Author Topic: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB  (Read 358243 times)

0 Members and 16 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1350 on: October 14, 2020, 02:30:32 PM »
It's a discussion forum...if I want to give my opinion on your posts that's up to me. If someone said the earth was flat I would consider that ridiculous..that's how I see your posts

Well I'm not saying the earth is flat ...I'm saying I believe the mccs are involved in what happened to Maddie.

 

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1351 on: October 14, 2020, 02:32:29 PM »
Well I'm not saying the earth is flat ...I'm saying I believe the mccs are involved in what happened to Maddie.

and I think you have misunderstood all the evidence.....

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1352 on: October 14, 2020, 02:54:32 PM »
Well I'm not saying the earth is flat ...I'm saying I believe the mccs are involved in what happened to Maddie.

One of those statements could be described as ridiculous because we have evidence which proves it's false. The other isn't ridiculous because there's not evidence which proves it's false. Unlike the flat earth idea it's a belief shared by many other perfectly sensible people.

The constant attempts by some to suggest that you and others like you are lacking in some way suggests, in my opinion, that they are unable to find any evidence which proves you are wrong.
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 Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1353 on: October 14, 2020, 03:02:04 PM »

What is happening on this Forum at the moment is quite ridiculous.

The McCanns, against whom no real evidence has ever been found, are Guilty, while Brueckner who is an absolute s..m bag and convicted Paedophile and Rapist is Innocent.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1354 on: October 14, 2020, 03:04:19 PM »
One of those statements could be described as ridiculous because we have evidence which proves it's false. The other isn't ridiculous because there's not evidence which proves it's false. Unlike the flat earth idea it's a belief shared by many other perfectly sensible people.

The constant attempts by some to suggest that you and others like you are lacking in some way suggests, in my opinion, that they are unable to find any evidence which proves you are wrong.

if you had followed the posts you would understand that what I said was ridiculous was Kizzys post taht if CB was cleared...that would leave the McCanns....I think that is a ridiculous post...perhaps you agree with it.

Theres lots of evidence to show amarals theory is wrong but its basically impossible to prove anything on a discussion forum.

First amaral based his theory on flawed evidence...he clearly did not understand the basics

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1355 on: October 14, 2020, 03:05:33 PM »
What is happening on this Forum at the moment is quite ridiculous.

The McCanns, against whom no real evidence has ever been found, are Guilty, while Brueckner who is an absolute s..m bag and convicted Paedophile and Rapist is Innocent.

thats basically the sceptic position....as barmy as it might sound

Offline barrier

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1356 on: October 14, 2020, 03:07:24 PM »
What is happening on this Forum at the moment is quite ridiculous.

The McCanns, against whom no real evidence has ever been found, are Guilty, while Brueckner who is an absolute s..m bag and convicted Paedophile and Rapist is Innocent.

They are both innocent and thats that, suspicions remain depending on your point of view.
This is my own private domicile and I shall not be harassed, biatch:Jesse Pinkman Character.

Offline jassi

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1357 on: October 14, 2020, 03:08:09 PM »
What is happening on this Forum at the moment is quite ridiculous.

The McCanns, against whom no real evidence has ever been found, are Guilty, while Brueckner who is an absolute s..m bag and convicted Paedophile and Rapist is Innocent.

Such is life.
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1358 on: October 14, 2020, 03:10:47 PM »
Such is life.

Not according to The Law, it isn't.

Offline The General

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1359 on: October 14, 2020, 03:20:58 PM »
thats basically the sceptic position....as barmy as it might sound
That does sound barmy, because it's a fallacy of your creation.
Subject Matter Expert - Hobos.

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1360 on: October 14, 2020, 03:25:15 PM »
That does sound barmy, because it's a fallacy of your creation.

No it isn't.  I made the Comment in the first place so why not have a go at me.  Why pick on Davel who merely agreed with me?

Offline kizzy

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1361 on: October 14, 2020, 03:28:55 PM »
What is happening on this Forum at the moment is quite ridiculous.

The McCanns, against whom no real evidence has ever been found, are Guilty, while Brueckner who is an absolute s..m bag and convicted Paedophile and Rapist is Innocent.

I don't think it is as straight forward as that.

If you dont believe as the mccs say that Maddie was abducted from her bed.

How can I think that CB abducted Maddie ...regardless of what he is - although I do agree on your description of him.

That doesn't make him an abducter.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1362 on: October 14, 2020, 03:31:38 PM »
That does sound barmy, because it's a fallacy of your creation.

No it isn't...most sceptics believe the McCanns guilty and CB innocent

Offline barrier

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1363 on: October 14, 2020, 03:32:02 PM »
What is happening on this Forum at the moment is quite ridiculous.

The McCanns, against whom no real evidence has ever been found, are Guilty, while Brueckner who is an absolute s..m bag and convicted Paedophile and Rapist is Innocent.

Think what you like of CB until due process of law as been undertaken, what is your view on his innocence in the McCann case.
This is my own private domicile and I shall not be harassed, biatch:Jesse Pinkman Character.

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Is there more circumstantial evidence against the mccanns than there is CB
« Reply #1364 on: October 14, 2020, 03:33:30 PM »
Think what you like of CB until due process of law as been undertaken, what is your view on his innocence in the McCann case.
My view is that he may well be guilty...I can't say for certain...as Amaral did re the McCanns