Perceptions of Madeleine's Abduction

[G-Unit]

Her ability to use her undoubted high intelligence to deduce that the only plausible and logical explanation for Madeleine’s disappearance was a stranger abduction.

Whether she's intelligent or logical I don't know, but the case of Ellie Butler highlights her lack of perceptiveness imo and she was heavily criticised.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/22/ellie-butler-judge-took-unwarranted-steps-to-reunite-her-with-violent-parents

[Venturi Swirl]

Whether she's intelligent or logical I don't know, but the case of Ellie Butler highlights her lack of perceptiveness imo and she was heavily criticised.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/22/ellie-butler-judge-took-unwarranted-steps-to-reunite-her-with-violent-parents

Soooo predictable.  Your response I mean.

[Venturi Swirl]

Of course it's a problem, but while members disapprove of a rule it isn't easy. I don't think you were all that committed and supportive actually;

I have posted on numerous forums in the last 10years and this is the only one where posters MUST write IMO when expressing an opinion, or provide cites.  It’s also the only forum I’ve posted on where posters are punished with points for breaking the rules.

 Vertigo Swirl on August 15, 2018.

You’re right, thanks for quoting me.  I am utterly against it but if you are going to sanction me for not doing something then you’d better bloody well be even handed about it and not turn a blind eye when someone you support “forgets” to do it.

[Venturi Swirl]

They cleared bruckner without even speaking to him, how does one supposedly great police force do that?

Brilliant question!

[Brietta]

Whether she's intelligent or logical I don't know, but the case of Ellie Butler highlights her lack of perceptiveness imo and she was heavily criticised.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jun/22/ellie-butler-judge-took-unwarranted-steps-to-reunite-her-with-violent-parents

A perfect example of taking in the broader picture I think.

There are those who have leapt to the defence of a habitual sexual offender and frequenter of the dark paedophile web where the  most unimaginable obscenities are posted and where Brueckner was a contributor and member.

How do you and fellow sceptics equate your blaming post with Brady's recording of the death of a child which brought hardened detectives and all who heard it to their knees.
At the time Brady wasn't a murderer - because he hadn't been caught.

How do you and fellow sceptics equate defending a convicted felon who hoards horrific child pornography exactly as Brady did, by using the exoneration that he doesn't have a conviction for child abduction.

If you are going to use anyone's post event record against them as a debating point, don't you realise that opens the flood gates to everyone being fair game? within the confines of libel laws.

In other words - Brueckner may or may not have harmed Madeleine - but his record to date is a tough one to defend.

[G-Unit]

A perfect example of taking in the broader picture I think.

There are those who have leapt to the defence of a habitual sexual offender and frequenter of the dark paedophile web where the  most unimaginable obscenities are posted and where Brueckner was a contributor and member.

How do you and fellow sceptics equate your blaming post with Brady's recording of the death of a child which brought hardened detectives and all who heard it to their knees.
At the time Brady wasn't a murderer - because he hadn't been caught.

How do you and fellow sceptics equate defending a convicted felon who hoards horrific child pornography exactly as Brady did, by using the exoneration that he doesn't have a conviction for child abduction.

If you are going to use anyone's post event record against them as a debating point, don't you realise that opens the flood gates to everyone being fair game? within the confines of libel laws.

In other words - Brueckner may or may not have harmed Madeleine - but his record to date is a tough one to defend.

I thought we were discussing "Perceptions of Madeleine's Abduction"? What have CB and IB got to do with it?

[Eleanor]

You’re right, thanks for quoting me.  I am utterly against it but if you are going to sanction me for not doing something then you’d better bloody well be even handed about it and not turn a blind eye when someone you support “forgets” to do it.

You were lucky.  Your Old Comment is only four years old.  Mine was eight years old.

What a lot of trawling back this must take.

[Wonderfulspam]

A perfect example of taking in the broader picture I think.

There are those who have leapt to the defence of a habitual sexual offender and frequenter of the dark paedophile web where the  most unimaginable obscenities are posted and where Brueckner was a contributor and member.

How do you and fellow sceptics equate your blaming post with Brady's recording of the death of a child which brought hardened detectives and all who heard it to their knees.
At the time Brady wasn't a murderer - because he hadn't been caught.

How do you and fellow sceptics equate defending a convicted felon who hoards horrific child pornography exactly as Brady did, by using the exoneration that he doesn't have a conviction for child abduction.

If you are going to use anyone's post event record against them as a debating point, don't you realise that opens the flood gates to everyone being fair game? within the confines of libel laws.

In other words - Brueckner may or may not have harmed Madeleine - but his record to date is a tough one to defend.

IMO Brueckner had nothing at all to do with Madeleine's not abduction.

Have you still not worked that out yet?

Dearie me.

[Wonderfulspam]

They cleared bruckner without even speaking to him, how does one supposedly great police force do that?

Because its obvious he didn't do It?

[Wonderfulspam]

Concrete evidence.

I can't believe people are still clinging to that myth.

There really are some gullible people about.

[Wonderfulspam]

Her ability to use her undoubted high intelligence to deduce that the only plausible and logical explanation for Madeleine’s disappearance was a stranger abduction.

And how's the search for the abductor going?

Not having much luck are they, for obvious reasons.

[barrier]

And how's the search for the abductor going?

Not having much luck are they, for obvious reasons.

Give it time , its just not being reported, too much else going on, womans euros, tory trials and tribulations, Mo Farrah is not who he says he is, what can compete with that, oh ! excitement about a bit of weather.

[Venturi Swirl]

I thought we were discussing "Perceptions of Madeleine's Abduction"? What have CB and IB got to do with it?

They both abducted  and murdered children.

[Mr Gray]

Lunchtime, Sunday, 29th April 2007.

NOT lunchtime, Thursday, 3rd May, as claimed.

Maddie was abducted and murdered by a paedophile... The Germans have proof... She did not die in 5a and her body was not detected by grime and his dogs. The dogs do not have a 100% record.. Grime confirms this in his white paper

[G-Unit]

They both absucted and murdered children.

IB did. No charges against CB, just lots of suspicion.