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

[Icanhandlethetruth]

whats the point of me hypothesising...you wouldnt believe my answer if it didnt suit yoiur beleifs...its  a pathetic question

That's the beauty of human existence we can hypothesize and imagine things that may never have happened or ever happen. What a ride!

[Mr Gray]

So with all this talk about the apartment searches not being equitable and Grime spending more time on the scenic than the other cars what do you conclude from this, that he was bad at his job or he was trying to frame 2 innocent parents for the death of their child.

its quite telling you can only see two scenarios....I see another..

Grime was looking for evidence.....wherever it led....thats his and the dogs' job...nothing wrong with that. He spent more time on things McCann because thats where he was likely to find evidence.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

its quite telling you can only see two scenarios....I see another..

Grime was looking for evidence.....wherever it led....thats his and the dogs' job...nothing wrong with that. He spent more time on things McCann because thats where he was likely to find evidence.

So doing his job correctly. As I have always maintained.

[Mr Gray]

So doing his job correctly. As I have always maintained.

So what does that show...nothing found...alerts with no evidental value or relaibility

[Eleanor]

Those who support the abduction theory have nothing but praise for Operation Grange and one person in particular is prepared to believe in the German prosecutor Wolters despite knowing nothing about his abilities or track record.

When it comes to a UK police officer who was the best in his area of expertise, (an opinion ratified by the FBI), he receives uninformed but extensive criticism.

In my opinion that's because his findings cast doubt on the abduction theory. Had his dogs alerted to someone else's property and clothing I suspect that they would not have criticised him.

What?  "Best in his area of expertise?"   What price other UK Dog Handlers?

Wherein do The FBI come in to this?  American Dog Handlers aren't stupid, so why does the opinion of The FBI matter?  Some Smart Alec British Constable with a British Accent knows better, does he?  And perhaps more likely to get a conviction.

Grime wasn't even the only handler of these two dogs.  The South Yorkshire Police gave these dogs to Grime because they were of no use anymore.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

So what does that show...nothing found...alerts with no evidental value or relaibility

Nothing found? hmmm, Evidence? hmmm, But at least you concede Grime did his job correctly.

[Mr Gray]

Those who support the abduction theory have nothing but praise for Operation Grange and one person in particular is prepared to believe in the German prosecutor Wolters despite knowing nothing about his abilities or track record.

When it comes to a UK police officer who was the best in his area of expertise, (an opinion ratified by the FBI), he receives uninformed but extensive criticism.

In my opinion that's because his findings cast doubt on the abduction theory. Had his dogs alerted to someone else's property and clothing I suspect that they would not have criticised him.

cite....I think youve made this up

[Vertigo Swirl]

Good point G-Unit. Last night I was going to open a thread saying that for all “supporters” imagine the dogs were never summoned in 2007 but instead in 2020 and alerted to Christian Bs house, car, and clothing where he lived in 2007. What would be the opinions not just on these alerts but on all dog alerts, It may be different. But then I thought what’s the point.

So let's get this straight.  If the dogs had alerted to Christian B's camper van, house, clothing etc, then you would accept he was Madeleine's abductor and killer would you?  No, didn't think so....

[Eleanor]

Good point G-Unit. Last night I was going to open a thread saying that for all “supporters” imagine the dogs were never summoned in 2007 but instead in 2020 and alerted to Christian Bs house, car, and clothing where he lived in 2007. What would be the opinions not just on these alerts but on all dog alerts, It may be different. But then I thought what’s the point.

Never think, "What's the point."  This is a discussion Forum which supports all views, providing they aren't Libellous.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

So let's get this straight.  If the dogs had alerted to Christian B's camper van, house, clothing etc, then you would accept he was Madeleine's abductor and killer would you?  No, didn't think so....

You have jumped to a conclusion. I am not one of the Mccanns did it no matter what people.
I believe that is the first time I have typed the parents name on this forum,
As I can imagine and hypothesize, I think if the dogs hadn’t alerted in 2007 but did so in Christian Bs locations in 2020 I would regard it as another piece of evidence against him and would in no way dismiss it. I would definitely be leaning to his involvement
What about you? Can you imagine and hypothesize the other way?

[Vertigo Swirl]

You have jumped to a conclusion. I am not one of the Mccanns did it no matter what people.
I believe that is the first time I have typed the parents name on this forum,
As I can imagine and hypothesize, I think if the dogs hadn’t alerted in 2007 but did so in Christian Bs locations in 2020 I would regard it as another piece of evidence against him and would in no way dismiss it. I would definitely be leaning to his involvement
What about you? Can you imagine and hypothesize the other way?

Firstly, tell me what conclusion I have jumped to?  I asked you if you would see the dog alerts as confirmation that Bruckener abducted and killed Madeleine.  I see that you would not.  Secondly, yes I am able to imagine and hypothesise the other way, and would take the dog alerts for what they were - interesting but ultimately worthless as they wouldn't tell us if they were linked to Madeleine's disappearance without forensic supporting evidence. 

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Never think, "What's the point."  This is a discussion Forum which supports all views, providing they aren't Libellous.

Well yes when I joined I saw it as a discussion forum but over time since I joined, to me it has taken the appearance of a 13 year long argument where no point can be conceded.
BTW not trying to butter you up but you are still my favourite moderator very reasoned and fair. I appreciate the difficult work you do here.

[Mr Gray]

Well yes when I joined I saw it as a discussion forum but over time since I joined, to me it has taken the appearance of a 13 year long argument where no point can be conceded.
BTW not trying to butter you up but you are still my favourite moderator very reasoned and fair. I appreciate the difficult work you do here.

what have you ever concede...or is it only others who should

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Firstly, tell me what conclusion I have jumped to?  I asked you if you would see the dog alerts as confirmation that Bruckener abducted and killed Madeleine.  I see that you would not.  Secondly, yes I am able to imagine and hypothesise the other way, and would take the dog alerts for what they were - interesting but ultimately worthless as they wouldn't tell us if they were linked to Madeleine's disappearance without forensic supporting evidence.

You jumped to the conclusion that if the dogs alerted to Christian Bs locations I wouldn’t accept he was Madeleines abductor and killer. That is a conclusion you jumped to. Its all in your post. Read it back.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

what have you ever concede...or is it only others who should

From memory I conceded that Adrian Prout was not convicted using dog alert evidence on the other thread, What about you?