Re: Christian Brueckner: To be or not to be

by **PeterMac** 13.10.24 8:18

BOOK
Tuesday, 22 May 2007. Fiona, Dave and the girls left Praia da Luz at 6.30am. ….

At lunchtime, Gerry arrived back in Praia da Luz with Clarence. …

We’d arranged to go to Fátima the following day – our twentieth day without Madeleine – so part of Tuesday afternoon was spent preparing for that. In the evening, Gerry’s sister Phil flew in from Glasgow. It was so good to see her.

McCann, Kate. Madeleine (pp. 151-152). Transworld Digital. Kindle Edition.

*******
And the Pool photo was released on 24th, so APR must have received it on 23rd. From Clarence, who got it from Philomena

by **Silentscope** 16.10.24 16:51

After the acquittal of the German suspect in the case of the British girl Madeleine "Maddie" McCann, who disappeared in Portugal in 2007, in a rape process, the public prosecutor in Braunschweig and the incidental courses have filed a revision. This was announced by a spokeswoman for the district court in Braunschweig on Wednesday. The prosecutor's office in the Lower Saxony city had already announced the step after the verdict last week.

In an appeal proceedings, the Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe must now review the decision. The several times because of sexual offenses B. used to stay in Portugal regularly for a longer period of time, but also lived in Braunschweig, among other places. The prosecutor's office there also regards him as a murder suspect in the case of Maddie, which disappeared from a holiday home in Portugal in 2007. However, they have not yet brought charges.

Source: https://www.stuttgarter-nachrichten.de/inhalt.deutscher-verdaechtiger-im-fall-maddie-nach-freispruch-staatsanwaltschaft-und-nebenklage-legen-revision-ein.6d029c24-2950-44bd-a7aa-01820ea16f58.html

by **CaKeLoveR** 16.10.24 18:31

Incredible. It's not as if there's reasonable doubt. What's wrong with these people?

by **Nina** 16.10.24 18:37

CaKeLoveR wrote:Incredible. It's not as if there's reasonable doubt. What's wrong with these people?

Am I understanding this correctly? They are appealing?

by **crusader** 16.10.24 18:38

I think it's standard procedure.

by **Nina** 16.10.24 19:14

crusader wrote:I think it's standard procedure.

Well yes I suppose it is to be honest but do they really think there is a chance or are they just going through the process because it is expected?

by **AnneCGuedes** 16.10.24 19:23

"It is not necessary to hope in order to act, nor to succeed in order to persevere". (William of Orange)

by **Silentscope** 16.10.24 22:11

Obviously Bernts Book has had no effect on Wolters, who still clings to his Bizarre Theory that it was Brückner that 'did it'.

Which only leaves one Question.

Who is he really working for?

by **crusader** 16.10.24 22:18

If anyone in authority is going to take Wolters seriously, he will have to reveal his "concrete evidence".

by Honesty 16.10.24 22:22

How long does it take in Germany for an appeal to be heard and then for the verdict to be delivered?

by **CaKeLoveR** 16.10.24 22:29

Silentscope wrote:Obviously Bernts Book has had no effect on Wolters, who still clings to his Bizarre Theory that it was Brückner that 'did it'.

Which only leaves one Question.

Who is he really working for?

Operation Grange?

by **Cammerigal** 16.10.24 23:09

Silentscope wrote:Obviously Bernts Book has had no effect on Wolters, who still clings to his Bizarre Theory that it was Brückner that 'did it'.

Which only leaves one Question.

Who is he really working for?

Methinks there must be some very heavy Kompromat to get Wolters, professional German public prosecutor to risk his career and credibility on a fatuous and ultimately failed prosecution, based on a tissue of lies that are underpinned by paid-for but non-evidential allegations and gossip from fellow prison criminals.

Look directly at the UK Home office and their MI5 First desk, aka the fat controller, the MI5 links across to German intelligence BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst) and the collective wish to create a scapegoat for the death of Madeleine McCann at whatever cost to the public purse. The Metropolitan Police's Operation Grange is likewise funded by the Home Office and has been directed to 'not investigate the McCanns',

The Kompromat could be filmed and recorded sexual deviances, gambling debts/theft or drug related. All blackmail-worthy material, but that with the most shame prevails. This was successfully used to undermine the IRA in Northern Ireland and we also know this has strong links to this case. Likewise the UK government instigated the COBRA committee and imposed a D notice on the press to protect 'the national interest'.

by **AnneCGuedes** 17.10.24 1:34

CaKeLoveR wrote:
Silentscope wrote:Obviously Bernts Book has had no effect on Wolters, who still clings to his Bizarre Theory that it was Brückner that 'did it'.

Which only leaves one Question.

Who is he really working for?
Operation Grange?

He works for himself, his glory, his place in history, whatever satisfies his pride, a task in which SY encourages him all the more because it is in its interest to eternally postpone the moment of accountability.

by pinkgladioli 17.10.24 10:00

Yes I agree there is an aim eith regards to postponing the moment of accountability

by **Silentscope** 17.10.24 14:18

Honesty wrote: Post #192 wrote:How long does it take in Germany for an appeal to be heard and then for the verdict to be delivered?

How long can a revision last?

A revision can take different lengths because it depends on various factors. This includes, among other things, the complexity of the case and the utilization of the court. On average, however, it is possible to expect a duration of about six months to two years.

What are the chances of a revision?
The chances of success from audits vary from lawyer to lawyer and cannot be generalized. According to statistics, the probability of a successful revision is around 3%.

So Herr Wolters chances of convincing any Judge of a sound mind, are so slim he should really not waste his Time, or Taxpayers money on a Case or Cases which he is 97% sure to lose.

He should take a Tip from Maddie, and just 'move on'.

by **AnneCGuedes** 17.10.24 19:56

Silentscope wrote:
Honesty wrote: Post #192 wrote:How long does it take in Germany for an appeal to be heard and then for the verdict to be delivered?
How long can a revision last?

A revision can take different lengths because it depends on various factors. This includes, among other things, the complexity of the case and the utilization of the court. On average, however, it is possible to expect a duration of about six months to two years.

What are the chances of a revision?
The chances of success from audits vary from lawyer to lawyer and cannot be generalized. According to statistics, the probability of a successful revision is around 3%.

So Herr Wolters chances of convincing any Judge of a sound mind, are so slim he should really not waste his Time, or Taxpayers money on a Case or Cases which he is 97% sure to lose.

He should take a Tip from Maddie, and just 'move on'.

They'll only examine if there are errors in the application of law.

by Honesty 18.10.24 8:17

Silentscope wrote:
Honesty wrote: Post #192 wrote:How long does it take in Germany for an appeal to be heard and then for the verdict to be delivered?
How long can a revision last?

A revision can take different lengths because it depends on various factors. This includes, among other things, the complexity of the case and the utilization of the court. On average, however, it is possible to expect a duration of about six months to two years.

What are the chances of a revision?
The chances of success from audits vary from lawyer to lawyer and cannot be generalized. According to statistics, the probability of a successful revision is around 3%.

So Herr Wolters chances of convincing any Judge of a sound mind, are so slim he should really not waste his Time, or Taxpayers money on a Case or Cases which he is 97% sure to lose.

He should take a Tip from Maddie, and just 'move on'.

I'm sorry Silentscope, but curiosity has got the better of me. Could you please explain your last sentence.

by **Silentscope** 18.10.24 16:17

Moving on was a phrase first used by Kate McCann.

When Madeleine asked about why her Parents did not come when the Twins were crying.

Source: https://www.hellomagazine.com/film/708030/kate-mccann-chilling-conversation-madeliene-before-disappearance/

Wolters should just 'move on' to another Case.

by Honesty 18.10.24 16:30

Silentscope wrote:Moving on was a phrase first used by Kate McCann.

When Madeleine asked about why her Parents did not come when the Twins were crying.

Source: https://www.hellomagazine.com/film/708030/kate-mccann-chilling-conversation-madeliene-before-disappearance/

Wolters should just 'move on' to another Case.

Thank you. I understand.

by **Ladyinred** 19.10.24 6:53

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13975685/night-savagely-raped-German-attacker-prime-suspect-snatching-Maddie.html

Daily Mail today; behind a paywall. She is certain her attacker is the prime suspect in Madeleine's disappearance.

by **PeterMac** 19.10.24 7:19

Ladyinred wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13975685/night-savagely-raped-German-attacker-prime-suspect-snatching-Maddie.html

Daily Mail today; behind a paywall. She is certain her attacker is the prime suspect in Madeleine's disappearance.

To get round the paywall put
12ft.io/
in front of the link
Like this

12ft.io/https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13975685/night-savagely-raped-German-attacker-prime-suspect-snatching-Maddie.html

by deepeepee 19.10.24 10:33

or... archive.ph works too
here is the direct link

The night I was savagely raped near Praia da Luz - and why I am 100% certain my blue-eyed German attacker is the prime suspect for snatching Maddie | Daily Mail Online (archive.ph)

by **Ladyinred** 19.10.24 10:44

What that woman, Hazel, endured was horrendous.

by **PeterMac** 19.10.24 10:49

The much trumpeted Cross-shared scar (or birthmark, or from removal of birthmark,) which Clarke made so much of seems mysteriously to have been "whooshed" from this account.

It was THAT which proved beyond a reasonable doubt that it was NOT Brückner, and MUST have been somebody else.

For those who have now been paying attention he was examined early on by Doctors, but Fülscher let her give her evidence. He was then examined by BOTH sets of lawyers, and it was agreed he has NO SUCH SCAR.
He has a small and insignificant scar in the inguinal crease from a childhood operation for a undescended testicle [orchiopexy]

by **PeterMac** 19.10.24 10:50

Ladyinred wrote:What that woman, Hazel, endured was horrendous.

Agreed. But sending an innocent man to prison for it does not help.

by **crusader** 19.10.24 10:56

In the daily mail, she say's this

'I said there was a mark on his leg; perhaps a ladder in his tights, maybe a scar or a tear. Later I learned he had a very aggressive form of psoriasis and there could have been scars from that.'

by GreenTara 19.10.24 11:26

My personal guess is that the intention is to pin this on Brueckner, loosely enough that it can’t be challenged but tightly enough to leave the passing public with the impression that there was an abduction & that Brueckner is responsible.

by **Nina** 19.10.24 12:29

crusader wrote:In the daily mail, she say's this

'I said there was a mark on his leg; perhaps a ladder in his tights, maybe a scar or a tear. Later I learned he had a very aggressive form of psoriasis and there could have been scars from that.'

How can a man wearing tights rape? I am not being flippant here. She doesn't say he undressed. Also the aggressive form of psoriasis would have left DNA deposits around as well as in and about her own body.

by **crusader** 19.10.24 12:34

That's exactly what I thought.

by **Silentscope** 19.10.24 12:57

They can never give up trying to convince the People that it must be Brückner who Kidnapped and later killed Madeleine McCann.

Because it takes the Focus AWAY from the odour of Death in Apartment 5A, and the pool of Blood found under the Tiles under the living room window.

Where the body was ‘so swiftly removed’ according to Kate McCann.
Not Abducted.

Latest topics