Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #39

[RichardKimble]

Statements against interest (e.g a confession) are normally admissible in the US/UK as well as an exception to hearsay. As described by HeB in his interview, the question is more whether it was a confession, as it requires interpretation as to what CB meant.

Hearsay | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

The "she didn't scream" statement needed to be heard in context, if CB said it ,was he referring to all the media hype surrounding the alleged abduction no one heard a scream or directly referencing his involvement.

 

[RichardKimble]

Nice post. I agree. The problem at this point is unless they are still getting live tips, how are they taking the case forward? The reservoir search is apparently an example of new, cogent info, that apparently led to nothing. So are they really still waiting for someone to give that tip or for the body to be discovered by accident? (it happens)

At some points soon I imagine they either have to charge or scale down. Personally I feel they need to charge given the claims made.



I think this is not such a big issue as the Judges will be presumed not to be influenced by prior publicity

Ref the charges, we know the onus in Germany is that the probability of a conviction is higher than the probability of an acquittal, therefore they need to be sure and then some more given the publicity on the case.

 

[Mex]

Nothing wrong with that, albeit a mere drop in the ocean.
To my mind though, there is much more to policing than concentrating on a handful of deviants and deploying large resources against said deviants is always at the expense of other equally important offences

It was thought MM's case was unsolvable and without the deployment of resources it probably would have been despite the fact that the suspect in 2023 was there or thereabouts in 2007 when he was on police radar.

Water under the bridge now but CB and his life as sex abuser and career criminal must have touched many lives during his career.
I think spending resources to keep the streets clear of such deviants is a price worth paying particularly when information has been given of the volume and nature of the digital keepsakes police found in some of his hidden hoard.

My opinion

 

[Mex]

Ref the charges, we know the onus in Germany is that the probability of a conviction is higher than the probability of an acquittal, therefore they need to be sure and then some more given the publicity on the case.

The five cases which are all independent of MM although the diligence of German MM investigators led to the acceptance of the charge in all cases obviously meeting the required criteria,

There is no problem with the evidence supporting the charges made.

The problem is with jurisdiction for which we await the result of the appeal Nor logically would one expect any movement on the MM case until the jurisdiction responsible for it is known.

My opinion

 

[Mex]

Statements against interest (e.g a confession) are normally admissible in the US/UK as well as an exception to hearsay. As described by HeB in his interview, the question is more whether it was a confession, as it requires interpretation as to what CB meant.

Hearsay | The Crown Prosecution Service

www.cps.gov.uk

As far as my memory of the breaking news is concerned there was no confession made in Spain, CB however spaced out he may have been remained enigmatic.

HB putting two+two together to form an opinion does not a confession make unless what was said led to other corroborating evidence and so on and so on.

It may well have. We don't know what evidence the Germans have and they obviously intend to keep it that way until indictment and trial should there be one.

My opinion

 

[mrjitty]

Ref the charges, we know the onus in Germany is that the probability of a conviction is higher than the probability of an acquittal, therefore they need to be sure and then some more given the publicity on the case.

I think in a case like this they would not pull the trigger unless they were very confident

 

[Mex]

It is quite easy to underthink this case as well as to overthink it. A lot more than most cases, probably. But for my money, possibly all that has happened is that the German prosecutors received some quality intelligence from a snitch - or more than one snitch - about what happened to MM. Intelligence itself - e.g. "I was CB's mate, and he dunnit" - is not evidence usable in court. But it may lead you to evidence: you now know to look at where and how a named person lived, worked, travelled, operated.

So this intelligence about CB provided tangible leads for once: his name, odd bits of property usable as hiding places, his van, a local beauty spot by a lake.

This is consistent in particular with one quite important observation they've made - that HB is not core to the case. This would be so if what he had done was identify where usable evidence might be found. If so, the prosecutor's intended case is indeed not reliant on him. His value is that his information may lead the prosecutor to evidence, having which, they don't actually need him.

This probably wasn't information of the poor quality you get from some nutter who watches a TV documentary about e.g. the Suzy Lamplugh abduction. And suddenly "remembers" stuff about it with perfect recall fourteen years later having been completely silent in the meantime. No, this was better: specific places for police to go look.

I suspect that in the meantime, what's happened is that the promising new information has been looked into...and come up completely empty. There's been no word of anything found at CB's allotment shed, in his van, or at the lake. These are all places we know have been searched. But the tangible leads have all led, er, nowhere.

On a site like WS it is hugely tempting to imagine that murders can be fathomed out by the application of facts and logic. I suspect unfortunately that this is almost never true, and that what you need is either a smoking hot evidence trail, or, when it's this long ex post, a snitch. Perhaps all the BKA ever had was a really convincing and well-informed snitch, whose information has unfortunately not helped.

The BKA's communications strategy around this has been baffling. I really do not understand what they gained operationally from announcing, way back when, that they reckoned they had their man. It seems possible to me that what we are seeing now is them trying to walk back from their "CB dunnit" position and gradually dismount therefrom. If their source is flaking, they are quite right to say that this doesn't matter; he was never a witness, only an informant. The trouble now is that, assuming Germany has equivalent provisions to UK and other law around the right to a fair trial, it seems unlikely CB could ever be charged even if he did this, because he's been convicted by insinuation already.

The reasoning behind your post is indisputable and very eloquently put.

I don't agree with much of your last paragraph given that their communications strategy (if they had one)was blown in 2019 and they had to make contingency plans to compensate.

I don't see them trying to revoke what they have claimed are the reasons CB is their only suspect in crimes against MM,

They have made the public pronouncement on the why and do not require to reiterate that unless changes are made to the status quo and none have been.

It is a good procedural move for a defence to unsettle a prosecution regarding trial venue.
We have seen it working in the five cases.
It is also a good procedural move for a defence to allege bias either in regard to judges or prosecutors. I will be amazed should the MM case reach trial stage if the tactic is not put into operation. But there is less chance of it being successful under the German system.

My opinion

 

[Mex]

So why then has the spokesperson for the prosecutors office changed the the position relating to charges.

This is a very important point. He has proclaimed that CB is guilty, repeatedly and with complete conviction that charges would be laid.

It’s not okay that now he is winding back these statements. He has given hope to the child’s parents and the the concerned public.

If HeB’s evidence is not important, we should still be hearing statements that the book of evidence is building, that the case against CB is strengthening and we should have some indication on when charges could be laid.

The fact is, we are not. We are experiencing an endless timeframe and doubt that charges will be laid.

This is indefensible IMO and HCW and his colleagues should have their feet held to the fire… very closely.

What evidence do you have to reinforce your opinion?

 

[WestLondoner]

The reasoning behind your post is indisputable and very eloquently put.

I don't agree with much of your last paragraph given that their communications strategy (if they had one)was blown in 2019 and they had to make contingency plans to compensate.

I don't see them trying to revoke what they have claimed are the reasons CB is their only suspect in crimes against MM,

They have made the public pronouncement on the why and do not require to reiterate that unless changes are made to the status quo and none have been.

It is a good procedural move for a defence to unsettle a prosecution regarding trial venue.
We have seen it working in the five cases.
It is also a good procedural move for a defence to allege bias either in regard to judges or prosecutors. I will be amazed should the MM case reach trial stage if the tactic is not put into operation. But there is less chance of it being successful under the German system.

My opinion

I don't disagree really - my bemusement is really around what they are trying to achieve by saying out loud what they have, when they have. Initially BKA had a solid new suspect and were bullish that charges would soon follow (summing up very roughly). Here we are some years later, and in terms of charges, they don't appear to be a lot more imminent now than then.

If you've got a snitch who's given you some plausible information, surely you investigate it first before saying anything at all? If the snitch has come up gold, great - charges are indeed imminent. If he's (or she's) given you nothing you were able to take forward, at least you don't have to face questioning about what's happening given how confident you sounded before.

These people are not stupid, nor are they elected officials seeking favourable headlines ahead of a poll. So there must be a reason they went off at half-*advertiser censored* in this way. I would say that maybe they had a good lead but needed more, so went public to encourage other CB associates to come forward - except that the BKA didn't initially name CB. If the idea was to get his other cronies to grass him up, they weren't going to get very far without naming the person about whom they wanted information.

 

[Anxala]

RSBM

IMO this is what the media must hold the prosecutors' office accountable for. Braunschweig made big allegations, outside of the charging/judicial process. As we enter the fourth year it is absolutely correct that the media should be asking hard questions, especially if Witness 0 is seeking to back away from the tip that started it all.

Of course the prosecutor might not be able to give satisfactory answers because it is an active investigation. But what I really don't like is a prosecutor discussing secret evidence and saying yeah this evidence doesn't matter but we have some other great evidence oh yeah but maybe not enough to prove the case... all very odd IMO

I am still wondering what could be the evidence that means they know it was a murder and CB did it, yet doesn't rise to proving the case. One strong possibility is witness testimony IMO.

Personally, and in the absence of anything credible 3 and a half years in to point to, I'm beginning to wonder if a pair of not entirely reliable witnessess, combined with 'compelling revelations' in CB's Das Buch (parts one and two), are at the root of and the sum total of what HCW's MM claims are based upon.

That it looked so good at the beginning, that HCW felt he was on very solid ground, that the further evidence he needed against CB would come pouring in via his appeals, pad it all out and bring it home. But it never did.

And now he's having to deal with the reality of that and the paucity of what he put such stock in.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

What evidence do you have to reinforce your opinion?

Many statements made by HCW in the media.

 

[MadMcGoo]

This thread is for the discussion of Christian Bueckner as the suspect in Madeleine's disappearance.

 

[Lyall0814]

It is quite easy to underthink this case as well as to overthink it. A lot more than most cases, probably. But for my money, possibly all that has happened is that the German prosecutors received some quality intelligence from a snitch - or more than one snitch - about what happened to MM. Intelligence itself - e.g. "I was CB's mate, and he dunnit" - is not evidence usable in court. But it may lead you to evidence: you now know to look at where and how a named person lived, worked, travelled, operated.

So this intelligence about CB provided tangible leads for once: his name, odd bits of property usable as hiding places, his van, a local beauty spot by a lake.

This is consistent in particular with one quite important observation they've made - that HB is not core to the case. This would be so if what he had done was identify where usable evidence might be found. If so, the prosecutor's intended case is indeed not reliant on him. His value is that his information may lead the prosecutor to evidence, having which, they don't actually need him.

This probably wasn't information of the poor quality you get from some nutter who watches a TV documentary about e.g. the Suzy Lamplugh abduction. And suddenly "remembers" stuff about it with perfect recall fourteen years later having been completely silent in the meantime. No, this was better: specific places for police to go look.

I suspect that in the meantime, what's happened is that the promising new information has been looked into...and come up completely empty. There's been no word of anything found at CB's allotment shed, in his van, or at the lake. These are all places we know have been searched. But the tangible leads have all led, er, nowhere.

On a site like WS it is hugely tempting to imagine that murders can be fathomed out by the application of facts and logic. I suspect unfortunately that this is almost never true, and that what you need is either a smoking hot evidence trail, or, when it's this long ex post, a snitch. Perhaps all the BKA ever had was a really convincing and well-informed snitch, whose information has unfortunately not helped.

The BKA's communications strategy around this has been baffling. I really do not understand what they gained operationally from announcing, way back when, that they reckoned they had their man. It seems possible to me that what we are seeing now is them trying to walk back from their "CB dunnit" position and gradually dismount therefrom. If their source is flaking, they are quite right to say that this doesn't matter; he was never a witness, only an informant. The trouble now is that, assuming Germany has equivalent provisions to UK and other law around the right to a fair trial, it seems unlikely CB could ever be charged even if he did this, because he's been convicted by insinuation already.

If they do dismount they won't be doing it before the other five cases have been dealt with imo. They'll have all their fingers and toes crossed they can prosecute them successfully, eventually. If they do then they've succeeded in keeping him incarcerated and the MM case isn't so crucial/pressurised. If they don't then they might be in trouble.

 

[Consider Dudley]

wrt to the McCann case, HCW had this to say yesterday:

“we can continue to assume that we have jurisdiction for it because the court decided that based on the current state of information, the last known place of residence was in Braunschweig and not Saxony-Anhalt. So that applies for the Maddie case too, meaning that the Maddie investigations are continuing unchanged. There is no plan to hand it off anywhere, there’s no need.”

 

[RichardKimble]

If they do dismount they won't be doing it before the other five cases have been dealt with imo. They'll have all their fingers and toes crossed they can prosecute them successfully, eventually. If they do then they've succeeded in keeping him incarcerated and the MM case isn't so crucial/pressurised. If they don't then they might be in trouble.

Either way it doesn't matter, he either killed MM and HCW has the evidence or he doesn't, no other distraction won't effect that outcome imo.

 

[Mex]

wrt to the McCann case, HCW had this to say yesterday:

“we can continue to assume that we have jurisdiction for it because the court decided that based on the current state of information, the last known place of residence was in Braunschweig and not Saxony-Anhalt. So that applies for the Maddie case too, meaning that the Maddie investigations are continuing unchanged. There is no plan to hand it off anywhere, there’s no need.”

We are told that it will probably be 2024 before the five delayed trials will be heard in court. What a waste of time the delay has proved to be for all concerned.

CB is still in jail and the knock on effect for the Braunschweig prosecutors' office of diverting resources to the jurisdiction appeal must have impinged on all other outstanding cases, including MM's.

It had to be done though.

Should CB face trial in MM's case, there is now absolutely no impediment regarding jurisdiction; although It would have been interesting had boxes of evidence and the suspect been shipped off to Portugal where it all began. But I'm glad that doesn't have to happen now.

CB can be legally tried in Braunschweig for crimes against MM just as the successful appeal against jurisdiction will enable the progress to trial in the other five sexual abuse cases.

My opinion

 

[Mex]

Either way it doesn't matter, he either killed MM and HCW has the evidence or he doesn't, no other distraction won't effect that outcome imo.

I don't know how right you will be regarding there being no other distraction for a trial to take place. I'm sure CB's defence team will find something.
Had it not been for following the precedent of DM's rape trial with the unexpected indictments for five others getting in the way, one could have expected years of litigation had it been the MM case being charged.

There will be a contingency plan.

My opinion

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Ref the charges, we know the onus in Germany is that the probability of a conviction is higher than the probability of an acquittal, therefore they need to be sure and then some more given the publicity on the case.

I don’t think Germany is special in this regard. The conviction rates are similar to the UK so the CPS would have similar threshold for probability of conviction.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Either way it doesn't matter, he either killed MM and HCW has the evidence or he doesn't, no other distraction won't effect that outcome imo.

I think it’s reasonable to suggest that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge CB for a crime against MM in October 2022 or he would have been charged with the other five cases. I can’t see how anything has changed since then. It’s hard to see how it will change in the future.

 

[mrjitty]

I think it’s reasonable to suggest that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge CB for a crime against MM in October 2022 or he would have been charged with the other five cases. I can’t see how anything has changed since then. It’s hard to see how it will change in the future.

Agreed

There is no way a prosecutor would choose to run with his lesser charges while sitting on a murder indictment unless the murder case wasn't ready to go.

With jurisdiction apparently resolved, we will see if he drops the murder indictment now (i.e he was waiting for that to be resolved) or if he still doesn't have a strong enough case.

If it was just jurisdictional issues in the way, we can expect the murder indictment to drop imminently as it should be all ready to go.