Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #16

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dlk79 said:
The van in question I interpreted as belonging to one of the friends who burgled the farmhouse, not CB or MT. Not sure though.

To be honest, I have doubts over whether there even was a van. Or at least that the tape was scrapped in one. I think the story may be embellished to cover up what they really did with the tape. In MT's interview he says he thinks they burned the tape, so that's yet another version of the story.

JMO but I have a feeling they may have given the tape and all the other stash back to CB when he got out of prison. Early reports made out that these friends went to rob CB's house while he was in prison (and presumably kept his stuff). We then later find out that it's actually CB who asked them to raid the house. Haven't seen anything to prove they didn't honour what they were asked to do and just get his belongings out for him and hand them over when he got out.

ETA: I can also imagine them making up the scrapped van story though IF they had indeed burned the tape as MT claimed. Deliberate destruction of evidence would have made them directly complicit in covering up a crime. Making out they forgot about the tape and it got scrapped with a vehicle doesn’t make them look as bad.
Click to expand...

LE could hardly scrap the van if it wasn't registered to CB.
Plenty of info if you google Monchique Blue Bedford MT
 
Sharkbite said:
LE could hardly scrap the van if it wasn't registered to CB.
Plenty of info if you google Monchique Blue Bedford MT
Click to expand...
That's not what I was saying. I know the Bedford was registered to CB and I know LE scrapped it when it was determined to not be in a fit state to be sold.

What I'm saying is that I think the van that was scrapped with the tape in it, was a different van, one that didn't belong to CB. That's if the robbers story is even true.

As I said, I've not seen any MSM reports claiming the van that was scrapped with the tape was also the scrapped Bedford van. When I read the initial reports, my interpretation was that it was the robber's own van and that the robber himself had scrapped it years after the event.
 
Last edited:
Dlk79 said:
That'snot what I was saying. I know the Bedford was registered to CB and I know LE scrapped it when it was determined to not be in a fit state to be sold.

What I'm saying is that I think the van that was scrapped with the tape in it, was a different van, one that didn't belong to CB. That's if the robbers story is even true.

As I said, I've not seen any MSM reports claiming the van that was scrapped with the tape was also the scrapped Bedford van. When I read the initial reports, my interpretation was that it was the robber's own van and that the robber himself had scrapped it years after the event.
Click to expand...

A few posts ago you were doubting the Bedfords existence?, Ive never heard of another van being scrapped that's all. Where could I find info on the robbers story, I must have missed that as well?
 
Says here it was the blue Bedford van

Madeleine McCann: Police destroy suspect Christian Brueckner's van | Metro News

'
Key evidence in the Madeleine McCann case may have been destroyed when a van used by suspect Christian Brueckner was crushed by police.

The blue Bedford van, which the German paedophile used to sleep in on the beach near Praia da Luz, is understood to have been sold for scrap.

According to local media, he drove it just before the three-year-old’s disappearance in May 2007'..
 
Brexit and the consequences in case of MM / CB

This is unbelievable: Yesterday at noon, the ECJ already published the
"OPINION OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL
MICHAL BOBEK​
of 6 August 2020" online.

The website of the ECJ offers (top left) the possibility to choose among many European languages, namely those of the EU member states. All translations are available, but not those into English. What are the poor Irish doing? They want to read this too.

That is very strange.

Nevertheless here the link
PS: maybe the translation into English will come a little later
 
Last edited:
Sharkbite said:
A few posts ago you were doubting the Bedfords existence?, Ive never heard of another van being scrapped that's all. Where could I find info on the robbers story, I must have missed that as well?
Click to expand...
No. You've misunderstood what I said, I was talking about the robbers van.

"The van in question (i.e. the one with the tape in it, not the Bedford) I interpreted as belonging to one of the friends who burgled the farmhouse, not CB or MT. Not sure though.

To be honest, I have doubts over whether there even was a van."

Obviously I know the Bedford existed, there's been dozens of reports on it. Me and you had a discussion about it on the thread previously when discussing CB's fine.

What I keep trying to say, is that I think there were 2 different vans that were scrapped. CB's Bedford by LE and the robbers van containing the tape which he supposedly scrapped himself. Just saying that the robber may have made that story about his van up.

Why do you think the tape was in the Bedford van out of interest, have you got any link where it says it was that van?
 
Dlk79 said:
No. You've misunderstood what I said, I was talking about the robbers van.

"The van in question (i.e. the one with the tape in it, not the Bedford) I interpreted as belonging to one of the friends who burgled the farmhouse, not CB or MT. Not sure though.

To be honest, I have doubts over whether there even was a van."

Obviously I know the Bedford existed, there's been dozens of reports on it. Me and you had a discussion about it on the thread previously when discussing CB's fine.

What I keep trying to say, is that I think there were 2 different vans that were scrapped. CB's Bedford by LE and the robbers van containing the tape which he supposedly scrapped himself. Just saying that the robber may have made that story about his van up.

Why do you think the tape was in the Bedford van out of interest, have you got any link where it says it was that van?
Click to expand...

That was the point of my initial post about the Bedford, I don't believe that there were videos/camcorder in the Bedford when it was destroyed.
 
SuperdadV8 said:
According to that german article, the conviction in the rape case has only been made of witness testimonies, without any video evidence. F.F. stated that at ECJ. So it seems, the video didn't exist at the time of the trial or wasn't known to exist.
Click to expand...
In the article linked by you it says

According to Fülscher, there are inconsistencies in the procedure. The court had essentially followed the statements of two ex-friends of Christian B., who had stolen a video camera from him and watched a film with the rape scenes on it.

However, the judges had not seen the film themselves. A second point makes the lawyer suspicious. Parts of the statements of a witness had been blackened in the investigation files.

Christian B. (...) was convicted because of a piece of evidence: a body hair was found in the house of the victim. It was found on the bed sheet of the victim.
 
Sharkbite said:
Ive never heard of another van being scrapped that's all. Where could I find info on the robbers story, I must have missed that as well?
Click to expand...
See attached report.

"A second film showed a younger person in the house. She was tied naked to a wooden beam. The house inhabitant, his acquaintance, had sat on the sofa in this sequence. The young woman had asked him to release her a few times.

It was a rape, what was going on, she said in German. The witness who stole the camera said he and his friend wanted nothing to do with what they found.

He claimed he left the videotapes in his motorhome which which was later scrapped. He said he and his accomplice were certain that what they saw was no staged scene."

Testimony reveals how new Madeleine McCann suspect raped US tourist
 
Miss_Paula said:
Brexit and the consequences in case of MM / CB

This is unbelievable: Yesterday at noon, the ECJ already published the
"OPINION OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL
MICHAL BOBEK​
of 6 August 2020" online.

The website of the ECJ offers (top left) the possibility to choose among many European languages, namely those of the EU member states. All translations are available, but not those into English. What are the poor Irish doing? They want to read this too.

That is very strange.

Nevertheless here the link
PS: maybe the translation into English will come a little later
Click to expand...
Await this patiently, thank you for all your time Miss.
 
Miss_Paula said:
In the article linked by you it says

According to Fülscher, there are inconsistencies in the procedure. The court had essentially followed the statements of two ex-friends of Christian B., who had stolen a video camera from him and watched a film with the rape scenes on it.

However, the judges had not seen the film themselves. A second point makes the lawyer suspicious. Parts of the statements of a witness had been blackened in the investigation files.

Christian B. (...) was convicted because of a piece of evidence: a body hair was found in the house of the victim. It was found on the bed sheet of the victim.
Click to expand...

The interesting fact in this, if it's true, that parts of the testimony have been blackened out.

The rape trial was sentenced in december 2019. The investigation files should have been handed out to every solicitor in the past. They have the right to get every information, even if the solicitor changes over the time.

That statement of F.F. makes no sense!
 
Miss_Paula said:
Brexit and the consequences in case of MM / CB

This is unbelievable: Yesterday at noon, the ECJ already published the
"OPINION OF THE ADVOCATE GENERAL
MICHAL BOBEK​
of 6 August 2020" online.

The website of the ECJ offers (top left) the possibility to choose among many European languages, namely those of the EU member states. All translations are available, but not those into English. What are the poor Irish doing? They want to read this too.

That is very strange.

Nevertheless here the link
PS: maybe the translation into English will come a little later
Click to expand...
Hold on, I'm confused now. Can you explain what is meant by these comments in the report -

"The Defendant and Ireland contend that such a circumstance does not affect the application of the specialty principle."

...The defendant and Ireland are therefore right to say that the application of the exception in Article 27 (3) (a) of Framework Decision 2002/584 is conditional on voluntary return, but wrong in their assumption that his forced return is not subject to his voluntary return Departure reactivated the principle of specialty based on the first handover."

Is this saying that the reason Irish government representatives were involved in the initial Appeal hearing was because they were agreeing with CB on the extradition principle of specialty, and that his rape trial was illegal? Most people assumed it was to do with their vested interest in the HB case but this reads quite differently.
 
Dlk79 said:
See attached report.

"A second film showed a younger person in the house. She was tied naked to a wooden beam. The house inhabitant, his acquaintance, had sat on the sofa in this sequence. The young woman had asked him to release her a few times.

It was a rape, what was going on, she said in German. The witness who stole the camera said he and his friend wanted nothing to do with what they found.

He claimed he left the videotapes in his motorhome which which was later scrapped. He said he and his accomplice were certain that what they saw was no staged scene."

Testimony reveals how new Madeleine McCann suspect raped US tourist
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link. If I had seen the link previously I doubt I would've connected the 'motorhome' as being the Blue Bedford anyway.

ETA

Nothing to do with the Bedford, but after reading through the article it seems they are referring to more than one witness.

"The man testified at the trial of Christian Brueckner in December, stating he saw a film sequence on the video camera in which an older woman was bound and masked and whipped then raped.

'Then the man sat on the bed and pulled the mask off his face. Then I thought: That can't be. ' He recognized the house occupant"

Forgive if i'm wrong, but wasn't it 2017 when CB showed the video of the rape where he unmasked himself? This person then went to the police and thus became a witness.

Further in the article

"The witness who stole the camera said he and his friend wanted nothing to do with what they found.

He claimed he left the videotapes in his motorhome which which was later scrapped. He said he and his accomplice were certain that what they saw was no staged scene.

For the police, this statement prompted them to look for possible rape victims."

Is the article discussing 3 witnesses, or not?
 
Last edited:
SuperdadV8 said:
The interesting fact in this, if it's true, that parts of the testimony have been blackened out.

The rape trial was sentenced in december 2019. The investigation files should have been handed out to every solicitor in the past. They have the right to get every information, even if the solicitor changes over the time.

That statement of F.F. makes no sense!
Click to expand...

There is only one possibility, for blackened parts in witness testimonies and that's a witness protection program, to preserve an identity IMO.....
 
SuperdadV8 said:
The interesting fact in this, if it's true, that parts of the testimony have been blackened out.
(...) The investigation files should have been handed out to every solicitor in the past. They have the right to get every information, even if the solicitor changes over the time.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with whether lawyers change during a trial. What goes into the files is decided once and then is not changed during the trial and the judgement.

At best in a new trial in a higher court, but I do not know. The lawyers would then have to file applications for evidence.

There are good reasons for blacking out parts of the police interrogation. For example, if the witnesses incriminate themselves. Or if they refer to another crime that the investigating authorities want to pursue separately, and so on ...

In any case, no relevant statements may be blackened with regard to the case to be heard. These are just empty phrases that FF is using.

Sorry, @SuperdadV8, I've had the same thought - but slower
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 101 more.
Total: 2,781 (members: 102, guests: 2,679)

Online statistics

Members online
102
Guests online
2,679
Total visitors
2,781
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
599,730
Messages
18,098,779
Members
230,917
Latest member
CP95
Back
Top