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

[jassi]

We are all just fed up with waiting to see.  It doesn't really matter who wins.  Someone will.

There'll really only be losers, whatever the outcome.

[Eleanor]

There'll really only be losers, whatever the outcome.

Madeleine could still be alive.

[Brietta]

Madeleine could still be alive.

The only way to know that for sure is for investigators to find out categorically what happened to her and I think we are nearing that point.

[G-Unit]

I don't think it's about winning.

It's more for me about what you believe to be true.

I have said before if I believed the mccs were innocent I wouldn't be on any of the threads.

I wouldn't see the point.

What fascinates me is that there was no miscarriage of justice per se, because no-one was ever tried for any crime. I agree with the conclusions of the first investigation;

it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Since that was written in 2008 I have seen no new evidence suggesting that any one of those possibilities could be seen as the only possibility. I have had to assume, therefore, that all the investigators since 2008 are relying on their own opinions of what crime was committed rather than on evidence.

[Vertigo Swirl]

What fascinates me is that there was no miscarriage of justice per se, because no-one was ever tried for any crime. I agree with the conclusions of the first investigation;

it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Since that was written in 2008 I have seen no new evidence suggesting that any one of those possibilities could be seen as the only possibility. I have had to assume, therefore, that all the investigators since 2008 are relying on their own opinions of what crime was committed rather than on evidence.

why would you expect to be privy to new evidence uncovered since 2008?  As far as I’m aware they don’t have to run it past you first for approval.

[jassi]

What fascinates me is that there was no miscarriage of justice per se, because no-one was ever tried for any crime. I agree with the conclusions of the first investigation;

it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Since that was written in 2008 I have seen no new evidence suggesting that any one of those possibilities could be seen as the only possibility. I have had to assume, therefore, that all the investigators since 2008 are relying on their own opinions of what crime was committed rather than on evidence.

Or following instructions .

[barrier]

I thought it was King Solomon. Pride goes before destruction, and haughtiness before a fall. – Proverbs 16:18

The fall was originally thought to be a downfall,lapse, ergo eve was the first.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Or following instructions .

That’ll be them Lizard Folk at Q Anon.

[kizzy]

What fascinates me is that there was no miscarriage of justice per se, because no-one was ever tried for any crime. I agree with the conclusions of the first investigation;

it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Since that was written in 2008 I have seen no new evidence suggesting that any one of those possibilities could be seen as the only possibility. I have had to assume, therefore, that all the investigators since 2008 are relying on their own opinions of what crime was committed rather than on evidence.

 

[Mr Gray]

What fascinates me is that there was no miscarriage of justice per se, because no-one was ever tried for any crime. I agree with the conclusions of the first investigation;

it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Since that was written in 2008 I have seen no new evidence suggesting that any one of those possibilities could be seen as the only possibility. I have had to assume, therefore, that all the investigators since 2008 are relying on their own opinions of what crime was committed rather than on evidence.

From everything Wolters has said I'm fairly sure he knows exactly how Madeleine died.... And has the evidence to support it.

[faithlilly]

From everything Wolters has said I'm fairly sure he knows exactly how Madeleine died.... And has the evidence to support it.

Fairly?

[barrier]

Fairly?

Different from concrete, but Wolters can't convince himself, being a prosecutor an all.

[Mr Gray]

Fairly?

Almost certain

[Mr Gray]

Different from concrete, but Wolters can't convince himself, being a prosecutor an all.

You need to differentiate between the evidence Maddie is dead and the evidence CB did it

[Robittybob1]

Bible.

Read the whole Bible.