New German suspect in Madeleine McCann mystery disappearance.

[Gertrude]

Why did he confess to abducting Madeleine?

He didn't. It is alleged he confessed. Supposedly a friend said he did. He didn't admit it to police, it wasn't recorded.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/madeleine-mccann-disappearance-christian-brueckner-suspect-other-cases-a9552021.html

If he did there are many reasons someone who fantasizes about torture might say he did. Many criminals make false confessions.  Can we be accurate about what the police have?  They have a friend saying he confessed. It wasn't to police, we don't know if he made it up.  That's why UK police have said there isn't enough to charge him!

The phone call did put him in the area of the town reports have said. I haven't seen any reports of the call placing him near 5a.  Again it's not enough to prove he was in 5a is it? hence the appeals.

[misty]

We know from Crimewatch 2013 that 8 families between them had left 11 children at OC night creche on 3rd May so it's reasonable to assume that they were all dining at locations other than their respective apartments. We know from the guest list that none of those families were staying in Block 5.
If TMS is correct that CB was the man she saw on 2 occasions specifically watching Block 5 during daylight hours then it's not unreasonable to think Block 5 apartments were the target. However, iirc, at least 2 of the recent burglaries at OC did not involve apartments occupied by families with children. If maximising gains by theft of money & valuables was the sole motive of such an intruder then Block 5 with its 4 families was hardly the place to achieve that.
Why did Brueckner (if it was him) allow himself to be so obviously seen observing Block 5 during daylight hours - or was reconnoitring for another party? It will be interesting to see if recent media coverage prompts any memories of him lurking in the vicinity at night.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11805709/portuguese-police-ignore-statement-madeleine-mccann/

[Eleanor]

  A friend was quoted as saying he stole 'tourist sh*t'. Which is why I said he was a 'petty' thief.

 At the stage he was supposedly casing apartment 5a, he was a petty thief who's child abuse convictions did not seem to be linked to thieving or entering property. I think that's an accurate assessment but some people seem to think I am trying to dismiss his other crimes.
 Maybe that's come from an expectation of thinking people who do not believe the McCann's version of events are desperate to minimise the sadistic profile of Bruckner, I'm not one of them. I can see he's a very dangerous individual ....that is still not proof he was in 5a that night.

No one has said that he was in 5a that evening.

He wasn't a Petty Thief at that point.

So what are you talking about?

[jassi]

His phone put him in the area of 5a.  He confessed to a friend that he abducted Madeleine.  His phone number was listed in a phone owned by an ex Tapas Restaurant worker.

He lived in the area. He had friends who had his phone number.

Hardly criminal activities are they?

[Eleanor]

He lived in the area. He had friends who had his phone number.

Hardly criminal activities are they?

But Paedophilia and Rape are.  Of which he had already been convicted.

[Wonderfulspam]

But Paedophilia and Rape are.  Of which he had already been convicted.

Well, that proves Maddie was abducted then.

I stand corrected.

[jassi]

But Paedophilia and Rape are.  Of which he had already been convicted.

Indeed, but they are quite separate cases, unconnected to Madeleine's disappearance.
Do you say that because he's guilty of those crimes he must be guilty of this one ?
I agree he's prime suspect, probably the only suspect but that isn't enough.
I'm afraid there needs to be something much more substantial linking him to Madeleine be proved before this will go to court.

[Gertrude]

No one has said that he was in 5a that evening.

He wasn't a Petty Thief at that point.

So what are you talking about?

Why is this so hard to understand?  He had a conviction at aged 17 for '“performing sexual acts in front of a child”
he was not at the time he was supposedly casing 5a a convicted multiple rapist.
He was at the time most certainly was a petty thief because he stole petty tourist items

Can I make it any clearer why I referred to his burglary career at this point as 'petty'?

[Gertrude]

But Paedophilia and Rape are.  Of which he had already been convicted.

That's incorrect. He had a conviction for ' sexual activity in front of a child' in 1994, No rape conviction until 2018.

[Eleanor]

Well, that proves Maddie was abducted then.

I stand corrected.

Not by my standards, it doesn't.  You may think as you please.  Providing you don't say that as a fact on this Forum.

[Eleanor]

Indeed, but they are quite separate cases, unconnected to Madeleine's disappearance.
Do you say that because he's guilty of those crimes he must be guilty of this one ?
I agree he's prime suspect, probably the only suspect but that isn't enough.
I'm afraid there needs to be something much more substantial linking him to Madeleine be proved before this will go to court.

I have never said that he is guilty of anything he hasn't been convicted of.  I haven't even said that he should be a Suspect.

Why do you keep on trying to trip me up?  You are wasting your time and obviously not very good at it.

[John]

It's a big leap in anyone's book to go from a sex pest or even rapist burglar to a child abductor and murderer. As far as I am aware, this suspect has never even been arrested on suspicion of murder let alone been convicted of it?

[Eleanor]

Why is this so hard to understand?  He had a conviction at aged 17 for '“performing sexual acts in front of a child”
he was not at the time he was supposedly casing 5a a convicted multiple rapist.
He was at the time most certainly was a petty thief because he stole petty tourist items

Can I make it any clearer why I referred to his burglary career at this point as 'petty'?

His First Crime was Paedophillia at the age of 17 and already documented.  What is petty about that?

[jassi]

I have never said that he is guilty of anything he hasn't been convicted of.  I haven't even said that he should be a Suspect.

Why do you keep on trying to trip me up?  You are wasting your time and obviously not very good at it.

Why would I wish to trip you up?
Just trying to clarify your position on this point of previous convictions.

[Gertrude]

His First Crime was Paedophillia at the age of 17 and already documented.  What is petty about that?

How many more times do I have to explain? I said his Theiving was petty! 

I think it's pretty clear, I am being factual here.

He wouldn't have been considered a serious offender by any police force at that time even if you want to quibble about how serious you personally see his crimes.