Is It Possible For A Non Professional Investigator To Solve The Case?

[Mr Gray]

No evidence is insufficient evidence

[barrier]

If either the PJ or SY uncover evidence,does the UK justice forum expect them to name suspects for their benefit the members?

[G-Unit]

according to De Carmo... Theres no evidence

Do you have a link to him saying that?

[Mr Gray]

Do you have a link to him saying that?

You've seen it many times

[Vertigo Swirl]

Yes, horrified. Especially if the Met are as suggestible as the Carl Beech fiaso suggests. They could be digging into the life of a perfectly innocent person as we speak.

Erm...what is your problem with this?  Should they only be digging into the lives of people they pre-suppose to be guilty??  Oh wait...

[Vertigo Swirl]

According to Portugal's Supreme Court there was 'insufficient evidence', not 'no evidence'.

Do youthink the police were wrong to be digging into perfectly innocent lives in this case then?

[The General]

Erm...what is your problem with this?  Should they only be digging into the lives of oeople they pre-suppose to be guilty??  Oh wait...

Only the protagonists who's surname begins with 'M'.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Only the protagonists who's surname begins with 'M'.

Yeah, of course, silly me.

[Robittybob1]

Yeah, of course, silly me.

Funny that!

[Vertigo Swirl]

According to Portugal's Supreme Court there was 'insufficient evidence', not 'no evidence'.

Meaning what?  They were insufficiently innocent I suppose. 

[Holly Goodhead]

As I've said... You have a theory... You haven't solved the case... You obviously didn't have the evidence to convince myster... So you don't have the evidence... Just a theory

Some criminal trials result in acquittals.  What does this tell you? 

Some criminal trials result in majority verdicts as opposed to a unanimous verdict.  What does this tell you?

Some criminal trials result in wrongful convictions which are subsequently overturned many years later in the appeal courts often having already been heard in the appeal courts.  What does this tell you? 

[Holly Goodhead]

If either the PJ or SY uncover evidence,does the UK justice forum expect them to name suspects for their benefit the members?

For all any of us know significant developments may have taken place.  I believe my suspects are expats living in Algarve so given the secrecy surrounding Portuguese criminal cases how/when would we expect to learn of any developments

[Mr Gray]

Some criminal trials result in acquittals.  What does this tell you? 

Some criminal trials result in majority verdicts as opposed to a unanimous verdict.  What does this tell you?

Some criminal trials result in wrongful convictions which are subsequently overturned many years later in the appeal courts often having already been heard in the appeal courts.  What does this tell you?

It doesn't tell me anything I don't already know.... I know you haven't solved this crime...your post reinforces and supports my belief...

waht it tells me is even when the professionals arrest someone...put them on trial...they may still not have solved the crime. But you have...you seem to have already decided your suspects are guilty....

[Holly Goodhead]

It doesn't tell me anything I don't already know.... I know you haven't solved this crime...your post reinforces and supports my belief...

How can you be so sure I haven't solved the case and why are you so keen for this to be the case?

waht it tells me is even when the professionals arrest someone...put them on trial...they may still not have solved the crime. But you have...you seem to have already decided your suspects are guilty....

Exactly.  It shows even in cases where most, lay and professional, think its a slam dunk whether for or against not everyone agrees regardless of how the case is built ie forensics/circumstantial. 

Myster hasn't said he totally disagrees.  He said he thinks its unlikely based on character type.  I thought the same initially but then I kept coming back to it and all the pieces fit.  I think a lot of cases rise and fall based on pre-conceived ideas about the likely perpetrators of the crime.  In this case people are either cynical about the 'doctors' or they're on the look out for creepy looking men lurking in the shadows!

[Mr Gray]

How can you be so sure I haven't solved the case and why are you so keen for this to be the case?

Exactly.  It shows even in cases where most, lay and professional, think its a slam dunk whether for or against not everyone agrees regardless of how the case is built ie forensics/circumstantial. 

Myster hasn't said he totally disagrees.  He said he thinks its unlikely based on character type.  I thought the same initially but then I kept coming back to it and all the pieces fit.  I think a lot of cases rise and fall based on pre-conceived ideas about the likely perpetrators of the crime.  In this case people are either cynical about the 'doctors' or they're on the look out for creepy looking men lurking in the shadows!

I would be very happy if you had solved the case but the idea that you have us just plain daft imo

To have solved a case you would need to be able to convince a jury... Yet the first person to see your theory isn't convinced