Why now?

[G-Unit]

The McCann message is "FIND MADELEINE!".  What do you think it is.

I think it's a bit more complex than that.

[Carana]

I wonder whether supporters would sing a different tune if the dogs had targeted someone other than McCann - say Murat's property or a camper van ?

I'm not quite sure why nearly every thread, whatever the OP, ends up with the dogs.

[Brietta]

They didn't find anything particularly suspicious about the sighting, apart from the man appearing not to want to speak.

They presumed at the time it was a father & daughter.

Of course, this sighting should have been in the forefront of their minds & they should have gone to the police immediately with their non suspicion.

They couldn't go to the police could they.  Well not until after they had a family conference to discuss whether or not they had dreamed the whole thing.

[Venturi Swirl]

I'm not quite sure why nearly every thread, whatever the OP, ends up with the dogs.

This thread is so off topic I don’t know what the point is of even having separate threads, we may as well have just one where the same tired, tiresome arguments get trotted out day in, day out.  Focusing  on the dogs and the Smiths seems to provide comfort to those who can’t bear the thought that the McCanns aren’t being investigated for Madeleine’s disappearance and that someone else is the prime suspect.

[Wonderfulspam]

They couldn't go to the police could they.  Well not until after they had a family conference to discuss whether or not they had dreamed the whole thing.

Then they decided to go to the police & lie about it all.

Just fancied a quick trip back to Portugal to waste a day in a police station committing a criminal offence.

[Lace]

There's a very wide gulf between having circumstantial evidence as against having a sufficiency of evidence which could sustain a guilty verdict in any court of law. There is a lot of inculpatory circumstantial evidence in this case ranging from the Smiths sighting to the dog alerts. There's no denying it and as most of us here have spent over ten years discussing it all in depth, I'm certainly not going to dissect it all again.

One final point. It could be argued that Kate McCanns refusal to answer questions when interviewed as an official suspect did her no favours. I don't know many mothers of missing children who would behave in such a manner unless they had something to hide and/or were protecting someone.

Or they had a Police Officer who was hell bent on framing them.

[G-Unit]

Then they decided to go to the police & lie about it all.

Just fancied a quick trip back to Portugal to waste a day in a police station committing a criminal offence.

They actually did a reconstitution, didn't they. They showed the PJ where each of them crossed paths with the man, judging by the photos.

That would have been a problem for McCann, Tanner and Wilkins, when all three pointed to different parts of the road where they encountered each other.

Jane Tanner;

2115: JT leaves table, and sees GM talking with fellow resident ("Jez" Wilkins) outside the patio gate of 5A. The two were standing just up the hill from the gate towards Rua A. da Silva Road.

Jes Wilkins;

I met him near the stairs of a ground floor. There was a gate leading up to some stairs.

Gerry McCann;

After going through the side gate, and while on his way to the secondary reception entrance, less than 10 metres from the gate, he saw JEZ coming up the street on the opposite pavement bring with him a baby carriage with his youngest child. He crossed the road in JEZ's direction...

[G-Unit]

Or they had a Police Officer who was hell bent on framing them.

Framing them? Isn't that a bit old hat now? No-one invented the circumstantial evidence which aroused suspicion.

[Venturi Swirl]

Framing them? Isn't that a bit old hat now? No-one invented the circumstantial evidence which aroused suspicion.

Do you know what's REALLY old hat?  Your previous post.

[Carana]

They actually did a reconstitution, didn't they. They showed the PJ where each of them crossed paths with the man, judging by the photos.

That would have been a problem for McCann, Tanner and Wilkins, when all three pointed to different parts of the road where they encountered each other.

Jane Tanner;

2115: JT leaves table, and sees GM talking with fellow resident ("Jez" Wilkins) outside the patio gate of 5A. The two were standing just up the hill from the gate towards Rua A. da Silva Road.

Jes Wilkins;

I met him near the stairs of a ground floor. There was a gate leading up to some stairs.

Gerry McCann;

After going through the side gate, and while on his way to the secondary reception entrance, less than 10 metres from the gate, he saw JEZ coming up the street on the opposite pavement bring with him a baby carriage with his youngest child. He crossed the road in JEZ's direction...

I know I've posted this before, however as we seem to keep going around in circles in the absence of any major news...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8617945.stm

Ten different witnesses can have ten different recollections of the same event. During their own version of a Crimewatch-style reconstruction (why do people still call it a "reconstitution"?), Jane and Gerry agreed to disagree. According to JT's rog, the UK police walked her through a cognitive interview. I'm not sure if the others were.

[Wonderfulspam]

Why did Jane need a cognitive interview but no one else did?

Is she cognitively impaired?

Maybe the trauma of seeing some shins & feet had got to her.

[Venturi Swirl]

I don't know about JT, but there sure seems to be some cognitive impairment in evidence on this forum. 

[Wonderfulspam]

To be fair to Jane, she did believe the man was walking away from the apartment when he was actually walking towards it.
So yeah, she's probably retarded.

[Mr Gray]

Framing them? Isn't that a bit old hat now? No-one invented the circumstantial evidence which aroused suspicion.

In your opinion
.The idea of using the alerts to gather intelligence was made up by Mark Harrison. Both Grime and Harrison the alerts had no evidential value or reliability so you are wrong to claim they are circumstantial evidence. 

I don't think there was any alett to cadaver and no one can prove me wrong.. In fact many experts would agree that was a possibility.
The question arises as to why Grime felt it necessary to write such a supportive account iof the alerts then say no evidential value.  The pair of them really didn't have a clue how reliable the alerts were with Harrison clearly contradicting himself.
Grimes claims of Eddies history  misled the PJ imo.

[Carana]

Why did Jane need a cognitive interview but no one else did?

Is she cognitively impaired?

Maybe the trauma of seeing some shins & feet had got to her.

Perhaps because at the time, she was the only person in the group and in the immediate vicinity who may have encountered her being taken away?

Oh and on cognitive interviews:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_interview