Author Topic: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB  (Read 300485 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2550 on: November 07, 2020, 01:19:38 PM »
That doesn’t mean I ignored it. I read it and accepted it as your point of view.
OK, but I think it would have been courteous to have received an acknowledgement especially as you appear to be under the misapprehension that "supporters" aren't able to apply their imagination or to see things from a different point of view, or indeed of conceding a point.  But hey ho, let's move on now....
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2551 on: November 07, 2020, 01:28:36 PM »
OK, but I think it would have been courteous to have received an acknowledgement especially as you appear to be under the misapprehension that "supporters" aren't able to apply their imagination or to see things from a different point of view, or indeed of conceding a point.  But hey ho, let's move on now....
I am under no misapprehension. Please point out where I state that “supporters” aren't able to apply their imagination. Anyone is able to apply their imagination. Where do I say “supporters” aren’t able to see a different point of view. Where do I say “supporters aren’t able to concede a point. I made no distinction on who can concede a point.
But heyho, lets move on

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2552 on: November 07, 2020, 01:31:52 PM »
I am under no misapprehension. Please point out where I state that “supporters” aren't able to apply their imagination. Anyone is able to apply their imagination. Where do I say “supporters” aren’t able to see a different point of view. Where do I say “supporters aren’t able to concede a point. I made no distinction on who can concede a point.
But heyho, lets move on

perhaps you could answer the question...why did Grime say he ddint know the renault belonged to the McCanns when it was plastered with posters of MM. Was he just not very observant

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2553 on: November 07, 2020, 01:32:05 PM »
I am under no misapprehension. Please point out where I state that “supporters” aren't able to apply their imagination. Anyone is able to apply their imagination. Where do I say “supporters” aren’t able to see a different point of view. Where do I say “supporters aren’t able to concede a point. I made no distinction on who can concede a point.
But heyho, lets move on
Go on then.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2554 on: November 07, 2020, 01:37:28 PM »
perhaps you could answer the question...why did Grime say he ddint know the renault belonged to the McCanns when it was plastered with posters of MM. Was he just not very observant
perhaps he really didn't know it was the McCanns car. If the car had a poster saying "this is the McCanns car" he would be naïve to state he didn't know it was said car. Why would he lie? He doesn't have to mention if he knows whose car it is or not. Don't forget they weren't the Mccanns car and random other cars. All the cars that were searched were linked to the case.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2555 on: November 07, 2020, 01:44:18 PM »
perhaps he really didn't know it was the McCanns car. If the car had a poster saying "this is the McCanns car" he would be naïve to state he didn't know it was said car. Why would he lie? He doesn't have to mention if he knows whose car it is or not. Don't forget they weren't the Mccanns car and random other cars. All the cars that were searched were linked to the case.

He stated he wasnt aware at the time that it was the McCanns car even though it had several large posters of MM in the windows. ...

At least you confirm your claim that posters wont concede anything....I concede you were right on that

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2556 on: November 07, 2020, 01:50:02 PM »
Well, Grime fibbed, didn't he.  What an idiot.  That was his credibility down the pan.

And then the next time we saw the car all of the posters had been removed.

No wonder Grime bogged off to America.

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2557 on: November 07, 2020, 01:52:15 PM »
He stated he wasnt aware at the time that it was the McCanns car even though it had several large posters of MM in the windows. ...

At least you confirm your claim that posters wont concede anything....I concede you were right on that
But they could be uncle “John” or Friend “Rogers” posters in their own car that they rented.
Why do think Martin Grime lied then? For what gain?
You do understand the meaning of the word concede. It means to have once held an opposite opinion and then agree that you were incorrect and agree with a contrary opinion

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2558 on: November 07, 2020, 02:00:56 PM »
But they could be uncle “John” or Friend “Rogers” posters in their own car that they rented.
Why do think Martin Grime lied then? For what gain?
You do understand the meaning of the word concede. It means to have once held an opposite opinion and then agree that you were incorrect and agree with a contrary opinion

I understand what concedes mean but it appears you dont understand what irony means

Offline Icanhandlethetruth

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2559 on: November 07, 2020, 02:02:43 PM »
I understand what concedes mean but it appears you dont understand what irony means
the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect
Not sure how that fits but Hey Ho lets move on.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2560 on: November 07, 2020, 02:24:53 PM »
The idea that in a garage full of cars (which included a car that the McCanns were seen driving around in on news reports and inPdL itself, and that was plastered with posters of Madeleine) Grime would not have been able to have had a reasonable idea which was the McCanns is beyond laughable.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline barrier

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2561 on: November 07, 2020, 03:07:27 PM »
So for how long do you think Madeleine's dead body was lying around in 5A?
How long does a body have to lie before cadaver is produced? truth is no one knows, controlled experiments show X,real terms?

The fresh stage of decay kicks off about four minutes after death. Once the heart has stopped beating, the cells in the body are deprived of oxygen. As carbon dioxide and waste products build up, the cells start to break down as a result of enzymatic processes – these are known as autolysis. Initial visual signs of decomposition are minimal, although as autolysis progresses blisters and sloughing of skin may occur.

https://www.compoundchem.com/2014/10/30/decompositionodour/
This is my own private domicile and I shall not be harassed, biatch:Jesse Pinkman Character.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2562 on: November 07, 2020, 03:15:04 PM »
How long does a body have to lie before cadaver is produced? truth is no one knows, controlled experiments show X,real terms?

The fresh stage of decay kicks off about four minutes after death. Once the heart has stopped beating, the cells in the body are deprived of oxygen. As carbon dioxide and waste products build up, the cells start to break down as a result of enzymatic processes – these are known as autolysis. Initial visual signs of decomposition are minimal, although as autolysis progresses blisters and sloughing of skin may occur.

https://www.compoundchem.com/2014/10/30/decompositionodour/
Not even the most ardent cadaver dog champion has ever claimed that a dog would be able to detect the presence of a corpse that had been dead for 4 minutes in a  location a month earlier so not sure what your red coloured quote adds to the discussion...?
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline barrier

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2563 on: November 07, 2020, 03:20:04 PM »
Not even the most ardent cadaver dog champion has ever claimed that a dog would be able to detect the presence of a corpse that had been dead for 4 minutes in a  location a month earlier so not sure what your red coloured quote adds to the discussion...?
Best not join in then.
This is my own private domicile and I shall not be harassed, biatch:Jesse Pinkman Character.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #2564 on: November 07, 2020, 03:25:47 PM »
Best not join in then.
That's not very friendly.  Perhaps you could tell us what your quote demonstrates with regard to the discussion of the dog alerts in 5A? 
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".