Unsolved Madeleine McCann * Current Trial of Main Suspect Christian Brueckner

[FR0GGY]

This is the interview with Berndt Stellander the guy who says he has filmed the McCanns visiting a grave site.

Should be pretty easy to prove then.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Should be pretty easy to prove then.

Location is on a hill overlooking PDL. If it's public land and you assume it is then yes it should be very easy to prove whether it is or isn't a grave. Even if McCanns visited a place that may be a memorial site that isn't incriminating.

 

[jason_recliner]

You can't spell Bernt Stellander without 'Bell End'.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Personally I think it was a little foolish of BS to make the claim he did (even if he does have video evidence of visits) because the body is unlikely to have been buried in such close proximity to the place she went missing. There was too much activity and focus. It's more likely at a place like Budens implicated for various reasons. Pat Brown has even identified certain back dirt roads to places she thinks are likely at that location.

 

[johnymac1]

BS should not be baiting the McCanns, there is nothing to indicate they did anything really bad.
I understand BS emailed a swag of other people, including CW and CB's lawyer. He should let the Trial of CB run its due course. He also sounds a little narcissistic, although I do agree on one point. The Smith sighting is bogus.
I do think some unusual things occurred between May 1st and May 3rd. I can't really put my finger on it!

 

[Angry Red Bull]

BS should not be baiting the McCanns, there is nothing to indicate they did anything really bad.
I understand BS emailed a swag of other people, including CW and CB's lawyer. He should let the Trial of CB run its due course. He also sounds a little narcissistic, although I do agree on one point. The Smith sighting is bogus.
I do think some unusual things occurred between May 1st and May 3rd. I can't really put my finger on it!

Yes its an interesting approach to bait them especially when you'd have to say that a burial site in close proximity to PDL would be unlikely because of the media attention at the time. How would they do that if they did?

The two incriminating things about Smithman is the level of confidence of the family members that it was GM AND the fact the daughter described the man as wearing beige shorts with buttons down the leg on the outside. I've posted a picture of GM here some time ago wearing exactly that style of beige shorts with buttons.

I love wearing quality shorts but I can honestly say I've never bought a pair with buttons on the outside of leg spaced down the leg. Unusual and because they are, somewhat incriminating being a match to the testimony of the daughter.

 

[faible]

ITT: Gerry McCann is now guilty because he has BUTTONS on his shorts.

We've cracked it.

 

[BonzaRam]

Yes its an interesting approach to bait them especially when you'd have to say that a burial site in close proximity to PDL would be unlikely because of the media attention at the time. How would they do that if they did?

The two incriminating things about Smithman is the level of confidence of the family members that it was GM AND the fact the daughter described the man as wearing beige shorts with buttons down the leg on the outside. I've posted a picture of GM here some time ago wearing exactly that style of beige shorts with buttons.

I love wearing quality shorts but I can honestly say I've never bought a pair with buttons on the outside of leg spaced down the leg. Unusual and because they are, somewhat incriminating being a match to the testimony of the daughter.

So where were these shorts with buttons bought? locally where many people could have bought the same style shorts ? (tends to happen in touristy areas, or even at kmart or big w etc... amazing how many people have the same decor, clothing, kitchen utensils etc because they shop at the same place.) or some obscure place where only GM could have bought them?

 

[Angry Red Bull]

So where were these shorts with buttons bought? locally where many people could have bought the same style shorts ? (tends to happen in touristy areas, or even at kmart or big w etc... amazing how many people have the same decor, clothing, kitchen utensils etc because they shop at the same place.) or some obscure place where only GM could have bought them?

Yes possible.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Madeleine McCann suspect 'confessed to abducting girl from apartment'

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian Brueckner confessed to a fellow inmate that he took a child from a Portuguese apartment, a court in Germany has heard today.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Further claims about CB link to MM abduction, this time a 'confession' to a cellmate.

A car used not a van. A burglary changed to an abduction when the child was found. An argument with a woman afterwards (which I presume to be N Ferlingher). But she testified recently and was painted as a potential human trafficker. Huh?

Take your pick. Two directions being pushed equally as hard now.

It seems the recent case may not result in further convictions. They will have to charge him or he will be released early next year. They won't charge him

 

[Angry Red Bull]

So it seems that the 'evidence' that CW has is an email to a trafficker, a discussion with Busching about MM going missing (he concludes was a confession, but was really a generic response) and a cellmate confession where again he fails to identify MM..

it's common for criminals to brag about their crimes even when not committed by them. There has to be supporting evidence linking hin to the death and abduction without which it's just hot air. Things like touch DNA, finger prints, photographic evidence post adduction to name a few.

Even if NF had implicated him in a post abduction argument about MM corroborating the cellmate ......but she hasn't..

Soooo WHY has this further information been released NOW? Well, perhaps CW realises he has no case and doesn't want to look like a fool when he's forced to release CB.

 

[Kurve]

So it seems that the 'evidence' that CW has is an email to a trafficker, a discussion with Busching about MM going missing (he concludes was a confession, but was really a generic response) and a cellmate confession where again he fails to identify MM..

it's common for criminals to brag about their crimes even when not committed by them. There has to be supporting evidence linking hin to the death and abduction without which it's just hot air. Things like touch DNA, finger prints, photographic evidence post adduction to name a few.

Even if NF had implicated him in a post abduction argument about MM corroborating the cellmate ......but she hasn't..

Soooo WHY has this further information been released NOW? Well, perhaps CW realises he has no case and doesn't want to look like a fool when he's forced to release CB.

Yet, Wolters has been very specific in claims that Madeleine is dead. This is in the face of the McCanns.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Yet, Wolters has been very specific in claims that Madeleine is dead. This is in the face of the McCanns.

"It's the only conclusion we can come to" were his words which implies deductive reasoning. Weak. We have:

• An incriminating email
• Busching
• A cellmate

Had NF turned on him (seemingly under threat from CW that she did ie the threat of being charged for the $150k burglary) then I would be more inclined to start to think there is some weight to it. She didn't so instead he painted her as a human trafficking accomplice in his story

The 3 pieces of 'evidence' have a common thread...... CBs mouth. He even bragged to NFs father about using his Winnebago to transport abducted children so I take them with a grain of salt.

 

[Kurve]

The 3 pieces of 'evidence' have a common thread...... CBs mouth. He even bragged to NFs father about using his Winnebago to transport abducted children so I take them with a grain of salt.

Did the police not find little girls swimwear in his Winnebago?

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Did the police not find little girls swimwear in his Winnebago?

Yes they did. He has been convicted of molestation previously. No question.

But each crime stands alone and requires proof

 

[Kurve]

Yes they did. He has been convicted of molestation previously. No question.

But each crime stands alone and requires proof

He even bragged to NFs father about using his Winnebago to transport abducted children

That adds up, is what I meant.

He bragged about using his Winnebago to transport abducted children and the police found children's swimsuits in the Winnebago. This tends to prove he isn't always lying.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

That adds up, is what I meant.

He bragged about using his Winnebago to transport abducted children and the police found children's swimsuits in the Winnebago. This tends to prove he isn't always lying.

Propensity evidence only gets you so far I believe. Ultimately you need a concrete link to the crime itself. Something like finger prints, a witness, DNA, a photograph, a body. if you recall CW asked for bedding to be DNA tested again by PJ and they refused. We therefore don't have that concrete link. In its place we have consciousness of guilt behaviours all over relating to GM and KM.

 

[Kurve]

Propensity evidence only gets you so far I believe.

I didn't mention propensity evidence, if that might hold some added weight. I was referring to whether Brueckner told lies and what the test of that is. He bragged about taking very young girls, proof of that as a truth was in the little girls swimsuits found in his Winnebago.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I didn't mention propensity evidence, if that might hold some added weight. I was referring to whether Brueckner told lies and what the test of that is. He bragged about taking very young girls, proof of that as a truth was in the little girls swimsuits found in his Winnebago.

Which is propensity evidence. "He must have done it before so did it with MM"

 

[Kurve]

Which is propensity evidence. "He must have done it before so did it with MM"

I'm not sure what the rules are around propensity evidence in Germany, tricky enough in Australia. I imagine easier admissibility in Germany, especially since there's no jury.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I'm not sure what the rules are around propensity evidence in Germany, tricky enough in Australia. I imagine easier admissibility in Germany, especially since there's no jury.

I did a quick analysis earlier. They virtually allow everything but then must use judgement to exclude on similar rules though not defined.....the essential aim is to uncover substantive truth......and therein lies the problem. No amount of propensity evidence convicts a person without DIRECT connection to the crime.

 

[Kurve]

I did a quick analysis earlier. They virtually allow everything but then must use judgement to exclude on similar rules though not defined.....the essential aim is to uncover substantive truth......and therein lies the problem. No amount of propensity evidence convicts a person without DIRECT connection to the crime.

Circumstantial evidence if there's enough of it, can be strong evidence.

An admission may also be strong, direct evidence.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Circumstantial evidence if there's enough of it, can be strong evidence.

An admission may also be strong, direct evidence.

Kurve, there is no way the comment made to Busching is a confession. It's a comment on how he thinks she went missing. If you read the article too about the cellmate the "confession" wasn't that he specifically took MM. Given he doesn't mention MM by name in order to link him to THE crime they will need evidence connecting him to Unit 5A or Maddie. Otherwise it's hot air from a scumbag who likes to brag he is a scumbag.

Unless there is something not yet divulged i can't see how they raise charges against him.

Any confessional statement must be accepted as truthful and accurate beyond reasonable doubt or the 'substantial truth' per German system..That necessarily means they must connect him to the crime and be totally satisfied it is a truthful account. Given the evidence we have pointing elsewhere it simply doesn't satisfy the threshold.

One way is for NF to be identified as the woman with whom he had argument and supporting the cellmate accusation about the context of the argument. But to date, she hasn't .

 

[Kurve]

Kurve, there is no way the comment made to Busching is a confession. It's a comment on how he thinks she went missing. If you read the article too about the cellmate the "confession" wasn't that he specifically took MM. Given he doesn't mention MM by name in order to link him to THE crime they will need evidence connecting him to Unit 5A or Maddie. Otherwise it's hot air from a scumbag who likes to brag he is a scumbag.

I don't think it's hot air, there's already a conviction for which Brueckner is doing time on Busching's testimony.

One way is for NF to be identified as the woman with whom he had argument and supporting the cellmate accusation about the context of the argument. But to date, she hasn't .

We don't have everything Wolters has got yet.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I don't think it's hot air, there's already a conviction for which Brueckner is doing time on Busching's testimony.



We don't have everything Wolters has got yet.

Well....given the way the case is going relating to other charges it seems he may be released in new year. CW is going to be forced to charge him. It will test what he has then.

My judgement call is he has nothing linking him.