Germany/Portugal - Christian Brueckner, 27 @ time of 1st crime (2004), charged with sexual assault crimes, Praia de Rocha, Portugal. #5

[mrjitty]

I wonder if Bild will engage in any introspection here? Their payment to a key trial witness for a video they ran pretrial was obviously very stupid.

To be fair to the prosecutor, they probably had no way to prevent it.

 

[RichardKimble]

Apparently HeB gave four versions of the rapes he alleged to have seen on tape, also UL the prosecuter didn't bother turning up for the verdict!

The witness gave three versions of the crime in three different interrogations in 2017, 2018 and 2019. And in court, version number four suddenly occurred to him that the film had a date in which the year 2005 was said to have been seen. „The Chamber is convinced that this information is untrue and is based on the desire not to let the crime expire after “, the judge said. „Helge B. has no problem lying to the court. “
Lindemann and her colleague Vanessa Beyse seemed to prefer not to listen to such humiliations. They stayed away from the last day of the session and sent a colleague to listen to the embarrassments for his house.

Christian B.: Der „komplett unglaubhafte“ Zeuge – und die Verbindung zum Fall Maddie - WELT

Ein Gericht hat den vorbestraften Sexualstraftäter Christian B. in einem Vergewaltigungsprozess freigesprochen. Die Urteilsverkündung gerät zur Demütigung für die Staatsanwaltschaft. Das könnte die Ermittler auch im Fall der verschwundenen Madeleine McCann in Schwierigkeiten bringen.

www.welt.de

 

[mrjitty]

IIRC in the DM trial the Court held that HeB and MS must have seen rapes on tape due to the similarities - i.e they could not have invented their testimony because they did not know details of the DM case. So it was probative in that case.

But in this case, their direct testimony is required to prove the case BARD with no identified victim and no forensics

So the difference in the Court's attitude is at least partially explained by the differing standard or proof here. I get the feeling at least one saw disturbing videos. Bit which parts are true, which parts are invented, and what they can't really remember accurately anymore can't be unpacked.

You can also see how the prosecution, relying on the good impression of these witnesses in the DM trial, runs afoul of sceptical judges given the deterioration of the witnesses, pre-trial publicity, evolving versions etc etc

MOO