The boxes ticked by prime suspect Brueckner

[Ms Para glider]

Getting back to the thread topic of "boxes ticked by CB", and also in light of comments made about which prior convictions are most relevant in indicating the "probability" of someone being capable of murder, I thought 'some' people might be interested in this study.

https://eprints.lancs.ac.uk/3423/1/prs144.pdf

The purpose of the study was to investigate the links between previous criminal convictions of those who go on to commit murder or serious sexual assault. Although it covers both topics, the results are separated out between murder and sexual assault so I'll only reference the data relating to the people who were convicted of murder here (although the previous conviction correlations are surprisingly similar anyway).

This is a summary of what they discovered in terms of previous offending history in the sample of 569 murderers.

- Of the murderers with prior convictions, the most common previous conviction was for 'theft and/or handling stolen goods' with 72% of the sample subjects having this conviction.

- The second most common conviction in murderers was 'burglary' at 61%

- The third most common conviction was 'violence against the person' at 57%

- In terms of the other rankings - 4th was Criminal damage (33%), 5th Fraud/forgery (22%), 6th Robbery (20%), 7th Drug offences (18%), 8th Sexual offences (5%)

So... in terms of those 8 offences in relation to CB and the boxes he ticks as far as I'm aware of...

1. Theft & handling stolen goods - Convicted
2. Burglary - Convicted
3. Violence against a person - Convicted
4. Criminal Damage - Anecdotal evidence only AFAIK
5. Forgery - Convicted
6. Robbery - Convicted
7. Drug offences - Convicted
8. Sexual offences - Convicted


 

[Vertigo Swirl]

^^^ well that shut them all up! 
Not even a rallying “just because he’s a rapist/paedo/burglar doesn’t mean he dunnit” response?  I guess there’s still time….

[The General]

^^^ well that shut them all up! 
Not even a rallying “just because he’s a rapist/paedo/burglar doesn’t mean he dunnit” response?  I guess there’s still time….

Really interesting study. However it's not applicable for our specific purposes, as CB isn't a murderer, or certainly hasn't been convicted of such a crime.
Sample size was a bit small too, but I suppose that's to be expected given the demographic. Love all that though.

[Mr Gray]

Really interesting study. However it's not applicable for our specific purposes, as CB isn't a murderer, or certainly hasn't been convicted of such a crime.
Sample size was a bit small too, but I suppose that's to be expected given the demographic. Love all that though.

You post want you want to be true.. Not what is.
You don't know CB is not a murderer

[Brietta]

^^^ well that shut them all up! 
Not even a rallying “just because he’s a rapist/paedo/burglar doesn’t mean he dunnit” response?  I guess there’s still time….

I cannot quite believe the staunch support given to the presumption of innocence granted to the man who meets all and every prerequisite of the "perfect patsy" and then some and who is considered the prime suspect for the murder of Madeleine McCann.
Given the vilification meted out to and endured for fifteen years specifically denying that right to Madeleine's parents without there being a shred of evidence in support by the very same individuals.

The Judicial Police in Portugal reopened Madeleine's case in 2013 using the justification that Madeleine had been abducted by a stranger who they suspected was Euclides Monteiro.

That particular so called "patsy" seems to have been eliminated.
The interesting thing about him is that like Brueckner he ticked many a box and investigative avenue and like Brueckner he was not investigated and eliminated from the inquiry in 2007; and when he was finally investigated it seemed to be a short and sharp process.

That is where the comparison with Brueckner appears to end.  Brueckner seems to be the result of an elimination process too, his being when others had been checked out as Monteiro was however belatedly leaving Brueckner as the last man standing.

As far as we know police have been ticking off Brueckner's boxes seriously since 2017.  The fact that has resulted in evidence being found which continues to lead on to another part of the jigsaw is I think significant.
It would tend to show that far from being "the patsy" some would like him to be - Brueckner is a bona fide suspect in a most heinous crime.
The evidence is there for that, proving the evidence they have at a remove of fifteen years is the difficult part and I don't think the BKA and the German prosecutors are in any great rush to jeopardise the case they are building or have built, with undue haste.
Particularly when time is on their side.

[Brietta]

You post want you want to be true.. Not what is.
You don't know CB is not a murderer

I find it quite sad that there are those who cannot bear the thought of Madeleine's case being solved :(

[Vertigo Swirl]

You post want you want to be true.. Not what is.
You don't know CB is not a murderer

"CB isn't a murderer because he hasn't got a prior conviction for murder" in a thread examining which boxes CB ticks (pretty much all of them) is exactly what someone in denial would say, that and the trusty old get out for anyone presented with compelling statistical evidence that contradicts their beliefs -  "the sample size is too small".  Yeah right.  We don't know if CB is a murderer.  He might be.  He might have murdered before Madeleine's disappearance.  He might have murdered again after killing her.  He might never have murdered at all, but based on the boxes he ticks CB does fit the profile of a would-be murderer in very many ways, i think that's pretty much irrefutable. 

[The General]

You post want you want to be true.. Not what is.
You don't know CB is not a murderer

I think I got the jist of that word salad.
I didn't say that, the second decipherable sentence I mean. I said he hadn't been convicted, so it's moot. Plus the sample size is inevitably quite small, as is the case with most of these studies, particularly colloquially. Plus not all murderers are the same and have the same motivations.
I could go on, but, in isolation, the study has some limited points of merit and perhaps additional research.

[The General]

I find it quite sad that there are those who cannot bear the thought of Madeleine's case being solved :(

Whatever you do, never look at the comments section of any website, Youtube video or online news article pertaining to the case. I'd wager 90% who know anything about the case (and 23.3% of those who don't) believe the parents 'did it'.
That's a lot of sadness for you to bear. You can thank me later.

[Mr Gray]

Whatever you do, never look at the comments section of any website, Youtube video or online news article pertaining to the case. I'd wager 90% who know anything about the case (and 23.3% of those who don't) believe the parents 'did it'.
That's a lot of sadness for you to bear. You can thank me later.

probably 100% of those who believe the parents did it also belive the dog aklerts are highly significant....most of them have been taken in to think the dogs have never been wrong in 200 cases...that they have 100% record...that the dna 15/19 would be proof in most other countries...their beliefs are total junk

[Mr Gray]

I think I got the jist of that word salad.
I didn't say that, the second decipherable sentence I mean. I said he hadn't been convicted, so it's moot. Plus the sample size is inevitably quite small, as is the case with most of these studies, particularly colloquially. Plus not all murderers are the same and have the same motivations.
I could go on, but, in isolation, the study has some limited points of merit and perhaps additional research.

you said...
as CB isn't a murderer, or certainly hasn't been convicted of such a crime.

[Vertigo Swirl]

CB is a criminal with a proven track record in rape, child abuse and theft but some people seem to think that all these criminal actions are completely irrelevant and mean nothing with regard to CB's motivations and propensities.  Why is that I wonder...?  Let's flip it.  What in CB's character and past history makes him not a suitable potential suspect for the crime of child abduction and murder? 

[Brietta]

Whatever you do, never look at the comments section of any website, Youtube video or online news article pertaining to the case. I'd wager 90% who know anything about the case (and 23.3% of those who don't) believe the parents 'did it'.
That's a lot of sadness for you to bear. You can thank me later.

The problem you and others seem to be evidencing is accepting that there is an incredibly realistic candidate in the shape of Brueckner who has brought himself to the attention of investigators involved in Madeleine's case.

Brueckner ticks so many boxes that we know about that he doesn't lend himself readily to the normal sceptic ridicule and put downs that any apparent progress in the search for Madeleine is usually subjected to.
And that is without even taking into consideration the undoubted evidence the Germans hold but which is not in the public domain.

I recognise that it is a tough time for sceptics which is why I can readily excuse your rude response and lack of interest in exploring the topic of of threads featuring the prime suspect - Brueckner.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I reckon if you look at any video of 9/11 on youtube 90% of the comments underneath will be from Truthers who "know" it was an inside job.  As if youtube comments meant anything, it's really quite laughable!

[The General]

probably 100% of those who believe the parents did it also belive the dog aklerts are highly significant....most of them have been taken in to think the dogs have never been wrong in 200 cases...that they have 100% record...that the dna 15/19 would be proof in most other countries...their beliefs are total junk

They don't care, these arbiters of truth. These unilateral fact finders. The utter sausage monkeys.
I don't either. I didn't even read your post. Something about 100% of 200 something.
When Jeremy Beadle died I got the news in a hotel in Geneva whilst drinking Bison Grass Vodka with an Polish ex-tank commander. He said, and I quote '....the ice machine is broken. This is a dark day.' And it was.

Good to see you're still in decent fettle, Davel.