UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: faithlilly on April 10, 2023, 11:32:13 AM
-
12 months ago I added this to my profile.
“ Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”
Let’s count the months, shall we?”
How closer are we to Brueckner being charged with anything in connection with Madeleine’s disappearance?
Same time next year eh?
-
The Trial for the other five charges will have to come first.
My mind is still in abeyance on The Madeleine Affair.
-
The Trial for the other five charges will have to come first.
My mind is still in abeyance on The Madeleine Affair.
That wouldn’t stop them bringing charges. It appears that there’s not enough evidence even to do that.
-
12 months ago I added this to my profile.
“ Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”
Let’s count the months, shall we?”
How closer are we to Brueckner being charged with anything in connection with Madeleine’s disappearance?
Same time next year eh?
Hard to tell, Article 6 of the ECHR says (see below), trouble is no charges have been laid against CB in relation to Madeleine ,save in press releases.
1 In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
-
That wouldn’t stop them bringing charges. It appears that there’s not enough evidence even to do that.
No one knows what evidence they have. Sad to say that I no longer care all that much. I just want to see Brueckner locked up for a very long time and I don't care how they do it so long as he is found Guilty of whatever.
-
12 months ago I added this to my profile.
“ Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”
Let’s count the months, shall we?”
How closer are we to Brueckner being charged with anything in connection with Madeleine’s disappearance?
Same time next year eh?
It's all a big game to some people isn't it? Come back in a year for another gloat. Or maybe not. Perhaps you'll be laughing on the other side of your face by then.
-
No one knows what evidence they have. Sad to say that I no longer care all that much. I just want to see Brueckner locked up for a very long time and I don't care how they do it so long as he is found Guilty of whatever.
I absolutely agree. Let’s hope that something sticks and he is locked up for a very long time. I very much doubt that it will be anything to do with Madeleine’s disappearance though.
-
I absolutely agree. Let’s hope that something sticks and he is locked up for a very long time. I very much doubt that it will be anything to do with Madeleine’s disappearance though.
"very much hope" more like.
-
I absolutely agree. Let’s hope that something sticks and he is locked up for a very long time. I very much doubt that it will be anything to do with Madeleine’s disappearance though.
Sad to say that Madeleine is still on the back burner. But it has been 16 years so another couple of years won't make much difference, except perhaps to The McCanns.
Madeleine wasn't, or isn't my child and so I cannot feel the pain. To most McCann Supporters the whole thing has always been academic. Find the proof against anyone.
-
Some crimes go unsolved or at least unresolved for many, many years. The fact that the police have yet to bring charges against the key suspect should not imo be an excuse for mockery or gloating and yet it appears that that is precisely what is happening here on this thread and often on other threads thanks to the trolls and WUMs who get their kicks from such childish behavour. It's time people behaved like adults and realised that just because a crime is complex and difficult to solve doesn't mean that the police are not on the right track. Anyone with an ounce of decency would be hoping for a positive outcome from this investigation, and by that I mean the successful prosecution of the culprit that took Madeleine from her bedroom.
-
Some crimes go unsolved or at least unresolved for many, many years. The fact that the police have yet to bring charges against the key suspect should not imo be an excuse for mockery or gloating and yet it appears that that is precisely what is happening here on this thread and often on other threads thanks to the trolls and WUMs who get their kicks from such childish behavour. It's time people behaved like adults and realised that just because a crime is complex and difficult to solve doesn't mean that the police are not on the right track. Anyone with an ounce of decency would be hoping for a positive outcome from this investigation, and by that I mean the successful prosecution of the culprit that took Madeleine from her bedroom.
It is amusing to watch the "but what about the ... ... ... " showing so little regard for the victims of the crimes with which Brueckner is currently charged.
What about the three rape victims whose cases are on hold while Brueckner's lawyers protect his right to a fair trial? There are also the sexual assaults on children to be considered as the authorities weigh their rights and Brueckner's rights in the same legal argument involving all five indictments.
In what way have indictments speeded up progress to trial?
There is a log jam here ~ and until it is resolved and it decided not if but where Brueckner will face trial we are stuck with it.
All part of the legal process and presently the ball is with Brueckner's lawyers. It is all very time consuming but if they seem to be in no hurry to be getting on with it, why the furore?
Madeleine's case is unlikely to be dealt with in court any sooner than anyone else's even if Brueckner was charged. We are watching the delay happening with five charges already ~ why would it benefit anyone to add a sixth delay.
Brueckner has rights and his legal team is defending them to the hilt. So who is defending the rights of the victims. Is that objectionable for some people. I think it seems so.
-
Some crimes go unsolved or at least unresolved for many, many years. The fact that the police have yet to bring charges against the key suspect should not imo be an excuse for mockery or gloating and yet it appears that that is precisely what is happening here on this thread and often on other threads thanks to the trolls and WUMs who get their kicks from such childish behavour. It's time people behaved like adults and realised that just because a crime is complex and difficult to solve doesn't mean that the police are not on the right track. Anyone with an ounce of decency would be hoping for a positive outcome from this investigation, and by that I mean the successful prosecution of the culprit that took Madeleine from her bedroom.
And Brueckner deserves the right to a fair trial which is not happening because of prolonged legal arguments by his defence team.
One presumes they have consulted their client on this manoeuvre and he is on board with the delay caused.
-
And Brueckner deserves the right to a fair trial which is not happening because of prolonged legal arguments by his defence team.
One presumes they have consulted their client on this manoeuvre and he is on board with the delay caused.
There are witnesses and a police arrest involved in the child sexual abuse charges. I will be most surprised if they don't get him on those two before his present sentence runs out. So time enough later to decide on what to do about Madeline. There is no real hurry anymore. After sixteen years why would there be?
-
There are witnesses and a police arrest involved in the child sexual abuse charges. I will be most surprised if they don't get him on those two before his present sentence runs out. So time enough later to decide on what to do about Madeline. There is no real hurry anymore. After sixteen years why would there be?
He was arrested in flagrante by an off duty police officer attending the event with her family.
Interestingly witnesses thought he was accompanied by another man who fled the scene.
I wonder why it has been left to the German police to prosecute this man for a crime committed on Portuguese soil, against Portuguese children and arrested by a Portuguese police officer which in any jurisdiction would be a slam dunk case.
What is this guy's get out of jail free card when even retired cop Amaral goes out of his way to champion him.
-
He was arrested in flagrante by an off duty police officer attending the event with her family.
Interestingly witnesses thought he was accompanied by another man who fled the scene.
I wonder why it has been left to the German police to prosecute this man for a crime committed on Portuguese soil, against Portuguese children and arrested by a Portuguese police officer which in any jurisdiction would be a slam dunk case.
What is this guy's get out of jail free card when even retired cop Amaral goes out of his way to champion him.
It is all looking rather nasty. Will the Portuguese police officer be called as a witness at Brueckner's trial in Germany? That will be interesting.
-
He was arrested in flagrante by an off duty police officer attending the event with her family.
Interestingly witnesses thought he was accompanied by another man who fled the scene.
I wonder why it has been left to the German police to prosecute this man for a crime committed on Portuguese soil, against Portuguese children and arrested by a Portuguese police officer which in any jurisdiction would be a slam dunk case.
What is this guy's get out of jail free card when even retired cop Amaral goes out of his way to champion him.
Yep, very interesting that with such a witness as a policewoman, it seems as though .
I wonder which and why?it was hushed up or they couldn't be bothered
-
Yep, very interesting that with such a witness as a policewoman, it seems as though .
I wonder which and why?it was hushed up or they couldn't be bothered
It was hushed up. Or Portugal doesn't care about it's own children. Or both.
-
It was hushed up. Or Portugal doesn't care about it's own children. Or both.
Neither, it seems, do the U.K. 4,500 individuals convicted of child sex abuse spent not one day in prison.
Absolutely shocking.
-
Neither, it seems, do the U.K. 4,500 individuals convicted of child sex abuse spent not one day in prison.
Absolutely shocking.
Yes, there was that 25 year old man in Scotland convicted of child rape recently who got community service, outrageous!
-
Neither, it seems, do the U.K. 4,500 individuals convicted of child sex abuse spent not one day in prison.
Absolutely shocking.
Ah well, there wouldn't be room for them all.
What would be needed is a designated 'Paedophile Island' where they could serve out their time, far away from any temptation
-
Yes, there was that 25 year old man in Scotland convicted of child rape recently who got community service, outrageous!
Seems the police did their job, they did find the evidence to bring him to trial. It's the court system which might be the problem.
-
Neither, it seems, do the U.K. 4,500 individuals convicted of child sex abuse spent not one day in prison.
Absolutely shocking.
Labour’s claim fact-checked
In the first of the attack adverts released by Labour last week, the party claimed that under the Conservatives, 4,500 adults convicted of sexually assaulting children under 16 served no time in prison.
The ad relies on Ministry of Justice data, which is accurate but is from 2010 to the first half of last year, which extends to before Sunak was an MP but also includes the time when Sir Keir Starmer was director of public prosecutions and sat on the Sentencing Council, which sets sentencing guidelines. In 2012 it set out guidelines suggesting that not all child sex abusers should automatically be jailed.
It is judges and magistrates who decide on sentences for criminals rather than politicians, but parliament can set minimum and maximum sentences. Labour claimed the lenient punishments were due in part to problems within the criminal justice system including case backlogs and crowded prisons.
In 2020, according to the Sentencing Academy, the average sentence for sexual assault of a child under 13 in 2020 was three years and eight months, up from two years and three months in 2010 when Labour was last in power.
There was a gradual increase in the average sentence for the offence before it peaked in 2019.
-
Ah well, there wouldn't be room for them all.
What would be needed is a designated 'Paedophile Island' where they could serve out their time, far away from any temptation
Something like Alcatraz Island perhaps. In my opinion CB can't be described as a paedophile as he isn't primarily or exclusively attracted to children. He's an abuser pure and simple; any female of any age will do.
-
Something like Alcatraz Island perhaps. In my opinion CB can't be described as a paedophile as he isn't primarily or exclusively attracted to children. He's an abuser pure and simple; any female of any age will do.
I think you’ll find that many if not most people described as paedophiles are quite capable of being attracted to or at least having sex with adults. So Gary Glitter is not a paedophile, nor Jimmy Savile by your definition then?
-
I think you’ll find that many if not most people described as paedophiles are quite capable of being attracted to or at least having sex with adults. So Gary Glitter is not a paedophile, nor Jimmy Savile by your definition then?
Sexuality is a complex subject. Homosexual people married the opposite sex when their preferences were illegal, but would have preferred same sex relationships. Sex is one thing, but romance is another, and it seems to me that a true paedophile is more likely to have romantic feelings about a child, just as a homosexual is more likely to have those feelings about someone of the same sex.
-
Sexuality is a complex subject. Homosexual people married the opposite sex when their preferences were illegal, but would have preferred same sex relationships. Sex is one thing, but romance is another, and it seems to me that a true paedophile is more likely to have romantic feelings about a child, just as a homosexual is more likely to have those feelings about someone of the same sex.
It seems you are saying people should only be labelled paedophiles if they have romantic attachments to pre-pubescent children, do correct me if I'm wrong. That would discount Savile, Glitter, Ian Brady, Ian Huntley, every man (or woman) who has ever abducted and murdered a child, or photographed or downloaded indecent images of children, the large majority of those who have criminal records for committing acts of child abuse. In fact you seem to be saying that people can no more help being paedophiles than they can help being gay, which maybe in fact be true but your apparent need to separate the term "paedophile" from the crimes that such people commit against children is somewhat baffling. Actually, no it's not - it's just another example of your semantic quibbling. IMO.
-
It seems you are saying people should only be labelled paedophiles if they have romantic attachments to pre-pubescent children, do correct me if I'm wrong. That would discount Savile, Glitter, Ian Brady, Ian Huntley, every man (or woman) who has ever abducted and murdered a child, or photographed or downloaded indecent images of children, the large majority of those who have criminal records for committing acts of child abuse. In fact you seem to be saying that people can no more help being paedophiles than they can help being gay, which maybe in fact be true but your apparent need to separate the term "paedophile" from the crimes that such people commit against children is somewhat baffling. Actually, no it's not - it's just another example of your semantic quibbling. IMO.
People, including in particular journalists, use the paedophile label very readily. It's not 'semantic quibbling' to make people aware that not all paedophiles are child abusers and not all child abusers are paedophiles.
Given the ages of those abused by CB, paedophile seems to be a label which only applies to some of his offenses.
-
People, including in particular journalists, use the paedophile label very readily. It's not 'semantic quibbling' to make people aware that not all paedophiles are child abusers and not all child abusers are paedophiles.
Given the ages of those abused by CB, paedophile seems to be a label which only applies to some of his offenses.
Is CB a paedo who rapes adult women, or a rapist who is also a paedo ?
-
People, including in particular journalists, use the paedophile label very readily. It's not 'semantic quibbling' to make people aware that not all paedophiles are child abusers and not all child abusers are paedophiles.
Given the ages of those abused by CB, paedophile seems to be a label which only applies to some of his offenses.
Do you really think anyone here needs to be educated by you on the subject? Are you going to protest every time someone labels Jimmy Savile or Gary Glitter a paedohile, or is it only CB who you feel merits your protection from being labelled thus? Could it be that by denying that he is a paedophile that it makes him (in your eyes) less likely to have abducted a child to sexually abuse and murder? I wonder…
-
People, including in particular journalists, use the paedophile label very readily. It's not 'semantic quibbling' to make people aware that not all paedophiles are child abusers and not all child abusers are paedophiles.
Given the ages of those abused by CB, paedophile seems to be a label which only applies to some of his offenses.
So that's alright then.
-
Is CB a paedo who rapes adult women, or a rapist who is also a paedo ?
I cannot quite believe you posted that "question". Certainly says a lot though.
-
Is CB a paedo who rapes adult women, or a rapist who is also a paedo ?
Christian Brueckner is a Human Being, first & foremost.
Then a burglar, then a rapist & then a paedophile. Although, I think he was a paedophile before he committed any burglaries or rapes. I think. I dunno, I suppose it all depends on which crime he committed first really. But I'm sticking with burgling rapist & paedophile because I think that sounds best.
-
Christian Brueckner is a Human Being, first & foremost.
Then a burglar, then a rapist & then a paedophile. Although, I think he was a paedophile before he committed any burglaries or rapes. I think. I dunno, I suppose it all depends on which crime he committed first really. But I'm sticking with burgling rapist & paedophile because I think that sounds best.
CB a man of many talents within the criminal fraternity, a hero to some!
I want him to be guilty for 3 reasons
1. I just don't like him and his savage rapes he has been found guilty of. Please make it legal for someone to remove his head from his body!
2. He could expose the parents complicities by telling us where he grabbed MBM from? the apartment or the street
3. It would show the McCanns asthe despicable people they are MY OPINION as they still hold onto 'she is alive' mantra and the money they gained to 'help find her'.
MBM was tortured and I believe murdered and her little body disposed of.
3
-
CB a man of many talents within the criminal fraternity, a hero to some!
I want him to be guilty for 3 reasons
1. I just don't like him and his savage rapes he has been found guilty of. Please make it legal for someone to remove his head from his body!
2. He could expose the parents complicities by telling us where he grabbed MBM from? the apartment or the street
3. It would show the McCanns asthe despicable people they are MY OPINION as they still hold onto 'she is alive' mantra and the money they gained to 'help find her'.
MBM was tortured and I believe murdered and her little body disposed of.
3
A post which epitomises the sheer abomination of the disregard of the pain and suffering being endured by the McCann family.
The visceral hatred shown for a family who spent last week watching an international police endeavour to trace what might remain of their innocent little girl is a disgrace.
If it doesn't bring this forum into disrepute I really do not know what does.
-
A post which epitomises the sheer abomination of the disregard of the pain and suffering being endured by the McCann family.
The visceral hatred shown for a family who spent last week watching an international police endeavour to trace what might remain of their innocent little girl is a disgrace.
If it doesn't bring this forum into disrepute I really do not know what does.
Critical thinking and Free speech...tsk tsk whatever next!
-
The Trial for the other five charges will have to come first.
My mind is still in abeyance on The Madeleine Affair.
Oooof.
Mind unabayed I imagine.
-
Madeleine McCann detectives launch new search near home of prime suspect
Gerard Couzens & Liam Doyle & Neal Keeling
Mon 2 June 2025
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/
-
Christian Brueckner gives first interview... while new police dig for clues begins in Portugal
By ROB HYDE and NATALIA PENZA and NICK PISA
Published: 08:42, 3 June 2025 | Updated: 08:52, 3 June 2025
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14774871/Madeleine-McCann-suspect-broken-rib-prison-assault-Christian-Brueckner.html
Now there is a thing.
The pervert who refuses to open his mouth in court or to give an interview to police has been poked into action at the news that police are still searching for Madeleine is singing to the media..
Looks like they may have hit on the correct location this time round.
-
... through the participation of the media, half the world considers me a cruel rapist.?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/06/03/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-says-will-flee/?msockid=1d5471b3775560aa2ce1652c76ee616b
One was under the impression that the sexual deviant Brueckner is considered to be a 'cruel rapist' because that is precisely what the German courts have found that is precisely what he is.
Nothing at all to do with the media who performed their job of reporting the facts not Brueckner's fantasy.
-
... through the participation of the media, half the world considers me a cruel rapist.?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/06/03/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-says-will-flee/?msockid=1d5471b3775560aa2ce1652c76ee616b
One was under the impression that the sexual deviant Brueckner is considered to be a 'cruel rapist' because that is precisely what the German courts have found that is precisely what he is.
Nothing at all to do with the media who performed their job of reporting the facts not Brueckner's fantasy.
You're on his list.
-
... through the participation of the media, half the world considers me a cruel rapist.?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/06/03/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-says-will-flee/?msockid=1d5471b3775560aa2ce1652c76ee616b
One was under the impression that the sexual deviant Brueckner is considered to be a 'cruel rapist' because that is precisely what the German courts have found that is precisely what he is.
Nothing at all to do with the media who performed their job of reporting the facts not Brueckner's fantasy.
Yes and despite being a sadistic rapist who also likes to abuse children in his spare time there is at least one prominent sceptic on another forum declaring how sorry she feels for him. It beggars belief, really.
-
Yes and despite being a sadistic rapist who also likes to abuse children in his spare time there is at least one prominent sceptic on another forum declaring how sorry she feels for him. It beggars belief, really.
Ted Bundy had a fan club who'd show up at the trial and beyond, so.....women [rolleyes].
-
Ted Bundy had a fan club who'd show up at the trial and beyond, so.....women [rolleyes].
CB seems to have a lot of male fans and apologists too, it must be the suit they admire. Or perhaps it?s simply the fact that to some people a sadistic rapist and child molester is a far more sympathetic character than the pair of doctors they simply love to hate.
-
CB seems to have a lot of male fans and apologists too, it must be the suit they admire. Or perhaps it?s simply the fact that to some people a sadistic rapist and child molester is a far more sympathetic character than the pair of doctors they simply love to hate.
No. It's just that I see no good reason to believe that he did it & the doctors didn't. Plus he's quite sexy.
-
No. It's just that I see no good reason to believe that he did it & the doctors didn't. Plus he's quite sexy.
He's got that certain je ne sais quoi that some female supporters are drawn to; a rugged, piss-soaked paedo-hobo allure, with George Harrison teeth, or cosmetically enhanced teeth, long hair with no hair, acne and a smooth complexion, domineering, yet tender. Athletic, lithe, catlike abilities, rich too, with several houses in various stages of dilapidation and numerous cars, swimsuits, hard drives, guns. Gangsta. Diesel? No problem freuline.
Looks a bit like Robert Murat to at least one admirer.
-
No. It's just that I see no good reason to believe that he did it & the doctors didn't. Plus he's quite sexy.
Should have gone to Specsavers. On both counts.
-
If you were to ask AI to create an image of the physical male opposite of Robert Murat, it would generate one that looked like Christian Brueckner - a foot shorter, two functioning eyes, no glasses, lank, greasy hair, complexion of a gravel driveway, 100lb lighter, shoulders of a Corby Trouser Press, teeth like a burnt fence and the nose of a mongoose.
Yet Jane identified him as the man she saw carrying a child away from 5a. If you discard every other facet of this case, that should be enough for the man on the Clapham Omnibus to reasonably conclude that, either Brueckner cannot possibly the perpetrator, or Jane lied.
-
If you were to ask AI to create an image of the physical male opposite of Robert Murat, it would generate one that looked like Christian Brueckner - a foot shorter, two functioning eyes, no glasses, lank, greasy hair, complexion of a gravel driveway, 100lb lighter, shoulders of a Corby Trouser Press, teeth like a burnt fence and the nose of a mongoose.
Yet Jane identified him as the man she saw carrying a child away from 5a. If you discard every other facet of this case, that should be enough for the man on the Clapham Omnibus to reasonably conclude that, either Brueckner cannot possibly the perpetrator, or Jane lied.
You honestly haven?t a clue have you? Jane saw a bloke called Totman. He came forward and in doing so completely validated her description of the man she said she saw. Was he in on it too?
-
You honestly haven?t a clue have you? Jane saw a bloke called Totman. He came forward and in doing so completely validated her description of the man she said she saw. Was he in on it too?
Totman was walking in the opposite direction as stated.
Besides, she contemperaneously ID'd Murat - definitively. She performed a volte face in 2013.
Ergo, prior to Totman deciding to come forward she fingered Murat.
How many men were carrying sleeping children that night?
It's lies, Sandra. An attempted fit up.
-
Totman was walking in the opposite direction as stated.
Besides, she contemperaneously ID'd Murat - definitively. She performed a volte face in 2013.
Ergo, prior to Totman deciding to come forward she fingered Murat.
How many men were carrying sleeping children that night?
It's lies, Sandra. An attempted fit up.
Firstly she never id?ed Murat. Amaral lied about that in his book, and we know that because there is nothing in the files about JT positively id?ing Murat. You would have thought something of that significance might have merited at least one line of text on some official piece of PJ headed paper, no? . Secondly when was it definitively established by Totman which direction he was walking in? How do you explain the fact that a man completely unconnected to the case came forward and explained that he had been carrying his small daughter past the apartment at the time JT said she saw a man, and wearing almost identical clothes to the ones she described?
-
Firstly she never id?ed Murat. Amaral lied about that in his book, and we know that because there is nothing in the files about JT positively id?ing Murat. You would have thought something of that significance might have merited at least one line of text on some official piece of PJ headed paper, no? . Secondly when was it definitively established by Totman which direction he was walking in? How do you explain the fact that a man completely unconnected to the case came forward and explained that he had been carrying his small daughter past the apartment at the time JT said she saw a man, and wearing almost identical clothes to the ones she described?
She ID'd him in the back of the van - she admits that herself. She alleges confirmation bias was to blame.
He was made arguido on the back of that ID. This isn't folklore, it's fact.
Stop with the revisionism. They have plenty of protection without you geggin in.
This post is OFF TOPIC.
Please desist, OPERATION UPDATE means exactly that. Thankyou
-
She ID'd him in the back of the van - she admits that herself. She alleges confirmation bias was to blame.
He was made arguido on the back of that ID. This isn't folklore, it's fact.
Stop with the revisionism. They have plenty of protection without you geggin in.
She doesn?t admit it. Where is the official police statement in which she claims she saw Murat? Where?
-
Future OFF TOPIC posts will be deleted. Thankyou
-
Future OFF TOPIC posts will be deleted. Thankyou
Finally, thank you, for nothing. Delete this.....ugh.....
Who cares? What are you moderating?
Fck all. 98% of all posts here are OFF TOPIC.
Even a new search that hit headlines across the globe didn't result in a spike in activity here. It's dead, babe, dead.
You're moderating nothing.
-
Finally, thank you, for nothing. Delete this.....ugh.....
Who cares? What are you moderating?
Fck all. 98% of all posts here are OFF TOPIC.
Even a new search that hit headlines across the globe didn't result in a spike in activity here. It's dead, babe, dead.
You're moderating nothing.
It?s WUMs like you and Spam that killed it, well done. Now why are you sticking around here feeding off the dead? Aren?t there other forums you could go and destroy? How about Havern?s? See how you enjoy the moderating there.
-
It?s WUMs like you and Spam that killed it, well done. Now why are you sticking around here feeding off the dead? Aren?t there other forums you could go and destroy? How about Havern?s? See how you enjoy the moderating there.
No. You can't blame us. It isn't our fault the case is ripe for mockery. That is due to 'the abduction' having sod all evidence to support it.
-
No. You can't blame us. It isn't our fault the case is ripe for mockery. That is due to 'the abduction' having sod all evidence to support it.
Yes dear, that is why the German police with the cooperation of the Portuguese police are currently searching areas associated with their prime suspect in PdL. Because they are of course keen to spend large amounts of German tax payers money on keep the abduction myth alive, obviously. If anything or anyone is ripe for mockery it?s people who simply cannot grasp what is the only logical and plausible reason for Madeleine?s disappearance, ie that she was abducted by a stranger. And extra dollops of mockery for those who sincerely believe that Burnt Salamander is the reason why the current searches are going on and that the softly softly monkey is tick-tocking once again.
-
Yes dear, that is why the German police with the cooperation of the Portuguese police are currently searching areas associated with their prime suspect in PdL. Because they are of course keen to spend large amounts of German tax payers money on keep the abduction myth alive, obviously. If anything or anyone is ripe for mockery it?s people who simply cannot grasp what is the only logical and plausible reason for Madeleine?s disappearance, ie that she was abducted by a stranger. And extra dollops of mockery for those who sincerely believe that Burnt Salamander is the reason why the current searches are going on and that the softly softly monkey is tick-tocking once again.
That's a lot of waffle, but it isn't evidence Madeleine was abducted. Try again.
-
Anyway. The current search operation will find absoloutely nothing whatsoever connecting Christian Brueckner to Madeleines disappearance, & empty crisp packets, fag butts & discarded coke cans are not evidence Madeleine was abducted.
-
You really have got sand in your fanny today.
still being thoroughly objectionable I see. Why? What do you get out of it?
-
That's a lot of waffle, but it isn't evidence Madeleine was abducted. Try again.
I realise that well reasoned and logical posts will look like waffle to the hard of thinking but that?s your problem not mine.
-
I realise that well reasoned and logical posts will look like waffle to the hard of thinking but that?s your problem not mine.
Your reason & logic is that police are searching, therefore Madeleine was abducted. It's retarded, but thats entirely what I've come to expect from McCann believers.
-
Your reason & logic is that police are searching, therefore Madeleine was abducted. It's retarded, but thats entirely what I've come to expect from McCann believers.
No, my logic is that they wouldn?t have been investing years of their time and millions of euros on this case if they didn?t have very solid reasons for thinking that CB was responsible for taking Madeleine. Just because they didn?t write and inform you personally of those reasons or ask for your permission to investigate doesn?t mean they don?t exist. Don?t refer to me as retarded again thanks.
-
No, my logic is that they wouldn?t have been investing years of their time and millions of euros on this case if they didn?t have very solid reasons for thinking that CB was responsible for taking Madeleine. Just because they didn?t write and inform you personally of those reasons or ask for your permission to investigate doesn?t mean they don?t exist. Don?t refer to me as retarded again thanks.
They have nothing against Brueckner, because Madeleine wasn't abducted. That's why I was able to predict that he wouldn't be charged, & that all their searching will yield absolutely nothing. Least of all, any evidence Madeleine was abducted in the first place. I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I won't be, because the Smith family passed Gerry, not Brueckner.
-
That's why I was able to predict that he wouldn't be charged, & that all their searching will yield absolutely nothing. Least of all, any evidence Madeleine was abducted in the first place. I'm happy to be proven wrong, but I won't be,
Funny how the shoe, if it were on someone else's foot, fits the previous.....if the shoe fits, put a cap on it......if the cap fits the shoe......a shoe, as shoe, my Kingdom.......if a shoe falls in the woods, does the bear wear the pope? A shoe in the bush is worth a cap on the bus.
-
Martin Smith stated that he did not recognise Brueckner, yet he's fairly certain he recognised Gerry.
Again, there's more evidence that Gerry was involved than there is Brueckner.
If Martin Smith would have recognised Brueckner I'm sure the MACA brigade (and the BKA) would have been all over it like a hobo on chips. Funny how the shoe, if it were on someone else's foot, fits the previous.....if the shoe fits, put a cap on it......if the cap fits the shoe......a shoe, as shoe, my Kingdom.......if a shoe falls in the woods, does the bear wear the pope? A shoe in the bush is worth a cap on the bus.
This is simply wrong. It it were true then it would be Gerry that would still be in the frame, not the local rapist / paedophile that the Germans (with the cooperation of the Met and the PJ) have spent years and millions of euros pursuing. A 60%-80% sure sighting of Gerry is as worthless as a 100% sure sighting of Madeleine and there were many of those. Now tell me I?m a retard with a sandy fanny.
-
Exactly what I was saying yesterday (but slagged off for supposedly lying)
Madeleine McCann search goes on but is it 18 years too late? https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20qdwxq394o
-
This is simply wrong. It it were true then it would be Gerry that would still be in the frame, not the local rapist / paedophile that the Germans (with the cooperation of the Met and the PJ) have spent years and millions of euros pursuing. A 60%-80% sure sighting of Gerry is as worthless as a 100% sure sighting of Madeleine and there were many of those. Now tell me I?m a retard with a sandy fanny.
If Martin Smith would have fingered Brueckner at 60 - 80% you and your drooling mob of sandy-fannied retards would be calling that conclusive evidence.
-
If Martin Smith would have fingered Brueckner at 60 - 80% you and your drooling mob of sandy-fannied retards would be calling that conclusive evidence.
Keep it coming, I?m getting off on your abuse.
-
I?m loving the thinly disguised rage and angst that this latest activity has stirred up in our little sceptic community. The level of abuse always ramps up when the police reiterate their focus is not remotely anywhere close to being on the McCanns.
-
I?m loving the thinly disguised rage and angst that this latest activity has stirred up in our little sceptic community. The level of abuse always ramps up when the police reiterate their focus is not remotely anywhere close to being on the McCanns.
Ask and ye shall receive.
There's no rage here, just spittin' facts - Martin Smith ID's Brueckner and all of a sudden the sighting would be valid.
But because he doubled down he gets demonised by the MACA collective.
-
Ask and ye shall receive.
There's no rage here, just spittin' facts - Martin Smith ID's Brueckner and all of a sudden the sighting would be valid.
But because he doubled down he gets demonised by the MACA collective.
There have been all sorts of witness statements claiming CB confessed or CB was seen in the area at the time, do you see me harping on about them ad nauseam? And it works both ways: if Martin Smithnsaid he was only 60-80% certain he saw Bruckner carrying Madeleine you?d be the first to poo-pooh it, that?s also a fact.
-
There have been all sorts of witness statements claiming CB confessed or CB was seen in the area at the time, do you see me harping on about them ad nauseam? And it works both ways: if Martin Smithnsaid he was only 60-80% certain he saw Bruckner carrying Madeleine you?d be the first to poo-pooh it, that?s also a fact.
Well at least you admit it, that's progress.
-
Well at least you admit it, that's progress.
What did I admit? Did you admit you?d pooh-pooh Smith?s sighting if it was 60-80% certain of Bruckner not Gerry? Of would you be totally objective and say hmm, yes despite the fact he never saw his face and only decided many months later that it was him from the way he carried a child that Smith?s sighting is very strong evidence that Bruckner took Madeleine? Because I can tell you for a fact I would not.
-
What did I admit? Did you admit you?d pooh-pooh Smith?s sighting if it was 60-80% certain of Bruckner not Gerry? Of would you be totally objective and say hmm, yes despite the fact he never saw his face and only decided many months later that it was him from the way he carried a child that Smith?s sighting is very strong evidence that Bruckner took Madeleine? Because I can tell you for a fact I would not.
It is incorrect to state that Smith never saw his face. Smith was able to tell the subject had no beard or glasses. Beards & glasses are worn on....... the face, therefore he must have seen his face.
-
It is incorrect to state that Smith never saw his face. Smith was able to tell the subject had no beard or glasses. Beards & glasses are worn on....... the face, therefore he must have seen his face.
He also said he would not be able to recognise him in person or ina photograph - why not, if he had seen his face? And, he also said the man did not appear to be a tourist. Well guess what? Gerry was a tourist. Can?t have been him then. Next.
-
He also said he would not be able to recognise him in person or ina photograph - why not, if he had seen his face? And, he also said the man did not appear to be a tourist. Well guess what? Gerry was a tourist. Can?t have been him then. Next.
Yes. He couldn't recall his face entirely. But then he saw him alight the plane carrying a child & felt, b....r me, I think thats him! He felt strongly enough about it that he called the police. Something the McCanns themselves were reluctant to do, following 'the abduction'.
-
Yes. He couldn't recall his face entirely. But then he saw him alight the plane carrying a child & felt, b....r me, I think thats him! He felt strongly enough about it that he called the police. Something the McCanns themselves were reluctant to do, following 'the abduction'.
It?s absolute nonsense isn?t it. He recognised not a face, but a method of carrying a child, a method that is commonly used by many if not most parents. And this b....r me moment happened many months after the event and after months and months of Gerry?s face being all over the world?s media without triggering a flicker of recognition from a single member of the Smith family. Yes, absolute nonsense sums it up.
-
It?s absolute nonsense isn?t it. He recognised not a face, but a method of carrying a child, a method that is commonly used by many if not most parents. And this b....r me moment happened many months after the event and after months and months of Gerry?s face being all over the world?s media without triggering a flicker of recognition from a single member of the Smith family. Yes, absolute nonsense sums it up.
That's all very well, but he could still be right. The investigation into Brueckner has drawn a total blank, & maybe thats because the Smiths actually did encounter Gerry. Which would also explain why the McCanns didn't call the police.
-
That's all very well, but he could still be right. The investigation into Brueckner has drawn a total blank, & maybe thats because the Smiths actually did encounter Gerry. Which would also explain why the McCanns didn't call the police.
He could also be wrong and all the witnesses claiming Bruckner done it could be right which would explain why the police aren?t investigating Gerry but are instead investing millions of euros and years of manpower into their prime suspect with the aim of bringing a successful prosecution.
-
He could also be wrong and all the witnesses claiming Bruckner done it could be right which would explain why the police aren?t investigating Gerry but are instead investing millions of euros and years of manpower into their prime suspect with the aim of bringing a successful prosecution.
There isn't going to be any prosecution, at any time in the foreseeable future. Wolters has looked as far as he can see & there are no charges appearing over the horizon. Such is the strength of the concrete evidence.
-
There isn't going to be any prosecution, at any time in the foreseeable future. Wolters has looked as far as he can see & there are no charges appearing over the horizon. Such is the strength of the concrete evidence.
Maybe there will never be enough evidence to ensure a successful prosecution of the prime suspect, that?s true but that doesn?t mean Gerry did it. There is no logic to that assumption.
-
Maybe there will never be enough evidence to ensure a successful prosecution of the prime suspect, that?s true but that doesn?t mean Gerry did it. There is no logic to that assumption.
There will never be any prosecution. That's a 100% certainty. You can take it too the bank. Brueckner simply didn't do it. There's no evidence that Brueckner & Maddy came together anywhere, at any time. Which is surprising, considering all the abduction evidence some people imagine the police already have.
-
There will never be any prosecution. That's a 100% certainty. You can take it too the bank. Brueckner simply didn't do it. There's no evidence that Brueckner & Maddy came together anywhere, at any time. Which is surprising, considering all the abduction evidence some people imagine the police already have.
I?m really not remotely interested in your predictions. Just take it as read that we all know your opinion about this by now so there?s really no need to keep going on and on and on and on and on and on and zzzzz
-
I?m really not remotely interested in your predictions. Just take it as read that we all know your opinion about this by now so there?s really no need to keep going on and on and on and on and on and on and zzzzz
No. No I am not having this No I wont stop going on and on and on and I simply refuse to be told what to do or not do by anyone. No.
-
Where have all the grown ups gone?
-
Where have all the grown ups gone?
Need your diaper changing? You'll have to wait.
-
Need your diaper changing? You'll have to wait.
I'm certainly not going to hold my breath waiting for you to write a comment that isn't either obnoxious and/or abusive.
-
An interesting snippet from today's Times which shows just how much investment the Germans have put into this search alone
"The operation, involving more than 60 officers at an estimated cost of at least ?300,000, began on Monday".
They obviously have very strong evidence that CB is involved as I can't see them spending this amount of money and manpower on the case at this late stage. If they weren't absolutely sure they hadtheir man they would have given up years ago.
-
Today the Sun are telling us that the search is over and they are packing up and going home, presumably empty handed.
-
Today the Sun are telling us that the search is over and they are packing up and going home, presumably empty handed.
Or maybe they found what they were looking for with a day to spare
-
Or maybe they found what they were looking for with a day to spare
Yes, I think you might be right. We just have to wait for Wolters to address the media. I think he'll be announcing the sad news by this evening. They've found Madeleines body & all the sceptics & McCann bashers will have some serious apologising to do.
-
Today the Sun are telling us that the search is over and they are packing up and going home, presumably empty handed.
That's simply not true. They took two buckets of shit away yesterday which was widely reported.
Circa ?100k for two buckets of shit scratched together from a ruined shack.
It's a visual metaphor for Wolters' career.
Hansie zwei eimer Wolters. I'll bet someone's already changed his email signature while he was on the bog.
-
Yes, I think you might be right. We just have to wait for Wolters to address the media. I think he'll be announcing the sad news by this evening. They've found Madeleines body & all the sceptics & McCann bashers will have some serious apologising to do.
I think you?re being overly optimistic. Or should that be pessimistic? Whichever you?re definitely being facetious which makes a nice change from your usual sincere and reasonable postings.
-
That's simply not true. They took two buckets of shit away yesterday which was widely reported.
Circa ?100k for two buckets of shit scratched together from a ruined shack.
It's a visual metaphor for Wolters' career.
Hansie zwei eimer Wolters. I'll bet someone's already changed his email signature while he was on the bog.
Would you like to proffer a sensible reason for why the German BKA would agree to go along with HCW?s mad obsession at vast expense in time and resources in order to obtain two buckets of Portuguese shit?
-
So it?s all over and they?ve allegedly found nothing of interest. Now, does this not pose a bit of a dilemma for some sceptics? Wasn?t this search based on the Burnt Salamander Brick book? Didn?t the police look under the pink flowers? If they did, well as they found nothing so does this mean it?s now time for sceptics to use the Brick for what it was always going to be most useful for, ie kindling and bottom wiping purposes?
-
Anyway. I think the fact that they didn't find Maddie at these search locations proves the PJ were right not to bother searching there in the first place. Well done Amaral.
-
Anyway. I think the fact that they didn't find Maddie at these search locations proves the PJ were right not to bother searching there in the first place. Well done Amaral.
Oddly the great man himself claims they did search there, though how he imagined the McCanns got up there and back during the night to stuff Madeleine in the fridge he never quite explains.
-
Today the Sun are telling us that the search is over and they are packing up and going home, presumably empty handed.
Ooer, and they have just been awarded another sum of money to carry on
Ooer, makes you wonder, innit?
-
Ooer, and they have just been awarded another sum of money to carry on
Ooer, makes you wonder, innit?
So soon after the last award of money and a little less. Makes me wonder if this is the End Game. Are we about to prosecute and we are tidying up the lose ends?