Author Topic: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.  (Read 270018 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #255 on: February 01, 2017, 11:46:10 AM »
The McCann's obviously got some real bad legal advice and by all accounts paid handsomely for it.

Add that to the bad private detectives and you have one big sorry mess!

Perhaps they ignored it and went ahead anyway.
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline Eleanor

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #256 on: February 01, 2017, 12:05:15 PM »

I don't understand how anyone could admire such an odious little man who saw fit to personally profit from a missing child.

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #257 on: February 01, 2017, 12:06:50 PM »
No, I don't suppose you can.
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #258 on: February 01, 2017, 12:08:08 PM »
No, I don't suppose you can.

 to be  honest  jass  the mcanns   and  GA are old enough  to  fight their own battles  maddie  wasnt  though  was she??  and   thats  what    most people  dont like about the  mcanns they have made it all about themselves with a  after thought about maddie   

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #259 on: February 01, 2017, 12:10:00 PM »
I don't understand how anyone could admire such an odious little man who saw fit to personally profit from a missing child.

You view him as an kdious little man, some worse than that, others think he merely did his job.

Offline carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #260 on: February 01, 2017, 12:11:37 PM »
You view him as an kdious little man, some worse than that, others think he merely did his job.

which he  did  do 

Offline Eleanor

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #261 on: February 01, 2017, 12:13:14 PM »
You view him as an kdious little man, some worse than that, others think he merely did his job.

He didn't do it very well, did he.

Offline carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #262 on: February 01, 2017, 12:14:04 PM »
He didn't do it very well, did he.

either    did the mcanns  as  parents

Offline Eleanor

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #263 on: February 01, 2017, 12:15:28 PM »

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #264 on: February 01, 2017, 12:16:14 PM »

It is not the end of the road for the McCanns ... nor will it ever be until they find out what happened to Madeleine.

At the moment it matters not because the Policia Judiciaria and Scotland Yard are still looking for her and to find that out. 

If they are unsuccessful and one sincerely hopes that won't be the case, Madeleine's parents will be without the financial resources to keep their own enquiries open or divert the money to others.
Some will find contentment in that thought.

Depends who you mean by one.

You don't.  I don't.  Countless others here don't.

But, you know ......

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #265 on: February 01, 2017, 12:20:29 PM »
If SY, reputedly among the best, can't come up with the goods, what hope of success  has a tuppenny halfpenny private investigation?
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline carlymichelle

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #266 on: February 01, 2017, 12:28:13 PM »
If SY, reputedly among the best, can't come up with the goods, what hope of success  has a tuppenny halfpenny private investigation?

exactly   i think its time  that some people accept  it is over dont you??

Offline misty

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #267 on: February 01, 2017, 12:39:20 PM »
exactly   i think its time  that some people accept  it is over dont you??

It'll never be over until the truth is uncovered but those with no hearts could never understand that.

I see the victor has yet to issue a public statement of gratitude.

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #268 on: February 01, 2017, 12:41:56 PM »
It'll never be over until the truth is uncovered but those with no hearts could never understand that.

I see the victor has yet to issue a public statement of gratitude.

So unlikely ever to be over.

I'm sure those who subscribed to the go fund found the result thanks enough.  8)--))
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline Benice

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #269 on: February 01, 2017, 12:42:35 PM »
to be  honest  jass  the mcanns   and  GA are old enough  to  fight their own battles maddie  wasnt  though  was she??  and   thats  what    most people  dont like about the  mcanns they have made it all about themselves with a  after thought about maddie

The whole point of her parents bringing the case was to fight for and protect Madeleine's RIGHT to be regarded as a missing child and not to be dismissed and forgotten as a dead one - which is what Amaral was claiming.

The fact that purely out of an intense dislike for the parents, there are those who actually want to take it out on a little girl by supporting the removal  of Madeleine's right to be searched for -  just for the pleasure of spiting her mum and dad -  is both sad and disturbing IMO.

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