Perceptions of Madeleine's Abduction

[G-Unit]

Oh really?

Does Ret Sym need you to explain his thoughts?   He seems rather clever to me, altho he is acting rather dull atm

No he doesn't, but you do.

[Myster]

I think vehicles are figments of the imagination. I wasn't subscribing to the idea, just explaining Myster's thoughts to you. He thinks just one man and his vehicle were involved, so there was no imaginary driver.

That's what I originally thought because of Wolter's view that Brueckner alone killed Madeleine, as he was usually a sole operator whether burgling, raping or kiddy-fiddling. Although it's possible that he worked in tandem to abduct for a healthy profit, so there could have been a getaway driver waiting nearby.  If there was a contract between Brueckner and a Mr. Big, Russians or whoever and the deal fell through for some reason, then he would have had no alternative but to destroy and dispose of the evidence to avoid being caught.

[G-Unit]

That's what I originally thought because of Wolter's view that Brueckner alone killed Madeleine, as he was usually a sole operator whether burgling, raping or kiddy-fiddling. Although it's possible that he worked in tandem to abduct for a healthy profit, so there could have been a getaway driver waiting nearby.  If there was a contract between Brueckner and a Mr. Big, Russians or whoever and the deal fell through for some reason, then he would have had no alternative but to destroy and dispose of the evidence to avoid being caught.

My sceptical nature has yet to be convinced that there was a stranger abduction, so speculating about who did it isn't of much interest to me tbh.

[Lace]

That's what I originally thought because of Wolter's view that Brueckner alone killed Madeleine, as he was usually a sole operator whether burgling, raping or kiddy-fiddling. Although it's possible that he worked in tandem to abduct for a healthy profit, so there could have been a getaway driver waiting nearby.  If there was a contract between Brueckner and a Mr. Big, Russians or whoever and the deal fell through for some reason, then he would have had no alternative but to destroy and dispose of the evidence to avoid being caught.

I think Brueckner got paid for doing something,  hence the fancy van he bought.   He smuggled drugs,  he was involved with a lot of dodgy people, he was using the dark web,  who knows who he was in contact with.  Maybe someone thought as he smuggled drugs he could smuggle a child.  He bragged about that,  probably thinking if he joked about it people wouldn't take him seriously. 

[barrier]

I think Brueckner got paid for doing something,  hence the fancy van he bought.   He smuggled drugs,  he was involved with a lot of dodgy people, he was using the dark web,  who knows who he was in contact with.  Maybe someone thought as he smuggled drugs he could smuggle a child.  He bragged about that,  probably thinking if he joked about it people wouldn't take him seriously.

Wasn't he supposed to have been involved in e100,000 robbery , plenty of disposable income there .

[Mr Gray]

My sceptical nature has yet to be convinced that there was a stranger abduction, so speculating about who did it isn't of much interest to me tbh.

You can catch up with the rest of us at a later date

[Lace]

Wasn't he supposed to have been involved in e100,000 robbery , plenty of disposable income there .

True he could have bought his van with some of that money.   Then negotiated  with others to smuggle out a child.  Bragging was his middle name.   'Ive got a van that can smuggled drugs and small children'.  He said they would never be found.

[Venturi Swirl]

My sceptical nature has yet to be convinced that there was a stranger abduction, so speculating about who did it isn't of much interest to me tbh.

Have you yet to be convinced the parents were involved, owing to your sceptical nature?  After all you seem convinced that they are hiding something…

[Eleanor]

Have you yet to be convinced the parents were involved, owing to your scepicsl nature?  After all you seem convinced that they are hiding something…

This Forum has become nonsensical.  And frightfully boring.  But having nothing better to do then we might as well go through all of the rubbish all over again, and again.

And I am up for it.  And with a very long memory.  So don't imagine that I am done.  I will see the nasty innuendos and debunk them.

There is way too much Libel going on.  And Innuendo is Libel.  Anthony Bennett knows this only too well.

[Mr Gray]

It maybe that a succesful prosecution of CB for the Behan rape is what Wolters needs to charge CB for the Maddue case... I can see that there, may be a circumstantial link

[sadie]

No he doesn't, but you do.

He is the one to explain his thoughts,  I can't do that.

[barrier]

This Forum has become nonsensical.  And frightfully boring.  But having nothing better to do then we might as well go through all of the rubbish all over again, and again.

And I am up for it.  And with a very long memory.  So don't imagine that I am done.  I will see the nasty innuendos and debunk them.

There is way too much Libel going on.  And Innuendo is Libel.  Anthony Bennett knows this only too well.

The legal background of expertise in libel is ?

[Mr Gray]

The legal background of expertise in libel is ?

Some of us dont need a legal degree to understand a simple law like libel. Eleanor is quite right in the fact that inuendo is libel. Having said that nothing said here would satisfy the libel requirements as the readership is small. Bennett reached a far bigger audience

[G-Unit]

The legal background of expertise in libel is ?

I'm still waiting for a link showing Bennett had a conviction for 'libelling by innuendo'. I know he was convicted of contempt of court, which, with Carter Ruck representing the McCanns, meant he had to pay large costs imo.

[Mr Gray]

I'm still waiting for a link showing Bennett had a conviction for 'libelling by innuendo'. I know he was convicted of contempt of court, which, with Carter Ruck representing the McCanns, meant he had to pay large costs imo.

Bennett libelled the mccanns according to UK libell law. He offerred no defence and agreed not to repeat the allegations