Author Topic: Wandering Off Topic  (Read 1464961 times)

0 Members and 9 Guests are viewing this topic.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #690 on: May 08, 2016, 08:15:36 PM »
  ... and where exactly does the missing child fit into all of this?

That is a question you should pose to the mccanns, as regards child care.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #691 on: May 08, 2016, 08:26:57 PM »
His theory is more complex than you have described.

Alternatively, your description is not accurate in terms of his theory.

Take your pick.

I have asked him to explain in more detail how he concluded that it was physically impossible for the McCanns to be involved in Madeleine's disappearance, but he hasn't answered. (which is his prerogative). I just wondered if you understood how he reached that conclusion?
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #692 on: May 08, 2016, 09:30:55 PM »
I have asked him to explain in more detail how he concluded that it was physically impossible for the McCanns to be involved in Madeleine's disappearance, but he hasn't answered. (which is his prerogative). I just wondered if you understood how he reached that conclusion?
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.

Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.
What's up, old man?

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #693 on: May 08, 2016, 09:36:04 PM »
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.

Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.

Why would a burglar need to silence a 3 year old child just woken up ?

Secondly, a burglar seeing the place occupied would invaribly scarper thinking other people were there.

Third, no sign of a struggle and the apartment was not in a mess.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #694 on: May 08, 2016, 09:44:19 PM »
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.

Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.

From what you have said Heri does not suspect the mcCanns at the moment but would change his mind if new evidence arose...that is my position and the stated position of the very open minded supporters on this forum
« Last Edit: May 08, 2016, 10:25:53 PM by John »

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #695 on: May 08, 2016, 09:55:30 PM »
Why would a burglar need to silence a 3 year old child just woken up ?

Secondly, a burglar seeing the place occupied would invaribly scarper thinking other people were there.

Third, no sign of a struggle and the apartment was not in a mess.
Let me start again.  I do not support Heri's theorem, which I have said before.   And I do not wish to champion Heri's theorem, which I have said before.

But here it is.  The burglar does not have the mental stability/maturity that you or I do.  The burglar is not acting as a mature and balanced adult.

The act is one of panic.  Something done in a flash that was stupid, but impulse made it seem reasonable at the time.

It's like a lightening strike.  Why does it happen where it happens and when it happens, rather than a half a mile away and ten seconds later?
What's up, old man?

Offline pegasus

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #696 on: May 08, 2016, 10:32:56 PM »
@Heri did you look at all the names marked with convictions ?

« Last Edit: May 08, 2016, 11:51:28 PM by pegasus »

Offline pegasus

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #697 on: May 08, 2016, 10:36:31 PM »
Why would a burglar need to silence a 3 year old child just woken up ? (snip)
Agreed. On seeing a child present a burglar would flee.
No way would a burglar take the child.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #698 on: May 08, 2016, 10:39:01 PM »
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.

Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.

I find this statement strange. Heri states on his blog that Maddie was abducted by a stranger...he states it as a fact...yet you claim he has not ruled out the Mccanns ...that does not add up. 

The fact that you describe one of the leading sceptics on the forum as one of the most open minded is also strange. Please note that myself and other supporters are very open minded and would be happy to consider any new evidence that implicates the McCanns...there just isn't any...and Heri seems to agree with us

Offline Miss Taken Identity

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #699 on: May 08, 2016, 10:46:42 PM »
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.




Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.




That is  one theorm that errs on the could have happened. Another recent theorm I was interested in was Maddie could have witnessed something she shouldn't have and been silenced....( I am not prepered to say what, or by who)
'Never underestimate the power of stupid people'... George Carlin

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #700 on: May 08, 2016, 10:51:22 PM »



That is  one theorm that errs on the could have happened. Another recent theorm I was interested in was Maddie could have witnessed something she shouldn't have and been silenced....( I am not prepered to say what, or by who)

I prefer the abducted by aliens from the planet Zog...its more believable

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #701 on: May 08, 2016, 10:59:24 PM »
Theorem.  Burglar A burgles 5A, and in so doing disturbs Madeleine, then silences her.

Makes it to a place nearby, where person B, linked to the burglary, is now confronted with a dead body.

Persons A and B are local, thus having much more knowledge of Luz than the McCanns.

Person A is Tannerman.  Person B is Smithman.

Person B, with local knowledge, gets rid of the body.

Heri hasn't ruled out the McCanns.  He is open to evidence that changes his current viewpoint.  I mentioned your username as one of those more open-minded than most, and he was genuinely interested.  Mind you, we covered so much stuff that I could write a book just about what we discussed.

I think you should correct your post...Heri plainly believes maddie was abducted...you are misrepresenting his views

Offline mercury

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #702 on: May 08, 2016, 10:59:30 PM »
Let me start again.  I do not support Heri's theorem, which I have said before.   And I do not wish to champion Heri's theorem, which I have said before.

But here it is.  The burglar does not have the mental stability/maturity that you or I do.  The burglar is not acting as a mature and balanced adult.

The act is one of panic.  Something done in a flash that was stupid, but impulse made it seem reasonable at the time.

It's like a lightening strike.  Why does it happen where it happens and when it happens, rather than a half a mile away and ten seconds later?

Two burglars wearing the same clothes but different hair explained
One burglar being located east,(one walking towards there wth dead body)  doing what?
He then goes west to get rid of body
Crecheman being almost eliminated by Redwood must fit in here somewhere, but where?

If Heri has moved Tanners sighting to half hour later than what she said, are we supposed to thnk tanner made two major mstakes, one of the time and two seeing jez and gerry at the time of her check?






Offline John

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #703 on: May 08, 2016, 11:26:22 PM »
I prefer the abducted by aliens from the planet Zog...its more believable

You know you could be onto something there Dave.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #704 on: May 09, 2016, 12:34:07 AM »
I find this statement strange. Heri states on his blog that Maddie was abducted by a stranger...he states it as a fact...yet you claim he has not ruled out the Mccanns ...that does not add up. 

The fact that you describe one of the leading sceptics on the forum as one of the most open minded is also strange. Please note that myself and other supporters are very open minded and would be happy to consider any new evidence that implicates the McCanns...there just isn't any...and Heri seems to agree with us
Take it up with Heri.
What's up, old man?