CHAPTER 65
CLARKE SPEEDS UP THE SHREDDING OF HIS OWN REPUTATION
As 2024 begins to fade away we might like to reflect on what Jon Clarke and the egregious Olive Press told us was coming, and compare it with what actually did.
The Olive Press remains as strange and unfocussed as ever, apparently still unable to decide whether it is a “News” paper, or more of a free and mildly absorbent magazine full of adverts and bulked out with embellished old stories.
The paper is published fortnightly. So even if you pick up a copy by the check-out of a supermarket the day it arrived there, any “news” will be at least four days old, and most at least a fortnight. To mark any report as “Exclusive’ under such circumstances seems a trifle ambitious.
The best one can hope for is a measured update and commentary on longer running stories. But as we know that is usually beyond its remit.
It still runs ambitious headlines, but all too often the editorial content fails to live up to the expectations raised.
A recent example was this [21 Aug 2024]
SWEDISH EXPAT IN SPAIN WHO ONCE MANAGED THE TRAGIC MIKE LYNCH SUPERYACHT GIVES HER VERDICT ON THE INCIDENT AFTER 75M VESSEL SUNK
OFF COAST OF ITALY
Apart for the expected grammatical mistake – [‘SANK’ being the simple past tense of ‘SINK’, with SUNK being the past participle, (though it is often used as the simple past by the ill-educated). Eg. After it SANK. After it HAD SUNK …] – we are drawn deeper into the decidedly meagre article, where we read
And that is it. There is no verdict. No commentary, no view, no discussion. The Headline is misleading, and probably contravenes the Trades Descriptions Act 1968 (as amended).
We also note the usual innumeracy at which the Olive Press excels. A long time ago we had a 5 tonne bull (actually about 0.5 tonne, 500 kg), and a 5 tonne rock in the road, (actually about 35 tonne) but the length of the yacht is not an estimate. It is well recorded so anyone with a keyboard and internet access can check. As I have just done, obviously.
75m in the headline is 246 feet
The “Bayesian” was in FACT (sorry for using that rude word) 183 ft long, which is 56m.
The Headline is wrong on a matter of fact, and misleading on a matter of content.
It demonstrates sloppy sub-editing.
REF 1
In the body of the Olive Press we keep seeing a selection of regurgitated news about the now terminated trial of Christian Brückner
Let us recap, for those new to the story
In the trial of Christian Brückner in Braunschweig, Lower Saxony, Germany for five more or less serious sexual offences allegedly committed in the Algarve, Portugal between 2004 and 2016 his defence team, led by H. Fülscher, submitted that there was “No case to Answer” on the grounds that the evidence placed before the court by the prosecution was insufficient to raise even a reasonable suspicion.
The judge Fr. Uta Engemann, who had been highly critical of the witnesses during their testimony and had asked several questions which went to the very heart of their credibility, agreed, and announced that there was insufficient even to continue with the Arrest warrant which was duly cancelled. Brückner remained in custody serving an existing sentence.
Important Note: Germany and other European Countries have an INQUISITORIAL Legal system, where the Judge and the Lay ‘magistrates’ are entitled to ask questions to find the Truth. England has an ACCUSATORIAL system where the Judge and Jury are presented ONLY with the evidence the Prosecution and Defence SELECT to put before them. The objective TRUTH may or may not be included.
The prosecution naturally appealed. They asked for this judgment to be overruled, AND that the judge and the lay judges – “Schöffen” – namely H. Timo Schmidt and Fr. Anke Hesse, who sat with her – should be dismissed and the entire case reopened and heard from the start by a differently constituted bench.
H.Schmidt Fr. Engemann Fr. Hesse
This second count was on the basis of alleged ‘bias’ by the judge.
The Senate which reviewed this appeal refused to overrule the judgment, and the decision was published in the Braunschweiger Zeitung on 8th September.
REF 2
The decision on the second count, that of dismissing the entire Bench and ordering a full re-trial was also dismissed and the trial continued, with the prosecution insisting it had “concrete evidence”, but after several more months, and then the final submissions with the Prosecution melodramatically demanding 15 years imprisonment PLUS indefinite ‘preventive Detention’ and the defence quietly and respectfully observing that there was no adequate evidence, Christian Brückner was acquitted of all five charges.
REF 3
During her speech the Judge made some trenchant observations about the duty of the court to consider only the evidence presented and not to listen to the Press, or the view of the man sitting at the “Stammtisch” in the local Bierkeller. [Stammtisch = the table occupied solely and exclusively by regulars, who put the world to rights each evening over a Maß or zwei of Bier, or a Glas of Wein.
SIDE NOTE:
It is polite to knock twice gently on corner of the table on leaving the pub to acknowledge and pay respect to their presence and status. It is forbidden by a tradition far more powerful than any Law or Divine Commandment to sit at the Stammtisch unless specifically invited. [The rules of membership are unknown and unknowable except to those who are already members or who have lived in the area for many generations, probably spanning centuries.]
The words Stammtischpolitik (Stammtisch politics) and Stammtischniveau (Stammtisch level) describe the over-simplified nature of Stammtisch discussions, and have an established
metaphorical usage in describing over-simplified political and social discussions beyond the Stammtisch itself.
END
The judge was therefore this using this word in a seriously derogatory, even borderline abusive way, – similar to how politicians are disparaged by using the terms “Student Politics” or “The 6th Form Debating Club”, – and she was roundly condemning those who listened to and took notice of idle gossip, rumour, and unstructured opinions based on no hard evidence, and who then did not seek out and present any argument or evidence either to back it up or refute it.
It is a crushing condemnation of H. Wolter’s and Fr. Uta Lindemann’s preparation and presentation of the case, and by extension of those who have blindly followed and written books and Newspaper articles – all based on No persuasive or probative evidence at all.
It is worth reading the Article from Die Welt,
WIKI: Die Welt ("The World") is a German national daily newspaper, published as a broadsheet by Axel Springer SE. Die Welt is the flagship newspaper of the Axel Springer publishing group, and considered a newspaper of record in Germany. . . The modern paper takes a self-described "liberal cosmopolitan" position in editing, but it is generally considered to be conservative. END
QUOTE:
“08/10/2024: ‘A court has acquitted the previously convicted sex offender Christian B. in a rape trial. The pronouncement of judgement turns into a humiliation for the public prosecutor's office ...
This was the case last Tuesday at Braunschweig District Court. At the end of the 38-day trial against Christian B., the public prosecutor's office stands there as the defeated party, whose indictment was literally pulverised by the criminal chamber.
According to judge Uta Engemann, nothing, not even the smallest accusation in the document, could be proven. ‘We have heard deliberately lying witnesses here,’ said the chairwoman of the chamber. ‘We cannot base a judgement on that.’ ... A court cannot judge the quality of a witness any worse.
However, this continued ‘inconsistency of the statements’ could also have been noticed by senior public prosecutor Uta Lindemann, Engemann hinted - and referred to the plea of defence lawyer Friedrich Fülscher, whose argument she agreed with on this point. ...’ - END
“Humiliation; Defeated; Pulverised; Nothing could be proven” That is strong stuff.
REF 4
Even the Guardian reported her comments
“She said that “everyone” had heard about Brückner in connection with the McCann case and the labelling of Brückner, “as a sex monster and a pervert”, amounted to “massive third-party suggestions” which had influenced witnesses and resulted in testimonies to the court being “almost worthless for the legal chamber”.
REF 5
The Prosecution said it would to Appeal against the finding, and apply for a full re-trial – obviously with a new Judge and panel of Schöffen.
Given that they tried this once already – and failed – and that the only real grounds are that they don’t like the verdict –
Given that the Judge had been making observations about the quantum and strength of the evidence, but nevertheless allowed the trial to proceed to its bitter end –
Given that the Prosecution clearly does not have any other evidence, or it would have already used it –
Given that an independent Tribunal (Senate) has already investigated and analysed the professional competence and impartiality of the judge – one of the most senior, experienced, outspoken and respected judges on the panel of Nieder Sachsen, and found nothing of concern –
this will be an enormous task which will require some seriously persuasive legal arguments and overwhelming precedents from the annals of the Supreme Court itself.
Some commentators with good knowledge of the German Legal System doubt it will or can succeed, but – even if it does – it only starts the trial off again from the start, where the same lack of credible evidence will be exposed ever further since H. Fülscher now knows the answers he got last time. Any slight deviation or “massaging” of the evidence and perceived coaching of [or further payments to !] the witnesses will be mercilessly exposed and obviously will then run the significant risk of being accused of perjury either at the new trial or during the old one. H. Fülscher himself is not prevented from asking even more penetrating and surgically crafted questions.
But WE must retain open minds, and say at this stage that a successful appeal and a new trial on the same facts perhaps “Appear Unlikely”.
Whether H. Wolters would risk including all five charges in the new indictment which ranged from relatively minor indecent exposures, through TWO apparently egregious sexual acts but with NO KNOWN VICTIMS, NO REPORTED COMPLAINTS, and NO AVAILABLE EVIDENCE, to a single rape of a young woman, many kilometres away, in the most strange and unbelievable of circumstances, where her OWN evidence – of graphic and precise details of scars and “piercing blue eyes” – effectively eliminated Brückner, who has neither . . . is unclear, to say the least.
Those who followed the case (other than in the Olive Press ) know that the woman judge was not impressed with any of the evidence provided, as most of it was second hand hearsay from unreliable witnesses.
And moreover not a single exhibit was produced. Not a single document, not a single tape, camera, knife, whip, mark, costume, CD, photo, DNA trace, fingerprint, CCTV clip, cross shaped scar, receipt for a full realignment of lower jaw and front teeth. . . NOTHING
Not even a photo of the interior of the house in PdL with the post (or ring) in the wall of the living room to which the unknown schoolgirl had been tied for a week whilst being abused on a daily basis. The house is still there. Not even Jon Clarke bothered to get a photo of the interior. We can of course surmise why that might have been, and suspect it is revealing of Clarke’s own view of that particular story. But interestingly nor did the BKA, MI6, Grange, M3, or indeed anyone else.
THINK ABOUT THAT FOR A MOMENT.
The house is still there. Exterior photos of it are not difficult to find on the internet. But not even Clarke, accustomed to poking around the interiors of derelict cardboard box factories in former East Germany and rooting through the boot of a car he found there to discover the scissors required by law to be in every car . . . – not even he managed to poke a camera lens up against the window nor even to knock on the door and ask politely if he might take a photo of the interior in his quest for the Truth and to assist the legal process.
All the court had were vague and conflicting stories about what the two alleged former acquaintances had seen on the tiny screen attached to a 1990s era video camera which they admitted or alleged one of them had stolen from Brückner, but which neither of them could produce or account for its whereabouts.
Both were convicted criminals, both harbouring grudges against the Scapegoat and both compromised by their association and contact with the Press – including Clarke – and the strong suspicion that they had received money to say what they did.
* * *
But let us rewind to the Judge’s remarks . . .
One of the figures behind the hounding of Brückner - and many others, of whom more later – has been Jon Clarke, owner, editor, and occasional reporter for his free supermarket newspaper, and expensive on-line website – The Olive Press.
His history with the McCann saga goes back a long way – to Friday 4th May 2007, or even Thursday 3rd May, a date he has allowed to be published in his name, but a date he also denies. We have tried several times to reconcile this position but have so far failed. His boast of arriving on 3/5/7 or the very early hours of 4/5/7 is still on his own Face-book page.
REF 6
What is clear is that he turned up in the town and joined a group of reporters who were already there and standing outside the McCann’s apartment block. Contemporaneous newsreel footage exists of him close to the platoon of GNR police, photographers, news reporters, Police dogs and Handlers, Scenes of crime specialists and the Policia Judiciaria (PJ).
The fact that he has repeatedly reported his having been the First Journalist on the scene; that the dogs did not arrive until “late afternoon”; that the police were not taking it seriously; and much more, was only the start of what has turned out to be an extraordinary 18 year cascade of mendacity, torrent of untruth, a tsunami of pure invention.
The world has been subjected to a long list :–
Walking into apartment 5A HE DIDN’T
Speaking to the McCanns in the apartment HE DIDN’T
Speaking to them as they were leaving HE DIDN”T
Deep Trench outside the apartment THERE WASN’T ONE
and a catalogue of other nonsense, a small selection of which we have recorded in previous Chapters.
REF 6
One of the BIG problems Clarke now faces is the very real possibility of a suit for Libel being brought against him. Monetary damages for libel in Germany law seem to be capped, though if the defamation is for financial gain a term of imprisonment of up to two years is available.
The book however was published by an Englishman, in English, and sold worldwide on all Amazon outlets, very obviously for maximum financial gain.
Under those circumstances, Brückner and Fülscher might be better advised to sue in England, under English law. We remember the awards of £600,000 to Mr. Robert Murat, and the large but undisclosed damages to the Tapas 7. The latter were said to have been paid into the “Fund” but so far no one has been able to identify the payment in the account. That too may merit further investigation at a later stage.
Parallel with this is the publication in England of a book about the trial
paediatric ICU nurse accused of murdering a series of desperately ill premature babies. There is
considerable disquiet about the trial and the conviction, and a full appeal is being launched at the same time that a public enquiry is being held.
REF 7
Private Eye, an English Investigative and satirical magazine, is following the case closely (and sceptically) and in the latest edition, No 1636 (8 Nov - 21 Nov 2024) at p. 36, we find the following observation [edited]
“The danger of publishing a book about a killer … before [the] appeal process is completed is that you may end up being sued if [he] wins. … it may have been wiser for the author… to hold fire. Unfortunately, [the book] is already out of date , as it fails to mention that . . .” and so on
REF 8
Clarke’s book, which I have reviewed elsewhere, was written
REF 9
How much more egregious is this than a book written after a trial, conviction and sentencing ?
Clarke boasted for many years of having a contact or mole, informant or even a spy in H. Wolters’ office, which enabled him to reveal details of the BKA’s work messing around next to lakes, and poking undergrowth with sticks in woodland, complete with “Copyright Images” in his newspaper which on examination turned out to be stock photos from the internet, a trait of Clarke’s we have exposed before. His publishing of what all the ‘witnesses’ were going to say during the trial in the book and his newspaper, much of which was then sold on to the tabloids and gutter press of the world, is in the view of some tantamount to interfering with a trial and the Course of Justice, and is surely what Judge Engemann was referring to.
How much of what Clarke told the world had been authorised for release by H. Wolters we may never know, but they have now both felt the sting in her public and published comments about their lack of professionalism. Wolters will feel it. Clarke may not even notice, understand, or even if he does, care.
We shall also never know how much was pure invention, nor whether Clarke paid the two most egregious witnesses to say what they did. I sincerely hope he did not stoop to that, but it cannot be ruled out in the murky world of tabloid journalism, phone tapping, interception of mail and witness interference. And in any event he will deny it so discussion is otiose.
We may never know how much of Wolters’ direction of the BKA’s activities referred to above was his and his alone, and how much was influenced by Clarke’s extravagant and highly inventive imagination. ‘ Digging places up’ is a recurring theme through the book and his columns. Allotments, ruined factories, plots of land behind villas in Portugal; it seemed anywhere Brückner had ever visited… all were proposed as sites for “digging up”
A small representative selection is appended
REF 10
I have no doubt however that Clarke will not be supporting the suggestion by Bernt Stellander after the publication of his book “The Sudden Impulse” and his interview with James English where he suggests a burial site for Madeleine and backs it with observations of the parents and others visiting the area, that the place he identifies be “dug up” by experts.
REF 11
* * * * *
Since it is coming up to the end of the year perhaps someone could lighten the atmosphere and craft a jingle out of this . . .
🎶 On the first day of Christmas
Jon Clarke-Kent sent to me –
10 unlikely suspects
9 tapas members
8 different stories
7 times arriving
6 threats of libel
5 places speaking
4 apartment entries
3 bogus Agencies
2 erratic dogs
And a Dee-ee-ee-ee-ee-eep Trench. 🎵
Allegedly Amazon v Netflix are, or were, in race to get the next Madeleine video out. Both seem to have been knocked off course by the Court Judgment and the projects may be dead in the water after the arch-guru Clarke turned out to be a false prophet (PROFIT ??). What their financial loss might be can only be guessed
REF 12
Clarke obviously pocketed the Netflix lucre – at least 30 pieces of silver, probably a LOT more – for his lies Direct to Camera. And they know that now. They have been sent the evidence of his fraud.
Now we wait to see if either Netflix or Amazon would touch him
And if they or either do – we wait to see whether he will cleanse whatever remains of his soul and admit his lies and deceit, or if he will merely come up with a list of excuses, and perhaps dig deeper into the trench of his own excavation.
Having sunk to the level of the gutter, perhaps throwing himself into his own deep trench is the only way he can sink any lower.
Happy Christmas
REFERENCES:
1a Olive Press 21 August 2024
1b https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayesian_(yacht)
3 Olive Press 8 October 2024
BBC https://bbc.com/news/articles/ckgmk2g1zpzo
6 https://www.facebook.com/jon.clarke.3745
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=4853987891318382&set=pcb.4853995174650987
7 https://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/2024/02/chapter
31, 32, 33 ,34, ,36, 38, 40, 42, 43, 48, 49, 50, 57, and 64. (So far)
8 Unmasking Lucy Letby: The Untold Story of the Killer Nurse – as seen on BBC Panorama. Hardcover – 24 Oct. 2024
by Jonathan Coffey & Judith Moritz (Author)
Amazon £9.99
9 https://www.private-eye.co.uk/. Issue 1636, p.36
10 MY SEARCH FOR MADELEINE: One Reporter’s 14-Year Hunt To Solve Europe’s Most Harrowing Crime Paperback – 1 Sept. 2021
by Jon Clarke (Author). New £10.00. Used £3.79
11 “she would happily allow police to dig at her property…
“and asked them to search the house and dig the ground to check…
“Sabine Sellig’s plea to dig up her allotment in Braunschweig…
“. . . . has pleaded with police to dig up the grounds of the allotment home…
‘“I expect the police will come and dig the place up at some stage,’…
“Why hasn’t more been done on the ground in Portugal, and Germany, digging up Brueckner’s former properties and places of interest, looking for evidence? Surely if he buried 8,000-plus files at the box factory, he could have buried more elsewhere? Yet despite a couple of haphazard searches in wells by Portuguese police in late 2020 there has been remarkably little activity going on in the Algarve to solve the case. Why haven’t they excavated his infamous Yellow House in Praia da Luz? Why haven’t police dug up Villa Bianca in Foral where he spent considerable time? The villa’s owner Lia welcomes it but the police don’t seem interested. Sabine Sellig has pleaded with police to dig up the grounds of the allotment home he lived in near Braunschweig, saying she worries she could be sleeping on ‘top of the body of Madeleine McCann’. And nothing. It does make me wonder if someone, maybe someone in authority, is protecting him.”
Clarke, Jon. MY SEARCH FOR MADELEINE: One Reporter’s 14-Year Hunt To Solve Europe’s Most Harrowing Crime (pp various). OP Books. Kindle Edition.
12a The Sudden Impulse. by Bernt Stellander
Language: english:
Publisher: MoDocromia, May 2024 ‧
12b Madeleine McCann was Not Abducted - Foreign Detective Bernt Stellander Tells All
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AtUT5BO3e4&t=95s