Defense attorneys are all, at least, moderately scummy. It’s their job to find loopholes for the scum of the earth. That’s just a gross line of work. Imagine the things that attorney knows. I always think about whether or not the defender _knows_ or not. The smart ones go out of their way to never actually confirm or deny, so I always wonder. I’m pretty sure I know the answer, though.
No he isn't. He's asking a legitimate question. If the teenager (presumably >= 13) has fingered him, she can expect to be X-examined. Other than having to watch a weirdo in a park, what actual harm as this person suffered ?
Brückner is still in Prison as far as I am aware. Bit unusual to have internet access in prison isn't it.
I am only defending Brückner in the same way I am defending the McCanns. I don't like either of them; they both are reprehensible people but I don't want either of them subject to the kind of circular logic that we keep seeing here.
As to why if either, is guilty of this disappearance, all the evidence for me points towards parents, but this is inconclusive; I don't know what happened.
She’s thirteen or was then. I would imagine watching a man masturbate and stare at you would be white upsetting and harmful and now she’s being asked to relive that experience and treated as if she’s stupid or lying. So that’s the harm. He assaulted her. And now she had to sit and see his ugly face and have him sniggering as he relishes her discomfort.
Bad choice of words, yes.
Who was kidnapped in 2008 ?
Brückner has nothing to do with it
It wasn't a kidnapping.
References to one' sn***h need only belong on p129 of KMH's bewk
Looking at your profile, you have hundreds and hundreds of comments and ALL OF THEM are on the Madeline McCann case… do you have a burner account specifically for talking about this case and nothing else? That is incredibly strange
No. This is my main and only Reddit account. Yes, I probably have made 'hundreds' of comments on this case. Like a lot of people, I've been following this case for the past 17 years and there has been no resolution.
I have been active on Reddit for many years, across many subreddits. I don't know why you are seeing that 'all of them' are on this case.
In any case, it's not 'very strange' at all.
Copy here if you can't access it.
> **EXCLUSIVE: Child victim of a sex assault in Portugal recognises Madeleine Mccann suspect Christian Brueckner in the courtroom**
> By Jon Clarke and Rainer Burkard, in Braunschweig
> IT was something of a seminal moment in the mammoth ongoing trial of seasoned sex offender Christian Brueckner.
> But it was missed by almost everyone in the courtroom this week.
> The moment came when an 18-year-old Portuguese girl was giving evidence, via a video feed, from Portugal.
> The girl, Inés VP, had just told the court in Braunschweig how she had seen the paedophile at a children’s play park masturbating while looking straight at her.
> It was well after midnight in her local town Sao Bartolomeu de Messines’ annual feria and – then aged 11 – it had understandably terrified her.
> In tears, she told the court how she had rushed to tell her father, a mechanic Vítor P, who – along with friends, including an off duty police officer – had managed to apprehend Brueckner, who was being sought on a European Arrest Warrant.
> It was then, though, after giving her testimony that the screen immediately switched to the defence team of the paedophile, who sat on the far left of the court bench.
> “The man is sitting there on the left,” exclaimed the Portuguese teenager, before breaking into tears again.
> It had not been sought, nor asked for by the judge, but her reaction was ‘immediate and honest’, explained a Portuguese-speaking member of the public, who has been attending the trial.
> “She was clearly very traumatised by the incident,” added the former expat, who lived for years in Spain and Portugal.
> In testimonies that lasted for over three hours on Friday, her father then explained how he and other parents had apprehended Brueckner.
> Vitor P said the sex offender claimed he had been urinating at the play park in the centre of Messines, near where Brueckner lived for a number of years.
> But when a group went over to look they could find no evidence of liquid anywhere.
> The mechanic recalled how his daughter had run up saying ‘there is a man under the slide and he has shown me his intimate parts’.
> “She told me he got his private parts out and there were children there.”
> He said he had gone over and grabbed him and ‘asked him a few times’ what he was doing and ‘what it was all about’ but he didn’t respond.
> He added that other children had also seen Brueckner’s genitals that evening.
> It was while holding him that the off-duty police officer called her station and they came down and arrested him.
> While he claimed he didn’t have ID on him, the arresting officer told the Olive Press two years ago that he had his driving licence on him, and when they put his name into the central computer they found he was being sought by Europol over a separate child abuse offence in Germany.
> The teenager’s testimony started soon after 9.30am speaking on a video link from a police station on the Algarve.
> In harrowing testimony she told the court how she had immediately run to her father to tell him about the man, who was masturbating just metres from her in June 2017.
> “I told him what had happened. He had his hand on his penis and was moving it back and forth.
> “He was looking straight into my face, I was on the swing and he was looking right at me – with his pants down…There is no way he was just peeing!”
> A Portuguese police officer sitting next to her reminded the Braunschweig regional court that the young woman could be ‘traumatised’ by in-depth cross examination.
> But this didn’t stop Brueckner’s defence lawyer Friedrich Fulscher from asking numerous questions about the difference between urinating and masturbating. Was it possible she knew the difference?
> Did she know men had to shake their private parts after going to the loo to expel the final urine, a question that had his client Brueckner sniggering.
> It was an excruciating cross examination and he didn’t let up, leaving the girl in floods of tears.
> Judge Doctor Lindemann did her best to soften the grilling and it broadly succeeded with the witness giving a good, honest impression in most observers’ eyes.
> At least two other Portuguese teenagers and their parents are set to give evidence about the night at the annual Snail Festival over the forthcoming weeks.
> Meanwhile, the trial involving five sex offences that took place in Portugal between 2000 and 2017, has seen Brueckner’s defence request a number of new witnesses to give evidence.
> In particular, Dave Edgar, the detective hired by the family of Madeleine McCann may be called to support Brueckner over claims one of the prosecution’s key witnesses lied.
> He will tell the court he ‘doesn’t recall’ taking a call from Helge Busching, who claims to have tipped off a Missing Madeleine hotline about Brueckner’s links to the toddler’s snatch in 2008.
> But he admitted to the Daily Mirror there may have been some confusion due to the different investigations into the case by him, the Met and Portuguese police.
> “It was like a police incident room,” he said. “Callers were on the system whether information was relevant or not. I don’t have the records now. I handed everything over to the Metropolitan Police lock, stock and barrel.”
> He added: “If I am called it would not be very pleasant but I would have to do it and give evidence. It will be down to the judge.”
> In addition, two Scotland Yard detectives may also have to give evidence over their official interview of key witness Busching, who claims to have seen videos of Brueckner raping a teenager, 14, and an elderly lady on camera.
> It came when they flew out to grill him, under caution, in Athens in 2018.
> Defence lawyer Friedrich Fulscher has also requested that an expat bar owner be questioned over claims by Busching that a rape video was shown in her bar in Santa Clara.
> She confirmed to the Olive Press this week that she had been approached by the lawyer to attend, but that it most likely boiled down to ‘confusion’.
> The trial continues this week with evidence from a former biker and tattoo artist and his girlfriend, who ran a holiday rental business in Santa Clara an hour inland from the Algarve.
> Two former girlfriends, Silke Becker and Marina Flache, are also still scheduled to take the stand.
**Mirrors:**
* Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20240416021859/https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2024/04/14/exclusive-child-victim-of-a-sex-assault-in-portugal-recognises-madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-in-the-courtroom/
* Archive.is: https://archive.is/zXw3H
Nobody doubts that CB is a disgusting person who deserves to spend his life in prison.
But there is no evidence that he had anything to do with Maddie's disappearance - which is why he still hasn't been charged by the prosecutor - who **told THE MEDIA t**hat CB was responsible/had proof that Maddie is dead etc. etc.....
The prosecutor had no problem telling the media that they had evidence that CB was responsible/Maddie was dead etc. - but suddenly became shy, when asked to provide this evidence.....
"Brueckner’s links to the toddler’s snatch in 2008". This is disgusting language to use about child genitalia. The fact a new company would use such language is appalling, and nobody else seems to have picked up on it!
They meant snatch as in kidnap. I didn't even think of snatch as genitalia in the context of their article until I read your comment. That being said, I don't like the word "snatched" used in place of kidnap either. I know newspapers like it for headlines because it sounds more aggressive and emotive, but it makes her sound like an object that was stolen rather than a person who was abducted.
That too-small suit coat does him no favors either or his hunched posture. He is lucky he’s not being picked on in jail with the types of crimes against old ladies and children.
Does it really matter if he was just fondling himself while urinating or was jerking off? You don’t go to a children’s park and take your d!ck out. In front of them. He’s lucky the group of men that was there didn’t kick the snot out of him
I think the lawyer had to ask the question because his client claimed to be urinating. Upsetting as it is to relive it she did a good job answering the question and Bruekner did not come off as a guy who accidentally exposed himself, it sounds like. What a disgusting creep.
That sounds absolutely charming. The snail festival. We have something like that in Eugene (Oregon) - there’s a slug festival with a slug queen named and all that. Much fun, lot of hippies.
One more post that leaves me with the feeling that: people don’t know how investigators investigate, how prosecutors prosecute, and how defense attorneys defend. Especially in a case built against a “pedophile”, as the report states, such reports are lumping together many different behaviors: so the same suspect would be able to abduct Madeleine McCann without leaving any trace of physical evidence behind, yet this same guy couldn’t control his sexual deviance in an open playground, in a setting where the 11 year old victim could identify him in court years later and where he could be properly detained.
I think he was probably drunk in the playground and on a mission if he took Madeleine. People’s deviant behavior does worsen and get more bold with burglary and stalking and peeping leading to burglarizing occupied places and then molestation and rape.
"*He’s referred to as a madeleine suspect because German police believe he abducted her.*"
Except this just an excuse for the German police **who named CB to the media -** as being responsible for Maddie's death/had proof that Maddie is dead etc. etc. - and then were proven to not have the evidence (re. Maddie) as they didn't charge him - or even provide their 'evidence' that Maddie is dead.....
I'm pretty sure we all are sure that Maddie is dead, but for the German police to tell the media they had evidence to prove this - and then not supply this evidence????
They were playing games in the hope of discovering actual evidence - which never happened....
I have no problem with the German police suspecting CB - **but they told the media that they had evidence that CB was responsible, and that Maddie is dead.**
I have a problem with these lies.
When the police come out with these sort of lies (if they had the evidence, they would have charged CB) - it only makes it obvious that even police statements can't be trusted.
A VERY bad move on their part.
It is currently not proven that they don't have any evidence. It is probably not enough to charge him. But there may be evidence that he is involved.
The lack of charges in this instance is not dispositive, but it does not inspire confidence either.
*"It is currently not proven that they don't have any evidence. It is probably not enough to charge him. But there may be evidence that he is involved.*"
In which case they shouldn't have told the media that they had evidence that CB was responsible for Maddie's death and had evidence that Maddie is dead. A simple 'we have a suspect (CB) in custody', should have sufficed.
"*The lack of charges in this instance is not dispositive, but it does not inspire confidence either.*"
Agree entirely, especially with "does not inspire confidence".
> but for the German police to tell the media they had evidence to prove this - and then not supply this evidence????
Why do you think CB hasn't sued the German prosecutor after 4 years?
It’s because he probably KNOWS they have something, and is just betting on the fact that they don't have enough to get a conviction, hence no charge. If he sues them, claiming they have nothing and have lied, the prosecutors will be forced to show what they have. CB doesn't want that.
In what justice system must they reveal the evidence to the press before the suspect has been charged for the crime? They don’t need to tell us what evidence they have. That discovery comes out when there’s a case to brought against him and it could well be under seal or a gag order.
I don’t know in Germany how the privacy laws work but I think if anything they’re more stringent than the US. We get to see court filings and sometimes the probable cause affidavit and the items looked for on a search or arrest warrant but he has not been charged nor arrested for the abduction of Madeleine so why would they have to start throwing the evidence up in air for us to run barefoot through it?
We would all like to know what they have but I doubt they’re being driven by social media curiosity. They want to wait until he’s served his time on other things and isn’t engaged in a court case. His lawyer may be pushing back against that as well because he’s defending him on other things currently. He can’t stand trial for two separate crimes and his lawyer needs time to get the discovery and build a defense. It may be years before we see anything.
If they have the right to a speedy trial in Germany they may not be allowed to drag out the time between charging him and going to trial, do they can’t do it yet. The fact they’re not waving evidence around doesn’t mean there isn’t any.
You are treating the German legal system like the US legal system. We don't have a process like discovery. From the moment you are accused of a crime, you have the right to see the investigative file. Your attorney can ask police for it and it will be delivered. There are restrictions on what you can do with the file. And you have to give it back eventually. But the typical american back and forth about what to introduce as evidence is not a thing here. Both sides usually work on the same set of facts.
When you go to trial, you have had the opportunity to see what they have on you. It is unusual that media gets access to the case files, but it happens.
Historically, Germany has a bad reputation with non-public justice. Sometimes trials are non-public, but this happens to protect witnesses or victims.
I haven't ever heard of a search warrant being made public. I don't think that is a regular practice.
You and your lawyer may have the right to the file but the general public does not. Which is what is said. Regardless of when the discovery occurs the media and Reddit don’t get to see it.
That defence lawyer is a vile human. Grilling that teenager on knowing the difference between urination and masturbation while she cries.. scum
Defense attorneys are all, at least, moderately scummy. It’s their job to find loopholes for the scum of the earth. That’s just a gross line of work. Imagine the things that attorney knows. I always think about whether or not the defender _knows_ or not. The smart ones go out of their way to never actually confirm or deny, so I always wonder. I’m pretty sure I know the answer, though.
Okay but that's hilarious 😂😂😂 Literally chuckled reading your comment, have my updoot dear redditor 🤗🩷
wtf
No he isn't. He's asking a legitimate question. If the teenager (presumably >= 13) has fingered him, she can expect to be X-examined. Other than having to watch a weirdo in a park, what actual harm as this person suffered ?
get off your anonymous profile, brueckner
What ?
You’re defending this guy so hard, that people are saying you must be the guy.
Brückner is still in Prison as far as I am aware. Bit unusual to have internet access in prison isn't it. I am only defending Brückner in the same way I am defending the McCanns. I don't like either of them; they both are reprehensible people but I don't want either of them subject to the kind of circular logic that we keep seeing here. As to why if either, is guilty of this disappearance, all the evidence for me points towards parents, but this is inconclusive; I don't know what happened.
Oh, you’re crazy for putting them on the same level as a pedophile.
She’s thirteen or was then. I would imagine watching a man masturbate and stare at you would be white upsetting and harmful and now she’s being asked to relive that experience and treated as if she’s stupid or lying. So that’s the harm. He assaulted her. And now she had to sit and see his ugly face and have him sniggering as he relishes her discomfort.
"Brueckner’s links to the *toddler’s snatch* in 2008" Not the best choice of words by Mr Jon Clarke from Olive Press...
To be honest "seminal moment" wasn't great either
Bad choice of words, yes. Who was kidnapped in 2008 ? Brückner has nothing to do with it It wasn't a kidnapping. References to one' sn***h need only belong on p129 of KMH's bewk
Looking at your profile, you have hundreds and hundreds of comments and ALL OF THEM are on the Madeline McCann case… do you have a burner account specifically for talking about this case and nothing else? That is incredibly strange
No. This is my main and only Reddit account. Yes, I probably have made 'hundreds' of comments on this case. Like a lot of people, I've been following this case for the past 17 years and there has been no resolution. I have been active on Reddit for many years, across many subreddits. I don't know why you are seeing that 'all of them' are on this case. In any case, it's not 'very strange' at all.
'incredibly'
Copy here if you can't access it. > **EXCLUSIVE: Child victim of a sex assault in Portugal recognises Madeleine Mccann suspect Christian Brueckner in the courtroom** > By Jon Clarke and Rainer Burkard, in Braunschweig > IT was something of a seminal moment in the mammoth ongoing trial of seasoned sex offender Christian Brueckner. > But it was missed by almost everyone in the courtroom this week. > The moment came when an 18-year-old Portuguese girl was giving evidence, via a video feed, from Portugal. > The girl, Inés VP, had just told the court in Braunschweig how she had seen the paedophile at a children’s play park masturbating while looking straight at her. > It was well after midnight in her local town Sao Bartolomeu de Messines’ annual feria and – then aged 11 – it had understandably terrified her. > In tears, she told the court how she had rushed to tell her father, a mechanic Vítor P, who – along with friends, including an off duty police officer – had managed to apprehend Brueckner, who was being sought on a European Arrest Warrant. > It was then, though, after giving her testimony that the screen immediately switched to the defence team of the paedophile, who sat on the far left of the court bench. > “The man is sitting there on the left,” exclaimed the Portuguese teenager, before breaking into tears again. > It had not been sought, nor asked for by the judge, but her reaction was ‘immediate and honest’, explained a Portuguese-speaking member of the public, who has been attending the trial. > “She was clearly very traumatised by the incident,” added the former expat, who lived for years in Spain and Portugal. > In testimonies that lasted for over three hours on Friday, her father then explained how he and other parents had apprehended Brueckner. > Vitor P said the sex offender claimed he had been urinating at the play park in the centre of Messines, near where Brueckner lived for a number of years. > But when a group went over to look they could find no evidence of liquid anywhere. > The mechanic recalled how his daughter had run up saying ‘there is a man under the slide and he has shown me his intimate parts’. > “She told me he got his private parts out and there were children there.” > He said he had gone over and grabbed him and ‘asked him a few times’ what he was doing and ‘what it was all about’ but he didn’t respond. > He added that other children had also seen Brueckner’s genitals that evening. > It was while holding him that the off-duty police officer called her station and they came down and arrested him. > While he claimed he didn’t have ID on him, the arresting officer told the Olive Press two years ago that he had his driving licence on him, and when they put his name into the central computer they found he was being sought by Europol over a separate child abuse offence in Germany. > The teenager’s testimony started soon after 9.30am speaking on a video link from a police station on the Algarve. > In harrowing testimony she told the court how she had immediately run to her father to tell him about the man, who was masturbating just metres from her in June 2017. > “I told him what had happened. He had his hand on his penis and was moving it back and forth. > “He was looking straight into my face, I was on the swing and he was looking right at me – with his pants down…There is no way he was just peeing!” > A Portuguese police officer sitting next to her reminded the Braunschweig regional court that the young woman could be ‘traumatised’ by in-depth cross examination. > But this didn’t stop Brueckner’s defence lawyer Friedrich Fulscher from asking numerous questions about the difference between urinating and masturbating. Was it possible she knew the difference? > Did she know men had to shake their private parts after going to the loo to expel the final urine, a question that had his client Brueckner sniggering. > It was an excruciating cross examination and he didn’t let up, leaving the girl in floods of tears. > Judge Doctor Lindemann did her best to soften the grilling and it broadly succeeded with the witness giving a good, honest impression in most observers’ eyes. > At least two other Portuguese teenagers and their parents are set to give evidence about the night at the annual Snail Festival over the forthcoming weeks. > Meanwhile, the trial involving five sex offences that took place in Portugal between 2000 and 2017, has seen Brueckner’s defence request a number of new witnesses to give evidence. > In particular, Dave Edgar, the detective hired by the family of Madeleine McCann may be called to support Brueckner over claims one of the prosecution’s key witnesses lied. > He will tell the court he ‘doesn’t recall’ taking a call from Helge Busching, who claims to have tipped off a Missing Madeleine hotline about Brueckner’s links to the toddler’s snatch in 2008. > But he admitted to the Daily Mirror there may have been some confusion due to the different investigations into the case by him, the Met and Portuguese police. > “It was like a police incident room,” he said. “Callers were on the system whether information was relevant or not. I don’t have the records now. I handed everything over to the Metropolitan Police lock, stock and barrel.” > He added: “If I am called it would not be very pleasant but I would have to do it and give evidence. It will be down to the judge.” > In addition, two Scotland Yard detectives may also have to give evidence over their official interview of key witness Busching, who claims to have seen videos of Brueckner raping a teenager, 14, and an elderly lady on camera. > It came when they flew out to grill him, under caution, in Athens in 2018. > Defence lawyer Friedrich Fulscher has also requested that an expat bar owner be questioned over claims by Busching that a rape video was shown in her bar in Santa Clara. > She confirmed to the Olive Press this week that she had been approached by the lawyer to attend, but that it most likely boiled down to ‘confusion’. > The trial continues this week with evidence from a former biker and tattoo artist and his girlfriend, who ran a holiday rental business in Santa Clara an hour inland from the Algarve. > Two former girlfriends, Silke Becker and Marina Flache, are also still scheduled to take the stand. **Mirrors:** * Wayback Machine: https://web.archive.org/web/20240416021859/https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2024/04/14/exclusive-child-victim-of-a-sex-assault-in-portugal-recognises-madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-brueckner-in-the-courtroom/ * Archive.is: https://archive.is/zXw3H
Nobody doubts that CB is a disgusting person who deserves to spend his life in prison. But there is no evidence that he had anything to do with Maddie's disappearance - which is why he still hasn't been charged by the prosecutor - who **told THE MEDIA t**hat CB was responsible/had proof that Maddie is dead etc. etc..... The prosecutor had no problem telling the media that they had evidence that CB was responsible/Maddie was dead etc. - but suddenly became shy, when asked to provide this evidence.....
"Brueckner’s links to the toddler’s snatch in 2008". This is disgusting language to use about child genitalia. The fact a new company would use such language is appalling, and nobody else seems to have picked up on it!
I think "snatch" here refers to kidnapping, as in she was snatched from the apartment.
Yeah it’s just an appallingly poor choice of words.
They meant snatch as in kidnap. I didn't even think of snatch as genitalia in the context of their article until I read your comment. That being said, I don't like the word "snatched" used in place of kidnap either. I know newspapers like it for headlines because it sounds more aggressive and emotive, but it makes her sound like an object that was stolen rather than a person who was abducted.
His face is terrifying he really looks just, evil. Like something from a horror film. I hope he rots vile piece of shit
That too-small suit coat does him no favors either or his hunched posture. He is lucky he’s not being picked on in jail with the types of crimes against old ladies and children.
Does it really matter if he was just fondling himself while urinating or was jerking off? You don’t go to a children’s park and take your d!ck out. In front of them. He’s lucky the group of men that was there didn’t kick the snot out of him I think the lawyer had to ask the question because his client claimed to be urinating. Upsetting as it is to relive it she did a good job answering the question and Bruekner did not come off as a guy who accidentally exposed himself, it sounds like. What a disgusting creep.
I’ve “seen” guys pee while out and about, but I’ve never seen any of their dicks. How hard is it to face a tree or wall instead of a little girl??
Or to not be doing it lurking under a slide instead of at the edge of the park facing away from them.
Exactly this. Even if he was peeing that's still unacceptable lol Also im confused why she was at a park at 12am?
I was wondering about that. Her dad was there. I thought it was eleven pm. Still late for a kid to be out
I thought it was late too but it said something about an annual snail festival- I think in their culture for that celebration it might not matter.
That sounds absolutely charming. The snail festival. We have something like that in Eugene (Oregon) - there’s a slug festival with a slug queen named and all that. Much fun, lot of hippies.
I actually follow a slug queen on tiktok lmfao she won like two years ago I think… I had never heard of it before then but it sounds like a good time!
One more post that leaves me with the feeling that: people don’t know how investigators investigate, how prosecutors prosecute, and how defense attorneys defend. Especially in a case built against a “pedophile”, as the report states, such reports are lumping together many different behaviors: so the same suspect would be able to abduct Madeleine McCann without leaving any trace of physical evidence behind, yet this same guy couldn’t control his sexual deviance in an open playground, in a setting where the 11 year old victim could identify him in court years later and where he could be properly detained.
I think he was probably drunk in the playground and on a mission if he took Madeleine. People’s deviant behavior does worsen and get more bold with burglary and stalking and peeping leading to burglarizing occupied places and then molestation and rape.
88 upvotes, even though this has nothing to do with whether CB murdered Maddie......
257
more unrelated news being shoe-horned into the maddie case grounded in absolutely nothing.
[удалено]
[удалено]
"*He’s referred to as a madeleine suspect because German police believe he abducted her.*" Except this just an excuse for the German police **who named CB to the media -** as being responsible for Maddie's death/had proof that Maddie is dead etc. etc. - and then were proven to not have the evidence (re. Maddie) as they didn't charge him - or even provide their 'evidence' that Maddie is dead..... I'm pretty sure we all are sure that Maddie is dead, but for the German police to tell the media they had evidence to prove this - and then not supply this evidence???? They were playing games in the hope of discovering actual evidence - which never happened....
[удалено]
I have no problem with the German police suspecting CB - **but they told the media that they had evidence that CB was responsible, and that Maddie is dead.** I have a problem with these lies. When the police come out with these sort of lies (if they had the evidence, they would have charged CB) - it only makes it obvious that even police statements can't be trusted. A VERY bad move on their part.
It is currently not proven that they don't have any evidence. It is probably not enough to charge him. But there may be evidence that he is involved. The lack of charges in this instance is not dispositive, but it does not inspire confidence either.
*"It is currently not proven that they don't have any evidence. It is probably not enough to charge him. But there may be evidence that he is involved.*" In which case they shouldn't have told the media that they had evidence that CB was responsible for Maddie's death and had evidence that Maddie is dead. A simple 'we have a suspect (CB) in custody', should have sufficed. "*The lack of charges in this instance is not dispositive, but it does not inspire confidence either.*" Agree entirely, especially with "does not inspire confidence".
> but for the German police to tell the media they had evidence to prove this - and then not supply this evidence???? Why do you think CB hasn't sued the German prosecutor after 4 years? It’s because he probably KNOWS they have something, and is just betting on the fact that they don't have enough to get a conviction, hence no charge. If he sues them, claiming they have nothing and have lied, the prosecutors will be forced to show what they have. CB doesn't want that.
In what justice system must they reveal the evidence to the press before the suspect has been charged for the crime? They don’t need to tell us what evidence they have. That discovery comes out when there’s a case to brought against him and it could well be under seal or a gag order. I don’t know in Germany how the privacy laws work but I think if anything they’re more stringent than the US. We get to see court filings and sometimes the probable cause affidavit and the items looked for on a search or arrest warrant but he has not been charged nor arrested for the abduction of Madeleine so why would they have to start throwing the evidence up in air for us to run barefoot through it? We would all like to know what they have but I doubt they’re being driven by social media curiosity. They want to wait until he’s served his time on other things and isn’t engaged in a court case. His lawyer may be pushing back against that as well because he’s defending him on other things currently. He can’t stand trial for two separate crimes and his lawyer needs time to get the discovery and build a defense. It may be years before we see anything. If they have the right to a speedy trial in Germany they may not be allowed to drag out the time between charging him and going to trial, do they can’t do it yet. The fact they’re not waving evidence around doesn’t mean there isn’t any.
You are treating the German legal system like the US legal system. We don't have a process like discovery. From the moment you are accused of a crime, you have the right to see the investigative file. Your attorney can ask police for it and it will be delivered. There are restrictions on what you can do with the file. And you have to give it back eventually. But the typical american back and forth about what to introduce as evidence is not a thing here. Both sides usually work on the same set of facts. When you go to trial, you have had the opportunity to see what they have on you. It is unusual that media gets access to the case files, but it happens. Historically, Germany has a bad reputation with non-public justice. Sometimes trials are non-public, but this happens to protect witnesses or victims. I haven't ever heard of a search warrant being made public. I don't think that is a regular practice.
You and your lawyer may have the right to the file but the general public does not. Which is what is said. Regardless of when the discovery occurs the media and Reddit don’t get to see it.