Christian Brueckner: To be or not to be

 The Sun has got it's hat on, shout hip hip hooray - the Sun has got it's hat on and it's coming out today ....  

MADDIE 'ALIBI' Case against Madeleine McCann prime suspect Christian B set to crumble after investigators found he has an alibi

   Michael Hamilton

   22:34, 8 Jan 2022

THE case against Madeleine McCann prime suspect Christian B is set to crumble after British investigators found he has an alibi.

A team led by an ex-detective have discovered the sex predator, 44, was “30 minutes away” from the resort in Praia da Luz, Portugal, when Madeleine disappeared.

Their TV programme, Madeleine McCann: Investigating the Prime Suspect, is set to demolish the case against B, who is in jail in Germany where authorities have said he killed her.

Phone records were said to show him near the scene the night she vanished aged three in 2007.

But the new probe led by former Surrey Police detective Mark Williams-Thomas, is said to show an alibi for B “stacks up”.

The TV team, who spent months in Portugal and Germany, found new witnesses in both countries who throw his guilt into doubt.

Our source said: “They have concluded B could not have snatched Madeleine. He was 30 minutes away and was not on the phone in Praia da Luz the night she vanished.”

The three-parter is set to air on Channel 5 soon.



https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/8254151/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-b-alibi/
...................

A new probe?

       

Remember folks .... you saw it first!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10382961/Madeleine-McCann-prime-suspect-Christian-B-case-against-crumble.html

Madeleine McCann prime suspect Christian B 'will see case against him crumble after UK detectives found the sex predator was 30 minutes from the Portugal resort when she was taken'

• New probe has found that prime suspect in Madeleine case has an alibi 
  
• Christian B was not at resort on night she disappeared but '30 minutes away'
  
• Television programme Madeleine McCann: Investigating the Prime Suspect expected to dismantle case against him
  
• Witnesses were found in Portugal and Germany who cast doubt on B's guilt in case 
  

Hmmm.  Mark WC at it again.
I wonder if JC will publish this in the Olive Press, and issue an apology for his book

I WANT MY MONEY BACK !!

o dear, we already know what der hans thinks about former police officers, who say things that are not welcome.

but will the british press ask for a new reaction of der hans, or would they just go, for recycling a bit of opinion this time? like normal.

how much press shopping had dear mark m. have to do, that it ended up into a scottish sun, last years news from mark m. ended a bit as a fiasco. wasn't he the one that found the keeper of a phone number, that must have been in his nappies in 2007?

the only exciting element in this is, which tabloid would be the first to recycle this storyline. because the news about a alibi could not be news of course. as you think cb did not do it, he must have something different, so a alibi is not news here, only if cb himself could remember what he had done on 3 may 2007.

so that question has a answer too, the daily mail won.

'will see case against him crumble 

The real issue is that there isn't a Case against anyone.
Not until someone, somewhere can show some evidence
 that Madeleine was Abducted from her bed in 5A
on 3/5/7 between 2125 and 2135.

Just anything will do, to give the PJ, the BKA, OG and everyone else a start.

***

Of course being 30 minutes away is only an alibi IF you follow the time-line drawn up by . . .
dah – dah !
The MCCANNS and the TAPAS 7

If they had admitted there were no hourly, or half hourly, or 15 minute-ly checks
then being 30 minutes away at any time between 1930 and 2230 would be irrelevant.

But by inventing the whole scenario and fixing the window of opportunity to less than 5 minutes,
and writing it down, three, or even four times, and committing it to their signed statements, they have in so many words
STUFFED themselves.

yeah, we already are told, it happened under different circumstances, by the person that was there, in her own words. 

for me those 2 statements are for me still the truth between the lies.

even if we give them the complete week, there was no proof, or even a tiny lead, to think abduction was a possibility. also the then legal guardians never had said, that madeleine mccann was taken, alive or dead without the consent of them. 

simple words like taken and gone, need always a context, they are not meaning a thing without it. but telling you have knowledge of what had taken place, and that you are a witness of what had happened, gives a obligation to do justice to a victim.

there is no case against others to make. a case is already made, making a case is not the duty of a police force, their job is to solve it. 

do the germans have to wait till this new program is on air, or has mark w. already give them a call?

So we can now add a new name to the long list of people Clarke has defamed and libelled

Nicole Kidman
Robert Murat
Peter MacLeod
Anthony Bennett
Christian Brückner

The first two were paid out by other people.

The third and fourth stood on their personal dignity and did nothing more than make the observation
that they had been defamed.

Might Brückner, who has a legal advisor and nothing to lose, choose to something different ?

Madeleine McCann News: Turning the tide in the investigation! Police present new evidence For more than ten years, the fate of little Maddie McCann has moved the world. After there was no hot trail for a long time, the police have a new main suspect since June 2020. But now the investigators found new evidence that exonerates Christian B.

The British girl Maddie McCann has been missing for almost 15 years now. One night, when her parents had gone out for dinner and left Madleine and her siblings alone in their vacation apartment, Maddie McCann disappeared without a trace. While Madeleine's parents Gerry and Kate McCann have not given up hope of seeing their daughter alive again, the German prosecutor's office has been convinced for several months that Maddie McCann is dead.

Madeleine McCann News: Did Christian B. kill Maddie? Since June 2020, the investigators have a new main suspect in the German sex offender Christian B. The multiple because of Suspects with a criminal record lived in the Algarve between 1995 and 2007. He is said to have kidnapped and killed Maddie, according to the police. Currently, Christian B. is serving a multi-year sentence for rape in a prison in Lower Saxony. According to an earlier report by the British "Mirror", the investigators have no body and no DNA, but they have other evidence that leads to the conclusion that Christian B. is the perpetrator.

Police present new evidence: Does Christian B. have an alibi? But currently there is movement again in the missing person case Maddie McCann. As the British "Express" now reports, the police seem to have found an alibi for Christian B. British investigators concluded that Christian B. was 30 minutes from Praia da Luz at the time of Madeleine's disappearance and therefore could not have kidnapped the child. Telephone records are intended to substantiate and prove this theory. According to Express, the investigation is part of a new TV series airing on Channel 5 that deals with the Maddie case. Christian B. has so far denied having anything to do with the disappearance of the girl.
https://www.news.de/panorama/856073192/maddie-mccann-news-aktuell-neue-beweise-polizei-legt-alibi-fuer-christian-b-vor-wende-in-ermittlungen/1/

OK, so Wolters and BKA got it wrong about Christian Brueckner being involved but what about their claims that Madeleine was murdered? How are they going to back peddle on that claim?

Many thanks for the translation.

But in all jurisdictions in the modern western world the standard of proof in a criminal case is
Beyond a reasonable doubt.

If there is a doubt he must be found not Guilty, or more likely, not charged.
The onus will be on the prosecution to destroy the alibi, not merely call it into question.

And that in itself will not be enough. 
They have to prove he got in, and be able to demonstrate how and when
They have to prove he got out and be able to demonstrate how and when
They have to prove he took Madeleine, and be able to demonstrate how and when
They have to prove he killed her, and be able to demonstrate how and when

No one has yet been able to provide any evidence for any of those legal points

does anyone here knows anything about two books in progress , written by cb, that could be part of the evidence in the mccann case against him. they were part of what was taken from one of his places, possibly the former factory grounds he owned in germany. 

i can not find the source of this back. my memory thinks it was written in a german news write up, or one of the german forums.

i think such books, even if written as a fantasy, could very well be, why der hans and company is feeling 100% sure, but lots of people could write their fictional views about this case. a growing list have taken that step already. 

cb likes to write, he had said keep up with girls he knowed by nice letters. then there is a probably fantastic jail correspondence as mentioned in that last piece of  sonia poulton. 
it was told as being books in progress, not if it looked like a diary, or such. still books written by cb is one thing no journalist, or so-called journalist asked questions about. all other possible type of evidence got a no from der hans.

Verdi wrote:

MADDIE 'ALIBI' Case against Madeleine McCann prime suspect Christian B set to crumble after investigators found he has an alibi

   Michael Hamilton
   22:34, 8 Jan 2022

THE case against Madeleine McCann prime suspect Christian B is set to crumble after British investigators found he has an alibi.

A team led by an ex-detective have discovered the sex predator, 44, was “30 minutes away” from the resort in Praia da Luz, Portugal, when Madeleine disappeared.

Their TV programme, Madeleine McCann: Investigating the Prime Suspect, is set to demolish the case against B, who is in jail in Germany where authorities have said he killed her.

Phone records were said to show him near the scene the night she vanished aged three in 2007.

But the new probe led by former Surrey Police detective Mark Williams-Thomas, is said to show an alibi for B “stacks up”.

The TV team, who spent months in Portugal and Germany, found new witnesses in both countries who throw his guilt into doubt.

Our source said: “They have concluded B could not have snatched Madeleine. 

The three-parter is set to air on Channel 5 soon.

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/8254151/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-b-alibi/

A new probe?

First problem: The 'ex-detective' in this case is Mark Williams-Thomas, whose CV includes: resigning under a cloud from Surrey Police, aged around 30, his police career therefore over; claiming that the case of Madeleine McCann was similar to that pf Joana Cipriano (murdered by her mother and uncle!); claiming that Madeleine's body was thrown down a well; and a career of TV shows littered with false conclusions

Second problem: Where Christian Brueckner was 'on the might she vanished' is irrelevant if the evidence is that she actually vanished late on Sunday 29 April, not Thursday 3 May when her alleged abduction was reported 

Third problem: "30 minutes away"?  There are street signs where I live saying that the railway station is '5 minutes away' (on foot). There are other signs in the town saying that Welshpool is 'two hours away' (by bicycle). Does this mean '30 minutes away by car, by bike, on foot or what?

At the end of the day, when this '3-part' documentary is shown, it will make money for Williams-Thomas and the TV company, it will perpetuate the abduction myth, and contribute absolutely nothing to what really happened to Madeleine McCann.

Actually, I suspect that Williams-Thomas probably knows fine well what really happened to Madeleine McCann

I don't think the case against Brueckner will ever get to court.

Concrete evidence that Madeleine is dead?

So called friend of Brueckner, who suddenly appeared with information against him?

Why did this friend not shop him at the time when there was a £million reward, the people who are coming forward with information now, were nowhere to be seen, or heard in 2007.

Brueckner using his mobile phone "outside the McCann's apartment"?

Still waiting to fall off my chair.

I wish it would get to court, this has got to be brought to an end with Brueckner once and for all.

Tony Bennet wrote:At the end of the day, when this '3-part' documentary is shown, it will make money for Williams-Thomas and the TV company, it will perpetuate the abduction myth, and contribute absolutely nothing to what really happened to Madeleine McCann.

 . . . which is probably why the McCanns do not seek injunctions or issue threats stopping the broadcasting of these nonsense mockumentaries, and the publication of works of fiction.

If they all keep repeating "Abduction, 5A, 2125-2135, 3/5/7"   like demented Daleks, it is worth millions in savings for the Fund

MW-T and JC and all the others are doing their PR work for them, and costing nothing.

But woe betide anyone who tries to publish anything with a few facts, or an alternative to the "Official McStory"

I seem to recall MWT always broadcast his belief as being " Madeleine woke and wandered" so I'm wondering if he still holds that belief but it wasn't CB who came across her .
Interesting is what's going on making him defend the guy possibly almost everyone supporting abduction wants to see held responsible because Wolters had made public what a gross individual he is so might as well be done with this case for everyone's sake .

Angel wrote:I seem to recall MWT always broadcast his belief as being "  Madeleine woke and wandered" so I'm wondering if he still holds that belief but it wasn't CB who came across her .
Interesting is  what's going on making him defend the guy  possibly almost everyone supporting abduction wants to see held responsible because Wolters had made public what a gross individual he is so might as well be done with this case for everyone's sake .

They're all in this together and that confusion is probably part of the build up to the C5 series that they are making on the case. I bet that most of that was recorded well before we heard of CBs alibi and yet it will still be discussed in the programme.

let's say they convicted Bruckner (we know he's just a patsy but let's say they convicted him)wouldn't the McCann's take a stand in the witness box, and that's not what they want. 

so are we going to have a new patsy?

rtl germany asked der hans about an alibi for cb.

https://www.rtl.de/cms/maddie-mccann-hat-christian-b-ein-alibi-staatsanwaltschaft-widerspricht-4897338.html

in german of course.

original; Man habe "keine Kenntnis von einem Alibi", erklärte Staatsanwalt Christian Wolters gegenüber "RTL". "Uns gegenüber hat sich weder der Beschuldigte noch sein Verteidiger zur Sache geäußert", so Wolters. Die Medienberichte bestünden offenbar in erster Linie aus Vermutungen, sagte der Staatsanwalt.


You have "no knowledge of an alibi," said public prosecutor Christian Wolters to "RTL". "Neither the accused nor his defense attorney spoke to us on the matter," said Wolters. The media reports are apparently primarily made up of guesswork, said the prosecutor.



you have  has a better translation as one has....

and the mirror had a bit of the same, but in english.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/prosecutors-reject-claims-madeleine-mccann-25905370

the first conclusion must be, mark w. has not taken the liberty to assist the german investigation. 
so again we get into a trial by media. 

Prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters said: “If I had an alibi and was accused of this, I would say it. But I have heard no such claims from Brueckner or his lawyer.”


wel usually the public expects if the police got perp, they arrest them, and bring them before a judge. but modern times, we have to wait until all is been in the media. justice vernetflixed, not nice to see that happen.

onehand wrote:and the mirror had a bit of the same, but in english.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/prosecutors-reject-claims-madeleine-mccann-25905370

the first conclusion must be, mark w. has not taken the liberty to assist the german investigation. 
so again we get into a trial by media. 

Prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters said: “If I had an alibi and was accused of this, I would say it. But I have heard no such claims from Brueckner or his lawyer.”


wel usually the public expects if the police got perp, they arrest them, and bring them before a judge. but modern times, we have to wait until all is been in the media. justice vernetflixed, not nice to see that happen.

Maybe it would have helped if Wolters had bothered to question him and give him the opportunity to present his alibi. A lot of time could have saved if Wolters didn't drag his heels.

How many cases against CB have they got wrong so far?

A rape case
Inga Ghericke
Madeleine McCann

Is he some sort of willing patsy or someone willing to play along for a while until he is exonerated so that they get a story for a TV series?

yeah, in the old days, you had a criminal who did a criminal something, then the police solved the case, brought them before the court, that got them in a nice jail, now and then there was written a book about it, than even more rarely it got into a documentary, or even movie.

nowadays we have not a crime, as per portuguese police, so the british police take over, but can't find a perp, so the germans find them a perp, they tell us he is guilty on tv, but would, for the time being, not bring any charges. so some idiot writes a book about that, saying the perp did it, and another one makes a tv series about it, telling the perp had not dunnit, so the police says ; but well he did not tell us that. not the perp, not his lawyer, not the tv series puppets. so the police of germany has to wait until the tv series is to be seen on a lesser tv channel. what will make it into a cliffhanger. 

and all those people do not play nice, first all european writers of pieces for papers, have to offer their sunday afternoon with their family to write something about nothing. and then it was a scoop for the scottish sun, of all papers. that alibi finder must hate those writers of pieces very much. 

also the alibi finder has ruined all the work of the german synchronizers, before they could rehash an old reality series about the perp.

what now, would the movie come out before a charge is brought, or is that deadline just before the case gets to the courts? or would they ask judge julie for deciding this spectacle?

It will be interesting to watch this farce, paying particular attention to the timelines. Its beginning to look more and more like another hoax.

onehand wrote:Prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters said: “If I had an alibi and was accused of this, I would say it. But I have heard no such claims from Brueckner or his lawyer.”

Brückner is under no obligation to assist the Prosecutor in any way.
In English law the caution now reads

"“You do not have to say anything. But, it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.”
(Other modern jurisdictions have similar provisions,  5th Amendment and so on)

Note that it says it MAY harm your defence.
Not that it WILL destroy

You still do not have to reveal an alibi to the person questioning you. 
You are entitled to keep it 'up your sleeve' and produce it at the last minute, in court, under cross examination,
and then hope that the Prosecution QC is not able to destroy it.

there are often differences between the english law system, based on the common law, were most countries on the mainland follow civil law. 

this is a translation of the german criminal code into english; 

https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stgb/englisch_stgb.html

beside this, there is also a code of criminal procedure, in english;

https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_stpo/englisch_stpo.html

both go hand in hand. beside these books of formal law, there is also a lot of case law. so a decision of a judge in one case, could have influence on how the law in following cases has to be interpreted. 

leaflets like this one, a bit older, but changes in criminal laws are mostly small. this one is written to give a not german person some understanding of rights and happenings when you got arrested in germany.

https://www.fairtrials.org/wp-content/uploads/Germany-advice-note.pdf

criminal laws are unique to every nation. beside a national law, there is also international law, what in this case will also play a role. 

why germany does the follow up in this case is based on their habit to not extradite a german national to a court of an other nation. they have as solution to bring such a case before the german courts. 

if you look at the first link under section 5 , you can find how that is possible. 
because they go to follow up for murder, the supposed perp does not have to live in germany, but only be a german. 

if they get this case graded down by the german judge, like back to a crime against a personal liberty, it becomes more difficult, because for most, that german have to be also a formal address in germany. see point 6 and 9.

even if there comes a case before a german judge, it also means it will be under the rules and regulations of that german law. 

why in this case there is a big shot law firm in tow, is most likely not in the first processes, but what happened after that. 
this case would certainly made it to the european courts, because we see a very negative outcome in this case for the defendant. under the portuguese law he would not have to stand trial, because the maximum statute of limitations is 15 years. under german law there is not anything like that in play.

it is just not nice that a german could face a long conviction, because of only his nationality, while he choose to live in another, and when the deed was done in that country. 

also it give a lot of difficulty, because the facts and circumstances and all formal investigation is done under the law of a different country. meaning different thresholds, different systems of archiving and research facilities. 

still the principle of innocent until proven guilty stands as a first rule. in this case hardly anyone mind a lot, because there is a impression and record to see cb as a not valuable citizen, that earns a life in freedom. 
think it could be anyone of us, who one day are to stand there, while being innocent. 

until now this case had not only breach conventions, but it looks like the german prosecutors office are walking a very thin line. they have no obligation to present this case to the public, but the choose to go for the glitter and glamour. 

from the perspective of law it will become a case for the books. for me a very interested part of this saga. 
except it could have a very negative, or positive outcome for others, that have to stand in court. 

the germans are now hard at work to consolidate anything useful in portugal and the uk, and made that into usable material under german law. that part is also very interesting. that part has to happen under portuguese and british laws. meaning there will be a lot of gaps.
they would prefer not that portugal make cb into an arguido, because that makes they have to show their hand. 

in germany the judge has an active role in all proceedings. it will be the judge who will decide who will be there as a witness. so do not dream to early about kate and gerry in a courthouse. if the prosecutor chooses to follow for the first mwt theory, as in walking out and taken after that, the mccann's only role could be a form that states that madeleine beth mccann was a minor british citizen, living under their parental rights. 
but more likely, it will be a formal letter of a british court, that tell madeleine beth mccann was a existing living person, with the british nationality on a certain date. 

the lack of evidence in portugal about abduction from 5a lost any meaning, if they choose to follow the walk and wander before taken is followed. 

i think the reason the germans are 100% sure about cb as perp in this case, is into one of those books in progress they have found. a story written in the I form, as if that I tells what had taken place. that is no true form of evidence, but it could hold a lot of information , normally only be known by the perp. his career into breaking in could have given him inside knowledge about the place itself. from his records in criminal activity, he must be able to write up a fantasy about this case. 

so now the germans are running to all sides, to get behind any form of evidence that proof such a story is not fiction, but a reality. 

it looks for me, the only way how they got a 100% sure, and tell the public, if we had seen what they had, we would agree with them. all other possible concrete evidence type of things got at one point a no, we do not have such from der hans.