Disposal of the body

Silentscope wrote:Whoever removed the body according to the available PHYSICAL EVIDENCE got cadaver odour and DNA particles on them in the process.

This wasn’t planned in advance for the following reasons.

1. Brückner had no access to the articles where the above evidence was found, clothing, apartment or vehicle.

2. Even if he had access granted, any evidence would have been disposed of, or a different vehicle hired later on. It was not.
No hirers of the Vehicle between the times of the alleged ‘Abduction’ and Hiring reported any bad smells.

3. Nobody can prove that at the time he was known to suspects.

So I rule him out of the abduction, this however does not clear him of any involvement whatesover. He could still have caused her harm. Just probably NOT at the times stated if the checks were true and diligently carried out.

But it is only a probably ludicrous theory of mine...

Your theorizing does not help in anything; certainly not in the discovery of the truth.

Silentscope wrote:He could still have caused her harm. Just probably NOT at the times stated if the checks were true and diligently carried out.

Where is this coming from?

There is NO evidence that indicates Christian Brueckner was inside Apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort.

Silentscope wrote:[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

What's this Silentscope ^^^ ?

Verdi wrote:Here we go again, off into the realms of fantastical feeries without a shred of evidence to support.

For the sake of the forum - and above all else, with respect for the name of Madeleine McCann could we please keep this as far as possible, within acceptable boundaries of available fact and evidence.
 
Wild speculation is not helpful,

Unless you are one of the chosen few of course, who are allowed to post their thoughts and interpretations without any comment, put down or ridicule by certain moderators.

Adios Amigos

I've only glanced through this thread, but I need to ask 3 questions before my middle-aged brain forgets. 

1. Too late - hold on....

Exactly right pauloalexandre - there is no way to prove or disprove he was ever there or not. At any point in time whatsoever.

So how will all the circumstantial evidence and MSM convict him?

I don’t know why the last Post disappeared, maybe it’s a glitch?

Verdi, can you answer the following questions then please?

1. When did Brückner ever use the Hire car?

2. How does one person aparrently have the DNA profiles of three people?

3. How do the FSS know for a certainty the sample was from MBM ?

4. Why even let an unsupervised suspect provide it?

5. Why use the LCN test when it cannot be relied upon in court?

Lastly, I don’t want to read any more of your bollocks. I am allowed to think, if you don’t like it, tough. 

P.S. Thanks Septic

Silentscope wrote:Lastly, I don’t want to read any more of your bollocks. I am allowed to think, if you don’t like it, tough.

Then you won't want me to answer your questions - what a relief!

i'am not verdi, but i have some answers for you, silentscope.

1, he did not need the hired car, or any car at all. read every little bit of information, told to us by every officer of law that was present at the scene, when they got a positive from the dogs. there is a possibility to get relicts of a body into a car, without the body itself being present.  

there are even two possibilities to look at. both do not reach the threshold of the standards of this forum. as they would not be acceptable in a court of law, without a lot more of facts, circumstances and evidence. so do your own mindwork, all you need is there.

2 and 5, do some study into the lcn and moreover the pcr technique used in these settings and you get your own answer. nothing to do with one person with 3 identities by dna. 

3, that is an easy one, that answer is in the pj files, under forensics, you just had not read careful enough, stopped to early, or did not read all there is. 

4, this is your claim, we do not have any knowledge about what has been done by who, the day possible samples were gathered in the rotley home. 

there is a certain guide line in every investigation: if a human can do something, it can be a possibility, but to give it credit, you must build it on from facts, circumstances, and evidence. speculation is nice, if you use it to make a list of possibles, or nots, beyond that it, it deserves no credit. 

disposal of a body is not a first, there are many options, most are quite horrid, by my own standards to horrid to use in a discussion on a open forum. it's not a game. even all of these options have been used before, we know that from the ones that made small mistakes and be found out in the end. i think every on of us would like to get the answers, but please always keep in mind, all this is still about a very young girl named madeleine mccann. a real person, not a fantasy figure. 

and about brueckner, i do not need a translation, i'am fluent in german, so i have seen the originals, and because i was not up to date with the specific juridical procedures in braunzweig , germany, i did looked it up. it is nothing more then a very preliminary investigation to rule a person in or out of this case for them. there are no charges at this moment. they got this person into their scope because of leads, shame the german storyteller does not know that hinweis is not translated into evidence, but into a lead. a concrete lead is a a very different level then concrete evidence in a investigation. it is far to early to think about brueckner using anything at all. so your first question is nonsense. far to early to think about.

I will take your advice and get back to you in PM, as the last thing I want is to have any arguments on line. 

Murphy's LAW applies to us all, doesn’t it?