Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect - #21

[SuperdadV8]

OK - I am calling BS at this stage



Trust us the accused is guilty but we need to conceal the evidence from the accused himself???

To me this is outrageous. You claim in public a man is guilty of murder, but also refuse to confront him with the evidence

This allows the state to pronounce people guilty of serious crimes, whilst refusing to prosecute or make any case.



And now let's smear him with some more crimes.

I am fine with the language of suspects, assisting with inquiries etc. But either charge people or not.

Saying he "may" have committed some sex offences??? Like either you have evidence he did, or you don't.

In some way i can understand your outrage, but in germany only a criminal court is allowed to decide, if it is convinced that the accused commited the crime, that he or she has been accused of.

Until the existence of a sentence or an aquittal it is appropiate behavior by the law enforcment, to communicate their verdict that a suspect may have commited a crime. There is no need to wait for that until a trial has begun.

Please do not forget, that we are talking about a typical cold case. Not every unusual or even questionable investigation method is illegitimate.

In my opinion, the prosecuters are convinced, that they will force charges. Otherwise their statements would have a different tone. Induction of wanted pressure in a investigation is always permissible.

 

[Ardoch]

Madeleine McCann: Public 'would reach same conclusion' on suspect

Not forgetting the amount of time and work possibly sifting through video/photographic evidence that could involve other victims while also linking it to to MM.

 

[Newthoughts]

OK - I am calling BS at this stage



Trust us the accused is guilty but we need to conceal the evidence from the accused himself???

To me this is outrageous. You claim in public a man is guilty of murder, but also refuse to confront him with the evidence

This allows the state to pronounce people guilty of serious crimes, whilst refusing to prosecute or make any case.



And now let's smear him with some more crimes.

I am fine with the language of suspects, assisting with inquiries etc. But either charge people or not.

Saying he "may" have committed some sex offences??? Like either you have evidence he did, or you don't.

Actually I'm calling the Brexit talks going badly for our useless PM so our press are dragging out a poor murdered child as a dead cat distraction from our political and economic woes.

Did HCW say this unprompted or did the UK press including the seriously diminished BBC seek him out for an update? I'd love to know. What with MM and a vaccine the spotlight is off Johnson.

JMO

 

[mrjitty]

In some way i can understand your outrage, but in germany only a criminal court is allowed to decide, if it is convinced that the accused commited the crime, that he or she has been accused of.

Until the existence of a sentence or an aquittal it is appropiate behavior by the law enforcment, to communicate their verdict that a suspect may have commited a crime. There is no need to wait for that until a trial has begun.

Please do not forget, that we are talking about a typical cold case. Not every unusual or even questionable investigation method is illegitimate.

In my opinion, the prosecuters are convinced, that they will force charges. Otherwise their statements would have a different tone. Induction of wanted pressure in a investigation is always permissible.

I get Germany is different, but in other jurisdictions, Law Enforcement does not use such explicit language unless the suspect is actually charged.

It is the act of charging that expresses conviction in guilt

Otherwise police can smear people with guilt despite having no evidence or minimal evidence.

 

[mrjitty]

Actually I'm calling the Brexit talks going badly for our useless PM so our press are dragging out a poor murdered child as a dead cat distraction from our political and economic woes.

Did HCW say this unprompted or did the UK press including the seriously diminished BBC seek him out for an update? I'd love to know. What with MM and a vaccine the spotlight is off Johnson.

JMO

What i don't get is why does Wolters even need to make these comments?

He can use media to seek information and simply say CB is a focus of the inquiry - why does he feel the need to pronounce guilt based on secret evidence and then claim this is all "tactics"?

It rather gives the game way

 

[Trivento]

It concerns me that someone who knows something useful might not bother coming forward with it if they hear the German police say we are already sure of our case.
They might just think ..“well my help is obviously not required anymore I’ll just keep quiet and save myself some hassle..! “
Unless the BKA don't really need any more info and are just needing time to process what they have..?

 

[Okapi]

Actually I'm calling the Brexit talks going badly for our useless PM so our press are dragging out a poor murdered child as a dead cat distraction from our political and economic woes.

Did HCW say this unprompted or did the UK press including the seriously diminished BBC seek him out for an update? I'd love to know. What with MM and a vaccine the spotlight is off Johnson.

JMO

Sooo true Newthoughts. It's sad when this case is reduced to "Quick! Look! Over there!"

 

[Zuleika]

What i don't get is why does Wolters even need to make these comments?

He can use media to seek information and simply say CB is a focus of the inquiry - why does he feel the need to pronounce guilt based on secret evidence and then claim this is all "tactics"?

It rather gives the game way

I’m fully in agreement with what you’re saying .Kind of weird ..., a public announcement ....if you knew what I knew kind of thing .

 

[peanutJelly]

It concerns me that someone who knows something useful might not bother coming forward with it if they hear the German police say we are sure of our case. Unless the BKA don't really need any more info and are just needing time to process what they have..?

I wonder if we would feel differently if we knew all the evidence of the crimes that they have seen. They seem really sure that they need to keep CB locked away for a long time. IMO they have found some horrendous stuff that even if not linked to MM, convinces them them he’s too dangerous to be released

 

[SuperdadV8]

I get Germany is different, but in other jurisdictions, Law Enforcement does not use such explicit language unless the suspect is actually charged.

It is the act of charging that expresses conviction in guilt

Otherwise police can smear people with guilt despite having no evidence or minimal evidence.

Yes of course, although in my honest opinion, the police does that all day in almost every country.

Why? We are living in a world, in which almost every case with media-attention, police forces are tracked by the first minute on and further. Almost no single movement isn't in the online tabloids as breaking news. Every witness or even suspect is named within minutes. So in the MM case. German prosecuters have never named CB in the press, until the press named him and buried out everything about the suspect.

Also in this case. The BKA started the public inquiry and instructed Braunschweig prosecuters with further investigations. There aren't any secrets anymore except the one or two things, that make the prosecuters so convinced. If they would make it public, the media will flash over instsantly IMO.

And then the whole world calls for a charge and the life of the suspect would be in serious danger in prison. Nobody from the prosecuters wants a dead suspect before a trial or 100 tabloids blaming them, that they do not charge the suspect right now!

But what if it is maybe just one single picture, that contains CB and a (yet unharmed) MM, maybe by or in his van? Does it proof a murder, without having any forensics but many possibilites of a suspect saying, that he left her alive at a nearby gas station e.g.? Does it guarantee a sentence for murder, if many other pieces are still missing? IMO not!

But would it be enough to be sure they've got the person responsible and rise on the pressure on and on, to make the suspect or other persons to talk one day? IMO yes, it does!

 

[Ardoch]

What i don't get is why does Wolters even need to make these comments?

He can use media to seek information and simply say CB is a focus of the inquiry - why does he feel the need to pronounce guilt based on secret evidence and then claim this is all "tactics"?

It rather gives the game way

Unless they want other potential (nervous) victims of CB to come forward?
In order to encourage that, he's emphasising that they have enough evidence to link him to these particular type of crimes and to MM. JMO

 

[Newthoughts]

I wonder if we would feel differently if we knew all the evidence of the crimes that they have seen. They seem really sure that they need to keep CB locked away for a long time. IMO they have found some horrendous stuff that even if not linked to MM, convinces them them he’s too dangerous to be released

I tend to agree with you. I also wonder if MM is just a small part and this is smoking out others.

 

[mrjitty]

Why are you calling BS? BS on what exactly, that they have the evidence or in reference to how they are going about this case?

I call BS on this media strategy.

Wolters gives direct quotes to the BBC, ostensibly defending and justifying his own conduct but makes no plea for public assistance. So why is he doing this interview, other than to protect himself and smear the suspect further, despite offering no evidence?

It's more strong words from the prosecutor indeed.

Mr Wolters said: "If you knew the evidence we had you would come to the same conclusion as I do but I can't give you details because we don't want the accused to know what we have on him - these are tactical considerations."

"I can't promise, I can't guarantee that we have enough to bring a charge but I'm very confident because what we have so far doesn't allow any other conclusion at all."

IMO, he wouldn't say these things if he didn't mean it. Nor would he pronounce guilt unless the evidence was so strong. It seems to me they just need that last piece of the puzzle, maybe all they need is a photo or something that places CB in PDL to bring the charge. Who knows.

But why even give these comments to the media? What is their purpose other than to protect Wolters?

 

[mrjitty]

Unless they want other potential (nervous) victims of CB to come forward?
In order to encourage that, he's emphasising that they have enough evidence to link him to these particular type of crimes and to MM. JMO

But he doesn't ask for any assistance.

 

[mrjitty]

I tend to agree with you. I also wonder if MM is just a small part and this is smoking out others.

How does an article on the BBC smoke anyone out?

Are the key people in the UK?

 

[redplanet]

Why are you calling BS? BS on what exactly, that they have the evidence or in reference to how they are going about this case?

It's more strong words from the prosecutor indeed.

Mr Wolters said: "If you knew the evidence we had you would come to the same conclusion as I do but I can't give you details because we don't want the accused to know what we have on him - these are tactical considerations."

"I can't promise, I can't guarantee that we have enough to bring a charge but I'm very confident because what we have so far doesn't allow any other conclusion at all."

IMO, he wouldn't say these things if he didn't mean it. Nor would he pronounce guilt unless the evidence was so strong. It seems to me they just need that last piece of the puzzle, maybe all they need is a photo or something that places CB in PDL to bring the charge. Who knows.

Going back to the appeal on the BKA website, the "furthermore" section suggests BKA believe existence of other/s who may know what happened and maybe even body location. IMO probably that is a further result gained by BKA from the exact same concrete evidence. Therefore the real reason for strictly not saying what the concrete evidence is, could be to protect that IMO parallel but unpublicised investigation ???

 

[redplanet]

What i don't get is why does Wolters even need to make these comments?

He can use media to seek information and simply say CB is a focus of the inquiry - why does he feel the need to pronounce guilt based on secret evidence and then claim this is all "tactics"?

It rather gives the game way

Yes this question puzzles me also.

 

[mrjitty]

Going back to the appeal on the BKA website, the "furthermore" section suggests BKA believe existence of other/s who may know what happened and maybe even body location. IMO probably that is a further result gained by BKA from the exact same concrete evidence. Therefore the real reason for strictly not saying what the concrete evidence is, could be to protect that IMO parallel but unpublicised investigation ???

Possibly - but then why do this BBC interview?

 

[redplanet]

Have BKA people ever been to PdL?

 

[Trivento]

It seems like they need some “ gold nuggets “ of info to get the MM case to charging in court stage..
So am curious how will get those “ nuggets” if do TV appearances saying we’re already sure of our case and not taking opportunity to make an appeal or ask for help getting that vital info..?