Author Topic: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB  (Read 300367 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1755 on: October 22, 2020, 12:33:31 PM »

"Those thousands of Sun readers asked a question (allegedly) and got an answer. Kate and Gerry were not happy to do anything to help clear their names. They had conditions. End of story."

This statement is bordering on Libellous Innuendo.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1756 on: October 22, 2020, 12:36:59 PM »
"Those thousands of Sun readers asked a question (allegedly) and got an answer. Kate and Gerry were not happy to do anything to help clear their names. They had conditions. End of story."

This statement is bordering on Libellous Innuendo.

Libellous innuendo ? That’s a new one.
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 #1757 on: October 22, 2020, 12:41:54 PM »
IMO it doesn’t...in fact quite the opposite.

Then you need to read it again...It says they may help. Anyone with a basic level of intelligence will understand that these twsts are not reliable  and prove nothing.
Why do you think they are not used
« Last Edit: October 22, 2020, 08:05:17 PM by Brietta »

Offline Snowgirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1758 on: October 22, 2020, 12:43:55 PM »
Then you need to read it again...It says they may help. Anyone with a basic level of intelligence will understand that these twsts are not reliable  and prove nothing.
Why do you think they are not used
So of what actual use are they?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1759 on: October 22, 2020, 12:44:14 PM »
Don’t worry I’ll wait.

UK papers claim that FF said the phonecalls actually prove CBs innocence,... FF says he has not spoken to the UK papers

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1760 on: October 22, 2020, 12:45:07 PM »
Libellous innuendo ? That’s a new one.

Not on this Forum it isn't.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1761 on: October 22, 2020, 12:47:00 PM »
So of what actual use are they?

as they are not used by UK police or courts...then no use.  Jeremy Kyle seems to like them. In reality they can provide intelligence...i beleive some insurance companies use them..but not proof as Kizzy repeatedly claims

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1762 on: October 22, 2020, 12:47:16 PM »
So of what actual use are they?

They aren't of any use.  And not acceptable in any Court of Law.

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1763 on: October 22, 2020, 12:53:00 PM »

quoting the sun again...no credibility.


the way I see it they were asked if the would take  a polygraph....gerry answered..

if the PJ asked us to
If they were admissable
if they were reliable
 

Some have taken this as an agreemnet to take  atest.

IMO it absolutely isnt. Its expalining why they wouldnt take the test. Its all about context. IMO the McCans never agreed to a test and therefore never changed their mind. Unless aposter can come up with proof they agreed to take a test everything is specualtion

 IMO the McCans never agreed to a test and therefore never changed their mind.


Well, it's just the obvious thing to do if you are telling the truth IMO.

Look well if CB takes one and passes ...how would you react to that.

I have already said if mccs had done one and passed I would believe them.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1764 on: October 22, 2020, 12:57:51 PM »
Then you need to read it again...It says they may help. Anyone with a basic level of intelligence will understand that these twsts are not reliable  and prove nothing.
Why do you think they are not used

Yes, it may help.....and if you asked almost all parents that would be enough.
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 #1765 on: October 22, 2020, 12:58:43 PM »
UK papers claim that FF said the phonecalls actually prove CBs innocence,... FF says he has not spoken to the UK papers

You can’t produce the cite, can you ? That’s okay, we’re used to it from you.
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 #1766 on: October 22, 2020, 01:00:07 PM »
They aren't of any use.  And not acceptable in any Court of Law.

But they move the investigation on. An self respecting parent would grab that chance.
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 G-Unit

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1767 on: October 22, 2020, 01:01:46 PM »
"Those thousands of Sun readers asked a question (allegedly) and got an answer. Kate and Gerry were not happy to do anything to help clear their names. They had conditions. End of story."

This statement is bordering on Libellous Innuendo.

The source said, "Kate and Gerry are happy to do anything that will help clear their names.”
https://themaddiecasefiles.com/we-ll-do-lie-test-the-sun-21-09-07-t3058.html

"Anything" didn't include a lie detector test unless it was requested and run by police, however. Therefore they wouldn't just do "anything", would they? That isn't innuendo nor libel, it's a factual account of what was reported.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1768 on: October 22, 2020, 01:03:17 PM »
But they move the investigation on. An self respecting parent would grab that chance.

How can they move the investigation on if they can't be trusted?

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1769 on: October 22, 2020, 01:09:24 PM »

Who dragged this one up?  And of what use is it?