Unsolved Madeleine McCann

[Angry Red Bull]

Brueckner's alibi.

The call Brueckner had with girlfriend on the night of 3/05/2007 she was told he was traveling to Tomar from Floral in winnebago and pinged his phone within 200 metres of McCann apartment. That was clearly a lie. Because he was actually instead being with this girl something he would be unlikely to divulge depending on whether relationship was monogamous or not. Got the impression it was hookups and not monogamous

The alibi is of a girl then 17 yo who spent the night and had sex with him in his campervan (not his Winnebago) in Foro (over an hr away from PDL). Next day he took her to the airport and on the way they were stopped at a roadblock and photographed and once at the airport she was charged with carrying pepper spray through security.

How can the tower ping be misinterpreted? He can't be in two places. She is independent and has no reason to lie.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Former Detective Mark Thomas' findings about phone data tower pings undermines the case. It is phone pings that German authorities say place him within 200 metres of McCann apartment that night. His findings say that is just not accurate.

If the tower pings are not right or accurate on location as suggested AND there is a 17yo girl saying they were an hour away having sex in his campervan then spending the night together then this case falls over.

We don't know how or why Thomas says the phone data is inaccurate but the former detective is adamant he is innocent and the inaccurate findings are part of that

 

[faible]

former Detective Mark Thomas' findings about phone data tower pings undermines the case. It is phone pings that German authorities say place him within 200 metres of McCann apartment that night. His findings say that is just not accurate.

If the tower pings are not right or accurate on location as suggested AND there is a 17yo girl saying they were an hour away having sex in his campervan then spending the night together then this case falls over.

We don't know how or why Thomas says the phone data is inaccurate but the former detective is adamant he is innocent and the inaccurate findings are part of that

Do you know how to link sources?

You keep posting walls of text clearly taken from <somewhere> and never sourcing them. Literally dozens of times.

Madeline McCann investigator sure Christian Brueckner didn't do it

An investigator for the case of Madeline McCann says convicted paedophile Christian Brueckner (pictured) is a monster, but that he isn't responsible for the young girl's disappearance.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Here's one for this post for you. Daily Mail the known high quality evidence based source law enforcement rely upon.

 

[bomberclifford]

Former Detective Mark Thomas' findings about phone data tower pings undermines the case. It is phone pings that German authorities say place him within 200 metres of McCann apartment that night. His findings say that is just not accurate.

If the tower pings are not right or accurate on location as suggested AND there is a 17yo girl saying they were an hour away having sex in his campervan then spending the night together then this case falls over.

We don't know how or why Thomas says the phone data is inaccurate but the former detective is adamant he is innocent and the inaccurate findings are part of that

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Brueckner

The Daily Mail has come out and said that fibres of Maddie's pyjamas have been found in the Camper van of Brueckner. When you read further it actually quotes the prosecutor as saying he isn't allowed to discuss the investigation but when pressed whether there is such fibre evidence he says "I dont want to deny it". The Daily Mail then ran that as positive confirmation of what they thought.

OMG the history of Brueckner paints him as truly a horrible miscreant. That said not discussing evidence is fast becoming a way for a potential denial of justice. If you are not allowed to discuss then don't. If instead you give a misguided negative response worded in a way that media construe is actually a positive then you are INTENTIONALLY driving media speculation to a trial by media. Extremely poor.

Fibres of Pyjamas are unlikely to have DNA. In fact the prosecutor Wolters has said they don't have DNA evidence. It's certainly possible to match fibres to clothes of Maddie if they exist and are retained. But she wore them when allegedly abducted so you instead would be comparing them to manufacture evidence of the brand. That is helpful but no way conclusive that the fibres were in fact Maddie's pyjamas AND there would need to be something within the manufacture that was distinctive and identifiable too.

If Brueckner is nailed then please let it be with proper evidence not what is happening. A man even a horrible miscreant of one deserves due process.

Even if there are fibres matching the manufacture label then it remains a far cry from just one comparable piece of evidence we already have..... A TShirt of Maddie's still with Kate & Gerry was found to have cadaverine smell when checked by UK cadavar dogs and their record is stated as being 97% accurate by the handler!!! Why would it have that smell? Oh that's right it would need to be removed to allow the abduction story at night in pyjamas after she had died in the Tshirt. Not coincidentally the two pieces of Kate clothing matched an outfit she was seen wearing during the day in PDL in at least one image I know of.

Perhaps I shouldnt mention this. I REALLY dont want Kate coming out and saying she often took random pieces of her kids clothing to work as a Doctor and rubbed them against people she treated who had died. Please NO NO NO

So the hypothesis is that he abducted her abused and killed her, disposed of her and then had a hook up over night in the same van with a then 17 yo who then grew up not knowing him but ratifying his alibi.....that's credible

 

[faible]

Brueckner

The Daily Mail has come out and said that fibres of Maddie's pyjamas have been found in the Camper van of Brueckner. When you read further it actually quotes the prosecutor as saying he isn't allowed to discuss the investigation but when pressed whether there is such fibre evidence he says "I dont want to deny it". The Daily Mail then ran that as positive confirmation of what they thought.

OMG the history of Brueckner paints him as truly a horrible miscreant. That said not discussing evidence is fast becoming a way for a potential denial of justice. If you are not allowed to discuss then don't. If instead you give a misguided negative response worded in a way that media construe is actually a positive then you are INTENTIONALLY driving media speculation to a trial by media. Extremely poor.

Fibres of Pyjamas are unlikely to have DNA. In fact the prosecutor Wolters has said they don't have DNA evidence. It's certainly possible to match fibres to clothes of Maddie if they exist and are retained. But she wore them when allegedly abducted so you instead would be comparing them to manufacture evidence of the brand. That is helpful but no way conclusive that the fibres were in fact Maddie's pyjamas AND there would need to be something within the manufacture that was distinctive and identifiable too.

If Brueckner is nailed then please let it be with proper evidence not what is happening. A man even a horrible miscreant of one deserves due process.

Even if there are fibres matching the manufacture label then it remains a far cry from just one comparable piece of evidence we already have..... A TShirt of Maddie's still with Kate & Gerry was found to have cadaverine smell when checked by UK cadavar dogs and their record is stated as being 97% accurate by the handler!!! Why would it have that smell? Oh that's right it would need to be removed to allow the abduction story at night in pyjamas after she had died in the Tshirt. Not coincidentally the two pieces of Kate clothing matched an outfit she was seen wearing during the day in PDL in at least one image I know of.

Sourced it for you;

New Maddie evidence revealed 15 years to the day since she disappeared

Speaking on Portuguese TV, prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters again reiterated he believed the toddler was dead and insisted Brueckner, 45, was the man responsible, citing new evidence

www.dailymail.co.uk

Probably stop doing this thing where you don't link to sources.

 

[faible]

deserves due process.

Kate & Gerry

Funny how you don't apply this to Kate, but do to Brueckner.

 

[Kurve]

OMG the history of Brueckner paints him as truly a horrible miscreant. That said not discussing evidence is fast becoming a way for a potential denial of justice. If you are not allowed to discuss then don't. If instead you give a misguided negative response worded in a way that media construe is actually a positive then you are INTENTIONALLY driving media speculation to a trial by media. Extremely poor.

Fibres of Pyjamas are unlikely to have DNA. In fact the prosecutor Wolters has said they don't have DNA evidence. It's certainly possible to match fibres to clothes of Maddie if they exist and are retained. But she wore them when allegedly abducted so you instead would be comparing them to manufacture evidence of the brand. That is helpful but no way conclusive that the fibres were in fact Maddie's pyjamas AND there would need to be something within the manufacture that was distinctive and identifiable too.

Brueckner won't be convicted for Maddie's abduction on his criminal history.

Fibres is excellent evidence. We've been seeing solid convictions on fibres evidence and not much else here in Australia for decades now. Fibres comparisons may be made with an identical set but they may also be matched to fibres from the apartment and more specifically the bed.

This is right and proper evidence.

 

[Kurve]

So the hypothesis is that he abducted her abused and killed her, disposed of her and then had a hook up over night in the same van with a then 17 yo who then grew up not knowing him but ratifying his alibi.....that's credible

Nobody's ratified his alibi, Brueckner hasn't even spoken to the cops. All he's doing is writing chit in some letters apparently and some including the press are seizing on them to make some noise. The press is using it to pressure Germany in to giving their case away.

 

[Kurve]

Funny how you don't apply this to Kate, but do to Brueckner.

Sometimes it doesn't even require scratching the surface to recognise prejudice. It's there for everyone to see. That the focus is on and it's directed more specifically towards Kate across most social media discussions, misogyny will be at the root.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Everyone deserves due process. Brueckner AND McCann's.

So far no evidence has been forthcoming regarding Brueckner (apart from a whole heap of misleading statements which may or may not be true). An ex Detective has described the evidence he has gathered as sufficient to blow the case out of the water regarding Brueckner....his exact words. Also unstated but by an independent investigator experienced in detective work. At the same time the UK investigators have said the witnesses are credible having investigated. I therefore want to see evidence before I judge. But at this time with what we know I'm inclined to say the case is weak and possibly untenable. We will see I guess.

As regards McCann, the only thing that prevented them being charged (or at least Kate) was because the blood DNA analysis was 'mixed' even though it recorded a 15 of 19 match for Maddie. It was still inconclusive. In most jurisdictions a 15 of 19 is adequate to say it is positive but not in Portugal which needs 100%. Absent their financial medical records and the final DNA work by Perlin all the evidence points in one difection. An authoritative analysis was done (I think by Maddelaine foundation) resulting in an 87 page document citing 60 reasons why an abduction didn't happen. The findings of that report were 100% consistent with the PJ investigative report (before political interference occurred). I've looked at the vast majority of evidence applicable to the Maddie case independently and I happen to think both are accurate and persuasive. I form that conclusion on the evidence and only the evidence and certainly absent any misogynistic motive.

The DNA would resolve it but will never happen. Just as financial records of McCann, friends and family would likey too. That will never happen either. The case was polluted by politics and will ultimately die without formal answer imo. You certainly can't charge them with current evidence. The DNA would in my opinion resolve the boot DNA findings just as the financial records will likely resolve the hidden body gap of time. Both were refused to be done or provided.

 

[Kurve]

s regards McCann, the only thing that prevented them being charged (or at least Kate) was because the blood DNA analysis was 'mixed' even though it recorded a 15 of 19 match for Maddie. It was still inconclusive. In most jurisdictions a 15 of 19 is adequate to say it is positive but not in Portugal which needs 100%. Absent their financial medical records and the final DNA work by Perlin all the evidence points in one difection. An authoritative analysis was done (I think by Maddelaine foundation) resulting in an 87 page document citing 60 reasons why an abduction didn't happen. The findings of that report were 100% consistent with the PJ investigative report (before political interference occurred). I've looked at the vast majority of evidence applicable to the Maddie case independently and I happen to think both are accurate and persuasive. I form that conclusion on the evidence and only the evidence and certainly absent any misogynistic motive.

This is utterly absurd. Of course if her sibling or parents DNA is found in the car, there's going to be marker matches to Maddie and it isn't evidence of anything. Perlin has absolutely nothing to offer here.

Political inteference is laughable, if the McCanns had been peasants and without resources they would have been made scapegoats by the likes of Amaral.

 

[faible]

Everyone deserves due process.

You say this, then immediately proceed to ignore that the due process failed to find any evidence that the McCann's did it, whilst multiple authorities are telling you they have actual evidence on Breuckner, and you continue slinging mud at Kate McCann.

For someone claiming such lofty intelligence, you're bad at this.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

This is utterly absurd. Of course if her sibling or parents DNA is found in the car, there's going to be marker matches to Maddie and it isn't evidence of anything. Political inteference is laughable, if the McCanns had been peasants and without resources they would have been made scapegoats by the likes of Amaral.

Perlin has absolutely nothing to offer here.

The DNA sample came exactly from where the blood dog indicated and where a cadavar dog did too. I assume that the twins travelled inside the car and were alive still and not bleeding. I sincerely hope that they weren't asked to travel in the boot either way. If I recall that was in the right hand side front part of the boot

Apparently there was quite a deal of hair in that sample. Not sure how a body decomposes but I assume the hair disconnects from scalp. Why it was then mixed is beyond me that's something Perlin would solve no doubt

 

[Kurve]

The DNA sample came exactly from where the blood dog indicated and where a cadavar dog did too. I assume that the twins travelled inside the car and were alive still and not bleeding. I sincerely hope that they weren't asked to travel in the boot either way. If I recall that was in the right hand side front part of the boot

Apparently there was quite a deal of hair in that sample. Not sure how a body decomposes but I assume the hair disconnects from scalp. Why it was then mixed is beyond me that's something Perlin would solve no doubt

None of ^^^^ is evidence. Not even close.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Sometimes it doesn't even require scratching the surface to recognise prejudice. It's there for everyone to see. That the focus is on and it's directed more specifically towards Kate across most social media discussions, misogyny will be at the root.

Kate was targeted by PJ for a number of reasons:

• she was the only adult with cadavarine on her top and slacks
• David Payne was asked to visit with her to be sure all was well when she was only left alone with her own kids for an hour. Red flag
• she was the only one left alone for a period of time possibly witnessing or causing accident
• the only one with finger prints on the bedroom window. originally they said it had been jimmied open then the story changes to the patio sliding door being left open once there was no evidence of that
• she was the one who found her missing
• mmeduately upon finding her missing she screamed.. "the f****** b******* have taken her" despite Maddie earlier in the week having ran away and being tracked down .

she jumped to a hasty immediate abduction scenario that was probably one of a few choices at that time

Later we now know that in reference to the night she found Maddie had gone missing she commented "I wondered if she might be cowering under a table". That is a massive red flag

I have little doubt it was also strategically motivated to crack a confession

There is evidence of concern that has nothing to do with misogyny. Sorry it doesn't

 

[Angry Red Bull]

None of ^^^^ is evidence. Not even close.

It isn't admissible. Doesn't mean it doesn't play a massive part in investigation

 

[Kurve]

It isn't admissible. Doesn't mean it doesn't play a massive part in investigation

Of course it's inadmissable for a very good reason, it's not evidence of anything.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Of course it's inadmissable for a very good reason, it's not evidence of anything.

Then why is it used as a valuable resource? ANSWER from Grimes the handler

A dog can't give evidence or testimony but they can be trained to certain specific tasks to an accuracy of 97% and give investigative indications where evidence can be located. That was done in the case of Maddie and showed where DNA was found but was inconclusive because it was mixed. These dogs are a valuable investigative resource else they wouldn't spend the time training then using them. So to say it's not evidence of anything is to understate their role imo

 

[faible]

where evidence can be located

Which conclusive evidence wasn't.

 

[Kurve]

Then why is it used as a valuable resource? ANSWER from Grimes the handler

A dog can't give evidence or testimony but they can be trained to certain specific tasks to an accuracy of 97% and give investigative indications where evidence can be located. That was done in the case of Maddie and showed where DNA was found but was inconclusive because it was mixed. These dogs are a valuable investigative resource else they wouldn't spend the time training then using them. So to say it's not evidence of anything is to understate their role imo

Not interested in criticising the dogs here. They're not my dogs, I don't know them and I don't know their handler. What I do know is that maybe they alerted to something in an apartment that probably has over 200 guests a year and where anything could have happened in there and probably did over the thirty odd years it's been there. They also alerted to something in a .. now get this .. a HIRE car that has just as many people using it over the year, had off nappies and bathroom refuse recently stored in the boot and may have even run over a few dead things in it's road travels.

It's evidence of even less now in that context.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Not interested in criticising the dogs here. They're not my dogs, I don't know them and I don't know their handler. What I do know is that maybe they alerted to something in an apartment that probably has over 200 guests a year and where anything could have happened in there and probably did over the thirty odd years it's been there. They also alerted to something in a .. now get this .. a HIRE car that has just as many people using it over the year, had off nappies and bathroom refuse recently stored in the boot and may have even run over a few dead things in it's road travels.

It's evidence of even less now in that context.

The history of the Apartment was no one had ever died

The history of the car was 3000 klm use only. Ie relatively new

 

[Kurve]

The history of the Apartment was no one had ever died

The history of the car was 3000 klm use only. Ie relatively new

Still not evidence of anything going towards the McCanns involvement and it never will be.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Still not evidence of anything going towards the McCanns involvement and it never will be.

Agree with that. There will never now be a case against McCann. UK aren't interested

As regards Brueckner my personal assessment is there is 95% :5% dichotomy. I think chances of Brueckner case being successful charge and conviction is about 5%. perhaps less.

What will interest me is that IF he is charged he will likely use all the evidence against McCann to prove innocence or reasonable doubt

Imagine if Brueckner tried to use Perlin to finish DNA study. UK would refuse imo. Perhaps that is why now 3rd may has past they are trying to scuttle the Brueckner case. They DONT want pressure to finish the DNA

 

[Kurve]

Agree with that. There will never now be a case against McCann. UK aren't interested

Nobody's interested in prosecuting the McCanns except for a few internet die hards who can't admit that maybe they were wrong.

As regards Brueckner my personal assessment is there is 95% :5% dichotomy. I think chances of Brueckner case being successful charge and conviction is about 5%. perhaps less.

If they charge him in Germany, he's as good as done for it.

https://www.fairtrials.org/app/uploads/2022/01/Germany-advice-note.pdf

In criminal and administrative law, Germany uses an inquisitorial system where the judges are actively involved in investigating the facts of the case, as compared to an adversarial system where the role of the judge is primarily that of an impartial referee between the prosecutor or plaintiff and the defendant.

Imagine if Brueckner tried to use Perlin to finish DNA study. UK would refuse imo. Perhaps that is why now 3rd may has past they are trying to scuttle the Brueckner case. They DONT want pressure to finish the DNA

This is a truly terrible take.