So what exactly is Wolters sure about?

[G-Unit]

I fail to understand the need some have to malign the McCanns and treat indulging in it with the same contempt I have for the presumption Scotland Yard entered Madeleine's case after it had been reviewed without exercising due diligence.

Such a notion is risible.

Who do you think "instructed" the Germans.  Me ... I rather go with the notion that they have been following the evidence much as I have credence for Scotland Yard doing likewise.  It is what investigators do and I think it has now gone far beyond the Portuguese dictating the terms of what can and can't be done.

You can believe the Met exercised due diligence if you wish, although offering some evidence supporting your belief seems to be beyond you.

[Eleanor]

You can believe the Met exercised due diligence if you wish, although offering some evidence supporting your belief seems to be beyond you.

Toi aussi, Madame.

[Venturi Swirl]

You can believe the Met exercised due diligence if you wish, although offering some evidence supporting your belief seems to be beyond you.

The only evidence they didn’t that you can proffer is the say so of some bitter old ex cop which isn’t much better imo.

[Wonderfulspam]

The only evidence they didn’t you that can proffer is the say so of some bitter old ex cop which isn’t much better imo.

Can anyone translate this for me?

[Eleanor]

Can anyone translate this for me?

Try reading it.

[Venturi Swirl]

Can anyone translate this for me?

The only evidence they didn’t that you can proffer is the say so of some bitter old ex cop which isn’t much better imo.

[Wonderfulspam]

The only evidence they didn’t that you can proffer is the say so of some bitter old ex cop which isn’t much better imo.

Thanks.

I was a bit stuck on the original you that part.

[Venturi Swirl]

Thanks.

I was a bit stuck on the original you that part.

Yeah, it was a mistake, I inserted a “that” in the sentence after writing it and put it in the wrong place, I do apologise.

[G-Unit]

The only evidence they didn’t that you can proffer is the say so of some bitter old ex cop which isn’t much better imo.

I think you mean the say so of a successful Met detective, now retired. As someone who understood the nature of such investigations and how they should be conducted his views are credible imo. They certainly have more value than the blind faith and rhetoric relied on and used by some.

[Eleanor]

I think you mean the say so of a successful Met detective, now retired. As someone who understood the nature of such investigations and how they should be conducted his views are credible imo. They certainly have more value than the blind faith and rhetoric relied on and used by some.

Sadly he failed to mention from whom he got his information.

[Venturi Swirl]

I think you mean the say so of a successful Met detective, now retired. As someone who understood the nature of such investigations and how they should be conducted his views are credible imo. They certainly have more value than the blind faith and rhetoric relied on and used by some.

You do like to pick and choose who you believe don’t you, why should this successful Met detective be any more credible than any other successful Met detective, or succesful German prosecutor for that matter?  You appear to believe Sutton without question but doubt everything that Wolters says for example.

[Brietta]

You do like to pick and choose who you believe don’t you, why should this successful Met detective be any more credible than any other successful Met detective, or succesful German prosecutor for that matter?  You appear to believe Sutton without question but doubt everything that Wolters says for example.

Sutton had never worked on Madeleine's case and had absolutely no idea how it was conducted.  I doubt very much if he had any real idea of how absurdly obdurate some of the Portuguese counter parts were capable of being.

Brueckner was a work in progress for Wolters which Madeleine became part of.  Confirmed photographic evidence was that Brueckner abused children.  Madeleine and Praia da Luz then became the focus of part of a wider reaching German investigation.

Therefore approaching Madeleine's case from a different angle and with fresh eyes was as a result of investigating available evidence involving the Praia da Luz rapist.
Madeleine's parents did not feature ... but Brueckner became prime suspect in Madeleine's disappearance as a result of evidence + investigation = suspicion.

[G-Unit]

You do like to pick and choose who you believe don’t you, why should this successful Met detective be any more credible than any other successful Met detective, or succesful German prosecutor for that matter?  You appear to believe Sutton without question but doubt everything that Wolters says for example.

It was obvious to anyone with a brain that Operation Grange were taking an unusual approach to this case by concentrating on just one possible scenario; stranger abduction. Once their remit was released it seemed that the crime had been identified before the investigation began. Sutton merely confirmed what many had already suspected.

[Venturi Swirl]

It was obvious to anyone with a brain that Operation Grange were taking an unusual approach to this case by concentrating on just one possible scenario; stranger abduction. Once their remit was released it seemed that the crime had been identified before the investigation began. Sutton merely confirmed what many had already suspected.

And he told you exactly what you wanted to hear, that’s why you believe him unquestioningly.

[Eleanor]

The whole World is conspiring to protect The McCanns.  Excepting Portugal who only managed to find zilch with which to charge them despite the humungous efforts of their best detective ever.