The boxes ticked by prime suspect Brueckner

[Brietta]

I will give you one reason. Maybe he didn’t.
The press, the Met Police and people on the internet may have taken the words used on the BKA website asking for information on Bruekner and misinterpreted them.
The BKA website says “Die letzte bekannte Zulassung nach dem Tattag war bei der Stadt Augsburg.
which translates to “The last known registration after the day of the crime was with the city of Augsburg”
This doesn’t indicate that the car was re registered the day after the crime, just that the last known registration of the car after the 4th May 2007 was in Augsburg.
All IMO.

You are clutching at straws.

Do your research and you will discover that Brueckner did indeed change the car documentation to another name.

I believe the registered owner is recorded in a tv interview saying so while trying to put as much clear water between him and Brueckner as he could.
It is also on record that Brueckner continued to use the vehicle and never passed it over to the registered owner despite living in his house for a bit.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

You are clutching at straws.

Do your research and you will discover that Brueckner did indeed change the car documentation to another name.

I believe the registered owner is recorded in a tv interview saying so while trying to put as much clear water between him and Brueckner as he could.
It is also on record that Brueckner continued to use the vehicle and never passed it over to the registered owner despite living in his house for a bit.

There is no straw clutching going on. You asked for any reasons why he re registered his car the very next day and I complied with your request and supplied a possible reason. Its your prerogative to dismiss it out of hand but even you find it bizarre that he would do such a thing,

“I think it is bizarre that he registered his vehicle in someone else's name the day after her disappearance; what on earth might his reason for that have been?”

He would be the dumbest child abductor on the planet if he abducted a young girl at about 9-10PM the previous day and then thought his best course of action would be to re-register the car to another person in another country the very next day.

And I have done my research, if you read what I posted that was on the BKA site it says

“The last known registration after the day of the crime was with the city of Augsburg”

From that I can deduce that he did transfer ownership on a date that was after 4th May 2007 just not definitely the following day. Any day from the 5th of May onwards.

[Vertigo Swirl]

There is no straw clutching going on. You asked for any reasons why he re registered his car the very next day and I complied with your request and supplied a possible reason. Its your prerogative to dismiss it out of hand but even you find it bizarre that he would do such a thing,

“I think it is bizarre that he registered his vehicle in someone else's name the day after her disappearance; what on earth might his reason for that have been?”

He would be the dumbest child abductor on the planet if he abducted a young girl at about 9-10PM the previous day and then thought his best course of action would be to re-register the car to another person in another country the very next day.

And I have done my research, if you read what I posted that was on the BKA site it says

“The last known registration after the day of the crime was with the city of Augsburg”

From that I can deduce that he did transfer ownership on a date that was after 4th May 2007 just not definitely the following day. Any day from the 5th of May onwards.

Why mention 4th May at all then?  Why not say he transferred ownership some time after that date, or even give the actual date he did this?

[Eleanor]

Why mention 4th May at all then?  Why not say he transferred ownership some time after that date, or even give the actual date he did this?

Brueckner could well have been worried that his car could have been seen in Luz on the 3rd of May.  So if The PJ checked the number plate it would not have come up in his name.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Brueckner could well have been worried that his car could have been seen in Luz on the 3rd of May.  So if The PJ checked the number plate it would not have come up in his name.

That may well be one reason and I would not dismiss it out of hand.
 It is indeed one scenario, but if the Portuguese police requested the info from the German police I would expect the German police as efficient as they are to notify the Portuguese police that a transfer of ownership took place on the 4th of May.   But I agree that it is possible.

Its just that the statement on the BKA site doesn't say it was the very next day. 
It's all a bit of Chinese whispers IMO.

[sadie]

Brueckner could well have been worried that his car could have been seen in Luz on the 3rd of May.  So if The PJ checked the number plate it would not have come up in his name.

There was a black saloon car that was heading in a northerly direction up Rua Dr FGM at the time that Kate and Gerry would have been appearing and walking down the same road to the Tapas restaurant.   A witness by the name of Joyce (surname, I think) with her husband saw it do a very hurried about turn and head off in the way that it had come.  It was near Baptista supermarket.    They thought that it was suspicious enough to report.

There is a PJ Report if anyone cares to look it up.   I dont think that a number was recorded.


If you remember, I speculated on an earlier thread that this maybe was the abductor arriving with his getaway vehicle, when he suddenly saw Kate anf Gerry coming down the steps/walking the street en route to the resturant.   He panicked and did a quick turn round in one of the little side streets?


If I am correct in my thoughts here, then he ceratinly would want to get rid of it pronto.   

[Eleanor]

That may well be one reason and I would not dismiss it out of hand.
 It is indeed one scenario, but if the Portuguese police requested the info from the German police I would expect the German police as efficient as they are to notify the Portuguese police that a transfer of ownership took place on the 4th of May.   But I agree that it is possible.

Its just that the statement on the BKA site doesn't say it was the very next day. 
It's all a bit of Chinese whispers IMO.

Why bother to change the name at all?

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Why bother to change the name at all?

Well if I was to speculate, he transferred ownership to the guy who was giving him accommodation as the guy had expressed a passion for Jaguar cars. A friendly gesture maybe, who knows.
I am not disputing that he transferred registration at some point for some reason, only that it is not definite that he transferred on the very next day.

[Eleanor]

There was a black saloon car that was heading in a northerly direction up Rua Dr FGM at the time that Kate and Gerry would have been appearing and walking down the same road to the Tapas restaurant.   A witness by the name of Joyce (surname, I think) with her husband saw it do a very hurried about turn and head off in the way that it had come.  It was near Baptista supermarket.    They thought that it was suspicious enough to report.

There is a PJ Report if anyone cares to look it up.   I dont think that a number was recorded.


If you remember, I speculated on an earlier thread that this maybe was the abductor arriving with his getaway vehicle, when he suddenly saw Kate anf Gerry coming down the steps/walking the street en route to the resturant.   He panicked and did a quick turn round in one of the little side streets?


If I am correct in my thoughts here, then he ceratinly would want to get rid of it pronto.

But Brueckner didn't get rid of the car, Sadie.  He only changed the name of the registered owner.  Why do that if he had nothing to hide?

[jassi]

Because he is the prime suspect in a murder investigation and if his explanation is satisfactory and accepted by investigators, could help in clearing him.
On the other hand if he doesn't remember anything about a perfectly ordinary day of the third - it stands to reason he must remember the 4th and his reasons for altering the registration on his vehicle to someone else on that day.

Aren't you the teeniest bit curious - cos I know I am and I think the joint police investigators will be with me and my curiosity.

In that case they should get around to asking him about it.

[Eleanor]

Well if I was to speculate, he transferred ownership to the guy who was giving him accommodation as the guy had expressed a passion for Jaguar cars. A friendly gesture maybe, who knows.
I am not disputing that he transferred registration at some point for some reason, only that it is not definite that he transferred on the very next day.

But he didn't give the Jaguar to the man he transferred it to.  Fat lot of friendly gesture that was.

The 4th of May isn't all that important.  He did it very soon after.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

But he didn't give the Jaguar to the man he transferred it to.  Fat lot of friendly gesture that was.

The 4th of May isn't all that important.  He did it very soon after.

But it doesn’t really cover any tracks really does it? The records will show Brueckner was the registered keeper on the 3rd of May 2007. It's hardly a fool proof plan.

You do know what Wolters has said about the Jag.

Mr Wolters played down the significance of the Jaguar despite Scotland Yard appealing for information about it.
He said the car was in Germany when Madeleine went missing and information about it was released only to jog memories. 'The vehicles are not of direct interest for the Madeleine case,' he said.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8424065/Madeleine-McCanns-parents-told-letter-written-German-prosecutors-dead.html

[barrier]

But Brueckner didn't get rid of the car, Sadie.  He only changed the name of the registered owner.  Why do that if he had nothing to hide?

Why change if he's something to hide especially to another German where it seems its easily traceable, more likely imo to either torch it or take it further a field , some one else's car got torched didn't it.

[Eleanor]

But it doesn’t really cover any tracks really does it? The records will show Brueckner was the registered keeper on the 3rd of May 2007. It's hardly a fool proof plan.

You do know what Wolters has said about the Jag.

Mr Wolters played down the significance of the Jaguar despite Scotland Yard appealing for information about it.
He said the car was in Germany when Madeleine went missing and information about it was released only to jog memories. 'The vehicles are not of direct interest for the Madeleine case,' he said.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8424065/Madeleine-McCanns-parents-told-letter-written-German-prosecutors-dead.html

A brief check would only have shown the current registered owner, who was of no interest at all.  And since The PJ weren't exactly quick off the mark, if they even bothered to check anything, then it probably no longer matters.

Apparently, Brueckner then trailered the Jaguar back to Germany very shortly afterwards.  But didn't give the car to the new registered owner.

I personally don't much care about the Jaguar.  But Brueckner was up to something.  And Brueckner's phone was in Luz that night.  Was he there with it?

[Eleanor]

Why change if he's something to hide especially to another German where it seems its easily traceable, more likely imo to either torch it or take it further a field , some one else's car got torched didn't it.

Time should have been of the essence, which it wasn't to The PJ.

I am more interested in Amaral's attempts  to blatantly misrepresent Brueckner.