Germany/Portugal - Christian Brueckner, 27 @ time of 1st crime (2004), charged with sexual assault crimes, Praia de Rocha, Portugal. #3

There is bound to be differences over the years - the court will make allowances IMO

The main thing is that he has been broadly consistent, and told his story before he could ever have known anything about DM
The witness is also suffering from a serious life threatening illness and stood by his original testimony without making any substantial alteration. The court will also take that on board too.
My opinion
 
The thing is surely he'd have told them because it's an on going investigation he wouldn't talk about it before agreeing to attend.

He wouldn't have even needed to say that. It wouldn't have been an expectation. These are professional people who know the law.

The idea that the Defence - and I don't know where that idea has even come from? Where has it come from? Was it the Olive Press? Because it sounds exactly like the 'evil fiend's evil conniving Defence' bullcrap the OliveP is notorious for - would think the presiding judge would allow questioning in court of a serving SY OG police officer about a case that has nothing to do with the trial in hand is ludicrous. It would not happen.

Can we not just respect both sides as doing their professional jobs, rather than going down the agenda-led tabloid route of ridiculing one to big up the other.
 
Last edited:
He wouldn't have even needed to say that. It wouldn't have been an expectation. These are professional people who know the law.

The idea that the Defence - and I don't know where that idea has even come from? Where has it come from? Was it the Olive Press? Because it sounds exactly like the 'evil fiend's evil conniving Defence' bullcrap the OliveP is notorious for - would think the presiding judge would allow questioning in court of a serving SY OG police officer about a case that has nothing to do with the trial in hand is ludicrous. It would not happen.

Can we not just respect both sides as doing their professional jobs, rather than going down the agenda-led tabloid route of ridiculing one to big up the other.
Actually the defence did ask him and he denied answering about the MM case
 
Actually the defence did ask him and he denied answering about the MM case
You'd of thought from the outset he'd confirm he'd not be answering about OG and MM.
 
He wouldn't have even needed to say that. It wouldn't have been an expectation. These are professional people who know the law.

The idea that the Defence - and I don't know where that idea has even come from? Where has it come from? Was it the Olive Press? Because it sounds exactly like the 'evil fiend's evil conniving Defence' bullcrap the OliveP is notorious for - would think the presiding judge would allow questioning in court of a serving SY OG police officer about a case that has nothing to do with the trial in hand is ludicrous. It would not happen.

Can we not just respect both sides as doing their professional jobs, rather than going down the agenda-led tabloid route of ridiculing one to big up the other.
Nick Pisa of the Mail said in his piece dated 12th April, a source close to the defence.
A source close to the legal team said: 'We will be calling the British police from Operation Grange to give evidence – especially those officers that talked to Mr Helge Busching.

 
Behind the paywall , any one give a summary?



Christian B.: Göttingen judges decide on reopening.
Braunschweig. He wants to challenge his Braunschweig rape conviction from 2019. A “Maddie” investigator is testifying in the ongoing trial.
 
Actually the defence did ask him and he denied answering about the MM case

And so? The defence asked and the witness responded, and that was the end of that.

Don't forget that it's the prosecution that has involved MM here. They're the ones who publicly named CB as both abductor and murderer of MM with absolutely nothing to show for it almost 4 years after making this claim. This trial would not even be on our radar were it not for that. The defence knows this and is entitled to use that 'lack' for its own ends.
 
Last edited:
Behind the paywall , any one give a summary?



Christian B.: Göttingen judges decide on reopening.
Braunschweig. He wants to challenge his Braunschweig rape conviction from 2019. A “Maddie” investigator is testifying in the ongoing trial.
It’s about the DM case FF wanted to reopen, but it doesn’t look Goodson FF
 
Last edited:
The next date for the trial is 15 of may. The others were cancelled, possibly because of the rejection of the defense's motion for retrial in the case of the rape of D. Menkes in 2019.

„Proceedings before the 2nd Criminal Chamber in connection with five offenses against sexual self-determination - file number 2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22) - cancellation of dates

The Presiding Judge of the 2nd Criminal Chamber has canceled the continuation dates for Friday, 03.05.2024 and Wednesday, 08.05.2024.

The next continuation date is scheduled for

Wednesday, 15.05.2024, at 09:00 a.m «
 
You'd of thought from the outset he'd confirm he'd not be answering about OG and MM.
It was not for the witness to pre-empt what questions would be put to him the extraordinary thing is that the questions on an active police investigation were asked at all. Bearing in mind there was no relevance to the five cases being tried.
 
Behind the paywall , any one give a summary?



Christian B.: Göttingen judges decide on reopening.
Braunschweig. He wants to challenge his Braunschweig rape conviction from 2019. A “Maddie” investigator is testifying in the ongoing trial.
Thank you for that information.
As I see it there already was a procedure in place for appealing convictions and CB had already made use of it and failed. Neither the actual court proceedings nor the witnesses were challenged in this appeal. They went for a procedural issue instead claiming that his extradition from Italy had been unlawful.
Snip
"The 6th Criminal Senate of the Federal Court of Justice had submitted the legal question to the European Court of Justice as to whether the principle of mutual legal assistance as defined in European law opposed the specialty of conviction.
" The court statement added: "The Court of Justice denied this with a judgment of September 24, 2020. Since the appellate review of the judgment of the Regional Court of Braunschweig — apart from a clarification of the sentence formula — did not reveal any legal error to the detriment of the accused, the Senate rejected his appeal as unfounded in accordance with the motion of the Attorney General. The aforementioned judgment is therefore final."

 
The next date for the trial is 15 of may. The others were cancelled, possibly because of the rejection of the defense's motion for retrial in the case of the rape of D. Menkes in 2019.

„Proceedings before the 2nd Criminal Chamber in connection with five offenses against sexual self-determination - file number 2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22) - cancellation of dates

The Presiding Judge of the 2nd Criminal Chamber has canceled the continuation dates for Friday, 03.05.2024 and Wednesday, 08.05.2024.

The next continuation date is scheduled for

Wednesday, 15.05.2024, at 09:00 a.m «
Thanks Hygge, seems strange to cancel an ongoing case for a rejection of another case, one presumes any witnesses due to testify on the cancelled dates are readily available on other dates.
 
In this case it is very important, how reliable and credible is HelB.
The behavior panel checked him out..

 
The next date for the trial is 15 of may. The others were cancelled, possibly because of the rejection of the defense's motion for retrial in the case of the rape of D. Menkes in 2019.

„Proceedings before the 2nd Criminal Chamber in connection with five offenses against sexual self-determination - file number 2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22) - cancellation of dates

The Presiding Judge of the 2nd Criminal Chamber has canceled the continuation dates for Friday, 03.05.2024 and Wednesday, 08.05.2024.

The next continuation date is scheduled for

Wednesday, 15.05.2024, at 09:00 a.m «

Thank you for this info! Changing my notes....
 
Thank you for that information.
As I see it there already was a procedure in place for appealing convictions and CB had already made use of it and failed. Neither the actual court proceedings nor the witnesses were challenged in this appeal. They went for a procedural issue instead claiming that his extradition from Italy had been unlawful.
Snip
"The 6th Criminal Senate of the Federal Court of Justice had submitted the legal question to the European Court of Justice as to whether the principle of mutual legal assistance as defined in European law opposed the specialty of conviction.
" The court statement added: "The Court of Justice denied this with a judgment of September 24, 2020. Since the appellate review of the judgment of the Regional Court of Braunschweig — apart from a clarification of the sentence formula — did not reveal any legal error to the detriment of the accused, the Senate rejected his appeal as unfounded in accordance with the motion of the Attorney General. The aforementioned judgment is therefore final."

The rejection was related to the legality of the EAW, and as such was nothing to do with the actual rape conviction.
As far as I'm aware he never lodged an appeal against his conviction, only the right of the court to hold the trial in the first place. There were probably no grounds for such an appeal.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Hygge, seems strange to cancel an ongoing case for a rejection of another case, one presumes any witnesses due to testify on the cancelled dates are readily available on other dates.
Wasn’t there an expert expected?
« As the third additional witness, Brückner's defender Dr. Dennis Bock (45) requested to invite an expert. She has considerable doubts about a BKA report that assigns a hair to the accused that was found at the scene of the rape in Praia da Luz in 2004. For this act, Brückner was sentenced to seven years in prison in 2019, which he is currently serving in the JVA Sehnde. »
 
Wasn’t there an expert expected?
« As the third additional witness, Brückner's defender Dr. Dennis Bock (45) requested to invite an expert. She has considerable doubts about a BKA report that assigns a hair to the accused that was found at the scene of the rape in Praia da Luz in 2004. For this act, Brückner was sentenced to seven years in prison in 2019, which he is currently serving in the JVA Sehnde. »
Could be that, I suppose one of the press will reveal the reason.
 
The headline talks of a rejection.Behind a paywall.


03.05.2024, 09:40 Uhr • Lesezeit: 3 Minuten
Christian B.: Göttingen judges reject reopening
 
The rejection was related to the legality of the EAW, and as such was nothing to do with the actual rape conviction.
As far as I'm aware he never lodged an appeal against his conviction, only the right of the court to hold the trial in the first place. There were probably no grounds for such an appeal.
There is a record of CB's defence team resorting to procedural issues rather than going through due process as we have seen with the delays resulting from his defenders' efforts to have him released without facing trial.
The current five serial sexual charges would not have been heard in a court room had the jurisdiction ploy been found of relevance.

Prime suspect has rape allegations against him dropped

Court in Germany drops trial, saying it did not have jurisdiction over case of Christian Brueckner, who is accused of rape in Portugal

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/madeleine-mccann-suspect-rape-allegations-dropped-b2323453.html

Nevertheless when CB became eligible for parole it was denied. Probably because he was deemed to be a proven flight risk as well as his record marking him as a continued danger to society.

Snip
CB, a German national, became eligible for parole after serving half his sentence in the northern city of Kiel.

But a panel denied the request because they deemed he would commit further offences if released, according to The Daily Mirror.

The application was heard in private in Oldenburg, Lower Saxony, on April 21.

A spokesperson for the Oldenburg District Court said: "The court ruled there were no grounds for suspending the remainder of the sentence."

Brueckner, 43, will now remain locked up until at least May 2023, the next time a parole application can be made.

 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
3,712
Total visitors
3,811

Forum statistics

Threads
594,001
Messages
17,997,276
Members
229,294
Latest member
drena519
Back
Top