New German suspect in Madeleine McCann mystery disappearance.

[Mr Gray]

It depends on how you see the evidence in the case.  Evidence does support abduction..
For me it's clear Wolters has absolute proof of abduction.
I wonder what it will take before some sceptivs will accept they are wrong

[Wonderfulspam]

It depends on how you see the evidence in the case.  Evidence does support abduction..
For me it's clear Wolters has absolute proof of abduction.
I wonder what it will take before some sceptivs will accept they are wrong

How about some sort of credible evidence Maddie was abducted, if you know of any, care to share it?

Or, perhaps, if that's too difficult a task for you, how about some credible evidence Brueckner murdered Maddie, have you got any of that ?

[Vertigo Swirl]

It depends on how you see the evidence in the case.  Evidence does support abduction..
For me it's clear Wolters has absolute proof of abduction.
I wonder what it will take before some sceptivs will accept they are wrong

My bet is - nothing.  Any conclusive proof of abduction is bound to be rejected for some convoluted conspiracy-based reason, you can count on that at least.

[Wonderfulspam]

You see, even Barrier manages to  up his game over on WS, over here he just repeats the same old tired mantras.

The tired old mantra of no abduction evidence, you mean?

You could just share all the abduction evidence with the forum & put an end to it once & for all.

I wonder why you don't just do that?

It's because there just isn't any, isn't it.

[Wonderfulspam]

My bet is - nothing.  Any conclusive proof of abduction is bound to be rejected for some convoluted conspiracy-based reason, you can count on that at least.

Well share all the evidence with the forum then & let's see if you're right.

Why not just do that?

[Wonderfulspam]

Since none of the forum sleuths are willing to grasp the nettle, how about I start.

List of abduction evidence:

1) The McCanns claim Maddie was abducted.

2) Someone said that Brueckner said he knew all about what happened to Maddie.

I can't see anymore than that, but do feel free to add to the list with the wealth of abduction knowledge you've since discovered over on websleuths.

[jassi]

As an observer on WS, two things in particular amuse me.

First is the absolute conviction that because Brueckner has been convicted of other, unrelated crimes, he MUST therefore be responsible for Madeleine's demise - this without any credible evidence at all being in the public domain.
Move over Amaral, Brueckner has supplanted you as the devil incarnate

second is the obsessive poring over the minutiae of Brueckner's life, presumably in the belief that this is going to lead  to the elusive breakthrough that will solve the case.

[Wonderfulspam]

As an observer on WS, two things in particular amuse me.

First is the absolute conviction that because Brueckner has been convicted of other, unrelated crimes, he MUST therefore be responsible for Madeleine's demise - this without any credible evidence at all being in the public domain.
Move over Amaral, Brueckner has supplanted you as the devil incarnate

second is the obsessive poring over the minutiae of Brueckner's life, presumably in the belief that this is going to lead  to the elusive breakthrough that will solve the case.

I went there for 2 minutes once.
Some idiot was posting that Brueckner could have abducted Joana.
Says it all really. 

[Wonderfulspam]

But it's VS's favourite forum now 

[Wonderfulspam]

As an observer on WS, two things in particular amuse me.

First is the absolute conviction that because Brueckner has been convicted of other, unrelated crimes, he MUST therefore be responsible for Madeleine's demise - this without any credible evidence at all being in the public domain.
Move over Amaral, Brueckner has supplanted you as the devil incarnate

second is the obsessive poring over the minutiae of Brueckner's life, presumably in the belief that this is going to lead  to the elusive breakthrough that will solve the case.

P.S   Wolters has already solved it, if you're davel.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It appears the WUM is in overdrive, making up for lost time I guess. 

[Wonderfulspam]

It appears the WUM is in overdrive, making up for lost time I guess.

Maybe you should reflect on why it's so damn easy for me to rip the piss out of you with regards to 'the abduction'.
Think about that for a minute.

[Vertigo Swirl]

As an observer on WS, two things in particular amuse me.

First is the absolute conviction that because Brueckner has been convicted of other, unrelated crimes, he MUST therefore be responsible for Madeleine's demise - this without any credible evidence at all being in the public domain.
Move over Amaral, Brueckner has supplanted you as the devil incarnate

second is the obsessive poring over the minutiae of Brueckner's life, presumably in the belief that this is going to lead  to the elusive breakthrough that will solve the case.

You need to remove your fogged up sceptacles (see what I did there) and look again.  I don't see anyone there saying he MUST be responsible for Madeleine's demise, and if there is to be a breakthrough in this case then presumably obsessive poring is one route to achieving this (though this is better achieved by those with access to and full possession of all the known facts and evidence).  As for Bruckner being the devil incarnate - again, I see no one on WS saying this, but he's not a very nice man (though you probably admire him, after all it was only a bit of kiddie fiddling and the old woman was prbably asking for it).

[Mr Gray]

The tired old mantra of no abduction evidence, you mean?

You could just share all the abduction evidence with the forum & put an end to it once & for all.

I wonder why you don't just do that?

It's because there just isn't any, isn't it.

I've explained fully before and have no intention of doing it again. I don't give a toss what you think or believe

[Wonderfulspam]

I've explained fully before and have no intention of doing it again. I don't give a toss what you think or believe

Just get back to me when Wolters reveals the concrete evidence won't you.
Shouldn't be much longer now.