Mark Williams-Thomas making new three part crime series for Ch5.

[jassi]

I don't think there's doubt that this rape occurred and there will be a police record record to that effect.
Whether there is sufficient evidence to lead to a charge against Brueckner remains to be seen.

I don't suppose he will have an alibi - why should he? - unless, for example,  he can demonstrate he was in another country at the time.

[jassi]

Nope - but it is possible to have oneself eliminated from the inquiry by presenting cast iron evidence to that effect or even just irrefutable evidence.

Why would he want to at this stage ? Why would he not wait and see if he was to be charged  before speaking ?

[Eleanor]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-22463839
It's a press story, but we're agreed it's true, right?
Or maybe misinformation. Who knows.

....but again, you've already seen this

Thank you for that.  No, I hadn't seen it.  But what a horrific story.  Just how many murderous paedophiles are there in Germany?

[The General]

I don't think there's doubt that this rape occurred and there will be a police record record to that effect.
Whether there is sufficient evidence to lead to a charge against Brueckner remains to be seen.

I don't suppose he will have an alibi - why should he? - unless, for example,  he can demonstrate he was in another country at the time.

He's going to have to ask Fulscher to compile an alibi database and deal with each allegation as they arise.
There's every chance he did it, but rape is one of the most heinous crimes and, almost perversely, one with the lowest conviction rate (generally speaking).

[The General]

Why would he want to at this stage ? Why would he not wait and see if he was to be charged  before speaking ?

He wouldn't. Here's why - if he starts batting back each allegation, and HCW has actually goaded him in to doing that this week, which is telling, then all he does is gives them additional information that they didn't have, does their job for them and gives them the opportunity to switch focus from dead ends and continue their efforts to pin the tail on the donkey elsewhere or as a result of false positives.
Plus, as you alluded to, he clearly holds nothing but contempt for the judiciary, so he's very unlikely to assist doing anything. this is a man who made them clean up the shit he'd smeared himself with. I doubt he's going to be penning them whimsical diary entries any time soon.

[Brietta]

Exactly, he's in jail for awhile serving time for rape, Wolters is conducting an investigation via the media, CB is well aware no doubt, so why not enjoy his (CB) moments of infamy. The legend that CB killed Madeleine is writ.

Interestingly enough, Amaral tried to direct the legend.  He set the wheels for it in motion by introducing, formulating and promoting the legend that Brueckner is a long haired patsy.

Haven't heard too much of that lately have we.

Wonder if MWT interviewed Amaral.  I would certainly be interested in questioning resulting in his reasons for putting his head on the block in defence of a guy his investigation ignored in 2007.

[The General]

Interestingly enough, Amaral tried to direct the legend.  He set the wheels for it in motion by introducing, formulating and promoting the legend that Brueckner is a long haired patsy.

Haven't heard too much of that lately have we.

Wonder if MWT interviewed Amaral.  I would certainly be interested in questioning resulting in his reasons for putting his head on the block in defence of a guy his investigation ignored in 2007.

Amaral, in his current, lucrative role as talking head for hire, probably gave them what he thought would make him the most money and be the most controversial. He pinned his colours to the mast in 2007, so of course he thinks CB is a patsy; anyone who is alleged to have abducted MM, in his opinion, didn't.
Ironically, HCW inadvertently swelled the Amaral pension coffers exponentially, as he opened up all manner of opportunities to regurgitate what's been well documented for over a decade. It's an Infinite Ching Ching Train and Amaral will ride it as long as they keep paying him to.

[G-Unit]

Someone on Websleuths posited that it could have been him on the other end of the phonecall in question, having lent his phone to an accomplice in PdL.  I don’t think being 30 minutes away necessarily lets him off the hook unless he can account for every minute of his actions that evening.  In the same way that sceptics are fully prepared to believe that despite having multiple alibis Gerry managed to stride off in the night bold as brass with a dead body looking for an inconvenient bin the other side of town.

Gerry's multiple alibis exist only if the witnesses who provided them also got the time right.

[Venturi Swirl]

That's just the start.

I’d say it was the start, middle and end of your not very convincing case that we can completely exonerate CB from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.

[Venturi Swirl]

Gerry's multiple alibis exist only if the witnesses who provided them also got the time right.

Ditto any alibis provided for CB.

[jassi]

Amaral, in his current, lucrative role as talking head for hire, probably gave them what he thought would make him the most money and be the most controversial. He pinned his colours to the mast in 2007, so of course he thinks CB is a patsy; anyone who is alleged to have abducted MM, in his opinion, didn't.
Ironically, HCW inadvertently swelled the Amaral pension coffers exponentially, as he opened up all manner of opportunities to regurgitate what's been well documented for over a decade. It's an Infinite Ching Ching Train and Amaral will ride it as long as they keep paying him to.

It may not be infinite, but as long as it's running along why not ? Easy money.

[The General]

I’d say it was the start, middle and end of your not very convincing case that we can completely exonerate CB from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.

No exoneration required. Even Fulscher doesn't work to that particular burden of proof. He, and I, for the sake of the forum replies, merely have to introduce reasonable doubt. In my case, I just have to have the opinion of reasonable doubt, as that's the legal standard we are currently working to.
I know there's no jury, but we're not at trial.

[Mr Gray]

I read the Chapter in John Corners book that gunit directed me to.
It makes me more convinced of his professionalism and credibility. He'd the prosecutor not an investigator. It confirms a couple of points I had already worked out.
First that he's the spokesman for thee investigation. The idea of 100% evidence therefore doesn't come from him but from the investigation.
The reason he couldn't answer all the questions re the phone is that he doesn't have all the information... That's held by the investigating team

[Venturi Swirl]

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-22463839
It's a press story, but we're agreed it's true, right?
Or maybe misinformation. Who knows.

....but again, you've already seen this

So rather than accusing him of rape, the police actually did their best to clear him from suspicion for this one.

Police investigating the possible involvement of prime Maddie suspect Brueckner today ruled him out as a suspect.

A police spokesman told German newspaper Bild: "After comparing the information obtained, it can be said that Christian B was not in Grevenbroich at the time in the case of Claudia Ruf.

"In addition, a DNA comparison is said to have been negative."

[The General]

Ditto any alibis provided for CB.

Not necessarily. We've seen Gerry's phone records; we haven't seen CB's.