CMTV Gonçalo Amaral - O Enigma - with English subtitles

[Alice Purjorick]

of course there is evidence of abduction if you actually understand what the word evidence means

OK so if we concentrate on the salient points we have two types of evidence:
Direct Evidence which proves or disproves a fact directly; commonly  eye witness testimony, where a witness describes exactly what  he/she saw, heard, or experienced.
Indirect or Circumstantial Evidence which is not direct evidence from a witness who saw or heard something. Indirect evidence is a fact that can be used to infer another fact.
Indirect evidence implies something occurred but doesn't directly prove it; proof of one or more facts from which one can find another fact; proof of a chain of facts and circumstances indicating an event happened or did not happen.

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/c342.htm
http://www.rotlaw.com/legal-library/what-is-circumstantial-evidence-what-is-direct-evidence/
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/direct+evidence

 

[stephen25000]

But they have determined that her parents played no part in her disappearance.

The crime, if any, remains unknown.

Never forget that.

[pathfinder73]

Kate McCann's response the this has always interested me. Rather than mentioning anything which could eliminate them, she refers to how he had seen how grief-stricken they were shortly after the disappearance.  Does she really think that being grief-stricken is evidence?

"I believe people are inherently good"  KM.

She believes in the high emotional approach to connect with people and win them over. The police won't fall for it but others will. It's also a good diverting tactic from the issue at hand.

"All of this the assistant chief constable for Leicestershire made clear in a statement written for the court. He had come out to Portugal shortly after Madeleine’s abduction and had seen us at our most grief-stricken, and yet he felt able to comment of Gerry and me in this statement:

‘While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.’

We were completely staggered. No evidence to eliminate us? Whether or not it was his intention, that line stuck in our heads as ‘guilty until proven innocent’. KM

[Erngath]

The crime, if any, remains unknown.

Never forget that.

Not according to OG.
Never forget that.

[pathfinder73]

But they do not seem to suspect Madeleine's parents of being involved in her disappearance

If they were investigating them, do you honestly believe they would tell us? It would be extremely naive to think so.

[Mr Gray]

OK so if we concentrate on the salient points we have two types of evidence:
Direct Evidence which proves or disproves a fact directly; commonly  eye witness testimony, where a witness describes exactly what  he/she saw, heard, or experienced.
Indirect or Circumstantial Evidence which is not direct evidence from a witness who saw or heard something. Indirect evidence is a fact that can be used to infer another fact.
Indirect evidence implies something occurred but doesn't directly prove it; proof of one or more facts from which one can find another fact; proof of a chain of facts and circumstances indicating an event happened or did not happen.

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/c342.htm
http://www.rotlaw.com/legal-library/what-is-circumstantial-evidence-what-is-direct-evidence/
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/direct+evidence

 

ok

[stephen25000]

Not according to OG.
Never forget that.

Do you actually know what members of OG think at this current stage of the case ?

[Erngath]

You have no idea what  happened.

You have your opinion, like we all do.

Don't forget that.

Neither do you.

I do.

I never do.

[Mr Gray]

We already know that.

We also know he referred to several hypotheses.

Basically, IMHO , he hasn't got a clue.

this is what he said......

this is a young girl who is missing and at the
heart of this has been an abduction


so you know better than this seniorofficer who has had access to all the material

[Alice Purjorick]

So do you believe they are investigating the parents and are just playing "games" when they say that the parents are not suspects and you obviously do not go along with the theory that the parents are "off limits"
it's all so confusing when posting to sceptics.

Nah! Two rules
Rule One: Loads of supporters with but one belief.
Rule Two: Loads of sceptics with loads of theories mostly differing but with a common belief that the belief in Rule One is erroneous.
Easy old stuff 

[Mr Gray]

They 'had a look at all the material' and 'were happy'. They're easily pleased is all I can say.

A C Rowley;
the involvement of the parents, that was dealt with at the time by the  original investigation by the Portuguese. We had a look at all the material and we are happy that was all dealt with and there is no reason whatsoever to reopen that

without knowing exactly how he reached that decision you are not in  position to decide if he is right or wrong

[John]

thats your opinion....I think hes absolutely bang on....without knowing how he has reached that decision you are not in  a position to make a valid judgement on what he says

Well you would say that but then you are a civilian with no police background.

[Mr Gray]

None of these people have a baldy clue what happened to Madeleine McCann so please stop posting comments as if they do.

Madeleine McCann...10 years on...fate unknown.

yet we have  a video with amaral staing his conclusions on evidence which is blatantly inncorrect that you have described as a fair summation...or something similar

[Erngath]

Nah! Two rules
Rule One: Loads of supporters with but one belief.
Rule Two: Loads of sceptics with loads of theories mostly differing but with a common belief that the belief in Rule One is erroneous.
Easy old stuff 

I will begin with a phrase I loathe
At this moment in time OG seem to be favouring Rule one  but hey tick tock  and all that.

[Mr Gray]

I think he playing to the converted for obvious reasons.

you can think what you like but that doesnt make you right.....particularly after your summation of amarals appalling effort.....

A reasonable attempt by CMTV to review the events surrounding the disappearance ten years on


it is anything but reasonable