The McCanns will have been interviewed by Operation Grange.

[Mr Gray]

I've got a chair.  In fact I get to pick from several chairs.  We have many.

Kindly produce your evidence.

Your opinion is fine, as your opinion.

Here's my opinion.  I would not support your opinion in a criminal court, due to the lack of evidence.  I would not support your opinion in a civil court, due to the lack of evidence.

Evidence?

I have produced my evidence...

[ShiningInLuz]

I have produced my evidence...

I've got a chair.

Evidence?  Or none?

[Mr Gray]

I've got a chair.

Evidence?  Or none?

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word evidence..are you confusing it with proof.....I have quoted a definition of evidence and the evidence that supports my contention

[ShiningInLuz]

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word evidence..are you confusing it with proof.....I have quoted a definition of evidence and the evidence that supports my contention

Would that be the mysterious non-appearing evidence you continually refer to?  I'm still waiting.

[G-Unit]

you have said i have offered not one iota of evidence.....



Reply #416 on: May 06, 2016, 05:46:47 PM »
QuoteModify
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


You need a chair

Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion. This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence

If OG began by investigating a disappearance they would immediately focus on the last people to see Madeleine. If they began at a later stage; 'the abduction' the starting point could have been different. It all depends on how the remit was interpreted.

If OG began with 'the abduction' then the parents and their friends would obviously not be suspects or persons of interest.

Your first 'reason' is based upon your opinion that OG followed 'standard police practice', but you have no evidence that they did so. Your second 'reason' is based upon your opinion why DCI Redwood made a certain statement. You have no evidence as to why he said it though.

[Mr Gray]

Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion. This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence

If OG began by investigating a disappearance they would immediately focus on the last people to see Madeleine. If they began at a later stage; 'the abduction' the starting point could have been different. It all depends on how the remit was interpreted.

If OG began with 'the abduction' then the parents and their friends would obviously not be suspects or persons of interest.

Your first 'reason' is based upon your opinion that OG followed 'standard police practice', but you have no evidence that they did so. Your second 'reason' is based upon your opinion why DCI Redwood made a certain statement. You have no evidence as to why he said it though.

are you saying my statements do not satisfy the definition of evidence...they do

[mercury]

Evidence for what? That the last people to see a missing person are police interviewed? No evidence or definitions of words required for this basic. But it is not an evidenced FACT in this case at this time and in the circumstances. IM sure SIL has two very strong legs.

Bump

Your opinions are not evidenced facts, therefore just opinions.

There is no evidence that SY HAVE interviewed the mccanns

[Mr Gray]

Bump

Your opinions are not evidenced facts, therefore just opinions.

There is no evidence that SY HAVE interviewed the mccanns

there is evidence..but you don't understand what evidence is

[ShiningInLuz]

A number of people on this thread, myself included, have said that by standard practice, or good procedure, it is that the McCanns should have been re-interviewed by OG back near the start.

What we have is incredibly weak evidence that they have.  On a 0 to 10 scale, it does not manage to muster a one.

[G-Unit]

are you saying my statements do not satisfy the definition of evidence...they do

Only if you're right about OG investigating a disappearance rather than an abduction. 

[Mr Gray]

I am afraid dave, people don't believe you.

shows how poor their reasoning is

[Mr Gray]

I think the way moderating works, this will probably get deleted sooner rather than later, which I consider to be somewhat of a shame.

A number of people on this thread, myself included, have said that by standard practice, or good procedure, it is that the McCanns should have been re-interviewed by OG back near the start.

What we have is incredibly weak evidence that they have.  On a 0 to 10 scale, it does not manage to muster a one.

My chairs are fine.  My legs are fine.  My eyes are fine.  My credibility is doing OK, IMO.

Do you have evidence or is it your opinion?

so you admit there is evidence...weak but evidence...so tell me... what evidence are you referring to apart from the evidence i have posted

[pegasus]

Think about it, if later someone puts in this FOI request
"Did OG interview GM?"
OG would look very silly if they reply "actually no we didn't".

[ShiningInLuz]

so you admit there is evidence...weak but evidence...so tell me... what evidence are you referring to apart from the evidence i have posted

Given that you have not posted any evidence, it's not my task to scratch back through the whole thread.

Do you have any evidence?

[G-Unit]

Think about it, if later someone puts in this FOI request
"Did OG interview GM?"
OG would look very silly if they reply "actually no we didn't".

First you have to get them to answer, no mean feat in itself. Secondly it depends what the questioner means by 'interview' and what the Met mean by 'interview'. A face to face meeting can be described as an interview.