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

[Mr Gray]

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?

yes...as I have already stated. Again I think you are confusing evidence and proof.  You talk about facts versus opinion......these sorts of posts are rife on this board so perhaps we can see you taking some action...

you say there is no evidence that the mccanns were interviewed before the remit...that would suggest you know when the remit was drawn up...so when was it drawn up and what is your evidence for the date

[Mr Gray]

Redwood is history.  His investigation was a sham.

I think sil would take issue with that statement as it is opinion stated as fact.....and from a mod too

[Mr Gray]

So sil...what do you make of the statement ...quoting opinion as fact from the mod...angelo

[Angelo222]

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.

If they are so confident why thwart the reconstruction?

[Mr Gray]

If they are so confident why thwart the reconstruction?

because they did not trust the portuguese police,,,same reason they left portugal and hired an extradition lawyer...nothing odd

[Angelo222]

I think sil would take issue with that statement as it is opinion stated as fact.....and from a mod too

It is an observation based on the fact that he was unable to prove anything either way.

[Angelo222]

because they did not trust the portuguese police,,,same reason they left portugal and hired an extradition lawyer...nothing odd

Certainly the actions of someone with something to hide and unprecedented in the realms of such cases. 

Does anyone else know of a claimed child abduction case where the parents refuse to cooperate with police, are made official suspects, clear off the minute they get the chance, incorporate a limited company to collect funds, start a worldwide propaganda campaign and employ crooked private investigators?

The SY investigation has shadowed the original Portuguese enquiry all along and effectively arrived at the same conclusions.  Will we see arrests?

[ShiningInLuz]

yes...as I have already stated. Again I think you are confusing evidence and proof.  You talk about facts versus opinion......these sorts of posts are rife on this board so perhaps we can see you taking some action...

you say there is no evidence that the mccanns were interviewed before the remit...that would suggest you know when the remit was drawn up...so when was it drawn up and what is your evidence for the date

Waffle.

[Mr Gray]

Waffle.

Pathetic reply
The McCanns have been interviewed
It would be unheard of in the history of criminal investigations before them not to be

What evidence would you expect or accept

[stephen25000]

Pathetic reply
The McCanns have been interviewed
It would be unheard of in the history of criminal investigations before them not to be

What evidence would you expect or accept

Any.

[Mr Gray]

Any.

such as

[stephen25000]

Any evidence, not belief.

[Mr Gray]

Any evidence, not belief.

such as

[stephen25000]

So we are still waiting for evidence that the mccanns and associates were interviewed or investigated.

Noting other people who have been questioned/interviewed in the investigation have had their names in the press.

[G-Unit]

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

I can think of two.

1. They have been investigated and ruled out of any involvement in the disappearance.
2. OG's remit was to investigate an abduction, so the parents didn't need to be investigated.