Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #34

[Davieson]

I can't see that knowing how the lawyers are funded is of any great importance.

 

[Malleux]

I can't see that knowing how the lawyers are funded is of any great importance.

It "might" not be in the grand scheme, it all depends on the motive for bankrolling it. Equally, it "might" be important, and as the saying goes... "follow the money"...

 

[Davieson]

According to the information supplied in Malleux's post I don't think anyone in CB's legal team require any advertising eithe pro bono or at the going rate.

All they have to do is win the case by hook or by crook.

And they have done a magnificent job so far in keeping five current cases out of the system for many months.

My opinion - there is powerful and big money being represented here. Probably the same money which has spent sixteen vindictive years maligning MM's parents.

The whistle blowers who have shed new light on the case might be petty criminals, but I think very brave people.

Not sure how you reach that conclusion. From what I can see, there is no organised vendetta against the McCanns, other than maybe one pathetic website.
There is also at least one pro-McCann website. Is that funded by big money?

 

[RichardKimble]

According to the information supplied in Malleux's post I don't think anyone in CB's legal team require any advertising eithe pro bono or at the going rate.

All they have to do is win the case by hook or by crook.

And they have done a magnificent job so far in keeping five current cases out of the system for many months.

My opinion - there is powerful and big money being represented here. Probably the same money which has spent sixteen vindictive years maligning MM's parents.

The whistle blowers who have shed new light on the case might be petty criminals, but I think very brave people.

There is no hook or by crook, it's either done within requirements of a legal frame work or it's not, the fact as of this moment the 5 sex charges are on hold could well be the failure of the state prosecutors to not be aware the possibility that CB legal team had a point of law or procedure.

 

[RichardKimble]

Not sure how you reach that conclusion. From what I can see, there is no organised vendetta against the McCanns, other than maybe one pathetic website.
There is also at least one pro-McCann website. Is that funded by big money?

Madeleine who?

 

[Mex]

Not sure how you reach that conclusion. From what I can see, there is no organised vendetta against the McCanns, other than maybe one pathetic website.
There is also at least one pro-McCann website. Is that funded by big money?

Off topic for discussion but suffice to say that a quick glance at the internet will reveal a tad more than "one pathetic website" dedicated to that cause. One wonders why bother?

Just as one wonders "why bother" funding the legal expenses of a rapist and child molester? And long before he became notoriously connected with the MM case.

 

[Malleux]

There is no hook or by crook, it's either done within requirements of a legal frame work or it's not, the fact as of this moment the 5 sex charges are on hold could well be the failure of the state prosecutors to not be aware the possibility that CB legal team had a point of law or procedure.

It's not through unawareness. Braunschweig had the claim to jurisdiction based on what was known of his registered addresses and what they could prove in that regard. If Madgeburg had claimed initial jurisdiction, his lawyers could pull the exact same trick as they are doing now. If anything, their claim against jurisdiction would be stronger then since there's no proof CB was ever actually "living" at the box factory. Plus they could dispute the factory counted as a viable domicile using the exact same arguments the Braunschweig prosecutors are using now in that it had no utilities and wasn't legally a registered residence but rather, a commercial property. He'd owned it for over a decade while provably "living" elsewhere during that period.

 

[Mex]

There is no hook or by crook, it's either done within requirements of a legal frame work or it's not, the fact as of this moment the 5 sex charges are on hold could well be the failure of the state prosecutors to not be aware the possibility that CB legal team had a point of law or procedure.

It will be interesting to see if the German state considers that a disused industrial 'dwelling place' with no sanitation is appropriate accommodation for a citizen who does the "princess and the pea" fairy tale regarding his prison conditions where he can at least flush a toilet.

 

[Davieson]

Off topic for discussion but suffice to say that a quick glance at the internet will reveal a tad more than "one pathetic website" dedicated to that cause. One wonders why bother?

Just as one wonders "why bother" funding the legal expenses of a rapist and child molester? And long before he became notoriously connected with the MM case.

I often ask myself why anyone bothers either defending or attacking the McCanns.

 

[RichardKimble]

It's not through unawareness. Braunschweig had the claim to jurisdiction based on what was known of his registered addresses and what they could prove in that regard. If Madgeburg had claimed initial jurisdiction, his lawyers could pull the exact same trick as they are doing now. If anything, their claim against jurisdiction would be stronger then since there's no proof CB was ever actually "living" at the box factory. Plus they could dispute the factory counted as a viable domicile using the exact same arguments the Braunschweig prosecutors are using now in that it had no utilities and wasn't legally a registered residence but rather, a commercial property. He'd owned it for over a decade while provably "living" elsewhere during that period.

So how did CB's successfully lawyers argued otherwise.

 

[Mex]

So how did CB's successfully lawyers argued otherwise.

My opinion is that the lower court judge was reducing future grounds for appeal by having the decision deferred to a higher court knowing his decision would likely be challenged.

Just dotting the i's and crossing the t's.

 

[Malleux]

So how did CB's successfully lawyers argued otherwise.

Because IMO, the lower court had to give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant since Braunschweig could not "prove" the claim of "living" at the box factory was false and, for reasons yet to be fully explained, the Judge accepted the factory could be classified as a domicile.

An appeal at a higher court might see it differently and would be basing their judgement on the strength of the respective claims to jurisdiction for Madgeburg and Braunschweig. Specifically, Braunschweig will be challenging certain aspects of the lower court's reasoning and it will be on the higher court to judge if they think their objections to the judgment are valid. In other words, in the first judgement it was on the Prosecutors to prove the claim was false, in an appeal, the judge will be specifically evaluating the argument against the first judgement.

We've been here before, the Amaral trials serve as a good example of how an initial court's ruling can be overturned by the defeated party objecting to specific aspects or advocating clauses in their favour. The legal classification of the box factory as a "domicile" is one such aspect I expect them to challenge for example.

 

[Malleux]

Because IMO, the lower court had to give the benefit of the doubt to the defendant since Braunschweig could not "prove" the claim of "living" at the box factory was false and, for reasons yet to be fully explained, the Judge accepted the factory could be classified as a domicile.

An appeal at a higher court might see it differently and would be basing their judgement on the strength of the respective claims to jurisdiction for Madgeburg and Braunschweig. Specifically, Braunschweig will be challenging certain aspects of the lower court's reasoning and it will be on the higher court to judge if they think their objections to the judgment are valid. In other words, in the first judgement it was on the Prosecutors to prove the claim was false, in an appeal, the judge will be specifically evaluating the argument against the first judgement.

We've been here before, the Amaral trials serve as a good example of how an initial court's ruling can be overturned by the defeated party objecting to specific aspects or advocating clauses in their favour. The legal classification of the box factory as a "domicile" is one such aspect I expect them to challenge for example.

Another aspect to bear in mind is the lower court is not ruling on who IS the responsible court to hear the charges. They are only ruling on whether there is sufficient proof that THEY ARE the responsible court.

If an appeal at the Braunschweig higher court is unsuccessful, the Prosecutors can then appeal at Germany's BGH high court who will evaluate the strength of the respective claims to jurisdiction and make a determination of which specific court should be responsible to hear the charges.

 

[Trivento]

Would be interesting to establish if he was actually only staying in a motorhome in grounds of box factory , so then would be bit of a stretch to claim he was residing in box factory ... would he be staying in a messy and dirty ruin instead of a clean , equipped motorhome..? imo

 

[Pixie Child]

P.J. POLICE FILES: DEREK FLACK PHOTO FIT ID

In DF statement , he says the man he saw was about 1.70m , that’s only about 5ft 7in …not a tall man .

He looks 6’4” or more to me! (Instagram)

 

[Pixie Child]

And.. Just to touch on the subject of CB's ever expanding portfolio of legal representatives, I think it should be made clear that there are many restrictions on what costs can be claimed from the state and under what circumstances.

We are told CB has been represented since 2020 by Friedrich Fulscher... and Johann Schwenn... two of the best defence lawyers in the country (they really are) plus now...a recent name added in 2023 in Phillip Marquot. FF also claims there is a team of UK lawyers being contracted with one of their main roles being to review the media coverage around CB...and yet the man had no pennies...amazing stuff!

The point is...whomever is bankrolling all this, we can be 100% sure it is not the German state!



Legal aid is available for legal proceedings before the following courts:

• Administrative court ("Verwaltungsgericht"): That is, for instance, if you want to complain about the BAMF's rejection of your asylum request.

• Civil court ("Zivilgericht"): That is where you go, for instance, when you need to resolve a dispute with a neighbour in court.

• Labor court ("Arbeitsgericht"): That is where you can complain against an employer who fired you.

• Social court ("Sozialgericht"): That is where you can, for instance, take legal actions against the decision to cut your welfare benefits.

Please note: If you are charged with a crime, you cannot receive legal aid. But if you do not have enough money, the state will pay for your lawyer. You cannot, however, choose a lawyer yourself-- the court will pick a lawyer for you.

Legal Aid

Can I get financial help for legal proceedings when I go to court? Which costs does legal aid cover? Do I have to pay it back?

handbookgermany.de

In Germany, a distinction is made between advisory assistance and legal aid (see question 2 above).

Advisory assistance (covering advice and, if necessary, representation) is granted in civil-law matters, including employment law, administrative law, constitutional law and social law. Only advice is given in matters of criminal law and administrative offences law.

Legal aid | European e-Justice Portal

e-justice.europa.eu

Law on legal advice and representation for low-income citizens (Counseling Assistance Act - BerHG)
§ 2 Object of the counseling assistance

(1) The advisory assistance consists of advice and, if necessary, representation. Representation is required when, after counseling, litigants are unable to exercise their rights themselves because of the scope, difficulty or importance the legal matter has for them.

(2) Advisory assistance under this Act is granted in all legal matters. In matters of criminal law and the law on administrative offenses, only advice is provided.

§ 2 BerHG - Einzelnorm

In other words, you can't go cherry pick the best lawyers in the land to come represent you and even moreso when you haven't even been charged with anything yet...

To get such lawyers representing you doesn't happen through a lottery. It's either a big Pro Bono deal (which the defence would normally advertise to their advantage)... or some 'body' is playing the fiddle in the background....

JMO.


When asked who was funding Brueckner’s representation, Mr Fuelscher replied: “I’m afraid I cannot answer that question.”

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner using British lawyers for defence

EXCLUSIVE: It remains unclear who is paying the fees to retain 43-year-old Christian Brueckner's team of British lawyers as he has no source of income

www.mirror.co.uk

Didn’t HCW suggest it was former criminal clients of FF (funding the case)?

I can’t find any former clients but this article (paywalled) has the title ‘We are lawyers for the mafia’. Wir sind die Anwälte der Mafia - WELT

 

[Malleux]

Didn’t HCW suggest it was former criminal clients of FF (funding the case)?

Not to my knowledge. In JC's book he claims HCW told him some "illuminating" things about how FF was being paid but no further detail was mentioned. He may just have told JC that it wasn't being state funded or something though rather than who was actually behind it. JMO.

 

[Trivento]

He looks 6’4” or more to me! (Instagram)

Yes..makes one wonder if DF saw someone other than SBG .

 

[enquirer6]

Would be interesting to establish if he was actually only staying in a motorhome in grounds of box factory , so then would be bit of a stretch to claim he was residing in box factory ... would he be staying in a messy and dirty ruin instead of a clean , equipped motorhome..? imo

Somehow, "messy and dirty ruin" seems more in tune.

But I see what you're getting at ....

 

[Deleted member 268165]

I am giving a glance at the GA's book NML.
Did he say that NL and JT were lying in their statements?
But I remember that NL statement led to the identification of a Renault car, and from there to the identification of the Polish WK.
What am I missing?