Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"

[Alfie]

...and you can't disprove it.

However, the good news is, I already know some who have.

Meanwhile, do you believe all members of SY or any other police force support the McCann's ?

I notice, yet again you don't answer certain questions.

It is not the job of SY to support or attack the McCanns, their job is to investigate the crime of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, objectively, with a clear head and without prejudice or bias.  If some members choose to donate to the fund of a man who clearly IS biased against the McCanns then that is for them and their consciences, and may not necessarily reflect their views on whether or not the McCanns dunnit.

[stephen25000]

It is not the job of SY to support or attack the McCanns, their job is to investigate the crime of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, objectively, with a clear head and without prejudice or bias.  If some members choose to donate to the fund of a man who clearly IS biased against the McCanns then that is for them and their consciences, and may not necessarily reflect their views on whether or not the McCanns dunnit.

Biased against the Mccanns ?

Really ?

and what do you think the mccanns are, as regards him, or other officers of the PJ.

Who said the McCann's dunnit ?

By the way, a proper investigation would go through all possible scenarios, and not just choose one.

[Mr Gray]

...and you can't disprove it.

However, the good news is, I already know some who have.

Meanwhile, do you believe all members of SY or any other police force support the McCann's ?

I notice, yet again you don't answer certain questions.

I'm sure there are police who don't believe the McCanns
It would be very odd if there were not
Some police are not too bright
It's of no importance whatsoever

[stephen25000]

So in davel-land, police who believe the McCann's are intelligent, those who don't aren't.

Do you have any idea of how pathetic that is ?

[Mr Gray]

So in davel-land, police who believe the McCann's are intelligent, those who don't aren't.

Do you have any idea of how pathetic that is ?

What I have posted is absolutely true

[stephen25000]

What I have posted is absolutely true

Oh dear.

[Alfie]

Biased against the Mccanns ?

Really ?

and what do you think the mccanns are, as regards him, or other officers of the PJ.

Who said the McCann's dunnit ?

By the way, a proper investigation would go through all possible scenarios, and not just choose one.

Of course Amaral is biased against the McCanns and I have no doubt whatsoever that they in turn have an extremely negative view of him.   As for your final comment I never said anyone said the McCanns dunnit, I merely stated that supporting Amaral's Fund as these coppers are alleged to have done does not necessarily mean they are of the view that the McCanns  are guilty of hiding their child's body - do you not agree? 

[Mr Gray]

Oh dear.

Then tell me what in my post is not true

[ferryman]

In partial defence (of those police who don't believe the McCanns) there may be some who have had no direct involvement in the case, have not (closely) followed the investigation and just have a general impression (from skim-reading headlines or articles) that there may be something untoward concerning the McCanns or their friends. 

Then there might be others like PeterMac.

Every profession has its share of bad apples.

[stephen25000]

In partial defence (of those police who don't believe the McCanns) there may be some who have had no direct involvement in the case, have not (closely) followed the investigation and just have a general impression (from skim-reading headlines or articles) that there may be something untoward concerning the McCanns or their friends. 

Then there might be others like PeterMac.

Every profession has its share of bad apples.

Utter rubbish.

So you and davel, are of the same school of thought.

[faithlilly]

Of course Amaral is biased against the McCanns and I have no doubt whatsoever that they in turn have an extremely negative view of him.   As for your final comment I never said anyone said the McCanns dunnit, I merely stated that supporting Amaral's Fund as these coppers are alleged to have done does not necessarily mean they are of the view that the McCanns  are guilty of hiding their child's body - do you not agree?

Do you think Amaral was biased towards the McCanns while he was coordinator and if so why? Wasn't he simply like SY investigating are at the moment and interpreting the evidence as it presented itself ? Further if such a bias existed why make Murat an arguido if he was totally focused on the McCanns as perpetrators ?

[ShiningInLuz]

Of course the evidence that came into their possession never changed.    IIRC SY had over 40,000 documents - from various sources -  the contents of which remained the same whatever the remit was.  SY's intention was to go back to the beginning.  AFAIK it was not in their remit to exclude or ignore information provided by the McCanns and their friends from their investigations.   

The idea that SY could carry out a proper investigation whilst excluding the input of the McCanns and their friends is totally unrealistic IMO.  (if that is what you are claiming).

My question remains the same.    What would SY do with information that may have emerged from those 40,000 plus documents which clearly suggested that the McCanns were implicated in their daughter's disappearance?

The idea that because of their remit they would not follow up such evidence is preposterous IMO - unless one believes they were part of a massive conspiracy to protect the McCanns at all costs - which is even more preposterous IMO.

The information does not remain the same if the remit is different.  If the remit of a project was to build a channel tunnel you would not get a channel bridge, because a channel bridge would not be considered.

OG has quite clearly not considered everything, as proved by its actions.  To claim that the remit is meaningless is nonsensical.

[Mr Gray]

The information does not remain the same if the remit is different.  If the remit of a project was to build a channel tunnel you would not get a channel bridge, because a channel bridge would not be considered.

OG has quite clearly not considered everything, as proved by its actions.  To claim that the remit is meaningless is nonsensical.

Your analogy is rather stupid
Your claim tha OG has not considered everything is your opinion and wrong IMO
As John has pointed out the remit is not set in stone and the direction of the investigation can change at any time
Are you suggesting OG is only considering abduction as per remit and not death in the apartment.. outside of the remit

[G-Unit]

I'm sure there are police who don't believe the McCanns
It would be very odd if there were not
Some police are not too bright
It's of no importance whatsoever

What policemen do have is vast experience of dealing with people who are being deceptive. As a result they rely on evidence, not on what people tell them. There is no evidence that Madeleine McCann was abducted, despite her parent's insistence that she was. Any policeman who accepts the word of a civilian isn't doing his job.

I watch police programmes and everyone they stop for having no insurance protests that they do have it. The police never accept the word of these people, they check. Most of them don't have insurance.

[Mr Gray]

What policemen do have is vast experience of dealing with people who are being deceptive. As a result they rely on evidence, not on what people tell them. There is no evidence that Madeleine McCann was abducted, despite her parent's insistence that she was. Any policeman who accepts the word of a civilian isn't doing his job.

I watch police programmes and everyone they stop for having no insurance protests that they do have it. The police never accept the word of these people, they check. Most of them don't have insurance.

Have the police accepted the word of Ben Needhams grandmother
Let's keep it simple and start there
The answer is simple
Yes or no