Mark Williams-Thomas making new three part crime series for Ch5.

[Mr Gray]

No he hasn’t.

He has... You are showing your ignorance

[faithlilly]

He has... You are showing your ignorance

And you are gaslighting. Desist.

[Venturi Swirl]

And you are gaslighting. Desist.

says the forum's very own Fanny.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanny_by_Gaslight_(film)

[Mr Gray]

And you are gaslighting. Desist.

He said it live on TV in the discovery programme... You are speaking from a position of ignorance

[faithlilly]

He said it live on TV in the discovery programme... You are speaking from a position of ignorance

No he didn’t. You are yet again misinterpreting what he said.

[Mr Gray]

No he didn’t. You are yet again misinterpreting what he said.

Tell us what you think he said... I would say you haven't got a clue.. I know exactly what he said.. You are totally wrong once again

[faithlilly]

Tell us what you think he said... I would say you haven't got a clue.. I know exactly what he said.. You are totally wrong once again

I know exactly what he said.

“We do not have any forensic evidence for the death of Madeleine McCann. We have no body or body parts. On the other hand we have different evidence. It COULD be witnesses, videos, photos but at the moment I CAN’T SAY WHAT KIND OF EVIDENCE WE HAVE”

As I said, you continue to misinterpret what he says.

[barrier]

I know exactly what he said.

“We do not have any forensic evidence for the death of Madeleine McCann. We have no body or body parts. On the other hand we have different evidence. It COULD be witnesses, videos, photos but at the moment I CAN’T SAY WHAT KIND OF EVIDENCE WE HAVE”

As I said, you continue to misinterpret what he says.

He also said in October just gone.


Mr Wolters said they have no idea how she died and no DNA or photo evidence linking the German sex offender to the alleged murder.

Adding:

Evidence being investigated includes a “confession” Brueckner made to a pal and phone analysis showing he was at the Ocean Club when the toddler vanished. Mr Wolters said: “It is circumstantial evidence – we have no scientific evidence. If we had a video of the act or a picture of Madeleine dead with Brueckner on camera, we wouldn’t have had to make a public appeal. But we only have circumstantial evidence.”


So he can't  say how she died meaning there's no video of any act likely to cause her death.

[faithlilly]

He also said in October just gone.


Mr Wolters said they have no idea how she died and no DNA or photo evidence linking the German sex offender to the alleged murder.

Adding:

Evidence being investigated includes a “confession” Brueckner made to a pal and phone analysis showing he was at the Ocean Club when the toddler vanished. Mr Wolters said: “It is circumstantial evidence – we have no scientific evidence. If we had a video of the act or a picture of Madeleine dead with Brueckner on camera, we wouldn’t have had to make a public appeal. But we only have circumstantial evidence.”


So he can't  say how she died meaning there's no video of any act likely to cause her death.

Thank you, that puts more meat on the bones.

Perhaps Davel will cease gaslighting now.

[Venturi Swirl]

For what it's worth I doubt there's any video or photographic evidence either - I strongly believe that if such material existed it would be the moral (if not legal) duty of any police force to share that information with the next of kin and others investigating the case and I don't believe that has happened in this case.  I don't think HCW is playing semantic word games when he says they don't have any photos or videos of Madeleine dead, implying they have such material depicting a live child only not linked directly to Bruckner.  This would be sensational evidence and I just don't believe it exists. 

[Wonderfulspam]

All I'm interested in are the photos of Brueckner wearing lingerie.

[jassi]

Of course if this alibi, soon to be revealed by MWT stands up to scrutiny, everything else goes by the board and Wolters et al will need to look elsewhere, though I feel that if Brueckner were no longer in the frame, the Germans would rapidly lose interest in the McCann case.

[Mr Gray]

He also said in October just gone.


Mr Wolters said they have no idea how she died and no DNA or photo evidence linking the German sex offender to the alleged murder.

Adding:

Evidence being investigated includes a “confession” Brueckner made to a pal and phone analysis showing he was at the Ocean Club when the toddler vanished. Mr Wolters said: “It is circumstantial evidence – we have no scientific evidence. If we had a video of the act or a picture of Madeleine dead with Brueckner on camera, we wouldn’t have had to make a public appeal. But we only have circumstantial evidence.”


So he can't  say how she died meaning there's no video of any act likely to cause her death.

You are absolutely wrong.  Wolters has said the evidence they have although not showing her death is such that death is realistically the only possible outcome. So they assume she is dead but do not have proof. It seems exactly the same as Rui Pedro . I m going by what Wolters has said... Not by what it has, been reported in the papers.
It seems you and faith just haven't kept up with all the information

[Mr Gray]

Of course if this alibi, soon to be revealed by MWT stands up to scrutiny, everything else goes by the board and Wolters et al will need to look elsewhere, though I feel that if Brueckner were no longer in the frame, the Germans would rapidly lose interest in the McCann case.

That's if a proper alibi exists which based on what Wolters has said is unlikely

[Mr Gray]

For what it's worth I doubt there's any video or photographic evidence either - I strongly believe that if such material existed it would be the moral (if not legal) duty of any police force to share that information with the next of kin and others investigating the case and I don't believe that has happened in this case.  I don't think HCW is playing semantic word games when he says they don't have any photos or videos of Madeleine dead, implying they have such material depicting a live child only not linked directly to Bruckner.  This would be sensational evidence and I just don't believe it exists.

I think it's the most probable evidence Wolters is referring to. Hrs explained why he hasn't divulged it.

Thetrs a forum called Websleuths.. Where several quite bright people post... And the photo theory is quite popular there