New German suspect in Madeleine McCann mystery disappearance.

[Vertigo Swirl]

An ellipse is a squashed circle. Strictly speaking an ellipsis is used to demonstrate the omission of text from a quoted source. It's indicated by three or four full stops depending on how much text has been omitted. They are also used to  indicate an unfinished thought, a leading statement, a slight pause, an echoing voice, or a nervous or awkward silence. Ellipses is the plural of both words.

AND apparently frowned upon on this forum for some unknown reason.

[Robittybob1]

Oh I use ellipses all the time.  Never heard the word ellipses applied to grammar until recently; to me the word means a shape rather like a squashed circle

I couldn't cope without grammatical Ellipses.   Apologies to any I offend, but soz, I will be using them in the future cos my grammar ain't strong enough without them

Because they express an incomplete thought, it is sometimes impossible to determine what is being said if too many ellipses are used.  It makes the job of the moderator even more difficult.  Everyone should try and be as clear as possible.   Thanks.


Ellipses | Punctuation Rules
www.grammarbook.com › punctuation › ellipses
Definition. An ellipsis (plural: ellipses) is a punctuation mark consisting of three dots. Use an ellipsis when omitting a word, phrase, line, paragraph, or more from ...

Singular - ellipsis ...
Multiple - ellipses ... ...

[Robittybob1]

Write not right ... got me good one there...

[Mr Gray]

Same goes for you Davel.  Complete your thoughts and write them down .... or I'll ..... delete ....future tense .... you know.

I find this post pathetic, disruptive and childish. You may remember you started a similar campaign last year which caused massive disruption on the forum with John rulingthat it was perfectly acceptable. Do you want to reconsider Your post or do I need to contact John again. The forum has been flowing freely...might be  agood idea not to disrupt it.

[Mr Gray]

So your statement above is somewhat premature then;

snip/
"I think the desperation is coming from sceptics who just cannot bear to see evidence of abduction."

In reality there's no evidence to see as yet. There may be IF they have the abductor and IF they can prove he murdered MM.

Just because theres no evidence to see doesnt mean it doesnt exist. You yourself has inferred that it doesnt ..which is premature. I think it's highly unlikely...based on the evidence...that HCW would claim he has the evidence if he doesnt.

Germany has strict privacy laws and I don't see taht HCW would break these laws recklessly

[G-Unit]

Just because theres no evidence to see doesnt mean it doesnt exist. You yourself has inferred that it doesnt ..which is premature. I think it's highly unlikely...based on the evidence...that HCW would claim he has the evidence if he doesnt.

Germany has strict privacy laws and I don't see taht HCW would break these laws recklessly

Please ensure that you don't post opinion as fact again;

snip/
"I think the desperation is coming from sceptics who just cannot bear to see evidence of abduction."

[Robittybob1]

I find this post pathetic, disruptive and childish. You may remember you started a similar campaign last year which caused massive disruption on the forum with John rulingthat it was perfectly acceptable. Do you want to reconsider Your post or do I need to contact John again. The forum has been flowing freely...might be  agood idea not to disrupt it.

Are you not aware of the trouble G-unit was having with a specific post.   See how you misinterpreted my post to you.  You have no idea what I was saying because there were multiple ellipses in it.
On the whole you have lessened your use of ellipses and that has been much appreciated.

[Mr Gray]

Please ensure that you don't post opinion as fact again;

snip/
"I think the desperation is coming from sceptics who just cannot bear to see evidence of abduction."

the fact that i have used the word...I think...shows my post is opinion...have another read

[Robittybob1]

Please ensure that you don't post opinion as fact again;

snip/
"I think the desperation is coming from sceptics who just cannot bear to see evidence of abduction."

To me that is still opinion expressed as an opinion not as a fact.  "I think ...."  means it is an opinion.

[Mr Gray]

Are you not aware of the trouble G-unit was having with a specific post.   See how you misinterpreted my post to you.  You have no idea what I was saying because there were multiple ellipses in it.
On the whole you have lessened your use of ellipses and that has been much appreciated.

you are posting your opinion as fact...it isnt. Your post was very easy to understand. Once more...imo...you are disrupting teh thread

[Mr Gray]

To me that is still opinion expressed as an opinion not as a fact.  "I think ...."  means it is an opinion.

thank you rob

[Robittybob1]

you are posting your opinion as fact...it isnt. Your post was very easy to understand. Once more...imo...you are disrupting teh thread

So you think.   Back to the topic.

[G-Unit]

the fact that i have used the word...I think...shows my post is opinion...have another read

snip/
"I think the desperation is coming from sceptics who just cannot bear to see evidence of abduction.".

So you merely think that sceptics cannot bear to see evidence of abduction? Just as well, as there is none. Obviously there's no desperation either, or if there is there's another reason for it.

Never mind, perhaps Wolters will manage to find something some day to confirm his suspicions.

[Mr Gray]

snip/
"I think the desperation is coming from sceptics who just cannot bear to see evidence of abduction.".

So you merely think that sceptics cannot bear to see evidence of abduction? Just as well, as there is none. Obviously there's no desperation either, or if there is there's another reason for it.

Never mind, perhaps Wolters will manage to find something some day to confirm his suspicions.

You are stating opinion as fact...there may well be evidence of abduction based on the statement byHCW. That means you merely "think" there is no evidence when in fact there may well be.


To clarify....i dont just think scepetics cant bear to hear any evidence of abduction...I'm absolutely certain

[Brietta]

Just because theres no evidence to see doesnt mean it doesnt exist. You yourself has inferred that it doesnt ..which is premature. I think it's highly unlikely...based on the evidence...that HCW would claim he has the evidence if he doesnt.

Germany has strict privacy laws and I don't see taht HCW would break these laws recklessly

I watched a TV drama documentary programme on serial killer Dennis Nilson who was convicted of his crimes by a majority verdict.

This despite the fact that ...

• he had initially cooperated with the police
• he had confessed in detail to the crimes
• he was able to confirm the names of missing people with the DNA profile of some remains
• he had shown the police where he had burned some of the bodies in the garden of a previous residence from which forensic evidence proved his accuracy
• boiled human heads were recovered from Nilson's flat
• severed human legs were found

  the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict on his crimes.

It really isn't as easy as is made out by some to gather sufficient evidence which will stand in court to ensure the conviction of a perpetrator.
Nilson's jury could not agree. 

Now think of the uphill task facing German prosecutors in a thirteen+ year old cold case as they search for evidence connecting any individual even if the perpetrator to those events.

________________________________________________________


More on the drama from some of the police team who worked on the case ...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-8735607/Des-Police-reveal-David-Tennant-got-right-wrong-investigation.html