Germany/Portugal - Christian Brueckner, 27 @ time of 1st crime (2004), charged with sexual assault crimes, Praia de Rocha, Portugal. #5

[onemoremiletogo]

IMO appeal will go nowhere. "Waste of time"...but they should know that.
MM case as a go or go.

 

[Davieson]

IMO appeal will go nowhere. "Waste of time"...but they should know that.
MM case as a go or go.

You are probably right, but the Prosecutors just can't accept defeat and let it go.

As for MM, I doubt it will ever come to trial, they just don't have the evidence to see it through.
In my opinion, they've created a narrative based on coincidences and the verbal statements of a couple of dubious criminals with no hard evidence to connect CB to MM and have convinced themselves that's what happened.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

You are probably right, but the Prosecutors just can't accept defeat and let it go.

As for MM, I doubt it will ever come to trial, they just don't have the evidence to see it through.
In my opinion, they've created a narrative based on coincidences and the verbal statements of a couple of dubious criminals with no hard evidence to connect CB to MM and have convinced themselves that's what happened.

Yes, that's why the "marks".

For MM, very very difficult to come to trial, but I would not say impossible. But they need to get something additional. Having not getting it in 4 years...
But they have more than you say. They have him in the area, the call, chat conversations, incriminating emails, may have autobiographic texts autonomously and independently corroborated by different testimonies, re-registered Jaguar on 4th May.
And IMO they may have even more than we know or it's publicized, but, yes, still not enough to charge.

 

[Davieson]

Yes, that's why the "marks".

For MM, very very difficult to come to trial, but I would not say impossible. But they need to get something additional. Having not getting it in 4 years...
But they have more than you say. They have him in the area, the call, chat conversations, incriminating emails, may have autobiographic texts autonomously and independently corroborated by different testimonies, re-registered Jaguar on 4th May.
And IMO they may have even more than we know or it's publicized, but, yes, still not enough to charge.

I believe a lot of that just wouldn't stand up to scrutiny in a court.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

I believe a lot of that just wouldn't stand up to scrutiny in a court.

Not enough to charge, yes, but again, IMO they have more and let see what else they can get...(or not).
Too too too much coincidences...no turning back, CB is involved up to the ears.

 

[Davieson]

Not enough to charge, yes, but again, IMO they have more and let see what else they can get...(or not).
Too too too much coincidences...no turning back, CB is involved up to the ears.

I doubt it, but look forward to a trial, provided I manage to live long enough.

 

[Anxala]

Yes, that's why the "marks".

For MM, very very difficult to come to trial, but I would not say impossible. But they need to get something additional. Having not getting it in 4 years...
But they have more than you say. They have him in the area, the call, chat conversations, incriminating emails, may have autobiographic texts autonomously and independently corroborated by different testimonies, re-registered Jaguar on 4th May.
And IMO they may have even more than we know or it's publicized, but, yes, still not enough to charge.

And yet HCW spent the last four years and counting saying ad nauseum in countless interviews that they DID have enough to charge CB but were waiting for something something to make the best possible case against him.

So he lied, effectively. Let's be honest going forward and at least acknowledge that whatever it was he had/has was never going to be enough to charge him. And still isn't.

And acknowledge also that it's not ok that he did that and that it's contrary to everything that's held holy and written in the legal code of practice re the pursuit of justice.

 

[Mex]

Such is the reliance on the perception of judges regarding the 'body language' of witnesses that it would be a bit remiss for judges not to give the situation the most serious consideration.
The judge was not there but the witness was and aggressive questioning is not the way to arrive at the truth of the matter; indeed it could be counter-productive.
The judge sets the tone and U E did just that with a vengeance; which we are told is unusual, the chief prosecutor indicating that he had never seen the like in twenty years.

Snip
The judge decides whether the witness is credible and whether his testimony is credible. However, it is difficult for a judge to tell when a witness is telling the truth and when he is lying.

Why is the lie not recognized?​

Does the mistake begin in legal education? How are future judges prepared? During your studies, you work on a completely clarified fact, and witnesses are questioned a few times during the legal preparatory service?

No wonder that a judge cannot correctly evaluate the behaviour of the witness and the nature of the testimony. Are witness statements wrongly assessed?

Even if the witnesses do not lie intentionally, human memory cannot be relied on one hundred percent. Is a crime reliably reconstructed? Much depends on concentrating on the course of action. Memory gaps arise, various details are omitted. The judge is thus given a distorted picture of the decisive events.

The ability to perceive varies from person to person. The ability to perceive depends on the current state, age and concentration on certain events. For example, details that could be important for the clarification of the facts are perceived incorrectly. The witnesses can interrogate each other, deceive themselves optically, confuse people and their names. Let's take a traffic accident as an example. This usually happens quickly, so that a person can hardly grasp all events correctly. Rather, he captures individual parts of the event and from this he unconsciously forms the "overall event".
Numerous researches have been conducted on this topic. They showed that events interpreted directly by people are often associated with other circumstances and only then stored. Later, the events are distorted.

Aussagen und Lügen vor Gericht - Wahrheit und Pflicht? - Dr. Thomas Schulte Rechtsanwalt

Bei vielen Rechtsstreitigkeiten geht es nicht um schwierige Gesetzesauslegungen, sondern um die Beweise. Tipps gegen lügende Zeugen.

www.dr-schulte.de

 

[onemoremiletogo]

I doubt it, but look forward to a trial, provided I manage to live long enough.

Obviously, you are free to "insist"...but not the forum to discuss other possible creative narratives you eventually have.
IMO, here, not even a stopped clock will be right two times saying it was not him.

 

[Davieson]

Obviously, you are free to "insist"...but not the forum to discuss other possible creative narratives you eventually have.
IMO, here, not even a stopped clock will be right two times saying it was not him.

Oh I don't insist on anything.
While I have my own views, I wouldn't dream of trying to convert others to my way of thinking.
I'm content to wait for a trial - if it ever happens, to see if I am right or wrong.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

And yet HCW spent the last four years and counting saying ad nauseum in countless interviews that they DID have enough to charge CB but were waiting for something something to make the best possible case against him.

So he lied, effectively. Let's be honest going forward and at least acknowledge that whatever it was he had/has was never going to be enough to charge him. And still isn't.

And acknowledge also that it's not ok that he did that and that it's contrary to everything that's held holy and written in the legal code of practice re the pursuit of justice.

To make the best possible case against him...that's it. They don't have doubts. But they are still in this process to charge BARD. Maybe yes maybe not. HCW is not here to respond to the desire and rush of the spectators.

It's not ok what CB has done to several victims along the years. Now known, others may be still unknown.
CB was not known, now he is worldwide. If illegal, how, in Germany, HCW is still there?!
I hope they are able to charge but if not, we'll see what happens to HCW...if judged. Many doubts.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

Oh I don't insist on anything.
While I have my own views, I wouldn't dream of trying to convert others to my way of thinking.
I'm content to wait for a trial - if it ever happens, to see if I am right or wrong.

Again with "marks".

That's it, our own views, honestly far from even trying to change anyone's mind. But it will always be: right or wrong.
I just think that in MM case, there are TOO MUCH coincidences and no longer other option. But just MO. This was already extensively debated here.
Although unlikely, I'll be the first to confess my total shock if it turns out it wasn't CB, even more if it is proven to be someone else. I have no problems with that.

 

[mrjitty]

To make the best possible case against him...that's it. They don't have doubts. But they are still in this process to charge BARD. Maybe yes maybe not. HCW is not here to respond to the desire and rush of the spectators.

It's not ok what CB has done to several victims along the years. Now known, others may be still unknown.
CB was not known, now he is worldwide. If illegal, how, in Germany, HCW is still there?!
I hope they are able to charge but if not, we'll see what happens to HCW...if judged. Many doubts.

I think it's pretty clear what HCW and Braunschweig did was unconstitutional. The pre-trial publicity contaminated witnesses according to the Judges who rebuked him for it. That is why the prosecutor should not accuse people of murder and then not bring charges. The State makes such allegations by bringing charges so that they play out in Court, and not in the press / law enforcement investigatory process.

Whether Braunschweig ever confront that failing - I have no idea as we don't know who was behind these decisions.

 

[Davieson]

I think it's pretty clear what HCW and Braunschweig did was unconstitutional. The pre-trial publicity contaminated witnesses according to the Judges who rebuked him for it. That is why the prosecutor should not accuse people of murder and then not bring charges. The State makes such allegations by bringing charges so that they play out in Court, and not in the press / law enforcement investigatory process.

Whether Braunschweig ever confront that failing - I have no idea as we don't know who was behind these decisions.

HVW doesn't seem to have received any rebuke for his behaviour, so presumably his superiors were not unhappy with his approach.

 

[RichardKimble]

Whether it was released elsewhere there's nothing here about the appeal.

landgericht-braunschweig.de

 

[Mex]

I think it's pretty clear what HCW and Braunschweig did was unconstitutional. The pre-trial publicity contaminated witnesses according to the Judges who rebuked him for it. That is why the prosecutor should not accuse people of murder and then not bring charges. The State makes such allegations by bringing charges so that they play out in Court, and not in the press / law enforcement investigatory process.

Whether Braunschweig ever confront that failing - I have no idea as we don't know who was behind these decisions.

In the interests of accuracy it is worth bearing in mind that back in the day media speculation was rife that the forces of law and order were very much on the track of a plausible suspect in the MM disappearance. They just didn't know who.

HCW represents the forces of law and order in an investigation which was still being visibly worked in 2023 while many other cases were being dealt with at the same time; such as the unrelated five serious sexual assaults presently seeking permission for appeal.

HCW is not the top of the tree; he has bosses who must be approving every step of this long ranging and expensive use of resources.

snip
Speaking to the BBC, Braunschweig prosecutor HCW said the German-led investigation is ongoing out of the public eye and has included other searches.

He said: "We work continuously on this case but not everything we do is made public. We continuously investigate and interview.

"There are repeated searches, not all of them are in the eye of the public like this one was. Much of what we're doing you won't notice."
...
Commenting on the investigation, Mr W said: "Nothing has changed with regard to our suspect in the last three years. We have found nothing in the last three years that would contradict our suspicion.

"We haven't found anything which would exonerate him. We've found nothing which would rule him out. We haven't yet disclosed all the evidence against him and we don't want to do that now.

"Of course, you can rightly assume that within the last three years various pieces of the puzzle were added but it's not the right time for us to publish that."
German authorities have previously declined to say what triggered the new search but said they were acting on the basis of "certain tips".

Madeleine McCann search analysis 'will take several weeks'

German prosecutors say it will take time to examine materials recovered from this week's search in Portugal.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Mex]

HVW doesn't seem to have received any rebuke for his behaviour, so presumably his superiors were not unhappy with his approach.

I can't envisage FF slipping up on such serious charges so whatever HCW is doing - it must be legal. Which is what one would expect from a chief prosecutor who knows the law and applies it as part of his daily workload.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

HVW doesn't seem to have received any rebuke for his behaviour, so presumably his superiors were not unhappy with his approach.

But the trial judge was very concerned about it. Perhaps it’s not illegal but it still compromised the trial. I’m sure HCW didn’t make the decision to go public on his own, it would have been agreed at all levels within the Braunschweig prosecutor’s office. Nevertheless, it was clearly a bad decision which has backfired.

 

[Mex]

But the trial judge was very concerned about it. Perhaps it’s not illegal but it still compromised the trial. I’m sure HCW didn’t make the decision to go public on his own, it would have been agreed at all levels within the Braunschweig prosecutor’s office. Nevertheless, it was clearly a bad decision which has backfired.

It will be interesting to wait and see if the prosecution's request for an appeal will be successful or not.

The decision to go public was premature because pointers had been given to the press about "a German paedophile" as early as 2019.
Given a free rein we probably still would not have heard of CB and the recent trial for five serious sexual crimes could have been conducted with discretion, out of the media spotlight as was his conviction for the aggravated rape of DM.
My opinion

 

[Anxala]

Obviously, you are free to "insist"...but not the forum to discuss other possible creative narratives you eventually have.
IMO, here, not even a stopped clock will be right two times saying it was not him.

@Davieson is not insisting anything or making any demands on anyone else to agree with him. He's just expressing his opinion based on the information we have re the evidence the prosecution claims to have. And most particularly when this recent trial has highlighted the prosecution's many shortcomings in terms of bringing a case to fruition.

Why is someone expressing an opinion so triggering? Why the need to discount that opinion when we're all at the mercy of the same lack of information? It seems so reductive in terms of reasonable onward discussion.

[Mod edit] That's where attention that claims to be coming from a concerned place needs to be directed at, not at other posters who happen to have opinions that don't sit or fit with a 'CB must be guilty' narrative.