Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #33

[RichardKimble]

If CB had not been exonerated I don't think we would have heard about the phone call or the vehicles until after the trial given that the phone had already been flagged up in 2013.
Madeleine McCann suspect told he was on police radar in 2013 Madeleine McCann suspect told he was on German police radar in 2013

I'm coming round to the way of thinking that the information put into the public domain by investigators is not as significant as we were led to think it was.
Probably neither HCW or the BKA are as naïve as some think.

But yet in 2014 its known OG went after three locals, if the Germans were suspicious of CB in 2013 were those thoughts handed to Grange, if not then it's easy to say none of the investigative teams have covered themselves in glory.

 

[Davieson]

If CB had not been exonerated I don't think we would have heard about the phone call or the vehicles until after the trial given that the phone had already been flagged up in 2013.
Madeleine McCann suspect told he was on police radar in 2013 Madeleine McCann suspect told he was on German police radar in 2013

I'm coming round to the way of thinking that the information put into the public domain by investigators is not as significant as we were led to think it was.
Probably neither HCW or the BKA are as naïve as some think.

Except that it led to tabloid hysteria about CB.
This should have been foreseen so perhaps Wolters was more naive than you think.

 

[G-Unit]

Presumption of innocence is simply a legal principle that means the onus is on the prosecution to prove a suspect's guilt when it gets to court and not for the suspect to prove their innocence. It doesn’t mean a prosecutor cant accuse someone of a crime before a verdict has been reached.

Whether any ethical or HR laws have been breached is a matter of opinion, not a fact. Ultimately, the court has granted permission for the authorities to make this public appeal. In some instances, it is seen as a necessary step if other avenues have been all but exhausted but there is still a high level of suspicion against that individual and public assistance is required to fill the gaps.

The presumption of innocence is one of the most basic requirements of a fair trial. Prejudicial comments made by a prosecutor themselves raise an issue under Article 6 § 2 irrespective of other considerations.
https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/guide_art_6_criminal_eng.pdf page 73 no 378

 

[Mex]

Had it ? no name was released.

The seed had been planted in 2019 and journalists were hot on the trail of the only known German paedophile in prison in Germany.
They didn't know about CB but it was only a matter of time.

 

[Mex]

Except that it led to tabloid hysteria about CB.
This should have been foreseen so perhaps Wolters was more naive than you think.

I think some of the publicity was beneficial in that other serious crime was identified, for example the rapes for which he stands indicted.

But as far as the phone dump and CB's vehicles are concerned I think that may well have been an intelligence gathering exercise. Perhaps useful as such but I don't know if it could be considered crucial.

 

[Mex]

But yet in 2014 its known OG went after three locals, if the Germans were suspicious of CB in 2013 were those thoughts handed to Grange, if not then it's easy to say none of the investigative teams have covered themselves in glory.

Protected by Portuguese law these individuals were questioned as arguidos or as far as Operation Grange was concerned, as persons of interest.

I believe that like CB their names were brought to the attention of investigators as a direct result of following through the evidence represented by their phone activities.

Part of police procedure is exonerating persons who might be of interest, releasing investigators to progress to the next stage of the inquiry, until there is nothing left to investigate.

In 2014 the interviewees were eliminated from the inquiry. Which is not a failure but part of the process. But importantly the case progressed down other evidential avenues which are still being investigated in 2023.

 

[Deleted member 268165]

Protected by Portuguese law these individuals were questioned as arguidos or as far as Operation Grange was concerned, as persons of interest.

I believe that like CB their names were brought to the attention of investigators as a direct result of following through the evidence represented by their phone activities.

Part of police procedure is exonerating persons who might be of interest, releasing investigators to progress to the next stage of the inquiry, until there is nothing left to investigate.

In 2014 the interviewees were eliminated from the inquiry. Which is not a failure but part of the process. But importantly the case progressed down other evidential avenues which are still being investigated in 2023.

I had sent to OG the name of JCFdS in june 2013, and of RR in february 2014. They were elimnated from the inquiry in May, 2017, not in 2014.

 

[RichardKimble]

Protected by Portuguese law these individuals were questioned as arguidos or as far as Operation Grange was concerned, as persons of interest.

I believe that like CB their names were brought to the attention of investigators as a direct result of following through the evidence represented by their phone activities.

Part of police procedure is exonerating persons who might be of interest, releasing investigators to progress to the next stage of the inquiry, until there is nothing left to investigate.

In 2014 the interviewees were eliminated from the inquiry. Which is not a failure but part of the process. But importantly the case progressed down other evidential avenues which are still being investigated in 2023.

Doesn't address if the Germans had CB on the radar in 2013, did they pass it on to OG, if not why not, did OG know and ignore it, finally why were the Germans interested in CB in 2013, whats the catalyst for that.

 

[Mex]

I had sent to OG the name of JCFdS in june 2013, and of RR in february 2014. They were elimnated from the inquiry in May, 2017, not in 2014.

I have tried to edit my post to change the date to 2017 but have been timed out.

 

[RichardKimble]

I thought Rowley said by the end of 2014 they'd been ruled out. Clear as mud mind.

Q: How old were the suspects because I think you interviewed them originally through the Portuguese beginning of July 2014?
MR: By the end of the year we were happy to have brought them out and we were moving on to other parts of the investigation.

 

[Dave55]

operandi is not proof, only a hint to focus the investigation. There is not exclusive modus operandi, many persons can share the same modus operandi.

It can be more than a hint.
The rapes of DM and HB shared around five unusual points,...how many rapists set up a video camera..I won't go into the other points.
If the other two rapes have the same details and CB is found guilty.,if MMs abuse has the same pattern...then it's very strong evidence
.

 

[Davieson]

Doesn't address if the Germans had CB on the radar in 2013, did they pass it on to OG, if not why not, did OG know and ignore it, finally why were the Germans interested in CB in 2013, whats the catalyst for that.

I think the initial German interest was in response to a request from either PJ or Grange.
I don't think they were investigating CB themselves at that time.

 

[RichardKimble]

I think the initial German interest was in response to a request from either PJ or Grange.
I don't think they were investigating CB themselves

Then why was it not followed, maybe there just wasn't any thing on him, its only from what we know he's allegedly told some one he knows all about it.

 

[Mex]

Doesn't address if the Germans had CB on the radar in 2013, did they pass it on to OG, if not why not, did OG know and ignore it, finally why were the Germans interested in CB in 2013, whats the catalyst for that.

As far as I know the German authorities had no interest in the MM case at that early stage of proceedings and had carried out a home visit at the request of OG who were making preliminary enquiries.

The visit from the local police would have alerted CB who had been asked to report in.

To tick all the boxes the files held in Germany and those held in Portugal would have to be accessed and collated. Operation Grange were carrying out an elimination process of the evidence to hand. That is the information on record of phone activity at relevant times. CB was not a suspect then and there was nothing incriminating him at the time. He was probably being checked out as a witness, not a perpetrator. My opinion.

 

[Mex]

It can be more than a hint.
The rapes of DM and HB shared around five unusual points,...how many rapists set up a video camera..I won't go into the other points.
If the other two rapes have the same details and CB is found guilty.,if MMs abuse has the same pattern...then it's very strong evidence
.

I think it is strong because there was no question of a copycat incident either by a second perpetrator or a victim because there had been no publicity.

 

[RichardKimble]

As far as I know the German authorities had no interest in the MM case at that early stage of proceedings and had carried out a home visit at the request of OG who were making preliminary enquiries.

The visit from the local police would have alerted CB who had been asked to report in.

To tick all the boxes the files held in Germany and those held in Portugal would have to be accessed and collated. Operation Grange were carrying out an elimination process of the evidence to hand. That is the information on record of phone activity at relevant times. CB was not a suspect then and there was nothing incriminating him at the time. He was probably being checked out as a witness, not a perpetrator. My opinion.

The link you provided mentions nothing about request from OG.Must be treated with caution though its the press.

According to a report in the news weekly Der Spiegel, Brückner received a letter from police in Braunschweig on 4 November 2013 inviting him to be interviewed as a witness in the “missing person case Madeleine McCann”.
Braunschweig police had sent the letter after noticing Brückner’s history of sexual offences following a routine request by the German Federal Office for Criminal Investigation.
Officers cited by Der Spiegel describe the letter as a mistake, saying such a high-profile case would have required investigators to gather more evidence before approaching a suspect. “This should not have happened and in no way complies with common procedure in such a delicate case,” said one.

 

[Davieson]

It can be more than a hint.
The rapes of DM and HB shared around five unusual points,...how many rapists set up a video camera..I won't go into the other points.
If the other two rapes have the same details and CB is found guilty.,if MMs abuse has the same pattern...then it's very strong evidence
.

I think IF is the important word here

 

[RichardKimble]

I think IF is the important word here

Also only one has been prosecuted the other is not on file as a charge now ? on that point the charges posted by niner on page one have now been removed .

 

[Deleted member 268165]

I thought Rowley said by the end of 2014 they'd been ruled out. Clear as mud mind.

Q: How old were the suspects because I think you interviewed them originally through the Portuguese beginning of July 2014?
MR: By the end of the year we were happy to have brought them out and we were moving on to other parts of the investigation.

Thanks Richard. That answer was given by Rowley in April 2017. I always thought it refers to the end of 2016.

 

[Dave55]

S Also only one has been prosecuted the other is not on file as a charge now ? on that point the charges posted by niner on page one have now been removed .

It explaim

I think the initial German interest was in response to a request from either PJ or Grange.
I don't think they were investigating CB themselves at that time.

I think IF is the important word here

Of course it's if....but it's a perfect fit with how the Germans are working