McCanns appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

[Wonderfulspam]

It does seem rather strange to me that the evidence Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger, doesn't implicate any stranger in particular. It has a certain ambiguity about it, the evidence Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger. I wonder what it could possibly be?
Perhaps someone who believes in it's existence can explain?

[Wonderfulspam]

Why is it OK to mock my opinion but not the troll’s, out of interest?

I believe G-Unit silently accepts that it's very difficult to argue with the troll.

[misty]

It does seem rather strange to me that the evidence Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger, doesn't implicate any stranger in particular. It has a certain ambiguity about it, the evidence Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger. I wonder what it could possibly be?
Perhaps someone who believes in it's existence can explain?

SY ruled out both woke & wandered and all the people in Luz close to Madeleine having removed her from 5A.

[Wonderfulspam]

SY ruled out both woke & wandered and all the people in Luz close to Madeleine having removed her from 5A.

I wonder how they managed that, considering her parents were the last to claim to have seen her?
I suppose they must have just accepted the McCanns word as entirely truthful, since there's no way to actually corroborate their last sighting of Madeleine at all.

[misty]

I wonder how they managed that, considering her parents were the last to claim to have seen her?
I suppose they must have just accepted the McCanns word as entirely truthful, since there's no way to actually corroborate their last sighting of Madeleine at all.

There's no way to corroborate the claims Amaral made in his book either but that didn't stop more than one judge ruling in his favour.

[Wonderfulspam]

There's no way to corroborate the claims Amaral made in his book either but that didn't stop more than one judge ruling in his favour.

Sigh.

The judges weren't ruling on the accuracy or otherwise of Amaral's claims. Instead, what damage, if any, the thesis in his book had caused them. As it happens, the McCanns failed to demonstrate the book harmed them in any measurable way.

[misty]

Sigh.

The judges weren't ruling on the accuracy or otherwise of Amaral's claims. Instead, what damage, if any, the thesis in his book had caused them. As it happens, the McCanns failed to demonstrate the book harmed them in any measurable way.

The judges referred to "proven facts" from the files as the basis for Amaral's value judgement. The way in which Amaral presented his opinion bore little evidential resemblance to the proven facts and therefore DID add insult to injury imo.
Many people seem quite content to accept such uncorroborated speculation yet refuse to believe the words of the (living) people most affected by the events of 3/5/07.
 I guess the damage GA's book & documentary caused to the search for Madeleine over the years is of secondary importance to sceptics. Even now they'd rather think the worst of the McCanns than the best of BKA & SY.

[Wonderfulspam]

The judges referred to "proven facts" from the files as the basis for Amaral's value judgement. The way in which Amaral presented his opinion bore little evidential resemblance to the proven facts and therefore DID add insult to injury imo.
Many people seem quite content to accept such uncorroborated speculation yet refuse to believe the words of the (living) people most affected by the events of 3/5/07.
I guess the damage GA's book & documentary caused to the search for Madeleine over the years is of secondary importance to sceptics. Even now they'd rather think the worst of the McCanns than the best of BKA & SY.

I'm sorry, what damage to the search did the book & documentary cause exactly?
As I understand things, Brueckner had already murdered Maddie & destroyed the evidence by the 4th of May, so there wasn't any chance of her being found anyway. Uncorroborated book or no.

[G-Unit]

SY ruled out both woke & wandered and all the people in Luz close to Madeleine having removed her from 5A.

With the evidence available that wasn't possible imo.

[G-Unit]

The judges referred to "proven facts" from the files as the basis for Amaral's value judgement. The way in which Amaral presented his opinion bore little evidential resemblance to the proven facts and therefore DID add insult to injury imo.
Many people seem quite content to accept such uncorroborated speculation yet refuse to believe the words of the (living) people most affected by the events of 3/5/07.
 I guess the damage GA's book & documentary caused to the search for Madeleine over the years is of secondary importance to sceptics. Even now they'd rather think the worst of the McCanns than the best of BKA & SY.

You are taking the same path as Mr Gray. What was proved was that most of the facts used by Amaral in his book were taken from the case files. The idea that the book harmed the search for Madeleine was dismissed seven years ago by the very first Portuguese judge as not proved. It's an opinion, not a fact.

[Venturi Swirl]

You are taking the same path as Mr Gray. What was proved was that most of the facts used by Amaral in his book were taken from the case files. The idea that the book harmed the search for Madeleine was dismissed seven years ago by the very first Portuguese judge as not proved. It's an opinion, not a fact.

Using your preferred celestial teapot argument prove that the book did not harm the search for Madeleine.

[Venturi Swirl]

With the evidence available that wasn't possible imo.

Tell that to Andy Redwood, Mark Rowley, et al, I’m sure they would benefit from your wisdom and expertise (despite the fact that you haven’t got access to all the information they have in this case and have no professional experience).

[G-Unit]

Using your preferred celestial teapot argument prove that the book did not harm the search for Madeleine.

In a civil trial the accusor must prove their allegations. Witness Maria Isabel Stilwell gave evidence, but all she could offer is 'a feeling'. The allegation was not provable.

"ID - Did the attention of the public and the media decrease after the publication of the book and the broadcast of the documentary?
IS says she "has a feeling" it did.

ID - Are there numbers, notes supporting this?
IS says that as a newspaper editor she knows when an issue is important."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2411.0

[G-Unit]

Tell that to Andy Redwood, Mark Rowley, et al, I’m sure they would benefit from your wisdom and expertise (despite the fact that you haven’t got access to all the information they have in this case and have no professional experience).

So how can someone with no more access to information than me state as fact that "SY ruled out both woke & wandered and all the people in Luz close to Madeleine having removed her from 5A."? SY haven't ever claimed those specific achievements as far as I know.

[Venturi Swirl]

So how can someone with no more access to information than me state as fact that "SY ruled out both woke & wandered and all the people in Luz close to Madeleine having removed her from 5A."? SY haven't ever claimed those specific achievements as far as I know.

Use logic, read what Redwood and Rowley have said and you will arrive at your answer.