Author Topic: The PJ final report ...  (Read 1642 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Faithlilly

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #30 on: April 14, 2017, 12:51:29 PM »
There are potent and logical reasons for supposing Inspector Carlos had it bang-on right to suppose Gerry was at the table at the moment of the Smith sighting.

Gerry had eight people ( although not independent witnesses) to his presence at the table. That would be a hard alibi to break.
Moral Guilt
Detractors of the work of our British Police in bringing criminals to justice generally ignore the important distinction between moral proof and legal evidence of guilt. In not a few cases that are popularly classed with 'unsolved mysteries of crime,' the offender is known, but evidence is wanting. If, for example, in- a recent murder case of special notoriety and interest,* certain human remains had not been found in a cellar, a great crime would have been catalogued among `Police failures'; and yet, even without the evidence which sent themurderer to the gallows, the moral proof of his guilt would have been full and clear.
Robert Anderson

Offline ferryman

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #31 on: April 14, 2017, 12:54:37 PM »
Gerry had eight people ( although not independent witnesses) to his presence at the table. That would be a hard alibi to break.

Unclear why you felt the need to introduce your lack of knowledge on what is, or is not, an independent witness into this?
Why is Victoria Derbybshire persona non grata on this board?

Offline Faithlilly

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #32 on: April 14, 2017, 12:57:30 PM »
Unclear why you felt the need to introduce your lack of knowledge on what is, or is not, an independent witness into this?

An independent witness is one with no established relationship with the person under suspicion. Surely you knew that?
Moral Guilt
Detractors of the work of our British Police in bringing criminals to justice generally ignore the important distinction between moral proof and legal evidence of guilt. In not a few cases that are popularly classed with 'unsolved mysteries of crime,' the offender is known, but evidence is wanting. If, for example, in- a recent murder case of special notoriety and interest,* certain human remains had not been found in a cellar, a great crime would have been catalogued among `Police failures'; and yet, even without the evidence which sent themurderer to the gallows, the moral proof of his guilt would have been full and clear.
Robert Anderson

Offline Alice Purjorick

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6421
  • Total likes: 2326
  • One man's style must not be the rule of another's.
Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #33 on: April 14, 2017, 01:02:32 PM »

An independent witness means that the person does not know any of the parties involved.
Apart from that Mrs Lincoln how did you like the play?

Offline davel

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #34 on: April 14, 2017, 01:11:13 PM »
They weren't on trial.

 8(0(*

On the evidence they would have been found not guilty
as experienced investigators...based on the evidence...we believe Madeleine McCann was removed from the apartment by a stranger....DCI Redwood...Scotland Yard

Neither the McCanns nor their friend are persons of interest or suspects

If civil questions are being asked can we have the courtesy to provide civil answers.

Offline Alfie

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #35 on: April 14, 2017, 01:13:04 PM »
On the evidence they would have been found not guilty
But that wouldn't have been considered the end of it as far as the sceptics are concerned - oooh noooo.

Mind you this is Portugal we're talking about.  They would probably have been found not guilty  and then ten years later found guilty in absentia.
Only asking questions....

Offline barrier

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #36 on: April 14, 2017, 01:14:42 PM »
Conclusion from the report:

In conclusion, it results from everything that has been done, despite the efforts that were made and all investigation lines being explored, that it is not possible to obtain a solid and objective conclusion about what really happened that night, and about the present location of the missing minor.

All but nine years on April2016 words attributed to DSI Duthie,we do not have a" full understanding" of what happened,not much changed.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2017, 02:05:37 PM by barrier »

Offline barrier

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #37 on: April 14, 2017, 01:22:27 PM »
Accusation be damned!

The Supreme Court judges ignored the report.

I'm wondering why.
It probably would have been better for the McCann's if their lawyer had ignored it.

Offline Angelo222

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #38 on: April 14, 2017, 01:35:12 PM »
The truth is that if the McCanns had been tried on the evidence they would have been found not guilty
That must make it evidence of innocence

Finding someone not guilty in a court of law is not an absolute indication of innocence. Examples being Sion Jenkins and Barry George where the English High Court ruled that both be denied compensation because it was not shown beyond any shadow of a doubt that they were innocent.  So it appears that in English law at least, a not guilty verdict, a jury failing to return a verdict or being cleared on appeal is NOT an automatic right to be viewed as innocent.

The converse is also true, anyone found guilty could very well be innocent.
« Last Edit: April 14, 2017, 01:47:13 PM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline barrier

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #39 on: April 14, 2017, 02:03:38 PM »
Finding someone not guilty in a court of law is not an absolute indication of innocence. Examples being Sion Jenkins and Barry George where the English High Court ruled that both be denied compensation because it was not shown beyond any shadow of a doubt that they were innocent.  So it appears that in English law at least, a not guilty verdict, a jury failing to return a verdict or being cleared on appeal is NOT an automatic right to be viewed as innocent.

The converse is also true, anyone found guilty could very well be innocent.
Stefan kiszko being one.

Offline davel

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #40 on: April 14, 2017, 02:12:02 PM »
Finding someone not guilty in a court of law is not an absolute indication of innocence. Examples being Sion Jenkins and Barry George where the English High Court ruled that both be denied compensation because it was not shown beyond any shadow of a doubt that they were innocent.  So it appears that in English law at least, a not guilty verdict, a jury failing to return a verdict or being cleared on appeal is NOT an automatic right to be viewed as innocent.

The converse is also true, anyone found guilty could very well be innocent.
Read my post
Not guilty would have been evidence of innocence as I have said
Not proof
as experienced investigators...based on the evidence...we believe Madeleine McCann was removed from the apartment by a stranger....DCI Redwood...Scotland Yard

Neither the McCanns nor their friend are persons of interest or suspects

If civil questions are being asked can we have the courtesy to provide civil answers.

Offline ferryman

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #41 on: April 14, 2017, 02:24:07 PM »
An independent witness is one with no established relationship with the person under suspicion. Surely you knew that?

An independent witness is one with no reason to lie.

Why is Victoria Derbybshire persona non grata on this board?

Offline G-Unit

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #42 on: April 14, 2017, 02:25:39 PM »
What would be "some sort of truth" in your view?  For example if someone were tried and found guilty would that be some sort of truth?  Is the result of the SC Judgement some sort of truth?  What is truth and who determines whether it is so or not?

The report's contents are not set in stone, There are no completely accurate times, for example.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline G-Unit

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #43 on: April 14, 2017, 02:28:43 PM »
There are potent and logical reasons for supposing Inspector Carlos had it bang-on right to suppose Gerry was at the table at the moment of the Smith sighting.

Name them.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline ferryman

Re: The PJ final report ...
« Reply #44 on: April 14, 2017, 02:30:21 PM »
The report's contents are not set in stone, There are no completely accurate times, for example.

The files (that we read on line) are littered with errors and corrections.
Why is Victoria Derbybshire persona non grata on this board?