« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 38 39 [40] 41 42 ... 143   Go Down

Author Topic: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.  (Read 270122 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #585 on: February 03, 2017, 08:46:13 PM »
True or an attempt to get some bids coming in? Did the friend really say that about Lorraine? Do any of them engage brain before opening mouth?
Logged
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 Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #586 on: February 03, 2017, 08:48:36 PM »
Quote from: G-Unit on February 03, 2017, 08:46:13 PM
True or an attempt to get some bids coming in? Did the friend really say that about Lorraine? Do any of them engage brain before opening mouth?

it is obvious this would happen....I told you they would come back stronger....they have been kicked in the teeth and they have  a lot of ammunition...it is going to be wonderful
Logged

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #587 on: February 03, 2017, 08:49:52 PM »
I think we will see leonora Ciprianos face in the paper with amarals role highlighted
Logged

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #588 on: February 03, 2017, 08:50:22 PM »
Quote from: G-Unit on February 03, 2017, 08:46:13 PM
True or an attempt to get some bids coming in? Did the friend really say that about Lorraine? Do any of them engage brain before opening mouth?

desperation
Logged

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #589 on: February 03, 2017, 09:02:35 PM »
Following the Supreme Court decision, I have allowed more leeway than usual to members to express their sentiment.

But I have had enough.

It looks like a Friday night barney is kicking off.

Please don't waste your time.  Or mine.

I have had enough.
Logged
What's up, old man?

Offline Brietta

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #590 on: February 03, 2017, 09:05:48 PM »
Quote from: ShiningInLuz on February 03, 2017, 09:02:35 PM
Following the Supreme Court decision, I have allowed more leeway than usual to members to express their sentiment.

But I have had enough.

It looks like a Friday night barney is kicking off.

Please don't waste your time.  Or mine.

I have had enough.

I don't think some members had thought it through to when one door closes ... another one opens ... with the subsequent ramifications Davel pointed out
Logged
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline jassi

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #591 on: February 03, 2017, 09:08:04 PM »
Time will tell.  All else is mere fantasy
Logged
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 G-Unit

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #592 on: February 03, 2017, 09:09:25 PM »
Quote from: davel on February 03, 2017, 08:48:36 PM
it is obvious this would happen....I told you they would come back stronger....they have been kicked in the teeth and they have  a lot of ammunition...it is going to be wonderful

Do you really think that bragging about a bidding war for 10th Anniversary interviews is admirable behaviour? They have frittered away the money donated to them on dodgy detectives and doomed libel trials, but never mind, there's plenty more where that came from?

My prediction is that Kate McCann will speak to Lorraine Kelly. After all, she doesn't ask searching questions, even if ITV don't pay much. To get a big payout she would probably have to face someone who would want more answers.









Logged
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

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #593 on: February 03, 2017, 09:10:10 PM »
The ramifications for the mccann's have barely begun.
Logged

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #594 on: February 03, 2017, 09:30:01 PM »
Quote from: ferryman on February 03, 2017, 08:36:59 PM
And the penultimate sentence of Mark Harrison's final report:

How on earth was Amaral allowed to get away with that?

Interesting wording, "if death has occurred".
Logged
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #595 on: February 03, 2017, 09:33:01 PM »
Quote from: Slartibartfast on February 03, 2017, 09:30:01 PM
Interesting wording, "if death has occurred".

"Interesting" in what sense?

Harrison was tasked by the PJ to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered and worked to it.
Logged

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #596 on: February 03, 2017, 09:38:16 PM »
Quote from: davel on February 03, 2017, 08:50:22 PM
desperation

I wondered what you were doing.
Logged
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #597 on: February 03, 2017, 09:39:08 PM »
Quote from: Brietta on February 03, 2017, 09:05:48 PM
I don't think some members had thought it through to when one door closes ... another one opens ... with the subsequent ramifications Davel pointed out


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SDCOOI_mdQ
Logged
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #598 on: February 03, 2017, 09:40:54 PM »
Quote from: ferryman on February 03, 2017, 09:33:01 PM
"Interesting" in what sense?

Harrison was tasked by the PJ to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered and worked to it.

You wonder why he didn't say "if M had been murdered" in that case.
Logged
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Supreme Court rules against the McCanns in damages case.
« Reply #599 on: February 03, 2017, 09:42:49 PM »
Quote from: Slartibartfast on February 03, 2017, 09:40:54 PM
You wonder why he didn't say "if M had been murdered" in that case.

He made explicitly plain that he was tasked to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 38 39 [40] 41 42 ... 143   Go Up
« previous next »