Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #19

[MENDEL]

So why did he photograph her dead?

1 His own paraphilia had escalated to that point.

2. It had a value - either commercial or gave him access to dark web sites.

3. He needed to provide evidence to someone else.

Great question. If there are only pictures of her dead, that will be very hard, if not sinister, to explain in court as CB uses to "dokumentieren" his acts as we widely know. That paraphilia on 1 is unbeknownst so far on CB. 3 would be more likely with a mafia gangster, not a tot. If Herr Wolters is counting on a direct inference between him being at PDL 2 hours before abduction according to Tapas' timeline and MM's death, that's like climbing the Everest in one step.

 

[SuperdadV8]

???

"A previous search in Portugal is said to have uncovered memory sticks containing child abuse images and photos of Christian B part-naked."

Madeleine McCann prosecutor says he has 'material evidence' she is dead as he tries to pin murder on Christian B

 

[Dlk79]

Agreed, because if abducted, the natural and obvious inference that the prosecution will invite any Court to reach is that she was murdered.

It is beyond obvious that CB has not been keeping MM alive all these years, and if he had, the evidential onus would be on the defence to establish

We certainly don't need photos of a body to prove that

Like I said, we aren't going to agree. I simply don't believe HCW would make such strong statements based on that simple inference IMO. I think there's something concrete they have that proves the actual death BARD.

And I wouldn't say it was automatically logical to come to that conclusion of death based on the time passed. Child trafficking happens every day and there's always that small chance that she could be alive following an abduction. Some people even now think CB may have sold MM on, either to a ring or a new family, which then wouldn't make him guilty of murder. The investigators have ruled that out, "no margin for manoeuvre" is not based on an inference IMO. They know.

Anyway we're just going round in circles on this. Time will tell. Hopefully.

 

[Chiatos]

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P9/09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2334.jpg
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P9/09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2335.jpg
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P9/09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2336.jpg

Thanks, "SNOW"

 

[MENDEL]

Snow White.

 

[Chiatos]

June 9, 2020;
... police are interested in Brueckner because he has 'knowledge' of the abduction that only a suspect could be aware of

The officer [a senior Portuguese police official*], described as a former Policia Judiciaria chief with in-depth knowledge of the Madeleine McCann probe who still works for the force, told ABC: 'There's no evidence Christian Brueckner is involved in her disappearance.
* GA?
Police investigating Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner hunt for his ex-girlfriend | Daily Mail Online

 

[mrjitty]

So why did he photograph her dead?

1 His own paraphilia had escalated to that point.

2. It had a value - either commercial or gave him access to dark web sites.

3. He needed to provide evidence to someone else.

Let's get real

If he had images of the victim dead he would be charged in 2 seconds

 

[SuperdadV8]

Let's get real

If he had images of the victim dead he would be charged in 2 seconds

As long as the evidence has been obtained an a lawful way....

 

[MENDEL]

June 9, 2020;
... police are interested in Brueckner because he has 'knowledge' of the abduction that only a suspect could be aware of

The officer [a senior Portuguese police official*], described as a former Policia Judiciaria chief with in-depth knowledge of the Madeleine McCann probe who still works for the force, told ABC: 'There's no evidence Christian Brueckner is involved in her disappearance.
* GA?
Police investigating Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner hunt for his ex-girlfriend | Daily Mail Online

GA doesn't "still works for the force", Chiatos.

 

[Pixie Child]

Let's get real

If he had images of the victim dead he would be charged in 2 seconds

The photos/film may not contain the face, rather post mortem posing. They need to place him at the OC to prove it was her, not someone else.

 

[C.greek]

Let's get real

If he had images of the victim dead he would be charged in 2 seconds

I don't see how being in possession of such horrible images would automatically mean that you should be charged for the murder of the person depicted.

 

[SuperdadV8]

As a prosecuter, maybe from SY, you can already buy evidence. That ain't a problem for itself.

But what if that evidence had been obtained earlier by another crime, like a theft or a burglary. Will it be admissible evidence at trial?

So maybe you got everything you need and need to know, but there is a jeopardy at court, to use it.

@mrjitty

How do you judge that, as a former lawyer?

You should even not be allowed to make it public. So you need it again, obtained in a lawful way. And maybe you have to start to dig....

 

[enjy15]

As a rule a dead body must be positively identified by some close person. I can't see it will any different with a picture or video footage. In case of a body, alternate ways can be used if there's no close person (fingerprints, teeth and so on). But perhaps with media only a close person can identify positively BARD.

I don’t think the German LE would want to show the parents the evidence for identification unless they are 100% sure it is Madeleine in the photo/video. I remember HCW saying he and the rest of those working on the case are 99% sure Madeleine is dead. I think they need something extra like clothing or parts of a body to confirm it is more than coincidence to have footage of a girl who looks very similar to Madeleine and supporting evidence that Madeleine and CB are linked. CB could say someone sent him that photo of a girl who appears to look like MM, but without a body they can’t prove it’s her.

 

[MENDEL]

I don't see how being in possession of such horrible images would automatically mean that you should be charged for the murder of the person depicted.

Jitty didn't say charged for murder. Only said charged, C.greek.

 

[C.greek]

Jitty didn't say charged for murder. Only said charged, C.greek.

Charged for what? For possession of such an image? CB is already in jail. Why would they want to jeopardize their work at this point?

 

[MENDEL]

Charged for what? For possession of such an image? CB is already in jail. Why would they want to jeopardize their work at this point?

Of course, charged for possession of illegal images. What's the matter he's in jail? Every crime must be charged on him even if he was serving a life sentence.

 

[Pixie Child]

I don't see how being in possession of such horrible images would automatically mean that you should be charged for the murder of the person depicted.

If they have a post mortem pic, they should have GPS of the crime scene. They haven’t torn apart any building in Portugal that we know of, does this mean it was the van? I know the house was cleaned but still.

 

[LeopardLeotard]

Maddie detectives have 'material evidence' she is dead but refuse to say more

Mr Wolters told Portugal's RTP TV that evidence of Maddie's death exists.

I've been away and just catching up,..that sounds pretty solid.. 'evidence of her death exists' imo sounds strange,not we have the evidence of her death,it's like it's out there but we don't have it.I believe he absolutely documented it,but surely if he did he may have distributed it,in which case it was a very very highly requested commodity (that sounds awfully cold I know),..or they found evidence on the usbs.Looks like I have much to catch up on

 

[Dlk79]

Let's get real

If he had images of the victim dead he would be charged in 2 seconds

Who said "he" had them? Besides, without knowing what the potential video shows, how can you ascertain that it's enough to charge?

Just for example, what if police uncovered a video during a different case, a bust on a paedophile ring or something like that. And say this video shows MM being killed by a man disguised head to toe, in the same manner that CB dressed during rape of the 72-year-old. It would be enough for LE to be confident of death, and point to further evidence of CB being the culprit based on the MO, but would that evidence really be enough to charge him on it's own?

 

[Pixie Child]

Who said "he" had them? Besides, without knowing what the potential video shows, how can you ascertain that it's enough to charge?

Just for example, what if police uncovered a video during a different case, a bust on a paedophile ring or something like that. And say this video shows MM being killed by a man disguised head to toe, in the same manner that CB dressed during rape of the 72-year-old. It would be enough for LE to be confident of death, and point to further evidence of CB being the culprit based on the MO, but would that evidence really be enough to charge him on it's own?

And if it’s just another pic amongst 8000, how do they refute his likely defence that he downloaded the pic from an online site? They would have to link his camera to it.