Christian Brueckner: To be or not to be

sandancer wrote:Yet Kate knows more than we do , because she was there !

" I know what happened wasn't due to us leaving them sleeping , I know it happened under other circumstances "

Oh how I wish she'd tell us what those " other circumstances " are !!

She did tell - indirectly..

Unless the German judiciary have evidence they've so far not revealed, they haven't even any circumstantial evidence to work on.

A phone ping from an aerial in the region of the Ocean Club and a whisper from a known felon about a confession said to be heard in a bar.

The case would be laughed out of court.

Add to that, most of the information circulating about the life and times of Brueckner is by way of the press and media, say no more.

It's repeatedly claimed that Brueckner led a life of crime, including sexually assaulting minors, but I've never seen any conclusive evidence to support such claims. Seems to be a case of it must be fact because the Mirror said so.

Anyway it's null and void, there is nothing to support a claim against Brueckner in connection with Madeleine McCann's disappearance. Append the name to whatever or whoever but that doesn't/can't change history.

Trying to pin the tale on the donkey flies in the face of fact and evidence.

Brückner “is final suspect”

By Natasha Donn

3rd May 2022

With the world’s press now maintaining that Christian Brückner has an alibi for the night Madeleine went missing, the main issue is that as of May 3 the Statute of Limitations on prosecutions of this kind has come crashing down.

This means that Christian Brückner is positively the last suspect authorities can put up.

They now have until November 3, 2029 to ‘gather proof against him’, explains legal commentator Rui Pereira.

“Any proof gathered from now on can only be directed at Brückner”, he told Correio da Manhã. This is because crimes punishable with jail terms of more than 10 years have a 15-year prosecution limit.

“In this case, the crime is one of aggravated murder, carrying a prison terms of up to 25 years (…) In my opinion (the time limit) is very short and should be extended”, he added. But the law is the law and Christian Brückner is covered by it.

Now that he has been made an official suspect, police have half the period of the legal time limit (seven and a half years) to come up with their proof that he is the man responsible for snatching Madeleine.

As Brückner is in jail, there is no huge rush – albeit more and more voices are coming out to insist the 44-year-old has simply been chosen as he is a convenient option; a scapegoat, in other words.

The scapegoat label was first fixed by former PJ police coordinator Gonçalo Amaral – the man who led the initial investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance; it was acknowledged by Brückner’s lawyer and has now been reaffirmed by British ‘investigator’ Mark Williams Thomas, whose documentary ‘Madeleine McCann: The Hunt for the Prime Suspect’ airs this evening on the AMC Crime channel.

Mark Williams Thomas’ assertions are carried today by British tabloid the Daily Mail, a newspaper that has also described him as “self promoting” and “obsessed with celebrity sex abusers” to the point that he helped police ruin the lives of several people who were “totally innocent”.

https://www.portugalresident.com/bruckner-is-final-suspect/

Daily Mail report here: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10776215/Christian-Brueckner-monster-Im-sure-didnt-says-Madeleine-McCann-investigator.html

We're all waiting for Operation Grange to admit they wasted millions of Pounds. Then re-start the investigation from the beginning and first people to eliminate would be the parents. Not sure they'd be eliminated if the Police did their investigation properly next time.

'Mistakes were made'. 'Opportunities were missed' etc.

at silent scope; why would hcw be wrong, or mistaken, it is a separate case, the one of the american lady had already a conviction. this a new one from the statements of the duo of witnesses. 

the text in your picture is unreadable, why not just give a link to it. 

of the about 5 cases without any link to madeleine mccann, two do not have dates, one a older lady, unknown identity, and a young lady, who is much younger, identity also unknown. and for both cases the dates are also not known. 

the description of the case of the young lady by mouth of manfred s. did get a lot of comments online, because she was described as very young, different statements between 14 and 16, but the age of consent under german law is 14 years, i never realized they never changed that bit. 

the same as it is possible to file a case against a unknown perpetrator, it also can be done from a unknown victim. criminal law is not about the victim, but an offence against the state or people, in most countries the victim has no active role, besides maybe and when possible that of being a witness. 

hcw has his witnesses, and some circumstances, none of that what has gotten out in the media is hard evidence, it still could be sprouted from the fantastical minds of two junkies and known criminals. 
it is just a bid to see how low can you go in court without sound evidence and facts, but even the case of the american lady was already very flimsy. 

i do not like it you reproduce a non expert internet opinion about dementia of a victim. it is the role of the defending lawyer to see to such things and it did not happen at the time of that trial. so there was no official diagnosis out and about. and as i did mention above, the victim has no separate role, other than being a witness in a criminal case. so even a official diagnosis would not stand anything in the way of a court case.

my personal opinion about that specific court case in germany is thin ice, but do not forget, cb had still the right to appeal against the outcome, he even could have brought on a lousy presentation by his lawyer, the moment you do not make use of these rights you agree with your conviction. it is not a one sided affair. he could even have challenged the judge. it was certainly not his first dance. 

again on personal note, i think with a better quality lawyer the verdict could have had a different outcome, but you never can bet on the outcome of any court case. and there are stipulations in place if the representation is incompetent. 

even if we look away of all the cases presented against cb because of the portugal connections, cb is still not a good guy. he never had showed the will to not harm others in his way of life. he had a bad form well before that. for me it does not feel right to drag victims of a crime through the mud of internet, because even if there is a chance the perp in their case was not cb, these people are still victims of crimes that are very damaging to them and usually take a heavy toll on the quality of their lives forever. 

the victims are not the prosecutioners, and there is no need to give them a trial by media. usually victims are already pretty tried and tested before there is a trial. 
and criminals do not need a hero status, they do not deserve that at all. they keep more than enough rights to protect them. 

being able to write down your full day to day active life on a calendar is usually not associated with having dementia. 
the human memory ability is graded as overall very bad, already well known for so called long term memory, and also short term memory is pretty recent given that same complement. 
it is up to the court to accept and declare a witness fit to testify. even if after a testimony is given there are reasons that make their opinion different, the court still can decide to scrap the use out of the trial. 
i agree hcw is quite unique in his presentation and behavior in the media, but you can not tell me the complete german justice system is incompetent as a rule.

where is the post from silent scope gone?

Dag Meneer / Hi Sir,
I deleted it because I was also not happy with the Qaulity of the Spiegel TV Screenshot I took ages ago, that is also why there is no Link to the Picture. It is from one of Spiegels Dokus.

HCW might have made a mistake however, which may be revealing.

From HCW Press release:

1. at an unspecified time between 28.12.2000 and 08.04.2006 to have surprised an unknown approx. 70-80 year old woman in her vacation apartment in Portugal in her bedroom. Then the masked accused is to have tied up and raped the victim. He then allegedly beat the victim several times with a whip. The accused is said to have recorded the entire event with a video camera.

StA Wolters should know the EXACT Date AND the Victim Diane M was Identified.

It was on the 02.09.2005, after watching the News about Hurricane Katrina she went to check her Emails when she was attacked. 



It is all in his own Files.

Why does he now not want to know the Victims name? Or when it happened?

Or is it something he does not want US to know?

come on get real silent scope, look up the list of the cases they wanted to charge cb for and you will find there was another case with an older victim hcw was charging cb against, that piece is not about the 2005 case of the american lady at all. 

you can charge against a unknown perp, you can charge a named one with an unknown date and unknown victim. 

you are just mixing two different cases. 

i give you the press information, you are citing from, it is in german, as you know and understand well. 

https://staatsanwaltschaft-braunschweig.niedersachsen.de/startseite/aktuelles/presseinformationen/anklageerhebung-wegen-mehrerer-sexualstraftaten-gegen-den-verdachtigen-im-fall-madeleine-maddie-mccann-216151.html

these are 5 new and fresh cases, the case of the american lady from 2005 is a case already closed with a final verdict, even hcw would not think to bring that again. you would not find that 2005 case in this press information. 

you are just milking the wrong cow!

so it is you who are very much mistaken!

for others, the link gives the official press statement from hcw, please translate it if needed with the translating app of your choice. it is the full list of new cases hcw wanted to charge cb with, and these cases are the ones the braunschweig courts have declared themselves incompetent. they have no territory because cb by representation of his lawyer told the court, his as last accepted officially registered address was faulty, because he bought and owned a terrain, we know as the old box factory in another state within germany. 
he was not only owner of the terrain, but also lived there, even as we would see it as in a primitive way. 

so this spectacle has little meaning on older cases like the 2005 one with the american lady as a victim, to say it in simple terms, that case is done and dusted. no appeal possible, the verdict was finalized. like all his earlier convictions. 

legally you can not say cb can no longer be charged with these 5 cases, der hans can seek appeal, and there are even more appeals possible from both sides, even up to the european courts, well we know a bit how that works by now, because of the court adventures of the mccanns of course. 
or the competent court in the state of sachsen anholt accept it to work these cases under their jurisdictions, or the court that serves the arrival on airport frankfurt can do that. 

so actually it is only a legal battle for the time being, it means these case are standing still. all what now can happen is trow the ax, and stop all action against cb in these 5 cases on the list in the press statement, or seek appeal or a agreement with one of the other jurisdictions that can work the cases. 

it will have implications for the case of madeleine mccann with cb as suspect, because braunschweig would not be competent for that case in the same manner, with also the same escape routes possible. 

the incompetence of the courts of braunschweig means als that their can be no competence to do the investigation in any case against cb in braunschweig. it is not the same as cb is or was innocent, because it is not about guilt. it is only a technicality, legally it means court incompetent, the prosecution and police in that same district must be seen as incompetent, none can legally work these cases, but usually there are fixes possible to keep working these cases for the time being and until it becomes clear who can work these cases. 

it depends on manpower, budgets and the want to take the cases through the court stages, so braunschweig can ask because of time and money invested to get an exception, or an other competent state can just take over these cases.

my expectations, none of these cases have duration, all are pretty old and controversial, so it is not to be expected it got a quick fix. there is simple no need for it, it would not make a difference on the outcome in a court. so it can take easily a year if they only have to get to a conclusion about who is competent and if another court want the case done. and easily up to 5 years if it ends up the full way up to the european courts, again, these cases do not need a quick fix, so usually no need for a quick answer of the european court. 

the problem for germany is, cb is getting to around 3/4 of his active sentence, and can get paroled, but even if parole is not given, it is unlikely he still will be in prison when any of these cases can start. after this he just will be a free man, there is no way to keep him restricted without a court decision on at least a case against him.

cb can decide to leave germany, what is difficult, because he would give up the protection to be extradited to another country, like portugal, if their minster of justice has taken use of his right to declare some national importance on the madeleine case and by that lifts the statute of limitations. 
but germany has to do the whole get him back circus over again, with the usual legalities that go with an arrest warant and extradition. 

so only when der hans decides to rest with the incompetent declaration of his residing court, there is to say it is probably over. but still the state cb was to be seen as legal resident can decide to take cases against cb. 

so all in all there is reason to hoist a flag, bring on the fireworks, what in itself would also be very unrespectful to the victims in these 5 other cases that are on loose sand, they deserve their justice too!

so at least do not start new fiction by mixing up different cases, it is also not a declaration of innocence.

Silentscope:
Have you any Link to this other older Case you speak of?

HCW mentions no other unknown Pensioner being attacked before Diane M.

1. Diane M. 02.09.2005. 
2. Unknown 14 year old Girl. Time unknown.
3. Hazel B. 15.06.2004
4. Joanna E. 04.2007.
5. Playground case. 2017

That is my understanding.

common silent scope, even in germany there is a rule of law you cannot be tried twice in the same case, and even der hans would not reopen a case they won. 

number one, is the case manfred s. was telling the world as being in his age range hinting on adult activities, and that must have told something in italian to cb in the video. helge b. told she was much older and spoke english. 

the 2005 case with the american lady as a victim became final in 2020.

her lawyer has already tried to reopen that one, or to get it declared void, but was unsuccessful. only when he gets the other case of the table, he can try to go for a declaration of incompetence of that same court in the 2005 case. 

i did look at twitter, and a lot is said over there about case dropped, this is not what is happened, it could happen that all the cases are getting dropped, but courts do not work in weekends. there is no definitiv answer, it takes its time. it is not that a bunch of officers in braunschweig are standing at the paper shredder or the copy machines, emptying out their desks. courts do not work in weekends. there isnot even a motivation on the website of the court.

all there is, is the declaration of incompetence of the courts in braunschweig to handle these 5 cases. publication by her lawyer.
you can not predict what the outcome will be for those 5 cases, you can say all other cases in the making by braunschweig against cb can also not be handled by the braunschweig courts. 
it is not a new thing, and there are solutions to be looked into. 

by points of law you can say, after that court decision was published there are at this moment no open cases against cb. der hans have some weeks to appeal, germany has not a very long period to do that usually.  

at the moment it is not about any earlier conviction of cb, and the 2005 case has such a conviction. 
all 5 cases on that list are new cases, der hans was asking for an arrest warrant, to be able to bring on charges. it is nonsense to get the idea you have to do that in a case that is already having a verdict. all 5 cases are new cases. the 2005 case is a earlier and very separate case of these 5.

also again, these 5 cases have victims, only in 3 of the 5 they are known by names. these people do deserve their justice. it is not okay to put a full party mode out when a serial offender escapes trial. in one of these 5 cases a group of young children became victims of cb, he was caught red handed. the other 4 cases he could have declared himself as being innocent. the court would have to decide and a court still can decide about that. only not the court of braunschweig

the handling of these case by der hans is not something that becomes the new german standard. even the 2005 case was not up to the usual standards of practice. 
it is always nice when it is clear someone was indeed the perp. and it is always good when people are made responsible for the things they indeed have done.

technicalities are just no declaration of innocence. yes, it had set free many criminals, you know the people you do not want to live near, or find on your own paths of life. there is very little reason to play it all around as if this cb figure is the hero. if cb is your hero, something is certainly wrong between your ears. 


so please silentscope, do not rewrite official statements yourself, case number one is a new accusation against cb, for a supposed criminal act, to a unknown woman of an estimated age, on a unknown time within a certain time frame, at a place unknown. 

case number one is resting on only spoken witness statements, as they have produced from their memory of supposedly seen video materials, on a day after cb was arrested and in jail in 2006. 
der hans has decided this is not the same lady as in the 2005 case, so another supposed victim of an criminal act. 

proceedings in courts with many unknown qualifications are not rare, most examples are found in war crimes, if you look at how the most law systems on the mainland are founded, names and dates are not that important, the important part is the criminal act that has taken place. 

the victim has no active role in these systems of law, because the crime itself is an act against all of us, to society, usually taken together as versus the people, or the state, the prosecution officer represents the people or the state. 
there is hardly any direct representation of the victim as a person. the victim is part of the society. a victim is not separated as another kind of human.

it gets a bit changed, like we have for just a few years room to let the victim, or a representation of the victim speak out in the court to the accused at the end of the trial. 

it is also the society, or better the representation of the society that makes the law. 

it does not matter if a victim is unknown to us, or the law, it is all about what criminal act had taken place. 
and it is also very practical, because the accused and the victims do often not know about the identity of the others. even when the identity of a dead body is never known, if there is evidence of murder, it will still be handled as the crime of murder. 

and it is not uncommon, when you caught someone red handed, they do not tell who they are, and it can take a lot of time to find it out, but they can not escape the law. it is getting easier to find out who such a person is, but it is not a deal breaker when it comes to law. 

if names and other facts like time, date and place are known, they will be part of the case files. there are rules and regulations when to use names of victims in public publications.

it is you, silent scope who has taken the liberty to put a name to case number 1 out of 5, and it still is you who are mistaken. the 2005 case of the american lady, there is no need to put her name out, is not part of these 5 cases, and is not the same case as number one in the statement of hcw. number 1 is in itself just another and unique case hcw his office wanted to accuse cb as soon as it the court pleased to get him permission to start a case against cb. 

so please, do remove the name of a victim from an much earlier case from your listings, it has no purpose at all, and it is even quite offending to re-use that victim her name in such a faulty list. the 2005 case has already a verdict. a final one.

i still agree that the 2005 case was not a high standard one from the side of the prosecution. but the court has already spoken. there is no communication made public about reopening at all. 
you need new hard evidence to get a finalized verdict taken down. but at this moment in time this case is silent and resting under that final verdict. 

and you could read in the media just like all others, that even hcw never has communicated he would reopen the 2005 case by his actions, but you could have read and hear hcw was bringing on 5 other cases against cb. 

so please stop to rewrite history. there are many old ladies in the world who can be victim of a crime, the victim in the 2005 case is not the only one. it is pretty common for serial offenders to look for and use victims of the same type and age group. 
accusation number 1 is another crime with a modus operandi that has a lot in common to the case of 2005, but to a different victim. 

hcw would not bring out an new accusation in the same case he already has a won in court. the 2005 case is already tried, has a verdict and a final one.  

silent scope it is up to you to prove that case number one on the listings of hcw is the same case as the 2005 one

i prove my point with the court number of the finalization of the 2005 case verdict, as to be found in the database jure in german. the number is; BGH 04.11.2020 6 StR 41/20 

the full court listings of procedure in the 2005 it to find in this link; 

https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Gericht=LG%20Braunschweig&Datum=18.11.2020&Aktenzeichen=50%20StVK%20418/20

statement of motivation by the court, in german; https://www.bundesgerichtshof.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilungen/DE/2020/2020143.html

@onehand Wrote:

Silentscope it is up to you to prove that case number one on the listings of hcw is the same case as the 2005 one.

No my friend, it is not.
It is up to Wolters to prove he has a new unknown Victim in an unknown Time.

I fail to see why - as you rightly Stated - he has chosen to include the Diana M Case in this Press Statement when it has already been Judged and is Final.

I consider this Case personally as a possibly Unsafe conviction. (IMHO)

so show me where hcw, as you stated, he included the 2005 case in his press communication about cases he served to the court of braunschweig. because he did not in the statement i have read. 

where in your citation is the hint to that 2005 case. 

it is only your deduction that their was no such case before the 2005 one, but that is not what is stated by hcw in his statement at all. 

this is the original german citation of case 1;
1. Zu einem nicht näher bestimmbaren Zeitpunkt zwischen dem 28.12.2000 und dem 08.04.2006 eine unbekannt gebliebene ca. 70-80 Jahre alte Frau in ihrer Ferienwohnung in Portugal in deren Schlafzimmer überrascht zu haben. Dann soll der maskierte Angeschuldigte das Opfer gefesselt und vergewaltigt haben. Anschließend habe er mehrfach mit einer Peitsche auf das Opfer eingeschlagen. Das gesamte Geschehen soll der Angeschuldigte mit einer Videokamera aufgezeichnet haben.


source; https://staatsanwaltschaft-braunschweig.niedersachsen.de/startseite/aktuelles/presseinformationen/anklageerhebung-wegen-mehrerer-sexualstraftaten-gegen-den-verdachtigen-im-fall-madeleine-maddie-mccann-216151.html


translation by deepl; 
1. at an unspecified time between 28.12.2000 and 08.04.2006, to have surprised an unknown 70-80 year old woman in her holiday flat in Portugal in her bedroom. The masked accused then allegedly tied up the victim and raped her. He then beat the victim several times with a whip. The accused is said to have recorded the entire event with a video camera.



the unknown time is established only before cb his portuguese sentance for the diesel theft. it is not known when this case has taken place, it could be before or after the 2005 case of the 72 year old american lady, it is just a complete different case, that has only the modus operandi in common with the 2005 case. 


there is nothing in the statement of hcw that give room to deduce it is about the 2005 case, only your mind makes it into that. for the 2005 case all is already known and been through the courts, the date, name of the victim, age and place of the crime, and even the crimes are already formulated in a court of law.


why can you not understand that there could be more cases with just the same modus operandi. but very different and unique in their own right victims. 


as far as we can know, case number 1, a crime against a unknown victim, on a unknown time and place, rests only on witness statements about finding/stealing, depending on the media they told their stories to, a video camera with tapes/film or other storing device containing evidence of such crimes happening with cb visible or by recognizing his voice in it. the video device or the storing devices are never be shown. 


most of case 1 is in the public domain by mouth of manfred s. look back at the sat eins docu about it. it is out and about everywhere. you can look by yourself and hear his own voice telling about a case, that was not the 2005 one, but another one. both witnesses have never ever stated they have seen the victim of the 2005 case on a device. 
in court of the 2005 case, the modus operandi of what is now known as case 1 in the press statement of hcw, was used to connect cb to the 2005 case.  the witnesses did connect cb to being able to such modus operandi, because they stated they had seen cb doing it on another video. 


there is never been a video or any device for storage or produce video material shown in tn court during the trial of the 2005 case. 


so yes, again i ask you, do show me your proof of case number 1 being the same case as the 2005 case with as a victim a 72 years old american lady. 


you have said nothing to prove hcw made a mistake with that at all. i do not have high regards of der hans, but i do not see him making any mistake as you present to us. 

the official press communication of the court itself about the latest developments;

for original german, just look here; 

https://landgericht-braunschweig.niedersachsen.de/aktuelles/landgericht-braunschweig-erklart-sich-in-dem-verfahren-2-kls-213-js-52790-18-15-22-vergewaltigung-sexueller-missbrauch-fur-unzustandig-221592.html

translation with deepl;

Braunschweig Regional Court declines jurisdiction in proceedings 2 KLs 213 Js 52790/18 (15/22) (rape, sexual abuse)
BRAUNSCHWEIG REGIONAL COURT DECLINES JURISDICTION IN THE PROCEEDINGS 2 KLS 213 JS 52790/18 (15/22) (RAPE, SEXUAL ABUSE)

In the course of the interlocutory proceedings in the above-mentioned proceedings, the Regional Court of Braunschweig examined, inter alia, the local jurisdiction pursuant to section 16 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) and, by order of 19.04.2023, declared itself without jurisdiction with regard to the indictment of the Public Prosecutor's Office of Braunschweig dated 05.10.2022 (see also press release of 12.10.2022).

In detail:

The 2nd Criminal Chamber stated that the jurisdiction of the Regional Court of Braunschweig was solely due to the place of jurisdiction of the last domicile pursuant to § 8 para. 2 2nd Alt. StPO came into consideration. The place of jurisdiction of the last domicile was exclusively determined for the case that the accused no longer had a current domestic domicile and the habitual residence was unknown or abroad. The accused currently no longer has a domestic residence, as he is housed in a correctional institution and his last habitual residence was abroad.

It is true that the accused was originally resident and also registered in the local district. However, in the opinion of the chamber, this is not relevant, since the accused - as he himself also submitted - established a new and thus last residence in Saxony-Anhalt. This was also supported by the fact that he was entered in the land register as the owner of a property there. In addition to various vehicles, the accused's personal belongings were also on this property. Two months later, he fled abroad. He kept the property.

After a comprehensive assessment of all the arguments presented, the chamber assumed that the accused had last resided outside of the local district and therefore declared itself incompetent.

The accused is currently in criminal custody in another matter. The Regional Court cancelled the additional arrest warrant of 18.11.2022 (see also press release of 28.11.2022). Against this background, the question of urgent suspicion did not have to be re-examined. The revocation has no influence on the further serving of the current sentence.

The order can be challenged by simple appeal pursuant to section 304 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The appeal would then have to be decided by the Higher Regional Court of Braunschweig.

Background:

§ 8 Place of jurisdiction of the domicile or place of residence.

(1) The place of jurisdiction is also established at the court in whose district the accused has his domicile at the time the action is brought.

(2) If the defendant does not have a domicile within the area of application of this Federal Act, the place of jurisdiction shall also be determined by the habitual place of residence and, if such a place is not known, by the last place of residence.

maybe hcw did not directly, but his witnesses did. look back to the video material with manfred s. 

and you can see the best declaration it is indeed a different case, in the press communication of the court.

in german;

Der Angeklagte befindet sich derzeit in anderer Sache in Strafhaft. Das Landgericht hat den zusätzlichen Haftbefehl vom 18.11.2022 (s. auch Pressemitteilung vom 28.11.2022) aufgehoben. Die Frage des dringenden Tatverdachts war vor diesem Hintergrund nicht erneut zu prüfen. Die Aufhebung hat keinen Einfluss auf die weitere Verbüßung der derzeitigen Strafhaft.


translation;

The accused is currently in criminal custody in another matter.



there is never been a video that contains the abuse of the american lady in 2005. both witnesses helge b and manfred s. have declared about the once existence of video material, but not from this lady, but another, but helge keeps on it was an old lady, manfred openly told on screen, the lady was not that old, he estimated she was in his range of candidates for adult entertainment, also helge told the lady on video spoke in english, but manfred stated it was in italian. 


both are also the source for the other case with a unknown victim and time and date, the accusation estimated her age as about 14, manfred s, said 15,16 years of age. the place of that crime is known, because both witnesses could recognize the large wooden beam in the living room of the cottage/small finca near pdl, where cb lived before he got caught and send to jail. 


there is never any video produced with the victim of the 2005 case in it, or in the case of the irish young lady. but in both cases the filming of his victim was part of the modus operandi.


the testimony of helge b and manfred s. could be used to sustain a connection between modus operandi on the video and the statement of the victim of the case in 2005, because both told, cb was heard on screen, and at the end of his doings he put of his mask on screen. the storing device itself and the material video itself have never been in court.


hcw could choose to bring on the cases with unknown victims, because both his witnesses have been earlier accepted as sound enough to convict. we only do see the press communication, but he had to do a lot more to convince the court these 5 new cases, they happen longer ago, but prosecution is new, could pass the court.
5 new cases is a lot, but it meant if the court did not accept one or more, he had still some left. 


but i do not get the misunderstanding, why would any prosecution want to do a case over again, if that case already had a final verdict? and yes the 2005 case and case number 1 and 2 have a lot of questionable points, so there is never a good argument to choose to do it again, also it would not be called a new case or a different case, but a reopening, and it would be very unusual to do that with 4 or 5 other cases in tow.


the second case of depending of witnesses between 40 and 80 years old is not new in discussion. 


cb is at this moment nearing 3/4 of his sentence he got for the 2005 case of the american lady in portugal, the full sentence was 7 years.  in this case the victim is known by name, age and also the place the crime took place is known. that information was always known, because there is a crime report made in portugal. 


in 2017 helge b. sought contact with operation grange and told cb into the story of madeleine mccann, but also refereed to the video's, grange got in contact with the german police, and the german police asked portugal about rape cases with the quite horrific description as helge had told about he has seen on the videodevice.
manfred s. was found on a unknown moment to be also witness of the video's. 


the 2005 case was found in portugal that did indeed had the same mo as seen by both men. 


but the two ladies seen on the video's by both men, never have taken the step to report a crime. the irish young lady recognized her abuse in the descriptions that ended up in the media, she had taken the step to file a crime report.


but the list of 5 cases hcw had brought to the attention of the court for possibility to prosecute, are 5 different and not earlier proceeded cases. 


there must be a bit of statement somewhere from hcw that do call out to both and other ladies to come forward.


there was in the official call out for information only a little sentence; have you been a victim of his crimes yourself.


the german media have still small pieces online about the time the accusations are brought on.


https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/madeleine-maddie-mccann-haftbefehl-gegen-christian-b-wegen-weiterer-sexualstraftaten-erlassen-a-73e3e5f9-5a57-4a38-978d-5e49816676be


citation; Some of the other alleged victims are unknown so far. The investigators refer to video recordings which the accused himself is said to have made of the victims during the crimes. However, the police do not have the recordings. The prosecution relies on witness statements by two men who testified about the videos. One of them had also accused B. in the Madeleine McCann case. The three-year-old girl had disappeared from a Portuguese holiday resort in 2007. To this day, there is no trace of Madeleine.

want a different one, try this one to long to translate;https://www.stern.de/panorama/verbrechen/fall--maddie---die-akte-des-hauptverdaechtigen-christian-b--32807434.html

or this one, even better;https://regionalheute.de/verdaechtiger-im-maddie-fall-fuer-weitere-verbrechen-angeklagt-braunschweig-gifhorn-goslar-harz-helmstedt-peine-salzgitter-wolfsburg-1665495762/

it is not known when this case 1 (and case 2) happened, only that it has to have been before he was in jail in april 2006 in portugal, and helge b and manfred s. raided his cottage. the most earliest date is usually from when the type of video system became on the market , together with cb being in portugal.  
cb came out of jail just before christmas 2006, but did never have lived at that pdl address after it. 

it is not the only detail that gives a mix up because it is taken on by the uk media.  so in total there have been 4 rape cases to women brought in investigation against cb, the first one is the already final verdict case of 2005, of the 72 years old american lady. the others are the case of the irish holiday rep, the very young lady, that made a mess of cb his carpet, estimated between 14 and 15 or 16 by manfred s. and the second older lady no name, no date and time and no place known. only the last 3 are part of the 5 cases in the accusation that is for now in a stand still until further notice. the other two cases of the 5 are the beach case with a 10 or 11 years old girl and the playground case where cb was caught red handed by parents and taken into custody in portugal, before being extradited to germany, for earlier convictions of child abuse and drugs.

there is also absolutely nothing to gain from opening up the 2005 case, but everything to loose, the risk it becomes a mistrial is far to great, that means they have to let go of cb immediately, without the 2005 case there are no outstanding cases against him to keep him of the streets. so even when hcw gives not a very good representation of a prosecution officer, he is not completely of his rocker. 

maybe the media and the bka could have been more clear in their presentation, but their is nothing that will tell the 2005 case and case 1 are the same case. because they are not and have never been that.

There is something deeply disturbing about this mix of information collated from various sources over the years - it keeps leading me back to Spain.

I recall having posted-up my rough translation of Manfred S's appearance on a Madeleine McCann documentary.  Looking back on the Netflix thread I found this taken from an old Telegraph report..

Meanwhile, Julian Peribanez, a Spanish private investigator once hired by the McCanns tells the documentary he infiltrated a paedophile ring sharing obscene videos and passed their details to police. Twenty three people were questioned and 13 arrested, and a former head of cybercrime told the documentary: “Some of these investigations may lead to these minors being found and rescued from their captors."

“There is always something left to do until you find her,” he says.

This might appear irrelevant - depends where it leads.

I think I have found the confusion.

Onehand is correct that: The accused is currently in criminal custody in another matter.


The other matter was that he was already in Prison in Kiel for selling Drugs on the Holiday Island of Sylt. He denied Raping the Pensioner.


Christian B. hat die Tat stets bestritten. Zurzeit sitzt er noch eine andere Haftstrafe ab, zu der er wegen Drogenhandels auf Sylt verurteilt worden ist.

Source:
https://www.welt.de/politik/article220592440/Fall-Maddie-Tatverdaechtiger-bleibt-in-Haft.html

the famous or infamous hair of cb, i heard some time ago a bit of a podcast with a true forensic expert in these affairs, i did looked her up, and i think that even john lowe would not have gotten beyond one of his famous inconclusives with that.

the problem is, that there is no unrestricted access at this moment in time, so a lot that is out there, is from tit bits people have downloaded and kept before, most german media guys do have print outs, but it is very difficult to check if it is still the real deal. 

in june 2020 when it all began rolling the german database was still open for the summaries of all cb his convictions, i did looked them up when there was a list shared everywhere, and only kept my notes. but from september 2020 on the older case information about cb got barred.

and most is still is. so it is hard to really check what is said in the media. 

and i will look if i can still find that podcast, but if this expert was correct, than that hair is only used to blindsided a judge with scientific mumble jumble. and the 2005 case was mostly resting on the two with a reputation, a bad one. 

i still find it very difficult to think you get, based on what i could find, the 2005 case through a court. i never had the luck to work with such an easy peasy prosecution officer. i am used to the nitty picky ones, that always asks you for more, more info, more background, and more facts, more evidence before a case even made it to a court. 

and from my certainly not endless experience with the german justice people, and them being german, it is still unthinkable to foresee such an adventure as der hans had made of it all. 

amaral already has told a fair bit about the evidence der hans made use of. of course we are not able to check amaral, but no one has taken it on besides der hans to say amaral his words have not been in line with reality. her lawyer is making fair use of it. so there is little needed to just accept amaral was pretty serious in what he told. and from that very correct too.

so i dare to say from every thing that is out there, that one thing der hans never will risk, and that is reopening of that case of 2005. it is his golden egg, the madeleine mccann case is his golden goose, his pension plan. and he need some of the 5 other cases to get that into a court.

read on , his drugs sentence was over in februari 2021, so that is not the other case he was in jail for in oktober 2022.

the uk media was not shy for keeping posting that drugs related sentence as his reason to be in jail much longer.

According to the verdict, B. grows up in a home, starts an apprenticeship as a car mechanic after graduating from secondary school. As early as 1992, B. commits his first burglary, followed by several thefts.

In 1994, B. stands trial in Bavaria for the first time on charges of "abuse of a child" and "performing sexual acts in front of a child. To avoid a juvenile sentence of two years, B. breaks off his education and moves to Lagos in Portugal without further planning.

Over the next few years, B. and his girlfriend finance their livelihood by acquiring advertising customers for a German newspaper; later, B. performs assembly work in the company of an acquaintance. Because he does not become the managing director there as he had hoped, he sets up his own business in Portugal together with his girlfriend and another acquaintance.

But the plan does not work out: B. is arrested in Portugal, extradited to Germany and the execution of his juvenile sentence is implemented. Meanwhile, his acquaintance forces him out of the joint business. After serving his sentence in 2000, B. is left with nothing. His girlfriend has meanwhile separated from him, and he moves back to Portugal.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Source:
https://www.rnd.de/panorama/sexualstraftater-mit-grossen-planen-das-leben-des-christian-b-VDXFDHQUINDOPF2BPDUXAHKALY.html

EXCLUSIVE:  MADELEINE MCCANN SUSPECT SEX CRIMES TRIAL WILL STILL GO AHEAD

Prosecutor and victim tell Olive Press it is merely 'a technicality' and Brueckner will soon face justice.

By Jon Clarke (Publisher & Editor) - 21 Apr, 2023 @ 13:06

A SEX offences trial of Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner in Germany has not been cancelled.

Despite global headlines to the contrary yesterday, a date had not yet been set for a hearing of the five charges that were levelled at the convicted paedophile, 46, in October last year.

The chief prosecutor in the case has told the Olive Press it is ‘merely an issue of jurisdiction’ and the trial will ‘certainly’ still go ahead.

Hans Christian Wolters confirmed there was ‘no reason to speculate’ and ‘nothing has changed’ after Braunschweig Landgericht, or the city’s lower court, provisionally passed the case over to the region of Magdeburg.

“And in terms of the Maddie case, for now, nothing will change as a result of the decision and we are continuing to investigate it,” he added.




In fact, police sources in Germany, told the Olive Press the case against Brueckner abducting and killing the British toddler in Praia da Luz, in May 2007, is ‘stronger than ever’.

And meanwhile, new evidence has emerged over the five s-e-x charges, three rapes and two child abuse cases, all in Portugal, between 1999 and 2017.

In particular, in the vicious rape of Irish woman, Hazel Behan, on the Algarve, in 2004, a new ‘key witness’ has recently come forward, the Olive Press can reveal.

The technicality, which will merely slow down the prosecution ‘between two and five months’, came about after Brueckner’s lawyer, Friedrich Fulscher, insisted the Braunschweig court had no jurisdiction over the case, as his client’s last address was near Magdeburg, 100km away.

However, as Wolters explained, this was a deserted box factory, in the village of Neuwegersleben, that had no running water, electricity or sewage.

Under German law you cannot be registered permanently at such an address and he will appeal the decision to Braunschweig’s upper court next week.

Failing that he will argue his case at Germany’s BGH High Court, which he would be ‘confident of winning’ as it has already made similar rulings on jurisdiction cases.

He is certain the sex offender was living on and off in Braunschweig since 2013 and had various addresses, plus an official PO Box there.

He has also been tried and convicted of the rape of a 70-year-old American pensioner, in Portugal, in 2005, at Braunschweig court, for which he is serving a seven-year prison sentence.

“It is logical that he be tried for all sex crimes in Braunschweig then,” explained a police source. “However, it doesn’t matter where the case is tried, the evidence has been uncovered and compiled from the BKA police headquarters in Wiesbaden.

“That evidence is stronger than ever and, if needs be, Braunschweig will send two of their prosecution team to Magdeburg to get the court there up to speed.

“Brueckner will still face these heinous crimes for which there is lots of very strong evidence, particularly, in the case of Hazel.”

Behan, a mother-of-two, now based near Dublin, told the Olive Press today she was initially ‘horrified’ the case would be dropped, but ‘has faith’ in the German police that the prosecution will continue.

“When I was called yesterday saying the trial had been dropped and asking how I felt, I was horrified. It came out of the blue and I couldn’t understand why neither my lawyer nor the police had notified me first.

“I now understand from my solicitor in Germany this is just a way for Brueckner’s team to slow down proceedings and it is merely a technicality.

“Thankfully I am still looking forward to facing this evil man in court and seeing justice finally done,” she added. “I hope this is sooner than later.”

The further crimes for which he was formally charged last year were the violent rape of a teenager and another older woman, in Praia da Luz, between 1999 and 2006 and the groping of a 10-year-old girl on a beach in 2007, plus exposing himself to four children in 2017 in a playground.

https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2023/04/21/exclusive-maddie-suspect-sex-crimes-trial-will-still-go-ahead/

Silentscope wrote:According to the verdict, B. grows up in a home, starts an apprenticeship as a car mechanic after graduating from secondary school. As early as 1992, B. commits his first burglary, followed by several thefts.

In 1994, B. stands trial in Bavaria for the first time on charges of "abuse of a child" and "performing sexual acts in front of a child. To avoid a juvenile sentence of two years, B. breaks off his education and moves to Lagos in Portugal without further planning.

Over the next few years, B. and his girlfriend finance their livelihood by acquiring advertising customers for a German newspaper; later, B. performs assembly work in the company of an acquaintance. Because he does not become the managing director there as he had hoped, he sets up his own business in Portugal together with his girlfriend and another acquaintance.

But the plan does not work out: B. is arrested in Portugal, extradited to Germany and the execution of his juvenile sentence is implemented. Meanwhile, his acquaintance forces him out of the joint business. After serving his sentence in 2000, B. is left with nothing. His girlfriend has meanwhile separated from him, and he moves back to Portugal.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Source:
https://www.rnd.de/panorama/sexualstraftater-mit-grossen-planen-das-leben-des-christian-b-VDXFDHQUINDOPF2BPDUXAHKALY.html

'According to the verdict' reads like a court decision - it takes the whole thing out of context.

It is not taken from a legal document, it is a German press report reporting bits and pieces taken from other press reports.

Strange isn't it, someone who has led a life of crime, heinous and otherwise, manages to duck and dive authority yet leave a trail of salacious juice to satiate the appetite of the press and media.

The article in full..

Sex offenders with 'big plans': The life of Christian B.

Matthias Schwarzer
05.06.2020, 14:19h

Christian B. is considered the prime suspect in the case of the missing Maddie McCann. His résumé reads like a thriller: He changes his place of residence and his job countless times, always ending up in prison. There are few constants – apart from sex and violence.

Brunswick. 13 years after Maddie McCann's disappearance, imprisoned sex offender Christian B. is the prime suspect. The 43-year-old German is urgently suspected of having something to do with the disappearance of the then three-year-old British woman in Portugal. The Braunschweig authorities have initiated proceedings on suspicion of murder.

Christian B. is no stranger - his criminal record is long: sexual abuse of children, assault, drug trafficking, grand theft, drunk driving. B. has been in prison in Kiel JVA since December 2019. He was sentenced to seven years in prison for aggravated rape combined with extortion.

The court judgment from 2019, which is available to the editorial network Germany (RND), reveals: almost B.'s entire life is characterized by enormous criminal energy. He changes his place of residence and his profession countless times, always ending up in prison. There are few constants – apart from sex and violence.

A companion describes B. in a conversation with "Spiegel" as "engaging, dominant and sociable". B. seems like a “hopeless dreamer who always had big plans”.

B. flees youth imprisonment to Portugal

According to the verdict, B. grew up in the home and began training as a car mechanic after graduating from secondary school. As early as 1992, B. commits his first burglary, followed by several thefts. B. first appeared in court in Bavaria in 1994 for “abusing a child” and “performing sexual acts in front of a child”. In order to avoid a two-year juvenile detention, B. breaks off his education and moves to Lagos in Portugal without further planning.

In the years to come, B. and his girlfriend financed their livelihood by acquiring advertising customers for a German newspaper. Later B. carried out assembly work in a friend's company. Because he did not become the managing director there as he had hoped, he set up his own business in Portugal together with his girlfriend and another acquaintance.

But the plan doesn't work: B. is arrested in Portugal, extradited to Germany and the youth penalty is carried out. His acquaintance is meanwhile pushing him out of the joint business. After serving the sentence in 2000, B. is left with nothing. His girlfriend has since broken up with him and he is moving back to Portugal.

Hotel burglaries

In the coming period, B. has several relationships with women, but they only last a few years. Professionally, he tries again with the acquisition of advertisements and as a waiter. Between 2002 and 2003 he also ran a car dealership.

In 2005, B. committed a brutal rape in Portugal. He assaults, ties up, beats and abuses a 72-year-old woman. Then he disappears with her money. The investigators only found out about B. many years later.

In 2006, B. meets an acquaintance and steals diesel and solar panels with him in order to sell them on. Both are caught and sentenced for it.

At this time, B. apparently also gets into hotel complexes and steals. He is said to have told an acquaintance that he also climbs up facades and has already crawled into rooms where “someone had slept”, reports the “Spiegel”. It's the time Maddie McCann disappears too.

https://www.rnd.de/panorama/sexualstraftater-mit-grossen-planen-das-leben-des-christian-b-VDXFDHQUINDOPF2BPDUXAHKALY.html

In the eyes of the law, you can't go around shouting rape without producing 'evidence'.

I don't believe the Irish woman was raped by Brueckner. I think she's chancing her arm.

it is not that difficult to start a court case with so many unknowns. to work a case during the court case is difficult. 

and usually such examples are reserved for textbooks in law school. the basic reason why you could bring on such a case is, because the court in reality has to follow articles of law books. and those articles, do not specify what exactly has to be there, but only what is a crime. so the crime named is the most important.
if it is a crime by law, it can be investigated and tried in court. 

in this case a bit more specific, the case is most likely based on sexual harassment with some details, and it are the witnesses who have to declare all that they have seen and understand fits a crime, on the also not to reproduced video content. it will lead heavy on memory and opinion of the witnesses. 

there is no victim to tell that it was indeed what has happened, or that they have been mistaken. an outsider can conclude or get to an opinion something looks like what they think it is, but in reality they could have been mistaken. they could be just made up these video's. and the victims in the 2005 case and the irish holiday rep have declared their offender did use video equipement during their criminal act. so it is difficult to prove there never was a camera. 

most prosecution officers would not want to try a case on so little information and the lack of hard evidence. 
bring on an investigation, and later on bring it to a court of law, it is not cheap, and no ecspectations for a win. so usually the case itself must have a good chance in leading to a conviction. 

it is more into ethical reasons why there is often little support to bring such cases under criminal law to a court.

first , there can be, if the witnesses are correct in their observations, a victim, that had made the choice to not register a crime report. if that is happening you are, even if you are legally allowed to bring this case to a court, again not listen to the victim. 

and in abuse cases it is very common, that the victims seek contact with the police themselves,(or outsiders with knowledge of a crime, and that is legally enough to report a crime in most countries,) but decide to say; no, i do not want to be part of more investigation, or going to court. 
it is a well accepted rule of thumb to respect the victim in that decision. you do not want to be the next party that do not respect the wishes of someone who clearly said no. and it is hard to going through these cases as a victim. 

basic information about the victim can not left out of court case. so when you do know time, date, age and personal information you cannot leave them just out of your case. there could be restrictions on full names, but this information is bound to that crime. this kind of information can be striped for some reasons, like wrong information, only found out after the files are send to the court, even during the case, a judge can strip it as it is not usable and for legal reasons. unknown parts could on a later time brought to the attention of the court, and become part of that case, a lot of investigations can be still ongoing. 

also it is pretty extreem if a case you have a unknown victim, unknown time and date and unknown place, but happening in another country also, and you only entry to your case has to come from witnesses,with almost none credibility, most prosecution officers would just ask if you are insane.

but i dare to say, that these 5 cases and the 2005 case are not brought before a court on their own merits. it is not a conspiracy opinion to tell from all that is known about the adventures of der hans, that these cases are important, because each can deliver steppingstones into the case of madeleine mccann. 

when the courts accept in its own right flimsy things, like the two witnesses their credibility. their weight grows. also building a modus operandi, because that will have specific capabilities of the suspect. it will never be so strong you can call that evidence, but it gives something to bring on as an argument.

there are massive gaps to fill in the madeleine case, and what lacks in facts and evidence can in potentially come from his earlier convictions. like making him recognized by court as a master get-in by window access, leaving little dna and other signs he was there. telling around, writing a book about it. the books are to have a presentation in one of those cases, diversity in victims.

from the piece of our most dearest reporter, i get the idea der hans has already looked in all the old filings about cb. still it was major blunder, he just had not to assume something because of his earlier investments in fall maddie, as it is named in germany. and ask for a pro forma court decision about what was his legal address, before cb got in jail. at least that would be the usual way to solve such things. 

of course doing a hansell works better for the movie. you have your viewers sitting up and awake for the adds.

i think der hans would not give up by himself, only when higher up in the rankings,or the courts someone says stop, it will end, and there are not many ranks above him.  30, 40 years ago technicality failures did mean dead end, but in today's world the have often some form of legal super glue in use.

Petermac observed that scars, operation sites, birthmarks and such would be on prison records, and therefore known about.

“I felt something was peculiar in my room and I always felt as if somebody had been in there watching me.”

“I made it known a few times, I said it to people but we wrote it off as me being nervous. At one stage I had money taken, so I had physical proof that someone had been in there. My boss replaced the money and I thought someone probably just broke in chancing their arm.”

On the 15th June 2004, two weeks before her 21st birthday, Hazel went out to a local bar with a group of friends.


After her boyfriend had a disagreement with his boss and an argument ensued, she left to return home, walking the 200 meters back to the hotel alone.

Worn out, she lay on the bed fully dressed and fell asleep. She doesn’t know how long she was out for before she was awoken by someone calling her name.

Source:
https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/radio/tubridy-floored-by-bravery-of-woman-sharing-her-harrowing-rape-ordeal-live-on-air/30921788.html

If Brückner did it, how would he know her Name?