The Cunning Plan ?

The Prosecutors Office of the small North German city of Braunschweig (Brunswick) , a City around the size of say Southampton has launched a press campaign accusing Christian Brueckner of being suspected to be responsible for for the abduction and subsequent murder of Maddie McCann.  Information has gradually come out over the last few days and it would appear that, the Prosecutor has seen evidence that has led him to conclude that Maddie is dead having been murdered shortly after being abducted in May 2007.  The evidence appears to be either hearsay or based on presumably intercepted conversations between paedofiles where a person believed to be Bruckner apparently boats  that he killed Maddie and disposed of the body.  The Prosecutor appears to be highly confident that they have got the killer but the evidence is apparently not sufficient to charge Bruckner nor even allow them to obtain a warrant to go and question him in Kiel Prison.

As is well known the Portuguese police officer who was in charge of the case for the first 5 months Gonzalo Amaral spoke on the Maddie podcast back in April 2019 and said that he understoof that the British police were working on setting up a German who had previously been convicted on child abuse charges and was now in jail in Germany.  There seems little doubt that he must have been referring to Brueckner.

So what is going on?  Many casual observers have been impressed by the confidence expressed by the Prosecutor's spokesman that they know what has happened and the fact that they are not British given Scotland Yard is widely considered "compromised" on the Maddie question.

Here is my take on the matter.

The Braunschweig Prosecutor has been suspicious of Brueckner for some time, seemingly since around 2017 when they gathered some intelligence linking him to a disturbing attack on a 72 year old American lady in the Luz are back in 2005.  They seem to have connected him to the attack primarily through a hair matching his DNA left on her bed.  It seems to have taken quite some time to get a conviction in this  case with a  number of mistakes made along the way.  In particular when they originally wanted to charge him he was already in custody in a German jail on another unrelated charge, however before they were able to complete the paperwork for the charge he seems to have been released from jail and promptly gone to Italy.  Once in Italy they were eventually able to extradite him but it seems that this was done in relation to a different crime (maybe the cannabis distribution charge that it seems he is currently serving), nevertheless  the trial for the rape  case seems to have proceeded and the judge convicted him and sentenced him to 7 years.  However, it seems that he has been able to lodge an appeal to this conviction apparently based on something of a technicality ie  being extradited in relation to a different charge.  As things stood as of last week he was due to be eligible for parole on his cannabis  charge and given the  appeal on his rape conviction was likely to have been able to exit jail pending resolution of the Appeal against the rape charge.  The Prosecutor was presumably very concerned that once on parole he was likely to leave Germany once again and thus slip through their clutches necessitating relocating him and going through yet another extradition process.

At some point during this time they appear to have gathered information that has lead them to conclude that he maybe responsible for Maddie's abduction and murder.  This information appears to be some form of hearsay derived from monitoring the conversations in paedofile forums where it appears that he was boasting about some activity (we  do not know how explicit) that was interpreted as the abduction and murder of Maddie and disposal of her body.  Besides that the Prosecutor has revealed a couple of pieces of what can only be regarded as weak circumstantial evidence.  1 that he  appears to have had a 30 minute phone conversation which locates him in the  area perhaps on the  previous day and 2 that he  seems to have transferred ownership of his Jaguar car on the  day following Maddie's disappearance to a contact in Germany.  They seem to have got Portuguese police to question people in the Luz area at some point in the last couple of years but seemingly have not been able to uncover any more concrete evidence implicating him in Maddie's disappearance.  In the meantime, they seem to also be confident that he maybe responsible for other sex related crimes in the Luz area but really have no  idea  what these might be.

If this is indeed an accurate summary the obvious, though perhaps naive response is.  OK well  if  this  is  what you suspect happened, you should  request that Scotland Yard submit the DNA Data samples to Dr Perlin's Cybergenetics to discover whether it is indeed possible to use latest DNA techniques to resolve just who the  blood/DNA samples obtained from behind the sofa and in the  Scenic  are  from.  It is  very obvious that unless you have  conclusive  proof  such as a body or at least a confession, no  case against him can be  realistically pursued in Court given 1 The Public  Statement by Amaral that the British police have been trying to set him up for  over a year and 2 Dr Perlin's claim that the identity of the DNA samples can probably be resolved  pretty easily within a week.

We  don't know whether he has requested Scotland Yard submit the DNA samples to Perlin, my very strong suspicion is  that he has not done so or if he  has  then he  hasn't pushed  back very hard when they refused to do so.

Instead he has launched a very public campaign against Brueckner claiming essentially that he  is highly confident that he has abducted and murdered Maddie but that the evidence that he  has got (which in Germany needs to be sufficiently strong to make a conviction more likely to succeed that o fail) isn't strong enough to press  charges  nor  even to obtain a warrant to question him.

In my view the Prosecutor has calculated that he  has a win - win strategy.  Maybe the publicity following the announcement will bring forth substantial evidence, either on the  Maddie  case or on other  crimes that he  may have committed.  Maybe the pressure put on Brueckner will be  sufficient for him to make a credible  confession.  if  either of these happen, the Prosecutor will be  widely acclaimed as a hero for having solved one of the  most notorious and perplexing cases of the Century so far.

If on the other hand, no such hard evidence emerges, the publicity is almost certain to be sufficient for Brueckners parole to be be  denied and the appeal against the rape conviction to fail. He  will therefore be able to keep him in jail for  at least 7 more  years rather than have him walk free  again and make a laughing stock out of the Prosecutor.  In this  scenario, I suspect that the McCanns would  be  tempted to bring an end to their "search" declare "closure" and  claim that at least the likely culprit is languishing in jail for a lengthy period, be it convicted of other  crimes.

The Prosecutor's main downside would seem to be in a contested trail without a body or confession, but he  has already warned that he is unlikely to proceed without one of  these.

The main wild  card is probably that Brueckner either commits suicide or is murdered in jail.  Particularly in light of the Epstein case, this is likely to be treated with considerable scepticism that their has been foul play and the German's may push for an investigation which could have unforeseen consequences. 

So far the McCann's and indeed Scotland Yard have been taking a back seat in this  development.  I think they are  very concerned to be able to continue the funding of Operation Grange, without being seen to be  overtly seen to be  lobbying for this.  A German lead investigation therefore probably suits them very well.  

To my mind it is highly implausible that Brueckner was infact responsible for the abduction and murder of Maddie.  All  the  major  pieces of evidence that we have so far such as The Dogs/Forensics, The Smithman Sighting and the Open Window/Shutter claim points toward parental involvement and we have so far not been made privy to anything but relatively weak circumstantial evidence that would implicate him..  If Brueckner was involved at all it is likely to have been limited to the disposal of the body for a cash reward.  Though some of the snippets of hearsay evidence that have emerge do seem to point in this direction, it would be difficult to reconcile this with the evidence from the Scenic (both the dogs/forensics and the fumigation story).  Pending more information, my view is therefore that though involvement in the disposal of the body is possible, it is a relatively low  probability scenario. 

As more information becomes available and events play out we  will see  whather these conclusions need to be revised.