Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #39

[Davieson]

This case worries me.
There are too many inconsistencies with the original reporting of what actually happened on the night of MM missing.
To much trying to silence or get on side the media and now what does appear to be a "Patsy" who is put in the frame to focus all media attention on one man, simply because he has a track record.

Have the British media been served with D notices? Does anyone know.

This is almost the same as the Claudia Lawrence case where Christopher Halliwell is constantly being named as the culprit because he had abducted 2 women before. He is not but those wanting to escape the heat buy into this story.

My concern is that even if he does go to trial for MM and is sentenced for this, we will have the wrong man and the true culrprit(s) will go Scott free.

I don't think the government would need to be involved with D notices.
Gagging orders issued by the UK courts have generally proved sufficient in the past.

 

[Woodburnbay]

I don't think the government would need to be involved with D notices.
Gagging orders issued by the UK courts have generally proved sufficient in the past.

What about agencies that report most of the time to Government but on issues of national security are allowed to move without any ministers permission.

 

[Davieson]

What about agencies that report most of the time to Government but on issues of national security are allowed to move without any ministers permission.

Ah yes, national security. I believe this came up in connection with a FoI question, but of course it was never explained why the disappearance of an insignificant small child should involve national security.

Just another little mystery among so many in this case.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

I would say that if there is not sufficient evidence to charge, then whatever evidence they have is not strong.

I would suggest that what the prosecutors have is a disparate collection of snippets of information (evidence) which they have attempted to assemble into a compelling narrative of guilt.
While this may work well within the media, it is woefully inadequate to put before a judge and they realise that.

IMO

I used ditto marks for "strong". Even if I initially thought they could only have autobiographic texts corroborated by independent testimonies, that, IMO, would not have been enough to proceed with a worldwide appeal. Even more knowing their typical conservative approach. I think they know it was him and they have more (e.g. a photo?!, more from the chat?! panikspatz?) but not (yet) sufficient to charge beyond reasonable doubt. Maybe they expected someone else (e.g. Diogo Silva?!), who they suspect might know more about the case, to come forward. But it did not happen.
IMO they would not risk reputation and careers, even more in a such mediatic case.
Despite all this, and just personally, what I can no longer imagine is that he could still be the wrong man.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

I suspect that even if CB is not convicted he will be forever labelled as 'killer' and police will close down any further investigation. Job done.

It may happen indeed. But it would be "bitter-sweet".

 

[Mex]

I would say that if there is not sufficient evidence to charge, then whatever evidence they have is not strong.

I would suggest that what the prosecutors have is a disparate collection of snippets of information (evidence) which they have attempted to assemble into a compelling narrative of guilt.
While this may work well within the media, it is woefully inadequate to put before a judge and they realise that.

IMO

My suggestion is that the BKA and prosecutors required far more evidence than you suggest to firm up an honest evidence led case against CB.
These guys are not amateurs – they know how to get legitimate results when all else has failed.

I rest my case on CB’s proven guilt in the aggravated rape he committed in a villa in Praia da Luz a mile from the apartment from which MM was lifted two years later.

There is no comparison between the media whose job it is to sell stories either for information or entertainment and police investigators whose job is to fight crime and deliver justice when possible.
Much as they did for DM and hopefully they will do likewise for MM.

My opinion

 

[Mex]

This case worries me.
There are too many inconsistencies with the original reporting of what actually happened on the night of MM missing.
To much trying to silence or get on side the media and now what does appear to be a "Patsy" who is put in the frame to focus all media attention on one man, simply because he has a track record.

Have the British media been served with D notices? Does anyone know.

This is almost the same as the Claudia Lawrence case where Christopher Halliwell is constantly being named as the culprit because he had abducted 2 women before. He is not but those wanting to escape the heat buy into this story.

My concern is that even if he does go to trial for MM and is sentenced for this, we will have the wrong man and the true culrprit(s) will go Scott free.

MM’s case has moved on considerably since 2007 and the present day investigation can learn nothing from it.

Snip

On May 7, 2007, Hill – then a Surrey detective superintendent seconded to the UK's new Child Exploitation and Online Protection centre – flew to Portugal to lend expert help to the hunt for MM.

Detective Superintendent Hill – who had secured the world's first conviction based on familial DNA – could have helped while the evidence was still fresh.

But because of systemic dysfunction and suspicion of outside intervention by the Portuguese police team – his input was unwelcome.

Madeleine McCann case: Bungling officers froze me out - detective

A leading UK detective claims he was frozen out of the Madeleine McCann investigation.

www.nzherald.co.nz

Were I you I would have no fear whatsoever on CB’s behalf regarding his guilt or innocence.

Neither CB nor his legal teams need to prove a thing.

The burden of proving CB's guilt lies with the prosecution.
To get as far as even the indictment stage the prosecutors must present evidence.
And in a murder trial that evidence will have to be pretty damn good.

My opinion

 

[Mex]

I used ditto marks for "strong". Even if I initially thought they could only have autobiographic texts corroborated by independent testimonies, that, IMO, would not have been enough to proceed with a worldwide appeal. Even more knowing their typical conservative approach. I think they know it was him and they have more (e.g. a photo?!, more from the chat?! panikspatz?) but not (yet) sufficient to charge beyond reasonable doubt. Maybe they expected someone else (e.g. Diogo Silva?!), who they suspect might know more about the case, to come forward. But it did not happen.
IMO they would not risk reputation and careers, even more in a such mediatic case.
Despite all this, and just personally, what I can no longer imagine is that he could still be the wrong man.

If the police had got the wrong man they would have discovered that by now and have given up on investigating CB for MM’s murder.

It wouldn’t be the first time in this and countless other cases that the lack of evidence or indeed exonerating evidence has either caused a shut down of a case or taking a different investigative path.

I think the German investigators have the evidence which will bring CB to trial for MM’s murder unfortunately later rather than sooner because I think we ain’t seen nothin’ yet when it comes to procedural obstructions in the German courts over the next few months and perhaps years.
My opinion

 

[Consider Dudley]

Ah yes, national security. I believe this came up in connection with a FoI question, but of course it was never explained why the disappearance of an insignificant small child should involve national security.

Just another little mystery among so many in this case.

No one has ever made this claim to the best of my knowledge apart from conspiracy theorists on the internet.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

If the police had got the wrong man they would have discovered that by now and have given up on investigating CB for MM’s murder.

It wouldn’t be the first time in this and countless other cases that the lack of evidence or indeed exonerating evidence has either caused a shut down of a case or taking a different investigative path.

I think the German investigators have the evidence which will bring CB to trial for MM’s murder unfortunately later rather than sooner because I think we ain’t seen nothin’ yet when it comes to procedural obstructions in the German courts over the next few months and perhaps years.
My opinion

If the police had got the wrong man they would have discovered that by now and have given up on investigating CB for MM’s murder.
Yes. Years of investigation, maybe not difficult to imagine BKA testing also any counter-narrative that could deconstruct their clues, their target and "clear" CB. But no, nothing.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

If the police had got the wrong man they would have discovered that by now and have given up on investigating CB for MM’s murder.

It wouldn’t be the first time in this and countless other cases that the lack of evidence or indeed exonerating evidence has either caused a shut down of a case or taking a different investigative path.

I think the German investigators have the evidence which will bring CB to trial for MM’s murder unfortunately later rather than sooner because I think we ain’t seen nothin’ yet when it comes to procedural obstructions in the German courts over the next few months and perhaps years.
My opinion

The likely reason the investigation is still ongoing is because the BKA don’t have evidence to charge.

Having committed substantial resources to the investigation it wouldn’t be straightforward to close without a result.

HCW and FF are the only credible sources and over the last year or so, their commentary has shifted to “if” the MM case proceeds, no when. Wishful thinking should be separated from real indications.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

It may happen indeed. But it would be "bitter-sweet".

Certainly no symphony I would be happy with. It’s the worst possible outcome.

 

[Mex]

The likely reason the investigation is still ongoing is because the BKA don’t have evidence to charge.

Having committed substantial resources to the investigation it wouldn’t be straightforward to close without a result.

HCW and FF are the only credible sources and over the last year or so, their commentary has shifted to “if” the MM case proceeds, no when. Wishful thinking should be separated from real indications.

I don’t know if it is all as simplistic as that. The investigation is still an ongoing one because investigators are obviously still actively working on it and they and the evidence are the arbitrators of when it will be finished. If there is still evidence out there surely the sensible and mandatory reaction is to keep going until sure they've got it all.

The German system seems to be very complex indeed and I doubt if anyone working in it can have any idea of exactly how the evidence in a case such as CB’s will be used to best effect in upholding his murder suspect status. Without a doubt there is a plethora of evidence in MM’s case and I don’t think “if” comes into it.

The German system is different from either the Portuguese or British. In the German system the prosecutor is tasked with looking for indications of the suspect’s innocence as well as indications of guilt. Striking a balance to get to the facts of what actually happened.

It is plain in CB’s case investigating the evidence has increased suspicion of guilt.

Another issue regards the fact that the judge who decides if the indictment is supported by the evidence will be the judge – or one of the judges – who will preside at the suspect's trial.

Absolutely nothing is writ on tablets of stone.

My opinion

____________________________________________

Country: GERMANY

Contractor’s name: Deutsches Institut für Menschenrechte e.V.

Authors: Thorben Bredow, Lisa Fischer

Reviewer: Petra Follmar-Otto

Date: 27 May 2020 (Revised version: 20 August 2020;second revision: 28 August 2020) page #28

Legal overview

In the German criminal justice system, the public prosecutor's office is not a party. Thus, the prosecution is obliged not only to unilaterally collect evidence of the suspect's guilt, but it must also investigate in favour of the accused person, section 160 (1), (2) Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO).

The court investigates the facts of the case ex officio and thus tries to find out what truly happened, section 244 (2) Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO).

The trial follows the principle of free judicial assessment of evidence, section 261 Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO).

If the Court still has reasonable doubt after the assessment of all evidence, the decision rule of the benefit of the doubt (in dubio pro reo) applies. This means that the Court has to decide in favour of the defendant by choosing the most favourable conclusion for the defendant from several possible conclusions.
This rule is universally accepted and applied, but not mentioned in the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) and the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) has so far left open whether it has
constitutional rank.

https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/germany-2021-country-research-presumption-innocence_en.pdf

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I don’t know if it is all as simplistic as that. The investigation is still an ongoing one because investigators are obviously still actively working on it and they and the evidence are the arbitrators of when it will be finished. If there is still evidence out there surely the sensible and mandatory reaction is to keep going until sure they've got it all.

The German system seems to be very complex indeed and I doubt if anyone working in it can have any idea of exactly how the evidence in a case such as CB’s will be used to best effect in upholding his murder suspect status. Without a doubt there is a plethora of evidence in MM’s case and I don’t think “if” comes into it.

The German system is different from either the Portuguese or British. In the German system the prosecutor is tasked with looking for indications of the suspect’s innocence as well as indications of guilt. Striking a balance to get to the facts of what actually happened.

It is plain in CB’s case investigating the evidence has increased suspicion of guilt.

Another issue regards the fact that the judge who decides if the indictment is supported by the evidence will be the judge – or one of the judges – who will preside at the suspect's trial.

Absolutely nothing is writ on tablets of stone.

My opinion

____________________________________________

Country: GERMANY

Contractor’s name: Deutsches Institut für Menschenrechte e.V.

Authors: Thorben Bredow, Lisa Fischer

Reviewer: Petra Follmar-Otto

Date: 27 May 2020 (Revised version: 20 August 2020;second revision: 28 August 2020) page #28

Legal overview

In the German criminal justice system, the public prosecutor's office is not a party. Thus, the prosecution is obliged not only to unilaterally collect evidence of the suspect's guilt, but it must also investigate in favour of the accused person, section 160 (1), (2) Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO).

The court investigates the facts of the case ex officio and thus tries to find out what truly happened, section 244 (2) Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO).

The trial follows the principle of free judicial assessment of evidence, section 261 Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO).

If the Court still has reasonable doubt after the assessment of all evidence, the decision rule of the benefit of the doubt (in dubio pro reo) applies. This means that the Court has to decide in favour of the defendant by choosing the most favourable conclusion for the defendant from several possible conclusions.
This rule is universally accepted and applied, but not mentioned in the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) and the Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht) has so far left open whether it has
constitutional rank.

https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/germany-2021-country-research-presumption-innocence_en.pdf

I agree that nothing is sacrosanct; where our opinions differ is on CB as the only suspect. My view is that he is currently a suspect in a German investigation but only time will tell if he will fail to be charged like all the suspects who have preceded him. IMO, this looks likely.

From the appeal until Oct 2021, the riddles and innuendo from HCW pointed to a strong case, building towards a charge and conviction. Since then, he has equivocated on several occasions and never stated that a charge was certain - why would this be? This does not demonstrate an “increased suspicion of guilt;” it indicates the evidence is not strong enough to charge.

I hope you are right and that a judge will deem the evidence strong enough for a trial. Then and only then will we find out the strength of this case and if this crime can finally be put to bed - I very much doubt it.

 

[Mex]

I agree that nothing is sacrosanct; where our opinions differ is on CB as the only suspect. My view is that he is currently a suspect in a German investigation but only time will tell if he will fail to be charged like all the suspects who have preceded him. IMO, this looks likely.

From the appeal until Oct 2021, the riddles and innuendo from HCW pointed to a strong case, building towards a charge and conviction. Since then, he has equivocated on several occasions and never stated that a charge was certain - why would this be? This does not demonstrate an “increased suspicion of guilt;” it indicates the evidence is not strong enough to charge.

I hope you are right and that a judge will deem the evidence strong enough for a trial. Then and only then will we find out the strength of this case and if this crime can finally be put to bed - I very much doubt it.

My concern is that HCW has been turned into the bogey man here and much of that is due to German procedures which are poorly understood in English terms.

For example page #34 says

https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/germany-2021-country-research-presumption-innocence_en.pdf

Snip
All interviewees indicated that defendants were allowed to cover their faces if the press was at the trial, so that they did not have to appear in the media if they did not want to. A public prosecutor explained that according to case law, journalists were only allowed to take pictures or film at the beginning of the proceedings and had to leave the courtroom before the trial started. He described how this issue was handled in practice as follows
“In practice, it is like this: The case is called, the cameramen come in, take a picture of the room and the involved persons and leave again. And then the hearing starts. This is what the Federal Constitutional Court provides for. [...] [Before the trial starts], anyone can put whatever they want in front of their face. There are no restrictions.” (Prosecutor/Germany) End quote
Different!

It is always worth remembering that the initial press interest in "the German paedophile in prison" was not generated by the Braunschweig Prosecutors' Office or HCW. It emanated from information given to an Australian journalist long before the official announcement was made in 2020.
But for that it is perfectly possible that even at this remove, none of us would have heard of CB. Who very definitely is the last man standing for crimes against MM.

 

[RichardKimble]

The likely reason the investigation is still ongoing is because the BKA don’t have evidence to charge.

Having committed substantial resources to the investigation it wouldn’t be straightforward to close without a result.

HCW and FF are the only credible sources and over the last year or so, their commentary has shifted to “if” the MM case proceeds, no when. Wishful thinking should be separated from real indications.

To back that up a Bild article (See post 607) had HCW saying no charges expected soon, also FF in response to an article from the Olive Press had this to say

The trial in the Maddie McCann case will begin “soon after,” claims Olive Press. Brückner's lawyer doesn't believe it: “This statement is absolute nonsense. To this day I have not seen the investigation file. It is completely absurd to assume that a trial will follow in the near future. To this day it is completely unclear whether a trial will ever take place. The public prosecutor's office will make the decision whether to charge or dismiss the case after the investigation has been completed and a hearing has been granted. We still seem to be a long way from that.”

 

[Denis R Tandib]

My concern is that HCW has been turned into the bogey man here and much of that is due to German procedures which are poorly understood in English terms.

For example page #34 says

https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/germany-2021-country-research-presumption-innocence_en.pdf

Snip
All interviewees indicated that defendants were allowed to cover their faces if the press was at the trial, so that they did not have to appear in the media if they did not want to. A public prosecutor explained that according to case law, journalists were only allowed to take pictures or film at the beginning of the proceedings and had to leave the courtroom before the trial started. He described how this issue was handled in practice as follows
“In practice, it is like this: The case is called, the cameramen come in, take a picture of the room and the involved persons and leave again. And then the hearing starts. This is what the Federal Constitutional Court provides for. [...] [Before the trial starts], anyone can put whatever they want in front of their face. There are no restrictions.” (Prosecutor/Germany) End quote
Different!

It is always worth remembering that the initial press interest in "the German paedophile in prison" was not generated by the Braunschweig Prosecutors' Office or HCW. It emanated from information given to an Australian journalist long before the official announcement was made in 2020.
But for that it is perfectly possible that even at this remove, none of us would have heard of CB. Who very definitely is the last man standing for crimes against MM.

Can we just agree that HCW is synonymous with the Braunschweig prosecutors office and vice versa?

You’ve made the point about GA releasing info prior to the appeal before… despite the guidelines.

I disagreed then and still do now. Without the appeal GA’s comments would have fallen into ether like other past comments.

The only reason CB is in the media is due to the appeal and public trial driven by the prosecutors.

 

[Mex]

To back that up a Bild article (See post 607) had HCW saying no charges expected soon, also FF in response to an article from the Olive Press had this to say

The trial in the Maddie McCann case will begin “soon after,” claims Olive Press. Brückner's lawyer doesn't believe it: “This statement is absolute nonsense. To this day I have not seen the investigation file. It is completely absurd to assume that a trial will follow in the near future. To this day it is completely unclear whether a trial will ever take place. The public prosecutor's office will make the decision whether to charge or dismiss the case after the investigation has been completed and a hearing has been granted. We still seem to be a long way from that.”

I have no doubt that FF is a very clever defence lawyer. He is a trier and acting on behalf pf CB has given him plenty of practice be it extraditions or appeal. But he didn't see the 2019 rape case coming and initially he appears to have been on the back foot regarding the pending court case.
Even in the quote you have chosen he professes his ignorance when he states he has not seen the files. Which is exactly as the prosecutors want it to be for the simple reason they are still working on MM's case.

Snip
However, FF said if the case ever did get to trial, CB would face the court 'serenely and calmly... he has nothing to hide'.

Lawyer for Brueckner does not believe client will ever be charged

German Friedrich Fulscher (pictured), the lawyer of the key suspect in the Madeline McCann case Christian Brueckner has said that the witness against him is 'the worst witness you can get'.

www.dailymail.co.uk

It doesn't take a genius to work out that MM's case will be a long and drawn out experience. Thus it is probably best to wait for the turn of events even if they are a long time coming. Rather than lending credence to a defender whose job it is to do what he's complaining about. Who can deny his prowess for procrastination; he's good at it and I forecast we will see much more in the same vein coming from him.
My opinion

 

[Anxala]

Certainly no symphony I would be happy with. It’s the worst possible outcome.

I can't believe anyone would think otherwise. We all know CB is a nasty piece of work but the 'tough sh*it' narrative in the potential absence of any conclusion in the MM case is disturbing. The truth about what happened to MM is the only thing that matters for anyone who genuinely cares about this case. The idea that it's all left hanging with a big red arrow still pointing at CB's head is not an outcome that anyone who cares about justice being served would be remotely happy with.

The only acceptable outcome here would be either a charge and a trial or for HCW & Co to admit that the evidence they have falls short of that required to charge CB and that their case against him is now closed. One or the other.

Personally, I'd much prefer the former - a charge and a trial - so the prosecution is held to account for its claims, we finally get to hear the evidence against CB and CB's defence gets its day in court. That's the only way that an informed conclusion can be reached as to the validity of and justification for the circus HCW was happy to be ringmaster of for the past three and counting years.

Step up, one way or the other.

 

[Anxala]

My concern is that even if he does go to trial for MM and is sentenced for this, we will have the wrong man and the true culrprit(s) will go Scott free.

HCW may not be concerned about the 'minutae' of what happened on the evening of the 3rd May 2007 but CB's defence team will be. They'll be all over it, imo.

That's why a charge and a trial is so important.