A Good, Bad or Average Theory What's The Difference?

[Holly Goodhead]

Just imagine the accolades bestowed upon our senior investigator - a thorough going over by Andrew Marr, invitation to lunch with Her Maj and subsequent Damehood, free TV makeovers, Nike running shoe sponsorship, lifetime Man U. managerial appointment (once Ole gets the boot), resident slot on "Loose Women", the list is endless...

And think what a platform it would give me to spout on about Bamber 

[Myster]

And think what a platform it would give me to spout on about Bamber 

Yes, but you were mistaken about that too, dearest! 

[Holly Goodhead]

Yes, but you were mistaken about that too, dearest! 

As it stands in the eyes of the law Bamber is guilty yes but it remains to be seen whether or not his conviction based on 20th century forensics will withstand scrutiny based on 21st century forensics. 

Now we're both going to seriously upset the McCannics by Bambering on here! 

[Eleanor]

As it stands in the eyes of the law Bamber is guilty yes but it remains to be seen whether or not his conviction based on 20th century forensics will withstand scrutiny based on 21st century forensics. 

Now we're both going to seriously upset the McCannics by Bambering on here!

No, No.  Do carry on.  I bailed out of The Bamber Forum because it scared me witless when I said I thought he could be Innocent.

This Forum is much easier to deal with.

[Holly Goodhead]

No, No.  Do carry on.  I bailed out of The Bamber Forum because it scared me witless when I said I thought he could be Innocent.

This Forum is much easier to deal with.

Yes the Bamber board was quite a scary place at times if your were in the minority of pro innocence.  I was forced to up my game especially with a certain member from across the pond 

[Eleanor]

Yes the Bamber board was quite a scary place at times if your were in the minority of pro innocence.  I was forced to up my game especially with a certain member from across the pond 

I used to get frantic PMs from some members to go and sort them out because I was the only Moderator on the whole Board at the time.

Tim Whatsisname wasn't amused.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I know your question was directed at davel,  but what I would expect them to do,  if it is plausible, say nothing to Holly but to investigate and then if it turns out she is right,  arrest solve the case,  report to the public and give thanks to Holly in their reports on tv and other media.

They wouldn’t have to acknowledge Holly at all, unless She has copyright over her theory.

[Mr Gray]

As it stands in the eyes of the law Bamber is guilty yes but it remains to be seen whether or not his conviction based on 20th century forensics will withstand scrutiny based on 21st century forensics. 

Now we're both going to seriously upset the McCannics by Bambering on here!

You're not... Just because a court finds someone guilty doesn't make them guilty... As in the cipriano case... It's important to look at the evidence

[Mr Gray]

Yes they might just say a member of the public was able to provide some useful info.

I'm sure, the press would find out... Absolutely sure

[Myster]

Topic please... Any further off topic posts will be, removed on sight

Aye, Aye Cap'n. 

[Eleanor]

Topic please... Any further off topic posts will be, removed on sight

Snort!

[Anthro]

“I'm pretty sure I've heard police officers, not just in this case but others too, refer to hypothesising and theories about what happened and who was involved”.

Miss Taken Identity once pointed out to me that in Madeleine’s case none of us know what the crime is that has been committed. All we know is that Madeleine is missing. True and valuable words to keep in mind.

[Mr Gray]

“I'm pretty sure I've heard police officers, not just in this case but others too, refer to hypothesising and theories about what happened and who was involved”.

Miss Taken Identity once pointed out to me that in Madeleine’s case none of us know what the crime is that has been committed. All we know is that Madeleine is missing. True and valuable words to keep in mind.

We know a lot.. lot more than that. ...so a poor synopsis of where we are now imo

[Anthro]

Hi Davel, how is it that you know a lot more besides the fact that Madeleine is missing? I would think that if there was more information out there, the case would after 12 years, not still be on-going.

[Mr Gray]

Hi Davel, how is it that you know a lot more besides the fact that Madeleine is missing? I would think that if there was more information out there, the case would after 12 years, not still be on-going.

we know there is no evidence to implicate the mccanns...and lots lots more...to say all we know is that madeleine is missing is totally absurd