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

[carlymichelle]

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!

some people take  things literal     look at the jon benet  ramsey case that hasent been  solved  and it    happned  23 years ago many  still suspect the parents or her brother in that  case 

[Vertigo Swirl]

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!

What pieces fit?  What do you know about the character, lifestyle, movements and whereabouts  of your suspect in 2007 that couldn’t possibly apply to others who were in PdL that night?  What is the killer piece of proof?  There won’t be one of course...

[Holly Goodhead]

What pieces fit?  What do you know about the character, lifestyle, movements and whereabouts  of your suspect in 2007 that couldn’t possibly apply to others who were in PdL that night?  What is the killer piece of proof?  There won’t be one of course...

Most criminal cases that reach trial do not have a 'killer piece of proof'.  Many are made up of entirely circumstantial evidence. 

[Holly Goodhead]

And what 'killer piece of proof' existed against RM when he was made an arguido?

And what 'killer piece of proof' existed against the McCanns when they were made arguidos?

[barrier]

And what 'killer piece of proof' existed against RM when he was made an arguido?

And what 'killer piece of proof' existed against the McCanns when they were made arguidos?

The same that as that which the three amigos were made arguido's back in 2014.
That status infers rights not necessarily meaning they are suspects.
Its also possible for someone to declare themselves arguido thus making themselves available of those right's.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Most criminal cases that reach trial do not have a 'killer piece of proof'.  Many are made up of entirely circumstantial evidence.

In order for you to be 100% certain you are right I would suggest that you need 100% proof.  Do you?

[barrier]

In order for you to be 100% certain you are right I would suggest that you need 100% proof.  Do you?

Murder convictions with out a body must rely on circumstantial surely.

[Vertigo Swirl]

And what 'killer piece of proof' existed against RM when he was made an arguido?

And what 'killer piece of proof' existed against the McCanns when they were made arguidos?

There was no requirement for 100% proof to make these people arguidos, in fact no evidence at all was enough.  You however claim to be certain you’re right, so you must surely have some cast iron proof?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Murder convictions with out a body must rely on circumstantial surely.

So what?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Most criminal cases that reach trial do not have a 'killer piece of proof'.  Many are made up of entirely circumstantial evidence.

Could you answer the other part of my question please.

[Holly Goodhead]

The same that as that which the three amigos were made arguido's back in 2014.
That status infers rights not necessarily meaning they are suspects.
Its also possible for someone to declare themselves arguido thus making themselves available of those right's.

Yes I appreciate that.  Arguido status provides the arguido with enhanced rights eg access to legal representation. 

[Holly Goodhead]

There was no requirement for 100% proof to make these people arguidos, in fact no evidence at all was enough.  You however claim to be certain you’re right, so you must surely have some cast iron proof?

Nothing relies on 100% proof, even a full life tariff.  At the end of a trial a defendant is either found not guilty or guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

[Holly Goodhead]

Could you answer the other part of my question please.

No because to do so I would have to reveal too much.

[Vertigo Swirl]

No because to do so I would have to reveal too much.

How very convenient. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

Nothing relies on 100% proof, even a full life tariff.  At the end of a trial a defendant is either found not guilty or guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Surely there is something above all other elements that makes your suspect stand out above all others that were there that night?  Was she senn carrying a small child answering Madeleine’s description?  Did she leave the resort hurriedly the next day before her stay was due to end?  Did she express longing for a blonde haired girl to another guest?  Was she ever seen in close proximity to Madeleiene before her disappearance?  Did she make attempts to befriend her parents?  Was she seen observing the patio doors to the apartment?  Come on, there must be something!!