Strange Witness Statements

[Alfred R Jones]

You really must keep up with Pathfinder's post, Alfred.

He says practically nothing but, the|McCannsdunit and has zero sinbin points.

There's your answer ....

I thought so, but wanted to hear it straight from the horse's mouth.

[slartibartfast]

I thought so, but wanted to hear it straight from the horse's mouth.

There is a distinct difference between making innuendo without any supporting facts which may be libellous and pointing out referenced discrepancies in witnesses stories.

The first is not allowed, the second is.

Clear enough silly.

[pathfinder73]

You really must keep up with Pathfinder's post, Alfred.

He says practically nothing but, the|McCannsdunit and has zero sinbin points.

There's your answer ....

I provide evidence and ask questions you don't like. Parents who refuse to answer police questions and change stories don't deserve my trust.

[ferryman]

I provide evidence and ask questions you don't like. Parents who refuse to answer police questions and change stories don't deserve my trust.

Your 'sleuthing skills' have outshone those of the PJ, UK detectives involved in the shelved enquiry, PJ and Scotland Yard participants in the second enquiry and the Portuguese prosecutors.

Or there is another explanation? ...

[Brietta]

There is a distinct difference between making innuendo without any supporting facts which may be libellous and pointing out referenced discrepancies in witnesses stories.

The first is not allowed, the second is.

Clear enough silly.

The law of defamation recognises two types of meaning:

Natural and ordinary meaning of the words

This is not limited to the literal and obvious meaning but includes any inference which the ordinary, reasonable reader would draw from the words.

Innuendo meaning

There are two types of innuendo meaning:

1. False innuendo

Alternative meaning which the ordinary reasonable person can read between the lines or infer from the words.

2. True innuendo

This is were the words appear to be innocent to some people but appear to be defamatory to others because they have special knowledge or extra information, an example of this would be, somebody who is said to be getting married which would not be defamatory to the majority of readers, but it would be to the readers who knew that the person was already married and as such would be committing bigamy.
http://www.carruthers-law.co.uk/what-we-do/defamation/defamation-definitions/#.VqZ-1yqLS00

[Alfred R Jones]

There is a distinct difference between making innuendo without any supporting facts which may be libellous and pointing out referenced discrepancies in witnesses stories.

The first is not allowed, the second is.

Clear enough silly.

As mud, thanks.

[Mr Gray]

I provide evidence and ask questions you don't like. Parents who refuse to answer police questions and change stories don't deserve my trust.

I'm sure,but hey are not bothered about having your trust

[Mr Gray]

There is a distinct difference between making innuendo without any supporting facts which may be libellous and pointing out referenced discrepancies in witnesses stories.

The first is not allowed, the second is.

Clear enough silly.

the mistake pathfinder and others  make is to treat the non verbatim twice translated "stories" as accurate

[G-Unit]

the mistake pathfinder and others  make is to treat the non verbatim twice translated "stories" as accurate

The statements may be accurate or inaccurate, but clearly they were read back and signed by those making them. If a translation from the Portuguese is unclear the original text can usually be seen, translated, and the meaning extracted. They are all there is though, so what are those who dismiss the statements basing their opinions on instead?

[Mr Gray]

The statements may be accurate or inaccurate, but clearly they were read back and signed by those making them. If a translation from the Portuguese is unclear the original text can usually be seen, translated, and the meaning extracted. They are all there is though, so what are those who dismiss the statements basing their opinions on instead?

they would have been read back in English.....that does not mean what was written down in Portuguese matched....an absolute recipe for disaster...we do not know what the mccanns said...only someone elses version of it

[G-Unit]

they would have been read back in English.....that does not mean what was written down in Portuguese matched....an absolute recipe for disaster...we do not know what the mccanns said...only someone elses version of it

So, answer my question. On which facts do you base your opinions?

[Mr Gray]

So, answer my question. On which facts do you base your opinions?

on the general facts but you cannot be sure of the details...

[G-Unit]

on the general facts but you cannot be sure of the details...

A fact is known or proved to be true. Which facts are you basing your opinions on?

[Mr Gray]

A fact is known or proved to be true. Which facts are you basing your opinions on?

there are plenty of facts in this case......you wont agree with my reasoning so whats the point.......the mccanns are not involved and maddie was almost certainly abducted..imo

[G-Unit]

there are plenty of facts in this case......you wont agree with my reasoning so whats the point.......the mccanns are not involved and maddie was almost certainly abducted..imo

I probably won't. but I've only heard you mention two things, both said by Redwood. Is your whole theory based on two things a retired detective said ages ago or is there more?