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

[barrier]

The day on which Madeleine disappeared somewhere near you?  And then changed the name on your car registration?  I would remember.

Who places CB there or close by?

[Eleanor]

Who places CB there or close by?

His cell phone.

[barrier]

His cell phone.

Problem,I alluded to here or in another thread,Police: suspect no1,on Channel 5 this week,they had a suspect whose phone alerted on certain mast's,the police said they can't use it as evidence,all their suspect would need to say his brother or some other has the phone,then how do they prove otherwise? forensics or a confession is what it will take,the first is not there imo nor will the 2nd part be forthcoming from anyone imo.

[G-Unit]

You didn't live in Luz in 2007....I don't need any confirmation from anyone here...I know exactly what I'm talking about

His girlfriend knows exactly where she an he were the day before the disappearance..

You're making assumptions, that's all, because you have no way of knowing what other people remember. As to the 'girlfriend' she is alleged to have told a friend what Brueckner said and he (the friend) told The Sun. If that's the kind of gossip you're quoting as fact you are clutching at straws imo.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11823591/madeleine-mccann-suspect-horrible-job/

[Eleanor]

Problem,I alluded to here or in another thread,Police: suspect no1,on Channel 5 this week,they had a suspect whose phone alerted on certain mast's,the police said they can't use it as evidence,all their suspect would need to say his brother or some other has the phone,then how do they prove otherwise? forensics or a confession is what it will take,the first is not there imo nor will the 2nd part be forthcoming from anyone imo.

Balance of probabilities.  He hasn't got a brother.  Why would someone else be using his phone?

[barrier]

Balance of probabilities.  He hasn't got a brother.  Why would someone else be using his phone?

Who can place him there?

[Mr Gray]

You're making assumptions, that's all, because you have no way of knowing what other people remember. As to the 'girlfriend' she is alleged to have told a friend what Brueckner said and he (the friend) told The Sun. If that's the kind of gossip you're quoting as fact you are clutching at straws imo.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11823591/madeleine-mccann-suspect-horrible-job/

wait and see who is right

[Eleanor]

Who can place him there?

Circumstantial Evidence is acceptable in a Court of Law.  And if it wasn't him then he can always say who it was who had his phone if it wasn't him.

[Mr Gray]

Circumstantial Evidence is acceptable in a Court of Law.  And if it wasn't him then he can always say who it was who had his phone if it wasn't him.

For what its worth as I doubt ill be posting much more.......on its own this might not be much...but HCW is compiling  a mountain of circumstantial evience...he doesnt have  a body but he doesnt need one

some posters are assessing each individual piece of evidence on its own...that isnt how it works...its the totality that counts

[jassi]

Circumstantial Evidence is acceptable in a Court of Law.  And if it wasn't him then he can always say who it was who had his phone if it wasn't him.

You make the basic assumption that the phone in question was his. This would need to be proved to a Court's satisfaction.

[Vertigo Swirl]

The moderation on this forum has reached an all time low. It appears john has just given me a warning for using bad laguage...which  plainly isnt true. If john doesnt want an opposing point of view expressed thats up to him

Did you see the nasty post the General wrote to Sadie - no warning issued, nothing.

[Eleanor]

For what its worth as I doubt ill be posting much more.......on its own this might not be much...but HCW is compiling  a mountain of circumstantial evience...he doesnt have  a body but he doesnt need one

some posters are assessing each individual piece of evidence on its own...that isnt how it works...its the totality that counts

Sorry.  Just answering ridiculous questions.

[Vertigo Swirl]

You make the basic assumption that the phone in question was his. This would need to be proved to a Court's satisfaction.

It's a fair assumption IMO - unless CB could prove he was in the habit of lending his phone out to friends and associates. 

[Mr Gray]

Sorry.  Just answering ridiculous questions.

I'm agreeing with you Eleanor

[jassi]

It's a fair assumption IMO - unless CB could prove he was in the habit of lending his phone out to friends and associates.

I think any prosecution would need to prove that the phone was his, not for him to prove it belonged to someone else.
Perhaps they can do this, perhaps they can't.