Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB

[G-Unit]

Has any sceptic here or anywhere else ever said “just because DP made a “suggestive gesture” once a couple of years before Madeleine disappeared doesn’t mean he’s involved in Madeleine’s disappearance “?  because I have heard quite a few say something like “just because Bruckner is a burglar, a child abuser and a violent rapist doesn’t mean he’s involved in Madeleine’s disappearance “.  Which sceptics will now step forward and defend DP’s reputation in this way?  Anyone?

Pointing out and discussing the evidence in the files isn't an attack on DP's reputation.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Pointing out and discussing the evidence in the files isn't an attack on DP's reputation.

no of course not.  So you won’t object to a new thread about Murat to discuss the infamous statement from one of his acquaintances then?

[G-Unit]

no of course not.  So you won’t object to a new thread about Murat to discuss the infamous statement from one of his acquaintances then?

If you want one, go ahead.

[Vertigo Swirl]

If you want one, go ahead.

Seriously?  You would authorise a thread devoted to discussing allegations of bestiality against an ex arguido?

[Robittybob1]

Seriously?  You would authorise a thread devoted to discussing allegations of bestiality against an ex arguido?

As a vet I believe it is anatomically impossible to have sex with a cat.

[The General]

As a vet I believe it is anatomically impossible to have sex with a cat.

Post of the Week contender right there.

[Vertigo Swirl]

As a vet I believe it is anatomically impossible to have sex with a cat.

Depends on the anatomy.  Ever heard of a micro-penis?  Anyway, let's open a thread to discuss the issue in depth and see if we can't cast a few more groundless smears at one of the ex-arguidos.  I mean if we can do it for DP who was never even an arguido then why the hell not? 

[Lace]

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.

There's a person on twitter who only the other week called DP and GM paedo's.    He should be prosecuted it's disgraceful.

[The General]

There's a person on twitter who only the other week called DP and GM paedo's.    He should be prosecuted it's disgraceful.

Ring Crimestoppers: 0800 555 111

[Brietta]

I don't see the difference between discussing the evidence in the files mentioning Robert Murat and the evidence mentioning David Payne. Off topic yes, but libelous? I think not.

Then in my opinion you have very little idea regarding libel laws.  In particular innuendo.  Allow me to refer you to:- Summary: Defamation - Meaning – Natural and Ordinary Meaning – Innuendo – Repetition Rule - Social Media

https://www.5rb.com/case/lord-mcalpine-west-green-v-sally-bercow/


Now wouldn't it be a good idea to exercise a little discipline and lead by example just for today and encourage members to stay on the topic of the thread.

[Lace]

Ring Crimestoppers: 0800 555 111

It's not clever to make a joke about it.

[Brietta]

Pointing out and discussing the evidence in the files isn't an attack on DP's reputation.

Not all the evidence in the files we have seen are accurate.  For example no-one here has seen the original Gasper statements.  But Levy has.

[G-Unit]

Depends on the anatomy.  Ever heard of a micro-penis?  Anyway, let's open a thread to discuss the issue in depth and see if we can't cast a few more groundless smears at one of the ex-arguidos.  I mean if we can do it for DP who was never even an arguido then why the hell not?

I'm not sure why you're annoyed.

[G-Unit]

Then in my opinion you have very little idea regarding libel laws.  In particular innuendo.  Allow me to refer you to:- Summary: Defamation - Meaning – Natural and Ordinary Meaning – Innuendo – Repetition Rule - Social Media

https://www.5rb.com/case/lord-mcalpine-west-green-v-sally-bercow/


Now wouldn't it be a good idea to exercise a little discipline and lead by example just for today and encourage members to stay on the topic of the thread.

I will check on whether discussing documented evidence amounts to innuendo. As for staying on topic, I'm happy to insist that everyone does that at all times.

[Brietta]

I will check on whether discussing documented evidence amounts to innuendo. As for staying on topic, I'm happy to insist that everyone does that at all times.

Please do.  You really should know about these things.  In my opinion not just the legality but the morality of repeating allegations which were long since discarded by investigators as having no foundation.