Should the Germans Have Dropped Their Investigation By Now?

[Eleanor]

Repeating Wolter's libel doesn't help your case IMO.

So what is this Thread all about?

[Mr Gray]

Repeating Wolter's libel doesn't help your case IMO.

Who says wolters is commiting libel...I think its possible he has taht evidence...remeber its evidence he has not proof.

Im not repeating what wolters is saying...Im not repeating libel...Im not saying wolters has strong evidence....im saying thats what wolters is saying...its  a fact that he is saying it

[Robittybob1]

Who says wolters is commiting libel...I think its possible he has taht evidence...remeber its evidence he has not proof.

Im not repeating what wolters is saying...Im not repeating libel...Im not saying wolters has strong evidence....im saying thats what wolters is saying...its  a fact that he is saying it

I think if it is potential libel, as you already have said, "If Cb isnt happy with that he needs to take it up with Wolters", repeating what Wolters said is also potential libel IMO.
I thought we had established that on the other thread.   Everyone has the right to a good reputation.

[Mr Gray]

I think if it is potential libel, as you already have said, "If Cb isnt happy with that he needs to take it up with Wolters", repeating what Wolters said is also potential libel IMO.
I thought we had established that on the other thread.   Everyone has the right to a good reputation.

Wolters is staing as afact that he has concrete evidence....Im not stating fact he has concrete evidence. What im saying is not libellous.....

[Brietta]

Operation Grange was a full MIT at first, but that stopped over five years ago. There are just four officers in the team now, keeping it ticking over I assume.

I don't know enough to pontificate on operational matters and your assumptions rather suggest that you know nothing either.
However I am very keen in my hopes for justice for Madeleine and to that end I wish the Germans success whatever that may be in their investigations ~ can you express a similar aspiration to mine?

[Robittybob1]

iWolters is staing as afact that he has concrete evidence....Im not sating fact he has concrete evidence. What im saying is not libellous.....

We also have to judge cases of potential libel on the forum.

[Eleanor]

I think if it is potential libel, as you already have said, "If Cb isnt happy with that he needs to take it up with Wolters", repeating what Wolters said is also potential libel IMO.
I thought we had established that on the other thread.   Everyone has the right to a good reputation.

Close down this Thread now then.  Or remove every mention of what Wolters has said.

[Robittybob1]

Close down this Thread now then.  Or remove every mention of what Wolters has said.

And how do you do that?

[Brietta]

I think if it is potential libel, as you already have said, "If Cb isnt happy with that he needs to take it up with Wolters", repeating what Wolters said is also potential libel IMO.
I thought we had established that on the other thread.   Everyone has the right to a good reputation.

Quite often I wish you would pause for thought prior to hitting the post button, Rob, so many of your posts are harbingers of total disruption to the threads.

The thread consists of discussing  the German case which features a proven violent rapist and child abuser.  Good luck to anyone who can find any signs of him having any claim to a 'good reputation' ~ his convictions seem to show that has already been blown away many years ago.

[Mr Gray]

I think if it is potential libel, as you already have said, "If Cb isnt happy with that he needs to take it up with Wolters", repeating what Wolters said is also potential libel IMO.
I thought we had established that on the other thread.   Everyone has the right to a good reputation.

What I have said is not libellous.

[Eleanor]

And how do you do that?

If you want the Thread closed down then report it to John.

If you want any mention of what Wolters has said eradicated then crack on and do it.

[Brietta]

And how do you do that?

Having once done so inadvertently ... I have absolutely no intention of telling you how to do it.

Is there any chance of us progressing the thread without constant aggravation.  This is a discussion forum ... not a war zone.

[Robittybob1]

Quite often I wish you would pause for thought prior to hitting the post button, Rob, so many of your posts are harbingers of total disruption to the threads.

The thread consists of discussing  the German case which features a proven violent rapist and child abuser.  Good luck to anyone who can find any signs of him having any claim to a 'good reputation' ~ his convictions seem to show that has already been blown away many years ago.

That is a similar argument the SC tried to raise against the McCanns.   

Having once done so inadvertently ... I have absolutely no intention of telling you how to do it.

Is there any chance of us progressing the thread without constant aggravation?  This is a discussion forum ... not a war zone.

Yes, get Eleanor to answer the question.  I'm not at war. 

[Robittybob1]

Probably becasue the Germans are now leading the investigation which is as good as solved..imo

When you say "as good as solved"  I took that to mean the case against CB is as good as solved, implying CB is guilty of murder, and that you had this view even before the evidence has been presented in court and CB being found guilty by a court. 
Look, if I have misjudged the meaning of your post I apologise.

[Mr Gray]

I don't know why they ever started, the case was solved by Amaral in 2007.

What about this one...liked by gunit. Can we have some comsistency