Has Scotland Yard dodged a bullet in the Maddie case?

[Vertigo Swirl]

The only reason imo that sy give a shit is because some one has to justify £millions on no result.

Strange logic.  It’s clear by the amount of money spent that a serious investigation has been taking part for the last few years, we don’t know how much the Portuguese government has thrown at the case over the same number of years, I wonder why not. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

All my posts on the subject were referring to the PJ.

. This is what we call “goal post shifting”.

[ShiningInLuz]

If you state something as a fact you have to provide a cite, otherwise it’s just your opinion.  Therefore in your opinion the PJ are busy beavering away investigating the case.  The end.

At no time did I claim this.

 

[barrier]

Strange logic.  It’s clear by the amount of money spent that a serious investigation has been taking part for the last few years, we don’t know how much the Portuguese government has thrown at the case over the same number of years, I wonder why not.

Maybe they feel they don't have a need.

[Vertigo Swirl]

All my posts on the subject were referring to the PJ.

So when I wrote
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 13, 2018, 11:27:26 PM
At what point, if ever, will you accept that the McCanns are not being investigated?  What would the police have to say or do to convince you, is there anything at all that would?

Your reply below should have been

At what point, if ever, will you understand what I say? I don't know what the PJ are investigating and neither do you. You are peddling a belief, not a fact.

Not what you actually wrote which was


At what point, if ever, will you understand what I say? I don't know what the police are investigating and neither do you. You are peddling a belief, not a fact.

[Mr Gray]

I have just run a simple Google check on the Porto team and there is evidence of activity.

Don't ask me for a cite - do your own simple Google check.

So what is this evidence of activity....present tense

There is none and you have been caught out

[Vertigo Swirl]

Maybe they feel they don't have a need.

Exactly, no need to investigate, cba.

[Vertigo Swirl]

At no time did I claim this.

 

You claimed there is evidence of PJ activity, you refuse to provide a cite, therefore in your opinion this is an active PJ investigation.  That’s it.

[Mr Gray]

At no time did I claim this.

 

You now don't seem to remember what you claimed

[barrier]

Exactly, no need to investigate, cba.

Or nothing new to investigate that wasn't done first time around.

[G-Unit]

And those statements are evidence....the apparent inaction of the PJ is also evidence

Apparent?

You might as well say 'I don't know if the PJ have acted or not, but I'm going to assume they haven't because I've not seen any evidence that they have. I'm then going to use my assumption as evidence that they're not investigating the McCanns'.

[G-Unit]

So when I wrote
Quote from: Vertigo Swirl on October 13, 2018, 11:27:26 PM
At what point, if ever, will you accept that the McCanns are not being investigated?  What would the police have to say or do to convince you, is there anything at all that would?

Your reply below should have been

At what point, if ever, will you understand what I say? I don't know what the PJ are investigating and neither do you. You are peddling a belief, not a fact.

Not what you actually wrote which was


At what point, if ever, will you understand what I say? I don't know what the police are investigating and neither do you. You are peddling a belief, not a fact.

I was discussing the PJ, whether you were aware of it or not. I believe Operation Grange are investigating an abduction 'as if it occurred in the UK' and have been doing so for years. They may have deleted all the evidence from their website, but it still exists elsewhere.

[ShiningInLuz]

So what is this evidence of activity....present tense

There is none and you have been caught out

'Evidence of activity' has no verb in it, so there is no tense.

As in 'Thousands of years ago this volcano was extremely active.  But for the last millennium there has been no evidence of activity."

That's a past tense wrapper around a tense-free phrase.

Time to move on?

[Mr Gray]

Apparent?

You might as well say 'I don't know if the PJ have acted or not, but I'm going to assume they haven't because I've not seen any evidence that they have. I'm then going to use my assumption as evidence that they're not investigating the McCanns'.

All your opinion again. It's not an assumption that no one has evidence of action by the pj...it's a fact....you really are struggling

[Mr Gray]

'Evidence of activity' has no verb in it, so there is no tense.

As in 'Thousands of years ago this volcano was extremely active.  But for the last millennium there has been no evidence of activity."

That's a past tense wrapper around a tense-free phrase.

Time to move on?

You said there is evidence of activity..
Is...is a verb and is present tense

You are digging yourself into a deeper hole...you have been caught out


This is what you posted....notice the word ..is... present tense

I have just run a simple Google check on the Porto team and there is evidence of activity.