The "number 1 suspect" Christian B

Freedom wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8599435/Germany-sought-Italys-okay-extradite-McCann-suspect-EU-court-adviser-says.html?ito=push-notification&ci=26789&si=10306854

For "It means that the child abuser, who has been convicted several times, is unlikely to be released on 7 January 2021, buying Madeleine McCann detectives valuable time to build the case against him" read "to gather enough nonsense to stitch him up".

Prosecutor Hans Christian Wolters, who is leading the investigation, has told the McCanns they have concrete evidence that Madeleine is dead, in the biggest break-through in the 13-year-old case.

While I believe that the prime suspects are Madeleine's parents and their friends who aided and abetted them, imo, it is quite possible that this latest suspect was involved in her disappearance or even death in some way.

Possibilities, in my opinion, not mutually exclusive.

1. Madeleine was abused that week and this latest suspect was involved in a paedophile ring which carried out abuse on her.
2. Madeleine came to harm that week - possibly in relation to the above - and the suspect was pulled in to carry out a job.
3. Madeleine was heavily sedated by Thursday (possibly as a result of the above) and the latest suspect was involved in her final demise, by accident or design.
4. The suspect has knowledge of the area and has contacts and these might have come in useful for hiding and disposing a body.
5. The suspect is not directly involved but is part of a wider circle or ring. Bringing a case against him would expose a cover-up - or not, as the case may be!
6. The suspect was alerted to the apartments being left empty in the evening that week (with children sleeping in them) and he was drawn to the scene for the purposes of an attempted burglary and/or sexual abuse of a child.  

I'm just not sure why the German police would want to stitch Brueckner up for something he didn't do or wasn't involved with in any way at all? It's not as if there aren't enough other crimes that he has committed, after all! I presume that any case against Brueckner in relation to this case would dig up a can of worms. (On the other hand we have the Soham case in which Huntley was stitched up, in my opinion. So in that particular case the lid remained closed despite the most obvious miscarriage of justice I think. Could this end up being another Soham as it's too hot to handle?)

There were some indications that other people might have been involved with taking Madeleine away (or her body away). For instance, Kate is claimed to have shouted out on Thursday evening: 'The bastards have taken her.' She is also claimed to have told social worker Yvonne Martin on Friday morning that a couple had taken her child. (Kate told the Yvonne at 10am that Madeleine had been taken 13 hours previously - which would have been around 7pm. Could this possibly have been the truth? That a couple took away Madeleine at around 7pm on Thursday evening? Thursday afternoon/early evening is the most likely time, imo, that Madeleine would have been removed from OCpremises. This would have been around or just after the time of David Payne's alleged visit to the McCann apartment).

Much seems to be made of the latest suspect's girlfriend at the time who could have been a 'partner in crime' (the woman who ran the refuge for troubled children). I think it has been inferred that the suspect could have been making a call to her on his mobile near the Ocean Club on the evening of the disappearance.

All in my own opinion as always.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/YVONNE-WARREN-MARTIN.htm

What's the latest on this story?

Just found this. I think this is important. The man is a convicted child sex offender. I still think that the prime suspects for Madeleine's disappearance are the parents and their friends but that does not rule out Brueckner as having some involvement, or being part of an organised ring, say.

I think that the Nigel from Southampton conversation on Thursday morning provides indications that photographing/filming children is sensitive and I think Nigel caught members of the group red-handed using a video-recorder in a clandestine manner. It would be great to see Nigel's police statement. Kate's attempt to sanitize the incident are laughable, imo, and Russell talks about the incident at great length - he goes on and on and on which no doubt was partly as a result of skilled questioning on the part of the police interviewer. Rather like the prince Andrew interview, if you hand out enough rope it quite effectively produces a result.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8631335/Christian-Brueckner-jailed-sexually-abusing-ex-girlfriends-five-year-old-daughter.html#reader-comments

There are those who claim Brueckner had nothing to do with this case. How do they know that? It's best to keep an open mind. I do not believe that the German authorities would be pointing a finger if there was NOTHING AT ALL to link the suspect with this case. The links could be tenuous, perhaps. or perhaps not.

The parents and their friends claimed Madeleine was taken by a paedophile or a paedophile ring. Who was in that ring, if that claim is true? Why did the parents make this claim?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, Brueckner might be a handy person to have hanging around in the event that you are going to claim that your child was abducted by a paedophile or by a paedophile ring. The Joker is quite meticulous, imo. We have the 'sea bass' odours to explain the cadaver findings; we have the crying incident which Madeleine wasn't bothered about the next day (I would pinpoint this crying incident and the abrupt cessation of the crying as the beginning of the end in terms of this poor child). We have some strange creche signatures. There are indications that a large number of people have some involvement on some levels with this case (Philip Edmonds and the photo of Madeleine on Thursday? That's weird - why didn't he release the photo?)

I don't see why Brueckner wouldn't join the melee. And we KNOW that Kate won't allow for any blond suspects preferring them to be dark, swarthy and preferably pimply and very ugly.

Another story to convince us that CB is a wrong 'un - as if we didn't already know.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8702767/Madeleine-McCann-prime-suspect-Christian-Brueckner-linked-sex-attack-German-girl-10.html?ito=push-notification&ci=32099&si=10306854

Hardly a sex attack by the sound of it, more extremely indecent exposure.

A piece by Brunt on sky as reported by Yahoo,theres nothing to link CB to Madeleine.

The disappearance of Madeleine McCann: Have they got the right man this time?
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/disappearance-madeleine-mccann-got-man-132300405.html


Mr Wolters said: "There is no forensic evidence, but it is not necessary to have forensics to charge our suspect. We just need more evidence, but I can't say what it is we are looking for though there are different possibilities. Maybe a witness, a photo or a video."

He added: "Someone asked me if we had found Madeleine's clothes. If we had found something like that it would be great for our investigation, but it's not true."

If they are looking for a picture or a video, it sounds as if they don't have those things at present, so not found in his stash of porn.

froggy wrote:If they are looking for a picture or a video, it sounds as if they don't have those things at present, so not found in his stash of porn.

Maybe they should raid CEOP.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/german-paedophile-suspected-abducting-madeleine-22900797

I'll put the link for the latest Mark S podcast here too as it focuses on this case.

https://omny.fm/shows/they-ve-taken-her/maddies-dead

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/christian-b-madeleine-mccann-suspect-germany-b1767863.html

So Hans Christian Andersen, sorry Wolters, thinks that eventually CB is likely to be charged.

I came across this by chance and, in view of the other trash that has come from Australian TV, I hold out no hope that it will be anything other than dreadful. I only managed about five minutes of it - the message screamed out loud and clear that the paedo did it. If anyone can stomach it, please let's have your thoughts.

It comes from the channel that made one of the worst programmes ever so that has settled it - I won't be watching!

https://maddiemccannmystery.forumotion.co.uk/t1872-australian-tv-show-sunday-night-with-pat-brown?highlight=rhani+sadler

This film is 42 min long. I have to confess that I couldn't face watching it all. I watched the first 5 min then jumped in and out of it and watched the last 5 min.

Now if you only knew the basic story - little girl vanishes from holiday apartment and the stupid Portuguese police couldn't find her then the film is believable.

Sandra (ask the dogs) is in it several times and is convinced that the nasty German did it.

Facts provided by the film - he lived a 'stone's throw away' for several years - then was in Germany, in trouble, then came back to PDL a few months before Maddie vanished.

The evidence against him:

1. He is a bad man with a record - that is true.
2. He was in the area at the time.
3. He made a phone call reflected in the local telephone mast for the holiday complex.  Sandra said the phone call must have been to his accomplice as he couldn't have taken Maddie without help.
4. They found swimsuits of little girls in his camper van (nothing of Maddie's)
5. He deregistered his jaguar car the day after Maddie vanished. (what is the significance of this?)
6. They found 8,000 home made videos with unpleasant content hidden in his PDL residence - surely if there was a film of Maddie he would have been arrested immediately?

The last 4 min of the film featured an interview with Kerry Needham talking about her missing little boy Ben. The interviewer Liz Hayes said Kerry had a bond with Kate and you saw part of a handwritten letter on a table (allegedly) from Kate to Kerry.

Your bravery is appreciated!

When I saw Sandra in the first four minutes saying that CB is the most likely suspect, my will to live went out of the window! As you say, very convincing if you know next to nothing about the case.

Antonia wrote:
5. He deregistered his jaguar car the day after Maddie vanished. (what is the significance of this?)

Presumably the significance is in the coincidental timing.

Of course the other numerous and quite remarkable coincidences around this case have long gone ignored.

I'll watch the video later and report back.

unreorganised wrote:

I'll watch the video later and report back.

OK, I made it through, despite that drawn out, patronising tone that reminded me again why I hardly watch broadcast "journalism". Initial random thoughts :-

It's almost certainly him. TBF I've thought that since the first announcements as my posts here, I think, show. It sits right with me.

Be interesting to know how long he's really been under suspicion. Why was Germany targeted for the "Crimewatch" type appearance? Why did Danie Krugel, and later Scotland Yard, search so close to his home?

If he really was such a "wrong 'un" why did nobody locally finger him at the time?

Did he know Murat or Malinka? Anybody in the McCann circle?

Lots of questions to be asked around his income and means of supporting himself. How did he buy the factory? The kiosk?

I was surprised that anybody would recognise him from the efits shown, neither of which I thought particularly resembled him. There are other among the myriad of suspect's pictures churned out over the years that do resemble him, I think, but not the ones shown. I think there is a good chance that he is the man described by the witness Tasmin Silence, although again it would be strange if she did not just recognise him, with them both living in the village all year round.


I'm sure there's more. It'll come back to me.

Oh yeah.

Sandra is a flake who will say anything to get on the telly.

Also, no disrespect intended, and I can't claim to understand, but if the American lady had reported the rape at the time, subsequent events could have been very different.

Goodness knows what made Sandra do such a drastic about turn.

I haven't heard about the rape not being reported at the time.

unreorganised wrote:

unreorganised wrote:

I'll watch the video later and report back.

OK, I made it through, despite that drawn out, patronising tone that reminded me again why I hardly watch broadcast "journalism". Initial random thoughts :-

It's almost certainly him. TBF I've thought that since the first announcements as my posts here, I think, show. It sits right with me.

Be interesting to know how long he's really been under suspicion. Why was Germany targeted for the "Crimewatch" type appearance? Why did Danie Krugel, and later Scotland Yard, search so close to his home?

If he really was such a "wrong 'un" why did nobody locally finger him at the time?

Did he know Murat or Malinka? Anybody in the McCann circle?

Lots of questions to be asked around his income and means of supporting himself. How did he buy the factory? The kiosk?

I was surprised that anybody would recognise him from the efits shown, neither of which I thought particularly resembled him. There are other among the myriad of suspect's pictures churned out over the years that do resemble him, I think, but not the ones shown. I think there is a good chance that he is the man described by the witness Tasmin Silence, although again it would be strange if she did not just recognise him, with them both living in the village all year round.


I'm sure there's more. It'll come back to me. Who the fook is Alison ?

Bolded bit, Metodo 3 tried to link him.


https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SERGEY-MALINKA.htm

439 - Confidential report
re: denouncement of



Sergei Malinka (Spanish)

---------------

(The second of the three pieces of information from the book given to the PJ by Metodo 3)

Processos Vol XIII
Page 3439

2. RECORD OF PAEDOPHILE MATERIAL

Alison informs us that 4 years ago her boyfriend Cristian was spending two nights at Sergei Malinka's home when, upon going to send an email from one of Sergei's computers and upon joining an attachment he saw paedophile material. When asked for explanations, Sergei told him that it was a client's computer and that he would denounce the fact to the pertinent authorities the following day.

That is what Alison told us.

Heisenburg wrote:

That is what Alison told us.

Yes, I've wondered if Metodo 3 were not retained on the basis of finding this specific individual.

Am I having a madder than usual moment? Is the inference that "Cristian" is the same person as Christian B?

Freedom wrote:Am I having a madder than usual moment? Is the inference that "Cristian" is the same person as Christian B?

Nobody knows who he is. Better try ringing Alison.



https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SERGEY-MALINKA.htm#p13p3439

Put it this way; I wouldn't die of surprise if it was.