Why do some believe the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance?

[Vertigo Swirl]

So what do you believe that poll shows?

That nearly 40% of forum members believed the parents are involved in MM's disappearance


I suspect the McCanns of involvement but given enough further information I may change my mind.
12 (30.8%)
I suspect the McCanns of involvement and nothing is likely to change my mind. 3 (7.7%)


"suspect. A suspect is a person who is believed to be guilty of a crime. ... If others believe you have committed a crime, you are a suspect. The word can also be used as a verb and an adjective. To suspect someone of something is to believe that they probably did it".

[G-Unit]

That nearly 40% of forum members believed the parents are involved in MM's disappearance


I suspect the McCanns of involvement but given enough further information I may change my mind.
12 (30.8%)
I suspect the McCanns of involvement and nothing is likely to change my mind. 3 (7.7%)


"suspect. A suspect is a person who is believed to be guilty of a crime. ... If others believe you have committed a crime, you are a suspect. The word can also be used as a verb and an adjective. To suspect someone of something is to believe that they probably did it".

Sispecting and believing are two different things. I suspect that the Conservatives may choose Rory Stewart as their leader, but I wouldn't go so far as to say I believe they will.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Sispecting and believing are two different things. I suspect that the Conservatives may choose Rory Stewart as their leader, but I wouldn't go so far as to say I believe they will.

I went to the liberty of supplying the definition of "to suspect" in my previous post.  Here it is again:
. The word can also be used as a verb and an adjective. To suspect someone of something is to believe that they probably did it".
I think you're grasping at straws to claim that to suspect is different to to believe. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

Sispecting and believing are two different things. I suspect that the Conservatives may choose Rory Stewart as their leader, but I wouldn't go so far as to say I believe they will.

I went to the liberty of supplying the definition of "to suspect" in my previous post.  Here it is again:
. The word can also be used as a verb and an adjective. To suspect someone of something is to believe that they probably did it".
I think you're grasping at straws to claim that to suspect is different to to believe. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

SUSPECT | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/suspect
suspect definition: 1. to think or believe something to be true or probable: 2. to think that someone has committed a crime or done something wrong: 3. to not trust ...

[Vertigo Swirl]

Suspect | Definition of Suspect at Dictionary.com
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/suspect
Suspect definition, to believe to be guilty, false, counterfeit, undesirable, defective, bad, etc., with little or no proof: to suspect a person of murder. See more.

[Vertigo Swirl]

G-Unit suspects Rory Steawart will be the next British PM, but doesn't believe he will be.   

[ShiningInLuz]

Hmm... https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/us/04scent.html

It's an interesting article that I had not seen before so 

However, I don't see the relevance to the disappearance of MBM.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It's an interesting article that I had not seen before so 

However, I don't see the relevance to the disappearance of MBM.

I posted in response to the claim that dog alerts are considered by some to be junk science.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Why do some people suspect the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance whilst simultaneously not believing that they were?

[Carana]

Hmm... https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/us/04scent.html

Yeah, I know. I've read about quite a few of those cases.

On the other hand, I've also read of cases in which they've really been an asset... but when remains were indeed likely to be physically present in nearby, but often dangerous, terrain to venture into without a positive alert. Natural disasters, for example.

I can also see a use in potential homicide cases, if a corpse has been concealed somewhere nearby or even in those in which someone has confessed to depositing a body somewhere but can't remember exactly where.

I am far more sceptical about sometimes waffly anecdotal evidence of a dog having alerted where a dead body was expected to be found and subsequently finding that it had been, or may have been, at that location at some point in time.

[Mr Gray]

Yeah, I know. I've read about quite a few of those cases.

On the other hand, I've also read of cases in which they've really been an asset... but when remains were indeed likely to be physically present in nearby, but often dangerous, terrain to venture into without a positive alert. Natural disasters, for example.

I can also see a use in potential homicide cases, if a corpse has been concealed somewhere nearby or even in those in which someone has confessed to depositing a body somewhere but can't remember exactly where.

I am far more sceptical about sometimes waffly anecdotal evidence of a dog having alerted where a dead body was expected to be found and subsequently finding that it had been, or may have been, at that location at some point in time.

These dogs are only sent to places where a dead body is suspected... How often have the dogs not alerted at a, potential murder scene... Thats, an in interesting question

[ShiningInLuz]

I posted in response to the claim that dog alerts are considered by some to be junk science.

Thank you for clarifying.

I watch lots of true crime programmes, usually late at night.  I have yet to see one where anyone got 'banged up' over a dog alert.

Your article describes or implies a failure of the police in those cases to progress beyond the dog alerts.

The McCanns have not been 'banged up', AFAIK.

Police failure does not equate to dogs are junk science.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Thank you for clarifying.

I watch lots of true crime programmes, usually late at night.  I have yet to see one where anyone got 'banged up' over a dog alert.

Your article describes or implies a failure of the police in those cases to progress beyond the dog alerts.

The McCanns have not been 'banged up', AFAIK.

Police failure does not equate to dogs are junk science.

Of course any failure in justice is a human failure not a canine failure.  They are just dogs after all, and don't make value judgements about innocence or guilt.

[faithlilly]

Sispecting and believing are two different things. I suspect that the Conservatives may choose Rory Stewart as their leader, but I wouldn't go so far as to say I believe they will.

It’s a poor indictment of politics today that Rory Stewart is getting support simply for being the least swivel-eyed of the politicians running for PM.