Author Topic: The known facts and the speculations featuring Brueckner, the prime suspect  (Read 120689 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline sadie

Thank you Sadie. Yes, I understand they were sat in the restaurant area, so maybe should not have used the terminology "Bar" but people do tend to refer to it all interchangeably as the "Tapas Bar". I'm aware it comprises two separate areas though. All I meant is that since Jane admits to drinking wine in the restaurant that night, it's quite probable that she had drunk "some" prior to doing her first check given the times.

And just to clarify, at no point have I tried to make out they were drunk (or even tiddly for that matter). My original comment was simply that "Alcohol had been consumed". That is all. Even a small amount of alcohol can cause some impairment, hence the reason we have drink-drive limits for example. I agree that it does not appear they were drinking excessively. Although some people seem desperate to twist my words to make out that is what I meant.

Thanks Para.   They are two seperate rooms, not just seperate areas in the same room alho there is easy access between them.   From memory, the buildings were different styles and seem to have been built at different times.   Maybe the restaurant was built later, but I do not know.


There is a lot of disinformation around, including two photographs claiming to be of the Tapas restaurant.   The one is correct, but the other is nothing like the actual Tapas restaurant.   This image has been around so long that my bet is that many think this is the actual restaurant.   There is so much that I could correct, but I simply do not have the time or necessary energy.

And, yes, alcohol had been consumed but not in excess it seems.

Offline G-Unit

Are you of the opinion that the media must know the full extent of the evidence held by the German investigation?

Of course not. Nor am I of the opinion that they always repeat Wolters' words correctly. What isn't helpful, imo, is how much he has been willing to engage with the media despite being allowed to say very little. That suggests to me that he was either being niaive or there was a fishing expedition going on.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Mr Gray

Of course not. Nor am I of the opinion that they always repeat Wolters' words correctly. What isn't helpful, imo, is how much he has been willing to engage with the media despite being allowed to say very little. That suggests to me that he was either being niaive or there was a fishing expedition going on.

Thats why as much  possible to base my conclusions on what I've seen or heard Wolters say live on film

Offline Brietta

Of course not. Nor am I of the opinion that they always repeat Wolters' words correctly. What isn't helpful, imo, is how much he has been willing to engage with the media despite being allowed to say very little. That suggests to me that he was either being niaive or there was a fishing expedition going on.

I believe Wolters is the designated spokesperson which rather makes it his job to speak to the media.  I really do not think you have the measure of the man if you really think he can be described as "naïve".

Bear in mind we heard nothing of the German investigation until Amaral broke Brueckner's cover in December 2019.

Without that unwarranted intervention I think it possible we still might have been in ignorance of Brueckner's role or existence.

SY and the BKA had been working on the Brueckner angle since 2017 without feeling the need of going public on him.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline G-Unit

Thats why as much  possible to base my conclusions on what I've seen or heard Wolters say live on film

Here's what he told Sky News a year ago;

"There's so many facts that she is dead. There's no opportunity that she's still living. We don't have Madeleine McCann's body but we expect that she's dead. We have some evidence that the suspect has done the deed but we need more information from people. We hope that some British tourists can help us to find the murderer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZyYoCyHeBY

What else has he said live on film?


Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline G-Unit

I believe Wolters is the designated spokesperson which rather makes it his job to speak to the media.  I really do not think you have the measure of the man if you really think he can be described as "naïve".

Bear in mind we heard nothing of the German investigation until Amaral broke Brueckner's cover in December 2019.

Without that unwarranted intervention I think it possible we still might have been in ignorance of Brueckner's role or existence.

SY and the BKA had been working on the Brueckner angle since 2017 without feeling the need of going public on him.

The Germans went public because they needed information, as Wolters said. Imo it wasn't a response to anything said by Amaral, given the time lapse.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Of course not. Nor am I of the opinion that they always repeat Wolters' words correctly. What isn't helpful, imo, is how much he has been willing to engage with the media despite being allowed to say very little. That suggests to me that he was either being niaive or there was a fishing expedition going on.
What do you mean by “fishing expedition “?  Do you mean appealing to the public for more evidence to build a case against Brückner? 
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline G-Unit

What do you mean by “fishing expedition “?  Do you mean appealing to the public for more evidence to build a case against Brückner?

That's what Herr Wolters said;

We have some evidence that the suspect has done the deed but we need more information from people. We hope that some British tourists can help us to find the murderer.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Vertigo Swirl

That's what Herr Wolters said;

We have some evidence that the suspect has done the deed but we need more information from people. We hope that some British tourists can help us to find the murderer.
Why do you have a problem with this?
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline G-Unit

Why do you have a problem with this?

I have no problem with them appealing for information.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: The known facts and the speculations featuring Brueckner, the prime suspect
« Reply #1000 on: February 22, 2022, 03:03:45 PM »
I have no problem with them appealing for information.
You appear to have a problem with it IMO
"What isn't helpful, imo, is how much he has been willing to engage with the media despite being allowed to say very little. That suggests to me that he was either being niaive or there was a fishing expedition going on".
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The known facts and the speculations featuring Brueckner, the prime suspect
« Reply #1001 on: February 22, 2022, 03:19:38 PM »
I have no problem with them appealing for information.

Doesn't matter if you do does it

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The known facts and the speculations featuring Brueckner, the prime suspect
« Reply #1002 on: February 22, 2022, 03:41:07 PM »
Here's what he told Sky News a year ago;

"There's so many facts that she is dead. There's no opportunity that she's still living. We don't have Madeleine McCann's body but we expect that she's dead. We have some evidence that the suspect has done the deed but we need more information from people. We hope that some British tourists can help us to find the murderer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZyYoCyHeBY

What else has he said live on film?

What about.. We have concrete evidence MM is dead and our suspect murdered her.. Have you not heard that

Offline barrier

Re: The known facts and the speculations featuring Brueckner, the prime suspect
« Reply #1003 on: February 22, 2022, 04:06:11 PM »
What about.. We have concrete evidence MM is dead and our suspect murdered her.. Have you not heard that

Or how about.

Wolters said they have no idea how she died and no DNA or photo evidence linking the German sex offender to the alleged murder.
This is my own private domicile and I shall not be harassed, biatch:Jesse Pinkman Character.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: The known facts and the speculations featuring Brueckner, the prime suspect
« Reply #1004 on: February 22, 2022, 04:23:39 PM »
Or how about.

Wolters said they have no idea how she died and no DNA or photo evidence linking the German sex offender to the alleged murder.

Thats a newspaper report not his actual spoken words..