Author Topic: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB  (Read 357995 times)

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1215 on: October 09, 2020, 08:09:22 AM »
I don't think your post bears any relation to the post you appear to be answering.  Kindly elucidate.

I don't know what you mean.
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 #1216 on: October 09, 2020, 10:44:23 AM »
Correct. Why do you state this?

Why I state it because four months ago all hell broke loose it was on every media out let possible.

Nothing has moved since, HCW certainly made a name for himself but seems it has backed fired.

They have known about CB for 3 years so surely you would think after the massive publicity in the case if they had what they said charges would have been made.

What we know is hearsay a phone ping and trial by media.

HCW I believe had an ulterior motive to keep CW in jail Maddie was used for maximum publicity. IMO.

Now he has gone deathly quiet, so has D it seems.

Offline Erngath

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1217 on: October 09, 2020, 10:49:12 AM »
Why I state it because four months ago all hell broke loose it was on every media out let possible.

Nothing has moved since, HCW certainly made a name for himself but seems it has backed fired.

They have known about CB for 3 years so surely you would think after the massive publicity in the case if they had what they said charges would have been made.

What we know is hearsay a phone ping and trial by media.

HCW I believe had an ulterior motive to keep CW in jail Maddie was used for maximum publicity. IMO.

Now he has gone deathly quiet, so has D it seems.

Who is D?
Deal with the failings of others as gently as with your own.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1218 on: October 09, 2020, 11:01:31 AM »
Who is D?
Davel
He said he was taking a break.  Which is rather good TBH.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Erngath

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1219 on: October 09, 2020, 11:10:12 AM »
Davel
He said he was taking a break.  Which is rather good TBH.

I do wish posters would not shorten user names to one initial.
.Really doesn't take much more effort to type the full name.
Why do you think it is  rather good?
Deal with the failings of others as gently as with your own.

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1220 on: October 09, 2020, 11:14:08 AM »
I do wish posters would not shorten user names to one initial.
.Really doesn't take much more effort to type the full name.
Why do you think it is  rather good?

Best stay on topic.

Offline Erngath

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1221 on: October 09, 2020, 11:15:06 AM »
Best stay on topic.

You took it off topic.
Deal with the failings of others as gently as with your own.

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1222 on: October 09, 2020, 11:27:57 AM »
You took it off topic.

How do you work that out ...I was answering a post ....and on topic...regarding CB


Offline Erngath

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1223 on: October 09, 2020, 11:41:14 AM »
How do you work that out ...I was answering a post ....and on topic...regarding CB


Your last four words plus one initial.
Best stay on topic now.
Deal with the failings of others as gently as with your own.

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1224 on: October 09, 2020, 11:53:30 AM »

Your last four words plus one initial.
Best stay on topic now.

Whats your problem ..it was a comment in with my on-topic post ..so best u stay in topic.

Seems the circumstantial evidence is running very thin against CB though.




Offline Erngath

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1225 on: October 09, 2020, 12:02:40 PM »
Whats your problem ..it was a comment in with my on-topic post ..so best u stay in topic.

Seems the circumstantial evidence is running very thin against CB though.

I didn't know who D was.
Why you felt the need to make any reference to D  in your post is rather puzzling.
So you went.off topic.
Busy at the moment.
Will leave you to continue speculating about what or may not be happening with CB.
Deal with the failings of others as gently as with your own.

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1226 on: October 09, 2020, 12:28:43 PM »
I didn't know who D was.
Why you felt the need to make any reference to D  in your post is rather puzzling.
So you went.off topic.
Busy at the moment.
Will leave you to continue speculating about what or may not be happening with CB.

No, what is puzzling is why you think I have to explain my posts to you.


Offline barrier

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1227 on: October 09, 2020, 12:47:44 PM »
Why I state it because four months ago all hell broke loose it was on every media out let possible.

Nothing has moved since, HCW certainly made a name for himself but seems it has backed fired.

They have known about CB for 3 years so surely you would think after the massive publicity in the case if they had what they said charges would have been made.

What we know is hearsay a phone ping and trial by media.

HCW I believe had an ulterior motive to keep CW in jail Maddie was used for maximum publicity. IMO.

Now he has gone deathly quiet, so has D it seems.

The information about the supposed phone call is no longer being sought by SY,Wolters says his man acted alone,so the phone call by that can be ruled out,next. (&^&
This is my own private domicile and I shall not be harassed, biatch:Jesse Pinkman Character.

Offline Brietta

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1228 on: October 09, 2020, 02:34:01 PM »
I don't know what you mean.

That's a pity.  I'm sure if you give it some thought you will be able to work it out.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline Brietta

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1229 on: October 09, 2020, 02:43:04 PM »
The information about the supposed phone call is no longer being sought by SY,Wolters says his man acted alone,so the phone call by that can be ruled out,next. (&^&

I think you have misinterpreted the meaning of what is going on.  It is my experience that once the police have made an appeal and received the information requested they just get on with the job of building their case.

Why repeat requests for information they may already have.  That would not only be silly it would be inefficient.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....