Author Topic: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.  (Read 299506 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline xtina

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #90 on: January 31, 2017, 07:26:52 PM »
Now, funnily enough that thought had already crossed my mind.  What a thoroughly magnanimous gesture that would be, and one which would totally redeem him in my eyes (assuming it wasn't just a sarky fiver he bunged in).


zilch is more appropriate .....

why would he donate .........when thy used it to destroy him ....and make hi mm suffer...

fortunately ...it back fired

all brought on by themselves.....they gave it publicity money could not buy
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #91 on: January 31, 2017, 07:27:46 PM »

zilch is more appropriate .....

why would he donate .........when thy used it to destroy him ....and make hi mm suffer...

fortunately ...it back fired

all brought on by themselves.....they gave it publicity money could not buy
There you go then - they did him an enormous favour, he should be grateful.

Offline xtina

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #92 on: January 31, 2017, 07:29:07 PM »
Who says it's the truth

who says its a lie
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #93 on: January 31, 2017, 07:30:12 PM »
who says its a lie

You said it's the truth
You don't know that

Offline Angelo222

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #94 on: January 31, 2017, 07:30:39 PM »
He didn't understand the forensic evidence
Imo his book was rubbish as was most of what he has said since
Maddie did not fall off the sofa and die

Do you mean that which the FSS told him initially or the revised report?
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: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #95 on: January 31, 2017, 07:32:38 PM »
Do you mean that which the FSS told him initially or the revised report?
He doesn't speak English
There's no proof of a first report

Offline Angelo222

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #96 on: January 31, 2017, 07:33:11 PM »

why..........they tried to destroy him .......but truth always prevails.........

like the truth of the lie

They certainly did.  First with Metedo and that idiot lawyer who see things in dreams and then in court.
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Angelo222

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #97 on: January 31, 2017, 07:34:24 PM »
He doesn't speak English
There's no proof of a first report

Point being Amaral knows much more than any of us about the case and now he has been vindicated yet again.
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: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #98 on: January 31, 2017, 07:37:37 PM »
Point being Amaral knows much more than any of us about the case and now he has been vindicated yet again.

I dont believe he does....i think hes a very poor cop who got a lot wrong...and a convicted liar too

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #99 on: January 31, 2017, 07:49:04 PM »
who says its a lie


Blood markers on the wall behind the sofa
Other than her sleep problems, it is possible that Madeleine suffered from an illness, a hypothesis that was never confirmed. Immediately after the discovery of traces of blood in the apartment, the mother, in the course of an interview with a Portuguese magazine, revealed that Madeleine had a nose bleed. But the bleeding could be associated with certain pathologies.



that is a blatant lie from his book.......those marks were never identified as blood

Offline xtina

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #100 on: January 31, 2017, 07:53:20 PM »
You said it's the truth
You don't know that


whatever davel .............you don't know it isn't do you
Always listen to both sides of the story before you judge.

The first storyteller you will always find has modified the story, for there benefit BE WISE.

Offline Admin

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #101 on: January 31, 2017, 07:54:26 PM »
Posters are reminded to keep comments convivial at all times.

Admin

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #102 on: January 31, 2017, 07:54:33 PM »

whatever davel .............you don't know it isn't do you

if you dont know its the truth you cant claim it is the truth

Offline G-Unit

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #103 on: January 31, 2017, 08:27:29 PM »
What a strange headline, considering they already have.

Portugal Supreme Court rules McCanns cannot sue detective for libel over The Truth of the Lie book
http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/the-lad-bible-seeks-40-more-uk-staff-in-recruitment-drive-ahead-of-global-expansion/
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 Miss Taken Identity

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #104 on: January 31, 2017, 08:37:06 PM »
Ypu have seen the cite showing the source of that theory, why do you continue to perpetuate the myth?

Indeed!  his theory...no more no less credable than abduction through a small window n the space pf 5 minutes?... It seems a bit strange that Alfie was asking everyone about their theories in an other thread... to the point of goading one member. So theories are not theories unless they are true... oh spinning heads in different directions here... wax on was off!

But anyway, I have an idea  theory...I can't prove it though...hmmm
'Never underestimate the power of stupid people'... George Carlin