Author Topic: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB  (Read 357717 times)

0 Members and 26 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #390 on: September 21, 2020, 02:41:47 PM »
Mostly media gossip in my opinion. The only bit of interest is Wolter's 'concrete' evidence, which is unknown.

I think thats quite ridiculous to write it all of as media gossip., but it doesnt matter becauses we will soon know exactly whats happening

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #391 on: September 21, 2020, 02:42:40 PM »
Mostly media gossip in my opinion. The only bit of interest is Wolter's 'concrete' evidence, which is unknown.

I think thats quite ridiculous to write it all of as media gossip., but it doesnt matter becauses we will soon know exactly whats happening

Offline The General

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #392 on: September 21, 2020, 03:09:12 PM »
I think thats quite ridiculous to write it all of as media gossip., but it doesnt matter becauses we will soon know exactly whats happening
OK, OK, we get the message.

....there's every chance we will hear nada / nicht. It's now what's been labelled by insiders as The Wolters Paradox; - if they don't receive any further leads, then they can't do anything but sit on it, despite his assertion to the contrary, or he'll look like a prize tit on a table and probably get the Spanish Archer.
If he does get something meaningful, then it will have to be chased down like all the other 'drinking buddy', 'burglar in tandem', 'battered ex', 'erstwhile drug dealer', 'allotment owner' leads that never came to fruition - and then cast aside and rinse and repeat.

Hunker down ladies, we're in for a bleak deutscher Winter
Subject Matter Expert - Hobos.

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #393 on: September 21, 2020, 03:36:47 PM »
I think thats quite ridiculous to write it all of as media gossip., but it doesnt matter becauses we will soon know exactly whats happening

Surely you can see whats happening now .....nothing.

Seems he is just now waiting for all the terrified people coming forward.

Bit rich being terrified of him when he is in prison.

Especially if they are sitting on information to keep him in there for a long time ...lol.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #394 on: September 21, 2020, 03:44:46 PM »
Surely you can see whats happening now .....nothing.

Seems he is just now waiting for all the terrified people coming forward.

Bit rich being terrified of him when he is in prison.

Especially if they are sitting on information to keep him in there for a long time ...lol.

I think theres a lot going on and I think we will see charges against  CB

His lawyer has been to Portugal looking for evidence  for the defence.... He must therefore see charges as a possibly
« Last Edit: September 21, 2020, 03:58:16 PM by Davel »

Offline The General

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #395 on: September 21, 2020, 04:06:18 PM »
I think theres a lot going on and I think we will see charges against  CB

His lawyer has been to Portugal looking for evidence  for the defence.... He must therefore see charges as a possibly
Quite the opposite. He stated that he had something revealed to him (oooohhh, Matron) and it was 'big news' or some such or other. Reads like a discarded Carry On film, granted, but he didn't come across (ooh errr) as a defeated man, quite the opposite, he was quite ebullient.
Still reminds me of Martin Prince, Jr. off The Simpsons though.
Subject Matter Expert - Hobos.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #396 on: September 21, 2020, 04:21:03 PM »
Quite the opposite. He stated that he had something revealed to him (oooohhh, Matron) and it was 'big news' or some such or other. Reads like a discarded Carry On film, granted, but he didn't come across (ooh errr) as a defeated man, quite the opposite, he was quite ebullient.
Still reminds me of Martin Prince, Jr. off The Simpsons though.


We simply have to wait and see

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #397 on: September 21, 2020, 04:31:31 PM »
Fgs was he the only one in the area [unique like] ..same as the unique abduction.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11819000

Brown said it was "extremely unlikely" anyone from a child sex ring would have abducted Madeleine. She said children could be illegally bought in some poor areas or "easily taken from drug addicts and prostitutes".

"Even blonde ones," she said.

'They're not going to steal a British tourist from a holiday resort because they know that will prompt a major investigation into them."
Brown?  Would that be PAT Brown by any chance?  @)(++(*
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Lace

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #398 on: September 21, 2020, 05:31:55 PM »
Fgs was he the only one in the area [unique like] ..same as the unique abduction.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11819000

Brown said it was "extremely unlikely" anyone from a child sex ring would have abducted Madeleine. She said children could be illegally bought in some poor areas or "easily taken from drug addicts and prostitutes".

"Even blonde ones," she said.

'They're not going to steal a British tourist from a holiday resort because they know that will prompt a major investigation into them."


Is she saying they would say no to a child if offered one for payment?

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #399 on: September 21, 2020, 05:41:36 PM »

Is she saying they would say no to a child if offered one for payment?

In the weeks following Madeleine McCann's disappearance anyone touching her with a bargepole would have had to be mentally challenged.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #400 on: September 21, 2020, 05:59:49 PM »

Is she saying they would say no to a child if offered one for payment?


She is saying they would not want a high profile British girl....stolen while on holiday when there is.


Brown said it was "extremely unlikely" anyone from a child sex ring would have abducted Madeleine. She said children could be illegally bought in some poor areas or "easily taken from drug addicts and prostitutes".

"Even blonde ones," she said.

'They're not going to steal a British tourist from a holiday resort because they know that will prompt a major investigation into them."






While profiling the case, Brown developed a theory about what happened to Madeleine.

"When I do a crime scene analysis it is a theory based on evidence to then be given to police and used to look for more proof and evidence suitable for prosecution," she said.

"When I analysed [Madeleine's] case, it led me to believe evidence does not support an abduction.

"An abduction was extremely unlikely based on the amount of time, evidence at the scene, and every other shred of evidence there has ever been."

Brown said Madeleine most likely died in an accident that was "covered up".

"The evidence supports the theory of an accident occurring through neglect and possible medication," she said.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #401 on: September 21, 2020, 06:02:21 PM »
In the weeks following Madeleine McCann's disappearance anyone touching her with a bargepole would have had to be mentally challenged.
I personally think anyone carrying their dead daughter through a holiday resort in order to hide the body moments before/after the alarm was raised regarding her disappearance would have to be mentally challenged.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2020, 06:35:10 PM by Vertigo Swirl »
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #402 on: September 21, 2020, 06:40:15 PM »
Pat Brown said
"An abduction was extremely unlikely based on the amount of time, evidence at the scene, and every other shred of evidence there has ever been."

Wow, compelling argument.  What evidence at the scene?  What other shreds of evidence have there ever been? 
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline pathfinder73

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #403 on: September 21, 2020, 08:01:22 PM »
I personally think anyone carrying their dead daughter through a holiday resort in order to hide the body moments before/after the alarm was raised regarding her disappearance would have to be mentally challenged.

Depends on how she died and what an autopsy would reveal! The consequences could be far worse.
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #404 on: September 21, 2020, 08:23:55 PM »
Depends on how she died and what an autopsy would reveal! The consequences could be far worse.
Far worse than being caught disposing of your daughter’s body in a bin?  Another illogical comment imo.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".