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

[kizzy]

How do you work that one out?

Well, my working out is Imo if the window wasn't open why would kmc say it was. ta-da

[kizzy]

Why make such a public pronouncement in the first place then?  Just playing games?

Not games no, but I do think he thought his mega-media publicity would pay off.

Seems to me he took a gamble and it didn't pay off -  so spose you could call it a game

[kizzy]

Ahaic if Wolters has the evidence he's fine.. Otherwise he might be in big trouble. That suggests to me he has it

Well IMO you could be in the minority by thinking that - even the media has lost interest it seems

[Mr Gray]

Well IMO you could be in the minority by thinking that - even the media has lost interest it seems

I have no problem being in the minority

[G-Unit]

Investigating police officers are covered by privelige for statements made as part of an investigation. I had a discussion here with ICHTT covering it.

I saw that, and imo your arguments were defeated.

[Mr Gray]

I saw that, and imo your arguments were defeated.

Then you didn't follow it properly. ICHTT argued that Wolters was covered by privelige and could say what he wants

[Lace]

Not games no, but I do think he thought his mega-media publicity would pay off.

Seems to me he took a gamble and it didn't pay off -  so spose you could call it a game

You don't know what he gained from his publicity.  So can't possibly say it didn't pay off.

[Lace]

Well IMO you could be in the minority by thinking that - even the media has lost interest it seems

Maybe Wolters isn't feeding the media.

[Eleanor]

Brueckner's reputation doesn't include the word "murderer". He has never been tried or convicted of murder, and is entitled to a fair trial and to the presumption of innocence. Wolters seems to be working on a presumption of guilt.

Brueckner would surely have to be Convicted of Abduction and or Murder before he can take a case to The ECHR.

Remembering that The ECHR cannot overturn a Conviction.  Or so I am told.

By which time Brueckner will have no Reputation to trash?

Sheesh.  This is doing my head in.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Well, my working out is Imo if the window wasn't open why would kmc say it was. ta-da

nope, you've lost me.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Not games no, but I do think he thought his mega-media publicity would pay off.

Seems to me he took a gamble and it didn't pay off -  so spose you could call it a game

I was referring to CB's lawyer's pronouncement about explosive evidence of his client's innocence that would have us falling off our chairs.

[Mr Gray]

Brueckner would surely have to be Convicted of Abduction and or Murder before he can take a case to The ECHR.

Remembering that The ECHR cannot overturn a Conviction.  Or so I am told.

By which time Brueckner will have no Reputation to trash?

Sheesh.  This is doing my head in.

Thats how I see it

[Eleanor]

Thats how I see it

Thank You.  At least I haven't gone completely bonkers.

[kizzy]

You don't know what he gained from his publicity.  So can't possibly say it didn't pay off.

So can't possibly say it didn't pay off.


Well you are wrong L

I will say it again seems it didn't pay off. IMO.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Then you didn't follow it properly. ICHTT argued that Wolters was covered by privelige and could say what he wants

If you are going to quote me at least quote me correctly, I have never said he could say what he likes. I said he has to have some evidence to enable him to claim the person is involved, just being in the location will do.

Last I heard from you on the subject you were claiming Absolute privilege was a false alarm, and I had given up on receiving the cite I asked for,the one about when Wolters had absolute and when he had qualified privilege.