The Smithman e-fits

[slartibartfast]

Of course the mccanns fought to get the investigation  reopened... But new evidence had to be found first... It couldn't just be reopened.  That's why they asked for a review  which led to the investigation being  reopened.
So as Rob questions... Why would they do this if they we're involved... It's another piece of  evidence which shows their innocence... Imo

IMO they asked for a review of the investigation for unknown reasons (anyone stating reasons is giving an opinion).

[Mr Gray]

IMO they asked for a review of the investigation for unknown reasons (anyone stating reasons is giving an opinion).

It would be a very odd situation  where someone who was guilty of a crime.... Had gotten away with it... And then press to have the evidence looked at again...

IMO posters, are just in total denial

[kizzy]

It would be a very odd situation  where someone who was guilty of a crime.... Had gotten away with it... And then press to have the evidence looked at again...

IMO posters, are just in total denial

You don't know how it came about to reopen the case, or who did what in the first place, imo the mccanns have to move forward with things whether they want to or not.

Its like saying it is evidence that the book G A wrote was the truth, of the lie. imo

[G-Unit]

Of course the mccanns fought to get the investigation  reopened... But new evidence had to be found first... It couldn't just be reopened.  That's why they asked for a review  which led to the investigation being  reopened.
So as Rob questions... Why would they do this if they we're involved... It's another piece of  evidence which shows their innocence... Imo

Perhaps you have evidence of the McCann's fight to get the investigation reopened? I assume that they wanted what they asked Cameron for;

we are seeking a joint INDEPENDENT, TRANSPARENT and COMPREHENSIVE review of ALL information held in relation to Madeleine's disappearance.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/8511093/Madeleine-McCann-text-of-parents-letter-to-David-Cameron.html

What they got was not a joint review, just a UK investigative review and it certainly hasn't been transparent in my opinion.

[Mr Gray]

You don't know how it came about to reopen the case, or who did what in the first place, imo the mccanns have to move forward with things whether they want to or not.

Its like saying it is evidence that the book G A wrote was the truth, of the lie. imo

We know that the mccanns put pressure on Cameron to have the evidence reviewed which led to the case being reopened ...we know the evidence GA relied on in his book was flawed

[Mr Gray]

Perhaps you have evidence of the McCann's fight to get the investigation reopened? I assume that they wanted what they asked Cameron for;

we are seeking a joint INDEPENDENT, TRANSPARENT and COMPREHENSIVE review of ALL information held in relation to Madeleine's disappearance.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/8511093/Madeleine-McCann-text-of-parents-letter-to-David-Cameron.html

What they got was not a joint review, just a UK investigative review and it certainly hasn't been transparent in my opinion.

They fought for a review  which led to the case being reopened

[Robittybob1]

They fought for a review  which led to the case being reopened

How many guilty people would do that?  Any got an example?

[Carana]

It would be a very odd situation  where someone who was guilty of a crime.... Had gotten away with it... And then press to have the evidence looked at again...

IMO posters, are just in total denial

I presume that most of us can think of cases where a child has died due to some form of familial abuse, and that the disappearance has been presented as an abduction.

Offhand, I can't think of a single case in which parents have pressed for an official review and later been found to have been guilty of (insert directly-related criminal activity).

No doubt someone will find one to prove otherwise, but I haven't come across any.

[kizzy]

How many guilty people would do that?  Any got an example?

What like all those that go on camera appealing for witnesses etc.

When they have done it themselves.

Some people are railroaded into things, as its the only thing they can do to prove there innocence.

Even though, they are the ones that are guilty. imo

[Mr Gray]

What like all those that go on camera appealing for witnesses etc.

When they have done it themselves.

Some people are railroaded into things, as its the only thing they can do to prove there innocence.

Even though, they are the ones that are guilty. imo

For two or three weeks... Not ten years

[kizzy]

For two or three weeks... Not ten years

yes well some don't have the best lawyers money can buy, etc etc do they. imo

[Carana]

What like all those that go on camera appealing for witnesses etc.

When they have done it themselves.

Some people are railroaded into things, as its the only thing they can do to prove there innocence.

Even though, they are the ones that are guilty. imo

The case was archived in 2008 and they were never even arrested, let alone charged.

What do you suppose would have led them to subsequently press for at least a review of available evidence?

[jassi]

The case was archived in 2008 and they were never even arrested, let alone charged.

What do you suppose would have led them to subsequently press for at least a review of available evidence?

Because in the eye of the public they are not squeaky clean.
They expected that pressing for a review would demonstrate their" innocence"
This has not happened, so they don't dare let go of the tiger's tail.
IMO

[Mr Gray]

Because in the eye of the public they are not squeaky clean.
They expected that pressing for a review would demonstrate their" innocence"
This has not happened, so they don't dare let go of the tiger's tail.
IMO

Ridiculous... Imo

[jassi]

Your opinion is of no interest to me.