Author Topic: A Simple Question.  (Read 5188 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #30 on: March 12, 2018, 09:44:20 AM »
Or we can answer withe answer of ourchoice

Which would still amount to either a yes or no really wouldn't it.

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #31 on: March 12, 2018, 09:56:08 AM »
Yes,because they looked at the original interview's carried out under the stewardship of Amaral,which would suggest they are satisfied with it all,only concentrating on that which the PJ didn't consider important aka,the supposed burglars, now who was right one wonders.

I find it interesting that, apparently, the PJ didn't consider the burglars as suspects, yet SY did.

Other than the dead black guy, just who are or have been the PJ's suspects? They don't seem to have leaked anything.

Online G-Unit

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #32 on: March 12, 2018, 10:11:43 AM »
A very, very simple question that only requires only a yes or no answer.

If OG and the PJ were investigating the McCann’s and their friend’s role in Madeleine’s disappearance do you think they would tell the general public ?

For obvious reasons the answer is NO.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline Faithlilly

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #33 on: March 12, 2018, 10:18:29 AM »
I don't think they would answer the question

So how would that work ? Would Redwood/Rowley ( fill in the name ) simply leave the question hanging in the air, inviting speculation or claim that all scenarios are still being looked at, yet again inviting speculation ?
Moral Guilt
Detractors of the work of our British Police in bringing criminals to justice generally ignore the important distinction between moral proof and legal evidence of guilt. In not a few cases that are popularly classed with 'unsolved mysteries of crime,' the offender is known, but evidence is wanting. If, for example, in- a recent murder case of special notoriety and interest,* certain human remains had not been found in a cellar, a great crime would have been catalogued among `Police failures'; and yet, even without the evidence which sent the murderer to the gallows, the moral proof of his guilt would have been full and clear.
Robert Anderson

Offline Eleanor

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #34 on: March 12, 2018, 10:22:08 AM »
For obvious reasons the answer is NO.

In which case this Thread is rather pointless, don't you think.

Online Davel

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #35 on: March 12, 2018, 10:23:22 AM »
So how would that work ? Would Redwood/Rowley ( fill in the name ) simply leave the question hanging in the air, inviting speculation or claim that all scenarios are still being looked at, yet again inviting speculation ?

He would simply say he was unwilling to answer any questions Re suspects... Has his answer reduced speculation
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #36 on: March 12, 2018, 10:28:28 AM »
He would simply say he was unwilling to answer any questions Re suspects... Has his answer reduced speculation

Martin Brunt still needed persuading, for some reason, as was evident in his interview with Rowley.

I can't quite understand why Brunt remained sceptical, given that Redwood had made his not suspect statement previously.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2018, 10:33:00 AM by Wonderfulspam »

Offline Faithlilly

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #37 on: March 12, 2018, 10:31:09 AM »
He would simply say he was unwilling to answer any questions Re suspects... Has his answer reduced speculation

So a reporter would say....are the McCanns or their friends being considered suspects in your investigation......to which ( name of officer ) would reply.....I am unwilling to answer any questions regarding suspects. Can you really see that happening?
Moral Guilt
Detractors of the work of our British Police in bringing criminals to justice generally ignore the important distinction between moral proof and legal evidence of guilt. In not a few cases that are popularly classed with 'unsolved mysteries of crime,' the offender is known, but evidence is wanting. If, for example, in- a recent murder case of special notoriety and interest,* certain human remains had not been found in a cellar, a great crime would have been catalogued among `Police failures'; and yet, even without the evidence which sent the murderer to the gallows, the moral proof of his guilt would have been full and clear.
Robert Anderson

Online Angelo222

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #38 on: March 12, 2018, 10:33:33 AM »
A very, very simple question that only requires only a yes or no answer.

If OG and the PJ were investigating the McCann’s and their friend’s role in Madeleine’s disappearance do you think they would tell the general public ?

Of course they wouldn't, that would be against all good police practise.  My own belief is that they had to investigate the parents in order to satisfy themselves that the culprit or culprits lay elsewhere.  The fact that they went on to look at others speaks for itself imo.
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #39 on: March 12, 2018, 10:41:05 AM »
Of course they wouldn't, that would be against all good police practise. My own belief is that they had to investigate the parents in order to satisfy themselves that the culprit or culprits lay elsewhere.  The fact that they went on to look at others speaks for itself imo.

Not according to Rowley they didn't.

They are happy that had been dealt with by the original investigation.

If the McCanns had been re-investigated & subsequently ruled out, why wouldn't they just say so?


Offline Wonderfulspam

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #40 on: March 12, 2018, 10:46:17 AM »
In which case this Thread is rather pointless, don't you think.

I think the same could be said about every thread here.

It's all just hot air & none of it will bring Maddie back.

Offline jassi

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #41 on: March 12, 2018, 10:58:58 AM »
I think the same could be said about every thread here.

It's all just hot air & none of it will bring Maddie back.

I couldn't have put it better myself.

Could we be related ?   @)(++(*
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 -   11 years and still no solution.

Online Davel

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #42 on: March 12, 2018, 11:02:20 AM »
So a reporter would say....are the McCanns or their friends being considered suspects in your investigation......to which ( name of officer ) would reply.....I am unwilling to answer any questions regarding suspects. Can you really see that happening?

If they were suspects... Yes
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Online G-Unit

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #43 on: March 12, 2018, 11:04:14 AM »
In which case this Thread is rather pointless, don't you think.

Most threads only become interesting when off topic posts appear. I have restricted myself to answering the question asked, but I expect others won't.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: A Simple Question.
« Reply #44 on: March 12, 2018, 11:05:05 AM »
I couldn't have put it better myself.

Could we be related ?   @)(++(*

There were times I thought he was my son!
It's okay to reinvent the wheel, but only when you understand how the current wheel works.