Was the naming of the arguidos an unnecessary and dumb move?

[Mr Gray]

I'm afraid that Amaral has been privy to a lot more evidence than any of us could possibly gleam from a load of documents, his interpretation of that evidence is a matter for him.

That may be your opinion
I don't agree at all

[G-Unit]

What a pity that he misunderstood so many things and used stuff that wasn't really evidence at all.

And that he had such a vivid imagination

I think there are people whose imaginations far outstrip Amaral's. 

[Brietta]

EVERYONE is posting Off Topic on this thread **including John**.  Can we now make the effort to get back on track ... there must be plenty still to be said about 'arguidos' ... let's make the effort.

[stephen25000]

EVERYONE is posting Off Topic on this thread **including John**.  Can we now make the effort to get back on track ... there must be plenty still to be said about 'arguidos' ... let's make the effort.

Agreed Bietta.

[Eleanor]

Agreed Bietta.

Me too. 

[Angelo222]

EVERYONE is posting Off Topic on this thread **including John**.  Can we now make the effort to get back on track ... there must be plenty still to be said about 'arguidos' ... let's make the effort.

The pathetic attempts to incriminate Portuguese locals in a Maddie abduction scenario are shameful imo.

[Angelo222]

That may be your opinion
I don't agree at all

You never do but that is to be expected.  Amaral was head honcho on the ground, he was privy to everything and that is a fact despite your crude attempts to deny it.

[Mr Gray]

You never do but that is to be expected.  Amaral was head honcho on the ground, he was privy to everything and that is a fact despite your crude attempts to deny it.

You don't seem to understand
I'm sure he was privy to all the facts
I've never denied anything so you are wrong on that score

John and you are making an assumption that there is evidence we have not heard of that implicates the McCann's
That is pure speculation
I would say there is not
That's my opinion

[Eleanor]

You don't seem to understand
I'm sure he was privy to all the facts
I've never denied anything so you are wrong on that score

John and you are making an assumption that there is evidence we have not heard of that implicates the McCann's
That is pure speculation
I would say there is not
That's my opinion

And mine as well.  In no way would Amaral have been capable of keeping his mouth shut about something like that.

[Mr Gray]

The pathetic attempts to incriminate Portuguese locals in a Maddie abduction scenario are shameful imo.

Maddie may well have been abducted by a local
That is a fact and nothing wrong with saying so

[stephen25000]

Maddie may well have been abducted by a local
That is a fact and nothing wrong with saying so

Abduction is a theory, as are the others.

No firm evidence for any of them.

[Robittybob1]

The pathetic attempts to incriminate Portuguese locals in a Maddie abduction scenario are shameful imo.

Not if they were burglars operating in the area that night.

[Robittybob1]

Abduction is a theory, as are the others.

No firm evidence for any of them.

How do you justify that post under the heading "Was the naming of the arguidos an unnecessary and dumb move?"?

[stephen25000]

How do you justify that post under the heading "Was the naming of the arguidos an unnecessary and dumb move?"?

Are you kidding Rob ?

The arguidos were possible suspects in the hypothetical 'abduction.

The last 4 have been cleared.

Did you watch the BBC program where some were questioned ?

[Eleanor]

Are you kidding Rob ?

The arguidos were possible suspects in the hypothetical 'abduction.

The last 4 have been cleared.

Did you watch the BBC program where some were questioned ?

If The McCanns haven't been cleared then how do we know that these four have been cleared?