General discussion about the latest news (not search related)

[barrier]

If everyone wants proven cites then we might as well give up.

But if were to say I've just read elsewhere that Mr Smith has never retracted his statement regards the sighting on the night of 3rd May 2007 and remain's with a certain degree of percentage of whom he saw would the forum accept it or would a cite be required?

[Mr Gray]

But if were to say I've just read elsewhere that Mr Smith has never retracted his statement regards the sighting on the night of 3rd May 2007 and remain's with a certain degree of percentage of whom he saw would the forum accept it or would a cite be required?

you would provide the cite and others could make up their minds how reliable it was...a cite is not proof is the point i made

[Eleanor]

But if were to say I've just read elsewhere that Mr Smith has never retracted his statement regards the sighting on the night of 3rd May 2007 and remain's with a certain degree of percentage of whom he saw would the forum accept it or would a cite be required?

I found it all so much more lively when Posters made statements and some other Posters proved it or not.

[Mr Gray]

I found it all so much more lively when Posters made statements and some other Posters proved it or not.

so did I...the forum has got to restrictive...imo of course. The fact that I am unable to post without adding imo to everything proves the point...imo of course

[Eleanor]

But if were to say I've just read elsewhere that Mr Smith has never retracted his statement regards the sighting on the night of 3rd May 2007 and remain's with a certain degree of percentage of whom he saw would the forum accept it or would a cite be required?

Since Mr. Smith's original statement quoted 60% to 80% his statement itself is ambiguous and in some doubt.

[G-Unit]

I have been asked to provide a cite...which I have via you. I was not asked to provide proof of the statement

I know. I was answering a different point raised by Rob. A better cite would have been a direct quote from Gerry or the lawyer saying he was advised to be silent, but I don't think either of them have commented.

[Mr Gray]

I know. I was answering a different point raised by Rob. A better cite would have been a direct quote from Gerry or the lawyer saying he was advised to be silent, but I don't think either of them have commented.

i think we all understand that but imo its unlikely that the lawyer advised kate not to answer and not gerry...secondly I dont remember you questioning kates account of the advice before

[G-Unit]

I found it all so much more lively when Posters made statements and some other Posters proved it or not.

I disagree. Why should members be expected to research whether another members post is correct r not? Without cites being provided entire threads end up discussing things which may never have happened.

[Mr Gray]

Was he incensed?  Was he advised not to answer?

That's news to me.  Is there a cite?  Or was that an IYO?

Incensed is the exact word Kate uses in her book to describe how gerry felt when asked the questions and that is why he decided to ignore the lawyers advice...according to Kate. The fact that it is news to you shows how incomplete your knowledge of the case is

[Eleanor]

I disagree. Why should members be expected to research whether another members post is correct r not? Without cites being provided entire threads end up discussing things which may never have happened.

Entire Threads do end up discussing things that may never have happened.

[barrier]

Since Mr. Smith's original statement quoted 60% to 80% his statement itself is ambiguous and in some doubt.

Thats  subjective is it not.

[Mr Gray]

Thats  subjective is it not.

no...60 to 80 % is by definition ambiguous

[barrier]

no...60 to 80 % is by definition ambiguous

Seeing as the court and jury of Jf holds no sway its subjective.

[Mr Gray]

Seeing as the court and jury of Jf holds no sway its subjective.

In your opinion

[pathfinder73]

Nonsense that certain posters on here claimed witness Martin Smith had changed his mind. He's never changed his mind about the sighting.

Gemma O'Doherty
‏
@gemmaod1
36 minutes ago

Louth man Martin Smith has confirmed he remains 60-80% sure he saw Gerry McCann carrying a child on the night Madeleine disappeared. Police are keen to talk to the man he saw, who has yet to come forward and identify himself. My report is in @VillageMagIRE today #McCann







20:40 "The Smiths themselves now believe they saw someone else."