UK Justice Forum

Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Mr Gray on April 18, 2021, 12:29:33 PM

Title: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 18, 2021, 12:29:33 PM
Reasons why I think Wolters evidence may well be photo/video.

1. When asked if there was any DNA in the car Wolters was quite open....when asked if his evidence was photograhic he refused to answer.

2.In the first episode of the discovery programme Wolters actually said that the evidence could be something like video/photos.

3. In the second discovery episode it was said that none of the photos found at CBs abandoned factory related to Inga. Why not mention MM when the programme was about her.

4. Wolters has appealed for info re anyone with details about the inside of any dwelling used by CB. Why is this important. Could it be they have a photo of maddie inside a room and wish to see if it relates to CB.

5. Wolters has said he has evidence which SHOWS MM is no longer alive.

For those who think its impossible remember this is exactly what was found in the RUI Pedro case....a child who was abducted by  a paedophile in Portugal
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 18, 2021, 01:09:48 PM
There is nothing to suggest he has images of Madeleine, first and foremost who identified the image, it certainly isn't the parents nor I'd venture SY.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 18, 2021, 01:18:28 PM
There is nothing to suggest he has images of Madeleine, first and foremost who identified the image, it certainly isn't the parents nor I'd venture SY.

I've shown points to suggest he may have photographic evidence. It would depend on the photo/video how difficult it would be to identify
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 18, 2021, 03:34:34 PM
I've shown points to suggest he may have photographic evidence. It would depend on the photo/video how difficult it would be to identify

I am more inclined to believe that this is true.  And if so then it would prove Abduction.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 18, 2021, 03:44:48 PM
I am more inclined to believe that this is true.  And if so then it would prove Abduction.

I think based on what he has said Wolters has proof of abduction but not proof CB is involved... But some evidence that implicates him
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 18, 2021, 04:01:21 PM
I think based on what he has said Wolters has proof of abduction but not proof CB is involved... But some evidence that implicates him

I think you could well be right.  And Wolters is hardly pushed for time at the moment.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 18, 2021, 04:29:44 PM
I've shown points to suggest he may have photographic evidence. It would depend on the photo/video how difficult it would be to identify

I think it could be incredibly difficult even for the parents of a missing child to categorically make an identification based on photographic evidence alone.

For example, the child caught on CCTV in New Zealand was only ruled out by DNA so similar was she to Madeleine.  If memory serves me well I think she even had the same flaw in the iris of her eye.

Therefore I think Wolters has photographic evidence.  As a result of which I think he is sure that a child appears to have died and Brueckner is complicit in this.  But is the child Madeleine?

I think it is worthwhile waiting patiently to find out in the interest of Justice and I think that is precisely what he is doing. 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 18, 2021, 04:53:39 PM
I think it could be incredibly difficult even for the parents of a missing child to categorically make an identification based on photographic evidence alone.

For example, the child caught on CCTV in New Zealand was only ruled out by DNA so similar was she to Madeleine.  If memory serves me well I think she even had the same flaw in the iris of her eye.

Therefore I think Wolters has photographic evidence.  As a result of which I think he is sure that a child appears to have died and Brueckner is complicit in this.  But is the child Madeleine?

I think it is worthwhile waiting patiently to find out in the interest of Justice and I think that is precisely what he is doing.

Depends if there was a closeup of the face. I dont see Wolters beig so definite if he wasnt sure
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 18, 2021, 06:19:52 PM
Depends if there was a closeup of the face. I dont see Wolters beig so definite if he wasnt sure

Wolters doesn't have an axe to grind.  He is following the evidence exactly as it has been uncovered and like the Judicial Police and Scotland Yard before him has found absolutely nothing to implicate Madeleine's parents but has gone for stranger abduction.  He has the requisite evidence to back up his opinion.

I had overlooked the advances in digital technology which have taken place over the years.  "A facial recognition system is a technology capable of identifying or verifying a person from a digital image or a video frame from a video source." Wikipedia 
It is now an everyday tool in the box for police and one in which I am sure the BKA will have an expertise.

As you keep saying ~ we will just have to be patient and await events unfolding as they undoubtedly will.  But the focus of the investigation is now well and truly on Brueckner and most certainly not Madeleine's parents.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 18, 2021, 06:46:24 PM
I remember Mr Wolters saying that they have no forensic evidence such as Madeleine’s pyjamas. Why mention that as such? It leads me to think that they have photographic material of this but are unable to link to Brückner in particular.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on April 19, 2021, 11:00:03 AM
I've shown points to suggest he may have photographic evidence. It would depend on the photo/video how difficult it would be to identify

So, if that's the case why would wolt think it was Maddie.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 19, 2021, 11:39:10 AM
So, if that's the case why would wolt think it was Maddie.

And of course if he has photographic evidence, why hasn't he shown it the McCanns for identification?
They are the ones who should best know if it's their daughter.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 19, 2021, 12:12:20 PM

I've been thinking.  Yer yer, I know.  But, supposing Wolters has found a photo on a Porn Site.  It is not impossible to take a photo of a small child with her face in evidence and still alive while not quite clear.

It seems to me that some of you are desperate to discredit Wolters when if The McCanns were in the frame you would all be in there supporting him.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 19, 2021, 12:38:08 PM
I've been thinking.  Yer yer, I know.  But, supposing Wolters has found a photo on a Porn Site.  It is not impossible to take a photo of a small child with her face in evidence and still alive while not quite clear.

It seems to me that some of you are desperate to discredit Wolters when if The McCanns were in the frame you would all be in there supporting him.

Surely if a photo is not quite clear, then any identification will be not quite clear either.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 19, 2021, 12:46:04 PM
So, if that's the case why would wolt think it was Maddie.

It may have a close up of Maddies face. The fact that Wolters wants information re the inside of any dwelling used by CB is a major clue. Many thing point to a photo being the evidence he has.... All my opinion but based on evidence
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 19, 2021, 12:47:00 PM
I've been thinking.  Yer yer, I know.  But, supposing Wolters has found a photo on a Porn Site.  It is not impossible to take a photo of a small child with her face in evidence and still alive while not quite clear.

It seems to me that some of you are desperate to discredit Wolters when if The McCanns were in the frame you would all be in there supporting him.

What is intriguing me at the moment is the total lack of information emanating from any source.  Total lockdown! from the police and Brueckner's defence.
Even the media have been restrained for the moment.

There must be a lot of information to be gone through.  International paedophile rings have been exposed and many locations associated with Brueckner have been probed.

I don't think the lack of comment is because interest in Madeleine's case is flagging ~ we know that is not the case.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 19, 2021, 12:48:54 PM
Surely if a photo is not quite clear, then any identification will be not quite clear either.

I think it must be clear for Wolters to be so definite
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 19, 2021, 12:55:46 PM
Surely if a photo is not quite clear, then any identification will be not quite clear either.

I don't know.  I am just speculating.  But with all of the hideous photos of Madeleine put up by CMoMM there could be a match.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 19, 2021, 01:02:56 PM
It may have a close up of Maddies face. The fact that Wolters wants information re the inside of any dwelling used by CB is a major clue. Many thing point to a photo being the evidence he has.... All my opinion but based on evidence

I agree that it has to be photographic evidence which I think Wolters has had in his possession for quite some time, probably from prior investigation of Brueckner's possible involvement in other crimes.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 19, 2021, 01:03:55 PM
What is intriguing me at the moment is the total lack of information emanating from any source.  Total lockdown! from the police and Brueckner's defence.
Even the media have been restrained for the moment.

There must be a lot of information to be gone through.  International paedophile rings have been exposed and many locations associated with Brueckner have been probed.

I don't think the lack of comment is because interest in Madeleine's case is flagging ~ we know that is not the case.

Was Breuckner not himself on a Porn Site?  Who knows what Wolters has found?  Or what other charges are pending?

This ought to be a laugh a minute with concerted efforts to defend Breuckner while vilifying The McCanns.  But it isn't.  It is actually quite outrageous.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: John on April 19, 2021, 01:11:41 PM
What is intriguing me at the moment is the total lack of information emanating from any source.  Total lockdown! from the police and Brueckner's defence.
Even the media have been restrained for the moment.

There must be a lot of information to be gone through.  International paedophile rings have been exposed and many locations associated with Brueckner have been probed.

I don't think the lack of comment is because interest in Madeleine's case is flagging ~ we know that is not the case.

IMO, if Wolters had anything of significance we would have seen more movement by now to charge Christian Brückner. The other very telling fact pointed out a while back is that Wolters refuses to divulge his concrete evidence to the child's parents.  That in itself is both unprofessional and immoral.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 19, 2021, 01:18:46 PM
IMO, if Wolters had anything of significance we would have seen more movement by now to charge Christian Brückner. The other very telling fact pointed out a while back is that Wolters refuses to divulge his concrete evidence to the child's parents.  That in itself is both unprofessional and immoral.

Is it normal practice for police to divulge evidence in an ongoing case to other than colleagues ?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 19, 2021, 01:22:55 PM
Was Breuckner not himself on a Porn Site?  Who knows what Wolters has found?  Or what other charges are pending?

This ought to be a laugh a minute with concerted efforts to defend Breuckner while vilifying The McCanns.  But it isn't.  It is actually quite outrageous.

Even from the little we know of Brueckner he was definitely no angel and the words attributed to him from on line paedophile discussion make my blood run cold.
The thought of this man having the time and the opportunity to do just that is unthinkable.  But her parents must be thinking about it even if consciously trying not to.  I wouldn't be in their shoes for all the tea in China.

Words fail me for a description to cover those who have gone out of their way for years to do as much damage as they possibly can to everything McCann, particularly their search for Madeleine.  All my prejudices condemning them have been fortified by all that has happened between Amaral's gift of Brueckner to the media and the continued opprobrium directed at the McCann family.
It should be unbelievable that people see fit to behave like that, unfortunately it is evidently very true and very sad.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 19, 2021, 01:26:37 PM
IMO, if Wolters had anything of significance we would have seen more movement by now to charge Christian Brückner. The other very telling fact pointed out a while back is that Wolters refuses to divulge his concrete evidence to the child's parents.  That in itself is both unprofessional and immoral.

IMO and for the reasons I've given I think it's a near certainty he has photographic evidence of death. He can't charge CB because he doesn't have enough linking him to the crime. It's   very significant he wants details of the interior of any dwelling associated with CB.

What other reason could there be for Wolters to ask for anyone with knowledge of the interior of properties associated with CB
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 19, 2021, 01:28:52 PM
Is it normal practice for police to divulge evidence in an ongoing case to other than colleagues ?
Wolters has explained the reasons why he is keeping his evidence under wraps
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 19, 2021, 01:30:55 PM
IMO, if Wolters had anything of significance we would have seen more movement by now to charge Christian Brückner. The other very telling fact pointed out a while back is that Wolters refuses to divulge his concrete evidence to the child's parents.  That in itself is both unprofessional and immoral.

I think this case involves much more than Madeleine.  Why risk jeopardising it by precipitately laying charges he doesn't need to.  Brueckner isn't going anywhere for a few years yet.

I think the McCanns will have been kept informed.  If ever there was a need for an FLO I think it may be now.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: John on April 19, 2021, 01:42:11 PM
Is it normal practice for police to divulge evidence in an ongoing case to other than colleagues ?

Yes certainly if it involves a child's disappearenc.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on April 19, 2021, 04:13:15 PM
IMO, if Wolters had anything of significance we would have seen more movement by now to charge Christian Brückner. The other very telling fact pointed out a while back is that Wolters refuses to divulge his concrete evidence to the child's parents.  That in itself is both unprofessional and immoral.

That situation may have changed over the course of time, though.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on April 19, 2021, 04:35:46 PM
IMO and for the reasons I've given I think it's a near certainty he has photographic evidence of death. He can't charge CB because he doesn't have enough linking him to the crime. It's   very significant he wants details of the interior of any dwelling associated with CB.

What other reason could there be for Wolters to ask for anyone with knowledge of the interior of properties associated with CB

There could be several possibilities:

- He COULD be playing King Kong to draw attention to himself, but in fact has nothing more than what he's already said. Possible (others have certainly done so in other cases), but I haven't seen anything to substantiate that.

- Bluffing in a genuine attempt to obtain info?

- There COULD be photographic evidence of her (possibly simply taken at some point during the week, but... coupled with other photographic evidence of others / criminal history, could lead him to reasoned assumptions, but without proof.

- Photographic evidence of her in a dire situation (heaven forbid), but with no irrefutable link to CB for the moment.

- No directly-related photographic evidence, but something else?

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on April 19, 2021, 05:04:53 PM
IMO and for the reasons I've given I think it's a near certainty he has photographic evidence of death. He can't charge CB because he doesn't have enough linking him to the crime. It's   very significant he wants details of the interior of any dwelling associated with CB.

What other reason could there be for Wolters to ask for anyone with knowledge of the interior of properties associated with CB

If you think wolt has a photo it could be no more than a picture of CB in some place with a prominent back ground.

He may want to know where he was at the time maybe to search the area. or solve something else.

As you say he has nothing linking CB to the crime regardless of all the publicity for nearon a year now.

I do think you are overthinking all this - your opinion based on evidence. ..what evidence.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 19, 2021, 05:07:59 PM
So in short, all supposition and  speculation as to what this evidence might be.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 19, 2021, 05:46:10 PM
So in short, all supposition and  speculation as to what this evidence might be.
What did you expect?  A definive answer with the actual photograph reproduced on the forum?  FYI it’s been 14 years of supposition and speculation and yet here you are still.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 19, 2021, 06:46:21 PM
So in short, all supposition and  speculation as to what this evidence might be.
I've given the evidence that supports my suspicion
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 19, 2021, 06:47:49 PM
If you think wolt has a photo it could be no more than a picture of CB in some place with a prominent back ground.

He may want to know where he was at the time maybe to search the area. or solve something else.

As you say he has nothing linking CB to the crime regardless of all the publicity for nearon a year now.

I do think you are overthinking all this - your opinion based on evidence. ..what evidence.

Based on the evidence I suspect he has a photo of Maddie... For the reasons given in my opening post
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 19, 2021, 10:04:36 PM
Based on the evidence I suspect he has a photo of Maddie... For the reasons given in my opening post
Maybe he has a photo of someone he thinks could be Madeleine, but he'd like to know where the photo was taken, and then to do a forensic examination at this location.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on April 20, 2021, 10:57:15 AM
Based on the evidence I suspect he has a photo of Maddie... For the reasons given in my opening post




Reasons why I think Wolters evidence may well be photo/video.

1. When asked if there was any DNA in the car Wolters was quite open....when asked if his evidence was photograhic he refused to answer.

2.In the first episode of the discovery programme Wolters actually said that the evidence could be something like video/photos.



So why doesn't he say nothing at all what he has and hasn't got - instead of silly titbits that mean nothing.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 20, 2021, 10:59:05 AM



Reasons why I think Wolters evidence may well be photo/video.

1. When asked if there was any DNA in the car Wolters was quite open....when asked if his evidence was photograhic he refused to answer.

2.In the first episode of the discovery programme Wolters actually said that the evidence could be something like video/photos.



So why doesn't he say nothing at all what he has and hasn't got - instead of silly titbits that mean nothing.

I think you are so convinced by Amaral's accident theory that your mind is closed
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on April 20, 2021, 11:10:42 AM
I think you are so convinced by Amaral's accident theory that your mind is closed

It isn't GA theory at all -  I go by my own theory that the mccs are involved.

Nothing has made me see it any other way.

This photo your going on about  - it isn't wolt saying he has a photo of Maddie ...Its you assuming he has

IMO your posts over think things that haven't happened - it seems the only mind closed is yours. D .
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 20, 2021, 11:53:02 AM
It isn't GA theory at all -  I go by my own theory that the mccs are involved.

Nothing has made me see it any other way.

This photo your going on about  - it isn't wolt saying he has a photo of Maddie ...Its you assuming he has

IMO your posts over think things that haven't happened - it seems the only mind closed is yours. D .

Im happy with the logic of my conclusions... Your opinion is your opinion.. And wrong imo
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Lace on April 20, 2021, 12:08:57 PM
It isn't GA theory at all -  I go by my own theory that the mccs are involved.

Nothing has made me see it any other way.

This photo your going on about  - it isn't wolt saying he has a photo of Maddie ...Its you assuming he has

IMO your posts over think things that haven't happened - it seems the only mind closed is yours. D .

You go by your own theory that the McCann's are involved.   Like to share?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 20, 2021, 12:23:53 PM
It isn't GA theory at all -  I go by my own theory that the mccs are involved.

Nothing has made me see it any other way.

This photo your going on about  - it isn't wolt saying he has a photo of Maddie ...Its you assuming he has

IMO your posts over think things that haven't happened - it seems the only mind closed is yours. D .

So you popped off to Praia da Luz to conduct your own investigation and interviews to gain enough evidence to enable you to form your own individual opinion without reference to any of Amaral's theories.
Well done you ✨

Back in the real world investigators have reached opinions as far removed from yours and Amaral's as night is from day.

Brueckner is known to have filmed his exploits.  The German prosecutor is now asking for background shots of places associated with Brueckner. 

There can be be very few reasons for his interest but one in particular is patently obvious given Brueckner's photographic interest in selfies in possibly identifiable locations and the fact that the Germans are in possession of much of Brueckner's stache of photographic images on concealed pen drives.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on April 20, 2021, 12:51:11 PM
Im happy with the logic of my conclusions... Your opinion is your opinion.. And wrong imo

Your opinion is your opinion.. And wrong imo



Whats this  ...your dad is bigger than my dad stuff.

IMO you loose your argument by constantly defending what you think and rubbishing me...or constantly counteracting what I post.

Seems to me IMO you are not all that confident in what you post...

You don't know if he has a photo or not do you ...wolt refused to answer huh
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on April 20, 2021, 12:52:42 PM
You go by your own theory that the McCann's are involved.   Like to share?

Share what fgs - keeping up with the case for nearly 14 years.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on April 20, 2021, 12:55:43 PM
So you popped off to Praia da Luz to conduct your own investigation and interviews to gain enough evidence to enable you to form your own individual opinion without reference to any of Amaral's theories.
Well done you ✨

Back in the real world investigators have reached opinions as far removed from yours and Amaral's as night is from day.

Brueckner is known to have filmed his exploits.  The German prosecutor is now asking for background shots of places associated with Brueckner. 

There can be be very few reasons for his interest but one in particular is patently obvious given Brueckner's photographic interest in selfies in possibly identifiable locations and the fact that the Germans are in possession of much of Brueckner's stache of photographic images on concealed pen drives.

So what have you done - popped over to Germany - for you to be so confident it is CB who took Maddie.

Or, just going on what you have seen in media/interviews. ..CB is only a suspect/person of interest nothing to prove he was involved with maddie. all what you have posted is what YOU think is happening ...it doesnt mean to say it is.

Where I don't have to pop anywhere everything is there to read what has gone on in this case with the mccs.

All official statements court cases ect ect all official not just stuff from a prosecutor that no one knows any thing about, B
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 20, 2021, 12:56:06 PM
Your opinion is your opinion.. And wrong imo



Whats this  ...your dad is bigger than my dad stuff.

IMO you loose your argument by constantly defending what you think and rubbishing me...or constantly counteracting what I post.

Seems to me IMO you are not all that confident in what you post...

You don't know if he has a photo or not do you ...wolt refused to answer huh

I haven't lost any argument... I think it's highly probable based on the evidence supplied that Wolters has a photo of Maddie which proves abduction and death
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Lace on April 20, 2021, 01:13:59 PM
Share what fgs - keeping up with the case for nearly 14 years.

Well obviously I meant share your theory.   I would be interested to see why you think the McCann's are involved,  something that the Police forces investigating the case have failed to see.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 20, 2021, 02:29:26 PM
So what have you done - popped over to Germany - for you to be so confident it is CB who took Maddie.

Or, just going on what you have seen in media/interviews. ..CB is only a suspect/person of interest nothing to prove he was involved with maddie. all what you have posted is what YOU think is happening ...it doesnt mean to say it is.

Where I don't have to pop anywhere everything is there to read what has gone on in this case with the mccs.

All official statements court cases ect ect all official not just stuff from a prosecutor that no one knows any thing about, B

I'm not making the claim for myself that you claim for yourself and mainly when I am posting I at least make the attempt to stick to the thread topic.
This one relates to whether or not Wolters has photographic evidence which may be linking Brueckner, the prime suspect in Madeleine's case to her disappearance.

Your 'investigation' on which you seem to have built your opinion is fourteen years old;  maybe time to have a look at how the case has moved on since the Portuguese archived it? 
Starting with Amaral's fact that Brueckner was investigated by the PJ back in the day and now fourteen years down the line he has popped up once more thanks to Amaral's 'inside knowledge', only this time as a prime suspect with an interest in photography among other things..
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 20, 2021, 05:53:55 PM
So what have you done - popped over to Germany - for you to be so confident it is CB who took Maddie.

Or, just going on what you have seen in media/interviews. ..CB is only a suspect/person of interest nothing to prove he was involved with maddie. all what you have posted is what YOU think is happening ...it doesnt mean to say it is.

Where I don't have to pop anywhere everything is there to read what has gone on in this case with the mccs.

All official statements court cases ect ect all official not just stuff from a prosecutor that no one knows any thing about, B

I've seen all the official statements you have and I don't see anything that points to the McCanns guilt. We know the original investigation did not understand  the evidence... That's thr mistake some posters make
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on April 21, 2021, 01:30:23 PM
I've seen all the official statements you have and I don't see anything that points to the McCanns guilt. We know the original investigation did not understand  the evidence... That's thr mistake some posters make

But yet also @B

The mccs have not been completely cleared of any involvement for what happened to Maddie it seems.

This thread has been built round a photo that you don't even know exist, just reading into something wolt refused to answer when asked if he had photo/video.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 21, 2021, 01:41:17 PM
But yet also @B

The mccs have not been completely cleared of any involvement for what happened to Maddie it seems.

This thread has been built round a photo that you don't even know exist, just reading into something wolt refused to answer when asked if he had photo/video.

This "not being totally cleared" is total rubbish. The Needham family havent been totally cleared of any involvement in Bens disappearnce...its not  anormal thing to happen. They have never been officially accused of anything...never been charged.

If they were charged and found not guilty that wouldnt totally clear them. I think you are posting total rubbish.

They are clearly not suspects.

Ive said its possible taht this photo exists....based on sound logic...I dont expect you to accept it. if it does exist ..as it may...It certainly clears teh McCanns


Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on April 21, 2021, 03:00:54 PM
This "not being totally cleared" is total rubbish. The Needham family havent been totally cleared of any involvement in Bens disappearnce...its not  anormal thing to happen. They have never been officially accused of anything...never been charged.

If they were charged and found not guilty that wouldnt totally clear them. I think you are posting total rubbish.

They are clearly not suspects.

Ive said its possible taht this photo exists....based on sound logic...I dont expect you to accept it. if it does exist ..as it may...It certainly clears teh McCanns

 if it does exist ..as it may...It certainly clears teh McCanns


So my post is not rubbish after all  - as it seems to bother you they are not cleared or else why make a point of it.

True though, as of now there is no photo/of Maddie in wolts possession.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 21, 2021, 04:59:04 PM

 if it does exist ..as it may...It certainly clears teh McCanns


So my post is not rubbish after all  - as it seems to bother you they are not cleared or else why make a point of it.

True though, as of now there is no photo/of Maddie in wolts possession.

I think you misunderstand.. It wouldnt bother me if the McCanns were arrested tomorrow... I'm just an interested observer giving my view
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: misty on April 21, 2021, 05:14:15 PM
Am I correct in believing that, in 2007, a time & date stamp had to be added manually on videos taken on a VCR? It may be that BKA have some video evidence/stills from CB's USB's but they cannot positively link the VCR to him.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on April 21, 2021, 06:10:40 PM
I think you misunderstand.. It wouldnt bother me if the McCanns were arrested tomorrow... I'm just an interested observer giving my view

Yes, and so am I.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 21, 2021, 06:45:07 PM
Am I correct in believing that, in 2007, a time & date stamp had to be added manually on videos taken on a VCR? It may be that BKA have some video evidence/stills from CB's USB's but they cannot positively link the VCR to him.

I have looked back at our video material from 2006/7 and the Canon recorder’s default setting was time and date-stamped. I agree, Misty. The BKA possibly have photographic material but cannot link the device it was recorded on, to Brückner in particular. Hence, Davel’s observation that they need more information on his properties to see if there is some identifiable feature matching what they have.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 21, 2021, 06:55:37 PM
Such a time and date-stamped piece of material may also explain Wolters’ announcement that Madeleine was killed within a couple of days of/shortly after her disappearance (?)
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 21, 2021, 07:05:47 PM
Such a time and date-stamped piece of material may also explain Wolters’ announcement that Madeleine was killed within a couple of days of/shortly after her disappearance (?)

I sincerely hope not.  But it does tie in with reports of a call to another pervert on the dark web detailing his fantasy.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 21, 2021, 07:58:37 PM
I sincerely hope not.  But it does tie in with reports of a call to another pervert on the dark web detailing his fantasy.
I know, Brietta.😔
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on April 26, 2021, 09:18:35 AM
According to the following CB will never be charged as there's no evidence linking him to MM's diappearance:

British detectives are said to have told the couple that they think it is "highly unlikely Christian Brueckner will be charged over Madeleine's disappearance as there is no evidence" linking him to it.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14764062/madeleine-mccann-parents-hunt-missing-daughter-end-probe/
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 09:24:58 AM
According to the following CB will never be charged as there's no evidence linking him to MM's diappearance:

British detectives are said to have told the couple that they think it is "highly unlikely Christian Brueckner will be charged over Madeleine's disappearance as there is no evidence" linking him to it.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14764062/madeleine-mccann-parents-hunt-missing-daughter-end-probe/
Before anyone gets too excited it is an unnamed source quoting unnamed British detectives in a tabloid report, and I know what many of you sceptics think of those!
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 26, 2021, 09:28:34 AM
According to the following CB will never be charged as there's no evidence linking him to MM's diappearance:

British detectives are said to have told the couple that they think it is "highly unlikely Christian Brueckner will be charged over Madeleine's disappearance as there is no evidence" linking him to it.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14764062/madeleine-mccann-parents-hunt-missing-daughter-end-probe/


From the Sun article -""But they will never give up looking for Madeleine.

When it is shelved, and if there is no result, Kate and Gerry will use money in the fund to continue the hunt"

If the combined resources of 3 police forces can find no trace of her, I fail to see how  private investigators will do any better.
Their previous detectives didn't achieve much.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 09:30:20 AM

From the Sun article -""But they will never give up looking for Madeleine.

When it is shelved, and if there is no result, Kate and Gerry will use money in the fund to continue the hunt"

If the combined resources of 3 police forces can find no trace of her, I fail to see how  private investigators will do any better.
Their previous detectives didn't achieve much.
Quite - and if they are guilty of hiding Madeleine's body surely they would after 14 years exhale a HUGE sigh of relief and quietly fritter the Fund money away on yachts and earrings, using some of that legendary McCans subterfuge?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2021, 09:34:55 AM
Before anyone gets too excited it is an unnamed source quoting unnamed British detectives in a tabloid report, and I know what many of you sceptics think of those!

Yes, we can't believe this unsubstantiated claim.

Instead we must believe the unsubstantiated claims of a prosecutor who's very job it is to paint Brueckner guilty.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2021, 09:37:13 AM

From the Sun article -""But they will never give up looking for Madeleine.

When it is shelved, and if there is no result, Kate and Gerry will use money in the fund to continue the hunt"

If the combined resources of 3 police forces can find no trace of her, I fail to see how  private investigators will do any better.
Their previous detectives didn't achieve much.

Like I said before, it's been 14 years & I've had not one visit from either the police or the McCanns private detectives.

Maddie may well be buried in my back garden but no one has bothered to ask.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 02:15:49 PM
Yes, we can't believe this unsubstantiated claim.

Instead we must believe the unsubstantiated claims of a prosecutor who's very job it is to paint Brueckner guilty.
Darling, you don't have to do anything you don't want to, chill.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 26, 2021, 07:00:40 PM
Before anyone gets too excited it is an unnamed source quoting unnamed British detectives in a tabloid report, and I know what many of you sceptics think of those!

Absolutely, why search when the BKA say she is dead.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 07:20:24 PM
Absolutely, why search when the BKA say she is dead.
And why search when you *know* your daughter’s dead because you chucked her body in the bin, eh?  The question no one wants to answer.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2021, 07:24:38 PM
And why search when you *know* your daughter’s dead because you chucked her body in the bin, eh?  The question no one wants to answer.

I haven't seen the McCanns searching anywhere recently.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 26, 2021, 07:26:21 PM
I haven't seen the McCanns searching anywhere recently.

Or indeed ever after that first night.
After that they expected others to do the donkey work.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 26, 2021, 07:27:09 PM
And why search when you *know* your daughter’s dead because you chucked her body in the bin, eh?  The question no one wants to answer.

If thats your line of thinking, go for it.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 08:31:59 PM
I haven't seen the McCanns searching anywhere recently.
Where have you been looking?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2021, 08:41:56 PM
Where have you been looking?

Nowhere, I've been deliberately keeping my eyes very firmly closed for the past 14 years to make absolutely certain I never catch glimpse of her, because the McCanns expected me to Look for Madeleine & I will not be told what to do by anyone, especially negligent parents.

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 26, 2021, 08:42:36 PM
I haven't seen the McCanns searching anywhere recently.
I think it is probable that the 16-year-old twins are (re)searching (for) their missing sibling.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 26, 2021, 08:44:38 PM
I think it is probable that the 16-year-old twins are (re)searching (for) their missing sibling.

Why would you think that ?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2021, 08:45:51 PM
Why would you think that ?

The presumption of searching.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 08:57:37 PM
Nowhere, I've been deliberately keeping my eyes very firmly closed for the past 14 years to make absolutely certain I never catch glimpse of her, because the McCanns expected me to Look for Madeleine & I will not be told what to do by anyone, especially negligent parents.
I hope you don’t have a car.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 26, 2021, 09:03:11 PM
Why would you think that ?
My son is the same age as the twins and very capable of researching almost anything. I would think the McCann twins are capable too, especially because their sibling has not yet been found. Why would you think the contrary?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 26, 2021, 09:06:14 PM
My son is the same age as the twins and very capable of researching almost anything. I would think the McCann twins are capable too, especially because their sibling has not yet been found. Why would you think the contrary?

Because it's all been done before - by experts. What would they think  their 'research' could possibly add?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 09:15:01 PM
Because it's all been done before - by experts. What would they think  their 'research' could possibly add?
Probably the same thing as any other case “researcher”.  Why not ask the ones on here what they think their research could possibly add? 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 26, 2021, 09:25:24 PM
Because it's all been done before - by experts. What would they think  their 'research' could possibly add?
Hypothetically, they are the only witnesses in Madeleine’s disappearance. Some children as young as the age of two, remember ‘snapshots’ of events and people, even more so when they get older.
https://slate.com/human-interest/2012/04/childrens-memories-toddlers-remember-better-than-you-think.html
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 26, 2021, 09:40:48 PM
Any real memories they may have had will have been well and truly obliterated over the years by the mCcann narrative.
IMO
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 26, 2021, 09:50:56 PM
Any real memories they may have had will have been well and truly obliterated over the years by the mCcann narrative.
IMO
Please elaborate on the McCann narrative.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 26, 2021, 10:38:18 PM
I hope you don’t have a car.

I do actually. A blue 2010 Toyota Prius T-Spirit with full grey leather interior.
It has just 33,000 on the clock & is the best car I've ever owned.Such a smooth drive. Granted it's rather creased & dented now since I drive blindfolded but that's a sacrifice I must make in order to disobey the McCanns.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Robittybob1 on April 26, 2021, 10:55:43 PM
I think it is probable that the 16-year-old twins are (re)searching (for) their missing sibling.
Interesting idea.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 26, 2021, 10:56:51 PM
I do actually. A blue 2010 Toyota Prius T-Spirit with full grey leather interior.
It has just 33,000 on the clock & is the best car I've ever owned.Such a smooth drive. Granted it's rather creased & dented now since I drive blindfolded but that's a sacrifice I must make in order to disobey the McCanns.
Cool.  We used to have a Prius.  It was great apart from when it simply wouldn’t start on cold mornings.  Glad to be rid of it now.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 27, 2021, 01:11:09 AM
I think it is probable that the 16-year-old twins are (re)searching (for) their missing sibling.
My blood runs cold at the thought  Anthro, because it will have been impossible for them to avoid the shameful vitriol directed at their family whatever internet research they carry out .

I think they will have to have been exposed to the ordure of it gradually probably with professional help to school and prepare them for what they were going to encounter.

I think there has been a perverse element which has eagerly anticipated soiling their young impressionable minds with their corrupt beliefs in the full knowledge that of course they were certain to use the internet.  If that isn't child abuse I don't know what is.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 27, 2021, 05:57:18 AM
I think it is probable that the 16-year-old twins are (re)searching (for) their missing sibling.
What ever for, the BKA say she is dead.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 27, 2021, 09:13:13 AM
My blood runs cold at the thought  Anthro, because it will have been impossible for them to avoid the shameful vitriol directed at their family whatever internet research they carry out .

I think they will have to have been exposed to the ordure of it gradually probably with professional help to school and prepare them for what they were going to encounter.

I think there has been a perverse element which has eagerly anticipated soiling their young impressionable minds with their corrupt beliefs in the full knowledge that of course they were certain to use the internet.  If that isn't child abuse I don't know what is.

I wonder if they've read their mother's account of the truth yet?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 27, 2021, 09:51:17 AM
I wonder if they've read their mother's account of the truth yet?

Probably nightly  story time since they were small.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 27, 2021, 09:58:36 AM
What a lovely pair of snide comments above to start off the day. 

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 27, 2021, 08:31:48 PM
What ever for, the BKA say she is dead.
She still hasn’t been found, though.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 27, 2021, 08:40:15 PM
Interesting idea.
Hi Rob, imagine Sean now having some sort of recollection/image/vision/flashback of the night when the crying incident happened.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on April 28, 2021, 06:00:07 AM
Hypothetically, they are the only witnesses in Madeleine’s disappearance. Some children as young as the age of two, remember ‘snapshots’ of events and people, even more so when they get older.
https://slate.com/human-interest/2012/04/childrens-memories-toddlers-remember-better-than-you-think.html

Yes, I'm one of them. My earliest (verifiable, non-contaminated) memories date back to when I was just over 2 years old. A few others date back to earlier, but they're harder to verify for the moment.

However, not all children have such early memories, and the twins were presumably fast asleep at the time.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 28, 2021, 06:03:23 AM
She still hasn’t been found, though.
Is any one looking for her, or to what happened to her.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 28, 2021, 07:05:40 AM
Is any one looking for her, or to what happened to her.
Yes.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 28, 2021, 09:32:13 AM
Yes.

The last time I saw the police search was 2013.

Where have they been looking for her since then?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 28, 2021, 09:53:04 AM
The last time I saw the police search was 2013.

Where have they been looking for her since then?
You do know that looking for someone doesn't only involve digging holes in the ground don't you?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 28, 2021, 09:54:06 AM
You do know that looking for someone doesn't only involve digging holes in the ground don't you?

It involves door to door searches.

Been to your house have they?

Because they've never bothered coming to mine.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 28, 2021, 09:57:05 AM
It involves door to door searches.

Been to your house have they?

Because they've never bothered coming to mine.
Yes, they just knocked and I've sent them round to yours, so put the kettle on.   
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 28, 2021, 06:57:26 PM
The last time I saw the police search was 2013.

Where have they been looking for her since then?

On a memory card some would like us to believe.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 28, 2021, 07:19:38 PM
On a memory card some would like us to believe.
Apparently, when Wolters took over from the previous German prosecutor in 2013, he decided to review Christian Brückner and his past. It seems Brückner has been on the radar of the BKA since then. Wolters also confirmed that he made a connection between Madeleine and Brückner when they searched the abandoned factory in Germany for any clues re. Inga Gehricke. Whatever was found there, seems to have given the impetus to the current investigation. My opinion.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 28, 2021, 07:26:30 PM
I fear Wolters might have put 2 & 2 together and made 5 or even 6. Just my opinion
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 28, 2021, 07:47:58 PM
Apparently, when Wolters took over from the previous German prosecutor in 2013, he decided to review Christian Brückner and his past. It seems Brückner has been on the radar of the BKA since then. Wolters also confirmed that he made a connection between Madeleine and Brückner when they searched the abandoned factory in Germany for any clues re. Inga Gehricke. Whatever was found there, seems to have given the impetus to the current investigation. My opinion.

Bolded bit, he did? where and when.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 28, 2021, 08:06:25 PM
Bolded bit, he did? where and when.
http://sandhillsexpress.com/cbs_national/do-usb-drives-hold-clues-to-what-happened-to-madeleine-mccann-cbside2d701a1/
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 28, 2021, 08:14:34 PM
http://sandhillsexpress.com/cbs_national/do-usb-drives-hold-clues-to-what-happened-to-madeleine-mccann-cbside2d701a1/

I can't see that Wolters says what you claim in that article.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 28, 2021, 08:42:19 PM
I can't see that Wolters says what you claim in that article.

People see what they want to see sometimes, not what is actually there imo.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 28, 2021, 09:12:42 PM
I can't see that Wolters says what you claim in that article.
It is a well known fact that German officials discovered something related to Madeleine during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by Brückner.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 28, 2021, 09:15:25 PM
People see what they want to see sometimes, not what is actually there imo.
Since you are commenting on something I have said, please give some credence to your statement.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 28, 2021, 09:17:39 PM
Bolded bit, he did? where and when.
Barrier, surely you have some understanding of this (?)
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 28, 2021, 09:20:54 PM
It is a well known fact that German officials discovered something related to Madeleine during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by Brückner.

That may be so , but you made a untrue  claim  about what Wolters said in that article.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on April 28, 2021, 09:30:02 PM
It is a well known fact that German officials discovered something related to Madeleine during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by Brückner.

What exactly did German officials discover about MM during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by CB?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 28, 2021, 09:35:57 PM
That may be so , but you made a untrue  claim  about what Wolters said in that article.
Hi Jassi, an untrue claim? I suggest you spend time researching and familiarise yourself with the the latest developments.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 28, 2021, 09:45:31 PM
Hi Jassi, an untrue claim? I suggest you spend time researching and familiarise yourself with the the latest developments.

Yes an untrue claim about what was contained in your cite.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 28, 2021, 09:49:31 PM
What exactly did German officials discover about MM during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by CB?
Hi Holly, I suggest you stay in touch and familiarise yourself with the current discourse. You seem to deliberately catapult yourself into the Forum whenever it suits you.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 28, 2021, 10:04:03 PM
What exactly did German officials discover about MM during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by CB?

That she wasn't there.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 29, 2021, 03:01:24 AM
People see what they want to see sometimes, not what is actually there imo.
Snip
Prosecutors have insisted they “remain optimistic” they will crack the Madeleine McCann mystery – as the 14th anniversary of her disappearance approaches.

Hans Christian Wolters said a German investigation into suspect Christian Brueckner, 44, is running “at full speed”.

And he hoped a new TV documentary will help uncover more clues.

He told the Sunday Mirror: “Even if the public does not notice it much, our investigations in the Maddie case continue to run at full speed.


“We still assume the accused, Christian B, killed Madeleine. Even though the investigation of a case that will be 14 years old in a few days is very difficult after all this time, we remain optimistic and hopeful that we will be able to solve the crime.

“In doing so, we continue to work closely with the Metropolitan Police and the Portuguese law enforcement authorities, regardless of Brexit.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-german-probe-still-23891137


You can read into that whatever you wish.

As far as I am concerned Wolters has specifically intimated that Madeleine's case remains a very active one.  I hope that the programme which aired yesterday in Germany will provide information from the public to his satisfaction and to advance the case he is building.

I get the distinct impression that there are those who are not best pleased that Madeleine continues to be looked for or that Wolters just is not going to give up on finding what happened to her.
Quite sad really.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 29, 2021, 05:48:19 AM
What exactly did German officials discover about MM during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by CB?
Speculation.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 29, 2021, 06:20:26 AM
Barrier, surely you have some understanding of this (?)
I have an understanding that what ever Wolters claimed to be concrete against his suspect CB is anything but, 11 months on will bear this out, a recent article  from admittedly a brit red top had  SY supposedly saying CB won t be charged.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 29, 2021, 08:18:17 AM
Since you are commenting on something I have said, please give some credence to your statement.

You wrote "Wolters also confirmed that he made a connection between Madeleine and Brückner when they searched the abandoned factory in Germany for any clues re. Inga Gehricke."

When asked for a cite you gave this link;
http://sandhillsexpress.com/cbs_national/do-usb-drives-hold-clues-to-what-happened-to-madeleine-mccann-cbside2d701a1/

It didn't seem to contain the information you suggested though, which is why I responded with my comment.

You later claimed that "It is a well known fact that German officials discovered something related to Madeleine during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by Brückner."

Where did you get the idea that this is a well known fact? You really need to provide a cite now confirming your claim imo.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 29, 2021, 08:22:23 AM
Snip
Prosecutors have insisted they “remain optimistic” they will crack the Madeleine McCann mystery – as the 14th anniversary of her disappearance approaches.

Hans Christian Wolters said a German investigation into suspect Christian Brueckner, 44, is running “at full speed”.

And he hoped a new TV documentary will help uncover more clues.

He told the Sunday Mirror: “Even if the public does not notice it much, our investigations in the Maddie case continue to run at full speed.


“We still assume the accused, Christian B, killed Madeleine. Even though the investigation of a case that will be 14 years old in a few days is very difficult after all this time, we remain optimistic and hopeful that we will be able to solve the crime.

“In doing so, we continue to work closely with the Metropolitan Police and the Portuguese law enforcement authorities, regardless of Brexit.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-german-probe-still-23891137


You can read into that whatever you wish.

As far as I am concerned Wolters has specifically intimated that Madeleine's case remains a very active one.  I hope that the programme which aired yesterday in Germany will provide information from the public to his satisfaction and to advance the case he is building.

I get the distinct impression that there are those who are not best pleased that Madeleine continues to be looked for or that Wolters just is not going to give up on finding what happened to her.
Quite sad really.

All very interesting, but it doesn't shed any light on the claim that "It is a well known fact that German officials discovered something related to Madeleine during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by Brückner."
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on April 29, 2021, 08:26:41 AM
Hi Holly, I suggest you stay in touch and familiarise yourself with the current discourse. You seem to deliberately catapult yourself into the Forum whenever it suits you.

Hi Anthro, please answer the question preferably with a cite.  Thank you. 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 29, 2021, 09:19:42 AM
Hi Anthro, please answer the question preferably with a cite.  Thank you.

Members are not expected to give Cites that have already been given.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 29, 2021, 09:22:09 AM
Members are not expected to give Cites that have already been given.

In this case it was a cite that did not show or support what was claimed.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 29, 2021, 10:13:16 AM
In this case it was a cite that did not show or support what was claimed.

There are far too many unnecessary Cites being demanded that have already been supplied.

There is a perfectly adequate Search Facility.  Use it.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 29, 2021, 10:19:48 AM
There are far too many unnecessary Cites being demanded that have already been supplied.

There is a perfectly adequate Search Facility.  Use it.

That is a totally inappropriate response from a 'senior' moderator.  IMO
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 29, 2021, 10:55:43 AM
There are far too many unnecessary Cites being demanded that have already been supplied.

There is a perfectly adequate Search Facility.  Use it.

I disagree with your stance and have reported it
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 29, 2021, 11:14:54 AM
There are far too many unnecessary Cites being demanded that have already been supplied.

There is a perfectly adequate Search Facility.  Use it.

If someone claims that "It is a well known fact that German officials discovered something related to Madeleine during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by Brückner." that needs a cite to support it, because I have never seen anything to support that "fact". All we have seen is a cite that does not support it.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: John on April 29, 2021, 11:17:07 AM
If someone claims that "It is a well known fact that German officials discovered something related to Madeleine during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by Brückner." that needs a cite to support it, because I have never seen anything to support that "fact". All we have seen is a cite that does not support it.

I agree
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 29, 2021, 03:34:16 PM
I am a great believer that members should provide cites whether asked for or not (and I am usually roundly derided for doing so).  But not all cites are accurate. 
For example "the bloody footprint" in the McCann apartment springs to mind ~

"Blood

There is also the evidence of a "partial footwear mark" found just outside Madeleine's bedroom which had traces of blood in it visible to the naked eye, according to a forensics report.

Laboratory tests in Birmingham were inconclusive but found there was a "moderate" chance the blood was the youngster's. There were also specks of blood said to be on the walls of the bedroom, but forensic results have been inconclusive." https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id21.htm

Which is of course absolute nonsense while being a valid cite.

As far as the evidence Wolter's has regarding Brueckner's association with Madeleine's case which seems to have prompted him to believe that Brueckner is guilty of murdering her ... it had to come from somewhere.

As far as is known, while searching for evidence regarding Inge's disappearance some of Brueckner's pornographic collection was uncovered.

We know nothing was found to connect this material with Inge.  But there is a supposition that some of it may relate to Madeleine and I believe there has been a bit of internet discussion to that effect ~ which I would have supposed anyone with interest in the case might be up to speed with.

That Wolter's information may spring from the source indicated in Anthro's post is a fair notion I think.  Particularly as I am sure we may have already discussed it on the forum.

But one thing for certain sure is that "the bloody shoe" cite from Pamalam is so outdated it has spiders webs hanging from it but no accompanying health warning as to its inaccuracy ~ Anthro is dealing with current information which is generally 100% accurate.
Which generally beats the circa 2007 info still in vogue for some - it isn't often that Anthro slips up but I'm sure she will rest easy now in the full knowledge that she has a fan club dedicated to keeping her on her toes - I know I take the greatest solace from having the same one myself 😁
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 29, 2021, 03:55:25 PM
Of what relevance is this to Wolters' photographic evidence, the subject of this thread ?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 29, 2021, 05:04:43 PM

I have decided that I think Brueckner was employed by someone else to abduct Madeleine and then to pass her on.  And possibly Joanna Cipriano as well.  Nothing much different from my original Theory, excepting that I didn't have anyone in particular in mind as The Abductor.

If in fact it was Brueckner then he might have been required to take a photo of Madeleine, before, during or after the abduction to confirm that he had the right child.  Wolters might have found this.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 29, 2021, 06:09:09 PM
I have decided that I think Brueckner was employed by someone else to abduct Madeleine and then to pass her on.  And possibly Joanna Cipriano as well.  Nothing much different from my original Theory, excepting that I didn't have anyone in particular in mind as The Abductor.

If in fact it was Brueckner then he might have been required to take a photo of Madeleine, before, during or after the abduction to confirm that he had the right child.  Wolters might have found this.

How would you square this idea with Wolters' claim that Brueckner murdered Madeleine?
If he was commissioned to take her, then he's unlikely to have killed her  IMO
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 29, 2021, 06:27:21 PM
There are far too many unnecessary Cites being demanded that have already been supplied.

There is a perfectly adequate Search Facility.  Use it.

All very well but the search will not find that which is not there.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 29, 2021, 06:31:24 PM
How would you square this idea with Wolters' claim that Brueckner murdered Madeleine?
If he was commissioned to take her, then he's unlikely to have killed her  IMO

I don't have to square it.  Until they find a body or get a confession I am not going to believe Madeleine is dead.
And possibly not even then.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 29, 2021, 06:50:19 PM
I have decided that I think Brueckner was employed by someone else to abduct Madeleine and then to pass her on.  And possibly Joanna Cipriano as well.  Nothing much different from my original Theory, excepting that I didn't have anyone in particular in mind as The Abductor.

If in fact it was Brueckner then he might have been required to take a photo of Madeleine, before, during or after the abduction to confirm that he had the right child.  Wolters might have found this.
There has always been talk along those lines of photographs being taken of children.  It was a line of inquiry for the Judicial Police https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/A14_5/14_volume_XIV_apenso_V_3033-90.jpg which the McCann detectives followed as did Scotland Yard when they came on board.

It is perfectly possible that Brueckner was a link in the chain.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 29, 2021, 07:03:06 PM
I am a great believer that members should provide cites whether asked for or not (and I am usually roundly derided for doing so).  But not all cites are accurate. 
For example "the bloody footprint" in the McCann apartment springs to mind ~

"Blood

There is also the evidence of a "partial footwear mark" found just outside Madeleine's bedroom which had traces of blood in it visible to the naked eye, according to a forensics report.

Laboratory tests in Birmingham were inconclusive but found there was a "moderate" chance the blood was the youngster's. There were also specks of blood said to be on the walls of the bedroom, but forensic results have been inconclusive." https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id21.htm

Which is of course absolute nonsense while being a valid cite.

As far as the evidence Wolter's has regarding Brueckner's association with Madeleine's case which seems to have prompted him to believe that Brueckner is guilty of murdering her ... it had to come from somewhere.

As far as is known, while searching for evidence regarding Inge's disappearance some of Brueckner's pornographic collection was uncovered.

We know nothing was found to connect this material with Inge.  But there is a supposition that some of it may relate to Madeleine and I believe there has been a bit of internet discussion to that effect ~ which I would have supposed anyone with interest in the case might be up to speed with.

That Wolter's information may spring from the source indicated in Anthro's post is a fair notion I think.  Particularly as I am sure we may have already discussed it on the forum.

But one thing for certain sure is that "the bloody shoe" cite from Pamalam is so outdated it has spiders webs hanging from it but no accompanying health warning as to its inaccuracy ~ Anthro is dealing with current information which is generally 100% accurate.
Which generally beats the circa 2007 info still in vogue for some - it isn't often that Anthro slips up but I'm sure she will rest easy now in the full knowledge that she has a fan club dedicated to keeping her on her toes - I know I take the greatest solace from having the same one myself 😁
Thank you Brietta, for giving context to my claim. I have previously been labelled as ‘misleading the Forum’ but will now be even more on the ‘qui vive’.😇 This reference may (not) apply: “The development came after police found a potential link between McCann's disappearance and that of a five-year-old girl named Inga in Germany in 2015”. https://www.9news.com.au/world/madeleine-mccann-suspect-evidence-german-prosecutor-interview-missing-toddler-cold-case/b0e8f550-292e-4e00-9b63-b76442926dbe
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 29, 2021, 07:05:08 PM
I don't have to square it.  Until they find a body or get a confession I am not going to believe Madeleine is dead.
And possibly not even then.

So if Brueckner  confessed to killing her, you wouldn't believe him - is that right ?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 29, 2021, 07:10:24 PM
So if Brueckner  confessed to killing her, you wouldn't believe him - is that right ?

I might not.  It depends on the circumstances.  Although unlike The PJ I don't think it's likely that suspects get beaten up.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 29, 2021, 09:05:32 PM
I am a great believer that members should provide cites whether asked for or not (and I am usually roundly derided for doing so).  But not all cites are accurate. 
For example "the bloody footprint" in the McCann apartment springs to mind ~

"Blood

There is also the evidence of a "partial footwear mark" found just outside Madeleine's bedroom which had traces of blood in it visible to the naked eye, according to a forensics report.

Laboratory tests in Birmingham were inconclusive but found there was a "moderate" chance the blood was the youngster's. There were also specks of blood said to be on the walls of the bedroom, but forensic results have been inconclusive." https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id21.htm

Which is of course absolute nonsense while being a valid cite.

As far as the evidence Wolter's has regarding Brueckner's association with Madeleine's case which seems to have prompted him to believe that Brueckner is guilty of murdering her ... it had to come from somewhere.

As far as is known, while searching for evidence regarding Inge's disappearance some of Brueckner's pornographic collection was uncovered.

We know nothing was found to connect this material with Inge.  But there is a supposition that some of it may relate to Madeleine and I believe there has been a bit of internet discussion to that effect ~ which I would have supposed anyone with interest in the case might be up to speed with.

That Wolter's information may spring from the source indicated in Anthro's post is a fair notion I think.  Particularly as I am sure we may have already discussed it on the forum.

But one thing for certain sure is that "the bloody shoe" cite from Pamalam is so outdated it has spiders webs hanging from it but no accompanying health warning as to its inaccuracy ~ Anthro is dealing with current information which is generally 100% accurate.
Which generally beats the circa 2007 info still in vogue for some - it isn't often that Anthro slips up but I'm sure she will rest easy now in the full knowledge that she has a fan club dedicated to keeping her on her toes - I know I take the greatest solace from having the same one myself 😁

If someone claims to be possession of a well known fact then a cite is mandatory imo. Without a cite a claim becomes a rumour or speculation. So far this 'well known fact' appears to be neither well known nor factual.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 29, 2021, 10:01:17 PM

I've just had a thought.  Supposing Brueckner is afraid that the Ring Leaders might kill him if he lets on.  If so then he won't tell Wolters anything.  Photo or no photo.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 29, 2021, 10:09:34 PM
If someone claims to be possession of a well known fact then a cite is mandatory imo. Without a cite a claim becomes a rumour or speculation. So far this 'well known fact' appears to be neither well known nor factual.
I am not in ‘possession’ of a well known fact. During the past year, there have been numerous discussions on how Mr Wolters and the BKA became aware of Brückner’s involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance. I suggest that while they were looking into the disappearance of Inga Gehricke, they stumbled upon something related to Madeleine. This is my personal view and opinion. Please forgive me for stating something as fact and being unable to provide a credible cite. Kindly moderate my non-factual and not well known contribution to the Forum.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 29, 2021, 10:15:13 PM
You wrote "Wolters also confirmed that he made a connection between Madeleine and Brückner when they searched the abandoned factory in Germany for any clues re. Inga Gehricke."

When asked for a cite you gave this link;
http://sandhillsexpress.com/cbs_national/do-usb-drives-hold-clues-to-what-happened-to-madeleine-mccann-cbside2d701a1/

It didn't seem to contain the information you suggested though, which is why I responded with my comment.

You later claimed that "It is a well known fact that German officials discovered something related to Madeleine during their search of Inga at the abandoned factory owned by Brückner."

Where did you get the idea that this is a well known fact? You really need to provide a cite now confirming your claim imo.
From different platforms re. Madeleine’s disappearance.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 29, 2021, 10:27:09 PM
I have decided that I think Brueckner was employed by someone else to abduct Madeleine and then to pass her on.  And possibly Joanna Cipriano as well.  Nothing much different from my original Theory, excepting that I didn't have anyone in particular in mind as The Abductor.

If in fact it was Brueckner then he might have been required to take a photo of Madeleine, before, during or after the abduction to confirm that he had the right child.  Wolters might have found this.
Also, Brückner has no record of murder and his friends believe he took Madeleine and sold her. The Belgian communication that was intercepted a couple of days before Madeleine’s disappearance may also be significant.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 29, 2021, 11:05:39 PM
From different platforms re. Madeleine’s disappearance.

A rumour repeated on various platforms may become accepted as a fact, but is actually nothing of the kind.

“Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”, is a law of propaganda often attributed to the Nazi Joseph Goebbels. Among psychologists something like this known as the "illusion of truth" effect.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20161026-how-liars-create-the-illusion-of-truth
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 29, 2021, 11:13:52 PM
A rumour repeated on various platforms may become accepted as a fact, but is actually nothing of the kind.

“Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth”, is a law of propaganda often attributed to the Nazi Joseph Goebbels. Among psychologists something like this known as the "illusion of truth" effect.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20161026-how-liars-create-the-illusion-of-truth
you seem to be suggesting that Anthro is deliberately lying and using Nazi propaganda to mislead when she has already stated that she was expressing her opinion.  A bit OTT isn’t it?  That’s a question btw.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 30, 2021, 12:11:22 AM
you seem to be suggesting that Anthro is deliberately lying and using Nazi propaganda to mislead when she has already stated that she was expressing her opinion.  A bit OTT isn’t it?  That’s a question btw.

Not at all. I think Anthro assumed she was sharing a well known fact, but she wasn't, she was being misled imo.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 30, 2021, 03:45:11 AM
Not at all. I think Anthro assumed she was sharing a well known fact, but she wasn't, she was being misled imo.

Seems there are quite a few who have been "misled" by this particular pattern and I may be one of them, because the I find the sequence of events compelling in their logic.

2017 seems to have been the year when Christian Brueckner became a person of interest for SY and the BKA.  We do know that the BKA had photographic evidence connected to Brueckner so we can surmise everyone was working away diligently and silently ("The Metropolitan Police seem to have been quietly working on this behind the scenes for some time and to me that is welcome.
"Hopefully we will see that persistence can pay off https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-police-chief-always-suspected-22136267) gathering evidence in the hope finding enough to progress Madeleine's case.   

Nobody knew what they were at.

Then a huge big wrecking ball smashed their cover;  Goncalo Amaral brazenly told all to an Australian podcast.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8387585/Did-Portuguese-police-let-Madeleine-McCanns-abductor-escape-justice.html


Snip

Police investigated Brueckner for weeks in 2016 over Inga's disappearance, which was compared to Maddie's
___________________________________________________________________________

More than 100 officers descended on the old box factory in February 2016, digging holes looking for Inga's body.

The little girl wasn't found but Brueckner's USB stash of child sex abuse images was found on a USB stick hidden under 'animal bones' with police now set to return, according to German tabloid Bild.
___________________________________________________________________________

The Daily Mail can reveal that Brueckner emerged as a 'person of interest' for British police early on in a major Scotland Yard review of the case that started in 2011.
___________________________________________________________________________

Last night, a source said that Brueckner's name cropped up after Met detectives began probing the case but there was no firm evidence then linking him to Madeleine's disappearance.

'He was an itinerant whose exact whereabouts on the night could not be established,' the source added. 'This is why he was not treated as a suspect at that stage.' It was only in 2017 that Brueckner emerged as a potential key suspect, after German police were tipped off about his possible involvement.

According to German law enforcement officials, Brueckner lived almost permanently in the Algarve between 1995 and 2007.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8391315/Police-link-jailed-paedophile-abduction-girl-aged-five-2015.html


Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 30, 2021, 05:59:36 AM
I am not in ‘possession’ of a well known fact. During the past year, there have been numerous discussions on how Mr Wolters and the BKA became aware of Brückner’s involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance. I suggest that while they were looking into the disappearance of Inga Gehricke, they stumbled upon something related to Madeleine. This is my personal view and opinion. Please forgive me for stating something as fact and being unable to provide a credible cite. Kindly moderate my non-factual and not well known contribution to the Forum.
Supposed involvement, he's not even been questioned yet, the legend has been writ alright.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 07:14:34 AM
Not at all. I think Anthro assumed she was sharing a well known fact, but she wasn't, she was being misled imo.
You mean she was deliberately being lied to?  By whom and to what end? What was this deliberate Nazi-like propaganda lie?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 30, 2021, 08:26:49 AM
You mean she was deliberately being lied to?  By whom and to what end? What was this deliberate Nazi-like propaganda lie?

It sounds like it was speculation which was repeated on various platforms enough times to be seen as 'a well known fact'. It wasn't propaganda, it wasn't deliberate, it was just an example of how a non-fact can become seen as a fact through repetition, which propagandists use. Another prime example imo is how a disappearance became an abduction.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 30, 2021, 08:29:27 AM
I have decided that I think Brueckner was employed by someone else to abduct Madeleine and then to pass her on.  And possibly Joanna Cipriano as well.  Nothing much different from my original Theory, excepting that I didn't have anyone in particular in mind as The Abductor.

If in fact it was Brueckner then he might have been required to take a photo of Madeleine, before, during or after the abduction to confirm that he had the right child.  Wolters might have found this.

Apart from the fact that there's no evidence Brueckner abducted Maddie.
No evidence Joana was abducted.
No evidence of any organised child abduction gangs Iin Portugal and no evidence Maddie was abducted or photographed, apart from all that I agree completely.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 30, 2021, 09:02:47 AM
Seems there are quite a few who have been "misled" by this particular pattern and I may be one of them, because the I find the sequence of events compelling in their logic.

2017 seems to have been the year when Christian Brueckner became a person of interest for SY and the BKA.  We do know that the BKA had photographic evidence connected to Brueckner so we can surmise everyone was working away diligently and silently ("The Metropolitan Police seem to have been quietly working on this behind the scenes for some time and to me that is welcome.
"Hopefully we will see that persistence can pay off https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/former-police-chief-always-suspected-22136267) gathering evidence in the hope finding enough to progress Madeleine's case.   

Nobody knew what they were at.

Then a huge big wrecking ball smashed their cover;  Goncalo Amaral brazenly told all to an Australian podcast.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8387585/Did-Portuguese-police-let-Madeleine-McCanns-abductor-escape-justice.html


Snip

Police investigated Brueckner for weeks in 2016 over Inga's disappearance, which was compared to Maddie's
___________________________________________________________________________

More than 100 officers descended on the old box factory in February 2016, digging holes looking for Inga's body.

The little girl wasn't found but Brueckner's USB stash of child sex abuse images was found on a USB stick hidden under 'animal bones' with police now set to return, according to German tabloid Bild.
___________________________________________________________________________

The Daily Mail can reveal that Brueckner emerged as a 'person of interest' for British police early on in a major Scotland Yard review of the case that started in 2011.
___________________________________________________________________________

Last night, a source said that Brueckner's name cropped up after Met detectives began probing the case but there was no firm evidence then linking him to Madeleine's disappearance.

'He was an itinerant whose exact whereabouts on the night could not be established,' the source added. 'This is why he was not treated as a suspect at that stage.' It was only in 2017 that Brueckner emerged as a potential key suspect, after German police were tipped off about his possible involvement.

According to German law enforcement officials, Brueckner lived almost permanently in the Algarve between 1995 and 2007.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8391315/Police-link-jailed-paedophile-abduction-girl-aged-five-2015.html

Oh My.  And we all assumed that The Animal Bones were Brueckner's Dead Dog.  Perhaps they weren't.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 09:21:11 AM
It sounds like it was speculation which was repeated on various platforms enough times to be seen as 'a well known fact'. It wasn't propaganda, it wasn't deliberate, it was just an example of how a non-fact can become seen as a fact through repetition, which propagandists use. Another prime example imo is how a disappearance became an abduction.
So why did you feel the need to invoke Godwin's Law?  It was OTT, as I said before.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 30, 2021, 09:24:17 AM
So why did you feel the need to invoke Godwin's Law?  It was OTT, as I said before.

As an example/explanation of how people accept something as a fact if it's repeated often enough.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on April 30, 2021, 10:52:43 AM
As an example/explanation of how people accept something as a fact if it's repeated often enough.

So many falsehoods abound, that one needs to check source material to see where things originate.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 30, 2021, 10:55:33 AM
So many falsehoods abound, that one needs to check source material to see where things originate.

I couldn't agree more... I'm afraid Amaral is a prime example of not doing this
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 30, 2021, 11:05:18 AM
I couldn't agree more... I'm afraid Amaral is a prime example of not doing this

Our very own version of Godwin's Law, imo, in which "Amaral" replaces "Nazi's or Hitler"  @)(++(*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law#:~:text=Godwin's%20law%2C%20short%20for%20Godwin's,or%20Hitler%20becomes%20more%20likely.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 30, 2021, 11:33:18 AM
Our very own version of Godwin's Law, imo, in which "Amaral" replaces "Nazi's or Hitler"  @)(++(*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law#:~:text=Godwin's%20law%2C%20short%20for%20Godwin's,or%20Hitler%20becomes%20more%20likely.

I think you are dreaming... I'm pointing out Amaral needed to check his sources... Nothing to do with Nazis
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 30, 2021, 12:41:42 PM
I think you are dreaming... I'm pointing out Amaral needed to check his sources... Nothing to do with Nazis

Godwin's Law is "an Internet adage asserting that as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler becomes more likely."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

On this board we have our own version imo; "as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Amaral becomes more likely."
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 30, 2021, 12:47:33 PM
Godwin's Law is "an Internet adage asserting that as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler becomes more likely."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

On this board we have our own version imo; "as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Amaral becomes more likely."
As he's central to the accusations against the McCanns does that surprise you.  You seem to look at every topic with sceptic eyes.
I see many posts gravitating to leaving the children alone.. Is that another godwins law example
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 30, 2021, 12:58:10 PM
As he's central to the accusations against the McCanns does that surprise you.  You seem to look at every topic with sceptic eyes.
I see many posts gravitating to leaving the children alone.. Is that another godwins law example

Amaral is only central in the opinions of the McCanns and their supporters. Those who have doubts about the McCanns don't rely on his accusations quite as much imo.

Leaving the children alone is an admitted fact which is relevant. Godwin's Law has no bearing on it.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Lace on April 30, 2021, 12:58:53 PM
Apart from the fact that there's no evidence Brueckner abducted Maddie.
No evidence Joana was abducted.
No evidence of any organised child abduction gangs Iin Portugal and no evidence Maddie was abducted or photographed, apart from all that I agree completely.

Why did Brueckner tell his girlfriend he had a horrible job to do the next day,  the next day being May 3rd,  why did he tell her she wouldn't see him for a while.   As it turned out he left Portugal not long after Madeleine went missing.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Lace on April 30, 2021, 01:01:34 PM
I have decided that I think Brueckner was employed by someone else to abduct Madeleine and then to pass her on.  And possibly Joanna Cipriano as well.  Nothing much different from my original Theory, excepting that I didn't have anyone in particular in mind as The Abductor.

If in fact it was Brueckner then he might have been required to take a photo of Madeleine, before, during or after the abduction to confirm that he had the right child.  Wolters might have found this.


Why would Brueckner say he had a horrible JOB to do tomorrow,   IMO that means he was doing a job for someone else.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 30, 2021, 01:15:03 PM

Why would Brueckner say he had a horrible JOB to do tomorrow,   IMO that means he was doing a job for someone else.

I briefly had a job in a meat processing plant when I was about 16, hosing blood & guts down the drains all day.
I can't say I enjoyed it.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 30, 2021, 01:16:03 PM

Why would Brueckner say he had a horrible JOB to do tomorrow,   IMO that means he was doing a job for someone else.

I hadn't actually considered that, but thanks.

Brueckner was a know criminal around The Algarve and good at breaking into buildings.  Who better able?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 30, 2021, 01:34:50 PM
Why did Brueckner tell his girlfriend he had a horrible job to do the next day,  the next day being May 3rd,  why did he tell her she wouldn't see him for a while.   As it turned out he left Portugal not long after Madeleine went missing.

I don't see why that's anybody's business but his own.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 30, 2021, 01:36:14 PM
Why did Brueckner tell his girlfriend he had a horrible job to do the next day,  the next day being May 3rd,  why did he tell her she wouldn't see him for a while.   As it turned out he left Portugal not long after Madeleine went missing.

Even more interesting imo is why this woman assumed she was his girlfriend, how she remembered his words after such a long time and why she shared her story with the tabloid press.

Did Brueckner leave Portugal not long after Madeleine went missing? Who says?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 01:42:13 PM
Even more interesting imo is why this woman assumed she was his girlfriend, how she remembered his words after such a long time and why she shared her story with the tabloid press.

Did Brueckner leave Portugal not long after Madeleine went missing? Who says?
His landlord - the bloke who took over ownership of the Jag? 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 01:44:25 PM
As an example/explanation of how people accept something as a fact if it's repeated often enough.
A much more appropriate example was the lie that the parents sedate their children.  So many internet commentators make this allegation it seems to have become an actual factoid now.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 01:47:12 PM
Amaral is only central in the opinions of the McCanns and their supporters. Those who have doubts about the McCanns don't rely on his accusations quite as much imo.

Leaving the children alone is an admitted fact which is relevant. Godwin's Law has no bearing on it.
erm...Hitler and the Nazis are also an admitted and accepted fact, and your point is?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 30, 2021, 01:54:46 PM
erm...Hitler and the Nazis are also an admitted and accepted fact, and your point is?

My point is, I wish there were more Nazis & I don't think Hitler was as bad as people make out.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 30, 2021, 02:15:25 PM
A much more appropriate example was the lie that the parents sedate their children.  So many internet commentators make this allegation it seems to have become an actual factoid now.

Imo that is indeed another example, but I don't understand why you think it's much more appropriate than the one under discussion.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on April 30, 2021, 02:46:10 PM
Imo that is indeed another example, but I don't understand why you think it's much more appropriate than the one under discussion.

You are wrong again... No one is saying Wolyers has photographic evidence... I've said I think it'd possible and giving the reasons why II think that
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 02:59:22 PM
Imo that is indeed another example, but I don't understand why you think it's much more appropriate than the one under discussion.
Because Hitler and the Nazis propaganda is less appropriate to the subject of Madeleine McCann than propaganda about parental sedation of the children.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 03:00:30 PM
My point is, I wish there were more Nazis & I don't think Hitler was as bad as people make out.
Dumkopf.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 30, 2021, 03:15:48 PM
As an example/explanation of how people accept something as a fact if it's repeated often enough.
With reference to Godwin😶 I think Goebbels could only have gazed in awe at the propaganda machine set in motion by Amaral.

But there are times when even masters of their art overstep themselves as Amaral did when the trail leading to the upset caused by leaking of confidential investigative police work led back directly to him.

And he couldn't have been more transparently caught with his hand in the till than when in a blare of publicity aimed at derailing German operations he allowed himself to be associated with promulgating false information.

The cartoon covered van and Brueckner's photoshopped dreadlocked image left Amaral with egg on his face when footage of Brueckner and van taken shortly before Madeleine's disappearance firmly refuted Amaral's doctored photographs making a lie of the legend he was intent on creating.

Snip

Maddie case: Gonçalo Amaral makes new revelations about the investigation
Fri, 26 June 2020
The former inspector of the PJ Gonçalo Amaral asks the Judicial Police to continue the investigation into the Maddie case and made new revelations, which contradict the German investigation.

In an interview with the Central Journal, the former inspector presented a portrait of the now suspect Christian Brueckner, but at the time of Madeleine's disappearance.
https://tviplayer.iol.pt/programa/jornal-das-8/53c6b3903004dc006243d0cf/video/5ef657990cf2c4d7ff3f9f68


Gonçalo Amaral reveals photos that says they are the suspect's van in which the vehicle is different
Sofia Santana 21/06/2020

In an interview conducted by José Alberto Carvalho, Gonçalo Amaral questioned the reasons why he says they changed "the images of the campervan".

Did the German authorities come to the conclusion that in 2007 the vehicle was still painted white? Who told them that. "Did the German or English authorities, Do not know who did this, certainly was not in Portugal, is that who disclosed this is trying to 'check' information, see if someone appears to call 'look I saw the car' and did not see anything because the car was otherwise", he asked.
https://www.msn.com/pt-pt/noticias/ultimas/gon%C3%A7alo-amaral-revela-fotos-que-diz-serem-da-van-do-suspeito-nas-quais-o-ve%C3%ADculo-est%C3%A1-diferente/ar-BB15NLbo


Exclusive: Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner is filmed at wheel of 'kidnap' camper van on road trip from Praia de Luz - just weeks before she vanished
By SHEKHAR BHATIA IN BERLIN FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 09:34, 31 July 2020

Madeleine McCann prime suspect Christian Brueckner was filmed at the wheel of a battered VW campervan just weeks before German police believed he used it to kidnap the three-year-old girl.

In the footage, obtained exclusively by MailOnline, Brueckner can be seen laughing and joking as he squats down in the back of the van looking at a map.

Casually dressed with a black necklace and white sweatshirt, the convicted sex offender used his distinctive rusting white and yellow T3 Westfalia to give three young German travellers a lift to Spain.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8576985/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-Christian-Brueckner-kidnap-campervan-weeks-vanished.html?ci=25796&si=3872197

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: misty on April 30, 2021, 03:48:44 PM
The cartoons on the VW Westfalia were not actually doctored; GA must have had access to a photo of the vehicle when it was recovered in 2019 from its current owner (a graffiti artist)
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 30, 2021, 04:27:17 PM
Because Hitler and the Nazis propaganda is less appropriate to the subject of Madeleine McCann than propaganda about parental sedation of the children.

I never said that Hitler and the Nazis propaganda was appropriate to the subject of Madeleine McCann. What I was trying to say is that false facts can arise when others consciously or unconsciously use the same tactics that they did; repeating a false fact until people accept it as true.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on April 30, 2021, 04:38:02 PM
The cartoons on the VW Westfalia were not actually doctored; GA must have had access to a photo of the vehicle when it was recovered in 2019 from its current owner (a graffiti artist)

I thought the van was taken from a scrapyard in Silves?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/i-bought-campervan-madeleine-mccann-23300766
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 30, 2021, 05:12:57 PM
The cartoons on the VW Westfalia were not actually doctored; GA must have had access to a photo of the vehicle when it was recovered in 2019 from its current owner (a graffiti artist)

I stand corrected that it was doctored, Misty.  But it certainly was misrepresented as being like that when Brueckner was driving it around the time of Madeleine's disappearance.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 05:16:57 PM
I never said that Hitler and the Nazis propaganda was appropriate to the subject of Madeleine McCann. What I was trying to say is that false facts can arise when others consciously or unconsciously use the same tactics that they did; repeating a false fact until people accept it as true.
Your reference to Hitler and Nazi propaganda was wholly inappropriate and OTT imo.  A far more appropriate institution and personage for repeating false facts until people accept them to be true can be found within the original 2007 investigation and the author of the “Truth of the Lie” propaganda pamphlet masquerading as a serious tome.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 05:19:20 PM
I thought the van was taken from a scrapyard in Silves?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/i-bought-campervan-madeleine-mccann-23300766

From your quoted article:

In 2015, Peter W, of Regensburg, southern Germany, paid suspect Christian Brueckner £5,000 for his yellow and white Volkswagen T3 Westfalia campervan in the Algarve, Portugal.
Police seized it from Peter W’s scrapyard and shipped it to Germany for forensic tests.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 30, 2021, 05:31:10 PM
I stand corrected that it was doctored, Misty.  But it certainly was misrepresented as being like that when Brueckner was driving it around the time of Madeleine's disappearance.

Has he got dreadlocks now?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: misty on April 30, 2021, 06:34:26 PM
From your quoted article:

In 2015, Peter W, of Regensburg, southern Germany, paid suspect Christian Brueckner £5,000 for his yellow and white Volkswagen T3 Westfalia campervan in the Algarve, Portugal.
Police seized it from Peter W’s scrapyard and shipped it to Germany for forensic tests.


https://www.mittelbayerische.de/region/regensburg-stadt-nachrichten/fall-maddie-spur-fuehrt-zu-autowerkstatt-21179-art1970402.html
REGENSBURG. In the case of Maddie McCann, who disappeared on Praia da Luz in Portugal in 2007 and made headlines around the world, a Regensburg resident may hold the key to clarifying the case. The emigrant Peter W. (name changed) involuntarily came into the focus of investigators from Great Britain and Germany. That is why his car plays a key role.
 (Rest of article behind a paywall)
Credit to Sharkbite on Websleuths.

Reading between the lines, I think the Westfalia was kept, on & off, at Piro's scrapyard for a number of years. The reported change of ownership in 2015 seems to coincide with the son's departure to pastures new.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 30, 2021, 06:38:03 PM
Why did Brueckner tell his girlfriend he had a horrible job to do the next day,  the next day being May 3rd,  why did he tell her she wouldn't see him for a while.   As it turned out he left Portugal not long after Madeleine went missing.

Its not been tested in a court of law, so him supposedly saying this, that and the other is just tittle tattle which it seems Wolters fell for hook line and sinker.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: misty on April 30, 2021, 06:41:02 PM
I stand corrected that it was doctored, Misty.  But it certainly was misrepresented as being like that when Brueckner was driving it around the time of Madeleine's disappearance.

Yes, Amaral did try to misrepresent the appearance of the vehicle in May 2007. It was fortunate for German investigators that the group Brueckner drove to Spain videoed some of the experience, clearly showing both the Westfalia & Brueckner as they were in March/April 2007.
Amaral did admit that the image of Brueckner with dreadlocks was "robot".
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 06:56:08 PM
Yes, Amaral did try to misrepresent the appearance of the vehicle in May 2007. It was fortunate for German investigators that the group Brueckner drove to Spain videoed some of the experience, clearly showing both the Westfalia & Brueckner as they were in March/April 2007.
Amaral did admit that the image of Brueckner with dreadlocks was "robot".
I don’t think nearly enough has been made of Amaral’s deliberate sttempt to mislead about the German investigation.  Surely his actions were beneath contempt but we hear no words of condemnation from the sceptics on here.  Why not?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 30, 2021, 07:00:48 PM
Yes, Amaral did try to misrepresent the appearance of the vehicle in May 2007. It was fortunate for German investigators that the group Brueckner drove to Spain videoed some of the experience, clearly showing both the Westfalia & Brueckner as they were in March/April 2007.
Amaral did admit that the image of Brueckner with dreadlocks was "robot".

It is possible to come up with a few suppositions to explain Amaral's extraordinary behaviour and deliberate wrecking attempt at this critical time in Madeleine's investigation.

I think he has flagged up a lot of questions about himself and who knows whether or not the time might come when he is required to answer them.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on April 30, 2021, 07:01:26 PM
I don’t think nearly enough has been made of Amaral’s deliberate sttempt to mislead about the German investigation.  Surely his actions were beneath contempt but we hear no words of condemnation from the sceptics on here.  Why not?


You personally know which path the German investigation is taking?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 30, 2021, 07:01:40 PM
I don’t think nearly enough has been made of Amaral’s deliberate sttempt to mislead about the German investigation.  Surely his actions were beneath contempt but we hear no words of condemnation from the sceptics on here.  Why not?

What is Portugal doing about it is what I want to know.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 07:05:48 PM

You personally know which path the German investigation is taking?
WTF has that got to do with Amaral posting misleading information about Bruckner’s van and appearance?  But, guess what?  I (along with the rest of the world) know that the Germans (sorry, I mean German’s just so you understand who I’m referring to) are investigating Brückner over Madeleine’s disappearance.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 30, 2021, 07:10:54 PM
I don’t think nearly enough has been made of Amaral’s deliberate sttempt to mislead about the German investigation.  Surely his actions were beneath contempt but we hear no words of condemnation from the sceptics on here.  Why not?

Couldn't agree more.

He was the whistle blower who alerted anyone who might have had an association with Brueckner of official police interest in him.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 30, 2021, 07:13:35 PM

Isn't it against the law in Portugal to interfere with the course of justice?

Sorry, silly question.  Probably not.  At least not for Amaral.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 30, 2021, 07:16:00 PM
What is Portugal doing about it is what I want to know.

I doubt they will ever do anything about him.  I think the question is will anyone else ~ bearing in mind there is more than one way to skin a rat.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: misty on April 30, 2021, 07:16:25 PM
It is possible to come up with a few suppositions to explain Amaral's extraordinary behaviour and deliberate wrecking attempt at this critical time in Madeleine's investigation.

I think he has flagged up a lot of questions about himself and who knows whether or not the time might come when he is required to answer them.

IMO he never anticipated that any other police force would uncover solid evidence against another person which would exonerate the parents.
The question I'd really like answered is why a cop, mired in debt, thought it would be a really good move to give up a steady job with regular income to release a book about an unsolved case.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 07:17:59 PM
IMO he never anticipated that any other police force would uncover solid evidence against another person which would exonerate the parents.
The question I'd really like answered is why a cop, mired in debt, thought it would be a really good move to give up a steady job with regular income to release a book about an unsolved case.
I think because he knew (or was persuaded by his publisher) thst it would make him very rich.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 30, 2021, 07:19:02 PM
IMO he never anticipated that any other police force would uncover solid evidence against another person which would exonerate the parents.
The question I'd really like answered is why a cop, mired in debt, thought it would be a really good move to give up a steady job with regular income to release a book about an unsolved case.

This was in Portugal where anything goes, apparently.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 30, 2021, 07:22:13 PM

I think it's time the police dropped their investigation into Christian Brueckner & started investigating Islamic Brueckner instead.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: misty on April 30, 2021, 07:24:00 PM
I think because he knew (or was persuaded by his publisher) thst it would make him very rich.

I'm at a loss to understand why the publisher didn't realise the book was libellous & refuse to print it in its current form.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on April 30, 2021, 07:30:51 PM
I'm at a loss to understand why the publisher didn't realise the book was libellous & refuse to print it in its current form.
Being Portuguese they probably gambled on the likelihood  that the legal system would be heavily biased in their favour.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: misty on April 30, 2021, 07:35:22 PM
This was in Portugal where anything goes, apparently.

It certainly does, if Operation Marques is anything to go by (Corruption case involving Jose Socrates)
https://www.portugalresident.com/hundreds-of-motorists-honk-horns-in-disgust-in-lisbon-and-viseu-as-petition-to-oust-marques-judge-hits-170000-signatures/


Anyway, back to the photographic evidence. I agree with Anthro that, whatever was unearthed at the derelict Neuwegersleben box factory eventually provided BKA with a solid link to CB's involvement in Madeleine's case. As they didn't find a body or Madeleine's pyjamas, it's logical to presume there must have been images of some description on the buried USB sticks/camera cards.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 30, 2021, 07:39:51 PM
IMO he never anticipated that any other police force would uncover solid evidence against another person which would exonerate the parents.
The question I'd really like answered is why a cop, mired in debt, thought it would be a really good move to give up a steady job with regular income to release a book about an unsolved case.

I believe he totally underestimated the McCanns and their tenacity for finding their daughter.  And I can see where he was coming from with that because I think they achieved the impossible.

Amaral had never written a book before.  He had no idea it was going to be a best seller and worth leaving a steady job for.  He could not foresee the new media career ahead and chat show darling he was to become.

All in all quite a risk to take when one has a family to support.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 30, 2021, 07:40:46 PM
Isn't it against the law in Portugal to interfere with the course of justice?

Sorry, silly question.  Probably not.  At least not for Amaral.

I wish Derek Chauvin had interviewed the McCanns.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on April 30, 2021, 07:42:37 PM
I believe he totally underestimated the McCanns and their tenacity for finding their daughter.  And I can see where he was coming from with that because I think they achieved the impossible.

Amaral had never written a book before.  He had no idea it was going to be a best seller and worth leaving a steady job for.  He could not foresee the new media career ahead and chat show darling he was to become.

All in all quite a risk to take when one has a family to support.

But he wasn't actually supporting them was he?.  His wife did that, apparently.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on April 30, 2021, 07:45:48 PM
I'm at a loss to understand why the publisher didn't realise the book was libellous & refuse to print it in its current form.

Wasn't the publisher Spanish?
Perhaps the nuances in Portuguese were missed?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on April 30, 2021, 07:52:56 PM

https://www.mittelbayerische.de/region/regensburg-stadt-nachrichten/fall-maddie-spur-fuehrt-zu-autowerkstatt-21179-art1970402.html
REGENSBURG. In the case of Maddie McCann, who disappeared on Praia da Luz in Portugal in 2007 and made headlines around the world, a Regensburg resident may hold the key to clarifying the case. The emigrant Peter W. (name changed) involuntarily came into the focus of investigators from Great Britain and Germany. That is why his car plays a key role.
 (Rest of article behind a paywall)
Credit to Sharkbite on Websleuths.

Reading between the lines, I think the Westfalia was kept, on & off, at Piro's scrapyard for a number of years. The reported change of ownership in 2015 seems to coincide with the son's departure to pastures new.
I find this very interesting, Misty. Flavio Piro could be a key witness in all of this. My opinion. B Piro seems to have been very kind to Brückner in the past.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-spent-8-22225289
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 01, 2021, 08:10:05 AM
IMO he never anticipated that any other police force would uncover solid evidence against another person which would exonerate the parents.
The question I'd really like answered is why a cop, mired in debt, thought it would be a really good move to give up a steady job with regular income to release a book about an unsolved case.

His pal Cristovão did.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 01, 2021, 09:00:46 AM
IMO he never anticipated that any other police force would uncover solid evidence against another person which would exonerate the parents.
The question I'd really like answered is why a cop, mired in debt, thought it would be a really good move to give up a steady job with regular income to release a book about an unsolved case.

It remains to be seen whether any police force has evidence to convict another and exonerate the McCanns. Amaral explains why he retired from the PJ and wrote his book in the book's foreword. Some may disagree, but calling him a liar about his motives would, of course be libellous.

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 01, 2021, 09:12:48 AM
It remains to be seen whether any police force has evidence to convict another and exonerate the McCanns. Amaral explains why he retired from the PJ and wrote his book in the book's foreword. Some may disagree, but calling him a liar about his motives would, of course be libellous.

Erm, which was to regain his freedom of expression... lol

TOTL:
"Certainly, this book responds to the need I felt to defend myself, having been discredited by the institution for which I worked for more than twenty-six years, without being given any chance to explain myself, publicly or within the institution itself. I made the request several times, but it was never heard. I, therefore, scrupulously respected the rules of the judiciary police and I refrained from making any comment. But this goes without saying: I experienced that silence to which I was constrained as an attack on my dignity. Later, I was removed from the investigation. It was then that I understood that it was time to speak. To do that, I requested early retirement in order to be able to express myself freely.

I could pick up on a few details in that paragraph.
"I, therefore, scrupulously respected the rules of the judiciary police and I refrained from making any comment."

Seriously?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 01, 2021, 09:17:33 AM
Erm, which was to regain his freedom of expression... lol

TOTL:
"Certainly, this book responds to the need I felt to defend myself, having been discredited by the institution for which I worked for more than twenty-six years, without being given any chance to explain myself, publicly or within the institution itself. I made the request several times, but it was never heard. I, therefore, scrupulously respected the rules of the judiciary police and I refrained from making any comment. But this goes without saying: I experienced that silence to which I was constrained as an attack on my dignity. Later, I was removed from the investigation. It was then that I understood that it was time to speak. To do that, I requested early retirement in order to be able to express myself freely.

I could pick up on a few details in that paragraph.
"I, therefore, scrupulously respected the rules of the judiciary police and I refrained from making any comment."

Seriously?

As far as I know no public comment was made by Amaral until after his retirement.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 01, 2021, 09:25:31 AM
It remains to be seen whether any police force has evidence to convict another and exonerate the McCanns. Amaral explains why he retired from the PJ and wrote his book in the book's foreword. Some may disagree, but calling him a liar about his motives would, of course be libellous.
I would say based on what Wolters has said that the BKK do  have evidence that exhonerates the parents.

I believe Amaral wrote his book because he actually believed what he wrote... That to me is incompetence and nothing to do with lying
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 01, 2021, 09:49:12 AM
I would say based on what Wolters has said that the BKK do  have evidence that exhonerates the parents.

I believe Amaral wrote his book because he actually believed what he wrote... That to me is incompetence and nothing to do with lying

I would reply that I think Wolters has yet to convince everyone, although he seems to have convinced some. Obviously Amaral believed what he wrote. Whether that makes him incompetent remains to be seen, but if he did pursue the wrong suspects he won't be the first or the last policeman to do that.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 01, 2021, 09:53:21 AM
It remains to be seen whether any police force has evidence to convict another and exonerate the McCanns. Amaral explains why he retired from the PJ and wrote his book in the book's foreword. Some may disagree, but calling him a liar about his motives would, of course be libellous.

No, it wouldn't be Libellous.  Amaral is a convicted perjurer.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 01, 2021, 10:00:17 AM
I would reply that I think Wolters has yet to convince everyone, although he seems to have convinced some. Obviously Amaral believed what he wrote. Whether that makes him incompetent remains to be seen, but if he did pursue the wrong suspects he won't be the first or the last policeman to do that.

Wolters doesn't have to convince everyone... He hasn't revealed his evidence yet but SY have said they are working very very closely with the Germans... That sounds very supportive to me
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 01, 2021, 10:17:16 AM
Wolters doesn't have to convince everyone... He hasn't revealed his evidence yet but SY have said they are working very very closely with the Germans... That sounds very supportive to me

So closely that they haven't shared their evidence & SY haven't reached the same conclusion.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 01, 2021, 10:19:06 AM
So closely that they haven't shared their evidence & SY haven't reached the same conclusion.

And Wolters has explained why he hadn't shared... Its boring going over the same things
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 01, 2021, 10:20:52 AM
And Wolters has explained why he hadn't shared... Its boring going over the same things

Wolters has nothing.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 01, 2021, 10:24:01 AM
No, it wouldn't be Libellous.  Amaral is a convicted perjurer.

And? obviously the coals aren't cold yet, talk about bitter, mind I like a pint of it, so keep pouring.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 01, 2021, 10:24:36 AM

The evidence against Brueckner is so incredibly damning that he can't be charged or tried with anything.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 01, 2021, 10:25:36 AM
Wolters has nothing.

Nothing is better than something, if the something turns out worse than the nothing.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 01, 2021, 10:26:42 AM
The evidence against Brueckner is so incredibly damning that he can't be charged or tried with anything.


Yeah but, his name is out there, just like the man who shot Liberty Valance, only he didn't.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 01, 2021, 10:27:51 AM
There once were pictures of fairies at the bottom of some one's garden, took years to bust that myth.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 01, 2021, 10:28:37 AM
As far as I know no public comment was made by Amaral until after his retirement.

You are wrong.

His rant to a reporter led to him being taken off the case.

"The source close to the PJ" convention which had been in force for some time was disregarded on this occasion so perhaps his public comment was made inadvertently ~ but it was 'public comment' and it was made prior to his retirement.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 01, 2021, 10:30:13 AM
You are wrong.

His rant to a reporter led to him being taken off the case.

"The source close to the PJ" convention which had been in force for some time was disregarded on this occasion so perhaps his public comment was made inadvertently ~ but it was 'public comment' and it was made prior to his retirement.

I get the link now, Wolters has a snap of Amaral.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 01, 2021, 10:32:49 AM
I get the link now, Wolters has a snap of Amaral.

Amaral & that Cristovao bloke helped Martin Ney & Brueckner abduct Maddie, Joana & Renee Hasee.

I believe Wolters has photographic evidence of all of this.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 01, 2021, 10:39:20 AM
No, it wouldn't be Libellous.  Amaral is a convicted perjurer.

If someone writes that he's lying about his motives for writing his book but can't prove it that's libel, whatever has happened in his past. Even convicted purjurers can't be assumed to lie about everything.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 01, 2021, 10:48:29 AM
Amaral & that Cristovao bloke helped Martin Ney & Brueckner abduct Maddie, Joana & Renee Hasee.

I believe Wolters has photographic evidence of all of this.

This is what I said previously in another thread.

Smitman deposited Madeleine's remains some where, some one saw him, picked the package up thinking it was swag, boy did they get a surprise, took pictures for some perverted pleasure, prove it wrong mr prosecuter.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 01, 2021, 10:53:19 AM
I get the link now, Wolters has a snap of Amaral.

Do you really think so!!!  WOW ... have a care though, you could be quoted on that.

There hasn't been much physical contact between investigators of late.  Probably no requirement these days given the ease of video conferencing but some things do take time to arrange and one obstacle is getting the legal formalities in place to interview witnesses.

I think that very soon we will see movement on that; and if the Portuguese are involved in the process it shouldn't be too long before we are privy to a version of events 😀

Snip

Scotland Yard’s hunt for Madeleine’s abductor continues, with four detectives still working on Operation Grange.

A top-level summit between German, British and Portuguese detectives is due to take place in Lisbon this summer.

The Mirror revealed in January that cops are launching a push to find what they have referred to as the “missing piece of the jigsaw” that they say could snare Brueckner.

German and Portuguese investigators are to carry out new interviews of key witnesses in the Algarve who knew him.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-refuse-give-24015255
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 01, 2021, 10:54:47 AM
You are wrong.

His rant to a reporter led to him being taken off the case.

"The source close to the PJ" convention which had been in force for some time was disregarded on this occasion so perhaps his public comment was made inadvertently ~ but it was 'public comment' and it was made prior to his retirement.

Oh yes, I forgot about that.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 01, 2021, 10:59:37 AM
I seem to remember the 3 burglars were about to be nailed according to the red tops back in 2013.

I wonder whatever happened to all that evidence against them?

Or maybe they are still in the frame, as Brueckner's accomplices, along with Hewlett, some gardeners & a dead black guy.

Has anyone thought of that yet?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 01, 2021, 11:47:23 AM
If someone writes that he's lying about his motives for writing his book but can't prove it that's libel, whatever has happened in his past. Even convicted purjurers can't be assumed to lie about everything.

Nice deflection but I would really like to see a proper discussion of salient points made by members while recognising that attack is the best form of defence.

Misty mused on the question of why given his financial predicament he would voluntarily leave secure employment to take such a leap in the dark.

Snip
The question I'd really like answered is why a cop, mired in debt, thought it would be a really good move to give up a steady job with regular income to release a book about an unsolved case.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12049.msg649761#msg649761

While Carana wrote >
TOTL:
"Certainly, this book responds to the need I felt to defend myself, having been discredited by the institution for which I worked for more than twenty-six years, without being given any chance to explain myself, publicly or within the institution itself. I made the request several times, but it was never heard.
 Amaral
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12049.msg649789#msg649789

Nobody libelling a nobody there; rather just two good points for debate.

I think the contrast between whatever evidence Wolters has and the manner in which he has conducted the investigation couldn't be more marked.

That there have been witness statements taken is irrefutable and the likelihood that there may have been photographic information available either as a result of public appeal or from searches is high.  The fact that Wolter's cannot speak about that is very revealing.
Snip
Detectives confirmed they dug up 8,000 pieces of potential evidence which had been buried at an abandoned German box factory owned by Christian B.

It is alleged at least some of this disturbing material includes videos and pictures of his suspected crimes - with the files found on hard drives and USB sticks in a plastic bag.

The material was buried alongside his dead dog at the dilapidated and rubbish filed site in Neuwegers­leben.

Mr Wolters however declined to confirm if any of these pictures and videos includes evidence linked to the Madeleine case.

Speaking on Aussie TV, he said: "At the moment, I am not allowed to contend on that, so I am not able to say if there are pictures or there are no pictures of Madeleine."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11975041/madeleine-mccann-evidence-dead-christian-b-buried-videos/
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 01, 2021, 11:55:21 AM

Detectives confirmed they dug up 8,000 pieces of potential evidence which had been buried at an abandoned German box factory owned by Christian B.

It is alleged at least some of this disturbing material includes videos and pictures of his suspected crimes - with the files found on hard drives and USB sticks in a plastic bag.


Alleged by whom?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 01, 2021, 12:28:10 PM
I seem to remember the 3 burglars were about to be nailed according to the red tops back in 2013.

I wonder whatever happened to all that evidence against them?

Or maybe they are still in the frame, as Brueckner's accomplices, along with Hewlett, some gardeners & a dead black guy.

Has anyone thought of that yet?


They'll get there, have faith.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 01, 2021, 01:17:56 PM
Detectives confirmed they dug up 8,000 pieces of potential evidence which had been buried at an abandoned German box factory owned by Christian B.

It is alleged at least some of this disturbing material includes videos and pictures of his suspected crimes - with the files found on hard drives and USB sticks in a plastic bag.


Alleged by whom?


Some hack reporter, without a doubt.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 01, 2021, 02:02:48 PM
And? obviously the coals aren't cold yet, talk about bitter, mind I like a pint of it, so keep pouring.

What goes cold on Perjury?  Amaral is a convicted liar.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 01, 2021, 02:05:39 PM
Amaral & that Cristovao bloke helped Martin Ney & Brueckner abduct Maddie, Joana & Renee Hasee.

I believe Wolters has photographic evidence of all of this.

You could be right.  Thank you for saying so.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 01, 2021, 02:12:04 PM
Oh yes, I forgot about that.
given that Amaral wrote
 "I, therefore, scrupulously respected the rules of the judiciary police and I refrained from making any comment" and given that you've conceded he blabbed to a reporter before being taken off the case, is it not fair comment to call the man a liar?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 01, 2021, 02:16:05 PM
If someone writes that he's lying about his motives for writing his book but can't prove it that's libel, whatever has happened in his past. Even convicted purjurers can't be assumed to lie about everything.

Well, that's a new one.  Amaral was convicted of Perjury by a Portuguese Court.  Was that not good enough for you?

It is bad enough to Commit Perjury In Court, but he won't do it again?  Okay, if you say so.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 01, 2021, 02:19:36 PM
Oh yes, I forgot about that.

You appear to be very good at forgetting.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 01, 2021, 03:43:20 PM
Detectives confirmed they dug up 8,000 pieces of potential evidence which had been buried at an abandoned German box factory owned by Christian B.

It is alleged at least some of this disturbing material includes videos and pictures of his suspected crimes - with the files found on hard drives and USB sticks in a plastic bag.


Alleged by whom?

The Dog?  Presuming it was even dead.  Who can possibly tell?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: sadie on May 02, 2021, 12:38:10 AM
Amaral & that Cristovao bloke helped Martin Ney & Brueckner abduct Maddie, Joana & Renee Hasee.

I believe Wolters has photographic evidence of all of this.

Oh really?   I always wonderted
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 02, 2021, 08:21:26 AM
given that Amaral wrote
 "I, therefore, scrupulously respected the rules of the judiciary police and I refrained from making any comment" and given that you've conceded he blabbed to a reporter before being taken off the case, is it not fair comment to call the man a liar?
This was a question for G-Unit.  It has so far remained unanswered, maybe she missed it?  Asking again in hope of a reply this time...
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 02, 2021, 11:38:08 AM
This was a question for G-Unit.  It has so far remained unanswered, maybe she missed it?  Asking again in hope of a reply this time...

I doubt you'll get one.

Members aren't obliged to answer questions.  8)--))
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 02, 2021, 11:53:06 AM
I doubt you'll get one.

Members aren't obliged to answer questions.  8)--))
Sometimes it's the questions that they choose not to answer that offer the greater insight...
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 02, 2021, 01:40:29 PM
Sometimes it's the questions that they choose not to answer that offer the greater insight...

Much as the questions Wolters said he was not presently allowed to answer speak volumes.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 02, 2021, 01:43:45 PM
Much as the questions Wolters said he was not presently allowed to answer speak volumes.

Yes, if you want to believe an anonymous allegation of the existence of photo evidence.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 02, 2021, 05:39:35 PM
Much as the questions Wolters said he was not presently allowed to answer speak volumes.

More pertinently, Wolters is not allowed to ask.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 02, 2021, 06:02:40 PM
More pertinently, Wolters is not allowed to ask.

                                        ?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 02, 2021, 06:28:38 PM
Much as the questions Wolters said he was not presently allowed to answer speak volumes.

The volumes it speaks to me is he is very unprofessional

Why have an interview then say he is allowed to answer could mean more like ....he doesn't know the answer.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 02, 2021, 06:46:24 PM
The volumes it speaks to me is he is very unprofessional

Why have an interview then say he is allowed to answer could mean more like ....he doesn't know the answer.

I believe the interview was primarily given because Volters was publicising the German interest in information gathering to further Madeleine's case not giving Brueckner the get out of jail card of gifting him information already in his possession.
I think he is building as waterproof a case as he possibly can in the hope of keeping this already judicially proven monster behind bars for life which is exactly where he should be.  My opinion.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 02, 2021, 06:59:18 PM
I think it is becoming apparent according to the Sunday times article today, that there may be parallels between the brutal rape of Ms Behan and Madeleine's abduction.

It is not known if the rape was filmed.

But the witness statement given by Ms Behan describing her ordeal and her assailant might be a possible match with photographic evidence already in BKA hands connected to Brueckner.


Modified to correct that the rape was filmed
Snip
He also set up a video camera and produced a bag of chains and whips before removing her clothes with a scissors.
https://www.irishcentral.com/news/german-prosecutors-madeleine-mccann-rape-irish-woman
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 06:05:12 AM
I believe the interview was primarily given because Volters was publicising the German interest in information gathering to further Madeleine's case not giving Brueckner the get out of jail card of gifting him information already in his possession.
I think he is building as waterproof a case as he possibly can in the hope of keeping this already judicially proven monster behind bars for life which is exactly where he should be.  My opinion.

Yes, he's building a water tight case.....

With no evidence Maddie was abducted.

No evidence Brueckner ever set foot in 5a.

No DNA or forensic evidence linking Brueckner to Maddie & no body or parts of a body.

Good luck taking that to court.

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 07:28:04 AM
Yes, he's building a water tight case.....

With no evidence Maddie was abducted.

No evidence Brueckner ever set foot in 5a.

No DNA or forensic evidence linking Brueckner to Maddie & no body or parts of a body.

Good luck taking that to court.
Is this what you hope or what you know? if the latter how is it you have gained such privileged access into the German investigation?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 07:53:52 AM
Is this what you hope or what you know? if the latter how is it you have gained such privileged access into the German investigation?

It's just the facts. Don't blame me.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 08:16:55 AM
It's just the facts. Don't blame me.
Wolters has claimed he does have evidence of Brückner’s involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.  He claims that if we knew what it was we would agree with him.  I take it you have privileged access to this evidence and can state as fact that he has nothing at all?  If so what is it, perhaps you can tell us?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 08:24:02 AM
Wolters has claimed he does have evidence of Brückner’s involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.  He claims that if we knew what it was we would agree with him.  I take it you have privileged access to this evidence and can state as fact that he has nothing at all?  If so what is it, perhaps you can tell us?

He claims a lot. But what evidence has he actually shown, other than nothing?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 09:13:45 AM
Wolters has claimed he does have evidence of Brückner’s involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.  He claims that if we knew what it was we would agree with him.  I take it you have privileged access to this evidence and can state as fact that he has nothing at all?  If so what is it, perhaps you can tell us?

Supposed involvement doesn't make him a killer.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:14:38 AM
He claims a lot. But what evidence has he actually shown, other than nothing?
you mean he hasn't shown you what he's got but you know it's nothing at all?  Right you are then. 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:16:56 AM
you mean he hasn't shown you what he's got but you know it's nothing at all?  Right you are then.

Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

But let's start at the beginning.

What evidence is there Maddie was abducted?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:18:34 AM
Supposed involvement doesn't make him a killer.
I think Wolters has claimed that he has evidence Madeleine was murdered by Bruckner and this is the evidence he has declined to share.  Do you think he is 100% lying and if so to what end, and why is he presumably being supported by his superiors?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:20:46 AM
Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

But let's start at the beginning.

What evidence is there Maddie was abducted?
there's no point discussing it with you because you refuse to accept that there is any.  You are completely close minded to that possibility and appear quite certain that Madeleine was murdered by her parents. 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 09:21:07 AM
Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

But let's start at the beginning.

What evidence is there Maddie was abducted?

Starter for 10.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:22:51 AM
If there is more evidence that the McCanns hid their child's body than that she was abducted then why are they not currently being investigated by the three police forces looking into the disappearance?  There's another starter for 10 for you.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 09:23:00 AM
I think Wolters has claimed that he has evidence Madeleine was murdered by Bruckner and this is the evidence he has declined to share.  Do you think he is 100% lying and if so to what end, and why is he presumably being supported by his superiors?

Has he ever claimed his suspect actually killed the girl, if so why can't he lay charges, think it through.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:25:09 AM
there's no point discussing it with you because you refuse to accept that there is any.  You are completely close minded to that possibility and appear quite certain that Madeleine was murdered by her parents.

The police have spent 14 years investigating & have presented no abduction evidence, other than a sighting of Gerry, it's not unreasonable therefore to believe they have sod all.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 09:26:25 AM
If there is more evidence that the McCanns hid their child's body than that she was abducted then why are they not currently being investigated by the three police forces looking into the disappearance?  There's another starter for 10 for you.

This is a thread about photographic evidence. Simple answer, yes he found/saw the bundle Smithman put down and opened it, boy did he get a surprise, took a photo for some perverted pleasure/insurance, prove it wrong mr prosecutor, CB never abducted any live body.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:27:44 AM
Has he ever claimed his suspect actually killed the girl, if so why can't he lay charges, think it through.
Because he doesn't have proof, and therefore the charges may not stick.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:28:25 AM
Because he doesn't have proof, and therefore the charges may not stick.

He doesn't even have evidence.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:28:31 AM
The police have spent 14 years investigating & have presented no abduction evidence, other than a sighting of Gerry, it's not unreasonable therefore to believe they have sod all.
a proven sighting of Gerry or a doubtful one?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:28:51 AM
He doesn't even have evidence.
How do you know?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:29:11 AM
a proven sighting of Gerry or a doubtful one?

More solid than any sighting of Brueckner, of which there are none.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:29:43 AM
How do you know?

Easy. He hasn't presented anything.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:29:50 AM
This is a thread about photographic evidence. Simple answer, yes he found/saw the bundle Smithman put down and opened it, boy did he get a surprise, took a photo for some perverted pleasure/insurance, prove it wrong mr prosecutor, CB never abducted any live body.
One of the most absurd theories I've ever heard and as believable as "the dog ate my homework". 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:30:15 AM
Easy. He hasn't presented anything.
Why do you think he should have presented it to you then?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 09:31:10 AM
One of the most absurd theories I've ever heard and as believable as "the dog ate my homework".

Not quite on par with a stranger going into 5a and lifting Madeleine away with out a trace.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:31:25 AM
More solid than any sighting of Brueckner, of which there are none.
The evidence that Bruckner was in PdL that night is more solid as the Smithman evidence I would say.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:31:36 AM
Why do you think he should have presented it to you then?

He hasn't even presented it to SY, despite it being a very, very serious investigation & working very closely with them.

He's like a man who claims a big penis but is scared to get it out at a urinal.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:31:54 AM
The evidence that Bruckner was in PdL that night is more solid as the Smithman evidence I would say.

He lived there. Go figure.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 09:32:11 AM
The evidence that Bruckner was in PdL that night is more solid as the Smithman evidence I would say.


There is?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:32:41 AM
Not quite on par with some one going into 5a and lifting Madeleine away with out a trace.
So you think abduction is a farcical, impossible fantasy do you?  At least two professional police forces disagree with you so it would seem your opinion counts for very little.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:33:24 AM

There is?

He used a mobile phone.

You know who else used mobile phones that night?

The McCanns, only they never bothered calling the police on them.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 09:33:50 AM
He lived there. Go figure.

Much like the 3 amigo's SY questioned, asking at the time did you kill Madeleine, it was reported.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:34:28 AM
So you think abduction is a farcical, impossible fantasy do you?  At least two professional police forces disagree with you so it would seem your opinion counts for very little.

Two professional police forces who make bold claims but have presented nothing.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:34:38 AM
He lived there. Go figure.
Right - so you accept he was there at the time of the disappearance.  A paedophile and rapist with an interest in little girls and entering holiday apartments unlawfully.  Do you think he should never even have been investigated?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 09:34:49 AM
So you think abduction is a farcical, impossible fantasy do you?  At least two professional police forces disagree with you so it would seem your opinion counts for very little.

That may be the very reason its still at an investigation stage.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:35:15 AM
Two professional police forces who make bold claims but have presented nothing.
Not to you they haven't - is that the problem?  You feel they should have sought your approval first?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 09:36:08 AM
Guys, much as l love being attacked by you this BH Monday morning I have work to attend to, so pile on your interrogations and I will be back when I have done the stuff i need to do now - tara a bit.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:36:19 AM
Right - so you accept he was there at the time of the disappearance.  A paedophile and rapist with an interest in little girls and entering holiday apartments unlawfully.  Do you think he should never even have been investigated?

It's a bit pointless investigating someone if you have no abduction evidence in the first place.

Maybe that's why SY aren't investigating him.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 09:37:09 AM
Guys, much as l love being attacked by you this BH Monday morning I have work to attend to, so pile on your interrogations and I will be back when I have done the stuff i need to do now - tara a bit.

See if you can find some of that abduction evidence whilst you're out.

I look forward to seeing it.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 09:46:55 AM
Guys, much as l love being attacked by you this BH Monday morning I have work to attend to, so pile on your interrogations and I will be back when I have done the stuff i need to do now - tara a bit.

Its your opinion which is being attacked.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 09:51:13 AM
It's a bit pointless investigating someone if you have no abduction evidence in the first place.

Maybe that's why SY aren't investigating him.

I think it's clear the Germans have abduction evidence
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 10:03:41 AM
I think it's clear the Germans have abduction evidence

From 5a?  which could only have been collected by the PJ ?

Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2021, 10:13:52 AM
The evidence that Bruckner was in PdL that night is more solid as the Smithman evidence I would say.

Well we know for sure Brueckner exists and we know the type of rap sheet he has accumulated over the years; what do we know for certain about Smithman except that Mr Smith was unable to ID him.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 10:26:59 AM
I think it's clear the Germans have abduction evidence

I think it's clear the Germans have Brueckner's porn stash, dead dog & very little more.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 10:59:43 AM

One thing is for sure.  If Volters has got photographic evidence then we won't get to see it, even if he is convicted.

So we can all go on for years and years believing whatever we like.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 11:01:16 AM
From 5a?  which could only have been collected by the PJ ?

Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.


If Wolters has a photo of Maddie with her abusers then that would be evidence of abduction.

I suggested some time ago that the evidence may be photographic and Wolters confirmed in the discovery programme that the evidence  could be photographic
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 11:02:31 AM
One thing is for sure.  If Volters has got photographic evidence then we won't get to see it, even if he is convicted.

So we can all go on for years and years believing whatever we like.
It would have to be shown in court so it's existence would be confirmed
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 11:06:20 AM
It would have to be shown in court so it's existence would be confirmed

I know.  But you don't seriously believe that this would be enough for some, do you?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2021, 11:12:03 AM
I think it's clear the Germans have abduction evidence

That depends on what you think is 'abduction evidence'. As at June 2020 they had no evidence placing CB in PdL on the evening of May 3rd 2007. They had evidence that a PAYE phone they believed was his was there, but not that he was using it at the time. Their appeal to the owner/user of the caller's phone was so they could ask him/her who they actually spoke to.

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Angelo222 on May 03, 2021, 11:14:13 AM
I know.  But you don't seriously believe that this would be enough for some, do you?

Madeleine's parents have stated publicly that their child could be still alive which puts Wolters claims in the stupid box imo.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Angelo222 on May 03, 2021, 11:15:15 AM
That depends on what you think is 'abduction evidence'. As at June 2020 they had no evidence placing CB in PdL on the evening of May 3rd 2007. They had evidence that a PAYE phone they believed was his was there, but not that he was using it at the time. Their appeal to the owner/user of the caller's phone was so they could ask him/her who they actually spoke to.

So Wolters is grasping at straws basically?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2021, 11:21:39 AM
So Wolters is grasping at straws basically?

That was a while ago, so he may have more information by now, but at the time he went public he didn't have definitive evidence of CB being near to Madeleine before she disappeared. If he has evidence of CB being with her after her disappearance that doesn't amount to evidence that he abducted her from apartment 5A imo.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 11:27:01 AM
Madeleine's parents have stated publicly that their child could be still alive which puts Wolters claims in the stupid box imo.

Or the McCann's, they can't both be right, does one believe the parents or the police.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 11:34:06 AM

I can hardly believe I'm reading some of this.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 11:35:17 AM
That depends on what you think is 'abduction evidence'. As at June 2020 they had no evidence placing CB in PdL on the evening of May 3rd 2007. They had evidence that a PAYE phone they believed was his was there, but not that he was using it at the time. Their appeal to the owner/user of the caller's phone was so they could ask him/her who they actually spoke to.
What I think is abduction evidence is a photo of Maddie being abused by persons unknown
As in the Rui Pedro case
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 11:38:17 AM
That was a while ago, so he may have more information by now, but at the time he went public he didn't have definitive evidence of CB being near to Madeleine before she disappeared. If he has evidence of CB being with her after her disappearance that doesn't amount to evidence that he abducted her from apartment 5A imo.

He's never claimed abduction from 5a, either its Angelo's theory of the girl waking and wandering or it's my outrageous one, we'll see. imo.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 11:39:40 AM
I can hardly believe I'm reading some of this.

Don't then, but what do you conclude from the arguments in favour of Wolters.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 11:44:29 AM
Quote from: Angelo222 links=topic=12049.msg649995#msg649995 date=1620036853
Madeleine's parents have stated publicly that their child could be still alive which puts Wolters claims in the stupid box imo.

You are quite wrong.  The McCanns have said they will not accept Maddie is dead without incontrovertible proof... Wolters has said he does not have that... No disagreement whatsoever
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 11:48:04 AM
That was a while ago, so he may have more information by now, but at the time he went public he didn't have definitive evidence of CB being near to Madeleine before she disappeared. If he has evidence of CB being with her after her disappearance that doesn't amount to evidence that he abducted her from apartment 5A imo.

I'm claiming evidence of abduction.. Not evidence of abduction by CB
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 11:50:05 AM
That was a while ago, so he may have more information by now, but at the time he went public he didn't have definitive evidence of CB being near to Madeleine before she disappeared. If he has evidence of CB being with her after her disappearance that doesn't amount to evidence that he abducted her from apartment 5A imo.

It's evidence that someone abducted her
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 11:53:33 AM
You are quite wrong.  The McCanns have said they will not accept Maddie is dead without incontrovertible proof... Wolters has said he does not have that... No disagreement whatsoever

So despite arguing for 11 months Wolters has concrete evidence, you accept he's hasn't.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 03, 2021, 11:58:27 AM
I'm claiming evidence of abduction.. Not evidence of abduction by CB

Well then, the onus is on you to present it.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 11:58:45 AM
Quote from: barrier link=topic=12049.msg650012#msg650012
date=1620039213
So despite arguing for 11 months Wolters has concrete evidence, you accept he's hasn't.

Concrete evidence is not have incontrovertible proof.
If you had listened to what Wolters has said you would understand this
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 11:59:34 AM
Well then, the onus is on you to present it.

No it isn't... Read the thread
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 03, 2021, 12:06:12 PM
So despite arguing for 11 months Wolters has concrete evidence, you accept he's hasn't.

Did he ever specify what he had concrete evidence of ?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 12:06:37 PM
Don't then, but what do you conclude from the arguments in favour of Wolters.

Unfortunately I am obliged to read it.

I haven't concluded anything from Wolter's arguments.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2021, 12:09:35 PM
What I think is abduction evidence is a photo of Maddie being abused by persons unknown
As in the Rui Pedro case

Claiming that is a bit of an imaginative leap imo. You have, after all, no evidence that such a photo exists.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 12:09:51 PM
Did he ever specify what he had concrete evidence of ?

Yes he did
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 12:11:15 PM
Claiming that is a bit of an imaginative leap imo. You have, after all, no evidence that such a photo exists.

I do have evidence it exists... The problem is you don't seem to understand the meaning of the word evidence
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 12:12:55 PM
Did he ever specify what he had concrete evidence of ?

Various reports had him saying he had concrete evidence the girl was dead and writing to the McCann's to that effect.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 12:13:07 PM
I do have evidence it exists... The problem is you don't seem to understand the meaning of the word evidence

It suits them not to understand.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 12:16:26 PM
Various reports had him saying he had concrete evidence the girl was dead and writing to the McCann's to that effect.
He has actually stated.. Live on air and in English... Quite a lot more than that.  What you and others show is you are not really up to speed as to what he has claimed... Yet you want to pontificate about it
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2021, 12:33:13 PM
Unfortunately I am obliged to read it.

I haven't concluded anything from Volter's arguments.

I find much of it mindbogglingly boring in its contrived obtuseness (or maybe I'm being kind in assuming it is contrived and not for real).

I've decided that it is all a plot to drive those of us who must read it even further down the road to insanity than we already are ❤
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 12:36:48 PM
Agreed - this is one of those utterly pointless arguments - no one knows precisely what the German authorities do or don't have.  They are confident they have something significant, and I find that reason enough to believe they may have, but i can't be sure it isn't a bluff also.  If and when it is revealed they never had anything then that IMO is the time to pour scorn on them, until then it's best to simply wait and see and not be so intent on pretending you know everything about everything, you might end up looking foolish. 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2021, 01:11:57 PM
I do have evidence it exists... The problem is you don't seem to understand the meaning of the word evidence

Imo cherry-picking some quotes and inventing a theory around them isn't evidence, it's speculation.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 01:17:53 PM
Imo cherry-picking some quotes and inventing a theory around them isn't evidence, it's speculation.

Funny you should say that.  I was about to say the same thing.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 03, 2021, 01:28:37 PM
Agreed - this is one of those utterly pointless arguments - no one knows precisely what the German authorities do or don't have.  They are confident they have something significant, and I find that reason enough to believe they may have, but i can't be sure it isn't a bluff also.  If and when it is revealed they never had anything then that IMO is the time to pour scorn on them, until then it's best to simply wait and see and not be so intent on pretending you know everything about everything, you might end up looking foolish.

I don't believe BKA have anything, but if I assume for a moment I'm wrong and they do indeed have something then why the need for HCW to make the statements we are all familiar with?  Why the need for what appears to be a fishing expedition instead of just quietly building a case behind the scenes?

Neither the BKA or HCW named CB, as per German privacy laws, and yet divulged enough info to allow the media to identify which imo is somewhat underhanded. 

BKA has very recently arrested three men and a fourth is being held in Paraguay for allegedly running one of the world's biggest online networks for sharing images of child sex abuse.  And yet no identifying info has been revealed:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56969414

Some 3 years ago a German couple were found guilty of child sex abuse and again no identifying info was made available in accordance with German privacy law:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45096183

Why is the case of MM being treated differently?  Is the public prosecutor getting off on the attention the case attracts?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 01:35:54 PM
Imo cherry-picking some quotes and inventing a theory around them isn't evidence, it's speculation.

Wolters statements are evidence...you should understand that

Wolters has now said his evidence may be photographic so what do you imagine Im inventing. its quite coincidental that I made my statement before wolters admitted the evidence may be photographic
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 01:47:42 PM
Wolters statements are evidence...you should understand that

Wolters has now said his evidence may be photographic so what do you imagine Im inventing. its quite coincidental that I made my statement before wolters admitted the evidence may be photographic

Yes, you did actually.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Angelo222 on May 03, 2021, 02:28:01 PM
Wolters statements are evidence...you should understand that

Wolters has now said his evidence may be photographic so what do you imagine Im inventing. its quite coincidental that I made my statement before wolters admitted the evidence may be photographic

Such nonsense  @)(++(*

Christian Bruckner has no history of infanticide. He is a sex deviant who preyed on the vulnerable but murder is something else.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 02:42:44 PM
Such nonsense  @)(++(*

Christian Bruckner has no history of infanticide. He is a sex deviant who preyed on the vulnerable but murder is something else.

Perhaps he murdered his dog.  Murderers often start with animals.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 02:52:51 PM
Such nonsense  @)(++(*

Christian Bruckner has no history of infanticide. He is a sex deviant who preyed on the vulnerable but murder is something else.

Perhaps you could tell me what history Ian Huntley had of murder... With logic like yours no first time murderers would be arrested
Looks like the nonsense is coming from you
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 03, 2021, 02:53:23 PM
I don't believe BKA have anything, but if I assume for a moment I'm wrong and they do indeed have something then why the need for HCW to make the statements we are all familiar with?  Why the need for what appears to be a fishing expedition instead of just quietly building a case behind the scenes?

Neither the BKA or HCW named CB, as per German privacy laws, and yet divulged enough info to allow the media to identify which imo is somewhat underhanded. 

BKA has very recently arrested three men and a fourth is being held in Paraguay for allegedly running one of the world's biggest online networks for sharing images of child sex abuse.  And yet no identifying info has been revealed:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56969414

Some 3 years ago a German couple were found guilty of child sex abuse and again no identifying info was made available in accordance with German privacy law:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45096183

Why is the case of MM being treated differently?  Is the public prosecutor getting off on the attention the case attracts?

I think he misjudged the situation and the amount of media attention it would attract.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 03:04:20 PM
I think he misjudged the situation and the amount of media attention it would attract.

We were told the PJ had ruled out CN from the Behan rape... Noe it looks like the Germans msy charge him... Do you think they've misjudged that too
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 03:04:22 PM
I don't believe BKA have anything, but if I assume for a moment I'm wrong and they do indeed have something then why the need for HCW to make the statements we are all familiar with?  Why the need for what appears to be a fishing expedition instead of just quietly building a case behind the scenes?

Neither the BKA or HCW named CB, as per German privacy laws, and yet divulged enough info to allow the media to identify which imo is somewhat underhanded. 

BKA has very recently arrested three men and a fourth is being held in Paraguay for allegedly running one of the world's biggest online networks for sharing images of child sex abuse.  And yet no identifying info has been revealed:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56969414

Some 3 years ago a German couple were found guilty of child sex abuse and again no identifying info was made available in accordance with German privacy law:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45096183

Why is the case of MM being treated differently?  Is the public prosecutor getting off on the attention the case attracts?
”Getting off on”?  What, do you mean sexually?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 03:05:41 PM
Such nonsense  @)(++(*

Christian Bruckner has no history of infanticide. He is a sex deviant who preyed on the vulnerable but murder is something else.
Are you saying there is no chance whatsoever that a paedophile/ rapist could ever murder a child?  On what basis do you arrive at this conclusion?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 03:23:46 PM

What to say?

It's not Infanticide to murder a four year old.

And it isn't funny.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 03:33:10 PM
We were told the PJ had ruled out CN from the Behan rape... Noe it looks like the Germans msy charge him... Do you think they've misjudged that too

For one who in the past is sceptical about press reports, you now appear to think its a given what they say.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 03:37:25 PM
For one who in the past is sceptical about press reports, you now appear to think its a given what they say.

Please read the post properly... I said MAY charge.. That is not a given
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 03, 2021, 03:46:06 PM
”Getting off on”?  What, do you mean sexually?

Enjoying the attention.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 03:47:30 PM
I don't believe BKA have anything, but if I assume for a moment I'm wrong and they do indeed have something then why the need for HCW to make the statements we are all familiar with?  Why the need for what appears to be a fishing expedition instead of just quietly building a case behind the scenes?

Neither the BKA or HCW named CB, as per German privacy laws, and yet divulged enough info to allow the media to identify which imo is somewhat underhanded. 

BKA has very recently arrested three men and a fourth is being held in Paraguay for allegedly running one of the world's biggest online networks for sharing images of child sex abuse.  And yet no identifying info has been revealed:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56969414

Some 3 years ago a German couple were found guilty of child sex abuse and again no identifying info was made available in accordance with German privacy law:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45096183

Why is the case of MM being treated differently?  Is the public prosecutor getting off on the attention the case attracts?


Arguably the most high profile mystery disappearance in recent times, what kudos it would be to solve it.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Angelo222 on May 03, 2021, 03:48:51 PM
Perhaps you could tell me what history Ian Huntley had of murder... With logic like yours no first time murderers would be arrested
Looks like the nonsense is coming from you

Bruckner's offending has been exposed for all to see but not once did he come anywhere near murder. I think you and Wolters need to go back to basics.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Angelo222 on May 03, 2021, 03:50:25 PM
Are you saying there is no chance whatsoever that a paedophile/ rapist could ever murder a child?  On what basis do you arrive at this conclusion?

No, not no chance but merely a slim one. Rapists and murderers are two different animals usually.  If Maddie was abducted for financial gain then harming her was not to his advantage. It would have been in his interest to keep her alive and unharmed.

I repeat, Bruckner was a sex offender, he was not a murderer.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 03:56:25 PM
Bruckner's offending has been exposed for all to see but not once did he come anywhere near murder. I think you and Wolters need to go back to basics.

It's you who is posting nonsense... Ian Huntley had no history of murder... Same as countless other first time offenders.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 05:14:04 PM
No, not no chance but merely a slim one. Rapists and murderers are two different animals usually.  If Maddie was abducted for financial gain then harming her was not to his advantage. It would have been in his interest to keep her alive and unharmed.

I repeat, Bruckner was a sex offender, he was not a murderer.
I would venture that pretty much all sexually motivated murders of women and children are perpetrated by sex offenders. 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 05:16:50 PM
It's you who is posting nonsense... Ian Huntley had no history of murder... Same as countless other first time offenders.
Quite.  Bruckner is a man who has used violence and weapons against at least one other human being in order to commit a prolonged sex attack and yet we are supposed to believe he would never dream of crossing the line and actually kill someone?!  Nonsense indeed...
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 05:18:46 PM

Arguably the most high profile mystery disappearance in recent times, what kudos it would be to solve it.
and what abject humiliation and worldwide scorn if it turned out he made the whole thing up.  Is he mad?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 05:20:45 PM
and what abject humiliation and worldwide scorn if it turned out he made the whole thing up.  Is he mad?

There are those of you who pour scorn on a certain former PJ officer, his theory is yet to be proven wrong.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 05:23:46 PM
There are those of you who pour scorn on a certain former PJ officer, his theory is yet to be proven wrong.

The one convicted of lying who's understanding of the evidence has been proved wrong
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 05:26:32 PM
The one convicted of lying who's understanding of the evidence has been proved wrong


By whom, where and when?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 05:30:39 PM
There are those of you who pour scorn on a certain former PJ officer, his theory is yet to be proven wrong.

How long do you want?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 05:31:20 PM

By whom, where and when?

Amaral relied on this alerts and the forensics to prove his theory... Neither proved anything... He was wrong.  According to Mark S he claimed the shutters couldn't be opened from the outside and a man could not fit through the window ..wrong on both
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 05:32:51 PM
How long do you want?


All bets are off, Wolters as got nowt of significance imo.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 05:34:25 PM

All bets are off, Wolters as got nowt of significance imo.

How long do you want for Amaral to be proved right?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 05:40:49 PM
How long do you want for Amaral to be proved right?

You've obviously never memorised my thoughts on the outcome.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 05:44:00 PM
You've obviously never memorised my thoughts on the outcome.

Mainly because a lot of them don't make sense.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 05:45:03 PM
There are those of you who pour scorn on a certain former PJ officer, his theory is yet to be proven wrong.
that’s got nothing to do with my point.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2021, 05:45:42 PM
There are those of you who pour scorn on a certain former PJ officer, his theory is yet to be proven wrong.

Rebello proved him wrong way back in 2008.  Seems there are those who haven't wakened up to that fact yet.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 05:46:05 PM
According to amaral we will know when MI5 release, their files
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 03, 2021, 05:46:26 PM
Mainly because a lot of them don't make sense.


Good. Save you reading then.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 05:47:24 PM

All bets are off, Wolters as got nowt of significance imo.
Perhaps he’s only pretending to know what happened so that he can emulate Amaral and write a book about the investigation to get rich?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2021, 05:47:30 PM

By whom, where and when?

By Rebello.  By the Portuguese prosecutors. 2008.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2021, 06:03:36 PM
Rebello proved him wrong way back in 2008.  Seems there are those who haven't wakened up to that fact yet.

Did Rebelo follow a different direction?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 03, 2021, 06:12:20 PM
According to amaral we will know when MI5 release, their files

You forgot NASA.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 07:06:52 PM
No, not no chance but merely a slim one. Rapists and murderers are two different animals usually.  If Maddie was abducted for financial gain then harming her was not to his advantage. It would have been in his interest to keep her alive and unharmed.

I repeat, Bruckner was a sex offender, he was not a murderer.
What about this guy?  I’m guessing that after you read about his previous you would have to conclude that he was not a murderer, right?
“Criminal record and deportation[edit]
He has a long criminal record.[1] His first conviction was for robbery – he mugged a woman at knifepoint in Stockwell in 1986, for which he was sentenced to six weeks' detention. In 1987, he moved to Sidcup and was convicted of burglary and robbery.[1] In 1988, he was convicted of indecent assault and indecent exposure and sentenced to two years' probation. Later in 1988, he was convicted of indecent assault and assault occasioning actual bodily harm.[1] In 1989, he was convicted of indecent exposure and sentenced to 80 hours' community service. In 1990, he was convicted of assaulting a police officer.[1]
Dixie lived in Australia from 1993 and overstayed his visa. He was deported in 1999 after being convicted of a sex offence, for which he was fined.[1]
Dixie was accused of a sexual assault in 2001, where it is believed he masturbated in front of a woman in a telephone booth. He was not prosecuted for this.[4]”


Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 03, 2021, 07:32:12 PM
Since Mr Wolters is saying that there are parallels between the cases of Diana Menkes, Hazel Behan and Madeleine, I’m wondering if it could be the machete knife (?)
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2021, 07:50:06 PM
Did Rebelo follow a different direction?

Rebello followed the evidence.

It probably helped that he understood the forensics.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 03, 2021, 07:50:22 PM
Since Mr Wolters is saying that there are parallels between the cases of Diana Menkes, Hazel Behan and Madeleine, I’m wondering if it could be the machete knife (?)

It would suggest he has some knowledge of Maddie's fate... And therefore information he has not shared
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2021, 07:59:52 PM
Rebello followed the evidence.

It probably helped that he understood the forensics.

I recall him being keen to hold a reconsitution, which suggests he wasn't convinced by the group's description of the timeline.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 03, 2021, 08:04:20 PM
I recall him being keen to hold a reconsitution, which suggests he wasn't convinced by the group's description of the timeline.
I don't think he was all that keen or he would have done more to allay the concerns which caused innocent witnesses to refuse a return to Portugal following legal advice.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 03, 2021, 08:15:32 PM
I recall him being keen to hold a reconsitution, which suggests he wasn't convinced by the group's description of the timeline.
Do you think if the group’s timeline had all tallied perfectly that the PJ would have concluded there was no need for a reconstitution?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 03, 2021, 09:27:38 PM
I don't think he was all that keen or he would have done more to allay the concerns which caused innocent witnesses to refuse a return to Portugal following legal advice.

Imo he tried hard to allay the witnesses concerns, as Fiona Payne acknowledged;

We appreciated that paulo Rebelo attempted to answer many of our concerns
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm#p16p4231

The main problem, it seems, was that the witnesses didn't think that the reconstruction would further the search for Madeleine McCann. Imo finding the PJ wanting and advising them how to do their jobs was a continuing theme by the witnesses in this case.

I don't know what advice their lawyers gave, but I do know that lawyers usually try to minimise risk for their clients.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 03, 2021, 09:30:49 PM
It would suggest he has some knowledge of Maddie's fate... And therefore information he has not shared
I agree. What a horrific thought, Davel.😔
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 03, 2021, 09:42:01 PM
Imo he tried hard to allay the witnesses concerns, as Fiona Payne acknowledged;

We appreciated that paulo Rebelo attempted to answer many of our concerns
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RE_ENACTMENT.htm#p16p4231

The main problem, it seems, was that the witnesses didn't think that the reconstruction would further the search for Madeleine McCann. Imo finding the PJ wanting and advising them how to do their jobs was a continuing theme by the witnesses in this case.

I don't know what advice their lawyers gave, but I do know that lawyers usually try to minimise risk for their clients.

He told them not to bring their children?  If I recall correctly.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2021, 12:38:42 AM
He told them not to bring their children?  If I recall correctly.

You do.

But most interesting of all is that the first person to decline the invitation to return to Portugal was not a member of the McCann party but Jes Wilkins, the guy who met Gerry while walking his infant son.

If an individual with only a fleeting holiday acquaintance was spooked, what on earth motivates people to raise faux concerns about a reconstitution fourteen years to the day after Madeleine's disappearance.  While the rest of the world is concentrating on the horror that is Brueckner and the possibility that the German police may be in possession of photographic evidence linking him to Madeleine.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2021, 07:59:20 AM

I think that Rebello's idea of a reconstruction was an attempt at a face saving exercise.  After all, it should have been done when The McCanns first requested one.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 04, 2021, 09:07:15 AM
There are those of you who pour scorn on a certain former PJ officer, his theory is yet to be proven wrong.

At some point in the distant past, there was a (very short) thread on what he seemed to have got right. It would have been even shorter if the usual interpersonal slanging matches had been removed.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 04, 2021, 10:04:49 AM
Since Mr Wolters is saying that there are parallels between the cases of Diana Menkes, Hazel Behan and Madeleine, I’m wondering if it could be the machete knife (?)

There could indeed be a physical element linking  - or attempting to link - several offences. However, unless there is visual evidence of what a / the knife actually was or may have been, descriptions may not match.

However, there could also be other elements of interest, potentially linking cases. However, in cases that I've followed or read a lot about, including police practice, there's a fine line to be drawn between how much information should be divulged (e.g., general media updates); general info sought from the public (release of CCTV images, etc., of "persons of interest"); gradually narrowing down to more specific potentially case-related info.

If too much info is released at the wrong time, the defence would have its work handed to it on a platter. If the cops zoom in too quickly on a potential suspect - and who was innocent - that person's reputation could be forever in shatters.

For an innocent person, winning a civil lawsuit and a media apology on page 256 won't stop people staring and doubting for a very long time.

A fine line to tread.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2021, 10:29:41 AM

I'm surprised that Brueckner didn't actually kill the American woman that he beat and raped.  He is obviously a sadist.  And it's a fine line.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2021, 10:56:26 AM
I'm surprised that Brueckner didn't actually kill the American woman that he beat and raped.  He is obviously a sadist.  And it's a fine line.
s

Maybe he just hadn't crossed that final line at that stage.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2021, 11:04:54 AM
There could indeed be a physical element linking  - or attempting to link - several offences. However, unless there is visual evidence of what a / the knife actually was or may have been, descriptions may not match.

However, there could also be other elements of interest, potentially linking cases. However, in cases that I've followed or read a lot about, including police practice, there's a fine line to be drawn between how much information should be divulged (e.g., general media updates); general info sought from the public (release of CCTV images, etc., of "persons of interest"); gradually narrowing down to more specific potentially case-related info.

If too much info is released at the wrong time, the defence would have its work handed to it on a platter. If the cops zoom in too quickly on a potential suspect - and who was innocent - that person's reputation could be forever in shatters.

For an innocent person, winning a civil lawsuit and a media apology on page 256 won't stop people staring and doubting for a very long time.

A fine line to tread.

I have never understood the pressure put on the police and the demands to know everything which is going on in Madelaine's investigation.  Logic dictates it can only be prejudicial.

Similarly I think it is a blot on us as a nation, that our police have to regularly go cap in hand for funding to keep the investigation going while the Germans give the the assurance that does not apply to them.  For as long as they have leads to follow the money will be forthcoming without the necessity for a begging bowl.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2021, 11:15:28 AM
s

Maybe he just hadn't crossed that final line at that stage.

He enjoyed tormenting and torturing.  It was always likely that he would go further one day.

If not yet then best he is stopped now.

From what we have so far, he will be locked up until he is at least 50 years of age.  Not long enough, obviously.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2021, 11:18:15 AM
I have never understood the pressure put on the police and the demands to know everything which is going on in Madelaine's investigation.  Logic dictates it can only be prejudicial.

Similarly I think it is a blot on us as a nation, that our police have to regularly go cap in hand for funding to keep the investigation going while the Germans give the the assurance that does not apply to them.  For as long as they have leads to follow the money will be forthcoming without the necessity for a begging bowl.

It's okay.  It will all go on for a bit longer yet.  This is one that Britain can't afford to give up on.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 04, 2021, 11:23:03 AM
I have never understood the pressure put on the police and the demands to know everything which is going on in Madelaine's investigation.  Logic dictates it can only be prejudicial.

Similarly I think it is a blot on us as a nation, that our police have to regularly go cap in hand for funding to keep the investigation going while the Germans give the the assurance that does not apply to them.  For as long as they have leads to follow the money will be forthcoming without the necessity for a begging bowl.

Way back in the day, the PJ website only announced arrests / convictions. The "justice operates in silence" mantra.
Officially, yet, as a journalist of one of the major media outlets at the time noted: if it weren't for media leaks from the PJ, there were be no crime journalism.

I'd put "journalism" in quotes, as they relied on whatever the PJ chose to say (off record) OR.

OR sessions occur elsewhere (including in the UK), but as part of a strategy. Accredited journos are informed of a few details (hence giving them time to prepare scoops / background articles) on the proviso that they shut up until the green light is given.

If respected, I find that to be fair.

What I don't find to be fair, is a constant "leak" of "info" from dubious sources aimed - not at gaining verifiable info from the public, nor at informing the public - but at amplifying the 'glorificating'  image of the authorities involved.

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 04, 2021, 11:49:45 AM
I have never understood the pressure put on the police and the demands to know everything which is going on in Madelaine's investigation.  Logic dictates it can only be prejudicial.

Similarly I think it is a blot on us as a nation, that our police have to regularly go cap in hand for funding to keep the investigation going while the Germans give the the assurance that does not apply to them.  For as long as they have leads to follow the money will be forthcoming without the necessity for a begging bowl.

IMO, Not in PT. I can sort of understand the issues: people could be in pre-trail detention for many years, without any obvious signs of the PJ actually doing anything more to investigate further.

Laws were updated to put a little legal 'explosive" under their bums for them to further put up or shut up.

I find the idea good, but it severely limited the time for investigations to come to a conclusion.

I have no problem with the idea in principle, but I wonder if whoever was involved in passing these laws had consulted with the various law enforcement agencies.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2021, 11:55:38 AM
Way back in the day, the PJ website only announced arrests / convictions. The "justice operates in silence" mantra.
Officially, yet, as a journalist of one of the major media outlets at the time noted: if it weren't for medial leaks from the PJ, there were be no crime journalism.

I'd put "journalism" in quotes, as they relied on whatever the PJ chose to say (off record) OR.

OR sessions occur elsewhere (including in the UK), but as part of a strategy. Accredited journos are informed of a few details (hence giving them time to prepare scoops / background articles) on the proviso that they shut up until the green light is given.

If respected, I find that to be fair.

What I don't find to be fair, is a constant "leak" of "info" from dubious sources aimed - not at gaining verifiable info from the public, nor at informing the public - but at amplifying the 'glorificating'  image of the authorities involved.

Sadly, The PJ weren't very good at solving crimes of this nature when a good beating would do.  But they were still coming out of the dark ages of Salazar.

Most of the senior members of The PJ grew up during that era, including Amaral.  But there was no possibility of Kate McCann falling down any Police Station Stairs, so they resorted to Leaks which were many and copious.

As it happens, I know a bit more than most about what went on.  And I saw some of it, although my husband knew more than I did.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 04, 2021, 12:00:36 PM
I have never understood the pressure put on the police and the demands to know everything which is going on in Madelaine's investigation.  Logic dictates it can only be prejudicial.

Similarly I think it is a blot on us as a nation, that our police have to regularly go cap in hand for funding to keep the investigation going while the Germans give the the assurance that does not apply to them.  For as long as they have leads to follow the money will be forthcoming without the necessity for a begging bowl.

The demands on the PJ to share details of their investigation with the McCanns and the media were unprecedented imo.

Operation Grange is funded by the Home Office because they decided it was unfair to expect London residents to meet the cost of an investigation into a crime outside of the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Police. There is no need for begging as I understand it. The investigation will continue as long as the Met think there are actions they can take.

I don't know how police funding is arranged in Germany, but I know it's the Federal Police who are carrying out investigations into Brueckner. We don't have a National Police Force.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2021, 12:14:08 PM
The demands on the PJ to share details of their investigation with the McCanns and the media were unprecedented imo.

Operation Grange is funded by the Home Office because they decided it was unfair to expect London residents to meet the cost of an investigation into a crime outside of the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Police. There is no need for begging as I understand it. The investigation will continue as long as the Met think there are actions they can take.

I don't know how police funding is arranged in Germany, but I know it's the Federal Police who are carrying out investigations into Brueckner. We don't have a National Police Force.

Britain doesn't need a National Police Force.  And how much would that cost anyway?

Madeleine is a British Citizen lost abroad.  Her passport is supposed to protect her.  Or at least find out what happened to her.

That is The End.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 04, 2021, 12:46:24 PM
The demands on the PJ to share details of their investigation with the McCanns and the media were unprecedented imo.

Operation Grange is funded by the Home Office because they decided it was unfair to expect London residents to meet the cost of an investigation into a crime outside of the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Police. There is no need for begging as I understand it. The investigation will continue as long as the Met think there are actions they can take.

I don't know how police funding is arranged in Germany, but I know it's the Federal Police who are carrying out investigations into Brueckner. We don't have a National Police Force.

To which "demands" do you refer. 

Pre or post the Portuguese shutting down Madeleine's investigation a few months after her disappearance. 

Or the information arriving in Portugal post the archival of Madeleine's investigation in 2008 which Ricardo Paiva secreted assiduously into files marked "not relevant" despite the awful truth that when a Portuguese judge ruled they should be given to the McCanns in 2010 it was discovered some might have been very relevant indeed.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 04, 2021, 12:53:49 PM
Britain doesn't need a National Police Force.  And how much would that cost anyway?

Madeleine is a British Citizen lost abroad.  Her passport is supposed to protect her.  Or at least find out what happened to her.

That is The End.

But she's never paid a penny in taxes, instead she has cost the state millions.

Nope, I'm sorry, I think the amount spent on missing British citizens should depend on how much each particular citizen has paid in taxes.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2021, 12:58:10 PM
But she's never paid a penny in taxes, instead she has cost the state millions.

Nope, I'm sorry, I think the amount spent on missing British citizens should depend on how much each particular citizen has paid in taxes.

How much are you entitled to?  I don't suppose we could have a look at your Tax Returns.  Probably not.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 04, 2021, 01:26:01 PM
How much are you entitled to?  I don't suppose we could have a look at your Tax Returns.  Probably not.

Do you know what.

You've helped change my mind.

I actually do hope Maddie is found alive & well, with condition that she then be forced to reimburse every penny she has cost the state.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 04, 2021, 01:31:50 PM
But she's never paid a penny in taxes, instead she has cost the state millions.

Nope, I'm sorry, I think the amount spent on missing British citizens should depend on how much each particular citizen has paid in taxes.
So the richer and older you are the better public services you are entitled to? Great idea!  Do you work for Boris? 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2021, 01:43:27 PM
Do you know what.

You've helped change my mind.

I actually do hope Maddie is found alive & well, with condition that she then be forced to reimburse every penny she has cost the state.

How do you propose to do that?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Wonderfulspam on May 04, 2021, 01:46:43 PM
So the richer and older you are the better public services you are entitled to? Great idea!  Do you work for Boris?

Yes.

If someone like a retiree who had worked full time & paid tax all their life went missing, there should be a police response proportionate to the amount of tax paid.

But obviously, if a 3 month old went missing, little to no action at all should be taken.

It sounds cruel, but you have to be cruel to be kind & this proposed legislation will encourage people not to go missing.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2021, 02:08:04 PM
Yes.

If someone like a retiree who had worked full time & paid tax all their life went missing, there should be a police response proportionate to the amount of tax paid.

But obviously, if a 3 month old went missing, little to no action at all should be taken.

It sounds cruel, but you have to be cruel to be kind & this proposed legislation will encourage people not to go missing.

Such a pity that an opportunity was lost.  But never say never I say.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 04, 2021, 02:31:40 PM
Yes.

If someone like a retiree who had worked full time & paid tax all their life went missing, there should be a police response proportionate to the amount of tax paid.

But obviously, if a 3 month old went missing, little to no action at all should be taken.

It sounds cruel, but you have to be cruel to be kind & this proposed legislation will encourage people not to go missing.
It makes perfect sense.  Divert the majority of resources into looking for senile biddys that have escaped from the Old Folks home and let infanticide rip through the country unchecked.  Man you're a genius.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 04, 2021, 02:34:00 PM
Such a pity that an opportunity was lost.  But never say never I say.
I wonder if Spam's model is how the Portuguese do it?  Which is why they only spent one week looking for Madeleine.  Probably if she'd been a 90 year old Portuguese man they'd probably have searched every well in the Algarve for him by now.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Eleanor on May 04, 2021, 02:45:07 PM
I wonder if Spam's model is how the Portuguese do it?  Which is why they only spent one week looking for Madeleine.  Probably if she'd been a 90 year old Portuguese man they'd probably have searched every well in the Algarve for him by now.

Come on, be fair.  They might have found Madeleine by accident.  Instead of which someone dug up Spammy.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 19, 2021, 03:24:24 PM

The Organization that Arranged for the Abduction May Have Been Captured
Translated from Google Translate

https://www.abc.com.py/nacionales/2021/05/18/paraguay-habria-colaborado-con-datos-para-el-esclarecimiento-del-caso-madeleine-mccann/

Paraguay provided data to clarify the Madeleine McCann case

Commissioner Nimio Cardozo, Chief of Anti-kidnapping of the Police, confirmed that Paraguay collaborated to collect data that is being used to clarify the case of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. In the country, important elements and big data were seized from an international paedophile network that would be behind the probable death of the girl who has been wanted since 2007.

This morning, new information related to the case of Madeleine McCann was released, indicating that the girl was murdered in Portugal, where her disappearance was recorded in 2007.

According to the publications, new evidence was collected that is related to the pedophile arrested in Germany and, according to what was indicated today by Commissioner Nimio Cardozo, the man would be linked to a network that is being investigated in Paraguay with the Irma project and the Hades operative.

The anti-kidnapping chief confirmed that yesterday he was talking with various authorities such as prosecutor Irma Llano "and there are elements and we believe that in one way or another" the Paraguayan security body was able to contribute to the clarification of Madeleine McCann's case.

He did not want to provide more information until his German peers authorize it, but he did confirm that with the Irma project, which is carried out in Paraguay to detect pedophiles, it was possible to capture relevant information for the network that would be behind the disappearance of the British girl.

He also stressed that they do not rule out that the data collected after the procedure by which a German citizen was arrested on April 12 in Concepción, Paraguay, could also have been related to this case.

“At the time we carried out the operation, we caught one of the largest administrators of pedophilia sites in the world in flagrante delicto, a person wanted by several countries in Europe and by the United States (...) Doing the forensic analysis of both computers ( from Paraguay and Germany) it was possible to identify more than 5,000 IPs that were connected by exchanging photos and videos of paedophilia. We do not rule out that within all the big data that could have been seized there has also been important information for this, ”he explained.

Read more: Alleged German paedophile operated from the bank of the Ypané, in Bethlehem

According to international publications , the German Police gathered new data pointing to Christian Brueckner , the German paedophile and serial rapist, as the main suspect in Madeleine's death.

According to preliminary data, Brueckner was part of the same international network as the other German citizen, Christian Manfred Kruse , who was arrested on the banks of the Ypané River, in Belén, Concepción.

When he was arrested, Kruse was surfing the deep web and spreading underage pornographic materials. From his power, two notebooks, external drives, a modem and cell phones, among others, were seized.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2021, 11:23:59 AM
For the moment, all I can work out is that several countries, including Paraguay, zoomed in to identify and arrest the ringleader of a child abuse website and that the IPs and images may or may not provide evidence that Brückner had been consulting or contributing to it. 

Whether there ends up being any connection to the Madeleine case or not, hats off to all those involved in what can only be harrowing work to try to bring some form of justice, hopefully, to all the victims and their loved ones, and prevent them from abusing more.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 20, 2021, 12:24:53 PM
I suppose that people can be part of such a network without knowing the identity of others, such is the nature of their world.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 20, 2021, 02:31:13 PM
I suppose that people can be part of such a network without knowing the identity of others, such is the nature of their world.

Quite possibly, but if there's payment involved, there may be traces beyond IPs.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 20, 2021, 03:01:55 PM
Quite possibly, but if there's payment involved, there may be traces beyond IPs.

There is no doubt they can be traced.  It has been done but it must be one heck of a job doing so.  Finding the perpetrators is one part of it another is attempting to identify the abused children to help them.

I think striking at the perpetrators has been more successful than rescuing the children.

It is like a Hydra.  Cut off the head and more grow in its place.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 20, 2021, 03:06:11 PM
Quite possibly, but if there's payment involved, there may be traces beyond IPs.

I wasn't suggesting that they couldn't be traced, just that individuals wouldn't necessarily know the identity of fellow members.
So for example, this Kruse person might not know Brueckner other than as an on-line user name
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 20, 2021, 04:36:23 PM
I wasn't suggesting that they couldn't be traced, just that individuals wouldn't necessarily know the identity of fellow members.
So for example, this Kruse person might not know Brueckner other than as an on-line user name
“One of the top figures in the gang was a known contact of Christian Brueckner, the number one suspect in McCann’s kidnapping”.
https://7news.com.au/news/missing-person/paraguay-cops-dismantle-global-paedophile-ring-with-links-to-madeleine-mccann-c-2889192
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 20, 2021, 04:41:40 PM
“One of the top figures in the gang was a known contact of Christian Brueckner, the number one suspect in McCann’s kidnapping”.
https://7news.com.au/news/missing-person/paraguay-cops-dismantle-global-paedophile-ring-with-links-to-madeleine-mccann-c-2889192

Maybe, but it doesn't mean he knew him.
You are one of my contacts on this forum, but I don't know you from Adam.

Added. I also notice that that statement is not attributed to anyone, so is just that - an unsupported statement.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 20, 2021, 06:40:39 PM
Maybe, but it doesn't mean he knew him.
You are one of my contacts on this forum, but I don't know you from Adam.

Added. I also notice that that statement is not attributed to anyone, so is just that - an unsupported statement.
He could’ve also been in Brückner’s mobile phone contact list.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 20, 2021, 06:49:59 PM
He could’ve also been in Brückner’s mobile phone contact list.

He certain could, but what evidence is there to support that idea ?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 20, 2021, 09:19:16 PM
He could’ve also been in Brückner’s mobile phone contact list.

Unless the Germans have the mobile phone, how would they know who his contacts were?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 20, 2021, 09:37:56 PM
Unless the Germans have the mobile phone, how would they know who his contacts were?
His contacts list may have been transferred to another device, such as a laptop.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 21, 2021, 12:02:15 PM
There is no doubt they can be traced.  It has been done but it must be one heck of a job doing so.  Finding the perpetrators is one part of it another is attempting to identify the abused children to help them.

I think striking at the perpetrators has been more successful than rescuing the children.

It is like a Hydra.  Cut off the head and more grow in its place.

Re tracing payments, I have no idea how cash transactions sent by the ancient method of an envelope in the post can be traced, let alone e.g. bitcoin ones.

A year or so ago, I read that a huge international ring had been dismantled and I think it was 8 (?) living children rescued.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 21, 2021, 01:41:00 PM
Re tracing payments, I have no idea how cash transactions sent by the ancient method of an envelope in the post can be traced, let alone e.g. bitcoin ones.

A year or so ago, I read that a huge international ring had been dismantled and I think it was 8 (?) living children rescued.

Quite often these degenerates use their own children.  So locating the perpetrators often means the children are found.
But there are many who are just untraceable.

I think Wolters has photographic evidence of Madeleine probably verified by facial recognition software.  I don't think investigation of Madeleine's case instigated the present worldwide attack on these criminals because law enforcement have shut down many rings in the past - but I think it might indicate what happened to her.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 23, 2021, 01:58:17 PM
Quite often these degenerates use their own children.  So locating the perpetrators often means the children are found.
But there are many who are just untraceable.

I think Wolters has photographic evidence of Madeleine probably verified by facial recognition software.  I don't think investigation of Madeleine's case instigated the present worldwide attack on these criminals because law enforcement have shut down many rings in the past - but I think it might indicate what happened to her.


Everything you post B at the end of the day is only what you think happened or is happening.

Same as me ....we don't know what happened to maddie.

IMO nothing is concrete ....mccs not been cleared ...CB not been charged.

There is no reason for your conclusion ...to be any different from mine..

Regardless of what Police are doing ....they are getting nowhere.

They seem to be not even on the same sheet...Germans say Maddie is dead...SY still looking fro a live maddie.

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 23, 2021, 02:42:37 PM

Everything you post B at the end of the day is only what you think happened or is happening.

Same as me ....we don't know what happened to maddie.

IMO nothing is concrete ....mccs not been cleared ...CB not been charged.

There is no reason for your conclusion ...to be any different from mine..

Regardless of what Police are doing ....they are getting nowhere.

They seem to be not even on the same sheet...Germans say Maddie is dead...SY still looking fro a live maddie.

So much is wrong with your post..
First.. The SC did not say the McCanns have not been cleared

What that shows is we might all be posters.. But some posters have more knowledge than others
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 23, 2021, 02:45:13 PM

Everything you post B at the end of the day is only what you think happened or is happening.

Same as me ....we don't know what happened to maddie.

IMO nothing is concrete ....mccs not been cleared ...CB not been charged.

There is no reason for your conclusion ...to be any different from mine..

Regardless of what Police are doing ....they are getting nowhere.

They seem to be not even on the same sheet...Germans say Maddie is dead...SY still looking fro a live maddie.



I find this strange.
Either Wolters has not shared his concrete evidence with OG, or his concrete evidence isn't concrete enough for OG
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 23, 2021, 02:51:23 PM

I find this strange.
Either Wolters has not shared his concrete evidence with OG, or his concrete evidence isn't concrete enough for OG

It isn't strange... Wolters has said he hasn't shared his concrete evidence
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 23, 2021, 02:56:54 PM
It isn't strange... Wolters has said he hasn't shared his concrete evidence

Wot, not with anyone ?
So much for police cooperation.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 23, 2021, 03:00:48 PM
Wot, not with anyone ?
So much for police cooperation.

He's explained why.. One of the reasons being he doesn't trust the PJ not to leak
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 23, 2021, 03:08:11 PM
He's explained why.. One of the reasons being he doesn't trust the PJ not to leak

Why were the PJ supposed to have searched some well's then.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 23, 2021, 03:11:07 PM
Why were the PJ supposed to have searched some well's then.
Why do you think
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 23, 2021, 03:22:58 PM
He's explained why.. One of the reasons being he doesn't trust the PJ not to leak

We are talking about OG, not PJ.
Does he not trust OG not to leak either?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: sadie on May 23, 2021, 03:25:49 PM
We are talking about OG, not PJ.
Does he not trust OG not to leak either?

Might just be German Police Policy never to share.

Same could be true of SY
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 23, 2021, 03:35:14 PM
So much is wrong with your post..
First.. The SC did not say the McCanns have not been cleared

What that shows is we might all be posters.. But some posters have more knowledge than others


But some posters have more knowledge than others

Oh right ....albeit useless knowledge... it wont find Maddie.

We all know Maddie disappeared ...but not how -

Its just that some think they are superior to others when they are not imo

As it stands it seems no one  are any  further on from the day Maddie disappeared.[proof wise]
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 23, 2021, 04:13:37 PM
Why were the PJ supposed to have searched some well's then.
Some well’s what?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 23, 2021, 04:30:31 PM

But some posters have more knowledge than others

Oh right ....albeit useless knowledge... it wont find Maddie.

We all know Maddie disappeared ...but not how -

Its just that some think they are superior to others when they are not imo

As it stands it seems no one  are any  further on from the day Maddie disappeared.[proof wise]

Having more knowledge leads to a better understanding of whats happened and what's happening. I think it's clear the  Germans have taken the case forward.....
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 23, 2021, 05:16:08 PM
Having more knowledge leads to a better understanding of whats happened and what's happening. I think it's clear the  Germans have taken the case forward.....

Still only though what you think........nothing more.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 23, 2021, 05:32:16 PM
Still only though what you think........nothing more.

It's more than what I think... Its what Wolters is saying
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 23, 2021, 06:23:18 PM
It's more than what I think... Its what Wolters is saying

Ye....an what he has been saying for nearly a year now.

Its only words.......nothing more.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 23, 2021, 06:27:36 PM
For the moment, it seems that there are three main countries involved: Portugal, UK and Germany. Each have their laws and procedures.

They may not just be trying to solve the Madeleine case... there could well be others. And, somehow, they have to cooperate within their own norms, and find a mid-point on some. And that includes a media strategy.

Under Amaral, the PJ lost a lot of credibility, IMO, in terms of half-baked "info" leaked to the media. Once trust is lost, it may well take some time to re-establish it.

IMO, any inopportune leak to the media about anything that hasn't been mutually agreed concerning any of the cases that they may be collaborating on could well have a defense lawyer all over it like a rash.



Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 23, 2021, 06:30:23 PM
Ye....an what he has been saying for nearly a year now.

Its only words.......nothing more.
You don't know its nothing more... Its very unlikely to be nothing more. Unlike Amaral he doesn't have a conviction for lying.. Yet you and others hang on to his every word
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 23, 2021, 06:48:04 PM
For the moment, it seems that there are three main countries involved: Portugal, UK and Germany. Each have their laws and procedures.

They may not just be trying to solve the Madeleine case... there could well be others. And, somehow, they have to cooperate within their own norms, and find a mid-point on some. And that includes a media strategy.

Under Amaral, the PJ lost a lot of credibility, IMO, in terms of half-baked "info" leaked to the media. Once trust is lost, it may well take some time to re-establish it.

IMO, any inopportune leak to the media about anything that hasn't been mutually agreed concerning any of the cases that they may be collaborating on could well have a defense lawyer all over it like a rash.

Succinctly put.
Since it is obvious that this is a German case which is being worked within the parameters of German law and any trial will be according to German law - Wolters will know exactly what he is doing in preparation for that.

The stakes are high and I don't think he is leaving any hostages to fortune.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 24, 2021, 11:19:36 AM
For the moment, it seems that there are three main countries involved: Portugal, UK and Germany. Each have their laws and procedures.

They may not just be trying to solve the Madeleine case... there could well be others. And, somehow, they have to cooperate within their own norms, and find a mid-point on some. And that includes a media strategy.

Under Amaral, the PJ lost a lot of credibility, IMO, in terms of half-baked "info" leaked to the media. Once trust is lost, it may well take some time to re-establish it.

IMO, any inopportune leak to the media about anything that hasn't been mutually agreed concerning any of the cases that they may be collaborating on could well have a defense lawyer all over it like a rash.



They may not just be trying to solve the Madeleine case



Exactly ...It seems the germans are interested in CB regarding other cases. not to solve the maddie case.

IMO it was used for maximum publicity ...this is why it seems -  he is not committing himself to any concrete evidence regarding maddie.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 11:54:02 AM



They may not just be trying to solve the Madeleine case



Exactly ...It seems the germans are interested in CB regarding other cases. not to solve the maddie case.

IMO it was used for maximum publicity ...this is why it seems -  he is not committing himself to any concrete evidence regarding maddie.

He has committed himself to concrete evidence on the MM case
.. Perhaps you think he's lying... I can't see that being true
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 24, 2021, 12:09:25 PM
He has committed himself to concrete evidence on the MM case
.. Perhaps you think he's lying... I can't see that being true

The problem seems to be, in this context concrete could mean anything, who knows? I certainly don’t.

But, Mr Neville added, some developments were getting lost in translation.
“We can only hope she is still alive, but I think there is a real confusion about the phrase of the Germans used, concrete evidence,” he told Sunrise.
“In Britain and probably Australia, that means there is absolutely top drawer evidence, fingerprints, DNA, CCTV and alike.
“In Germany, however, it generally means it is something tangible, not just a rumour.
“In Britain you would charge someone with concrete evidence, but in Germany, you may not even arrest them. I do think we got the wrong end of the stick sometimes with this difference in translation.”


https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/investigator-on-hitech-methods-that-could-be-used-to-find-maddie-mccann/news-story/e5d6b501a8b205b73ce9fe1c50a76529

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 12:18:50 PM
The problem seems to be, in this context concrete could mean anything, who knows? I certainly don’t.

But, Mr Neville added, some developments were getting lost in translation.
“We can only hope she is still alive, but I think there is a real confusion about the phrase of the Germans used, concrete evidence,” he told Sunrise.
“In Britain and probably Australia, that means there is absolutely top drawer evidence, fingerprints, DNA, CCTV and alike.
“In Germany, however, it generally means it is something tangible, not just a rumour.
“In Britain you would charge someone with concrete evidence, but in Germany, you may not even arrest them. I do think we got the wrong end of the stick sometimes with this difference in translation.”


https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/investigator-on-hitech-methods-that-could-be-used-to-find-maddie-mccann/news-story/e5d6b501a8b205b73ce9fe1c50a76529

What makes you think Neville knows anything...
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 24, 2021, 12:21:05 PM
What makes you think Neville knows anything...

Probably could say the same about wolt.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 12:36:00 PM
Probably could say the same about wolt.

Not a very smart post.. Imo
Wolts leading the german investigation.. Neville is a retired detective
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 24, 2021, 01:08:28 PM
Not a very smart post.. Imo
Wolts leading the german investigation.. Neville is a retired detective

Well ditto....I dont think your posts are very smart either.

Hanging on to wolts every word.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 24, 2021, 01:28:28 PM
What makes you think Neville knows anything...

Concrete evidence = Konkrete bewise in German. Which isn't always translated as 'concrete'. It can be translated as;

actual evidence
factual evidence
physical evidence
hard evidence
particular evidence
strong evidence

It depends, as Neville said, on the context.
https://www.linguee.com/german-english/translation/konkrete+beweise.html
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 03:28:12 PM
Well ditto....I dont think your posts are very smart either.

Hanging on to wolts every word.

You obviously don't understand my logic... Whereas I do understand yours
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 03:31:08 PM
Concrete evidence = Konkrete bewise in German. Which isn't always translated as 'concrete'. It can be translated as;

actual evidence
factual evidence
physical evidence
hard evidence
particular evidence
strong evidence

It depends, as Neville said, on the context.
https://www.linguee.com/german-english/translation/konkrete+beweise.html

All those definitions are quite strong..
Wolters has said that anyone who saw the evidence he has would agree with his conclusions... I wonder how much Neville knows. His knowledge of Wolters statements could be quite weak for all we know
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 24, 2021, 04:04:59 PM
Many here have pointed out that some of the material in T9 wit stats was 'lost' in translation so why not with HCW?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 24, 2021, 04:06:11 PM
If HCW has it all sewn up it surely begs the question why OG requires further funding?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 04:12:29 PM
Many here have pointed out that some of the material in T9 wit stats was 'lost' in translation so why not with HCW?

Because HCW has spoken in English.... Plus when he has spoken in German his words are on record. We have no record of the English used by the McCanns
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 24, 2021, 04:48:34 PM
Because HCW has spoken in English.... Plus when he has spoken in German his words are on record. We have no record of the English used by the McCanns

But we know he isn't bilingual from the short clip here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZyYoCyHeBY
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 04:58:39 PM
But we know he isn't bilingual from the short clip here:

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

Based on everything HCW has said... And the context he has said it in... I'm convinced he has significant evidence... And most probably proof MM is dead
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 24, 2021, 05:21:02 PM
Many here have pointed out that some of the material in T9 wit stats was 'lost' in translation so why not with HCW?
His words were spoken in English, recorded in English and broadcast in English.  How is that comparable to statements given in English, written down, translated into Portuguese and then translated back into English?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 24, 2021, 06:07:23 PM
Based on everything HCW has said... And the context he has said it in... I'm convinced he has significant evidence... And most probably proof MM is dead

I would be more convinced if we heard from BKA, who afterall would have been responsible for gathering the "significant evidence" you refer to, but not a word!?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 06:09:52 PM
I would be more convinced if we heard from BKA, who afterall would have been responsible for gathering the "significant evidence" you refer to, but not a word!?

It seems to me Wolters is the spokesman. It's not me referring to the evidence... Its Wolters
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 24, 2021, 07:04:44 PM
But we know he isn't bilingual from the short clip here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZyYoCyHeBY
In my view, that is an ill-informed statement. People who are multilingual often have a clear understanding and interpretation of written text without being able to communicate it in ‘standard’ form.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 24, 2021, 07:16:36 PM
His words were spoken in English, recorded in English and broadcast in English.  How is that comparable to statements given in English, written down, translated into Portuguese and then translated back into English?

As I'm sure you know when languages are translated they often do not have the same literal meaning.  Concrete evidence in German is konkreter hinweis which means specific note.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 24, 2021, 07:44:15 PM
As I'm sure you know when languages are translated they often do not have the same literal meaning.  Concrete evidence in German is konkreter hinweis which means specific note.
So what point are you actually tryimg to make?  That Wolters has not claimed to have any specific evidence of Madeleine’s death or of CB’s involvement or what?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 24, 2021, 08:21:58 PM
So what point are you actually tryimg to make?  That Wolters has not claimed to have any specific evidence of Madeleine’s death or of CB’s involvement or what?

That his claims of 'concrete evidence' might not have the meaning we apply to it. 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 08:24:08 PM
As I'm sure you know when languages are translated they often do not have the same literal meaning.  Concrete evidence in German is konkreter hinweis which means specific note.

hinweis is note...besweis is evidence...you are wrong
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 08:25:11 PM
That his claims of 'concrete evidence' might not have the meaning we apply to it.

he says he has concrete evidence that CB murdered Maddie...what do you think he means
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 24, 2021, 08:26:30 PM
In my view, that is an ill-informed statement. People who are multilingual often have a clear understanding and interpretation of written text without being able to communicate it in ‘standard’ form.

If HCW is bilingual (German/English) it begs the question why he needed assistance with translation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZyYoCyHeBY
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 08:34:25 PM
If HCW is bilingual (German/English) it begs the question why he needed assistance with translation:

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

Unklar bleibt, um was für Indizien es sich handelt. Während DNA-Spuren des mutmaßlichen Täters unwahrscheinlich sind, könnte es andere spektakuläre Beweise geben.   Laut „BILD“ könnten die Ermittler sogar im Besitz von Fotos oder Videos der Tat sein.

It remains unclear what the evidence is. While DNA traces of the suspected perpetrator are unlikely, there could be other spectacular evidence. According to "BILD", the investigators could even be in possession of photos or videos of the fact.



leta see what hes got...you may have to eat your hat
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 24, 2021, 08:39:11 PM
Unklar bleibt, um was für Indizien es sich handelt. Während DNA-Spuren des mutmaßlichen Täters unwahrscheinlich sind, könnte es andere spektakuläre Beweise geben.   Laut „BILD“ könnten die Ermittler sogar im Besitz von Fotos oder Videos der Tat sein.

It remains unclear what the evidence is. While DNA traces of the suspected perpetrator are unlikely, there could be other spectacular evidence. According to "BILD", the investigators could even be in possession of photos or videos of the fact.



leta see what hes got...you may have to eat your hat

Davel its almost a year now and I'm afraid my hat is long gone! 
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 24, 2021, 08:40:57 PM
Davel its almost a year now and I'm afraid my hat is long gone!

Police 'don't know where Madeleine McCann is buried but know how she was killed’
Julian Reichelt, the editor of Germany's Bild newspaper, claims paedophile Christian Brueckner has "insight" that points detectives "in the direction" of how Madeleine McCann died
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 24, 2021, 08:44:47 PM
If HCW is bilingual (German/English) it begs the question why he needed assistance with translation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZyYoCyHeBY
That is my point. He most likely is not fluent in spoken English. He had to have some assistance in announcing the BKA’s stance on the most publicised and reported case of a missing child. Are you bi/multilingual, Holly?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Holly Goodhead on May 24, 2021, 09:24:40 PM
That is my point. He most likely is not fluent in spoken English. He had to have some assistance in announcing the BKA’s stance on the most publicised and reported case of a missing child. Are you bi/multilingual, Holly?

We can see from the BKA's initial appeal that it makes no such ref to 'concrete evidence' etc.

https://www.bka.de/DE/IhreSicherheit/Fahndungen/Personen/BekanntePersonen/43_Jaehriger_Deutscher_TV/Sachverhalt.html
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 24, 2021, 09:40:39 PM
We can see from the BKA's initial appeal that it makes no such ref to 'concrete evidence' etc.

https://www.bka.de/DE/IhreSicherheit/Fahndungen/Personen/BekanntePersonen/43_Jaehriger_Deutscher_TV/Sachverhalt.html
In case you have missed it, the German investigation has made progress.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 24, 2021, 10:09:13 PM
That his claims of 'concrete evidence' might not have the meaning we apply to it.
What do you think he means when he says they have concrete evidence then?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 25, 2021, 06:33:15 AM
In case you have missed it, the German investigation has made progress.

Have they? In what way?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 25, 2021, 07:53:26 AM
Have they? In what way?
They've established that the evidence they do have is insufficient, in isolation, to charge him.
That's progress of sorts.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 25, 2021, 09:18:55 AM
They've established that the evidence they do have is insufficient, in isolation, to charge him.
That's progress of sorts.

That's true. Almost a year since they went public with their suspicions and whatever they were hoping might emerge it looks like it hasn't.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 09:26:30 AM
That's true. Almost a year since they went public with their suspicions and whatever they were hoping might emerge it looks like it hasn't.
The fact is we don't know what evidence has emerged but based on the claims made by Wolters he must have something very significant.. Imo
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: carlymichelle on May 25, 2021, 09:48:37 AM
my opinion is this time next year we will still be talking about this
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 25, 2021, 10:25:34 AM
The fact is we don't know what evidence has emerged but based on the claims made by Wolters he must have something very significant.. Imo
But not significant enough, clearly.
At some point he will have to show his hand and interview CB, as his plan to flush out the caller to CB's phone on the fateful night has drawn a blank.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 10:43:19 AM
But not significant enough, clearly.
At some point he will have to show his hand and interview CB, as his plan to flush out the caller to MB's phone on the fateful night has drawn a blank.
I think he is on record as saying he has obtained more evidence. I also seem to remember him talking about disclosing his evidence at the upcoming meeting with the PJ and SY... In order to get better cooperation from the PJ. We will just have to wait and see
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 25, 2021, 10:47:29 AM
I think he is on record as saying he has obtained more evidence. I also seem to remember him talking about disclosing his evidence at the upcoming meeting with the PJ and SY... In order to get better cooperation from the PJ. We will just have to wait and see
We could give it another year, see where we are then.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 25, 2021, 11:57:57 AM
I think he is on record as saying he has obtained more evidence. I also seem to remember him talking about disclosing his evidence at the upcoming meeting with the PJ and SY... In order to get better cooperation from the PJ. We will just have to wait and see


I think he is on record as saying he has obtained more evidence

I don't think it is.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 12:02:22 PM

I think he is on record as saying he has obtained more evidence

I don't think it is.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9585791/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-phone-records-new-evidence-reveal-movements-Portugal.html
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 25, 2021, 12:19:44 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9585791/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-phone-records-new-evidence-reveal-movements-Portugal.html
New old evidence then.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 01:22:50 PM
New old evidence then.


Any evidence from 2007 by definition will be old.
I've said for a long time they will be reconstructing his movements around the critical time and that appears to be exactly what they are doing. I don't see any evidence of Wolters being some kind of fraud as those who have such a fixed mindset they cannot accept an abduction took place
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 25, 2021, 01:33:16 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9585791/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-phone-records-new-evidence-reveal-movements-Portugal.html


Ah .......so are we accepting media reports as proof now - or just when it suits.

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 25, 2021, 01:38:50 PM

Any evidence from 2007 by definition will be old.
I've said for a long time they will be reconstructing his movements around the critical time and that appears to be exactly what they are doing. I don't see any evidence of Wolters being some kind of fraud as those who have such a fixed mindset they cannot accept an abduction took place
'Old' evidence as in it's not 'new' as stated by the paper and, apparently, the guy himself.
Phone records that were collated, sifted and tabulated by a diligent member of the PJ.
Seems HCW has simply used that data and stuck some pins in a map. Groundbreaking. No wonder CB hasn't been charged.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 25, 2021, 02:00:59 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9585791/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-phone-records-new-evidence-reveal-movements-Portugal.html


Portuguese Madeleine McCann cops 'claim German police have NO evidence that Christian Brueckner abducted the child'




Portuguese police have accused German cops of having no evidence that Christian Brueckner abducted Madeleine McCann, according to a leaked memo.

Officers from the Policia Judiciaria said they were 'shocked' after being briefed on the German case against Brueckner, adding there is 'no evidence, just speculation'.

Portuguese detectives believe the allegations against Brueckner are designed to 'keep him in prison at all costs', and accused their German counterparts of failing to conduct a serious investigation
.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8929765/Portuguese-Madeleine-McCann-cops-claim-German-police-NO-evidence.html
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 02:01:39 PM

Ah .......so are we accepting media reports as proof now - or just when it suits.
No one has mentioned proof...
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 02:03:40 PM

Portuguese Madeleine McCann cops 'claim German police have NO evidence that Christian Brueckner abducted the child'




Portuguese police have accused German cops of having no evidence that Christian Brueckner abducted Madeleine McCann, according to a leaked memo.

Officers from the Policia Judiciaria said they were 'shocked' after being briefed on the German case against Brueckner, adding there is 'no evidence, just speculation'.

Portuguese detectives believe the allegations against Brueckner are designed to 'keep him in prison at all costs', and accused their German counterparts of failing to conduct a serious investigation
.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8929765/Portuguese-Madeleine-McCann-cops-claim-German-police-NO-evidence.html

It might have some credibility if it had a named source... But it doesn't... So total junk imo
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 25, 2021, 02:20:44 PM
It might have some credibility if it had a named source... But it doesn't... So total junk imo

 @)(++(*...I think you will find most of media reports are....propaganda

But seems yor posts indicate when it suits your agenda you use them D
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 02:32:31 PM
@)(++(*...I think you will find most of media reports are....propaganda

But seems yor posts indicate when it suits your agenda you use them D

Nope... It depends on certain criteria... A named source being the first one
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 25, 2021, 02:40:24 PM
Nope... It depends on certain criteria... A named source being the first one

That's a bit rich as the cite you provided earlier has an unnamed source.
Double standards?

“A source told The Sun they relate to phone records.”
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 25, 2021, 03:16:26 PM

Portuguese Madeleine McCann cops 'claim German police have NO evidence that Christian Brueckner abducted the child'




Portuguese police have accused German cops of having no evidence that Christian Brueckner abducted Madeleine McCann, according to a leaked memo.

Officers from the Policia Judiciaria said they were 'shocked' after being briefed on the German case against Brueckner, adding there is 'no evidence, just speculation'.

Portuguese detectives believe the allegations against Brueckner are designed to 'keep him in prison at all costs', and accused their German counterparts of failing to conduct a serious investigation
.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8929765/Portuguese-Madeleine-McCann-cops-claim-German-police-NO-evidence.html

Your cite is dated 9 November 2020 which in a live and continuing investigation is a long time ago 💤💤
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 25, 2021, 03:34:44 PM
Your cite is dated 9 November 2020 which in a live and continuing investigation is a long time ago

No less valid for that.
Wolters statement about concrete evidence is older than that   & yet is acceptable to some.

IMO
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 03:49:10 PM
That's a bit rich as the cite you provided earlier has an unnamed source.
Double standards?

“A source told The Sun they relate to phone records.”

I said its based on certain criteria... A source being one of those criteria... But not the only one
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 25, 2021, 03:54:52 PM
I said its based on certain criteria... A source being one of those criteria... But not the only one

No, let's get it right, you said your first criteria was a named source. If your first criteria fails you don’t progress any further down the list do you?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 25, 2021, 03:56:33 PM

Portuguese Madeleine McCann cops 'claim German police have NO evidence that Christian Brueckner abducted the child'




Portuguese police have accused German cops of having no evidence that Christian Brueckner abducted Madeleine McCann, according to a leaked memo.

Officers from the Policia Judiciaria said they were 'shocked' after being briefed on the German case against Brueckner, adding there is 'no evidence, just speculation'.

Portuguese detectives believe the allegations against Brueckner are designed to 'keep him in prison at all costs', and accused their German counterparts of failing to conduct a serious investigation
.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8929765/Portuguese-Madeleine-McCann-cops-claim-German-police-NO-evidence.html



I'm afraid I have a few problems with that article (which dates back to 9 November 2020) about a supposed leaked internal PJ memo following the update meeting, which makes it sound as if it was written by one of the officers attending the meeting.

A few clues:

- the "info" was taken from a Sun article, by none other than Nick Pisa.
- from the Sun article:

Now a leaked memo from the Policia Judiciaria, seen by The Sun, has revealed dismissive comments made in an internal email following the top secret conference in Lisbon.

In it an unidentified Portuguese officer claimed that the German BKA have no solid leads and are just holding the suspect in jail in the hope they can make two other sex cases against him stick.

He wrote: ''There is no evidence, just speculation. When reading the German case I was shocked. I never thought that the BKA would investigate so badly.

"It is not a serious and objective investigation, but only just to keep the suspect in prison at all costs.

''The meeting was to get the point of the situation, the BKA wants to investigate the other two cases of possible sexual harassment, so that the suspect does not leave prison until the end of the year and they will drop the suspect.''


Imo, the alleged so-called internal memo by an "unidentified Portuguese officer"... sounds incredibly like Amaral, IMO; whom I doubt would have been anywhere near the meeting.


Anyway, a German federal court threw out the rape appeal later that month, so he seems unlikely to be getting out any time soon.

Court rejects McCann suspect’s appeal in separate rape case
November 20, 2020

BERLIN (AP) — A German federal court has dismissed an appeal against the rape conviction of a man who is currently also being investigated over the disappearance of British toddler Madeleine McCann.

The court in Karlsruhe said Friday it had rejected the appeal by Christian Brueckner against his conviction last year for the 2005 rape of a 72-year-old American woman in Portugal and confirmed the seven-year sentence.
https://apnews.com/article/portugal-madeleine-mccann-6058a832fff1f2425e5395e1b3d97164

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 04:22:45 PM
No, let's get it right, you said your first criteria was a named source. If your first criteria fails you don’t progress any further down the list do you?

Yes I do.. Its the logical thing to do... Other criteria may well be important such as the claim is factually incorrect.
Why would naming CB as a suspect without interviewing him  or producing any evidence against hil keep him in jail... What Portuguese officer do you think would have said that
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 25, 2021, 04:40:36 PM
Yes I do.. Its the logical thing to do... Other criteria may well be important such as the claim is factually incorrect.
Why would naming CB as a suspect without interviewing him  or producing any evidence against hil keep him in jail... What Portuguese officer do you think would have said that

Not much of a first criterion if you disregard it because all the other criteria fits your beliefs but each to their own.
We have gone through the bit about keeping Breuckner in jail here about 6 months ago. You thought he had already had the sentence confirmed when he hadn’t, see the dates on your cite (9/11/2020) and the post from Carana covering the confirmation of 7 year sentence (20/11/2020). At the time of the meeting the sentence had not been confirmed.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 25, 2021, 04:41:29 PM
Yes I do.. Its the logical thing to do... Other criteria may well be important such as the claim is factually incorrect.
Why would naming CB as a suspect without interviewing him  or producing any evidence against hil keep him in jail... What Portuguese officer do you think would have said that

You don't know anything about wolt.

How good is he as a prosecutor ...you dont know.

Is he credible....you don't know.

Has he got concrete evidence ....you don't know.

Has he got any evidence....you don't know.

IMO its only the media who is talking him serious....but there again it sell papers.

You jump out with a post the minute anything against him is posted.

Strangely for what ever reason you have all your eggs in one basket. when he hasn't got a shred of evidence IMO
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 06:04:51 PM
You don't know anything about wolt.

How good is he as a prosecutor ...you dont know.

Is he credible....you don't know.

Has he got concrete evidence ....you don't know.

Has he got any evidence....you don't know.

IMO its only the media who is talking him serious....but there again it sell papers.

You jump out with a post the minute anything against him is posted.

Strangely for what ever reason you have all your eggs in one basket. when he hasn't got a shred of evidence IMO

If you've read my posts I've said for years abduction is the most likely...not the only possibility. Imo Wolters has proof of abduction... Based on what he has said.

Its lots and lots of things when added together that makes ma conclude abduction. Medically... I don't think death due to an accident in that time frame is a reasonable possibility.
Certainly in the time frame I would say death from a head injury would be impossible..based on my medical knowledge
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 06:11:49 PM
Not much of a first criterion if you disregard it because all the other criteria fits your beliefs but each to their own.
We have gone through the bit about keeping Breuckner in jail here about 6 months ago. You thought he had already had the sentence confirmed when he hadn’t, see the dates on your cite (9/11/2020) and the post from Carana covering the confirmation of 7 year sentence (20/11/2020). At the time of the meeting the sentence had not been confirmed.
The idea that the aim of making CB a suspect would keep him in jail is bonkers imo. You may find it credible... It sounds like something Amaral would come up with
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 25, 2021, 06:49:02 PM

Portuguese Madeleine McCann cops 'claim German police have NO evidence that Christian Brueckner abducted the child'




Portuguese police have accused German cops of having no evidence that Christian Brueckner abducted Madeleine McCann, according to a leaked memo.

Officers from the Policia Judiciaria said they were 'shocked' after being briefed on the German case against Brueckner, adding there is 'no evidence, just speculation'.

Portuguese detectives believe the allegations against Brueckner are designed to 'keep him in prison at all costs', and accused their German counterparts of failing to conduct a serious investigation
.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8929765/Portuguese-Madeleine-McCann-cops-claim-German-police-NO-evidence.html
PJ leaking again or the Rent-a-Gob shit-stirring again?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 25, 2021, 06:49:47 PM
The idea that the aim of making CB a suspect would keep him in jail is bonkers imo. You may find it credible... It sounds like something Amaral would come up with

That was my thought as well if you read up. It certainly wouldn't be the first time that Nick Pisa has made up a story  (anyone remember his quickly-pulled article on the Amanda Knox appeal trial?). That said, I find it possible that Amaral did actually say something to that effect at some point and it was dressed up as an "internal PJ memo". Even if that's the case,  I find it irresponsible.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 25, 2021, 06:51:50 PM
PJ leaking again or the Rent-a-Gob shit-stirring again?

For the moment, I have no reason to believe that the current cops who would have been in that meeting would have even written such a "memo", let alone leaked it to the Sun.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 25, 2021, 06:56:43 PM
It recently emerged German cops have new leads on Christian B.

The Sun Online now understands this relates to phone records that could throw fresh light on his movements around Praia Da Luz at the time Maddie went missing.

“For a long time German officers have said many key pieces of the jigsaw were missing about Christian B‘s movements in the Algarve,” a source said.

“This new information may help provide one of those pieces.”

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14973862/madeleine-mccann-evidence-revealed-suspects-phone/

Although I find it plausible that the new information could indeed relate to phone records, "the Sun Online now understands this relates to phone records" could simply be a euphemism for hacks speculating over morning coffee.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 25, 2021, 07:00:36 PM
You don't know anything about wolt.

How good is he as a prosecutor ...you dont know.

Is he credible....you don't know.

Has he got concrete evidence ....you don't know.

Has he got any evidence....you don't know.

IMO its only the media who is talking him serious....but there again it sell papers.

You jump out with a post the minute anything against him is posted.

Strangely for what ever reason you have all your eggs in one basket. when he hasn't got a shred of evidence IMO

In the piece with Mark Saunokonoko Wolters says they can't say what they are looking for, maybe a witness more witness's or video or photographic evidence, which would provide  to the thread title the answer,  no.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 25, 2021, 07:19:18 PM
Have they? In what way?

Did some landscaping, like OG.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 25, 2021, 07:25:41 PM
That's true. Almost a year since they went public with their suspicions and whatever they were hoping might emerge it looks like it hasn't.

Some like to believe he has photographic evidence, lets play the scenario he has, its obviously not illegal to have such material with CB not being arrested and questioned, this photographic evidence one could suppose is taken  after the alleged abduction, yet its not compelling enough for Wolters to tell the parents, they claim no contact has been made.

Kate & Gerry McCann Statement: June 16th, 2020
Since the recent police appeals regarding Madeleine’s disappearance there have been many inaccurate stories reported in the media.  The widely reported news that we have a received a letter from the German authorities that states there is evidence or proof that Madeleine is dead is FALSE.  Like many unsubstantiated stories in the media, this has caused unnecessary anxiety to friends and family and once again disrupted our lives.


 

Kate and Gerry
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 25, 2021, 07:39:11 PM
Some like to believe he has photographic evidence, lets play the scenario he has, its obviously not illegal to have such material with CB not being arrested and questioned, this photographic evidence one could suppose is taken  after the alleged abduction, yet its not compelling enough for Wolters to tell the parents, they claim no contact has been made.

Kate & Gerry McCann Statement: June 16th, 2020
Since the recent police appeals regarding Madeleine’s disappearance there have been many inaccurate stories reported in the media.  The widely reported news that we have a received a letter from the German authorities that states there is evidence or proof that Madeleine is dead is FALSE.  Like many unsubstantiated stories in the media, this has caused unnecessary anxiety to friends and family and once again disrupted our lives.


 

Kate and Gerry

Your first mistake is taht some think he MAY have photographic evidence  not that he has..

second this evidence if it exists may not conclusively implicate CB


third...The McCanns state in your qoute that they have not reeived aletter stating HCW has evidence or proof Maddie is dead...not that they havent received a letter...

zero for accuracy
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 25, 2021, 07:54:36 PM
Have they? In what way?
A link between Brückner and Kruse was recently publicised. To me, that seems to be an advancement into Madeleine’s disappearance and fate.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 25, 2021, 08:09:54 PM
A link between Brückner and Kruse was recently publicised. To me, that seems to be an advancement into Madeleine’s disappearance and fate.

But is it true?
I seem to recall it was an unattributed statement in a newspaper.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 25, 2021, 08:31:10 PM
But is it true?
I seem to recall it was an unattributed statement in a newspaper.

It won't be the first (or last) time that rumours in the press become 'facts' to be quoted on social media.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 25, 2021, 08:40:53 PM
But is it true?
I seem to recall it was an unattributed statement in a newspaper.
I think it is valid. De Bild and Der Spiegel newspapers have covered it extensively.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 26, 2021, 06:03:46 AM
Your first mistake is taht some think he MAY have photographic evidence  not that he has..

second this evidence if it exists may not conclusively implicate CB


third...The McCanns state in your qoute that they have not reeived aletter stating HCW has evidence or proof Maddie is dead...not that they havent received a letter...

zero for accuracy
Your first mistake is thinking that I wrote  some say he has, I wrote some like to think, (actually they dont) nil point for you there.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 26, 2021, 06:06:40 AM
A link between Brückner and Kruse was recently publicised.
If true, not a big enough one, CB isn't one of those arrested is he?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 26, 2021, 11:03:44 AM
If true, not a big enough one, CB isn't one of those arrested is he?
As far as I know, prosecutors are in the process of building their case re. Brückner.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2021, 11:21:54 AM
I wonder how many years they will take ?
Given OG's apparent lack of progress it come be some significant length of time.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2021, 11:26:11 AM
Your first mistake is thinking that I wrote  some say he has, I wrote some like to think, (actually they dont) nil point for you there.

Read it again... Its some think he May heve photo evidence.. Not that he has. There are 4 or 5 statements that suggest photographic evidence... I think he may well have photos/video... But I'm certainly not sure. I'm very  confident he has some very strong evidence of of abduction and death
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2021, 11:27:50 AM
If true, not a big enough one, CB isn't one of those arrested is he?

HCW has explained that CB will only be arrested and questioned when his investigation is complete
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 26, 2021, 02:56:28 PM
Read it again... Its some think he May heve photo evidence.. Not that he has. There are 4 or 5 statements that suggest photographic evidence... I think he may well have photos/video... But I'm certainly not sure. I'm very  confident he has some very strong evidence of of abduction and death
We know what it isn't.
We also know it's not enough.
We also know CB can't be physically linked.
Ergo, we know what it is. He's told us by not telling us.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2021, 04:10:22 PM
Your first mistake is thinking that I wrote  some say he has, I wrote some like to think, (actually they dont) nil point for you there.

I think your mistake is in thinking that anyone pays much attention to what sceptics are saying in their ongoing retreat from reality.

Ostriches don't really bury their heads in the sand you know.  It is an illusion.  It just looks as though they do because they think if they get their heads low enough and can't see what's coming - it won't see them either and pass them by.

Amaral has made an absolute prat of himself in ways that cannot be explained or justified.

The investigation into what happened to Madeleine carries on apace and on this thread the discussion is the photographic evidence Wolters has accumulated.
There is no question he has photographic evidence the only question is what does it contain.

Whatever is going to be revealed will be in the fullness of time; deflecting from what is presently happening just won't make it go away and if it weren't such a heart breaking issue the obvious discomfiture of sceptics would be a joy to behold.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2021, 04:18:21 PM
We know what it isn't.
We also know it's not enough.
We also know CB can't be physically linked.
Ergo, we know what it is. He's told us by not telling us.
We don't know what it is as you claim.. I know what it might be... He's told us without telling us perhaps
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 26, 2021, 04:42:30 PM
I think your mistake is in thinking that anyone pays much attention to what sceptics are saying in their ongoing retreat from reality.

Ostriches don't really bury their heads in the sand you know.  It is an illusion.  It just looks as though they do because they think if they get their heads low enough and can't see what's coming - it won't see them either and pass them by.

Amaral has made an absolute prat of himself in ways that cannot be explained or justified.

The investigation into what happened to Madeleine carries on apace and on this thread the discussion is the photographic evidence Wolters has accumulated.
There is no question he has photographic evidence the only question is what does it contain.

Whatever is going to be revealed will be in the fullness of time; deflecting from what is presently happening just won't make it go away and if it weren't such a heart breaking issue the obvious discomfiture of sceptics would be a joy to behold.


Amaral has made an absolute prat of himself in ways that cannot be explained or justified.

 @)(++(*......What makes you think wolt isn't going to do the same.

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 26, 2021, 04:48:18 PM
I think your mistake is in thinking that anyone pays much attention to what sceptics are saying in their ongoing retreat from reality.

Ostriches don't really bury their heads in the sand you know.  It is an illusion.  It just looks as though they do because they think if they get their heads low enough and can't see what's coming - it won't see them either and pass them by.

Amaral has made an absolute prat of himself in ways that cannot be explained or justified.

The investigation into what happened to Madeleine carries on apace and on this thread the discussion is the photographic evidence Wolters has accumulated.
There is no question he has photographic evidence the only question is what does it contain.

Whatever is going to be revealed will be in the fullness of time; deflecting from what is presently happening just won't make it go away and if it weren't such a heart breaking issue the obvious discomfiture of sceptics would be a joy to behold.

This post contains an absolute falsehood.

In evolutionary terms if ostriches really did apply the strategy you suggest they would be an easy meal for any predator large enough to take them down. They do in fact run very fast to escape predators, the head in the sand adage comes from their behaviour after they have laid their eggs in a hollow in the sand and they turn the eggs regularly.

Sheesh, there is enough misinformation on this forum without starting on the ostriches.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2021, 05:14:11 PM
This post contains an absolute falsehood.

In evolutionary terms if ostriches really did apply the strategy you suggest they would be an easy meal for any predator large enough to take them down. They do in fact run very fast to escape predators, the head in the sand adage comes from their behaviour after they have laid their eggs in a hollow in the sand and they turn the eggs regularly.

Sheesh, there is enough misinformation on this forum without starting on the ostriches.

The myth is that ostriches bury their heads in the sand - it is no myth that sceptics actually do.
           (https://www.bing.com/images/blob?bcid=RC5pnvfmz8oCGA)  Absolutely correct that lifting a huge egg and running with it wouldn't help the reproduction process - glad you set the record straight on that very important issue 🤓 but it goes nowhere near scratching the surface of the quandary that sceptics have trapped themselves in as they continue their unfavourable assessment of Wolters v eulogising the expertise of Amaral and his botched investigation.

Much of the evidence 'discovered' by Redwood and later reinforced by Wolters was there in 2007 if Amaral et al had bothered looking beyond their navels and the McCann phone records to see it.

Why I wonder is there such sceptic resistance to the fact that Wolters might have the evidence which will crack this crime.  One could be forgiven for thinking they don't want it solved ~ certainly 'dreadlocks man' Amaral seems to be cheerleading that camp.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 26, 2021, 05:29:40 PM
The myth is that ostriches bury their heads in the sand - it is no myth that sceptics actually do.
           (https://www.bing.com/images/blob?bcid=RC5pnvfmz8oCGA)  Absolutely correct that lifting a huge egg and running with it wouldn't help the reproduction process - glad you set the record straight on that very important issue 🤓 but it goes nowhere near scratching the surface of the quandary that sceptics have trapped themselves in as they continue their unfavourable assessment of Wolters v eulogising the expertise of Amaral and his botched investigation.

Much of the evidence 'discovered' by Redwood and later reinforced by Wolters was there in 2007 if Amaral et al had bothered looking beyond their navels and the McCann phone records to see it.

Why I wonder is there such sceptic resistance to the fact that Wolters might have the evidence which will crack this crime.  One could be forgiven for thinking they don't want it solved ~ certainly 'dreadlocks man' Amaral seems to be cheerleading that camp.

I am guessing that you are including me in this cabal of sceptics, do you believe I have my head in the sand?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2021, 05:32:59 PM
I am guessing that you are including me in this cabal of sceptics, do you believe I have my head in the sand?

I think anyone who has written HCW off has their head in the sand
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Angelo222 on May 26, 2021, 05:36:53 PM
The myth is that ostriches bury their heads in the sand - it is no myth that sceptics actually do.
           (https://www.bing.com/images/blob?bcid=RC5pnvfmz8oCGA)  Absolutely correct that lifting a huge egg and running with it wouldn't help the reproduction process - glad you set the record straight on that very important issue  but it goes nowhere near scratching the surface of the quandary that sceptics have trapped themselves in as they continue their unfavourable assessment of Wolters v eulogising the expertise of Amaral and his botched investigation.

Much of the evidence 'discovered' by Redwood and later reinforced by Wolters was there in 2007 if Amaral et al had bothered looking beyond their navels and the McCann phone records to see it.

Why I wonder is there such sceptic resistance to the fact that Wolters might have the evidence which will crack this crime.  One could be forgiven for thinking they don't want it solved ~ certainly 'dreadlocks man' Amaral seems to be cheerleading that camp.

I think that you will find that Redwood found nothing really. All he did was spend a pile of public money on yet another wild goose chase. Wolters too has nothing imo but then, time will tell.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 26, 2021, 05:46:25 PM
I think anyone who has written HCW off has their head in the sand

But I haven't written him off, I am waiting to hear him present his evidence. Not soundbites, but evidence.
Nothing so far has convinced me he has any tangible evidence but he may well have, we will see in the fullness of time.
Quick question, how long do you give HCW?, 1 more year, 5 years, 20 years?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2021, 05:58:56 PM
Has Wolters been written off ? I don't think so.
It's just that he's not proving to be a man of action at the moment, so it's more a case of 'wait and see', rather than relying on blind faith.

IMO
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 26, 2021, 06:05:50 PM
But I haven't written him off, I am waiting to hear him present his evidence. Not soundbites, but evidence.
Nothing so far has convinced me he has any tangible evidence but he may well have, we will see in the fullness of time.
Quick question, how long do you give HCW?, 1 more year, 5 years, 20 years?

If he follows the Grange model of funding, it will be when the money runs out.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2021, 06:16:02 PM
I think that you will find that Redwood found nothing really. All he did was spend a pile of public money on yet another wild goose chase. Wolters too has nothing imo but then, time will tell.

Redwood pointed the investigation towards burglars and criminal phones in use in Luz on the night Madeleine disappeared.

He acknowledged that the attacks on children under their own roofs which were commonplace occurrences in the Algarve merited investigation.  Not only in relation to Madeleine but because serious crimes had been committed on other little girls.

What he didn't have was access to Portuguese records on Brueckner;  the Portuguese did had they wanted and the opportunity to scrutinise them was squandered in favour of the unfounded and ill thought theories of an incompetent.

It took till 2013 before anyone bothered to broaden their horizons - all Wolters has done is to follow the evidence as it developed to its logical conclusion - and that process isn't finished yet.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2021, 06:18:36 PM
I am guessing that you are including me in this cabal of sceptics, do you believe I have my head in the sand?

I answered your post.  Did I make any reference to you in my reply.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Icanhandlethetruth on May 26, 2021, 06:24:46 PM
I answered your post.  Did I make any reference to you in my reply.

But you posted

"The myth is that ostriches bury their heads in the sand - it is no myth that sceptics actually do."

So I was wondering if you considered me to be a sceptic and if so it follows that you believe I bury my head in the sand, n'est-ce pas?

Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 26, 2021, 07:18:31 PM
But I haven't written him off, I am waiting to hear him present his evidence. Not soundbites, but evidence.
Nothing so far has convinced me he has any tangible evidence but he may well have, we will see in the fullness of time.
Quick question, how long do you give HCW?, 1 more year, 5 years, 20 years?

I don't see that he would make the statements he has re CB unless he had significant evidence...jes been quite straightforward and hasn't contradicted himself. How long will I give him.. That's an impossible question to answer. What I think is that he will at some stage in the next 6 months have to share his evidence with SY... Having said that he may share it soon. The interesting point will be whether SY continue to work closely with the Germans. If they do it suggests they accept CB as a suspect
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2021, 08:05:02 PM
But you posted

"The myth is that ostriches bury their heads in the sand - it is no myth that sceptics actually do."

So I was wondering if you considered me to be a sceptic and if so it follows that you believe I bury my head in the sand, n'est-ce pas?

You took that personally?  Hmm ... interesting.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 26, 2021, 08:13:47 PM
I don't see that he would make the statements he has re CB unless he had significant evidence...jes been quite straightforward and hasn't contradicted himself. How long will I give him.. That's an impossible question to answer. What I think is that he will at some stage in the next 6 months have to share his evidence with SY... Having said that he may share it soon. The interesting point will be whether SY continue to work closely with the Germans. If they do it suggests they accept CB as a suspect

I don't think there would be much if any disagreement between any of the investigators about Brueckner being an appropriate guy to investigate further.

Even Amaral thinks Brueckner is the perfect suspect apart from not being dead 😁 but I don't think he is too keen for the Germans to continue investigating him though if his antics are anything to go by.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 26, 2021, 11:01:19 PM
But I haven't written him off, I am waiting to hear him present his evidence. Not soundbites, but evidence.
Nothing so far has convinced me he has any tangible evidence but he may well have, we will see in the fullness of time.
Quick question, how long do you give HCW?, 1 more year, 5 years, 20 years?
As long as it takes.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 27, 2021, 07:20:12 AM
I see no reason why Wolters should give the public a running commentary on any new pieces of the jigsaw, unless there is a reason to divulge something within the context of a public appeal.

AFAIK, Brückner hasn't been formally questioned yet, but when (if) that happens, it may well be a turning point. I expect that the first time whatever new or future evidence comes to light publicly would be at his trial, if he is ever charged.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 27, 2021, 07:23:38 AM
I don't think there would be much if any disagreement between any of the investigators about Brueckner being an appropriate guy to investigate further.

Even Amaral thinks Brueckner is the perfect suspect apart from not being dead 😁 but I don't think he is too keen for the Germans to continue investigating him though if his antics are anything to go by.

I could speculate on a few reasons why...
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 27, 2021, 07:52:35 AM
The myth is that ostriches bury their heads in the sand - it is no myth that sceptics actually do.
           (https://www.bing.com/images/blob?bcid=RC5pnvfmz8oCGA)  Absolutely correct that lifting a huge egg and running with it wouldn't help the reproduction process - glad you set the record straight on that very important issue 🤓 but it goes nowhere near scratching the surface of the quandary that sceptics have trapped themselves in as they continue their unfavourable assessment of Wolters v eulogising the expertise of Amaral and his botched investigation.

Much of the evidence 'discovered' by Redwood and later reinforced by Wolters was there in 2007 if Amaral et al had bothered looking beyond their navels and the McCann phone records to see it.

Why I wonder is there such sceptic resistance to the fact that Wolters might have the evidence which will crack this crime.  One could be forgiven for thinking they don't want it solved ~ certainly 'dreadlocks man' Amaral seems to be cheerleading that camp.
Is that your profile pic?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 27, 2021, 08:04:00 AM
I don't see that he would make the statements he has re CB unless he had significant evidence...jes been quite straightforward and hasn't contradicted himself. How long will I give him.. That's an impossible question to answer. What I think is that he will at some stage in the next 6 months have to share his evidence with SY... Having said that he may share it soon. The interesting point will be whether SY continue to work closely with the Germans. If they do it suggests they accept CB as a suspect
Dav, he's got pics of a dead girl that may or may not be MM. There, I said it. Clearly there's no way to 'prove' a link to CB, but that's the focus of his attention. The plea for the phone caller to come forward would place him at the scene, rather than 'maybe in the vicinity'.
The fact that the photos exist mean that the person took them for later use, probably as insurance. But even the most paranoid, expert investigation force in western Europe with all of their resources still can't garner anything useful to pin the deed on CB. They would have analysed them every which way to next Wednesday, including checking exif, tampering, photoshop editing, etc. They would analyse every minute detail of the background of each. Yet still nowhere near charging CB. I'll also wager they've been back and to to the prosecutor.
Did he do it? Who knows. Who was he talking to that night? Why use his own phone? Why are SY hedging their bets and continuing the 'search'?
What I will say is, I've been in Germany for several weeks recently (trapped due to COVID). This story is not of interest to them, I can assure you of that.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2021, 08:36:17 AM
Dav, he's got pics of a dead girl that may or may not be MM. There, I said it. Clearly there's no way to 'prove' a link to CB, but that's the focus of his attention. The plea for the phone caller to come forward would place him at the scene, rather than 'maybe in the vicinity'.
The fact that the photos exist mean that the person took them for later use, probably as insurance. But even the most paranoid, expert investigation force in western Europe with all of their resources still can't garner anything useful to pin the deed on CB. They would have analysed them every which way to next Wednesday, including checking exif, tampering, photoshop editing, etc. They would analyse every minute detail of the background of each. Yet still nowhere near charging CB. I'll also wager they've been back and to to the prosecutor.
Did he do it? Who knows. Who was he talking to that night? Why use his own phone? Why are SY hedging their bets and continuing the 'search'?
What I will say is, I've been in Germany for several weeks recently (trapped due to COVID). This story is not of interest to them, I can assure you of that.

You seem to be coming round to my way of thinking...
Except... I think if he has a photo it's clearly MM
I think there does exist a link but not strong enough for court.
He may well have more circumstantial and has asked people for descriptions of the interior of places CB has frequented which would support the existence of a photo
I think SY are totally on board and the missing person statement is Semantics
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 27, 2021, 08:46:51 AM
You seem to be coming round to my way of thinking...
Except... I think if he has a photo it's clearly MM
I think there does exist a link but not strong enough for court.
He may well have more circumstantial and has asked people for descriptions of the interior of places CB has frequented which would support the existence of a photo
I think SY are totally on board and the missing person statement is Semantics
Even a tenuous link would probably be sufficient for them to grill him. Yes, I know they'd be playing their hand, but I'm sure CB and his legal team can join the dots just as we have, so that reason for not arresting doesn't wash with me.
These photos cannot be definitive. They may be definitive in terms of an ID of MM, although I doubt that, but there's no way to put CB in the scene.
I'm no crime expert, or indeed expert in anything (using the Gladwell '10,000 hours' definition), but if there are photos and there's a suspect but no link, this must be unique when the circumstances are factored in.

At some point in this drawn out circus HCW will have to give it up. This link will only ever come from CB himself; that much is now clear, a year on from the initial proclamation.
It's the essence of Catch 22 as Heller described it - there's not enough evidence to arrest CB according to the prosecutor, so they can't interview him. But even if they interview him and show their hand, now that he is pretty certain that they don't have enough to charge him, he just has to sit there and say nothing. So HCW knows this is how it plays out, so he has to keep looking for this corroboration that he has failed to find in at least a year (potentially 3).
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2021, 09:11:11 AM
Even a tenuous link would probably be sufficient for them to grill him. Yes, I know they'd be playing their hand, but I'm sure CB and his legal team can join the dots just as we have, so that reason for not arresting doesn't wash with me.
These photos cannot be definitive. They may be definitive in terms of an ID of MM, although I doubt that, but there's no way to put CB in the scene.
I'm no crime expert, or indeed expert in anything (using the Gladwell '10,000 hours' definition), but if there are photos and there's a suspect but no link, this must be unique when the circumstances are factored in.

At some point in this drawn out circus HCW will have to give it up. This link will only ever come from CB himself; that much is now clear, a year on from the initial proclamation.
It's the essence of Catch 22 as Heller described it - there's not enough evidence to arrest CB according to the prosecutor, so they can't interview him. But even if they interview him and show their hand, now that he is pretty certain that they don't have enough to charge him, he just has to sit there and say nothing. So HCW knows this is how it plays out, so he has to keep looking for this corroboration that he has failed to find in at least a year (potentially 3).

You are definitely coming round to my way of thinking... Almost proof of death... But not a strong enough link to CB. No point in interviewing him.. He won't say a word.
My other thought is.. Perhaps HCW thinks he might be able to find the body..

Interesting times ahead
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 27, 2021, 10:13:44 AM
Is that your profile pic?

I'm not as good looking as that.  Going to the hairdresser tomorrow to get hid of the lockdown locks, so that will help 😉
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 27, 2021, 11:01:31 AM
I see no reason why Wolters should give the public a running commentary on any new pieces of the jigsaw, unless there is a reason to divulge something within the context of a public appeal.

AFAIK, Brückner hasn't been formally questioned yet, but when (if) that happens, it may well be a turning point. I expect that the first time whatever new or future evidence comes to light publicly would be at his trial, if he is ever charged.
I agree, Carana.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 27, 2021, 11:16:09 AM
Dav, he's got pics of a dead girl that may or may not be MM. There, I said it. Clearly there's no way to 'prove' a link to CB, but that's the focus of his attention. The plea for the phone caller to come forward would place him at the scene, rather than 'maybe in the vicinity'.
The fact that the photos exist mean that the person took them for later use, probably as insurance. But even the most paranoid, expert investigation force in western Europe with all of their resources still can't garner anything useful to pin the deed on CB. They would have analysed them every which way to next Wednesday, including checking exif, tampering, photoshop editing, etc. They would analyse every minute detail of the background of each. Yet still nowhere near charging CB. I'll also wager they've been back and to to the prosecutor.
Did he do it? Who knows. Who was he talking to that night? Why use his own phone? Why are SY hedging their bets and continuing the 'search'?
What I will say is, I've been in Germany for several weeks recently (trapped due to COVID). This story is not of interest to them, I can assure you of that.
1) who cares? 2) did you conduct an extensive survey of German opinion? 3) who cares?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2021, 12:23:39 PM
Even a tenuous link would probably be sufficient for them to grill him. Yes, I know they'd be playing their hand, but I'm sure CB and his legal team can join the dots just as we have, so that reason for not arresting doesn't wash with me.
These photos cannot be definitive. They may be definitive in terms of an ID of MM, although I doubt that, but there's no way to put CB in the scene.
I'm no crime expert, or indeed expert in anything (using the Gladwell '10,000 hours' definition), but if there are photos and there's a suspect but no link, this must be unique when the circumstances are factored in.

At some point in this drawn out circus HCW will have to give it up. This link will only ever come from CB himself; that much is now clear, a year on from the initial proclamation.
It's the essence of Catch 22 as Heller described it - there's not enough evidence to arrest CB according to the prosecutor, so they can't interview him. But even if they interview him and show their hand, now that he is pretty certain that they don't have enough to charge him, he just has to sit there and say nothing. So HCW knows this is how it plays out, so he has to keep looking for this corroboration that he has failed to find in at least a year (potentially 3).

I was speaking to an Austrian friend a few weeks ago... He knew all about it
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 27, 2021, 01:09:48 PM
1) who cares? 2) did you conduct an extensive survey of German opinion? 3) who cares?
1. Davel's Austrian friend.
2. Yes
3. Davel. Davel's Austrian friend.
4. Wibble.
5. Mississippi.
6. Michael Collins.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 27, 2021, 01:24:54 PM
I was speaking to an Austrian friend a few weeks ago... He knew all about it
I think you may have quoted the wrong post in all the excitement.
But just to elaborate on the post you did quote, HCW had to go public last June, he had little choice. I'm sure it was a last resort because it's a revealing of his hand in and of itself.
His evidence is apparently screaming at him, the grown ups have probably intimated that it's compelling, but just eek out some corroboration.
I doubt he would have envisaged his public appeal for information would yield nothing (otherwise there would have been action by now). Couple this with the less than outright backing from SY and it's all a bit embarrassing.
It was always a shit or bust call....ID the caller and it's Christmas, get nothing of substance and it's bin bag for Hans.
His last vestige of hope is that the prosecutors roll the dice with what they have and hope CB sings like Gladys Knight - and I would buy tickets to watch that go down.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 27, 2021, 01:29:49 PM
1. Davel's Austrian friend.
2. Yes
3. Davel. Davel's Austrian friend.
4. Wibble.
5. Mississippi.
6. Michael Collins.
Point 2:  no you didn’t.  The rest is just bollix.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 27, 2021, 01:43:22 PM
Dav, he's got pics of a dead girl that may or may not be MM. There, I said it. Clearly there's no way to 'prove' a link to CB, but that's the focus of his attention. The plea for the phone caller to come forward would place him at the scene, rather than 'maybe in the vicinity'.
The fact that the photos exist mean that the person took them for later use, probably as insurance. But even the most paranoid, expert investigation force in western Europe with all of their resources still can't garner anything useful to pin the deed on CB. They would have analysed them every which way to next Wednesday, including checking exif, tampering, photoshop editing, etc. They would analyse every minute detail of the background of each. Yet still nowhere near charging CB. I'll also wager they've been back and to to the prosecutor.
Did he do it? Who knows. Who was he talking to that night? Why use his own phone? Why are SY hedging their bets and continuing the 'search'?
What I will say is, I've been in Germany for several weeks recently (trapped due to COVID). This story is not of interest to them, I can assure you of that.

I find it plausible that there may be some kind of photographic evidence, but no one (outside of the investigation) knows whether that is the case or not. Nor whether any images found may have a direct or even an indirect link, either to her or to him.

We don't know either whether the person behind the phone number that called him that evening has been identified, whether it was an innocent call or not, nor whether he was actually in possession of the receiving phone that evening.

Despite his past and the circumstantial evidence, it's also possible that he wasn't involved after all.

I wonder who's paying for his defense lawyer?
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 27, 2021, 02:41:58 PM
I think you may have quoted the wrong post in all the excitement.
But just to elaborate on the post you did quote, HCW had to go public last June, he had little choice. I'm sure it was a last resort because it's a revealing of his hand in and of itself.
His evidence is apparently screaming at him, the grown ups have probably intimated that it's compelling, but just eek out some corroboration.
I doubt he would have envisaged his public appeal for information would yield nothing (otherwise there would have been action by now). Couple this with the less than outright backing from SY and it's all a bit embarrassing.
It was always a shit or bust call....ID the caller and it's Christmas, get nothing of substance and it's bin bag for Hans.
His last vestige of hope is that the prosecutors roll the dice with what they have and hope CB sings like Gladys Knight - and I would buy tickets to watch that go down.

SY are working very very closely with the Germans so I don't seem that they are at odds. I think Wolters has more than you think and is far from a fool. Interestingly my friend lives in Graz... I recall someone being questioned there
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: The General on May 27, 2021, 03:19:31 PM
I find it plausible that there may be some kind of photographic evidence, but no one (outside of the investigation) knows whether that is the case or not. Nor whether any images found may have a direct or even an indirect link, either to her or to him.

We don't know either whether the person behind the phone number that called him that evening has been identified, whether it was an innocent call or not, nor whether he was actually in possession of the receiving phone that evening.

Despite his past and the circumstantial evidence, it's also possible that he wasn't involved after all.

I wonder who's paying for his defense lawyer?
We do, unless the caller has come forward this week. HCW hasn't retracted his appeal, so we're all still frantically searching for the mystery caller.

Who's paying his legal fees? Nobody. It will be pro bono, quid pro quo, in nomine iustitia, quia fama
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 27, 2021, 04:15:29 PM
We do, unless the caller has come forward this week. HCW hasn't retracted his appeal, so we're all still frantically searching for the mystery caller.

Who's paying his legal fees? Nobody. It will be pro bono, quid pro quo, in nomine iustitia, quia fama


Might be crowd funded by subscribers to the Dark Web.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Carana on May 27, 2021, 06:06:56 PM

Might be crowd funded by subscribers to the Dark Web.

LOL

Which reminds me of crowd-funding for someone else (who happened to eventually retain a rather large sum of money from book sales, a "documentary" and various media appearances).
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: barrier on May 27, 2021, 06:16:20 PM
1. Davel's Austrian friend.
2. Yes
3. Davel. Davel's Austrian friend.
4. Wibble.
5. Mississippi.
6. Michael Collins.

I doubt these are.
’ Bill Brewer, Jan Stewer, Peter Gurney, Peter Davy, Dan’l Whiddon, Harry Hawk, old Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all,”
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 27, 2021, 07:18:12 PM
LOL

Which reminds me of crowd-funding for someone else (who happened to eventually retain a rather large sum of money from book sales, a "documentary" and various media appearances).

The crowd funding was obviously successful then.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 28, 2021, 12:41:09 PM
The crowd funding was obviously successful then.


I think they are successful when people believe in - what they are donating money too.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2021, 01:14:41 PM

I think they are successful when people believe in - what they are donating money too.

Yes... The McCanns have raised millions for the search for Maddie
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 28, 2021, 01:18:58 PM
Yes... The McCanns have raised millions for the search for Maddie

Nowt to show for it though
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2021, 01:24:56 PM
Nowt to show for it though
Sadly
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 28, 2021, 01:25:18 PM
Yes... The McCanns have raised millions for the search for Maddie

At least one of which was raised by threatening to sue people.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 28, 2021, 01:27:27 PM
Sadly

I don't think Madeleine's investigation would be at the stage it is without the determination shown by her parents to keep her case alive.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 28, 2021, 01:28:48 PM
Nowt to show for it though

There's a saying that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys. The McCanns uniquely hired monkeys and paid them well imo.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 28, 2021, 01:30:17 PM
At least one of which was raised by threatening to sue people.

Sigh ... that just does not merit a response 🙄
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Brietta on May 28, 2021, 01:35:29 PM
There's a saying that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys. The McCanns uniquely hired monkeys and paid them well imo.

Ah ... so very true.  As Sofia Leal confirmed in reference to the peanuts paid to her monkey.

"As you must know, because you seem very well informed to me, my husband's salary was barely 1.5 times the minimum wage of your country. However, as a wife, mother and Portuguese, I cannot complain, given that Gonçalo Amaral's salary was the equivalent of 4.5 times the minimum wage in Portugal. Pay attention to this, which serves as an example of what I am going to explain: at one time, an individual shot an officer of the PSP and fled into neighbouring Spain. Between the comings and goings of a PJ team, of which my husband was a part, they were there for more than 15 days.

At that time, international expenses were 100€. As madam Kate can imagine, it is not possible on that amount to eat and to lodge in Spain, still less when it is Christmas Eve, and this money would only be available (with a bit of luck) by Easter."  Sofia Leal
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2021, 01:36:11 PM
At least one of which was raised by threatening to sue people.

By convincing people Maddie was dead... Would affect the search...
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 28, 2021, 01:40:21 PM
Yes... The McCanns have raised millions for the search for Maddie

So what have they spent it on D..SY Germans PJ seems they the ones spending all the money in there search.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2021, 01:45:41 PM
So what have they spent it on D..SY Germans PJ seems they the ones spending all the money in there search.

If you have followed the case you would know the answer... None of the police forces are investigating the McCanns
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 28, 2021, 01:52:33 PM
If you have followed the case you would know the answer... None of the police forces are investigating the McCanns


I have followed the case from practically day one.

I believe the first payment were mortgages there expenditure bent Detectives etc IIRC,
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2021, 02:04:52 PM

I have followed the case from practically day one.

I believe the first payment were mortgages there expenditure bent Detectives etc IIRC,

I can't be bothered explaining. It to you
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 28, 2021, 02:20:08 PM
I can't be bothered explaining. It to you

So don't ......there's nothing I want you to explain anyway.

Seems to me your posts are for guest visitors anyway D.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: G-Unit on May 28, 2021, 02:45:39 PM
By convincing people Maddie was dead... Would affect the search...

The only people actually looking seem to have been the general public and they reported sightings world-wide, most of which were clearly wishful thinking.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2021, 03:12:59 PM
The only people actually looking seem to have been the general public and they reported sightings world-wide, most of which were clearly wishful thinking.
Do you think all those people were dishonest and making things up... Or part of the govt conspiracy to protect the McCanns at all cost.
What those sightings show is how unreliable public Id evidence is... Like the Smith sighting
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: jassi on May 28, 2021, 03:46:00 PM
I reckon people saw what they wanted to see.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 28, 2021, 04:26:41 PM
At least one of which was raised by threatening to sue people.
And what's wrong with that?  If "people" were so sure of what they had written or said they wouldn't have needed to cough up, but if you think people should be allowed to write any old crap and get away with it then I guess this would stick in your craw somewhat.
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2021, 04:28:10 PM
I reckon people saw what they wanted to see.

So all the sightings of Maddie are unreliable... But the Smith sighting isn't... Is what sceptics think... Its not what the police think
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 28, 2021, 04:28:21 PM
deleted
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: kizzy on May 28, 2021, 05:51:25 PM
So all the sightings of Maddie are unreliable... But the Smith sighting isn't... Is what sceptics think... Its not what the police think

Did I say that ......No.................
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Mr Gray on May 28, 2021, 06:03:25 PM
Did I say that ......No.................

I would say you agree with it... Or do you think the Smith sighting is unreliable.. The police certainly seem to think so
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Anthro on May 28, 2021, 06:33:58 PM
We do, unless the caller has come forward this week. HCW hasn't retracted his appeal, so we're all still frantically searching for the mystery caller.

Who's paying his legal fees? Nobody. It will be pro bono, quid pro quo, in nomine iustitia, quia fama

“Speaking as the show ended, top cop Alfred Hettmer claimed: There have been 16 calls about this number and one of them is promising. The caller is believed to be from Bavaria, Germany – where Brueckner lived before moving to Portugal”.
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-police-tipped-promising-22294371

It would be interesting to know what Christian Kruse’s location was on 3/5/07.
https://wochenblatt.cc/mutmasslicher-madeleine-mccann-moerder-war-teil-des-paedophilen-netzwerkes-zudem-deutscher-aus-concepcion-gehoerte/
Title: Re: Does Wolters have photographic evidence?
Post by: Vertigo Swirl on May 28, 2021, 06:40:33 PM
I reckon people saw what they wanted to see.
And people believe what they want to believe eg that Martin Smith saw Gerry carrying a dead body through the streets of Luz.