Visits to the play area after tea. What is the truth?

[G-Unit]

Notice how you refuse to answer my one question and then expect me to answer your questions.  You need to accept your accusations, Re my questions, are false, or provide a cite to support your assertions

I don't really care, Davel, and I'm getting bored. I have no intention of answering your biased question and have given my reasons.

To clarify, the visits to the play area after tea always took place before the children were bathed and dressed in their night attire, not after as the McCanns tried to suggest. So if David Payne didn't visit to see if Kate McCann wanted help to take the children over to the play area, why did he visit?

[Vertigo Swirl]

I don't really care, Davel, and I'm getting bored. I have no intention of answering your biased question and have given my reasons.

To clarify, the visits to the play area after tea always took place before the children were bathed and dressed in their night attire, not after as the McCanns tried to suggest. So if David Payne didn't visit to see if Kate McCann wanted help to take the children over to the play area, why did he visit?

for paedo funtime I expect.  Isn’t that the subtext here?  If it wasn’t for the reasons stated it would have to be something sinister like that, is that what you truly believe?  That Kate McCann would invite him in to “play” with her kids? 

[G-Unit]

for paedo funtime I expect.  Isn’t that the subtext here?  If it wasn’t for the reasons stated it would have to be something sinister like that, is that what you truly believe?  That Kate McCann would invite him in to “play” with her kids?

What a nasty mind you have!

[Vertigo Swirl]

What a nasty mind you have!

No, you’re the one with the nasty insinuations.  You’re the one suggesting that both David Payne and Kate McCann lied about his visit.  What other possible inference is there, other than that something deeply sinister was going on that had a bearing on Madeleine’s disappearance?  I wholeheartedly reject the notion of some parental paedo ring, I bet you don’t!

[Mr Gray]

I don't really care, Davel, and I'm getting bored. I have no intention of answering your biased question and have given my reasons.

To clarify, the visits to the play area after tea always took place before the children were bathed and dressed in their night attire, not after as the McCanns tried to suggest. So if David Payne didn't visit to see if Kate McCann wanted help to take the children over to the play area, why did he visit?

I dont beleive you are bored ...i think you realise you are simply losing the argument. You have made things up re what I have postsed and cant substantiate them.
For the record...the evidence shows sexual abuse of children is more likely where children are not with their natural parents. i wasnt really referring to step parents ....more a single mom who has just got a new boyfriend and they are both drug dependant.

There is plenty of circumstantial evidence to support the abduction and the mccanns innocence...you just cant bring yourself to accept it. I think you are not as openminded as you think and you refuse to believe evidence which contradicts your entrenched views...the overwhelming evidence for smoking  causing lung cancer beiing agood example...which you refuse to accept...very closed minded

[G-Unit]

I dont beleive you are bored ...i think you realise you are simply losing the argument. You have made things up re what I have postsed and cant substantiate them.
For the record...the evidence shows sexual abuse of children is more likely where children are not with their natural parents. i wasnt really referring to step parents ....more a single mom who has just got a new boyfriend and they are both drug dependant.

There is plenty of circumstantial evidence to support the abduction and the mccanns innocence...you just cant bring yourself to accept it. I think you are not as openminded as you think and you refuse to believe evidence which contradicts your entrenched views...the overwhelming evidence for smoking  causing lung cancer beiing agood example...which you refuse to accept...very closed minded

Here is some evidence I found, where does yours come from?

participants who had experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, only 13.5% identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour, and 15.3% by other known person (ABS, 2005).
https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children

[Brietta]

Here is some evidence I found, where does yours come from?

participants who had experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, only 13.5% identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour, and 15.3% by other known person (ABS, 2005).
https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children

What point are you making in relation to the topic of the thread ?

[Mr Gray]

Here is some evidence I found, where does yours come from?

participants who had experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, only 13.5% identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour, and 15.3% by other known person (ABS, 2005).
https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children

you said you were bored...I said I didnt beleive you.....looks like im right as you are responding. What I said was sexual abuse to a child was more likely to come from a step parent rather than a natural parent....your post doesnt address that...this link does...looks like im right again

https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/stepchildren-family-parents-abuse-0409132?fbclid=IwAR0esWcRPHXlNGAWPo9E1RW__pJQLKDMe7BojZeopHWJdIAAXql-pB902Oc
There is abundant evidence that children living in stepfamilies are more likely to experience sexual abuse

[G-Unit]

you said you were bored...I said I didnt beleive you.....looks like im right as you are responding. What I said was sexual abuse to a child was more likely to come from a step parent rather than a natural parent....your post doesnt address that...this link does...looks like im right again

https://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/stepchildren-family-parents-abuse-0409132?fbclid=IwAR0esWcRPHXlNGAWPo9E1RW__pJQLKDMe7BojZeopHWJdIAAXql-pB902Oc
There is abundant evidence that children living in stepfamilies are more likely to experience sexual abuse

And from the same source (and probably more relevant);

the stepchildren were less likely to be physically injured than the biological children.

[The General]

What point are you making in relation to the topic of the thread ?

Jesus L Jackson, she was asked to verify various points by Davros. How else is she going to do that? Or use your extensive powers effectively for a change and cull the whole Davros / G-Unit conversation. I don't see you questioning the origin of the questions posed in relation to the topic. Come on, a fair crack .

[Mr Gray]

And from the same source (and probably more relevant);

the stepchildren were less likely to be physically injured than the biological children.

I think you need to go back to my original statement to see the relevance... The one you claimed you were bored with and wouldnt respond to

[Mr Gray]

Jesus L Jackson, she was asked to verify various points by Davros. How else is she going to do that? Or use your extensive powers effectively for a change and cull the whole Davros / G-Unit conversation. I don't see you questioning the origin of the questions posed in relation to the topic. Come on, a fair crack .

Would need to cull monkeys posts Re odds too... Which is what started the whole thing... No problem for me..

[G-Unit]

What point are you making in relation to the topic of the thread ?

Am I being singled out? I'm not the only one off-topic you know.

[Brietta]

Am I being singled out? I'm not the only one off-topic you know.

The thread topic is ...
"Visits to the play area after tea. What is the truth?"

You have posted ...
"Here is some evidence I found, where does yours come from?

participants who had experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, only 13.5% identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour, and 15.3% by other known person (ABS, 2005).
https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children "

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg573566#msg573566


You have been asked to explain what you meant by that post in the context of the thread.

Your misapprehension that that you are being singled out for being "off topic" as a result of being asked to explain your post in context is risible.
But I would still like an answer to my original question ...
"What point are you making in relation to the topic of the thread ?"    Thank you.

[G-Unit]

The thread topic is ...
"Visits to the play area after tea. What is the truth?"

You have posted ...
"Here is some evidence I found, where does yours come from?

participants who had experienced sexual abuse before the age of 15, only 13.5% identified that the abuse came from their father/stepfather, 30.2% was perpetrated by other male relative, 16.9% by family friend, 15.6% by acquaintance/neighbour, and 15.3% by other known person (ABS, 2005).
https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/who-abuses-children "

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11155.msg573566#msg573566


You have been asked to explain what you meant by that post in the context of the thread.

Your misapprehension that that you are being singled out for being "off topic" as a result of being asked to explain your post in context is risible.
But I would still like an answer to my original question ...
"What point are you making in relation to the topic of the thread ?"    Thank you.

I was replying to post #518. I don't know what you mean by 'in relation to the topic of the thread'. I might as well ask you the same question about your post #467.