Germany/Portugal - Christian Brueckner, 27 @ time of 1st crime (2004), charged with sexual assault crimes, Praia de Rocha, Portugal. #4

[Mex]

Clearly the judges have heard enough.

It really doesn't work like that.
Judges are required and expected to make judgements based on all the available evidence. It is not a pick and mix.
My opinion

 

[RichardKimble]

Do you not think it's wrong of the judges to claim there's no evidence when all the evidence has not been heard

Has the actual e mail been seen? that says no evidence?

From the Olive earlier in the week, no mention of "no" evidence.

In proceedings 2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22) in connection with five acts against sexual self-determination, the Chamber revoked the arrest warrant at the request of the Defence because the Chamber denies an urgent suspicion of all charges.”

EXCLUSIVE: Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner could be free within MONTHS after German court quashes arrest warrant that led to sex abuse trial - sparking fury among witnesses - Olive Press News Spain

A GERMAN court has quashed an arrest warrant that was issued for Madeleine Mccann suspect Christian Brueckner for a series of alleged sexual assaults and

www.theolivepress.es

 

[Mex]

That would be rather petty
I believe judges would be above that sort of thing.

I agree with that.
Plus I think what has happened in this instance absolutely demands explanation.

German judges are fiercely independent. But I doubt if what happened here follows due process in any legitimate jurisdiction.

 

[Dave55]

Do you really think the prosecution has something that could tip the balance?

The evidence so far amounts to a couple of alcoholic ex cons and some illegally obtained USB drives.

The warrant has been lifted because the prosecution’s case is a shambles.

I admire your resolve but the shipped has sailed.

Looks like bias is not confined to the judges

 

[mrjitty]

Do you not think it's wrong of the judges to claim there's no evidence when all the evidence has not been heard

The judges already know what all the evidence is. They appear to be saying CB will be aquitted unless the prosecution has new evidence not within the current process.

 

[Davieson]

The judges already know what all the evidence is. They appear to be saying CB will be aquitted unless the prosecution has new evidence not within the current process.

If there was new evidence, should it not have already been declared ?

 

[mrjitty]

I fear posters are way out over their skis.

The prosecution brought 5 historical sex offence charges, 2 with no identified victims, and one with no forensics or clean identification. Such cases are hard to win, in any jurisdiction.

The Judges already know all the evidence which will be presented, but are yet to hear from a couple of witnesses. The Judges are now saying the state hasn't met its burden to maintain an arrest warrant (similar to bail I assume). The State appears to be on notice of an inbound acquittal, unless they can produce new evidence.

The state wish to appeal that decision - as is their right.

There is no conspiracy

IMO

 

[Dave55]

Looks like bias is not confined to the judges

What's the point of the hearing in that case

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Looks like bias is not confined to the judges

Are the judges biased or the prosecutors sore losers?

 

[Megnut]

Observation: it is said that it is better for ten guilty men to escape than one innocent man suffer... and it's always said in the context of rule of law.

I don't understand how an arrest warrant/probable cause falls apart this far into trial, and I don't think for a second this is the case of an innocent man improperly charged; this is a criminal reoffender who may walk, over technicalities.

If the greatest evidence against him was ill-got, he may walk. One of the ten guilty men who escape the justice they deserve, namely accountability for the crimes committed.

I weep for the victims.

Regardless of how this plays out, it doesn't anywhere mean he's innocent.

JMO

 

[Mex]

Do you really think the prosecution has something that could tip the balance?

The evidence so far amounts to a couple of alcoholic ex cons and some illegally obtained USB drives.

The warrant has been lifted because the prosecution’s case is a shambles.

I admire your resolve but the shipped has sailed.

I haven't heard all the evidence in the five cases so would be unable to voice an opinion one way or t'other.

Similarly, neither has the judge, who is thus also incapable of taking an informed decision.

It is this anomaly the prosecution are challenging.

The time for this argument should have been at the initial stages when the decision was made regarding whether there was sufficient evidence to justify indictment or not.
Certainly not at this stage in a sexual abuse trial particularly when the vulnerability of some of the complainants can be safely assumed.

It is actually a good thing that this bias can be addressed before more damage can be done both to this case in particular and German justice as a whole.
My opinion

 

[Mex]

The judges already know what all the evidence is. They appear to be saying CB will be aquitted unless the prosecution has new evidence not within the current process.

With due respect, it is not the place of the judge to make decisions without all the evidence having been heard.

 

[Mex]

What's the point of the hearing in that case

There would be none.

But worse than that - it does not conform with German jurisprudence.

I think this might even be a constitutional matter.

But whatever, it is a situation which requires the closest scrutiny
My opinion

 

[RichardKimble]

Observation: it is said that it is better for ten guilty men to escape than one innocent man suffer... and it's always said in the context of rule of law.

I don't understand how an arrest warrant/probable cause falls apart this far into trial, and I don't think for a second this is the case of an innocent man improperly charged; this is a criminal reoffender who may walk, over technicalities.

If the greatest evidence against him was ill-got, he may walk. One of the ten guilty men who escape the justice they deserve, namely accountability for the crimes committed.

I weep for the victims.

Regardless of how this plays out, it doesn't anywhere mean he's innocent.

JMO

Nor does it assume guilt, the presumption of innocence stands.

 

[RichardKimble]

The argument goes that the judges haven't seen all the evidence, wasn't this presented pre trial?

 

[mrjitty]

Observation: it is said that it is better for ten guilty men to escape than one innocent man suffer... and it's always said in the context of rule of law.

I don't understand how an arrest warrant/probable cause falls apart this far into trial, and I don't think for a second this is the case of an innocent man improperly charged; this is a criminal reoffender who may walk, over technicalities.

If the greatest evidence against him was ill-got, he may walk. One of the ten guilty men who escape the justice they deserve, namely accountability for the crimes committed.

I weep for the victims.

Regardless of how this plays out, it doesn't anywhere mean he's innocent.

JMO

probable cause hasn’t fallen apart.

as far as i can understand there is not enough to keep him in custody because acquittal is now likely.

but as he is in prison for a different crime he won’t be released.

 

[Dave55]

Are the judges biased or the prosecutors sore losers?

That's not for us to decide

 

[Dave55]

It may be the judge has strong views on the presumption of innocence and is offended by the prosecutors office presumption of guilt. This may affect her impartiality

 

[Davieson]

It may be the judge has strong views on the presumption of innocence and is offended by the prosecutors office presumption of guilt. This may affect her impartiality

I think that would be called 'doing her job'