Why did the McCanns reject Henri Exton's expertise ?

[jassi]

you say Mitchell lied...wheres your source for the official denial by the pj..perhaps Mitchell is not the one lying

Could be a toughie - do you believe a spin doctor/ wannabe politician or a police force?

[Mr Gray]

Could be a toughie - do you believe a spin doctor/ wannabe politician or a police force?

 well at they moment its albertini making this claim....and unless he can provide a source...Mitchell is not the one lying

[Luz]

well at they moment its albertini making this claim....and unless he can provide a source...Mitchell is not the one lying

No, Mitchell never lies :-)

[Mr Gray]

No, Mitchell never lies :-)

 but we know amaral does because it has been proved in court

[Albertini]

Whers your source for the pj officially denied it

I didn't say the PJ officially denied it in terms of making an statement.

If you check the C4 News youtube video from the 14th October Simon Israel of C4 news states categorically they were not handed over to the PJ.

Where do you think he got that information from?

Please note that comment was made some 2 weeks before the ST article was published.

On the 19th the Telepgraph followed it up and Mitchell placed his lie out there but under an unnamed source close to the McCann's.

Then it was swiftly dropped as the unofficial or official response in the ST piece.

Why do you think that is?

[Luz]

but we know amaral does because it has been proved in court

You have to learn to read, in my opinion.

However the question is "WHY DID THE MCCANN REJECT (I would use, hide) Henri Exton's expertise?

In my opinion, for the same reason they rejected to respond questions (K.McCann), help with a re-enactment or, most important of all, intervene in July 2008, to keep the investigation open. They needed to keep the investigation closed in order to escape their responsibility in their daughter's disappearance.

[Albertini]

well at they moment its albertini making this claim....and unless he can provide a source...Mitchell is not the one lying

Yes he is. C4 news stated n the 14th Ocotber they were not handed over to the PJ.

Have C4 published an apology or retraction for that?

[Mr Gray]

I didn't say the PJ officially denied it in terms of making an statement.

If you check the C4 News youtube video from the 14th October Simon Israel of C4 news states categorically they were not handed over to the PJ.

Where do you think he got that information from?

Please note that comment was made some 2 weeks before the ST article was published.

On the 19th the Telepgraph followed it up and Mitchell placed his lie out there but under an unnamed source close to the McCann's.

Then it was swiftly dropped as the unofficial or official response in the ST piece.

Why do you think that is?

Your exact words...Or given the PJ offically denied it......then you go on to say that you didn't say this...seeing as you accuse others of lying perhaps you should look at the truthfulness of your own statements...

So the pj haven't officially denied it..fact

[Mr Gray]

Yes he is. C4 news stated n the 14th Ocotber they were not handed over to the PJ.

Have C4 published an apology or retraction for that?

perhaps you should apologise to Mitchell when in fact it was you who wasn't telling the truth

[Carana]

It's amazing isn't it?! Five years. And the McCann want us to believe that their daughter is alive when they couldn't care to have that report investigated!

The PJ doesn't have to deny anything, it's common knowledge that the McCann, from the start, contracted PIs to attempt to divert the official police investigation. The only information they gave to the PJ were e-mails from cucoo   psychics.

The insinuation that the McCann gave this report or/and e-fits to the PJ is the same sort of strategy (it is in the same BS category) used by their portuguese lawyer after the first trial against Amaral, when she implied there were 195 sightings that had not been investigated. Then, like now, nobody ever heard about those allegations again...Liar, liar, pants on fire.

Could you please support that statement?

[Luz]

perhaps you should apologise to Mitchell when in fact it was you who wasn't telling the truth

Why did the McCann hide the Exton report?

[Benice]

It's amazing isn't it?! Five years. And the McCann want us to believe that their daughter is alive when they couldn't care to have that report investigated!

The PJ doesn't have to deny anything, it's common knowledge that the McCann, from the start, contracted PIs to attempt to divert the official police investigation. The only information they gave to the PJ were e-mails from cucoo   psychics.

The insinuation that the McCann gave this report or/and e-fits to the PJ is the same sort of strategy (it is in the same BS category) used by their portuguese lawyer after the first trial against Amaral, when she implied there were 195 sightings that had not been investigated. Then, like now, nobody ever heard about those allegations again...Liar, liar, pants on fire.

What a libellous post! 

[Luz]

Could you please support that statement?
[/quote



.

[Mr Gray]

Could you please support that statement?

 I wouldn't even bother asking ...they just seem to post what they like and call it the "truth"

[Albertini]

perhaps you should apologise to Mitchell when in fact it was you who wasn't telling the truth

Nope not at all.

It has been stated and not withdrawn the efits were not handed over to the PJ before the ST article came out.

Where did Simon Israel of C4 news get this information from? In order to state they were not given to the PJ the PJ must have confirmed to him that they did not receive them. Correct?

Otherwise he has made it up.

Are you accusing him of making it up DaveL?

Why would he say that on TV if it was not true?

If as a journalist you state "they were never passed onto the PJ" you must have received that information from the people you claim haven't received them?

agree?