So what exactly is Wolters sure about?

[Eleanor]

I don’t know what you are talking about.

Nor does anyone else.

[barrier]

Nor does anyone else.

Infamy, infamy, she's got it infamy.

[Eleanor]

Infamy, infamy, she's got it infamy.

What a pillock.  No true brains to put together?  But who cares?

[barrier]

What a pillock.  No true brains to put together?  But who cares?

Either you go or I'm banned so...............


https://youtu.be/Nr64DrUZGCE

[Eleanor]

Either you go or I'm banned so...............


https://youtu.be/Nr64DrUZGCE

Sorry, Not interested.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

How can Neville possibly say there is no tangible evidence connecting CB to MM... What does he know that we dont

Surely his remark can just be taken at face value i.e. there is no tangible evidence connecting CB to MM. It seems likely that's correct imho, otherwise CB would have been charged weeks ago.

[Mr Gray]

Surely his remark can just be taken at face value i.e. there is no tangible evidence connecting CB to MM. It seems likely that's correct imho, otherwise CB would have been charged weeks ago.

There are deveral reasons why CB has not been charged.. One being HVW is concerned about double jeopardy... But you been away and have missed a lot.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

There are deveral reasons why CB has not been charged.. One being HVW is concerned about double jeopardy... But you been away and have missed a lot.

Another reason being there is actually a lack of evidence. That seems a reasonable assumption in my opinion. I've been away and nothing has changed! The useful stooge is openly declared guilty as no-one is going to leap to the defence of a sick paedophile, but there are no charges and no concrete evidence is presented.

[Eleanor]

Another reason being there is actually a lack of evidence. That seems a reasonable assumption in my opinion. I've been away and nothing has changed! The useful stooge is openly declared guilty as no-one is going to leap to the defence of a sick paedophile, but there are no charges and no concrete evidence is presented.

No McCann Supporter has declared Brueckner to be guilty, so please be careful of what you say.

You are basically talking nonsense.  And we already have enough of that.

[Brietta]

Surely his remark can just be taken at face value i.e. there is no tangible evidence connecting CB to MM. It seems likely that's correct imho, otherwise CB would have been charged weeks ago.

You can only hope for your agenda to be fulfilled because nothing you post isn't knowledge based for a certainty .  It is risible to suppose that the Germans are about to keep every Tom Dick or Harry up to speed with the evidence of goodness knows how many active cases being pursued against Brueckner.
They are probably spoiled for choice about which one to charge him with first.

Whatever strategy they are working to it seems Brueckner blinked first when he apparently approached the media to break his silence to complain.
It seems the "long drink in Hell" didn't take as long to be poured as his lawyer thought 😁

[G-Unit]

What do we know for sure?

We know that at the beginning of June there was no plan to charge Brueckner in the near future. Wolters is quoted as saying;

“We hope we can solve the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, although this will take several months."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-disappearance-could-solved-24261708

So despite his claims that Madeleine is dead and Brueckner killed her it remains a suspicion, not a fact.

We also know that prosecutors are breaching a suspect's human rights when they declare them guilty before they are charged and tried.

Brueckner has now made it clear that he's aware of this, so even if he's charged he has a reason to apply to the ECHR if found guilty.

[Mr Gray]

What do we know for sure?

We know that at the beginning of June there was no plan to charge Brueckner in the near future. Wolters is quoted as saying;

“We hope we can solve the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, although this will take several months."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-disappearance-could-solved-24261708

So despite his claims that Madeleine is dead and Brueckner killed her it remains a suspicion, not a fact.

We also know that prosecutors are breaching a suspect's human rights when they declare them guilty before they are charged and tried.

Brueckner has now made it clear that he's aware of this, so even if he's charged he has a reason to apply to the ECHR if found guilty.

It may well be a fact that Maddie is dead... Thats how it appears to me... But lots of evidence but no proof CB is the perp.

You think CB has acase re the ECHR.... So you must accept the McCanns do

[Brietta]

What do we know for sure?

We know that at the beginning of June there was no plan to charge Brueckner in the near future. Wolters is quoted as saying;

“We hope we can solve the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, although this will take several months."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-disappearance-could-solved-24261708

So despite his claims that Madeleine is dead and Brueckner killed her it remains a suspicion, not a fact.

We also know that prosecutors are breaching a suspect's human rights when they declare them guilty before they are charged and tried.

Brueckner has now made it clear that he's aware of this, so even if he's charged he has a reason to apply to the ECHR if found guilty.

You really don't half make me smile when noting your strenuous defensive efforts on behalf of Brueckner who is a proven rapist and paedophile when it comes to consideration of his human rights.

Conversely you have suggested that Kate and Gerry McCann's appeal to the ECHR in protection of theirs "would suggest a pathological desire to be proved right."  ​http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7160.msg332433#msg332433

What pathological desire is your suggestion for Brueckner - you must surely have one

[Brietta]

It may well be a fact that Maddie is dead... Thats how it appears to me... But lots of evidence but no proof CB is the perp.

You think CB has acase re the ECHR.... So you must accept the McCanns do

Thinking the McCanns have any rights might be a step too far for many sceptics. 

[Eleanor]

What do we know for sure?

We know that at the beginning of June there was no plan to charge Brueckner in the near future. Wolters is quoted as saying;

“We hope we can solve the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, although this will take several months."
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-disappearance-could-solved-24261708

So despite his claims that Madeleine is dead and Brueckner killed her it remains a suspicion, not a fact.

We also know that prosecutors are breaching a suspect's human rights when they declare them guilty before they are charged and tried.

Brueckner has now made it clear that he's aware of this, so even if he's charged he has a reason to apply to the ECHR if found guilty.

So funny how he might get away with that when The McCanns were not afforded the same courtesy by the likes of you, don't you think?

But probably not.  Each to his own.  But I won't be banking on Brueckner although you might.

Let's hear it for Brueckner.  You are beginning to appal me when I actually believed that you were capable of being half reasonable.