The McCanns are the victims in all of this!

[Redblossom]

When you say "official bod" you mean someone more official than Operation Grange detectives investigating the case and the Portuguese Police who have also investigated the case, and continue to do so?

SY are investigating, they have not cleared them

Andy Redwood has said they are not suspects last July, as part of their investigations as it stood,thats hardly "clearing"

The PJ did not "clear them"

The Public Prosecutor in Portugal did not "clear them" in 2008 and neither did the attorney general or any court/judges ergo they remain "uncleared"

Edited

[pathfinder73]

The efit is suppressed? Who do you believe has suppressed this efit, and I take it when you say Smithman you mean the man seen carrying a child that the family saw but only the father says it looked a bit like Gerry yest other members of the family didn't think so?

The efits that were done in 2008 so YES they were suppressed. Leave no stone unturned?

[Wonderfulspam]

When you say "official bod" you mean someone more official than Operation Grange detectives investigating the case and the Portuguese Police who have also investigated the case, and continue to do so?

So why don't SY just show us [ censored word ]s this solid evidence they obviously must have which proves Kate & Gerry's  complete non involvement in their daughters disappearance?

If they did that then we could apologise for doubting them, start being nice about them, join the support group & assist the 'search'.

[Redblossom]

The efits that were done in 2008 so YES they were suppressed. Leave no stone unturned?

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2794.0

Singularity needs to read this thread

[Redblossom]

So why don't SY just show us [ censored word ]s this solid evidence they obviously must have which proves Kate & Gerry's  complete non involvement in their daughters disappearance?

If they did that then we could apologise for doubting them, start being nice about them, join the support group & assist the 'search'.

Well thats never going to happen is it?

Lets face it, 7 yrs later

Bbl

[j.rob]

A letter from a reader called Steve Bywaters, from London, apparently appeared in the Leicstershire Mercury on 31st March a few years back. It was up long enough for some copies to have stayed up on the Internet. Might be interesting to speak to the paper about its veracity.

The reader gives an account of what he thinks happened to Madeleine and why Jane Tanner was involved.

It makes somewhat uncomfortable reading. And it is, of course, one person's opinion.

What it does not explain is Payne's involvement and there is no doubt in my mind he is a key player in whatever was going on.)  But I suppose people can draw their own conclusions about that.  However unpalatable they might unfortunately be.

[Wonderfulspam]

Well thats never going to happen is it?

Giving the 3 Burglars a months prior warning they are going to nick them is obviously not deemed damaging to the investigation.

So would it really be damaging to show us the evidence which clears the McCanns, or could it actually assist the search for Madeleine ?

[The Singularity]

So why don't SY just show us [ censored word ]s this solid evidence they obviously must have which proves Kate & Gerry's  complete non involvement in their daughters disappearance?

Why should SY show you or anyone any evidence related to any investigation they are doing?

[Redblossom]

Giving the 3 Burglars a months prior warning they are going to nick them is obviously not deemed damaging to the investigation.

So would it really be damaging to show us the evidence which clears the McCanns, or could it actually assist the search for Madeleine ?

Yep they are not cleared

[Wonderfulspam]

Why should SY show you or anyone any evidence related to any investigation they are doing?

Don't SY want the McCanns to live in peace?  They could make that happen couldn't they?

They don't seem to mind telling the burglars they are after them.

And they have shown us some of the evidence which almost certainly eliminates Tannerman.

[Redblossom]

A letter from a reader called Steve Bywaters, from London, apparently appeared in the Leicstershire Mercury on 31st March a few years back. It was up long enough for some copies to have stayed up on the Internet. Might be interesting to speak to the paper about its veracity.

The reader gives an account of what he thinks happened to Madeleine and why Jane Tanner was involved.

It makes somewhat uncomfortable reading. And it is, of course, one person's opinion.

What it does not explain is Payne's involvement and there is no doubt in my mind he is a key player in whatever was going on.)  But I suppose people can draw their own conclusions about that.  However unpalatable they might unfortunately be.

This?


http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/mccanns-steve-bywater-and-chilling.html


Interesting but......too many buts

[The Singularity]

Giving the 3 Burglars a months prior warning they are going to nick them is obviously not deemed damaging to the investigation.

So would it really be damaging to show us the evidence which clears the McCanns, or could it actually assist the search for Madeleine ?

Reading between the lines on this one I don't think there is any evidence to clear them, how do you prove a negative. If they had evidence to support the suspicion that both of them were complicit in Madeleine's disappearance then I am sure Snr Amaral would have acted a lot faster than he did. And if not him, then his colleagues.

Also people who are insisting with great force that they have not been cleared, well yes they have. Again facts are that the Grange team do not consider Madeleine's parents as suspects. I’m fairly sure they must have explored the possibility that they could have been involved and as such, ruled it out.

In fact if some need to see it in writing, then most of the news sites carried a direct quote from Redwood explaining that the McCanns were not under suspicion nor linked to any of their ongoing leads after reviewing the evidence. Seems that some prefer to deal with semantics when it comes to interpreting the posture of a DCI when he says someone is no longer under suspicion of a crime.

[The Singularity]

Don't SY want the McCanns to live in peace?  They could make that happen couldn't they?

They don't seem to mind telling the burglars they are after them.

And they have shown us some of the evidence which almost certainly eliminates Tannerman.

The question  being asked was in fact why should SY show you or anyone any evidence related to any investigation they are doing?

[Wonderfulspam]

Reading between the lines on this one I don't think there is any evidence to clear them, how do you prove a negative. If they had evidence to support the suspicion that both of them were complicit in Madeleine's disappearance then I am sure Snr Amaral would have acted a lot faster than he did. And if not him, then his colleagues.

Also people who are insisting with great force that they have not been cleared, well yes they have. Again facts are that the Grange team do not consider Madeleine's parents as suspects. I’m fairly sure they must have explored the possibility that they could have been involved and as such, ruled it out.

In fact if some need to see it in writing, then most of the news sites carried a direct quote from Redwood explaining that the McCanns were not under suspicion nor linked to any of their ongoing leads after reviewing the evidence. Seems that some prefer to deal with semantics when it comes to interpreting the posture of a DCI when he says someone is no longer under suspicion of a crime.

So they haven't actually been formally cleared then.

[Estuarine]

This?


http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/2011/08/mccanns-steve-bywater-and-chilling.html


Interesting but......too many buts

This seems to be from the same bucket as The Knights Templar and other crafts theories. Or as we used to say in the playground "I know something you don't know".