The Remit of SY

[Eleanor]

It’s not anything, is it?

Of all the supporters here I always felt that you were least likely to pigeonhole a person because of a single opinion. Perhaps I was wrong.

Which opinion is that?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Which opinion is that?

”You’ve let Faithlilly down, you’ve let Sceptics down, and worst of all, you’ve let yourself down”
 

[Brietta]

Remember when supporters thought Brueckner abducted Maddie?
Some still think he might have.
Some even think he might yet be charged.
Sceptics had a good handle on that one, from the moment Wolters opened his mouth.

Remember when supporters thought Brueckner abducted Maddie? 
My memory is of Amaral on a Saunokonoko podcast announcing to the world that a German paedophile currently under arrest was under suspicion of Madeleine's abduction.
Some still think he might have.
Some like the German police - the Portuguese police - and the English police have seen the evidence that has convinced them to declare Brueckner as their chief suspect.
Some even think he might yet be charged.
That Brueckner would be charged with other heinous sex crimes was derided by McCann sceptics.  He has subsequently been charged with those crimes.
Sceptics had a good handle on that one, from the moment Wolters opened his mouth.
Starting long before displaying their ignorance about what defines a remit in an active police investigation, sceptics had never had a 'handle' on anything which had any connection to reality.

Sceptics have got everything wrong from 2007 right through until the present day when being one has become very much a fringe occupation.

[Wonderfulspam]

Remember when supporters thought Brueckner abducted Maddie? 
My memory is of Amaral on a Saunokonoko podcast announcing to the world that a German paedophile currently under arrest was under suspicion of Madeleine's abduction.
Some still think he might have.
Some like the German police - the Portuguese police - and the English police have seen the evidence that has convinced them to declare Brueckner as their chief suspect.
Some even think he might yet be charged.
That Brueckner would be charged with other heinous sex crimes was derided by McCann sceptics.  He has subsequently been charged with those crimes.
Sceptics had a good handle on that one, from the moment Wolters opened his mouth.
Starting long before displaying their ignorance about what defines a remit in an active police investigation, sceptics had never had a 'handle' on anything which had any connection to reality.

Sceptics have got everything wrong from 2007 right through until the present day when being one has become very much a fringe occupation.

I don't see what Mark Saunokonkos podcast has to do with my first point.

The 'evidence' the three investigative forces have consists of a secondhand alleged confession & b....r all else, that much is obvious.

I never once said Brueckner wouldn't be charged with other crimes.

But other than that you got everything right.

Now, just remember to get back to me when the three expert investigative forces charge Brueckner with anything related to Maddie won't you.

[Vertigo Swirl]

If charges not yet having been brought sgainst one’s preferred suspect is a measure of one’s wrongness, then just how wrong does that make those who believe the McCanns dunnit?  15+ years and counting since they were made arguidos, shouldn’t be long now, tick-tock, etc.

[Wonderfulspam]

If charges not yet having been brought sgainst one’s preferred suspect is a measure of one’s wrongness, then just how wrong does that make those who believe the McCanns dunnit?  15+ years and counting since they were made arguidos, shouldn’t be long now, tick-tock, etc.

That doesn't make sense, the McCanns aren't suspects.
P.S, you read my post again, so time to quit being dishonest & change your signature line imo.

[Eleanor]

”You’ve let Faithlilly down, you’ve let Sceptics down, and worst of all, you’ve let yourself down”
 

It's not possible to insult me.  I've been at this for too long.

Now, where were we?  Oh yes.  The Remit of SY.  Although I confess to being an Off Topic Offender.

[Wonderfulspam]

Besides, there is CONCRETE EVIDENCE Maddie is dead.
Wolters & the BKA are SURE, on the evidence, that Brueckner is the murderer.
The only 'evidence' against the McCanns are dog alerts which aren't even evidence & a sighting of Gerry.

[Wonderfulspam]

Gerry definitely wasn't out 'searching' alone at the time of the Smiths sighting. Wolters can prove it.

[Wonderfulspam]

Anyway, let's get back to the remit.
Investigating the abduction. SY were quite right to do so as we now know Redwood found evidence that Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger. Quite why that evidence didn't lead them to the murderer is anyone's guess, but I'm sure the three expert investigative forces will explain one day why it was that their combined evidence failed miserably until a vagrant beating, people trafficker finally opened his trap.

[faithlilly]

I don't see what Mark Saunokonkos podcast has to do with my first point.

The 'evidence' the three investigative forces have consists of a secondhand alleged confession & b....r all else, that much is obvious.

I never once said Brueckner wouldn't be charged with other crimes.

But other than that you got everything right.

Now, just remember to get back to me when the three expert investigative forces charge Brueckner with anything related to Maddie won't you.

OG asked for three Portuguese men to be made arguido even when the PJ were saying that they weren’t their men so it’s rather disingenuous for Brietta to claim that Brueckner being made arguido has anything to do with the Portuguese stance on the case. In fact in a face to face meeting between the BKA and PJ the PJ had made it clear that they had been shown NO evidence categorically implicating Brueckner.

[faithlilly]

Anyway, let's get back to the remit.
Investigating the abduction. SY were quite right to do so as we now know Redwood found evidence that Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger. Quite why that evidence didn't lead them to the murderer is anyone's guess, but I'm sure the three expert investigative forces will explain one day why it was that their combined evidence failed miserably until a vagrant beating, people trafficker finally opened his trap.

Post of the Week.

[G-Unit]

snip/
Starting long before displaying their ignorance about what defines a remit in an active police investigation, sceptics had never had a 'handle' on anything which had any connection to reality.

I assume you think you know "what defines a remit in an active police investigation". Do explain...

[Wonderfulspam]

OG asked for three Portuguese men to be made arguido even when the PJ were saying that they weren’t their men so it’s rather disingenuous for Brietta to claim that Brueckner being made arguido has anything to do with the Portuguese stance on the case. In fact in a face to face meeting between the BKA and PJ the PJ had made it clear that they had been shown NO evidence categorically implicating Brueckner.

....and yet there are still people who believe Wolters has concrete evidence. It just goes to show how gullible supporters are really.
But maybe it's just that Wolters can't share the concrete evidence with the PJ, the MET or Madeleine's parents, because it could damage the case?
One could cling to that ridiculous idea I suppose.
Yes. I think it must be that.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Post of the Week.

"Post of the Week" my Aunt Fanny. Anyone REASONABLE (and that clearly discounts you and the troll) will realise that some investigations remain unsolved despite the very best efforts of the police, and that sometimes all it takes is a lucky break such as one unsavoury specimen decides to spill the beans on another unsavoury specimen, which then finally takes the investigation down the correct route.