When was Murat ruled out?

[pathfinder73]

Please provide a cite for “the wells were nothing to do woth his suspect”, thanks Sherlock.

I already have.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I already have.

No you haven’t.  Where does it say the well searches were nothing to do with CB?  Please provide a cite.

[G-Unit]

No you haven’t.  Where does it say the well searches were nothing to do with CB?  Please provide a cite.

It was media speculation that they were connected to CB. They also speculated that another twenty were going to be searched and that didn't happen. Media stories are often merely rumour.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It was media speculation that they were connected to CB. They also speculated that another twenty were going to be searched and that didn't happen. Media stories are often merely rumour.

Pathfinder has stated as fact that the well searches were nothing to do with CB.  What are you going to do about it Moderator?

[Eleanor]

No you haven’t.  Where does it say the well searches were nothing to do with CB?  Please provide a cite.

Don't even bother to ask.  The Sceptics will defend Brueckner in a way in which they will never defend The McCanns.  They actually want The McCanns to be guilty and would so much rather that some horror story didn't do this.

I have no real understanding of this.  I don't understand people like this, excepting that it is in genes.  Some people are born thinking like this.  It happened many centuries ago.  And nothing to be done about it now.

These were these people at The Village Pump who still exist to this day.  The Internet is only The Village Pump.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Yeah blunders - talking about the PJ searching the wells that have nothing to do with his suspect etc. He would have been told to keep his trap shut.

^^^ Pathfinder tells us that the well searches have  nothing to do with CB.  Is this now an established fact?  I thought we didn’t accept such statements without proper cites, one that explicitly states the well searches were unconnected with the german suspect. 

[faithlilly]

Don't even bother to ask.  The Sceptics will defend Brueckner in a way in which they will never defend The McCanns.  They actually want The McCanns to be guilty and would so much rather that some horror story didn't do this.

I have no real understanding of this.  I don't understand people like this, excepting that it is in genes.  Some people are born thinking like this.  It happened many centuries ago.  And nothing to be done about it now.

These were these people at The Village Pump who still exist to this day.  The Internet is only The Village Pump.

Who is defending Brueckner ? I thought you were all for innocent until proven guilty ? Brueckner is a nasty piece of work, you have no argument there, but, so far there is absolutely nothing in the public domain that categorically ties him to the McCann case and until there is he, in your own words, is innocent. Does that mean you are defending him too ?

[Eleanor]

^^^ Pathfinder tells us that the well searches have  nothing to do with CB.  Is this now an established fact?  I thought we didn’t accept such statements without proper cites, one that explicitly states the well searches were unconnected with the german suspect.

It doesn't actually matter.  The Germans will get him, or not.  But I don't think he will be running free any time soon.

Madeleine?  Perhaps a bit too late now and I am tired of blaming Amaral.  He was just a walking disaster and we all know that.

He tried to involve Robert Murat, but only because he knew that The McCanns could not have done this alone.

Amaral was one very stupid and very nasty little man. On his own head be it.

[Eleanor]

Who is defending Brueckner ? I thought you were all for innocent until proven guilty ? Brueckner is a nasty piece of work, you have no argument there, but, so far there is absolutely nothing in the public domain that categorically ties him to the McCann case and until there is he, in your own words, is innocent. Does that mean you are defending him too ?

I don't have to defend him.  It ain't my bag, Mate.  I have always been more concerned with the Innocence of The McCanns.

I am just having a bit of a bad one with the rampant effing hypocrisy.  Which I certainly don't need to explain to you.

[faithlilly]

I don't have to defend him.  It ain't my bag, Mate.  I have always been more concerned with the Innocence of The McCanns.

I am just having a bit of a bad one with the rampant effing hypocrisy.  Which I certainly don't need to explain to you.

Hypocrisy works both ways and those who cried the loudest about a lack of evidence against the parents, even before the files were released, are the same members now hanging Brueckner before a scintilla of direct evidence against him has been produced.

[pathfinder73]

No you haven’t.  Where does it say the well searches were nothing to do with CB?  Please provide a cite.

The Germans would know if the PJ was carrying out searches to do with their suspect. Wolters did not know anything about it as he was reported to have said. You are definitely no Sherlock 

[faithlilly]

I don't have to defend him.  It ain't my bag, Mate.  I have always been more concerned with the Innocence of The McCanns.

I am just having a bit of a bad one with the rampant effing hypocrisy.  Which I certainly don't need to explain to you.

Are posts that break no forum rules deleted on a whim now ?

[Vertigo Swirl]

The Germans would know if the PJ was carrying out searches to do with their suspect. Wolters did not know anything about it as he was reported to have said. You are definitely no Sherlock 

So no cite then, just an insult, why am I not surprised?

[Brietta]

Are posts that break no forum rules deleted on a whim now ?

Posts which break forum rules are NOT deleted on a whim.  They are deleted because they are breaking forum rules just exactly as this goading , looking for trouble one is.

Not to mention that it is off topic and should have been posted elsewhere in its own special thread http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8404.msg419741#msg419741


This is a new day.  Let's start it off without snide remarks (against forum rules) and criticism of moderation (against forum rules) and moderators (against forum rules).

That short sentence you posted contains how many reasons (all rule breakers) for deletion????????????????

In my opinion were posters to post more responsibly and with more thought there would be far fewer deletions as well as a better posting experience for all members.

[Angelo222]

Are posts that break no forum rules deleted on a whim now ?

Absolutely not and this is being addressed.