Author Topic: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB  (Read 357573 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 #690 on: September 27, 2020, 09:31:52 PM »
What little I remember of the statement I saw, it was a ramble of if, buts and maybes.
But was this not one of the statements taken in English, translated into Portuguese and then back into English?

it was given in the UK so would have been in english..then translated by the PJ. i dont think anyone ha sseen the original english statement...only the PJ version. So...how accurate is it...no one knows

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #691 on: September 27, 2020, 10:00:35 PM »

Sexual Abuse of a young girl is a serious criminal offence, which leads me to wonder why she didn't report it immediately, making her an accessory, which is also a criminal offence.
No one can explain this, so they willl just ignore it.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #692 on: September 27, 2020, 10:07:24 PM »
No one can explain this, so they willl just ignore it.

I hope that this is true.  Otherwise I might worry about their morals.

Offline pathfinder73

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #693 on: September 27, 2020, 10:17:45 PM »
"The first time I heard of the terrible news about Madeleine's disappearance through the radio, my thoughts went immediately to Dave." KG
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 Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #694 on: September 27, 2020, 10:23:26 PM »
"The first time I heard of the terrible news about Madeleine's disappearance through the radio, my thoughts went immediately to Dave." KG

Fortunately we don't have to worry about your morals.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #695 on: September 27, 2020, 10:25:12 PM »
"The first time I heard of the terrible news about Madeleine's disappearance through the radio, my thoughts went immediately to Dave." KG
So she thought he was a paedo but did nothimg to stop him gaining access to little children including his own?  Why did her thoughts not go straight to Gerry who was allegedly chatting merrily to DP about the abuse of his own daughter? 
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #696 on: September 27, 2020, 10:28:37 PM »
So she thought he was a paedo but did nothimg to stop him gaining access to little children including his own?  Why did her thoughts not go straight to Gerry who was allegedly chatting merrily to DP about the abuse of his own daughter?

Mayhap she didn't care so long as it wasn't her daughter.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #697 on: September 27, 2020, 10:32:59 PM »
Mayhap she didn't care so long as it wasn't her daughter.
What a disgrace to her profession she is then.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #698 on: September 27, 2020, 10:39:05 PM »
What a disgrace to her profession she is then.

Hopefully she was genuinely confused and spent two years worrying about it.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #699 on: September 27, 2020, 10:47:26 PM »
Hopefully she was genuinely confused and spent two years worrying about it.
When you google “Dr David Payne” the first two results link him to paedophilia.  She has a lot  to answer for IMO yet no one here who supports CB’s right not to be linked to Madeleine’s disappearance on the basis of his past misdemeanours hesitate for one second to return again and again to the Gaspar Statement.  By their own rationale (let us not forget) - just because CB abused children (“hardly the crime of the century” as one of them commented) doesn’t mean he had anything to do with Madeleine’s disappearance .   As far as the sceptics on here go it would seem making a suggestive gesture is far more damning than masturbating in front of a child or violently raping an old woman.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2020, 10:57:30 PM by Vertigo Swirl »
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #700 on: September 27, 2020, 10:59:00 PM »
When you google “Dr David Payne” the first two results link him to paedophilia.  She has a lot  to answer for IMO yet no one here who supports CB’s right not to be linked to Madeleine’s disappearance on the basis of his past misdemeanours hesitate for one second to return again and again to the Gaspar Statement.  By their own rationale (let us not forget) - just because CB abused children (“hardly the crime of the century” as one of them commented) doesn’t mean he had anything to do with Madeleine’s disappearance .   As far as the sceptics on here go it would seem making a suggestive gesture is far more damning than masturbating in front of a child or raping an old woman.

To be as fair as is possible, I don't think Katerina Gaspar expected her statement to be made public.  And it wouldn't have been, but for The Portuguese Investigation.

However, the allegation was investigated and dismissed, which wasn't all that surprising under the circumstances.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #701 on: September 27, 2020, 11:15:36 PM »
I hope that this is true.  Otherwise I might worry about their morals.

And yet she did report it, all the while knowing that it may mean trouble for her. That appears to show how much the incident concerned her.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #702 on: September 27, 2020, 11:21:02 PM »
And yet she did report it, all the while knowing that it may mean trouble for her. That appears to show how much the incident concerned her.

Nearly two years later.  What must she have thought was happening in the meantime?

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #703 on: September 27, 2020, 11:23:41 PM »
Nearly two years later.  What must she have thought was happening in the meantime?

You would have to ask her that. The point still stands that she knew she would be questioned on why she hadn’t reported the incident sooner but reported it anyway.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #704 on: September 28, 2020, 12:17:36 AM »
You would have to ask her that. The point still stands that she knew she would be questioned on why she hadn’t reported the incident sooner but reported it anyway.

But she wouldn't have reported it at all if Madeleine hadn't disappeared.  All a bit too late by then, don't you think?