Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB

[Mr Gray]

How do you think "Looks like she was abducted and murdered by CB.." is acceptable?

Because HCW has said he has evidence that shows that's what happened

[Mr Gray]

How do you think "Looks like she was abducted and murdered by CB.." is acceptable?

You can't prove it is true.

Never said I could..that's why I said looks like...that isn't definite.
Watched s 5 minute video on statement analysis do I'm an expert now.

When told about about the existence of evidence CBs lawyer doesn't say my clients innocent so it can't exist..he says ..show me the evidence

[Robittybob1]

Never said I could..that's why I said looks like...that isn't definite.
Watched s 5 minute video on statement analysis do I'm an expert now.

When told about about the existence of evidence CBs lawyer doesn't say my clients innocent so it can't exist..he says ..show me the evidence

Was that English?  I couldn't get the meaning out of it, sorry.  "do" could be "so".  OK you are an expert at statement analysis!

[Miss Taken Identity]

Never said I could..that's why I said looks like...that isn't definite.
Watched s 5 minute video on statement analysis do I'm an expert now.

When told about about the existence of evidence CBs lawyer doesn't say my clients innocent so it can't exist..he says ..show me the evidence

The lawyer wouldn't make a statement saying his client is innocent- he would say his client denies the charge and expect the prosecutor to provide the evidence. The court  decides innocence or guilt, based on the evidence presented.

Not that much of an expert in the real world. But you can still play pretend in here Davel.

[Mr Gray]

The lawyer wouldn't make a statement saying his client is innocent- he would say his client denies the charge and expect the prosecutor to provide the evidence. The court  decides innocence or guilt, based on the evidence presented.

Not that much of an expert in the real world. But you can still play pretend in here Davel.

The court doesn't decide innocence

[Miss Taken Identity]

The court doesn't decide innocence

They decide guilty or not guilty (AKA Innocent)

In Scotland we have  a 'not proven' as well... leaves a bad taste in all concerned with a case with such an outcome.

[Mr Gray]

They decide guilty or not guilty (AKA Innocent)

In Scotland we have  a 'not proven' as well... leaves a bad taste in all concerned with a case with such an outcome.

Not guilty is not the same as innocent

[Snowgirl]

Without knowing if the child was capable of opening the Yale type lock on the front door ... or able to slide the patio door open ... I doubt anyone could answer that.
Madeleine McCann's mother was apparently of the opinion she couldn't.  Which seems to be backed up by the lack of  Madeleine's fingerprints or any other trace in these areas.

She could have exited via the window.  Similarly there is no trace she did that either and the nanny was of the opinion the height of the window would have been a barrier to that.

I think aged three Madeleine was a petite child, who if able to open the patio door probably would not have closed it behind her.
I don't think she left the apartment of her own volition

[John]

Not guilty is not the same as innocent

In a trial, 'not guilty' simply means that there is an insufficiency of evidence to return a guilty verdict beyond all reasonable doubt.  I clearly recall an incident in Edinburgh when a hoodlum leader was boasting of his criminal endeavours and returned from the courtroom laughing his head off with a not guilty verdict.

[Miss Taken Identity]

In a trial, 'not guilty' simply means that there is an insufficiency of evidence to return a guilty verdict beyond all reasonable doubt.  I clearly recall an incident in Edinburgh when a hoodlum leader was boasting of his criminal endeavours and returned from the courtroom laughing his head off with a not guilty verdict.

Indeed. I said this many moons ago. Someone can be guilty but found to be not guilty and vice versa.  I made that claim as all we read about from supporters was the McCanns are innocent blah blah.

using he word innocent out of context was deliberate..

[Mr Gray]

Indeed. I said this many moons ago. Someone can be guilty but found to be not guilty and vice versa.  I made that claim as all we read about from supporters was the McCanns are innocent blah blah.

using he word innocent out of context was deliberate..

You have that back to front. Its scepetics who claim that the Mccanns havent been proven innocent and  Icontinually point out there is no mechanism to prove innocence...as Barry George has found out.

You didnt use the word out of contet you made an incorrect claim...ie. that  innocent was AKA not guilty

[Miss Taken Identity]

You have that back to front. Its scepetics who claim that the Mccanns havent been proven innocent and  Icontinually point out there is no mechanism to prove innocence...as Barry George has found out.

You didnt use the word out of contet you made an incorrect claim...ie. that  innocent was AKA not guilty

No I have not got that back to front at all.  No sceptic on this forum has said the parents are not innocent- the claim was made by supporters they were innocent- and  that claim was challenged by non supporters.

It was the PJ who said they failed to prove their innocence.

[Mr Gray]

No I have not got that back to front at all.  No sceptic on this forum has said the parents are not innocent- the claim was made by supporters they were innocent- and  that claim was challenged by non supporters.

It was the PJ who said they failed to prove their innocence.

Trust me...youve got it back to front....you are making so many errors of fact in your posts its impossible to know where to start. If the courts cant prove innocence how were the mccanns supposed to prove theirs...it was a stupid idea...and the archiving report never said taht...neither did the PJ

[Miss Taken Identity]

Trust me...youve got it back to front....you are making so many errors of fact in your posts its impossible to know where to start. If the courts cant prove innocence how were the mccanns supposed to prove theirs...it was a stupid idea...and the archiving report never said taht...neither did the PJ

Seriously... I mean  WHAT!

You are typing because you have nothing else to do with your life. nothing wrong with that at all.

Have a nice rest later...

[Mr Gray]

Seriously... I mean  WHAT!

You are typing because you have nothing else to do with your life. nothing wrong with that at all.

Have a nice rest later...

Oh dear...you know nothing about me and my life.....but like everything selse you know nothing about...you think you are an expert on it. The forum is descending into  a shadow of its former self...and I actually have much better things to do than post here