"We must reconstruct Maddie’s fateful night" says former Portuguese police chief.

[G-Unit]

false.. I have not repeatedly claimed they have been investigated...I have repeatedly claimed they have been interviewed...posters have repeatedly claimed as there is no evidence they have been interviewed ..it is clear they have been interviewed

Thank you. Can we assume that you now accept there's no evidence that OG have investigated the McCanns and ruled them out?

[slartibartfast]

so now you are asking for not just evidence...but evidence that proves the interviews took place.....moving goalpost alert...

More personal criticism from you re my debating style....because you are losing the argument..IMO..

you ask for evidence. the portugues have a quaint evidence rule...the rule of common experience....interviews proved by the evidence of common experience

Mod: please stop abusing the mods.

[Mr Gray]

Mod: please stop abusing the mods.

it was the mod who started the personal criticism referring to my education on logic... making derogatory comments on my debating style...those are ad hom attacks

[Mr Gray]

Thank you. Can we assume that you now accept there's no evidence that OG have investigated the McCanns and ruled them out?

i would say there is evidence they have  been interviewed at length and we have been told they are not suspects

[G-Unit]

i would say there is evidence they have  been interviewed at length and we have been told they are not suspects

Why are you refusing to answer my question? Is that because there is a huge difference between being interviewed and being investigated?

'Interviews' can include informal chats, formal statements or interrogations under caution. Please could you specify which kind of 'interviews' you believe OG carried out upon the McCanns?

[Mr Gray]

Why are you refusing to answer my question? Is that because there is a huge difference between being interviewed and being investigated?

'Interviews' can include informal chats, formal statements or interrogations under caution. Please could you specify which kind of 'interviews' you believe OG carried out upon the McCanns?

I would say that they were formal interviews ...recorded....possibly under caution but not necessarily. I would then say..imo.. that SY found nothing in those statements to suspect the Mccanns and therefore declared that they were not suspects....that seems perfectly logical to me..but unfortunately anathema to others on this forum

[ShiningInLuz]

so now you are asking for not just evidence...but evidence that proves the interviews took place.....moving goalpost alert...

More personal criticism from you re my debating style....because you are losing the argument..IMO..

you ask for evidence. the portugues have a quaint evidence rule...the rule of common experience....interviews proved by the evidence of common experience

My mistake on the use of the word 'prove'.  I thought I had changed it to 'support', but it looks like I didn't, so mea culpa, but I'm not interested in moving the goalposts.

So here we go yet again.  Do you have any evidence to support the idea that the McCanns were interviewed first, and that the remit was established subsequent to the interviews?

It would make a massive difference in interpretation of what is going on.  Therefore it is very, very important.

Any evidence?  Anything?

Or are we simply expected to accept your speculation as fact?

If there is no evidence of such a process, it places the McCanns in the firing line if OG halts without a resolution, so this is no small matter.

So, is there any EVIDENCE?

[Mr Gray]

My mistake on the use of the word 'prove'.  I thought I had changed it to 'support', but it looks like I didn't, so mea culpa, but I'm not interested in moving the goalposts.

So here we go yet again.  Do you have any evidence to support the idea that the McCanns were interviewed first, and that the remit was established subsequent to the interviews?

It would make a massive difference in interpretation of what is going on.  Therefore it is very, very important.

Any evidence?  Anything?

Or are we simply expected to accept your speculation as fact?

If there is no evidence of such a process, it places the McCanns in the firing line if OG halts without a resolution, so this is no small matter.

So, is there any EVIDENCE?

I have answered the question several times
It is obvious to me and several other posters.....including two mods... That the McCanns have been interviewed

I think it's about time you accepted reality
Again..... Do you think it is possible that SY have not questioned the last two known people to see Maddie alive
Perhaps you could answer that question

[stephen25000]

I have answered the question several times
It is obvious to me and several other posters.....including two mods... That the McCanns have been interviewed

I think it's about time you accepted reality
Again..... Do you think it is possible that SY have not questioned the last two known people to see Maddie alive
Perhaps you could answer that question

Supposition is irrelevant.

You have the evidence to back up your assertions or you don't.

[Mr Gray]

Supposition is irrelevant.

You have the evidence to back up your assertions or you don't.

Depends whether you understand the meaning of the word evidence or like sil mean proof

[Mr Gray]

Evidence....

 one or more reasons for believing that something is or is not true: according to the cambridge dictionary..

First reason...when someone goes missing it is standard police practice to interview the last person to see the missing person...in fact I doubt if there is a case in the UK where this was not done

Second reason.....statement from the lead officer that the McCanns are not suspects...what reason would he have for saying this...

as I said...not proof...but evidence

[Brietta]

Why would there be inconsistencies at this stage when interviewed or spoken to about the abduction storyline? They have had 9 years to get their stories straight 

They haven't really though have they?  Had nine years I mean.  Everything they have said officially is on file anything they have said in interview is on the record.  In effect their version of events hasn't changed in nine years.

Now think about the people who really have had nine years to get their story straight.

[ShiningInLuz]

I have answered the question several times
It is obvious to me and several other posters.....including two mods... That the McCanns have been interviewed

I think it's about time you accepted reality
Again..... Do you think it is possible that SY have not questioned the last two known people to see Maddie alive
Perhaps you could answer that question

In answer to your question, yes, I think it is possible.  I think it is possible, because as I have stated on numerous occasions, I have no evidence to make a definitive decision.

It is not a case of which mods support what.  In the absence of you naming two mods who agree with your speculation, I have to make assumptions.

I would assume one is Brietta, who has the decency to make clear that the view is based on opinion, not on actual evidence.  I have no axe to grind with an opinion expressed by Brietta.  None whatsoever.  Brietta has conformed to the forum norms, and is fully entitled to an opinion, when it is made clear it is an opinion, and Brietta has consistently done that.

Here is where I do have an axe to grind.  When I first started reading this forum, I found it extremely difficult to separate fact (supported by evidence) from opinion (not supported by evidence).  It took me hours and hours to separate the two on many an occasion.

I don't see why anyone reading this exchange should be subjected to the same torture.

So let me make a simple, clear statement.

There is no evidence to support the idea that the McCanns were interviewed before the remit of OG (abduction) was established.

Any evidence on this?

[Brietta]

Supposition is irrelevant.

You have the evidence to back up your assertions or you don't.

It truly matters not one jot what we think.

By recommending the reopening of the investigation into Madeleine's case by Scotland Yard acknowledged that not only was the end game to discover what had become of Madeleine and hopefully recover her but that a court case resulting in prosecution was possible.

Murder detectives would be very well aware of what was required to build their case and Scotland Yard would not miss out an elementary part of that procedure by a failure to interrogate the parents of a missing child and keep a record of that and every other step along the way.

[Angelo222]

Evidence....

 one or more reasons for believing that something is or is not true: according to the cambridge dictionary..

First reason...when someone goes missing it is standard police practice to interview the last person to see the missing person...in fact I doubt if there is a case in the UK where this was not done

Second reason.....statement from the lead officer that the McCanns are not suspects...what reason would he have for saying this...

as I said...not proof...but evidence

Redwood is history.  His investigation was a sham.