Author Topic: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case  (Read 99395 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline jassi

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #435 on: February 10, 2016, 08:46:01 PM »
Dead easy. I have a group of friends who will testify that   I was in Sc..thorpe at exactly the time that whatever happened happened and any similarity to any e-fit is pure coincidence  8(>((
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline G-Unit

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #436 on: February 10, 2016, 08:47:32 PM »
I was talking to G- Unit, do keep up.

You were attempting to order G-Unit around which is a rather silly thing to try to do.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Alfred R Jones

  • Guest
Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #437 on: February 10, 2016, 08:49:38 PM »
You were attempting to order G-Unit around which is a rather silly thing to try to do.
I know, quite absurd of me to expect G-Unit to actually answer my question because to do so she would have to concede I have a point, never mind I can live with the fact that once again she has wriggled out of giving a straight answer. 8(>((

Alfred R Jones

  • Guest
Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #438 on: February 10, 2016, 08:50:52 PM »
Dead easy. I have a group of friends who will testify that   I was in Sc..thorpe at exactly the time that whatever happened happened and any similarity to any e-fit is pure coincidence  8(>((
so you say, some of us know different... 8(>((

Offline jassi

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #439 on: February 10, 2016, 08:55:37 PM »
so you say, some of us know different... 8(>((

Just malicious rumour put about by those jealous of my good looks and success as a celebrity chef.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2016, 08:58:10 PM by jassi »
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline G-Unit

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #440 on: February 10, 2016, 09:01:52 PM »
I know, quite absurd of me to expect G-Unit to actually answer my question because to do so she would have to concede I have a point, never mind I can live with the fact that once again she has wriggled out of giving a straight answer. 8(>((

What point? That despite your certainty that the receptionist spoke English you actually have no idea whether he did or not?  @)(++(*
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #441 on: February 10, 2016, 09:02:09 PM »
whilst simultaneously knocking on every door in Portugal naturally.
Good Lord no. Where did you get that strange idea? That's what the cops is for.
Don't buy a dog and bark yourself.
(For all those who think the universe began on May 3rd 2007 the dog crack predates Gene Keela and Eddie).
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Alfred R Jones

  • Guest
Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #442 on: February 10, 2016, 11:09:23 PM »
What point? That despite your certainty that the receptionist spoke English you actually have no idea whether he did or not?  @)(++(*
I do know, because I've read the files. 

Offline G-Unit

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #443 on: February 11, 2016, 08:25:45 AM »
I do know, because I've read the files.

Really? What's the point of asking me then?  Did Helder Luis speak English or not, do tell.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Carana

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #444 on: February 11, 2016, 08:26:17 AM »
The actual reason is not because the McCanns were leaving but because of some imminent change in the law which meant you actually needed a shred of evidence before making someone an arguido, or something along those lines, Carana will help me out here..,

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2127.msg70219#msg70219

Offline Carana

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #445 on: February 11, 2016, 12:26:14 PM »
So what, that he never learned to speak English.

That's something that I don't understand.

I have been frequently told that most Portuguese, particularly in the Algarve, understood / could communicate in English.

Yet this doesn't appear to be the case at the time for those involved.


Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #446 on: February 11, 2016, 12:43:20 PM »
Really? What's the point of asking me then?  Did Helder Luis speak English or not, do tell.
I am of the opinion that he did, based on two small scraps of information.

He was the sole rep at OC reception from 4pm to midnight on 3 May.  The main language spoken by guests was English.  To have a single rep on duty who could not speak English when the principal language used to communicate with guests was English does not make sense to me.

Matthew Oldfield said he spoke to the receptionist to request a telephone call, but did not insist on it.  What he did not mention is any difficulty in communicating with a receptionist in limited English.

So Helder spoke English, or he was not the only receptionist.
What's up, old man?

Offline Carana

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #447 on: February 11, 2016, 12:51:45 PM »
I am of the opinion that he did, based on two small scraps of information.

He was the sole rep at OC reception from 4pm to midnight on 3 May.  The main language spoken by guests was English.  To have a single rep on duty who could not speak English when the principal language used to communicate with guests was English does not make sense to me.

Matthew Oldfield said he spoke to the receptionist to request a telephone call, but did not insist on it.  What he did not mention is any difficulty in communicating with a receptionist in limited English.

So Helder spoke English, or he was not the only receptionist.

I would find it unusual for 24-hour receptionists in a tourist resort popular with Brit tourists to not have a conversant understanding of English.

It may be less important for restaurant staff if you could just point to a menu or use sign language to point out what you wanted.


Offline Brietta

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #448 on: February 11, 2016, 12:55:31 PM »
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2127.msg70219#msg70219

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2127.msg70219#msg70219   In other words the rush to make the Drs McCann "suspects" in Madeleine's disappearance was because of a change in the law due to come into effect days later ... which meant there had to be evidence to enable such a step to be taken.
As we know there was none at the time nor has any been found since

It is worth bearing in mind that change in the law was in force when the present investigations constituted persons arguidos.  This means that there was some evidence which justified that;  the fact that we have not been told what that is is neither here nor there;  in the meantime Madeleine's case is live.

I find that a hopeful situation.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline G-Unit

Re: Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case
« Reply #449 on: February 11, 2016, 01:21:03 PM »
I am of the opinion that he did, based on two small scraps of information.

He was the sole rep at OC reception from 4pm to midnight on 3 May.  The main language spoken by guests was English.  To have a single rep on duty who could not speak English when the principal language used to communicate with guests was English does not make sense to me.

Matthew Oldfield said he spoke to the receptionist to request a telephone call, but did not insist on it.  What he did not mention is any difficulty in communicating with a receptionist in limited English.

So Helder spoke English, or he was not the only receptionist.

The receptionist on duty the following day didn't speak English, which casts doubt on your first assumption.

Matthew, who seems to have been the group errand boy, is supposed to have gone to reception twice. The receptionist didn't mention seeing him at all. Neither of them are very reliable witnesses. You have decided that Matthew's statement was correct. I will suspend judgement, as there's nothing to support his claim that he went there.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2016, 01:24:50 PM by G-Unit »
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0