Author Topic: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB  (Read 300236 times)

0 Members and 35 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1695 on: October 21, 2020, 09:00:30 PM »
Are you able to provide a cite with provenance the McCanns agreed as you intimate - in their own words - or are you relying on tabloids for your information?

What like this posted by you recently ?


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12915322/madeleine-mccann-christian-b-russian-brothers/

Please if you are not willing to accept tabloid articles as cites have the courtesy not to use them yourself.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Brietta

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1696 on: October 21, 2020, 09:09:18 PM »
What like this posted by you recently ?


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12915322/madeleine-mccann-christian-b-russian-brothers/

Please if you are not willing to accept tabloid articles as cites have the courtesy not to use them yourself.

I reiterate ... Are you able to provide a cite with provenance the McCanns agreed as you intimate - in their own words - or are you relying on tabloids for your information?

Quite obviously you are unable to do so.

It would therefore be appropriate if you desisted from deflecting from your inability to back up your allegations. Which in that circumstance can only be described as false allegations.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1697 on: October 21, 2020, 09:13:43 PM »
do you have a link....or is it a newspaper report.

CBs lawyer has aid there are no UK lawyers involved....a direct statement from his FB account. Yet UK papers claim there were...shows how much you can trust newspapers
It is definitely a spoken interview because Kate says she will take a "lie detector test" (second after Gerry's offer) and just about chokes on the words.
Surely someone knows the interview.   I'll see if I can find it but no guarantees as I don't know how to search for videos.
Google might help.
  My apologies I was having a memory fade - it was Patsy Ramsey who offered to do the lie detector test.

PS: Yet I was somewhat supported by this article, but I wasn't aware of that situation.  I was just getting the two cases a little confused. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-494765/Now-Kate-McCann-refuses-lie-detector-test-clear-name.html)
« Last Edit: October 21, 2020, 09:19:32 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1698 on: October 21, 2020, 09:21:17 PM »
What like this posted by you recently ?


https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12915322/madeleine-mccann-christian-b-russian-brothers/

Please if you are not willing to accept tabloid articles as cites have the courtesy not to use them yourself.

I think we have all realised just how unreliable tabloid articles are

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1699 on: October 21, 2020, 09:22:26 PM »
I reiterate ... Are you able to provide a cite with provenance the McCanns agreed as you intimate - in their own words - or are you relying on tabloids for your information?

Quite obviously you are unable to do so.

It would therefore be appropriate if you desisted from deflecting from your inability to back up your allegations. Which in that circumstance can only be described as false allegations.

Any reasonable member will be happy that I have backed up my claim in the same manner as other members. If you  are not can I suggest that you take it to John.

I now consider the matter closed.

Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1700 on: October 21, 2020, 09:26:20 PM »
I think we have all realised just how unreliable tabloid articles are

I agree but spoken interviews are few and far between and if you use tabloid articles relentlessly to illustrate a point you cannot chastise others for doing the same.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1701 on: October 21, 2020, 09:32:51 PM »
I agree but spoken interviews are few and far between and if you use tabloid articles relentlessly to illustrate a point you cannot chastise others for doing the same.

I dont use tabloid articles to prove a point...they dont. if you have  agood memeory you might remember me saying the SUN once claimed to be quoting me....when I had never said the statement

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1702 on: October 21, 2020, 09:35:55 PM »
I dont use tabloid articles to prove a point...they dont. if you have  agood memeory you might remember me saying the SUN once claimed to be quoting me....when I had never said the statement

I do and, yes, they are notoriously unreliable but they are, mostly, all we’ve got.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1703 on: October 21, 2020, 09:39:45 PM »
I do and, yes, they are notoriously unreliable but they are, mostly, all we’ve got.
Then you have to accept the McCanns may never have agreed to  a polygraph

Offline Brietta

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1704 on: October 21, 2020, 09:43:54 PM »
False Claim and Misquote.  Neither Kate nor Gerry McCann made any such public statement.

Summary of Verifiable Facts
  • The McCanns' spokesman, Clarence Mitchell is quoted as saying that the McCanns would take a lie detector (polygraph) test if the Portuguese Police asked them to - NOT one sponsored for the media and administered by a polygrapher who works in the entertainment industry.
  • The Portuguese Police did not ask the McCanns to take a lie detector test.
  • Lie detector tests are not admissible in Portuguese courts, nor in British courts.
  • The McCanns declined a lie detector test administered by Don Cargill who is a polygrapher on daytime entertainment programme "Trisha".


This is London - 21 September 2007
Quote:


Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns' spokesman, said that it was "extremely unlikely" the couple would be asked to take a lie detector test by police. He said: "Kate and Gerry McCann have absolutely nothing to hide and, if a request from the Portuguese authorities was made for them to undergo such a lie detector test, they would have no issue with it, provided the test is suitably overseen by an appropriate expert who can ensure the absolutely reliability of the equipment being used.  However, it is my understanding that such machines are not used in Portuguese criminal cases, nor is the information from them deemed admissible in court, and there are question marks over their reliability. Therefore we think it is extremely unlikely that such a request for a test would come through."

 

Sky News - 21 September 2007
Quote:


McCann are unlikely to face a lie detector test in connection with the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine, the family's spokesman has said.
The couple had said they were prepared to take a test to prove they had nothing to do with the child going missing.  But spokesman Clarence Mitchell said evidence from any test would not be admissible in a Portuguese court.  "Kate and Gerry McCann have absolutely nothing to hide," Mr Mitchell said.

"If a request from the Portuguese authorities was made for them to undergo such a lie detector test, they would have no issue with it, provided the test is suitably overseen by an appropriate expert who can ensure the absolutely reliability of the equipment being used."

But he said he understood that such machines were not used in Portuguese criminal cases, nor was the information from them admissible in court.

"Therefore we think it is extremely unlikely that such a request for a test would come through," he added.


The McCanns' declaration that they would be happy to take a lie detector test is just the latest stage of a public fightback to show they had nothing to do with their daughter's disappearance.

The couple, from Rothley, Leicestershire, were declared suspects by detectives after DNA traces were found in a car hired after Madeleine's disappearance.

The couple have returned to Britain after a four-month stay in Portugal and have been told that police do not have enough evidence to justify interviewing them again.



Report that the McCanns would not take a media sponsored lie detector
 
This following report was published two months later and headlined to suggest that the McCanns had "changed their minds" about taking a lie detector.  However, a comparison with the above reports which quote the McCanns' Official Spokesman, proves that there is no retraction and no change of mind,.

 
In the original 21 September statement, the McCann's spokesman made it clear that they would only be willing to take lie detector tests at the request of the Portuguese Police and if they were 100% accurate and admissible in Portuguese courts.


 

Daily Mail - 19 November 2007
Don Cargill is the polygrapher in the UK daytime magazine show "Trisha".  The British police do not use lie detector tests.

Quote:

Don Cargill, chairman of the British and European Polygraph Association, said the McCanns told him they would only take the test if it was 100 per cent accurate and admissible in a Portuguese court.
He told the Sunday Express: "Kate said she'd take it to prove her innocence but in reality, she wasn't willing.  "I was dumbfounded, to tell the truth.
"I don't think it was the McCanns' fault. I was left with the impression the whole thing was a PR exercise to get sympathy at a time when Kate was under increasing scrutiny."  Lie detectors work by measuring physiological responses such as blood pressure levels, pulse rate, breathing and sweat gland activity in the skin during questioning.  Any significant difference in these rates may indicate the subject is lying.  The process has been criticised but the American Polygraph Association claims the current computerised technology is 98 per cent accurate.  They are not admissible in British or Portuguese courts.
McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "Of course they are not going to take the test. It's inadmissible in Portugal and there are doubts about the accuracy.  "Gerry and Kate don't need to do one as they are telling the truth."
 

 

Conclusion
There are no contradictions in those statements which came directly from the McCanns' official spokesman.   The McCanns said all along that they would have no issue with lie detectors requested by the Portuguese Police.  However no such request was received as indeed lie detectors are inadmissible in both Portuguese and British courts.  The lie detector test which the McCanns declined was not an official one, but rather one sponsored by a newspaper at the height of the media frenzy surrounding the case and which would have been administered by a polygrapher best recognised for his participation in a daytime entertainment programme specialising in sensational human interest stories.

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39077824/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2022#ThisisLondon21September2007


"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1705 on: October 21, 2020, 09:54:40 PM »
False Claim and Misquote.  Neither Kate nor Gerry McCann made any such public statement.

Summary of Verifiable Facts
  • The McCanns' spokesman, Clarence Mitchell is quoted as saying that the McCanns would take a lie detector (polygraph) test if the Portuguese Police asked them to - NOT one sponsored for the media and administered by a polygrapher who works in the entertainment industry.
  • The Portuguese Police did not ask the McCanns to take a lie detector test.
  • Lie detector tests are not admissible in Portuguese courts, nor in British courts.
  • The McCanns declined a lie detector test administered by Don Cargill who is a polygrapher on daytime entertainment programme "Trisha".


This is London - 21 September 2007
Quote:


Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns' spokesman, said that it was "extremely unlikely" the couple would be asked to take a lie detector test by police. He said: "Kate and Gerry McCann have absolutely nothing to hide and, if a request from the Portuguese authorities was made for them to undergo such a lie detector test, they would have no issue with it, provided the test is suitably overseen by an appropriate expert who can ensure the absolutely reliability of the equipment being used.  However, it is my understanding that such machines are not used in Portuguese criminal cases, nor is the information from them deemed admissible in court, and there are question marks over their reliability. Therefore we think it is extremely unlikely that such a request for a test would come through."

 

Sky News - 21 September 2007
Quote:


McCann are unlikely to face a lie detector test in connection with the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine, the family's spokesman has said.
The couple had said they were prepared to take a test to prove they had nothing to do with the child going missing.  But spokesman Clarence Mitchell said evidence from any test would not be admissible in a Portuguese court.  "Kate and Gerry McCann have absolutely nothing to hide," Mr Mitchell said.

"If a request from the Portuguese authorities was made for them to undergo such a lie detector test, they would have no issue with it, provided the test is suitably overseen by an appropriate expert who can ensure the absolutely reliability of the equipment being used."

But he said he understood that such machines were not used in Portuguese criminal cases, nor was the information from them admissible in court.

"Therefore we think it is extremely unlikely that such a request for a test would come through," he added.


The McCanns' declaration that they would be happy to take a lie detector test is just the latest stage of a public fightback to show they had nothing to do with their daughter's disappearance.

The couple, from Rothley, Leicestershire, were declared suspects by detectives after DNA traces were found in a car hired after Madeleine's disappearance.

The couple have returned to Britain after a four-month stay in Portugal and have been told that police do not have enough evidence to justify interviewing them again.



Report that the McCanns would not take a media sponsored lie detector
 
This following report was published two months later and headlined to suggest that the McCanns had "changed their minds" about taking a lie detector.  However, a comparison with the above reports which quote the McCanns' Official Spokesman, proves that there is no retraction and no change of mind,.

 
In the original 21 September statement, the McCann's spokesman made it clear that they would only be willing to take lie detector tests at the request of the Portuguese Police and if they were 100% accurate and admissible in Portuguese courts.


 

Daily Mail - 19 November 2007
Don Cargill is the polygrapher in the UK daytime magazine show "Trisha".  The British police do not use lie detector tests.

Quote:

Don Cargill, chairman of the British and European Polygraph Association, said the McCanns told him they would only take the test if it was 100 per cent accurate and admissible in a Portuguese court.
He told the Sunday Express: "Kate said she'd take it to prove her innocence but in reality, she wasn't willing.  "I was dumbfounded, to tell the truth.
"I don't think it was the McCanns' fault. I was left with the impression the whole thing was a PR exercise to get sympathy at a time when Kate was under increasing scrutiny."  Lie detectors work by measuring physiological responses such as blood pressure levels, pulse rate, breathing and sweat gland activity in the skin during questioning.  Any significant difference in these rates may indicate the subject is lying.  The process has been criticised but the American Polygraph Association claims the current computerised technology is 98 per cent accurate.  They are not admissible in British or Portuguese courts.
McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "Of course they are not going to take the test. It's inadmissible in Portugal and there are doubts about the accuracy.  "Gerry and Kate don't need to do one as they are telling the truth."
 

 

Conclusion
There are no contradictions in those statements which came directly from the McCanns' official spokesman.   The McCanns said all along that they would have no issue with lie detectors requested by the Portuguese Police.  However no such request was received as indeed lie detectors are inadmissible in both Portuguese and British courts.  The lie detector test which the McCanns declined was not an official one, but rather one sponsored by a newspaper at the height of the media frenzy surrounding the case and which would have been administered by a polygrapher best recognised for his participation in a daytime entertainment programme specialising in sensational human interest stories.

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39077824/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2022#ThisisLondon21September2007

very good work......i wonder what the sceptics will have to say about that

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1706 on: October 21, 2020, 09:56:47 PM »
Then you have to accept the McCanns may never have agreed to  a polygraph

Or the German police may not be looking for two Russians, who knows ?

But I’m sure you’ll point this out when some posts an article about Amaral.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1707 on: October 21, 2020, 10:00:49 PM »
Or the German police may not be looking for two Russians, who knows ?

But I’m sure you’ll point this out when some posts an article about Amaral.

i beleive what supprted by decent evidence...i'm not convinced about the russian connection

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1708 on: October 21, 2020, 10:06:07 PM »
False Claim and Misquote.  Neither Kate nor Gerry McCann made any such public statement.

Summary of Verifiable Facts
  • The McCanns' spokesman, Clarence Mitchell is quoted as saying that the McCanns would take a lie detector (polygraph) test if the Portuguese Police asked them to - NOT one sponsored for the media and administered by a polygrapher who works in the entertainment industry.
  • The Portuguese Police did not ask the McCanns to take a lie detector test.
  • Lie detector tests are not admissible in Portuguese courts, nor in British courts.
  • The McCanns declined a lie detector test administered by Don Cargill who is a polygrapher on daytime entertainment programme "Trisha".


This is London - 21 September 2007
Quote:


Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns' spokesman, said that it was "extremely unlikely" the couple would be asked to take a lie detector test by police. He said: "Kate and Gerry McCann have absolutely nothing to hide and, if a request from the Portuguese authorities was made for them to undergo such a lie detector test, they would have no issue with it, provided the test is suitably overseen by an appropriate expert who can ensure the absolutely reliability of the equipment being used.  However, it is my understanding that such machines are not used in Portuguese criminal cases, nor is the information from them deemed admissible in court, and there are question marks over their reliability. Therefore we think it is extremely unlikely that such a request for a test would come through."

 

Sky News - 21 September 2007
Quote:


McCann are unlikely to face a lie detector test in connection with the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine, the family's spokesman has said.
The couple had said they were prepared to take a test to prove they had nothing to do with the child going missing.  But spokesman Clarence Mitchell said evidence from any test would not be admissible in a Portuguese court.  "Kate and Gerry McCann have absolutely nothing to hide," Mr Mitchell said.

"If a request from the Portuguese authorities was made for them to undergo such a lie detector test, they would have no issue with it, provided the test is suitably overseen by an appropriate expert who can ensure the absolutely reliability of the equipment being used."

But he said he understood that such machines were not used in Portuguese criminal cases, nor was the information from them admissible in court.

"Therefore we think it is extremely unlikely that such a request for a test would come through," he added.


The McCanns' declaration that they would be happy to take a lie detector test is just the latest stage of a public fightback to show they had nothing to do with their daughter's disappearance.

The couple, from Rothley, Leicestershire, were declared suspects by detectives after DNA traces were found in a car hired after Madeleine's disappearance.

The couple have returned to Britain after a four-month stay in Portugal and have been told that police do not have enough evidence to justify interviewing them again.



Report that the McCanns would not take a media sponsored lie detector
 
This following report was published two months later and headlined to suggest that the McCanns had "changed their minds" about taking a lie detector.  However, a comparison with the above reports which quote the McCanns' Official Spokesman, proves that there is no retraction and no change of mind,.

 
In the original 21 September statement, the McCann's spokesman made it clear that they would only be willing to take lie detector tests at the request of the Portuguese Police and if they were 100% accurate and admissible in Portuguese courts.


 

Daily Mail - 19 November 2007
Don Cargill is the polygrapher in the UK daytime magazine show "Trisha".  The British police do not use lie detector tests.

Quote:

Don Cargill, chairman of the British and European Polygraph Association, said the McCanns told him they would only take the test if it was 100 per cent accurate and admissible in a Portuguese court.
He told the Sunday Express: "Kate said she'd take it to prove her innocence but in reality, she wasn't willing.  "I was dumbfounded, to tell the truth.
"I don't think it was the McCanns' fault. I was left with the impression the whole thing was a PR exercise to get sympathy at a time when Kate was under increasing scrutiny."  Lie detectors work by measuring physiological responses such as blood pressure levels, pulse rate, breathing and sweat gland activity in the skin during questioning.  Any significant difference in these rates may indicate the subject is lying.  The process has been criticised but the American Polygraph Association claims the current computerised technology is 98 per cent accurate.  They are not admissible in British or Portuguese courts.
McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "Of course they are not going to take the test. It's inadmissible in Portugal and there are doubts about the accuracy.  "Gerry and Kate don't need to do one as they are telling the truth."
 

 

Conclusion
There are no contradictions in those statements which came directly from the McCanns' official spokesman.   The McCanns said all along that they would have no issue with lie detectors requested by the Portuguese Police.  However no such request was received as indeed lie detectors are inadmissible in both Portuguese and British courts.  The lie detector test which the McCanns declined was not an official one, but rather one sponsored by a newspaper at the height of the media frenzy surrounding the case and which would have been administered by a polygrapher best recognised for his participation in a daytime entertainment programme specialising in sensational human interest stories.

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39077824/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2022#ThisisLondon21September2007

Thank you for the text.

‘The couple had said they were prepared to take a test to prove they had nothing to do with the child going missing.  But spokesman Clarence Mitchell said evidence from any test would not be admissible in a Portuguese court.  "Kate and Gerry McCann have absolutely nothing to hide," Mr Mitchell said.’

Then

‘ McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "Of course they are not going to take the test. It's inadmissible in Portugal and there are doubts about the accuracy.  "Gerry and Kate don't need to do one as they are telling the truth.’

So they agreed to a test then demurred....just as I posted.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Brietta

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1709 on: October 21, 2020, 10:14:02 PM »
Thank you for the text.

‘The couple had said they were prepared to take a test to prove they had nothing to do with the child going missing.  But spokesman Clarence Mitchell said evidence from any test would not be admissible in a Portuguese court.  "Kate and Gerry McCann have absolutely nothing to hide," Mr Mitchell said.’

Then

‘ McCann spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "Of course they are not going to take the test. It's inadmissible in Portugal and there are doubts about the accuracy.  "Gerry and Kate don't need to do one as they are telling the truth.’

So they agreed to a test then demurred....just as I posted.

Oh dearie me ... none so blind etc etc

« Last Edit: October 22, 2020, 03:37:51 PM by John »
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....