Sunday Times claim that Smith e-fits had been suppressed for 5 years.

[Victoria]

I can't believe what I am reading - I thought the clocks only went back by an hour today - things like:

If they don't sue - it must be true

If they don't deny - it cannot be a lie

If they are not Rucked - they are not f---d

Were repeated with so much glee and back slapping years ago.

Doe anyone remember the old has been duffer from Essex who used to use those phrases and permutations of them?

He spent many a happy hour in the High Court making a complete fool of himself.

Ah ha ha! Yes he did, didn't he. Same old same old. When will these idiots learn.

[Apostate]

"frankly it should have been out there a long time ago"

Why wasn't it then, Clarence?

[Lyall]

To misquote Fawlty Towers: "Don't mention the Smith sighting!"

We all know why it worries them - but to have laboured bundleman for 5 years when their own guys told them to drop it. Incredible. 5 years wasted. More than ever the "search" seems insincere.

It's a puzzle Apostate, but after Crimewatch every single paper didn't bother asking the question about the new e-fits, not even the Express and Star. But they surely can't avoid the question now can they?

[Mr Gray]

Ah ha ha! Yes he did, didn't he. Same old same old. When will these idiots learn.

based on the posts weve seen today..no

[Lyall]

based on the posts weve seen today..no

You can't answer the question either, so we've every right to discuss it and the rest of this article.

[imustpointout]

Nope. seriously, do you guys purposely misunderstand everything?

I'm bored of the lets deflect game.

Can we play, why have the Mccanns suppressed important information for 5 years now please?

I posted the original article. What game was I playing?

[Cariad]

according to the telegraph article several posts above..no..so you believe  what you want to believe but please don't post it as fact

The Telegraph quoted a source close to the Mccanns, The Times published a statement attributed to The Madeleine foundation*.

I trust the paper with the named source, how about you?


....edit *The find Madeleine fund! Thanks Apostate !

[Apostate]

The Telegraph quoted a source close to the Mccanns, The Times published a statement attributed to The Madeleine foundation.

I trust the paper with the named source, how about you?

To be honest I don't think it was them LOL

[Mr Gray]

You can't answer the question either, so we've every right to discuss it and the rest of this article.

never said you didn't have the right..just pointing out that the article may not be true

[stephen25000]

never said you didn't have the right..just pointing out that the article may not be true

Now if it is, then what do you say ?

[Mr Gray]

The Telegraph quoted a source close to the Mccanns, The Times published a statement attributed to The Madeleine foundation*.

I trust the paper with the named source, how about you?


....edit *The find Madeleine fund! Thanks Apostate !

The madeleine fund is not a named source

[Mr Gray]

Now if it is, then what do you say ?

I probably wont be able to speak because Ill be eating my hat

[Cariad]

never said you didn't have the right..just pointing out that the article may not be true

I don't think anyone is arguing that a newspaper article is definitely, undoubtedly true! It seems like it's probably true though!

I honestly don't think it can be a complete fabrication, simply cause the McCanns are so litigious. I asked you earlier, but you may have missed it in the speed this thread moves, how long before we accept it as fact?

[imustpointout]

cariad

I don't think anyone is arguing that a newspaper article is definitely, undoubtedly true! It seems like it's probably true though!

lol lol

[Cariad]

The madeleine fund is not a named source

There is a statement from the Madeleine Fund. It's the last two paragraphs of the article.