Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #39

[Anxala]

He said: “Anyone who has said something must be measured by it.

That may come back to haunt him.

 

[frank-cole]

I see all the latest is from the sun, but others are quoting it, some truth in it?

Case against Madeleine suspect 'crumbling as witness threatens to pull plug'

A key witness in the case against Maddie McCann suspect Christian Brueckner is said to be in danger of withdrawing his testimony in court, putting the case at threat of falling apart

www.mirror.co.uk

Madeleine McCann prime suspect case ‘on verge of collapsing’

Fears of another blow to the investigation to find out what happened to Madeleine McCann

www.independent.co.uk

Madeleine McCann case against paedophile suspect 'close to collapsing'

Christian Brueckner, 45, was named last year by prosecutors as the key suspect in the disappearance and murder of the three-year-old in 2007.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Evidently not. Classic tabloids it seems :-(

The problem with the investigation being dragged on so long is that it allows time & space for the tabloids to do their thing.

I question the motives of some (other) people who appear to celebrate or ‘like’ the idea of the cases being dropped (based on tabloid rumour). I presumed that we all wanted this to be heard in court, regardless of what our opinions are. That seems more rational & sensible.

Madeleine McCann case against Christian Brueckner ‘is still on’

The German prosecutor investigating the convicted rapist Christian Brueckner for the alleged abduction and murder of Madeleine McCann has strongly denied claims

www.thetimes.co.uk

 

[RichardKimble]

Evidently not. Classic tabloids it seems :-(

The problem with the investigation being dragged on so long is that it allows time & space for the tabloids to do their thing.

I question the motives of some (other) people who appear to celebrate or ‘like’ the idea of the cases being dropped (based on tabloid rumour). I presumed that we all wanted this to be heard in court, regardless of what our opinions are. That seems more rational & sensible.

Madeleine McCann case against Christian Brueckner ‘is still on’

The German prosecutor investigating the convicted rapist Christian Brueckner for the alleged abduction and murder of Madeleine McCann has strongly denied claims

www.thetimes.co.uk

I see there is no direct quote attributed to HCW.

 

[Consider Dudley]

I see there is no direct quote attributed to HCW.

Wolter told The Times: “He can’t choose whether he appears as a witness and he can’t retract his statements and act as if nothing had happened. That doesn’t work in the legal system in Germany, and he is certainly not the decisive support in the proceedings when it comes to Maddie.”

He added: “I don’t know if the witness is withdrawing his testimony. The fact is that in Germany it’s different from other legal systems.

“In Germany a witness has to appear in court, he has no choice. And if he has already testified, the statements that he has made can of course also be introduced in the trial.


“So if he were to say, ‘I’m not talking to you’ — even if that were the case, and I don’t know if it is — that would not lead to our case collapsing here.”

Wolters added: “At the moment it is not yet clear whether there will be a trial or not because we do not yet know whether what we have is sufficient for an indictment. But among all that we have, Helge B’s statements are certainly not the most decisive.”

 

[RichardKimble]

 

[frank-cole]

I see there is no direct quote attributed to HCW.

"He can't choose whether he appears as a witness and he can't retract his statements and act as if nothing had happened. That doesn't work in the legal system in Germany, and he is certainly not the decisive support in the proceedings when it comes to Maddie."

“I don't know if the witness is withdrawing his testimony. The fact is that in Germany it's different from other legal systems.”

“In Germany a witness has to appear in court, he has no choice. And if he has already testified, the statements that he has made can of course also be introduced in the trial”

"So if he were to say, 'I'm not talking to you' - even if that were the case, and I don't know if it is - that would not lead to our case collapsing here."


HCW

 

[Anxala]

Wolter told The Times: “He can’t choose whether he appears as a witness and he can’t retract his statements and act as if nothing had happened. That doesn’t work in the legal system in Germany, and he is certainly not the decisive support in the proceedings when it comes to Maddie.”

He added: “I don’t know if the witness is withdrawing his testimony. The fact is that in Germany it’s different from other legal systems.

“In Germany a witness has to appear in court, he has no choice. And if he has already testified, the statements that he has made can of course also be introduced in the trial.


“So if he were to say, ‘I’m not talking to you’ — even if that were the case, and I don’t know if it is — that would not lead to our case collapsing here.”

Wolters added: “At the moment it is not yet clear whether there will be a trial or not because we do not yet know whether what we have is sufficient for an indictment. But among all that we have, Helge B’s statements are certainly not the most decisive.”

Thanks for that.

It's pretty much as expected, HCW sticking firmly to his precarious position, saying on the one hand that

(a) HB is bound by the T&Cs of the German legal system so any nonsense he spouts in the public domain is just him talking nonsense;
(b) but that anyway, nonsense or no nonsense, HB is not crucial to the investigation; and
(c) that it doesn't really matter one way or the other since there may never be a charge or a trial due to him and his team not having sufficient evidence against CB to move forward on the MM front.

And that's the no nonsense reality, straight from the horse's mouth.

 

[Davieson]

Thanks for that.

It's pretty much as expected, HCW sticking firmly to his precarious position, saying on the one hand that

(a) HB is bound by the T&Cs of the German legal system so any nonsense he spouts in the public domain is just him talking nonsense and of no importance;
(b) but that anyway, nonsense or no nonsense, HB is not crucial to the investigation; and
(c) that it doesn't really matter one way or the other since there may never be a charge or a trial due to him and his team not having sufficient evidence.

And that's the reality, straight from the horse's mouth.

I think that sums it up nicely.

 

[frank-cole]

Thanks for that.

It's pretty much as expected, HCW sticking firmly to his precarious position, saying on the one hand that

(a) HB is bound by the T&Cs of the German legal system so any nonsense he spouts in the public domain is just him talking nonsense;
(b) but that anyway, nonsense or no nonsense, HB is not crucial to the investigation; and
(c) that it doesn't really matter one way or the other since there may never be a charge or a trial due to him and his team not having sufficient evidence against CB to move forward on the MM front.

And that's the no nonsense reality, straight from the horse's mouth.

Absolutely. It dispels any myths that somehow the case is as strong as HB’s testimony or that the case hinges upon said testimony.

The fact the case hasn’t been dropped (after all this time) speaks volumes IMO. Not committing to/or promising an indictment before an indictment makes sense - also indicates they’re still in the investigative phase.JMO

 

[investikater]

Madeleine McCann police in Germany 'were warned about

Christian Brueckner, 45, was named last year by prosecutors as the key suspect in the disappearance and murder of the three-year-old in 2007.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I've said all along IMO it is very unwise, perhaps even wrong, to publicly declare a poi or suspect based upon circumstance and hearsay. You need something objective.

Madeleine McCann case against Christian Brueckner ‘is still on’

The German prosecutor investigating the convicted rapist Christian Brueckner for the alleged abduction and murder of Madeleine McCann has strongly denied claims

www.thetimes.co.uk

Paywall so quoting others:

Wolters added: “At the moment it is not yet clear whether there will be a trial or not because we do not yet know whether what we have is sufficient for an indictment. But among all that we have, Helge B’s statements are certainly not the most decisive.”

And there W goes again with his, for all we know (IN MY OPINION) mythical 'evidence'.

We are never allowed to see it, but W promises it's there.

Yet he's not sure if it's good enough for an indictment. Yet he never finds out?

But he's sure she is dead and that CB probably did it.

Just trust him.

**facepalm**

The logical contradiction here seems very simple to me:

They either; have proof she's dead and he did it or they don't.

If they have proof she's dead and he did it then they would have indicted already.

If they don't have enough proof for an indictment then by definition they don't have proof!

And if they don't have proof then by definition they don't know!

But they believe it?

ALL MY OWN OPINION!

 

[Mex]

Madeleine McCann police in Germany 'were warned about

Christian Brueckner, 45, was named last year by prosecutors as the key suspect in the disappearance and murder of the three-year-old in 2007.

www.dailymail.co.uk

I've said all along IMO it is very unwise, perhaps even wrong, to publicly declare a poi or suspect based upon circumstance and hearsay. You need something objective.

Madeleine McCann case against Christian Brueckner ‘is still on’

The German prosecutor investigating the convicted rapist Christian Brueckner for the alleged abduction and murder of Madeleine McCann has strongly denied claims

www.thetimes.co.uk

Paywall so quoting others:


And there W goes again with his, for all we know (IN MY OPINION) mythical 'evidence'.

We are never allowed to see it, but W promises it's there.

Yet he's not sure if it's good enough for an indictment. Yet he never finds out?

But he's sure she is dead and that CB probably did it.

Just trust him.

**facepalm**

The logical contradiction here seems very simple to me:

They either; have proof she's dead and he did it or they don't.

If they have proof she's dead and he did it then they would have indicted already.

If they don't have enough proof for an indictment then by definition they don't have proof!

And if they don't have proof then by definition they don't know!

But they believe it?

ALL MY OWN OPINION!

It is a huge pity that HCW comments have been hidden behind a paywall in the Times while other journalists have followed on with the sensational comments from an anonymous "source in Germany".

HCW did make the comment you have paraphrased.

But he also made a statement which consisted of five paragraphs in which he

• Gave a very clear synopsis of the actual circumstances should the witness attempt to crumble as the tabloids suggest
• The case would not collapse even if the rumours had any substance as reported in the press
• The particular statements made by the allegedly wobbly witness certainly will not disrupt or outweigh all the hundreds of statement already on file in the MM case should indictments be made and a trial scheduled

Not my opinion but my synopsis of the Times article which you selectively quote from and minus the huge chunk of information HCW imparted during the five paragraphs of his interview with the Times journalist.

Madeleine McCann case against Christian Brueckner ‘is still on’

The German prosecutor investigating the convicted rapist Christian Brueckner for the alleged abduction and murder of Madeleine McCann has strongly denied claims

www.thetimes.co.uk

 

[Denis R Tandib]

That may come back to haunt him.

Beautiful!

 

[Mex]

We haven't even touched base on the five serious crimes with which CB has been charged without opening a fresh indictment naming him.

Given the seriousness of the crimes the German prosecutor has told the Times that should CB be found guilty he would expect "a very substantial sentence" to be handed down with a worst case scenario for him "possibly not getting out of prison at all."

It is very high stakes indeed. The doom and gloom of these little reported outcomes have been taken aboard by CB who recognises the seriousness of his situation. Hence his effort to drum up support for character references from friends.

My opinion

 

[investikater]

It is a huge pity that HCW comments have been hidden behind a paywall in the Times while other journalists have followed on with the sensational comments from an anonymous "source in Germany".

Yes it is extremely annoying. You could post more of it but I know that can be tricky with copyright.

HCW did make the comment you have paraphrased.

As I clearly said in my post I was quoting others here who were quoting the article. I can't access the article behind the paywall. I'm not the one who 'paraphrased' it. And I'm unsure if you're using that word correctly? Because I suspected the quote I copied was probably just copied directly from the article without changes. Was it not?

But he also made a statement which consisted of five paragraphs in which he

• Gave a very clear synopsis of the actual circumstances should the witness attempt to crumble as the tabloids suggest
• The case would not collapse even if the rumours had any substance as reported in the press
• The particular statements made by the allegedly wobbly witness certainly will not disrupt or outweigh all the hundreds of statement already on file in the MM case should indictments be made and a trial scheduled

Not my opinion but my synopsis of the Times article which you selectively quote from and minus the huge chunk of information HCW imparted during the five paragraphs of his interview with the Times journalist.

I read the bits you mention that were copied here.
I didn't selectively leave them out, I left them out for brevity because they are covered by what I was saying anyway.

So this witness will be forced to testify or his previous statements will be used.
So?
That means bupkis if he is a fantasist who is full of #&$% like other LE mentioned in the articles, already know is quite possibly the case. ACCORDING TO THE REPORTING

will not disrupt or outweigh all the hundreds of statement already on file

And they have lots of other witness statements.
Well that's great news. Are they and their testimony as high quality as the star witness?
Witness statements. Whoopdedoo. 'Witness statements' could be a pile of people saying 'I didn't see anything', or 'I saw a blue fairy.' Thats still a witness statement, even though it accomplishes very little.

minus the huge chunk of information HCW imparted during the five paragraphs of his interview with the Times journalist

What information?! It was a masterclass in how to talk for a long time without actually saying any information!
Not a mention of anything objective or concrete.


And more of his usual 'we're not sure if we have enough to indict'. THEN WHY DOESNT HE ASK SOMEONE?! Like a prosecutor perhaps? Then he would know! And could stop telling us he's not sure!

Madeleine McCann case against Christian Brueckner ‘is still on’

The German prosecutor investigating the convicted rapist Christian Brueckner for the alleged abduction and murder of Madeleine McCann has strongly denied claims

www.thetimes.co.uk

Why are you linking again to an article we can't read? Maybe you can copy more of the article? I'm not sure how much is allowed?

ALL MY OWN OPINION!

 

[Mex]

HCW is obviously right but it depends on how critical HeB’s testimony is. If it’s important for the case against CB and the key witness is shaky, it makes it less likely the case will ho to court, IMO.

Balanced against the sum of the total of witness statements HB's witness statement is surely infinitesimal.

He saw nothing of relevance pertaining to MM. His personal opinion that CB "dunnit" won't carry a great deal of interest in a German court.

Snip
HB, 48, was the first person to give CB’s name to police in connection with the case back in 2017, a decade after the three-year-old’s abduction.

When asked by the Sun what he thought of his fellow German, the recycling worker said: ‘One word. Guilty.

Witness who restarted Madeleine McCann investigation 'knows suspect is guilty'

The man says jail is 'the right place' for Christian Brueckner and hopes he will 'stay there a long time'.

metro.co.uk

Once again the ubiquitous Sun appears to be dictating the agenda and there is absolutely no chance that HB's non appearance in Court in the unlikely event of that happening, will have very much relevance when weighed against the rest of the evidence.

My opinion

 

[Davieson]

Until this 'evidence' becomes public knowledge, we wont be able to determine if it has any value worth talking about.

 

[Mex]

Yes it is extremely annoying. You could post more of it but I know that can be tricky with copyright.

As I clearly said in my post I was quoting others here who were quoting the article. I can't access the article behind the paywall. I'm not the one who 'paraphrased' it. And I'm unsure if you're using that word correctly? Because I suspected the quote I copied was probably just copied directly from the article without changes. Was it not?


I read the bits you mention that were copied here.
I didn't selectively leave them out, I left them out for brevity because they are covered by what I was saying anyway.

So this witness will be forced to testify or his previous statements will be used.
So?
That means bupkis if he is a fantasist who is full of #&$% like other LE mentioned in the articles, already know is quite possibly the case. ACCORDING TO THE REPORTING



And they have lots of other witness statements.
Well that's great news. Are they and their testimony as high quality as the star witness?
Witness statements. Whoopdedoo. 'Witness statements' could be a pile of people saying 'I didn't see anything', or 'I saw a blue fairy.' Thats still a witness statement, even though it accomplishes very little.


What information?! It was a masterclass in how to talk for a long time without actually saying any information!
Not a mention of anything objective or concrete.


And more of his usual 'we're not sure if we have enough to indict'. THEN WHY DOESNT HE ASK SOMEONE?! Like a prosecutor perhaps? Then he would know! And could stop telling us he's not sure!



Why are you linking again to an article we can't read? Maybe you can copy more of the article? I'm not sure how much is allowed?

ALL MY OWN OPINION!

Paywalls certainly don’t make it easy for us sleuths to access and post information, not even the little we are presently allowed to use when observing copyright.

I linked to the original Times article for the simple reason it verifies the title and the content of my post which by necessity must be paraphrased.

• MM case against CB is still on
• The German prosecutor investigating the convicted rapist CB for the alleged abduction and murder of MM has strongly denied claims (the case is close to collapse.)

So even if my paraphrasing might not be the best I don't think it can be denied that I have got the gist of the stout rebuttal the prosecutor made of the latest "shock, horror" being promulgated in the tabloids with the Sun well to the fore.

The prosecutor’s comments having been lost in the MSM amongst the sensationalism put about by the Sun it is important to maintain the balance which HCW did by informing what German law actually says and not what the Sun would like it to.

 

[Mex]

Until this 'evidence' becomes public knowledge, we wont be able to determine if it has any value worth talking about.

Are you able to name another live investigation where the evidence has been or is expected to be publicised prior to an indictment being served.

It just does not happen; so you are perfectly correct in thinking we will just have to wait for it.
My opinion

 

[Mex]

Until this 'evidence' becomes public knowledge, we wont be able to determine if it has any value worth talking about.

Sorry - I made the assumption you were replying to my post because I did mention evidence and so did you.

Very strange - but I'm fine with guesswork; keeps the old brain cells working,

 

[Anxala]

Until this 'evidence' becomes public knowledge, we wont be able to determine if it has any value worth talking about.

That's the reality. HCW can continue to do all the rather inept damage control he's been doing, jumping in whenever and wherever there's public doubt, but the message he's trying to send out - 'all is well, keep calm and carry on' - is really not the message he's delivering.