-
Urge caution to take cooperation in Madeleine case
MAY 19, 2021
The clarification of the case of British girl Madeleine McCann, who disappeared in 2007, could be thanks to Paraguayan cooperation, but investigators urge caution.
The arrest of Christian Manfred Kruse (58), the German citizen who was captured in Bethlehem, Concepcion, could be key to reaching those responsible for the girl's disappearance.
Commissioner Jorge Olmedo, of the Police Anti-Kidnapping Department, who participated in that operation, indicated that reports were heard that the German might be linked to the Madeleine case, but he anticipated that there are many data that have yet to be corroborated.
The version handled by the men in uniform is that Kruse was involved in the abduction of the girl.
The arrest of the German was the result of a work that had the help of German police and that in our country was led by the prosecutor Irma Llano.
The man was wanted in three countries internationally, as he handled at least four pages of child pornography, was in charge of advising paedophiles around the world and decided who was part of the network, as well as accepting or rejecting sexual content.
In the case of Bethlehem, a platform was discovered where there were 400,000 members, and sources consulted by ÚH say that all the material seized in the operation must be completed first.
THE CASE. Madeleine disappeared 14 years ago, while in a hotel in Portugal, spending the holidays with her family. It was May 3, 2007 and since then the follow-up of the case became a puzzle.
His parents, Gerry and Kate McCann are campaigning around the world to try to get to the truth in this case.
Prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters, who is leading the investigation in Germany, says police are convinced the girl died in Portugal.
The investigation indicates that the girl was killed after a kidnapping that occurred in the room where she slept in the rented place to spend her holidays.
During these years of investigation, the version that the girl was brought to Paraguay was also mentioned.
This was said by the private investigator of British origin Miraz Ullah Ali Isa, who was in our country, but this version was discarded by the Police.
https://www.ultimahora.com/instan-tomar-cautela-cooperacion-caso-madeleine-n2941542.html
German leading child pornography network agreed to be extradited
JUNE 24, 2021
The German citizen who was under international investigation for being the administrator of several child pornography sites agreed to be extradited to his country.
The German citizen Christian Manfred Kruse, 58, finally accepted on Thursday the abbreviated extradition to be sent to his country to submit to justice, considering that there he is wanted since 2017 for child pornography.
The man appeared in the morning hours before Judge Mirko Valinottifor the person identification hearing, reported Ultima Hora journalist Raul Ramirez.
Last April, the foreign national was arrested in a house in the town of Belén,in the Department of Concepción. Authorities discovered a platform with 400,000 members.
Prosecutor Irma Llano, of the Unit against Computer Crimes, had said that the man was wanted in Germany, the U.S., the United Kingdom and Australia, since he handled at least four pages of child pornography,was in charge of advising paedophiles around the world and decided who was part of the network. In addition, he was the one who accepted or rejected the sexual contents of the pages.
Related note: Urge caution in Madeleine case
Commissioner Jorge Olmedo, of the Police Anti-Kidnapping Department, who participated in that operation, had indicated that reports were heard that the German could be linked to the case of the British girl Madeleine McCann, who disappeared in 2007, but anticipated that there are many data that have yet to be corroborated.
Kruse entered the country in 2010 and remained irregularly, without Paraguayan documentation; that is, it was handled clandestinely.
https://www.ultimahora.com/aleman-que-lideraba-red-pornografia-infantil-acepto-ser-extraditado-n2947601.html
-
At this stage, there seems to be no way of knowing whether there's a genuine potential connection to this or any other case, or whether it's just clickbait.
-
At this stage, there seems to be no way of knowing whether there's a genuine potential connection to this or any other case, or whether it's just clickbait.
I think the "connection" might be the dark web and Brueckner. There is evidence that Kruze is heavily involved internationally and I believe that the German police may have evidence of Brueckner's use of it.
-
I think the "connection" might be the dark web and Brueckner. There is evidence that Kruze is heavily involved internationally and I believe that the German police may have evidence of Brueckner's use of it.
Which proves nothing.
-
Which proves nothing.
Too true. Its all if and maybe , with, as yet, no demonstrable connection between either Brueckner and Kruse, or Madeleine and either German
-
Too true. Its all if and maybe , with, as yet, no demonstrable connection between either Brueckner and Kruse, or Madeleine and either German
There is a tentative association made about Brueckner and a conversation he had on the dark web regarding Madeleine which was alleged by none other than Goncalo Amaral.
Snip
According to the former inspector, in an interview with the Spanish television network Cuatro, this new suspect, a convicted of paedophilia in Germany who killed three of his victims, is not the man who is in the crosshairs of the police
"Right now, there is talk of a German paedophile who is sentenced to life in prison. He killed children and was reported in the British press. Only what I do know is that it's not that man. It's another one," says Gonçalo Amaral.
This other indicated by the former inspector is also detained in Germany and also he is a paedophile. According to him, the man was flagged after talking about Maddie in a private chatroom of paedophilia.
https://theworldnews.net/pt-news/goncalo-amaral-diz-que-suspeito-do-desaparecimento-de-maddie-e-quase-igual-a-gerry-mccann
-
This is the same Amaral who is a proven liar and who's word cannot be believed ?
-
This is the same Amaral who is a proven liar and who's word cannot be believed ?
Do you have an opinion on whether the perjurer is running true to form or do you have validating information from an independent source that Brueckner had used the dark web to discuss 'something little'.
Or do you have nothing to add to any sort of discussion on what is after all a discussion forum.
-
When I see something I consider worthy of debate then I am more than happy to contribute.
-
Do you have an opinion on whether the perjurer is running true to form or do you have validating information from an independent source that Brueckner had used the dark web to discuss 'something little'.
Or do you have nothing to add to any sort of discussion on what is after all a discussion forum.
The latter, definitely IMO.
-
When I see something I consider worthy of debate then I am more than happy to contribute.
To be honest with you ~ I cannot say I have noticed anything but negativity emanating from you and certainly no desire to make contributions as your deflections and non sequiturs style of posting gets in the way.
Once again you have successfully deflected discussion into inanity. It is not adult and I cannot help but imagine it may very well be by design.
There is quite a lot going on in Madeleine's case at the moment. Much of which can only be surmised about for the simple reason hers is an active case and the police are playing their cards very close to their chests ~ perhaps or particularly, even their Aces.
Please take part in discussion when it suits you to but please don't continue to throw jemmys into the works either when it suits you - it is becoming inordinately tiresome and in my opinion unfair to other posters.
-
It would be interesting to know where Kruse was in 2007. He’s been in Paraguay since 2010. The hairline in the attached pictures has caught my eye.
-
This is the same Amaral who is a proven liar and who's word cannot be believed ?
Sounds like a case of confirmation bias.
For those who bearte Amaral/PJ I would respectfully point out the shortcomings of the UK's MET:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9690017/Met-Police-branded-institutionally-corrupt-Daniel-Morgan-murder.html
-
It would be interesting to know where Kruse was in 2007. He’s been in Paraguay since 2010. The hairline in the attached pictures has caught my eye.
You always seem to seize on paedophiles and yet there's no firm evidence the disappearance was sexually motivated.
-
Sounds like a case of confirmation bias.
For those who bearte Amaral/PJ I would respectfully point out the shortcomings of the UK's MET:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9690017/Met-Police-branded-institutionally-corrupt-Daniel-Morgan-murder.html
Classic Whataboutery.
-
You always seem to seize on paedophiles and yet there's no firm evidence the disappearance was sexually motivated.
Did you overlook what is going on in the world at the moment and the turn taken by the German investigation into Madeleine McCann's case?
-
You always seem to seize on paedophiles and yet there's no firm evidence the disappearance was sexually motivated.
You may not be aware but the paedophile angle is one very much seized upon by both current police investigations, so it’s not just Anthro.
-
Did you overlook what is going on in the world at the moment and the turn taken by the German investigation into Madeleine McCann's case?
Please provide a link as you usually do.
-
Please provide a link as you usually do.
Are you serious?
-
You always seem to seize on paedophiles and yet there's no firm evidence the disappearance was sexually motivated.
It's what's known as The Presumption of Paedophiles.
It's roots can be traced to the evening of May 3rd 2007, where on, without any evidence of paedophiles, Gerry was ranting down the phone about gangs of them.
He has never explained how he gleaned the information & to date, not a shred of evidence of these paedophile abductor gangs has been presented.
-
It's what's known as The Presumption of Paedophiles.
It's roots can be traced to the evening of May 3rd 2007, where on, without any evidence of paedophiles, Gerry was ranting down the phone about gangs of them.
He has never explained how he gleaned the information & to date, not a shred of evidence of these paedophile abductor gangs has been presented.
On the contrary, it would seem PdL was stiff with paedos, even Amaral concedes that.
-
On the contrary, it would seem PdL was stiff with paedos, even Amaral concedes that.
Paedophiles gangs abducting kids?
How many such abductions have there been?
-
Did you overlook what is going on in the world at the moment and the turn taken by the German investigation into Madeleine McCann's case?
If its all being handled by the Germans why do think the MET put in a request, since granted, for additional funding from HO?
-
Paedophiles gangs abducting kids?
How many such abductions have there been?
As many as there have been examples of Gerry McCann ranting about paedo gangs abducting kids.
-
Please stay on topic. I have removed several posts including one of my own. TY
-
Paedophiles gangs abducting kids?
How many such abductions have there been?
(https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/05/NINTCHDBPICT000654133698-6.jpg?w=1860)
This is four year old Cash Gernon
(https://www.the-sun.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2021/05/NINTCHDBPICT000654259224-5.jpg?w=1860)
This is Cash being abducted from his bed where he was sleeping beside his twin brother
Cash was brutally murdered. The intruder returned to take his twin brother but fortunately was disturbed and ran off.
https://todayuknews.com/travel/texas-woman-who-cared-for-cash-gernon-4-gives-tearful-account-of-kidnap/
-
There is a tentative association made about Brueckner and a conversation he had on the dark web regarding Madeleine which was alleged by none other than Goncalo Amaral.
Snip
According to the former inspector, in an interview with the Spanish television network Cuatro, this new suspect, a convicted of paedophilia in Germany who killed three of his victims, is not the man who is in the crosshairs of the police
"Right now, there is talk of a German paedophile who is sentenced to life in prison. He killed children and was reported in the British press. Only what I do know is that it's not that man. It's another one," says Gonçalo Amaral.
This other indicated by the former inspector is also detained in Germany and also he is a paedophile. According to him, the man was flagged after talking about Maddie in a private chatroom of paedophilia.
https://theworldnews.net/pt-news/goncalo-amaral-diz-que-suspeito-do-desaparecimento-de-maddie-e-quase-igual-a-gerry-mccann
The first guy sounds like Martin Ney.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Ney
Re the second (presumably Bruckner), is this private chatroom anything more than an alleged chat with a pal in a pub?
FIEND'S 'BRAG' German paedo suspect ‘boasted to a friend in a pub about snatching Madeleine McCann’
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11786866/german-paedo-boast-snatch-maddie/
-
The first guy sounds like Martin Ney.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Ney
Re the second (presumably Bruckner), is this private chatroom anything more than an alleged chat with a pal in a pub?
FIEND'S 'BRAG' German paedo suspect ‘boasted to a friend in a pub about snatching Madeleine McCann’
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11786866/german-paedo-boast-snatch-maddie/
“PAEDOPHILE CHATROOM
Police also believe they have Brueckner talking in a paedophile chatroom in 2013 about how "bad" he wanted to abuse a little girl.
In the disturbing audio, which aired on 60 Minutes, Brueckner claims to have said if the "evidence is destroyed", he will "document exactly how they will be tortured".
"He's very, very clear about his fantasy, about abducting children and torturing them and using them for a couple of days. So these are very clear words," Hoffman said.”
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/inside-the-depraved-world-of-christian-brueckner-suspect-in-maddie-mccann-case/USAZBN3JXF4TB5M27LT4V45O2A/
-
The horrific case posted by Brietta demonstrates that children can be abducted from their beds without waking and scremaing the place down. It also demonstrates that they can be abducted even with their carers present in the house.
-
The horrific case posted by Brietta demonstrates that children can be abducted from their beds without waking and screaming the place down. It also demonstrates that they can be abducted even with their carers present in the house.
There are indeed some horrendously evil people around and being naïve about their existence allows them free rein.
-
German police have 'solved 90 per cent' of the Madeleine McCann case and are 'very convinced' Christian Brueckner is responsible
21 July 2020
Dieter Fehlinger, father of Brueckner's alleged 'ex-lover', said he spoke to police
Brueckner is prime suspect in the kidnap and murder of Madeleine McCann, 3
Mr Fehlinger said police 'seemed to be convinced that Christian B was their man'
Daughter Nicole has always maintained she hardly knew the serial sex offender
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8543033/German-police-solved-90-cent-Madeleine-McCann-case.html
Madeleine McCann suspect and ex had secret Portugal compound guarded by fierce dogs
25 JUN 2021
Nicole Fehlinger’s father Dieter went back to speak to the German equivalent of the FBI for a second time.
Prosecutors have confirmed he gave a lengthy interview and that they are seriously examining this new lead.
Nicole lived in Portugal at the time with Brueckner, ...
Mr Fehlinger has told investigators that Nicole and Brueckner had a secret compound on the Algarve which no-one else had been aware of.
Mr Fehlinger said: “No one knows that my daughter not only had the private residence in Portugal at her disposal, but also a separate compound.
“No-one has ever searched there or the property has never turned up in connection with Maddie, Brueckner or Nicole.
“The area is completely overgrown, not visible. No one could get in or out, only my daughter and perhaps Brueckner with her.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mcann-police-told-suspect-24400965
Did Mr Fehlinger know about the property in 2020 when he gave his first statement to the police. Or has he only found out about it more recently one wonders.
-
It's the 100m long by 50m wide rectangular area with patchy vegetation directly south of the White House (89) in Foral...
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Foral,+Algoz,+Portugal/@37.1927982,-8.2569568,149m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0xd1ac59bc719ce87:0x1c13350cfb8da65a!8m2!3d37.1949777!4d-8.2577792 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Foral,+Algoz,+Portugal/@37.1927982,-8.2569568,149m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0xd1ac59bc719ce87:0x1c13350cfb8da65a!8m2!3d37.1949777!4d-8.2577792)
-
It's the 100m long by 50m wide rectangular area with patchy vegetation directly south of the White House (89) in Foral...
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Foral,+Algoz,+Portugal/@37.1927982,-8.2569568,149m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0xd1ac59bc719ce87:0x1c13350cfb8da65a!8m2!3d37.1949777!4d-8.2577792 (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Foral,+Algoz,+Portugal/@37.1927982,-8.2569568,149m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0xd1ac59bc719ce87:0x1c13350cfb8da65a!8m2!3d37.1949777!4d-8.2577792)
Doesn't look to be totally enclosed, if I'm looking at the correct area, only boundary walls to north & south.
-
Doesn't look to be totally enclosed, if I'm looking at the correct area, only boundary walls to north & south.
Was it secure enough to keep them beasties in ?
-
I think Brueckner might have been to a pub, ate at a restaurant & used a public toilet at least once in his life.
Have these places been searched yet?
-
Was it secure enough to keep them beasties in ?
Wait a minute.
Maybe Brueckners girlfriends dogs were the same vicious animals that tried mauling Kate to death?
He set them on her!
-
I think Brueckner might have been to a pub, ate at a restaurant & used a public toilet at least once in his life.
Have these places been searched yet?
Fret not, it's on the 'to do' list when all else has failed. 8(0(*
-
Was it secure enough to keep them beasties in ?
Doesn't look like it. It seems to be part of a larger unenclosed area, some of it cultivated.
-
Doesn't look like it. It seems to be part of a larger unenclosed area, some of it cultivated.
No-one's mentioned dogs there when Nicole F was in residence. The owner of the property had a lot of dogs as I recall...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scPh64slUbs
-
Good story for the tabloids though. After all, who's going to refute it even if untrue?
-
No-one's mentioned dogs there when Nicole F was in residence. The owner of the property had a lot of dogs as I recall...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scPh64slUbs
Well either
1) her dad is lying
2) her dad has Alzheimers
3) the Mirror completely made it up
4) It’s true.
For some reason it’s been necessary to ridicule the idea that there were 4 fierce dogs guarding the property- I suppose in the absence of anything else to heap scorn on today it will do to keep little minds amused.
-
Well either
1) her dad is lying
2) her dad has Alzheimers
3) the Mirror completely made it up
4) It’s true.
For some reason it’s been necessary to ridicule the idea that there were 4 fierce dogs guarding the property- I suppose in the absence of anything else to heap scorn on today it will do to keep little minds amused.
That's because it is a ridiculous non-story.
Tabloid guff.
-
That's because it is a ridiculous non-story.
Tabloid guff.
It’s certainly woken up the trolls.
-
If the Germans told us a year ago that Madeleine's case was 90% solved I think it means that all that is missing is proof positive of Brueckner's or AN other's or Brueckner + AN other's involvement.
But I think they will get there if they're not there already.
It looks very much as though Dieter Fehlinger has managed to recall information he didn't pass on a year ago. If he can do that who is to say there won't be others.
-
Well either
1) her dad is lying
2) her dad has Alzheimers
3) the Mirror completely made it up
4) It’s true.
For some reason it’s been necessary to ridicule the idea that there were 4 fierce dogs guarding the property- I suppose in the absence of anything else to heap scorn on today it will do to keep little minds amused.
It isn't unusual either in Portugal or in any remote and secluded area worldwide to have big business type dogs roaming free on your property.
Mrs Murat is an example.
It is so predictable that everyone and everything outwith the sceptic lexicon is subject to sceptic scorn ~ so utterly predictable the only surprise would be their failure to do so.
If there were three or four large dogs prowling around on land we are told Brueckner had access to it means that when he was away 'on business' or in jail someone had to be there on occasion to look after them and check on whatever their presence denotes was being guarded.
They weren't guarding the scrub on the wasteland that is for sure.
I think this new information is interesting from many points of view ~ which is why there is such an obvious and concerted effort to deflect attention.
Doesn't matter a bit though what shenanigans internet detectives get themselves up to ~ the big boys better known as the real detectives will have it well marked and are probably working on that and other information even as the sceptics continue their self delusion the spectacle of which I am finding far more amusing than anything else.
-
It isn't unusual either in Portugal or in any remote and secluded area worldwide to have big business type dogs roaming free on your property.
Mrs Murat is an example.
It is so predictable that everyone and everything outwith the sceptic lexicon is subject to sceptic scorn ~ so utterly predictable the only surprise would be their failure to do so.
If there were three or four large dogs prowling around on land we are told Brueckner had access to it means that when he was away 'on business' or in jail someone had to be there on occasion to look after them and check on whatever their presence denotes was being guarded.
They weren't guarding the scrub on the wasteland that is for sure.
I think this new information is interesting from many points of view ~ which is why there is such an obvious and concerted effort to deflect attention.
Doesn't matter a bit though what shenanigans internet detectives get themselves up to ~ the big boys better known as the real detectives will have it well marked and are probably working on that and other information even as the sceptics continue their self delusion the spectacle of which I am finding far more amusing than anything else.
When were we told Brueckner had access to this land?
I didn't read that anywhere in the article.
-
It isn't unusual either in Portugal or in any remote and secluded area worldwide to have big business type dogs roaming free on your property.
Mrs Murat is an example.
It is so predictable that everyone and everything outwith the sceptic lexicon is subject to sceptic scorn ~ so utterly predictable the only surprise would be their failure to do so.
If there were three or four large dogs prowling around on land we are told Brueckner had access to it means that when he was away 'on business' or in jail someone had to be there on occasion to look after them and check on whatever their presence denotes was being guarded.
They weren't guarding the scrub on the wasteland that is for sure.
I think this new information is interesting from many points of view ~ which is why there is such an obvious and concerted effort to deflect attention.
Doesn't matter a bit though what shenanigans internet detectives get themselves up to ~ the big boys better known as the real detectives will have it well marked and are probably working on that and other information even as the sceptics continue their self delusion the spectacle of which I am finding far more amusing than anything else.
I thought they were generally known as Fat Cats 8)--))
-
When were we told Brueckner had access to this land?
I didn't read that anywhere in the article.
Then your comprehension skills are pathetic "Mr Fehlinger has told investigators that Nicole and Brueckner had a secret compound on the Algarve which no-one else had been aware of."
-
Unless Myster is wrong, it's been shown to be a piece of open scrub land.
-
Then your comprehension skills are pathetic "Mr Fehlinger has told investigators that Nicole and Brueckner had a secret compound on the Algarve which no-one else had been aware of."
According to the Mail.....
"compound owned by the ex-girlfriend"
Not Brueckner.
"The area was so overgrown, Mr Fehlinger reportedly said, that no one would be able to get in or out, other than his daughter and perhaps her then-boyfriend."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9727235/Madeline-McCann-Detectives-searching-girl-investigate-new-tip-secret-compound.html
Anyway, about your comprehension skills................
-
According to the Mail.....
"compound owned by the ex-girlfriend"
Not Brueckner.
"The area was so overgrown, Mr Fehlinger reportedly said, that no one would be able to get in or out, other than his daughter and perhaps her then-boyfriend."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9727235/Madeline-McCann-Detectives-searching-girl-investigate-new-tip-secret-compound.html
Anyway, about your comprehension skills................
Nothing at all wrong with my comprehension.
As I said ~ Brueckner had access ~ much as he had access to many other areas in Portugal and Europe where he was free to come and go and do pretty much as he liked throughout his criminal career.
We know that one was used to store the proceeds of some of his crimes. We know that in another he had stored evidence of his paedophilia.
I imagine investigators will have more than a passing interest in any area identified as having a connection to Breuckner prior to 2007 and onwards.
Obviously Mr Fehlinger thinks so too or he wouldn't have bothered the German police with his recent recollection of his daughter's property, which seems to have also slipped her mind when Brueckner was declared as prime suspect in Madeleine's disappearance 😁
-
Nothing at all wrong with my comprehension.
As I said ~ Brueckner had access ~ much as he had access to many other areas in Portugal and Europe where he was free to come and go and do pretty much as he liked throughout his criminal career.
We know that one was used to store the proceeds of some of his crimes. We know that in another he had stored evidence of his paedophilia.
I imagine investigators will have more than a passing interest in any area identified as having a connection to Breuckner prior to 2007 and onwards.
Obviously Mr Fehlinger thinks so too or he wouldn't have bothered the German police with his recent recollection of his daughter's property, which seems to have also slipped her mind when Brueckner was declared as prime suspect in Madeleine's disappearance 😁
"Brueckner had access"
Where in the interview does Mr Fehlinger say that?
-
"Brueckner had access"
Where in the interview does Mr Fehlinger say that?
I'm bored with you now. Please forgive me if I don't respond to any more of your nonsense for the time being 😁
-
I'm bored with you now. Please forgive me if I don't respond to any more of your nonsense for the time being 😁
Well I'm sorry you are bored with the detail, but nowhere in either the mirror or the mail article is there any claim Brueckner had access to this property owned, not by him, but by his girlfriend.
Mr Felingher himself said 'perhaps' Brueckner could get in there .
He doesn't even know himself, but you do apparently.
Like I said earlier today, perhaps Brueckner went to pizza hut once.
-
Well I'm sorry you are bored with the detail, but nowhere in either the mirror or the mail article is there any claim Brueckner had access to this property owned, not by him, but by his girlfriend.
Mr Felingher himself said 'perhaps' Brueckner could get in there .
He doesn't even know himself, but you do apparently.
Like I said earlier today, perhaps Brueckner went to pizza hut once.
You’re right. He probably had no access to his girlfriend’s property. That’s probably why she had the dogs - to make sure her horrible rapist paedo boyfriend stayed away.
-
Well I'm sorry you are bored with the detail, but nowhere in either the mirror or the mail article is there any claim Brueckner had access to this property owned, not by him, but by his girlfriend.
Mr Felingher himself said 'perhaps' Brueckner could get in there .
He doesn't even know himself, but you do apparently.
Like I said earlier today, perhaps Brueckner went to pizza hut once.
By implication, Brückner had access to the named compound?
‘Mr Fehlinger has told investigators that Nicole and Brueckner had a secret compound on the Algarve which no-one else had been aware of’.
-
You’re right. He probably had no access to his girlfriend’s property. That’s probably why she had the dogs - to make sure her horrible rapist paedo boyfriend stayed away.
I thought she had a live-in boyfriend and it wasn't Brueckner?
-
I thought she had a live-in boyfriend and it wasn't Brueckner?
was she two-timing him then?
-
It would seem the Portuguese media are in on the plot to link these two together and blacken their names by association
“
Court documents in Portugal have revealed that she had regular phone conversations with Brueckner and enjoyed a romantic weekend break in Lisbon together – just months after Madeleine disappeared in May 2007.
Nicole Fehlinger was accused of tipping off the German drifter so he could steal a family’s life-savings from a house along the coast from Praia da Luz in November 2007.
Portuguese TV investigation show Friday at Nine reported: ‘As in the Maddie case, the phone call took place just before the crime, signalling that the house was free.
‘A man who neighbours have described as being Christian Brueckner made a phone call and left with a ruck sack from which hung a heavy tool.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8536519/Pictured-Girlfriend-accomplice-McCann-suspect-seen-time-unmasked.html
-
So which house is she referring to here then?
‘One day I came home and he was in my neighbour’s garden and they were talking about cars.
‘My neighbour told me he was German and he introduced me. Because we are both German we started talking.
‘Sometime later he asked if he could park his campervan outside my house. He asked if he could take water and some electricity. I said why not.’
Fehlinger, who was looking after troubled children as part of a German fostering programme, added: ‘He came into the house sometimes – for something to eat and to watch over the children.
‘I was not interested in him. I had my own boyfriend at the time. But I cannot say that he was not interested in me.’
-
Ms Fehlinger should be arrested.
She had access to Brueckners kid porn.
-
Ms Fehlinger should be arrested.
She had access to Brueckners kid porn.
Did she? How do you work that one out? I thought it was buried under a dead dog in Germany.
-
Did she? How do you work that one out? I thought it was buried under a dead dog in Germany.
Well it's been claimed Brueckner had access to Felhingers property by way of dating her.
-
Well it's been claimed Brueckner had access to Felhingers property by way of dating her.
Fehlinger has stated as fact that Brückner had access to her property, (and more worryingly her kids). You may wish to ridicule that fact but fact it is nonetheless.
-
Fehlinger has stated as fact that Brückner had access to her property, (and more worryingly her kids). You may wish to ridicule that fact but fact it is nonetheless.
Did she mention her secret property?
-
So which house is she referring to here then?
‘One day I came home and he was in my neighbour’s garden and they were talking about cars.
‘My neighbour told me he was German and he introduced me. Because we are both German we started talking.
‘Sometime later he asked if he could park his campervan outside my house. He asked if he could take water and some electricity. I said why not.’
Fehlinger, who was looking after troubled children as part of a German fostering programme, added: ‘He came into the house sometimes – for something to eat and to watch over the children.
‘I was not interested in him. I had my own boyfriend at the time. But I cannot say that he was not interested in me.’
Yes, the boyfriend’s name is Roman.
-
So which house is she referring to here then?
‘One day I came home and he was in my neighbour’s garden and they were talking about cars.
‘My neighbour told me he was German and he introduced me. Because we are both German we started talking.
‘Sometime later he asked if he could park his campervan outside my house. He asked if he could take water and some electricity. I said why not.’
Fehlinger, who was looking after troubled children as part of a German fostering programme, added: ‘He came into the house sometimes – for something to eat and to watch over the children.
‘I was not interested in him. I had my own boyfriend at the time. But I cannot say that he was not interested in me.’
Did you notice that these words weren't actually spoken by Fehlinger?
"The 'ex-lover' of Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner today refused to answer questions about her, when challenged to tell the truth by MailOnline...Nicole Fehlinger allegedly told a friend"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8536519/Pictured-Girlfriend-accomplice-McCann-suspect-seen-time-unmasked.html
So it was an anonymous friend who alleged that she said those things.
-
Did you notice that these words weren't actually spoken by Fehlinger?
"The 'ex-lover' of Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner today refused to answer questions about her, when challenged to tell the truth by MailOnline...Nicole Fehlinger allegedly told a friend"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8536519/Pictured-Girlfriend-accomplice-McCann-suspect-seen-time-unmasked.html
So it was an anonymous friend who alleged that she said those things.
So often the way with this case.
-
Perhaps these are the German Shepherd dogs the article is referring to (?)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8396679/amp/Owner-villa-Madeleine-McCann-murder-suspect-lived-urges-police-search-grounds.html
-
Is this not The Compound that Sadie referred to some time ago and appeared to know quite a lot about?
-
Perhaps these are the German Shepherd dogs the article is referring to (?)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8396679/amp/Owner-villa-Madeleine-McCann-murder-suspect-lived-urges-police-search-grounds.html
Vicious Kangal dogs they are not, it'll be Cerberus or even Fluffy next.
-
https://www.google.com/search?q=kangal+dogs&safe=off&client=firefox-b-d&sxsrf=ALeKk0240VXQSLTP5oW6qHTaqLhVvDzvSA:1624792688351&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj58Ja42LfxAhXZVRUIHbEbAUsQ_AUoAXoECAEQBA&biw=1279&bih=751
Big brutes, aren't they ?
-
Perhaps these are the German Shepherd dogs the article is referring to (?)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8396679/amp/Owner-villa-Madeleine-McCann-murder-suspect-lived-urges-police-search-grounds.html
Dogs which are associated with the owner, who makes no mention of inheriting them from her tenant;
Silva now shares the property called Villa Bianca with eight rescue dogs who repeatedly run and jump up at wrought iron gates when people walk past.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8396679/amp/Owner-villa-Madeleine-McCann-murder-suspect-lived-urges-police-search-grounds.html
-
Perhaps these are the German Shepherd dogs the article is referring to (?)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8396679/amp/Owner-villa-Madeleine-McCann-murder-suspect-lived-urges-police-search-grounds.html
Is that a recent photo? If so it wouldn't be the dogs they mentioned the dogs would have been there 14 years ago and so would be dead by now.
-
Perhaps these are the German Shepherd dogs the article is referring to (?)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8396679/amp/Owner-villa-Madeleine-McCann-murder-suspect-lived-urges-police-search-grounds.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8396679/amp/Owner-villa-Madeleine-McCann-murder-suspect-lived-urges-police-search-grounds.html)
There's a worn out, broken-down sceptic tank in one of the photos... much like the one that still exists on here.
-
Is that a recent photo? If so it wouldn't be the dogs they mentioned the dogs would have been there 14 years ago and so would be dead by now.
Well, not necessarily dead by now, but certainly on their last legs. Someone else appears to own that compound now.
The point being that this was ignored at the time. Or are there two compounds? Both of which need looking at.
Brueckner seems to have parked his camper van somewhere. Well, he would have had to, wouldn't he.
I find the analysis of Davel entirely pertinent, although not necessarily correct.
-
There's a worn out, broken-down sceptic tank in one of the photos... much like the one that still exists on here.
It never ceases to amaze me of how many bodies get found in Sceptic Tanks. Pun intended, as no doubt was yours.
-
Did she mention her secret property?
Maybe. I take it you would much rather this area was not searched. Maybe the McCanns knew about it, eh?
-
Perhaps these are the German Shepherd dogs the article is referring to (?)
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8396679/amp/Owner-villa-Madeleine-McCann-murder-suspect-lived-urges-police-search-grounds.html
Don't think I would stick my big toe over the boundary of their compound unless I had an invitation.
-
Did you notice that these words weren't actually spoken by Fehlinger?
"The 'ex-lover' of Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner today refused to answer questions about her, when challenged to tell the truth by MailOnline...Nicole Fehlinger allegedly told a friend"
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8536519/Pictured-Girlfriend-accomplice-McCann-suspect-seen-time-unmasked.html
So it was an anonymous friend who alleged that she said those things.
So where did you get the idea she had another boyfriend at the time?
-
Is this not The Compound that Sadie referred to some time ago and appeared to know quite a lot about?
I know that Sadie and her husband thought it best to make an exit tout suite. She did refer to the presence of children and she thought they might have been in some kind of care as in orphanage or something.
-
Don't think I would stick my big toe over the boundary of their compound unless I had an invitation.
And nor would Amaral, apparently.
-
I wonder why Fehlinger hasn’t sued the media about all these allegedly false stories about her in the media.
-
And nor would Amaral, apparently.
As far as he was concerned he had his woman stitched up. Interestingly enough the ubiquitous former coordinator has been rather conspicuous of late by his absence from current events.
I think between Brueckner, Herr Felhinger and others breaking their silence and Amaral keeping schtum I'm getting the impression that the German investigation is doing some hard hitting.
-
I wonder why Fehlinger hasn’t sued the media about all these allegedly false stories about her in the media.
I think the media are treading warily here ~ the caveat printed speaks volumes and is a privilege the McCanns never enjoyed.
-
I think the media are treading warily here ~ the caveat printed speaks volumes and is a privilege the McCanns never enjoyed.
Well I reckon she bears a physical resemblance to the Posh Spice photofit, so sue me.
-
Well I reckon she bears a physical resemblance to the Posh Spice photofit, so sue me.
It is heart breaking to think of the investigative opportunities which were bypassed because the PJ just didn't have a clue about how to deal with a missing child case.
Getting bogged down in mistakes built around Calpol - 'the scent of death' and trying to build a case on prejudice and not evidence gave no hope of resolution.
Even yet so many years after Amaral still pushes his ludicrous opinions in television interviews as far as I could see with no challenge, when the rest of the world awaits for the results of the German investigation.
-
Dogs which are associated with the owner, who makes no mention of inheriting them from her tenant;
Silva now shares the property called Villa Bianca with eight rescue dogs who repeatedly run and jump up at wrought iron gates when people walk past.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8396679/amp/Owner-villa-Madeleine-McCann-murder-suspect-lived-urges-police-search-grounds.html
They may be offspring, though (?)
-
It is heart breaking to think of the investigative opportunities which were bypassed because the PJ just didn't have a clue about how to deal with a missing child case.
Getting bogged down in mistakes built around Calpol - 'the scent of death' and trying to build a case on prejudice and not evidence gave no hope of resolution.
Even yet so many years after Amaral still pushes his ludicrous opinions in television interviews as far as I could see with no challenge, when the rest of the world awaits for the results of the German investigation.
If only the world would just wait for the results of the German investigation. Instead there's speculation, gossip, and innuendo. We know the Germans don't have the evidence they need to charge their suspect because they've said so.
-
If only the world would just wait for the results of the German investigation. Instead there's speculation, gossip, and innuendo. We know the Germans don't have the evidence they need to charge their suspect because they've said so.
Indeed yes, all of this may be nothing more than red herrings, as have all the other 'leads'
-
If only the world would just wait for the results of the German investigation. Instead there's speculation, gossip, and innuendo. We know the Germans don't have the evidence they need to charge their suspect because they've said so.
Yeah, like McCann sceptics aka "serious researchers" never indulged in that in the last 14 years. The lack of self awareness is breathtaking!
-
If only the world would just wait for the results of the German investigation. Instead there's speculation, gossip, and innuendo. We know the Germans don't have the evidence they need to charge their suspect because they've said so.
Like what The PJ did do you mean? Now there's a laugh.
-
Yeah, like McCann sceptics aka "serious researchers" never indulged in that in the last 14 years. The lack of self awareness is breathtaking!
This really isn't worth the time of day.
But since The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann is now being forced into this discussion I do think that we have to consider what they have to say.
In fact I would start a Thread myself if I thought it might help.
Is anyone else up for this?
-
Oh Dear. You could be right about that. I never diid know why I was dropped from that Site. But I haven't looked at that one for years either. Does anyone?
No idea. I find this place more than enough.
-
No idea. I find this place more than enough.
Me too also. Gulp.
But this is what The UK Justice Forum tries to do. I just get a bit shirty now and again when confronted by too much bottox.
You all will have to forgive me for that.
And I certainly wouldn't want to see the loss of you.
-
Yeah, like McCann sceptics aka "serious researchers" never indulged in that in the last 14 years. The lack of self awareness is breathtaking!
So it's OK because 'they' do it too?
-
So it's OK because 'they' do it too?
Did I say that? Tell you what - practice what you preach and don’t write another word on the case until the German investigation has been concluded, can you?
-
Did I say that? Tell you what - practice what you preach and don’t write another word on the case until the German investigation has been concluded, can you?
I'll be posting the known facts as I usually do. Which are that Wolters, at this moment, doesn't have the evidence he needs to charge his suspect.
-
I'll be posting the known facts as I usually do. Which are that Wolters, at this moment, doesn't have the evidence he needs to charge his suspect.
My understanding is that Mr Wolters has enough evidence but since Brückner is already imprisoned, he is using the opportunity to gather more information. It was said that his team will be bringing a witness back to Portugal to assist in their investigation. This person may well be Dieter, Nicole’s father. Questioning a suspect is the last step in German law. Ps. Nicole’s daughter is no longer on facebook. Dieter has also changed his privacy settings.
-
I'll be posting the known facts as I usually do. Which are that Wolters, at this moment, doesn't have the evidence he needs to charge his suspect.
Instead of speculating about whether or not the investigation has made headway (a discussion which you engaged in and encouraged recently) you could just wait and see couldn’t you? Also, your posting of “known facts” is very selective imo.
-
I'll be posting the known facts as I usually do. Which are that Wolters, at this moment, doesn't have the evidence he needs to charge his suspect.
Its not an established fact that Wolters does not have enough evidence to charge CB
-
My understanding is that Mr Wolters has enough evidence but since Brückner is already imprisoned, he is using the opportunity to gather more information. It was said that his team will be bringing a witness back to Portugal to assist in their investigation. This person may well be Dieter, Nicole’s father. Questioning a suspect is the last step in German law. Ps. Nicole’s daughter is no longer on facebook. Dieter has also changed his privacy settings.
Has Wolters said he has enough evidence? I must have missed that. Such a wide spectrum of opinion about all this. I'm with Mick Neville;
“There’s nothing, there’s no tangible evidence whatsoever connecting him to the crime.
“He’s a reasonable suspect, given he’s looking at child pornography and the fact we know we know he was in the area with a vehicle but that’s about it really.”
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-only-hope-24090479
-
Please stay on topic guys. Cheers !
-
Has Wolters said he has enough evidence? I must have missed that. Such a wide spectrum of opinion about all this. I'm with Mick Neville;
“There’s nothing, there’s no tangible evidence whatsoever connecting him to the crime.
“He’s a reasonable suspect, given he’s looking at child pornography and the fact we know we know he was in the area with a vehicle but that’s about it really.”
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-only-hope-24090479
Is Mick Neville being briefed on progress by the Germans then?
-
I'll be posting the known facts as I usually do. Which are that Wolters, at this moment, doesn't have the evidence he needs to charge his suspect.
I think it highly probable that you are confusing your opinion with fact. Mr Wolters has been playing his cards very close to his chest of late and at this moment you really do not know what evidence he may have.
-
Has Wolters said he has enough evidence? I must have missed that. Such a wide spectrum of opinion about all this. I'm with Mick Neville;
“There’s nothing, there’s no tangible evidence whatsoever connecting him to the crime.
“He’s a reasonable suspect, given he’s looking at child pornography and the fact we know we know he was in the area with a vehicle but that’s about it really.”
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-only-hope-24090479
You said you were posting known facts and then quote someone's opinion as reported in the Star.. How does this idiot thinks he knows what Wolters has
-
You said you were posting known facts and then quote someone's opinion as reported in the Star.. How does this idiot thinks he knows what Wolters has
To quote someone else on this forum, he’s just another hustler making a buck.
-
You said you were posting known facts and then quote someone's opinion as reported in the Star.. How does this idiot thinks he knows what Wolters has
What he said is what we know Wolters has. All else is speculation.
-
What he said is what we know Wolters has. All else is speculation.
It depends how you interptet what he says... And understand the context. Wolters may well have enough to charge..but wants more. Therefore it is not an established fact
-
It depends how you interptet what he says... And understand the context. Wolters may well have enough to charge..but wants more. Therefore it is not an established fact
It isn't a fact Wolters has evidence.
It's a fact that he claims to have evidence.
-
To be honest with you ~ I cannot say I have noticed anything but negativity emanating from you and certainly no desire to make contributions as your deflections and non sequiturs style of posting gets in the way.
Once again you have successfully deflected discussion into inanity. It is not adult and I cannot help but imagine it may very well be by design.
There is quite a lot going on in Madeleine's case at the moment. Much of which can only be surmised about for the simple reason hers is an active case and the police are playing their cards very close to their chests ~ perhaps or particularly, even their Aces.
Please take part in discussion when it suits you to but please don't continue to throw jemmys into the works either when it suits you - it is becoming inordinately tiresome and in my opinion unfair to other posters.
Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn what you think.
-
It depends how you interptet what he says... And understand the context. Wolters may well have enough to charge..but wants more. Therefore it is not an established fact
Interpretation is just another word for opinion imo.
-
Here endeth today's lesson in semantics (one hopes).
-
Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn what you think.
Hmm...you cared enough to reply though. How about you send Brietta to Coventry too like you have done to me, that way you needn't trouble yourself to think up new ways to be insulting? Hope this helps.
-
Maybe. I take it you would much rather this area was not searched. Maybe the McCanns knew about it, eh?
Sorry, I've only just seen your reply.
Yes, I think they really should finger tip search Ms Felinghers secret property that Brueckner may or may not have visited & may or may not have even known existed.
It will give me something else to sneer at when they inevitably find absolutely nothing in connection with Maddie.
-
Please note ~ I will be deleting all off topic posts or any which don't meet with forum etiquette. Thank you.
-
Interpretation is just another word for opinion imo.
Neither are facts
-
Sorry, I've only just seen your reply.
Yes, I think they really should finger tip search Ms Felinghers secret property that Brueckner may or may not have visited & may or may not have even known existed.
It will give me something else to sneer at when they inevitably find absolutely nothing in connection with Maddie.
Child.
-
Here endeth today's lesson in semantics (one hopes).
Define semantics.
This is fact;
"We are making progress and have the same number of investigators working on the case, but we don't yet have enough to charge the suspect."
https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccann-police-have-been-investigating-prime-suspect-in-case-for-four-years-12324624
Which has been interpreted as;
snip/
"Wolters may well have enough to charge..but wants more."
That is wishful thinking imo.
-
"Define semantics" @)(++(*
I find it interesting that you are now ascribing the word "fact" to describe everything that HCW says. So, when he says (words to the effect of) "if you knew what the evidence was you would accept that CB was responsible for taking Madeleine" you accept that is a fact do you? Somehow I doubt it.
-
Define semantics.
This is fact;
"We are making progress and have the same number of investigators working on the case, but we don't yet have enough to charge the suspect."
https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccann-police-have-been-investigating-prime-suspect-in-case-for-four-years-12324624
Which has been interpreted as;
snip/
"Wolters may well have enough to charge..but wants more."
That is wishful thinking imo.
My opinions are based on evidence.
I realise things may be different in Germany but..
Michael Stone was convicted with it seems the only evidence being his confession to another inmate.
Colin Stagg was arrested and tried based on basically no evidence.
Wolters imo.. From his statements.. Has more than there was against either of those but not enough to guarantee s conviction
Thats my opinion and you cannot prove it wrong... Therefore saying he doesnt have enough evidence to charge is not a fact
-
"Define semantics" @)(++(*
I find it interesting that you are now ascribing the word "fact" to describe everything that HCW says. So, when he says (words to the effect of) "if you knew what the evidence was you would accept that CB was responsible for taking Madeleine" you accept that is a fact do you? Somehow I doubt it.
Difficult to define isn't it?
It's a fact that Wolters has said certain things. It's not a fact that eveything he says is factual. As Brueckner has not been charged it's reasonable to believe that the prosecutor is telling the truth when he says he doesn't have enough evidence to lay charges.
When Wolters says;
"If you knew the evidence we had you would come to the same conclusion as I do..."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55224904
He's speculating, because he can't possibly predict what others will think.
-
Difficult to define isn't it?
It's a fact that Wolters has said certain things. It's not a fact that eveything he says is factual. As Brueckner has not been charged it's reasonable to believe that the prosecutor is telling the truth when he says he doesn't have enough evidence to lay charges.
When Wolters says;
"If you knew the evidence we had you would come to the same conclusion as I do..."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55224904
He's speculating, because he can't possibly predict what others will think.
Do you accept that he has information that is not in the public domain that (jn his opinion and presumably that of his department) strengthens his case against Bruckner or not?
-
Difficult to define isn't it?
It's a fact that Wolters has said certain things. It's not a fact that eveything he says is factual. As Brueckner has not been charged it's reasonable to believe that the prosecutor is telling the truth when he says he doesn't have enough evidence to lay charges.
When Wolters says;
"If you knew the evidence we had you would come to the same conclusion as I do..."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55224904
He's speculating, because he can't possibly predict what others will think.
It would depend on what evidence he has.... He can predict what others will think depending on the evidencee he has.. So you are speculating.
-
It would depend on what evidence he has.... He can predict what others will think depending on the evidencee he has.. So you are speculating.
I can predict that if and when this evidence is revealed (no matter how compelling) that certain individuals will not accept it as evidence that Bruckner committed the crime.
I wonder if the evidence is a cadaver dog alert to his property - now that would be interesting. It would be a bit like witnessing the flipping of the magnetic poles.
-
Difficult to define isn't it?
It's a fact that Wolters has said certain things. It's not a fact that eveything he says is factual. As Brueckner has not been charged it's reasonable to believe that the prosecutor is telling the truth when he says he doesn't have enough evidence to lay charges.
When Wolters says;
"If you knew the evidence we had you would come to the same conclusion as I do..."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55224904
He's speculating, because he can't possibly predict what others will think.
The CPS told me in my case.. Not enough evidence to charge but I know as a fact the suspect is guilty and if you knew the evidence I had you would agree
-
Do you accept that he has information that is not in the public domain that (jn his opinion and presumably that of his department) strengthens his case against Bruckner or not?
Wolters certainly seems convinced, by the evidence he claims to have, of his suspect's guilt. That's not enough, however. His job is to prove to a court of law that he's correct. Only time will tell if he can do that.
-
Wolters certainly seems convinced, by the evidence he claims to have, of his suspect's guilt. That's not enough, however. His job is to prove to a court of law that he's correct. Only time will tell if he can do that.
You didn't answer my question directly (as per usual).
-
Wolters certainly seems convinced, by the evidence he claims to have, of his suspect's guilt. That's not enough, however. His job is to prove to a court of law that he's correct. Only time will tell if he can do that.
Amaral claimed he could prove MM died in the apartment.. He told us the evidence he had... Which proved nothing.
I have seen nothing to suggest Wolters is so incompetent
-
Amaral claimed he could prove MM died in the apartment.. Je told us the evidence he had... Which proved nothing.
I have seen nothing to suggest Wolters is so incompetent
Why?
What evidence does Wolters have?
-
You didn't answer my question directly (as per usual).
Afaik I'm under no obligation to answer your many questions.
-
Afaik I'm under no obligation to answer your many questions.
You did answer it - only you didn't give a straight answer as per usual, which to me tells me all I need to know, thanks.
-
Perhaps just wait until Wolters reveals his evidence rather than this constant speculation
-
Perhaps just wait until Wolters reveals his evidence rather than this constant speculation
well exactly.
-
‘I’m persecuted’ – Suspect in Madeleine McCann case writes statement from prison cell
June 15 2021 02:30
The German suspect in the disappearance of English toddler Madeleine McCann has released a statement from prison protesting his innocence.
In his first public comment on the case, Christian Bruckner said German prosecutors had failed to bring charges and accused them of persecuting him.
“Charging someone with a crime is one thing. It is something completely different, namely an unbelievable scandal, when a public prosecutor starts a public prejudicial campaign before proceedings are even opened,” the 44-year-old convicted paedophile and rapist said in a handwritten statement issued from his prison cell.
“You have proved worldwide, through arbitrary convictions in the past and through scandalous prejudicial campaigns in the present, that you are unsuitable for the office of an ‘advocate for the honest and German people who trust in justice’, and that you bring shame to the German legal system.”
Bruckner was named as a suspect in the toddler’s disappearance a year ago.
German prosecutors claim they have evidence he killed the child but have yet to bring any charges against him in connection with the case.
Scotland Yard has said it is yet to see any evidence Madeleine is dead or was murdered, and it is still treating her case as a missing person inquiry.
Bruckner is serving a seven-year sentence for the 2005 rape of a 72-year-old woman in the same area of Portugal where Madeleine went missing. A year after Bruckner was named as a suspect, despite extensive searches and public appeals for information, no charges have been brought.
Bruckner called on the two German prosecutors in charge of the case, Hans Christian Wolters and Ute Lindemann, to resign. His statement was accompanied by a crude childish drawing, apparently by Bruckner, of the two prosecutors in a restaurant ordering a “fillet of forensic” – a reference to comments by the prosecutors that they do not have “forensic evidence” linking him to the disappearance.
The statement, dated May 8, has only now been released to the media.
It is signed with Bruckner’s full name, apparently waiving his right to anonymity under German privacy laws.
Madeleine was three when she went missing from a Praia da Luz holiday villa in 2007.
https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/britain/im-persecuted-suspect-in-madeleine-mccann-case-writes-statement-from-prison-cell-40540010.html
I don't think Brueckner's legal team would have had any role to play in Brueckner's rather rattled communication with the press.
I don't think they would have allowed him to make that elementary error if they had anything to do with it.
Seems the pressure is getting to him anyway, whatever the advice from his lawyers might have been.
-
It would depend on what evidence he has.... He can predict what others will think depending on the evidencee he has.. So you are speculating.
But unless CB is charged it's safe to assume that there is not enough evidence to convict him.
-
But unless CB is charged it's safe to assume that there is not enough evidence to convict him.
I dont know if hes guilty... But Wolters may. It is possible to know someone is guilty but not have the evidence to charge or convict. We need to wait for Wolt to play his hand
-
I dont know if hes guilty... But Wolters may. It is possible to know someone is guilty but not have the evidence to charge or convict. We need to wait for Wolt to play his hand
Sometimes the forum is well ahead of the game in the discussion of Madeleine's case. Much as we were when the Topic: Search for Madeleine McCann moves to Greece.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8461.msg422586#msg422586 was opened back in September 2017
It lasted for two pages. There seems to be a lack of interest in expanding any discussion which is not aimed at traducing the McCanns and dumbing down the forum as a result.
Scotland Yard is looking for Madeleine’s secret in Athens
August 28, 2017
Scotland Yard is looking for the secret of British toddler Madeleine McCann in Athens after a witness contacted the team Grange. A Greek newspaper revealed that a German citizen living in Athens contacted “Team Grange” claiming he had information about the case as he was in nearby area when 3-year-old Madeleine disappeared from a hotel in Algarve Portugal in 2007.
According to Sunday newspaper To Vima, the 46-year-old German citizen has already spoken with detectives of Scotland Yard’s “Grange”, a team established in 2011 and assigned with the Madeleine’s case.
The meeting between the British detectives and the German took place in Athens a couple of days ago, the man reportedly gave critical information about the girl’s fate. He has been described as “important and trustworthy witness.”
https://www.keeptalkinggreece.com/2017/08/28/madeleine-mccann-greece/
Thanks to Valeria we had the news first.
Did we bother to treat it with any sort of analytical intelligence or did we just continue with ensuring the main task of assiduously dumbing down the content of the McCann board and threads with the usual vigour.
Madeleine McCann: Police have been investigating prime suspect in case for four years
4 June 2021
Police have been investigating the prime suspect in the Madeleine McCann case for four years, Sky News has learned.
German prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters says police have been looking for information on the main suspect, known as Christian B, for a long time and "had already built up a fact file on him before we asked the public to help us".
A year ago the prosecutor and Scotland Yard announced they had a new suspect and made appeals to anyone who knew him, his movements and lifestyle.
They didn't name the suspect, but it quickly emerged he was a 43-year-old German drifter known, under German privacy laws, as Christian B.
Mr Wolters said: "By that time Christian B had been under investigation already for three years. We did not take the decision to go public lightly.
"Since then we have found a lot more pieces of the puzzle, but I cannot reveal what they are. We are making progress and have the same number of investigators working on the case, but we don't yet have enough to charge the suspect."
He added: "There is no time limit to our investigation, but we won't keep it going forever."
The prosecutor has said in the past he was conducting a murder investigation and that he has evidence that Madeleine died in Portugal, though he hasn't explained to her parents Kate and Gerry McCann why he is so sure.
Christian B was living in Portugal in 2007 when three-year-old Madeleine vanished from her bed in her family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz on the Algarve coast.
The case against him is circumstantial - he is a convicted paedophile, he lived in the area, on the night she disappeared his mobile phone was in use nearby and the next day he changed the registration of one of his vehicles.
He's also alleged to have confessed that he abducted Madeleine to a criminal associate during a bar conversation.
The associate, who was later arrested in Greece, contacted Scotland Yard and told them of Christian B's alleged confession to him.
Scotland Yard detectives flew to Greece to interview the associate and they later changed the focus of the Madeline investigation.
Christian B is currently serving a seven-year jail sentence in Germany for the rape of an elderly American widow in Portugal in 2005. He denies any involvement in Madeleine's disappearance.
His lawyer Friedrich Fulscher said: "My client is innocent in the Madeleine case. The prosecutor keeps saying he is guilty but he hasn't interviewed him and hasn't shown us any of the evidence he says he has."
Mr Wolters is also investigating Christian B over three other allegations in Portugal: two sex assaults and the rape of an Irish holiday resort worker.
Mr Wolters said: "We are speaking with witnesses and interviewing a lot of people. We are making progress."
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/madeleine-mccann-police-investigating-prime-103500696.html
-
TVI NEWS: POLICE IDENTIFY GERMAN AS FORMAL SUSPECT IN MADDIE'S ABDUCTION AND DEATH
TVI knows that this is a sexual predator who is currently trapped in his country. He's serving time for another case, rape a woman, but he was on Luz Beach when Maddie disappeared.
2020-06-03 19:16 Henry Machado
The Judicial Police (PJ), London Metropolitan Police and German Police (BKA), who have been secretly articulated in recent years, have reached a formal suspect in the abduction and death of Madeleine McCann, an English child who disappeared in May 2007 on Luz beach, Lagos, when she was just three years old.
Over the past 13 years, this is the first time police have taken formal suspicions about a suspect.
This is a 43-year-old German, tvi knows, a sexual predator who is currently trapped in his country. He's serving time for another case, rape a woman, but he was on Luz Beach when Maddie disappeared. This man will have lived in the Algarve between 1996 and 2007, in an apartment about four kilometres from the beach.
The suspect in question, 43 years old, with a criminal record, resided in Portugal between 1996 and 2007 and is currently serving prison time in Germany, "the judicial police statement reads.
There is evidence gathered in recent months that puts him as the alleged perpetrator of the crimes of abduction and murder of Maddie, a child who was vacationing in the Algarve with his parents and friends. As for the mobile of crime, everything points to motives of a sexual nature.
In close coordination with the German (BKA) and English (Metropolitan Police) authorities, in the sharing of information, in carrying out formal acts of investigation and expertise, in Portugal and abroad, elements were collected indictment of the possible intervention, in the disappearance of the child, of a German citizen",adds the document.
The Metropolitan Police, which is investigating the disappearance in an investigation called Operation Grange, has identified a white Volkswagen-branded caravan van that the suspect, who has not been identified, used for a living and also a Jaguar car to which he would have access.
Police also identified two mobile phone numbers, one used by the suspect and who received a call between 7:32 p.m. and 8:02 p.m. on May 3 in the Praia da Luz area, and another that initiated the call and may be a "highly significant witness".
As far as TVI has learned, the McCann couple have already been informed by the British police of the formal suspicions that fall on this German citizen.
https://tvi24.iol.pt/sociedade/maddie-mccann/noticia-tvi
_____________________________________________________________
The Judicial Police (PJ) reopened the investigation in 2013, after the case was filed by the Attorney General's Office in 2008, exonerating the three defendants, Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, and another Briton, Robert Murat.
https://www.tsf.pt/portugal/sociedade/policia-britanica-identificou-suspeito-alemao-no-desaparecimento-de-madeleine-mccann-12273379.html
Just a point regarding the current investigation and the legal status of arguidos when a case is archived.
I have noted on numerous occasions that when the subject arises or is mentioned in passing, that the Portuguese media have absolutely no difficulty with the fact that Kate and Gerry McCann and Robert Murat are innocent of any crime concerning Madeleine.
As mentioned above, that is how it is seen in Portugal. Sceptics appear to have jumped on the wrong bandwagon yet again in their denial of the facts in preference for making up their own.
The original "ilibando" in Portuguese which translates into English as "exonerating" (present participle)
(especially of an official body) absolve (someone) from blame for a fault or wrongdoing, especially after due consideration of the case.
synonyms:
absolve · clear · acquit · declare innocent · find innocent · pronounce not guilty · discharge · vindicate · exculpate
Seems clear enough.
___________________________________________________________________________
-
Obviously TSF didn’t get the sceptic memo stating that the McCanns have not been cleared, tsk tsk.
-
I dont know if hes guilty... But Wolters may. It is possible to know someone is guilty but not have the evidence to charge or convict. We need to wait for Wolt to play his hand
I'm not an expert in German law but in this country he would be presumed innocent until proven otherwise beyond all reasonable doubt. The proof must be evidential. If Wolters "knows" that CB is guilty he must be basing that knowledge on evidence. So let him put that before a court. What else could he have? A hypothesis? A hunch? How long are you going to wait for?
-
I'm not an expert in German law but in this country he would be presumed innocent until proven otherwise beyond all reasonable doubt. The proof must be evidential. If Wolters "knows" that CB is guilty he must be basing that knowledge on evidence. So let him put that before a court. What else could he have? A hypothesis? A hunch? How long are you going to wait for?
Ss I have explained its possible to know as a fact someone is guilty but not be able to prove it in court... Do you accept that
-
I'm not an expert in German law but in this country he would be presumed innocent until proven otherwise beyond all reasonable doubt. The proof must be evidential. If Wolters "knows" that CB is guilty he must be basing that knowledge on evidence. So let him put that before a court. What else could he have? A hypothesis? A hunch? How long are you going to wait for?
Hopefully he’ll reveal all in his best selling book just as soon as he’s sacked off the case.
-
Ss I have explained its possible to know as a fact someone is guilty but not be able to prove it in court... Do you accept that
In which case a prosecutor can't say publicly that his suspect is guilty. Something to do with the presumption of innocence I believe.
-
In which case a prosecutor can't say publicly that his suspect is guilty. Something to do with the presumption of innocence I believe.
Prosecutors do say that... It would depend on the evidence
-
Prosecutors do say that... It would depend on the evidence
No it doesn't. Assessing evidence and deciding on guilt is up to a jury or to judges, not prosecutors.
-
Ss I have explained its possible to know as a fact someone is guilty but not be able to prove it in court... Do you accept that
How can Wolters "know" something without material evidence?
I think you are conceding there is reasonable doubt? Otherwise if Wolters has the evidence to "know" CB is guilty then that evidence can be presented to court. What I accept is the absolute need for due legal process.
-
No it doesn't. Assessing evidence and deciding on guilt is up to a jury or to judges, not prosecutors.
Nor retired police officers... What about the Greek police who have declared the husband guilty
-
How can Wolters "know" something without material evidence?
I think you are conceding there is reasonable doubt? Otherwise if Wolters has the evidence to "know" CB is guilty then that evidence can be presented to court. What I accept is the absolute need for due legal process.
I know as a fact someone stole from me... 100 per cent fact... The CPS says not enough evidence... Try thinking more laterally
-
I know as a fact someone stole from me... 100 per cent fact... The CPS says not enough evidence... Try thinking more laterally
Do you mean a specific someone?
How do you know with 100% certainty they stole from you?
-
Do you mean a specific someone?
How do you know with 100% certainty they stole from you?
Yes I know the exact person on and am 100 % sure...as Wolters has said... If I told you what it was you would believe me too
-
Yes I know the exact oetson and am 100 % sure...as Wolters has said... If I told you what it was you would believe me too
So how do you know they stole from you? I presume you have some evidence and it’s not just a hunch? Please tell.
-
So how do you know they stole from you? I presume you have some evidence and it’s not just a hunch? Please tell.
I will tell..... Do you think what im saying is possible
-
I will tell..... Do you think what im saying is possible
OK - please do.
-
OK - please do.
So you accept its possible to know someones guilty but not be able to prove it.... Im looking for a yes or no
-
So you accept its possible to know someones guilty but not be able to prove it.... Im looking for a yes or no
That’s an irrelevant question. This is a miscarriage of justice forum. What is important is due legal process and evidence. In law there is a presumption of innocence until proven otherwise. The burden of proof in a criminal case is beyond reasonable doubt. What I think subjectively on an issue isn’t relevant. What is relevant is evidence…. Does it prove beyond reasonable doubt that CB, for example, killed Madeleine McCann?
I suspect we’re not going to hear about your theft case because I’m presuming what it would actually show is that there is an important legal distinction between believing something with great conviction and being able to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.
-
That’s an irrelevant question. This is a miscarriage of justice forum. What is important is due legal process and evidence. In law there is a presumption of innocence until proven otherwise. The burden of proof in a criminal case is beyond reasonable doubt. What I think subjectively on an issue isn’t relevant. What is relevant is evidence…. Does it prove beyond reasonable doubt that CB, for example, killed Madeleine McCann?
I suspect we’re not going to hear about your theft case because I’m presuming what it would actually show is that there is an important legal distinction between believing something with great conviction and being able to prove it beyond reasonable doubt.
It is also possible to know something as fact but be unable to prove it.
-
It is also possible to know something as fact but be unable to prove it.
How do you know something without evidence?
In my opinion, legally speaking. you are both confusing believing something and knowing something.
-
How do you know something without evidence?
In my opinion, legally speaking. you are both confusing believing something and knowing something.
I wasn’t talking legally, I was simply stating a fact.
-
I wasn’t talking legally, I was simply stating a fact.
Can you give me an example of a "fact" that you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt?
-
Can you give me an example of a "fact" that you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt?
I can.. I just like to hear you say its impossible.... It isnt.
Im not confusing believing with knowing. I know as a fact someone stole from me... But can
t prove it in court. So if its possible for me... Its possible for Wolters
-
There can be an objective event that has happened. But you can't know for sure it has happened without compelling evidence. Without the evidence you can only believe it has happened.
Legally speaking is important in this case otherwise you get all sorts of speculation dressed up as "fact" - as the McCann's know themselves!!
-
Can you give me an example of a "fact" that you can't prove beyond reasonable doubt?
A flatmate lends me his expensive camera. He then accuses me of stealing it and goes to the police. How do I prove beyond reasonable doubt that I didn’t steal it? I know I didn’t steal it but can’t prove my flatmate is lying.
-
How do you know something without evidence?
In my opinion, legally speaking. you are both confusing believing something and knowing something.
There is evidence in my case... Conclusive evidence
-
I can.. I just like to hear you say its impossible.... It isnt.
Im not confusing believing with knowing. I know as a fact someone stole from me... But can
t prove it in court. So if its possible for me... Its possible for Wolters
What makes you know this particular person stole from you? You stated that you would tell us.
-
A flatmate lends me his expensive camera. He then accuses me of stealing it and goes to the police. How do I prove beyond reasonable doubt that I didn’t steal it? I know I didn’t steal it but can’t prove my flatmate is lying.
That's turning things on their head!!!! It's not for you to prove you didn't steal the camera (that's impossible - unless you have a recording of their conversation). Your flatmate has to prove you did steal it... In the same way Wolters has to prove CB killed MM. CB doesn't have to prove he didn't.
-
What makes you know this particular person stole from you? You stated that you would tell us.
I will tell now. I wanted to make the point that you felt it was impossible...
I know because she admitted it to me and agreed to pay it back. The police were involved and insisted it was dealt with by a community resolution... I think thats the term.
When the police interviwed her she denied everything...
-
That's turning things on their head!!!! It's not for you to prove you didn't steal the camera (that's impossible - unless you have a recording of their conversation). Your flatmate has to prove you did steal it... In the same way Wolters has to prove CB killed MM. CB doesn't have to prove he didn't.
I provided you with a valid example of knowing something to be true but being unable to prove it. OK, try this one instead:
My flatmate stole my expensive camera. When I reported him to the police he claimed I lent it to him. I know he’s a liar and a thief but I can’t prove it beyond reasonable doubt.
-
I will tell now. I wanted to make the point that you felt it was impossible...
I know because she admitted it to me and agreed to pay it back. The police were involved and insisted it was dealt with by a community resolution... I think thats the term.
When the police interviwed her she denied everything...
When the Police were first involved had she paid the money back and did she tell them that or you? Was it money that was stolen? Is it possible she lied to you in the first instance? And you don't actually know she stole from you. You just believe her when she said she told you she had.ecent events related to
Also this has no bearing on CB and MM. She has not been returned (or found) after a confession. Wolters obviously believes CB is guilty - but it seems that, as fas as we know, Wolters doesn't have enough evidence to substantiate his belief beyond all reasonable doubt.
-
I provided you with a valid example of knowing something to be true but being unable to prove it. OK, try this one instead:
My flatmate stole my expensive camera. When I reported him to the police he claimed I lent it to him. I know he’s a liar and a thief but I can’t prove it beyond reasonable doubt.
I would suggest that maybe you could. Otherwise there would not be many convictions for theft if claiming something was borrowed was such a rock solid defence!!
-
I would suggest that maybe you could. Otherwise there would not be many convictions for theft if claiming something was borrowed was such a rock solid defence!!
You might find this interesting:
https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2013/08/when-does-borrowing-become-stealing.html
-
I would suggest that maybe you could. Otherwise there would not be many convictions for theft if claiming something was borrowed was such a rock solid defence!!
I doubt there are many such convictions but perhaps you could give me an example of incontrovertible evidence that my flatmate stole my camera, instead of being lent it by myself as he claims. See also the rape victim making a claim against an agressor. They may know as fact that they did not consent but may also not have incontrovertible evidence to prove it. How does Clement Freud’s alleged victim prove now beyond all reasonable doubt that he molested her as a child? She may know he is guilty but may not be able to prove it. In short it is very possible to know someone is guilty but be unable to provide rock solid evidence, as I said. See also Davel’s example.
-
I doubt there are many such convictions but perhaps you could give me an example of incontrovertible evidence that my flatmate stole my camera, instead of being lent it by myself as he claims. See also the rape victim making a claim against an agressor. They may know as fact that they did not consent but may also not have incontrovertible evidence to prove it. How does Clement Freud’s alleged victim prove now beyond all reasonable doubt that he molested her as a child? She may know he is guilty but may not be able to prove it. In short it is very possible to know someone is guilty but be unable to provide rock solid evidence, as I said. See also Davel’s example.
I don't know why this point keeps cropping up. It doesn't matter what someone knows, it's what can be proved in a court of law that matters.
-
I would suggest you research the case of the submarine murder in Sweden in which there was a mountain of circumstantial evidence against the suspect. The police knew he was the killer but could not find the incontrovertible evidence proving intent to kill for many many months of investigating. .
-
I don't know why this point keeps cropping up. It doesn't matter what someone knows, it's what can be proved in a court of law that matters.
It cropped up because Billy Whizz asked me to substantiate my claim that it is possible to know something as fact without having proof to back it up. I suggest you read back before criticising me.
-
When the Police were first involved had she paid the money back and did she tell them that or you? Was it money that was stolen? Is it possible she lied to you in the first instance? And you don't actually know she stole from you. You just believe her when she said she told you she had.ecent events related to
Also this has no bearing on CB and MM. She has not been returned (or found) after a confession. Wolters obviously believes CB is guilty - but it seems that, as fas as we know, Wolters doesn't have enough evidence to substantiate his belief beyond all reasonable doubt.
Interesting questions. Based on this I assume you don’t accept the verdict of guilty against the Ciprianos, that their guilt was not incontrovertibly proven?
-
It cropped up because Billy Whizz asked me to substantiate my claim that it is possible to know something as fact without having proof to back it up. I suggest you read back before criticising me.
OK. So people can't always prove what they know to be true. So what? Why is that interesting or relevant?
-
OK. So people can't always prove what they know to be true. So what? Why is that interesting or relevant?
Read back.
-
Read back.
It seems to be connected to Wolters, but what he knows doesn't matter a jot if he can't prove it.
-
It seems to be connected to Wolters, but what he knows doesn't matter a jot if he can't prove it.
Twll us something we don’t know.
-
Twll us something we don’t know.
So if there's no point discussing what someone knows but can't prove why does it keep being discussed?
-
So if there's no point discussing what someone knows but can't prove why does it keep being discussed?
We might as well all pack up and go home then. But Amaral keeps on trying, so what is the problem?
-
When the Police were first involved had she paid the money back and did she tell them that or you? Was it money that was stolen? Is it possible she lied to you in the first instance? And you don't actually know she stole from you. You just believe her when she said she told you she had.ecent events related to
Also this has no bearing on CB and MM. She has not been returned (or found) after a confession. Wolters obviously believes CB is guilty - but it seems that, as fas as we know, Wolters doesn't have enough evidence to substantiate his belief beyond all reasonable doubt.
100 % she stole the money and offered to pay it back
-
100 % she stole the money and offered to pay it back
You know the truth and 'she' knows the truth. Unfortunately there's no evidence with which to convince others, so what you know is useless in a legal sense.
-
You know the truth and 'she' knows the truth. Unfortunately there's no evidence with which to convince others, so what you know is useless in a legal sense.
I never said it wasn't... But we have established its possible to know someone is guilty without being able to prove it.
If Wolters is in the same position with CB then it is significant. We need to wsit until we know what his evidence is.
-
You know the truth and 'she' knows the truth. Unfortunately there's no evidence with which to convince others, so what you know is useless in a legal sense.
Exactly that. Though in Dave’s case his 100% certainty is only based on what someone has confessed to doing. He still can’t know with 100% certainty unless he has some other evidence e.g. proof no-one else had access to the money.
-
So if there's no point discussing what someone knows but can't prove why does it keep being discussed?
You tell me, you seem to know everything.
-
You tell me, you seem to know everything.
Why did Amaral keep on discussing it when he couldn't prove anything?
-
Exactly that. Though in Dave’s case his 100% certainty is only based on what someone has confessed to doing. He still can’t know with 100% certainty unless he has some other evidence e.g. proof no-one else had access to the money.
I have other evidence but the cps said not enough
I know 100%
-
I never said it wasn't... But we have established its possible to know someone is guilty without being able to prove it.
If Wolters is in the same position with CB then it is significant. We need to wsit until we know what his evidence is.
Nothing is significant without proof. Wolters may have breached his suspect's rights under Article 6 of the ECHR too;
"429. The Court has emphasised the increased vigilance to be shown by public officials in exercising
their right to freedom of expression in the context of on-going investigations, especially where those
officials are themselves responsible for conducting investigations involving information covered by
an official secrecy clause designed to ensure the proper administration of justice (Poyraz v. Turkey,
§§ 76-78).
430. With regard to statements by the authorities concerning criminal investigations in progress,
the Court has reiterated that Article 6 § 2 cannot prevent the authorities from informing the public
about such investigations; however, it requires that they do so with all the discretion and
circumspection necessary if the presumption of innocence is to be respected (Fatullayev
v. Azerbaijan, §§ 159-162; Garycki v. Poland, § 69; Lavents v. Latvia, §§ 126-127; Slavov and Others
v. Bulgaria, §§ 128-130).
431. The Court has stressed the importance of the choice of words by public officials in their
statements before a person has been tried and found guilty of a particular criminal offence
(Daktaras v. Lithuania, § 41; see also, in the context of interviews to the national press, Butkevičius
v. Lithuania, § 50; Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria, §§ 197 and 202-203).
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_10_eng.pdf
-
The double standards being employed are quite breath taking.
-
Nothing is significant without proof. Wolters may have breached his suspect's rights under Article 6 of the ECHR too;
"429. The Court has emphasised the increased vigilance to be shown by public officials in exercising
their right to freedom of expression in the context of on-going investigations, especially where those
officials are themselves responsible for conducting investigations involving information covered by
an official secrecy clause designed to ensure the proper administration of justice (Poyraz v. Turkey,
§§ 76-78).
430. With regard to statements by the authorities concerning criminal investigations in progress,
the Court has reiterated that Article 6 § 2 cannot prevent the authorities from informing the public
about such investigations; however, it requires that they do so with all the discretion and
circumspection necessary if the presumption of innocence is to be respected (Fatullayev
v. Azerbaijan, §§ 159-162; Garycki v. Poland, § 69; Lavents v. Latvia, §§ 126-127; Slavov and Others
v. Bulgaria, §§ 128-130).
431. The Court has stressed the importance of the choice of words by public officials in their
statements before a person has been tried and found guilty of a particular criminal offence
(Daktaras v. Lithuania, § 41; see also, in the context of interviews to the national press, Butkevičius
v. Lithuania, § 50; Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria, §§ 197 and 202-203).
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_10_eng.pdf
I disagree... It depends on what evidence Wolters has.
So its ok for amsral to say he can prove the McCanns are guilty..
-
Exactly that. Though in Dave’s case his 100% certainty is only based on what someone has confessed to doing. He still can’t know with 100% certainty unless he has some other evidence e.g. proof no-one else had access to the money.
The Portuguese Judges appeared quite certain that the Ciprianos murdered Joana - how is that possible in your view?
-
I disagree... It depends on what evidence Wolters has.
So its ok for amsral to say he can prove the McCanns are guilty..
I don't know, but as he wasn't a public official he wasn't constrained by the above as Wolters is. The first judge argued that Amaral was constrained, but the higher courts disagreed.
-
Nothing is significant without proof. Wolters may have breached his suspect's rights under Article 6 of the ECHR too;
"429. The Court has emphasised the increased vigilance to be shown by public officials in exercising
their right to freedom of expression in the context of on-going investigations, especially where those
officials are themselves responsible for conducting investigations involving information covered by
an official secrecy clause designed to ensure the proper administration of justice (Poyraz v. Turkey,
§§ 76-78).
430. With regard to statements by the authorities concerning criminal investigations in progress,
the Court has reiterated that Article 6 § 2 cannot prevent the authorities from informing the public
about such investigations; however, it requires that they do so with all the discretion and
circumspection necessary if the presumption of innocence is to be respected (Fatullayev
v. Azerbaijan, §§ 159-162; Garycki v. Poland, § 69; Lavents v. Latvia, §§ 126-127; Slavov and Others
v. Bulgaria, §§ 128-130).
431. The Court has stressed the importance of the choice of words by public officials in their
statements before a person has been tried and found guilty of a particular criminal offence
(Daktaras v. Lithuania, § 41; see also, in the context of interviews to the national press, Butkevičius
v. Lithuania, § 50; Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria, §§ 197 and 202-203).
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_10_eng.pdf
What protocols are you accusing Wolters of breaking?
It was Amaral who pointed the press pack in Brueckner's direction.
-
The double standards being employed are quite breath taking.
At one time I would have thought them incredible. Now - absolutely nothing surprises me as I watch it all with something approaching a morbid curiosity.
-
At one time I would have thought them incredible. Now - absolutely nothing surprises me as I watch it all with something approaching a morbid curiosity.
But it is all so way off beam with absolutely no evidence against The McCanns, so how can people be this stupid?
-
I don't know, but as he wasn't a public official he wasn't constrained by the above as Wolters is. The first judge argued that Amaral was constrained, but the higher courts disagreed.
So when Wolters resigns you believe he will be free to write that it's a fact that CB murdered Madeleine in a best-selling book, even if CB is not charged at the time of publication?
-
So when Wolters resigns you believe he will be free to write that it's a fact that CB murdered Madeleine in a best-selling book, even if CB is not charged at the time of publication?
Obligatory I would say.
-
But it is all so way off beam with absolutely no evidence against The McCanns, so how can people be this stupid?
The only incontrovertible fact in this case is that Madeleine McCann disappeared.
-
The only incontrovertible fact in this case is that Madeleine McCann disappeared.
There are a lot more incontrovertible facts than that
-
Obligatory I would say.
And I'm sure when Bruckner sues him, all the McCann sceptics will be defending Wolters' right to free speech over Bruckner's right to presumption of innocence....oh wait.
-
There are a lot more incontrovertible facts than that
I'm quoting the judge of the first instance. Are you quoting anyone or just offering your own opinion?
"Art 27 and 28. The decision concerning this issue faces, firstly, the problem of the dichotomy between "facts ascertained during the investigating process" and "facts that also are part of the investigating process". If “acts ascertained in the investigation" refers to those which, with rigour and according to the procedural-penal dogma, are the result of the investigation that was achieved, then only one deserves this qualification – the disappearance of Madeleine McCann."
page 10 https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/v02.htm
Notice the different type of facts she highlights, and her emphasis that only the disappearance has been ascertained (confirmed as true).
-
But it is all so way off beam with absolutely no evidence against The McCanns, so how can people be this stupid?
It is just another conspiracy theory amongst so many other conspiracy theories. Didn't you know the world is flat?
Ignorance - malevolence - and the inexplicable urge to 'organise' seems to power this one. It is their 'arguments' that are stupid. What it is that drives them to do what they do is beyond my comprehension.
None more so than when the rights of the parents of a missing child are weighed against the rights of a prolific criminal - burglar - rapist - paedophile, the rights of the latter reign supreme.
Just check out the number of 'hate' sites set up to direct and promulgate 'the message' and wonder.
-
I'm quoting the judge of the first instance. Are you quoting anyone or just offering your own opinion?
"Art 27 and 28. The decision concerning this issue faces, firstly, the problem of the dichotomy between "facts ascertained during the investigating process" and "facts that also are part of the investigating process". If “acts ascertained in the investigation" refers to those which, with rigour and according to the procedural-penal dogma, are the result of the investigation that was achieved, then only one deserves this qualification – the disappearance of Madeleine McCann."
page 10 https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/v02.htm
Notice the different type of facts she highlights, and her emphasis that only the disappearance has been ascertained (confirmed as true).
I think you might be posting on the wrong thread. I was rather hoping that a thread dealing with current issues might be of more interest than revisiting the wrongs which initiated the necessity of judges of whatever number of instances particularly the last lot in the direction of the ECHR.
I fully appreciate why you may wish to deflect from what must be one of the biggest issues affecting Madeleine's case but I think it is time we moved on from just being another hate site reflecting mean spirited attitudes and deal with the actualities.
A burglar and a paedophile was according to Amaral brought to the attention of the Judicial Police in 2007.
I am rather more interested in why there wasn't more interest in following that line of investigation than the one Amaral chose to follow.
Amaral's 'case' petered out in September 2007. The case against the Luz paedophile is in vigorous process against the worldwide background of what appears to be a war against paedophiles and traffickers.
I think it is maybe time for you to move on and note what is happening in the here and now.
-
I'm quoting the judge of the first instance. Are you quoting anyone or just offering your own opinion?
"Art 27 and 28. The decision concerning this issue faces, firstly, the problem of the dichotomy between "facts ascertained during the investigating process" and "facts that also are part of the investigating process". If “acts ascertained in the investigation" refers to those which, with rigour and according to the procedural-penal dogma, are the result of the investigation that was achieved, then only one deserves this qualification – the disappearance of Madeleine McCann."
page 10 https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/v02.htm
Notice the different type of facts she highlights, and her emphasis that only the disappearance has been ascertained (confirmed as true).
The McCanns have never been arrested
SY have said they are not suspects
The Germans havve said they are not suspects
Pedro da Carmo said not duspects
Wolters has said he has concrete evidence CB murdered MM
All those are facts
-
I'm quoting the judge of the first instance. Are you quoting anyone or just offering your own opinion?
"Art 27 and 28. The decision concerning this issue faces, firstly, the problem of the dichotomy between "facts ascertained during the investigating process" and "facts that also are part of the investigating process". If “acts ascertained in the investigation" refers to those which, with rigour and according to the procedural-penal dogma, are the result of the investigation that was achieved, then only one deserves this qualification – the disappearance of Madeleine McCann."
page 10 https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/v02.htm
Notice the different type of facts she highlights, and her emphasis that only the disappearance has been ascertained (confirmed as true).
Seems to me you're cherry picking which bits of what she said you agree with to suit your argument.
-
Seems to me you're cherry picking which bits of what she said you agree with to suit your argument.
Just as Amaral cherry picked the files to produce an unbalanved view... That could well be mentioned by the ECHR
-
The McCanns have never been arrested
SY have said they are not suspects
The Germans havve said they are not suspects
Pedro da Carmo said not duspects
Wolters has said he has concrete evidence CB murdered MM
All those are facts
According to the ECHR, however, the McCanns were charged with a criminal offence;
"The Court held that a person arrested on suspicion of having committed a criminal offence
(Heaney and McGuinness v. Ireland, § 42; Brusco v. France, §§ 47-50), a suspect questioned about his
involvement in acts constituting a criminal offence (Aleksandr Zaichenko v. Russia, §§ 41-43; Yankov
and Others v. Bulgaria, § 23; Schmid-Laffer v. Switzerland, §§ 30-31) and a person who has been
questioned in respect of his or her suspected involvement in an offence (Stirmanov v. Russia, § 39),
irrespective of the fact that he or she was formally treated as a witness (Kalēja v. Latvia, §§ 36-41) as
well as a person who has been formally charged with a criminal offence under procedure set out in
domestic law (Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], § 66; Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC],
§ 44) could all be regarded as being “charged with a criminal offence” and claim the protection of
Article 6 of the Convention.
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_6_criminal_eng.pdf
Charged but not tried.
-
According to the ECHR, however, the McCanns were charged with a criminal offence;
"The Court held that a person arrested on suspicion of having committed a criminal offence
(Heaney and McGuinness v. Ireland, § 42; Brusco v. France, §§ 47-50), a suspect questioned about his
involvement in acts constituting a criminal offence (Aleksandr Zaichenko v. Russia, §§ 41-43; Yankov
and Others v. Bulgaria, § 23; Schmid-Laffer v. Switzerland, §§ 30-31) and a person who has been
questioned in respect of his or her suspected involvement in an offence (Stirmanov v. Russia, § 39),
irrespective of the fact that he or she was formally treated as a witness (Kalēja v. Latvia, §§ 36-41) as
well as a person who has been formally charged with a criminal offence under procedure set out in
domestic law (Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], § 66; Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC],
§ 44) could all be regarded as being “charged with a criminal offence” and claim the protection of
Article 6 of the Convention.
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_6_criminal_eng.pdf
Charged but not tried.
Your posts are getting more and more ridiculous
-
Your posts are getting more and more ridiculous
I'm gobsmacked. I don't know what to say.
-
I'm gobsmacked. I don't know what to say.
I do but I’m probably not allowed to say it.
-
According to the ECHR, however, the McCanns were charged with a criminal offence;
"The Court held that a person arrested on suspicion of having committed a criminal offence
(Heaney and McGuinness v. Ireland, § 42; Brusco v. France, §§ 47-50), a suspect questioned about his
involvement in acts constituting a criminal offence (Aleksandr Zaichenko v. Russia, §§ 41-43; Yankov
and Others v. Bulgaria, § 23; Schmid-Laffer v. Switzerland, §§ 30-31) and a person who has been
questioned in respect of his or her suspected involvement in an offence (Stirmanov v. Russia, § 39),
irrespective of the fact that he or she was formally treated as a witness (Kalēja v. Latvia, §§ 36-41) as
well as a person who has been formally charged with a criminal offence under procedure set out in
domestic law (Pélissier and Sassi v. France [GC], § 66; Pedersen and Baadsgaard v. Denmark [GC],
§ 44) could all be regarded as being “charged with a criminal offence” and claim the protection of
Article 6 of the Convention.
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_6_criminal_eng.pdf
Charged but not tried.
What were the McCanns charged with and please provide the appropriate cites, ta.
-
What were the McCanns charged with and please provide the appropriate cites, ta.
Very restrained. Thank you.
-
Very restrained. Thank you.
I haven’t had a warning for weeks, I’m obviously not trying hard enough.
-
What were the McCanns charged with and please provide the appropriate cites, ta.
They weren't charged according to Portuguese law, but the ECHR has different criteria, as my quote demonstrated. It's definition of 'charged with a criminal offence' includes those who are questioned on suspicion.
-
They weren't charged according to Portuguese law, but the ECHR has different criteria, as my quote demonstrated. It's definition of 'charged with a criminal offence' includes those who are questioned on suspicion.
I thiink you need to read it again... It says regarded as charged... Not charged.
The POI means someone is regarded as innocent.. Not that they are innocent.
-
They weren't charged according to Portuguese law, but the ECHR has different criteria, as my quote demonstrated. It's definition of 'charged with a criminal offence' includes those who are questioned on suspicion.
So the ECHR regards those who have been charged no differently to those who have been questioned, from a POI perspective- so what?
-
I never said it wasn't... But we have established its possible to know someone is guilty without being able to prove it.
If Wolters is in the same position with CB then it is significant. We need to wsit until we know what his evidence is.
All we established is that you were prepared to accept a confession as confirmation of a crime. Thankfully the concept of justice in the UK, Germany, and Portugal have much more robust standards for making a judgement on an aggrieved party attempting to establish "fact".
You don't "know with 100% certainty" that the person stole from you. You believe they did - with very reasonable grounds, imo.
If Wolters has evidence that absolutely proves MM is dead and evidence that proves the death was caused by CB then it is imperative that this evidence is heard in a criminal court. If he does not have sufficient evidence then he can not "know" for sure that CB is guilty of murdering Madeleine McCann.
-
It is just another conspiracy theory amongst so many other conspiracy theories. Didn't you know the world is flat?
Ignorance - malevolence - and the inexplicable urge to 'organise' seems to power this one. It is their 'arguments' that are stupid. What it is that drives them to do what they do is beyond my comprehension.
None more so than when the rights of the parents of a missing child are weighed against the rights of a prolific criminal - burglar - rapist - paedophile, the rights of the latter reign supreme.
Just check out the number of 'hate' sites set up to direct and promulgate 'the message' and wonder.
That CB is involved is also currently just another [conspiracy] theory.
In terms of legal rights both the doctor with no criminal record and the rapist / paedophile / burglar have an equal right to due legal process. I'd like to believe that most people on a miscarriage of justice forum are aware of this basic tenet of criminal law.
-
That CB is involved is also currently just another [conspiracy] theory.
In terms of legal rights both the doctor with no criminal record and the rapist / paedophile / burglar have an equal right to due legal process. I'd like to believe that most people on a miscarriage of justice forum are aware of this basic tenet of criminal law.
Nonsense! Currently Brueckner is the police prime suspect in the case of a missing child.
Currently the rapist / paedophile / burglar is serving out his conviction in a German prison having undergone due process of the law and been found guilty of torture and rape and criminal offences against children.
He has neither been questioned, charged or tried for the offence for which he is the prime suspect and as a result is entitled to the presumption of innocence in that case irrespective of his proven guilt of rape/ torture and paedophilia in those cases for which he has been tried and found guilty.
The problem arises when members of a Justice Forum deny the presumption of innocence to individuals who having undergone exhaustive investigation have never been charged or tried for any offence.
Therein lies the injustice perpetrated by those on an 'injustice forum' who might or might not understand 'this basic tenet of criminal law' but who most certainly have no understanding of the respect due to victims of criminals such as Brueckner.
-
Nonsense! Currently Brueckner is the police prime suspect in the case of a missing child.
Currently the rapist / paedophile / burglar is serving out his conviction in a German prison having undergone due process of the law and been found guilty of torture and rape and criminal offences against children.
He has neither been questioned, charged or tried for the offence for which he is the prime suspect and as a result is entitled to the presumption of innocence in that case irrespective of his proven guilt of rape/ torture and paedophilia in those cases for which he has been tried and found guilty.
The problem arises when members of a Justice Forum deny the presumption of innocence to individuals who having undergone exhaustive investigation have never been charged or tried for any offence.
Therein lies the injustice perpetrated by those on an 'injustice forum' who might or might not understand 'this basic tenet of criminal law' but who most certainly have no understanding of the respect due to victims of criminals such as Brueckner.
As far as I know at this moment no-one has denied anyone the presumption of innocence. The situation is that the McCanns have accused Portugal of doing so, but no decision has been declared by the ECHR.
In CB's case the prosecutor may have interferred with his right under Article 6 of his right to a fair trial. If the prosecutor ever finds enough evidence to charge him, of course.
-
All we established is that you were prepared to accept a confession as confirmation of a crime. Thankfully the concept of justice in the UK, Germany, and Portugal have much more robust standards for making a judgement on an aggrieved party attempting to establish "fact".
You don't "know with 100% certainty" that the person stole from you. You believe they did - with very reasonable grounds, imo.
If Wolters has evidence that absolutely proves MM is dead and evidence that proves the death was caused by CB then it is imperative that this evidence is heard in a criminal court. If he does not have sufficient evidence then he can not "know" for sure that CB is guilty of murdering Madeleine McCann.
Not in Portugal. There two people (one of whom was definitely tortured) were imprisoned for murder on the strength of nothing more than a confession. Do you have a problem with the Cipriano verdict? I keep asking and you keep ignoring, I wonder why….
-
As far as I know at this moment no-one has denied anyone the presumption of innocence. The situation is that the McCanns have accused Portugal of doing so, but no decision has been declared by the ECHR.
In CB's case the prosecutor may have interferred with his right under Article 6 of his right to a fair trial. If the prosecutor ever finds enough evidence to charge him, of course.
Do you think the McCanns would have received a fair trial?
-
All we established is that you were prepared to accept a confession as confirmation of a crime. Thankfully the concept of justice in the UK, Germany, and Portugal have much more robust standards for making a judgement on an aggrieved party attempting to establish "fact".
You don't "know with 100% certainty" that the person stole from you. You believe they did - with very reasonable grounds, imo.
If Wolters has evidence that absolutely proves MM is dead and evidence that proves the death was caused by CB then it is imperative that this evidence is heard in a criminal court. If he does not have sufficient evidence then he can not "know" for sure that CB is guilty of murdering Madeleine McCann.
I dont accept a confession as proof of guilt. Portugal doeas as seen the Cipriano case. I have a lot more evidence and Im certain of her guilt.
You are drawing conclusions without knowing all the facts. Like Wolters... Im sure if I told you what evidence I have you would agree with me.
I dont know if CB is guilty but I dont think Wolters would make the claims he has if he doesnt have the evidence. Sceptics seem to want to write Wolters off without hearing his evidence... Id rather wait and see
-
Do you think the McCanns would have received a fair trial?
I don't know. Do you think they wouldn't have?
-
I don't know. Do you think they wouldn't have?
If the premise is that someone in a position of authority (and though Amaral may have resigned when he published his book and did his video he was nevertheless world famous as the cop on the McCann case and therefore an authoritative figure) endangers a fair trial by publicly accusing another of a heinous crime, then very evidently the McCanns would not have received one. I wish for once you would answer honestly, is it too much to ask?
-
Where have all the Sceptics gone? Long time passing.
-
I dont accept a confession as proof of guilt. Portugal doeas as seen the Cipriano case. I have a lot more evidence and Im certain of her guilt.
You are drawing conclusions without knowing all the facts. Like Wolters... Im sure if I told you what evidence I have you would agree with me.
I dont know if CB is guilty but I dont think Wolters would make the claims he has if he doesnt have the evidence. Sceptics seem to want to write Wolters off without hearing his evidence... Id rather wait and see
Your faith in Wolters is quite touching, but do try to remember that whatever evidence he has it isn't, on his own admission, good enough to lay charges let alone secure a guilty verdict in a court of law. Therefore it isn't acceptable as the basis of a public statement suggesting a suspect is guilty.
-
Your faith in Wolters is quite touching, but do try to remember that whatever evidence he has it isn't, on his own admission, good enough to lay charges let alone secure a guilty verdict in a court of law. Therefore it isn't acceptable as the basis of a public statement suggesting a suspect is guilty.
I dont think Wolters would say what he has without strong evidence. Ive demonstrated its possible to know someone is guilty without being able to prove it. Im more confident he has proof Maddie is dead at the hands of an abductor.
As regards faith... Ive see nothing to suggest Wolters is a liar or fantasist... Unlike those with blind faith in Amaral
-
Where have all the Sceptics gone? Long time passing.
All died of boredom I expect (or of a broken-heart because the McCanns aren't doing porridge in a s..mmy Portuguese jail).
-
All died of boredom I expect (or of a broken-heart because the McCanns aren't doing porridge in a s..mmy Portuguese jail).
When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?
-
When will they ever learn? When will they ever learn?
Youve got me singing
-
If the premise is that someone in a position of authority (and though Amaral may have resigned when he published his book and did his video he was nevertheless world famous as the cop on the McCann case and therefore an authoritative figure) endangers a fair trial by publicly accusing another of a heinous crime, then very evidently the McCanns would not have received one. I wish for once you would answer honestly, is it too much to ask?
Unfortunately you tend to set the terms when you ask a question. For example;
Where was it announced that Amaral was in a position of authority, world famous and an authoritative figure? They sound to me like your personal opinions rather than facts.
Secondly, did he publicly accuse the McCanns of committing a heinous (your opinion) crime?
There is another way of looking at things;
The defendant Goncalo Amaral...states, synthetically, that the book was written mainly to defend his personal and professional honour, that the claimants were the ones who breached the reserve of their private life and the rights to image and good name, and that the book and the documentary describe the facts contained in the investigation.
page 7 http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0
He told the Appeal Court;
The book, documentary and interview involved in the autos have as main motivation the defence of Gonçalo Amaral's personal and professional honour.
The respective contents (book, DVD, interview) do not offend any of the claimants' fundamental rights,
. neither their privacy, such as articles 80 (3) and 81 (4) of the CC (Civil Code) define it and describe its effects, insofar as they themselves voluntarily limited / alienated such right by multiplying interviews and interventions in the media organs.
. nor, in the same way, their image and reputation, as they themselves placed the matter in the public area and gave it a worldwide celebrity, opening the doors to all opinions, even opposing views.
. nor, furthermore, all the guarantees of a criminal procedure, namely a fair investigation and the right to liberty and safety (5), as the respective contents of the book, documentary and interview describe the facts included in the investigation.
page 1 https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Decision_19_04_2016.htm
-
Youve got me singing
Sorry about that. We'll have it stuck in our heads for the rest of the day.
-
Unfortunately you tend to set the terms when you ask a question. For example;
Where was it announced that Amaral was in a position of authority, world famous and an authoritative figure? They sound to me like your personal opinions rather than facts.
Secondly, did he publicly accuse the McCanns of committing a heinous (your opinion) crime?
There is another way of looking at things;
The defendant Goncalo Amaral...states, synthetically, that the book was written mainly to defend his personal and professional honour, that the claimants were the ones who breached the reserve of their private life and the rights to image and good name, and that the book and the documentary describe the facts contained in the investigation.
page 7 http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0
He told the Appeal Court;
The book, documentary and interview involved in the autos have as main motivation the defence of Gonçalo Amaral's personal and professional honour.
The respective contents (book, DVD, interview) do not offend any of the claimants' fundamental rights,
. neither their privacy, such as articles 80 (3) and 81 (4) of the CC (Civil Code) define it and describe its effects, insofar as they themselves voluntarily limited / alienated such right by multiplying interviews and interventions in the media organs.
. nor, in the same way, their image and reputation, as they themselves placed the matter in the public area and gave it a worldwide celebrity, opening the doors to all opinions, even opposing views.
. nor, furthermore, all the guarantees of a criminal procedure, namely a fair investigation and the right to liberty and safety (5), as the respective contents of the book, documentary and interview describe the facts included in the investigation.
page 1 https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Decision_19_04_2016.htm
YOu're right - there was no public proclamation that Amaral was an authority on the case - but it's self evident is it not? He certainly sets himself up as one in his book, and in his media interviews. He became the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman in the world off the back of the case (name another one as well known by the general public), so I don't think it is far fetched (or even simply my opinion) to say that Amaral who had been in a position of authority as far as the case was concerned, only got a publishing deal on the strength of that authority - I mean, if you'd written a book about the investigation I doubt any publisher would have been interested. I think you are deflecting by claiming it is only my opinion that Amaral was a well-known authority on the case, I mean COME ON!!!!
And look at it any which way you like - Amaral has made a career out of claiming that Madeleine was not abducted, that she died in an accident in the apartment and that her death was covered up. DOubtless you don't see that as accusing the parents, but that's because it suits you to twist things to fit your argument. You're a wriggler and no mistake!
Here's a couple of questions for you - what factors influence whether or not someone receives a fair trial? What factors specifically might influence a trial unfairly in the case of CB if he is ever put before a judge?
-
As far as I know at this moment no-one has denied anyone the presumption of innocence. The situation is that the McCanns have accused Portugal of doing so, but no decision has been declared by the ECHR.
In CB's case the prosecutor may have interferred with his right under Article 6 of his right to a fair trial. If the prosecutor ever finds enough evidence to charge him, of course.
Did the McCann's come up with the super wheeze of wheeching the Portuguese State into the European Court of Human Rights on a whim just for the fun of it, which seems to be your inference.
In Brueckner's case we have a suspect who has been under investigation for a number of years ... please do tell in which way a legitimate evidence based investigation of a criminal is an infringement of his human rights?
He has already tried the procedural route to complain about his arrest (note, not his innocence) and got short shrift with that.
What makes you think he will have any better luck if he tries the same with Wolters who has stuck to the letter of the law.
It was Amaral who breached the confidentiality of police forces to set the media loose on Brueckner's trail in the first instance; Amaral who then backtracked and publicised a false description of Brueckner for reasons best known to himself.
-
Where have all the Sceptics gone? Long time passing.
I think they may be having a long and thoughtful look at the present situation and the path which has led to where we are and managed to work out what two + two equals.
Maybe they are looking with a less jaundiced eye at fourteen years of vitriol spewed without let up on individuals whose phone records before and after Madeleine's disappearance are scrutinised to the nth degree while no-one bothered with that of known criminals.
I wonder if the light is beginning to dawn.
-
I think they may be having a long and thoughtful look at the present situation and the path which has led to where we are and managed to work out what two + two equals.
Maybe they are looking with a less jaundiced eye at fourteen years of vitriol spewed without let up on individuals whose phone records before and after Madeleine's disappearance are scrutinised to the nth degree while no-one bothered with that of known criminals.
I wonder if the light is beginning to dawn.
If only you are right. But sadly I don't think so.
-
Did the McCann's come up with the super wheeze of wheeching the Portuguese State into the European Court of Human Rights on a whim just for the fun of it, which seems to be your inference.
In Brueckner's case we have a suspect who has been under investigation for a number of years ... please do tell in which way a legitimate evidence based investigation of a criminal is an infringement of his human rights?
He has already tried the procedural route to complain about his arrest (note, not his innocence) and got short shrift with that.
What makes you think he will have any better luck if he tries the same with Wolters who has stuck to the letter of the law.
It was Amaral who breached the confidentiality of police forces to set the media loose on Brueckner's trail in the first instance; Amaral who then backtracked and publicised a false description of Brueckner for reasons best known to himself.
Your opinion of my 'inferences' are just that, your opinion. I simply stated the facts.
I haven't claimed that investigating Brueckner was an 'infringement of his human rights', so unless you have a cite showing I said that it's not something I feel the need to answer.
What I have said is that Wolters may have infringed Bruckner's rights under Article 6 of the ECHR by declaring him guilty of murder before he has been tried in a court of law.
-
YOu're right - there was no public proclamation that Amaral was an authority on the case - but it's self evident is it not? He certainly sets himself up as one in his book, and in his media interviews. He became the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman in the world off the back of the case (name another one as well known by the general public), so I don't think it is far fetched (or even simply my opinion) to say that Amaral who had been in a position of authority as far as the case was concerned, only got a publishing deal on the strength of that authority - I mean, if you'd written a book about the investigation I doubt any publisher would have been interested. I think you are deflecting by claiming it is only my opinion that Amaral was a well-known authority on the case, I mean COME ON!!!!
And look at it any which way you like - Amaral has made a career out of claiming that Madeleine was not abducted, that she died in an accident in the apartment and that her death was covered up. DOubtless you don't see that as accusing the parents, but that's because it suits you to twist things to fit your argument. You're a wriggler and no mistake!
Here's a couple of questions for you - what factors influence whether or not someone receives a fair trial? What factors specifically might influence a trial unfairly in the case of CB if he is ever put before a judge?
You can argue all you like, your opinion of Amaral's status remains your opinion, as does your reference to his 'career'.
I don't know if Amaral's book amounted to an accusation but if it did then so did the actions of the investigation up to 10th September 2007 which he describes.
-
You can argue all you like, your opinion of Amaral's status remains your opinion, as does your reference to his 'career'.
I don't know if Amaral's book amounted to an accusation but if it did then so did the actions of the investigation up to 10th September 2007 which he describes.
Are you saying you disagree with the notion that Amaral was an authority on the investigation? Are you disagreeing when I suggest that he was widely known internationally as the man leading the initial investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance? Are you disagreeing with the notion that he has publicly put the blame on the McCanns for hiding their child’s body? Do you disagree that his career since his resignation has been largely if not wholly focused on the McCann case and on exploiting it for maximum financial gain? Or are you just refusing to admit what is staggeringly obvious to any sentient being with an interest in the case because it doesn’t suit your argument on this occasion?
How about you have a go at answering the questions at the end of my last post if it’s not too much trouble?
-
Are you saying you disagree with the notion that Amaral was an authority on the investigation? Are you disagreeing when I suggest that he was widely known internationally as the man leading the initial investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance? Are you disagreeing with the notion that he has publicly put the blame on the McCanns for hiding their child’s body? Do you disagree that his career since his resignation has been largely if not wholly focused on the McCann case and on exploiting it for maximum financial gain? Or are you just refusing to admit what is staggeringly obvious to any sentient being with an interest in the case because it doesn’t suit your argument on this occasion?
How about you have a go at answering the questions at the end of my last post if it’s not too much trouble?
I have no need to "refuse to admit what is staggeringly obvious to any sentient being with an interest in the case" when the "sentient being" to whom everything is "staggeringly obvious" is you. You can hold whatever opinions you like, but if you want them to be treated as facts a little more evidence is required imo.
You want me to answer these questions?
"Here's a couple of questions for you - what factors influence whether or not someone receives a fair trial? What factors specifically might influence a trial unfairly in the case of CB if he is ever put before a judge?"
There are many factors which can interfere with a person's right to a fair trial. In Brueckner's case an announcement of 'guilty' by the prosecutor in charge of the case could be seen as such an interference.
-
With thanks to a poster on WebSleuths who has been giving further thought to Brueckner’s artistic rant which either meant something to Brueckner or he might just have been amusing himself secure in the knowledge we would puzzle ourselves into knots about his deeper meaning.
Interestingly Brueckner has depicted a female prosecutor who is the head of the unit at the prosecutors office in Braunschweig, for investigating sexual offences, including child porn.
Brueckner knows about her involvement and what her department’s remit is. I just took from his artwork that he is a worried man … and from that information, I can see why he might well be.
-
I have no need to "refuse to admit what is staggeringly obvious to any sentient being with an interest in the case" when the "sentient being" to whom everything is "staggeringly obvious" is you. You can hold whatever opinions you like, but if you want them to be treated as facts a little more evidence is required imo.
You want me to answer these questions?
"Here's a couple of questions for you - what factors influence whether or not someone receives a fair trial? What factors specifically might influence a trial unfairly in the case of CB if he is ever put before a judge?"
There are many factors which can interfere with a person's right to a fair trial. In Brueckner's case an announcement of 'guilty' by the prosecutor in charge of the case could be seen as such an interference.
OK. What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral was an authority on the case up until the point he retired?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral considered himself an authority on the case and that many also considered him an authority?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral was the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman internationally that there has ever been?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral publicly promoted the view that there was no abduction, that Madeleine died in an accident and that her death was covered up?
What evidence would you require to satisfy you that the majority of Amaral's income since retirement has been generated by his book and the promotion of the contents of his book ever since?
If the answer is that no evidence would satisfy you of any of the above, do you instead lean more towards the view that Amaral was not an authority on the case, did not consider himself an authority on the case, nor was considered by anyone else as an authority on the case, was not the most (in)famous policeman to have ever come out of Portugal and wielded little or no influence on anyone with his book or media appearances, that the majority of his income since retirement has not been as a result of his link to the case, and that he has never once suggested that the McCanns covered up the death of their daughter?
As to your answer to my previous question: Can you explain exactly how a public announcement of guilt by a person in charge of a case might affect someone's right to a fair trial? And how would stepping down from such a role change the effect that such a public announcement would have on the safety of a potential trial?
-
OK. What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral was an authority on the case up until the point he retired?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral considered himself an authority on the case and that many also considered him an authority?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral was the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman internationally that there has ever been?
What evidence would satisfy you that Amaral publicly promoted the view that there was no abduction, that Madeleine died in an accident and that her death was covered up?
What evidence would you require to satisfy you that the majority of Amaral's income since retirement has been generated by his book and the promotion of the contents of his book ever since?
If the answer is that no evidence would satisfy you of any of the above, do you instead lean more towards the view that Amaral was not an authority on the case, did not consider himself an authority on the case, nor was considered by anyone else as an authority on the case, was not the most (in)famous policeman to have ever come out of Portugal and wielded little or no influence on anyone with his book or media appearances, that the majority of his income since retirement has not been as a result of his link to the case, and that he has never once suggested that the McCanns covered up the death of their daughter?
As to your answer to my previous question: Can you explain exactly how a public announcement of guilt by a person in charge of a case might affect someone's right to a fair trial? And how would stepping down from such a role change the effect that such a public announcement would have on the safety of a potential trial?
It's not up to me to decide what evidence you need to support your opinions, it's up to you.
All I know is that Article 10 prevents the authorities from making statements suggesting that someone is guilty of a criminal offence.
430. With regard to statements by the authorities concerning criminal investigations in progress,
the Court has reiterated that Article 6 § 2 cannot prevent the authorities from informing the public
about such investigations; however, it requires that they do so with all the discretion and
circumspection necessary if the presumption of innocence is to be respected (Fatullayev
v. Azerbaijan, §§ 159-162; Garycki v. Poland, § 69; Lavents v. Latvia, §§ 126-127; Slavov and Others
v. Bulgaria, §§ 128-130).
431. The Court has stressed the importance of the choice of words by public officials in their
statements before a person has been tried and found guilty of a particular criminal offence
(Daktaras v. Lithuania, § 41; see also, in the context of interviews to the national press, Butkevičius
v. Lithuania, § 50; Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria, §§ 197 and 202-203).
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_10_eng.pdf
-
It's not up to me to decide what evidence you need to support your opinions, it's up to you.
All I know is that Article 10 prevents the authorities from making statements suggesting that someone is guilty of a criminal offence.
430. With regard to statements by the authorities concerning criminal investigations in progress,
the Court has reiterated that Article 6 § 2 cannot prevent the authorities from informing the public
about such investigations; however, it requires that they do so with all the discretion and
circumspection necessary if the presumption of innocence is to be respected (Fatullayev
v. Azerbaijan, §§ 159-162; Garycki v. Poland, § 69; Lavents v. Latvia, §§ 126-127; Slavov and Others
v. Bulgaria, §§ 128-130).
431. The Court has stressed the importance of the choice of words by public officials in their
statements before a person has been tried and found guilty of a particular criminal offence
(Daktaras v. Lithuania, § 41; see also, in the context of interviews to the national press, Butkevičius
v. Lithuania, § 50; Gutsanovi v. Bulgaria, §§ 197 and 202-203).
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_10_eng.pdf
I don't have to do anything, and it is extremely disingenuous of you to ask for evidence of something which is already self-evident in order to avoid addressing the point. So where are we at?
It appears you don't accept Amaral was an authority on the case.
It appears you don't accept that he considers himself an authority on the case and that many also considered him an authority on the case.
It appears you don't accept that Amaral was the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman there has ever been.
It appears you don't accept that Amaral publicly promoted the view that there was no abduction, that Madeleine died in the apartment and that her death was covered up.
It appears you don't accept that Amaral made a career out of the case since he retired.
It appears you believe that all the above is only my opinion.
Hilarious!! You'll be asking me to provide evidence that the sky is blue next.
-
I don't have to do anything, and it is extremely disingenuous of you to ask for evidence of something which is already self-evident in order to avoid addressing the point. So where are we at?
It appears you don't accept Amaral was an authority on the case.
It appears you don't accept that he considers himself an authority on the case and that many also considered him an authority on the case.
It appears you don't accept that Amaral was the most (in)famous Portuguese policeman there has ever been.
It appears you don't accept that Amaral publicly promoted the view that there was no abduction, that Madeleine died in the apartment and that her death was covered up.
It appears you don't accept that Amaral made a career out of the case since he retired.
It appears you believe that all the above is only my opinion.
Hilarious!! You'll be asking me to provide evidence that the sky is blue next.
I don't think sceptics do have a very great opinion of Amaral else why do they keep insisting that the big boys dunnit and he was only the filing clerk (which he was rubbish at too if Rebelo is to be believed about the mess he inherited from him).
I knew he was bad, he has proudly documented many of the errors of the botched case as proof of that. For example -
Why was not the reconstitution done soon? In chapter 5, the former PJ tries to justify why the re-enactment of the night of the girl's disappearance was not performed.
Faced with "the contradictions" in the statements of the McCann group of friends, the investigators, still in May, considered carrying out this diligence.
It did not happen because of 'the high number of tourists who were in the village'.
The space 'would have to be closed for several hours, affecting everyone's holiday' that was there.
The presence of journalists on the scene was also taken into account.
"It was also feared that parents and friends were suspected" and it was not desirable to 'have a trial in the public square'.
https://www.lux.iol.pt/sociedade/ultimas-noticias/maddie-os-erros-da-pj-segundo-goncalo-amaral
I think that was one but ranking on being the worst (difficult to choose because there are so many) would be Amaral's revelation that the PJ had the opportunity to rule Brueckner in or out of the investigation in the early days. Much as it was left to DCI Redwood to trace and eliminate burglars whose phones, like Brueckner's activated phone masts in Luz on the night Madeleine was taken.
The choice was made to target the mother of a missing child in particular and to ignore criminals who were burglars and one who had been extradited from Portugal on paedophile charges.
-
With thanks to a poster on WebSleuths who has been giving further thought to Brueckner’s artistic rant which either meant something to Brueckner or he might just have been amusing himself secure in the knowledge we would puzzle ourselves into knots about his deeper meaning.
Interestingly Brueckner has depicted a female prosecutor who is the head of the unit at the prosecutors office in Braunschweig, for investigating sexual offences, including child porn.
Brueckner knows about her involvement and what her department’s remit is. I just took from his artwork that he is a worried man … and from that information, I can see why he might well be.
The ‘waiter’ in the drawing was also said to resemble Amaral.
-
Extended funding seems to be aimed at the prime suspect, Brückner and collaboration between British and German law enforcement.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15641559/madeleine-mccann-cops-cash-boost-suspect/
-
I don't think sceptics do have a very great opinion of Amaral else why do they keep insisting that the big boys dunnit and he was only the filing clerk (which he was rubbish at too if Rebelo is to be believed about the mess he inherited from him).
I knew he was bad, he has proudly documented many of the errors of the botched case as proof of that. For example -
Why was not the reconstitution done soon? In chapter 5, the former PJ tries to justify why the re-enactment of the night of the girl's disappearance was not performed.
Faced with "the contradictions" in the statements of the McCann group of friends, the investigators, still in May, considered carrying out this diligence.
It did not happen because of 'the high number of tourists who were in the village'.
The space 'would have to be closed for several hours, affecting everyone's holiday' that was there.
The presence of journalists on the scene was also taken into account.
"It was also feared that parents and friends were suspected" and it was not desirable to 'have a trial in the public square'.
https://www.lux.iol.pt/sociedade/ultimas-noticias/maddie-os-erros-da-pj-segundo-goncalo-amaral
I think that was one but ranking on being the worst (difficult to choose because there are so many) would be Amaral's revelation that the PJ had the opportunity to rule Brueckner in or out of the investigation in the early days. Much as it was left to DCI Redwood to trace and eliminate burglars whose phones, like Brueckner's activated phone masts in Luz on the night Madeleine was taken.
The choice was made to target the mother of a missing child in particular and to ignore criminals who were burglars and one who had been extradited from Portugal on paedophile charges.
With regards to the reconstruction you appear to be re-writing history, in my opinion.... At the time it appeared to me that the Tapas group were resistant to a reconstruction. It was reported that they set certain conditions before they would return to test their timeline through a reconstruction. Some argued that those conditions were unreasonable.
And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?
-
With regards to the reconstruction you appear to be re-writing history, in my opinion.... At the time it appeared to me that the Tapas group were resistant to a reconstruction. It was reported that they set certain conditions before they would return to test their timeline through a reconstruction. Some argued that those conditions were unreasonable.
And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?
What an ill informed and nasty post.
The reconstitution to which Amaral refers was in the days following Madeleine's abduction when many holidaymakers such as the Totman family https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6225547/madeleine-mccann-gp-sighting-waste/ were still continuing their holiday.
The Smiths were still there.
A reconstitution might have jogged their memories a fortnight before they remembered their encounter.
Who knows ~ perhaps Dr Totman would have been able to clarify why he was walking in the wrong direction or if he had seen anyone flip flopping up the road in towards him had the Portuguese police asked.
The Irish journalist John McGee and others like him might have been able to fill a few gaps had a reconstruction happened when quite few holidaymakers were still around to tell their story.
Snip
At no stage of the initial investigation, however, did local police attempt to interview us or anyone in our apartment complex, despite its proximity to the Ocean Club resort.
In our case, certain things we had witnessed over the previous week and indeed on the night of Madeleine's disappearance might have been of use to them.
The suspicious looking characters hanging around Hugo Beatty's bar two nights earlier - one of whom resembled the identikit photo issued by the Metropolitan Police years later; the pick-up-style truck that sped past us as we walked back to the apartment from the restaurant that fateful night; the elderly bearded man videoing children at a nearby theme park three days before.
At the time, their possible significance meant nothing to us, but they might have been of some help.
It was only when we arrived back in Dublin five days later that we felt compelled to volunteer statements to the gardai, who then passed them on to Interpol, by then already on the case.
Presumably, Interpol then passed them on to the Portuguese police.
In addition, the many photos we had taken during our holiday that might have provided clues or identified 'people of interest' in and around Praia da Luz and Lagos were uploaded to a website that was set up by the investigation.
We never heard anything back from the Portuguese police, who in July 2008 officially closed the case.
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/crucial-madeleine-mccann-case-questions-that-remain-unanswered-after-a-decade-35670997.html
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11656.msg614750#msg614750
Jeremy Wilkins might have been able to make himself available in the early days rather than ~
Q. relative to the return to Portugal to realize a reconstitution;
I spoke with the police for a long time regarding this topic. I had some reservation about the press' intrusion onto my personal life and the hurt that resulted. I actually think that I would prefer not to take part. I have helped the investigation and am particularly interested in the investigative team gave me a solid base with would justify the reconstitution. J Wilkins Rogatory
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The reason Bridget O'Donnell, wrote this article in December 2007.
Throughout all this, I have always believed that Gerry and Kate McCann are innocent.
When they were made suspects, when they were booed at, when one woman told me she was "glad" they had "done it" because it meant that her child was safe, I began to write this article - because I was there, and I believe that woman is wrong.
There were no drug-fuelled "swingers" on our holiday; instead, there was a bunch of ordinary parents wearing Berghaus and worrying about sleep patterns.
Secure in our banality, none of us imagined we were being watched. One group made a disastrous decision; Madeleine was vulnerable and was chosen. But in the face of such desperate audacity, it could have been any one of us.
The British police came round shortly after our return. Jes was pleased to give them a statement. The Portuguese police had never asked.
Bridget O'Donnell is a writer and director.
The fee from this article will be donated to the Find Madeleine fund
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2091.msg68843#msg68843
I make nothing "of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?"
Except to say at risk of dignifying such profound misogyny with a response, that your post tells me so much more about you than I want to know.
Snip
“This is the latest in a terrifying line of cases where high profile figures have systematically used their status, celebrity and power, to abuse and to rape.
“Clement Freud was a senior figure in the Liberals, our party’s predecessor, and we are deeply shocked and horrified by this news. Our party was never aware of what happened, and our hearts go out to the women who were affected.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sir-clement-freud-accused-abusing-two-girls-1940s-1970s_uk_5760f9a5e4b0681487dc2b0b
Clement Freud died in 2009.
The allegations were made much later; the article I have linked to is dated 2016.
As a member of a miscarriage of justice forum I have an inherent dislike of such claims made when the individual concerned cannot either face lawful process or make any kind of defence let alone a proper one.
-
With regards to the reconstruction you appear to be re-writing history, in my opinion.... At the time it appeared to me that the Tapas group were resistant to a reconstruction. It was reported that they set certain conditions before they would return to test their timeline through a reconstruction. Some argued that those conditions were unreasonable.
And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?
Oh Dear. You don't know very much, do you.
-
What an ill informed and nasty post.
The reconstitution to which Amaral refers was in the days following Madeleine's abduction when many holidaymakers such as the Totman family https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6225547/madeleine-mccann-gp-sighting-waste/ were still continuing their holiday.
The Smiths were still there.
A reconstitution might have jogged their memories a fortnight before they remembered their encounter.
Who knows ~ perhaps Dr Totman would have been able to clarify why he was walking in the wrong direction or if he had seen anyone flip flopping up the road in towards him had the Portuguese police asked.
The Irish journalist John McGee and others like him might have been able to fill a few gaps had a reconstruction happened when quite few holidaymakers were still around to tell their story.
Snip
At no stage of the initial investigation, however, did local police attempt to interview us or anyone in our apartment complex, despite its proximity to the Ocean Club resort.
In our case, certain things we had witnessed over the previous week and indeed on the night of Madeleine's disappearance might have been of use to them.
The suspicious looking characters hanging around Hugo Beatty's bar two nights earlier - one of whom resembled the identikit photo issued by the Metropolitan Police years later; the pick-up-style truck that sped past us as we walked back to the apartment from the restaurant that fateful night; the elderly bearded man videoing children at a nearby theme park three days before.
At the time, their possible significance meant nothing to us, but they might have been of some help.
It was only when we arrived back in Dublin five days later that we felt compelled to volunteer statements to the gardai, who then passed them on to Interpol, by then already on the case.
Presumably, Interpol then passed them on to the Portuguese police.
In addition, the many photos we had taken during our holiday that might have provided clues or identified 'people of interest' in and around Praia da Luz and Lagos were uploaded to a website that was set up by the investigation.
We never heard anything back from the Portuguese police, who in July 2008 officially closed the case.
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/crucial-madeleine-mccann-case-questions-that-remain-unanswered-after-a-decade-35670997.html
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11656.msg614750#msg614750
Jeremy Wilkins might have been able to make himself available in the early days rather than ~
Q. relative to the return to Portugal to realize a reconstitution;
I spoke with the police for a long time regarding this topic. I had some reservation about the press' intrusion onto my personal life and the hurt that resulted. I actually think that I would prefer not to take part. I have helped the investigation and am particularly interested in the investigative team gave me a solid base with would justify the reconstitution. J Wilkins Rogatory
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The reason Bridget O'Donnell, wrote this article in December 2007.
Throughout all this, I have always believed that Gerry and Kate McCann are innocent.
When they were made suspects, when they were booed at, when one woman told me she was "glad" they had "done it" because it meant that her child was safe, I began to write this article - because I was there, and I believe that woman is wrong.
There were no drug-fuelled "swingers" on our holiday; instead, there was a bunch of ordinary parents wearing Berghaus and worrying about sleep patterns.
Secure in our banality, none of us imagined we were being watched. One group made a disastrous decision; Madeleine was vulnerable and was chosen. But in the face of such desperate audacity, it could have been any one of us.
The British police came round shortly after our return. Jes was pleased to give them a statement. The Portuguese police had never asked.
Bridget O'Donnell is a writer and director.
The fee from this article will be donated to the Find Madeleine fund
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2091.msg68843#msg68843
I make nothing "of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?"
Except to say at risk of dignifying such profound misogyny with a response, that your post tells me so much more about you than I want to know.
Snip
“This is the latest in a terrifying line of cases where high profile figures have systematically used their status, celebrity and power, to abuse and to rape.
“Clement Freud was a senior figure in the Liberals, our party’s predecessor, and we are deeply shocked and horrified by this news. Our party was never aware of what happened, and our hearts go out to the women who were affected.”
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/sir-clement-freud-accused-abusing-two-girls-1940s-1970s_uk_5760f9a5e4b0681487dc2b0b
Clement Freud died in 2009.
The allegations were made much later; the article I have linked to is dated 2016.
As a member of a miscarriage of justice forum I have an inherent dislike of such claims made when the individual concerned cannot either face lawful process or make any kind of defence let alone a proper one.
People tend to hypothesise on things, don't they? John McGee may have given statements, but they never reached the Portuguese police. Bridget O'Donnell is critial of the PJ, but she obviously didn't know that Amaral asked the British police to interview her husband. (and provided the questions to be asked)
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
-
With regards to the reconstruction you appear to be re-writing history, in my opinion.... At the time it appeared to me that the Tapas group were resistant to a reconstruction. It was reported that they set certain conditions before they would return to test their timeline through a reconstruction. Some argued that those conditions were unreasonable.
And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?
Talk about re-writing history!! You make it sound as if Kate enjoying Clement Freud’s company knowing he was a paedophile. I know what I make of your post but I’d better keep it to myself.
-
People tend to hypothesise on things, don't they? John McGee may have given statements, but they never reached the Portuguese police. Bridget O'Donnell is critial of the PJ, but she obviously didn't know that Amaral asked the British police to interview her husband. (and provided the questions to be asked)
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
Was that before or after this happened?
“It was only when we arrived back in Dublin five days later that we felt compelled to volunteer statements to the gardai, who then passed them on to Interpol, by then already on the case.
Presumably, Interpol then passed them on to the Portuguese police”.
-
Was that before or after this happened?
“It was only when we arrived back in Dublin five days later that we felt compelled to volunteer statements to the gardai, who then passed them on to Interpol, by then already on the case.
Presumably, Interpol then passed them on to the Portuguese police”.
Was what before or after Mr McGee contacted the Gardai?
-
Was what before or after Mr McGee contacted the Gardai?
Sorry, mixing up two different statements. Note to self: wake up properly before starting to post.
-
*^&* *^&*
Sorry, mixing up two different statements. Note to self: wake up properly before starting to post.
*^&*
-
Well I appear to have made G-Unit’s morning, always nice to know I’ve spread a little happiness before breakfast. @)(++(*
-
With regards to the reconstruction you appear to be re-writing history, in my opinion.... At the time it appeared to me that the Tapas group were resistant to a reconstruction. It was reported that they set certain conditions before they would return to test their timeline through a reconstruction. Some argued that those conditions were unreasonable.
And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?
Jeremy Wilkins refused to return for a reconstruction too didn't he? The McCann's agreed to return.
As for Clement Freud, tell me did he have 'Paedophile' written on his forehead?
-
Jeremy Wilkins refused to return for a reconstruction too didn't he? The McCann's agreed to return.
As for Clement Freud, tell me did he have 'Paedophile' written on his forehead?
Clement Freud only invited The McCanns for Lunch.
Yes, Jeremy Wilkins refused to return for a reconstruction. A key figure as it happens.
The McCanns had no choice.
The rest of The Tapas 7 refused because they were afraid of being arrested. "Don't bring your children" they were told.
-
Jeremy Wilkins refused to return for a reconstruction too didn't he? The McCann's agreed to return.
As for Clement Freud, tell me did he have 'Paedophile' written on his forehead?
Knowing Billy’s logic I’m surprised he hasn’t questioned the family’s support of Everton, seeing as how one of their team members is under investigation for Child sex abuse crimes.
-
People tend to hypothesise on things, don't they? John McGee may have given statements, but they never reached the Portuguese police. Bridget O'Donnell is critial of the PJ, but she obviously didn't know that Amaral asked the British police to interview her husband. (and provided the questions to be asked)
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
A recurring theme of the investigation into a missing child are the invisible 'anonymous' witnesses who leave no trace behind them but in Amaral's feverish imagination in the pages of his book or the chat show studios.
A second recurring theme which features in the investigation is the litany of actual witnesses who might have had information which could have been collated with the experience of others.
It is called 'collecting evidence.
One example of whom is Brueckner. For some reason he came to the attention of the Judicial Police and was visited, but he wasn't in according to Amaral who also claimed he was eliminated from the inquiry at that stage.
Amaral asked the British police to interview her husband. (and provided the questions to be asked)
Do you remember what 'rogatory' means.
Quite obviously the British police carried out their duty and interviewed a key witness whom the Portuguese didn't bother to follow through on at the time.
They had no problem bringing the Smiths over who seem to have been asked about Robert Murat.
Jeremy contacted the police because of his suspicions regarding the 'rasta man' he had encountered. The police weren't interested in that - not one question - but they were interested in the start of the investigation into the McCanns following Gerry's interview to the extent of requesting ~
2. In the spirit of Police to Police Cooperation we request the presence of a British Criminal Analyst who may be able to assist the enquiry.
Also the collaboration of the UK's "Child Exploitation Online Protection" may be useful if they wish to send one of their officers to provide assistance to the investigation,
But they did not follow through with Jeremy on his original statement and according to him - never spoke to him again until Rebelo took over the investigation.
Interesting that fourteen years later, Amaral chose to publicise an image of Brueckner (who had a collection of wigs) with rasta locks photoshopped in. Did it hit a chord with him for some reason
-
Well I appear to have made G-Unit’s morning, always nice to know I’ve spread a little happiness before breakfast. @)(++(*
You have your uses VS.
-
You have your uses VS.
Damned with faint praise... 8(8-))
-
Damned with faint praise... 8(8-))
Warnings Notwithstanding.
-
snip/
Amaral asked the British police to interview her husband. (and provided the questions to be asked)
Do you remember what 'rogatory' means.
Quite obviously the British police carried out their duty and interviewed a key witness whom the Portuguese didn't bother to follow through on at the time.
They had no problem bringing the Smiths over who seem to have been asked about Robert Murat.
Jeremy contacted the police because of his suspicions regarding the 'rasta man' he had encountered. The police weren't interested in that - not one question - but they were interested in the start of the investigation into the McCanns following Gerry's interview to the extent of requesting ~
2. In the spirit of Police to Police Cooperation we request the presence of a British Criminal Analyst who may be able to assist the enquiry.
Also the collaboration of the UK's "Child Exploitation Online Protection" may be useful if they wish to send one of their officers to provide assistance to the investigation,
But they did not follow through with Jeremy on his original statement and according to him - never spoke to him again until Rebelo took over the investigation.
Jes Wilkins spoke to the police on Friday 4th and told them about his 'rasta man' entering the Tapas restaurant when Jes was in there between 8.30 and 9pm. (or in the bar, or in the toilets, His accounts changed over time)
The police looked into this and identified the man.
After the McCanns and their friends were interviewed it became clear that Jes was present when Jane Tanner saw her man. This prompted the request by Amaral on 7th for him to be interviewed to find out if he saw anything. According to "madeleine" Gerry also asked the PJ to speak to Jes in case he saw Jane's man. (although Gerry had already sent Matt Oldfield to Jes's apartment at 1am on 4th to ask him that question)
In all, Jes was interviewed at the request of the PJ on 7th May. He and Bridget were interviewed on 2nd October but it's not clear who decided to do that. He was then included in the Rogatory requests, with some of the questions being supplied by the McCanns.
-
Jes Wilkins spoke to the police on Friday 4th and told them about his 'rasta man' entering the Tapas restaurant when Jes was in there between 8.30 and 9pm. (or in the bar, or in the toilets, His accounts changed over time)
The police looked into this and identified the man.
After the McCanns and their friends were interviewed it became clear that Jes was present when Jane Tanner saw her man. This prompted the request by Amaral on 7th for him to be interviewed to find out if he saw anything. According to "madeleine" Gerry also asked the PJ to speak to Jes in case he saw Jane's man. (although Gerry had already sent Matt Oldfield to Jes's apartment at 1am on 4th to ask him that question)
In all, Jes was interviewed at the request of the PJ on 7th May. He and Bridget were interviewed on 2nd October but it's not clear who decided to do that. He was then included in the Rogatory requests, with some of the questions being supplied by the McCanns.
Meanwhile the known paedophile who is now the prime suspect was ignored
-
Jes Wilkins spoke to the police on Friday 4th and told them about his 'rasta man' entering the Tapas restaurant when Jes was in there between 8.30 and 9pm. (or in the bar, or in the toilets, His accounts changed over time)
The police looked into this and identified the man.
After the McCanns and their friends were interviewed it became clear that Jes was present when Jane Tanner saw her man. This prompted the request by Amaral on 7th for him to be interviewed to find out if he saw anything. According to "madeleine" Gerry also asked the PJ to speak to Jes in case he saw Jane's man. (although Gerry had already sent Matt Oldfield to Jes's apartment at 1am on 4th to ask him that question)
In all, Jes was interviewed at the request of the PJ on 7th May. He and Bridget were interviewed on 2nd October but it's not clear who decided to do that. He was then included in the Rogatory requests, with some of the questions being supplied by the McCanns.
Considering Bruckner was considered worth taking the time to be paid a visit by the PJ and considering Amaral claimed he had dreadlocks at the time you'd wonder why the PJ didn't try a little harder to track him down wouldn't you? Well I would anyway...
-
Jes Wilkins spoke to the police on Friday 4th and told them about his 'rasta man' entering the Tapas restaurant when Jes was in there between 8.30 and 9pm. (or in the bar, or in the toilets, His accounts changed over time)
The police looked into this and identified the man.
After the McCanns and their friends were interviewed it became clear that Jes was present when Jane Tanner saw her man. This prompted the request by Amaral on 7th for him to be interviewed to find out if he saw anything. According to "madeleine" Gerry also asked the PJ to speak to Jes in case he saw Jane's man. (although Gerry had already sent Matt Oldfield to Jes's apartment at 1am on 4th to ask him that question)
In all, Jes was interviewed at the request of the PJ on 7th May. He and Bridget were interviewed on 2nd October but it's not clear who decided to do that. He was then included in the Rogatory requests, with some of the questions being supplied by the McCanns.
Amaral’s mind was already made up regarding the direction in which he would lead the investigation.
How can you have forgotten ‘the badly told story’ headlines in the Portuguese press on the fifth of May 2007...
JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA
Crime reporter, 'Diario de Noticias'
Information started circulating from sources connected to the Portuguese police that the story was full of holes from the side of the McCanns and their friends. Indeed within two days of Madeleine disappearing, this crime correspondent was filing this piece in the Portuguese Daily: Diario of the Noticias: "Headline: a badly told story." We started to receive information according to which the police suspected the theory they had apprehensions, didn't believe the theory that she had been kidnapped. To conclude, the police started to suspect the parents from the word go.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
Job done!
Suspects in place!
Concentrate on the preferred evidence and make sure the press play their part in destroying reputations 😁
All from the Amaral handbook on how not to conduct a missing child investigation.
-
Meanwhile the known paedophile who is now the prime suspect was ignored
With only one sentence you have succinctly summed up the situation.
-
Meanwhile the known paedophile who is now the prime suspect was ignored
Was he a known paedophile? I know he was a known deisel thief.
-
Was he a known paedophile? I know he was a known deisel thief.
Why did the PJ go and visit a known diesel thief in connection with the disappearance of a little girl?
-
Considering Bruckner was considered worth taking the time to be paid a visit by the PJ and considering Amaral claimed he had dreadlocks at the time you'd wonder why the PJ didn't try a little harder to track him down wouldn't you? Well I would anyway...
I wonder why you sometimes choose to not only believe Amaral but quote him to support your arguments? When I quote him he's dismissed as a liar, but when you quote him he's telling the truth, it seems.
-
I wonder why you sometimes choose to not only believe Amaral but quote him to support your arguments? When I quote him he's dismissed as a liar, but when you quote him he's telling the truth, it seems.
You need to learn to read my posts more carefully. I said Amaral “claimed” Bruckner had dreadlocks something he is on record as claiming, I didn’t say I believed him. Nor did I quote him. Dear me, your comprehension skills are rapidly deteriorating IMO.
-
Why did the PJ go and visit a known diesel thief in connection with the disappearance of a little girl?
Did they?
-
Was he a known paedophile? I know he was a known deisel thief.
Christian Brueckner TOLD Portuguese authorities he was a sexual predator a YEAR before Madeleine McCann disappeared but detectives searching for three-year-old 'never considered him a potential kidnapper'
Madeleine McCann: Murder suspect admitted he was a predator | Daily Mail Online
-
Did they?
According to Amaral they did, but then he is a terrible liar (as I'm sure you agree, well on this occasion anyway) so who really knows, eh?
-
Christian Brueckner TOLD Portuguese authorities he was a sexual predator a YEAR before Madeleine McCann disappeared but detectives searching for three-year-old 'never considered him a potential kidnapper'
Madeleine McCann: Murder suspect admitted he was a predator | Daily Mail Online
If you believe Amaral, they did. The problem is Amaral is a proven liar so one has to ask oneself why he would tell such a lie. On the other hand, he could have been breaking the habit of a lifetime and on this occasion be telling the truth which begs the question - how did the PJ eliminate Bruckner on the basis of one unanswered knock on a door? Whichever way you look at it, it does not reflect well on the PJ or the Great Doctor himself.
-
If you believe Amaral, they did. The problem is Amaral is a proven liar so one has to ask oneself why he would tell such a lie. On the other hand, he could have been breaking the habit of a lifetime and on this occasion be telling the truth which begs the question - how did the PJ eliminate Bruckner on the basis of one unanswered knock on a door? Whichever way you look at it, it does not reflect well on the PJ or the Great Doctor himself.
Amaral wanted Kate McCann to be guilty. It was the Mothers Kill Daughters Era.
-
Christian Brueckner TOLD Portuguese authorities he was a sexual predator a YEAR before Madeleine McCann disappeared but detectives searching for three-year-old 'never considered him a potential kidnapper'
Madeleine McCann: Murder suspect admitted he was a predator | Daily Mail Online
Are you assuming that if one 'authority' knows something it tells all the other 'suthorities'?
-
Are you assuming that if one 'authority' knows something it tells all the other 'suthorities'?
I’m not assuming anything. In 1994, Brückner was convicted in Germany of sexual abuse of a child, attempted sexual abuse of a child, and carrying out sexual acts in front of a child. Can you please explain what ‘suthorities’ means? English is my third language.
-
Was he a known paedophile? I know he was a known deisel thief.
Yes.. Are you not aware
-
Are you assuming that if one 'authority' knows something it tells all the other 'suthorities'?
Either they knew he was a paedo which is why they went a knocking on his door, or they didn’t know, didn’t knock and Amaral is a liar. Take your pick.
-
I’m not assuming anything. In 1994, Brückner was convicted in Germany of sexual abuse of a child, attempted sexual abuse of a child, and carrying out sexual acts in front of a child. Can you please explain what ‘suthorities’ means? English is my third language.
Are you assuming that the PJ knew this?
-
Are you assuming that the PJ knew this?
Are you assuming they didn’t?
-
Are you assuming they didn’t?
I don't think that The PJ were frightfully interested in Paedophiles in those days. Probably still aren't. They don't appear to have cared very much about some bloke breaking into children's bedrooms at the time.
-
Are you assuming that the PJ knew this?
The PJ knew this one year before Madeleine disappeared. Can you please expand on why you are questioning this?
-
The PJ knew this one year before Madeleine disappeared. Can you please expand on why you are questioning this?
"Even though Brueckner confessed his sexual criminal past to the judge that interrogated this information was never passed on to the PJ."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8440941/Christian-Brueckner-TOLD-authorities-predator-YEAR-Madeleine-McCann-disappeared.html
-
"Even though Brueckner confessed his sexual criminal past to the judge that interrogated this information was never passed on to the PJ."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8440941/Christian-Brueckner-TOLD-authorities-predator-YEAR-Madeleine-McCann-disappeared.html
“Details of his confession that he was a sexual predator have emerged in documents of his interview by criminal investigating Judge Antonieta Nascimento in the Portimao court house on 8th April 2006. His name should have been added to a list held by the Portugal’s investigative Policia Judiciaria [PJ] who were tasked with finding Madeleine McCann just a year later”.
🤭Another failure re. Portugal’s judicial system?
-
“Details of his confession that he was a sexual predator have emerged in documents of his interview by criminal investigating Judge Antonieta Nascimento in the Portimao court house on 8th April 2006. His name should have been added to a list held by the Portugal’s investigative Policia Judiciaria [PJ] who were tasked with finding Madeleine McCann just a year later”.
🤭Another failure re. Portugal’s judicial system?
Not very impressive is it. Absolutely useless in fact, right the way up to the top.
-
In fact, is it any wonder as to why The Supreme Court came down on the side of Amaral?
-
I dont accept a confession as proof of guilt. Portugal doeas as seen the Cipriano case. I have a lot more evidence and Im certain of her guilt.
You are drawing conclusions without knowing all the facts. Like Wolters... Im sure if I told you what evidence I have you would agree with me.
Come on then.... let's here your evidence, Dave.
-
Come on then.... let's here your evidence, Dave.
Let’s hear your take on the Cipriano evidence.
-
Come on then.... let's here your evidence, Dave.
I have her on tape agreeing to pay me back.... When the police played it to her... She said it was for a washing machine
In i think i can prove she was lying
Not sure if you would accept my proof
-
Clement Freud died in 2009.
The allegations were made much later; the article I have linked to is dated 2016.
As a member of a miscarriage of justice forum I have an inherent dislike of such claims made when the individual concerned cannot either face lawful process or make any kind of defence let alone a proper one.
It took my female relative 12 years to discuss the sexual abuse she suffered.... and many more months before she could make a statement to the Police. What happened has left deep psychological trauma. There is no way I would criticise any victim of sexual abuse for speaking out - even if it's clear the alleged perpetrator is not going to face due legal process.
Perhaps you feel some kind of partisan loyalty to Clement Freud? In my opinion it's likely that he is every bit as repulsive and predatory as CB. Freud's wife accepted what he had done - but your "dislike"clearly appears to be aimed at the actions of his victims.
-
Let’s hear your take on the Cipriano evidence.
I haven't studied it. From what I recall (and I can't remember the source) it was reported that Amaral beat a confession out of someone, but there's probably another thread for that case.
-
I have her on tape agreeing to pay me back.... When the police played it to her... She said it was for a washing machine
In i think i can prove she was lying
Not sure if you would accept my proof
Audio tape? So as I stated you accept her confession?
-
Audio tape? So as I stated you accept her confession?
Read the post again... Then comment... Its nothing to do with her confess... Its her agreeing to pay the money back
-
Audio tape? So as I stated you accept her confession?
She confessed to er family too... Still think I'm wrong
-
Read the post again... Then comment... Its nothing to do with her confess... Its her agreeing to pay the money back
I’ve read it several times. You don’t paint a picture of an honest character. Offering to pay it back on audio tape implies she has your money or was she talking about paying you for a washing machine? It’s hard to guess given we both accept she appears less than honest as a character.
-
She confessed to er family too... Still think I'm wrong
I never said you were wrong . I questioned whether your “evidence” was robust enough for you to “know” rather than “believe” she stole your money.
Good effort though - even if it did take you over 48 hours and amounts to you taping a dishonest woman who was either talking about money she stole or money she owed for a washing machine!! I’m not a solicitor but I’d say on the balance of probabilities I’m with you. The trouble is theft is a criminal offence though.
-
I don't think that The PJ were frightfully interested in Paedophiles in those days. Probably still aren't. They don't appear to have cared very much about some bloke breaking into children's bedrooms at the time.
And have OG had any success in investigating CB, or any of the other alleged or suspected paedophiles possibly linked to this case? It seemed to take them years to realise Smithman was possibly highly significant in my opinion.
-
It took my female relative 12 years to discuss the sexual abuse she suffered.... and many more months before she could make a statement to the Police. What happened has left deep psychological trauma. There is no way I would criticise any victim of sexual abuse for speaking out - even if it's clear the alleged perpetrator is not going to face due legal process.
Perhaps you feel some kind of partisan loyalty to Clement Freud? In my opinion it's likely that he is every bit as repulsive and predatory as CB. Freud's wife accepted what he had done - but your "dislike"clearly appears to be aimed at the actions of his victims.
I know nothing about Clement Freud's accusers but think on ... if you or your son or daughter were to be accused of historic sex abuse ... would that be it for you.
Would you, your son and your daughter accept the accusation - or accusations - without question and settle down to do your time with good grace.
We have a well established legal system based on the presumption of innocence which would allow you to argue a case to defend yourself.
Clement Freud was dead when his accuser made an appearance on a documentary 'Abused And Betrayed - A Life Sentence' and therefore could mount no defence.
The day following the release of the documentary Cliff Richard was cleared of accusations made against him. It took two horrible years as the police investigated - and no doubt expensive lawyers.
Cliff Richard was alive and able to fight his case.
Lord McAlpine was able to fight his. If they had been dead they would have shared the same addition to their name as that given to Clement Freud.
Accusers can tell it very wrong. Follow these two links to get a flavour of what Lord McAlpine was up against ~
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20269114#:~:text=Lord%20McAlpine%2C%20whose%20grandfather%20founded%20the%20McAlpine%20construction,post%20until%201990.%20He%20now%20lives%20in%20Italy.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2231212/Steven-Messham-Astonishing-story-BBC-DIDNT-tell-troubled-star-witness.html
-
And have OG had any success in investigating CB, or any of the other alleged or suspected paedophiles possibly linked to this case? It seemed to take them years to realise Smithman was possibly highly significant in my opinion.
I think that like everyone else you are just going to have to wait to be told what the police are doing in Madeleine's case.
Scotland Yard used the tools of the trade to cast a wide net and didn't confine themselves to concentrating in one direction which is the mistake Amaral made.
In the beginning, if the Portuguese had worked the cell dump as it should have been who knows where that might have led the investigation. It certainly was a missed opportunity which could well have spared many years of grief.
Snip
After carrying out a cell-dump of all mobile phone activity in the Praia da Luz area in the lead-up to Madeleine's disappearance and the days after, the Metropolitan Police were also able to identify all the telephone numbers we dialled, as well as the numbers that had dialled us during that period. As is the norm in such cases, details of all calls made and received were submitted as part of our statements.
The use of cell-dumps has helped police gain convictions in several high-profile murder cases in the past, and nowadays cell-dumps are almost as useful to the police as fingerprints or DNA. It was later reported by several UK newspapers that the cell-dump turned up a large number of telephone calls and texts in and around the Ocean Club between a group of men around the time of Madeleine's disappearance. Nothing ever came of it.
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/uk/crucial-madeleine-mccann-case-questions-that-remain-unanswered-after-a-decade-35670997.html
-
I haven't studied it. From what I recall (and I can't remember the source) it was reported that Amaral beat a confession out of someone, but there's probably another thread for that case.
You don’t need to “study” it. The fact of the matter is that there was no “cast iron evidence” the suspects committed the crime, in fact there was no forensic evidence at all. The trial lasted a day or two IIRC and they were both banged up largely if not solely due to the suspects’ confessions, one of which was withdrawn prior to trial, the one made by the suspect who was tortured by the police. I haven’t studied it but I believe those are the salient facts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Joana_Cipriano#Allegations_of_police_misconduct
So perhaps you’d like to give us your thoughts on that?
-
It took my female relative 12 years to discuss the sexual abuse she suffered.... and many more months before she could make a statement to the Police. What happened has left deep psychological trauma. There is no way I would criticise any victim of sexual abuse for speaking out - even if it's clear the alleged perpetrator is not going to face due legal process.
Perhaps you feel some kind of partisan loyalty to Clement Freud? In my opinion it's likely that he is every bit as repulsive and predatory as CB. Freud's wife accepted what he had done - but your "dislike"clearly appears to be aimed at the actions of his victims.
You previously questioned Kate McCann’s apparent fondness for this alleged paedophile. What point were you trying to make about her?
-
Well Brueckner's warning shot appears to have worked on Wolters. There have been no more interviews with the prosecutor recently. Quite right too, in my opinion. If there's one thing the UK police are good at it's saying just what they need to say to the media and no more.
-
Well Brueckner's warning shot appears to have worked on Wolters. There have been no more interviews with the prosecutor recently. Quite right too, in my opinion. If there's one thing the UK police are good at it's saying just what they need to say to the media and no more.
Interesting that you see it as Brückner being able to control Wolters behaviour from his prison cell.
-
Interesting that you see it as Brückner being able to control Wolters behaviour from his prison cell.
Wolters doesn't have to say anymore at the moment.
Wolters didn't expose Breuckner. Amaral did that. But what was Amaral thinking of? He has made himself look like a right pillock. Again.
-
Well Brueckner's warning shot appears to have worked on Wolters. There have been no more interviews with the prosecutor recently. Quite right too, in my opinion. If there's one thing the UK police are good at it's saying just what they need to say to the media and no more.
I remember lots of complaints that SY should share their evidence... Wolters is keeping us informed.. Thats good
-
Interesting that you see it as Brückner being able to control Wolters behaviour from his prison cell.
Well something's shut him up after a year of talking to anyone who asked him to. Coincidence? Maybe.
-
I remember lots of complaints that SY should share their evidence... Wolters is keeping us informed.. Thats good
True. People demanding to know what their Tax Payers Money was being spent on.
-
Well something's shut him up after a year of talking to anyone who asked him to. Coincidence? Maybe.
Could be he's finally realised he has nothing useful to say that he hasn't already said.
-
Well Brueckner's warning shot appears to have worked on Wolters. There have been no more interviews with the prosecutor recently. Quite right too, in my opinion. If there's one thing the UK police are good at it's saying just what they need to say to the media and no more.
Which warning shot is that?
From 2017 until Amaral 2019 spoke on Saunokonoko's podcast and into 2020 when Amaral clarified exactly to which German national locked up for his crimes in a German jail, he was referring.
Snip
"Speaking on the Maddie podcast, in a 2019 interview that has accurately foreshadowed today's developments, Mr Amaral confirmed the German had been on the Algarve.
"He was investigated by the [Policia Judiciaria, Portugal's police] at the time [and] when the case ended they discarded him," he said.
"The trailer that he lived in was taken to Germany for testing but nothing was found there."
Mr Amaral said the German suspect was a convicted sex offender and was serving sentences in Germany unrelated the disappearance of Madeleine, arguably the world's most famous missing person case.
The former cop hit out at Operation Grange, the long-running $20 million London Metropolitan Police investigation for Maddie.
He alleged Operation Grange only had "one investigation line", and claimed it was blinkered to other possibilities about what may have happened in the resort where Madeleine was staying.
_____________________________________________________
Mr and Mrs McCann have strenuously denied any involvement in their daughter's disappearance. Nine.com.au does not suggest they were involved in any way.
The German pedophile fits with the theory Mr and Mrs McCann have always believed could explain what happened to Madeleine: that someone broke into the holiday apartment and stole the three-year-old girl while she was sleeping.
Clouding that possible theory was circumstantial evidence developed by Mr Amaral and his team of detectives in the summer of 2007.
https://www.9news.com.au/national/madeleine-mccann-german-suspect-a-scapegoat-portugal-detective-goncalo-amaral-claims-maddie-podcast/0ea5ef10-8717-4cfb-adea-a1c8baf2d357
Until then you had never heard of Brueckner. Only those investigating him (and Amaral) had.
I don't think Wolters would probably have given interviews at that time if Amaral hadn't already blown Brueckner's cover making it opportune to seek public assistance.
Perhaps you have failed to notice that nobody is giving interviews at the moment suggesting to me that Wolters is running the show here, not Brueckner as you seem to imagine.
I think far from firing off warning shots Brueckner and his cartoon sent out signals to the contrary.
Anyway - you can think and say what you like I'm not too sure anyone is too bothered 😁
-
True. People demanding to know what their Tax Payers Money was being spent on.
Now we know, thanks to Amaral.
I have only listened to minimal Saunokonoko podcast material and only went there today to provide a link. A quick glance suggests to me that 9News is not nearly as supportive of Amaral's theories as sceptics think.
He is still on about Gaspar and freezers 😁
When everyone else has moved onto present day circumstances with real cops following evidence of perhaps more offences than the one which Amaral treated like a penny dreadful - and might have noted and wondered about Amaral's interference in the German investigation which he has consistently rubbished and promoted misleading information about.
-
I remember lots of complaints that SY should share their evidence... Wolters is keeping us informed.. Thats good
People are well aware that the Portuguese investigation closed without the crime being identified and without the suspicions about the parents being dissipated. Despite that, Operation Grange was given one crime only to investigate; stranger abduction. It wasn't unreasonable to wonder what evidence that decision was based on.
I expect Wolters is struggling to gather the evidence he needs because there's no definitive evidence that Madeleine McCann was abducted. Everyone (Wolters, the BKA and the dodgy informants) has assumed it happened but in a court of law it needs to be shown that it happened and that the accused was involved.
-
People are well aware that the Portuguese investigation closed without the crime being identified and without the suspicions about the parents being dissipated. Despite that, Operation Grange was given one crime only to investigate; stranger abduction. It wasn't unreasonable to wonder what evidence that decision was based on.
I expect Wolters is struggling to gather the evidence he needs because there's no definitive evidence that Madeleine McCann was abducted. Everyone (Wolters, the BKA and the dodgy informants) has assumed it happened but in a court of law it needs to be shown that it happened and that the accused was involved.
Seldom have I seen such circa 2007 rubbish repeated on what is supposed to be a fact based forum.
It is about time you got it through your head that Madeleine's parents were cleared of anything approaching the slurs Amaral continues to treasure and you to nourish.
I really think you cannot see what an embarrassment Amaral's botched investigation is to Portugal.
That you keep on reiterating that Scotland Yard was only "being allowed" to investigate abduction is absolutely beyond belief and an insult to officers who did their job efficiently and following procedure which could only have happened if the case was viewed as a whole.
You have absolutely no idea of the issues that motivated Scotland Yard to ask for Madeleine's case to be opened.
Don't pretend you do.
Meantime the rest of the world took note of the amount of loose ends arising from lack of Amaral's diligence which Scotland Yard had to work their way through ... and that path leads us to the present prime suspect.
Who do you think directed the Judicial Police to work round to the 'abduction theory' - declaring right from the start that the McCanns were not suspects but a burglar and a former employee of the Ocean Club was.
-
People are well aware that the Portuguese investigation closed without the crime being identified and without the suspicions about the parents being dissipated. Despite that, Operation Grange was given one crime only to investigate; stranger abduction. It wasn't unreasonable to wonder what evidence that decision was based on.
I expect Wolters is struggling to gather the evidence he needs because there's no definitive evidence that Madeleine McCann was abducted. Everyone (Wolters, the BKA and the dodgy informants) has assumed it happened but in a court of law it needs to be shown that it happened and that the accused was involved.
I think looking at the evidence the PJ collected it was clear the mccanns were not involved. Every personwho suspects the mccanns misunderstands the alerts imo.. That goes for all sveptics ive come across and the PJ.
The case wss archived becayse thete wss no real evidence against the McCanns
Ive listened to everything from .. Wolters... He hasnt contrafdicted himself once.. From whst he has said it seems he has proof of abduction and murder... But not enough evidence to be sure of convicting CB
-
People are well aware that the Portuguese investigation closed without the crime being identified and without the suspicions about the parents being dissipated. Despite that, Operation Grange was given one crime only to investigate; stranger abduction. It wasn't unreasonable to wonder what evidence that decision was based on.
I expect Wolters is struggling to gather the evidence he needs because there's no definitive evidence that Madeleine McCann was abducted. Everyone (Wolters, the BKA and the dodgy informants) has assumed it happened but in a court of law it needs to be shown that it happened and that the accused was involved.
Why is it so important to you that, like Amaral you really do not wish Madeleine’s case to be investigated properly if your posting history is anything to go by.
Three national police forces are investigating abduction and have been investigating a prime suspect for as many years as Amaral spent in months on botching Madeleine's case before being sacked from the job for his awfulness.
Who do you think would know more about Brueckner to share information with the authorities than his neighbours, friends, acquaintances, those who worked with him in legitimate jobs and in more nefarious enterprises such as drugs and burglary.
Not all informants will be “dodgy” as you term it. His phone number activated a mast in Luz on the night Madeleine disappeared – the PJ apparently ’ruled him out’ in 2007, and I think that is an interesting one indeed.
Quite obviously he is still very much ‘ruled in’ to the investigation and has been since 2017 when he apparently mouthed off in a pub, until now in 2021 when the police have evidence to name him as the Prime Suspect in Madeleine’s abduction.
It is my belief that investigators are checking out many more offences with which he may be associated and not just Madeleine's so the bad news for you is anguish for her parents, if it gives you solace to know that.
-
People are well aware that the Portuguese investigation closed without the crime being identified and without the suspicions about the parents being dissipated. Despite that, Operation Grange was given one crime only to investigate; stranger abduction. It wasn't unreasonable to wonder what evidence that decision was based on.
I expect Wolters is struggling to gather the evidence he needs because there's no definitive evidence that Madeleine McCann was abducted. Everyone (Wolters, the BKA and the dodgy informants) has assumed it happened but in a court of law it needs to be shown that it happened and that the accused was involved.
The archiving report said no evidence of any crime.. P D Carmo said no evidence no suspects... So who is that suspects the mccanns. I think its obvious why SY consider the crime to be abduction
From what HCW has said he has proof of abduction and muder but not enough evidence to guarantee a conviction for CB. Hes in no rush so hes looking to make a water tight case
-
Answers in red.
Seldom have I seen such circa 2007 rubbish repeated on what is supposed to be a fact based forum.
If only it was a fact based forum. I find it's anything but. It's a forum which repeats uninformed journalistic and other blog/forum based rumours and speculations far too frequently in my opinion. In fact much of this post is based on beliefs rather than facts imo.
It is about time you got it through your head that Madeleine's parents were cleared of anything approaching the slurs Amaral continues to treasure and you to nourish.
The McCanns were not cleared, the investigation was shelved due to a lack of evidence.
I really think you cannot see what an embarrassment Amaral's botched investigation is to Portugal.
Do you have a cite to support this "fact"?
That you keep on reiterating that Scotland Yard was only "being allowed" to investigate abduction is absolutely beyond belief and an insult to officers who did their job efficiently and following procedure which could only have happened if the case was viewed as a whole.
There is evidence which suggests that Op Grange were set up to investigate an abduction.
You have absolutely no idea of the issues that motivated Scotland Yard to ask for Madeleine's case to be opened.
Don't pretend you do.
Do you mean the Portuguese investigation?
Meantime the rest of the world took note of the amount of loose ends arising from lack of Amaral's diligence which Scotland Yard had to work their way through ... and that path leads us to the present prime suspect.
I thought it was informant information which led to the present prime suspect?
Who do you think directed the Judicial Police to work round to the 'abduction theory' - declaring right from the start that the McCanns were not suspects but a burglar and a former employee of the Ocean Club was.
No idea, do tell.
-
Well something's shut him up after a year of talking to anyone who asked him to. Coincidence? Maybe.
To test if that's true or not you'd need to look at all of HCW's public pronouncements and see how regular they were and what the longest interval was between pronouncements. It's only been a month since he last spoke, is that the longest period of silence from him?
-
Answers in red.
Seldom have I seen such circa 2007 rubbish repeated on what is supposed to be a fact based forum.
If only it was a fact based forum. I find it's anything but. It's a forum which repeats uninformed journalistic and other blog/forum based rumours and speculations far too frequently in my opinion. In fact much of this post is based on beliefs rather than facts imo.
It is about time you got it through your head that Madeleine's parents were cleared of anything approaching the slurs Amaral continues to treasure and you to nourish.
The McCanns were not cleared, the investigation was shelved due to a lack of evidence.
I really think you cannot see what an embarrassment Amaral's botched investigation is to Portugal.
Do you have a cite to support this "fact"?
That you keep on reiterating that Scotland Yard was only "being allowed" to investigate abduction is absolutely beyond belief and an insult to officers who did their job efficiently and following procedure which could only have happened if the case was viewed as a whole.
There is evidence which suggests that Op Grange were set up to investigate an abduction.
You have absolutely no idea of the issues that motivated Scotland Yard to ask for Madeleine's case to be opened.
Don't pretend you do.
Do you mean the Portuguese investigation?
Meantime the rest of the world took note of the amount of loose ends arising from lack of Amaral's diligence which Scotland Yard had to work their way through ... and that path leads us to the present prime suspect.
I thought it was informant information which led to the present prime suspect?
Who do you think directed the Judicial Police to work round to the 'abduction theory' - declaring right from the start that the McCanns were not suspects but a burglar and a former employee of the Ocean Club was.
No idea, do tell.
Have you ever asked yourself why the McCanns weren't reconstituted arguidos by the Portuguese when they re-opened their investigation into this case? If so, what conclusions did you draw, if any?
-
Now we know, thanks to Amaral.
I have only listened to minimal Saunokonoko podcast material and only went there today to provide a link. A quick glance suggests to me that 9News is not nearly as supportive of Amaral's theories as sceptics think.
He is still on about Gaspar and freezers 😁
When everyone else has moved onto present day circumstances with real cops following evidence of perhaps more offences than the one which Amaral treated like a penny dreadful - and might have noted and wondered about Amaral's interference in the German investigation which he has consistently rubbished and promoted misleading information about.
Amaral said a Police Officer knocked on CB's door but didn't get an answer. Amaral is saying they didn't find anything to link CB to Madeleine's disappearance. So did he interview CB or not?
-
To test if that's true or not you'd need to look at all of HCW's public pronouncements and see how regular they were and what the longest interval was between pronouncements. It's only been a month since he last spoke, is that the longest period of silence from him?
Wolters has said CB will be interviewed when their investigation is completed. Until then he can stew {Wolters didn't say that I did]
-
People are well aware that the Portuguese investigation closed without the crime being identified and without the suspicions about the parents being dissipated. Despite that, Operation Grange was given one crime only to investigate; stranger abduction. It wasn't unreasonable to wonder what evidence that decision was based on.
I expect Wolters is struggling to gather the evidence he needs because there's no definitive evidence that Madeleine McCann was abducted. Everyone (Wolters, the BKA and the dodgy informants) has assumed it happened but in a court of law it needs to be shown that it happened and that the accused was involved.
I don't believe OG were given the only crime of stranger abduction to investigate at all. As they said they read through everything, thousands of pages of investigation. Just because they said they didn't interview the McCann's as that was dealt with by the Portuguese Police [they had all the statements etc,]. doesn't mean they automatically just assumed the McCann's innocent. That is something the anti's use as an argument against the Police Forces saying the McCann's are innocent and there was no evidence the McCann's were involved in Madeleine's disappearance. Two Police Forces are investigating abduction, have the German Police been told not to investigate the McCann's too?
-
I don't believe OG were given the only crime of stranger abduction to investigate at all. As they said they read through everything, thousands of pages of investigation. Just because they said they didn't interview the McCann's as that was dealt with by the Portuguese Police [they had all the statements etc,]. doesn't mean they automatically just assumed the McCann's innocent. That is something the anti's use as an argument against the Police Forces saying the McCann's are innocent and there was no evidence the McCann's were involved in Madeleine's disappearance. Two Police Forces are investigating abduction, have the German Police been told not to investigate the McCann's too?
The other ludicrous assumption is that having read up on "all the incriminating evidence" against the McCanns in the files, the Met had no choice but to obey the orders from the High Ups and disregard it in order to chase a wild goose, which presumably is what sceptics like G-Unit believe - that the Met is so corrupt, and the McCanns so important that that is what has happened. Amazing no anonymouse whistleblower has yet come forward to the media to spill the beans on this amazing cover-up, just think of the fortune they could make by selling their story!
-
The other ludicrous assumption is that having read up on "all the incriminating evidence" against the McCanns in the files, the Met had no choice but to obey the orders from the High Ups and disregard it in order to chase a wild goose, which presumably is what sceptics like G-Unit believe - that the Met is so corrupt, and the McCanns so important that that is what has happened. Amazing no anonymouse whistleblower has yet come forward to the media to spill the beans on this amazing cover-up, just think of the fortune they could make by selling their story!
I have never bothered to argue this point because it is obvious to me.
I don't know if Operation Grange interviewed The McCanns but they had all of the information from The Portuguese Investigation who did their utmost to find The McCanns guilty.
Or are Sceptics saying that The Portuguese were incompetent and totally unable to find a pig in a poke?
-
I know nothing about Clement Freud's accusers but think on ... if you or your son or daughter were to be accused of historic sex abuse ... would that be it for you.
Would you, your son and your daughter accept the accusation - or accusations - without question and settle down to do your time with good grace.
We have a well established legal system based on the presumption of innocence which would allow you to argue a case to defend yourself.
Clement Freud was dead when his accuser made an appearance on a documentary 'Abused And Betrayed - A Life Sentence' and therefore could mount no defence.
The day following the release of the documentary Cliff Richard was cleared of accusations made against him. It took two horrible years as the police investigated - and no doubt expensive lawyers.
Cliff Richard was alive and able to fight his case.
Lord McAlpine was able to fight his. If they had been dead they would have shared the same addition to their name as that given to Clement Freud.
Accusers can tell it very wrong. Follow these two links to get a flavour of what Lord McAlpine was up against ~
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20269114#:~:text=Lord%20McAlpine%2C%20whose%20grandfather%20founded%20the%20McAlpine%20construction,post%20until%201990.%20He%20now%20lives%20in%20Italy.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2231212/Steven-Messham-Astonishing-story-BBC-DIDNT-tell-troubled-star-witness.html
If you believe our well established legal system is protecting the victims of paedophiles then all I can do is stress that I believe, from tragic personal involvement, that you are very sadly mistaken.
Also I shouldn't respond to your ad hominem rhetoric but the sentence stating "the mother's self proclaimed enjoyment of socialising with Clement Freud" contains no misogyny whatsoever. It's a factual statement based on Kate McCann's book. For the record, in my opinion, Gerry McCann appears controlling in terms of the couple's public persona and how that is managed. However it was Kate who wrote about enjoying the company of the alleged paedophile Clement Freud.
-
If you believe our well established legal system is protecting the victims of paedophiles then all I can do is stress that I believe, from tragic personal involvement, that you are very sadly mistaken.
Also I shouldn't respond to your ad hominem rhetoric but the sentence stating "the mother's self proclaimed enjoyment of socialising with Clement Freud" contains no misogyny whatsoever. It's a factual statement based on Kate McCann's book. For the record, in my opinion, Gerry McCann appears controlling in terms of the couple's public persona and how that is managed. However it was Kate who wrote about enjoying the company of the alleged paedophile Clement Freud.
Was Clement Freud an alleged paedophile at the time.
-
Was Clement Freud an alleged paedophile at the time.
It is alleged he was a paedophile from the late 1940s onwards. His wife has even accepted the allegations and has expressed her sympathy to the victims. This was not known in 2007 - but it is known now. In my opinion it's reasonable to believe that the McCann's might issue a public statement given what Kate wrote about him in her book, and the fact that from Day One it was them that linked this case to paedophilia.
-
It is alleged he was a paedophile from the late 1940s onwards. His wife has even accepted the allegations and has expressed her sympathy to the victims. This was not known in 2007 - but it is known now. In my opinion it's reasonable to believe that the McCann's might issue a public statement given what Kate wrote about him in her book, and the fact that from Day One it was them that linked this case to paedophilia.
So Kate didn't know about this at the time. Thank you. So why should Kate issue a statement and saying what exactly?
Was he ever found guilty? Or did his wife stand trial for him?
-
It is alleged he was a paedophile from the late 1940s onwards. His wife has even accepted the allegations and has expressed her sympathy to the victims. This was not known in 2007 - but it is known now. In my opinion it's reasonable to believe that the McCann's might issue a public statement given what Kate wrote about him in her book, and the fact that from Day One it was them that linked this case to paedophilia.
What a laughable suggestion IMO. Why does Kate McCann need to make a public statement about Clement Freud? Saying what exactly? If your best mate turned out to be a paedophile what sort of a public statement would you make about it?
-
If you believe our well established legal system is protecting the victims of paedophiles then all I can do is stress that I believe, from tragic personal involvement, that you are very sadly mistaken.
Also I shouldn't respond to your ad hominem rhetoric but the sentence stating "the mother's self proclaimed enjoyment of socialising with Clement Freud" contains no misogyny whatsoever. It's a factual statement based on Kate McCann's book. For the record, in my opinion, Gerry McCann appears controlling in terms of the couple's public persona and how that is managed. However it was Kate who wrote about enjoying the company of the alleged paedophile Clement Freud.
In my opinion Gerry took on the media as he was the stronger of the two, Kate said that Gerry was used to giving lectures he would do in his profession. To say he was 'controlling' is rather over the top when Kate preferred Gerry to speak out for them. Kate did get better at speaking as time went by.
So what if Kate did write about enjoying the company of Clement Freud? I believe they took other family members with them on the first visit. I think she felt a bit flattered as he was a well known person. Why shouldn't they have had a short break from the horrors of their daughters disappearance? A time to relax and just enjoy a meal, they would soon slam back to reality as soon as it was over. The McCann's wouldn't have known about his secrets, they just knew him as a well known person. Paedophile's are in all walks of life, who knows you may have even encountered one yourself without knowing it.
If I found my child missing from her bed with the window open when it had never been opened all the time they had been in the apartment, then she was not found in the apartment or anywhere around it, then I would think 'abduction' and yes my first thought would be Paedophile as they are the people who usually abduct a child. So what's all this Kate mentions Paedophile's of course she did, it would be every mothers worse scenario.
-
What a laughable suggestion IMO. Why does Kate McCann need to make a public statement about Clement Freud? Saying what exactly? If your best mate turned out to be a paedophile what sort of a public statement would you make about it?
I'm not a public figure but if I was and (a) had publicly declared that I thought a paedophile had abducted my daughter and then (b) discovered I had been socialising with a paedophile and publicly stating what great company he was then yes without doubt I would go on public record and condemn the alleged actions of this man and state my abhorrence of his actions and my regret that I had ever had the misfortune of setting foot in his house.
-
I'm not a public figure but if I was and (a) had publicly declared that I thought a paedophile had abducted my daughter and then (b) discovered I had been socialising with a paedophile and publicly stating what great company he was then yes without doubt I would go on public record and condemn the alleged actions of this man and state my abhorrence of his actions and my regret that I had ever had the misfortune of setting foot in his house.
Was Clement Freud ever found guilty?
-
In my opinion Gerry took on the media as he was the stronger of the two, Kate said that Gerry was used to giving lectures he would do in his profession. To say he was 'controlling' is rather over the top when Kate preferred Gerry to speak out for them. Kate did get better at speaking as time went by.
So what if Kate did write about enjoying the company of Clement Freud? I believe they took other family members with them on the first visit. I think she felt a bit flattered as he was a well known person. Why shouldn't they have had a short break from the horrors of their daughters disappearance? A time to relax and just enjoy a meal, they would soon slam back to reality as soon as it was over. The McCann's wouldn't have known about his secrets, they just knew him as a well known person. Paedophile's are in all walks of life, who knows you may have even encountered one yourself without knowing it.
If I found my child missing from her bed with the window open when it had never been opened all the time they had been in the apartment, then she was not found in the apartment or anywhere around it, then I would think 'abduction' and yes my first thought would be Paedophile as they are the people who usually abduct a child. So what's all this Kate mentions Paedophile's of course she did, it would be every mothers worse scenario.
Without doubt we jump to dark scenarios as parents but stranger abduction isn't the most common cause of missing children it is incredibly rare. You might have dark thoughts but to declare this is what has happened in public is a different reaction in my opinion. I draw no inference from this reaction. It was just the first in a string of alleged links with this case and paedophiles. It's led all the way to CB (now that RH is dead).
-
Was Clement Freud ever found guilty?
You know he wasn't. And as Dave is keen to point out that doesn't mean he wasn't guilty.
Do you believe his wife was wrong to accept the allegations and offer her sympathy to the victims?
-
You know he wasn't. And as Dave is keen to point out that doesn't mean he wasn't guilty.
Do you believe his wife was wrong to accept the allegations and offer her sympathy to the victims?
Neither does it mean that he was guilty. So not even an alleged paedophile.
I don't suppose you have a cite to his wife's statement, do you?
-
I'm not a public figure but if I was and (a) had publicly declared that I thought a paedophile had abducted my daughter and then (b) discovered I had been socialising with a paedophile and publicly stating what great company he was then yes without doubt I would go on public record and condemn the alleged actions of this man and state my abhorrence of his actions and my regret that I had ever had the misfortune of setting foot in his house.
And if she had she would undoubtedly be accused by some of protesting too much. Whatever abominations this man committed against children it goes without saying anyone in their right mind would be against it, but nothing can alter the fact that this man showed kindness towards Kate and her family at the time. IMO The only people expecting Kate McCann to issue a public proclamation on the matter are the same people who criticise her whatever she does or doesn’t do. Has this woman EVER done the right thing about anything in your view?
-
You know he wasn't. And as Dave is keen to point out that doesn't mean he wasn't guilty.
Do you believe his wife was wrong to accept the allegations and offer her sympathy to the victims?
Yes, very interesting that you consider Freud to be a paedophile on the strength of witness testimony alone.
-
Close personal friends of Clement Freud (far closer friends than Kate McCann) - how many of them have publicly condemned Freud for his alleged paedophilia since his death?
Bono
Alan Yentob
George Osborne
Mel Smith
Stephen Fry
Richard Curtis
Nicholas Parsons
Gyles Brandreth
Paul Merton
Graham Norton
Gordon Brown
David Steel
What can we infer from their silence?
-
Close personal friends of Clement Freud (far closer friends than Kate McCann) - how many of them have publicly condemned Freud for his alleged paedophilia since his death?
Bono
Alan Yentob
George Osborne
Mel Smith
Stephen Fry
Richard Curtis
Nicholas Parsons
Gyles Brandreth
Paul Merton
Graham Norton
Gordon Brown
David Steel
What can we infer from their silence?
This is just another attempt to blacken Kate McCann.
-
Without doubt we jump to dark scenarios as parents but stranger abduction isn't the most common cause of missing children it is incredibly rare. You might have dark thoughts but to declare this is what has happened in public is a different reaction in my opinion. I draw no inference from this reaction. It was just the first in a string of alleged links with this case and paedophiles. It's led all the way to CB (now that RH is dead).
Stranger abduction is the most likely scenario in this instance imo annd SY and.the Germans seem to agree with me
-
This is just another attempt to blacken Kate McCann.
Obviously.
-
Without doubt we jump to dark scenarios as parents but stranger abduction isn't the most common cause of missing children it is incredibly rare. You might have dark thoughts but to declare this is what has happened in public is a different reaction in my opinion. I draw no inference from this reaction. It was just the first in a string of alleged links with this case and paedophiles. It's led all the way to CB (now that RH is dead).
Try very, very, VERY hard to imagine that Kate McCann is an honest person and that you are in her shoes. Did you manage it? Right. Now imagine you have entered your child’s bedroom and find the child gone and the window wide open, not how you left it. Now what is your very first thought? The your child opened the window and shutter by herself and climbed out the window? Or that someone has broken into the room and taken her? Or that you child is playing a sick joke on you? Which is the most plausible scenario in your opinion? Now you might think the worst but you can’t quite believe it so you conduct a frantic search of the apartment and can’t find her. You are panic stricken. What are you thinking?
-
Stranger abduction is the most likely scenario in this instance imo annd SY and.the Germans seem to agree with me
I fully agree, Davel. Just because stranger abduction is unlikely, doesn’t mean it will not happen and I believe this is/was Madeleine’s fate.
-
Try very, very, VERY hard to imagine that Kate McCann is an honest person and that you are in her shoes. Did you manage it? Right. Now imagine you have entered your child’s bedroom and find the child gone and the window wide open, not how you left it. Now what is your very first thought? The your child opened the window and shutter by herself and climbed out the window? Or that someone has broken into the room and taken her? Or that you child is playing a sick joke on you? Which is the most plausible scenario in your opinion? Now you might think the worst but you can’t quite believe it so you conduct a frantic search of the apartment and can’t find her. You are panic stricken. What are you thinking?
It would help if there was cohesion in other accounts. Matthew Oldfield, for example, changed his account significantly over time. It moves from the whole group entering 5A to him not entering the bedroom to him not entering the apartment.
Matthew Oldfield
4th May
Then, the whole group went to Madeleine's bedroom and checked that the twins were sleeping OK. That there was no sign of a burglary in the apartment. Only one window in the childrens' bedroom was open. The window was open and the respective shutter
10th May
In view of such news all group members rushed to GM's apartment which was accessed through the rear entrance, namely by the sliding glass door facing the pool.
.
Asked, he relates that when he entered the apartment, from memory, he did not approach MBM's bedroom therefore cannot provide any details about its condition.
Rogatory interview
If you ask whether we went, you know, into the apartment and I'm almost a hundred percent sure we didn't go to the apartment...
-
Aye, if they'd all been closely questioned the following day, the PJ might have got something approaching the truth. IMO
-
It would help if there was cohesion in other accounts. Matthew Oldfield, for example, changed his account significantly over time. It moves from the whole group entering 5A to him not entering the bedroom to him not entering the apartment.
Matthew Oldfield
4th May
Then, the whole group went to Madeleine's bedroom and checked that the twins were sleeping OK. That there was no sign of a burglary in the apartment. Only one window in the childrens' bedroom was open. The window was open and the respective shutter
10th May
In view of such news all group members rushed to GM's apartment which was accessed through the rear entrance, namely by the sliding glass door facing the pool.
.
Asked, he relates that when he entered the apartment, from memory, he did not approach MBM's bedroom therefore cannot provide any details about its condition.
Rogatory interview
If you ask whether we went, you know, into the apartment and I'm almost a hundred percent sure we didn't go to the apartment...
That has absolutely nothing to do with my post or my point.
-
Aye, if they'd all been closely questioned the following day, the PJ might have got something approaching the truth. IMO
Questioning everyone ‘the following day’ didn’t seem to be on the PJ’s agenda. In my opinion, they were never concerned/committed to Madeleine’s fate.
-
That has absolutely nothing to do with my post or my point.
I can't help but wonder why one of their friends was happy to imply that he saw the open window in his first statement, but decided over time that not only did he not see it, but he was nowhere near it.
-
It would help if there was cohesion in other accounts. Matthew Oldfield, for example, changed his account significantly over time. It moves from the whole group entering 5A to him not entering the bedroom to him not entering the apartment.
Matthew Oldfield
4th May
Then, the whole group went to Madeleine's bedroom and checked that the twins were sleeping OK. That there was no sign of a burglary in the apartment. Only one window in the childrens' bedroom was open. The window was open and the respective shutter
10th May
In view of such news all group members rushed to GM's apartment which was accessed through the rear entrance, namely by the sliding glass door facing the pool.
.
Asked, he relates that when he entered the apartment, from memory, he did not approach MBM's bedroom therefore cannot provide any details about its condition.
Rogatory interview
If you ask whether we went, you know, into the apartment and I'm almost a hundred percent sure we didn't go to the apartment...
Don’t you think that Oldfield, in good faith, was under enormous pressure because he opted to do Kate’s check at 21h30, not sure if he saw Madeleine in her bed and him being suspected of been involved in Madeleine’s disappearance?
-
I can't help but wonder why one of their friends was happy to imply that he saw the open window in his first statement, but decided over time that not only did he not see it, but he was nowhere near it.
Totally irrelevant to the point I was discussing with Billy.
-
Don’t you think that Oldfield, in good faith, was under enormous pressure because he opted to do Kate’s check at 21h30, not sure if he saw Madeleine in her bed and him being suspected of been involved in Madeleine’s disappearance?
Why would that lead to his reluctance to admit to entering the children's bedroom at 10pm?
-
Why would that lead to his reluctance to admit to entering the children's bedroom at 10pm?
Stop making things up please. He was not reluctant to admit entering the children’s bedroom and this has got eff all to do with anything we were discussing, even less to do with the thread title.
-
If you believe our well established legal system is protecting the victims of paedophiles then all I can do is stress that I believe, from tragic personal involvement, that you are very sadly mistaken.
Also I shouldn't respond to your ad hominem rhetoric but the sentence stating "the mother's self proclaimed enjoyment of socialising with Clement Freud" contains no misogyny whatsoever. It's a factual statement based on Kate McCann's book. For the record, in my opinion, Gerry McCann appears controlling in terms of the couple's public persona and how that is managed. However it was Kate who wrote about enjoying the company of the alleged paedophile Clement Freud.
Congratulations in managing to get an 'alleged' in there.
Now if you don't mind this is not a thread for traducing the McCanns - it is to discuss what is going on as far as we know in the here and now of Madeleine's case.
Please bear that in mind for future posts. Thankyou
-
That has absolutely nothing to do with my post or my point.
I disagree. You were asking us to imagine our reaction to a scenario. There are conflicting accounts of the scenario as G-Unit is correctly pointing out. Asking how we might react to something that isn't an established fact is problematic.
-
This is just another attempt to blacken Kate McCann.
I clearly stated I made no inference. Do you, however, think it "blackens her name" that she enjoyed the company of Clement Freud - just one of many alleged paedophile connections to this case, in my opinion.
-
I can't help but wonder why one of their friends was happy to imply that he saw the open window in his first statement, but decided over time that not only did he not see it, but he was nowhere near it.
Very good point in my opinion.
-
Congratulations in managing to get an 'alleged' in there.
Now if you don't mind this is not a thread for traducing the McCanns - it is to discuss what is going on as far as we know in the here and now of Madeleine's case.
Please bear that in mind for future posts. Thankyou
If the here and now is centred on a paedophile surely it makes sense to examine the links from Day One to many other paedophiles. Maybe there are links to anyone of the thirty plus known paedophiles living in the area and CB.
-
If the here and now is centred on a paedophile surely it makes sense to examine the links from Day One to many other paedophiles. Maybe there are links to anyone of the thirty plus known paedophiles living in the area and CB.
Why not leave it to the professionals, eh?
-
If the here and now is centred on a paedophile surely it makes sense to examine the links from Day One to many other paedophiles. Maybe there are links to anyone of the thirty plus known paedophiles living in the area and CB.
Paedophiles don't all abuse children and not all child abusers are paedophiles. Brueckner's record suggests he was abusive to females of all ages, not just to children.
-
Paedophiles don't all abuse children and not all child abusers are paedophiles. Brueckner's record suggests he was abusive to females of all ages, not just to children.
Not an ageist then. There's something in his favour. Thank God for small mercies.
-
Paedophiles don't all abuse children and not all child abusers are paedophiles. Brueckner's record suggests he was abusive to females of all ages, not just to children.
paedophiles on the police radar are more than likely to have abused children or been complicit in their abuse.
-
paedophiles on the police radar are more than likely to have abused children or been complicit in their abuse.
Well obviously. Until the police become involved they are unknown. Some, like Miles Bradbury, have power which they make use of to carry out their abuses;
Bradbury manipulated the system to perform "criminal, intimate examinations", the report found.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-34591633
-
Well obviously. Until the police become involved they are unknown. Some, like Miles Bradbury, have power which they make use of to carry out their abuses;
Bradbury manipulated the system to perform "criminal, intimate examinations", the report found.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-34591633
What was the point you were making with this observation then?
"Paedophiles don't all abuse children".
-
What was the point you were making with this observation then?
"Paedophiles don't all abuse children".
Then in that case they aren't paedophiles.
G Unit has obviously lost the plot.
-
Then in that case they aren't paedophiles.
G Unit has obviously lost the plot.
I understand that you can have inclinations towards children and not act on them, so she is right in that respect but as we are discussing the idea of investigating all paedophiles in the PdL area wrt to the disappearance of a child I really don't see the relevance of this observation.
-
I understand that you can have inclinations towards children and not act on them, so she is right in that respect but as we are discussing the idea of investigating all paedophiles in the PdL area wrt to the disappearance of a child I really don't see the relevance of this observation.
In that case how can anyone tell that someone might be a paedophile. We might as well say that everyone has the potential to be a paedophile.
Is half of The World going around fancying small children?
What utter sick rubbish.
-
Then in that case they aren't paedophiles.
G Unit has obviously lost the plot.
Miles Bradbury, I assume, had a sexual interest in children which led him to commit illegal actions. There are others who also have that interest but don't act upon it. Are they only paedophiles when they're caught? I don't think so. That's when they become known paedophiles.
-
Miles Bradbury, I assume, had a sexual interest in children which led him to commit illegal actions. There are others who also have that interest but don't act upon it. Are they only paedophiles when they're caught? I don't think so. That's when they become known paedophiles.
How do you get to tell?
-
I disagree. You were asking us to imagine our reaction to a scenario. There are conflicting accounts of the scenario as G-Unit is correctly pointing out. Asking how we might react to something that isn't an established fact is problematic.
Read my post back. I asked you to TRY REALLY HARD TO IMAGINE KATE IS TELLING THE TRUTH. Obviously you have no imagination.
-
I clearly stated I made no inference. Do you, however, think it "blackens her name" that she enjoyed the company of Clement Freud - just one of many alleged paedophile connections to this case, in my opinion.
Just re-read what you wrote and tell us straight-faced that this was not a clear attempt to link Kate McCann to a paedophile, implying that she enjoyed spending time in the company of said paedophile (failing to point out that at the time she did not know he was a paedophile):
"And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?"
-
Just re-read what you wrote and tell us straight-faced that this was not a clear attempt to link Kate McCann to a paedophile, implying that she enjoyed spending time in the company of said paedophile (failing to point out that at the time she did not know he was a paedophile):
"And with regards to suspected paedophiles residing in the area what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?"
BillyWhizz is just being silly. No real need to get upset about this rubbish.
Clement Freud wasn't a paedophile and his wife knew nothing about any such thing.
-
BillyWhizz is just being silly. No real need to get upset about this rubbish.
Clement Freud wasn't a paedophile and his wife knew nothing about any such thing.
I think it's likely Freud was but I doubt even Billy Whizz Kid had any inkling that he was prior to the allegations being made. To criticise someone or cast their integrity in doubt because they were friendly with someone who later turns out to have been depraved in their private life is a bit of a low blow but oh so typical of the average McCann basher IMO. Any opportunity to get out the big pointy stick of blame and shame.
-
It would help if there was cohesion in other accounts. Matthew Oldfield, for example, changed his account significantly over time. It moves from the whole group entering 5A to him not entering the bedroom to him not entering the apartment.
Matthew Oldfield
4th May
Then, the whole group went to Madeleine's bedroom and checked that the twins were sleeping OK. That there was no sign of a burglary in the apartment. Only one window in the childrens' bedroom was open. The window was open and the respective shutter
10th May
In view of such news all group members rushed to GM's apartment which was accessed through the rear entrance, namely by the sliding glass door facing the pool.
.
Asked, he relates that when he entered the apartment, from memory, he did not approach MBM's bedroom therefore cannot provide any details about its condition.
Rogatory interview
If you ask whether we went, you know, into the apartment and I'm almost a hundred percent sure we didn't go to the apartment...
The first paragraph on May 4th, maybe should read they went to Madeleine's bedroom window [outside] ?
The second paragraph in my opinion, relates to when he went to check on the McCann children he didn't enter the bedroom.
The last paragraph in my opinion should read that they didn't go into the apartment.
If you want to read things into those sentences you can, but it is in my opinion quite easy to see it was not translated properly.
-
If the here and now is centred on a paedophile surely it makes sense to examine the links from Day One to many other paedophiles. Maybe there are links to anyone of the thirty plus known paedophiles living in the area and CB.
Well maybe Amaral did, though he said an officer knocked on CB's door and didn't get an answer so maybe they didn't get an answer from the others either.
CB happens to be a Paedophile and also a burglar. His phone pinged in the area of the Ocean Club, he confessed to taking Madeleine to a friend, why do that? He told his girlfriend the day before Madeleine disappeared that he had a terrible job to do the next day, but it will be the making of him [or similar words] he then went to live in another part of Portugal after the 3rd of May then went back to Germany. Dodgy or what?
-
Paedophiles don't all abuse children and not all child abusers are paedophiles. Brueckner's record suggests he was abusive to females of all ages, not just to children.
I think his wanting to take something small and abuse it for days, tells you CB is a Paedophile.
-
Madeleine McCann Search Granted Massive Financial Boost In Bid To Solve Investigation
BY : EMILY BROWN ON : 20 JUL 2021
The Home Office has granted the Metropolitan police a huge financial boost in an effort to solve the mystery of what happened when Madeleine McCann disappeared from her family’s apartment in May 2007.
In a statement cited by The Sun Online, a spokesperson for the Home Office said:
The Government has provided up to £350,000 for Operation Grange in 2021-22.
In line with our Special Grant processes, funding for Operation Grange is approved on an annual basis. Ministers have approved a request for £349,328 of funding for this financial year.
https://www.unilad.co.uk/news/madeleine-mccann-search-granted-massive-financial-boost-in-bid-to-solve-investigation/
-
I think his wanting to take something small and abuse it for days, tells you CB is a Paedophile.
If you believe the Tabloids.
-
Well maybe Amaral did, though he said an officer knocked on CB's door and didn't get an answer so maybe they didn't get an answer from the others either.
CB happens to be a Paedophile and also a burglar. His phone pinged in the area of the Ocean Club, he confessed to taking Madeleine to a friend, why do that? He told his girlfriend the day before Madeleine disappeared that he had a terrible job to do the next day, but it will be the making of him [or similar words] he then went to live in another part of Portugal after the 3rd of May then went back to Germany. Dodgy or what?
People fantasise about all sorts of weird things.
Every day I see people here imagining Maddie was abducted, for example.
-
People fantasise about all sorts of weird things.
Every day I see people here imagining Maddie was abducted, for example.
What do you fantasise about Spam? On second thoughts I’d rather not know, it’s bound to be extremely disturbing.
-
Clement Freud wasn't a paedophile and his wife knew nothing about any such thing.
From alleged victim accounts Clement Freud's allegedly first abused children from the late 1940s.You don't have spells of your life when you are a paedophile and times when you're not! The accusations were not widely known in 2007 and they only became public about 8 or 9 years later. I have no idea what the McCann's knew about his alleged illegal and harmful sexual preferences and nor do you. However, like I said I make no inference from what Kate wrote in her book about socialising with this man.
I realise you are partisan when it comes to associates of the McCann's, but do you seriously believe what you wrote there? Your staunch insistence of his innocence strikes me as quite bizarre given the evidence against him. In my opinion it would be akin to declaring Jimmy Saville innocent of any sexual abuse crimes. Despite your assertion it has been widely reported that Freud's wife "apologised profusely to two alleged sexual abuse victims of her husband" (Dowell, 2016 et al) . It has also been reported that Police investigated links between Clement Freud and the Madeleine McCann case.
https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/widow-profoundly-sorry-over-clement-freud-child-sex-abuse-allegations-as-links-to-madeleine-mccann-disappearance-investigated-34802990.html
https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/entertainment/sir-clement-freuds-widow-issues-heartfelt-apology-after-her-late-husband-is-named-as-sexual-abuser-of-an-underage-girl/
https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/crime/clement-freuds-widow-apologies-victims-catalogue-abuse-exposed-1796890
https://www.digitalspy.com/showbiz/a797824/clement-freuds-widow-issues-public-apology-over-sex-abuse-allegations/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1284246/paedophile-sir-clement-freud-had-a-villa-close-to-where-madeleine-mccann-went-missing-as-police-are-urged-to-probe-link/
I do not know what the McCann's knew about him and nor do you
-
I think it's likely Freud was but I doubt even Billy Whizz Kid had any inkling that he was prior to the allegations being made. To criticise someone or cast their integrity in doubt because they were friendly with someone who later turns out to have been depraved in their private life is a bit of a low blow but oh so typical of the average McCann basher IMO. Any opportunity to get out the big pointy stick of blame and shame.
I said I made no inference from the friendship between the McCann's and Freud. As I said it's another example in a long list of where paedophiles have been linked to this case from Day One and culminating in the current investigation of CB.
-
Well maybe Amaral did, though he said an officer knocked on CB's door and didn't get an answer so maybe they didn't get an answer from the others either.
CB happens to be a Paedophile and also a burglar. His phone pinged in the area of the Ocean Club, he confessed to taking Madeleine to a friend, why do that? He told his girlfriend the day before Madeleine disappeared that he had a terrible job to do the next day, but it will be the making of him [or similar words] he then went to live in another part of Portugal after the 3rd of May then went back to Germany. Dodgy or what?
Was it more or less dodgy than the actions RH in your opinion?
-
I said I made no inference from the friendship between the McCann's and Freud. As I said it's another example in a long list of where paedophiles have been linked to this case from Day One and culminating in the current investigation of CB.
It is transparently obvious why you linked the issue of the unproved allegations made against Clement Freud and Kate McCann.
The determination to turn this forum into a cesspit is a never ending task for some 😁
-
Was it more or less dodgy than the actions RH in your opinion?
Who is RH?
-
I said I made no inference from the friendship between the McCann's and Freud. As I said it's another example in a long list of where paedophiles have been linked to this case from Day One and culminating in the current investigation of CB.
what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?
-
what, pray tell, do you make of the "mother" and her self proclaimed fondness for socialising with Clement Freud?
That is a question asking someone else what they make of Kate McCann's account of her and Gerry socialising with Clement Freud. I make no inference from her self proclaimed fond visit(s) with Freud who was later accused of child sexual abuse.
https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/widow-profoundly-sorry-over-clement-freud-child-sex-abuse-allegations-as-links-to-madeleine-mccann-disappearance-investigated-34802990.html
An alleged paedophile in PDL may have links with CB, in my opinion. It would certainly be worth investigated along with the other 30+ known paedophiles that OG reportedly were also investigating.
I did express a personal opinion that I was surprised that after the allegations were made against Freud that the McCann's did not issue a public statement which states where they stand on said allegations. That's just my own personal surprise given what Kate wrote in her book. The book is still on sale. It is likely to be read by people who now know Freud is an alleged child abuser. No inference can be drawn from the lack of a public statement nor from the fond socialising, and neither is that intended.
-
Who is RH?
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/madeleine-mccann-news-son-of-dead-paedophile-suspect-raymond-hewlett-thought-he-was-being-watched_uk_584e8adfe4b0b7ff851d56ca
-
That is a question asking someone else what they make of Kate McCann's account of her and Gerry socialising with Clement Freud. I make no inference from her self proclaimed fond visit(s) with Freud who was later accused of child sexual abuse.
https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/widow-profoundly-sorry-over-clement-freud-child-sex-abuse-allegations-as-links-to-madeleine-mccann-disappearance-investigated-34802990.html
An alleged paedophile in PDL may have links with CB, in my opinion. It would certainly be worth investigated along with the other 30+ known paedophiles that OG reportedly were also investigating.
I did express a personal opinion that I was surprised that after the allegations were made against Freud that the McCann's did not issue a public statement which states where they stand on said allegations. That's just my own personal surprise given what Kate wrote in her book. The book is still on sale. It is likely to be read by people who now know Freud is an alleged child abuser. No inference can be drawn from the lack of a public statement nor from the fond socialising, and neither is that intended.
The question you originally asked is not the question you say you were asking. If it had been you would have asked “what do you make of Kate’s lack of condemnation of a man whose company she enjoyed subsequently accused of paedophilisa.”. No, your question clearly asks what should we make of her enjoyment of being in the company of a paedophile. Your post-rationalisation does not change thst.
As not one of Freud’s close celebrity friends issued a public statement condemning his actions as far as I’m aware I don’t see why the McCanns should be singled out for their failure to do so. Do you think there is any possible likelihood that they don’t condemn his actions? It may be important for you to gain this clarity but I would imagine that for 99% of those who have read the book it is of no consequence whatsoever.
-
That is a question asking someone else what they make of Kate McCann's account of her and Gerry socialising with Clement Freud. I make no inference from her self proclaimed fond visit(s) with Freud who was later accused of child sexual abuse.
https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/widow-profoundly-sorry-over-clement-freud-child-sex-abuse-allegations-as-links-to-madeleine-mccann-disappearance-investigated-34802990.html
An alleged paedophile in PDL may have links with CB, in my opinion. It would certainly be worth investigated along with the other 30+ known paedophiles that OG reportedly were also investigating.
I did express a personal opinion that I was surprised that after the allegations were made against Freud that the McCann's did not issue a public statement which states where they stand on said allegations. That's just my own personal surprise given what Kate wrote in her book. The book is still on sale. It is likely to be read by people who now know Freud is an alleged child abuser. No inference can be drawn from the lack of a public statement nor from the fond socialising, and neither is that intended.
What do you think would come of The McCanns making a public statement about someone who was never convicted of anything?
-
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/madeleine-mccann-news-son-of-dead-paedophile-suspect-raymond-hewlett-thought-he-was-being-watched_uk_584e8adfe4b0b7ff851d56ca
On the night Madeleine was abducted Raymond Hewlett was within spitting distance of Praia da Luz ~ with transport ~ with a record ~ with the perfect hiding place of a van full of blonde children ~ " ... living with six children in a converted Dodge truck, when they met English couple ..."
Clement Freud was not in Portugal let alone in his villa a stone's throw from Luz.
Interesting that you should mention Hewlett though.
Did anyone other than McCann detectives attempt to check him out ~ or is he yet another paedophile like Brueckner who was studiously ignored by Portuguese police who really were studying every move and phone call made by their prime suspects.
Snip
However, it is hardly surprising that Kate and Gerry McCann's investigators are now forensically examining any possible link between Hewlett and their daughter's disappearance in 2007.
Hewlett "has been repeatedly jailed for a series of violent sexual offences against young girls.
Once featured on a Crimestoppers list of most wanted paedophiles, he is currently wanted for questioning by British police forces for the indecent assault of a young girl more than 30 years ago.
Several years ago Irish officers investigating a series of attempted abductions were seeking Hewlett, who had been posing as an undercover police officer to search for young girls or befriend their families to gain access to children.
'To say we need to trace this man is an understatement,' said one detective. But, as in the past, Hewlett was one step ahead of the law and had fled."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1186788/Madeleine-McCanns-possible-abductor-Raymond-Hewlett-cunning-predator-30-years-depravity-him.html
You prove that the Algarve appears to have been awash with violent sexual predators when Madeleine was abducted particularly one with a record like Hewlett. Doesn't it make you wonder why Amaral set his sights on the parents of missing children.
By the way, what you are doing by repeatedly dragging Freud into Madeleine's case based on "allegation" is against decency and Portuguese Law.
Freud isn't fifty years dead.
Criminal Defamation of the Deceased
Seriously offending the dead is punishable under Art. 185 of the Portuguese Criminal Code with a prison term of maximum six months or a fine of maximum 240 days, subject to the defences of truth and legitimate interest and the aggravating circumstances of slander. The statute of limitations is 50 years. http://legaldb.freemedia.at/legal-database/portugal/
-
The question you originally asked is not the question you say you were asking. If it had been you would have asked “what do you make of Kate’s lack of condemnation of a man whose company she enjoyed subsequently accused of paedophilisa.”. No, your question clearly asks what should we make of her enjoyment of being in the company of a paedophile. Your post-rationalisation does not change thst.
As not one of Freud’s close celebrity friends issued a public statement condemning his actions as far as I’m aware I don’t see why the McCanns should be singled out for their failure to do so. Do you think there is any possible likelihood that they don’t condemn his actions? It may be important for you to gain this clarity but I would imagine that for 99% of those who have read the book it is of no consequence whatsoever.
Freud’s wife and the Liberal Democrats both made public statements that were unequivocal.
I make no inference from the fact that the McCanns chose not to as far as I am aware.
-
Freud’s wife and the Liberal Democrats both made public statements that were unequivocal.
I make no inference from the fact that the McCanns chose not to as far as I am aware.
Indeed you do make an inference which you don't even recognise as such.
How can one speak unequivocally about the actions of an "alleged" paedophile ...
I have not continued that sentence because I believe to do so would be libellous.
Now that you have got all that guff out of your system ~ I expect you to return to the thread title as per forum rules, bearing in mind that what is said has to be sensitive regarding Brueckner's proven record which we have only recently discovered, thanks to Amaral. I am sure there is more to come.
-
Freud’s wife and the Liberal Democrats both made public statements that were unequivocal.
I make no inference from the fact that the McCanns chose not to as far as I am aware.
It's really not surprising Freud's wife to whom he was married for many years and the party he represented for many years made a public statement but that still doesn't explain why you think Kate McCann (not even a long term close personl friend) should have done so. Oh well, there's nowt so queer as folk.
-
It's really not surprising Freud's wife to whom he was married for many years and the party he represented for many years made a public statement but that still doesn't explain why you think Kate McCann (not even a long term close personl friend) should have done so. Oh well, there's nowt so queer as folk.
Anything like that would have been gross impertinence in my opinion.
-
Indeed you do make an inference which you don't even recognise as such.
How can one speak unequivocally about the actions of an "alleged" paedophile ...
I have not continued that sentence because I believe to do so would be libellous.
Now that you have got all that guff out of your system ~ I expect you to return to the thread title as per forum rules, bearing in mind that what is said has to be sensitive regarding Brueckner's proven record which we have only recently discovered, thanks to Amaral. I am sure there is more to come.
I will post the statements after work but I stand by “unequivocal”
-
I will post the statements after work but I stand by “unequivocal”
Please do not post Mrs Freud's statement nor that from the LibDems. We have all read them and both are "Off Topic" on this thread.
Clement Freud died in April 2009 the first allegations about him were made in June 2016.
These are not recent events and not associated with Madeleine's disappearance.
-
“ A Portuguese source said: “The new information is pointing towards the fact two Russians could be behind it.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15683398/madeleine-mccann-christian-b-documentary/
-
“ A Portuguese source said: “The new information is pointing towards the fact two Russians could be behind it.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15683398/madeleine-mccann-christian-b-documentary/
There's going to be a few posters on this thread that will take issue with the "nothing concrete" claims. A few pages back it was claimed that CB's involvement was a "known" fact.
-
There's going to be a few posters on this thread that will take issue with the "nothing concrete" claims. A few pages back it was claimed that CB's involvement was a "known" fact.
In my opinion, Mr Wolters has always maintained that Brückner killed Madeleine, not that he removed her from 5A.
-
“ A Portuguese source said: “The new information is pointing towards the fact two Russians could be behind it.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15683398/madeleine-mccann-christian-b-documentary/
The TV team, led by an ex-detective, are understood to have new witnesses.
A Portuguese source said: “The new information is pointing towards the fact two Russians could be behind it.”
The three-part Channel 5 documentary is set to air later this year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may be proved wrong ~ but for me this has Amaral written all over it.
-
In my opinion, Mr Wolters has always maintained that Brückner killed Madeleine, not that he removed her from 5A.
The TV team, led by an ex-detective, are understood to have new witnesses.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15683398/madeleine-mccann-christian-b-documentary/
If they have "new witnesses" and there is an active investigation in progress shouldn't these witnesses be speaking to the police rather than appearing on a tv programme.
-
The TV team, led by an ex-detective, are understood to have new witnesses.
A Portuguese source said: “The new information is pointing towards the fact two Russians could be behind it.”
The three-part Channel 5 documentary is set to air later this year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I may be proved wrong ~ but for me this has Amaral written all over it.
Mark Williams-Thomas has been filming in Luz and is now heading to Germany.
https://mobile.twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/with_replies
-
In my opinion, Mr Wolters has always maintained that Brückner killed Madeleine, not that he removed her from 5A.
He tried to place him nearby though, which suggests to me that he thought he was involved in the abduction. He also said they weren't looking for anyone else, I think.
-
Mark Williams-Thomas has been filming in Luz and is now heading to Germany.
https://mobile.twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/with_replies
Oh God, not him again. His programmes are tutt.
-
In my opinion, Mr Wolters has always maintained that Brückner killed Madeleine, not that he removed her from 5A.
Agreed, Wolters has never claimed his suspect took the girl out of 5a, bit difficult really, creeping in the dark past the cots to go and open the window and shutters then half inch her out that way without leaving a trace without disturbing the twins or Madeleine into a screaming crying episode.
-
Agreed, Wolters has never claimed his suspect took the girl out of 5a, bit difficult really, creeping in the dark past the cots to go and open the window and shutters then half inch her out that way without leaving a trace without disturbing the twins or Madeleine into a screaming crying episode.
Jesus wept, we’ve been through this so many times. Children have been taken by abductors from their beds asleep from rooms in which other siblings slept without waking, there was even a video posted recently proving it.
-
Agreed, Wolters has never claimed his suspect took the girl out of 5a, bit difficult really, creeping in the dark past the cots to go and open the window and shutters then half inch her out that way without leaving a trace without disturbing the twins or Madeleine into a screaming crying episode.
I seem to remember Wolters mentioning abduction in relation too CB. He was cerrtainly asked if he had evidence of CB being in 5a and he said he couldnt answer the question at that time
-
Jesus wept, we’ve been through this so many times. Children have been taken by abductors from their beds asleep from rooms in which other siblings slept without waking, there was even a video posted recently proving it.
I seem to remember Wolters mentioning abduction in relation too CB. He was cerrtainly asked if he had evidence of CB being in 5a and he said he couldnt answer the question at that time
Wolters says there's no forensics. CB was never in 5a, you'll get there in the end.
-
Wolters says there's no forensics. CB was never in 5a, you'll get there in the end.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, you’ll understand that one day (hopefully).
-
Wolters says there's no forensics. CB was never in 5a, you'll get there in the end.
Im way ahead of you. Wolters has not said CB was never in 5a
-
Im way ahead of you. Wolters has not said CB was never in 5a
He doesn't need to, the world and his wife knows he wasn't.
-
He doesn't need to, the world and his wife knows he wasn't.
@)(++(* please would the world and his wife present their definitive proof of this statement, ta alot.
-
@)(++(* please would the world and his wife present their definitive proof of this statement, ta alot.
That burden lies with Wolters, if his suspect is the one, (however unlikely it is).
-
That burden lies with Wolters, if his suspect is the one, (however unlikely it is).
Brueckner is locked up for at least the next five years. No one cares all that much at the moment.
-
Brueckner is locked up for at least the next five years. No one cares all that much at the moment.
Latest reports say's it possible MWT does.
-
That burden lies with Wolters, if his suspect is the one, (however unlikely it is).
But you said the whole world knows t isn’t Brückner, so on what concrete proof did the whole world come to this conclusion?
-
Latest reports say's it possible MWT does.
It certainly sounds like someone (probably MWT) is preparing a possible alternative to Wolters' thesis.
-
It certainly sounds like someone (probably MWT) is preparing a possible alternative to Wolters' thesis.
Self aggrandisement again. What has Mark Williams Thomas ever come up with before?
-
Self aggrandisement again. What has Mark Williams Thomas ever come up with before?
Think he suggests the woke and wandered scenario, with no sign of an intruder in 5a, more on the money than a stranger abduction from within.
4 yrs ago.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4246558/Journalist-Did-Madeleine-McCann-just-wander-off.html
But TV detective Mr Williams-Thomas, believes the unsettled youngster walked out of the unlocked apartment searching for her parents in the poolside restaurant.
-
Self aggrandisement again. What has Mark Williams Thomas ever come up with before?
I'm not particularly impressed by MWT, but he's as entitled to air his opinion as other programme makers/commentators are imo.
-
Think he suggests the woke and wandered scenario, with no sign of an intruder in 5a, more on the money than a stranger abduction from within.
4 yrs ago.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4246558/Journalist-Did-Madeleine-McCann-just-wander-off.html
But TV detective Mr Williams-Thomas, believes the unsettled youngster walked out of the unlocked apartment searching for her parents in the poolside restaurant.
A failed Police Constable. A bit like Martin Grime.
-
A failed Police Constable. A bit like Martin Grime.
Rubbishing MWT won't make him go away 8(0(*
-
I'm not particularly impressed by MWT, but he's as entitled to air his opinion as other programme makers/commentators are imo.
Oh indeed and who knows, he may come up with something new for us to dissect.
-
Rubbishing MWT won't make him go away 8(0(*
Same can be said for HCW. 8)--))
-
Rubbishing MWT won't make him go away 8(0(*
Why would I want to? He is doing a fine job on himself. Just like all of the other wonkers. Anything for a free ride.
-
Oh indeed and who knows, he may come up with something new for us to dissect.
Ad Infinitum.
-
Same can be said for HCW. 8)--))
Good One.
-
It certainly sounds like someone (probably MWT) is preparing a possible alternative to Wolters' thesis.
Not sure he can come up with anything without access to all the evidence so it would be speculation based on speculation..
-
Sounds just the thing for this forum then.
-
Mark Williams-Thomas has been filming in Luz and is now heading to Germany.
https://mobile.twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/with_replies
Thanks Misty.
-
Agreed, Wolters has never claimed his suspect took the girl out of 5a, bit difficult really, creeping in the dark past the cots to go and open the window and shutters then half inch her out that way without leaving a trace without disturbing the twins or Madeleine into a screaming crying episode.
Brueckner was on the rampage for many years behaving in the manner you describe. Burglary sometimes involves creeping about in the dark past a variety of obstacles - we are told he entered a room full of sleeping teenagers one of whom raised the alarm causing him to run naked into the street to make his escape.
Burglars who leave traces behind them end up being addressed as 'prisoner in the dock'.
He spent a considerable amount of time raping and torturing a woman in her own home leaving only a pubic hair behind him.
My opinion is that for anyone with the record Brueckner has, entering and leaving apartment 5A would have been a dawdle.
So think again. Brueckner wouldn't have seen either PeterMac or Heri in his way when it came to raising from outside the shutters sceptics have spent years tryng to convince the world it couldn't be done when it is patently obvious that is nonsense.
An officer attempts to enter the apartment through Maddie's bedroom window
(https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/zzrebelo3d.jpg.w300h156.jpg)
Not only did he "attempt" to enter - he did enter via the window - and was apparently seen to hand a bundle through to his colleagues while the new coordinator watched what was obviously the reconstitution of a crime.
-
“ A Portuguese source said: “The new information is pointing towards the fact two Russians could be behind it.”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15683398/madeleine-mccann-christian-b-documentary/
How exciting, but I wonder if they would only be middle level. Involved but not the leaders? Cos, I think that I have a pretty good idea who the leaders are. I wonder what/who put them onto these Russians ? *%6^
NOTE: It must be 3 months that I have been excluded from forum, but today for some reason I am allowed back. Not good enough John. It needs sorting. please
-
How exciting, but I wonder if they would only be middle level. Involved but not the leaders? Cos, I think that I have a pretty good idea who the leaders are. I wonder what/who put them onto these Russians ? *%6^
NOTE: It must be 3 months that I have been excluded from forum, but today for some reason I am allowed back. Not good enough John. It needs sorting. please
Good to see you posting.
-
Good to see you posting.
Thankyou Erngath.
Hope i am here tomorrow ! Last time I got past the exclusion I was only in for a matter of hours before I was excluded again.
I don't think I have been norty or anything. It's a mystery why it keeps hitting me.
-
Brueckner was on the rampage for many years behaving in the manner you describe. Burglary sometimes involves creeping about in the dark past a variety of obstacles - we are told he entered a room full of sleeping teenagers one of whom raised the alarm causing him to run naked into the street to make his escape.
Burglars who leave traces behind them end up being addressed as 'prisoner in the dock'.
He spent a considerable amount of time raping and torturing a woman in her own home leaving only a pubic hair behind him.
My opinion is that for anyone with the record Brueckner has, entering and leaving apartment 5A would have been a dawdle.
So think again. Brueckner wouldn't have seen either PeterMac or Heri in his way when it came to raising from outside the shutters sceptics have spent years tryng to convince the world it couldn't be done when it is patently obvious that is nonsense.
An officer attempts to enter the apartment through Maddie's bedroom window
(https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/zzrebelo3d.jpg.w300h156.jpg)
Not only did he "attempt" to enter - he did enter via the window - and was apparently seen to hand a bundle through to his colleagues while the new coordinator watched what was obviously the reconstitution of a crime.
Your comment on the teenagers makes Barriers point!!!!
What’s happened with the shutters on that still photo from the forensic journal aka Gerry’s blog? The reality is that no one on this forum has ever put forward evidence that the shutters were opened and Maddie taken out of the window by an abductor. The Tapas group who were first on the scene couldn’t agree on the window and shutters when first asked. Also an abductor would have to be watching goings on to operate so successfully in such a small window of opportunity. They would have known that checks involving going inside didn’t normally happen and also that the doors facing the pool were not locked!! Why not just go in through the door? The bottom line is there was no evidence to suggest a break in and abduction.
-
Your comment on the teenagers makes Barriers point!!!!
What’s happened with the shutters on that still photo from the forensic journal aka Gerry’s blog? The reality is that no one on this forum has ever put forward evidence that the shutters were opened and Maddie taken out of the window by an abductor. The Tapas group who were first on the scene couldn’t agree on the window and shutters when first asked. Also an abductor would have to be watching goings on to operate so successfully in such a small window of opportunity. They would have known that checks involving going inside didn’t normally happen and also that the doors facing the pool were not locked!! Why not just go in through the door? The bottom line is there was no evidence to suggest a break in and abduction.
Yes there is - if you keep an open mind and don’t automatically assume everyone is lying about everything.
-
Yes there is - if you keep an open mind and don’t automatically assume everyone is lying about everything.
Billy Whizz isn't here to keep an open mind, but only to disrupt and present half baked theories that suit the Sceptic Agenda.
There are several ways in which the abductor could have got in and out of the appartment and more than one reason for why the window was open.
-
Your comment on the teenagers makes Barriers point!!!!
What’s happened with the shutters on that still photo from the forensic journal aka Gerry’s blog? The reality is that no one on this forum has ever put forward evidence that the shutters were opened and Maddie taken out of the window by an abductor. The Tapas group who were first on the scene couldn’t agree on the window and shutters when first asked. Also an abductor would have to be watching goings on to operate so successfully in such a small window of opportunity. They would have known that checks involving going inside didn’t normally happen and also that the doors facing the pool were not locked!! Why not just go in through the door? The bottom line is there was no evidence to suggest a break in and abduction.
You know for a fact that the abductor didn't go in through the unlocked patio door, do you?
-
Your comment on the teenagers makes Barriers point!!!!
What’s happened with the shutters on that still photo from the forensic journal aka Gerry’s blog? The reality is that no one on this forum has ever put forward evidence that the shutters were opened and Maddie taken out of the window by an abductor. The Tapas group who were first on the scene couldn’t agree on the window and shutters when first asked. Also an abductor would have to be watching goings on to operate so successfully in such a small window of opportunity. They would have known that checks involving going inside didn’t normally happen and also that the doors facing the pool were not locked!! Why not just go in through the door? The bottom line is there was no evidence to suggest a break in and abduction.
In my opinion the abductor did go in through the front door. Did Amaral wonder how the man who entered apartments to abuse children got in? Apparently the doors were locked. Didn't CB have a woman accomplice who let him know which apartments to burgle? In my opinion the window was opened in order for a quick escape, Gerry had already turned up unexpectedly. If Gerry had returned again he would have been cornered, so the window was opened for escape. If the abductor was CB he was a professional burglar, children would not faze him. I also wondered if Amaral took fingerprints in the apartments where the person who entered apartments at night to steal and abuse children. IMO
-
How exciting, but I wonder if they would only be middle level. Involved but not the leaders? Cos, I think that I have a pretty good idea who the leaders are. I wonder what/who put them onto these Russians ? *%6^
NOTE: It must be 3 months that I have been excluded from forum, but today for some reason I am allowed back. Not good enough John. It needs sorting. please
Same here with the exclusion Sadie, I've been excluded and now I am able to post again, don't know how long it will last, it has happened quite a few times now.
-
Same here with the exclusion Sadie, I've been excluded and now I am able to post again, don't know how long it will last, it has happened quite a few times now.
If you are having problems Logging In, try shutting everything down including Clearing History and then walk away for half an hour.
This usually works for me, although not always.
-
Yes there is - if you keep an open mind and don’t automatically assume everyone is lying about everything.
I don't think anyone is assuming that everyone is lying about everything, although some people do seem to assume that everyone is telling the truth about everything imo. Uncorroberated statements in particular should not be relied on.
-
I don't think anyone is assuming that everyone is lying about everything, although some people do seem to assume that everyone is telling the truth about everything imo. Uncorroberated statements in particular should not be relied on.
If you say there is no evidence of a break in then obviously you are assuming that Kate McCann is lying. Now tell me I'm wrong.
-
If you say there is no evidence of a break in then obviously you are assuming that Kate McCann is lying. Now tell me I'm wrong.
Kate may have been mistaken.
-
Kate may have been mistaken.
How? The window was open according to her and this was confirmed by her husband - so was he also mistaken?
-
How? The window was open according to her and this was confirmed by her husband - so was he also mistaken?
Yes, eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
-
If you say there is no evidence of a break in then obviously you are assuming that Kate McCann is lying. Now tell me I'm wrong.
Do you recall how Kate McCann described the bedroom curtains in the children's room? They were open, along with a window and the shutters. In her interviews in documentaries however, the curtains are described as closed and she demonstrates how they flew up in the breeze allowing her to notice the open window and shutters.
So which description is correct? Is Kate lying or misremembering?
-
Do you recall how Kate McCann described the bedroom curtains in the children's room? They were open, along with a window and the shutters. In her interviews in documentaries however, the curtains are described as closed and she demonstrates how they flew up in the breeze allowing her to notice the open window and shutters.
So which description is correct? Is Kate lying or misremembering?
The first appearance upon looking in was that the curtains were normal, but then a gust of wind came and they were open.
Simples, Gunit
-
Do you recall how Kate McCann described the bedroom curtains in the children's room? They were open, along with a window and the shutters. In her interviews in documentaries however, the curtains are described as closed and she demonstrates how they flew up in the breeze allowing her to notice the open window and shutters.
So which description is correct? Is Kate lying or misremembering?
Can you at least have the good grace to answer my question first before firing back at me with your own? thanks awfully. The issue is - evidence of abduction. Kate's witness statement is evidence of such - unless you assume she is making the whole thing up, which is what I said in the first place, and which you decided to contradict.
-
Yes, eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Indeed it is - it is still evidence however, no matter what you say. In the same way that Smith's statement is evidence that Gerry McCann paraded a corpse through PdL that night. You have decided he is 100% accurate and that Kate is 100% lying - that is a choice you have made but your opinion doesn't necessarily bear any relation to the actual truth of the matter.
-
Kate may have been mistaken.
Of course she might. She was, after all, traumatised and may not have been thinking straight.
-
The first appearance upon looking in was that the curtains were normal, but then a gust of wind came and they were open.
Simples, Gunit
I think they are your words, not the words of the witness. Therefore they are describing your assumptions.
-
I see that with the appearance of two Russian 'suspects', Brueckner may well be on the way to becoming a sub-prime suspect.
-
Indeed it is - it is still evidence however, no matter what you say. In the same way that Smith's statement is evidence that Gerry McCann paraded a corpse through PdL that night. You have decided he is 100% accurate and that Kate is 100% lying - that is a choice you have made but your opinion doesn't necessarily bear any relation to the actual truth of the matter.
Who said anything about parading a corpse?
As I recall Smithman was alone with child walking down a quiet back street & appeared not to want to communicate with the Smith family.
A parade is a procession of people, there weren't twenty odd baton twirling Smithmen & a marching band.
It's almost as if your statement doesn't bear any relation to the truth.
-
I see that with the appearance of two Russian 'suspects', Brueckner may well be on the way to becoming a sub-prime suspect.
I think it's only some ex dectective TV sleuth who believes Putin dunnit.
Obviously, he hasn't seen Wolters concrete evidence, the photos of Maddie & the evidence Brueckner was in 5a.
-
I think it's only some ex dectective TV sleuth who believes Putin dunnit.
Obviously, he hasn't seen Wolters concrete evidence, the photos of Maddie & the evidence Brueckner was in 5a.
Has anyone ?
-
Who said anything about parading a corpse?
As I recall Smithman was alone with child walking down a quiet back street & appeared not to want to communicate with the Smith family.
A parade is a procession of people, there weren't twenty odd baton twirling Smithmen & a marching band.
It's almost as if your statement doesn't bear any relation to the truth.
If it was an attempt to dispose of a corpse it was pretty damned brazen - uncovered, through the streets of a holiday town before closing time, then the same guy goes on international telly appealing for witnesses and info on said corpse's removal. Anyway, nicely deflecting from my point I see - good effort.
-
If it was an attempt to dispose of a corpse it was pretty damned brazen - uncovered, through the streets of a holiday town before closing time. Anyway, nicely deflecting from my point I see - good effort.
Not really.
It was early season, late, dark, there was a hurricane blowing so people would be indoors & he was only seen by one family.
-
I think they are your words, not the words of the witness. Therefore they are describing your assumptions.
Come on Gunit. Admit it.
I am not rereading all the statements but various videos have shown what happened and you WILL have seen them.
Common sense also tells you what happened. Such cheap flimsy curtains would blow in a gust and it was a gusty evening.
It does pose the question though. What other windows/patio doors were open on the poolside, or mayb the eastern side of the apartment? I think there must have been a gap somewhere for a draft lifting the curtains such as Kate described
-
Not really.
It was early season, late, dark, there was a hurricane blowing so people would be indoors & he was only seen by one family.
I missed the bit about the hurricane - what was its name? Strange the Tapas Group decidded to eat outdoors during a hurricane. Lucky they weren't blown away.
-
Come on Gunit. Admit it.
I am not rereading all the statements but various videos have shown what happened and you WILL have seen them.
Common sense also tells you what happened. Such cheap flimsy curtains would blow in a gust and it was a gusty evening.
It does pose the question though. What other windows/patio doors were open on the poolside, or mayb the eastern side of the apartment? I think there must have been a gap somewhere for a draft lifting the curtains such as Kate described
I've read the statements and watched the videos, I've even read the statements which, it was alleged, were leaked to a Spanish journalist. I can't judge which version is correct and I'm not as prepared to make assumptions as you are.
-
Hurricane Kate, the symptoms are gusty curtains & fake abductions.
I think the wind is all emanating from your direction today.
-
Hurricane Kate, the symptoms are gusty curtains & fake abductions.
Chapter Two Truth of the Lie
At the end of April 2007, it's spring in the Algarve, even if the weather is particularly gloomy. It rains often. While the sun shines, the temperature becomes pleasant, but the nights are cold and windy.
Note - the nights were cold and WINDY
-
I've read the statements and watched the videos, I've even read the statements which, it was alleged, were leaked to a Spanish journalist. I can't judge which version is correct and I'm not as prepared to make assumptions as you are.
One of the tactics of the typical conspiracy theorist is to focus on minor discrepancies between witness statements or in accounts given months or years after the event and blow their relevance or importance out of all proportion. Do you recognise this sort of behaviour? I have seen it time and again in this case, and in most other conspiracy theorists' arguments whether it be 9/11, Sandy Hook, moon landings whatever. It's a bit sad really, don't you think, that such people have to rely on such tactics in order to try and convince the rest of the world that they are right and cleverer and more perceptive than the majority? I definitely recognise this in this case and think it's quite pathetic behaviour.
-
Your comment on the teenagers makes Barriers point!!!!
What’s happened with the shutters on that still photo from the forensic journal aka Gerry’s blog? The reality is that no one on this forum has ever put forward evidence that the shutters were opened and Maddie taken out of the window by an abductor. The Tapas group who were first on the scene couldn’t agree on the window and shutters when first asked. Also an abductor would have to be watching goings on to operate so successfully in such a small window of opportunity. They would have known that checks involving going inside didn’t normally happen and also that the doors facing the pool were not locked!! Why not just go in through the door? The bottom line is there was no evidence to suggest a break in and abduction.
"Your comment on the teenagers makes Barriers point!!!!"
Rather it makes my point that an intruder – in this example, Brueckner – is capable of entering an occupied property completely unobserved.
As for the rest of your post, bearing in mind the amount of bandwith it has consumed over the years, it is simply tiresome.
-
I don't think anyone is assuming that everyone is lying about everything, although some people do seem to assume that everyone is telling the truth about everything imo. Uncorroberated statements in particular should not be relied on.
A material witness is being called a liar. Very rich when the accusation originates from the delusion of a serial liar who actually had a suspended prison sentence and conviction for lying (perjury by forging official documents).
More recently he has lied in a deliberate attempt to derail the German investigation into Madeleine's fate. Is it possible to sink any lower yet still have a following believing and promulgating every word.
-
Of course she might. She was, after all, traumatised and may not have been thinking straight.
Do you know, I think that is the most offensive passively aggressive posts I have ever read.
-
Yes, like I said, early season so cold & windy.
Wouldn't be as many people around as there would be on warmer summer nights, with the obvious exception being that endless number of men seen lurking suspiciously close to the McCanns apartment.
As the Smiths were out and about that evening your point is moot. Do you think Smithman thought to himself "oh it's a windy night, I should be fine to carry an uncovered corpse through town because everyone is bound to be indoors"?
-
Enough of Insulting Comments.
Warning Points come next.
-
A material witness is being called a liar. Very rich when the accusation originates from the delusion of a serial liar who actually had a suspended prison sentence and conviction for lying (perjury by forging official documents).
More recently he has lied in a deliberate attempt to derail the German investigation into Madeleine's fate. Is it possible to sink any lower yet still have a following believing and promulgating every word.
Once again I'm being accused of something I haven't done. Where exactly did you see a material witness being called a liar by me?
-
Once again I'm being accused of something I haven't done. Where exactly did you see a material witness being called a liar by me?
Quite, you're far too canny for that, yet only a complete idiot would fail to spot the continual veiled accusations emanating from your posts.
-
Quite, you're far too canny for that, yet only a complete idiot would fail to spot the continual veiled accusations emanating from your posts.
Veiled? I must have missed that. Nothing veiled about them.
-
Quite, you're far too canny for that, yet only a complete idiot would fail to spot the continual veiled accusations emanating from your posts.
So I make veiled accusations, do I? On the other hand these veiled accusations may exist only in the minds of the readers.
-
So I make veiled accusations, do I? On the other hand these veiled accusations may exist only in the minds of the readers.
You obviously take some of us for complete fools. It's blatantly obvious to me (and I would suggest also to any neutral or supporter) from your posting history that you think (at the very, VERY least) that the McCanns and their friends lied in their statements. You are a sceptic are you not? Which means that at the very least you are sceptical about the McCanns and their friends' version of events. Now, you may CLAIM that you think it's possible that this is due to mistakes on all their parts but do you really expect us to believe you seriously entertain that possibility? You've made it absolutely plain you won't accept translation errors for any of the discrepancies so its not a stretch for me to come to the conclusion that you don't accept plain old human fallibility either - in fact you said as much yesterday IIRC. You have also made the claim that IYO abduction was virtually impossible so please stop trying to play the *innocent face* card - it's very very boring now.
-
Veiled? I must have missed that. Nothing veiled about them.
Quite - she rather gave the game away when she liked Spam's post in which he claimed Amaral solved the case in May 2007. There is absolutely nothing objective or even-handed about this poster. IMO.
-
Quite - she rather gave the game away when she liked Spam's post in which he claimed Amaral solved the case in May 2007. There is absolutely nothing objective or even-handed about this poster. IMO.
Some people give themselves away without even meaning to.
-
So I make veiled accusations, do I? On the other hand these veiled accusations may exist only in the minds of the readers.
What the reader takes from a post is very important. Ask 😁 Sally Bercow
-
We all know what is going on here at the moment. But hardly worth talking about. And I don't care anyway.
It isn't going to happen.
-
You obviously take some of us for complete fools. It's blatantly obvious to me (and I would suggest also to any neutral or supporter) from your posting history that you think (at the very, VERY least) that the McCanns and their friends lied in their statements. You are a sceptic are you not? Which means that at the very least you are sceptical about the McCanns and their friends' version of events. Now, you may CLAIM that you think it's possible that this is due to mistakes on all their parts but do you really expect us to believe you seriously entertain that possibility? You've made it absolutely plain you won't accept translation errors for any of the discrepancies so its not a stretch for me to come to the conclusion that you don't accept plain old human fallibility either - in fact you said as much yesterday IIRC. You have also made the claim that IYO abduction was virtually impossible so please stop trying to play the *innocent face* card - it's very very boring now.
If the McCanns and their friends were so traumatised that their memories were adversely affected how can anyone know what is correct?
-
If you say there is no evidence of a break in then obviously you are assuming that Kate McCann is lying. Now tell me I'm wrong.
Clarence Mitchell:"There was no evidence of a break-in,"
-
If the McCanns and their friends were so traumatised that their memories were adversely affected how can anyone know what is correct?
Let's start with the fact Madeleine vanished then take it from there not with 'theories' but with EVIDENCE. Which is precisely what Wolters is doing at the moment. He has access to most of it enabling an informed opinion and you know nothing so like the rest you will have to wait.
You ask "how can anyone know what is correct?"don't you think trained police investigators are far more qualified than you to form opinions.
At the moment no-one except perhaps you is interested in rehashing Amaral's disastrous mistakes of 2007 - they are all far too busy waiting to see what Wolter's witnesses are saying in the here and now of 2021.
-
Let's start with the fact Madeleine vanished then take it from there not with 'theories' but with EVIDENCE. Which is precisely what Wolters is doing at the moment. He has access to most of it enabling an informed opinion and you know nothing so like the rest you will have to wait.
You ask "how can anyone know what is correct?"don't you think trained police investigators are far more qualified than you to form opinions.
At the moment no-one except perhaps you is interested in rehashing Amaral's disastrous mistakes of 2007 - they are all far too busy waiting to see what Wolter's witnesses are saying in the here and now of 2021.
Yes, she vanished and no-one knows why. Abduction is a theory, whether you accept that or not. The trained Portuguese police investigators didn't find enough evidence to identify the crime. The Portuguese authorities made that plain when they archived the case in 2008.
Operation Grange seem to have decided Madeleine was abducted, but their reasons have never been made clear. We do have A C Rowley's comment, that she was too young to have gone off to start a new life, but no-one ever thought she had anyway. It seems like a very weak reason to assume abduction, but no doubt someone shared it with Wolters and he agreed.
I wonder if Wolters has found any witnesses who haven't shared their knowledge with the media?
-
If the McCanns and their friends were so traumatised that their memories were adversely affected how can anyone know what is correct?
But you’ve already said you find it hard to believe 9 people could all have remembered differently so I think we can make a very reasonable assumption regarding your views about it. Don’t bother responding unless it’s to reply honestly and without fudge and deflection.
-
Yes, she vanished and no-one knows why. Abduction is a theory, whether you accept that or not. The trained Portuguese police investigators didn't find enough evidence to identify the crime. The Portuguese authorities made that plain when they archived the case in 2008.
Operation Grange seem to have decided Madeleine was abducted, but their reasons have never been made clear. We do have A C Rowley's comment, that she was too young to have gone off to start a new life, but no-one ever thought she had anyway. It seems like a very weak reason to assume abduction, but no doubt someone shared it with Wolters and he agreed.
I wonder if Wolters has found any witnesses who haven't shared their knowledge with the media?
You think Wolters is investigating CB because of Rowley’s comment about Madeleine being too young to go off on her own? Please don’t be silly.
-
One of the tactics of the typical conspiracy theorist is to focus on minor discrepancies between witness statements or in accounts given months or years after the event and blow their relevance or importance out of all proportion. Do you recognise this sort of behaviour? I have seen it time and again in this case, and in most other conspiracy theorists' arguments whether it be 9/11, Sandy Hook, moon landings whatever. It's a bit sad really, don't you think, that such people have to rely on such tactics in order to try and convince the rest of the world that they are right and cleverer and more perceptive than the majority? I definitely recognise this in this case and think it's quite pathetic behaviour.
How about you just look at the very first statements (rehearsed on a book cover) given in the first few days... and before you say "lost in translation" don't forget they willingly signed them. The fact is (as even Clarence admitted at one point) there was no evidence found to suggest a break in and abduction. There did, however, seem to be a very public campaign to promote this version of events. Forget "conspiracy theories". That's just lazy sloganeering. Concentrate on the evidence.... and remind us again what evidence is there to suggest a break in and stranger abduction?
-
The first appearance upon looking in was that the curtains were normal, but then a gust of wind came and they were open.
Simples, Gunit
Normal as in open or normal as in closed?!!
-
Indeed it is - it is still evidence however, no matter what you say. In the same way that Smith's statement is evidence that Gerry McCann paraded a corpse through PdL that night. You have decided he is 100% accurate and that Kate is 100% lying - that is a choice you have made but your opinion doesn't necessarily bear any relation to the actual truth of the matter.
I agree - but have the sense to understand that works two ways|!!
-
Yes there is - if you keep an open mind and don’t automatically assume everyone is lying about everything.
I don't assume they are lying. I just don't know which of their accounts is anywhere near accurate.
-
Billy Whizz isn't here to keep an open mind, but only to disrupt and present half baked theories that suit the Sceptic Agenda.
There are several ways in which the abductor could have got in and out of the appartment and more than one reason for why the window was open.
Why does expressing my opinion automatically go down as disruption in your eyes? Would you prefer an echo chamber where everyone just agrees CB, or the latest paedophile suspect, is the guilty party?
-
I agree - but have the sense to understand that works two ways|!!
If you read my post again you will see that I “have the sense” to see it both ways by referencing the Smiths testimony as evidence so please don’t be so rude.
-
You know for a fact that the abductor didn't go in through the unlocked patio door, do you?
That's a loaded question!!! We don't even know for a fact there was an abductor!! We need to be open minded remember!! We need to look at evidence... and something more concrete than hearsay.
-
I don't assume they are lying. I just don't know which of their accounts is anywhere near accurate.
I’m sorry but if you don’t accept Kate’s account of the open window is evidence of an abduction then that can only be brcause you think she is lying, please don’t deny it and pretend you think she might have been mistaken - that’s codswallop.
-
That's a loaded question!!! We don't even know for a fact there was an abductor!! We need to be open minded remember!! We need to look at evidence... and something more concrete than hearsay.
Do you accept Kate may be telling the truth? Do you accept the window may have been open? If so do you accept that this would be evidence of an abduction?
-
Do you accept Kate may be telling the truth? Do you accept the window may have been open? If so do you accept that this would be evidence of an abduction?
No.
A burglar could have opened the window, seen the children & then decided not to rob the place.
-
No.
A burglar could have opened the window, seen the children & then decided not to rob the place.
So an open window definitely can be ruled out as evidence of abduction because….?
-
So an open window definitely can be ruled out as evidence of abduction because….?
because it isn't evidence of abduction.
-
because it isn't evidence of abduction.
Explain why an open window (that was left closed) in a missing child’s bedroom is not evidence of abduction. What rules it out as evidence?
-
Explain why an open window (that was left closed) in a missing child’s bedroom is not evidence of abduction. What rules it out as evidence?
I don't have to explain anything.
Statements as fact without supporting evidence are permissible under new forum rules, apparently.
-
I don't have to explain anything.
Statements as fact without supporting evidence are permissible under new forum rules, apparently.
In this case an open window was evidence if abduction. Why in this case but not in the McCann case?
https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/isabel-celis-6-year-old-girl-vanishes-from-tucson-arizona-home
I don’t think you know how to answer this question.
-
In this case an open window was evidence if abduction. Why in this case but not in the McCann case?
https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/isabel-celis-6-year-old-girl-vanishes-from-tucson-arizona-home
I don’t think you know how to answer this question.
Because Maddie wasn't abducted.
-
If you read my post again you will see that I “have the sense” to see it both ways by referencing the Smiths testimony as evidence so please don’t be so rude.
Well obviously you can't ignore the Smith sighting as it's important evidence, but you didn't really present it in an open minded way did you. Talk of it being evidence of GM "parading" a corpse around the streets of PDL was an exaggeration of the events in an attempt to keep the reader's mind focussed away from certain conclusions. The use of that intransitive implies deliberately being exhibitive, flaunting something even, deliberately doing something to make people look at what you're doing. I didn't get that impression of Smithman from the family statements. Let's be open minded and lets examine the concrete evidence (not hearsay) which suggests there was a break in (or walk in) and an abduction. I'm still waiting to see this evidence but when I do I'll be quite happy to examine it with an open mind because like everyone else here I do not know what happened to Madeleine McCann.
-
Because Maddie wasn't abducted.
I knew you wouldn’t be able to explain and I was right.
-
Well obviously you can't ignore the Smith sighting as it's important evidence, but you didn't really present it in an open minded way did you. Talk of it being evidence of GM "parading" a corpse around the streets of PDL was an exaggeration of the events in an attempt to keep the reader's mind focussed away from certain conclusions. The use of that intransitive implies deliberately being exhibitive, flaunting something even, deliberately doing something to make people look at what you're doing. I didn't get that impression of Smithman from the family statements. Let's be open minded and lets examine the concrete evidence (not hearsay) which suggests there was a break in (or walk in) and an abduction. I'm still waiting to see this evidence but when I do I'll be quite happy to examine it with an open mind because like everyone else here I do not know what happened to Madeleine McCann.
So you don’t accept Kate’s statement is evidence but you do accept Smith’s satement is evidence, that’s what I discern from the above.
-
Normal as in open or normal as in closed?!!
Oh, Billy, please don't act like a simpleton. We know that you are not.
For any simpletons around:
We all know that with very cheap flimsy curtains such as these, when a sturdy gust of wind blows them, they fly inwards and open.
Hadn't you noticed that Billy?
-
I've read the statements and watched the videos, I've even read the statements which, it was alleged, were leaked to a Spanish journalist. I can't judge which version is correct and I'm not as prepared to make assumptions as you are.
Gunit, please acknowledge that a decent gust would blow such cheap flimsy curtains and open closed ones in doing so. They may have reclosed after the gust or they may have stayed open depending upon if the runners were free running.
From memory, the bigger gusts were recorded at over 20mph at about the time Kate checked.
-
Oh, Billy, please don't act like a simpleton. We know that you are not.
For any simpletons around:
We all know that with very cheap flimsy curtains such as these, when a sturdy gust of wind blows them, they fly inwards and open.
Hadn't you noticed that Billy?
We've seen Rebelo at the widow of No5 making an inspection.
Obviously he must have been satisfied by what he saw.
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/zzrebelo2d.jpg.w300h156.jpg)
Paulo Rebelo opens the window to Maddie's bedroom
Two things to note - the flimsy curtains which would easily be moved by a draught
- how big the actual window is which would allow easy ingress or egress or passing a child through to an accomplice
-
Why does expressing my opinion automatically go down as disruption in your eyes? Would you prefer an echo chamber where everyone just agrees CB, or the latest paedophile suspect, is the guilty party?
Of course it would , but maybe not from that particular poster.
-
It’s clear to me that G-Unit, Billy, Spam et al have double standards when it comes to accepting what is evidence. Hearsay evidence if it’s against the McCanns is “important “, “concrete”, etc, but hearsay evidence from the McCanns themselves is not considered evidence at all. I think that just about sums up the problem we have here.
-
The McCanns couldn't be trusted to look after their own kids. So it isn't unreasonable to doubt them on any other given subject.
-
The McCanns couldn't be trusted to look after their own kids. So it isn't unreasonable to doubt them on any other given subject.
I’m not talking about trustworthiness (how well do you know Mr Smith for example?) I’m talking about the concept of evidence - you accept Smith’s statement as evidence, you don’t accept Kates’s statement as evidence. Whether both or neither is true or false is beside the point as far as the concept of what constitutes evidence is concerned. I know there is no point trying to appeal to your sense of fairness or reasonabless, hopefully though others will understand what I am saying.
-
It’s clear to me that G-Unit, Billy, Spam et al have double standards when it comes to accepting what is evidence. Hearsay evidence if it’s against the McCanns is “important “, “concrete”, etc, but hearsay evidence from the McCanns themselves is not considered evidence at all. I think that just about sums up the problem we have here.
Firstly, I'm not sure you understand what hearsay evidence is, but if you give some examples I will probably understand what you mean.
Secondly, the evidence relating to the open window and shutters was uncorroberated (like the dog alerts). They weren't seen by any of the witnesses present and there was no forensic evidence confirming they had been opened.
The PJ doubted that it was possible that a draught would have the effect described by one of the witnesses;
The situation that concerns the window of the bedroom where MADELEINE slept, together with the twins, which was open, according to KATE. It would be necessary to clarify whether there was a draft, due to the fact that movement of the curtains and pressure under the bedroom door are mentioned, which would eventually be clarified through the reconstitution.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm
-
Gunit, please acknowledge that a decent gust would blow such cheap flimsy curtains and open closed ones in doing so. They may have reclosed after the gust or they may have stayed open depending upon if the runners were free running.
From memory, the bigger gusts were recorded at over 20mph at about the time Kate checked.
I am not able to judge the cost and weight of a set of curtains from a photograph, but they don't appear particularly cheap and flimsy to me. Therefore I'm not prepared to speculate about how they might behave. I'm also aware that there is disagreement about the weather that evening.
-
Firstly, I'm not sure you understand what hearsay evidence is, but if you give some examples I will probably understand what you mean.
Secondly, the evidence relating to the open window and shutters was uncorroberated (like the dog alerts). They weren't seen by any of the witnesses present and there was no forensic evidence confirming they had been opened.
The PJ doubted that it was possible that a draught would have the effect described by one of the witnesses;
The situation that concerns the window of the bedroom where MADELEINE slept, together with the twins, which was open, according to KATE. It would be necessary to clarify whether there was a draft, due to the fact that movement of the curtains and pressure under the bedroom door are mentioned, which would eventually be clarified through the reconstitution.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm
It was Billy Whizz who used the word “hearsay” to describe Kate’s statement about the open window. He rejects her statement as evidence of abduction- do you? If so why? Sometimes evidence is given in court with no corroboration, it’s still evidence is it not? Finally, you also appear to reject completely the fact that the open window WAS corroborated by an independent witness, why is her account not evidence of an abduction in your view? You may have decided she was wrong or lying but it doesn’t stop her statement being evidence.
-
I am not able to judge the cost and weight of a set of curtains from a photograph, but they don't appear particularly cheap and flimsy to me. Therefore I'm not prepared to speculate about how they might behave. I'm also aware that there is disagreement about the weather that evening.
So basically you reject any other explanation other than that Kate McCann misremembered or lied, right?
-
I’m not talking about trustworthiness (how well do you know Mr Smith for example?) I’m talking about the concept of evidence - you accept Smith’s statement as evidence, you don’t accept Kates’s statement as evidence. Whether both or neither is true or false is beside the point as far as the concept of what constitutes evidence is concerned. I know there is no point trying to appeal to your sense of fairness or reasonabless, hopefully though others will understand what I am saying.
Smith's evidence was corroberated by other family members. They all saw the man carrying the child and were all agreed about his description. If you are referring to Smith's later claim that the man was Gerry McCann, that was his uncorroborated opinion to which he's entitled. As it's uncorroborated, it may be nothing (like the dog alerts) or it may be intelligence (like the dog alerts).
-
It was Billy Whizz who used the word “hearsay” to describe Kate’s statement about the open window. He rejects her statement as evidence of abduction- do you? If so why? Sometimes evidence is given in court with no corroboration, it’s still evidence is it not? Finally, you also appear to reject completely the fact that the open window WAS corroborated by an independent witness, why is her account not evidence of an abduction in your view? You may have decided she was wrong or lying but it doesn’t stop her statement being evidence.
Just a point of law.. Kates statement is not hearsay. Hearsay evidence is when a statement is produced where the person who made the statement is not oresent in court
-
Just a point of law.. Kates statement is not hearsay. Hearsay evidence is when a statement is produced where the person who made the statement is not oresent in court
Point taken.
-
Smith's evidence was corroberated by other family members. They all saw the man carrying the child and were all agreed about his description. If you are referring to Smith's later claim that the man was Gerry McCann, that was his uncorroborated opinion to which he's entitled. As it's uncorroborated, it may be nothing (like the dog alerts) or it may be intelligence (like the dog alerts).
You accept corroborated evidence from friends and family except when its friends and family evidence corroborating the McCanns’ account then?
-
As I recall The Ciprianos were convicted on the strength of one uncorroborated confession, and one unoccoborated witness sighting of Joana apparently on her way home. So - how come that's good enough for McCann sceptics?
-
So an open window definitely can be ruled out as evidence of abduction because….?
It's circumstantial evidence, and there are more than one possible reason for an open window.
There's the burglar example above. It could also be evidence of staging too.
-
I knew you wouldn’t be able to explain and I was right.
I disagree. It is circumstantial evidence. On its own testimony that there was an open window does not prove an abduction. That is only one possibility.
-
@)(++(* - were you there in the police station when she gave her first account then? You do realise when you saw her giving her account she'd had to repeat her account probably dozens of times already don't you? Do you accept that her statement re: the open window is evidence of abduction or not?
-
It’s clear to me that G-Unit, Billy, Spam et al have double standards when it comes to accepting what is evidence. Hearsay evidence if it’s against the McCanns is “important “, “concrete”, etc, but hearsay evidence from the McCanns themselves is not considered evidence at all. I think that just about sums up the problem we have here.
That isn't true. I'm prepared to examine any evidence that is debated here. I'm happy to look at hearsay, forensic evidence, witness testimony, circumstantial evidence etc etc (and none of these are mutually exclusive either).
I asked for evidence of an abduction. So far we have Kate McCann saying there was an open window. I'm sorry but on its own I'm not going to conclude from that that there was definitely an abduction.
-
It's circumstantial evidence, and there are more than one possible reason for an open window.
There's the burglar example above. It could also be evidence of staging too.
Hallelujah! It's evidence of an abduction. Thank YOU!!! Yes it could be evidence of something else, but when someone says that there is NO EVIDENCE OF ABDUCTION that is patently false agreed?
-
I disagree. It is circumstantial evidence. On its own testimony that there was an open window does not prove an abduction. That is only one possibility.
Why do you disagree? I said it was evidence, you agree it is evidence. I didn't specify what sort of evidence nor did I describe it as proof.
-
That isn't true. I'm prepared to examine any evidence that is debated here. I'm happy to look at hearsay, forensic evidence, witness testimony, circumstantial evidence etc etc (and none of these are mutually exclusive either).
I asked for evidence of an abduction. So far we have Kate McCann saying there was an open window. I'm sorry but on its own I'm not going to conclude from that that there was definitely an abduction.
Again, you are making a false assumption that I said Kate's evidence proved it was definitely an abduction - stop misrepresenting what I said please.
-
I disagree. It is circumstantial evidence. On its own testimony that there was an open window does not prove an abduction. That is only one possibility.
Its evidence but not proof
-
@)(++(* - were you there in the police station when she gave her first account then? You do realise when you saw her giving her account she'd had to repeat her account probably dozens of times already don't you? Do you accept that her statement re: the open window is evidence of abduction or not?
Testimony from a witness that there was a window open in the children's bedroom that had been left closed does not prove there was an abduction. There are a number of inferences that could be drawn from the testimony.
Respectfully, can you please leave out comments such as the one about me not being in the Police station. Let's just look at the evidence and debate it. Thank you.
-
Its evidence but not proof
Correct sir I agree.
-
Why do you disagree? I said it was evidence, you agree it is evidence. I didn't specify what sort of evidence nor did I describe it as proof.
I accepted it as evidence. I described it as such. My problem is claiming abduction is the only conclusion that can be drawn. Dave is spot on. It is evidence but not proof. I think we all agree on that.
-
Testimony from a witness that there was a window open in the children's bedroom that had been left closed does not prove there was an abduction. There are a number of inferences that could be drawn from the testimony.
Respectfully, can you please leave out comments such as the one about me not being in the Police station. Let's just look at the evidence and debate it. Thank you.
What other are the other inferences that could be drawn from the window being open? It was left closed, it was open when Kate checked on the children.
-
Testimony from a witness that there was a window open in the children's bedroom that had been left closed does not prove there was an abduction. There are a number of inferences that could be drawn from the testimony.
Respectfully, can you please leave out comments such as the one about me not being in the Police station. Let's just look at the evidence and debate it. Thank you.
Respectfully, can you stop misrepresenting what I said - I never said Kate's statement proved abduction so why do you keep saying that? Also, if you're going to cast doubts on Kate's integrity I think I am entitled to point out the logic failure in how you arrived at your beliefs.
-
I'm not a trained criminal psychologist but to me the very well rehearsed whoooosh and door slam comes across as storytelling in my own personal opinion. It seems to be embellishment in my opinion. That was my own personal impression. However, that doesn't necessarily mean she is lying she might have practised the storytelling and embellishment to try to make her own honest belief sound more plausible.
Yet Amaral said in his book the nights were windy. Why make that up? Why not just say the abductor came in through the Patio doors? They told the Police the Patio doors were left open. Why not leave marks on the window outside dirt on the bed covers, come on if you are going to make out an abduction happened leave more clues.
-
I accepted it as evidence. I described it as such. My problem is claiming abduction is the only conclusion that can be drawn. Dave is spot on. It is evidence but not proof. I think we all agree on that.
Can you please point to any post I ever made in which I claimed it was proof? What you're doing is classic strawman argumentation, please stop it.
-
If I was staging an abduction I certainly wouldn't have left my finger prints on the window.
-
Why not ? She had lived there for a weeks so finding her fingerprints in the apartment would be quite normal.
-
If I was staging an abduction I certainly wouldn't have left my finger prints on the window.
I certainly wouldn't have closed the window that I staged by opening before the police even got there!
-
What other are the other inferences that could be drawn from the window being open? It was left closed, it was open when Kate checked on the children.
She might have forgotten close it, I mean, they did forgot to lock it, allegedly.
-
I certainly wouldn't have closed the window that I staged by opening before the police even got there!
I wouldn't have interfered with the only 'evidence of abduction' either. I would have shown it to my friends and to the police so they could see why I assumed my daughter had been abducted.
-
Smith's evidence was corroberated by other family members. They all saw the man carrying the child and were all agreed about his description. If you are referring to Smith's later claim that the man was Gerry McCann, that was his uncorroborated opinion to which he's entitled. As it's uncorroborated, it may be nothing (like the dog alerts) or it may be intelligence (like the dog alerts).
The Smith family visit to Kelly's is not corroborated either by staff or by receipt. There is no record of anyone witnessing the party making their way home and entering their apartment block and no record of the time at which they did get home.
The police didn't manage to get to one of the very few scenes of action covered by camera which might have been captured on CCTV until after the footage was deleted.
However I'm not sure what relevance this is to more recent events particularly when WE ALREADY KNOW that the three investigating police forces will not be at all interested in what went on in R. da Escola in 2007 as far as slurring the McCanns is concerned, unless it coincides with what their prime suspect and/or his mates were doing.
Isn't it about time you accepted that particular horse has bolted.
-
I am not able to judge the cost and weight of a set of curtains from a photograph, but they don't appear particularly cheap and flimsy to me. Therefore I'm not prepared to speculate about how they might behave. I'm also aware that there is disagreement about the weather that evening.
Look again at the curtain photos Gunit. See how cheaply they fall and how the light penetrates. Remember Matts statement where he could see light coming through them and the light was a mixture of sodium lighting colour yellow and the blue of the curtains IIRC. Cheap fabric; they didn't need sturdy fabric, cos they had shutters for excluding light and prying eyes. In actual fact they were merely a window dressing. Very thin fabric.
Additionally we all know that nets are very flimsy
Do not try and change the weather Gunit. That would be absolutely and totally dishonest.
The official weather reports have been posted on this forum several times. I observed years ago that some have been deleted and I wondered why?
I wonder if there are any actual bona fide weather reports, (without alteration) still standing on here, but I ain't wasting the time searching anymore
-
She might have forgotten close it, I mean, they did forgot to lock it, allegedly.
Who is *they*?
I ain't looking it up for you, but I distinctly remember it being stated that neither Kate nor Gerry ever attempted to open the window. They just left it closed all the time, day and night.
-
The Smith family visit to Kelly's is not corroborated either by staff or by receipt. There is no record of anyone witnessing the party making their way home and entering their apartment block and no record of the time at which they did get home.
The police didn't manage to get to one of the very few scenes of action covered by camera which might have been captured on CCTV until after the footage was deleted.
However I'm not sure what relevance this is to more recent events particularly when WE ALREADY KNOW that the three investigating police forces will not be at all interested in what went on in R. da Escola in 2007 as far as slurring the McCanns is concerned, unless it coincides with what their prime suspect and/or his mates were doing.
Isn't it about time you accepted that particular horse has bolted.
As far as I'm concerned there has been one justifiable investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Any investigators following after will need to be aware of, and take into account the evidence gathered by that investigation.
I have seen two examples of what happens when investigators don't familiarise themselves with the available evidence. DCI Redwood failed to explain why his replacement for Tannerman seemed to be heading the wrong way, and Prosecutor Wolters seemed to think there was a mobile phone signal tower belonging to the Ocean Club.
-
Why not ? She had lived there for a weeks so finding her fingerprints in the apartment would be quite normal.
Then why is it that sceptics make such a song and dance about Kate's fingerprints being on the glass - that is a rhetorical question.
I am far more interested in what is going on in the German investigation into Brueckner who for example left no fingerprints only a single pubic hair at the rape scene only a short distance from the McCann apartment.
Also it would be ON TOPIC.
-
Look again at the curtain photos Gunit. See how cheaply they fall and how the light penetrates. Remember Matts statement where he could see light coming through them and the light was a mixture of sodium lighting colour yellow and the blue of the curtains IIRC. Cheap fabric; they didn't need sturdy fabric, cos they had shutters for excluding light and prying eyes. In actual fact they were merely a window dressing. Very thin fabric.
Additionally we all know that nets are very flimsy
Do not try and change the weather Gunit. That would be absolutely and totally dishonest.
The official weather reports have been posted on this forum several times. I observed years ago that some have been deleted and I wondered why?
I wonder if there are any actual bona fide weather reports, (without alteration) still standing on here, but I ain't wasting the time searching anymore
I have rejected your speculative explanation and repeating it butters no parsnips imo.
-
As far as I'm concerned there has been one justifiable investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Any investigators following after will need to be aware of, and take into account the evidence gathered by that investigation.
I have seen two examples of what happens when investigators don't familiarise themselves with the available evidence. DCI Redwood failed to explain why his replacement for Tannerman seemed to be heading the wrong way, and Prosecutor Wolters seemed to think there was a mobile phone signal tower belonging to the Ocean Club.
As you are aware the first investigation thought the main evidence against the mccanns was the dog alerts so I doubt the present investigators will take much notice of that.
There was no real evidence against the parents... Confirmed by the srchiving despatch... PD Carmo... SY.. and the Germans.
Your problem imo is thst you THINK there is sufficient evidence to make the parents suspects.. The Portuguese, UK and German police dont agree with you.
Your fixation with your supposed evidence ptevents you looking at Wolters eith an open mind
-
As far as I'm concerned there has been one justifiable investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Any investigators following after will need to be aware of, and take into account the evidence gathered by that investigation.
I have seen two examples of what happens when investigators don't familiarise themselves with the available evidence. DCI Redwood failed to explain why his replacement for Tannerman seemed to be heading the wrong way, and Prosecutor Wolters seemed to think there was a mobile phone signal tower belonging to the Ocean Club.
Why do sceptics expect the police to 'explain' evidence and keep the criminal fraternity up to speed with wat is going on in an investigation.
I am quite sure Scotland Yard know a great deal more about Dr Totman and his direction of travel than is in the public domain.
Are you disputing the evidence in the files from 2007 that Brueckner's phone activated a mast in Praia da Luz shortly before Madeleine disappeared.
Technicians and engineers know what they are doing and will keep everyone right and I'm not even going to go there regarding English not being Wolter's first language, although he is extremely fluent.
-
I wouldn't have interfered with the only 'evidence of abduction' either. I would have shown it to my friends and to the police so they could see why I assumed my daughter had been abducted.
Which rather supports the theory that the abduction wasn't staged IMO.
-
Why not ? She had lived there for a weeks so finding her fingerprints in the apartment would be quite normal.
Tell Amaral that then as he used the fact that the window had Kates fingerprints on it to spread his staged abduction theory.
-
She might have forgotten close it, I mean, they did forgot to lock it, allegedly.
They said they didn't open the window at all.
-
They said they didn't open the window at all.
And never bothered to check if it was locked?
Well, I suppose, they couldn't be arsed to lock the door either, so it's not surprising.
-
Topic please or expect deletions.
-
And never bothered to check if it was locked?
Well, I suppose, they couldn't be arsed to lock the door either, so it's not surprising.
I am pretty sure tht the Mccanns also reported that the shutters were down all the time they were there, day and night.
With their understanding of the safety of shutters why should they bother if the window was locked or not?
The shutters were down.
-
I wouldn't have interfered with the only 'evidence of abduction' either. I would have shown it to my friends and to the police so they could see why I assumed my daughter had been abducted.
That's a very important point and I've never got my head around it. If you believe someone has broken in (or walked in, then climbed out of a window) with your child you wouldn't interfere with what is likely to give up vital forensic information, in my opinion.
-
Can you please point to any post I ever made in which I claimed it was proof? What you're doing is classic strawman argumentation, please stop it.
You seem to accept it as proof. What other evidence has led you to a theory of abduction?
-
Which rather supports the theory that the abduction wasn't staged IMO.
How so?
-
You seem to accept it as proof. What other evidence has led you to a theory of abduction?
It's the only obvious one.
-
It's the only obvious one.
One of the rarest scenarios is the obvious one? No, that isn't enough for me, sorry.
-
You seem to accept it as proof. What other evidence has led you to a theory of abduction?
Do I ? What leads you to that conclusion. Show us the evidence!
-
One of the rarest scenarios is the obvious one? No, that isn't enough for me, sorry.
Under the given circumstance, Yes. But let's not allow the facts to get in the way.
This is a Discussion Forum so any old rubbish will largely do.
Unless it is Libellous, of course. You might like to keep an eye on that one.
-
One of the rarest scenarios is the obvious one? No, that isn't enough for me, sorry.
You simply don't understand that stranger abduction can be both rare AND the only logical and plausible explanation. Look at the Susie Lamplugh case for example' Would you dismiss the possibility that she was abducted because it doesn't happen very often?
-
How so?
I'm sure you can work it out for yourself if you think really hard.
-
You simply don't understand that stranger abduction can be both rare AND the only logical and plausible explanation. Look at the Susie Lamplugh case for example' Would you dismiss the possibility that she was abducted because it doesn't happen very often?
It only needs to happen once. But I don't think this was the first case of a child vanishing while in the Algarve nor do I think it was the first time an attempt was made to cover up.
The denials about an intruder entering properties with intent to sexually assault children was denied for years despite the police knowing about it happening.
Which makes it all the more extraordinary that Amaral chose to implicate the McCanns based on not a shred of any concrete evidence at all to support the misconception.
It is difficult to stay on topic on this thread because so much of the investigation is under secrecy of justice. Only this time round we are not being entertained by leaks.
The only information is coming from official spokespersons who obviously are not telling us what their strategy or evidence is which is exactly as it should be.
I'm a bit dismayed that in 2021 despite the evidence of our eyes to the contrary there are those who cannot shake off believing the slurs suffered by the McCanns back in 2007.
-
You simply don't understand that stranger abduction can be both rare AND the only logical and plausible explanation. Look at the Susie Lamplugh case for example' Would you dismiss the possibility that she was abducted because it doesn't happen very often?
The abduction theory is not logical or plausible in my opinion and this case has nothing in common with the Lamplugh case.
-
The abduction theory is not logical or plausible in my opinion and this case has nothing in common with the Lamplugh case.
You might like to pay attention to possible Libel as well.
Sometimes "In My Opinion" isn't good enough.
-
Do I ? What leads you to that conclusion. Show us the evidence!
I'm basing it on your posts which, to me at least, read as if you do not accept there are any other possibilities.
-
The abduction theory is not logical or plausible in my opinion and this case has nothing in common with the Lamplugh case.
If the abduction theory is neither logical nor plausible then you must believe the two highly respected police forces investigating are complete idiots! Abduction IS the only logical and plausible explanation, not only in my opinion but in that of David Canter, Operation Grange, the German police and numerous other professional and respected individuals and commentators. It must be an incredible puzzle to you that this is the case, I wonder how you rationalise it without going down some curly-wurly [ censored word ]y wormhole?
-
I'm basing it on your posts which, to me at least, read as if you do not accept there are any other possibilities.
Just one post in which I have claimed the open window proves abduction, just one, go on, I know you’re frightfully busy but if you make claims like this you need to provide evidence,
-
You simply don't understand that stranger abduction can be both rare AND the only logical and plausible explanation. Look at the Susie Lamplugh case for example' Would you dismiss the possibility that she was abducted because it doesn't happen very often?
Abduction, however rare, is plausible and possible.
It isn't the "obvious" conclusion in the McCann case, in my opinion. Was Mark Harrison really just missing something so "obvious"?
-
Just one post in which I have claimed the open window proves abduction, just one, go on, I know you’re frightfully busy but if you make claims like this you need to provide evidence,
You haven't proved abduction in any of your posts. You have described the open window as evidence of abduction. It's also evidence of a burglar, or it being a hot day and someone opening a window etc etc etc. We agree that there is no proof of an abduction.
-
You haven't proved abduction in any of your posts. You have described the open window as evidence of abduction. It's also evidence of a burglar, or it being a hot day and someone opening a window etc etc etc. We agree that there is no proof of an abduction.
And no proof that The McCanns killed their daughter and disposed of her body.
-
And no proof that The McCanns killed their daughter and disposed of her body.
Absolutely correct.
-
You haven't proved abduction in any of your posts. You have described the open window as evidence of abduction. It's also evidence of a burglar, or it being a hot day and someone opening a window etc etc etc. We agree that there is no proof of an abduction.
Right so let’s never hear the “no evidence of an abduction “ mantra again.
-
The abduction theory is not logical or plausible in my opinion and this case has nothing in common with the Lamplugh case.
Why not...
What I think is that you are so convinced by what you believe is evidence that you cant accept you could be wrong
-
Right so let’s never hear the “no evidence of an abduction “ mantra again.
What abduction?
-
What abduction?
the one that there is evidence of having taken place in Apartment 5a on 3rd May 2007 in PdL.
-
the one that there is evidence of having taken place in Apartment 5a on 3rd May 2007 in PdL.
Nope, never seen any evidence of that I'm afraid.
-
Nope, never seen any evidence of that I'm afraid.
Take your blinkers off then.
-
I've just had to close the front room window just in case someone walks past & reports an abduction.
-
I've just had to close the front room window just in case someone walks past & reports an abduction.
Why would they do that? Has one of your (non-existent) children disappeared?
-
And no proof that The McCanns killed their daughter and disposed of her body.
Nor anyone else , come to that.
-
I am pretty sure tht the Mccanns also reported that the shutters were down all the time they were there, day and night.
With their understanding of the safety of shutters why should they bother if the window was locked or not?
The shutters were down.
I agree, Sadie. Also, Maintenance was called to fix the shutters at the back of the apartment, Tapas side. Hypothetically, nothing prevented them to check/unlock the children’s bedroom shutter. The cleaner could have also opened up the shutters and windows in the apartment, without locking it afterwards.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARIO_MOREIRA.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_CLEANER.htm
-
I have rejected your speculative explanation and repeating it butters no parsnips imo.
Why won't you accept the obvious from various photos, videos and reports. Those curtains are very cheap and flimsy. The nets are flimsy too.
Why are you unable to accept official weather records that state it was a gusty evening. Several different weather stations in the region have given their readings for that evening and YOU will have read them without doubt. They have ben posted often enough
Gusts of around 20mph were recorded that evening.
Dunno whether the reports are still there
-
Right so let’s never hear the “no evidence of an abduction “ mantra again.
Reportedly there was an open window.... and upon that that one piece of hearsay you do not accept any other conclusion other than rare stranger abduction? Mark Harrison saw things somewhat differently as I recall. It appeared to me that he tried to focus the various scenarios that the PJ were hypothesising on.
-
Under the given circumstance, Yes. But let's not allow the facts to get in the way.
This is a Discussion Forum so any old rubbish will largely do.
Unless it is Libellous, of course. You might like to keep an eye on that one.
I can't even fathom out where someone could possibly think I was being libellous. This being a discussion forum I believe different opinions are what's needed.
-
Why won't you accept the obvious from various photos, videos and reports. Those curtains are very cheap and flimsy. The nets are flimsy too.
Why are you unable to accept official weather records that state it was a gusty evening. Several different weather stations in the region have given their readings for that evening and YOU will have read them without doubt. They have ben posted often enough
Gusts of around 20mph were recorded that evening.
Dunno whether the reports are still there
In my opinion, thin curtains is the norm in that sort of climate and resort. Shutters add to cooling down a space. No need for heavy curtains in addition to shutters.
-
Reportedly there was an open window.... and upon that that one piece of hearsay you do not accept any other conclusion other than rare stranger abduction? Mark Harrison saw things somewhat differently as I recall. It appeared to me that he tried to focus the various scenarios that the PJ were hypothesising on.
it is not the sole reason I think Madeleine was abducted but I do think it is evidence (not hearsay evidence, see Davel’s earlier post on the subject). Did Mark Harrison rule out abduction then?
-
the one that there is evidence of having taken place in Apartment 5a on 3rd May 2007 in PdL.
The one not proven because of a lack of evidence to support the hypothesis. All it seems there was to support the abduction theory is a witness statement that there was an open window. Furthermore those on this forum who appear to most believe the abduction hypothesis are also the posters who tell us the testimony is unreliable because inconsistencies are apparently the result of translation issues.
I don’t know what happened to Madeleine McCann. There is no proof that her parents were involved. For me personally though I am not satisfied that there is anywhere near enough evidence to support rare stranger abduction.
-
it is not the sole reason I think Madeleine was abducted but I do think it is evidence (not hearsay evidence, see Davel’s earlier post on the subject). Did Mark Harrison rule out abduction then?
I very much doubt he ruled anything out but he appeared keen to apply some focus.
-
it is not the sole reason I think Madeleine was abducted but I do think it is evidence (not hearsay evidence, see Davel’s earlier post on the subject). Did Mark Harrison rule out abduction then?
Yes sorry that particular piece of evidence wasn’t hearsay. That was a mistake on my part. The story about the open window came from witnesses testimony.
-
The one not proven because of a lack of evidence to support the hypothesis. All it seems there was to support the abduction theory is a witness statement that there was an open window. Furthermore those on this forum who appear to most believe the abduction hypothesis are also the posters who tell us the testimony is unreliable because inconsistencies are apparently the result of translation issues.
I don’t know what happened to Madeleine McCann. There is no proof that her parents were involved. For me personally though I am not satisfied that there is anywhere near enough evidence to support rare stranger abduction.
How many times do you need to tell us the open window is not proof of abduction? Do you see anyone here saying otherwise? And as Kate McCann has repeatedly told us that the window was open why do you think translation errors are relevant regarding this evidence?
-
I very much doubt he ruled anything out but he appeared keen to apply some focus.
on what specifically?
-
on what specifically?
The investigation.
-
Reportedly there was an open window.... and upon that that one piece of hearsay you do not accept any other conclusion other than rare stranger abduction? Mark Harrison saw things somewhat differently as I recall. It appeared to me that he tried to focus the various scenarios that the PJ were hypothesising on.
It is on record that according to the PJ the main evidence against the McCanns was the dog alerts... So I dont see Harrison supporting such ignorance
-
It is on record that according to the PJ the main evidence against the McCanns was the dog alerts... So I dont see Harrison supporting such ignorance
I’m talking about the time before the dog alerts led to the collection of forensic evidence.
-
The investigation.
Obviously, but on which theory? You keep mentioning him as if he was sceptical of the abduction theory - was he?
-
Obviously, but on which theory? You keep mentioning him as if he was sceptical of the abduction theory - was he?
I’ve no idea what his personal thoughts were. I’m talking about his professional input into the investigation.
-
Back to the current investigation with this link taken from a thought provoking discussion on Websleuths.
What events I wonder left Brueckner destitute and on the streets in Italy with his only possessions being a bible and a card with his lawyer's address.
'When we arrested him we could see the surprise on his face': Italian police set a trap for Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner 'by making a fake appointment for a new passport'
Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner was arrested with a trap in Italy
The Italian police made a fake appointment with him for a new passport in 2018
Police said he looked homeless and was holding a bible on the day of the arrest
By JORDAN KING FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 02:29, 7 June 2020
Italian police set up a trap for Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner by making a fake appointment for a new passport at the German consulate in Milan, it has emerged today.
The police did not know he was a suspect in the McCann case but knew he was a fugitive when he came up for a drug conviction.
The German had just arrived from Switzerland and said he needed new ID documents because they had been stolen from him on the train.
When the police found the drug conviction they arranged an international arrest warrant and set up the fake appointment.
Col Michele Miulli, commander of the Carabinieri investigative unit that planned his arrest, told the Mirror they had 'no idea' about Brueckner's link to the McCann case.
Lieutenant Andrea Papa, part of the city's elite murder squad, said that Brueckner 'looked homeless' on the day he was arrested.
'He was in jeans, trainers and a military jacket. He had no phone or money, just a Bible and a business card with his lawyer's number,' said Lieutenant Andrea Papa.
The Lieutenant said they even felt sorry for the man and offered him some water.
Brueckner was extradited to Germany where he was also found guilty last year for raping a 72-year-old American woman in Portugal in 2005 and given seven years.
_______________________________________________________________
Now that Brueckner is being investigated in the McCann case his activities in Italy before his arrest are being looked at.
However, it is difficult to do this because there is no record of when he entered Italy or what he did there.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8395677/Italian-police-set-trap-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-Christian-Brueckner.html
-
Why won't you accept the obvious from various photos, videos and reports. Those curtains are very cheap and flimsy. The nets are flimsy too.
Why are you unable to accept official weather records that state it was a gusty evening. Several different weather stations in the region have given their readings for that evening and YOU will have read them without doubt. They have ben posted often enough
Gusts of around 20mph were recorded that evening.
Dunno whether the reports are still there
Yes...they're all there.
-
The abduction theory is not logical or plausible in my opinion and this case has nothing in common with the Lamplugh case.
Two Police forces are investigating abduction, but you know better.
-
Two Police forces are investigating abduction, but you know better.
Therein possibly lies why its still not been solved.
-
(&^&
Therein possibly lies why its still not been solved.
(&^&
-
Two Police forces are investigating abduction, but you know better.
I don't know why Operation Grange choose to investigate only one possible crime and neither do you. Could they be wrong? In my opinion they could because there is no definitive evidence that an abduction took place imo. Hopefully they didn't base their thesis on the fact that Madeleine wasn't old enough to run away and start a new life. That would be a very flimsy reason on which to base an assumption that she was abducted.
-
I don't know why Operation Grange choose to investigate only one possible crime and neither do you. Could they be wrong? In my opinion they could because there is no definitive evidence that an abduction took place imo. Hopefully they didn't base their thesis on the fact that Madeleine wasn't old enough to run away and start a new life. That would be a very flimsy reason on which to base an assumption that she was abducted.
Bottom line is that the Met failed to progress any criminal proceedings in the Madeleine McCann case despite all their hoohah and bravo.
-
I don't know why Operation Grange choose to investigate only one possible crime and neither do you. Could they be wrong? In my opinion they could because there is no definitive evidence that an abduction took place imo. Hopefully they didn't base their thesis on the fact that Madeleine wasn't old enough to run away and start a new life. That would be a very flimsy reason on which to base an assumption that she was abducted.
Please don’t be silly, thank you.
-
Bottom line is that the Met failed to progress any criminal proceedings in the Madeleine McCann case despite all their hoohah and bravo.
Given the lack of evidence, the time which had elapsed since the crime was committed and the difficulties of investigating in another country it's hardly surprising, is it? What is surprising is that people still have faith in such a doomed (imo) project.
-
Given the lack of evidence, the time which had elapsed since the crime was committed and the difficulties of investigating in another country it's hardly surprising, is it? What is surprising is that people still have faith in such a doomed (imo) project.
You are mistaken... I dont expect SY to be abble to solve the case due to the poor first investigation . Plus a stranger abduction is a notoriously difficult case to solve
I think it was clear that the best chance the case had got of being solved was if someone knew something and talked and gave the investigation some information.
I think there is a high probability that the Germans will sove the case based on what Wolters has said.
Whats odd to me is how some have faith in amaral who clearly didnt understand the evidence but no faith in Wolters
-
You are mistaken... I dont expect SY to be abble to solve the case due to the poor first investigation . Plus a stranger abduction is a notoriously difficult case to solve
I think it was clear that the best chance the case had got of being solved was if someone knew something and talked and gave the investigation some information.
I think there is a high probability that the Germans will sove the case based on what Wolters has said.
Whats odd to me is how some have faith in amaral who clearly didnt understand the evidence but no faith in Wolters
Par for the course. Some persons desperately want The McCanns to be culpable. No other explanation will do for them.
Don't ask me why. I have no idea, other than a sickness of mind.
-
You are mistaken... I dont expect SY to be abble to solve the case due to the poor first investigation . Plus a stranger abduction is a notoriously difficult case to solve
I think it was clear that the best chance the case had got of being solved was if someone knew something and talked and gave the investigation some information.
I think there is a high probability that the Germans will sove the case based on what Wolters has said.
Whats odd to me is how some have faith in amaral who clearly didnt understand the evidence but no faith in Wolters
SY made no promises, to be fair, but the only evidence they had was that collected by the first investigation plus a lot of nonsense from private investigators with no track record of success in such cases.
The crux of the matter is SY's conviction that a stranger abduction was the crime to investigate, given the dearth of evidence available.
Anyone who had something to offer could have contacted the police at any time after 3rd May 2007. It's odd that this only happened ten years later and there seemed to be no reason why it was withheld for so long.
-
SY made no promises, to be fair, but the only evidence they had was that collected by the first investigation plus a lot of nonsense from private investigators with no track record of success in such cases.
The crux of the matter is SY's conviction that a stranger abduction was the crime to investigate, given the dearth of evidence available.
Anyone who had something to offer could have contacted the police at any time after 3rd May 2007. It's odd that this only happened ten years later and there seemed to be no reason why it was withheld for so long.
People with no information and no suspicion could hardly have been expected to have anything to offer.
I believe it was Brueckner's extraordinary reaction to the tenth anniversary tv crime programme featuring Kate and Gerry making an appeal for news of Madeleine which alerted his companions.
His behaviour was such that they became concerned to the extent that they brought their suspicions to the police who investigated and who took it further.
I suggest to the trained professional eye of the German police the proximity between the rape committed in Praia da Luz in 2005 ~ for which Brueckner was convicted in Germany 2019 ~ and the McCann apartment must have set alarm bells ringing.
-
SY made no promises, to be fair, but the only evidence they had was that collected by the first investigation plus a lot of nonsense from private investigators with no track record of success in such cases.
The crux of the matter is SY's conviction that a stranger abduction was the crime to investigate, given the dearth of evidence available.
Anyone who had something to offer could have contacted the police at any time after 3rd May 2007. It's odd that this only happened ten years later and there seemed to be no reason why it was withheld for so long.
It happened due to a television appeal. Im sure Wolters has more than. Just that.
-
People with no information and no suspicion could hardly have been expected to have anything to offer.
I believe it was Brueckner's extraordinary reaction to the tenth anniversary tv crime programme featuring Kate and Gerry making an appeal for news of Madeleine which alerted his companions.
His behaviour was such that they became concerned to the extent that they brought their suspicions to the police who investigated and who took it further.
I suggest to the trained professional eye of the German police the proximity between the rape committed in Praia da Luz in 2005 ~ for which Brueckner was convicted in Germany 2019 ~ and the McCann apartment must have set alarm bells ringing.
Unless, of course, someone knew in 2008;
Helge Busching says he is the man who gave Brueckner's name to British police in 2017, around the 10th anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance.
Busching, 48, claims that Brueckner told him at a Spanish kite festival in 2008 that he was involved in Madeleine's abduction from Praia da Luz a year earlier.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8720485/Witness-helped-launch-Madeleine-McCann-investigation-says-Christian-Brueckner-guilty.html
-
Unless, of course, someone knew in 2008;
Helge Busching says he is the man who gave Brueckner's name to British police in 2017, around the 10th anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance.
Busching, 48, claims that Brueckner told him at a Spanish kite festival in 2008 that he was involved in Madeleine's abduction from Praia da Luz a year earlier.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8720485/Witness-helped-launch-Madeleine-McCann-investigation-says-Christian-Brueckner-guilty.html
The criminal fraternity are not really well known for volunteering information to the police are they?
When Busching finally 'came clean' in 2017 the information he gave to Scotland Yard would have been used to justify the continued Home Office funding for Madeleine's case.
You knew didn't you that there are a lot of individuals who really resent their tax pennies going to keep Madeleine's investigation continuing. Who if they had had their way - there never would have been such an investigation in the first instance.
-
The criminal fraternity are not really well known for volunteering information to the police are they?
When Busching finally 'came clean' in 2017 the information he gave to Scotland Yard would have been used to justify the continued Home Office funding for Madeleine's case.
You knew didn't you that there are a lot of individuals who really resent their tax pennies going to keep Madeleine's investigation continuing. Who if they had had their way - there never would have been such an investigation in the first instance.
Yes, please explain why I should have to pay for the McCanns child when they've never paid a penny for mine?
-
Yes, please explain why I should have to pay for the McCanns child when they've never paid a penny for mine?
Prove you've got a kid and I'll reimburse you the 20p it's cost you. Can't say fairer than that!
-
Prove you've got a kid and I'll reimburse you the 20p it's cost you. Can't say fairer than that!
No, I want my 17.5 pence reimbursed directly from the McCanns bank account.
-
No, I want my 17.5 pence reimbursed directly from the McCanns bank account.
PM me your details including name on the account and I’ll make sure this is actioned for you.
-
PM me your details including name on the account and I’ll make sure this is actioned for you.
How?
Do you know the McCanns personally?
-
PM me your details including name on the account and I’ll make sure this is actioned for you.
Can I help?
-
How?
Do you know the McCanns personally?
I’m well connected, so don’t worry about that bit. Make sure to include your full name, not just initials, ta.
-
I’m well connected, so don’t worry about that bit. Make sure to include your full name, not just initials, ta.
Don't forget date of birth. Spammy could be a minor something or other.
-
It happened due to a television appeal. Im sure Wolters has more than. Just that.
He has no body, you know as well as I do, no body conviction's are as rare as hen's teeth , in Germany.
-
How?
Do you know the McCanns personally?
I'm sure she'll know someone who does. 8(0(*
-
He has no body, you know as well as I do, no body conviction's are as rare as hen's teeth , in Germany.
Ive got a feeling hes hoping to find one
-
Ive got a feeling hes hoping to find one
He hopes Maddie is dead?
That's disgusting.
-
Ive got a feeling hes hoping to find one
He'll get no where without one imo.
-
He has no body, you know as well as I do, no body conviction's are as rare as hen's teeth , in Germany.
I wonder how the McCanns would view a murder conviction without a body ?
-
Does anyone care all that much, so long as he stays locked up for a very long time?
-
I wonder how the McCanns would view a murder conviction without a body ?
There won't be one, unless some one confesses .
-
Unless he's convicted of something new, he'll be released in a few years.
-
There won't be one, unless some one confesses .
I can't see that happening.
-
Does anyone care all that much, so long as he stays locked up for a very long time?
I don't understand this sentiment.
Brueckner hasn't raped me so I see no good reason to want him locked up.
Live & let live I say.
-
He hopes Maddie is dead?
That's disgusting.
Why? You hope she is too, does that mean you’re disgusting?
-
I can't see that happening.
Well its alleged he did and Wolters is sure its him .
-
Why? You hope she is too, does that mean you’re disgusting?
Only because that's what Eleanor wanted to hear.
-
I don't understand this sentiment.
Brueckner hasn't raped me so I see no good reason to want him locked up.
Live & let live I say.
So when he’s released you’d be quite happy for him to live next door to your mother or your sister or your little nieces, or any other female thst you care about I expect.
-
Only because that's what Eleanor wanted to hear.
no, I think you meant it.
-
So when he’s released you’d be quite happy for him to live next door to your mother or your sister or your little nieces, or any other female thst you care about I expect.
There'd be nothing I could do to prevent it so it's not worth worrying about.
-
There'd be nothing I could do to prevent it so it's not worth worrying about.
Of course there could. You could invite him to come and live with you instead.
-
According to a private group on Facebook, ‘Casa Liliana’ has been demolished. (credit: GS)
-
Now would be a good time for Stephen Birch to return.
-
According to a private group on Facebook, ‘Casa Liliana’ has been demolished. (credit: GS)
Could you explain the significance of this please >
-
According to a private group on Facebook, ‘Casa Liliana’ has been demolished. (credit: GS)
How strange, especially the timing. Is there any further information as to who arranged this demolition?
-
Could you explain the significance of this please >
🤦🏻♀️
-
🤦🏻♀️
I'll take that as a no, shall I ?
-
Could you explain the significance of this please >
The house belonged to Robert Murat & he probably worked with Brueckner, since they both lived in PDL, they were keeping abducted children in the basement IMO, time to destroy the evidence before Wolters gets there.
-
The house belonged to Robert Murat & he probably worked with Brueckner, since they both lived in PDL, they were keeping abducted children in the basement IMO, time to destroy the evidence before Wolters gets there.
Right. Gotcha.
So owner decides to re-develop property in tourist hot spot.
-
The house belonged to Robert Murat & he probably worked with Brueckner, since they both lived in PDL, they were keeping abducted children in the basement IMO, time to destroy the evidence before Wolters gets there.
Well he was never cleared was he?
-
Well he was never cleared was he?
Who? Murat or CB?
-
I'll take that as a no, shall I ?
Wrong. Best you familiarise yourself with emoticons.
-
Who? Murat or CB?
I was referring to Murat, but both obviously.
-
Wrong. Best you familiarise yourself with emoticons.
Your reply appeared on my screen as 3 little squares. No idea what that is supposed to signify.
-
Who? Murat or CB?
I've never understood the role of Murat, but wasn't he officially "cleared" in the same way Kate and Gerry were? Didn't he also win a court battle with the T7 which concluded there was no evidence to link him to Madeleine's demise?
-
I've never understood the role of Murat, but wasn't he officially "cleared" in the same way Kate and Gerry were? Didn't he also win a court battle with the T7 which concluded there was no evidence to link him to Madeleine's demise?
Oh dear Billy, you’ve broken a cardinal sceptic rule. You are never allowed to say that the McCanns were cleared, so if they weren’t cleared then obviously neither was Murat.
-
Oh dear Billy, you’ve broken a cardinal sceptic rule. You are never allowed to say that the McCanns were cleared, so if they weren’t cleared then obviously neither was Murat.
The double standards and hypocrisy leave me bemused. Nor am I very impressed with the abuse of what facts there are. Most of the Sceptic Comments don't even make sense anyway.
The use of The English Language is also an abuse of semantics. But my goodness me, I haven't half learned a lot.
-
The double standards and hypocrisy leave me bemused. Nor am I very impressed with the abuse of what facts there are. Most of the Sceptic Comments don't even make sense anyway.
The use of The English Language is also an abuse of semantics. But my goodness me, I haven't half learned a lot.
I particularly admired ~ "Didn't he also win a court battle with the T7 ..." A prime example of a lie and the truth just depending on the syntax.
-
I particularly admired ~ "Didn't he also win a court battle with the T7 ..." A prime example of a lie and the truth just depending on the syntax.
Yes I had to read that a few times to try and make sense of it, still not sure what Whizzy was getting at.
-
I particularly admired ~ "Didn't he also win a court battle with the T7 ..." A prime example of a lie and the truth just depending on the syntax.
And not even very clever. But you put it better than I did
-
Oh dear Billy, you’ve broken a cardinal sceptic rule. You are never allowed to say that the McCanns were cleared, so if they weren’t cleared then obviously neither was Murat.
Cleared and "cleared" have different meanings.
-
I've never understood the role of Murat, but wasn't he officially "cleared" in the same way Kate and Gerry were? Didn't he also win a court battle with the T7 which concluded there was no evidence to link him to Madeleine's demise?
He certainly won damages from someone but I can't remember who it was.
-
Cleared and "cleared" have different meanings.
Whichever definition you choose it applies both to Murat and to the McCanns.
-
He certainly won damages from someone but I can't remember who it was.
Here’s a clue - it wasn’t the Tapas 7.
-
Cleared and "cleared" have different meanings.
Really? Good heavens. I never knew that.
-
Really? Good heavens. I never knew that.
Allow me to explain: scepics believe that Murat was cleared and the McCanns were “cleared” (ie not cleared), your usual sceptic double standards.
-
I've never understood the role of Murat, but wasn't he officially "cleared" in the same way Kate and Gerry were? Didn't he also win a court battle with the T7 which concluded there was no evidence to link him to Madeleine's demise?
There was no court battle with the T7, but three of them returned to Portugal to confront him at the police station on 11th July;
RECORD OF CONFRONTATION
---- On 11 July, at 10:00, in the premises of the Department of Criminal Investigation of the Portimao Judicial Police, before me, Paulo Ferreira, Inspector, and Dr. Guilhermino Encarnacao, Deputy National Director of Judicial Police, appeared the defendant ROBERT JAMES QUERIOL EVELEIGH MURAT, already identified in the file, in order to proceed with his interrogation. Following on [prior] interrogatory work and contradictions having been seen between that which the defendant said and that of the witnesses, RACHEL MARIAMMA JEAN MAMPILLY, RUSSEL JAMES O'BRIEN, and FIONA ELAINE PAYNE, all also duly identified in the file, given that in the depositions of these people there exist clear contradictions with the answers of the defendant, this present work proceeded.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ROBERT-MURAT.htm
He later sued UK newspapers for libelling him and won significant damages.
-
There was no court battle with the T7, but three of them returned to Portugal to confront him at the police station on 11th July;
RECORD OF CONFRONTATION
---- On 11 July, at 10:00, in the premises of the Department of Criminal Investigation of the Portimao Judicial Police, before me, Paulo Ferreira, Inspector, and Dr. Guilhermino Encarnacao, Deputy National Director of Judicial Police, appeared the defendant ROBERT JAMES QUERIOL EVELEIGH MURAT, already identified in the file, in order to proceed with his interrogation. Following on [prior] interrogatory work and contradictions having been seen between that which the defendant said and that of the witnesses, RACHEL MARIAMMA JEAN MAMPILLY, RUSSEL JAMES O'BRIEN, and FIONA ELAINE PAYNE, all also duly identified in the file, given that in the depositions of these people there exist clear contradictions with the answers of the defendant, this present work proceeded.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ROBERT-MURAT.htm
He later sued UK newspapers for libelling him and won significant damages.
the reason there is a problem with agreeing if someone has been cleared is because there is no precise definition of cleared......what do possters think it means.
Was OJ cleared in his criminal trial..not guilty
Was Barry George cleared
does cleared mean innocent to some.....that is the problem
-
Allow me to explain: scepics believe that Murat was cleared and the McCanns were “cleared” (ie not cleared), your usual sceptic double standards.
Oh, I see. Could you possibly give me a Cite for your peculiar thinking?
-
the reason there is a problem with agreeing if someone has been cleared is because there is no precise definition of cleared......what do possters think it means.
Was OJ cleared in his criminal trial..not guilty
Was Barry George cleared
does cleared mean innocent to some.....that is the problem
I don't have a problem with this. If no one has been charged or convicted then there isn't a problem.
Any updates on this philosophy?
-
There is a concerted effort by a few diehard sceptics to dumb down the forum. Just check back to Anthro's post.
The Murat villa and its occupants played a prominent role in Madeleine's case so one would have expected that the information that it had been razed to the ground would have been of some interest.
But it appears that like everything which isn't focused on slurring the McCanns it is has been found more interesting to deflect from the information.
Times have moved on from short term memory regarding the Venturi effect which explains ~
Slamming of doors by a draft
The slamming of doors due to a draft, is also due to the Venturi effect.
The door gap is a constricted cross-section through which the air flows very quickly.
The air pressure in the gap between the door and the frame drops.
Around the door leaf, the air usually flows at a much lower speed.
The higher pressure on the door leaf compared to the air pressure in the gap, therefore slams the door with great force, even if the air stream flows with the opening direction of the door!
https://www.tec-science.com/mechanics/gases-and-liquids/examples-of-applications-of-the-bernoulli-effect/#Slamming_of_doors_by_a_draft
~ and we are now well and truly in the era of Prime suspect, Brueckner who I'm sure had mastered the art of raising shutters either from the outside using the control mechanism or from the inside using the control mechanism, he might have been able to use a key or might even have developed motor skills to enable him to slide an unlocked door. Who knows.
Anyway - I think that even if the demolition of Casa Liliana is an irrelevance - it is an interesting irrelevance none the less. Thanks for the information, Anthro; it has the benefit of being current.
-
There is a concerted effort by a few diehard sceptics to dumb down the forum. Just check back to Anthro's post.
The Murat villa and its occupants played a prominent role in Madeleine's case so one would have expected that the information that it had been razed to the ground would have been of some interest.
But it appears that like everything which isn't focused on slurring the McCanns it is has been found more interesting to deflect from the information.
Times have moved on from short term memory regarding the Venturi effect which explains ~
Slamming of doors by a draft
The slamming of doors due to a draft, is also due to the Venturi effect.
The door gap is a constricted cross-section through which the air flows very quickly.
The air pressure in the gap between the door and the frame drops.
Around the door leaf, the air usually flows at a much lower speed.
The higher pressure on the door leaf compared to the air pressure in the gap, therefore slams the door with great force, even if the air stream flows with the opening direction of the door!
https://www.tec-science.com/mechanics/gases-and-liquids/examples-of-applications-of-the-bernoulli-effect/#Slamming_of_doors_by_a_draft
~ and we are now well and truly in the era of Prime suspect, Brueckner who I'm sure had mastered the art of raising shutters either from the outside using the control mechanism or from the inside using the control mechanism, he might have been able to use a key or might even have developed motor skills to enable him to slide an unlocked door. Who knows.
Anyway - I think that even if the demolition of Casa Liliana is an irrelevance - it is an interesting irrelevance none the less. Thanks for the information, Anthro; it has the benefit of being current.
I have no idea why this villa has been demolished, who owns it, and what will be put in it's place. The last I heard of it was in 2015;
Jenny Murat...has put Casa Liliana up for sale. “It is very sad but the place has become a tourist attraction for all the wrong reasons,” she said. “I get people banging on my gate and someone broke in once. I don’t feel safe"...She will live with her daughter, Sammy, in Devon
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574547/Maddie-libel-detective-ruined-Retirement-retreat-seized-cover-McCann-payout
-
I have no idea why this villa has been demolished, who owns it, and what will be put in it's place. The last I heard of it was in 2015;
Jenny Murat...has put Casa Liliana up for sale. “It is very sad but the place has become a tourist attraction for all the wrong reasons,” she said. “I get people banging on my gate and someone broke in once. I don’t feel safe"...She will live with her daughter, Sammy, in Devon
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574547/Maddie-libel-detective-ruined-Retirement-retreat-seized-cover-McCann-payout
Ah, well you have it - mountain out of a molehill.
I'm sure there'll be a new 'tasteful' development in time 8(0(*
-
I have no idea why this villa has been demolished, who owns it, and what will be put in it's place. The last I heard of it was in 2015;
Jenny Murat...has put Casa Liliana up for sale. “It is very sad but the place has become a tourist attraction for all the wrong reasons,” she said. “I get people banging on my gate and someone broke in once. I don’t feel safe"...She will live with her daughter, Sammy, in Devon
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574547/Maddie-libel-detective-ruined-Retirement-retreat-seized-cover-McCann-payout
Ah, that's one less landmark on the Ghouls Tour, what a shame.
-
I have no idea why this villa has been demolished, who owns it, and what will be put in it's place. The last I heard of it was in 2015;
Jenny Murat...has put Casa Liliana up for sale. “It is very sad but the place has become a tourist attraction for all the wrong reasons,” she said. “I get people banging on my gate and someone broke in once. I don’t feel safe"...She will live with her daughter, Sammy, in Devon
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574547/Maddie-libel-detective-ruined-Retirement-retreat-seized-cover-McCann-payout
Yes ... I remember the "break in" and I remember Mrs Murat's decision to sell. But it doesn't stop me from being intrigued by news of the demolition.
-
Ah, well you have it - mountain out of a molehill.
I'm sure there'll be a new 'tasteful' development in time 8(0(*
Probably a block of flats. And why not? Robert Murat will never live there again. Or even his mother.
I personally would never have gone to Praia da Luz because it is frightfully down market.
And Yes, I do know what I am talking about.
-
Probably a block of flats. And why not? Robert Murat will never live there again. Or even his mother.
I personally would never have gone to Praia da Luz because it is frightfully down market.
And Yes, I do know what I am talking about.
That was my impression as well, which why I was surprised by the sort of people it attracted - ie the younger professional types
-
That was my impression as well, which why I was surprised by the sort of people it attracted - ie the younger professional types
Probably short of any serious money. Praia da Luz was pretty dreadful. Those appartments were awful.
But you probably wouldn't want to know of what I saw of Portugal. Or maybe you might. I was actually there during both Revolutions. But no one is really interested in that.
-
I know little of Portugal beyond it being England's oldest ally and being the jumping-off point for Wellington's campaigns against the French
-
I know little of Portugal beyond it being England's oldest ally and being the jumping-off point for Wellington's campaigns against the French
I might have to look into that. But I am personally more aware of Salazar and what he did to future generations.
Unfortunately Salazar left a mess of potage. But then most Dictators do. It takes a while to get over this. And Portugal hasn't quite managed it yet.
-
Probably a block of flats. And why not? Robert Murat will never live there again. Or even his mother.
I personally would never have gone to Praia da Luz because it is frightfully down market.
And Yes, I do know what I am talking about.
A down market location is one which attracts lower income consumers. I think Praia da Luz was a bit better than that; it seems to have attracted quite a few middle income people; doctors, lawyers, journalists and so on.
-
A down market location is one which attracts lower income consumers. I think Praia da Luz was a bit better than that; it seems to have attracted quite a few middle income people; doctors, lawyers, journalists and so on.
not to mention all the paedos, drug dealers and thieves.
-
A down market location is one which attracts lower income consumers. I think Praia da Luz was a bit better than that; it seems to have attracted quite a few middle income people; doctors, lawyers, journalists and so on.
Try Val de Lobo. It's only down the road a bit.
-
not to mention all the paedos, drug dealers and thieves.
Whoops.
-
Really looking forward to my next visit.
-
not to mention all the paedos, drug dealers and thieves.
Find me a place where there are none of the above.
-
Try Val de Lobo. It's only down the road a bit.
Is that a village?
-
Find me a place where there are none of the above.
I’m sure everywhere has a least one of each, PdL seemed to have more than its fair share of them for such a small town.
-
I’m sure everywhere has a least one of each, PdL seemed to have more than its fair share of them for such a small town.
According to rumour, yes.
-
I’m sure everywhere has a least one of each, PdL seemed to have more than its fair share of them for such a small town.
It certainly is weird to think that in the "woke and wandered" theory nobody finds it odd that Madeleine should walk straight into a paedophile who grabbed her.
Were they really as prevalent as that?
-
It certainly is weird to think that in the "woke and wandered" theory nobody finds it odd that Madeleine should walk straight into a paedophile who grabbed her.
Were they really as prevalent as that?
Is it more odd than a targetted abduction? Perhaps it was Sadie's getaway driver? He must have been well pleased - no more need for the planned abduction.
-
According to a private group on Facebook, ‘Casa Liliana’ has been demolished. (credit: GS)
Picture 3 shows a 2018 V/W Caravelle with a UK licence plate parked outside the property.
ETA Are you able to find out if the 3 photographs were all taken within a few days of each other?
-
^^^
I would have thought so. The message on the gate reads roughly - "We apologize for anything caused during our work" ... and the logo is of construction company, JA Duarte & Filho - http://en.jaduartefilho.com/ (http://en.jaduartefilho.com/)
-
Is it more odd than a targetted abduction? Perhaps it was Sadie's getaway driver? He must have been well pleased - no more need for the planned abduction.
Whether an abduction was targetted depends on othe supporting facts.
A paedophile in the area who has expressed a desire to capture something small
Contacts at the OC who have inside knowledge of a child being left alone
The report that CB is claimed to have said he had a terrible job to do tomorrow
I dont know if it was targeted... But I see it as a credible possibility
-
Whether an abduction was targetted depends on othe supporting facts.
A paedophile in the area who has expressed a desire to capture something small
Contacts at the OC who have inside knowledge of a child being left alone
The report that CB is claimed to have said he had a terrible job to do tomorrow
I dont know if it was targeted... But I see it as a credible possibility
Was that desire expressed before or after 3rd May 2007?
Who witin the OC was in contact with CB and how do you know they had knowledge of a child being left alone?
A terrible job could be anything.
Those are not supporting facts, they are speculations imo.
-
Was that desire expressed before or after 3rd May 2007?
Who witin the OC was in contact with CB and how do you know they had knowledge of a child being left alone?
A terrible job could be anything.
Those are not supporting facts, they are speculations imo.
I see them as supporting facts.. I think your bias is preventing your mind being open
-
Why would abducting a child to rape be a 'terrible job' for Brueckner?
I thought he liked paedophilia?
Catching something small was something he was looking forward to, according to him.
-
I see them as supporting facts.. I think your bias is preventing your mind being open
Your opinion about what amounts to a fact differs from mine. Perhaps due to your bias?
-
'Evidence' of this kind comes down to one persons word against another.
As someone once said.
-
Your opinion about what amounts to a fact differs from mine. Perhaps due to your bias?
The professional investigators seem to agree with me re abduction
The whole of the initial inveztigation was based on fallacies and therefore dont even qualify as speculation... Yet you support that.
It all deoends whether Wolters has actual facts to support his claims... He days he does
-
The professional investigators seem to agree with me re abduction
The whole of the initial inveztigation was based on fallacies and therefore dont even qualify as speculation... Yet you support that.
It all deoends whether Wolters has actual facts to support his claims... He days he does
Who knows where the fallacies lie in this case? You dismiss the evidence gathered by the PJ, but it exists and can be examined. You can place your faith in investigators whose evidence is unknown if you so desire, but as you have pointed out; professionals can be incompetent.
-
Who knows where the fallacies lie in this case? You dismiss the evidence gathered by the PJ, but it exists and can be examined. You can place your faith in investigators whose evidence is unknown if you so desire, but as you have pointed out; professionals can be incompetent.
The evidence used by the Amaral PJ team was neither of use in finding Madeleine or to achieve his prime objective of 'nailing' her parents in line with his oft quoted theory of events.
None at all.
That is not to say that there was no evidence which could have been used to direct investigators to other areas for investigation.
Scotland Yard uncovered phone evidence which seemed to have been ignored and carried out rogatory interviews on burglars as a result.
Similarly their colleagues from the Porto PJ showed an interest in a dead former disgruntled employee of Mark Warner also as a result of checking the phone traffic of the night Madeleine vanished.
The present investigation also has evidence retrieved from a phone dump covering that period that their prime suspect's phone was in use in proximity to the McCann apartment.
So the evidence was there to be investigated at the time. No-one bothered to look for it. They were too tied into checking the McCann phone traffic instead.
-
^^^
I would have thought so. The message on the gate reads roughly - "We apologize for anything caused during our work" ... and the logo is of construction company, JA Duarte & Filho - http://en.jaduartefilho.com/ (http://en.jaduartefilho.com/)
Thank you. I wonder why the local press haven't picked up on this development, given the villa's history in Madeleine's case?
-
Picture 3 shows a 2018 V/W Caravelle with a UK licence plate parked outside the property.
ETA Are you able to find out if the 3 photographs were all taken within a few days of each other?
The poster says he took the photos last Friday, Misty.
-
The poster says he took the photos last Friday, Misty.
Thanks, Anthro; so very recent. Does the poster know if the villa changed hands as I'm intigued by the presence of that expensive V/W Caravelle?
-
Thanks, Anthro; so very recent. Does the poster know if the villa changed hands as I'm intigued by the presence of that expensive V/W Caravelle?
He doesn’t seem to know if the property was sold or not, just that it was up for sale. Ps. Some of the comments question why everything except the driveway has been demolished (?)
-
Vehicular access perhaps? Why dig up a perfectly good hard standing when it can be removed later.
-
He doesn’t seem to know if the property was sold or not, just that it was up for sale. Ps. Some of the comments question why everything except the driveway has been demolished (?)
Thanks again. The property had been up for sale for years but I do appreciate the land may be of more value to a developer than the property itself.
It was the construction of the rear driveway which concerned Stephen Birch back in 2012 and, looking at the first photos, that seems to have been removed.
-
Thank you. I wonder why the local press haven't picked up on this development, given the villa's history in Madeleine's case?
They might have... not everything is online. Then again, local news editors probably think the residents are heartily sick of hearing about the McCanns.
-
It certainly is weird to think that in the "woke and wandered" theory nobody finds it odd that Madeleine should walk straight into a paedophile who grabbed her.
Were they really as prevalent as that?
Why should it be odd? These things do happen but mercifully on very few occasions. We know that Praia da Luz was a favourite hangout for paedophiles so the chances of that occurring were unfortunately elevated.
-
Why should it be odd? These things do happen but mercifully on very few occasions. We know that Praia da Luz was a favourite hangout for paedophiles so the chances of that occurring were unfortunately elevated.
The majority of the woke and wandered cases I've read about ~ of which there are amazingly quite a few ~ the wanderer is returned unharmed.
Amazingly they all seem to lead a charmed life as far as traffic is concerned because I don't think I've read of any.
I have seen quite a few videos of a stranger abduction in progress. Sometimes thwarted by family intervention and sometimes tragically not.
But I don't recall a report of a woke and wandered child being lifted by a paedophile right on the doorstep.
The oddness is that there was for a time a huge denial of burglaries and paedophile activity taking place in the Algarve.
Therefore the fact that it is accepted as a normal occurrence by these same deniers, that the minute Madeleine stepped over the threshold a predatory paedophile lay in wait is I find a decidedly odd conclusion for them to reach.
-
The majority of the woke and wandered cases I've read about ~ of which there are amazingly quite a few ~ the wanderer is returned unharmed.
Amazingly they all seem to lead a charmed life as far as traffic is concerned because I don't think I've read of any.
I have seen quite a few videos of a stranger abduction in progress. Sometimes thwarted by family intervention and sometimes tragically not.
But I don't recall a report of a woke and wandered child being lifted by a paedophile right on the doorstep.
The oddness is that there was for a time a huge denial of burglaries and paedophile activity taking place in the Algarve.
Therefore the fact that it is accepted as a normal occurrence by these same deniers, that the minute Madeleine stepped over the threshold a predatory paedophile lay in wait is I find a decidedly odd conclusion for them to reach.
I accept your points certainly but there is a first time for everything as the saying goes and if that did indeed happen to Madeleine then she was truly a very unfortunate child.
My own view is that she was the unfortunate victim of a terrible car accident and that the driver involved initially sought medical assistance (Smith sighting) but failed. Initial remorse and wishing to do the right thing is often followed by guilt and the need to cover up. If this did happen then the man involved was the man the Smiths saw, what occurred next is anyone's guess.
-
I accept your points certainly but there is a first time for everything as the saying goes and if that did indeed happen to Madeleine then she was truly a very unfortunate child.
My own view is that she was the unfortunate victim of a terrible car accident and that the driver involved initially sought medical assistance (Smith sighting) but failed. Initial remorse and wishing to do the right thing is often followed by guilt and the need to cover up. If this did happen then the man involved was the man the Smiths saw, what occurred next is anyone's guess.
If this were the case, why carry her through the streets on foot, rather than in the car and what happened to this car if it was left near the scene of the accident while he ran through the streets ?
-
I accept your points certainly but there is a first time for everything as the saying goes and if that did indeed happen to Madeleine then she was truly a very unfortunate child.
My own view is that she was the unfortunate victim of a terrible car accident and that the driver involved initially sought medical assistance (Smith sighting) but failed. Initial remorse and wishing to do the right thing is often followed by guilt and the need to cover up. If this did happen then the man involved was the man the Smiths saw, what occurred next is anyone's guess.
There is evidence that at least one truck was being driven at speed in the area https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/britain/we-saw-speeding-truck-and-suspicious-characters-but-police-never-asked-irish-journalist-recalls-night-madeleine-mccann-disappeared-39258350.html
But there was no evidence that there had been a RTA ~ and that was something that the Portuguese police did check out.
-
If this were the case, why carry her through the streets on foot, rather than in the car and what happened to this car if it was left near the scene of the accident while he ran through the streets ?
He was only seen on foot by the Smiths and coincidentally down by the medical centre which just happened to be closed that night. Amaral sought the CCTV footage further up the road but left it too late and it was overwritten. Thus there is no evidence he walked to the town centre or drove there.
-
There is evidence that at least one truck was being driven at speed in the area https://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/britain/we-saw-speeding-truck-and-suspicious-characters-but-police-never-asked-irish-journalist-recalls-night-madeleine-mccann-disappeared-39258350.html
But there was no evidence that there had been a RTA ~ and that was something that the Portuguese police did check out.
There wouldn't necessarily be any evidence that a truck hit a child. Can happen in seconds and the offending vehicle disappear just as quick.
-
He was only seen on foot by the Smiths and coincidentally down by the medical centre which just happened to be closed that night. Amaral sought the CCTV footage further up the road but left it too late and it was overwritten. Thus there is no evidence he walked to the town centre or drove there.
But why would he park the car & then walk?
If you were in that situation, would you not drive the car right up to the door, or at least the very nearest you could get to it ?
I really think this idea of going to the medical centre with an injured child.is a non-starter.
-
EXCLUSIVE: Maddie McCann suspect moved to high-security 'German Alcatraz' prison to be watched 24/7
Christian Brueckner's lawyer did not comment on why he has been moved to a super-max German prison dubbed the Alcatraz of The North where he can be watched 24/7 - but it is believed it comes after a scuffle with guards
Christian B was identified as the prime suspect in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann
ByAdam Aspinall, in OldenburgRob Hyde
20:00, 17 Aug 2021UPDATED20:11, 17 Aug 2021
The prime suspect in the Madeleine McCann case has been moved to a new high-security prison dubbed the Alcatraz of The North.
Christian Brueckner, who German investigators believe murdered Madeleine in 2007, is now in solitary confinement at Oldenburg prison near Bremen, north west Germany.
Although the modern prison is a step up in comfort from his previous jails it is covered with CCTV cameras.
All the doors and windows within the walls are made from special reinforced safety glass so guards can keep an eye on prisoners at all times.
Escape is thought to be almost impossible at the high-tech facility which is surrounded by a 22ft wall - although one prisoner managed to flee after befriending a guard.
When contacted by The Mirror, Brueckner’s lawyer, Friedrich Fuelscher, declined to comment on why Brueckner had been transferred.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/maddie-mccann-suspect-moved-high-24780962
-
EXCLUSIVE: Maddie McCann suspect moved to high-security 'German Alcatraz' prison to be watched 24/7
Christian Brueckner's lawyer did not comment on why he has been moved to a super-max German prison dubbed the Alcatraz of The North where he can be watched 24/7 - but it is believed it comes after a scuffle with guards
Christian B was identified as the prime suspect in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann
ByAdam Aspinall, in OldenburgRob Hyde
20:00, 17 Aug 2021UPDATED20:11, 17 Aug 2021
The prime suspect in the Madeleine McCann case has been moved to a new high-security prison dubbed the Alcatraz of The North.
Christian Brueckner, who German investigators believe murdered Madeleine in 2007, is now in solitary confinement at Oldenburg prison near Bremen, north west Germany.
Although the modern prison is a step up in comfort from his previous jails it is covered with CCTV cameras.
All the doors and windows within the walls are made from special reinforced safety glass so guards can keep an eye on prisoners at all times.
Escape is thought to be almost impossible at the high-tech facility which is surrounded by a 22ft wall - although one prisoner managed to flee after befriending a guard.
When contacted by The Mirror, Brueckner’s lawyer, Friedrich Fuelscher, declined to comment on why Brueckner had been transferred.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/maddie-mccann-suspect-moved-high-24780962
Do you think if you say "prime suspect" often enough people start to believe he did it? I'm pretty sure that's how it works.
-
Do you think if you say "prime suspect" often enough people start to believe he did it? I'm pretty sure that's how it works.
He is the prime suspect, unless you can think of another term to describe him?
-
Nothing new here, move along please.Dated Nov 20.
Maddie McCann suspect 'to be moved to former Gestapo jail before interrogation'
German paedophile Christian Brueckner, who is suspected of abducting and killing Madeleine McCann, will be moved to the Wolfenbuttel or Celle maximum security prison in January, it is reported
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/maddie-mccann-suspect-to-moved-23091982
-
Nothing new here, move along please.Dated Nov 20.
Maddie McCann suspect 'to be moved to former Gestapo jail before interrogation'
German paedophile Christian Brueckner, who is suspected of abducting and killing Madeleine McCann, will be moved to the Wolfenbuttel or Celle maximum security prison in January, it is reported
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/maddie-mccann-suspect-to-moved-23091982
That’s a different prison is it not?
-
That’s a different prison is it not?
Nonsense story, unless you think there's an ascending maximal.
-
Nonsense story, unless you think there's an ascending maximal.
What’s one of them then? Are you suggesting he’s not been moved to a different prison?
-
It's just the opposite of a descending minimal.
-
It's just the opposite of a descending minimal.
Is that something to do with music?
-
Apparently there is such a thing as super-maximum prisons, perhaps this is what Barrier is objecting to? I suggest he should petition world governments to do away with this Ascending Maximal,on the grounds that it's a clear affront to his grammatical sensibilitie's (sic).
-
Nonsense story, unless you think there's an ascending maximal.
I think he may have moved address yet again. From Kiel to Braunschweig to Oldenburg .
-
I think they are trying to protect him Breuckner. They hardly want him dead.
-
I think they are trying to protect him Breuckner. They hardly want him dead.
I think it possible that someone somewhere would be prepared to pay quite a bit of money for that occurrence. He must have amassed quite a bit of information over the years which some might find to be more than an embarrassment. So he will be under close observation.
The chances even of 'suicide' or are reduced by the observation arrangements of toughened glass and no doubt CCTV. I think the intervention of a friendly guard will be next to impossible too since somebody has already done that and I doubt it will be allowed to happen again.
If they have the evidence the authorities will want him alive to face trial.
-
He sure seems to be being treated as something more than just a common or garden rapist.
-
He sure seems to be being treated as something more than just a common or garden rapist.
Heinous as any suggested crime against Madeleine may be I think investigations stretch far beyond her case.
-
I think he may have moved address yet again. From Kiel to Braunschweig to Oldenburg .
It was announced that he would be leaving Kiel, in Schleswig-Holstein for a prison in Lower Saxony when his sentence for drug offences was served. The reason was that he was then going to serve another sentence for rape and it was the Prosecutors in Braunschweig who prosecuted him for that crime. There was speculation about which prison he would be moved to but I don't remember a definite destination being reported, just speculation.
Unless there are definite reports of previous moves, it looks like Oldenburg was the prison to which he was moved from Kiel, imo.
-
It was announced that he would be leaving Kiel, in Schleswig-Holstein for a prison in Lower Saxony when his sentence for drug offences was served. The reason was that he was then going to serve another sentence for rape and it was the Prosecutors in Braunschweig who prosecuted him for that crime. There was speculation about which prison he would be moved to but I don't remember a definite destination being reported, just speculation.
Unless there are definite reports of previous moves, it looks like Oldenburg was the prison to which he was moved from Kiel, imo.
It would appear he has been moved 3 times
"he fell and broke his ribs in a scuffle with guards at the grim Wolfenbüttel prison near Braunschweig.
Previously he was held in Kiel but was reportedly unhappy because he was bullied by other inmates for his alleged link to the McCann case".
ETA: I think the scuffle incident was at a temproary holding cell so not somewhere he was incarcerated for any length of time.
-
It would appear he has been moved 3 times
"he fell and broke his ribs in a scuffle with guards at the grim Wolfenbüttel prison near Braunschweig.
Previously he was held in Kiel but was reportedly unhappy because he was bullied by other inmates for his alleged link to the McCann case".
Protect him at whatever the cost, please. I want him to serve every minute of the sentences of which he has been convicted.
-
The "latest" news has CB transferred to Oldenburg, he's already there, none story, still it gives succour to some to believe its new..
Dated June.
Brueckner is serving a seven-year prison sentence in Oldenburg,
https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-breaks-silence-in-prison-letter/news-story/81b719811193aa3f9f55ab5cdef4591a
-
It would appear he has been moved 3 times
"he fell and broke his ribs in a scuffle with guards at the grim Wolfenbüttel prison near Braunschweig.
Previously he was held in Kiel but was reportedly unhappy because he was bullied by other inmates for his alleged link to the McCann case".
ETA: I think the scuffle incident was at a temproary holding cell so not somewhere he was incarcerated for any length of time.
I have seen reports of broken ribs when he was brought to court in Braunschweig (?) for a parole hearing. Did he have other broken ribs in a prison? I've seen no reports of that.
-
I have seen reports of broken ribs when he was brought to court in Braunschweig (?) for a parole hearing. Did he have other broken ribs in a prison? I've seen no reports of that.
I didn’t say he had other broken ribs.
-
The "latest" news has CB transferred to Oldenburg, he's already there, none story, still it gives succour to some to believe its new..
Dated June.
https://www.news.com.au/world/europe/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-breaks-silence-in-prison-letter/news-story/81b719811193aa3f9f55ab5cdef4591a
Yeah, I’m totally succored by this news, it’s really the most important news I’ve read all month.
-
I didn’t say he had other broken ribs.
The article did.
-
A good article quoting a Journalist turned Professor Jon Silverman. In particular;
“We can speculate for as long as we like – and goodness knows over 13 years there have been so many sightings and tip-offs and false leads – but just because this man is a convicted sex offender and committed burglaries in the Algarve area around the time that she was taken, and the fact that he reportedly said something in a bar in Germany in 2017 which suggested he had some intimate knowledge of Madeleine's disappearance, all these things still remain circumstantial until proven otherwise.
“This is the first time in these 13 long years that the focus has been on one specific individual and this man’s criminal profile certainly matches the sort of person who is thought to have taken Madeleine McCann, so all these circumstantial facts give added strength to the case.
“But I should say that we need to be cautious because there is clearly no conclusive forensic scientific or DNA evidence that places Madeleine in either of his two vehicles that we've heard about, otherwise this man – Christian B – would have already been charged.
“This is the first time in these 13 long years that the focus has been on one specific individual and this man’s criminal profile certainly matches the sort of person who is thought to have taken Madeleine McCann, so all these circumstantial facts give added strength to the case.
“But I should say that we need to be cautious because there is clearly no conclusive forensic scientific or DNA evidence that places Madeleine in either of his two vehicles that we've heard about, otherwise this man – Christian B – would have already been charged.
“The difference between the approach taken by Scotland Yard and the German prosecutor is striking. For the German authorities to say that they have evidence that Madeleine is dead whilst also admitting that they do not have a body and may not be able to charge the suspect, is both very curious and unusual, and so has re-awakened media interest in a case which may never be solved.”
https://www.beds.ac.uk/news/2020/june/be-cautious-of-new-mccann-evidence-until-charges-are-made-professor-warns/
-
Seems to me that the Germans, with the eager cooperation of the media have set the stage for the Last Act which will conclude that "Brueckner is guilty even though we can't prove it before a Court".
-
Seems to me that the Germans, with the eager cooperation of the media have set the stage for the Last Act which will conclude that "Brueckner is guilty even though we can't prove it before a Court".
Let's wait and see if the Germans can prove it in court before passing judgement. They tried and convicted Brueckner in Germany for the heinous torture and rape perpetrated in Praia da Luz.
So their record in solving cold Portuguese criminal cases and achieving justice for the victim of crime appears to be a good one.
-
The findmadeleine.com site has added the two Smith e-fits. Does anyone know when this was done?
-
The findmadeleine.com site has added the two Smith e-fits. Does anyone know when this was done?
Sorry I can't help Anthro. Someone will know because I've seen loads of complaints that allegedly they are not given the same prominence as Jane Tanner's sighting.
-
Let's wait and see if the Germans can prove it in court before passing judgement. They tried and convicted Brueckner in Germany for the heinous torture and rape perpetrated in Praia da Luz.
So their record in solving cold Portuguese criminal cases and achieving justice for the victim of crime appears to be a good one.
I'm waiting ?{)(**
-
I'm waiting ?{)(**
I hope you don't have long to wait and I hope the result is more to my liking than it could ever be for sceptic tastes.
-
Seems to me that the Germans, with the eager cooperation of the media have set the stage for the Last Act which will conclude that "Brueckner is guilty even though we can't prove it before a Court".
I wonder how Operation Grange would react to that?
-
I wonder how Operation Grange would react to that?
I reckon they'd breathe a great sigh of relief that they were off the hook.
Home Office likewise.
-
Seems to me that the Germans, with the eager cooperation of the media have set the stage for the Last Act which will conclude that "Brueckner is guilty even though we can't prove it before a Court".
Wolters has every right to say that as long as he shows the evidence its based on so that the public can evaluate it. If he does perhaps grange can then end their investigation.
-
I reckon they'd breathe a great sigh of relief that they were off the hook.
Home Office likewise.
Were they ever on the hook. Can't say I ever thought so.
-
You mean you never had any expectation of them solving the case, or at least coming up with a believable explanation for their 12 million ?
-
Wolters has every right to say that as long as he shows the evidence its based on so that the public can evaluate it. If he does perhaps grange can then end their investigation.
Will The Public be allowed to see this? Or just The Judges at any Trial?
-
Wolters has every right to say that as long as he shows the evidence its based on so that the public can evaluate it. If he does perhaps grange can then end their investigation.
I think you have as much chance of seeing Wolters' evidence as you have of seeing Operation Grange's.
-
I think you have as much chance of seeing Wolters' evidence as you have of seeing Operation Grange's.
But not for the reasons that you mean.
-
But not for the reasons that you mean.
How mysterious.
-
The findmadeleine.com site has added the two Smith e-fits. Does anyone know when this was done?
Which means he's never been identified, he's the key and always as been imo.
Also there's a grange number on the home page has that always been there ?
-
Which means he's never been identified, he's the key and always as been imo.
Also there's a grange number on the home page has that always been there ?
I think you could be right.
-
Could the Wayback machine answer those questions ?
-
How mysterious.
Not in the slightest.
-
Could the Wayback machine answer those questions ?
Good question. It probably could.
-
The findmadeleine.com site has added the two Smith e-fits. Does anyone know when this was done?
A long time ago. They were certainly on there at least a year ago.
-
EXCLUSIVE: First look inside Madeleine McCann suspect's sinister cellar 'dungeon' dug under home
The Mirror is the first newspaper to gain access to the creepy site and inspect the grim, dank cellar in convicted paedophile Christian Bruckner's former home in Germanytps://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/first-look-inside-madeleine-mccann-24798244
-
EXCLUSIVE: First look inside Madeleine McCann suspect's sinister cellar 'dungeon' dug under home
The Mirror is the first newspaper to gain access to the creepy site and inspect the grim, dank cellar in convicted paedophile Christian Bruckner's former home in Germanytps://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/first-look-inside-madeleine-mccann-24798244
That's convinced me. A grim dark cellar. Combine that with the phone mast ping in the PDL area, the car registration change, and the sick fantasies he wrote to other paedophiles and you've got a rock solid case now!! He'll be charged on Monday!!!
-
That's convinced me. A grim dark cellar. Combine that with the phone mast ping in the PDL area, the car registration change, and the sick fantasies he wrote to other paedophiles and you've got a rock solid case now!! He'll be charged on Monday!!!
I think you might just have convinced me as well.
-
That's convinced me. A grim dark cellar. Combine that with the phone mast ping in the PDL area, the car registration change, and the sick fantasies he wrote to other paedophiles and you've got a rock solid case now!! He'll be charged on Monday!!!
Don’t be silly. No one has claimed this was the missing piece of evidence needed for s conviction.
-
A good article quoting a Journalist turned Professor Jon Silverman. In particular;
“We can speculate for as long as we like – and goodness knows over 13 years there have been so many sightings and tip-offs and false leads – but just because this man is a convicted sex offender and committed burglaries in the Algarve area around the time that she was taken, and the fact that he reportedly said something in a bar in Germany in 2017 which suggested he had some intimate knowledge of Madeleine's disappearance, all these things still remain circumstantial until proven otherwise.
“This is the first time in these 13 long years that the focus has been on one specific individual and this man’s criminal profile certainly matches the sort of person who is thought to have taken Madeleine McCann, so all these circumstantial facts give added strength to the case.
“But I should say that we need to be cautious because there is clearly no conclusive forensic scientific or DNA evidence that places Madeleine in either of his two vehicles that we've heard about, otherwise this man – Christian B – would have already been charged.
“This is the first time in these 13 long years that the focus has been on one specific individual and this man’s criminal profile certainly matches the sort of person who is thought to have taken Madeleine McCann, so all these circumstantial facts give added strength to the case.
“But I should say that we need to be cautious because there is clearly no conclusive forensic scientific or DNA evidence that places Madeleine in either of his two vehicles that we've heard about, otherwise this man – Christian B – would have already been charged.
“The difference between the approach taken by Scotland Yard and the German prosecutor is striking. For the German authorities to say that they have evidence that Madeleine is dead whilst also admitting that they do not have a body and may not be able to charge the suspect, is both very curious and unusual, and so has re-awakened media interest in a case which may never be solved.”
https://www.beds.ac.uk/news/2020/june/be-cautious-of-new-mccann-evidence-until-charges-are-made-professor-warns/
I think its unlikely this man has watched the several videos featuring Wolters tthat some here have. If he hhad he might understand what the evidence might well bei
-
That's convinced me. A grim dark cellar. Combine that with the phone mast ping in the PDL area, the car registration change, and the sick fantasies he wrote to other paedophiles and you've got a rock solid case now!! He'll be charged on Monday!!!
We have known for quite some time that it was alleged that Brueckner had a fascination with Fritzl and most of us know who Doutroux is.
The fact that Brueckner was in the process of digging out a ten foot deep cellar underneath his residence is neither here nor there as far as Madeleine's case is concerned.
But in my opinion it shows his capabilities and perhaps his thought processes.
-
We have known for quite some time that it was alleged that Brueckner had a fascination with Fritzl and most of us know who Doutroux is.
The fact that Brueckner was in the process of digging out a ten foot deep cellar underneath his residence is neither here nor there as far as Madeleine's case is concerned.
But in my opinion it shows his capabilities and perhaps his thought processes.
No-one is disputing his sick intentions. That/s what makes him a good patsy imo
-
No-one is disputing his sick intentions. That/s what makes him a good patsy imo
Why would the Germans want to make him a patsy for a crime they had hitherto no interest or stake in?
-
Why would the Germans want to make him a patsy for a crime they had hitherto no interest or stake in?
they wanted more time to hold him imo.
-
they wanted more time to hold him imo.
But they have that anyway.
-
they wanted more time to hold him imo.
He's in prison for the next 6 years FGS!
-
He's in prison for the next 6 years FGS!
Indeed, now wasn't the original place of incarceration near Braunschweig which was close to the Investigators in Germany, now having been moved away from there, doesn't it seem kind of logical the BKA in or around Braunschweig don't have any intention of talking to CB any time soon about Madeleine, not withstanding concrete evidence.
-
Indeed, now wasn't the original place of incarceration near Braunschweig which was close to the Investigators in Germany, now having been moved away from there, doesn't it seem kind of logical the BKA in or around Braunschweig don't have any intention of talking to CB any time soon about Madeleine, not withstanding concrete evidence.
I hear the autobahns in Germany are quite efficient, so shouldn't be too logistically difficult to interview him when the time comes.
-
I hear the autobahns in Germany are quite efficient, so shouldn't be too logistically difficult to interview him when the time comes.
If more like, won't be long now, or maybe another Christmas will come and go, my monies on the latter.
-
No-one is disputing his sick intentions. That/s what makes him a good patsy imo
I rather think you and other sceptics have taken the lead from Amaral in downplaying the propensities of this "good patsy".
In fact so concerned was Amaral about him he lied about his appearance - even producing photoshopped images as his 'proof'.
At the moment this creature is anything but a patsy. He is the prime suspect in Madeleine McCann's disappearance and it has been officially reported that he is being investigated for other crimes.
Your use of "patsy" puts a label of your own making on you I think.
-
That's convinced me. A grim dark cellar. Combine that with the phone mast ping in the PDL area, the car registration change, and the sick fantasies he wrote to other paedophiles and you've got a rock solid case now!! He'll be charged on Monday!!!
Why would he want a soundproof cellar. did he own drums?
-
Why would he want a soundproof cellar. did he own drums?
Why indeed, he's supposed to have snatched madeleine with out a sound, there again it could all be bollox.
-
Why indeed, he's supposed to have snatched madeleine with out a sound, there again it could all be bollox.
He managed to rape and torture a woman very discretely and without trace bar one. You don't have breaking and entering as a successful part of your portfolio unless you can do it "without a sound".
-
The findmadeleine.com site has added the two Smith e-fits. Does anyone know when this was done?
According to Wayback it was between 3rd July and 1st August 2015.
-
He managed to rape and torture a woman very discretely and without trace bar one. You don't have breaking and entering as a successful part of your portfolio unless you can do it "without a sound".
It’s an established fact that you can’t open the shutters in 5A without a sound.
-
It’s an established fact that you can’t open the shutters in 5A without a sound.
No it isn't.
-
No it isn't.
It is. They were described as noisy. You can hear them on one You Tube video. It largely irrelevant anyway as the shutters as an entry point story didn’t last much longer than 48 hours imo and even the T7 don’t provide a great deal of corroboration about them being open before the alarm was raised.
-
It is. They were described as noisy. You can hear them on one You Tube video. It largely irrelevant anyway as the shutters as an entry point story didn’t last much longer than 48 hours imo and even the T7 don’t provide a great deal of corroboration about them being open before the alarm was raised.
It depends on how they were opened.
You do state some rubbish sometimes.
-
It depends on how they were opened.
You do state some rubbish sometimes.
Well enlighten me - how is it possible to open shutters without creating any sound waves?
-
Well enlighten me - how is it possible to open shutters without creating any sound waves?
I've told you once already. I'm not doing it again.
-
It is. They were described as noisy. You can hear them on one You Tube video. It largely irrelevant anyway as the shutters as an entry point story didn’t last much longer than 48 hours imo and even the T7 don’t provide a great deal of corroboration about them being open before the alarm was raised.
Noisy shutters;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3R4p2hRXvY
Corroborated by a witness;
We used to open the blinds during the day, returning to close them at night. When the blinds were [being] closed they would make much noise.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAUL_GORDON.htm
-
Noisy shutters;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3R4p2hRXvY
Corroborated by a witness;
We used to open the blinds during the day, returning to close them at night. When the blinds were [being] closed they would make much noise.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAUL_GORDON.htm
In a village where all the windows were covered by shutters it would be a non-event to hear shutters either being raised or lowered.
-
In a village where all the windows were covered by shutters it would be a non-event to hear shutters either being raised or lowered.
Not to those peacefully sleeping in the room imo.
-
Not to those peacefully sleeping in the room imo.
A pointless observation imo. The twins both slept through alot of noise and light. My own children used to sleep through firework displays virtually outside their bedroom window, what you think you would do or how you would react in a set of circumstances doesn’t hold true for every other person.
-
Not to those peacefully sleeping in the room imo.
Really? and you know this how?
-
Really? and you know this how?
It's my opinion.
-
It's my opinion.
not a particularly valid one IMO. How noisy are the shutters when opened slowly and carefully? Do you know? How much noise do they make inside a room if the windows are closed when the shutters are raised? Do you know that?
-
Noisy shutters;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3R4p2hRXvY
Corroborated by a witness;
We used to open the blinds during the day, returning to close them at night. When the blinds were [being] closed they would make much noise.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PAUL_GORDON.htm
PM was manually pulling them up, would they make that much noise if the shutters were risen from inside 5a?
-
PM was manually pulling them up, would they make that much noise if the shutters were risen from inside 5a?
I'm not an expert on these shutters, I only have experience of German wooden shutters which didn't have that metallic rattle, and, being heavier, offered more security imo.
(https://www.wooden-blinds.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/SKIRPUS-outdoor-exterior-wooden-blinds-for-historical-buildings-Kempen-1.jpg)
-
We have the same Portuguese Shutters here. And I never hear anyone pulling them up or down.
Nor did anyone hear anyone breaking into the Bar down the road back along.
-
We're reduced to arguing about opinions, which are obviously going to differ.
-
We're reduced to arguing about opinions, which are obviously going to differ.
My comment isn't Opinion. It's Fact.
-
My comment isn't Opinion. It's Fact.
I'm sure it is - for you. I expect the same is true for Portuguese residents. Not neccessarily for those unused to the sound though.
-
I'm sure it is - for you. I expect the same is true for Portuguese residents. Not neccessarily for those unused to the sound though.
Three sleeping children do you mean?
-
I'm not an expert on these shutters, I only have experience of German wooden shutters which didn't have that metallic rattle, and, being heavier, offered more security imo.
(https://www.wooden-blinds.eu/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/SKIRPUS-outdoor-exterior-wooden-blinds-for-historical-buildings-Kempen-1.jpg)
Those look exactly like the wooden venetian blinds I used to have ~ great on a particular type of window as here but I would never have thought of them as shutters.
-
Those look exactly like the wooden venetian blinds I used to have ~ great on a particular type of window as here but I would never have thought of them as shutters.
The ones pictured look a bit flimsy. Ours were very heavy; you wouldn't have been able to lift them from outside.
-
The ones pictured look a bit flimsy. Ours were very heavy; you wouldn't have been able to lift them from outside.
Mine were of course interior and being wood were certainly heavier than aluminium ones. Those illustrated are exterior mounted I think although I'm not sure what the weather would do to the 'strings'.
I would imagine that there will be few of the Portuguese type in existence now. As well as giving shade I think they would have to go for security as well.
-
Mine were of course interior and being wood were certainly heavier than aluminium ones. Those illustrated are exterior mounted I think although I'm not sure what the weather would do to the 'strings'.
I would imagine that there will be few of the Portuguese type in existence now. As well as giving shade I think they would have to go for security as well.
I think the 'strings' are made of steel, and the wood is seasoned. German efficiency of course.
-
No single abductor left 5A with Madeleine through the shuttered window. IMO, and that of others who have measured them, it's a nigh impossible task.
-
No single abductor left 5A with Madeleine through the shuttered window. IMO, and that of others who have measured them, it's a nigh impossible task.
Which laws of physics does it defy?
-
Which laws of physics does it defy?
It is hard to even make a joke of that. You can't fit a round pig through a square hole.
-
It is hard to even make a joke of that. You can't fit a round pig through a square hole.
4078 “I assumed it was quite a large window that someone would be easy, it would be easy for somebody to get in and out but that, that’s not the case.”
Reply “Well I don’t think so, I mean err a fat person wouldn’t get through put it that way.”
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm
-
It is hard to even make a joke of that. You can't fit a round pig through a square hole.
Oh Gosh. I am so glad to see you back. I don't care of what you think of it all. I bloody well missed you.
-
It is hard to even make a joke of that. You can't fit a round pig through a square hole.
You can if the round pig's circumference is small enough.
-
Which laws of physics does it defy?
[/quot
On the MS podcast series there’s an experienced, now retired, former UK detective who explains it based on the height of the window and it’s width plus factor in carrying a sleeping (or waking) 3 year old! IMO it didn’t happen!
-
Which laws of physics does it defy?
[/quot
On the MS podcast series there’s an experienced, now retired, former UK detective who explains it based on the height of the window and it’s width plus factor in carrying a sleeping (or waking) 3 year old! IMO it didn’t happen!
Is that Peter Mac by any chance?
-
4078 “I assumed it was quite a large window that someone would be easy, it would be easy for somebody to get in and out but that, that’s not the case.”
Reply “Well I don’t think so, I mean err a fat person wouldn’t get through put it that way.”
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/zzrebelo2d.jpg.w300h156.jpg)
Paulo Rebelo opens the window to Maddie's bedroom(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/zzrebelo3d.jpg.w300h156.jpg)
An officer attempts to enter the apartment through Maddie's bedroom window
Correio da Manha - 30 October 2007
Paulo Rebelo was yesterday for the first time at the apartment where Madeleine disappeared from, in Praia da Luz. The new coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) of Portimao led a team of six investigators who, throughout the afternoon, tested several scenarios and even made a possible reconstruction of what happened on the evening of May 3, in the apartment no. 5A of the Ocean Club.
In the company of the team members that he brought in from Lisbon - composed of two homicide inspectors, one from sexual abuse, another that is experienced in robberies and two specialists in technical analysis - Paulo Rebelo tried to find details and loose ends that may open new leads or confirm the existing ones.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id21.htm
If you are using Diane's statement to suggest the window was too small for entry or exit you obviously haven't had sight of these pictures which sort of contradict the impression you seem to be reinforcing.
There is not a burglar living or dead who would not be able to get through an aperture of that size whatever country in the world s/he was operating in.
-
4078 “I assumed it was quite a large window that someone would be easy, it would be easy for somebody to get in and out but that, that’s not the case.”
Reply “Well I don’t think so, I mean err a fat person wouldn’t get through put it that way.”
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm
Did Mrs Fenn have different sized windows in her apartment? She said she caught a burglar and he exited through the window.
-
Did Mrs Fenn have different sized windows in her apartment? She said she caught a burglar and he exited through the window.
The burglar wasn't carrying a child that was nearly four years old.
-
Did Mrs Fenn have different sized windows in her apartment? She said she caught a burglar and he exited through the window.
Yes, and Brückner’s friends call him ‘the climber’.
-
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/zzrebelo2d.jpg.w300h156.jpg)
Paulo Rebelo opens the window to Maddie's bedroom(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/zzrebelo3d.jpg.w300h156.jpg)
An officer attempts to enter the apartment through Maddie's bedroom window
Correio da Manha - 30 October 2007
Paulo Rebelo was yesterday for the first time at the apartment where Madeleine disappeared from, in Praia da Luz. The new coordinator of the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) of Portimao led a team of six investigators who, throughout the afternoon, tested several scenarios and even made a possible reconstruction of what happened on the evening of May 3, in the apartment no. 5A of the Ocean Club.
In the company of the team members that he brought in from Lisbon - composed of two homicide inspectors, one from sexual abuse, another that is experienced in robberies and two specialists in technical analysis - Paulo Rebelo tried to find details and loose ends that may open new leads or confirm the existing ones.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id21.htm
If you are using Diane's statement to suggest the window was too small for entry or exit you obviously haven't had sight of these pictures which sort of contradict the impression you seem to be reinforcing.
There is not a burglar living or dead who would not be able to get through an aperture of that size whatever country in the world s/he was operating in.
I was talking about the window as an exit point.... but thanks for the excellent link. It also states:
Jon Corner was quoted in the Daily Telegraph of 07 May 2007:
'Jon Corner, a close friend of Mrs McCann and godparent of the twins, said she telephoned him in the middle of the night distraught.
He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, 'They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.'
"They had left the apartment locked while they were having their meal, but when they went back the last time they saw the damage."
*
The shutters of all the apartments are old and heat-affected and would mark very easily if forced, yet, as can be clearly seen, there is no damage at all to the shutter in question.
This can be seen even more clearly by following this link
It's also worth observing, from the link above, that the bedroom window appears to operate in a similar way to the patio doors at the rear of the apartment. There is one fixed pane and the other pane slides behind it. This would surely make the removal of a child by this route even more difficult and time consuming for an 'abductor' who we would assume wanted to get out as quick as possible. Using the front door to escape, or the 'open' patio doors, shrouded in darkness, would surely have been a much more sensible, and less conspicuous, option.
Link to complete Daily Telegraph article quoted above
-
I was talking about the window as an exit point.... but thanks for the excellent link. It also states:
Jon Corner was quoted in the Daily Telegraph of 07 May 2007:
'Jon Corner, a close friend of Mrs McCann and godparent of the twins, said she telephoned him in the middle of the night distraught.
He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, 'They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.'
"They had left the apartment locked while they were having their meal, but when they went back the last time they saw the damage."
*
The shutters of all the apartments are old and heat-affected and would mark very easily if forced, yet, as can be clearly seen, there is no damage at all to the shutter in question.
This can be seen even more clearly by following this link
It's also worth observing, from the link above, that the bedroom window appears to operate in a similar way to the patio doors at the rear of the apartment. There is one fixed pane and the other pane slides behind it. This would surely make the removal of a child by this route even more difficult and time consuming for an 'abductor' who we would assume wanted to get out as quick as possible. Using the front door to escape, or the 'open' patio doors, shrouded in darkness, would surely have been a much more sensible, and less conspicuous, option.
Link to complete Daily Telegraph article quoted above
Philomena, Gerry's sister, still thought on 9th May that the apartment had been locked;
They were going back to check into a locked apartment, where they had left their kids sleeping, you know.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id250.htm
-
I was talking about the window as an exit point.... but thanks for the excellent link. It also states:
Jon Corner was quoted in the Daily Telegraph of 07 May 2007:
'Jon Corner, a close friend of Mrs McCann and godparent of the twins, said she telephoned him in the middle of the night distraught.
He said: "She just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, 'They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.'
"They had left the apartment locked while they were having their meal, but when they went back the last time they saw the damage."
*
The shutters of all the apartments are old and heat-affected and would mark very easily if forced, yet, as can be clearly seen, there is no damage at all to the shutter in question.
This can be seen even more clearly by following this link
It's also worth observing, from the link above, that the bedroom window appears to operate in a similar way to the patio doors at the rear of the apartment. There is one fixed pane and the other pane slides behind it. This would surely make the removal of a child by this route even more difficult and time consuming for an 'abductor' who we would assume wanted to get out as quick as possible. Using the front door to escape, or the 'open' patio doors, shrouded in darkness, would surely have been a much more sensible, and less conspicuous, option.
Link to complete Daily Telegraph article quoted above
This bit was not written by a Telegraph journo but by some anonymous sceptic blogger.
-
This bit was not written by a Telegraph journo but by some anonymous sceptic blogger.
Torygraph journo or blogger it's still a fair point.
-
Torygraph journo or blogger it's still a fair point.
I think it demonstrates a lack of imagination personally.
-
I think it demonstrates a lack of imagination personally.
Well yes. It's a factual comment rather than an imaginary scenario.... like jemmied shutters, for example.
-
Well yes. It's a factual comment rather than an imaginary scenario.... like jemmied shutters, for example.
No, it’s an opinion piece written by someone who has never tried removing a child via a that apartment window.
-
Writing letters to the German press seems to be a growing trend amongst German convicts...
https://www.bild.de/regional/bremen/bremen-aktuell/frankreich-hat-maskenmann-martin-ney-einen-weiteren-jungen-getoetet-77442942.bild.html
"Masked man" writes a lamentable letter about his fellow inmate
08/20/2021 - 7:26 pm
Bremen / Nantes - Is "mask man" Martin Ney (50) also responsible for the death of a boy in France? Now Ney rejects the suspicion of murder in the Jonathan case in a letter to the news magazine "Spiegel". It is the first time that the serial offender expresses himself publicly.
In the letter to the “Spiegel”, the 50-year-old describes his former inmate Mario T., on whose testimony the suspicion of murder against Ney is based, as a traumatized person and asks whether his “entire testimony is completely pathological”. He had "a certain understanding that one should include him as a" suspect in the investigation "due to the undoubtedly existing similarities in the commission of the crime. However, he is innocent.
The child murderer, who killed three boys between 1992 and 2001 and was extradited to France, is strongly suspected of having killed eleven-year-old Jonathan Coulom around 17 years ago. The Nantes public prosecutor is investigating this suspicion of murder against Ney, who was serving his sentence in the Celle prison until his extradition in January.
Martin Ney is said to have kidnapped the student on the night of April 7, 2004 from a school camp in the coastal town of Saint-Brevin-les-Pins (Loire-Atlantique) in the Cher region.
A month later, the fifth grader was discovered in the north-western municipality of Guérande, 30 kilometers away: his naked body, weighted down with stones, was lying in a pond.
The Stade district court had the "mask man" who, after his arrest in 2011, confessed to the murder of Dennis Klein († 9), Dennis Rostel († 8) and Stefan Jahr († 13) and the sexual abuse of 40 other minors, for a lifetime Sentenced to imprisonment. With a dark outfit and a balaclava, Ney had appeared in country homes and tent camps, among others.
According to the European arrest warrant with which the French judiciary obtained Ney's extradition, the suspicion of murder is also based on incriminating statements by Ney's former inmate in Celle, Mario T., who had claimed in several testimony in 2017 that Ney had confessed to him in five other unsolved murders of minors, including an act in France.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm pretty convinced BKA are waiting for Ney to be returned to Germany, after his trial in France, before they question Brueckner.
-
Yes, and Brückner’s friends call him ‘the climber’.
I'm sure he would have needed climbing skills for ingress and egress via the widow which was later covered by a metal grill.
-
Which laws of physics does it defy?
On the MS podcast series there’s an experienced, now retired, former UK detective who explains it based on the height of the window and it’s width plus factor in carrying a sleeping (or waking) 3 year old! IMO it didn’t happen!
Put it this way: if the rest of the apartment was on fire and you had to remove an unconscious or sleeping child from the bedroom but the only way in or out was via the window, would the child simply have to burn to death because of the height and width factor of the window?
-
On the MS podcast series there’s an experienced, now retired, former UK detective who explains it based on the height of the window and it’s width plus factor in carrying a sleeping (or waking) 3 year old! IMO it didn’t happen!
Put it this way: if the rest of the apartment was on fire and you had to remove an unconscious or sleeping child from the bedroom but the only way in or out was via the window, would the child simply have to burn to death because of the height and width factor of the window?
There are loads of reports of children being thrown out of windows of burning buildings.
Mother throws children to safety from burning building in Istanbul
Children unhurt after falling from third floor, and woman later discharged from hospital
(https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/f54bcffae7c02fa043560ef7fb66552874c56a0e/60_0_1800_1080/master/1800.jpg?width=700&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=a5c9167c0b2a3cea1c00c148660b2da2)
It certainly can be done.
As an aside, the aperture from which these children were thrown looks only slightly wider than the 5A window when opened.
-
Well of course Madeleine could have been thrown out of the window before the abductor climbed out without leaving a trace of such an act!! I wonder why they didn't just use the unlocked door though?!!! I'd also suspect a sleeping child being thrown from a metre height would (a) wake up (b) suffer traumatic injuries and (c) leave some forensic evidence.
-
Well of course Madeleine could have been thrown out of the window before the abductor climbed out without leaving a trace of such an act!! I wonder why they didn't just use the unlocked door though?!!! I'd also suspect a sleeping child being thrown from a metre height would (a) wake up (b) suffer traumatic injuries and (c) leave some forensic evidence.
Please don't be so silly.
The debating point was made that in a desperate situation people can be forced into doing desperate things.
Absolutely no-one suggested that anyone threw Madeleine out of the window. It has been suggested that she may have been passed through the window to an accomplice waiting outside, indeed it was one of the scenarios looked at when Rebelo took over the investigation.
The truth is no-one knows knows how Madeleine left the apartment and no-one knows why the window was open and the shutter raised.
I cannot quite take in the obduracy with which you post about matters long gone past which mean nothing in relation to the present investigation and where we are today.
The investigation never stalled in the time warp of 2007 it moved on. It did so unaware of the information available to the Portuguese in 2007 which they never used. It took on a head of steam when publicity stemming from Madeleine's parents caused Brueckner to drop his guard and raise suspicions which were reported to the German police. And this is where we are at today.
Nobody is listening to sceptics and their libellous conspiracy theories - they are far more interested in where Brueckner was in 2007 and in what he was doing.
In fourteen years scepticism has moved nothing forward, the answer is in the here and now. I wish the present investigators well in their attempts to find out what happened to Madeleine. Maybe you should be thinking about why sceptics hate the very thought of that with every fibre of their being because if ever there was a mystery, that is it.
-
Well of course Madeleine could have been thrown out of the window before the abductor climbed out without leaving a trace of such an act!! I wonder why they didn't just use the unlocked door though?!!! I'd also suspect a sleeping child being thrown from a metre height would (a) wake up (b) suffer traumatic injuries and (c) leave some forensic evidence.
She wouldn’t have to have been thrown. Placed gently would do it. Onto the ground outside or into the arms of an accomplice. And yes she might have awakened but she might also have been sleepy, confused, questioing rather than screaming her head off immediately. She might have stayed asleep. She may have been reassured or been gagged. She may have whimpered or even yelled unheard as she was taken away. All possibilities, none can be ruled out and imo no one can say definitively that the window was an impossible route into or out of the apartment for a potential abductor.
-
The burglar wasn't carrying a child that was nearly four years old.
I know that. I was pointing out that a man could get through the window.
-
Someone is getting agitated...
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15940617/ex-madeleine-mccann-cop-blames-parents/
Katie Davis
11:25, 23 Aug 2021Updated: 11:54, 23 Aug 2021
THE ex-cop who led the Madeleine McCann investigation before being fired has blamed her parents for her disappearance as he claimed suspect Christian B is innocent.
Shameless Goncalo Amaral has repeatedly made unfounded allegations that Gerry and Kate McCann killed their daughter - and has now insisted he believes the kidnapping was "only simulated".
The retired detective led the initial hunt when three-year-old Madeleine went missing from the Ocean Club holiday complex in Praia da Luz, Portugal, on May 3, 2007, and made her devastated parents official suspects.
He was removed as head of the investigation after criticising British detectives and claiming they were only following leads the McCanns asked them to pursue.
Amaral has remained outspoken on the case, and has now claimed prime suspect Christian B had "nothing to do with Maddie's disappearance" in an interview with BILD for the documentary, The Maddie McCann Case.
"It wouldn't be the first time a case has been solved by constructing a suspect," he told the outlet.
"The main culprits for the disappearance are those who had custody: the parents.
"The German public prosecutor shouldn't keep saying that he has something against (Christian B) in his hand.
"Then accuse him! Take him to court! And explain to me how someone broke into the apartment without leaving fingerprints or gloves!"
Amaral has also wildly claimed he believes the crime scene was faked.
"To this day I have no doubt that a kidnapping was only simulated," he told BILD.
"The signs of this: a window that no one could tell for sure whether it was open or closed. We were told that the alleged kidnapper climbed in and out of there.
"There were fingerprints of the mother showing that she opened the window. They were the only ones that were found."
But prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters has dismissed Amaral's claims, branding them "completely irrelevant".
"We are not interested in the opinion of a Portuguese ex-police officer," he said.
"We assume that he does not have our files.
"Therefore, his conclusions are completely irrelevant."
LEGAL BATTLE
Amaral previously released a book three days after the case was closed in 2008 called The Truth Of The Lie in which he cruelly alleged the McCanns faked Maddie's abduction to cover their tracks after she had been accidentally killed.
And he later took part in a documentary for Portuguese television in which he claimed that Madeleine was dead, there had been no abduction and the McCanns had hidden her body.
Gerry and Kate launched a legal battle against the ex-cop for his slurs in book after losing a case on appeal.
They lodged a fresh case at the European Court of Human Rights in 2017.
It comes after shocking photos revealed the “secret cellar lair” suspect Christian B dug underneath his German home.
Cops swooped on the rundown house in central Germany where the convicted paedophile had lived after the current tenant raised the alarm.
Christian B had lived at the home on the outskirts of Braunschweig when he ran a kiosk in the city between 2013 and 2016.
We are not interested in the opinion of a Portuguese ex-police officer. His conclusions are completely irrelevant.
Hans Christian Wolters
While living there he is said to have illegally dug a 10ft deep pit.
It was reported last year a pal of Christian B’s had claimed he wanted to build a dungeon, complete with soundproof walls, “like the guy in Austria,” in a disturbing reference to the evil Josef Fritzl.
There is no evidence though that he actually followed through with the idea.
German officials are continuing to compile evidence against Christian B, who became the prime suspect in Madeleine's disappearance in June 2020.
They believe the toddler was murdered.
Christian B branded the investigation against him as “scandalous” in a letter penned from his cell in May.
In the letter he claimed the public prosecutor had “brought shame to the legal system”.
He has constantly refused to speak to the cops or investigators about Maddie’s disappearance.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The original interview with Bild is behind a paywall.
https://www.bild.de/bild-plus/news/ausland/news-ausland/vorwuerfe-vom-ex-kripochef-maddies-entfuehrung-wurde-simuliert-77460112,view=conversionToLogin.bild.html#remId=1684228635530202683%3FjsRedirec
-
But prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters has dismissed Amaral's claims, branding them "completely irrelevant".
"We are not interested in the opinion of a Portuguese ex-police officer," he said.
"We assume that he does not have our files.
"Therefore, his conclusions are completely irrelevant.
8((()*/
-
Someone is getting agitated...
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15940617/ex-madeleine-mccann-cop-blames-parents/
Katie Davis
11:25, 23 Aug 2021Updated: 11:54, 23 Aug 2021
THE ex-cop who led the Madeleine McCann investigation before being fired has blamed her parents for her disappearance as he claimed suspect Christian B is innocent.
Shameless Goncalo Amaral has repeatedly made unfounded allegations that Gerry and Kate McCann killed their daughter - and has now insisted he believes the kidnapping was "only simulated".
The retired detective led the initial hunt when three-year-old Madeleine went missing from the Ocean Club holiday complex in Praia da Luz, Portugal, on May 3, 2007, and made her devastated parents official suspects.
He was removed as head of the investigation after criticising British detectives and claiming they were only following leads the McCanns asked them to pursue.
Amaral has remained outspoken on the case, and has now claimed prime suspect Christian B had "nothing to do with Maddie's disappearance" in an interview with BILD for the documentary, The Maddie McCann Case.
"It wouldn't be the first time a case has been solved by constructing a suspect," he told the outlet.
"The main culprits for the disappearance are those who had custody: the parents.
"The German public prosecutor shouldn't keep saying that he has something against (Christian B) in his hand.
"Then accuse him! Take him to court! And explain to me how someone broke into the apartment without leaving fingerprints or gloves!"
Amaral has also wildly claimed he believes the crime scene was faked.
"To this day I have no doubt that a kidnapping was only simulated," he told BILD.
"The signs of this: a window that no one could tell for sure whether it was open or closed. We were told that the alleged kidnapper climbed in and out of there.
"There were fingerprints of the mother showing that she opened the window. They were the only ones that were found."
But prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters has dismissed Amaral's claims, branding them "completely irrelevant".
"We are not interested in the opinion of a Portuguese ex-police officer," he said.
"We assume that he does not have our files.
"Therefore, his conclusions are completely irrelevant."
LEGAL BATTLE
Amaral previously released a book three days after the case was closed in 2008 called The Truth Of The Lie in which he cruelly alleged the McCanns faked Maddie's abduction to cover their tracks after she had been accidentally killed.
And he later took part in a documentary for Portuguese television in which he claimed that Madeleine was dead, there had been no abduction and the McCanns had hidden her body.
Gerry and Kate launched a legal battle against the ex-cop for his slurs in book after losing a case on appeal.
They lodged a fresh case at the European Court of Human Rights in 2017.
It comes after shocking photos revealed the “secret cellar lair” suspect Christian B dug underneath his German home.
Cops swooped on the rundown house in central Germany where the convicted paedophile had lived after the current tenant raised the alarm.
Christian B had lived at the home on the outskirts of Braunschweig when he ran a kiosk in the city between 2013 and 2016.
We are not interested in the opinion of a Portuguese ex-police officer. His conclusions are completely irrelevant.
Hans Christian Wolters
While living there he is said to have illegally dug a 10ft deep pit.
It was reported last year a pal of Christian B’s had claimed he wanted to build a dungeon, complete with soundproof walls, “like the guy in Austria,” in a disturbing reference to the evil Josef Fritzl.
There is no evidence though that he actually followed through with the idea.
German officials are continuing to compile evidence against Christian B, who became the prime suspect in Madeleine's disappearance in June 2020.
They believe the toddler was murdered.
Christian B branded the investigation against him as “scandalous” in a letter penned from his cell in May.
In the letter he claimed the public prosecutor had “brought shame to the legal system”.
He has constantly refused to speak to the cops or investigators about Maddie’s disappearance.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The original interview with Bild is behind a paywall.
https://www.bild.de/bild-plus/news/ausland/news-ausland/vorwuerfe-vom-ex-kripochef-maddies-entfuehrung-wurde-simuliert-77460112,view=conversionToLogin.bild.html#remId=1684228635530202683%3FjsRedirec
Media should really know better by now that the ECHR case is against Portugal.
-
She wouldn’t have to have been thrown. Placed gently would do it. Onto the ground outside or into the arms of an accomplice. And yes she might have awakened but she might also have been sleepy, confused, questioing rather than screaming her head off immediately. She might have stayed asleep. She may have been reassured or been gagged. She may have whimpered or even yelled unheard as she was taken away. All possibilities, none can be ruled out and imo no one can say definitively that the window was an impossible route into or out of the apartment for a potential abductor.
I would accept possible with an accomplice but not placing her down outside from the inside by one person. Well technically it’s possible but highly unlikely imo and furthermore there was no evidence to support this scenario.
Why incidentally do you believe talk of jemmied shutters were reported by friends and family of Madeleine?
-
Someone is getting agitated...
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/15940617/ex-madeleine-mccann-cop-blames-parents/
Katie Davis
11:25, 23 Aug 2021Updated: 11:54, 23 Aug 2021
THE ex-cop who led the Madeleine McCann investigation before being fired has blamed her parents for her disappearance as he claimed suspect Christian B is innocent.
Shameless Goncalo Amaral has repeatedly made unfounded allegations that Gerry and Kate McCann killed their daughter - and has now insisted he believes the kidnapping was "only simulated".
The retired detective led the initial hunt when three-year-old Madeleine went missing from the Ocean Club holiday complex in Praia da Luz, Portugal, on May 3, 2007, and made her devastated parents official suspects.
He was removed as head of the investigation after criticising British detectives and claiming they were only following leads the McCanns asked them to pursue.
Amaral has remained outspoken on the case, and has now claimed prime suspect Christian B had "nothing to do with Maddie's disappearance" in an interview with BILD for the documentary, The Maddie McCann Case.
"It wouldn't be the first time a case has been solved by constructing a suspect," he told the outlet.
"The main culprits for the disappearance are those who had custody: the parents.
"The German public prosecutor shouldn't keep saying that he has something against (Christian B) in his hand.
"Then accuse him! Take him to court! And explain to me how someone broke into the apartment without leaving fingerprints or gloves!"
Amaral has also wildly claimed he believes the crime scene was faked.
"To this day I have no doubt that a kidnapping was only simulated," he told BILD.
"The signs of this: a window that no one could tell for sure whether it was open or closed. We were told that the alleged kidnapper climbed in and out of there.
"There were fingerprints of the mother showing that she opened the window. They were the only ones that were found."
But prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters has dismissed Amaral's claims, branding them "completely irrelevant".
"We are not interested in the opinion of a Portuguese ex-police officer," he said.
"We assume that he does not have our files.
"Therefore, his conclusions are completely irrelevant."
LEGAL BATTLE
Amaral previously released a book three days after the case was closed in 2008 called The Truth Of The Lie in which he cruelly alleged the McCanns faked Maddie's abduction to cover their tracks after she had been accidentally killed.
And he later took part in a documentary for Portuguese television in which he claimed that Madeleine was dead, there had been no abduction and the McCanns had hidden her body.
Gerry and Kate launched a legal battle against the ex-cop for his slurs in book after losing a case on appeal.
They lodged a fresh case at the European Court of Human Rights in 2017.
It comes after shocking photos revealed the “secret cellar lair” suspect Christian B dug underneath his German home.
Cops swooped on the rundown house in central Germany where the convicted paedophile had lived after the current tenant raised the alarm.
Christian B had lived at the home on the outskirts of Braunschweig when he ran a kiosk in the city between 2013 and 2016.
We are not interested in the opinion of a Portuguese ex-police officer. His conclusions are completely irrelevant.
Hans Christian Wolters
While living there he is said to have illegally dug a 10ft deep pit.
It was reported last year a pal of Christian B’s had claimed he wanted to build a dungeon, complete with soundproof walls, “like the guy in Austria,” in a disturbing reference to the evil Josef Fritzl.
There is no evidence though that he actually followed through with the idea.
German officials are continuing to compile evidence against Christian B, who became the prime suspect in Madeleine's disappearance in June 2020.
They believe the toddler was murdered.
Christian B branded the investigation against him as “scandalous” in a letter penned from his cell in May.
In the letter he claimed the public prosecutor had “brought shame to the legal system”.
He has constantly refused to speak to the cops or investigators about Maddie’s disappearance.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The original interview with Bild is behind a paywall.
https://www.bild.de/bild-plus/news/ausland/news-ausland/vorwuerfe-vom-ex-kripochef-maddies-entfuehrung-wurde-simuliert-77460112,view=conversionToLogin.bild.html#remId=1684228635530202683%3FjsRedirec
Blah blah blah! More incorrect stories and blatent speculation from the Sun.
Amaral has never alleged that they killed their daughter, and a simulated kidnapping is not a new suggestion.
Clearly Amaral isn't (as some have suggested) keeping quiet, he's quite happy to speak out still. The ball is firmly in Wolter's court to uphold his accusations of murder against CB.
-
I would accept possible with an accomplice but not placing her down outside from the inside by one person. Well technically it’s possible but highly unlikely imo and furthermore there was no evidence to support this scenario.
Why incidentally do you believe talk of jemmied shutters were reported by friends and family of Madeleine?
I don't know and I don't really care - it's entirely irrelevant IMO and almost certainly down to a misunderstanding on the part of the teller or the told when recounting events.
-
Blah blah blah! More incorrect stories and blatent speculation from the Sun.
Amaral has never alleged that they killed their daughter, and a simulated kidnapping is not a new suggestion.
Clearly Amaral isn't (as some have suggested) keeping quiet, he's quite happy to speak out still. The ball is firmly in Wolter's court to uphold his accusations of murder against CB.
He's alleged they over-sedated her which led to her accidental death - that would be manslaughter would it not?
Meaning of manslaughter in English
the crime of killing a person when the killer did not intend to do it or cannot be responsible for his or her actions:
-
You can if the round pig's circumference is small enough.
Like a piglet.
-
Blah blah blah! More incorrect stories and blatent speculation from the Sun.
Amaral has never alleged that they killed their daughter, and a simulated kidnapping is not a new suggestion.
Clearly Amaral isn't (as some have suggested) keeping quiet, he's quite happy to speak out still. The ball is firmly in Wolter's court to uphold his accusations of murder against CB.
We will all be able to hear exactly what he said on the upcoming Bild documentary.
-
Blah blah blah! More incorrect stories and blatent speculation from the Sun.
Amaral has never alleged that they killed their daughter, and a simulated kidnapping is not a new suggestion.
Clearly Amaral isn't (as some have suggested) keeping quiet, he's quite happy to speak out still. The ball is firmly in Wolter's court to uphold his accusations of murder against CB.
What is he saying... CB is a patsy and the mccanns are responsible for maddies disappearance.... Cant you see thst none of thst is libel
-
We will all be able to hear exactly what he said on the upcoming Bild documentary.
I hope the McCanns sue him all over again.
-
I hope the McCanns sue him all over again.
He may well know that if the McCanns are successful at the ECHR they can ask for the original case to be opened again.... And yet some posters think the ECHR case is nothing to do with Amaral
-
Blah blah blah! More incorrect stories and blatent speculation from the Sun.
Amaral has never alleged that they killed their daughter, and a simulated kidnapping is not a new suggestion.
Clearly Amaral isn't (as some have suggested) keeping quiet, he's quite happy to speak out still. The ball is firmly in Wolter's court to uphold his accusations of murder against CB.
Amaral has stopped accusing the parents but im not surprised you cant see it. All he says re the parents here is that the parents were responsible for her disappearance... That could be argued is true as they left the children alone
-
Amaral has stopped accusing the parents but im not surprised you cant see it. All he says re the parents here is that the parents were responsible for her disappearance... That could be argued is true as they left the children alone
He’s openly accused them of faking an abduction. I think he’s not very bright, especially when you look at the evidence he puts forward for the supposed fake abduction.
-
Madeleine McCann suspect evaded police by ‘not being at home’
June 07 2020, 12.00pm
The chief suspect in Madeleine McCann’s disappearance was not questioned by police at the time because he was not at home when detectives called, the former head of the investigation has indicated.
He had fled to the Algarve from Germany in 1995 to avoid prosecution for child abuse offences. German police began investigating Brückner over Madeleine’s disappearance in 2019 after his conviction for raping a 72-year-old American woman near Praia da Luz in 2005, roughly 20 months before Madeleine went missing.
The former detective admitted his own failings in initially treating Madeleine’s disappearance “as if something had been stolen”. “The investigation should have been more comprehensive, like a murder: securing biological traces, fibres, hair,” he said. “That was a mistake.”
Amaral, 61, told Bild that Brückner “has nothing to do with Maddie’s disappearance”. He has previously claimed that Madeleine’s parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, both 53, from Rothley, Leicestershire, were suspects.
Madeleine McCann went missing in June 2007, aged three
Madeleine McCann went missing in June 2007, aged three
ALAMY
“The German prosecutor should not keep claiming that he has something on Brückner,” he said. “Then charge him. Take him to court. And explain to me how someone broke into the flat without leaving fingerprints or traces of gloves. That way it only serves the construction, so people will say: what a monster this Brückner is.”
Yesterday Hans Christian Wolters, a German prosecutor involved in Bruckner’s case, criticised the “very time-consuming requests” for information from Portugal.
“We still do not wish to comment on Mr Amaral’s statements because we assume that [he] has no knowledge of the current state of the investigation and that his statements are therefore completely irrelevant to us,” he said.
“I do not believe there is the slightest hint of suspicion against the McCann parents. The investigations are still continuing. I do not want to give any details about exactly which investigations are currently taking place.
“Unfortunately, the investigations cannot be speeded up, in particular due to the mandatory but very time-consuming requests for legal assistance to Portugal.”
Friedrich Fülscher, Brückner’s lawyer, declined to comment, as did the McCanns.
-
A comment under the article in the Times which sums up my feelings exactly
E
Eliza D
11 MINUTES AGO
Excuse my French but Mr Amaral sounds like an absolute tit.
He is just deflecting from his own damning failings. The truth is if competent police officers had been involved from the very start I am certain this case would have been solved by now, if not back in 2007.
-
The former detective admitted his own failings in initially treating Madeleine’s disappearance “as if something had been stolen”. “The investigation should have been more comprehensive, like a murder: securing biological traces, fibres, hair,” he said. “That was a mistake.”
No mate, that wasn’t a mistake, it was professional incompetence of the highest order.
-
So he admits they fked up the forensics and then says there’s no evidence of an abduction. Dimmer than a 20 watt bulb that man IMO.
-
What is he saying... CB is a patsy and the mccanns are responsible for maddies disappearance.... Cant you see thst none of thst is libel
The case isn't even considered a noteworthy pending on the echr site with others being communicated back in 2017 being as such, there's a long wait yet imo.
Seek and you will find.
-
The case isn't even considered a noteworthy pending on the echr site with others being communicated back in 2017 being as such, there's a long wait yet imo.
Seek and you will find.
Perhaps the Portuguese are dragging their heels.. Im in no hurry
-
Perhaps the Portuguese are dragging their heels.. Im in no hurry
Time and tide wait on no one.
Wasn't there time limits on responses, but none the less, there's a backlog.
-
The former detective admitted his own failings in initially treating Madeleine’s disappearance “as if something had been stolen”. “The investigation should have been more comprehensive, like a murder: securing biological traces, fibres, hair,” he said. “That was a mistake.”
No mate, that wasn’t a mistake, it was professional incompetence of the highest order.
Interesting.. In the Susan Pillay case it was claimed she was murdered in the basement... Yet not one fibre... Nothing found. Havent heard the sceptics claiming it didnt happen
-
The case isn't even considered a noteworthy pending on the echr site with others being communicated back in 2017 being as such, there's a long wait yet imo.
Seek and you will find.
The one thing that Amaral is pretty good at is keeping his nose to the ground in the interest of self preservation.
Just as he continued to mouth off to rubbish the German investigation when the realisation hit him that he should be feeling a bit hot under the collar as his incompetence is gone over one more time..
Remember the lies he told.
I think he's got wind of the ECHR beginning to move and he is irrelevantly getting his oar in first. Wonder how much he was paid for his irrelevant role in the documentary as he sees his cash cow hightailing it out of his field.
Watch the ECHR space.
I don't think it can be long now before he will be relevant yet again - briefly - and probably for the last time.
-
Time and tide wait on no one.
Wasn't there time limits on responses, but none the less, there's a backlog.
There are time limits on responses and the Portuguese may be taking advantages of every one. The dispute is described as covered by existing case law... If thats the case and the Portuguese are in the clear then imo it would have been thrown out by now
-
I don't know if there is current relevance (there's that word again 🤐) to Madeleine's case.
But it did bring to mind some of the thoughts that dear Sadie brought to the debate.
I was googling for something else; and as one does came across something entirely different which interested me for a variety of reasons not least of which was the time span of his Portuguese residency.- ex-pat German
- with quasi religious connotations
- paedophile
- resident in the North but with numerous properties
- on the run from Germany
- extradited from Portugal to Germany and prosecuted
German paedophile suspect arrested in Portugal
Lisbon police said on Sunday they have arrested a German man, wanted in Germany on suspicion of paedophilia.
29 June 2008
Acting on a European arrest warrant from German police, their Portuguese counterparts “detained a German citizen suspected of paedophile practices abroad,” according to a police statement.
Police did not identify the suspect, but Portuguese newspapers named the man on Sunday as Ulrich Schulz, a 59-year-old New Age musician known by his stage name, Oliver Shanti, whose music has been included in two of the popular Buddha Bar compilations.
Police said the man had been a regular visitor to Portugal for more than five years and would be taken before a court in Lisbon, before his likely handover to German authorities.
The Portuguese news agency Lusa said the man is suspected of more than 100 pedophile crimes committed on young members of a sect he formed in Bavaria in the 1980s.
He later set up home in the village of Vila Nova de Cerveira in northern Portugal which in 1994 honored him with a medal in recognition of his contribution to the local community.
“At the time, we could not imagine that this man could be suspected of paedophile acts,” said the Vila Nova mayor, Jose Manuel Carpinteira, pointing out that the musician had donated several vehicles to local emergency services.
https://www.thelocal.de/20080629/12779/
-
The one thing that Amaral is pretty good at is keeping his nose to the ground in the interest of self preservation.
Just as he continued to mouth off to rubbish the German investigation when the realisation hit him that he should be feeling a bit hot under the collar as his incompetence is gone over one more time..
Remember the lies he told.
I think he's got wind of the ECHR beginning to move and he is irrelevantly getting his oar in first. Wonder how much he was paid for his irrelevant role in the documentary as he sees his cash cow hightailing it out of his field.
Watch the ECHR space.
I don't think it can be long now before he will be relevant yet again - briefly - and probably for the last time.
Ooh I do hope so, but you know how it is - maybe this year, maybe next.
-
Nothing new here, move along please.Dated Nov 20.
Maddie McCann suspect 'to be moved to former Gestapo jail before interrogation'
German paedophile Christian Brueckner, who is suspected of abducting and killing Madeleine McCann, will be moved to the Wolfenbuttel or Celle maximum security prison in January, it is reported
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/maddie-mccann-suspect-to-moved-23091982
I suspect that they’ve taken the long route to the new jail.
-
There are time limits on responses and the Portuguese may be taking advantages of every one. The dispute is described as covered by existing case law... If thats the case and the Portuguese are in the clear then imo it would have been thrown out by now
Well be nearing the Autumn of 2022 and you'll still be using the same argument,then the year after, then year after.....
-
I suspect that they’ve taken the long route to the new jail.
Supertramp, Take the long home.
-
Supertramp, Take the long home.
you’ve lost your way.
-
Cleo Smith trolls have slithered under a rock…for now
Jane Moore
21:47, 9 Nov 2021
THE abduction of Cleo Smith from a family camping holiday in Australia has been likened to the case of Madeleine McCann.
Except, of course, four-year-old Cleo was found safe and well after 18 days while, 14 years on, the agony still endures for Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry.
But one deeply unwelcome similarity between the two cases was the rush by online trolls to heap blame on the already distraught parents — either by implicating them in their own child’s disappearance or accusing them of not watching her closely enough.
Despite the early-on insistence of Aussie detectives that they were not treating Cleo’s mum Ellie and stepfather Jake Gliddon as suspects, online forums rapidly started filling up with conspiracy theories.
Some of these “internet sleuths” were genuinely wanting to help, some were stirring the pot of suspicion with claims that there were “discrepancies” in the couple’s account, and some were just plain nasty.
And just like the McCanns, laced through it all were the same old tropes about how they just didn’t seem distressed enough to be the parents of a missing child.
It’s called shock and paralysing terror, you dimbos.
“I just don’t get why some people, when they get a keyboard, say the most horrible and shocking things that they would never say otherwise,” says Mark McGowan, premier of Western Australia.
But one deeply unwelcome similarity between the two cases was the rush by online trolls to heap blame on the already distraught parents — either by implicating them in their own child’s disappearance or accusing them of not watching her closely enough.
Despite the early-on insistence of Aussie detectives that they were not treating Cleo’s mum Ellie and stepfather Jake Gliddon as suspects, online forums rapidly started filling up with conspiracy theories.
Some of these “internet sleuths” were genuinely wanting to help, some were stirring the pot of suspicion with claims that there were “discrepancies” in the couple’s account, and some were just plain nasty.
And just like the McCanns, laced through it all were the same old tropes about how they just didn’t seem distressed enough to be the parents of a missing child.
It’s called shock and paralysing terror, you dimbos.
“I just don’t get why some people, when they get a keyboard, say the most horrible and shocking things that they would never say otherwise,” says Mark McGowan, premier of Western Australia.
Because they can do so with impunity, that’s why.
And until everyone has to be identifiable when they post comments, innocent people like Cleo’s parents and the McCanns will continue to bear the brunt of other people’s inadequacies.
Thankfully, Cleo was eventually found alive and well at the home of her suspected abductor 45 miles away, and the tables turned on the ghastly trolls.
“Let’s hope the conspiracy theorists who have posted vile accusations against her parents now offer a public apology,” tweeted one local journalist who worked on the case.
Except they won’t, of course. They’ll just slither back under the largely anonymous rock from whence they crawled to await their next victim.
Deputy Commissioner Col Blanch said: “We cautioned early on about internet detectives.
"Police were doing their work and sifting through it. I think what’s happened here today is a strong reminder, don’t judge too quickly.”
Hear hear.
The superb Netflix documentary Don’t F*** With Cats shows that, done correctly, the modern phenomenon of internet sleuths can strike gold after meticulous research.
But this is the rare exception, rather than the rule, and the majority of conspiracy theorists go down a rabbit hole of self-importance, unsubstantiated rumour and partisan judgment.
It is unhelpful to the police and downright distressing to those whose loved ones are involved in the case.
Thankfully, Ellie and Jake have a happy ending to their terrifying ordeal. But for the McCanns, the agonising wait of knowing what happened to Maddie goes on and persistent trolls continue to spit bile in their direction.
Shame on them.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16686903/cleo-smith-trolls-slithered-under-rock/
-
^^^ain’t it the truth^^^
-
Cleo Smith trolls have slithered under a rock…for now
Jane Moore
21:47, 9 Nov 2021
THE abduction of Cleo Smith from a family camping holiday in Australia has been likened to the case of Madeleine McCann.
Except, of course, four-year-old Cleo was found safe and well after 18 days while, 14 years on, the agony still endures for Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry.
But one deeply unwelcome similarity between the two cases was the rush by online trolls to heap blame on the already distraught parents — either by implicating them in their own child’s disappearance or accusing them of not watching her closely enough.
Despite the early-on insistence of Aussie detectives that they were not treating Cleo’s mum Ellie and stepfather Jake Gliddon as suspects, online forums rapidly started filling up with conspiracy theories.
Some of these “internet sleuths” were genuinely wanting to help, some were stirring the pot of suspicion with claims that there were “discrepancies” in the couple’s account, and some were just plain nasty.
And just like the McCanns, laced through it all were the same old tropes about how they just didn’t seem distressed enough to be the parents of a missing child.
It’s called shock and paralysing terror, you dimbos.
“I just don’t get why some people, when they get a keyboard, say the most horrible and shocking things that they would never say otherwise,” says Mark McGowan, premier of Western Australia.
But one deeply unwelcome similarity between the two cases was the rush by online trolls to heap blame on the already distraught parents — either by implicating them in their own child’s disappearance or accusing them of not watching her closely enough.
Despite the early-on insistence of Aussie detectives that they were not treating Cleo’s mum Ellie and stepfather Jake Gliddon as suspects, online forums rapidly started filling up with conspiracy theories.
Some of these “internet sleuths” were genuinely wanting to help, some were stirring the pot of suspicion with claims that there were “discrepancies” in the couple’s account, and some were just plain nasty.
And just like the McCanns, laced through it all were the same old tropes about how they just didn’t seem distressed enough to be the parents of a missing child.
It’s called shock and paralysing terror, you dimbos.
“I just don’t get why some people, when they get a keyboard, say the most horrible and shocking things that they would never say otherwise,” says Mark McGowan, premier of Western Australia.
Because they can do so with impunity, that’s why.
And until everyone has to be identifiable when they post comments, innocent people like Cleo’s parents and the McCanns will continue to bear the brunt of other people’s inadequacies.
Thankfully, Cleo was eventually found alive and well at the home of her suspected abductor 45 miles away, and the tables turned on the ghastly trolls.
“Let’s hope the conspiracy theorists who have posted vile accusations against her parents now offer a public apology,” tweeted one local journalist who worked on the case.
Except they won’t, of course. They’ll just slither back under the largely anonymous rock from whence they crawled to await their next victim.
Deputy Commissioner Col Blanch said: “We cautioned early on about internet detectives.
"Police were doing their work and sifting through it. I think what’s happened here today is a strong reminder, don’t judge too quickly.”
Hear hear.
The superb Netflix documentary Don’t F*** With Cats shows that, done correctly, the modern phenomenon of internet sleuths can strike gold after meticulous research.
But this is the rare exception, rather than the rule, and the majority of conspiracy theorists go down a rabbit hole of self-importance, unsubstantiated rumour and partisan judgment.
It is unhelpful to the police and downright distressing to those whose loved ones are involved in the case.
Thankfully, Ellie and Jake have a happy ending to their terrifying ordeal. But for the McCanns, the agonising wait of knowing what happened to Maddie goes on and persistent trolls continue to spit bile in their direction.
Shame on them.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16686903/cleo-smith-trolls-slithered-under-rock/
Very well said 8@??)(
-
^^^ain’t it the truth^^^
The thing is ~ it isn't done without malice aforethought.
It is done intentionally to cause harm and untold distress and there is something terribly sick about doing that.
The family friend had been at the campsite at the time Cleo went missing and helped scour the area in search of the four-year-old.
He said her distraught parents have also had to deal with online trolls who pointed the finger at them in the days following their daughter's disappearance.
Police have ruled out both Ms Smith and Mr Gliddon as suspects and Daily Mail Australia is not suggesting they had anything to do with her disappearance.
'I know it's affecting them. Fingers crossed they aren't looking at it too much,' the friend said.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10154095/Cleo-Smith-Grim-twist-police-sort-mountain-rubbish-clues.html
Cleo's parents had to suffer this for eighteen days, which is bad and bad enough. They enjoyed the absolute support of the police who had ruled them out as one of the first diligences performed.
Madeleine's parents have suffered this type of filth for coming up on fifteen years now and much of it was orchestrated by Amaral and his team of corrupt officers and friends.
It is not only "SHAME ON THEM" such trolling behaviour is beneath contempt.
-
Very well said 8@??)(
I agree Lace.
Many journalists have penned similar conclusions throughout but I don't think there is a true appreciation of how evil and rank this trolling is.
As well as the character assassination which has taken place of everyone who has the slightest connection to Madeleine's case, there are the deliberate and sustained attacks and campaigns with the object of disrupting and cancelling out any and all initiatives on behalf of Madeleine.
The latest being Amaral's transparent assault on the German led investigation. Quite bizarre.
-
Could Maddie McCann have been found like Cleo Smith?
7 Nov, 2021
The Telegraph's crime correspondent Martin Evans, who spent months reporting in Portugal on the Madeleine story, recalls how there was also seemingly "no strategy in place" at the inexperienced local force.
"The investigation was flawed from the very start as it was clear the police were totally out of their depth," Evans says. "They were unsure what they were even investigating for far too long – was it a missing person they were dealing with or an abduction? They had no idea."
During the Cleo investigation, a thorough and detailed land and sea search, involving helicopters and drones, was called off after a few days, leading local police, backed up by senior detectives flown in from Perth, to focus their resources solely on investigating the abduction theory.
In contrast, the Portuguese police led a chaotic, scatter-gun operation and spent weeks speculating Madeleine may have just wandered off, before slowly exploring other lines of inquiry.
Then came the extremely flawed "distractions" to the entire investigation, including the theory the McCanns had killed their own daughter and later placed her body in the boot of a hire car.
This harmful accusation, including declaring the parents "arguidos" (suspects), scuppered the chances of investigating local sex offenders and other vital lines of inquiry for some time.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/could-maddie-mccann-have-been-found-like-cleo-smith/Q3XQB5LCMZJTRI2BPDEPK22XVY/
After investigating and ruling everything else out, the Cleo police put all their resources together to concentrate on abduction.
They LOOKED for an abductor.
And guess what ~ they found one.
Not only that, they recovered Cleo safe and well while that outcome was still a possibility.
I think that is surely food for thought for every sceptic to take on board.
-
It was NOTHING like the Madeleine McCann case. Apart from a young girl went missing in the night whilst on holiday and asleep and disappeared apparently without trace, no forensics at all, only a zip left in a position the child could never have put it in (yeah, right!) Oh, and the parents didn't emote enough. And it's always the parents anyway so let's all point the finger at them straight away. And then when she turned up alive, then obviously the parents hadn't done a McCann they'd done a Matthews instead. Because one thing's for sure, judgey, sanctimonious, armchair sleuths always know best, until such a time as when their rubbish is proven to be false, then they rapidly change the subject. See the thread about the case on CMOMM for the proof of this. I'm fairly certain one of two of them STILL think (and hope) that Cleo's parents were involved somehow. Weirdos.
-
From the Cesspit (as if to prove my point perfectly)
“I'm still struggling with the concept of Kelly (or accomplice) driving all that way, picking that campsite, selecting that tent and that compartment to whisk away a little girl and take her back to within miles of her own home.
Smacks of Sharon Matthews. A family member (or partner thereof) will be involved somewhere”.
-
From the Cesspit (as if to prove my point perfectly)
“I'm still struggling with the concept of Kelly (or accomplice) driving all that way, picking that campsite, selecting that tent and that compartment to whisk away a little girl and take her back to within miles of her own home.
Smacks of Sharon Matthews. A family member (or partner thereof) will be involved somewhere”.
I think I read in a tabloid that after very gentle discussion with Cleo she seems to have indicated that there might have been a woman taking care of her while she was in the suspect's premises.
What on earth does the anonymous armchair detective mean by "driving all that way" in an Australian context? I think anyone who is familiar with the vast expanse of the continent would find that risible.
Could the police have been any clearer in stressing the absolute non-involvement of Cleo's parents. No wonder that the Amaral led police assault on Madeleine's parents has had such an effect.
Quite frankly until a few years ago I had no idea there was such stupidity being unashamedly advertised on the internet with recent events highlighting it even further.
-
Hi Brietta, I think the woman referred to is the mother of the suspect. They lived together.
-
Hi Brietta, I think the woman referred to is the mother of the suspect. They lived together.
Thanks, Anthro.
I thought his mum was dead. Obviously not.
-
Police reveal more charges may be laid in Cleo Smith case but dismiss claims a mystery woman is being investigated
https://www.news.com.au/national/western-australia/police-reveal-more-charges-could-be-laid-in-cleo-smith-case/news-story/0eb5e816fdd2322cfec63d5fc3d1d8cb
Link taken from 'Stop the Myths'
-
MADDIE MCCANN
FRIEND WHO WAS WATCHING THE MCCANN, AND HELPED THE GERMAN SUSPECT, CAN'T BE ARRESTED
Portuguese - who watched over the McCann and gave indications to the German suspect to have killed Maddie - did not commit any crime under Portuguese law.
Christian Brückner's friend who worked at the Ocean Club and who reportedly provided information about the McCann couple's routines cannot be punished.
According to the Correio da Manhã, in the light of Portuguese law, the man does not incur any sanction even if he knew that the German's goal was to rob the house where the English were.
Brückner's accomplice was Portuguese
The Portuguese and former tourist village employee revealed to authorities that he passed various information to his friend about the habits of English tourists, including Maddie's family. Brückner, who had previously been convicted of shoplifting and was referred to as sexual abuse, will have known through his friend that several tourists used to spend hours having dinner and left property in the apartments.
Leia mais em: https://www.vip.pt/maddie-mccann-amigo-que-vigiava-os-mccann-e-ajudou-o-suspeito-alemao-nao-pode-ser-preso
-
MADDIE MCCANN
FRIEND WHO WAS WATCHING THE MCCANN, AND HELPED THE GERMAN SUSPECT, CAN'T BE ARRESTED
Portuguese - who watched over the McCann and gave indications to the German suspect to have killed Maddie - did not commit any crime under Portuguese law.
Christian Brückner's friend who worked at the Ocean Club and who reportedly provided information about the McCann couple's routines cannot be punished.
According to the Correio da Manhã, in the light of Portuguese law, the man does not incur any sanction even if he knew that the German's goal was to rob the house where the English were.
Brückner's accomplice was Portuguese
The Portuguese and former tourist village employee revealed to authorities that he passed various information to his friend about the habits of English tourists, including Maddie's family. Brückner, who had previously been convicted of shoplifting and was referred to as sexual abuse, will have known through his friend that several tourists used to spend hours having dinner and left property in the apartments.
Leia mais em: https://www.vip.pt/maddie-mccann-amigo-que-vigiava-os-mccann-e-ajudou-o-suspeito-alemao-nao-pode-ser-preso
This is shocking if true.
-
This is shocking if true.
There are one or two Portuguese reports giving the same information which I've not had time to check out. I think the primary source might well emanate from the recent (confidential) tripartite meeting but I'll have to look for it.
It would explain a lot about the slow pace of the investigation.
-
This is shocking if true.
Not a new theory, but the article seems a bit iffy and waffly. I think I'll wait for confirmation.
-
MADDIE MCCANN
FRIEND WHO WAS WATCHING THE MCCANN, AND HELPED THE GERMAN SUSPECT, CAN'T BE ARRESTED
Portuguese - who watched over the McCann and gave indications to the German suspect to have killed Maddie - did not commit any crime under Portuguese law.
Christian Brückner's friend who worked at the Ocean Club and who reportedly provided information about the McCann couple's routines cannot be punished.
According to the Correio da Manhã, in the light of Portuguese law, the man does not incur any sanction even if he knew that the German's goal was to rob the house where the English were.
Brückner's accomplice was Portuguese
The Portuguese and former tourist village employee revealed to authorities that he passed various information to his friend about the habits of English tourists, including Maddie's family. Brückner, who had previously been convicted of shoplifting and was referred to as sexual abuse, will have known through his friend that several tourists used to spend hours having dinner and left property in the apartments.
Leia mais em: https://www.vip.pt/maddie-mccann-amigo-que-vigiava-os-mccann-e-ajudou-o-suspeito-alemao-nao-pode-ser-preso
This is just the sort of evidence... And more.. That Wolters could have. A statement from this friend could be useful
-
Not a new theory, but the article seems a bit iffy and waffly. I think I'll wait for confirmation.
This rumour was being circulated by Correio de Manha (quoted in the linked article) as early as June 2020, so it could be just a repeat of that.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8399409/Police-identify-crooked-hotel-worker-tipped-Madeleine-prime-suspect-Christian-Brueckner.html
-
This rumour was being circulated by Correio de Manha (quoted in the linked article) as early as June 2020, so it could be just a repeat of that.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8399409/Police-identify-crooked-hotel-worker-tipped-Madeleine-prime-suspect-Christian-Brueckner.html
there is new information in the latest report however, and thst is that this individual cannot be prosecuted which suggests that this “rumour” has legs.
-
there is new information in the latest report however, and thst is that this individual cannot be prosecuted which suggests that this “rumour” has legs.
Not sure. If it was just idle bar-room banter and the guy had no idea why CB was listening, then it probably wouldn't be a crime. If, on the other hand, he passed over documents (e.g. of hotel / restaurant reservations), then he could be considered an accomplice (although that might be difficult to prove now). In any case, if he was simply an accomplice to what he may have assumed was simple burglary, he would probably have got away with just a fine.
In any event, whether or not he was an passive accomplice in any burglaries, prescription would have run out long out.
On the other hand, assuming this guy does exist, I agree with Davel that a chat might be of interest.
So... I'm not that it does have legs yet.
-
there is new information in the latest report however, and thst is that this individual cannot be prosecuted which suggests that this “rumour” has legs.
I think the PJ have denied all knowledge of any such person, so they're unlikely to have said the person can't be prosecuted.
-
I think the PJ have denied all knowledge of any such person, so they're unlikely to have said the person can't be prosecuted.
The PJ are notorious for leaking to their contacts in the media so I don’t think we can read anything into their public denials.
-
The story of the OC friend passing on information has been circulating since at least June 2020. I don’t see how “he can’t be prosecuted” suddenly makes it a story with more substance to it.
-
The story of the OC friend passing on information has been circulating since at least June 2020. I don’t see how “he can’t be prosecuted” suddenly makes it a story with more substance to it.
It may mean it has recently been discussedat the recent meeting between the Germans and Portuguese authorities when looking at what options are available to them. Do you think the latest report was invented by CdM then? If so to what end?
-
It may mean it has recently been discussedat the recent meeting between the Germans and Portuguese authorities when looking at what options are available to them. Do you think the latest report was invented by CdM then? If so to what end?
Your first point makes sense.
I can’t comment on motives for newspaper stories but this case surely teaches us to take them all with at least a pinch of salt.
-
The PJ are notorious for leaking to their contacts in the media so I don’t think we can read anything into their public denials.
It has been alleged that the PJ leaked to the press, but not proved.
-
I think the PJ have denied all knowledge of any such person, so they're unlikely to have said the person can't be prosecuted.
Did they?
You will have a cite for that then.
-
It has been alleged that the PJ leaked to the press, but not proved.
Perhaps you can explain how information known only to the police gets into the public domain then.
-
Perhaps you can explain how information known only to the police gets into the public domain then.
In many examples the information wasn't quite correct, like Brunt's 100% DNA match. The McCann statements that a Spanish TV reporter claimed to have bore no relationship to the originals. Then there are those working with the police; translators, interpreters and so on. Not to mention family and friends of policemen who may have known snippets. Don't assume!
-
In many examples the information wasn't quite correct, like Brunt's 100% DNA match. The McCann statements that a Spanish TV reporter claimed to have bore no relationship to the originals. Then there are those working with the police; translators, interpreters and so on. Not to mention family and friends of policemen who may have known snippets. Don't assume!
Oh, is it ok if police leak to family and friends then, knowing it will likely get back to the media?
-
Oh, is it ok if police leak to family and friends then, knowing it will likely get back to the media?
There were many stories quoting sources close to the investigation or friends of the McCanns. None of that is OK, but with journalists waving payments and eavesdropping on people the main problem is the lack of ethical standards in that industry imo.
-
There were many stories quoting sources close to the investigation or friends of the McCanns. None of that is OK, but with journalists waving payments and eavesdropping on people the main problem is the lack of ethical standards in that industry imo.
The main problem in this case is also unethical policemen on the make IMO.
-
There were many stories quoting sources close to the investigation or friends of the McCanns. None of that is OK, but with journalists waving payments and eavesdropping on people the main problem is the lack of ethical standards in that industry imo.
Sandra F said Amaral leaked information and lied to her... Do you not accept that
-
Sandra F said Amaral leaked information and lied to her... Do you not accept that
It took her a lot longer than the Smiths to come forward, didn't it?
-
It took her a lot longer than the Smiths to come forward, didn't it?
Journalists protect their sources, until such a time as it is expedient to throw them under the bus, usually when it turns out just how bent they are. So it took SF a long time to get to that point but at least the penny dropped eventually.
-
In many examples the information wasn't quite correct, like Brunt's 100% DNA match. The McCann statements that a Spanish TV reporter claimed to have bore no relationship to the originals. Then there are those working with the police; translators, interpreters and so on. Not to mention family and friends of policemen who may have known snippets. Don't assume!
What was this?
-
What was this?
This is what Kate McCann was reported to have said in her statement;
"While we were having breakfast, Maddie said 'Mummy why didn't you come when we were crying last night,'" she toldpolice in a statement broadcast by Telecinco TV.
"Gerry and I spoke for a couple of minutes and agreed to keep a closer watch over the children."
https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=4634136&page=1
This is what she actually said in her statement;
"on the morning of Thursday May 3rd, Madeleine asked the interviewee why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying."
She said nothing about agreeing to keep a closer watch over the children.
-
This is what Kate McCann was reported to have said in her statement;
"While we were having breakfast, Maddie said 'Mummy why didn't you come when we were crying last night,'" she toldpolice in a statement broadcast by Telecinco TV.
"Gerry and I spoke for a couple of minutes and agreed to keep a closer watch over the children."
https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=4634136&page=1
This is what she actually said in her statement;
"on the morning of Thursday May 3rd, Madeleine asked the interviewee why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying."
She said nothing about agreeing to keep a closer watch over the children.
Could you be a bit more explicit as to how you interpret this so-called discrepancy?
-
Could you be a bit more explicit as to how you interpret this so-called discrepancy?
The journalist claimed certain things were said in the statements, but they weren't.
-
del
-
The journalist claimed certain things were said in the statements, but they weren't.
You're right that the last sentence isn't in the summary (statement) of Kate's pre-arguida interview on 6 September 2007.
Hmmm.
That must be the Nacho Abad saga. One of the very few leaks during Rebelo's time. I find it possible that it had been copied for a rainy day prior to him taking over, although that's pure speculation on my part.
Which still doesn't explain where that last sentence appeared from.
A bit of context...
The McCanns' had gone to Brussels to promote an EU-wide child kidnap alert system, and which had received quite a bit of media coverage. And, from memory, both the media and social media were still covering it over the weekend.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-missing-mccanns-interview-idUKGOR06572920080411
(April 10, 2008 appears to have been a Thursday and I can't now remember how long they stayed, nor which day they arrived.)
Over that same time frame Corte Real, Paiva and 2 others had gone to the UK to visit the FSS and listen in on some of the rogs (interestingly they didn't even stay for DP's, which was on the Friday). *
*ETA, I think I may have mixed up two trips to the UK. It wouldn't have been the trip with Corte Real, Paiva et al., to the FSS, but a different trip by Rebelo at the time of the rogs. Both tall and lanky. My bad.
On 15 April, there was this article in the Expresso.
In it, Nacho Abado affirms that he had a document to the effect of what he quoted, that the McCanns had "tacitly acknowledged" it's existence (whether he told them the entire supposed quote, or just the bit about "where were you" isn't clear).
It then mentions the fact that this "bombshell" appeared in the media the previous week (which corresponds to my recollection).
https://expresso.pt/dossies/dossiest_actualidade/dos_madeleine_mccan/jornalista-espanhol-contraria-declaracoes-da-pj-no-caso-maddie=f294306
It was hardly in the McCanns' interest to have attention diverted to that crying episode. Neither was it in Rebelo's, who needed to be seen as restoring order, including the windy PJ windows.
Could Nacho Thingy have been encouraged to add that bit? If so, hardly by the McCanns. Perhaps he just added it himself?
-
You're right that the last sentence isn't in the summary (statement) of Kate's pre-arguida interview on 6 September 2007.
Hmmm.
That must be the Nacho Abad saga. One of the very few leaks during Rebelo's time. I find it possible that it had been copied for a rainy day prior to him taking over, although that's pure speculation on my part.
Which still doesn't explain where that last sentence appeared from.
A bit of context...
The McCanns' had gone to Brussels to promote an EU-wide child kidnap alert system, and which had received quite a bit of media coverage. And, from memory, both the media and social media were still covering it over the weekend.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-missing-mccanns-interview-idUKGOR06572920080411
(April 10, 2008 appears to have been a Thursday and I can't now remember how long they stayed, nor which day they arrived.)
Over that same time frame Corte Real, Paiva and 2 others had gone to the UK to visit the FSS and listen in on some of the rogs (interestingly they didn't even stay for DP's, which was on the Friday).
On 15 April, there was this article in the Expresso.
In it, Nacho Abado affirms that he had a document to the effect of what he quoted, that the McCanns had "tacitly acknowledged" it's existence (whether he told them the entire supposed quote, or just the bit about "where were you" isn't clear).
It then mentions the fact that this "bombshell" appeared in the media the previous week (which corresponds to my recollection).
https://expresso.pt/dossies/dossiest_actualidade/dos_madeleine_mccan/jornalista-espanhol-contraria-declaracoes-da-pj-no-caso-maddie=f294306
It was hardly in the McCanns' interest to have attention diverted to that crying episode. Neither was it in Rebelo's, who needed to be seen as restoring order, including the windy PJ windows.
Could Nacho Thingy have been encouraged to add that bit? If so, hardly by the McCanns. Perhaps he just added it himself?
That's not the only bit of his story which doesn't fit with the statements, so he was either misquoting the originals or he didn't have them.
Misquoting them would have defeated his objective, which was to convince his audience that he had the statements in his possesion.
So he either defeated his own objectives or whatever documents he had were not copies of the original statements.
-
This is what Kate McCann was reported to have said in her statement;
"While we were having breakfast, Maddie said 'Mummy why didn't you come when we were crying last night,'" she toldpolice in a statement broadcast by Telecinco TV.
"Gerry and I spoke for a couple of minutes and agreed to keep a closer watch over the children."
https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=4634136&page=1
This is what she actually said in her statement;
"on the morning of Thursday May 3rd, Madeleine asked the interviewee why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying."
She said nothing about agreeing to keep a closer watch over the children.
She told that story in tv interviews I saw but said nothing about agreeing to keep a closer watch over the children .
-
Ah. Related to the above, I've just found a trace of what is now a vague memory.
Maddie: ‘Mummy, why did you let us cry?’
Thursday 10 Apr 2008 10:25 pm
Madeleine McCann asked her mother hours before her disappearance: ‘Why didn’t you come when we were crying last night?’, it was revealed.
https://metro.co.uk/2008/04/10/maddie-mummy-why-did-you-let-us-cry-82068/
As I thought I'd remembered, the leak appeared the very day they were lobbying for an EU-wide child alert in Brussels.
-
She told that story in tv interviews I saw but said nothing about agreeing to keep a closer watch over the children .
In their statements, however, both parents said;
"on the morning of the 3rd May, when Madeleine asked the witness the reason why they had not gone to her room when the twins were crying."
On 10th May Gerry changed his story;
"While they were taking breakfast MADELEINE addressed the mother and asked her ?why didn't you come last night when S*** and I were crying??."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm
In interviews Kate changed Madeleine's words to "we were crying" without specifying who "we" were.
-
That's not the only bit of his story which doesn't fit with the statements, so he was either misquoting the originals or he didn't have them.
Misquoting them would have defeated his objective, which was to convince his audience that he had the statements in his possesion.
So he either defeated his own objectives or whatever documents he had were not copies of the original statements.
Although some of it seems a bit made-up, / inaccurate, some details do refer to elements in the files (months before they were officially released.
https://metro.co.uk/2008/04/10/maddie-mummy-why-did-you-let-us-cry-82068/
Irrespective of which details are accurate or not, it's the timing that intrigues me. Why choose the very day of an appeal for a coordinated EU-wide child alert?
-
That's not the only bit of his story which doesn't fit with the statements, so he was either misquoting the originals or he didn't have them.
Misquoting them would have defeated his objective, which was to convince his audience that he had the statements in his possesion.
So he either defeated his own objectives or whatever documents he had were not copies of the original statements.
For the sake of accuracy, I corrected a bit in my post that you quoted as to who went to the UK at the time. It wouldn't have been the Corte Real trip to the FSS, but Rebelo who went for the rogs.
-
I hadn't realised (or had forgotten) that there is a long thread here on the Nacho Abad / Telecinco saga.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11196.0
-
MADDIE MCCANN
FRIEND WHO WAS WATCHING THE MCCANN, AND HELPED THE GERMAN SUSPECT, CAN'T BE ARRESTED
Portuguese - who watched over the McCann and gave indications to the German suspect to have killed Maddie - did not commit any crime under Portuguese law.
Christian Brückner's friend who worked at the Ocean Club and who reportedly provided information about the McCann couple's routines cannot be punished.
According to the Correio da Manhã, in the light of Portuguese law, the man does not incur any sanction even if he knew that the German's goal was to rob the house where the English were.
Brückner's accomplice was Portuguese
The Portuguese and former tourist village employee revealed to authorities that he passed various information to his friend about the habits of English tourists, including Maddie's family. Brückner, who had previously been convicted of shoplifting and was referred to as sexual abuse, will have known through his friend that several tourists used to spend hours having dinner and left property in the apartments.
Leia mais em: https://www.vip.pt/maddie-mccann-amigo-que-vigiava-os-mccann-e-ajudou-o-suspeito-alemao-nao-pode-ser-preso
Has there been a plea bargain of sorts entered into here? and that is why the alleged accomplice is said to be 'immune' from prosecution.
If as is said the employee had Brueckner's number in his phone he couldn't have had a leg to stand on when confronted and would have to have thought on his feet to avoid becoming the second suspect.
The information he was able to supply must have been very valuable to the investigators.
If that information is valid now - it was even more so back in 2007. The tremendously sad thing is that the 'missing link' to it was there all the time nestling away in the retrieved phone data in police hands.
Suspected of killing Maddie had accomplice at ocean club
Catherine da Eira Ballestero
jun 7, 2020
Christian Brückner received information from a former employee of the Algarve village, who revealed to him the habits of the English. I'd tell him how long it took them to have dinner and told him they had valuables in the apartments.
There is increasing news linking Christian Brückner, a 43-year-old German, to the abduction and possible murder of Madeleine McCann. After it was known that the suspect lived in the area of Praia da Luz at the time of the crime, and that he had a criminal record, it was made public that the German had an "undercover" in the Ocean Club, the Algarve village where the McCann were vacationing, along with a group of friends.
A former employee of the venture revealed to authorities that he passed on information about the habits of the English group, including Maddie's family, Christian Brückner. Already convicted previously of petty theft and referred to for sexual abuse of children, the German will have known, through his accomplice, that the various couples used to spend hours for dinner, leaving valuables in the apartments, writes the "Correio da Manhã".
The hypotheses about what happened inside the McCann apartment are several, but one of those shared by the Portuguese Judicial Police and the German authorities is that Christian Brückner entered the house to rob her when he realized the presence of the three children , Maddie and the twin brothers. Surprised by this fact, and recalling the background related to child abuse, the German will have decided to take the older one.
Although only now the authorities are considering Christian Brückner as the main suspect in the media case, the German's phone number has been in the process since 2007, due to the fact that it was one of the devices fired in the vicinity of the village a few hours before Maddie's disappearance. However, it wasn't until the suspect told a friend that he knew what happened to the English girl that the Judiciary Police made the call between the number, which the former Ocean Club employee had on his personal calendar, and the German.
https://magg.sapo.pt/atualidade/artigos/maddie-cumplice-ocean-club
-
Has there been a plea bargain of sorts entered into here? and that is why the alleged accomplice is said to be 'immune' from prosecution.
If as is said the employee had Brueckner's number in his phone he couldn't have had a leg to stand on when confronted and would have to have thought on his feet to avoid becoming the second suspect.
The information he was able to supply must have been very valuable to the investigators.
If that information is valid now - it was even more so back in 2007. The tremendously sad thing is that the 'missing link' to it was there all the time nestling away in the retrieved phone data in police hands.
Suspected of killing Maddie had accomplice at ocean club
Catherine da Eira Ballestero
jun 7, 2020
Christian Brückner received information from a former employee of the Algarve village, who revealed to him the habits of the English. I'd tell him how long it took them to have dinner and told him they had valuables in the apartments.
There is increasing news linking Christian Brückner, a 43-year-old German, to the abduction and possible murder of Madeleine McCann. After it was known that the suspect lived in the area of Praia da Luz at the time of the crime, and that he had a criminal record, it was made public that the German had an "undercover" in the Ocean Club, the Algarve village where the McCann were vacationing, along with a group of friends.
A former employee of the venture revealed to authorities that he passed on information about the habits of the English group, including Maddie's family, Christian Brückner. Already convicted previously of petty theft and referred to for sexual abuse of children, the German will have known, through his accomplice, that the various couples used to spend hours for dinner, leaving valuables in the apartments, writes the "Correio da Manhã".
The hypotheses about what happened inside the McCann apartment are several, but one of those shared by the Portuguese Judicial Police and the German authorities is that Christian Brückner entered the house to rob her when he realized the presence of the three children , Maddie and the twin brothers. Surprised by this fact, and recalling the background related to child abuse, the German will have decided to take the older one.
Although only now the authorities are considering Christian Brückner as the main suspect in the media case, the German's phone number has been in the process since 2007, due to the fact that it was one of the devices fired in the vicinity of the village a few hours before Maddie's disappearance. However, it wasn't until the suspect told a friend that he knew what happened to the English girl that the Judiciary Police made the call between the number, which the former Ocean Club employee had on his personal calendar, and the German.
https://magg.sapo.pt/atualidade/artigos/maddie-cumplice-ocean-club
All supposition and hearsay, OG had over 30 officers at one stage having the files translated yet never picked up on CB, they (OG) are either useless or there was nothing to suggest anything suspicious about CB.
-
All supposition and hearsay, OG had over 30 officers at one stage having the files translated yet never picked up on CB, they (OG) are either useless or there was nothing to suggest anything suspicious about CB.
Is Bruckner in the files then?
-
Is Bruckner in the files then?
Where did Wolters get the phone records from ?
-
Where did Wolters get the phone records from ?
No idea.
-
Is Bruckner in the files then?
If he had been it wouldn't have taken until the penny dropped amongst Brueckner's friends who contacted the police as a result for him to be checked out.
He has been checked out.
Significantly the investigators didn't rule him out. Instead they consider him to be the Prime Suspect in Madeleine's disappearance.
That should probably tell people something.
But it is nice to see that people do recognise the importance of the presumption of innocence - now all they need to do is work out why they believe it is not applicable to the McCanns.
-
If Bruckner’s number is in the files then why didn’t the PJ make more strenuous efforts to investigate him, or do sceptics believe it’s quite acceptable to rule suspects out on the strength of an unanswered knock on the door?
-
All supposition and hearsay, OG had over 30 officers at one stage having the files translated yet never picked up on CB, they (OG) are either useless or there was nothing to suggest anything suspicious about CB.
You really would have to ask the Portuguese why Brueckner didn't appear in the files. The Policia Judiciaria who knew about him but failed to follow through when they tried to contact him at the time might be able to tell you.
This is nothing to do with translations if the information was never there to be translated. It is far more to do with the incompetence of the Amaral led investigation which thought they had the answers and neglected to check out information which did not support that limited view.
-
You really would have to ask the Portuguese why Brueckner didn't appear in the files. The Policia Judiciaria who knew about him but failed to follow through when they tried to contact him at the time might be able to tell you.
This is nothing to do with translations if the information was never there to be translated. It is far more to do with the incompetence of the Amaral led investigation which thought they had the answers and neglected to check out information which did not support that limited view.
Amaral didn't want anyone else to be responsible. Mothers kill their children, Okay.
What a coup that would have been. Two dead daughters in a 7 mile distance in three years, both killed by their mothers. Accolades all the way to the top.
-
If Bruckner’s number is in the files then why didn’t the PJ make more strenuous efforts to investigate him, or do sceptics believe it’s quite acceptable to rule suspects out on the strength of an unanswered knock on the door?
Do you know how many phone numbers were included in the information from the mobile phone companies? Thousands.
"Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, who is leading the inquiry, said officers were examining a "substantial amount of data" from thousands of mobile phones thought to belong to people who were in the resort of Praia da Luz in the days just before, during and after Madeleine's disappearance."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24386130
Many, like the number attributed to Brueckner, were unregistered, so unless police knew Brueckner's number the records were of no use at all.
-
Do you know how many phone numbers were included in the information from the mobile phone companies? Thousands.
"Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, who is leading the inquiry, said officers were examining a "substantial amount of data" from thousands of mobile phones thought to belong to people who were in the resort of Praia da Luz in the days just before, during and after Madeleine's disappearance."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24386130
Many, like the number attributed to Brueckner, were unregistered, so unless police knew Brueckner's number the records were of no use at all.
I think you might find that it was the number of Breuckner's caller who was the problem.
You need to verify that Breuckner's number was unregistered.
-
Amaral didn't want anyone else to be responsible. Mothers kill their children, Okay.
What a coup that would have been. Two dead daughters in a 7 mile distance in three years, both killed by their mothers. Accolades all the way to the top.
He was an arguido in the torture of the mother of one of them. I think as a process of some twisted logic he imagined that charges laid against the other would mitigate his crime.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8490.msg512855#msg512855
Detective in McCann Case Investigated For Beating Convicted Child Murderer
Portuguese detective in McCann case accused of beating suspect in 2004 case.
By FABIOLA ANTEZANA
12 February 2009, 16:42
• 7 min read
PRAIA DA LUZ, Portugal, Sept. 26, 2007 — -- The husband of a convicted murderer has accused the Portuguese investigator spearheading the case of Madeleine McCann of beating a confession out of his wife.
Leonor Cipriano, 36, was convicted of the murder of her eight-year-old daughter Joana, who disappeared in the Algarve region in September 2004 under similar circumstances to the McCann disappearance.
In an exclusive interview, Cipriano's common-law husband, Leandro Silva, told ABC News that his wife said she was beaten repeatedly as police grilled her during a three-day long interrogation.
"'They beat it out of me', she told me, 'they beat me until I confessed,'" Silva said as he recalled his first visit to his wife about a week after police took her into custody.
"The only difference between the McCanns and us is that we don't have money," Silva said. "They have means, they have high powered attorneys that they can pay."
According to Silva, his wife told him that chief inspector Gonçalo Amaral, one of the leading detectives in the McCann case, watched as police hit her in the face and chest again and again.
Local newspapers have reported that Amaral and four other officers will be in court next month to face charges surrounding the beating allegations. But Amaral has not been suspended from his work on the McCann case.
Cipriano is currently serving a 16-year sentence for the murder of Joana who disappeared in 2004 in a town less than 15 miles from where Madeleine McCann disappeared nearly five months ago.
Joana's body has never been found. McCann, who was 3 years old when she went missing has also not been found, but the family and police still hold out hope that she is still alive.
Kate McCann and her husband, Gerry, were declared "arguido," or official suspects, last month, although under Portuguese law, the police are not allowed to divulge publicly what evidence they have. But the couple, both doctors and substantially well-off, have been allowed to leave Portugal.
Confession at All Costs Alleged
Silva said his wife retracted her statement just two days after confessing to Portuguese police, but she remains in a women's prison in Odemira, about a two-hour drive from Praia da Luz.
Joana went missing one night when her parents say she went for a short walk to the local market in her home town of Figuera, near Portimão. Cipriano was arrested and convicted, in part because of her confession, along with the discovery of some of Joana's blood, police say they found in Cipriano's home.
Maddie also disappeared just minutes from where her parents were dining at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz in May 2007.
"I knew immediately that it was the police that had done that to her," Silva said. "They wanted her to confess to a crime she did not commit."
He shakes his head back and forth saying that the police in Portugal don't work professionally.
Amaral could not be reached for comment and police refused to talk about the allegations.
"We all saw the bruises," Silva said. "My mother, my sister and me. Leonor's face was all battered and bruised, so was her chest."
"Leonor was a good person, she didn't deserve this, but then there is no justice for the poor."
Inequality Alleged Between Rich and Poor Suspects
Silva, a 41-year-old auto mechanic, said his wife is not the only member of his family to be treated roughly by Portuguese police.
Maria de Lourdes, Silva's mother, who visits her daughter-in-law regularly in prison, said she was also abused by Portuguese police in Faro in interviews conducted during the Joana investigation.
"The police in Portimão treated us really well," she told ABC News in her home near Lagos. "But the Faro police were awful. They gave us nothing to eat or drink the whole day," said the 57-year-old mother of nine. "They battered us physically and mentally."
Amaral was always present during questioning, de Lourdes said her daughter-in-law told her.
"He controlled everything," she said. "And he kept asking me: 'Did you see blood in the house?' 'I'm sure you cleaned the house with petrol to get rid of the smell.'"
"They have accused us of everything that we killed Joana, that we stabbed her, even that we sold her," de Lourdes said.
But as far as de Lourdes is concerned, the worst thing is not knowing what happened to Joana and then being blamed for her disappearance.
"How can they prove that we had anything to do with her disappearance?"
Privileged vs. Poor
"If Kate McCann were Portuguese, she would already be in jail," said de Lourdes.
The McCann's circle of friends and savvy contacts have been able to generate the kind of media attention that has made their daughter's face instantly recognizable all over the world. They have also hired top attorneys in Portugal and the U.K., as well as forensic experts to pick apart every DNA sample gathered by investigators.
The couple has also received financial backing from a British millionaire Brian Kennedy, a move that may have saved the 39-year-old doctors from having to sell their home to cover their legal defence.
Still, despite her bitterness over what she believes is her own daughter-in-laws wrongful conviction de Lourdes is convinced of Kate McCann's innocence. In fact the slightest mention of the couple brings empathy from de Lourdes.
"I don't think that that woman is capable of doing something like that to her daughter," she said. "I just don't believe it."
"The same Portuguese press that are now chasing the McCanns are the same journalists who were on my doorstep when Joana disappeared," she said.
And while she knows that she and Kate McCann come from very different worlds their situations are parallel.
"Our plight is not so different anymore," she said. "So I cannot help but feel for that woman. After all we are on the same path."
De Lourdes recalls vividly the day Joana went missing.
"I got the phone call around midnight," said de Lourdes. "My son Leandro was asking me if Joana was here with me." They then went to look for her at the cousin's house where she spent the afternoon.
"When I didn't hear from them again, I assumed they had found her," she said.
But the following morning when de Lourdes was getting ready to pick up her son to go to work, she saw her daughter in law Leonor walking down the street sobbing hysterically.
"'Joana is missing,'" she told me.
The girl's parents called police within an hour of Joana's disappearance. But according to Leandro and his mother, police did not begin searching for his daughter until 48 hours after they reported her missing.
Life After Joana
Silva remains convinced of his wife's innocence. But he is particularly bitter about Amaral, against whom he has lodged a formal complaint.
"He (Amaral) should not even be working on this (the McCanns') case," said Silva.
If the beating charges turn out to be true it will hurt the McCann investigation, according to Roy Ramm, former commander of special investigations at Scotland Yard. Ramm told ABC News: "This is not something you would expect to find in the U.K. When someone has allegations of falsifying evidence and beating a witness and these are very serious allegations -- it does not bode well for the case."
"People have to have confidence in the person leading the investigation," he added. "Otherwise the chances of a satisfactory outcome are jeopardized."
In a book entitled "The Star of Joana," former Portuguese detective Paulo Pereira Cristovão alleges how police took too long in organizing a search for the little girl.
Silva thinks his wife's beating was a simple matter of the police needing to find a suspect as well as maintaining a safe image for tourists who come to the Algarve.
He calls the accusations against her ridiculous. "She was a great mother," said Silva. "She never even hit Joana, not once even when our little girl insulted her."
Joana was not Silva's biological daughter but he insists she was still his daughter. "First they took my daughter, now the police have taken my love, my lifelong partner."
https://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3646987&page=1
-
Amaral didn't want anyone else to be responsible. Mothers kill their children, Okay.
What a coup that would have been. Two dead daughters in a 7 mile distance in three years, both killed by their mothers. Accolades all the way to the top.
Two little girls vanishing without trace in such close proximity to each other would have given rise to a "gut reaction" in most investigators that there might have been a connection between them which merited investigation.
I think that was ruled out by the circumstances surrounding the 'solving' of Joana's case meaning that Madeleine was thrown to the wolves just as Joana was before her.
-
Do you know how many phone numbers were included in the information from the mobile phone companies? Thousands.
"Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, who is leading the inquiry, said officers were examining a "substantial amount of data" from thousands of mobile phones thought to belong to people who were in the resort of Praia da Luz in the days just before, during and after Madeleine's disappearance."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24386130
Many, like the number attributed to Brueckner, were unregistered, so unless police knew Brueckner's number the records were of no use at all.
Do you have any idea how much hard work is necessary by police forces investigating the disappearance of a little child? Clearly some police forces are prepared to put in the work while others are happy to let lots of stones remain unturned.
-
He was an arguido in the torture of the mother of one of them. I think as a process of some twisted logic he imagined that charges laid against the other would mitigate his crime.
Snipped.
That reminds me of an in-depth article by a British journalist (not sure I could find it now), who'd chatted with an unnamed Portuguese one, who gave an analogy to the effect that when you lose a football match, the pressure is on to win the next one.
It stuck in my mind as, technically, he hadn't "lost" the Cipriano case.
-
Do you have any idea how much hard work is necessary by police forces investigating the disappearance of a little child? Clearly some police forces are prepared to put in the work while others are happy to let lots of stones remain unturned.
I suspect that the phone data was examined because the German investigators had a phone number they had already connected to Brueckner. That information wasn't available to the previous investigators.
-
If you want a back one on any of this when why not look at Amaral's past record.
Court Cases galore and vast sums of money that he owed even to his own family.
This was a bad man. He stole from his own brother.
Lied in Court about the beating of Leonor Cipriano and then went on two lie.
You must all be half daft if you believe him.
-
Quite a lot of the horror story for The McCanns was entirely related to Goncalo Amaral who couldn't tell the truth if you paid him. Goncalo Amaral never told the truth about anything pertaining to his own life which was pretty effing awful.
And now fourteen years later some of you still believe this absolute back side. In which case you must be as corrupt as he is.
Think about it.
-
Quite a lot of the horror story for The McCanns was entirely related to Goncalo Amaral who couldn't tell the truth if you paid him. Goncalo Amaral never told the truth about anything pertaining to his own life which was pretty effing awful.
And now fourteen years later some of you still believe this absolute back side. In which case you must be as corrupt as he is.
Think about it.
Do you think it really matters what anyone thinks ?
-
I am utterly done with this. Prove me wrong.
I will now proceed to assume that some of you have a serious problem in your own lives.
-
Do you think it really matters what anyone thinks ?
I really don't know. And nor do I care. It has never been my problem.
I sometimes left my children alone, probably for reasons that are entirely beyond you. But I won't be explaining any time soon.
-
I really don't know. And nor do I care. It has never been my problem.
I sometimes left my children alone, probably for reasons that are entirely beyond you. But I won't be explaining any time soon.
Has anybody asked you to explain? I certainly haven't as I'm not interested in you child-rearing skills.
-
Has anybody asked you to explain? I certainly haven't as I'm not interested in you child-rearing skills.
You’re not interested in anything apart from being disinterested and disparaging. IMO.
-
Has anybody asked you to explain? I certainly haven't as I'm not interested in you child-rearing skills.
I am really sorry about that because I think you hide a quite nice person.
However you only ever snipe and never actually contribute to any debate.
-
You’re not interested in anything apart from being disinterested and disparaging. IMO.
Well there you go. Nothing at all to say beyond being really unpleasant.
-
I am really sorry about that because I think you hide a quite nice person.
However you only ever snipe and never actually contribute to any debate.
I have my views.
I don't feel the need to share them and I am not interested in what yours are.
I will, however, comment as and when I wish.
-
I have my views.
I don't feel the need to share them and I am not interested in what yours are.
I will, however, comment as and when I wish.
Me too also. So not much difference.
-
I am really sorry about that because I think you hide a quite nice person.
However you only ever snipe and never actually contribute to any debate.
I also aren't interested in your child rearing practices and actually don't see how the fact that you left your children home alone contributes to any debate.
-
I also aren't interested in your child rearing practices and actually don't see how the fact that you left your children home alone contributes to any debate.
I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to Jassi
And at what point did my child rearing practices come into this? Or do you seriously want another punch up?
-
I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to Jassi
And at what point did my child rearing practices come into this? Or do you seriously want another punch up?
As I understand it anyone is free to comment, and no-one ever raises the subject of your child rearing practices except you, as you did on this occasion. As to 'punch ups', they're not something I indulge in.
-
Oooh, nice grammar!
There you go. I prefer not to comment on the abysmal grammar of some persons, let alone lack of punctuation. But let's have open season on that now.
This could teach us all something. And at least we might be able to understand what some one is actually saying, rather than a load of convolute rubbish.
-
If Bruckner’s number is in the files then why didn’t the PJ make more strenuous efforts to investigate him, or do sceptics believe it’s quite acceptable to rule suspects out on the strength of an unanswered knock on the door?
Unless I'm mistaken, OG did most of the plodwork in wading through phone numbers (I'm not sure whether the PJ ever went much beyond the McCanns, Murat and those associated with them).
I'm trying to verify if the Portuguese required ID to buy a pay-as-you-go number / SIM back then. If not, identifying the holders would have been difficult, if not impossible, unless it cross-referenced to someone.
Brueckner may or may not have been in the files, and even if he were, his phone number might not have been noted, or he could have changed it or had more than one.
What seems more likely to me is that the Germans got a tip-off, identifying him as the holder of the number, and then checked whether the number corresponded to one of the ones in the files.
-
Unless I'm mistaken, OG did most of the plodwork in wading through phone numbers (I'm not sure whether the PJ ever went much beyond the McCanns, Murat and those associated with them).
I'm trying to verify if the Portuguese required ID to buy a pay-as-you-go number / SIM back then. If not, identifying the holders would have been difficult, if not impossible, unless it cross-referenced to someone.
Brueckner may or may not have been in the files, and even if he were, his phone number might not have been noted, or he could have changed it or had more than one.
What seems more likely to me is that the Germans got a tip-off, identifying him as the holder of the number, and then checked whether the number corresponded to one of the ones in the files.
OG went deep into the phone records why wasn't CB flagged by them you have to ask, they came up with the three amigos.
-
Unless I'm mistaken, OG did most of the plodwork in wading through phone numbers (I'm not sure whether the PJ ever went much beyond the McCanns, Murat and those associated with them).
I'm trying to verify if the Portuguese required ID to buy a pay-as-you-go number / SIM back then. If not, identifying the holders would have been difficult, if not impossible, unless it cross-referenced to someone.
Brueckner may or may not have been in the files, and even if he were, his phone number might not have been noted, or he could have changed it or had more than one.
What seems more likely to me is that the Germans got a tip-off, identifying him as the holder of the number, and then checked whether the number corresponded to one of the ones in the files.
The PJ requested the mobile phone data for use if required, not with the intention of 'wading' through it.
One of the rogatory questions was about the owner of a portuguese mobile phone. It turned out to be one of the two purchased by contacts of David Payne on 4th May and delivered to him at Portimao police station. He kept one and gave the other to the McCanns. Those phones were bought without ID, or the PJ would have been able to trace an owner.
I agree that the Germans were given the number and then found evidence of it being in the area.
-
OG went deep into the phone records why wasn't CB flagged by them you have to ask, they came up with the three amigos.
I'm not sure you actually read my post.
-
OG went deep into the phone records why wasn't CB flagged by them you have to ask, they came up with the three amigos.
They could have investigated the three amigos because of a tip off.
-
OG went deep into the phone records why wasn't CB flagged by them you have to ask, they came up with the three amigos.
That's a good question. Maybe they shared information with the German police who had access to additional resources to analyse data further, or had linked intelligence that made CB's number corroborate something?
-
That's a good question. Maybe they shared information with the German police who had access to additional resources to analyse data further, or had linked intelligence that made CB's number corroborate something?
More likely the fact they had convictions for burglary... It seems Grange were not aware that CB had criminal convictions yet according to Amaral they went knocking on his door... Were grange aware of this
-
More likely the fact they had convictions for burglary... It seems Grange were not aware that CB had criminal convictions yet according to Amaral they went knocking on his door... Were grange aware of this
Probably. Let's get it right, the resources OG had their disposal far outweighed those of the PJ. I'm sure they went through every scrap meticulously, including all doors knocked on, all known chavs shook down and all known or suspected nonces.
-
More likely the fact they had convictions for burglary... It seems Grange were not aware that CB had criminal convictions yet according to Amaral they went knocking on his door... Were grange aware of this
Perhaps Amaral has confused CB with some rasta guy with cartoon characters all over a van?
-
deleted: posted twice.
-
Probably. Let's get it right, the resources OG had their disposal far outweighed those of the PJ. I'm sure they went through every scrap meticulously, including all doors knocked on, all known chavs shook down and all known or suspected nonces.
Quite possible PJ did not record the visit... Lots of unknowns apart from amaral saying the PJ were, aware of him bit didn't follow it up
-
Quite possible PJ did not record the visit... Lots of unknowns apart from amaral saying the PJ were, aware of him bit didn't follow it up
They knocked on one of his doors didn't they? If he was such a prolific recidivist then he's known to local police.
OG, IMO, sifted through the PJ records and went back over each 'intelligence'. Either that, or they were derelict in their duty.
As far as I see it, they matched their own findings with a phone call to CB's mobile 'somewhere' in the vicitiny.
....and isn't it all a bit coincidental that an apparently unrelated polcie force crack the case? A police force who happen to be of the same nationality as their new suspect?
-
They knocked on one of his doors didn't they? If he was such a prolific recidivist then he's known to local police.
OG, IMO, sifted through the PJ records and went back over each 'intelligence'. Either that, or they were derelict in their duty.
As far as I see it, they matched their own findings with a phone call to CB's mobile 'somewhere' in the vicitiny.
....and isn't it all a bit coincidental that an apparently unrelated polcie force crack the case? A police force who happen to be of the same nationality as their new suspect?
Do you know how CB came into the frame... No coincidence... May well be down to Grange
-
Do you know how CB came into the frame... No coincidence... May well be down to Grange
That's what I was driving at.
-
Quite possible PJ did not record the visit... Lots of unknowns apart from amaral saying the PJ were, aware of him bit didn't follow it up
Fancy quoting Amaral! Is that a first?
-
Fancy quoting Amaral! Is that a first?
Davel didn’t quote Amaral, nor did he indicate that he believed him. It is possible to refer to his public pronouncements without it meaning they are believed or approved of you know!
-
Davel didn’t quote Amaral, nor did he indicate that he believed him. It is possible to refer to his public pronouncements without it meaning they are believed or approved of you know!
Oh, sorry. I thought people were accepting Amaral's claims, despite there being no evidence at all that the PJ were aware of Brueckner.
-
Oh, sorry. I thought people were accepting Amaral's claims, despite there being no evidence at all that the PJ were aware of Brueckner.
You need to understand the difference between quoting someone and believing what they say.
I'm not particularly bothered Re the PJ as they did a pathetic job when they believed that the mmain evidence was the dog alerts... That really is pathetic
-
Oh, sorry. I thought people were accepting Amaral's claims, despite there being no evidence at all that the PJ were aware of Brueckner.
There's no evidence the PJ were aware of Bruckner apart from the public pronouncements of the ex co-ordinator on the case.
-
There's no evidence the PJ were aware of Bruckner apart from the public pronouncements of the ex co-ordinator on the case.
Amyone quoting him is quoting, in the words of the supporters, a 'convicted liar'. Why bother?
-
They could have investigated the three amigos because of a tip off.
After the digs produced zilch.
-
More likely the fact they had convictions for burglary... It seems Grange were not aware that CB had criminal convictions yet according to Amaral they went knocking on his door... Were grange aware of this
Why should they be less aware of one lot than the other .
-
Amyone quoting him is quoting, in the words of the supporters, a 'convicted liar'. Why bother?
Because he’s the only one blabbing about it. How often have you quoted Kate McCann out of interest and why do you bother?
-
Because he’s the only one blabbing about it. How often have you quoted Kate McCann out of interest and why do you bother?
I think Amaral was mistaken because Brueckner didn't have a door at the time. Why keep promoting his mistake?
-
I think Amaral was mistaken because Brueckner didn't have a door at the time. Why keep promoting his mistake?
How do you know Brückner didn’t have a door at the time? Where was he living then, a tent?
-
I think Amaral was mistaken because Brueckner didn't have a door at the time. Why keep promoting his mistake?
Cite for no door
-
How do you know Brückner didn’t have a door at the time? Where was he living then, a tent?
A camper van has a door, as far as I know.
-
Cite for no door
After his release from prison he didn't return to his previous address, so where was his door?
-
After his release from prison he didn't return to his previous address, so where was his door?
that is not a cite.......what dates.....who said this
-
that is not a cite.......what dates.....who said this
British detectives believe Brueckner was living in a VW T3 Westerfalia motorhome in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz when Madeleine disappeared...
The Met police said in a statement that the suspect “had access to this van from at least April 2007 until shortly after May 2007”...
He added, “We believe he had been living in this van for days, if not weeks, and that he may have been using it on May 3, 2007...
The German suspect lived in a warehouse outside Praia da Luz for several years but moved into a motorhome just before Madeleine’s disappearance.
https://www.fr24news.com/a/2020/06/in-the-last-known-address-of-madeleine-mccann-the-suspect-christian-brueckner.html
-
British detectives believe Brueckner was living in a VW T3 Westerfalia motorhome in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz when Madeleine disappeared...
The Met police said in a statement that the suspect “had access to this van from at least April 2007 until shortly after May 2007”...
He added, “We believe he had been living in this van for days, if not weeks, and that he may have been using it on May 3, 2007...
The German suspect lived in a warehouse outside Praia da Luz for several years but moved into a motorhome just before Madeleine’s disappearance.
https://www.fr24news.com/a/2020/06/in-the-last-known-address-of-madeleine-mccann-the-suspect-christian-brueckner.html
Was it a doorless campervan?
-
British detectives believe Brueckner was living in a VW T3 Westerfalia motorhome in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz when Madeleine disappeared...
The Met police said in a statement that the suspect “had access to this van from at least April 2007 until shortly after May 2007”...
He added, “We believe he had been living in this van for days, if not weeks, and that he may have been using it on May 3, 2007...
The German suspect lived in a warehouse outside Praia da Luz for several years but moved into a motorhome just before Madeleine’s disappearance.
https://www.fr24news.com/a/2020/06/in-the-last-known-address-of-madeleine-mccann-the-suspect-christian-brueckner.html
Did he give up the tenancy on the house shortly before madeleine disappeared..if he did...another coincidence
-
Did he give up the tenancy on the house shortly before madeleine disappeared..if he did...another coincidence
If, buts and maybe's add up to sod all.
-
Did he give up the tenancy on the house shortly before madeleine disappeared..if he did...another coincidence
If it's 'giving up' a tenancy when you don't pay the rent because you're in prison.
-
If it's 'giving up' a tenancy when you don't pay the rent because you're in prison.
When did he come out of prison... What was the last date he lived in the house.. When did the tenancy end.. Did the PJ think he still lived there.. Did the PJ knock on the door thinking he still lived there
-
When did he come out of prison... What was the last date he lived in the house.. When did the tenancy end.. Did the PJ think he still lived there.. Did the PJ knock on the door thinking he still lived there
All pertinent questions.
-
When did he come out of prison... What was the last date he lived in the house.. When did the tenancy end.. Did the PJ think he still lived there.. Did the PJ knock on the door thinking he still lived there
Jon Clarke knew all about it;
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8466347/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-British-neighbour-destroyed-likely-DNA-evidence-house.html
He lived there until arrested in April 2006.
In May 2006 his neighbour cleared his house out after it was burgled.
He was released from prison in December 2006.
Police knocked on the door of an address in Barrocal in November 2007, seeking payment of a fine.
-
Jon Clarke knew all about it;
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8466347/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-British-neighbour-destroyed-likely-DNA-evidence-house.html
He lived there until arrested in April 2006.
In May 2006 his neighbour cleared his house out after it was burgled.
He was released from prison in December 2006.
Police knocked on the door of an address in Barrocal in November 2007, seeking payment of a fine.
An itinerant with no fixed abode, thats more grist to the mill for the believers.
-
Jon Clarke knew all about it;
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8466347/Madeleine-McCann-suspects-British-neighbour-destroyed-likely-DNA-evidence-house.html
He lived there until arrested in April 2006.
In May 2006 his neighbour cleared his house out after it was burgled.
He was released from prison in December 2006.
Police knocked on the door of an address in Barrocal in November 2007, seeking payment of a fine.
was the nov visit the one referred to by amaral........i think that must be another visit
-
was the nov visit the one referred to by amaral........i think that must be another visit
Why?
-
Why?
He'd already been taken off the case by then for one thing, for another thing the PJ were convinced the parents dunnit by November so why would they have been knocking on his door then?
-
Why?
its common sense....quote..
He'd already been taken off the case by then for one thing, for another thing the PJ were convinced the parents dunnit by November so why would they have been knocking on his door then?
-
its common sense....quote..
He'd already been taken off the case by then for one thing, for another thing the PJ were convinced the parents dunnit by November so why would they have been knocking on his door then?
Some think Rebelo wasn't convinced of the parent's guilt. Did anyone say it was the PJ looking for him?
-
Some think Rebelo wasn't convinced of the parent's guilt. Did anyone say it was the PJ looking for him?
Erm...Amaral did?
-
Some think Rebelo wasn't convinced of the parent's guilt. Did anyone say it was the PJ looking for him?
Do you have a quote from Rebelo which would justify "some" thinking that, thankyou.
-
Erm...Amaral did?
Did he say PJ or police?
-
Did he say PJ or police?
Erm…what’s the difference?
Here’s what he actually said
“I have been told by colleagues, who are retired like me, that they had come knocking on the door. That person was not at home,” Mr Amaral said in an interview on Portuguese TV on Sunday night”.
Now as he worked for the PJ who do you suppose his colleagues were?
-
And reply came there none.
-
Erm…what’s the difference?
Here’s what he actually said
“I have been told by colleagues, who are retired like me, that they had come knocking on the door. That person was not at home,” Mr Amaral said in an interview on Portuguese TV on Sunday night”.
Now as he worked for the PJ who do you suppose his colleagues were?
My recollection is that the GNR did most of the plod work of knocking on doors, etc., as part of their search effort and the PJ interviewed (formally or informally) a few people known to have committed sexual or other serious offences.
The legal summary and final report seem a bit blurry about which force actually knocked on doors.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm
Although the PJ may have visited a few places, I find it plausible that the GNR (plus other civilian agencies and volunteers) did most of the door-knocking (around 400 residences?), but what did they note? The address? The names of the occupants? Then what did they hand over to the PJ? A list of all the places they'd been to with "no sign of the missing minor". Did the PJ take any of that further?
-
My recollection is that the GNR did most of the plod work of knocking on doors, etc., as part of their search effort and the PJ interviewed (formally or informally) a few people known to have committed sexual or other serious offences.
The legal summary and final report seem a bit blurry about which force actually knocked on doors.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm
Although the PJ may have visited a few places, I find it plausible that the GNR (plus other civilian agencies and volunteers) did most of the door-knocking (around 400 residences?), but what did they note? The address? The names of the occupants? Then what did they hand over to the PJ? A list of all the places they'd been to with "no sign of the missing minor". Did the PJ take any of that further?
If you’re right then that would be another example of information gathering by the GNR that appeared to be filed in the bin alongside Totman’s statement. I wonder who was responsible for co-ordinating the investigation between the two forces…?
-
If you’re right then that would be another example of information gathering by the GNR that appeared to be filed in the bin alongside Totman’s statement. I wonder who was responsible for co-ordinating the investigation between the two forces…?
The, erm, coordinator?
-
My recollection is that the GNR did most of the plod work of knocking on doors, etc., as part of their search effort and the PJ interviewed (formally or informally) a few people known to have committed sexual or other serious offences.
The legal summary and final report seem a bit blurry about which force actually knocked on doors.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm
Although the PJ may have visited a few places, I find it plausible that the GNR (plus other civilian agencies and volunteers) did most of the door-knocking (around 400 residences?), but what did they note? The address? The names of the occupants? Then what did they hand over to the PJ? A list of all the places they'd been to with "no sign of the missing minor". Did the PJ take any of that further?
There's a recorded incident in November 2007, when police tried to find Brueckner for non payment of a fine. That sounds like a GNR job to me (uniform rather than plain clothes). The address they had wasn't in PdL.
-
There's a recorded incident in November 2007, when police tried to find Brueckner for non payment of a fine. That sounds like a GNR job to me (uniform rather than plain clothes). The address they had wasn't in PdL.
It's of little or no importance apart from another possible example of poor policing by the PJ and I don't think we need anymore.. Perhaps the truth will come out when Wolters finishes his investigation
-
There's a recorded incident in November 2007, when police tried to find Brueckner for non payment of a fine. That sounds like a GNR job to me (uniform rather than plain clothes). The address they had wasn't in PdL.
So in your opinion did Amaral make it up, re: police visiting Brückner’s home shortly after Madeleine went missing?
-
So in your opinion did Amaral make it up, re: police visiting Brückner’s home shortly after Madeleine went missing?
Who knows? Only one visit is recorded.
-
Quite possible that Amaral was simply making it up as he went along.. Hr does seem to have a history of it... What does that say for his ability to co-ordinate the investigation... And the veracity if his book
-
Quite possible that Amaral was simply making it up as he went along.. Hr does seem to have a history of it... What does that say for his ability to co-ordinate the investigation... And the veracity if his book
Not much IMO. Good to see that some sceptics are prepared to face up to the possibility that Amaral is not to be trusted.
-
Quite possible that Amaral was simply making it up as he went along.. Hr does seem to have a history of it... What does that say for his ability to co-ordinate the investigation... And the veracity if his book
Very few of people tell the whole truth the whole time. Therefore I've never made the mistake of believing everything anyone involved in this case has said.
-
Very few of people tell the whole truth the whole time. Therefore I've never made the mistake of believing everything anyone involved in this case has said.
Do you think you are the only person who doesn't believe everything.. Anyone has said in this case.. I think that's common sense but it doesn't mean you have not believed some things that are not true.. And disbelieved some that are
-
Very few of people tell the whole truth the whole time. Therefore I've never made the mistake of believing everything anyone involved in this case has said.
Apart from the Tapas chef who claimed the group had all left the table by 9.20pm
-
Very few of people tell the whole truth the whole time. Therefore I've never made the mistake of believing everything anyone involved in this case has said.
There are people of impeccable character whose word is to be trusted implicitly whatever the circumstances. It is your misfortune that you don't appear to have encountered any whose word is their bond.
Amaral lied under oath.
That puts him into a very special category; quite simply, he is a criminal.
More recently he has tried to derail the investigation into Madeleine's case by promulgating disinformation; that again categorises him for all but the most blinkered of his supporters.
-
There are people of impeccable character whose word is to be trusted implicitly whatever the circumstances. It is your misfortune that you don't appear to have encountered any whose word is their bond.
Amaral lied under oath.
That puts him into a very special category; quite simply, he is a criminal.
More recently he has tried to derail the investigation into Madeleine's case by promulgating disinformation; that again categorises him for all but the most blinkered of his supporters.
No-one is perfect.
-
No-one is perfect.
Amaral was a very long way from perfect. He was a liar and lazy and just not very bright IMO, a lethal combination that led to many of the early mistakes made in this case and which probably accounts for why we’re all still here discussing it 14 years later.
-
Amaral was a very long way from perfect. He was a liar and lazy and just not very bright IMO, a lethal combination that led to many of the early mistakes made in this case and which probably accounts for why we’re all still here discussing it 14 years later.
As I said; no one person can be blamed for the farce this case became.
-
As I said; no one person can be blamed for the farce this case became.
When Keystone Kops are involved it usually does descend into farce.
-
As I said; no one person can be blamed for the farce this case became.
I think you are mistaken.
Whatever Amaral's intended design might have been - the 'search' for an innocent little girl was not allowed to get off the ground, all very much due to the fantasies of this incompetent.
He has clearly and unashamedly documented it all in his book and in his documentary.
Not content with his farcical manipulation of Madeleine's case when he officially had the licence to do so, as a busy body know it all civilian he attempted to turn the German investigation into as big a farce as the one he left behind him.
The truth will out and it has been well out in the open as a direct result of the latest perfidious pack of lies he has promoted on Portuguese media.
It took a long time for the truth to shine through on the base character of this man whose incompetence - if it was that - very much set the tone of the whole investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.
From first to recent developments and through all of the intervening years.
-
The truth is ? nothing pertaining to the disappearance has been tried in a court yet.
-
I think you are mistaken.
Whatever Amaral's intended design might have been - the 'search' for an innocent little girl was not allowed to get off the ground, all very much due to the fantasies of this incompetent.
He has clearly and unashamedly documented it all in his book and in his documentary.
Not content with his farcical manipulation of Madeleine's case when he officially had the licence to do so, as a busy body know it all civilian he attempted to turn the German investigation into as big a farce as the one he left behind him.
The truth will out and it has been well out in the open as a direct result of the latest perfidious pack of lies he has promoted on Portuguese media.
It took a long time for the truth to shine through on the base character of this man whose incompetence - if it was that - very much set the tone of the whole investigation into Madeleine's disappearance.
From first to recent developments and through all of the intervening years.
As I'm sure you expected, I reject your obsessive insistence on blaming one person for everything.
-
The truth is ? nothing pertaining to the disappearance has been tried in a court yet.
What's important is the evidence..
-
As I'm sure you expected, I reject your obsessive insistence on blaming one person for everything.
And so old hat.
The case would still be unsolved even if Amaral had never been anywhere near it.
The next guy did no better.
IMO
-
As I'm sure you expected, I reject your obsessive insistence on blaming one person for everything.
Please desist from the "obsessive". That is no way to progress debate. Personal insult reveals nothing more than your inability to defend your position in the face of the truth.
-
And so old hat.
The case would still be unsolved even if Amaral had never been anywhere near it.
The next guy did no better.
IMO
Five months were wasted by the incompetent and inexperienced police investigation. Five months which could never be recovered. Immaterial of what was being investigated, let alone a missing child, that time plus the time spent following the wrong tracks is irretrievable.
The fault for that belongs to those in charge of the initial investigation and no-one else.
-
Five months were wasted by the incompetent and inexperienced police investigation. Five months which could never be recovered. Immaterial of what was being investigated, let alone a missing child, that time plus the time spent following the wrong tracks is irretrievable.
The fault for that belongs to those in charge of the initial investigation and no-one else.
That may be your opinion, though you omit to say so. I happen to disagree with you.
-
Five months were wasted by the incompetent and inexperienced police investigation. Five months which could never be recovered. Immaterial of what was being investigated, let alone a missing child, that time plus the time spent following the wrong tracks is irretrievable.
The fault for that belongs to those in charge of the initial investigation and no-one else.
The names of those in charge, which you choose to ignore, were Neves and Encarnacao. In fact the only example of the rules governing investigations being breached was during their interview of the McCanns on 8th August. If Kate McCann's account was truthful, that is.
-
Not much IMO. Good to see that some sceptics are prepared to face up to the possibility that Amaral is not to be trusted.
I'm still wondering how CB's phone number was missed, if they had followed up the fact that CB was in the area they may have been able to get DNA. Poor Madeleine.
-
Do you think you are the only person who doesn't believe everything.. Anyone has said in this case.. I think that's common sense but it doesn't mean you have not believed some things that are not true.. And disbelieved some that are
I don't believe anything without supporting evidence.
-
I don't believe anything without supporting evidence.
I already understand that. .but you decide what supporting evidence is supportive and valid. For example you think the dog alerts are supported by evidence.. Mostly uncoroborated from their training.. I dint think they are.
So it often still comes down to personal opinion.. Not facts
-
The names of those in charge, which you choose to ignore, were Neves and Encarnacao. In fact the only example of the rules governing investigations being breached was during their interview of the McCanns on 8th August. If Kate McCann's account was truthful, that is.
The only example? Seriously? Where do you suppose the "100% match" myth came from? Or the Gerry-isn't-the-father" one? Or any of the dozens of others?
In charge of what? The investigation?
- Encarnaçao, technically, was Amaral's superior as head of the entire directorate (the division for the south of the country) and became seriously ill with cancer. Aside from a couple of meetings, and presumably being kept abreast of major developments, I doubt he had much time or energy to devote to the case.
- Re Neves (who, at the time of the disappearance was the head of the DCCB (Coordinator of the DCCB = Direcção Central de Combate ao Banditismo), i.e. the central organized crime squad, which covered human trafficking, abduction and hostage situations, etc.
From the libel / damages trial (08.10.2013):
The Judge asks the witness if he intervened in the criminal process related to Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
LN says he did, but not directly. He explains that, after some days, the then National Director of the PJ, Alipio Ribeiro, asked him to send officers of his unit who were specialised in cases of abduction and hostage. He adds that his team had collaborated in the Joana Cipriano murder case.
The Judge – What do you mean by "indirectly"?
LN says that, though he went to the Algarve a few times to meet Guilhermino Encarnação, then Director of the PJ in Faro, and Gonçalo Amaral, the operations were performed by Portimão police officers under the direction of his team.
The Judge asks if the witness' relations with Gonçalo Amaral are only professional or if there is a personal relationship.
LN says there's friendship between them.
http://mccannvamarallibeltrial.blogspot.com/2013/10/luis-neves.html
-
Mulling over this.
Hypothetically, of course, optics might not be optimal if ever the investigation re Brueckner (Brückner) brought up questions about the Cipriano case...
-
A different piece of the puzzle is where Cristovão may - or may not - fit into this.
-
What's important is the evidence..
Nope its the proof that will convince any jury or Judges, clearly lacking.
-
I already understand that. .but you decide what supporting evidence is supportive and valid. For example you think the dog alerts are supported by evidence.. Mostly uncoroborated from their training.. I dint think they are.
So it often still comes down to personal opinion.. Not facts
I'll mention just one example. On 3rd May Madeleine McCann asked her parents a question. That question was.....what?
Where were you when the twins cried?
Where were you when Sean and I cried?
Where were you when we cried?
They are all facts in that all three have been recorded, but which one is true?
-
The only example? Seriously? Where do you suppose the "100% match" myth came from? Or the Gerry-isn't-the-father" one? Or any of the dozens of others?
In charge of what? The investigation?
- Encarnaçao, technically, was Amaral's superior as head of the entire directorate (the division for the south of the country) and became seriously ill with cancer. Aside from a couple of meetings, and presumably being kept abreast of major developments, I doubt he had much time or energy to devote to the case.
- Re Neves (who, at the time of the disappearance was the head of the DCCB (Coordinator of the DCCB = Direcção Central de Combate ao Banditismo), i.e. the central organized crime squad, which covered human trafficking, abduction and hostage situations, etc.
From the libel / damages trial (08.10.2013):
The Judge asks the witness if he intervened in the criminal process related to Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
LN says he did, but not directly. He explains that, after some days, the then National Director of the PJ, Alipio Ribeiro, asked him to send officers of his unit who were specialised in cases of abduction and hostage. He adds that his team had collaborated in the Joana Cipriano murder case.
The Judge – What do you mean by "indirectly"?
LN says that, though he went to the Algarve a few times to meet Guilhermino Encarnação, then Director of the PJ in Faro, and Gonçalo Amaral, the operations were performed by Portimão police officers under the direction of his team.
The Judge asks if the witness' relations with Gonçalo Amaral are only professional or if there is a personal relationship.
LN says there's friendship between them.
http://mccannvamarallibeltrial.blogspot.com/2013/10/luis-neves.html
The officers we met on that occasion, and would continue to meet regularly, were the two men ultimately in charge of the investigation. Guilhermino Encarnação, chief of the Algarve PJ, based in Faro, we had encountered at the police station in Portimão on the day after Madeleine’s abduction. The other was Luís Neves
[madeleine]
Unproved leaking to the newspapers is one thing. Subjecting people to interviews which breached the rules is quite another.
On 8th August the McCanns were interviewed by Encarnacao and Neves without a civilian interpreter, without the knowledge of the consulate, and without a lawyer. During that interview, according to Kate McCann, questions were asked which should only have been asked of arguidos.
I was in no doubt now that they were trying to make me say I’d killed Madeleine or knew what had happened to her.
[madeleine]
-
Nope its the proof that will convince any jury or Judges, clearly lacking.
-
Nope its the proof that will convince any jury or Judges, clearly lacking.
The evidence supplies that proof.... And it's clear Wolters has it
-
I'll mention just one example. On 3rd May Madeleine McCann asked her parents a question. That question was.....what?
Where were you when the twins cried?
Where were you when Sean and I cried?
Where were you when we cried?
They are all facts in that all three have been recorded, but which one is true?
I think you are obsessed with the unimportant..
There are far more important questions such as are the translated statements accurate... You think they are... I think they will contain errors and my view is supported by evidence
-
The evidence supplies that proof.... And it's clear Wolters has it
Away with you, its all words and no action.
-
Away with you, its all words and no action.
It clearly isnt
-
The officers we met on that occasion, and would continue to meet regularly, were the two men ultimately in charge of the investigation. Guilhermino Encarnação, chief of the Algarve PJ, based in Faro, we had encountered at the police station in Portimão on the day after Madeleine’s abduction. The other was Luís Neves
[madeleine]
Unproved leaking to the newspapers is one thing. Subjecting people to interviews which breached the rules is quite another.
On 8th August the McCanns were interviewed by Encarnacao and Neves without a civilian interpreter, without the knowledge of the consulate, and without a lawyer. During that interview, according to Kate McCann, questions were asked which should only have been asked of arguidos.
I was in no doubt now that they were trying to make me say I’d killed Madeleine or knew what had happened to her.
[madeleine]
"Ultimately in charge". What does that mean? "The buck stops here?", as in they were above Amaral's pay grade?
IMP, the potential elephant in the rroom is the Cipriano case and any potential connection between the two.
-
I think you are obsessed with the unimportant..
There are far more important questions such as are the translated statements accurate... You think they are... I think they will contain errors and my view is supported by evidence
Why do you dismiss it as 'unimportant'? Police often ask witnesses the same questions again to test if they're anwers are consistent.
“While we were having breakfast, Maddie said ‘Mummy why didn’t you come when we were crying last night,’” she told police in a statement broadcast by Telecinco TV.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-madeleine-idUKWRI13622020080411
‘Why didn’t you come when Sean and I cried last night?’
[madeleine]
-
"Ultimately in charge". What does that mean? "The buck stops here?", as in they were above Amaral's pay grade?
IMP, the potential elephant in the rroom is the Cipriano case and any potential connection between the two.
As in the UK the SIO is in charge of his team's actions. Neves' lot were involved in the Cipriano case too.
-
Why do you dismiss it as 'unimportant'? Police often ask witnesses the same questions again to test if they're anwers are consistent.
“While we were having breakfast, Maddie said ‘Mummy why didn’t you come when we were crying last night,’” she told police in a statement broadcast by Telecinco TV.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-madeleine-idUKWRI13622020080411
‘Why didn’t you come when Sean and I cried last night?’
[madeleine]
im well aware of police asking the same question several times.....its whether the different answers are significant...you seem to be of the opinion they are. I domt see these discrepancies as significant.
-
im well aware of police asking the same question several times.....its whether the different answers are significant...you seem to be of the opinion they are. I domt see these discrepancies as significant.
Which just goes to show how different we are. ?{)(**
-
Which just goes to show how different we are. ?{)(**
absolutely... I think we will have some definitive answers soon that will show who is right.
-
The names of those in charge, which you choose to ignore, were Neves and Encarnacao. In fact the only example of the rules governing investigations being breached was during their interview of the McCanns on 8th August. If Kate McCann's account was truthful, that is.
Isn't it strange that when it suits, coordinator (which title obviously has a different meaning in Portuguese than in English) Amaral has been selling himself as THE authority in the case. But is portrayed as nothing more than a tea boy in the hierarchy by his hangers on.
The buck never quite stops at him as far as some are concerned. The buck does stop at him quite clearly though as far as his latest machinations are concerned. There is clearly no-one to blame but Amaral for the faked up Brueckner image nor the graffiti covered Westfalia for which even his most dyed in the wool support has been unable to come up with any excuses.
-
I'm still wondering how CB's phone number was missed, if they had followed up the fact that CB was in the area they may have been able to get DNA. Poor Madeleine.
They might even have been able to recover Madeleine within the golden hours had they moved quickly enough.
Amaral has assured us on numerous occasions that he had the case solved before he had breakfast on the fourth (TTOTL).
Quite patently he hadn't but to this day neither he nor his following will let go of his delusions.
-
I think you are obsessed with the unimportant..
There are far more important questions such as are the translated statements accurate... You think they are... I think they will contain errors and my view is supported by evidence
This is a trademark of conspiracy theorists whatever the subject may be, from holocaust denial to 9/11.
-
I'll mention just one example. On 3rd May Madeleine McCann asked her parents a question. That question was.....what?
Where were you when the twins cried?
Where were you when Sean and I cried?
Where were you when we cried?
They are all facts in that all three have been recorded, but which one is true?
2 and 3 are the same, one is at leat 50% correct, so what’s the problem? People’s accounts change with the re-telling over time, is this sinister? No, usually not. Should we care about this trifling detail? No, imo.
-
Isn't it strange that when it suits, coordinator (which title obviously has a different meaning in Portuguese than in English) Amaral has been selling himself as THE authority in the case. But is portrayed as nothing more than a tea boy in the hierarchy by his hangers on.
The buck never quite stops at him as far as some are concerned. The buck does stop at him quite clearly though as far as his latest machinations are concerned. There is clearly no-one to blame but Amaral for the faked up Brueckner image nor the graffiti covered Westfalia for which even his most dyed in the wool support has been unable to come up with any excuses.
I would argue that it was the UK press, the McCanns and their supporters who have chosen to highlight and inflate Amaral's importance.
I don't think 'tea boy' is the correct term to describe the person filling the role of coordinator in an inestigation. I would equate it to the role of 'silver commander' in UK policing;
"The silver commander commands and coordinates the overall tactical response in compliance with the strategy, and is the tactical commander of the incident."
https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/operations/command-and-control/command-structures/
She/he complies with, but doesn't decide on, the overall strategy, laid down by the gold commander.
-
2 and 3 are the same, one is at leat 50% correct, so what’s the problem? People’s accounts change with the re-telling over time, is this sinister? No, usually not. Should we care about this trifling detail? No, imo.
It's not an ordinary conversation to be forgotten and changed over time though. It's one of the last sentences spoken by a child who disappeared off the face of the earth later that day. A sentence never to be forgotten.
-
It's not an ordinary conversation to be forgotten and changed over time though. It's one of the last sentences spoken by a child who disappeared off the face of the earth later that day. A sentence never to be forgotten.
important in your opinion.....
-
It's not an ordinary conversation to be forgotten and changed over time though. It's one of the last sentences spoken by a child who disappeared off the face of the earth later that day. A sentence never to be forgotten.
In whatever form "one of the last sentences spoken by a child who disappeared off the face of the earth later that day" appears the actual occurrence was narrated by Kate McCann.
No-one would know anything at all about it but for that.
You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel when you are having to rely on the word of an individual you evidence such loathing and distrust of all and everything she has ever done or said while traducing her.
Really quite extraordinary.
-
It's not an ordinary conversation to be forgotten and changed over time though. It's one of the last sentences spoken by a child who disappeared off the face of the earth later that day. A sentence never to be forgotten.
Oh please, enough with the sentimental, sanctimonious claptrap. What is the significance in your view?
-
Why do you dismiss it as 'unimportant'? Police often ask witnesses the same questions again to test if they're anwers are consistent.
“While we were having breakfast, Maddie said ‘Mummy why didn’t you come when we were crying last night,’” she told police in a statement broadcast by Telecinco TV.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-madeleine-idUKWRI13622020080411
‘Why didn’t you come when Sean and I cried last night?’
[madeleine]
Did you know that when you say “we” it means you plus one or more other person/people, therefore these two sentences do not contradict each other?
-
I would argue that it was the UK press, the McCanns and their supporters who have chosen to highlight and inflate Amaral's importance.
I don't think 'tea boy' is the correct term to describe the person filling the role of coordinator in an inestigation. I would equate it to the role of 'silver commander' in UK policing;
"The silver commander commands and coordinates the overall tactical response in compliance with the strategy, and is the tactical commander of the incident."
https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-content/operations/command-and-control/command-structures/
She/he complies with, but doesn't decide on, the overall strategy, laid down by the gold commander.
You and other sceptics demonstrably play down Amaral's importance to the investigation. You are the people who reduce his role to nothing.
But it still does not go near to explaining the propaganda war embarked on by Amaral aided and abetted by his best mate and prolific criminal Cristovao not to mention other duped journalists such as Sandra Felguieras who broadcast and wrote about all his leaked fantasies.
Many of which are still believed to this day.
Amaral has spent the years since the night of Madeleine's disappearance living off her. If you don't think so, that's your privilege but I think the evidence supports my opinion - not yours.
-
In whatever form "one of the last sentences spoken by a child who disappeared off the face of the earth later that day" appears the actual occurrence was narrated by Kate McCann.
No-one would know anything at all about it but for that.
You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel when you are having to rely on the word of an individual you evidence such loathing and distrust of all and everything she has ever done or said while traducing her.
Really quite extraordinary.
I don't rely on the word of those whose stories change.
-
I don't rely on the word of those whose stories change.
I think it's established now that Maddie was abducted by a stranger.. And there is definitive evidence to to support it.
That makes all your reasoning and assumptions over the past 14 years, wrong.
-
I don't rely on the word of those whose stories change.
I’d strong suggest you don’t rely on the word of anyone because the human memory is fallible and accounts can change subtly over the course of time. In fact people who stict rigidly to the exact same story are probably working from a script.
-
I don't rely on the word of those whose stories change.
With reference to the thread title "More recent events related to Madeleine McCann's case" is there anything you have to say about those who fabricate stories as they go along.
Goncalo Amaral has been pretty good at that from "Swingers" to "Calpol" to "fridges" to "100% DNA" et al. His latest fantasy regarding his blatant falsehoods in an effort to derail the German investigation into Madelaine's case is indeed wonderous to behold.
You don't think that making up desperate lies could be considered just a tad iffy. STRANGE to say the least 👀
-
I don't rely on the word of those whose stories change.
What do you think of Mark Harrison who Grime credits with the idea of using the alerts, as intelligence... First saying the alerts may show that a cadaver has been present... Then changing his mind saying no inference can be drawn.
That's one of the reasons why I think the, alerts are a load of conkers.
-
With reference to the thread title "More recent events related to Madeleine McCann's case" is there anything you have to say about those who fabricate stories as they go along.
Goncalo Amaral has been pretty good at that from "Swingers" to "Calpol" to "fridges" to "100% DNA" et al. His latest fantasy regarding his blatant falsehoods in an effort to derail the German investigation into Madelaine's case is indeed wonderous to behold.
You don't think that making up desperate lies could be considered just a tad iffy. STRANGE to say the least 👀
Those are theories, not accounts of something which (it was claimed) really happened.
-
Did you know that when you say “we” it means you plus one or more other person/people, therefore these two sentences do not contradict each other?
And reply came there none.
-
And reply came there none.
Meaning is immaterial. Accuracy is the point when repeating another person's words.
-
Meaning is immaterial. Accuracy is the point when repeating another person's words.
It is accurate. “We” is the same as “Sean and I”, you are once again making mountains out of molehills, it’s utterly pathetic that you are having to resort to this imo.
-
Consider this. Madeleine may well have said “why didn’t you come when we were crying?”
Kate may then have asked “who was crying darling?”
Madeleine may have responded “Sean and I were”
So both “we” and “Sean and I” would be correct, not that it matters a good goddam, except to extreme pedants with an axe to grind.
-
Consider this. Madeleine may well have said “why didn’t you come when we were crying?”
Kate may then have asked “who was crying darling?”
Madeleine may have responded “Sean and I were”
So both “we” and “Sean and I” would be correct, not that it matters a good goddam, except to extreme pedants with an axe to grind.
The story isn't significant at all. The significance is that the story changes.
-
The story isn't significant at all. The significance is that the story changes.
The story doesn't change in any significant detail, you are seeing things, IMO.
-
Those are theories, not accounts of something which (it was claimed) really happened.
You are wrong.
There is nothing theoretical about the very long list of nasty and dishonourably underhand leaks to the press which are a feature of Amaral's time as an investigator, of which those I listed are but a few.
One of the later ones you seem to have adopted as your very own cause celebre which caused as much embarrassment to the new Portuguese investigation as it did to the McCanns when their confidential witness statements were leaked to the press.
Police chief tells of anger over 'crying Maddie' leak
By DANIEL BOFFEY
Last updated at 22:35 12 April 2008
Portugal's top policeman has told friends of Kate and Gerry McCann of his regret that witness statements by the couple were leaked to the media.
One excerpt suggested that on the morning of her disappearance, Madeleine said: "Mummy, why didn't you come when we were crying last night?"
The couple were furious and have accused the Portuguese police of attempting to slur them as they approach the anniversary of their daughter's disappearance on May 3.
The leak to a Spanish television station overshadowed the McCanns' visit on Thursday to Brussels where they called for a European rapid alert system for abducted children.
But it was revealed yesterday that Alipio Ribeiro, national director of the Policia Judiciaria, had interrupted interviews in Leicestershire with the "Tapas Seven" to tell the McCanns' friends of his own anger at the leak.
Mr Ribeiro returned a day early to Portugal on Friday after several days interrogating the friends who were on holiday with the McCanns in Praia da Luz last year.
A source said: "The matter came up in the interviews with Kate and Gerry's friends and Ribeiro was embarrassed by it.
"The leaks came as he was out of the country and he was angry about it. He also referred to it when speaking with Leicestershire police."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559297/Police-chief-tells-anger-crying-Maddie-leak.html
The leak was of no importance as far as finding what had happened to Madeleine was concerned.
As far as I can see there were two bonuses for those who orchestrated the leak- to slur the McCanns
- to embarrass the new investigation put in place after Amaral was sacked which had taken a firm line as far as conducting a professional investigation was concerned
I think both those aims were achieved at the time.
What I can't fathom is what your aim is as you doggedly latch onto this frippery, apart from frustration at watching everything campaigned for over the years going up in smoke.
Maybe you will enlighten us; but who really cares - it is an irrelevance saying much more about you than anything else.
-
You are wrong.
There is nothing theoretical about the very long list of nasty and dishonourably underhand leaks to the press which are a feature of Amaral's time as an investigator, of which those I listed are but a few.
One of the later ones you seem to have adopted as your very own cause celebre which caused as much embarrassment to the new Portuguese investigation as it did to the McCanns when their confidential witness statements were leaked to the press.
Police chief tells of anger over 'crying Maddie' leak
By DANIEL BOFFEY
Last updated at 22:35 12 April 2008
Portugal's top policeman has told friends of Kate and Gerry McCann of his regret that witness statements by the couple were leaked to the media.
One excerpt suggested that on the morning of her disappearance, Madeleine said: "Mummy, why didn't you come when we were crying last night?"
The couple were furious and have accused the Portuguese police of attempting to slur them as they approach the anniversary of their daughter's disappearance on May 3.
The leak to a Spanish television station overshadowed the McCanns' visit on Thursday to Brussels where they called for a European rapid alert system for abducted children.
But it was revealed yesterday that Alipio Ribeiro, national director of the Policia Judiciaria, had interrupted interviews in Leicestershire with the "Tapas Seven" to tell the McCanns' friends of his own anger at the leak.
Mr Ribeiro returned a day early to Portugal on Friday after several days interrogating the friends who were on holiday with the McCanns in Praia da Luz last year.
A source said: "The matter came up in the interviews with Kate and Gerry's friends and Ribeiro was embarrassed by it.
"The leaks came as he was out of the country and he was angry about it. He also referred to it when speaking with Leicestershire police."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559297/Police-chief-tells-anger-crying-Maddie-leak.html
The leak was of no importance as far as finding what had happened to Madeleine was concerned.
As far as I can see there were two bonuses for those who orchestrated the leak- to slur the McCanns
- to embarrass the new investigation put in place after Amaral was sacked which had taken a firm line as far as conducting a professional investigation was concerned
I think both those aims were achieved at the time.
What I can't fathom is what your aim is as you doggedly latch onto this frippery, apart from frustration at watching everything campaigned for over the years going up in smoke.
Maybe you will enlighten us; but who really cares - it is an irrelevance saying much more about you than anything else.
The PJ denied the leak and I believe them because the report didn't match the McCann's statements.
"The PJ want to make it clear that is entirely false that the contents of this report included material from the inquiry which is covered by (the law of) secrecy of justice,"
-
The PJ denied the leak and I believe them because the report didn't match the McCann's statements.
"The PJ want to make it clear that is entirely false that the contents of this report included material from the inquiry which is covered by (the law of) secrecy of justice,"
@)(++(* just how naive can you be? What is Portugal’s top police chief angry about then?
-
@)(++(* just how naive can you be? What is Portugal’s top police chief angry about then?
Perhaps he didn't check the reported contents of the statements with their actual contents.
-
Perhaps he didn't check the reported contents of the statements with their actual contents.
Yes, I’m sure the police chief simply accepted what the media reported, didn’t bother to check with his colleagues despite professing his anger at them and needlessly humiliated himself and his force by apologising for the leaks. Yes that must be it, because the two reports were so massively at variance, one using the word “we” and the other using the phrase “Sean and I”.
Give it up G-Unit, you’re defending the indefensible.
-
Yes, I’m sure the police chief simply accepted what the media reported, didn’t bother to check with his colleagues despite professing his anger at them and needlessly humiliated himself and his force by apologising for the leaks. Yes that must be it, because the two reports were so massively at variance, one using the word “we” and the other using the phrase “Sean and I”.
Give it up G-Unit, you’re defending the indefensible.
This is what Telecinco reported was in the 4th May statements.
Kate;
“While we had breakfast Maddie said: Mummy, why didn't you come when when we were crying last night?" (...) Gerry and I talked for a couple of minutes and decide to watch more for the children at night ".
“When I went to see Maddie I realized that she was not there. I looked in the whole apartment, returned to the children’s bedroom and at that moment I saw the curtains moving towards me making visible that the blind was opened up. I moved towards the window and I opened the curtains to see if she had climbed out through there but I saw no traces of her. I don’t know if I closed or not the window at that moment." , reports Maddie's mother.”
Gerry;
“When I came to the apartment I was surprised that Kate had dealt with the children and she even had douched them. I sat down with the children and read them a story" , Gerry stated.
The first one in checking condition of the children was Gerry himself. "I noticed that the angle of the door had changed and that it was opened some 45 degrees (…) perhaps Maddie had woken up and gone out of the room. I looked obliquely in our room but I saw that Maddie was not (...). I opened the door 60 degrees, looked at the left and saw Maddie asleep
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/04/horrifying-story-of-madeleines-parents.html
What the statements actually say;
Kate;
She reports only one episode where, on the morning of Thursday May 3rd, Madeleine asked the interviewee why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying. (no mention of closer watching of the children, and no mention of going to the window and opening the curtains)
Gerry;
No mention of being surprised that Kate had bathed the children and no mention of the angle of the bedroom door.
-
They'd possibly mentioned the incident during one of those informal interviews they had in the beginning.
-
You are wrong.
There is nothing theoretical about the very long list of nasty and dishonourably underhand leaks to the press which are a feature of Amaral's time as an investigator, of which those I listed are but a few.
One of the later ones you seem to have adopted as your very own cause celebre which caused as much embarrassment to the new Portuguese investigation as it did to the McCanns when their confidential witness statements were leaked to the press.
Police chief tells of anger over 'crying Maddie' leak
By DANIEL BOFFEY
Last updated at 22:35 12 April 2008
Portugal's top policeman has told friends of Kate and Gerry McCann of his regret that witness statements by the couple were leaked to the media.
One excerpt suggested that on the morning of her disappearance, Madeleine said: "Mummy, why didn't you come when we were crying last night?"
The couple were furious and have accused the Portuguese police of attempting to slur them as they approach the anniversary of their daughter's disappearance on May 3.
The leak to a Spanish television station overshadowed the McCanns' visit on Thursday to Brussels where they called for a European rapid alert system for abducted children.
But it was revealed yesterday that Alipio Ribeiro, national director of the Policia Judiciaria, had interrupted interviews in Leicestershire with the "Tapas Seven" to tell the McCanns' friends of his own anger at the leak.
Mr Ribeiro returned a day early to Portugal on Friday after several days interrogating the friends who were on holiday with the McCanns in Praia da Luz last year.
A source said: "The matter came up in the interviews with Kate and Gerry's friends and Ribeiro was embarrassed by it.
"The leaks came as he was out of the country and he was angry about it. He also referred to it when speaking with Leicestershire police."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559297/Police-chief-tells-anger-crying-Maddie-leak.html
The leak was of no importance as far as finding what had happened to Madeleine was concerned.
As far as I can see there were two bonuses for those who orchestrated the leak- to slur the McCanns
- to embarrass the new investigation put in place after Amaral was sacked which had taken a firm line as far as conducting a professional investigation was concerned
I think both those aims were achieved at the time.
What I can't fathom is what your aim is as you doggedly latch onto this frippery, apart from frustration at watching everything campaigned for over the years going up in smoke.
Maybe you will enlighten us; but who really cares - it is an irrelevance saying much more about you than anything else.
There's also the timing that's fishy - the day they were in Brussels campaigning for an EU-wide missing child alert.
-
This is what Telecinco reported was in the 4th May statements.
Kate;
“While we had breakfast Maddie said: Mummy, why didn't you come when when we were crying last night?" (...) Gerry and I talked for a couple of minutes and decide to watch more for the children at night ".
“When I went to see Maddie I realized that she was not there. I looked in the whole apartment, returned to the children’s bedroom and at that moment I saw the curtains moving towards me making visible that the blind was opened up. I moved towards the window and I opened the curtains to see if she had climbed out through there but I saw no traces of her. I don’t know if I closed or not the window at that moment." , reports Maddie's mother.”
Gerry;
“When I came to the apartment I was surprised that Kate had dealt with the children and she even had douched them. I sat down with the children and read them a story" , Gerry stated.
The first one in checking condition of the children was Gerry himself. "I noticed that the angle of the door had changed and that it was opened some 45 degrees (…) perhaps Maddie had woken up and gone out of the room. I looked obliquely in our room but I saw that Maddie was not (...). I opened the door 60 degrees, looked at the left and saw Maddie asleep
https://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2008/04/horrifying-story-of-madeleines-parents.html
What the statements actually say;
Kate;
She reports only one episode where, on the morning of Thursday May 3rd, Madeleine asked the interviewee why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying. (no mention of closer watching of the children, and no mention of going to the window and opening the curtains)
Gerry;
No mention of being surprised that Kate had bathed the children and no mention of the angle of the bedroom door.
Do you SERIOUSLY expect us to believe that Kate said nothing more than that Madeleine had asked her why she had not come when they were crying, that she added no further detail, just one short sentence about the incident? How many hours was she interviewed for? Did Telecino claim they had been given copies of the statements or were they told verbally what Kate and Gerry had said?
-
They'd possibly mentioned the incident during one of those informal interviews they had in the beginning.
Amazing that we’re discussing statements made by the McCanns over 14 years agon on a thread entitled “Most recent developments related to Madeleine McCann’s Case”. I guess some people feel more comfortable poring over ancient history than contemplating the here and now.
-
They'd possibly mentioned the incident during one of those informal interviews they had in the beginning.
According to Telecinco they were quoting from the statements.
-
According to Telecinco they were quoting from the statements.
And who was responsible for taking the statements and keeping them secure?
-
And who was responsible for taking the statements and keeping them secure?
The PJ were and they did, imo. Anyone who believes Telecinco were quoting from the McCann's statements is easily fooled imo.
-
The PJ were and they did, imo. Anyone who believes Telecinco were quoting from the McCann's statements is easily fooled imo.
So Telecino were lying but the chief of police still apologised for the leak? You’re not making any sense. I presume you must therefore consider that the PJ’s chief of police is easily fooled.
-
According to Telecinco they were quoting from the statements.
I wonder if there was a recording? The written statements are just a summary of what's said - they're not verbatim.
-
I wonder if there was a recording? The written statements are just a summary of what's said - they're not verbatim.
I think you need to accept that Nacho Abad was not quoting the statements given on 4th May, which is what he claimed to be doing.
-
I think you need to accept that Nacho Abad was not quoting the statements given on 4th May, which is what he claimed to be doing.
I think you need to accept that he was very obviously tipped off by someone from within the PJ, now I wonder who that could have been….? *%87
-
I think you need to accept that he was very obviously tipped off by someone from within the PJ, now I wonder who that could have been….? *%87
He quoted from statements made on 4th May 2007 which he claimed to have in his possession. The quotes were NOT in those statements.
-
He quoted from statements made on 4th May 2007 which he claimed to have in his possession. The quotes were NOT in those statements.
As I said before he was obviously tipped off about the contents of the statements by someone who knew exactly what was said in those interviews. Now, given that the Chief of Police actually admitted his force had leaked and given the timing of the report (to cause maximum damage to the McCanns on the day they were launching the Missing Child alert scheme) it really shouldn’t take a genius to work out how Telecino got the information.
-
As I said before he was obviously tipped off about the contents of the statements by someone who knew exactly what was said in those interviews. Now, given that the Chief of Police actually admitted his force had leaked and given the timing of the report (to cause maximum damage to the McCanns on the day they were launching the Missing Child alert scheme) it really shouldn’t take a genius to work out how Telecino got the information.
It was said that Alpino Rebeiro was present in Leicestershire for the interviews with the McCann's friends, and that he returned to Portugal 'a day early'. I don't think that is correct. Rebeiro wasn't in the UK, it was Paulo Rebelo who was there. It seems the Mail was putting words into the mouth of the wrong policeman. Very impressive!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559297/Police-chief-tells-anger-crying-Maddie-leak.html
-
He quoted from statements made on 4th May 2007 which he claimed to have in his possession. The quotes were NOT in those statements.
Why is t his so important to you. I would think if I could be bothered to spend an hour studying the details I could counter your claims.. The fact is it isn't worth it... The discussion is laughable imo
-
It was said that Alpino Rebeiro was present in Leicestershire for the interviews with the McCann's friends, and that he returned to Portugal 'a day early'. I don't think that is correct. Rebeiro wasn't in the UK, it was Paulo Rebelo who was there. It seems the Mail was putting words into the mouth of the wrong policeman. Very impressive!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559297/Police-chief-tells-anger-crying-Maddie-leak.html
I am really interested in the sceptic concentration on why? this particular slur on the McCanns which you appear to be pushing for all you are worth.
One sceptic mouthpiece has it billed as ...
Paulo Rebelo arrived,the McCanns left for Brussels with a devious plan .. they were about to accuse PJ of leaking information !
Portuguese police have arrived in Britain to observe as the friends of Kate and Gerry McCann are interviewed about the night Madeleine went missing.
At a time when it was still laughingly being denied that "a source close to the investigation" was feeding lying propaganda to journalists, it is being suggested that the McCanns were leaking pejorative information against themselves.
What is it that I'm missing about the importance sceptics hold about this innocuous sentence ("me n'Sean" - "the twins" - "me", etcetera etcetera) at a time when a rapist/paedophile is the main suspect in the disappearance of a little girl.
-
It was said that Alpino Rebeiro was present in Leicestershire for the interviews with the McCann's friends, and that he returned to Portugal 'a day early'. I don't think that is correct. Rebeiro wasn't in the UK, it was Paulo Rebelo who was there. It seems the Mail was putting words into the mouth of the wrong policeman. Very impressive!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-559297/Police-chief-tells-anger-crying-Maddie-leak.html
OK, so it was Rebelo that apologised for the leaks? He was even closer to the investigation then so do you reckon he was the type of copper to be easily fooled?
-
I am really interested in the sceptic concentration on why? this particular slur on the McCanns which you appear to be pushing for all you are worth.
One sceptic mouthpiece has it billed as ...
Paulo Rebelo arrived,the McCanns left for Brussels with a devious plan .. they were about to accuse PJ of leaking information !
Portuguese police have arrived in Britain to observe as the friends of Kate and Gerry McCann are interviewed about the night Madeleine went missing.
At a time when it was still laughingly being denied that "a source close to the investigation" was feeding lying propaganda to journalists, it is being suggested that the McCanns were leaking pejorative information against themselves.
What is it that I'm missing about the importance sceptics hold about this innocuous sentence ("me n'Sean" - "the twins" - "me", etcetera etcetera) at a time when a rapist/paedophile is the main suspect in the disappearance of a little girl.
It's desperate deflection IMO. As if anyone in "The Real World" actually cares about the discrepancies G-Unit seems to hold so dear to her heart and can't let go of.
-
Surely an even bigger story for Telecino to get their teeth into at the time when the McCanns were considered suspects in their daughter's disappearance would have been to report that their "Spin Doctor" had tried to sway public opinion by leaking sensitive information. But that didn't happen did it, because it makes no sense whatsoever. We KNOW the PJ leaked (they admitted it and apologised for it), we KNOW at least one Portuguese copper had it in for the McCanns from Day One. We know that the PJ as a whole felt aggrieved at the way they were treated by the "MSM", so joining the dots really shouldn't be too difficult for the super-sleuths on here.
-
OK, so it was Rebelo that apologised for the leaks? He was even closer to the investigation then so do you reckon he was the type of copper to be easily fooled?
I don't think anyone apologised for the leaks. Rebelo strongly denied the Telecinco claims.
-
It's desperate deflection IMO. As if anyone in "The Real World" actually cares about the discrepancies G-Unit seems to hold so dear to her heart and can't let go of.
Whichever way it is looked at I think it is nothing but trivia. Deflection is the best that can be said for it.
-
I don't think anyone apologised for the leaks. Rebelo strongly denied the Telecinco claims.
Do you have a cite for any of that?
-
I don't think anyone apologised for the leaks. Rebelo strongly denied the Telecinco claims.
Cite please.
-
So who could have had such a gripe not just against the McCanns, but the new head of the investigation?
-
Oh Dear. Same old same old and still no evidence that The McCanns were culpable.
As it is I don't have to do anything except to read the innuendo and other such rubbish.
Back later, although not sure when.
-
Oh Dear. Same old same old and still no evidence that The McCanns were culpable.
As it is I don't have to do anything except to read the innuendo and other such rubbish.
Back later, although not sure when.
After you've mopped up Des O'Connor's latest puddle, made another few jars of Quince jelly and installed a new radial circuit in your Melrand hovel?
-
After you've mopped up Des O'Connor's latest puddle, made another few jars of Quince jelly and installed a new radial circuit in your Melrand hovel?
Got it.
However, I suspect that I forgot to feed the rotten little shit tonight so I fed him again, or not. Things could be getting a bit dire around here. But he is never going to get fat at this rate.
I only fed him again because the tin was staring at me, so he could have been putting me on.
He is one sleekit beastie and a Rat for all time. His coat is so lovely just to look at.
-
So who could have had such a gripe not just against the McCanns, but the new head of the investigation?
It gave Mitchell an excuse to lambast the PJ, and provided a reason for the group to refuse to return to Portugal for the reconstitution;
Kate and Gerry McCann tonight threatened to pull out of plans to return to Portugal to help police reconstruct the events around their daughter Madeleine’s disappearance amid a furious row over leaked interviews...
"“All this nonsense over the last 24 or 36 hours does not in any way endear them to the idea of going back,” Mr Mitchell said.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/world/arid-30357298.html
-
It gave Mitchell an excuse to lambast the PJ, and provided a reason for the group to refuse to return to Portugal for the reconstitution;
Kate and Gerry McCann tonight threatened to pull out of plans to return to Portugal to help police reconstruct the events around their daughter Madeleine’s disappearance amid a furious row over leaked interviews...
"“All this nonsense over the last 24 or 36 hours does not in any way endear them to the idea of going back,” Mr Mitchell said.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/world/arid-30357298.html
Kate and Gerry were never asked to go back. So could you stop this sit now.
-
It gave Mitchell an excuse to lambast the PJ, and provided a reason for the group to refuse to return to Portugal for the reconstitution;
Kate and Gerry McCann tonight threatened to pull out of plans to return to Portugal to help police reconstruct the events around their daughter Madeleine’s disappearance amid a furious row over leaked interviews...
"“All this nonsense over the last 24 or 36 hours does not in any way endear them to the idea of going back,” Mr Mitchell said.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/world/arid-30357298.html
They hardly needed any more excuses to lambast the PJ, and the reconstitution didn’t happen because none of the others asked to attend were up for it including Jez Wilkins. Nice bit of innuendo on your part though.
-
They hardly needed any more excuses to lambast the PJ, and the reconstitution didn’t happen because none of the others asked to attend were up for it including Jez Wilkins. Nice bit of innuendo on your part though.
As ever always. But we have heard it all before.
-
Kate and Gerry were never asked to go back. So could you stop this sit now.
The PJ weren't required to ask them, just to notify them. I expect Mitchell knew that too.
-
The PJ weren't required to ask them, just to notify them. I expect Mitchell knew that too.
I think after all these years if Mitchell had given Telecino fake police statements to muddy the waters and protect his clients it might have come out by now don’t you? That’s a great news scoop right there.
-
I think after all these years if Mitchell had given Telecino fake police statements to muddy the waters and protect his clients it might have come out by now don’t you? That’s a great news scoop right there.
I don't know who Telecinco's source was and haven't accused anyone. All I know is that the content of the McCann's statements was not as reported. They definitely didn't mention deciding to check more carefully, and they continued to check every 30 minutes as they had every evening, despite Mitchell's claim;
"They decided to check more thoroughly the next night and that is what they did."
https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/mccanns-launch-furious-counter-attack-on-portuguese-police-after-maddie-in-tears-leak-7302079.html
-
I don't know who Telecinco's source was and haven't accused anyone. All I know is that the content of the McCann's statements was not as reported. They definitely didn't mention deciding to check more carefully, and they continued to check every 30 minutes as they had every evening, despite Mitchell's claim;
"They decided to check more thoroughly the next night and that is what they did."
https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/mccanns-launch-furious-counter-attack-on-portuguese-police-after-maddie-in-tears-leak-7302079.html
Is your post at all relevant to "More recent events related to Madeleine McCann's case" which is after all the topic of this thread.
-
Is your post at all relevant to "More recent events related to Madeleine McCann's case" which is after all the topic of this thread.
It's as relevant as most of the recent posts.
-
I don't know who Telecinco's source was and haven't accused anyone. All I know is that the content of the McCann's statements was not as reported. They definitely didn't mention deciding to check more carefully, and they continued to check every 30 minutes as they had every evening, despite Mitchell's claim;
"They decided to check more thoroughly the next night and that is what they did."
https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/mccanns-launch-furious-counter-attack-on-portuguese-police-after-maddie-in-tears-leak-7302079.html
Your insinuation is as clear as day. Unless you were in the room during the many hours Kate and Gerry were giving witness statements you cannot say for certain that they definitely didn't mention checking more carefully. There must have been a heap of detail that was never included in the statements that appear in the files, as these were reported second-hand, not verbatim.
-
It's as relevant as most of the recent posts.
You in particular seem to be determined to knock posts way off topic - check your recent posts on this thread for verification of that.
That is the opposite of what your status on the forum dictates your role should be.
-
Your insinuation is as clear as day. Unless you were in the room during the many hours Kate and Gerry were giving witness statements you cannot say for certain that they definitely didn't mention checking more carefully. There must have been a heap of detail that was never included in the statements that appear in the files, as these were reported second-hand, not verbatim.
I can say for certain what was in the McCann statements, which is what Telecinco claimed to have.
Telecinco said it had obtained leaked copies of the couple's statements to Portuguese police
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/spanish-tv-station-claims-it-obtained-leaked-11-04-t4152.html
-
I can say for certain what was in the McCann statements, which is what Telecinco claimed to have.
Telecinco said it had obtained leaked copies of the couple's statements to Portuguese police
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/spanish-tv-station-claims-it-obtained-leaked-11-04-t4152.html
Perhaps whoever gave them the police statements gave them some additional “colour” for their report, eh? Now if only there was a way you could prove it was Clarrie you’d be laughing! As you can’t I really don’t see what your point is apart from to waft a few insinuations about on a thread which is about current developments not ancient irrelevancies like this.
-
Police discovered thousands of child pornography content in the possession of Christian B.
On the premises, the police also discovered USB sticks with around 8,000 images – almost all with child pornographic content. They were buried in a plastic bag, along with B.'s dog, who had died a short time before.
Now his ex-girlfriend unpacked and gave the photo to the public.
She told journalists that she met Christian B. in 2009 at a dating event for over 30-year-olds. He is said to have offered her that she could live with him in the caravan – she allegedly should not pay anything for it.
He then showed her the abandoned factory on his property and asked her to take a picture of him. He said that he wanted to renovate the building and was very proud of it.
After a while, he is said to have come home more and more often completely drunk – in the middle of the night at two or three o'clock. At some point, it became too much for her because she realized that something was wrong. In an interview with the journalists, M. said that she then separated from Christian B.
https://www.rtl.de/cms/fall-maddie-mccann-das-sagt-die-ex-freundin-ueber-den-verdaechtigen-christian-b-heute-4706492.html
I found it interesting that Brueckner used a dating event for over thirties to make contact with people. I was under the impression he had a wide circle of friends.
-
09/06/2021, 11:31 Clock
Maddie kidnapped in a camper? Ex-lover of main suspect reveals details
Hardly a week goes by without new headlines about the missing Madeleine McCann. Now the ex-lover of the main suspect unpacks private details. Does it provide new clues about the camper in which Maddie may have been kidnapped?
Madeleine McCann missing: Ex-lover of main suspect recognizes minibus again
The main suspect continues to be Christian B, who was imprisoned in Germany for other crimes.
The ex-lover of the main suspect in the Madeleine McCann case has now said that she probably slept in the same minibus that he may have used for the kidnapping of the three-year-old, according to police.
Nuray Oezgen revealed to the Mail on Sunday that Christian B. - for whom the German police say they have "concrete evidence" of Madeleine's murder - described the van as his "home".
The alleged murderer once showed Nuray the Volkswagen T3 Westfalia in a park in Germany.
He has now become a crucial clue in one of the largest manhunts of all time, as witnesses want to have seen him near the area where Madeleine disappeared in Praia da Luz in 2007.
https://www.news.de/panorama/855936761/madeleine-mccann-maddie-vielleicht-entfuehrt-in-kleinbus-in-portugal-ex-freundin-von-hauptverdaechtigem-christian-b-lueftet-geheimnis/1/
As recognised by Amaral, it seems the Westfalia does indeed have a pivotal role in Brueckner's life.
-
Perhaps whoever gave them the police statements gave them some additional “colour” for their report, eh? Now if only there was a way you could prove it was Clarrie you’d be laughing! As you can’t I really don’t see what your point is apart from to waft a few insinuations about on a thread which is about current developments not ancient irrelevancies like this.
What current developments?
-
What current developments?
@)(++(* go back to sleep Rip Van Winkle.
-
Accomplice in the kidnapping of Maddie McCann?
Holiday resort employee had saved Christian B.'s number
In the case of the missing Maddie McCann, new investigation details are constantly coming to light. The main suspect Christian B. (43) is said to have received a tip from a holiday resort employee that the air is clean to break into the apartment.
Employee had number of child molester on his mobile phone
Meanwhile, new details about the investigation of the police in the case of Maddie became known. According to the Portuguese newspaper "Correio de Manhã", Christian B. received a tip from an employee of the resort that Maddie's parents were with friends for dinner in a tapas bar on that evening of May 3, 2007 and that it was easy to break into the apartment.
Before Maddie's disappearance – between 7.32 p.m. and 8.02 p.m. – Christian B.'s telephone number was answered by a call from another Portuguese number. The caller is said to have been a friend of B.'s at the time. The police were able to locate the man in the meantime. According to "Correio de Manhã", Christian B.'s number was stored on his mobile phone.
https://www.blick.ch/ausland/komplize-bei-der-entfuehrung-von-maddie-mccann-ferienresort-mitarbeiter-hatte-christian-b-s-nummer-gespeichert-id15929212.html
If Correio de Manhã have got this right it would indicate that the police now have the identity of Brueckner's accomplice in his career as a burglar as well as putting him in the resort when Madeleine was abducted.
That would indeed be weighty circumstantial evidence.
-
Police discovered thousands of child pornography content in the possession of Christian B.
On the premises, the police also discovered USB sticks with around 8,000 images – almost all with child pornographic content. They were buried in a plastic bag, along with B.'s dog, who had died a short time before.
Now his ex-girlfriend unpacked and gave the photo to the public.
She told journalists that she met Christian B. in 2009 at a dating event for over 30-year-olds. He is said to have offered her that she could live with him in the caravan – she allegedly should not pay anything for it.
He then showed her the abandoned factory on his property and asked her to take a picture of him. He said that he wanted to renovate the building and was very proud of it.
After a while, he is said to have come home more and more often completely drunk – in the middle of the night at two or three o'clock. At some point, it became too much for her because she realized that something was wrong. In an interview with the journalists, M. said that she then separated from Christian B.
https://www.rtl.de/cms/fall-maddie-mccann-das-sagt-die-ex-freundin-ueber-den-verdaechtigen-christian-b-heute-4706492.html
I found it interesting that Brueckner used a dating event for over thirties to make contact with people. I was under the impression he had a wide circle of friends.
Interestingly they never found any photos of a deceased person or we would have heard about it. Bruckner's MO never did point to him being involved in murder and that is an insurmountable problem for the Germans.
-
Interestingly they never found any photos of a deceased person or we would have heard about it. Bruckner's MO never did point to him being involved in murder and that is an insurmountable problem for the Germans.
According to Wolters they have enough evidence to charge now.. Your idea that his MO excudes him is totally without logic or foundation based on previous murder cases
What I see from some posters is a total refuusal to accept that the Germans may, well have solved the case.... That doesn't make any sense, to me
-
According to Wolters they have enough evidence to charge now.. Your idea that his MO excudes him is totally without logic or foundation based on previous murder cases
What I see from some posters is a total refuusal to accept that the Germans may, well have solved the case.... That doesn't make any sense, to me
That's because they haven't, they are not even close to solving it & they never will be all the time they presume abduction.
-
That's because they haven't, they are not even close to solving it & they never will be all the time they presume abduction.
It's clear they have proof of abduction by a stranger
-
That's because they haven't, they are not even close to solving it & they never will be all the time they presume abduction.
You know all this as a fact.. No you don't. As I said you can't even accept the Germans may have solved it
-
You know all this as a fact.. No you don't. As I said you can't even accept the Germans may have solved it
I know for a fact Christian Brueckner is innocent, he hasn't been charged with anything & I'm really looking forward to him walking free, then launching libel proceedings against yourself.
-
Interestingly they never found any photos of a deceased person or we would have heard about it. Bruckner's MO never did point to him being involved in murder and that is an insurmountable problem for the Germans.
Brueckner's MO consisted in part of the buzz he got from operating in risky situations and his expertise in burglary. He would have known about the routine between the apartments and dining table and the frequency and danger it represented probably appealed to his twisted sense of adventure.
Amaral thought it would have been off putting to an intruder and was one of his 'reasons' to suspect the parents. As in so many of his other deductions, I think he was wrong.
-
That's because they haven't, they are not even close to solving it & they never will be all the time they presume abduction.
It seems there may well be a holiday resort employee of the time with Brueckner's number on his phone who will be doing his best to convince the Portuguese police he was only a lookout and had nothing to do with planning and perpetrating a kidnap.
You know the sceptic battle cry of "Why Madeleine!" maybe we will soon have the answer to that.
-
I know for a fact Christian Brueckner is innocent, he hasn't been charged with anything & I'm really looking forward to him walking free, then launching libel proceedings against yourself.
Brueckner is being investigated at the moment - he is a SUSPECT - and as such he is entitled to the presumption of innocence, which is a concept only sceptics appear unable to get their heads round.
-
I know for a fact Christian Brueckner is innocent, he hasn't been charged with anything & I'm really looking forward to him walking free, then launching libel proceedings against yourself.
If you are going to post absolute rubbish don't expect any serious post in response
-
Brueckner is being investigated at the moment - he is a SUSPECT - and as such he is entitled to the presumption of innocence, which is a concept only sceptics appear unable to get their heads round.
Technically true indeed but I fear in reality the term innocent has little in common with Christian Bruckner. He is a monster for sure!
-
Technically true indeed but I fear in reality the term innocent has little in common with Christian Bruckner. He is a monster for sure!
He is certainly a prolific offender who seems to have the ability to function below the radar of most people. He seemed to mix well (for example as the 'mister nice guy' offering the contestants a lift) without raising any concerns.
Very different from the persona he portrayed when talking to 'friends' on the dark web.
I think he is a very complex personality and I don't think anyone will ever get to the bottom of him. Unlike his lawyer - I wouldn't even leave him alone with my dog.
-
... or sheep, cow or goat.
-
Technically true indeed but I fear in reality the term innocent has little in common with Christian Bruckner. He is a monster for sure!
Still does not a murderer make.
-
... or sheep, cow or goat.
I had forgotten that one.
That certainly was one lady (and sheep) who wasn't taking him at face value.
-
Still does not a murderer make.
What sort of person does make a murderer in your view?
-
You always seem to seize on paedophiles and yet there's no firm evidence the disappearance was sexually motivated.
I'm afraid the Germans claim they have concrete evidence it was... And taking everything into account it would be unthinkable they are lying
-
He is certainly a prolific offender who seems to have the ability to function below the radar of most people. He seemed to mix well (for example as the 'mister nice guy' offering the contestants a lift) without raising any concerns.
Very different from the persona he portrayed when talking to 'friends' on the dark web.
I think he is a very complex personality and I don't think anyone will ever get to the bottom of him. Unlike his lawyer - I wouldn't even leave him alone with my dog.
I don't believe he is killer material though. Being a drug dealer, pervert and rapist is one thing but murder is a whole new level.
-
I don't believe he is killer material though.
My opinion is that Brueckner is an archetypal predator who goes for weaker people than himself. I'm not sure if that would include males, but if the opportunity presented itself he probably would just for the fun of it and because he could.
His history with females - for example - his girlfriends, doesn't come over as a happy one for them; and the torture and degradation inflicted on his older victim says it all. Quite a variable age range there from abuse of the young right through to abusing an elderly person - and usually with some monetary reward in it for him.
Given the phone evidence of the third and his tout de suite departure from Luz, I think puts him in the frame as instrumental in taking part in Madeleine's abduction; what was done with her thereafter is less clear.
Perhaps if the PJ had given more credence to following up physically possible sightings of Madeleine regarding time or place we would have a more complete picture or even Madeleine being returned to her parents within days.
I think Brueckner is perfectly capable of killing an innocent little girl and the German prosecutors certainly believe they have evidence to support their conviction he did.
My blood just runs cold every time I read about his dark web ramblings describing his fantasy. I think he would have been perfectly capable of carrying that through to completion particularly if there was money to be made.
I sincerely hope he never did. But yes, I firmly believe he has no conscience and would be capable of murder.
The tabloids are presently running with a story that he killed an ex-girlfriend when he was drunk, I think his history of violence towards females doesn't make that improbable.
-
I don't believe he is killer material though. Being a drug dealer, pervert and rapist is one thing but murder is a whole new level.
This is simply nonsense. What IS killer material exactly? Not a man who sadistically rapes an old woman using violence and who has allegedly professed a desire to keep something small for days to abuse and then dispose of?
-
I don't believe he is killer material though. Being a drug dealer, pervert and rapist is one thing but murder is a whole new level.
The day before Ian Huntley killed Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman would you have considered him "killer material"? If so, on what basis?
-
I don't believe he is killer material though. Being a drug dealer, pervert and rapist is one thing but murder is a whole new level.
We actually know very little about Brueckner and his peripatetic lifestyle throughout Europe and for all we know, beyond.
But I think what we do know about the nature of the crimes he was caught at - all of them life changing for his victims - makes murder very small beer.
-
Sorry, but I still can't take the leap. I don't know why, beyond having vociferously defended The McCanns for many years and their Right to The Presumption of Innocence.
Brueckner is not a nice man, but I need to see a Court of Law.
I don't like what Wolters is doing, although I expect that he is allowed under German Law to do this, otherwise he wouldn't be doing it.
All a bit too much European Law for me, most of which remains beyond my comprehension. Not least Portuguese Law.
British Law must be embedded in my soul even after all these years of living in France.
-
What sort of person does make a murderer in your view?
Why do you think CB took the leap to murder, bearing in mind he's not even been questioned yet.
-
Why do you think CB took the leap to murder, bearing in mind he's not even been questioned yet.
Was a young couple slaughtered while their two children slept upstairs perhaps because of a row over a parking space?
-
Was a young couple slaughtered while their two children slept upstairs perhaps because of a row over a parking space?
The guy charged is an ex-commando, trained to kill, so not a good comparison with CB =IMO
-
Why do you think CB took the leap to murder, bearing in mind he's not even been questioned yet.
If he did... The same reason others do. If a paedophile takes a child... Murfer normally follows
-
The guy charged is an ex-commando, trained to kill, so a good comparison with CB =IMO
I am not sure what you mean.
There are often comments that don't make a lot of sense, but then we are all getting good at obfuscation.
You actually rarely put yourself on the line. However, I have seen enough of your comments to know that you are far from stupid. So you haven't fooled me.
Your own opinion is fine by me, excepting that I am still not sure of exactly what that opinion is.
Oh God, never end a sentence with, "Is".
-
If he did... The same reason others do. If a paedophile takes a child... Murfer normally follows
Do you know something? I don't know that. Possibly because I don't want to. I will deal with it if it actually happened.
Some of us like me go on hoping. Which probably makes me no where quite as logical as you.
-
Why do you think CB took the leap to murder, bearing in mind he's not even been questioned yet.
You question makes no logical sense.
-
You question makes no logical sense.
No, it actually doesn't make sense. But then we are all at it at the moment. Some of us are better at it than others
The use of words you see.
This is all good. But nothing to do with Madeleine McCann.
-
You question makes no logical sense.
It makes sense to me.
Barrier is asking what it is that makes them believe that CB became a murderer... given what we know about his previous. Barrier adds that CB hasn't even been questioned yet which gives anyone less to go on in order to form the opinion that CB had started killing people.
-
It makes sense to me.
Barrier is asking what it is that makes them believe that CB became a murderer... given what we know about his previous. Barrier adds that CB hasn't even been questioned yet which gives anyone less to go on in order to form the opinion that CB had started killing people.
Two simple questions..
Do you think it's possible Maddie, was, abducted
Do you think it's, possible CB murdered her
-
It makes sense to me.
Barrier is asking what it is that makes them believe that CB became a murderer... given what we know about his previous. Barrier adds that CB hasn't even been questioned yet which gives anyone less to go on in order to form the opinion that CB had started killing people.
Who said that Brueckner had started killing people? No one has said that on this Forum. So where did you get that idea?
-
It makes sense to me.
Barrier is asking what it is that makes them believe that CB became a murderer... given what we know about his previous. Barrier adds that CB hasn't even been questioned yet which gives anyone less to go on in order to form the opinion that CB had started killing people.
It is an entirely illogical question as whether or not Brückner has been questioned has absolutely nothing to do why why someone might consider him capable of murder. And it’s not as if he’s going to explain what did or didn’t mske him a murderer when questioned anyway. He could deny it, tell us he’s a kind and gentle man that was busy knitting stump socks for lepers that night, it doesn’t mean he’s telling the truth.
-
Who said that Brueckner had started killing people? No one has said that on this Forum. So where did you get that idea?
Surely anyone saying they believe Wolters has solved the case is agreeing Brueckner is a murderer, aren't they?
-
It is an entirely illogical question as whether or not Brückner has been questioned has absolutely nothing to do why why someone might consider him capable of murder. And it’s not as if he’s going to explain what did or didn’t mske him a murderer when questioned anyway. He could deny it, tell us he’s a kind and gentle man that was busy knitting stump socks for lepers that night, it doesn’t mean he’s telling the truth.
But he must be presumed innocent.
So yes, we can only presume he was busy darning when Maddie disappeared.
Unless we can prove otherwise of course.
-
Surely anyone saying they believe Wolters has solved the case is agreeing Brueckner is a murderer, aren't they?
Brueckner wasn't a rapist until he was convicted. At the moment - he is not a murderer. I thought you knew that was understood.
-
But he must be presumed innocent.
So yes, we can only presume he was busy darning when Maddie disappeared.
Unless we can prove otherwise of course.
Sceptics just cannot get their heads around the concept of innocent until proven guilty.
-
Brueckner wasn't a rapist until he was convicted. At the moment - he is not a murderer. I thought you knew that was understood.
He's not a ŕapist now either, he hasn't been raping anyone for about 17 years now.
-
He's not a ŕapist now either, he hasn't been raping anyone for about 17 years now.
He is a rapist - and a torturer. No eulogy will change the fact of his criminality.
-
He is a rapist - and a torturer. No eulogy will change the fact of his criminality.
Yes he raped & tortured someone in 2005, but that was a long time ago now & we can't hold it against him indefinitely.
It doesn't necessarily make him a bad person, we all make mistakes.
-
It is an entirely illogical question as whether or not Brückner has been quetstioned has absolutely nothing to do why why someone might consider him capable of murder. And it’s not as if he’s going to explain what did or didn’t mske him a murderer when questioned anyway. He could deny it, tell us he’s a kind and gentle man that was busy knitting stump socks for lepers that night, it doesn’t mean he’s telling the truth.
The German Prosecution Service will get Nothing from Brueckner I mean, would you if you were him. I certainly wouldn't. I would advise him to keep his mouth shut.
Although it might or might not do him any good. I don't know how The German Prosecution Service works. I spent far too much time wondering about The Portuguese Prosecution Service. And where did that get me?
You see, I really don't want to go into The War. But it does matter. And I haven't yet sussed just how much when it comes to crimes of paedophillia. Or even if this happened.
Brueckner may not be allowed to be found guilty just because he is German. Or am I the only one who has thought about this?
-
Yes he raped & tortured someone in 2005, but that was a long time ago now & we can't hold it against him indefinitely.
It doesn't necessarily make him a bad person, we all make mistakes.
And you are an arsehole. Poor old you.
-
"If we had a video of the act or a picture of Madeleine dead with Brueckner on camera, we wouldn’t have had to make a public appeal. But we only have circumstantial evidence"
There is a thought provoking analysis of the first sentence of that statement on the current McCann thread on Websleuths.
I recommend it to members.
-
"If we had a video of the act or a picture of Madeleine dead with Brueckner on camera, we wouldn’t have had to make a public appeal. But we only have circumstantial evidence"
There is a thought provoking analysis of the first sentence of that statement on the current McCann thread on Websleuths.
I recommend it to members.
And therein lies the problem. It simply isn't good enough.
We all fought for The McCanns on more or less than this. And I don't need Websleuths to tell me the difference.
Brueckner at least deserves the same consideration. So Wolters can piss off. Until he can come up with something else.
No, I don't like Brueckner very much at all. But I have no reason to believe that he murdered Madeleine.
And nor do I believe that The McCanns did either.
Take your pick. I can't be blaming someone when I don't even know. But some of you can. Think on that. You absolutely disgust me. I will never understand who you are.
-
Surely anyone saying they believe Wolters has solved the case is agreeing Brueckner is a murderer, aren't they?
You are making an assumption and are totally wrong.
Afaiac Wolters can prive MM was abducted and murdered.
That to me is solving the case. John has, said it's a mystery that may never be solved... I'm confident from everything that has been said that Wolters has solved the mystery..
Whether CB is the perp we don't know... But if you clsim he is innocent you are showing your ignorance. He may or may not be innocent. Even a court with all the evidence may not be able to answer that question... Whatever verdict they arrive at. You pontificate on CBs innocence a rights to sue.... Again you are showing your ignorance if the law.
I will preempt your question... Are the McCanbs innocent. My opinion is they are... But it's not an established fact
-
"If we had a video of the act or a picture of Madeleine dead with Brueckner on camera, we wouldn’t have had to make a public appeal. But we only have circumstantial evidence"
There is a thought provoking analysis of the first sentence of that statement on the current McCann thread on Websleuths.
I recommend it to members.
Exactly, there is nothing to link CB apart from him supposedly being in Luz, (so were others )and his mate saying CB confessed in a bar, maybe Wolters needs to get CB pissed to get him to talk.
-
And therein lies the problem. It simply isn't good enough.
We all fought for The McCanns on more or less than this. And I don't need Websleuths to tell me the difference.
Brueckner at least deserves the same consideration. So Wolters can piss off. Until he can come up with something else.
No, I don't like Brueckner very much at all. But I have no reason to believe that he murdered Madeleine.
And nor do I believe that The McCanns did either.
Take your pick. I can't be blaming someone when I don't even know. But some of you can. Think on that. You absolutely disgust me. I will never understand who you are.
Spot on.
-
And therein lies the problem. It simply isn't good enough.
We all fought for The McCanns on more or less than this. And I don't need Websleuths to tell me the difference.
Brueckner at least deserves the same consideration. So Wolters can piss off. Until he can come up with something else.
No, I don't like Brueckner very much at all. But I have no reason to believe that he murdered Madeleine.
And nor do I believe that The McCanns did either.
Take your pick. I can't be blaming someone when I don't even know. But some of you can. Think on that. You absolutely disgust me. I will never understand who you are.
I think there is every reason to believe that CB may have murdered Maddie.... Thats a reasonable statement based on the known facts. ..and protected by my right to free speech... Because it's, reasonable and supported by evidence
Brietta's cite is out of context.
-
But he must be presumed innocent.
So yes, we can only presume he was busy darning when Maddie disappeared.
Unless we can prove otherwise of course.
Just like you are always presuming the McCanns are innocent and were both frantic with worry having just discovered Madeleine missing when the Smiths sighting occurred you mean?
-
Exactly, there is nothing to link CB apart from him supposedly being in Luz, (so were others )and his mate saying CB confessed in a bar, maybe Wolters needs to get CB pissed to get him to talk.
You are making an assumption and presenting it a fact.. Briettas quote is a newspaper report and out of context. In real life Wolters has, said he has concrete evidence that CB murdered Maddie. He also says he now has sufficient evidence to charge... That implies, hes collected more since his initial announcement
-
I think there is every reason to believe that CB may have murdered Maddie.... Thats a reasonable statement based on the known facts. ..and protected by my right to free speech... Because it's, reasonable and supported by evidence
Brietta's cite is out of context.
It may or may not be supported by evidence, but not by any evidence publicly available. Unless you count the pronouncements of Wolters as evidence, that is.
-
It may or may not be supported by evidence, but not by any evidence publicly available. Unless you count the pronouncements of Wolters as evidence, that is.
The statements by Wolters are evidence... If you understand what evidence is
-
It may or may not be supported by evidence, but not by any evidence publicly available. Unless you count the pronouncements of Wolters as evidence, that is.
My opinion is supported by publicly available evidence
-
And you are an arsehole. Poor old you.
I think you'll find personal insults aren't permitted under forum rules.
Why hasn't this unwarranted attack been dealt with by the moderators?
-
The German Prosecution Service will get Nothing from Brueckner I mean, would you if you were him. I certainly wouldn't. I would advise him to keep his mouth shut.
Although it might or might not do him any good. I don't know how The German Prosecution Service works. I spent far too much time wondering about The Portuguese Prosecution Service. And where did that get me?
You see, I really don't want to go into The War. But it does matter. And I haven't yet sussed just how much when it comes to crimes of paedophillia. Or even if this happened.
Brueckner may not be allowed to be found guilty just because he is German. Or am I the only one who has thought about this?
An interesting thought. The Germans were happy enough to convict him for other crimes - why would this be an exception?
Would you care to expand further on your thoughts ?
-
You are making an assumption and presenting it a fact.. Briettas quote is a newspaper report and out of context. In real life Wolters has, said he has concrete evidence that CB murdered Maddie. He also says he now has sufficient evidence to charge... That implies, hes collected more since his initial announcement
The onus is on Wolters and his team, no charges or even questioning means he's not convinced.
Criminal law
As criminal proceedings in Germany are not adversarial, but apply the principle of official investigation (see Question 18), it is the court and the prosecutor that have to provide evidence both against and in favour of the accused.
In a criminal trial the standard of proof is similar to the one in civil matters: the court must be convinced beyond reasonable doubt. The benefit of any doubt goes to the accused.
-
The statements by Wolters are evidence... If you understand what evidence is
Not evidence of use in court.
-
Exactly, there is nothing to link CB apart from him supposedly being in Luz, (so were others )and his mate saying CB confessed in a bar, maybe Wolters needs to get CB pissed to get him to talk.
I wish you would desist from making assumptions you simply cannot substantiate, unless you have a direct line to the heart of the current investigation which I don't think you do.
-
It may or may not be supported by evidence, but not by any evidence publicly available. Unless you count the pronouncements of Wolters as evidence, that is.
You do know this is an ACTIVE police investigation ????? Oh well ~ maybe not 👀
-
The onus is on Wolters and his team, no charges or even questioning means he's not convinced.
Criminal law
As criminal proceedings in Germany are not adversarial, but apply the principle of official investigation (see Question 18), it is the court and the prosecutor that have to provide evidence both against and in favour of the accused.
In a criminal trial the standard of proof is similar to the one in civil matters: the court must be convinced beyond reasonable doubt. The benefit of any doubt goes to the accused.
You are again posting your opinion as fact and are wrong.
No charges... No questioning because although Wolters has enough evidence for both he feels he can get more.
-
Not evidence of use in court.
You posted...
It may or may not be supported by evidence, but not by any evidence publicly available. Unless you count the pronouncements of Wolters as evidence, that is.
It is supported by evidence.. Not evidence that could br used in court but evidence none the less.
-
You are again posting your opinion as fact and are wrong.
No charges... No questioning because although Wolters has enough evidence for both he feels he can get more.
He needs more.
-
He needs more.
Opinion as fact again.. What he has said is that he has enough to prosecute but would like more. Thats the reality
-
He needs more.
Indeed if he has enough to charge he wouldn't feel the need for more. IMO
-
Indeed if he has enough to charge he wouldn't feel the need for more. IMO
I don't know how the Germans do it, but the CPS prefer to prosecute those cases they think will be convicted.
-
I don't know how the Germans do it, but the CPS prefer to prosecute those cases they think will be convicted.
In the German system they say a suspect is guilty, then ask anyone who ever knew the suspect to come forward with second hand confessions & vague implications.
-
Then when he is charged & put to trial a judge tells the defendant that he's read all the dreadful stories about what an awful person he is & so there really is no doubt he must be guilty & he doesn't need to see any evidence further.
Then the McCanns write another book.
-
Then when he is charged & put to trial a judge tells the defendant that he's read all the dreadful stories about what an awful person he is & so there really is no doubt he must be guilty & he doesn't need to see any evidence further.
Then the McCanns write another book.
You appear to have completely run out of anything remotely sensible to say.
-
You appear to have completely run out of anything remotely sensible to say.
I wasn't aware I was obliged to take the alleged abduction seriously.
When was that supposed to start & who ordered such?
-
I wasn't aware I was obliged to take the alleged abduction seriously.
When was that supposed to start & who ordered such?
You're not obliged to do anything, just as I am not obliged to treat your posts with anything other than the contempt they richly deserve.
-
He needs more.
IMO BKA would like to know the precise motive behind the crime.
-
IMO BKA would like to know the precise motive behind the crime.
From what Wolters has said I think he feels he may yet find the body. I can therefore see why he is in no rush.
-
IMO BKA would like to know the precise motive behind the crime.
Yes, it would make things much clearer - though some crimes are without any logical motive - eg random killings
-
IMO BKA would like to know the precise motive behind the crime.
I agree that there is a lot more going on behind the scenes than we know about. Wolters was working towards building a watertight case against Brueckner and according to the last media reports he seems to have achieved that although it doesn't suit him to do anything about it right now.
He is working to a timescale which we are told, might still take years.
I think Madeleine is just one amongst many that we have never heard about. Her case is I think the catalyst which is tying a lot of events and individuals together.
-
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/how-madeleine-mccann-would-look-22354144
-
I agree that there is a lot more going on behind the scenes than we know about. Wolters was working towards building a watertight case against Brueckner and according to the last media reports he seems to have achieved that although it doesn't suit him to do anything about it right now.
He is working to a timescale which we are told, might still take years.
I think Madeleine is just one amongst many that we have never heard about. Her case is I think the catalyst which is tying a lot of events and individuals together.
Sorry. I can't bear to think about that.
-
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-news/how-madeleine-mccann-would-look-22354144
Someone needs to break it to him gently, poor thing, he obviously hasn't heard about the concrete evidence & that there's not even hope she's alive anymore.
-
I agree that there is a lot more going on behind the scenes than we know about. Wolters was working towards building a watertight case against Brueckner and according to the last media reports he seems to have achieved that although it doesn't suit him to do anything about it right now.
He is working to a timescale which we are told, might still take years.
I think Madeleine is just one amongst many that we have never heard about. Her case is I think the catalyst which is tying a lot of events and individuals together.
Is that why he's the only suspect?
-
Is there any evidence the McCann investigation has uncovered some organised child abduction gang?
No, there isn't is there.
-
I've lost count of the number of unsolved missing child cases in Portugal.
But I think it's about two, isn't it?
-
I still believe that Madeleine could still be alive.
I don't care of what any of you think of me. My life has always been related to Hope.
And I feel sad for you all if you don't have this.
-
I still believe that Madeleine could still be alive.
I don't care of what any of you think of me. My life has always been related to Hope.
And I feel sad for you all if you don't have this.
In the absence of being privy to proof of the contrary - I too think a miracle could have happened and Madeleine is still alive. There is absolutely no harm in hoping that may be the case.
-
Is there any evidence the McCann investigation has uncovered some organised child abduction gang?
No, there isn't is there.
McCann probe
published Jan 19, 2009
Madrid - Spanish private detectives investigating the 2007 disappearance of a British girl from a resort in Portugal uncovered an Internet paedophile ring, El Mundo reported in its online edition on Monday.
Police arrested 13 suspects as a result of the investigation by officials from the Barcelona-based Metodo-3 agency, which had been hired by Gerry and Kate McCann to trace their daughter Madeleine, said the report.
The agency's investigators were hired six months after her disappearance.
Two months into their investigation, they received an email claiming that Madeleine featured in a paedophile video posted on the Internet, El Mundo reported.
Although it turned out that she did not feature in the video, the agency tipped off Spanish police who subsequently arrested the suspects in a series of raids in December 2008.
As well as those arrested, police questioned another 10 people and seized a large quantity of computer equipment.
Approached by reporters, Metodo-3 was unable to confirm the report.
Spain has staged a series of operations against Internet child pornography in recent years, arresting more than 1 200 people over the last five years - of whom 408 were arrested in 2008 alone.
Madeleine McCann's parents have been funding a private investigation to try to find out what happened to their daughter.
The Portuguese authorities closed their probe into her disappearance in July 2008.
https://www.iol.co.za/mercury/news/world/paedophile-ring-uncovered-during-mccann-probe-431690
Continuing over the years there have been numerous international police operations to uncover paedophile rings.
I know you are aware of them - and recent ones too - because I do read your posts, for my sins, so you are just wumming again aren't you.
-
McCann probe
published Jan 19, 2009
Madrid - Spanish private detectives investigating the 2007 disappearance of a British girl from a resort in Portugal uncovered an Internet paedophile ring, El Mundo reported in its online edition on Monday.
Police arrested 13 suspects as a result of the investigation by officials from the Barcelona-based Metodo-3 agency, which had been hired by Gerry and Kate McCann to trace their daughter Madeleine, said the report.
The agency's investigators were hired six months after her disappearance.
Two months into their investigation, they received an email claiming that Madeleine featured in a paedophile video posted on the Internet, El Mundo reported.
Although it turned out that she did not feature in the video, the agency tipped off Spanish police who subsequently arrested the suspects in a series of raids in December 2008.
As well as those arrested, police questioned another 10 people and seized a large quantity of computer equipment.
Approached by reporters, Metodo-3 was unable to confirm the report.
Spain has staged a series of operations against Internet child pornography in recent years, arresting more than 1 200 people over the last five years - of whom 408 were arrested in 2008 alone.
Madeleine McCann's parents have been funding a private investigation to try to find out what happened to their daughter.
The Portuguese authorities closed their probe into her disappearance in July 2008.
https://www.iol.co.za/mercury/news/world/paedophile-ring-uncovered-during-mccann-probe-431690
Continuing over the years there have been numerous international police operations to uncover paedophile rings.
I know you are aware of them - and recent ones too - because I do read your posts, for my sins, so you are just wumming again aren't you.
That's news about an internet paedophile ring.
My question was about child abduction gangs.
Not the same thing.
-
I've lost count of the number of unsolved missing child cases in Portugal.
But I think it's about two, isn't it?
Two girls who disappeared within 2.5 years of each other, both close to areas where a known paedophile and drugs dealer is known to have had homes.
-
Two girls who disappeared within 2.5 years of each other, both close to areas where a known paedophile and drugs dealer is known to have had homes.
Yeah, there's not much in the way of evidence of abduction in either case really is there, apart from them disappearing.
But give it a few months, someone will come forward & say Brueckner confessed to killing Joana.
-
Two girls who disappeared within 2.5 years of each other, both close to areas where a known paedophile and drugs dealer is known to have had homes.
A sparsely populated area too. statistically it’s rare for a child to vanish without trace, but what are the odds of it happening twice in the same area in such a short timeframe? It makes sense to investigate a possible link imo.
-
A sparsely populated area too. statistically it’s rare for a child to vanish without trace, but what are the odds of it happening twice in the same area in such a short timeframe? It makes sense to investigate a possible link imo.
So why isn't Wolters?
-
From a Polish newspaper.
-
So, entertaining the idea that Brueckner abducted Joana.
Do we think Brueckner had been stalking Joana & knew she'd be leaving the house after 8pm?
Or, is this a chance abduction as he just happened to be in the area?
And, why didn't her mother call the police when she hadn't come home after several hours?
-
So, entertaining the idea that Brueckner abducted Joana.
Do we think Brueckner had been stalking Joana & knew she'd be leaving the house after 8pm?
Or, is this a chance abduction as he just happened to be in the area?
And, why didn't her mother call the police when she hadn't come home after several hours?
This white and brown van was in Bernard Piro’s scrapyard in Foral. That is the sort of van that was spotted near where Joana went missing some 7 km away from PdL. The van however, was found abandoned in PdL.
-
This white and brown van was in Bernard Piro’s scrapyard in Foral. That is the sort of van that was spotted near where Joana went missing some 7 km away from PdL. The van however, was found abandoned in PdL.
Was there anything particularly suspicious or incriminating about this van sighting?
What was the van doing when it was spotted?
-
They said the most crucial bit of evidence was a white and brown camper van, parked near Joana's home in the days before she was abducted.
The vehicle, with German number plates, disappeared around the time she vanished.
They added: "There was a man living in there, but he hardly left the van. A week later the van was found abandoned in farmland in Praia da Luz. We told the police to investigate it, but they didn't listen to us."
She said the man had short, curly brown hair and was about 40 years old.
...........................
The only article I can find & states 'in the days before she was abducted'
So there's no bias or anything.
The man they saw was around 40.
In 2004 Brueckner would have been around 25.
-
A sparsely populated area too. statistically it’s rare for a child to vanish without trace, but what are the odds of it happening twice in the same area in such a short timeframe? It makes sense to investigate a possible link imo.
Not just the timeframe, but "homes" in both vicinities. IF he was living in / still had access to the other place not far from where Joana disappeared, there was a fiesta that evening. I haven't been able to establish whether he was in the vicinity at that time, but he certainly was earlier in the year (cf traffic violation with the Jag).
NB: I've already posted (somewhere on here) that if he had gone from the villa near where Joana disappeared, it would have taken him ten minutes by car, according to Google Maps). The remaining question is whether he was even in the country at that time. If he wasn't then fair enough.
No doubt easier if he'd been seriously investigated at the time... but I can't think who wouldn't want the Cipriano case brought up again. Probably not just Amaral.
-
That still doesn't explain why the mother didn't call the police & report her daughter missing.
She'd only gone to the shops a few hundred metres away, about a 5 or 10 min journey, & yet, she doesn't report her daughter missing for over 4 hours, & even then it was someone else who called the police.
I'm not a mother so I can't be sure , maybe it's just standard practice not to call the police when your 8 year old child has been missing for 4 hours.
-
They said the most crucial bit of evidence was a white and brown camper van, parked near Joana's home in the days before she was abducted.
The vehicle, with German number plates, disappeared around the time she vanished.
They added: "There was a man living in there, but he hardly left the van. A week later the van was found abandoned in farmland in Praia da Luz. We told the police to investigate it, but they didn't listen to us."
She said the man had short, curly brown hair and was about 40 years old.
...........................
The only article I can find & states 'in the days before she was abducted'
So there's no bias or anything.
The man they saw was around 40.
In 2004 Brueckner would have been around 25.
In my opinion, CB looks very different in all the pictures that have been published.
-
That's great.
Now, why didn't her mother call the police when her daughter was abducted?
-
I wonder why the Ciprianos bothered to call the police so soon after murdering their daughter. You’d have thought they could have at least staged an abduction and gone out on the piss first.
-
Apparently she claimed she had no credit on her phone, that's why she didn't call the police.
So, she thought about phoning the police, couldn't, then never bothered asking anyone else if they had credit.
Sounds reasonable.
Maybe if she just waited another 4 hours Joana could just come walking in the door.
No point troubling the authorities over such a trivial issue.
Yes, those really do sound like the actions of a concerned parent.
-
I wonder why the Ciprianos bothered to call the police so soon after murdering their daughter. You’d have thought they could have at least staged an abduction and gone out on the piss first.
They didn't call the police.
What are you talking about?
-
They said the most crucial bit of evidence was a white and brown camper van, parked near Joana's home in the days before she was abducted.
The vehicle, with German number plates, disappeared around the time she vanished.
They added: "There was a man living in there, but he hardly left the van. A week later the van was found abandoned in farmland in Praia da Luz. We told the police to investigate it, but they didn't listen to us."
She said the man had short, curly brown hair and was about 40 years old.
...........................
The only article I can find & states 'in the days before she was abducted'
So there's no bias or anything.
The man they saw was around 40.
In 2004 Brueckner would have been around 25.
I'd agree that it doesn't sound like Brueckner himself, but did he have the van at the same time? Someone shared it with him at some point, but it's hard to pin down dates.
Looking for an early article that mentioned a darkish car that wasn't recognised by anyone in the village and seemed out of place / unusual. It could have been someone innocent passing through or by, but it might possibly have been the Jag.
-
I'd agree that it doesn't sound like Brueckner himself, but did he have the van at the same time? Someone shared it with him at some point, but it's hard to pin down dates.
Looking for an early article that mentioned a darkish car that wasn't recognised by anyone in the village and seemed out of place / unusual. It could have been someone innocent passing through or by, but it might possibly have been the Jag.
Might, possibly have been? Based on what?
Did Brueckner have sole possession of the only dark car in Portugal?
No.
Come on, this is the some vague nonsense.
Whilst ignoring the fact that the concerned parent didn't report the 8 year old missing for over 4 hours.
That's completely irrelevant isn't it, nothing suspicious about that in the slightest, is there?
But a car or a van, yes, that was probably Brueckner.
-
Was there anything particularly suspicious or incriminating about this van sighting?
What was the van doing when it was spotted?
It would be interesting to know.
-
It would be interesting to know.
Well, I'd be interested to know why McCann supporters see absolutely nothing suspicious about Leonor not calling the police.
It doesn't look like I'm going to get an answer on that.
-
April Jones mother became concerned for her daughter after about 20 minutes, briefly looked for her, then dialled 999.
Why didn't she just leave it another 4 hours?
-
April Jones mother became concerned for her daughter after about 20 minutes, briefly looked for her, then dialled 999.
Why didn't she just leave it another 4 hours?
April Jones mother became concerned for her daughter after about 20 minutes, briefly looked for her, then dialled 999.
Why didn't she just leave it another 4 hours?
Might, possibly have been? Based on what?
Did Brueckner have sole possession of the only dark car in Portugal?
No.
Come on, this is the some vague nonsense.
Whilst ignoring the fact that the concerned parent didn't report the 8 year old missing for over 4 hours.
That's completely irrelevant isn't it, nothing suspicious about that in the slightest, is there?
But a car or a van, yes, that was probably Brueckner.
I never said that it was probably him, but it might have been. He doesn't appear to have been investigated at the time despite his past.
I don't find anything unusual about how Leonor reacted at the time if you look back at the timeline (bearing in mind that it was a sleepy village, with a fiesta going on, with guys out looking for her and she had young kids at home).
-
I never said that it was probably him, but it might have been. He doesn't appear to have been investigated at the time despite his past.
I don't find anything unusual about how Leonor reacted at the time if you look back at the timeline (bearing in mind that it was a sleepy village, with a fiesta going on, with guys out looking for her and she had young kids at home).
Seriously?
A child is missing after dark for over 4 hours, having only been sent on a 10 minute trip, & you see nothing suspicious about the police not being informed.
If your 8 year old went missing after 8pm you'd do the same would you?
-
I don't see this being discussed on web sleuths.
Can't imagine why.
Not even The Right Honourable Member for Only Logical & Plausible Explanations seems to have an explanation.
-
Seriously?
A child is missing after dark for over 4 hours, having only been sent on a 10 minute trip, & you see nothing suspicious about the police not being informed.
If your 8 year old went missing after 8pm you'd do the same would you?
I take your point, but the circumstances were different.
-
I take your point, but the circumstances were different.
Oh right, the circumstances were such that it wasn't particularly pressing to inform the police an 8 year old girl had gone missing.
I see.
-
Well, I'd be interested to know why McCann supporters see absolutely nothing suspicious about Leonor not calling the police.
It doesn't look like I'm going to get an answer on that.
Your divide between so-called ‘supporters’ and ‘anti-supporters’ encompasses much more.
-
Your divide between so-called ‘supporters’ and ‘anti-supporters’ encompasses much more.
What's the missing child procedure in Africa & how does parental concern play out in your part of the world?
Do you inform the police immediately or do you tend to just leave it a few hours?
-
What's the missing child procedure in Africa & how does parental concern play out in your part of the world?
Do you inform the police immediately or do you tend to just leave it a few hours?
Theoretically, a missing child would be escalated to urgent. Yet, the principle rarely applies. 48 Hours is the norm.
-
Perhaps they were aware of the police’s penchant for beating false confessions out of people and were scared of being fitted up? Why go out looking for a child if you know she’s chopped up in little pieces in your fridge? Doesn’t seem very sensible behaviour to me. Incidentally Joana was twice April’s age and perhaps it was not uncommon for her to be out and about playing or visiting friends. I mean when I was a kid I was out for hours at a time, my parents never had a clue where I was modt of the time and I was often in the most dangerous of situations. I really must call social services on them before they kick the bucket.
-
Perhaps they were aware of the police’s penchant for beating false confessions out of people and were scared of being fitted up? Why go out looking for a child if you know she’s chopped up in little pieces in your fridge? Doesn’t seem very sensible behaviour to me. Incidentally Joana was twice April’s age and perhaps it was not uncommon for her to be out and about playing or visiting friends. I mean when I was a kid I was out for hours at a time, my parents never had a clue where I was modt of the time and I was often in the most dangerous of situations. I really must call social services on them before they kick the bucket.
Yeah she was 8 years old & it wasn't unusual for her to be out playing between 8pm & 12pm. Right.
Anyway, if that's why she didn't report her missing then why did she tell the GNR she hadn't made a call because she had no credit?
Which one was it?
-
It's a tragic tale. Figuera was an isolated, povery stricken village.
Leonor believed she was the only one who owned a mobile phone, nobody had access to land lines either, & sadly, she'd run out of credit.
Poor, poor Joana.
If only someone else in the village had a phone, or her mother had bothered to ask anyone if they did.
Because it turns out someone else in the village did have a phone, & they eventually phoned the police through their own concern, & not at the behest of the child's mother.
Anyway, I believe Brueckner owned & used motor vehicles & I find that very, very suspicious.
-
It’s been a hard day’s WUM, and he’s been barking like a dog…
-
It’s been a hard day’s WUM, and he’s been barking like a dog…
It's been an enjoyable days WUM.
It's been fun watching people try to explain away, or totally ignore altogether, the lack of concern by a mother for her young missing daughter.
It's quite a contradiction isn't it.
At least Carana agreed with the point, sort of. Well, not entirely, but she at least tried to make it seem like she did.
-
I seem to recall a similar situation with Bianca Jones.
Remember that one?
Poor D'Andre Lane was viciously car jacked at gun point & little Bianca abducted.
If Mr Lane's story is to be believed, he still had his phone with him after being car jacked & witnessing his precious daughter being abducted.
But, for reasons unexplained by Mr Lane, he doesn't phone the police immediately to report this dreadful child abduction, instead walking several blocks to his friends house, who eventually uses Lane's mobile phone to call 911, some 45 minutes after Bianca had been abducted.
But, he was a black guy so maybe he was just scared of calling police, or he was struck dumb & couldn't talk on a phone, or perhaps he couldn't remember the emergency number. Yes, I think that might be it.
-
So yes, I think it would be reasonable to re-open the case into Joana’s disappearance given that there was the likelihood of a predatory paedophile and prime suspect in other missing/murdered child cases living nearby. Perhaps the Ciprianos sold her to Brückner, or found his corpse disposal services advert in a local phone box and got him to chop her up and feed to the pigs. Worth checking out, eh?
-
So yes, I think it would be reasonable to re-open the case into Joana’s disappearance given that there was the likelihood of a predatory paedophile and prime suspect in other missing/murdered child cases living nearby. Perhaps the Ciprianos sold her to Brückner, or found his corpse disposal services advert in a local phone box and got him to chop her up and feed to the pigs. Worth checking out, eh?
Yes yes, because Leonors account is utterly convincing. Isn't it. Yes.
She doesn't call police because she has no credit, was unable to ask anyone else if they had a phone & the emergency number was premium rate aswell.
Oh well just go to bed & report your vulnerable child missing the next day.
Yes, well within the bounds of responsible parenting & entirely consistent with what you'd expect when an 8 year old girl gets abducted.
-
I suppose the PJ have absolutely no interest in considering the possibility that they got yet another high profile case wrong so the chances of the Cipriano case ever being re-opened is close to zero. Oh well. I reckon Brückner may have been involved and I shall keep on saying so until my dying breath, in much the same way as McCann sceptics will continue to point the finger at them until they keel over. Seems only fair, and I am all for equality.
-
What fits with abduction & Leonor's innocence even more, is the fact that Leonor confessed before a judge, on the 24th of September, to accidentally killing her daughter.
She was, of course, forced into this admission before the judge on the 24th of September, because she had foresight that the police were going to torture her into this confession on the 14th of October, some 3 weeks later.
Strange, she chose to tell the judge she'd killed the child, when this was her opportunity to protest her innocence & assert that the child had been abducted.
I wonder why the judge didn't notice her black eye, that she didn't get until 3 weeks later.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5783.0
-
Anyone with any faith in the Portuguese justice system needs a head wobble imo.
-
Anyone with any faith in the Portuguese justice system needs a head wobble imo.
But you trust a woman who admits to killing a child & who didn't call the police when she'd been missing for 4 hours, having only popped out for 10 minutes.
Yes, that's rational.
Yes, I imagine you'd do the same in her situation.
It's a lot of hassle phoning the emergency services.
Besides, she was 8, she could fend for herself
-
FREE LEONOR CIPRIANO!!!
Oh wait…
-
Hopefully D'Andre gets out soon & he can get to work searching for his abducted child.
If he does find anything, I sure hope he remembers how to use his phone this time around.
-
Yeah she was 8 years old & it wasn't unusual for her to be out playing between 8pm & 12pm. Right.
Anyway, if that's why she didn't report her missing then why did she tell the GNR she hadn't made a call because she had no credit?
Which one was it?
Will you stop asking such damn searching questions.
-
It's been an enjoyable days WUM.
It's been fun watching people try to explain away, or totally ignore altogether, the lack of concern by a mother for her young missing daughter.
It's quite a contradiction isn't it.
At least Carana agreed with the point, sort of. Well, not entirely, but she at least tried to make it seem like she did.
Actually, I said that I could see where you're coming from, but I disagree for a number of reasons.
-
Yes yes, because Leonors account is utterly convincing. Isn't it. Yes.
She doesn't call police because she has no credit, was unable to ask anyone else if they had a phone & the emergency number was premium rate aswell.
Oh well just go to bed & report your vulnerable child missing the next day.
Yes, well within the bounds of responsible parenting & entirely consistent with what you'd expect when an 8 year old girl gets abducted.
But that's not the sequence of events.
-
Actually, I said that I could see where you're coming from, but I disagree for a number of reasons.
Yes, I can't for the life of me imagine why.....
-
Will you stop asking such damn searching questions.
Cipriano may be a murderer but she may have paid Bruckner to dispose of the body. That seems to be a popular theory wrt to his possible involvement in Madeleine's disappearance so why not moot it in this one, eh?
-
Cipriano may be a murderer but she may have paid Bruckner to dispose of the body. That seems to be a popular theory wrt to his possible involvement in Madeleine's disappearance so why not moot it in this one, eh?
Oh, I see, she paid Brueckner to get rid of the body, then her brother admitted to disposing of the body himself so he could cover up for Brueckner.
Yes, it all makes sense now.
-
I don't think the Ciprianos were very bright. I think there is a history of miscarriages of justice against people with not two braincells to rub together that lazy police forces successfully coerce into confessing to make lives very much simpler for themselves. Take a look at what happened to Steven Avery's nephew for example. There was literally not one scrap of physical evidence against either Cipriano and considering they were supposed to have carved up a body and stuffed it in the fridge in the kitchen before carrying the bits to the pig pen to feed the animals I find that quite surprising. Perhaps it just means the PJ were really really rubbish at finding forensic evidence though.
-
So, Leonor was a bit retarded & that's why she couldn't use a phone, & why she told a judge she'd killed her accidentally.
Yes, I suppose her brother could have had the same mental incapacity, considering he never tried phoning the police either.
I wonder what they did in the house the rest of the night before finally going to the police station the next day?
-
I wonder why, when contacted the night before to be informed that Joana had gone missing the police did not visit the Ciprianos at their home and simply waited for them to turn up at the police station? Perhaps they were they just waiting for the parents to finish disposing of all the evidence? No sense of urgency these Portuguese police, when it comes to missing kids.
-
I wonder why, when contacted the night before to be informed that Joana had gone missing the police did not visit the Ciprianos at their home and simply waited for them to turn up at the police station? Perhaps they were they just waiting for the parents to finish disposing of all the evidence? No sense of urgency these Portuguese police, when it comes to missing kids.
After someone else called the police Leonor spoke to the GNR, I imagine she must have fell to her knees, tears streaming down her face & screamed out her concern for the child's welfare, how if only she had credit she'd have just called them already & could they please just do something now.
Or perhaps things might not have gone as I just described.
-
Some people have very vivid imaginations, not least the PJ who more or less made up what had happened to Joana and presented it as fact to the court without a shred of evidence and the court accepted it beyond presumably any reasonable doubt. Which when you consider the low intelligence of the suspects and the fact that at least one of them was tortured is quite shocking really. If Bruckner were found guilty in a German court on such flimsy evidence (ie none) and a dodgy confession after he'd been duffed up in prison I'm sure his fanclub here would be perfectly accepting of the verdict.
-
Some people have very vivid imaginations, not least the PJ who more or less made up what had happened to Joana and presented it as fact to the court without a shred of evidence and the court accepted it beyond presumably any reasonable doubt. Which when you consider the low intelligence of the suspects and the fact that at least one of them was tortured is quite shocking really. If Bruckner were found guilty in a German court on such flimsy evidence (ie none) and a dodgy confession after he'd been duffed up in prison I'm sure his fanclub here would be perfectly accepting of the verdict.
At least one of them was tortured. Yes.
After, get it, after having already told a judge they'd killed her.
Why didn't she tell the judge she was innocent?
-
Why does anyone confess to a crime they didn’t commit? Happene quite regularly but Cipriano did at least withdraw her confession.
-
Why does anyone confess to a crime they didn’t commit? Happene quite regularly but Cipriano did at least withdraw her confession.
Yes, the nasty police interrogated the stupid woman into confessing to a judge the first time didn't they.
1) She had no credit, that's why she didn't report her daughter missing.
2) She was so stupid that she confessed to killing her daughter, who'd actually just been abducted.
3) Her brother was so dumb he couldn't call police either & also confesses to a crime he didn't commit, whilst all time his favourite neice was in the hands of child abductors.
Yes.
That's what we have to believe, in order to believe Joana was abducted.
And since all that sounds totally credible, doesn't it, Joana must have been abducted.
That's the most logical, plausible explanation, isn't it.
-
Joana’s step-dad Leandro Silva has now called on German and Portuguese police to investigate if there are any links between pervert Brueckner and the child’s disappearance after he became the latest suspect in Madeleine’s case.
The 54-year-old said: “The moment I saw police had a Madeleine suspect I thought about poor Joana and how he could be involved.
“The disappearance of my step-daughter is an unresolved case, whatever the authorities say.
“Her body has never been found and I know Leonor would never have hurt Joana. She was a good mum.
“I think the police handled the investigation so badly.
“That’s why I’d like a new police team to re-examine everything and see if this German man is involved.
“Brueckner also seems to have been heavily into drugs and I think there’s a good chance he could be implicated.
“He appears to have done some horrible things here and he obviously knew the Algarve well.
“Christian Brueckner is a person who should be questioned. There are still so many unanswered questions hanging over Joana’s disappearance and he could hold the key to solving them.
-
At least one of them was tortured. Yes.
After, get it, after having already told a judge they'd killed her.
Why didn't she tell the judge she was innocent?
She never confessed to a judge before being tortured.. That is untrue like all the other rubbish you are posting.. Feel free to prove me wrong
-
She never confessed to a judge before being tortured.. That is untrue like all the other rubbish you are posting.. Feel free to prove me wrong
She was put before a judge on the 24th September.
Her injuries were recorded on the 18th of October.
Don't you think the judge would have noticed if she had black eyes?
Why does she get remanded, & her brother released on conditions?
There's a whole thread about it taken from a CDM report.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5783.0
-
She was put before a judge on the 24th September.
Her injuries were recorded on the 18th of October.
Don't you think the judge would have noticed if she had black eyes?
Why does she get remanded, & her brother released on conditions?
There's a whole thread about it taken from a CDM report.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=5783.0
The report is BS.... Been discussed many times
-
Ok, lets assume the CDM article was utterly incorrect & dismiss it all together.
The Ciprianos are both totally innoccent, & Brueckner abducted Joana.
Why does Leonor start accusing her brother then?
-
Ok, lets assume the CDM article was utterly incorrect & dismiss it all together.
The Ciprianos are both totally innoccent, & Brueckner abducted Joana.
Why does Leonor start accusing her brother then?
She's innocent afaiac... I've given all my reasons previously
-
She's innocent afaiac... I've given all my reasons previously
Yes, because innocent mothers don't call the police when their children have been missing for hours.
-
Joana’s step-dad Leandro Silva has now called on German and Portuguese police to investigate if there are any links between pervert Brueckner and the child’s disappearance after he became the latest suspect in Madeleine’s case.
The 54-year-old said: “The moment I saw police had a Madeleine suspect I thought about poor Joana and how he could be involved.
“The disappearance of my step-daughter is an unresolved case, whatever the authorities say.
“Her body has never been found and I know Leonor would never have hurt Joana. She was a good mum.
“I think the police handled the investigation so badly.
“That’s why I’d like a new police team to re-examine everything and see if this German man is involved.
“Brueckner also seems to have been heavily into drugs and I think there’s a good chance he could be implicated.
“He appears to have done some horrible things here and he obviously knew the Algarve well.
“Christian Brueckner is a person who should be questioned. There are still so many unanswered questions hanging over Joana’s disappearance and he could hold the key to solving them.
Interesting that Leandro believes Leonor is innocent, but doesn't mention anything about her brother.
I suppose, what with her having accused her brother of murder that would have meant admitting Leonor didn't tell the truth.
-
Please Note
Discussion on the Cipriano case takes place on its own board which can be accessed here - http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=71.0
Thank you
-
Gotta be true a brit rag says so.
Some one said there was cooperation between SY and the Germans, this doesn't seem to think so.
EXCLUSIVE: Met Police sources say they were not informed of the new evidence, with one former detective saying: “It seems extraordinary our officers are so much in the dark"
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/german-cops-wont-share-bombshell-25623352
This came after this.
German police are taking one 'last roll of the dice' with British and Portuguese counterparts reportedly looking to fine tune a profile of suspect Christian Brueckner with the aim of finding where Maddie may have been buried
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-cops-3-countries-22918365
-
Just how many 'last rolls of the dice' are they going to make?
Has there been more dice rolling since this article was published over a year ago?
-
Just how many 'last rolls of the dice' are they going to make?
Has there been more dice rolling since this article was published over a year ago?
Nothing to compare with the card sharp who primed his followers with promises of fictitious Ace after Ace - the only difference being Amaral promoted fiction whereas the BKA works with fact.
-
Gotta be true a brit rag says so.
Some one said there was cooperation between SY and the Germans, this doesn't seem to think so.
EXCLUSIVE: Met Police sources say they were not informed of the new evidence, with one former detective saying: “It seems extraordinary our officers are so much in the dark"
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/german-cops-wont-share-bombshell-25623352
This came after this.
German police are taking one 'last roll of the dice' with British and Portuguese counterparts reportedly looking to fine tune a profile of suspect Christian Brueckner with the aim of finding where Maddie may have been buried
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-cops-3-countries-22918365
context
-
Gotta be true a brit rag says so.
Some one said there was cooperation between SY and the Germans, this doesn't seem to think so.
EXCLUSIVE: Met Police sources say they were not informed of the new evidence, with one former detective saying: “It seems extraordinary our officers are so much in the dark"
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/german-cops-wont-share-bombshell-25623352
This came after this.
German police are taking one 'last roll of the dice' with British and Portuguese counterparts reportedly looking to fine tune a profile of suspect Christian Brueckner with the aim of finding where Maddie may have been buried
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/madeleine-mccann-cops-3-countries-22918365
I’d put money on the unnamed former Met Detective being Colin Sutton. Again.
-
I’d put money on the unnamed former Met Detective being Colin Sutton. Again.
The 'unnamed former detective' will be the semi-literate hack who was asked to regurgitate some old tat to keep the story machine churning.
-
The 'unnamed former detective' will be the semi-literate hack who was asked to regurgitate some old tat to keep the story machine churning.
You reckon? Thanks for sharing and Merry Christmas.
-
You reckon? Thanks for sharing and Merry Christmas.
Christmas
-
Christmas
That’s nice isn’t it? Oh well.