Madeleine McCann: German Prisoner Identified as Suspect, #41

[Hexe]

Who is BK?

BKA, not BK. Bundeskriminalamt, German federal criminal police.

 

[Hexe]

Oopsie daisie, got a double post.

 

[Spiderplant]

At what point, if any, can a mountain of circumstantial evidence, become ‘enough evidence’

Does the law of averages of all the circumstantial evidence become enough to test the law?

The guns; I think are part of the abduction process to scare and cause submission in all of CB’s activities, MOO.

However no one who has come forward had yet mentioned guns in any of his L, speculated crimes, that CB was cleared of.
But their presence to me adds to a grim picture.

I’m interested, as I said before in the adult clothing and any details we get- I hadn’t seen any reference to CB clothing until someone posted that maroon jumper from an attacker- (we don’t know this was CB) but unless BKA are looking for the only other clothing we know CB to have/ the white trousers in his arrand lake photos- this could be a link- perhaps to a different crime of CB’s

There are known clothing references in the media that I know of, that are only these two items, but there are probably more from witnesses perhaps that we don’t know and perhaps his own personal possessions- perhaps there some missing material from his favourite shirt from around 2004-2010 for example.

This is information I’m keen to hear more about when they are analysed and if they are made public. Assuming they were found and sent for testing…

I fought with the idea CB may have discarded anything so close to the apartments… but then I remember when this crime was committed no one knew how big the exposure would become. If you’ve been successful before, and perhaps you return to the scene of your fantasies/crimes maybe you would discard to later return to re live or to retrieve.

JMO

 

[Hexe]

I’m interested, as I said before in the adult clothing and any details we get- I hadn’t seen any reference to CB clothing until someone posted that maroon jumper from an attacker- (we don’t know this was CB) but unless BKA are looking for the only other clothing we know CB to have/ the white trousers in his arrand lake photos- this could be a link- perhaps to a different crime of CB’s

I would be deeply surprised if they were looking for any clothes. Neither fabrics nor biological traces can withstand eighteen years of exposure to the environment. Yes, synthetics would not decompose entirely, but the pigments in them are not resilient to exposure, the sunlight and water destroys them pretty fast. So even synthetic garment woukl be after eighteen years an unidentifiable mass of faded fibers. Whatever they looked for it was not clothing.

 

[Spiderplant]

https://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/19/world/europe/portugal-uk-madeleine-mccann

Garment I’m referencing.

 

[frank-cole]

I don't. The press and some commrntets tout is as a big find.

May well be nothing.

Do you not see the link between a gun & a murder?

 

[Hexe]

May well be nothing.

Do you not see the link between a gun & a murder?

Between an old, rusty museal gun and a hypothetical murder without known murder weapon, with suspect that haven't used a gun in any of his previous crimes? Weak and hazy at best.

 

[frank-cole]

You think BKA has only one witness in the MM case?

I think there’ll have more than 1. It’s odd that there has been almost radio silence from people who worked at the OC & the people staying there.

 

[frank-cole]

Between an old, rusty museal gun and a hypothetical murder without known murder weapon, with suspect that haven't used a gun in any of his previous crimes? Weak and hazy at best.

Those guns are still capable of doing devastating damage. Old & shiny doesn’t mean non lethal

 

[Davieson]

Those guns are still capable of doing devastating damage. Old & shiny doesn’t mean non lethal

It does in the case of the pistols under dicussion.

 

[frank-cole]

It does in the case of the pistols under dicussion.

Incorrect. Small revolvers & pocket pistols are dangerous - only way to know how they fire is to test.

 

[Hexe]

Those guns are still capable of doing devastating damage. Old & shiny doesn’t mean non lethal

But it increases the possibility these pieces of rust were lying there for ages and are unconnected to the case.

 

[Mex]

But it increases the possibility these pieces of rust were lying there for ages and are unconnected to the case.

That is probably correct.
However, according to the Portuguese press there seems to be no despondency.

Snip
The gun is unlikely to have been used as a “lethal weapon” although tests are understood to be ongoing, reports Portuguese daily Correio da Manha.

A second gun was also found during the renewed hunt for clues.

German cops have ruled it out as having any link to Maddie due to it being 50 years old and described by Portuguese sources as a “rusting relic.”

The three-day search had widely been labeled a flop after police appeared to leave the site next to Praia da Luz empty-handed last week.

But
Luis Neves,
the National Director of the Policia Judiciaria police force insisted the searches had “not been in vain”.

“IT’S OVER!” – Portuguese police scream after discovering shocking object in a sack near Lake Arade, which has been the focus of the 18-year search for Madeleine McCann - News

Prime suspect Christian Brueckner is believed to have carried a gun with him during his time living in the Algarve

newstvseries.com

 

[Denis R Tandib]

At what point, if any, can a mountain of circumstantial evidence, become ‘enough evidence’

In the rest of your post, you are discussing circumstantial evidence that CB is potentially a criminal. This is insufficient to prove guilt for the abduction and murder of MM.

To answer the question, it would need to leave no other possibility other than CB committing the crime.

Remember that this is a “no body” case, so the first thing that needs to be proven is that MM is dead. It must be pointed out that last count there were more than 4,000 alleged sightings of MM alive.

In similar cases, blood stains large enough to prove that survival was impossible would pass muster.

Without direct evidence like a blood stain, an email to an associate stating that the murder was going to happen and disposal of the body would be done in a named incinerator would be strong. If this were supported by cell-phone triangulation, cctv and witness statements showing the suspect had indeed travelled to the incinerator, well then that would be compelling.

This is the issue with all the released information: it generally implies that CB is a criminal with an interest in children - that he could be responsible. However, there are millions of people with a similar profile.

Based on the evidence we’ve seen, there is zero chance of a conviction for any crime against MM. It’s clear they have more evidence but it would need to be specific and extremely compelling for CB to stand trial.

I do think the prosecutors think they have such a theory but I’m not sure many of us will agree once the evidence is released.

 

[JB1510]

BBM

Perhaps BKA is establishing to prove they are his. Especially if he could have denied owning guns or ammunition.

jmo

If he’s denying owning guns the bullet holes in his abandoned car at the box factory may paint a different picture.

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Further to the above point, I thought this useful in relation to circumstantial evidence:

“Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis, may prove the death of a missing person, the existence of a homicide, and the guilt of the accused.”

“…when circumstantial evidence is relied on to prove guilt most courts attempt to impose a more onerous burden of persuasion by charging that the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence?”

This is the challenge for the prosecutors. How can they rule out other reasonable theories without a body and claims of sightings of MM alive.

Media articles about guns and threads only add to the public narrative that CB is rotten and capable of committing the crime. However, unless they provide support to the circumstantial case, they don’t mean much legally. It’s hard to see how a starting pistol could strengthen an abduction and murder case of a three-year-old.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1120202

 

[Denis R Tandib]

If he’s denying owning guns the bullet holes in his abandoned car at the box factory may paint a different picture.

He was issued a warrant to search a property where he was storing guns. Why would he deny owning guns in this situation?

 

[C.greek]

Further to the above point, I thought this useful in relation to circumstantial evidence:

“Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis, may prove the death of a missing person, the existence of a homicide, and the guilt of the accused.”

“…when circumstantial evidence is relied on to prove guilt most courts attempt to impose a more onerous burden of persuasion by charging that the evidence must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence?”

This is the challenge for the prosecutors. How can they rule out other reasonable theories without a body and claims of sightings of MM alive.

Media articles about guns and threads only add to the public narrative that CB is rotten and capable of committing the crime. However, unless they provide support to the circumstantial case, they don’t mean much legally. It’s hard to see how a starting pistol could strengthen an abduction and murder case of a three-year-old.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1120202

Your link about circumstantial evidence: it is a 1961 article about the US system. Does this apply to Germany?

 

[C.greek]

He was issued a warrant to search a property where he was storing guns. Why would he deny owning guns in this situation?

If you are talking about CB, he is actually denying everything. So this is a moot point imo

 

[Denis R Tandib]

Your link about circumstantial evidence: it is a 1961 article about the US system. Does this apply to Germany?

I don’t know for certain. German law is based on a legal constitution not case law, from what I can recall.

I had a quick look at the below Wikipedia page. I says that German law was overseen by the allies after WW2 - America would have had input.

If you have a source that shows there is a different definition of circumstantial evidence between the US and Germany, that would be helpful in understanding if my earlier point is correct.

However, even if the definition is different, it would be common sense to think that there is a high bar for a murder conviction based on circumstantial evidence - I am almost certain this would be true in any legal system.

Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org