If Brueckner is Never Charged.

[Brietta]

I was talking about his alleged involvement in the Mccann case,of course you knew full well that's what I meant, you're just posting anything/something which for some unfathomable reason you seem to think it suggest's he's involved.Has he been charged,no! thought not.

Nope follow the conversation, that is what I did.
You posted in direct response to a post casting doubt on the sexual assault on a five year old girl ... "I tend to think the suspicions are based on others words not evidence."  Suggesting that there was only gossip from girlfriend and acquaintances to substantiate allegations made against Brueckner.

Quite obviously that suggestion is wrong.  Brueckner has been convicted on numerous occasions that particular assault being one on which you have cast doubt.

I have merely rectified your erroneous opinion with fact.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I was talking about his alleged involvement in the Mccann case,of course you knew full well that's what I meant, you're just posting anything/something which for some unfathomable reason you seem to think it suggest's he's involved.Has he been charged,no! thought not.

I take it you’ve always stood in DP’s corner like you have for CB every time a sceptic brought up the Gaspar statement?  No, thought not.  Obviously a bit of nipple twiddling is FAR more damning than a criminal record as long as your arm which involves burglary, rape and child abuse. 

[Brietta]

For any who might doubt the vicious rape which occurred in Praia da Rocha 2004 the archived case file consists of 110 pages. 

Which included information that a swab from a medical examination had been destroyed in 2007 because it hadn’t been kept properly.

The file also contained the information that no other cases existed where the same modus operandi had been used.

Which was not the case for the rape which was perpetrated just a year later in Praia da Luz.  Praia da Rocha was the precedent for what happened there yet the Portuguese police ignored that there might be a link to the rape which had occurred in Praia da Rocha the previous year.
Imagine either the incompetence or the deliberate disregard of that information, because it had to be one or the other.

The Germans were able to secure a conviction in the Praia da Luz case because someone had overlooked the destruction of the evidence which should have happened as per procedure in 2010 and the Portuguese were able to send it to Germany in 2018 which no doubt played its part in Brueckner's conviction.

It remains to be seen what if anything can be salvaged from the the first assault in 2004 to make a viable prosecution as was done for the copycat assault of 2005 when the Germans took over the case in 2018.




https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/22/portugal-police-could-reopen-case-irish-woman-hazel-behan-2004-madeleine-mccann

[faithlilly]

For any who might doubt the vicious rape which occurred in Praia da Rocha 2004 the archived case file consists of 110 pages. 

Which included information that a swab from a medical examination had been destroyed in 2007 because it hadn’t been kept properly.

The file also contained the information that no other cases existed where the same modus operandi had been used.

Which was not the case for the rape which was perpetrated just a year later in Praia da Luz.  Praia da Rocha was the precedent for what happened there yet the Portuguese police ignored that there might be a link to the rape which had occurred in Praia da Rocha the previous year.
Imagine either the incompetence or the deliberate disregard of that information, because it had to be one or the other.

The Germans were able to secure a conviction in the Praia da Luz case because someone had overlooked the destruction of the evidence which should have happened as per procedure in 2010 and the Portuguese were able to send it to Germany in 2018 which no doubt played its part in Brueckner's conviction.

It remains to be seen what if anything can be salvaged from the the first assault in 2004 to make a viable prosecution as was done for the copycat assault of 2005 when the Germans took over the case in 2018.




https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/22/portugal-police-could-reopen-case-irish-woman-hazel-behan-2004-madeleine-mccann

Forensics were taken at the scene and the DNA subsequently retrieved did not match Brueckner. That the Portuguese may have been incompetent, unsympathetic etc etc may be true, the U.K. police,  it appears, do not differ greatly from their Portuguese counterparts in that respect, but it has nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

[Mr Gray]

Forensics were taken at the scene and the DNA subsequently retrieved did not match Brueckner. That the Portuguese may have been incompetent, unsympathetic etc etc may be true, the U.K. police,  it appears, do not differ greatly from their Portuguese counterparts in that respect, but it has nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

do you have  a cite for the dna did not match...are you relying on an article in a tabloid

[Anthro]

German authorities are preparing and probably finalising Brückner’s charge sheet in order to bring the case to court to ensure successful prosecution with the desired outcome. For this reason they will not release any more information into the public domain (for now) to ensure that their case is solid and ready to move forward. My opinion. Wolters said that he’s going to be ‘quiet’ for the next couple of months while their investigation proceeds. Hypothetically they already may have substantial evidence, albeit circumstantial e.g Brückner in holiday pictures of visitors to Praia da Luz at the time; confirmation from witnesses such as Tasmin Silence, Jeni Weinberger, the Jensen sisters, Carole Tranmer etc. as to the identity of the man/men watching the apartment; phone records from 28 April 2007 onwards pertaining to his number; picture evidence of Madeleine’s location but upon searching she has been moved and hence not recovered; etc. As Davel has pointed out, we simply do not know at this stage. My opinion.

[sadie]

German authorities are preparing and probably finalising Brückner’s charge sheet in order to bring the case to court to ensure successful prosecution with the desired outcome. For this reason they will not release any more information into the public domain (for now) to ensure that their case is solid and ready to move forward. My opinion. Wolters said that he’s going to be ‘quiet’ for the next couple of months while their investigation proceeds. Hypothetically they already may have substantial evidence, albeit circumstantial e.g Brückner in holiday pictures of visitors to Praia da Luz at the time; confirmation from witnesses such as Tasmin Silence, Jeni Weinberger, the Jensen sisters, Carole Tranmer etc. as to the identity of the man/men watching the apartment; phone records from 28 April 2007 onwards pertaining to his number; picture evidence of Madeleine’s location but upon searching she has been moved and hence not recovered; etc. As Davel has pointed out, we simply do not know at this stage. My opinion.

 

What a comprehensive and well thought out post.  Well done Anthro

[faithlilly]

German authorities are preparing and probably finalising Brückner’s charge sheet in order to bring the case to court to ensure successful prosecution with the desired outcome. For this reason they will not release any more information into the public domain (for now) to ensure that their case is solid and ready to move forward. My opinion. Wolters said that he’s going to be ‘quiet’ for the next couple of months while their investigation proceeds. Hypothetically they already may have substantial evidence, albeit circumstantial e.g Brückner in holiday pictures of visitors to Praia da Luz at the time; confirmation from witnesses such as Tasmin Silence, Jeni Weinberger, the Jensen sisters, Carole Tranmer etc. as to the identity of the man/men watching the apartment; phone records from 28 April 2007 onwards pertaining to his number; picture evidence of Madeleine’s location but upon searching she has been moved and hence not recovered; etc. As Davel has pointed out, we simply do not know at this stage. My opinion.

That isn’t even a circumstantial case. Brueckner in or near PDL at the time...so we’re thousands of people and I’m sure several with a history of sexual violence. Not sure what you mean about the witnesses...have any of them identified Brueckner ? TS said the man she saw was extremely ugly and had a pockmarked face, Brueckner is neither ugly nor pockmarked. The another witnesses describe a generic white man with differing hair and yet again none have identified Brueckner or he would have been charged. He used his phone near PDL...yet again not a suspicious act. Not sure what you mean by your last point.

In my opinion, Wolter hasn’t enough evidence even to question Brueckner never mind charge him and I doubt that reality will change.

[Mr Gray]

That isn’t even a circumstantial case. Brueckner in or near PDL at the time...so we’re thousands of people and I’m sure several with a history of sexual violence. Not sure what you mean about the witnesses...have any of them identified Brueckner ? TS said the man she saw was extremely ugly and had a pockmarked face, Brueckner is neither ugly nor pockmarked. The another witnesses describe a generic white man with differing hair and yet again none have identified Brueckner or he would have been charged. He used his phone near PDL...yet again not a suspicious act. Not sure what you mean by your last point.

In my opinion, Wolter hasn’t enough evidence even to question Brueckner never mind charge him and I doubt that reality will change.

If that's what you want to think feel free ..it doesn't matter in the slightest..he doesn't need much evidence to question him if he wants..in fact he probably doesn't need any..just a suspicion.

[Brietta]

That isn’t even a circumstantial case. Brueckner in or near PDL at the time...so we’re thousands of people and I’m sure several with a history of sexual violence. Not sure what you mean about the witnesses...have any of them identified Brueckner ? TS said the man she saw was extremely ugly and had a pockmarked face, Brueckner is neither ugly nor pockmarked. The another witnesses describe a generic white man with differing hair and yet again none have identified Brueckner or he would have been charged. He used his phone near PDL...yet again not a suspicious act. Not sure what you mean by your last point.

In my opinion, Wolter hasn’t enough evidence even to question Brueckner never mind charge him and I doubt that reality will change.

You really don't know what evidence Hans Christian Wolters has and I think you may be unpleasantly surprised if although I rather think it will be when he decides to press forward with it.

Not forgetting that a great deal of information has come in which all has to be processed which takes time.  I think his priority is to find Madeleine whichever 50% category she falls into bearing in mind that without evidence to the contrary Wolters concedes she may still be alive.

In my opinion the only people who have a stake in moving the investigation forward is the McCann family for whom this must be Hell on earth.  We are dabblers and dilettantes in other peoples' lives so it really isn't life changing for us as it is for them.

Brueckner is going nowhere for some time yet.

Therefore there is all the time in the world for the Germans to take their time and conduct their case appropriately; and I don't think they are about to be rushed into premature decisions until they are good and ready to proceed.
I think Madeleine and her family deserve that amount of respect.

[Anthro]

That isn’t even a circumstantial case. Brueckner in or near PDL at the time...so we’re thousands of people and I’m sure several with a history of sexual violence. Not sure what you mean about the witnesses...have any of them identified Brueckner ? TS said the man she saw was extremely ugly and had a pockmarked face, Brueckner is neither ugly nor pockmarked. The another witnesses describe a generic white man with differing hair and yet again none have identified Brueckner or he would have been charged. He used his phone near PDL...yet again not a suspicious act. Not sure what you mean by your last point.

In my opinion, Wolter hasn’t enough evidence even to question Brueckner never mind charge him and I doubt that reality will change.

‘My opinion’ as required by the Forum’s rules.

[Angelo222]

That isn’t even a circumstantial case. Brueckner in or near PDL at the time...so we’re thousands of people and I’m sure several with a history of sexual violence. Not sure what you mean about the witnesses...have any of them identified Brueckner ? TS said the man she saw was extremely ugly and had a pockmarked face, Brueckner is neither ugly nor pockmarked. The another witnesses describe a generic white man with differing hair and yet again none have identified Brueckner or he would have been charged. He used his phone near PDL...yet again not a suspicious act. Not sure what you mean by your last point.

In my opinion, Wolter hasn’t enough evidence even to question Brueckner never mind charge him and I doubt that reality will change.

I totally agree. Wolter is a glory hunter with no evidence imo.

[Mr Gray]

I totally agree. Wolter is a glory hunter with no evidence imo.

I think several posters are going to look more than a little foolish when Wolters questions CB and we see what his evidence is

[Vertigo Swirl]

I totally agree. Wolter is a glory hunter with no evidence imo.

” A truly innocent person will speak freely and openly to detectives” and yet we know CB has asserted he will not, ergo by your own logic CB has something to hide, o why do you write Wolters off as nothing more than a glory hunter?

[Angelo222]

I think several posters are going to look more than a little foolish when Wolters questions CB and we see what his evidence is

And some are going to look rather silly when it all goes sour as it did with the Azores chappie who died in a tractor accident.