New German suspect in Madeleine McCann mystery disappearance.

[Mr Gray]

I don't think he'll ever need to justify, the case will stay has a cold case imo. The legend is writ.
Canaan is named as prime suspect, no comeback in this (lamplugh) case.

From what I have read HCW could be jailed for those commnets if CB were to sue him...and they were not true

[barrier]

From what I have read HCW could be jailed for those commnets if CB were to sue him...and they were not true

What happens when/if he leaves office.

[Mr Gray]

What happens when/if he leaves office.

there will be  a time limit.....the point is...if Wolters is not telling the truth he risks jail. That is another pointer to me taht he is telling the truth

[G-Unit]

Do you realise he has to disclose it if he even questions CB.
Hes given a very good reaeson why he has not yet disclosed it but I dont see how he can keep quiet indefinitely.
Grange will need to know even if CB is not charged because they have vowed to keep on looking....and of course the parents. .

Then of course if he is not charged will CB just accept the slur against him...named as the murderer of MM...surely he would sue and the evidence would then be disclosed.

we need to wait...you are just to keen to dicmiss it when you have no idea what it is

If he can't get the evidence he needs he won't question CB. He's obviously under no obligation to tell the parents or Grange anything; in fact he appears to have misled us about his dealings with both of them. I think you're placing your faith in something that may never be revealed.

[Mr Gray]

If he can't get the evidence he needs he won't question CB. He's obviously under no obligation to tell the parents or Grange anything; in fact he appears to have misled us about his dealings with both of them. I think you're placing your faith in something that may never be revealed.

Again I think we need to wait and see...and it isnt faith...even though you and others try to make out all my conclussions are based on faith...they are based on reason but I dont expect you and others to accept that. It simply goes too much against everything you believe to be true.

I dont see hes misled anyone...again its you putting your slant on things to suit your agenda.

As I have said....if he doesnt have the evidence...he could be going to jail. I dont see he would take taht risk

[faithlilly]

Again I think we need to wait and see...and it isnt faith...even though you and others try to make out all my conclussions are based on faith...they are based on reason but I dont expect you and others to accept that. It simply goes too much against everything you believe to be true.

I dont see hes misled anyone...again its you putting your slant on things to suit your agenda.

As I have said....if he doesnt have the evidence...he could be going to jail. I dont see he would take taht risk

I don’t think he’d take that risk either...he knows his position will protect him.

[Mr Gray]

I don’t think he’d take that risk either...he knows his position will protect him.

I asked you for a cite but you cant give one because as I undersatnd it isnt true.  If it isnt true you agree with me he wouldnt take the risk.....so based on that he must have the evidence

[Mr Gray]

I don’t think he’d take that risk either...he knows his position will protect him.

From what I have read he is allowed to make reasonable staements based on evidence. ...certainly not declare someone guilty before a trial

[Robittybob1]

I asked you for a cite but you cant give one because as I undersatnd it isnt true.  If it isnt true you agree with me he wouldnt take the risk.....so based on that he must have the evidence

Is that logical?   I have my doubts but not the energy ATM.

[Robittybob1]

From what I have read he is allowed to make reasonable statements based on evidence. ...certainly not declare someone guilty before a trial

Did he go that far?

[Mr Gray]

Is that logical?   I have my doubts but not the energy ATM.

yes it is

[Mr Gray]

Did he go that far?

yes....have you listened to what he has said

[faithlilly]

From what I have read he is allowed to make reasonable staements based on evidence. ...certainly not declare someone guilty before a trial

I think your mind is closed and nothing I or anyone else says will change that.

[Robittybob1]

yes....have you listened to what he has said

Are you referring to the Saunokonoko podcast?

[Mr Gray]

Are you referring to the Saunokonoko podcast?

no the 60 mins australian doc