The breathtaking hypocrisy of those that support the McCanns

[Mo Stache]

To clarify, the forum takes great care and indeed  pride in not allowing libellous posts to stand when they are posted.  This applies irrespective of who they relate to.  Posts suggesting otherwise will always be removed as they are considered to be nothing more than mischief making.

Quote from: Tim Invictus on May 13, 2013, 10:39:43 AM

If I had to place a large bet, I would place it on Maddie being killed in a fit of temper by Kate. Not deliberately killed but probably by having her head banged against a wall or similar. I believe Gerry knows exactly what happened and is 'standing by' his wife knowing she didn't mean to kill Maddie. I believe the Tapas bar saga is nothing more than an elaborate coverup.

The question was 'what do you think happened'; well that's my opinion. I hope I am wrong and Maddie is alive and well somewhere being cared for and loved.

[icabodcrane]

To clarify, the forum takes great care and indeed  pride in not allowing libellous posts to stand when they are posted.  This applies irrespective of who they relate to.  Posts suggesting otherwise will always be removed as they are considered to be nothing more than mischief making.

Since this trial began I am guessing it's been a bit of a nightmare for the mods

You're doing a great job,  fair-play    

[C.Edwards]

So this posting of Tim's personal opinion is meant to be evidence of libel?  Good grief you need to think about that one a bit!

[Redblossom]

That was a personal opinion and from someone not au fait with case deeply, just an honest opinion is that all  you can  come up with when accusing this board of hosting loads of accusationsof killing and murder? Poor very poor and you know it

And no it isnt libel, so go find something else to complain about

[Chinagirl]

Change the record Chinagirl. Let them come after me if they want to try and pursue that one!

Start off here: http://aninspectorcallsyou.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/libel-diarygerry-mccann-as-witness-of.html and here: http://themccanngallery.blogspot.com/2010/01/kate-and-gerry-mccann-liars.html and here: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3177-what-s-in-a-name and here: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2440-madeleine-accounts-of-the-truth-dr-martin-roberts and here: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2984-uneasy-lies-the-head and here: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t1969-lies-damned-lies-and-statistics-by-dr-martin-roberts...

See I've got bored with this now. It's too easy.

The whole setting out of the libel claim is a lie - you can see with your own eyes from the Amsterdam pictures if nothing else that they're a long way from the emotional ruined wrecks they claim to be.

None of the links you have posted here is evidence that the McCanns are liars, as you have claimed.  They atre nothing but opinion posted on internet forums and of novalue whatsoever as EVIDENCE.

You need to do a lot better than that.

[icabodcrane]

None of the links you have posted here is evidence that the McCanns are liars, as you have claimed.  They atre nothing but opinion posted on internet forums and of novalue whatsoever as EVIDENCE.

You need to do a lot better than that.

Someone should have reminded Michael Wright of that before he took the stand 

[Chinagirl]

The links Edwards posted are ample evidence of anti-McCann sentiment and therefore legitimate for Wright to have used in court, but are certainly not evidence that the McCanns are liars, which is what Edwards claimed.

[Redblossom]

Since this trial began I am guessing it's been a bit of a nightmare for the mods

You're doing a great job,  fair-play   

Seconded
 

[Redblossom]

The links Edwards posted are ample evidence of anti-McCann sentiment and therefore legitimate for Wright to have used in court, but are certainly not evidence that the McCanns are liars, which is what Edwards claimed.

Take your blinkers off chinagirl for  a change might do you good lol

The  mccanns are definitely proven liars even if in the most part its so subtle but still detectable, and proven,sorry if it offends ur sensibilities, change them lol, might save you from the shock in the future lol and oh dear

[icabodcrane]

The links Edwards posted are ample evidence of anti-McCann sentiment and therefore legitimate for Wright to have used in court, but are certainly not evidence that the McCanns are liars, which is what Edwards claimed.

I see ...   when it challenges the McCann's position,  a forum reference is worthless ...  when it supports the McCann's position, a forum reference is of value  ?

OK then 

[Chinagirl]

I see ...   when it challenges the McCann's position,  a forum reference is worthless ...  when it supports the McCann's position, a forum reference is of value  ?

OK then

Where have I ever given a forum reference as a source for anything I claim?

Edwards has clearly, categorically stated that the McCanns are liars and claims there is evidence for making such statement.  Redblossom has even claimed in a post or two above that there is "proof" that they are liars.

I am now challenging both Edwards and Redblossom to produce their evidence - not opinion from prejudiced forums or blogs, otherwise their claims are libellous.

[icabodcrane]

Where have I ever given a forum reference as a source for anything I claim?

Edwards has clearly, categorically stated that the McCanns are liars and claims there is evidence for making such statement.  Redblossom has even claimed in a post or two above that there is "proof" that they are liars.

I am now challenging both Edwards and Redblossom to produce their evidence - not opinion from prejudiced forums or blogs, otherwise their claims are libellous.

I didn't mention you Chinagirl  ...  I mentioned Michael Wright    ....  HE  used a 'forum reference'  in court as a source for something he claimed

Didn't he  ?   

[Chinagirl]

I didn't mention you Chinagirl  ...  I mentioned Michael Wright    ....  HE  used a 'forum reference'  in court as a source for something he claimed

Didn't he  ?

Of course he did - that was his evidence!

Come on, Crane, you're not that stupid - you can see that Wright's claim (a discussion on a forum about kidnapping one of the twins for which he needed to produce the evidence from that forum) and Edwards statement that the McCanns are liars, offering opinions from forums as his "evidence" are completely different. 

It never works to compare apples with oranges!

[icabodcrane]

Of course he did - that was his evidence!

Come on, Crane, you're not that stupid - you can see that Wright's claim (a discussion on a forum about kidnapping one of the twins for which he needed to produce the evidence from that forum) and Edwards statement that the McCanns are liars, offering opinions from forums as his "evidence" are completely different. 

It never works to compare apples with oranges!

You either accept that forum references can legitimately be  used as a source to support a point of view  ..  or you do not 

If you do not,  then you must reject Michael Wright's reference to a forum,  which he used to  claim    that Amaral's book had incited threats against the McCann children

You  must     see the anomoly in your statement  ...  surely  ?     

[Chinagirl]

You either accept that forum references can legitimately be  used as a source to support a point of view  ..  or you do not 

If you do not,  then you must reject Michael Wright's reference to a forum,  which he used to  claim    that Amaral's book had incited threats against the McCann children

You  must     see the anomoly in your statement  ...  surely  ?   

You are being deliberately obtuse.

I have never accepted that forum references or blogs are a primary source of facts when all they offer is opinion.  I greatly regret that this forum seems to have reversed its policy in this regard, to its detriment.

Wright offered the fact that posters on a forum were discussing kidnapping the twins.  Edwards and Redblossom are offering only opinion from forums that the McCanns are liars.

Spot the difference!