Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB

[Mr Gray]

What part of what FF said do you not understand.

FROM CB LAWYER.

“One of the mistakes people have made is saying there is a film of the rape of the pensioner that is not true,” he said.

I understand  everything... I take it this is not a direct quote as he doesn't speak English... The truth and I understand is there was no film at the trial.
Why did he go to portugal to try and get hold of it

[Vertigo Swirl]

No....you are saying she made it up not me.

You are suggesting that there was no video footage of the rape, are you not?

[Mr Gray]

What has any of that got to do with my post you quoted ....that HCW witnesses have no credibility.

Also, they do anything for money. B

Why doesnt his girlfriend have any credibility...thats up to  a judge...not you or the defence lawyer

[Mr Gray]

Aw come on he is a lawyer...How AM I of the view the lady lied.

I didn't say it FF did ...take it up with him.

My point that you are twisting to your own advantage it seems.

Is if there isnt a film ...how can the so-called witnesses say they have seen it ..that is the question.

Its obvious FF  would know if there was one he has the documentation obviously because he is his lawyer for the rape.

Common sence should prevail here.

Do you have a cite for Fulscher being the lawyer at the rape trial..I seem to recall he wasnt

[kizzy]

Do you have a cite for Fulscher being the lawyer at the rape trial..I seem to recall he wasnt

Well, I seem to recall he was.

[Mr Gray]

Well, I seem to recall he was.

thats not  acite...so do you have a cite ...I seem to recall he wasnt

[kizzy]

thats not  acite...so do you have a cite ...I seem to recall he wasnt

So you recalled wrong.


 comes after the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) was told by an advisor on Thursday that Germany did not follow the correct procedures when extraditing the suspect, Christian Brueckner, from Italy.

Brueckner was extradited to Germany from Italy in 2018 under an arrest warrant that cited a drugs conviction but was subsequently convicted and sentenced for the 2005 rape of a 72-year-old American woman in Portugal.

His lawyer, Friedrich Fulscher, challenged the validity of the arrest warrant as it did not cite the 2005 rape charge. and argued it was a breach of international law to put him on trial for the rape.

[Mr Gray]

So you recalled wrong.


 comes after the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) was told by an advisor on Thursday that Germany did not follow the correct procedures when extraditing the suspect, Christian Brueckner, from Italy.

Brueckner was extradited to Germany from Italy in 2018 under an arrest warrant that cited a drugs conviction but was subsequently convicted and sentenced for the 2005 rape of a 72-year-old American woman in Portugal.

His lawyer, Friedrich Fulscher, challenged the validity of the arrest warrant as it did not cite the 2005 rape charge. and argued it was a breach of international law to put him on trial for the rape.

It doesnt say he was the lawyer for the rape trial...you need an imo

[kizzy]

It doesnt say he was the lawyer for the rape trial...you need an imo

No, because going back to the original point ....he will be privy to the evidence of the rape.

He said there were no film of the rape

you an VS just seem to totally try an disrupt what points are being made at the time....now that is IMO

[Vertigo Swirl]

No, because going back to the original point ....he will be privy to the evidence of the rape.

He said there were no film of the rape

you an VS just seem to totally try an disrupt what points are being made at the time....now that is IMO

What an absurd allegation.  Are we to sit back and allow you to claim that there was no video without comment?

[Brietta]

No, because going back to the original point ....he will be privy to the evidence of the rape.

He said there were no film of the rape

you an VS just seem to totally try an disrupt what points are being made at the time....now that is IMO

There may well have been evidence presented in court.

From another thread
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11585.msg619324#msg619324

[The General]

No, because going back to the original point ....he will be privy to the evidence of the rape.

He said there were no film of the rape

you an VS just seem to totally try an disrupt what points are being made at the time....now that is IMO

In fairness, if there was a video, then there'd be little need for the hair follicle  / DNA analysis, apart from building a cast iron case.
There may be a video, there may not, I dunno......actually who said there was a video? Does it matter? Does anyone here care? Who did say there was a video, though? Was it in the initial or subsequent trial? Does anyone care about that?

[Vertigo Swirl]

In fairness, if there was a video, then there'd be little need for the hair follicle  / DNA analysis, apart from building a cast iron case.
There may be a video, there may not, I dunno......actually who said there was a video? Does it matter? Does anyone here care? Who did say there was a video, though? Was it in the initial or subsequent trial? Does anyone care about that?

Perhaps the same could be said to apply to the Madeleine McCann case - they have video evidence but need to build  cast iron case around it.  Of course there was a video, unless the rape victim and/or police were complicit in a great deceit. 

[Mr Gray]

No, because going back to the original point ....he will be privy to the evidence of the rape.

He said there were no film of the rape

you an VS just seem to totally try an disrupt what points are being made at the time....now that is IMO

Another and hom... Afaiaa... He was not the lawyer in the rape case..

The quote from the paper is inaccurate from what I have read. He is referring  to be there being no video presented at the trial.

[Lace]

Jeez, he really must have done something to upset all his erstwhile pals!


Not at all ...they do anything for money it seems

It's a bit bizarre that he came up with CB abducted Madeleine though don't you think?   Telling the Police CB was the person who robbed this apartment or that apartment or he trafficked drugs,  but coming up with he told me he snatched Madeleine seems rather a massive thing to say unless it was true.  Then you get people saying 'we mentioned Madeleine and he went crazy saying she was dead'  and the girlfriend saying 'he told me he had a horrible job to do tomorrow but it will change my life'  the evening before Madeleine was taken,  this witness didn't know these people would come out and say these things did he?   Also he wouldn't have known CB's phone would ping outside the Tapas Bar.