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

[Niner]

Monday, August 5th:
*Trial continues (Day 27) (@ 9am CET) – Germany/Portugal - Hazel Behan (20 @ time/now 40) (in her home, June 16, 2004, Praia de Rocha on the Algarve coast, 10 miles from Praia de Luz, Portimao, Portugal) - *Christian Stefan Brückner (Bruekner) (27 @ time of 1st crime (2004)/45/now 47) charged (Oct. 11, 2022) with sexual assault (suspect held a knife & brutally raped her. The accused then tied & gagged the woman to a table & raped her again. He then whipped the victim on the back with a whip he had brought with him & finally forcibly performed oral sex with the victim. The accused filmed large parts of the events with a video camera he had brought with him). Braunschweig Regional District Court
Germany/Portugal – *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 - a 14 year old teenager (unknown victim) (on tape: assaulted/hit the naked girl with a whip. Said to have brutally forced the girl to have oral sex. The accused also videotaped this act). Took place between Dec. 28, 2000 to April 8, 2006 on the Praia da Luz, Algarve coast, Portugal.
Germany/Portugal - *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 - an elderly woman 70-80 yrs old (unknown victim) a Tour Rep (tied up & raped the victim in her holiday apt. He then hit the victim several times with a whip. The accused is said to have recorded the entire event with a video camera). Took place around the same time (between Dec. 28, 2000 to April 8, 2006) on the Praia de Luz, Algarve coast, Portugal.
Germany/Portugal – *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 - 10 year old German girl (Joana E.) (wearing only shoes & otherwise naked. He grabbed the child's wrist & began to perform masturbation movements on his naked penis). On Salema (Zalema) beach, near Praia de Luz, Portugal, April 7, 2007).
Germany/Portugal – *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 – Ines VP (11 year old Portuguese girl) (pulled down his trousers & underpants & made masturbation movements on his naked penis in order to sexually arouse himself, until the frightened girl ran to her father for help. The suspect was arrested on the spot by the Portuguese police). Exposed himself in playpark, São Bartolomeu de Messines, June 11, 2017).
Trial began on February 16, 2024. (And continued on Feb. 23rd, Mar. 1st & 14th, Apr. 2nd, 10th, 12th, 17th, 19th, 24th & 26th, May 2nd, 15th, 166th, 17th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, 28th, 29th & June 4th & 5th & 28th, July 5th).
Next Trial dates: August 5, August 15, 16, Sept. 5, 6, 25, 26, 27, Oct. 2, 7, 8, 21 & Oct. 22, 2024.
Presiding Judge Dr. Engemann. Lead Prosecutor Ute Lindermann. Defense attorneys Dr. Friedrich Fülscher, Philipp Marquort, Dennis Bock & Atilla Aykac.
Brueckner is currently serving a 7 year sentence for the 2005 rape on a pensioner; was sentenced in 2019. Release in Spring or Summer of 2026.
For Summary of events in trial so far – see post #329, page 17, thread #4.
Case info & charges & Brueckner info from June 1, 2020 thru Jan. 18, 2024 & Trial Day 1-24 (Feb. 16 thru June 6) reference post #502 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...imes-praia-de-rocha-portugal-4.714269/page-26
July 5, 2024 Friday, Day 26: *Furious prosecutors have applied to have “biased” judges thrown off the trial of Brueckner. They were left fuming after Judge Ute Inse Engelmann issued a ruling which criticized the evidence of key witnesses in the case. He is nearing the end of a seven-year prison term for raping an American pensioner in the Portuguese resort. The 47-year-old is currently standing trial on sex crimes he allegedly carried out in the Algarve. In a shock move on Wednesday, Judge Engelmann overturned an arrest warrant for Brueckner. She ruled the court had not heard strong enough evidence from witnesses to keep him behind bars. Judge Engemann’s ruling was a strong indication that Brueckner will be cleared of the charges he is facing. If he is found not guilty, Brueckner could be freed from prison in the early part of next year. Now prosecutors have filed a motion to have Judge Engemann & her two fellow judges dismissed, citing “concerns about bias”. A ‘chamber of representatives’ in Braunschweig must now make a ruling on the extremely rare application by early August. If the prosecution application is successful, the trial will collapse & a retrial would have to take place.
*The court case meanwhile continued this morning hearing from more witnesses & specialists. The judges heard from an eye specialist about whether victims can recognise their attackers just from their eyes. Regarding Hazel Behan's rape charges. The doctor sensationally told the court that Hazel was ‘in the right’ & it was possible. A number of other witnesses who were close to Behan at the time of the attack on the Algarve were also due to be heard this morning.
For more info see posts #522 (article) & 523 & 537 [page 27] & #630 & #631 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...imes-praia-de-rocha-portugal-4.714269/page-32
Trial continues on Friday, August 5, 2024.
*July 22, 2024 Update: Proceedings before the 2nd Criminal Division in connection with five acts against sexual self-determination - file #2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22) - motion to recuse the three professional judges unfounded In the proceedings, the responsible representatives rejected the motion to recuse the Braunschweig public prosecutor's office against the three professional judges of the division as unfounded. If the public prosecutor's office has also filed a further motion to recuse a professional judge, a separate decision will be made on this. The result of the decision will be announced by press release.
*July 23, 2024 Update: Further decision on rejection of the judge is pending; The court still wants to decide & inform separately about another request for recusal against an individual professional judge. This concerns alleged statements by the judge before the start of the trial, as a spokesman for the public prosecutor's office said, but without giving further details.
*July 25, 2024 Update: Proceedings before the 2nd Criminal Division in connection with five offenses against sexual self-determination - File number 2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22) - Motion to recuse a professional judge is already inadmissible, in any case unfounded in the proceedings 2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22), the responsible representatives have already rejected the further motion to recuse the Braunschweig public prosecutor's office against a professional judge of the division as inadmissible. In any case, the motion would also have been unfounded.

 

[Mex]

they’ve been used in this case though?

we had the whole drama over whether the search was unlawful.

I remain confused about this.

Is it possible for you to indicate in which way the information was used in any one of the five cases which presently are the subject of the trial featuring accusations of serious sexual crimes against CB.

Snip
In 2014, the Lörrach public prosecutor's office initiated an investigation against Frank S. for the possession and distribution of child *advertiser censored*.
The police were sent by for a raid.
Possibly in order to keep the criminal consequences for himself low, the accused cooperated, voluntarily gave out the password to his laptop during his interrogation, thus facilitating the evaluation.
He had Skype installed on the computer. He had chatted about it as "Panikspatz66" - among other things with "Holgerderwahnsinn".

https://archive.ph/Q9sY2#selection-2457.0-2457.515

CB is "Holgerderwahnsinn" in these internet conversations and the present trial does not feature anything relevant to abuse on the internet.
So why did the judges appear to have allowed that evidence to stand as part of this trial while apparently dismissing evidence given face to face by witnesses to their court in Braunschweig concerning the five offences actually under trial, before even hearing expert substantiating evidence only after charges had been dropped such as
*The court case meanwhile continued this morning hearing from more witnesses & specialists. The judges heard from an eye specialist about whether victims can recognise their attackers just from their eyes. Regarding HB's rape charges. The doctor sensationally told the court that HB was ‘in the right’ & it was possible. A number of other witnesses who were close to HB at the time of the attack on the Algarve were also due to be heard this morning.
For more info see posts #522 (article) & 523 & 537 [page 27] & #630 & #631 here:

Monday, August 5th:
*Trial continues (Day 27) (@ 9am CET) – Germany/Portugal - Hazel Behan (20 @ time/now 40) (in her home, June 16, 2004, Praia de Rocha on the Algarve coast, 10 miles from Praia de Luz, Portimao, Portugal) - *Christian Stefan Brückner (Bruekner) (27 @ time of 1st crime (2004)/45/now 47) charged (Oct. 11, 2022) with sexual assault (suspect held a knife & brutally raped her. The accused then tied & gagged the woman to a table & raped her again. He then whipped the victim on the back with a whip he had brought with him & finally forcibly performed oral sex with the victim. The accused filmed large parts of the events with a video camera he had brought with him). Braunschweig Regional District Court
Germany/Portugal – *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 - a 14 year old teenager (unknown victim) (on tape: assaulted/hit the naked girl with a whip. Said to have brutally forced the girl to have oral sex. The accused also videotaped this act). Took place between Dec. 28, 2000 to April 8, 2006 on the Praia da Luz, Algarve coast, Portugal.
Germany/Portugal - *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 - an elderly woman 70-80 yrs old (unknown victim) a Tour Rep (tied up & raped the victim in her holiday apt. He then hit the victim several times with a whip. The accused is said to have recorded the entire event with a video camera). Took place around the same time (between Dec. 28, 2000 to April 8, 2006) on the Praia de Luz, Algarve coast, Portugal.
Germany/Portugal – *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 - 10 year old German girl (Joana E.) (wearing only shoes & otherwise naked. He grabbed the child's wrist & began to perform masturbation movements on his naked penis). On Salema (Zalema) beach, near Praia de Luz, Portugal, April 7, 2007).
Germany/Portugal – *Charged (Oct. 11, 2022) & arrest warrant reinstated 11/18/22 – Ines VP (11 year old Portuguese girl) (pulled down his trousers & underpants & made masturbation movements on his naked penis in order to sexually arouse himself, until the frightened girl ran to her father for help. The suspect was arrested on the spot by the Portuguese police). Exposed himself in playpark, São Bartolomeu de Messines, June 11, 2017).
Trial began on February 16, 2024. (And continued on Feb. 23rd, Mar. 1st & 14th, Apr. 2nd, 10th, 12th, 17th, 19th, 24th & 26th, May 2nd, 15th, 166th, 17th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, 28th, 29th & June 4th & 5th & 28th, July 5th).
Next Trial dates: August 5, August 15, 16, Sept. 5, 6, 25, 26, 27, Oct. 2, 7, 8, 21 & Oct. 22, 2024.
Presiding Judge Dr. Engemann. Lead Prosecutor Ute Lindermann. Defense attorneys Dr. Friedrich Fülscher, Philipp Marquort, Dennis Bock & Atilla Aykac.
Brueckner is currently serving a 7 year sentence for the 2005 rape on a pensioner; was sentenced in 2019. Release in Spring or Summer of 2026.
For Summary of events in trial so far – see post #329, page 17, thread #4.
Case info & charges & Brueckner info from June 1, 2020 thru Jan. 18, 2024 & Trial Day 1-24 (Feb. 16 thru June 6) reference post #502 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...imes-praia-de-rocha-portugal-4.714269/page-26
July 5, 2024 Friday, Day 26: *Furious prosecutors have applied to have “biased” judges thrown off the trial of Brueckner. They were left fuming after Judge Ute Inse Engelmann issued a ruling which criticized the evidence of key witnesses in the case. He is nearing the end of a seven-year prison term for raping an American pensioner in the Portuguese resort. The 47-year-old is currently standing trial on sex crimes he allegedly carried out in the Algarve. In a shock move on Wednesday, Judge Engelmann overturned an arrest warrant for Brueckner. She ruled the court had not heard strong enough evidence from witnesses to keep him behind bars. Judge Engemann’s ruling was a strong indication that Brueckner will be cleared of the charges he is facing. If he is found not guilty, Brueckner could be freed from prison in the early part of next year. Now prosecutors have filed a motion to have Judge Engemann & her two fellow judges dismissed, citing “concerns about bias”. A ‘chamber of representatives’ in Braunschweig must now make a ruling on the extremely rare application by early August. If the prosecution application is successful, the trial will collapse & a retrial would have to take place.
*The court case meanwhile continued this morning hearing from more witnesses & specialists. The judges heard from an eye specialist about whether victims can recognise their attackers just from their eyes. Regarding Hazel Behan's rape charges. The doctor sensationally told the court that Hazel was ‘in the right’ & it was possible. A number of other witnesses who were close to Behan at the time of the attack on the Algarve were also due to be heard this morning.
For more info see posts #522 (article) & 523 & 537 [page 27] & #630 & #631 here:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/t...imes-praia-de-rocha-portugal-4.714269/page-32
Trial continues on Friday, August 5, 2024.
*July 22, 2024 Update: Proceedings before the 2nd Criminal Division in connection with five acts against sexual self-determination - file #2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22) - motion to recuse the three professional judges unfounded In the proceedings, the responsible representatives rejected the motion to recuse the Braunschweig public prosecutor's office against the three professional judges of the division as unfounded. If the public prosecutor's office has also filed a further motion to recuse a professional judge, a separate decision will be made on this. The result of the decision will be announced by press release.
*July 23, 2024 Update: Further decision on rejection of the judge is pending; The court still wants to decide & inform separately about another request for recusal against an individual professional judge. This concerns alleged statements by the judge before the start of the trial, as a spokesman for the public prosecutor's office said, but without giving further details.
*July 25, 2024 Update: Proceedings before the 2nd Criminal Division in connection with five offenses against sexual self-determination - File number 2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22) - Motion to recuse a professional judge is already inadmissible, in any case unfounded in the proceedings 2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22), the responsible representatives have already rejected the further motion to recuse the Braunschweig public prosecutor's office against a professional judge of the division as inadmissible. In any case, the motion would also have been unfounded.

 

[mrjitty]

The possible unlawfulness of the box factory raid has been discussed in this thread many times before. Please search back.

So called "Das Buch" appears to be part of what they found there.

It doesn't seem to me to be the case that they have held all that back.

IMO

 

[Mex]

Or is it the value of the full contents found at the box factory is worth more to the BKA undisclosed , hence no charges sought at this time ?

The judges appear to have been side-tracked from the five trials which which are the concern of their court into realms of total irrelevance.

There have been incidents recorded of the distress of material witnesses to sexual crimes as they relived their well documented traumas for the deliberation of the court.
Now compounded by the dismissal of their testimonies by the charges against the suspect being withdrawn by the court making CB in effect a free man, were he not still detained as he finishes doing his time for the aggravated rape he committed in 2005.

If one had penned a work of fiction using that scenario as a plot line it would never have been published for being too fantastical. The court ruling in this trial has changed all that at a stroke.
My opinion

 

[Mex]

The possible unlawfulness of the box factory raid has been discussed in this thread many times before. Please search back.

So called "Das Buch" appears to be part of what they found there.

It doesn't seem to me to be the case that they have held all that back.

IMO

So called "Das Buch" has absolutely nothing at all to do with any one of the five sexual offences presently under trial.

Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong about that.

 

[mrjitty]

The question was whether the box factory evidence had been held back.

But seeing as Das Buch appeared at this trial, it suggests to me that evidence has been disclosed to the defence, especially given they then sought to exclude it.

I am not aware of whether the fruits of the search could be withheld in part.

MOO

 

[RichardKimble]

The question was whether the box factory evidence had been held back.

But seeing as Das Buch appeared at this trial, it suggests to me that evidence has been disclosed to the defence, especially given they then sought to exclude it.

I am not aware of whether the fruits of the search could be withheld in part.

MOO

Exactly links to paywall German articles have been provided where reporting of this as taken place.

 

[Mex]

Exactly links to paywall German articles have been provided where reporting of this as taken place.

Might I respectfully suggest that attempting to glean any information at all from the most quoted paywalled articles is a futile exercise which rarely results in any meaningful additional information being added to the public domain.
My opinion

 

[frank-cole]

The judges appear to have been side-tracked from the five trials which which are the concern of their court into realms of total irrelevance.

There have been incidents recorded of the distress of material witnesses to sexual crimes as they relived their well documented traumas for the deliberation of the court.
Now compounded by the dismissal of their testimonies by the charges against the suspect being withdrawn by the court making CB in effect a free man, were he not still detained as he finishes doing his time for the aggravated rape he committed in 2005.

If one had penned a work of fiction using that scenario as a plot line it would never have been published for being too fantastical. The court ruling in this trial has changed all that at a stroke.
My opinion

IMO it’s likely that this change hasn’t come about on the basis of the evidence but on the basis of admissibility. I wouldn’t be surprised if FF has managed to have some of the evidence deemed inadmissible. The defence’s strategy has been quite consistent, even pre trial. They’re more occupied with challenging how the evidence was gathered rather than the evidence itself. IMO they’ll continue to discredit witnesses, continue with motions to have expert witnesses barred from involvement & continue to attack the admissibility of evidence. IMO it speaks volumes - but whatever one is ‘pro’, be that the victims or the legal obtaining of evidence - it has to be said that the defence have done very well. IMO they’ve chipped away at the amount the judge can judge on.

Challenge may be - for the defence - that this increases the strength of a future appeal by the prosecution.

It’s all about pressure & I think there’ll be more twists & turns well beyond the judges hammer in October.

For example - in the park incident- I have no doubt that the children are telling the truth & the paedophile is lying - it’s about having enough to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

My thoughts

 

[mrjitty]

It's literally the defence's job to challenge admissibility following a potentially illegal search

 

[Mex]

The question was whether the box factory evidence had been held back.

But seeing as Das Buch appeared at this trial, it suggests to me that evidence has been disclosed to the defence, especially given they then sought to exclude it.

I am not aware of whether the fruits of the search could be withheld in part.

MOO

Please be explicit about any indication you have in which the above opinion relates to any one of the five CB trials presently underway.

The offences are heinous enough in their own right to have been included in any charge sheet had they been part of the present trial.

The fact they are not indicates they never formed any part of the present criminal trial and are not the present concern of the court.

That being so, why have the Braunschweig court justices allowed so much time to be given to them considering that neither the BKA nor Scotland Yard officers were at liberty to discuss details pertaining to another case of interest to the defence.

 

[frank-cole]

It's literally the defence's job to challenge admissibility following a potentially illegal search

I know - that’s why I said they’ve done well.

 

[frank-cole]

Please be explicit about any indication you have in which the above opinion relates to any one of the five CB trials presently underway.

The offences are heinous enough in their own right to have been included in any charge sheet had they been part of the present trial.

The fact they are not indicates they never formed any part of the present criminal trial and are not the present concern of the court.

That being so, why have the Braunschweig court justices allowed so much time to be given to them considering that neither the BKA nor Scotland Yard officers were at liberty to discuss details pertaining to another case of interest to the defence.

Imo there’s a preemption that the type of evidence & the witnesses - may, in part overlap to some degree, into the MM case. I think that influences minds & may create a bias either way. This trial will have given the prosecution fair warning that every piece of evidence in the file cannot, even remotely, be at any risk of a loophole or technicality. The defence probably have experience defending mob bosses, crooked bankers & murderers - they’ll be very well versed in what works.

 

[Mex]

IMO it’s likely that this change hasn’t come about on the basis of the evidence but on the basis of admissibility. I wouldn’t be surprised if FF has managed to have some of the evidence deemed inadmissible. The defence’s strategy has been quite consistent, even pre trial. They’re more occupied with challenging how the evidence was gathered rather than the evidence itself. IMO they’ll continue to discredit witnesses, continue with motions to have expert witnesses barred from involvement & continue to attack the admissibility of evidence. IMO it speaks volumes - but whatever one is ‘pro’, be that the victims or the legal obtaining of evidence - it has to be said that the defence have done very well. IMO they’ve chipped away at the amount the judge can judge on.

Challenge may be - for the defence - that this increases the strength of a future appeal by the prosecution.

It’s all about pressure & I think there’ll be more twists & turns well beyond the judges hammer in October.

For example - in the park incident- I have no doubt that the children are telling the truth & the paedophile is lying - it’s about having enough to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

My thoughts

I agree wholeheartedly with your synopsis.

Backed up by the defence tactic of calling detectives from the BKA and Scotland Yard in an attempt to discredit the initial witnesses against CB. As well as calling the judge in CB's trial who found him guilty of aggravated rape.

It gives the impression that it is not the judges who are in charge of overseeing the trial but it is very much the defence which is holding the whip hand.
My opinion

 

[Mex]

Imo there’s a preemption that the type of evidence & the witnesses - may, in part overlap to some degree, into the MM case. I think that influences minds & may create a bias either way. This trial will have given the prosecution fair warning that every piece of evidence in the file cannot, even remotely, be at any risk of a loophole or technicality. The defence probably have experience defending mob bosses, crooked bankers & murderers - they’ll be very well versed in what works.

The defence have done nothing throughout this trial but lay down evidence about the MM case for which no charges have as yet been laid.

If there is any bias on the part of the judges in the five explicit trials which rightly should have been their focus, it is they were not up to their job and allowed the defence to run riot and with impunity.
This may indeed protect the rights of the accused; but who is there to keep a level playing field in which the voices of the injured can be heard.
My opinion

 

[frank-cole]

I agree wholeheartedly with your synopsis.

Backed up by the defence tactic of calling detectives from the BKA and Scotland Yard in an attempt to discredit the initial witnesses against CB. As well as calling the judge in CB's trial who found him guilty of aggravated rape.

It gives the impression that it is not the judges who are in charge of overseeing the trial but it is very much the defence which is holding the whip hand.
My opinion

The defence have done a good job as presenting CB as a deteriorating ‘victim’ & I think that’s caught the judges. Claims he’s the victim of a media witch hunt, he’s languishing in isolation, the same tattered clothing, cold showers, bad cheese sandwiches & wheeling him in in a wheelchair- have all been a big play in my opinion. I think the verdicts are a foregone conclusion. Not guilt on all counts. It’s interesting that the 2nd chamber changed it’s mind completely- I think clarity on what changed, will follow

I don’t think this is over when the judge bangs the hammer, I think the prosecution will have this all assessed thoroughly & the case will be in a state of appeal for months.

MM’s murder, a capital offence, shouldn’t be heard in a local court. I think it needs to go out of jurisdiction & into a court well versed in dealing with these crimes. How the 4 high profile defenders are being funded is something I’d like to know the answer to. Probably won’t like the answer though…

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Imo there’s a preemption that the type of evidence & the witnesses - may, in part overlap to some degree, into the MM case. I think that influences minds & may create a bias either way. This trial will have given the prosecution fair warning that every piece of evidence in the file cannot, even remotely, be at any risk of a loophole or technicality. The defence probably have experience defending mob bosses, crooked bankers & murderers - they’ll be very well versed in what works.

The defence were in place at least for two years before these five charges were made. FF and team are competent which is all the more reason for the prosecution to get its ducks in a row.

Unfortunately, the prosecution have gone to trial with what people must concede is fairly weak evidence and witnesses. TBH, obtaining evidence without a search warrant isn’t a loophole, it’s either stupid or deceitful.

in addition to the prosecution’s alarmist media campaign, this trial has swayed my view on the MM case… CB has nothing to do with it.

There are no photos, no footage, probably no decent witnesses - just a thesis that the prosecution tried so hard to make work but sadly for them it was in vain.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

The defence have done a good job as presenting CB as a deteriorating ‘victim’ & I think that’s caught the judges. Claims he’s the victim of a media witch hunt, he’s languishing in isolation, the same tattered clothing, cold showers, bad cheese sandwiches & wheeling him in in a wheelchair- have all been a big play in my opinion. I think the verdicts are a foregone conclusion. Not guilt on all counts. It’s interesting that the 2nd chamber changed it’s mind completely- I think clarity on what changed, will follow

I don’t think this is over when the judge bangs the hammer, I think the prosecution will have this all assessed thoroughly & the case will be in a state of appeal for months.

MM’s murder, a capital offence, shouldn’t be heard in a local court. I think it needs to go out of jurisdiction & into a court well versed in dealing with these crimes. How the 4 high profile defenders are being funded is something I’d like to know the answer to. Probably won’t like the answer though…

FF and his team are being paid by legal aid - they have taken the case for the government fee.

And, it’s easy for the defence because the prosecution’s case is a shambles.

 

[Mex]

It's literally the defence's job to challenge admissibility following a potentially illegal search

It is usual for the defence to challenge admissibility of evidence considered prejudicial to the client. But that diligence is usually subject to the evidence and the trial matching up.

For example - in which of the five cases for which CB is under trial did the notion of a potentially illegal search feature.

Not one

My opinion

 

[frank-cole]

The defence have done nothing throughout this trial but lay down evidence about the MM case for which no charges have as yet been laid.

If there is any bias on the part of the judges in the five explicit trials which rightly should have been their focus, it is they were not up to their job and allowed the defence to run riot and with impunity.
This may indeed protect the rights of the accused; but who is there to keep a level playing field in which the voices of the injured can be heard.
My opinion

i agree. There needs to be a balance between the rights of the accused & getting to the truth. I think their law will reflect that. I tend to think that may differ based on impression. I think it’ll feature as part of a bulky appeal & they’ll look to cite other cases in order to make this point.

I think the motions of bias are a positive development, because if bias exists it may create a more balanced trial. On the flip-side it could work against them.