Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #36

[Anxala]

Thank you Anxala. I should have expanded my post to include my opinion that just as DM's case was on file corroborating what the witnesses had viewed on the tape, the anonymous rapes may be in police files also.

It's possible, I suppose, but I kind of feel that if that were the case, the two 'unknowns' would not have been presented as they were in the official charge sheet. ie. if the cases are on file, then the names of the victims would be known, the approx dates of the assaults would be known and they would have been listed in the same 'anonymous' way the two child charges were. That's my take.

I guess we'll see.

 

[Lyall0814]

Honestly, after all we already know about CB, also the context, appeal, investigations, etc, do you really think he had no part in the disappearance?

IMO I really can't see why BKA take this case on for all this time, money and resources unless they weren't convinced he was guilty and they could prove it.
In fact I thought it didn't take that long to get the final proof and charge him inequivocally but...

It’s not just about charging him – we want to charge him with the best body of evidence possible.
When we still have questions, it would be nonsense to charge rather than wait for the answers that could strengthen our position.

He's echoing what judges have said to him imo but he might just be putting a little bit of spin on what he's been told by court officials.

 

[mrjitty]

It's possible, I suppose, but I kind of feel that if that were the case, the two 'unknowns' would not have been presented as they were in the official charge sheet. ie. if the cases are on file, then the names of the victims would be known, the approx dates of the assaults would be known and they would have been listed in the same 'anonymous' way the two child charges were. That's my take.

I guess we'll see.

The indictment has to particularise the offending with specifics. They've given the details as best they have them. i.e unknown victim with broad date range. Especially the prosecution can't hold back key details of the defence until later.

So obviously these were never reported.

02c

 

[mrjitty]

Could it be they have victim testimony on record with near enough the exact MO as the DM and HB rapes. The informants have no idea of the statements given by the victim.

No because the victims are unknown. It says that in the indictment.

 

[mrjitty]

For the young German woman in particular, how would that be possible when HB and MS claim to have thrown the camera in the lake?

They don't have the tape - we know this from the rape trial.

There is a very detailed account of the trial in an old FAZ article that was posted here.

 

[Mex]

It's possible, I suppose, but I kind of feel that if that were the case, the two 'unknowns' would not have been presented as they were in the official charge sheet. ie. if the cases are on file, then the names of the victims would be known, the approx dates of the assaults would be known and they would have been listed in the same 'anonymous' way the two child charges were. That's my take.

I guess we'll see.

I don't think I have ever seen the charge sheet in the DM rape case, so I've no idea how that was worded. But the precedent is certainly there as far as it being in the police files is concerned.

Everything about these two cases is just speculation for us. Although I remain mystified about an indictment being served without justifying evidence.

As you say, it is a waiting game which at the moment shows no sign of being speeded up.

 

[Mex]

The indictment has to particularise the offending with specifics. They've given the details as best they have them. i.e unknown victim with broad date range. Especially the prosecution can't hold back key details of the defence until later.

So obviously these were never reported.

02c

On the other hand, the defence and prosecution share the information at some point and perhaps there has been an agreement reached.
For example discretion regarding anonymity for the rape victim. But why not say that?

I really don't know and can only speculate, but it certainly is intriguing.

 

[mrjitty]

On the other hand, the defence and prosecution share the information at some point and perhaps there has been an agreement reached.
For example discretion regarding anonymity for the rape victim. But why not say that?

I really don't know and can only speculate, but it certainly is intriguing.

If name was being suppressed it would say that.

The prosecutor has told the court and the defendant they don't know who the victim is. We can take that at face value.

 

[RichardKimble]

Honestly, after all we already know about CB, also the context, appeal, investigations, etc, do you really think he had no part in the disappearance?

IMO I really can't see why BKA take this case on for all this time, money and resources unless they weren't convinced he was guilty and they could prove it.
In fact I thought it didn't take that long to get the final proof and charge him inequivocally but...

It’s not just about charging him – we want to charge him with the best body of evidence possible.
When we still have questions, it would be nonsense to charge rather than wait for the answers that could strengthen our position.

From the mirror article posted by Janosch, didn't sound as if they have the evidence to charge any time soon if at all, so that still leaves a possibility that CB isn't involved, what I think happened is neither here nor there, I think we all agree justice for Madeleine is what we wish for, I just don't see it with this guy, interestingly Wolters is not in touch with the McCanns ,probably that's left to Grange.





Mr Wolters said: “The investigation into the Maddie case will take as long as is necessary. If necessary, beyond a possible release of the accused.”


And confirming his team is yet to speak to Kate and Gerry, he added: “There is no contact with the McCann family.”

Fresh blow in Madeleine McCann case as suspect could be freed before probe ends

Hans Christian Wolters has admitted the probe against Christian Brueckner, who is suspected of kidnapping Madeleine McCann, could carry on beyond 2026 – when he is due to be released

www.mirror.co.uk

 

[UK Girl]

Honestly, after all we already know about CB, also the context, appeal, investigations, etc, do you really think he had no part in the disappearance?

IMO I really can't see why BKA take this case on for all this time, money and resources unless they weren't convinced he was guilty and they could prove it.
In fact I thought it didn't take that long to get the final proof and charge him inequivocally but...

It’s not just about charging him – we want to charge him with the best body of evidence possible.
When we still have questions, it would be nonsense to charge rather than wait for the answers that could strengthen our position.

Personally speaking although I think hes horrible and should never be allowed out of prison I personally am not convinced at the moment that he played a part.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

You have the advantage of me if you were having an argument, I’m afraid. Because I was having a non patronising discussion.

Suffice to say that CB was indicted five times for five separate crimes. That could not have happened had there not been evidence supporting all five indictments. That is not opinion, that is fact.

It is also a fact by your own admission that you know nothing about two of the victims of crime, not even their names. Which gives my opinion on the circumstances of how they came to be on the charge sheet against CB a bit of weight.
I think a valid question to ask is if you can come up with an explanation of why FF allowed that to happen without complaint?

An argument in the sense of debating opposing views on a theory or subject with reasons and supporting information.

The theory in this case was your emotive assertion that there are five victims awaiting justice. My position is that this is incorrect and I have explained why. Despite several attempts, you haven’t acknowledged this point so it’s probably best to leave it there.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I said
"I think it is perfectly possible that the evidence given to the police by CB's criminal friends has been validated if it was used in the charges made against him for aggravated rape."

Do you really not understand? Or are you being mischievous?

My prior post was about the Selema Beach attack on the ten year-old girl in 2007.

IIRC, this was witnessed by the girl’s family. It was not a rape.

Therefore, I do not understand the point you are making because it is irrelevant to the discussion subject.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I think it had been investigated and that Lina W is probably a key witness. IMO.

Why isn’t she named on the charge sheet then?

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Could it be they have victim testimony on record with near enough the exact MO as the DM and HB rapes. The informants have no idea of the statements given by the victim.

For which crime?

If they have a testimony; they have a known victim. The only crimes on the charge sheet without victims are the two rapes between 2000 and 2006.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

He's echoing what judges have said to him imo but he might just be putting a little bit of spin on what he's been told by court officials.

So, you think that the evidence they may have is even weaker, poorer than what they would have believed even after the appeal? I want to believe it is not so weak, but still not sufficient.

 

[Mex]

An argument in the sense of debating opposing views on a theory or subject with reasons and supporting information.

The theory in this case was your emotive assertion that there are five victims awaiting justice. My position is that this is incorrect and I have explained why. Despite several attempts, you haven’t acknowledged this point so it’s probably best to leave it there.

Thank you for being so explicit in your response. I shall bear it in mind for future reference.

 

[Lyall0814]

So, you think that the evidence they may have is even weaker, poorer than what they would have believed even after the appeal? I want to belive it is not so weak, but still not sufficient.

None of us really knows what evidence they have of course, we can only guess. You might well be right.

 

[Okapi]

Five crimes have been established as having occurred according to the Germans, therefore by my calculations that equals five possible or probable victims of a crime, regardless of whether or not they have all come forward. I don’t therefore understand what point you are making unless it’s that the testimony of the two convicted criminals (who helped put CB away for another rape) have either misinterpreted the videos of rape they claim to have seen, or that they point blank invented them. We know that one of their previous claims was supported by forensic evidence and found to be true by the court, and this appears to lend credibility to their other claims at least as far as the BKA are concerned, or so it would seem.

I agree.

On the first point (BBM): I’m not fluent in legalese, but I can’t understand how a charge of sexual crime can stand without the assumption of a victim? Am I missing something obvious? Genuine question.

On the second emboldened part: I had forgotten that their testimony supported CB’s earlier rape conviction. It does give weight to their allegations.

 

[onemoremiletogo]

From the mirror article posted by Janosch, didn't sound as if they have the evidence to charge any time soon if at all, so that still leaves a possibility that CB isn't involved, what I think happened is neither here nor there, I think we all agree justice for Madeleine is what we wish for, I just don't see it with this guy, interestingly Wolters is not in touch with the McCanns ,probably that's left to Grange.





Mr Wolters said: “The investigation into the Maddie case will take as long as is necessary. If necessary, beyond a possible release of the accused.”


And confirming his team is yet to speak to Kate and Gerry, he added: “There is no contact with the McCann family.”

Fresh blow in Madeleine McCann case as suspect could be freed before probe ends

Hans Christian Wolters has admitted the probe against Christian Brueckner, who is suspected of kidnapping Madeleine McCann, could carry on beyond 2026 – when he is due to be released

www.mirror.co.uk

All possibilities still... ok, but I admit it would be "shocking" boomerang bombshell if CB is really not involved. Not the fact that BKA, eventually, will be or will not be able to bring final conviction (late or never) but the fact that CB is not involved. Just my opinion, but, considering story, context, investigation, etc I cannot see a different scenario. And I'm also not seeing a new (old..) suspect appearing. I'm also not seeing CB with a credible alibi, although he does not need one. Yet.

BKA may try to charge CB for the other crimes to keep him in and "wait" for any new clue, evidence or for a "special" confession...
IMO find the exact location is difficult and forensics, now, it's just "impossible".

 

[onemoremiletogo]

Personally speaking although I think hes horrible and should never be allowed out of prison I personally am not convinced at the moment that he played a part.

One thing is he did not play a part, another is the evidence BKA may have is still not enough to charge (maybe never?!). As I refer above, I "no longer" see the first scenario as possible. JMO.