Madeleine McCann: German prisoner identified as suspect #30

[Deleted member 268165]

What do you mean? CB and FF have the case files for the beach sexual abuse so the case has already progressed much if this is what you are referring to?

I was editing. Sorry, read it again ...

 

[Dlk79]

Describing CB? (Salema)

"An individual of white race, dark skinned, with several signals all over the body, blond hair, short, without beard, little hair, about 1.80 / 1.85 in height, 20 / 30 years old, with 4 teeth up out..."

"white race, dark skinned" - I think they just mean he had a tan. It says he had blonde hair so it obviously doesn't refer to someone with an olive complexion if that's what you were thinking.

"little hair"- not hairy. They already described his hair as short and blonde so it sounds like they sare referring to his body hair here.

These photos and video of CB took place around the same time as the Salema beach assault. His teeth do stand out a bit IMO.

Christian Brueckner in 'kidnap' van weeks before Madeleine vanished

Madeleine McCann prime suspect Christian Brueckner was filmed at the wheel of a battered VW campervan just weeks before German police believed he used it to kidnap Madeleine.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[tedtink]

Describing CB? (Salema)

"An individual of white race, dark skinned, with several signals all over the body, blond hair, short, without beard, little hair, about 1.80 / 1.85 in height, 20 / 30 years old, with 4 teeth up out..."

Tanned. Meaning not fair skinned.

 

[Deleted member 268165]

"white race, dark skinned" - I think they just mean he had a tan.

These photos and video of CB took place around the same time as the Salema beach assault. His teeth do stand out a bit IMO.

Christian Brueckner in 'kidnap' van weeks before Madeleine vanished

Madeleine McCann prime suspect Christian Brueckner was filmed at the wheel of a battered VW campervan just weeks before German police believed he used it to kidnap Madeleine.

www.dailymail.co.uk

This pic is from March 30, 2007. One week later, on April 7, 2007, the Salema inicident happened. The short hair, yes. The teeth, maybe. The tan? The little hair?

 

[Betty_Boop88]

Supposedly got his teeth ‘fixed’ that year, too, unless that was BS from him and NF.

 

[Deleted member 268165]

SF article says that, according to phone data, CB was inf front of 5A.

JR is more accurate when she says "no more than 6 minutes of 5A" ... Walking? In a car?

 

[Betty_Boop88]

This pic is from March 30, 2007. One week later, on April 7, 2007, the Salema inicident happened. The short hair, yes. The teeth, maybe. The tan? The little hair?

View attachment 342807

Haven’t the victim and her family since confirmed that they recognised CB from photos as her attacker?

 

[Dlk79]

This pic is from March 30, 2007. One week later, on April 7, 2007, the Salema inicident happened. The short hair, yes. The teeth, maybe. The tan? The little hair?

View attachment 342807

See my previous post, I just edited it. He looks fairly tanned to me in this and other pics, I think he catches the sun quite easily. The "little hair" comment is referring to his body hair IMO. They already described his head hair previous to that so, given the man was naked, I read it as them saying he didn't have a hairy body.

 

[C.greek]

This pic is from March 30, 2007. One week later, on April 7, 2007, the Salema inicident happened. The short hair, yes. The teeth, maybe. The tan? The little hair?

View attachment 342807

Good still - his protruding upper teeth are very very clear in this one. And he is reddish / tanned I would say. He is definitely not fair skinned as one would expect a blonde person to be. And the little hair refers to his body hair imo. This case is pretty clear tbh. The victim recognised CB immediately when shown pictures

 

[C.greek]

SF article says that, according to phone data, CB was inf front of 5A.

JR is more accurate when she says "no more than 6 minutes of 5A" ... Walking? In a car?

Sf says that she saw a document that indicates CB was outside 5a. Not sure what document that could be, but it does sound important circumstantial evidence imo

 

[Deleted member 268165]

Sf says that she saw a document that indicates CB was outside 5a. Not sure what document that could be, but it does sound important circumstantial evidence imo

Ok. A document. Maybe not phone data. A witness?

 

[C.greek]

Ok. A document. Maybe not phone data. A witness?

that would be significant if it were a witness! jmo

 

[Deleted member 268165]

When HCW said, 23 months ago, that he was 100% sure CB killed MM, I thought "At last!".

But 23 months later, I am thinking: "Can you be 100% sure without proof?". Because if HCW has proof, why did not he charge CB yet?

So, I think HCW has the intuition, or circumstancial evidence, that CB killed MM, and could be 99% sure, or even 99.9% sure, but not 100%.

And now I am thinking that those HCW statements without making charges to CB were a gross error, because they produced a "media trial". It is a pity, because I think HCW is a good person.

But why did they do the public appeal without saying CB was the killer of MM?

Just my opinion.

 

[C.greek]

When HCW said, 23 months ago, that he was 100% sure CB killed MM, I thought "At last!".

But 23 months later, I am thinking: "Can you be 100% sure without proof?". Because if HCW has proof, why did not he charge CB yet?

So, I think HCW has the intuition, or circumstancial evidence, that CB killed MM, and could be 99% sure, or even 99.9% sure, but not 100%.

And now I am thinking that those HCW statements without making charges to CB were a gross error, because they produced a "media trial". It is a pity, because I think HCW is a good person.

But why did they do the public appeal without saying CB was the killer of MM?

Just my opinion.

This is one of the most difficult cases to solve and bring the culprit to justice.

The appeal was for the murder of MM. there must be some kind of evidence (circumstantial) that makes the BKA, the PJ and the MET sure of that.

The timing of closing down OG, ie the missing person investigation, the timing of making CB an arguido in portugal, the timing of the supposed alibi that FF has been trying to pass on to journalists, which has been trashed on the outset, the timing of the sad statement of the parents of MM, all point to some kind of advancement in the case and evidence. Just because we are not privy of it does not mean it does not exist.

They have been working on 5 other cases, all related to sexual violence, that they can pin on CB. This is also not random. The appeal was also about his person and any crimes he might have committed on other people.

Patience is a virtue and this is what we need to have. The parents at least are kept informed. This is what counts.

Jmo

 

[Davieson]

Good still - his protruding upper teeth are very very clear in this one. And he is reddish / tanned I would say. He is definitely not fair skinned as one would expect a blonde person to be. And the little hair refers to his body hair imo. This case is pretty clear tbh. The victim recognised CB immediately when shown pictures

I don't see why this should be in doubt.
Indecent exposure is his forte and completely in character.

 

[C.greek]

I don't see why this should be in doubt.
Indecent exposure is his forte and completely in character.

Sexual violence of this sort escalates and this can happen very quickly. See the murderer of Libby for one such recent example

 

[Denis R Tandib]

ETA just saw response from @C.greek and understand it.

 

[Pixie Child]

When HCW said, 23 months ago, that he was 100% sure CB killed MM, I thought "At last!".

But 23 months later, I am thinking: "Can you be 100% sure without proof?". Because if HCW has proof, why did not he charge CB yet?

So, I think HCW has the intuition, or circumstancial evidence, that CB killed MM, and could be 99% sure, or even 99.9% sure, but not 100%.

And now I am thinking that those HCW statements without making charges to CB were a gross error, because they produced a "media trial". It is a pity, because I think HCW is a good person.

But why did they do the public appeal without saying CB was the killer of MM?

Just my opinion.

Agreed it’s extraordinary and could only happen in a jurisdiction with Judge only trials. Perhaps he’s taking this approach because he has to reach people all over Europe about events that took place 15y ago.

It’s possible that BKA has intelligence that can’t be released to the public. They could have SATINT; they could have mob intercepts.

The phone evidence is weak and there’s nothing to link CB directly to the abduction. BKA are stronger on character & confessions/comments CB made in person, in his diary and online.

I think HCW has time so he’s probably trying to jog peoples memories about the holiday affair but he’s also putting pressure on CB and possibly others. Whoever grasses first will get the best deal.

 

[frank-cole]

Good still - his protruding upper teeth are very very clear in this one. And he is reddish / tanned I would say. He is definitely not fair skinned as one would expect a blonde person to be. And the little hair refers to his body hair imo. This case is pretty clear tbh. The victim recognised CB immediately when shown pictures

CB on his latest whiny letter writing crusade is waffling on about an elaborate plan to frame him based on his teeth. IMO he’s already trying to come up with excuses regarding this eye witness account in anticipation of the charge.

He’s a man who’s out of options. everything now is about ‘planted evidence’, ‘framed‘ ‘photoshopped pictures’ etc. It sounds like he’s been getting ‘sage’ legal advice from Isabelle McFadden. Those darn those invisible magical freezers!

 

[frank-cole]

I agree- he cannot avoid giving interviews. He has to, actually, as the main press person (speaker) of the BKA in Braunschweig. He just wants to show that the case is moving forwards indeed - but he will not share details. NF is not a person of interest for the MM case, according to HCW.

Good points. HCW, for good reason, is more than willing to be bold & direct about the murder but not about the abduction . I am & I think they are, absolutely convinced CB is solely responsible for both.

HCW is absolute about the murder, but is being extremely cautious about giving away anything on the abduction. IMO he won’t confirm or deny anything regarding the abduction, regardless of how far-fetched the questions are, because the abduction is the part that the defence may have more of an opportunity form counter-arguments, implicate somebody else, etc. It could also be (&/or) a game of cat & mouse where they are hoping CB trips himself up with more whiny letters. That said the evidence of abduction may be very detailed, perhaps not as compelling, but still large enough to be a big shock to FF & CB