Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB

[G-Unit]

So this is the sum of the evidence against the McCanns according to gunit

In your opinion. I haven't made any comment about evidence on this thread, but over the years I've discussed it at length on many threads.

[Brietta]

So this is the sum of the evidence against the McCanns according to gunit

Not only Gunit.  Despite the thread title no-one has been able to produce anything of substance against the McCanns not even if just more hot air.

[The General]

Not only Gunit.  Despite the thread title no-one has been able to produce anything of substance against the McCanns not even if just more hot air.

Gufffaw. Stop. Too funny.
In fairness, the thread title doesn't ask to list any, just whether there's more circumstantial evidence against the McCann's than there is CB.

....and it's a question we can't answer, as we don't know what circumstantial evidence there is, because the policeman is playing poker with a little girl's life and the feelings of two apparently bereft parents.

[Mr Gray]

In your opinion. I haven't made any comment about evidence on this thread, but over the years I've discussed it at length on many threads.

If you haven't then all your posts are off topic

[The General]

If you haven't then all your posts are off topic

No they're not. Stop that.

[G-Unit]

Not only Gunit.  Despite the thread title no-one has been able to produce anything of substance against the McCanns not even if just more hot air.

What, of substance, has been produced against Christian B?

[Brietta]

Gufffaw. Stop. Too funny.
In fairness, the thread title doesn't ask to list any, just whether there's more circumstantial evidence against the McCann's than there is CB.

....and it's a question we can't answer, as we don't know what circumstantial evidence there is, because the policeman is playing poker with a little girl's life and the feelings of two apparently bereft parents.

The thread title is ... "Is there more circumstantial  evidence against the mccanns than there is CB"
I've voiced my opinion on that ... but it is what it is.

Obviously you don't have a scooby about 'evidence' against the McCanns ... all of which is in the public domain ...  because had you known you wouldn't have been backwards in coming forward with it.  So no point in asking.

But it is thought provoking that those who claim to know are apparently keeping it very much to themselves when asked.

[Brietta]

What, of substance, has been produced against Christian B?

Please don't be silly about this ... the man is a career criminal with convictions for child abuse.  Funny you didn't mind the comparison being drawn on the forum between innocence and guilt before now 😀

[G-Unit]

Please don't be silly about this ... the man is a career criminal with convictions for child abuse.  Funny you didn't mind the comparison being drawn on the forum between innocence and guilt before now 😀

Being a career criminal with convictions for child abuse isn't evidence that he killed Madeleine McCann.

[Mr Gray]

Being a career criminal with convictions for child abuse isn't evidence that he killed Madeleine McCann.

Its evidence of his character...and therefore part of the circumstantial evidence.

His  statement that he wanted to find something small and use it for days...is evidence for motive.

The statements by his associates

the statement by his girlfriend

His phone ping in PDL placing him in the area that night.


Then we have the apparrent lack of an alibi and whatever HCW has as his concrete evidence.


as opposed to basically nothing of any substance  against the McCanns

[Brietta]

Being a career criminal with convictions for child abuse isn't evidence that he killed Madeleine McCann.

Did I say that ??  I know I did not.  Allow me to reiterate with regard to the thread title ...  "Funny you didn't mind the comparison being drawn on the forum between innocence and guilt before now 😀"

The question has been asked about McCann evidence.  You have been unable to provide an answer, nor has anyone else. 

Says it all really.

[The General]

The thread title is ... "Is there more circumstantial  evidence against the mccanns than there is CB"
I've voiced my opinion on that ... but it is what it is.

Obviously you don't have a scooby about 'evidence' against the McCanns ... all of which is in the public domain ...  because had you known you wouldn't have been backwards in coming forward with it.  So no point in asking.

But it is thought provoking that those who claim to know are apparently keeping it very much to themselves when asked.

At least you agree that the thread title doesn't actually ask for any evidence to be listed. Thanks for that.
The rest was just detritus.

[kizzy]

Please don't be silly about this ... the man is a career criminal with convictions for child abuse.  Funny you didn't mind the comparison being drawn on the forum between innocence and guilt before now 😀

Fgs was he the only one in the area [unique like] ..same as the unique abduction.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11819000

Brown said it was "extremely unlikely" anyone from a child sex ring would have abducted Madeleine. She said children could be illegally bought in some poor areas or "easily taken from drug addicts and prostitutes".

"Even blonde ones," she said.

'They're not going to steal a British tourist from a holiday resort because they know that will prompt a major investigation into them."
 

[G-Unit]

Its evidence of his character...and therefore part of the circumstantial evidence.

His  statement that he wanted to find something small and use it for days...is evidence for motive.

The statements by his associates

the statement by his girlfriend

His phone ping in PDL placing him in the area that night.


Then we have the apparrent lack of an alibi and whatever HCW has as his concrete evidence.


as opposed to basically nothing of any substance  against the McCanns

Mostly media gossip in my opinion. The only bit of interest is Wolter's 'concrete' evidence, which is unknown.

[kizzy]

Its evidence of his character...and therefore part of the circumstantial evidence.

His  statement that he wanted to find something small and use it for days...is evidence for motive.

The statements by his associates

the statement by his girlfriend

His phone ping in PDL placing him in the area that night.


Then we have the apparrent lack of an alibi and whatever HCW has as his concrete evidence.


as opposed to basically nothing of any substance  against the McCanns

Apart from them being suspects in their childs dissapearence

Seems most of the british opinion is that they are not cleared.

The CB scenario gets sillier by the day.



Be cautious of new McCann ‘evidence’ until charges are made, Professor warns



But I should say that we need to be cautious because there is clearly no conclusive forensic scientific or DNA evidence that places Madeleine in either of his two vehicles that we've heard about, otherwise this man – Christian B – would have already been charged.

“The difference between the approach taken by Scotland Yard and the German prosecutor is striking. For the German authorities to say that they have evidence that Madeleine is dead whilst also admitting that they do not have a body and may not be able to charge the suspect, is both very curious and unusual, and so has re-awakened media interest in a case which may never be solved.”



https://www.beds.ac.uk/news/2020/june/be-cautious-of-new-mccann-evidence-until-charges-are-made-professor-warns/