Do The McCanns Trust Operation Grange to Do the Job ?

[debunker]

You are not interpreting the document properly Debunker.  It is not necessary to have the word 'lie' in the Report as there are many other ways to represent the same understanding. 

The Attorney General clearly challenges the evidence of the parents and calls into question their timings which if correct would not have allowed any abduction to take place.

As my specialism is Spanish maybe someone with Portuguese would like to have a go?

Tal denota que os país nao estavam persistentemente preocupados com os filhos, que nao iam fazer a sua verificacao como depois declararam efectuar, antes negligenciaram, embora nao temeraria, nem grosseiramente, o dever de guarda dos mesmos filhos.

Se tal dever de guarda tivesse sido observado, na hipotese de se ter tratado de um rapto, como insistentemente se referiu e continua a referir e e admissivel que tenha acontecido, a sua ocorrencia poderia ter sido eventualmente inviabilizada.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P17/17_VOLUME_XVIIa_Page_4642.jpg

John someone fluent in Portuguese has translated it. I posted the translation earlier.

A previous forker fluent in Portuguese translated it.

You have already admitted you do not speak Portuguese so on what basis do you suspect the translation posted is not accurate ? Because you disagree with it  ?

Because the Portuguese word for 'Lie' (nor its cognates) does not appear in the AG's summary!

[faithlilly]

@ debunker

Please don't play semantics with me.

Words are important.

Saying someone lied is libel if incorrect. Saying someone was untruthful is not libel even if incorrect.

Lying requires a false statement with a clear intention to deceive. You misused the word. Suck it up.

Oh I think the AG is clear that the McCanns made false statements to deceive, his quoting of Mrs Fenn's statement proves this. He clearly believes the elderly lady over the McCanns and is explicit in saying so. He nowhere describes the McCanns false declarations as oversights or mistakes or indeed errors of recollection.  They lied and were caught out in those lies, that's the bones of it and no matter what way you try to spin it, that is what he says.

[Redblossom]

Give it up Faithlilly, DB will argue and split hairs about anything and everything, to the ridiculous extreme, he and some others are  no different to Clarence Mitchell, their mantra is there is always an innocent explanation for anything found or not found, in their case, anything said or not said

[debunker]

Give it up Faithlilly, DB will argue and split hairs about anything and everything, to the ridiculous extreme, he and some others are  no different to Clarence Mitchell, their mantra is there is always an innocent explanation for anything found or not found, in their case, anything said or not said

My mantra is that the truth is important.

You said that the AG said that the McCanns lied. He did not say that. You were lying or mistaken!

Not splitting hairs, just keeping you honest (a full time occupation apparently.)

[Redblossom]

Give it up Faithlilly, DB will argue and split hairs about anything and everything, to the ridiculous extreme, he and some others are  no different to Clarence Mitchell, their mantra is there is always an innocent explanation for anything found or not found, in their case, anything said or not said

My mantra is that the truth is important.

You said that the AG said that the McCanns lied. He did not say that. You were lying or mistaken!

Not splitting hairs, just keeping you honest (a full time occupation apparently.)

Are you drunk?


I never posted on this thread any such thing
 

[debunker]

Give it up Faithlilly, DB will argue and split hairs about anything and everything, to the ridiculous extreme, he and some others are  no different to Clarence Mitchell, their mantra is there is always an innocent explanation for anything found or not found, in their case, anything said or not said

My mantra is that the truth is important.

You said that the AG said that the McCanns lied. He did not say that. You were lying or mistaken!

Not splitting hairs, just keeping you honest (a full time occupation apparently.)

Are you drunk?


I never posted on this thread any such thing
 

Not on this thread possibly, but on another. Wriggle, wriggle.

[Redblossom]

Give it up Faithlilly, DB will argue and split hairs about anything and everything, to the ridiculous extreme, he and some others are  no different to Clarence Mitchell, their mantra is there is always an innocent explanation for anything found or not found, in their case, anything said or not said

My mantra is that the truth is important.

You said that the AG said that the McCanns lied. He did not say that. You were lying or mistaken!

Not splitting hairs, just keeping you honest (a full time occupation apparently.)

Are you drunk?


I never posted on this thread any such thing
 

Not on this thread possibly, but on another. Wriggle, wriggle.

Aww, must have been hard  for you to realise you were wrong, wriggle wriggle, as it was WRONG and LYNG of yiu to state yesterday that I never gice cites,or links to my posts, pitiful liar that you are

[faithlilly]

Give it up Faithlilly, DB will argue and split hairs about anything and everything, to the ridiculous extreme, he and some others are  no different to Clarence Mitchell, their mantra is there is always an innocent explanation for anything found or not found, in their case, anything said or not said

My mantra is that the truth is important.

You said that the AG said that the McCanns lied. He did not say that. You were lying or mistaken!

Not splitting hairs, just keeping you honest (a full time occupation apparently.)

Are you drunk?


I never posted on this thread any such thing
 

Not on this thread possibly, but on another. Wriggle, wriggle.

Aww, must have been hard  for you to realise you were wrong, wriggle wriggle, as it was WRONG and LYNG of yiu to state yesterday that I never gice cites,or links to my posts, pitiful liar that you are

If I were you I'd have another go at the vodka. Your prose and spelling might improve.

Unfortunately drunk or sober your reasoning doesn't.

[debunker]

Give it up Faithlilly, DB will argue and split hairs about anything and everything, to the ridiculous extreme, he and some others are  no different to Clarence Mitchell, their mantra is there is always an innocent explanation for anything found or not found, in their case, anything said or not said

My mantra is that the truth is important.

You said that the AG said that the McCanns lied. He did not say that. You were lying or mistaken!

Not splitting hairs, just keeping you honest (a full time occupation apparently.)

Are you drunk?


I never posted on this thread any such thing
 

Not on this thread possibly, but on another. Wriggle, wriggle.

Aww, must have been hard  for you to realise you were wrong, wriggle wriggle, as it was WRONG and LYNG of yiu to state yesterday that I never gice cites,or links to my posts, pitiful liar that you are

If I were you I'd have another go at the vodka. Your prose and spelling might improve.

Unfortunately drunk or sober your reasoning doesn't.

I think you will find my reasoning very sturdy- you just reject it because the results conflict with your mindset.

[Redblossom]

Give it up Faithlilly, DB will argue and split hairs about anything and everything, to the ridiculous extreme, he and some others are  no different to Clarence Mitchell, their mantra is there is always an innocent explanation for anything found or not found, in their case, anything said or not said

My mantra is that the truth is important.

You said that the AG said that the McCanns lied. He did not say that. You were lying or mistaken!

Not splitting hairs, just keeping you honest (a full time occupation apparently.)

Are you drunk?


I never posted on this thread any such thing
 

Not on this thread possibly, but on another. Wriggle, wriggle.

Aww, must have been hard  for you to realise you were wrong, wriggle wriggle, as it was WRONG and LYNG of yiu to state yesterday that I never gice cites,or links to my posts, pitiful liar that you are

If I were you I'd have another go at the vodka. Your prose and spelling might improve.

no use tryng to be psychic sally dear, I dont drink vodka, and your personal attack on me is pants, whether i have a sherry or wine has sod all to do with anything, when you cant answer the post you attack the poster, thats a deaperate inditement on YOU and no one else, poor poor poor show, credibility zero, nite luv xxx


Ps your spelling and grammar are pants too at times when you start to have a hernia over posts here  LOL hahah!!!!!

[debunker]

Give it up Faithlilly, DB will argue and split hairs about anything and everything, to the ridiculous extreme, he and some others are  no different to Clarence Mitchell, their mantra is there is always an innocent explanation for anything found or not found, in their case, anything said or not said

My mantra is that the truth is important.

You said that the AG said that the McCanns lied. He did not say that. You were lying or mistaken!

Not splitting hairs, just keeping you honest (a full time occupation apparently.)

Are you drunk?


I never posted on this thread any such thing
 

Not on this thread possibly, but on another. Wriggle, wriggle.

Aww, must have been hard  for you to realise you were wrong, wriggle wriggle, as it was WRONG and LYNG of yiu to state yesterday that I never gice cites,or links to my posts, pitiful liar that you are

If I were you I'd have another go at the vodka. Your prose and spelling might improve.

no use tryng to be psychic sally dear, I dont drink vodka, and your personal attack on me is pants, whether i have a sherry or wine has sod all to do with anything, when you cant answer the post you attack the poster, thats a deaperate inditement on YOU and no one else, poor poor poor show, credibility zero, nite luv xxx


Ps your spelling and grammar are pants too at times when you start to have a hernia over posts here  LOL hahah!!!!!

Are you into philosophy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_WRFJwGsbY

[faithlilly]

Faithlilly, how do you know the AG meant "they lied" and not "they were mistaken"?  Do you know the difference between lying and giving wrong information based on inaccurate recall?

Are you really suggesting the McCanns were 'mistaken in their recall' when declaring they had left the children for only 30 minutes when they had actually left them for over an hour ?

If they habitually checked every half-hour throughout the week and said so to the police, but on one or two occasions the gap between checks was actually longer does that make them liars?  I know it does in your book, but in the eyes of the PT AG I suspect it does not.

You suspect ? The AG's opinion is clear, categorical and not changed by your 'suspicions'.

You are wrong. The AG does not categorically state that the McCanns lied. End of.

Of course he does or you wouldn't be trying to twist his words.

[debunker]

Faithlilly, how do you know the AG meant "they lied" and not "they were mistaken"?  Do you know the difference between lying and giving wrong information based on inaccurate recall?

Are you really suggesting the McCanns were 'mistaken in their recall' when declaring they had left the children for only 30 minutes when they had actually left them for over an hour ?

If they habitually checked every half-hour throughout the week and said so to the police, but on one or two occasions the gap between checks was actually longer does that make them liars?  I know it does in your book, but in the eyes of the PT AG I suspect it does not.

You suspect ? The AG's opinion is clear, categorical and not changed by your 'suspicions'.

You are wrong. The AG does not categorically state that the McCanns lied. End of.

Of course he does or you wouldn't be trying to twist his words.

He certainly does not say it in the Portuguese. The translation distorts his words.

[Redblossom]

Faithlilly, how do you know the AG meant "they lied" and not "they were mistaken"?  Do you know the difference between lying and giving wrong information based on inaccurate recall?

Are you really suggesting the McCanns were 'mistaken in their recall' when declaring they had left the children for only 30 minutes when they had actually left them for over an hour ?

If they habitually checked every half-hour throughout the week and said so to the police, but on one or two occasions the gap between checks was actually longer does that make them liars?  I know it does in your book, but in the eyes of the PT AG I suspect it does not.

You suspect ? The AG's opinion is clear, categorical and not changed by your 'suspicions'.

You are wrong. The AG does not categorically state that the McCanns lied. End of.

Of course he does or you wouldn't be trying to twist his words.

He certainly does not say it in the Portuguese. The translation distorts his words.

You must be BALD by now with all that hair splitting! LOL

[faithlilly]

Blacksmith's back and with a very pertinet blog entry :

Carry on fibbing


 

Christmas 2012, Kate McCann on the Find Madeleine website: "Since March 2012 independent `physical' investigation of lines of enquiry by our team has been put on hold whilst the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Review progresses. This has been to avoid duplication (and thereby unnecessary expenditure) and to prevent the risk of compromising any work, albeit unintentionally, carried out by the MPS."

May 2013, Daily Mail and other news sites: Sources close to the McCanns ( yawn) say the family also want to speak to Mr Verran about his whereabouts at the time Madeleine was snatched from the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz, Portugal, in 2007. We’d like Mr Verran to explain these omissions from his interviews with us, [the McCanns' joke detectives] and say when he was in Portugal,’ said the source.