Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #41

[Megnut]

They said they don't have a photograph of MM, deceased, with CB.

They only have circumstantial evidence...

Hypothetically, a photograph of MM with unsustainable with an identifiable background consistent with a known CB location would be a piece of circumstantial evidence, and a strong one at that. Not direct evidence. One could still argue that he only possessed the photo, he didn't kidnap nor injure her, it was some other guy who did it, but combined with other circumstantial evidence, it might not be so easy to explain away.

A button or string consistent with the pajamas MM was wearing the night she went missing found in a vehicle owned by CB...

A hidden compartment discovered in a vehicle he once owned...

A single strand of hair matched to MM's mom....

Any one of those things would paint a pretty clear -- sad and clear -- picture putting MM in CB's orbit.

A quick look at CB's arrest and convictions and 72 little girl swimsuits, and I can't think of a parent who wouldn't drop to the floor in agony to realize their child had been in the company of this man.

Still, just one or two of those things might not be enough to secure a conviction, and no one wants a guilty man to walk, if that is what he is.

As long as CB was incarcerated for other crimes, it may have been enough for the family to know he was responsible and enough for LE to keep investigating, hoping always for tips and leads and new evidence so when the time comes to charge him, they have a case they can bring to conviction.

Just because they don't have enough to change him doesn't mean they have nothing.

JMO

 

[onemoremiletogo]

I really pity the people who want this monster released earlier into the world and fear for what humanity is becoming. Guilty or not of MM, paying for this person to roam the streets is unimaginable. Jmo

Totally agree.
Another obvious. We have already anticipated this. No surprise. But IMO it keeps disgusting.
Maybe he will receive also some support to help him reintegrate. Maybe the donor (and/or fans) can let him walk their dogs, play with their cats and, who knows, maybe later even with their daughters....

IMO, these people deal with this without any sense of humanity and even of own security.
Or not. Because it's like a virtual game in the sofa to fight the "cause". An online court of law in favor of the supreme justice for the poor innocent (yet) CB.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Hypothetically, a photograph of MM with unsustainable with an identifiable background consistent with a known CB location would be a piece of circumstantial evidence, and a strong one at that. Not direct evidence. One could still argue that he only possessed the photo, he didn't kidnap nor injure her, it was some other guy who did it, but combined with other circumstantial evidence, it might not be so easy to explain away.

This would be considered real evidence and in conjunction with the circumstantial evidence we know the prosecution has, it would have led to a charge… and likely conviction.

What Is Direct Evidence In Law? - Legal Inquirer

Understand circumstantial evidence, real evidence and direct evidence in law using examples and types of the evidence.

legalinquirer.com

A button or string consistent with the pajamas MM was wearing the night she went missing found in a vehicle owned by CB.

A single strand of hair matched to MM's mom....

Any one of those things would paint a pretty clear -- sad and clear -- picture putting MM in CB's orbit.

This trace evidence would be classified as “forensic evidence” and HCW has explicitly stated that their case is circumstantial and they do not have forensic evidence.

Just because they don't have enough to change him doesn't mean they have nothing.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting they have nothing, they clearly have a circumstantial case without any direct or real evidence. The doubt comes from what needs to be inferred from the circumstantial evidence they have.

Can the circumstantial evidence, for example emails, be corroborated by facts from the case or a witness testimony or is it just a sick pervert sounding off to another equally sick pervert.

My view is that it’s likely the latter but the suggestion of real or forensic evidence needs to stop - not least because the prosecutor’s spokesman has stated this as a fact.

 

[Megnut]

This would be considered real evidence and in conjunction with the circumstantial evidence we know the prosecution has, it would have led to a charge… and likely conviction.

What Is Direct Evidence In Law? - Legal Inquirer

Understand circumstantial evidence, real evidence and direct evidence in law using examples and types of the evidence.

legalinquirer.com

This trace evidence would be classified as “forensic evidence” and HCW has explicitly stated that their case is circumstantial and they do not have forensic evidence.


I don’t think anyone is suggesting they have nothing, they clearly have a circumstantial case without any direct or real evidence. The doubt comes from what needs to be inferred from the circumstantial evidence they have.

Can the circumstantial evidence, for example emails, be corroborated by facts from the case or a witness testimony or is it just a sick pervert sounding off to another equally sick pervert.

My view is that it’s likely the latter but the suggestion of real or forensic evidence needs to stop - not least because the prosecutor’s spokesman has stated this as a fact.

Circumstantial evidence is evidence.

A button or a fiber by itself couldn't prove CB abducted MM, or even that the button came from her clothing. Especially without the rest of the article to compare it to, for instance. But they can compare it to say a photograph of MM having worn it previously, or a receipt from a store. Or a matched dye lot comparison to a new one, same store. That's a lot of steps to elevate a clue but it still remains circumstantial. From it, one could begin to put together linkage. Why would a button or fiber consistent with MM be in CB's possession (assuming such a clue exists).

Brick by brick case.

But it will always come back to knowing someone is responsible and proving it.

JMO

 

[Zuleika]

I really pity the people who want this monster released earlier into the world and fear for what humanity is becoming. Guilty or not of MM, paying for this person to roam the streets is unimaginable. Jmo

Perhaps whomever has a bigger picture in mind ?
JMO

 

[C.greek]

Perhaps whomever has a bigger picture in mind ?
JMO

Like what? I don't understand what the bigger picture is? Unless we are talking about other offenders and paedophiles who would be buying disgusting stuff from him and have lost their source?

 

[Denis R Tandib]

I don't know what the actual statistics are, but in a lot of SA abductions, the children are assaulted and often murdered within the hour.

74% are killed in the first three hours.

The Truth About Child Abduction Statistics in 2023

Around 8 million children are reported missing each year worldwide. The US accounts for 800,000 missing child cases each year. One in six runaways are likely victims of child sex trafficking.

tuzarapost.substack.com

He had the ability to walk her away, secret her in vehicle and escape the area. Didn't discard her in the first hour nor the first 24 because he is a different brand of offender. If his writings are too be believed, he wanted to keep a little. And MM going missing and staying missing fits with that, in a way that most abductions IMO don't (assault, kill, discard).

The fact that MM disappeared from that resort with people so close and that she wasn't recovered deceased from nearby informs us what kind of person might be able, capable and comfortable doing so.

The absence of evidence can be evidence.

There are reports that CB was planning to abduct a child to sell to a childless couple. There are no reports and no evidence that MM was abused, even the prosecutor said he doesn’t know if this happened.

We can speculate but he is as likely to have trafficked her as he is to have kept he to satisfy his own desires. This is why some kind of foundation is important - otherwise it’s just fantasy.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Like what? I don't understand what the bigger picture is? Unless we are talking about other offenders and paedophiles who would be buying disgusting stuff from him and have lost their source?

I don’t know but perhaps legal process. No matter how depraved CB is, there are people who would think conviction before trial undermines the entire legal process.

 

[frank-cole]

Circumstantial evidence is evidence.

A button or a fiber by itself couldn't prove CB abducted MM, or even that the button came from her clothing. Especially without the rest of the article to compare it to, for instance. But they can compare it to say a photograph of MM having worn it previously, or a receipt from a store. Or a matched dye lot comparison to a new one, same store. That's a lot of steps to elevate a clue but it still remains circumstantial. From it, one could begin to put together linkage. Why would a button or fiber consistent with MM be in CB's possession (assuming such a clue exists).

Brick by brick case.

But it will always come back to knowing someone is responsible and proving it.

JMO

Good point ref finding somebody from the family’s DNA on something of CB’s. When asked whether they have evidence of CB going into 5a, HCW responded “I have an answer to that but it would bring a thousand more questions”. It’s very intriguing

 

[C.greek]

I don’t know but perhaps legal process. No matter how depraved CB is, there are people who would think conviction before trial undermines the entire legal process.

Ha, We are not talking here about MM, these are fines for completely unrelated crimes he committed! Like beating a teenager and drink driving. Legal processes prescribe that he either pays or stays in jail for a couple of months. To have someone with no relation to CB (recalling that he had 0 defence witnesses) pay for these fines is despicable and can only be driven by 2 things : either another paedophile who lost his source or conspiracy theorists who think of CB as a patsy. And the real problem is that if it is the second category, they veil their craziness by talking about legality and preferring to pay for such a psychopath like CB to be freed Jmo.

 

[Davieson]

Someone has decided to pay his outstanding fine.
Excluding any new charges, he will be released in September.
Jumping on the moral bandwagon about him or his benefactor is pointless.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Circumstantial evidence is evidence.

A button or a fiber by itself couldn't prove CB abducted MM, or even that the button came from her clothing. Especially without the rest of the article to compare it to, for instance. But they can compare it to say a photograph of MM having worn it previously, or a receipt from a store. Or a matched dye lot comparison to a new one, same store. That's a lot of steps to elevate a clue but it still remains circumstantial. From it, one could begin to put together linkage. Why would a button or fiber consistent with MM be in CB's possession (assuming such a clue exists).

Brick by brick case.

But it will always come back to knowing someone is responsible and proving it.

JMO

Buttons, threads etc. we know for certain are not part of the evidence - the prosecutor has said this and repeated it. If they did, it would be direct evidence not circumstantial.

They have pieces of information like witness statements, email correspondence and phone data. Together this infers that CB was responsible.

The only question that needs to be answered is how compelling this circumstantial evidence is when taken together.

I doubt it’s very strong but I’m open to being wrong.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Ha, We are not talking here about MM, these are fines for completely unrelated crimes he committed! Like beating a teenager and drink driving. Legal processes prescribe that he either pays or stays in jail for a couple of months. To have someone with no relation to CB (recalling that he had 0 defence witnesses) pay for these fines is despicable and can only be driven by 2 things : either another paedophile who lost his source or conspiracy theorists who think of CB as a patsy. And the real problem is that if it is the second category, they veil their craziness by talking about legality and preferring to pay for such a psychopath like CB to be freed Jmo.

I don’t have much interest in discussing this but paying the fine forces the prosecution to legitimise their allegations if they can. If not, whatever evidence they have is questionable.

And if he has served his time for all his prior offences, legally, he has been punished!

 

[Davieson]

The reason we have trials is to test evidence and establish guilt.
Prosecutors can say anything they like, but unless it can be challenged in a court,the validity of what they say cannot be established.
That is why it is important that CB is charged with whatever crimes the prosecutors believe he has committed.

 

[RichardKimble]

Just a reminder of that which HCW stated.


In a new documentary looking into the evidence surrounding the prime suspect in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, which aired last night, Hans Christian Wolters, spokesperson for the public prosecutors’ office, confirmed a long-held suspicion that all evidence against Brueckner remains circumstantial.

He told the Channel 5 programme: “We have no forensic evidence that Madeleine is dead, we have no other results.

“I don’t know where the body is right now. If we knew, we would have found it.”

Investigators ‘have no forensic evidence that Madeleine McCann is dead

GERMAN investigators examining the disappearance of Madeleine McCann "have no forensic evidence" to suggest she is dead, despite believing that she has been killed.

www.express.co.uk

 

[Zuleika]

Like what? I don't understand what the bigger picture is? Unless we are talking about other offenders and paedophiles who would be buying disgusting stuff from him and have lost their source?

Nowhere close to the bigger picture I was imagining but perhaps I've watched too many movies .

 

[Anxala]

Perhaps whomever has a bigger picture in mind ?
JMO

If you mean what I think you mean, that could certainly be a possibility too...

 

[Denis R Tandib]

If you mean what I think you mean, that could certainly be a possibility too...

Cryptic but I might be following…

 

[Anxala]

Cryptic but I might be following…

Basically that he might be safer in prison than out. That someone with 'revenge' in mind could organise his fine to be paid so as to have access to him. It's not beyond the realms of possibility.

PS. That may not be what @Zuleika was thinking of, of course, just my reading between the 'bigger picture' lines.

 

[C.greek]

Basically that he might be safer in prison than out. That someone with 'revenge' in mind could organise his fine to be paid so as to have access to him. It's not beyond the realms of possibility.

PS. That may not be what @Zuleika was thinking of, of course.

I don't think this is the mystery woman. I think it is one from the conspiracy theorists who was also pen-pals with CB. And if so, I am really sorry for her.