The Libel Trial - So who or what did hinder the search for Madeleine??

[C.Edwards]

Page 122
image snipped out

Nice work Luz. No doubt you'll be accused of linking the wrong version of the files now.  Gilet is completely unable to back up his claims.  I have no doubt there's be more bluster coming though.

[stephen25000]

I have given full answers to your questions which you spam on every thread on this forum.

The fact that you either do not understand those answers or deliberately choose not to accept them is your problem not mine.

Now do you have anything to say that is on the topic of this thread or are you going to continue disrupting it?

I am not disrupting anything.

The 'search' for Madeleine has continued since the beginning, either by police forces or by private investigators, so how has the 'search' been 'hindered' exactly ?

[Jazzy]

This is all the anti McCanns now have.

They cannot accept that Amaral in his blundering thesis which did not tally with the full evidence as outlined in the archival report hindered the search for Madeleine.


They have too much invested in their viewpoint. Too much time spent seizing on minutiae and endlessly twisting and discussing it as evidence of guilt. "Read the files" they shriek, and what do those files say? No evidence against the Mccanns. Two new investigations, both say the Mccanns played no part in any crime and they are still here, entrenched, holding on to old myths and spouting them as fact, still demanding "evidence". The facts and reality of the situation will never make a difference to them.

Edited to refelct removed post.

[gilet]

I am not disrupting anything.

The 'search' for Madeleine has continued since the beginning, either by police forces or by private investigators, so how has the 'search' been 'hindered' exactly ?

Exactly by the very nasty attempts to persuade the public whose assistance is needed by PIs and by Police that there is no point in looking for her because she is dead.

And who has led those attempts though he has not a shred of evidence to prove his claims? Why that would be Senhor Amaral!

When a child is missing and when there is hope that she may be found alive there is a greater impetus to assist than when there appears less point because finding a dead child is not so urgent.

If you cannot understand the fact that when a person is persuaded that a missing child is dead it makes a big difference to the way in which that person will assist in the search then I truly am sorry for you.

[Mr Moderator]

Please stay on topic.  Evidence of abduction is another issue.

[gilet]

Please stay on topic.  Evidence of abduction is another issue.

Thank you.

[Mr Gray]

Please stay on topic.  Evidence of abduction is another issue.

Thank You

[Lyall]

Exactly by the very nasty attempts to persuade the public whose assistance is needed by PIs and by Police that there is no point in looking for her because she is dead.

And who has led those attempts though he has not a shred of evidence to prove his claims? Why that would be Senhor Amaral!

When a child is missing and when there is hope that she may be found alive there is a greater impetus to assist than when there appears less point because finding a dead child is not so urgent.

If you cannot understand the fact that when a person is persuaded that a missing child is dead it makes a big difference to the way in which that person will assist in the search then I truly am sorry for you.

Crimewatch's role is to give police a platform to say here's what we know, please help us, but on October 14th it was perfectly obvious they still know nothing. That will have done nothing to encourage the public to believe Madeleine is still findable. The programme showed nothing but the usual irrelevant background story.

If, as you claim, they have facts they didn't tell us they failed Madeleine in that programme. Crimewatch did not give the public a single fact to go on.

[Mr Gray]

Crimewatch's role is to give police a platform to say here's what we know, please help us, but on October 14th it was perfectly obvious they still know nothing. That will have done nothing to encourage the public to believe Madeleine is still findable. The programme showed nothing but the usual irrelevant background story.

If, as you claim, they have facts they didn't tell us they failed Madeleine in that programme. Crimewatch did not give the public a single fact to go on.

Not true...they may have things we do not know

[Lyall]

Not true...they may have things we do not know

But if they want the public to think Madeleine did not sadly suffer the same fate as very nearly every other young child who disappears, a programme being shown six and a half years later needs to give viewers more than just the usual irrelevant background story of the holiday.

[Mr Gray]

But if they want the public to think Madeleine did not sadly suffer the same fate as very nearly every other young child who disappears, a programme being shown six and a half years later needs to give viewers more than just the usual irrelevant background story of the holiday.

who says so

[Lyall]

who says so

I say so. I was hoping Crimewatch would show us something new, but it didn't. All Crimewatch gave us was details of people 'acting suspiciously' in the days before the disappearance. You get claims like that in every single case, and huge numbers of them. It's a notoriously difficult, and unreliable, area of police work. And that's all Crimewatch had.

[stephen25000]

Exactly by the very nasty attempts to persuade the public whose assistance is needed by PIs and by Police that there is no point in looking for her because she is dead.

And who has led those attempts though he has not a shred of evidence to prove his claims? Why that would be Senhor Amaral!

When a child is missing and when there is hope that she may be found alive there is a greater impetus to assist than when there appears less point because finding a dead child is not so urgent.

If you cannot understand the fact that when a person is persuaded that a missing child is dead it makes a big difference to the way in which that person will assist in the search then I truly am sorry for you.

Has it occurred to you that people can read the files/information available on the case and come to different conclusions to yours because there was no evidence of abduction , namely that nothing has hindered the search, and the PJ investigated the parents ,  ?

I wonder if you have searched for Madeleine yourself, or do you just  type on the keyboard ?

I accept other people have a different viewpoint to mine, but your posts indicate a one dimensional aspect and no more.

[Cariad]

Wrong.

Folio 122

Morning, I have the PJ files open in another window, could you please supply the name of the employee?

Thanks in advance!

[gilet]

Crimewatch's role is to give police a platform to say here's what we know, please help us, but on October 14th it was perfectly obvious they still know nothing. That will have done nothing to encourage the public to believe Madeleine is still findable. The programme showed nothing but the usual irrelevant background story.

If, as you claim, they have facts they didn't tell us they failed Madeleine in that programme. Crimewatch did not give the public a single fact to go on.

I am sorry that is your opinion. Indeed I am quite saddened. But I am very glad it is not the opinion of all those who clearly saw quite a different programme to you and who responded so generously to it.

Crimewatch was appealing for specific assistance. They made that very clear. And they did it very effectively. That has resulted in truly massive coverage and an unusually large response.

However this is totally off topic.

The topic is the hindering of the search by Amaral.