Which is why the court affirmed the suspicions…. I just don’t see the opportunity to find nuance or context change via the courts statement. I think the simple reality is that when the jurisdictional technicality is sorted, the cases will inevitably end up in a court room. To your other point, German prosecutors only charge when the chances of conviction outweigh the chances of an acquittal. The details of the evidence remain confidential within that legal system, iMO there’s been no indication that the evidence is insufficient for convictions, much to the contrary actually. That said, it is very interesting to read all of the extensively thought out counter arguments & new ideas/scenarios to suggest CB is innocent or won’t have to pay for any of the individual crimes he’s the prime suspect for.
Agree. The jurisdictional issue becomes a loophole for transient members of society, but only a loophole to more time. IMO it’s perhaps a negative aspect of their law because some benefit whereas the majority of others don’t. I think FF’s plan was - wait for the evidence files, wait for the courts feedback, if there’s a strong prosecution case play the technicality card, if there’s a weak prosecution case don’t play the technicality card. I think there’s an argument for CB living in any of a number of places , so regardless of the area the prosecution started in IMO if the prosecutions’ cases were strong FF would have gone after the jurisdictional technicality. Evidently they possibly could have been prosecuted in Braunschweig, just as CB was in the DM case & case appeal. JMO
Thanks Misty I think your reasoning on that point is borne out by the inordinate length of the delay in trying to ascertain where the accused in the five cases was was living.The problem I foresee is that if defence wins the right to have the 5 pending charges moved to another jurisdiction, such as Magdeburg, then they could also appeal CB's right to be tried in Portugal should charges be pressed in MM case. Germany can already be accused of breaching CB's human rights by keeping him in solitary confinement for several months.
As Braunschweig have been gathering evidence against CB in the MM case, I'm not sure how much of that CB's defence would be able to have excluded under the Portuguese system (should the case get that far) if Braunschweig aren't deemed to be the correct jurisdiction for the other 5 cases. It could potentially all turn into a potential minefield of legal arguments over the collection of evidence but I don't profess to being an expert in such matters.
Admissibility of Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in the EU
With the increase in volume and importance of cross-border investigations in the EU, ensuring the admissibility of evidence gathered in another Member State at trial is crucial − both for efficient law enforcement and for the protection of fundamental rights.…eucrim.eu
Agree. Some have a tendency to overthink the significance of a jurisdictional technicality & turn it into some elaborate argument about the prosecution <modsnip>
Forgive me, that’s a non sequitur. You asked ‘Why is it important for the defence to have it moved?’ And volunteered ‘I can only come up with a couple of solutions into why CB's legal team need to establish a different place of domicile.’ Then you dismissed your own query.
BIB , then one must wonder why the Braunschweig office carried on , FF is quoted as saying he first raised it at a preliminary hearing , they carried on risking a Federal intervention which could have resulted one would think in a mistrial.FF Quoted below from a link I posted earlier.
Do you think by raising the jurisdiction issue , it's a step to get the charges completely struck off?
Yes there was a scrap over it by defence and prosecution. For reasons unknown to us. All may still be revealed, even incidentally, when these cases come to court.
I just don't see it has solely a residency issue, your post explains reasoning why it might not be, always a bigger picture.The problem I foresee is that if defence wins the right to have the 5 pending charges moved to another jurisdiction, such as Magdeburg, then they could also appeal CB's right to be tried in Portugal should charges be pressed in MM case. Germany can already be accused of breaching CB's human rights by keeping him in solitary confinement for several months.
As Braunschweig have been gathering evidence against CB in the MM case, I'm not sure how much of that CB's defence would be able to have excluded under the Portuguese system (should the case get that far) if Braunschweig aren't deemed to be the correct jurisdiction for the other 5 cases. It could potentially all turn into a potential minefield of legal arguments over the collection of evidence but I don't profess to being an expert in such matters.
Admissibility of Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in the EU
With the increase in volume and importance of cross-border investigations in the EU, ensuring the admissibility of evidence gathered in another Member State at trial is crucial − both for efficient law enforcement and for the protection of fundamental rights.…
Indeed, let's not forget it was a court that decided after hearing legal argument, not FF. There would likely have been previous case law that was used.
I must admit I was surprised by how short CB’s sentences were for the previous CSA convictions. Imo the HaB rape trial is likely to pose the threat of the lengthiest prison sentence.
I think Fuslcher's comment that you could order a drink of holy water in Hell before [his client] would confess to anything is one we can take as, literally, true. (Apart from the figuarative allusion to 'ordering a drink of holy water in hell')
Me too.
Yes, I’d forgotten about that holy water statement, setting the stall out. And the splitting hairs.
I have no doubt that the defender is speaking the truth as far as he sees it but it all depends on what he considers are the preliminary proceedings.
www.bild.de
I don't see a contradiction there.I have no doubt that the defender is speaking the truth as far as he sees it but it all depends on what he considers are the preliminary proceedings.
I posted a link previously which dates that as September 2022.
CB was not formally charged with the five serious crimes until October 2022.
Snip
Brückner's defender, the Kiel star lawyer FF (38) has doubted the jurisdiction of the district court. The public prosecutor's office deduced it from the fact that the suspect had his last registered residence in Germany in Braunschweig in 2016. That, says Fülscher, is not enough.
"As early as September 2022, I informed the public prosecutor's office in writing that, in my opinion, jurisdiction was assumed on the basis of incorrect legal considerations. The Federal Court of Justice has long since ruled that it does not matter where a defendant is registered to establish a place of residence. Before his arrest abroad, the accused last lived on his property in Neuwegersleben," the defense lawyer told BILD. In the small town in Saxony-Anhalt, Brückner owned a dilapidated warehouse.
Fall Maddie: Wird der Prozess nach Magdeburg verlegt?
Bald sollte in Braunschweig ein Prozess gegen den Maddie-Verdächtigen Christian Brückner beginnen. Doch nun ist unklar, ob das Gericht zuständig ist.
