Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #40

[Deleted member 268165]

I haven’t made any claims and you haven’t explained how you are able to arrive at your claims without being privy to the full facts of the investigation. IMO it serves no purpose to dismiss the German investigation in this manner because you do so not from a position of any authority.

Same position of any authority that you.

I would like to see the German authorities proving CB was the killer. But I am very skeptic now.

 

[Consider Dudley]

It reeks of the spin that I'd have thought we'd have left well behind a decade ago.



That version of events was categorically denied by the PJ. Categorically. For starters, as investigators, they would not have been in a position to offer KMcCann any such deal. For seconds, well, see for starters. It's spin that was given tabloid life in Kate McCann's book.

If German police can lie, spin and dissemble why not Portuguese police?

 

[enquirer6]

What's plain to me is that Herr Wolters has shared information with the McCanns he has not made, more widely, public, simply because of the fact that the McCanns now, for the first time, and (relatively!) recently seem to acknowledge that they will not see Madeleine alive again.

I believe Herr Wolters has definitvely proved Madeleine is dead, but can't, quite, defintely show Brueckner is the culprit (murdererer),

ETA: I think Consider Dudley and I are singing from (broadly) the same hymn-sheet.

 

[Consider Dudley]

Same position of any authority that you.

I would like to see the German authorities proving CB was the killer. But I am very skeptic now.

So what would you have them do now? Give up or start trying to build a case against someone else? Personally I see no reason why they should not continue seeking to stengthen their hand against their only suspect.

 

[Deleted member 268165]

So what would you have them do now? Give up or start trying to build a case against someone else?

I do not know what they must do. Maybe search for "the caller". They only know one mobile phone was in PdL (not necessarily close to 5A), and the another mobile in Portugal outside PdL.

I know what they should not have done, like appealing for witnesses who will lose credibility after CB photo appeared widely in the press.

 

[SuperdadV8]

Imho german prosecutors just waited for the outcome from the verdict of the germqn constitutional court, if someone that achieved an aquittal in the past can be charged again for murder, based on "new" evidence. The court ruled out just a few days ago, that the person can't be charged again. End of the story!

So now they will put everything they have together, and will charge, soon after the verdict in the other cases. No prosecutor has any interest in keeping it up for a too long period of time....

 

[Deleted member 268165]

Imho german prosecutors just waited for the outcome from the verdict of the germqn constitutional court, if someone that achieved an aquittal in the past can be charged again for murder, based on "new" evidence. The court ruled out just a few days ago, that the person can't be charged again. End of the story!

So now they will put everything they have together, and will charge, soon after the verdict in the other cases. No prosecutor has any interest in keeping it up for a too long period of time....

Non bis in idem.

But, how this may apply to CB?

 

[enquirer6]

I suppose the other point is that if it is just over 16 years since Madeleine vanished, it is 19 years since Hazel Behan was (allegedly!) raped by Brueckner, and Hazel, also, is patiently waiting for justice. In a strict pecking-order, Hazel's case against Brueckner should be heard before Madeleine's, because Brueckner's (alleged!) crime against her occurred before his crime against Madeleine.

 

[Deleted member 268165]

I do no understand this, @SuperdadV8 ...

"... german prosecutors just waited for the outcome from the verdict of the germqn constitutional court, if someone that achieved an aquittal in the past can be charged again for murder, based on "new" evidence. The court ruled out just a few days ago, that the person can't be charged again ..."

How this apply to CB?

 

[Consider Dudley]

I do not know what they must do. Maybe search for "the caller". They only know one mobile phone was in PdL (not necessarily close to 5A), and the another mobile in Portugal outside PdL.

I know what they should not have done, like appealing for witnesses who will lose credibility after CB photo appeared widely in the press.

We just don’t know how much valuable additional info they got from going public with CB’s picture so IMO it’s not possible to say that they should not have done this.

 

[Deleted member 268165]

We just don’t know how much valuable additional info they got from going public with CB’s picture so IMO it’s not possible to say that they should not have done this.

I agree. Maybe not having done this would be worse.

 

[frank-cole]

He asked for holidaymakers and people to come forward.

It seems HCW is far less interested in finding the user of the phone than he was when they first appealed. When the reports in 2020 surfaced many prompted the message that finding the caller was the key to this case & the only way to get it to a charging threshold. However, that no longer appears to be the case. Tourists pictures & videos are probably the most affective way of putting him near the OC that afternoon/evening. Judging by his rhetoric I think they’ve probably got that evidence now. My opinion.

 

[Deleted member 268165]

It seems HCW is far less interested in finding the user of the phone than he was when they first appealed. When the reports in 2020 surfaced many prompted the message that finding the caller was the key to this case & the only way to get it to a charging threshold. However, that no longer appears to be the case. Tourists pictures & videos are probably the most affective way of putting him near the OC that afternoon/evening. Judging by his rhetoric I think they’ve probably got that evidence now. My opinion.

But, I remember HCW said in the new BBC documentary that finding "the caller" is very important. Am I wrong?

 

[frank-cole]

Going in circles again...
IMO, they are sure he did it.
They should have more, I doubt we know all from that chat, they may have a testimony from "a client" who saw any photo/video related to MM?!, possibly torture, and they assume the girl is dead.
Specific holes in Arade to search for another pen drive?! based on the scenario they found in the factory.
They will try to get something supportive from the next trial (other cases). If they are able to keep him in prison more years maybe some other testimonies will have more confidence to come forward. Some risk if time is enemy and anything (health, death) happen to those testimonies. Anyway, private feedback should be an option. I even think this may be the tip of iceberg. Not even refer some dubiously "closed" cases that happened nearby and farway.

Agree. When HCW talked about the potential of a CB alibi he was certain there wouldn’t be one. That can only mean they have evidence that’s make them certain CB is responsible. Pen drives at the dam seems a tad like he’s just anticipating & squashing the defences claim they were looking for a body. It’s interesting that they’re still going through whatever they found at the dam. Probably would have done so by now if it were pen drives. My opinion.

HCW said at one point, that he has ‘an answer’ to CB being in 5a but it would bring ‘a thousand more questions. Lately I’ve wondered what that ‘answer’ (of CB being in 5a) could be.

 

[Lilly b]

I do not know what they must do. Maybe search for "the caller". They only know one mobile phone was in PdL (not necessarily close to 5A), and the another mobile in Portugal outside PdL.

I know what they should not have done, like appealing for witnesses who will lose credibility after CB photo appeared widely in the press.

I personally don't think the issue is finding the person on the other end of the call matters
It's placing cb there, and I do believe it has been said the NM said he was there at the time, as he told her so, and I wonder if NM is still in witness protection? If I have her initials incorrect, I apologize in advance, and it's the young girl who had the strangulation marks

 

[mrjitty]

So what would you have them do now? Give up or start trying to build a case against someone else? Personally I see no reason why they should not continue seeking to stengthen their hand against their only suspect.

Perhaps they could just investigate the case and stop discussing the evidence in the media

In the Pano documentary, HCW made specific comment about the text chain allegedly from CB, and what 'mm' might refer to.

This is usually wildly out of bounds

 

[Mex]

I suppose the other point is that if it is just over 16 years since Madeleine vanished, it is 19 years since Hazel Behan was (allegedly!) raped by Brueckner, and Hazel, also, is patiently waiting for justice. In a strict pecking-order, Hazel's case against Brueckner should be heard before Madeleine's, because Brueckner's (alleged!) crime against her occurred before his crime against Madeleine.

Very well put.

When CB was tried and found guilty of the horrific violation of DM the prosecutors and BKA had never heard of HB or the similarity of the nature of her ordeal so closely mirroring DM's.

It was only when HB came forward that another jigsaw piece was added to the mix.

​

Portugal police could reopen case into rape of Irish woman in 2004​

This article is more than 3 years old
Possible inquiry into assault on HB comes after claims against MM suspect

Portuguese police have begun a process that could lead to the reopening of an investigation into the unsolved rape of an Irish woman as they seek to build a case against a possible suspect in connection with the abduction of MM.

Detectives in Portugal last week collected the archived case file on the vicious assault in 2004 of HB, who was working as a holiday rep in Praia da Rocha on the Algarve, according to a source in the public prosecutor’s office.

A judge could later decide if the investigators can officially reopen the case, a ruling that is unlikely to happen until after the summer.

HB last month asked UK detectives working on MM’s disappearance to review her attack, after learning that a new suspect in the then three-year-old’s abduction had been convicted of a sexual assault with similarities to her own experience.

HB was alerted to the police appeal for new evidence in connection with CB, who was recently named as a main suspect in MM’s 2007 disappearance. She discovered the 43-year-old had recently been convicted of the rape of a 72-year-old American woman in Praia da Luz in 2005.

Portugal police could reopen case into rape of Irish woman in 2004

Possible inquiry into assault on Hazel Behan comes after claims against Madeleine McCann suspect

www.theguardian.com

 

[frank-cole]

But, I remember HCW said in the new BBC documentary that finding "the caller" is very important. Am I wrong?

it would be important, I could add another piece to the puzzle should details of the conversation be relevant to the crime or his movements. It also eliminates the argument of an accomplice. But I highly doubt they need the caller to put CB in the area. I think they’ll have other evidence of him in the area. My opinion

 

[Mex]

We just don’t know how much valuable additional info they got from going public with CB’s picture so IMO it’s not possible to say that they should not have done this.

I am even boring myself with this assertion having repeated it so often, so I do apologise.

I think they had no option but to go public on this aspect of the investigation when leaks regarding the prime suspect appeared on the internet.
It was a damage limiting exercise on their behalf without which we would probably never have heard about HB even at this remove.
My opinion

 

[frank-cole]

You are revisiting a history for which the PJ officers came to Britain to apologise for.

Time has moved on.

Nobody is pulling PJ strings they make their own decisions within Portuguese law.

They have decided to constitute CB as arguido ensuring his rights are protected under Portuguese law.

The apology was well overdue & it’s really good to learn of professionalism & conduct on behalf of the PJ. I think an apology had to be inevitable. They’re solely investigating CB, think there are strong indications of the practice of a crime & are working well with the BKA. It seems that the PJ are very clear that CB is responsible & that’s had them reflecting more on the critical errors that were made & the awful way the McCann’s were treated. I really hope Hazel receives a similar apology for the way she was treated in 2005. My opinion