The known facts and the speculations featuring Brueckner, the prime suspect

[Mr Gray]

It's well known what Wolters said, but for those who missed it here is the horse using his mouth;

24:34

"We have strong evidence that Madeleine McCann is dead and that our suspect killed her"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pvqu9Wd388c

And you need to use your ears. He's not claiming guilt or proof.. He's saying that they have strong evidence. Stating a fact no doubt

[G-Unit]

Do you really believe that because it's in quotation marks its totally correct. I think thats very naive

Do you realise that police have a defence of absolute privelige re defamation in a criminal cade

Please provide a cite for this 'absolute privilege'.

[Mr Gray]

Please provide a cite for this 'absolute privilege'.

You mean you haven't heard of it

[Mr Gray]

Please provide a cite for this 'absolute privilege'.

https://www.internetlawcentre.co.uk/suing-police-for-defamation


In the UK, there is a defence for action for defamation which is called “Absolute privilege”.

Absolute privilege is effectively a public policy defence which is designed to protect defamatory allegations made in certain situations, for example, statements made in court during or as part of legal proceedings; fair and accurate contemporaneous reports of such proceedings by the press and statements made, and documents created, in the course of a police criminal investigation.

[G-Unit]

https://www.internetlawcentre.co.uk/suing-police-for-defamation


In the UK, there is a defence for action for defamation which is called “Absolute privilege”.

Absolute privilege is effectively a public policy defence which is designed to protect defamatory allegations made in certain situations, for example, statements made in court during or as part of legal proceedings; fair and accurate contemporaneous reports of such proceedings by the press and statements made, and documents created, in the course of a police criminal investigation.

Thank you. I don't think this would protect a German prosecutor making prejudicial statements to the public, however.

[Ms Para glider]

Thank you. I don't think this would protect a German prosecutor making prejudicial statements to the public, however.

The obligation not to refer to suspects or accused persons as being guilty should not prevent public authorities from publicly disseminating information on the criminal proceedings where this is strictly necessary for reasons relating to the criminal investigation

...

The use of such reasons should be confined to situations in which this would be reasonable and proportionate, taking all interests into account.

Given that CB poses no immediate risk to the public due to his incarceration, the criteria of what is deemed "reasonable and proportionate" has to relate to the strength of their current evidence and the necessity to appeal publicly for confirmatory evidence IMO.

[G-Unit]

The obligation not to refer to suspects or accused persons as being guilty should not prevent public authorities from publicly disseminating information on the criminal proceedings where this is strictly necessary for reasons relating to the criminal investigation

...

The use of such reasons should be confined to situations in which this would be reasonable and proportionate, taking all interests into account.

Given that CB poses no immediate risk to the public due to his incarceration, the criteria of what is deemed "reasonable and proportionate" has to relate to the strength of their current evidence and the necessity to appeal publicly for confirmatory evidence IMO.

In my opinion it was necessary to appeal for information, which they did. It was completely unnecessary to claim that Madeleine is dead and their suspect did it.

[Ms Para glider]

In my opinion it was necessary to appeal for information, which they did. It was completely unnecessary to claim that Madeleine is dead and their suspect did it.

The charge they are pursuing against CB is murder. How does one infer such a charge without stating their belief that the victim is dead and their belief that their suspect did it?

If you accept it was necessary to appeal, what do you suggest they should have said instead?

[misty]

Is anyone able to provide information from ECHR about the rights of people who are already incarcerated for any reason, specifically the presumption of innocence before a suspect is ever tried in court for another offence when details of any previous convictions cannot be disclosed?

[faithlilly]

Have cadaver dogs checked any of CB's vehicles and homes? Probably not since their alerts have no evidential value in court.

As for whether anyone has identified CB carrying a child, do you know that they haven't? In terms of the parents, I assume you are referring to Martin Smith's dubious claim about the way Gerry carried his other child from the aeroplane. How many distinctive ways are there to carry a child I ask? This is the same Martin Smith who also says in the PJ files :

Having already seen various photographs of MADELEINE and televised images, states that the child who was carried by the individual could have been her. He cannot state this as fact.

and regarding the man carrying this girl:

States that it is not possible for him to recognise the individual in person or by photograph.

And as for the etc, etc part of your post. That just means you've run out of any other evidence to cite doesn't it? Thank you for confirming how pathetically weak the evidence pointing to the parents actually is.

Two small girls, Madeleine and a lookalike, being carried through the streets of PDL at the same time by a man similar in stature and appearance. Surely even you don’t believe that?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Two small girls, Madeleine and a lookalike, being carried through the streets of PDL at the same time by a man similar in stature and appearance. Surely even you don’t believe that?

”Surely even you” is such a trademark Faithlilly put down!   I’ve read Para’s post again and can’t see where he referenced two separate men and child incidents.  However, as there were a number of young children in the creche that night (let’s say half of whom were young girls) who would all presumably have to be picked up by a parent (let’s be sexist and say that task would fall to the father) and carried back to their holiday accommodation I don’t see it as being in the realms of the Loch Ness Monster or Sasquatch if there were two such incidents.

[G-Unit]

The charge they are pursuing against CB is murder. How does one infer such a charge without stating their belief that the victim is dead and their belief that their suspect did it?

If you accept it was necessary to appeal, what do you suggest they should have said instead?

Appeals can be made without prejudicial statements.

[Mr Gray]

Appeals can be made without prejudicial statements.

It may be that prejudicial statements are necessary to solve a case and achieve justice for victims... Its been shown the law supports that


The obligation not to refer to suspects or accused persons as being guilty should not prevent public authorities from publicly disseminating information on the criminal proceedings where this is strictly necessary for reasons relating to the criminal investigation

[G-Unit]

It may be that prejudicial statements are necessary to solve a case and achieve justice for victims... Its been shown the law supports that


The obligation not to refer to suspects or accused persons as being guilty should not prevent public authorities from publicly disseminating information on the criminal proceedings where this is strictly necessary for reasons relating to the criminal investigation

Which law is that then?

[Mr Gray]

Which law is that then?

Looks like a European directive.. Note I didn't say a law... I said the law..
The obligation not to refer to suspects or accused persons as being guilty should not prevent public authorities from publicly disseminating information on the criminal proceedings where this is strictly necessary for reasons relating to the criminal investigation