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

[Vertigo Swirl]

What does Faithlilly know about what “most parents “ wouldn’t be able to do?  Has she conducted a survey?

[Robittybob1]

What does Faithlilly know about what “most parents “ wouldn’t be able to do?  Has she conducted a survey?

Maybe she has studied these cases.

[Eleanor]

No one can possibly know unless and until it happens to them.

[G-Unit]

Sara Payne did it.

I think the lesson to be learned from these two cases is take a pro-active stance on behalf of your missing child and all too soon for Sara your murdered child ~ expect to be viciously trolled.

In my opinion it's difficult to define trolling. Often, imo, people are accused of trolling if they express an opinion which someone else disagrees with. Only if a law is broken can action be taken, as the McCann supporter dossier compilers discovered.

I see no point in complaining about trolling, because often the ones who complain are those it offends imo, and what offends one person might not offend others.

[Vertigo Swirl]

In my opinion it's difficult to define trolling. Often, imo, people are accused of trolling if they express an opinion which someone else disagrees with. Only if a law is broken can action be taken, as the McCann supporter dossier compilers discovered.

I see no point in complaining about trolling, because often the ones who complain are those it offends imo, and what offends one person might not offend others.

What a bizarre post.  Most right minded people would be offended by sick and gratuitous abuse directed at the mother of a murdered child.

[Brietta]

In my opinion it's difficult to define trolling. Often, imo, people are accused of trolling if they express an opinion which someone else disagrees with. Only if a law is broken can action be taken, as the McCann supporter dossier compilers discovered.

I see no point in complaining about trolling, because often the ones who complain are those it offends imo, and what offends one person might not offend others.

I am offended by the title of this thread.

Particularly by the fact not one individual is able to describe one single instance of evidence against the McCanns.

Yet the comparison is made with them and a vicious torturer, rapist and paedophile career criminal who is the prime suspect in their daughter's disappearance.

Is that trolling? because although I may be offended it is certain there are others who are not and indeed appear to revel in it all.

[G-Unit]

What a bizarre post.  Most right minded people would be offended by sick and gratuitous abuse directed at the mother of a murdered child.

It's the use of the word 'troll' that is the problem. This article explains my thoughts exactly;

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/once-we-ve-decided-what-troll-then-we-can-work-out-if-they-need-jailing-9806761.html

[Vertigo Swirl]

It's the use of the word 'troll' that is the problem. This article explains my thoughts exactly;

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/once-we-ve-decided-what-troll-then-we-can-work-out-if-they-need-jailing-9806761.html

who was talking about jailing trolls?  Again you shift the goalposts of the debate.

[Brietta]

It's the use of the word 'troll' that is the problem. This article explains my thoughts exactly;

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/once-we-ve-decided-what-troll-then-we-can-work-out-if-they-need-jailing-9806761.html

It isn't really difficult; the mechanism is already in place ~ it just seems there is a reluctance to use it.  It isn't about a name ~ it is about a behaviour and morality, in my opinion.
Communications Act 2003
 - Sending a malicious communication using social media was made a criminal offence.
 - It was declared an offence to "persistently make use of a public electronic communications network for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety".
Malicious communications
On 19 December 2012, to strike a balance between freedom of speech and criminality, the Director of Public Prosecutions issued interim guidelines, clarifying when social messaging is eligible for criminal prosecution under UK law. Only communications that are credible threats of violence, harassment, or stalking - Stalking is unwanted and/or repeated surveillance by an individual or group toward another person. Stalking behaviors are interrelated to harassment and intimidation and may include following the victim in person or monitoring them. The term stalking is used with some differing definitions in psychiatry and psychology, as well as in some legal jurisdictions as a term for a criminal offense.(such as aggressive Internet trolling - In Internet slang, a troll is a person who starts flame wars or intentionally upsets people on the Internet by posting inflammatory and digressive, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community with the intent of provoking readers into displaying emotional responses and normalizing tangential discussion, either for the troll's amusement or a specific gain.) which specifically targets an individual or individuals, or breaches a court order designed to protect someone (such as those protecting the identity of a victim of a sexual offence) will be prosecuted.   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Act_2003

[faithlilly]

Worst Case Scenario.

Nope....grieving parents just don’t allow themselves to go there.

[faithlilly]

Sara Payne did it.

I think the lesson to be learned from these two cases is take a pro-active stance on behalf of your missing child and all too soon for Sara your murdered child ~ expect to be viciously trolled.

Sara Payne did what ? Organised concerts months in advance ? Do you have a cite as per forum rules ?

[Brietta]

Sara Payne did what ? Organised concerts months in advance ? Do you have a cite as per forum rules ?

Really . . . providing a cite is as per forum rules?  I must remember to mention that to Gunit ~ she doesn't seem to have heard about that one.

I do have a cite ~ please see here ~ http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11772.msg625317#msg625317

But weirdly enough you have already replied to ~ "Fearing the media might "go off" the story at any time, the police organised a variety of headline-grabbing events - and in return, the public and the media displayed great willingness to help.

As the investigation entered its third week, the problem for the family and the police was how to keep it in the media spotlight. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/831699.stm
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11731.msg625346#msg625346

Quite obviously Sara Payne would never have given up on Sarah no matter how long it would have taken.  She suffered not knowing for three weeks and did everything she could for Sarah during that period.
The McCanns have suffered for thirteen+ years.

You're being a bit mischievous I think regarding your posts to me.  I'm finding it tedious yet again.  So please don't expect a direct response from me to your posts for some time ~ that way you won't be disappointed when I don't respond :)

[G-Unit]

Really . . . providing a cite is as per forum rules?  I must remember to mention that to Gunit ~ she doesn't seem to have heard about that one.

I do have a cite ~ please see here ~ http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11772.msg625317#msg625317

But weirdly enough you have already replied to ~ "Fearing the media might "go off" the story at any time, the police organised a variety of headline-grabbing events - and in return, the public and the media displayed great willingness to help.

As the investigation entered its third week, the problem for the family and the police was how to keep it in the media spotlight. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/831699.stm
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11731.msg625346#msg625346

Quite obviously Sara Payne would never have given up on Sarah no matter how long it would have taken.  She suffered not knowing for three weeks and did everything she could for Sarah during that period.
The McCanns have suffered for thirteen+ years.

You're being a bit mischievous I think regarding your posts to me.  I'm finding it tedious yet again.  So please don't expect a direct response from me to your posts for some time ~ that way you won't be disappointed when I don't respond :)

"Really . . . providing a cite is as per forum rules?  I must remember to mention that to Gunit ~ she doesn't seem to have heard about that one."

Are snide remarks acceptable Brietta?

Perhaps you should provide cites when asked then you will have earned the right to criticise others imo.

[Brietta]

"Really . . . providing a cite is as per forum rules?  I must remember to mention that to Gunit ~ she doesn't seem to have heard about that one."

Are snide remarks acceptable Brietta?

Perhaps you should provide cites when asked then you will have earned the right to criticise others imo.

Any reason you never bother to provide cites requested including today?  Might be an idea to take it to the mods room and give the reason there.
I have never knowingly ignored ignored a request for a cite.  Maybe you can back up your statement with ~ Lol ~ a cite ???

[Robittybob1]

This debate between the moderators needs to stop.