Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #33

[Malleux]

I think this is a problem of ethics and human rights. No person (even a known serial offender) should be exposed publicly as the kidnapper and killer of a child without a court rule.

That was a gross error of German authorities. Maybe they thought the evidence would appear very soon. But now they have a problem, they exposed him as the killer of Madeleine, and very soon his photo appeared in the MSM. The court now could ignore any witnesses testimonies who recognize CB because his exposure, except if a forensic evidence is presented.

In theory, CB could take legal action for defamation, libel or HR violation based on what the Prosecutors have said. He hasn't done so. IMO that is probably because he would have to show that the accusations are unfounded - and he can't.

That is the bit that I think some people are finding strange about this case, the public accusation. The reality - and the most plausible explanation for it - is that the Prosecutors are confident the evidence is substantial enough to protect them from any claims of any violation of CB's rights. JMO.

 

[RichardKimble]

In theory, CB could take legal action for defamation, libel or HR violation based on what the Prosecutors have said. He hasn't done so. IMO that is probably because he would have to show that the accusations are unfounded - and he can't.

That is the bit that I think some people are finding strange about this case, the public accusation. The reality - and the most plausible explanation for it - is that the Prosecutors are confident the evidence is substantial enough to protect them from any claims of any violation of CB's rights. JMO.

I don't think a prisoner quite has the same rights as a free person, Cannan in the UK is accused of killing S Lamplugh, its never reached a court house though, he's in prison on a separate murder case.

 

[RichardKimble]

In theory, CB could take legal action for defamation, libel or HR violation based on what the Prosecutors have said. He hasn't done so. IMO that is probably because he would have to show that the accusations are unfounded - and he can't.

That is the bit that I think some people are finding strange about this case, the public accusation. The reality - and the most plausible explanation for it - is that the Prosecutors are confident the evidence is substantial enough to protect them from any claims of any violation of CB's rights. JMO.

But have the Germans handled such a high profile case ? its possibly known world wide.

 

[Davieson]

How has he backtracked? In Oct 21 he was referring to the threshold to lay charges and said at the time it would be nonsense to charge when they had time on their side to potentially gather more evidence.

Do you have a cite of HCW saying he would charge him in the new year?

Unless they have limitless fund I find this difficult to accept.

 

[RichardKimble]

I think this is a problem of ethics and human rights. No person (even a known serial offender) should be exposed publicly as the kidnapper and killer of a child without a court rule.

That was a gross error of German authorities. Maybe they thought the evidence would appear very soon. But now they have a problem, they exposed him as the killer of Madeleine, and very soon his photo appeared in the MSM. The court now could ignore any witnesses testimonies who recognize CB because his exposure, except if a forensic evidence is presented.

A good defence lawyer which FF seems to be could sow the doubt if evidence was collected because of the publicly naming CB. Could they not have asked about two vehicles and the number which allegedly called CB without naming him or even indicating they had a prime suspect.

 

[Malleux]

I don't think a prisoner quite has the same rights as a free person, Cannan in the UK is accused of killing S Lamplugh, its never reached a court house though, he's in prison on a separate murder case.

Exactly, case in point. Cannan hasn't taken legal action either over the public accusation. While the evidence was deemed insufficient to take to trial by the CPS, it was clearly substantial enough to protect the police from making the claim over his guilt because Cannan would need to show it was unfounded.

 

[Lyall0814]

How does anything change in terms of opinion if they charge him? The evidence is the evidence, that's a fact, not an opinion. Based on that evidence, the prosecutors are confident they have the right man. That's what they've said. Nobody is obliged to believe that assertion and that wasn't what my criticism was about. The problem is some people are equating the time elapsed since the appeal with a botched investigation. That's nonsense IMO, this was always going to be a hard case to take to court without the body.

Is not investigating for three years without jurisdiction having been sorted out possibly a sign of a botched investigation?

 

[misty48]

Many thanks @misty48 ... Do you have a video of HCW saying this?

No I don't, Heri. My own opinion is that CB had the most valuable item he legally owned re-registered so police couldn't seize it in lieu of his unpaid fine. In doing so, he could still drive the Jag around the Algarve. The Westfalia wasn't his to be seized.
IMO BKA are just interested in the places people remember seeing either of those 2 vehicles back in 2007 and the ownership transfer date is just coincidence.

 

[Malleux]

Is not investigating for three years without jurisdiction having been sorted out possibly a sign of a botched investigation?

No, it's not. And the question over jurisdiction is far from clear cut. CB didn't raise any objection over Braunschweig's jurisdiction in the DM trial. Jurisdiction was decided based on his last official registered residence. Saxony-Anhalt/Madgeburg couldn't have just taken on the case instead based on an unproven assumption his last domicile was the box factory.

 

[misty48]

Is not investigating for three years without jurisdiction having been sorted out possibly a sign of a botched investigation?

The time to challenge jurisdiction would have been when CB was charged and convicted in Braunschweig for the DM rape. No appeal was ever made by CB's defence team on those grounds so why on earth would Braunschweig police assume they had no authority to continue their investigation into the prisoner?

 

[Janosch]

I read something about HCW saying that maybe they will never present charges against CB for MM's crime. But I do not remember neither where nor when. Maybe it was a fake news?

In any case, I think HCW/BKA now shall, must, are bound to, charge him, sooner or later, after all the publicity they made.

 

[RichardKimble]

I read something about HCW saying that maybe they will never present charges against CB for MM's crime. But I do not remember neither where nor when. Maybe it was a fake news?

In any case, I think HCW/BKA now shall, must, are bound to, charge him, sooner or later, after all the publicity they made.

Its in quoted tags so he probably said it, Oct last year, around the time or soon after FF raised the issue of jurisdiction imo.

He said there is no likelihood Brueckner will be charged by Christmas in connection with Maddie's disappearance and murder, adding: "There will definitely be no charge this year. Whether there will be a charge at all, and if so when, is completely open."

Madeleine McCann suspect won't be charged this year, prosecutor says

Hans Wolters says that previous claims the suspect would be charged in relation to Maddie's disappearance by Christmas this year were "misinformation".

www.express.co.uk

 

[Malleux]

I believe Cannan tried though.

And obviously got nowhere with it. Case in point.

 

[Lyall0814]

Fair enough, Misty and Malleux. We shall see if it's actually an easy issue to resolve and not something that will result in considerable delay.

The thing for me if when people like Clarke - who wants us to believe he's in regular contact with Wolters, and maybe even investigating for the prosecutors - say the strategy might actually be to try to convince CB to confess, after he's been convicted on the other charges and begins to understand he's never going to be going to be a free man again, alarm bells start ringing. That makes me even more suspicious than I already was that a good deal of Wolters says is bluffing.

(JMO though!)

 

[RichardKimble]

The time to challenge jurisdiction would have been when CB was charged and convicted in Braunschweig for the DM rape. No appeal was ever made by CB's defence team on those grounds so why on earth would Braunschweig police assume they had no authority to continue their investigation into the prisoner?

Well the lower court seems to think now is a good time.

 

[Malleux]

Fair enough, Misty and Malleux. We shall see if it's actually an easy issue to resolve and not something that will result in considerable delay.

The thing for me if when people like Clarke - who wants us to believe he's in regular contact with Wolters, and maybe even investigating for the prosecutors - say the strategy might actually be to try to convince CB to confess, after he's been convicted on the other charges and begins to understand he's never going to be going to be a free man again, alarm bells start ringing. That makes me even more suspicious than I already was that a good deal of Wolters says is bluffing.

(JMO though!)

That's fair enough, I don't share your opinion but I respect it.

 

[RichardKimble]

And obviously got nowhere with it. Case in point.

I deleted my post to late, can't find the article now, although there is this.

Mr Claughton said that, as far as John Cannan was concerned, there seemed to be no presumption of innocence, and no legal protection. He believed he would forever be labelled as the man who murdered Suzy Lamplugh, which was "completely wrong".

Lamplugh suspect denies playing games with police

The only suspect in the Suzy Lamplugh murder case yesterday denied any involvement in her disappearance, saying he was not playing mind games with the police and complaining he had been "tried and convicted in the media".

www.theguardian.com

 

[Malleux]

I deleted my post to late, can't find the article now, although there is this.

Mr Claughton said that, as far as John Cannan was concerned, there seemed to be no presumption of innocence, and no legal protection. He believed he would forever be labelled as the man who murdered Suzy Lamplugh, which was "completely wrong".

Lamplugh suspect denies playing games with police

The only suspect in the Suzy Lamplugh murder case yesterday denied any involvement in her disappearance, saying he was not playing mind games with the police and complaining he had been "tried and convicted in the media".

www.theguardian.com

I agree there are some uncanny parallels in terms of the public accusation. The overriding point though is that, for all it seems that Cannan was unfairly publicly accused, he's had no joy in taking any legal action over it. The reason - he can't show the claims are unfounded.

 

[RichardKimble]

I agree there are some uncanny parallels in terms of the public accusation. The overriding point though is that, for all it seems that Cannan was unfairly publicly accused, he's had no joy in taking any legal action over it. The reason - he can't show the claims are unfounded.

The most telling of all and its the same in both cases, the victim and suspect cannot be placed together.

 

[Dave55]

I think this is a problem of ethics and human rights. No person (even a known serial offender) should be exposed publicly as the kidnapper and killer of a child without a court rule.

That was a gross error of German authorities. Maybe they thought the evidence would appear very soon. But now they have a problem, they exposed him as the killer of Madeleine, and very soon his photo appeared in the MSM. The court now could ignore any witnesses testimonies who recognize CB because his exposure, except if a forensic evidence is presented.

They don't need forensic evidence. I think many here underestimate Wolters and the BKA