Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect #30

[RichardKimble]

Suspect bias? For a convicted child abuser and violent rapist? Who in his own words was a burglar and drug dealer?

Can you please pinpoint the bias?

Familiarise yourself with the Ricky Neave case, you'll see how it works.

 

[mrjitty]

For sure, but Summer Silly Season aside, there's absolutely nothing about the current stage of this investigation that would be likely to attract media attention anyway since it has nothing to do with MM.

She's the news generator, not CB.

When/if she seriously and concretely becomes the focus again, the media will likely reengage.

They might be waiting for it to be charged, so they are covered against libel.

I was rereading the UK guidelines for discussion of investigations, and they tend to be are quite tight, pre-charge, though there is latitude where the police or CPS make statements. Of course the german system is different, but perhaps they have simply decided that where the case doesn't involve MM (public interest) they won't publish until it's charged.

 

[mrjitty]

It is worth noting that so called Similar Fact Evidence (MO) is generally presumed inadmissible in common law countries (e.g. UK)*. That is because of the danger of propensity reasoning.

So for example the fact that the suspect has priors for sex offences and rape is not directly relevant in an abduction/murder case. You can't argue that CB is "the type of guy" who would do this (propensity reasoning). Whereas in the prospective HB prosecution, you can make an argument that the MO of the rapist is so similar to CB's rape of the American woman, that the probative value outweighs prejudice.

IMO the difficulty is that we don't have an MO in the MM case, and it doesn't fit with a burglary or violent attack. Perhaps the prosecutor can argue/prove that CB had burgled OC before and that therefore is powerful evidence to the prosecutors theory.

But all of this depends on having some other piece of evidence that ties CB directly to the murder IMO. It won't be enough that he fits a profile.



* usual disclaimers about Germany not using an adversarial jury system and different rules of evidence applying. In the end, how judges weigh evidence is the same.

 

[mrjitty]

Familiarise yourself with the Ricky Neave case, you'll see how it works.

Wow what a messed up case.

 

[enquirer6]

It is worth noting that so called Similar Fact Evidence (MO) is generally presumed inadmissible in common law countries (e.g. UK)*. That is because of the danger of propensity reasoning.

So for example the fact that the suspect has priors for sex offences and rape is not directly relevant in an abduction/murder case. You can't argue that CB is "the type of guy" who would do this (propensity reasoning). Whereas in the prospective HB prosecution, you can make an argument that the MO of the rapist is so similar to CB's rape of the American woman, that the probative value outweighs prejudice.

IMO the difficulty is that we don't have an MO in the MM case, and it doesn't fit with a burglary or violent attack. Perhaps the prosecutor can argue/prove that CB had burgled OC before and that therefore is powerful evidence to the prosecutors theory.

But all of this depends on having some other piece of evidence that ties CB directly to the murder IMO. It won't be enough that he fits a profile.



* usual disclaimers about Germany not using an adversarial jury system and different rules of evidence applying. In the end, how judges weigh evidence is the same.

Has not Herr Walters uttered words to the effect, 'if you could see the evidence we have'? At the very least implying that he has not revealed publicly all he knows?


Yes! This was from October last year:

Prosecutor '100% convinced' suspect abducted and murdered Madeleine McCann

Madeleine McCann prosecutors say they have no body and no DNA but other evidence leads to only one conclusion - jailed rapist Christian Brueckner is guilty and could be charged next year

www.mirror.co.uk

"They [the prosecutors] believe they have the evidence to charge the 44-year-old and it has “100% convinced” them that he killed her.

And they hope to be able to bring charges next year.

But as Brueckner is already in jail for separate offences the team are taking time to gather as much evidence as possible before bringing it to court."

 

[JB1510]

It is worth noting that so called Similar Fact Evidence (MO) is generally presumed inadmissible in common law countries (e.g. UK)*. That is because of the danger of propensity reasoning.

So for example the fact that the suspect has priors for sex offences and rape is not directly relevant in an abduction/murder case. You can't argue that CB is "the type of guy" who would do this (propensity reasoning). Whereas in the prospective HB prosecution, you can make an argument that the MO of the rapist is so similar to CB's rape of the American woman, that the probative value outweighs prejudice.

IMO the difficulty is that we don't have an MO in the MM case, and it doesn't fit with a burglary or violent attack. Perhaps the prosecutor can argue/prove that CB had burgled OC before and that therefore is powerful evidence to the prosecutors theory.

But all of this depends on having some other piece of evidence that ties CB directly to the murder IMO. It won't be enough that he fits a profile.



* usual disclaimers about Germany not using an adversarial jury system and different rules of evidence applying. In the end, how judges weigh evidence is the same.

HCW has previously stated there are parallels between the DM case , HB and MM , we are yet to discover what that is. I personally believe it’s indirect video or photo evidence where CB face is hidden . Its a possibility that the appeal for photos from holidaymakers is to confirm clothing he was wearing within the same timeframe . JMO

 

[Megnut]

HCW has previously stated there are parallels between the DM case , HB and MM , we are yet to discover what that is. I personally believe it’s indirect video or photo evidence where CB face is hidden . Its a possibility that the appeal for photos from holidaymakers is to confirm clothing he was wearing within the same timeframe . JMO

That's exactly how circumsyantial cases are pieced together. Perhaps there are confirmed photographs depicting a known crime in a notable setting (a van, a bed, a basement) in which the perpetrator is visible in part and new photographs showing MM in the same setting, with perhaps no part of him visible. It's also possible (and IMO) that MM may have been photgraphed during unthinkable torture which were not compatible with survival. So photos of MM in a setting known to be associated with the perpetrator, one who had the means, motive, opportunity -- that could go along way toward charges and conviction. IMO.

JMO

 

[C.greek]

It is worth noting that so called Similar Fact Evidence (MO) is generally presumed inadmissible in common law countries (e.g. UK)*. That is because of the danger of propensity reasoning.

So for example the fact that the suspect has priors for sex offences and rape is not directly relevant in an abduction/murder case. You can't argue that CB is "the type of guy" who would do this (propensity reasoning). Whereas in the prospective HB prosecution, you can make an argument that the MO of the rapist is so similar to CB's rape of the American woman, that the probative value outweighs prejudice.

IMO the difficulty is that we don't have an MO in the MM case, and it doesn't fit with a burglary or violent attack. Perhaps the prosecutor can argue/prove that CB had burgled OC before and that therefore is powerful evidence to the prosecutors theory.

But all of this depends on having some other piece of evidence that ties CB directly to the murder IMO. It won't be enough that he fits a profile.



* usual disclaimers about Germany not using an adversarial jury system and different rules of evidence applying. In the end, how judges weigh evidence is the same.

This makes no much sense if we take HCW words under consideration. Perhaps German law is indeed different or HCW is not aware of this.

according to the Times of London.

"The case against the suspect Christian B for the rape of Hazel Behan is in a good way, and it may be that we can charge him in the next three months. I am very hopeful for a charge on this case," [... ]"We are building a picture of Christian B and the methods he uses to commit his crimes. There are parallels with the case of the American tourist who was raped, the attack on Hazel Behan, and the abduction and murder of Madeleine McCann.

Wolters said that he hoped a judge will believe that Brückner was capable of abducting McCann if he is found guilty of raping Behan in the same area, which could be enough to take the Madeleine McCann case to trial.

"Maybe the judge will think that somebody who has raped more than one woman in the same place where Madeleine was taken would also be more likely to take and kill a young girl. It says something about his character," Wolters said.

German prosecutors set to charge Madeleine McCann suspect with rape of Irish woman​

German prosecutors are due to charge the prime suspect in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann with the rape of an Irish woman in 2004. Christian Brückner is suspected of raping Hazel Behan in her apartment in Praia da Rocha in 2004 when she was 20 years old.

www.irishcentral.com

 

[tedtink]

Familiarise yourself with the Ricky Neave case, you'll see how it works.

Yes, same parallels running through that case like GA's original investigation, ie. accuse the Mother. And the JC case, come to think of it.
I see what you mean.

 

[mrjitty]

Has not Herr Walters uttered words to the effect, 'if you could see the evidence we have'? At the very least implying that he has not revealed publicly all he knows?

RSBM - yes he has. We just don't know what it is.

I was commenting only as to what role similar fact evidence (e.g. in these rape cases) might play in any MM trial.

 

[mrjitty]

This makes no much sense if we take HCW words under consideration. Perhaps German law is indeed different or HCW is not aware of this.

<snip>

"Maybe the judge will think that somebody who has raped more than one woman in the same place where Madeleine was taken would also be more likely to take and kill a young girl. It says something about his character," Wolters said.

RSBM/BIB

Of course the prosecutor will argue that, but this is the kind of propensity/character reasoning that Judges don't like.

in the HB case, there is striking similarity in the facts, e.g the video taping, the prolonged attack, the clothing - specific features that link the rapes. To me these point to guilt

In your quoted snippet above the prosecutor uses propensity reasoning. i.e. a rapist is more likely to be a murderer. That is not terribly convincing, but of course he will likely make a more sophisticated argument in Court. It's also quite likely that he is not divulging what exact similarities might exist. So I suspect it's an argument for the media, not for the courtroom.

For instance, if HCW can prove that CB broke into other holiday apartments, and specifically into OC that would support his theory in a material way IMO.

 

[tedtink]

The SIM card allegedly from the OC, found at the box factory, could show CB robbed at the OC, especially if witness statements support it.

Could be connected to this for example....

She says that as far as she can remember, during the years that she has worked at the resort, she knows of some thefts from inside the apartments and most recently on 16th April 2007 there was a theft from an apartment in Block 5 L, from where a plasma display screen, credit cards and a mobile phone belonging to the respective guests were taken.
She says that she does not remember having been told that doors or windows had been forced, the guests having said that they had just left the door on the latch, however she is not certain.
As far as she knows, as she prepared the papers for the insurance company, the theft took place at the end of the day and according to the guests the event happened when they had left for dinner after completing check in and having left their suitcases in the apartment.
When asked, she says that she was never told of the existence of any suspects or where those responsible for the theft had been identified.
She became aware of the facts the next day, Friday, by means of a colleague.

P.J. POLICE FILES: MARIA DA GRACA GUERREIRO ALAO GONCALVES

Or the BKA may have found the actual owner of the SIM.
But I do believe we've thrashed this out previously!

 

[SuperdadV8]

RSBM/BIB

Of course the prosecutor will argue that, but this is the kind of propensity/character reasoning that Judges don't like.

in the HB case, there is striking similarity in the facts, e.g the video taping, the prolonged attack, the clothing - specific features that link the rapes. To me these point to guilt

In your quoted snippet above the prosecutor uses propensity reasoning. i.e. a rapist is more likely to be a murderer. That is not terribly convincing, but of course he will likely make a more sophisticated argument in Court. It's also quite likely that he is not divulging what exact similarities might exist. So I suspect it's an argument for the media, not for the courtroom.

For instance, if HCW can prove that CB broke into other holiday apartments, and specifically into OC that would support his theory in a material way IMO.

You are right in general Jitty, but as you mentioned before by yourself, we have lack of info about the whole content of the casefiles! So we all are just assuming in the end.

I'm convinced, that you would put your argumentation into an opposite one, if you would have the knowledge, about the existance of just a simple picture of MM, sitting in a yellow white campervan.

Just her sitting in the van, without anyone else being portrayed. Is it a 100 percent proof of murder? Does it really matter, how anybody broke into 5A? Just for example!

No offence so far, i know, you understand my point....hopefully!

 

[tedtink]

It is worth noting that so called Similar Fact Evidence (MO) is generally presumed inadmissible in common law countries (e.g. UK)*. That is because of the danger of propensity reasoning.

So for example the fact that the suspect has priors for sex offences and rape is not directly relevant in an abduction/murder case. You can't argue that CB is "the type of guy" who would do this (propensity reasoning). Whereas in the prospective HB prosecution, you can make an argument that the MO of the rapist is so similar to CB's rape of the American woman, that the probative value outweighs prejudice.

IMO the difficulty is that we don't have an MO in the MM case, and it doesn't fit with a burglary or violent attack. Perhaps the prosecutor can argue/prove that CB had burgled OC before and that therefore is powerful evidence to the prosecutors theory.

But all of this depends on having some other piece of evidence that ties CB directly to the murder IMO. It won't be enough that he fits a profile.



* usual disclaimers about Germany not using an adversarial jury system and different rules of evidence applying. In the end, how judges weigh evidence is the same.

In the Libby Squire trial the perps previous convictions were, indeed, brought up in UK Court.
Like you say different rules, but when you say 'Judges don't like it' do you mean it's explicitly disallowed in Germany?

In August 2019 you were sentenced in this court to a term of imprisonment of 5 years and 8 months for 4 offences of voyeurism, 3 counts of burglary and 2 counts of outraging public decency over a period from June 2017 to January 2019. All of those offences had been motivated by what you, during the course of this trial, referred to as “your problem”. By using such a term, you were referring to your inability to control your own urge for sexual self-gratification which led you to seek out young women to watch through their bedroom windows whilst they got dressed, had sexual intercourse or were simply lying there. You watched these women, staring back at them brazenly even after they had spotted you. You went into their homes, stealing personal items of clothing or sex toys, often leaving a calling card in the form of a condom that you had used for masturbation. You masturbated in public. During the three weeks before you raped and killed Liberty Squire, you confronted two sets of young women at night. On one occasion you masturbated in front of them whilst looking directly at them; on the other occasion you masturbated.
only a few metres away from the women and then followed them, ejaculating over the front door of their house.
5. The sentencing judge in August 2019 referred to your offending as a perverted campaign of sexually deviant behaviour. He was correct to do so. He also considered you to be, potentially, a very dangerous individual. Again, he was correct to do so. In the weeks and months before you raped and murdered Liberty Squire your offending escalated. You grew increasingly emboldened, no doubt because you were confident that you would not, and could not, be caught.

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/R-v-Pawel-Relowicz-sentencing-remarks.pdf

 

[mrjitty]

You are right in general Jitty, but as you mentioned before by yourself, we have lack of info about the whole content of the casefiles! So we all are just assuming in the end.

I'm convinced, that you would put your argumentation into an opposite one, if you would have the knowledge, about the existance of just a simple picture of MM, sitting in a yellow white campervan.

Just her sitting in the van, without anyone else being portrayed. Is it a 100 percent proof of murder? Does it really matter, how anybody broke into 5A? Just for example!

No offence so far, i know, you understand my point....hopefully!

I completely get your point.

Without knowing what specifically HCW has, it is hard to know how any similar fact evidence could be probative.

e.g a witness, seeing CB lurking around OC that night, could bring the priors into play, as they could indicate what his intent might well have been.

 

[mrjitty]

In the Libby Squire trial the perps previous convictions were, indeed, brought up in UK Court.
Like you say different rules, but when you say 'Judges don't like it' do you mean it's explicitly disallowed in Germany?

Snipped for focus

Libby's case is a great one to raise, as it illustrates when/where similar fact evidence is allowed. PR was caught on video with the victim entering his car, and lied to police about what he was doing lurking in the area late and night, and that he was acting as a good Samaritan. His prior offending illustrated his likely intent, in lurking and approaching the victim.

We weren't privy to the argumentation on this point (the defence likely opposed admissibility) but I think it is correct that even though he had not committed a rape before (that we know of) his intent was to sexually attack the vulnerable victim.

In other words the evidence goes to the context and is not to propensity. The probative value to a specific issue (what was his intent) outweighs propensity risk (i.e he is a perv so likely did a murder).

In germany it is different because the judges don't need to hold evidence back from a jury - but the same logic applies. You always have to weigh probative value vs prejudice when assessing evidence

When I say "judges don't like it" i mean judges don't like propensity reasoning.

Needless to say it is typically a hotly contested area as to whether evidence of bad character is probative or overly prejudicial.

5. The sentencing judge in August 2019 referred to your offending as a perverted campaign of sexually deviant behaviour. He was correct to do so. He also considered you to be, potentially, a very dangerous individual. Again, he was correct to do so. In the weeks and months before you raped and murdered Liberty Squire your offending escalated. You grew increasingly emboldened, no doubt because you were confident that you would not, and could not, be caught.

Remember in sentencing the trial judge is speaking after the murder conviction, and properly will have regard to prior convictions and the escalation. Similar fact rules don't apply in sentencing.

 

[SuperdadV8]

I completely get your point.

Without knowing what specifically HCW has, it is hard to know how any similar fact evidence could be probative.

e.g a witness, seeing CB lurking around OC that night, could bring the priors into play, as they could indicate what his intent might well have been.

Jitty, don't forget the alleged Boystown link, paraguayan authorities claimed. BT was raised in 2019, from 2018 CB has been cuffed...

So the alleged link can't be related to the platform itself, but maybe to some of it's hosts or content. The main suspect of BT, a guy named AG, is located almost a hundred miles away from his solicitor, who works in Augsburg!!!

So....where is the link between CB, AG or even CMK, if CB could never have used the platform called boystown? One of it's predecessors maybe?

I assume, Augsburg is a very important town in the MM complex. But just assumption!

 

[C.greek]

RSBM/BIB

Of course the prosecutor will argue that, but this is the kind of propensity/character reasoning that Judges don't like.

in the HB case, there is striking similarity in the facts, e.g the video taping, the prolonged attack, the clothing - specific features that link the rapes. To me these point to guilt

In your quoted snippet above the prosecutor uses propensity reasoning. i.e. a rapist is more likely to be a murderer. That is not terribly convincing, but of course he will likely make a more sophisticated argument in Court. It's also quite likely that he is not divulging what exact similarities might exist. So I suspect it's an argument for the media, not for the courtroom.

For instance, if HCW can prove that CB broke into other holiday apartments, and specifically into OC that would support his theory in a material way IMO.

Maybe HCW does have that evidence (witness statements for example). I find it really hard to believe that HCW does not know his facts or what propensity reasoning is or what is admissible or not in court. The most important thing from his quotes is that it shows that there is a strategy in bringing first these 5 cases to court - if CB is charged with the rape of HB then the MM case would follow.

He appears to be a quite successful prosecutor especially seeing the recent conviction in a no body murder case. So yes perhaps these are words for the lay people, but I am sure he could and would elaborate further in the court room if his or their strategy works (i.e. as he says conviction in HB's rape). And i also think that these quotes could indicate they do have enough evidence for a similar MO.

we are not privy of the evidence they have, but it must have been compelling even from the start for the court to allow this public appeal for information pinpointing CB as the only suspect.

Jmo

 

[mrjitty]

Maybe HCW does have that evidence (witness statements for example). I find it really hard to believe that HCW does not know his facts or what propensity reasoning is or what is admissible or not in court. The most important thing from his quotes is that it shows that there is a strategy in bringing first these 5 cases to court - if CB is charged with the rape of HB then the MM case would follow.

RSBM. Of course he knows what propensity reasoning is. He wasn't making an argument in Court, but rather in a newspaper, so as usual, one wonders what his purpose was in linking these 2 cases which are not even charged yet.

He is keeping his cards close to his chest so until he reveals them, I remain sceptical of his propensity argument. He already has the rape of the American woman as to CBs MO, so it is hard to imagine what a second conviction of the same type adds to the MM case.

Perhaps his comments should be read more as a rationalisation for the MM obsessed media, than a genuine legal strategy for the MM case. He has these 5 cases ready to prosecute on their own merits, so he is doing so. The MM case is not ready to charge, so he is not doing so.

 

[Anxala]

You are right in general Jitty, but as you mentioned before by yourself, we have lack of info about the whole content of the casefiles! So we all are just assuming in the end.

I'm convinced, that you would put your argumentation into an opposite one, if you would have the knowledge, about the existance of just a simple picture of MM, sitting in a yellow white campervan.

Just her sitting in the van, without anyone else being portrayed. Is it a 100 percent proof of murder? Does it really matter, how anybody broke into 5A? Just for example!

No offence so far, i know, you understand my point....hopefully!

I would say any image of MM that was found in CB's possession that can be proven to be post-abduction (ie. an image that cannot be accounted for by her parents) would be proof enough of CB's guilt. No yellow/white camper van or tabloid-friendly dark scary concealed basement required.

If that's what HCW has, then I agree that it would be damning.