLD YOU SO!!
He's not your man. It's over.

[The General]

"Nothing new was presented."

I am put in mind of Mandy Rice-Davis's word's - 'he would say that'

Wolters isn't going to admit that a mere journalist has anything new to offer -even if he had.

IMO

I'd go further, they wouldn't have allowed its airing, as I predicted, if there was a single morsel of anything 'new'.
Fair trial? Libel? We're way past that now. Not only are they jeopardising this apparent, ongoing investigation in to MM, they're also impinging on any other crimes he may or may not have committed.
His legal team are undoubtedly cataloguing all of this - dealing with the tsunami of shit talk is probably more of a problem for them - including this very forum.

[Mr Gray]

I'd go further, they wouldn't have allowed its airing, as I predicted, if there was a single morsel of anything 'new'.
Fair trial? Libel? We're way past that now. Not only are they jeopardising this apparent, ongoing investigation in to MM, they're also impinging on any other crimes he may or may not have committed.
His legal team are undoubtedly cataloguing all of this - dealing with the tsunami of shit talk is probably more of a problem for them - including this very forum.

Yet sceptics were believing the rubbish he had an alibi... I said he wouldn't have. Wolters knows exactly what he is doing and if he has solved the case as I think he has then he deserves nothing but admiration and total respect.

[Wonderfulspam]

Yet sceptics were believing the rubbish he had an alibi... I said he wouldn't have. Wolters knows exactly what he is doing and if he has solved the case as I think he has then he deserves nothing but admiration and total respect.

Only, he hasn't solved the case.

[G-Unit]

Yet sceptics were believing the rubbish he had an alibi... I said he wouldn't have. Wolters knows exactly what he is doing and if he has solved the case as I think he has then he deserves nothing but admiration and total respect.

So you think he's solved the case, even though you've no idea how? You're very trusting.

[The General]

So you think he's solved the case, even though you've no idea how? You're very trusting.

It's patently obvious to all but the simplest of minds that the case is far from solved.
If it were HCW would be basking in his victory by now, having quit the force and gone on a round the world speaking  / press tour.
As it is, he's sat in his office surrounded by a retinue of staffers sifting through shite, sometimes literally, hoping some nugget is going to present itself.
The phone's a dead end - despite his Hail Mary pass asking the public for help, he's no nearer pinning that line of enquiry down.
For every jailhouse snitch he's recruited (or failed jailhouse plant - cringe!) there's a CB pal telling the opposite story - yeh, that's going well.
No forensics.
No eye witness.
No body.
Images - yes. But clearly not the slam dunk variety.
Dark Web chat (quite how websleuths got the transcripts, well, perhaps they were there purely for 'research purposes'). It boils down to a solitary 'MM'. Compelling.
Dead dog - there is that, and it's still being flogged.

[Venturi Swirl]

So you think he's solved the case, even though you've no idea how? You're very trusting.

Where did Davel say he has no idea how?  I think it’s fairly easy to work out how he may have solved the case.

[Venturi Swirl]

What is patently obvious is that some people cannot bear the thought that HCW may have got closer to the truth than they have despite 14 long years of “doubting” and “only asking questions” (two phrases which are euphemisms for something a whole lot less edifying).

[G-Unit]

What is patently obvious is that some people cannot bear the thought that HCW may have got closer to the truth than they have despite 14 long years of “doubting” and “only asking questions” (two phrases which are euphemisms for something a whole lot less edifying).

Surely you don't expect those with sceptical leanings to accept someone's word for anything?

[Brietta]

Surely you don't expect those with sceptical leanings to accept someone's word for anything?

Let's address some on topic observations which have emerged in the past few days in an attempt to avoid the ad homs which are becoming the signature of the forum.



Christian Brueckner worked at the resort where Maddie went missing, it has been reported

ByMilo Boyd News Reporter
 31 Jan 2022

The German TV channel SAT.1 documentary claims that Brueckner, 44, was "very familiar" with Ocean Club, as well as surrounding parts of the Algarve.

When Maddie disappeared from the hotel room where her parents had left her, the rapist was no more than five minutes away - phone data analyses by SAT.1 suggests.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-prime-suspect-worked-26095059


Madeleine McCann prime suspect 'worked as handy man at resort where she vanished'

True or false ?