Unsolved Madeleine McCann * Current Trial of Main Suspect Christian Brueckner

[faible]

An experienced burglar would have opened the window for a couple of reasons, mostly for a quick exit if anybody came in through any of the doors, thereby avoiding a confrontation.

He didn't use the window.

The absence of finger prints is just open and shut evidence in all crimes.

Gloves don’t exist.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

The window was very small. Some observers say a man couldn't exit through the window. Many say a small thin man could IF he turned side on and squeezed through. All say a man couldn't carry a child through. Then there was a small drop to the ground outside making it worse. Being an experienced burglar he would have known all the idiosyncratic features of every unit. He would know that that window wasn't one that could be a safe exit in haste. If it came to the point he had to run it wasn't the escape route. It also was the bedroom for the kids. If what's been suggested is true( he knew the routine) then making his escape route in the same room that parents were returning to to check on kids......pretty dumb. He'd be halfway out having taken 15 or more seconds and the returning parent would grab him and start pounding his head having made himself vulnerable caught in that position unable to oppose

Could McCanns have left it open? Nah. They were the ones though who first reported to approx 8 people that it was jimmied and shattered by abductor to gain access. It wasn't of course. How could they get it soooo wrong? Kate's print was on the mechanism so at least she must have known how they operate and their functioning absent being 'shattered'. Yet she encouraged this mantra.

Pat Brown the criminal profiler has concluded that the unit was entirely locked that night. That's consistent with Gerry's first account to police when the window was suggested as access and exit point though Kate had indicated sliding doors were closed but unlocked. She was the one after all that had used the mechanism (finger print) and knew just how small the window opening was. Interesting that the two parents couldn't agree on how to enter despite regular visits to make sure the kids are safe. Gerry just couldn't remember he walked 50 metres less and came in the back way......and yet he stood at the street exit of that backway with Wilkins for several minutes.

 

[faible]

The window was very small. Some observers say a man couldn't exit through the window. Many say a small thin man could IF he turned side on and squeezed through. All say a man couldn't carry a child through. Then there was a small drop to the ground outside making it worse. Being an experienced burglar he would have known all the idiosyncratic features of every unit. He would know that that window wasn't one that could be a safe exit in haste. If it came to the point he had to run it wasn't the escape route. It also was the bedroom for the kids. If what's been suggested is true( he knew the routine) then making his escape route in the same room that parents were returning to to check on kids......pretty dumb. He'd be halfway out having taken 15 or more seconds and the returning parent would grab him and start pounding his head having made himself vulnerable caught in that position unable to oppose

Could McCanns have left it open? Nah. They were the ones though who first reported to approx 8 people that it was jimmied and shattered by abductor to gain access. It wasn't of course. How could they get it soooo wrong? Kate's print was on the mechanism so at least she must have known how they operate and their functioning absent being 'shattered'. Yet she encouraged this mantra.

Pat Brown the criminal profiler has concluded that the unit was entirely locked that night. That's consistent with Gerry's first account to police when the window was suggested as access and exit point though Kate had indicated sliding doors were closed but unlocked. Interesting that the two parents couldn't agree on how to enter despite regular visits to make sure the kids are safe. Gerry just couldn't remember he walked 50 metres less and came in the back way......and yet he stood at the street exit of that backway with Wilkins for several minutes.

It's not a large window, but Bruckner doesn't appear to be a large man.

In a pinch I wouldn't think it's unrealised for someone who's not particularly tall nor overweight, and reasonably 'young' to think they could fit through that window to escape if they were caught partway through. If it's an escape plan they don't need to be able to take the child through the window as well.

Assuming perfect knowledge is a flawed position to take.

 

[Zidane98]

I must say I agree, it is entirely possible for a child to be kidnapped through that window. A big burly bloke wouldn't be able to do it but from what I can see of Bruckner he could well do it.

 

[Kurve]

I must say I agree, it is entirely possible for a child to be kidnapped through that window. A big burly bloke wouldn't be able to do it but from what I can see of Bruckner he could well do it.

If it was Brueckner, he didn't go in or out of that window. On many witness accounts, he was an experienced burglar. Experienced burglars don't break in through windows, they go in and out through doors as risk management.

The reason is that nobody as a passerby remembers someone going in or out of doors or thinks to raise an alarm, they might see it then promptly forget they ever saw it because it's ordinary. Everybody will remember seeing someone climbing in or out of a window, possibly raise an alarm.

I'm confident whoever it was, only opened that window to give themselves a quick escape.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

If you go back to the timeline, what can now be proven is:

• The alarm went up at 9.15pm not 10.00 multiple witnesses.
• McCanns first went to tapas bar at 8.30pm
• Contrary to statements GM wasn't seen on the street at back entrance at 9.05 approx. The street was empty at that time.
• We know Wilkins did meet GM but he was less precise about the time. I'm inclined to suggest it was 8.55pm.

Soooo CB had 10 min from 8.55 to 9.05 pm allowing KM to find MM missing at 9.15. We also know that Jane Tanner said she passed by GM and JW at that back gate. She then walked up the street and headed left to her unit front entrance. That must have happened at 8.55 to 8.58..JW in his statement says he doesn't believe ANYONE could pass him and he not see them so contradicts JT.....but we assume JT was there. She would have walked past the McCann front door at the exact time CB was supposedly leaving Unit 5a with MM and NOT seen them. Right.

UK police did believe that the most authoritative sighting was the Smith sighting that did happen at 10pm 400 metres away. They are confirming the altered timeline I paint and simultaneously dismissing CB as that person......because it wouldn't take 45 minutes to walk 400 metres. Interesting.

Pat Brown takes the view that the most incriminating fact about the whole case is that the efit images of the Smith sighting were intentionally suppressed for 5 years (2008 to 2013) under threat of legal action by McCann using non disclosure agreements that had been signed by their investigators, those that prepared the efits. What possible explanation would they have for doing that?

 

[Kurve]

Pat Brown takes the view that the most incriminating fact about the whole case is that the efit images of the Smith sighting were intentionally suppressed for 5 years (2008 to 2013) under threat of legal action by McCann using non disclosure agreements that had been signed by their investigators, those that prepared the efits. What possible explanation would they have for doing that?

The last Pat Brown video I watched had her backpedallng and suggesting Brueckner may actually be responsible. Of course she's doing that now after having thrown shade all over the McCanns and getting lots of clicks out of it, because she was wrong.

 

[faible]

What possible explanation would they have for doing that?

Years upon years of speculation and false accusations?

 

[Angry Red Bull]

The last Pat Brown video I watched had her backpedallng and suggesting Brueckner may actually be responsible. Of course she's doing that now after having thrown shade all over the McCanns and getting lots of clicks out of it, because she was wrong.

She has always maintained the same opinion. She conceives it POSSIBLE that abduction occurred but considers it most unlikely based upon the lack of evidence pointing that direction. There is never absolutes in criminal investigation. Even after the dig at the lake she maintains that opinion. She says that the likelihood the case will now be solved is remote.

Her view is that the only way it gets solved is if someone comes forward and recants.

 

[Zidane98]

Since Bruckner was announced as a suspect has any other credible information about the case been released? Seems to me is most discussions centers around rehashing and / or analysing existing evidence.

 

[Kurve]

Since Bruckner was announced as a suspect has any other credible information about the case been released? Seems to me is most discussions centers around rehashing and / or analysing existing evidence.

Only that which tends to point more towards Brueckner as responsible.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Since Bruckner was announced as a suspect has any other credible information about the case been released? Seems to me is most discussions centers around rehashing and / or analysing existing evidence.

Wolters hasn't charged CB. Under German law they can't discuss the evidence. He has, however, sought to constantly speak up that he is 'certain' CB was responsible....which seems a contradiction. He has admitted doing that specifically in attempt to have more witnesses come foward who might enable charges to be laid with that new evidence. Thus far there is nothing of evidentiary value that has come to light. The evidence we surmise he has.....like the phone data ping has been questioned as wrong, not in his posession and/ or he was elsewhere with a teenager having sex.

Everything is circumstantial. He is an evil sex predator/ pedophile who was a local and burgled PDL properties. They haven't been able to link him with child murders that may add weight to their targeting of him. Nor have they linked him to unit 5a.

We are pretty sure they don't have DNA. Wolters admitted that. He also wanted to retest the saliva sample found on MM bedding but was denied by PJ.....so clearly is searching for the smoking gun still.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Only that which tends to point more towards Brueckner as responsible.

Given Wolters hasn't released detail of ANY evidence, how can you possibly suggest there is credible information increasingly pointing to CB guilt? What .....because Wolters increasingly tells us he is sure?

 

[johnymac1]

Since Bruckner was announced as a suspect has any other credible information about the case been released? Seems to me is most discussions centers around rehashing and / or analysing existing evidence.

Good observation
The PJ did early work, they identified CB and had photos of his van etc. no sighting of him near the resort though.
Early on, they were seeking a man with a rasta hair style. Never found that dude either!
Yes They like re-hashing old stuff- in made-for-media little press releases.

Back to your question. there were searches. yes, but nothing found yet! Nothing divulged.

And operation grange seems toothless.

 

[Kurve]

Given Wolters hasn't released detail of ANY evidence, how can you possibly suggest there is credible information increasingly pointing to CB guilt? What .....because Wolters increasingly tells us he is sure?

Wolters is adamant, we don't know the entirety of the evidence he has and German law stipulates that the public can't know what it all is until Brueckner has been given it.

Wolters wouldn't be that adamant in the face of the McCanns, unless he was certain.

It seems obvious to me that Wolters is simply sitting back and taking notes as these current trials unfold. He's in no rush and in the circumstances, it's wise.

I think these people appearing at Brueckner's current trial, will be significant in Madeleine's case.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Wolters is adamant, we don't know the entirety of the evidence he has and German law stipulates that the public can't know what it all is until Brueckner has been given it.

Wolters wouldn't be that adamant in the face of the McCanns, unless he was certain.

It seems obvious to me that Wolters is simply sitting back and taking notes as these current trials unfold. He's in no rush and in the circumstances, it's wise.

I think these people appearing at Brueckner's current trial, will be significant in Madeleine's case.

So effectively there isn't any credible information at all. You are entirely reliant upon the confidence of Wolters.

We know he doesn't have DNA. We know there aren't fingerprints. His main witness is Busching who is a criminal having had a falling out with CB and who asked CB how an abductor couldn't have not been detected said......because she didn't scream. Not that she didn't scream when HE took her, rather simply she didn't scream full stop. That is a opinion not admission of guilt or involvement. It's useless yet is the sort of evidence he is placing reliance upon. The fact he is gives me zero confidence he has anything of substance at all.

Time will tell. I agree with PB. This case goes nowhere.

 

[Kurve]

So effectively there isn't any credible information at all. You are entirely reliant upon the confidence of Wolters.

We know he doesn't have DNA. We know there aren't fingerprints. His main witness is Busching who is a criminal having had a falling out with CB and who asked CB how an abductor couldn't have not been detected said......because she didn't scream. Not that she didn't scream when HE took her, rather simply she didn't scream full stop. That is a opinion not admission of guilt or involvement. It's useless yet is the sort of evidence he is placing reliance upon. The fact he is gives me zero confidence he has anything of substance at all.

Time will tell. I agree with PB. This case goes nowhere.

Not entirely reliant on Wolters.

I'm not defending disgusting filth like Brueckner, it should be obvious to all with his priors, his circumstances and habits in Praia da Luz and on what we do know about him, that he's quite capable of having abducted Madeleine with no conscience whatsoever.

He did it imo.

Busching is considered a reliable witness, his testimony helped convict Brueckner on another crime and what he said, was consistent with the victim's statement.

 

[faible]

Not entirely reliant on Wolters.

I'm not defending disgusting filth like Brueckner, it should be obvious to all with his priors, his circumstances and habits in Praia da Luz and on what we do know about him, that he's quite capable of having abducted Madeleine with no conscience whatsoever.

He did it imo.

Busching is considered a reliable witness, his testimony helped convict Brueckner on another crime and what he said, was consistent with the victim's statement.

Amazing how confidence ARB is in the guilt of certain people despite no evidence, yet also so confident the police have nothing on someone else they claim to have actual evidence on.

Almost like it’s not about the evidence…

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Good observation
The PJ did early work, they identified CB and had photos of his van etc. no sighting of him near the resort though.
Early on, they were seeking a man with a rasta hair style. Never found that dude either!
Yes They like re-hashing old stuff- in made-for-media little press releases.

Back to your question. there were searches. yes, but nothing found yet! Nothing divulged.

And operation grange seems toothless.

Operation Grange prohibited investigating anything other than an abduction. We know that the UK police had determined that the original timeline was wrong. Alarm was 9.15 not 10. That's why they decided to revisit Smith interviews ( as they became relevant on revised timeline) in 13 only to find efits existed but were suppressed. They also made statement at same time indicating that the whereabouts of a blue sports bag was critical to the investigation. GM had stated categorically that bag didn't exist. So UK police were intentionally contradicting GM and suggesting it did and (consistent with OG remit) further, may have been taken that night by the abductor lol.

The man carrying child seen by Smith family wasn't carrying a blue sports bag . You'd have to conclude that UK police theory was that the bag was thrown away. What did they think it contained that was 'critical to the investigation?' There has always been speculation that drugs were involved to sedate the kids. KM herself even raised that possibility. Perhaps those drugs.

 

[Percel]

Bit of noise re: emails from POI late today.

I’ll wait for a better link

 

[Kurve]

Bit of noise re: emails from POI late today.

I’ll wait for a better link

From Brueckner?

 

[jason_recliner]

German police have discovered an email account linking Christian Brueckner to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, investigators have claimed.

Titus Stampa, a senior detective, told a court in Germany that investigators had found emails on a Hotmail account used by Brueckner that linked him directly to the case.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...adeleine-McCann-case-investigators-claim.html

 

[Kurve]

German police have discovered an email account linking Christian Brueckner to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, investigators have claimed.

Titus Stampa, a senior detective, told a court in Germany that investigators had found emails on a Hotmail account used by Brueckner that linked him directly to the case.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.da...adeleine-McCann-case-investigators-claim.html

Wow.

Speaking at the Braunschweig regional court in Germany, Stampa referred to the 'murder' email account allegedly possessed by Brueckner.

'An external hard drive is also belonging to the killing case - and I am not allowed to talk about it.'

He declined to say whether emails recovered included photos or videos implicating the suspect,
It has now been revealed prosecutors received access to a secret email account containing images of abuse after an appeal to Microsoft in 2019.

The account was said to have been opened in January 2007, months before Madeleine's disappearance.
Now, a court in Germany has heard how Brueckner allegedly attempted to delete 'many emails' showing filmed abuse of children as young as 'three or four'.

 

[Kurve]

It does appear they might have images on the external hard drive they found and something in emails.

 

[faible]

Wow.

Speaking at the Braunschweig regional court in Germany, Stampa referred to the 'murder' email account allegedly possessed by Brueckner.

'An external hard drive is also belonging to the killing case - and I am not allowed to talk about it.'

He declined to say whether emails recovered included photos or videos implicating the suspect,
It has now been revealed prosecutors received access to a secret email account containing images of abuse after an appeal to Microsoft in 2019.

The account was said to have been opened in January 2007, months before Madeleine's disappearance.
Now, a court in Germany has heard how Brueckner allegedly attempted to delete 'many emails' showing filmed abuse of children as young as 'three or four'.

Sounds like there might be a few victims in there, hopefully closure for any other families missing loved ones.