Age Progressed Images

[Vertigo Swirl]

I'm here for a few reasons. Thinking I know the answer isn't one of them.  There is so much missing information, most of it in the hands of the UK police. 550(?) people were in PdL and we've heard from about 6 of them.

I have examined the parent's evidence and that of their friends and found them evasive imo. I can think of various reasons for that, but can't pick out one as fact; just possibilities.

Although I've read most of the files it's not possible imo to work out what happened.

We’ve only heard from about 6 of them??  Really??!

[G-Unit]

We’ve only heard from about 6 of them??  Really??!

Actually I can't think of any statements taken by LP and forwarded to the PJ as of interest. Did none of those people have anything to say which was of interest to the investigation?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Actually I can't think of any statements taken by LP and forwarded to the PJ as of interest. Did none of those people have anything to say which was of interest to the investigation?

So you’re not counting the Tapas Group, Jes, the Smiths, the OC staff, nannies, GNR etc?

[G-Unit]

So you’re not counting the Tapas Group, Jes, the Smiths, the OC staff, nannies, GNR etc?

No, they were all interviewed by the PJ. Which people were interviewed by Leicestershire Constabulary on their own initiative?  Thanks to the PJ we know the movements of most OC & MW employees on 3rd. Thanks to LP we know nothing about the movements of 500+ holidaymakers that evening.

[Vertigo Swirl]

No, they were all interviewed by the PJ. Which people were interviewed by Leicestershire Constabulary on their own initiative?  Thanks to the PJ we know the movements of most OC & MW employees on 3rd. Thanks to LP we know nothing about the movements of 500+ holidaymakers that evening.

Were they all British then, these holidaymakers?

[G-Unit]

Were they all British then, these holidaymakers?

I imagine most of them came from OC records. LP wouldn't be asked to chase people up unless they were in the UK, would they?

[Vertigo Swirl]

I imagine most of them came from OC records. LP wouldn't be asked to chase people up unless they were in the UK, would they?

No, but you seem intent on blaming them for not chasing up 500+ people, that’s why I asked the question. 

[G-Unit]

No, but you seem intent on blaming them for not chasing up 500+ people, that’s why I asked the question.

They may have interviewed them all, for all I know. Whatever they did the PJ didn't include any interviews in their files, which means that either there were none or they weren't shared. Only the UK police can tell us the answer to that, and they're not likely to do so.

[Miss Taken Identity]

I am here for two reasons.  I believe totally in The Right to Innocence.  And I haven't got anything better to do most of the time.

And besides, it's all quite interesting stuff.

I never quite understood the claims about them being declared innocent or being afforded the right to presumption of innocent . Two quite different meanings.

Any person suspected of a crime has the presumption of innocence- to be declared innocent Must involve a court of law.
The McCanns have not been declared innocent because they have not been charged with a crime due to lack of evidence of a suspected crime. This does not mean they are innocent.

As for slagging off the McCANNS. They and their supporters do a great job on those who challenge their narrative. challenging what they claim is not slagging off, that is supporters speak to undermine and belittle those who refuse to conform.

It has been evidenced in many media outlets that, they as parents should not hold court and call the shots, they receive criticism for this as they and their supporters devilled a whole country.
 In many people’s opinions they are not nice people. just like their supporters tell sceptics they are nasty trolls etc.


Jimmy Saville can be presumed innocent- that doesn't mean he is- his victims get the last word on that- it is they who were denied justice.

[Robittybob1]

The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty. It was traditionally expressed by the Latin maxim ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (“the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies”).
Wikipedia.

[Robittybob1]

The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty. It was traditionally expressed by the Latin maxim ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (“the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies”).
Wikipedia.

The Latin expression doesn't seem to be equivalent to presumption of innocence.
How does the presumption of innocence work?  Best explained by: https://youtu.be/qrhmfHedJBo

Shame the punch line of the video has been cut short.

[slartibartfast]

The presumption of innocence is the legal principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty. It was traditionally expressed by the Latin maxim ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (“the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies”).
Wikipedia.

As part of a trial...

[Mr Gray]

As part of a trial...

It's not just as part of a trial... You are completely wrong..
It's throughout the judicial process... From suspects to trial

[ShiningInLuz]

It's not just as part of a trial... You are completely wrong..
It's throughout the judicial process... From suspects to trial

Pulease!

So the police should presume innocent at every stage of an investigation?

The CPS should look at the evidence and always presume innocent?

The prosecution barrister should look at the case file and refuse to prosecute, on a presumption of innocence?

Try living in reality.

[Mr Gray]

Pulease!

So the police should presume innocent at every stage of an investigation?

The CPS should look at the evidence and always presume innocent?

The prosecution barrister should look at the case file and refuse to prosecute, on a presumption of innocence?

Try living in reality.

I am ...you are not..this has been discussed sevearl times on the forum

All presumed innocent means is tahts its up to the prosecution to prove the case....the CPS understand taht if you dont....for you edification...the term is presumed innocent....NOT...innocent



The scope of the Directive is defined to apply from the moment a person is suspected
of having committed an offence until the final determination. In the view of the ICJ,
JUSTICE and NJCM, in order to ensure that the Directive accurately reflects
international law, it should also expressly provide for the continuing respect of the
presumption of innocence where a person is acquitted of an offence.