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

[Vertigo Swirl]

If only one of you sceptiics could actually explain in what way you think the reconstitution might have helped the McCanns to find their daughter I would sincerely love to hear it, but the silence as always will be deafening.

[Robittybob1]

The fact that Kate remained very good friends with Fiona Payne says it all. If any of my friends had refused to take part in any part of a police enquiry that was looking for my daughter they’d no longer be friends.

Did they refuse?

[faithlilly]

Did they refuse?

The friends ? Yes.

[Brietta]

I agree.  Had they really wanted to assist the PJ in the investigation of their daughter's mysterious disappearance they would have prevailed upon their friends to take part. But in the event not a sound.

The point is though that the PJ were no longer interested in investigating what had happened to Madeleine McCann and hadn't been for quite some time.  They had given up on Madeleine, it was her parents they wanted.

The McCanns had been made arguidos and were the prime suspects.  The investigation was all about prosecuting Madeleine's parents and nothing to do with finding her.

[Brietta]

The fact that Kate remained very good friends with Fiona Payne says it all. If any of my friends had refused to take part in any part of a police enquiry that was looking for my daughter they’d no longer be friends.

The PJ were not looking for Madeleine.  They were looking to prosecute her parents instead.

[Eleanor]

Did they refuse?

They were told not to bring their children and after lack of reassurance they were afraid that they would be made Arguidos themselves.

I wouldn't have asked a friend to do that.

[G-Unit]

If only one of you sceptiics could actually explain in what way you think the reconstitution might have helped the McCanns to find their daughter I would sincerely love to hear it, but the silence as always will be deafening.

I think you know that the aim was not to help the McCanns find their daughter, it was to give them and their friends an opportunity to demonstrate (or not) that their account of their movements on 3rd May was correct.

At the time there was speculation in the UK press that some of the group may be made arguidos, although there's no mention of that intention in the PJ files. It was, however, one of the reasons given for refusing to attend, along with their opinion that it wouldn't help to find Madeleine.

It was reported that the group met secretly in Rothley in November.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id379.htm

[Vertigo Swirl]

I think you know that the aim was not to help the McCanns find their daughter, it was to give them and their friends an opportunity to demonstrate (or not) that their account of their movements on 3rd May was correct.

At the time there was speculation in the UK press that some of the group may be made arguidos, although there's no mention of that intention in the PJ files. It was, however, one of the reasons given for refusing to attend, along with their opinion that it wouldn't help to find Madeleine.

It was reported that the group met secretly in Rothley in November.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id379.htm

And yet you all berate them for not helping the police to find Madeleine which as you admit above is patent ballcocks.  Why, KNOWING they were not complicit in hiding Madeleine’s body, would they all agree to take part in a farcical reconstruction which would 100% fail to prove their innocence?

[Mr Gray]

The friends simply didn't trust the PJ who had already demonstrated their ignorance.
If the group thought this was a genuine attempt to progress the search I'm sure they would have attended.

[G-Unit]

The friends simply didn't trust the PJ who had already demonstrated their ignorance.
If the group thought this was a genuine attempt to progress the search I'm sure they would have attended.

It was the statements and behaviour of this group which aroused the PJ's suspicions. Why refuse the opportunity to demonstrate their confidence in their story when it was offered? They could have dispelled those suspicions and moved on. Perhaps once they were back in the moment the position of Gerry and Jez's conversation would have been recalled and the reason why neither of them saw or heard anything would have become obvious to all, for example.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It was the statements and behaviour of this group which aroused the PJ's suspicions. Why refuse the opportunity to demonstrate their confidence in their story when it was offered? They could have dispelled those suspicions and moved on. Perhaps once they were back in the moment the position of Gerry and Jez's conversation would have been recalled and the reason why neither of them saw or heard anything would have become obvious to all, for example.

And if it didn’t?  Then what?  Jez is in on the plot too is he?  Whose recollection would the reconstitution have been based on and could it have cleared the McCanns or their friends of involvement?  Do you think the exact location of Gerry and Jes when passing has a bearing on JT’s possible involvement?  Why should suspects have to take part in any exercise designed to gather more evidence against them?  What if the reconstitution failed to establish their possible involvement, then what?  Cleared of suspicion?

[G-Unit]

And if it didn’t?  Then what?  Jez is in on the plot too is he?  Whose recollection would the reconstitution have been based on and could it have cleared the McCanns or their friends of involvement?  Do you think the exact location of Gerry and Jes when passing has a bearing on JT’s possible involvement?  Why should suspects have to take part in any exercise designed to gather more evidence against them?  What if the reconstitution failed to establish their possible involvement, then what?  Cleared of suspicion?

As they refused to have their stories examined we'll never know, will we? Jes could never confirm the time he met Gerry anyway, it was Jane who did that. She also said she had Gerry and the 'abductor' in sight at the same time. Unfortunately for her, neither man was able to confirm her sighting of the 'abductor'.

[Vertigo Swirl]

As they refused to have their stories examined we'll never know, will we? Jes could never confirm the time he met Gerry anyway, it was Jane who did that. She also said she had Gerry and the 'abductor' in sight at the same time. Unfortunately for her, neither man was able to confirm her sighting of the 'abductor'.

And you think a reconstitution would have achieved this?

[Mr Gray]

It was the statements and behaviour of this group which aroused the PJ's suspicions. Why refuse the opportunity to demonstrate their confidence in their story when it was offered? They could have dispelled those suspicions and moved on. Perhaps once they were back in the moment the position of Gerry and Jez's conversation would have been recalled and the reason why neither of them saw or heard anything would have become obvious to all, for example.

The PJ didn't understand the evidence...not opinion..fact. Once you truly understand that you will understand why they did not wish to return.

Amaral claimed at his trial that the official PJ investigation agreed with him...ie ...death in the apartment and a cover up by the parents could be proved..what was the point of the reconstruction

[Eleanor]

The PJ didn't understand the evidence...not opinion..fact. Once you truly understand that you will understand why they did not wish to return.

Amaral claimed at his trial that the official PJ investigation agreed with him...ie ...death in the apartment and a cover up by the parents could be proved..what was the point of the reconstruction

Why did Amaral refuse to do a reconstruction in the beginning when it might have been of some use?