Author Topic: Wandering Off Topic  (Read 2440401 times)

0 Members and 14 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2610 on: December 10, 2017, 09:54:02 AM »
We have been told clearly by both investigations taht the mCCanns are not suspects...combined with my opinion that there is no real evidence against them and that theya re not being investigated makes it reasonable to conclude they are not suspects
« Last Edit: December 10, 2017, 10:06:42 AM by slartibartfast »

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2611 on: December 10, 2017, 09:55:02 AM »

Yet they can't find an abductor, and you can't find what doesn't exist.

A.I.M.H.O. naturally.

you have already said that this morning and i replied that just because you cannot find something does not mean it does not exist

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2612 on: December 10, 2017, 09:56:25 AM »
im off to the park with the dog now...will leave you to it

Offline barrier

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2613 on: December 10, 2017, 09:59:01 AM »
im off to the park with the dog now...will leave you to it

That'll be the last thing you'd do in this part of the world with the weather as it is.
Now that is off topic.

 (&^&
This is my own private domicile and I shall not be harassed, biatch:Jesse Pinkman Character.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2614 on: December 10, 2017, 10:09:19 AM »
you have already said that this morning and i replied that just because you cannot find something does not mean it does not exist

As with accidental death and the walking out scenario.

Offline Benice

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2615 on: December 10, 2017, 10:14:21 AM »
You back the Mccanns 100%.

The Mccanns have a vested interest in attacking the PJ. Not that has done them any good.

I have never seen you mention the 'poor' behaviour of other police forces apart from where it is brought up by others.

As to not answering questions,  you should not preach to others.

There is a simple solution, of course, don't respond to my posts, and I won't respond to yours.

A.I.M.H.O. of course.

You seem to think that people back the McCanns because they 'like' the  McCanns, which is a ridiculous claim for anyone to make imo.

I do not know the McCanns, neither could I say for sure whether I would like them if I did meet them.     It is their INNOCENCE of the alleged crime of removing their dead daughters body from 5a and disposing of it which I back.    I came to that conclusion by studying the case and not because I like or dislike the McCanns.     The fact that you seem totally unable to grasp that concept is not my problem.
 
AIMHO
The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2616 on: December 10, 2017, 10:22:16 AM »
You seem to think that people back the McCanns because they 'like' the  McCanns, which is a ridiculous claim for anyone to make imo.

I do not know the McCanns, neither could I say for sure whether I would like them if I did meet them.     It is their INNOCENCE of the alleged crime of removing their dead daughters body from 5a and disposing of it which I back.    I came to that conclusion by studying the case and not because I like or dislike the McCanns.     The fact that you seem totally unable to grasp that concept is not my problem.
 
AIMHO

You do not know what happened there, do you.

It's your belief.

As to final paragraph, I too have studied the case, and see no evidence that an abduction took place, other than for the say so of the Mccanns.

...and they weren't there, when she disappeared.

The case is marked by a lack of evidence sufficient to prove any of the scenarios are true.

As to the 'fact' you state, that is your opinion, it doesn't mean I concur.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2017, 10:26:32 AM by stephen25000 »

Offline Eleanor

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2617 on: December 10, 2017, 10:34:37 AM »
You do not know what happened there, do you.

It's your belief.

As to final paragraph, I too have studied the case, and see no evidence that an abduction took place, other than for the say so of the Mccanns.

...and they weren't there, when she disappeared.

The case is marked by a lack of evidence sufficient to prove any of the scenarios are true.

As to the 'fact' you state, that is your opinion, it doesn't mean I concur.

This doesn't make sense.  You agree that The McCanns weren't there when Madeleine disappeared, so what do you think could have happened?

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2618 on: December 10, 2017, 10:35:57 AM »
This doesn't make sense.  You agree that The McCanns weren't there when Madeleine disappeared, so what do you think could have happened?

Yes it does.

None of the 3 scenarios requires the presence of the Mccanns in the apartment.

Offline Angelo222

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2619 on: December 10, 2017, 12:29:18 PM »
We have been told clearly by both investigations taht the mCCanns are not suspects...combined with my opinion that there is no real evidence against them and that theya re not being investigated makes it reasonable to conclude they are not suspects

You shouldn't believe anything a cop says publicly.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2017, 08:28:02 PM by John »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Angelo222

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2620 on: December 10, 2017, 12:32:19 PM »
As i have said the fact the police have said that they are not suspects must support their claim to innocence..imo

Works both ways, but the Portuguese Supreme Court tells us a different story and they are a higher authority than the Portuguese police.  It appears the jury are still out on the question of innocence.

eta some posters think that if they post the claim of innocence often enough that we might just believe them.   %77*
« Last Edit: December 10, 2017, 12:39:06 PM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2621 on: December 10, 2017, 01:09:29 PM »
Works both ways, but the Portuguese Supreme Court tells us a different story and they are a higher authority than the Portuguese police.  It appears the jury are still out on the question of innocence.

eta some posters think that if they post the claim of innocence often enough that we might just believe them.   %77*

You are 100% wrong..the SC made the point that the archiving report was not evidence of innocence....I believe they made the point that they were not there to rule on innoccence or guilt of the mccanns. The SC did not look at the evidence held by the police...the police are the ones best judged to deceide who and who is not a suspect as they have access to all the evidence and both police forces have stated the mccanns are NOT suspect

Offline Angelo222

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2622 on: December 10, 2017, 01:23:11 PM »
Everyone knows that cops never ever ever reveal the entire story.  The reason for this is because they are evidence gatherers, it is not within their brief to determine anyone innocent or guilty.  And that is why I accept the Portuguese SC ruling and not anything the police feel they are free to declare.
« Last Edit: December 10, 2017, 08:29:59 PM by John »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline pathfinder73

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2623 on: December 10, 2017, 01:31:12 PM »
The McCanns were not suspects in August 2007 when they clearly were. Here's a reminder:

Wednesday 8 August 2007 - McCanns officially NOT Suspects

João Carlos returned our car at lunchtime (albeit with a piece missing from the boot). He said that Neves and Encarnação were ready to see us later that afternoon.

If we’d wondered about the change of venue for our regular informal meeting, the reason for it soon became clear: this wasn’t our regular informal meeting. We were taken to an upstairs room at the police station where we were greeted by Luís Neves and Guilhermino Encarnação. Our interpreter this time was a police officer, not Proconsul Angela Morado, as was usually the case. The whole demeanour of Neves and Encarnação was different. They looked serious and cold. There had been a ‘shift’ in the investigation, they said. They had always been optimistic that Madeleine was alive, but now things had changed.

Gerry was then asked to leave the room. Now the sirens in my head were deafening. I was on my own and afraid. Please God, let my Madeleine be OK.
Tell us about that night, they said. Tell us everything that happened after the children went to bed. I gave them every detail I could remember, as I had before, but this time they responded by just staring at me and shaking their heads.

Neves stated bluntly that they didn’t believe my version of events.

On and on it went. They tried to convince me I’d had a blackout – a ‘loss of memory episode’, I think they called it. My denials, answers and pleas fell on deaf ears. This was their theory and they wanted to shoehorn me into it, end of story. At last they seemed to decide that the interview was over. They told me I could ring them any time, day or night, to give them the information they were waiting for.

Finally, Gerry tried to establish when – and if – we would be having another meeting with them. ‘The next time we meet it will be across the table.’ The message behind this rather Delphic statement was clear: there would be no more informal meetings.

« Last Edit: December 10, 2017, 08:30:39 PM by John »
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #2624 on: December 10, 2017, 01:46:44 PM »
The McCanns were not suspects in August 2007 when they clearly were. Here's a reminder:

Wednesday 8 August 2007 - McCanns officially NOT Suspects

João Carlos returned our car at lunchtime (albeit with a piece missing from the boot). He said that Neves and Encarnação were ready to see us later that afternoon.

If we’d wondered about the change of venue for our regular informal meeting, the reason for it soon became clear: this wasn’t our regular informal meeting. We were taken to an upstairs room at the police station where we were greeted by Luís Neves and Guilhermino Encarnação. Our interpreter this time was a police officer, not Proconsul Angela Morado, as was usually the case. The whole demeanour of Neves and Encarnação was different. They looked serious and cold. There had been a ‘shift’ in the investigation, they said. They had always been optimistic that Madeleine was alive, but now things had changed.

Gerry was then asked to leave the room. Now the sirens in my head were deafening. I was on my own and afraid. Please God, let my Madeleine be OK.
Tell us about that night, they said. Tell us everything that happened after the children went to bed. I gave them every detail I could remember, as I had before, but this time they responded by just staring at me and shaking their heads.

Neves stated bluntly that they didn’t believe my version of events.

On and on it went. They tried to convince me I’d had a blackout – a ‘loss of memory episode’, I think they called it. My denials, answers and pleas fell on deaf ears. This was their theory and they wanted to shoehorn me into it, end of story. At last they seemed to decide that the interview was over. They told me I could ring them any time, day or night, to give them the information they were waiting for.

Finally, Gerry tried to establish when – and if – we would be having another meeting with them. ‘The next time we meet it will be across the table.’ The message behind this rather Delphic statement was clear: there would be no more informal meetings.

The mcCanns were not suspects until new evidence arose..

We have been told by both police forces taht teh mccanns are not suspects...of course IF new evidence arises this could change...I just dont see that is like;y do you..
« Last Edit: December 10, 2017, 08:31:41 PM by John »