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

[Vertigo Swirl]

I'm not sure why you're annoyed.

'm not sure why you think I'm annoyed?  I'm simply exposing what I perceive to be the blatant hypocrisy and double standards *some* people on here are exhibiting IMO.  Personally, I would never start a thread to discuss an ex-arguido's alleged bestiality because I think to do so would be a really nasty (not to mention libellous) thing to do.  I am also pretty sure it would never be sanctioned by the forum owner despite your claim that I could start one. 

[G-Unit]

Then in my opinion you have very little idea regarding libel laws.  In particular innuendo.  Allow me to refer you to:- Summary: Defamation - Meaning – Natural and Ordinary Meaning – Innuendo – Repetition Rule - Social Media

https://www.5rb.com/case/lord-mcalpine-west-green-v-sally-bercow/


Now wouldn't it be a good idea to exercise a little discipline and lead by example just for today and encourage members to stay on the topic of the thread.

Is 'exercising discipline' and 'leading by example' something which all moderators except me practice in your opinion?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Is 'exercising discipline' and 'leading by example' something which all moderators except me practice in your opinion?

OFF TOPIC

[G-Unit]

'm not sure why you think I'm annoyed?  I'm simply exposing what I perceive to be the blatant hypocrisy and double standards *some* people on here are exhibiting IMO.  Personally, I would never start a thread to discuss an ex-arguido's alleged bestiality because I think to do so would be a really nasty (not to mention libellous) thing to do.  I am also pretty sure it would never be sanctioned by the forum owner despite your claim that I could start one.

I think the two examples are quite different.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I think the two examples are quite different.

No they're not.  Both are unsubstantiated, highly damaging insinuations / allegations, the only difference is: one of them is a subject of endless fascination to sceptics, the other one isn't.

[The General]

Please do.  You really should know about these things.  In my opinion not just the legality but the morality of repeating allegations which were long since discarded by investigators as having no foundation.

Beautiful.

[G-Unit]

Please do.  You really should know about these things.  In my opinion not just the legality but the morality of repeating allegations which were long since discarded by investigators as having no foundation.

Ah...morality. A matter of opinion.

[Mr Gray]

Ah...morality. A matter of opinion.

like a court verdict

[The General]

like a court verdict

That is recorded as fact.

[kizzy]

Not all the evidence in the files we have seen are accurate.  For example no-one here has seen the original Gasper statements.  But Levy has.

Not all of the information has been accurate it seems .....Why was information sat on for 5 years.

The E fit of the man carrying maddie.....one seemed to strongly resemble gmcc it seems but not now shown.

Why were Maddie suspect E-fits kept SECRET for five years? Images and evidence of sighting uncovered by private detectives were suppressed


The E-fits of a ‘new’ suspect for Madeleine McCann’s disappearance were drawn up five years ago – and suppressed.

Images of a man seen carrying a child through Praia da Luz at 10pm on the night the then three-year-old vanished were unveiled on BBC1’s Crimewatch two weeks ago.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478087/Why-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-E-fits-kept-secret-5-years.

[Mr Gray]

That is recorded as fact.

but its opinion

[The General]

but its opinion

Not when it's recorded as fact. There's a very finite tipping point. Get used to it.

[G-Unit]

like a court verdict

A court verdict is decided on opinions about facts. Morality isn't.

[Mr Gray]

A court verdict is decided on opinions about facts. Morality isn't.

A court verdict is still an opinion

[Lace]

Not all of the information has been accurate it seems .....Why was information sat on for 5 years.

The E fit of the man carrying maddie.....one seemed to strongly resemble gmcc it seems but not now shown.

Why were Maddie suspect E-fits kept SECRET for five years? Images and evidence of sighting uncovered by private detectives were suppressed


The E-fits of a ‘new’ suspect for Madeleine McCann’s disappearance were drawn up five years ago – and suppressed.

Images of a man seen carrying a child through Praia da Luz at 10pm on the night the then three-year-old vanished were unveiled on BBC1’s Crimewatch two weeks ago.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2478087/Why-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-E-fits-kept-secret-5-years.

In articles dated October 27 ("Madeleine clues hidden for 5 years" and "Investigators had E-Fits five years ago", News) we referred to efits which were included in a report prepared by private investigators for the McCanns and the Fund in 2008. We accept that the articles may have been understood to suggest that the McCanns had withheld information from the authorities. This was not the case. We now understand and accept that the efits had been provided to the Portuguese and Leicestershire police by October 2009. We also understand that a copy of the final report including the efits was passed to the Metropolitan police in August 2011, shortly after it commenced its review. We apologise for the distress caused."