Does Wolters have photographic evidence?

[Wonderfulspam]

Wolters has claimed he does have evidence of Brückner’s involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.  He claims that if we knew what it was we would agree with him.  I take it you have privileged access to this evidence and can state as fact that he has nothing at all?  If so what is it, perhaps you can tell us?

He claims a lot. But what evidence has he actually shown, other than nothing?

[barrier]

Wolters has claimed he does have evidence of Brückner’s involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.  He claims that if we knew what it was we would agree with him.  I take it you have privileged access to this evidence and can state as fact that he has nothing at all?  If so what is it, perhaps you can tell us?

Supposed involvement doesn't make him a killer.

[Vertigo Swirl]

He claims a lot. But what evidence has he actually shown, other than nothing?

you mean he hasn't shown you what he's got but you know it's nothing at all?  Right you are then. 

[Wonderfulspam]

you mean he hasn't shown you what he's got but you know it's nothing at all?  Right you are then.

Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

But let's start at the beginning.

What evidence is there Maddie was abducted?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Supposed involvement doesn't make him a killer.

I think Wolters has claimed that he has evidence Madeleine was murdered by Bruckner and this is the evidence he has declined to share.  Do you think he is 100% lying and if so to what end, and why is he presumably being supported by his superiors?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

But let's start at the beginning.

What evidence is there Maddie was abducted?

there's no point discussing it with you because you refuse to accept that there is any.  You are completely close minded to that possibility and appear quite certain that Madeleine was murdered by her parents. 

[barrier]

Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

But let's start at the beginning.

What evidence is there Maddie was abducted?

Starter for 10.

[Vertigo Swirl]

If there is more evidence that the McCanns hid their child's body than that she was abducted then why are they not currently being investigated by the three police forces looking into the disappearance?  There's another starter for 10 for you.

[barrier]

I think Wolters has claimed that he has evidence Madeleine was murdered by Bruckner and this is the evidence he has declined to share.  Do you think he is 100% lying and if so to what end, and why is he presumably being supported by his superiors?

Has he ever claimed his suspect actually killed the girl, if so why can't he lay charges, think it through.

[Wonderfulspam]

there's no point discussing it with you because you refuse to accept that there is any.  You are completely close minded to that possibility and appear quite certain that Madeleine was murdered by her parents.

The police have spent 14 years investigating & have presented no abduction evidence, other than a sighting of Gerry, it's not unreasonable therefore to believe they have sod all.

[barrier]

If there is more evidence that the McCanns hid their child's body than that she was abducted then why are they not currently being investigated by the three police forces looking into the disappearance?  There's another starter for 10 for you.

This is a thread about photographic evidence. Simple answer, yes he found/saw the bundle Smithman put down and opened it, boy did he get a surprise, took a photo for some perverted pleasure/insurance, prove it wrong mr prosecutor, CB never abducted any live body.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Has he ever claimed his suspect actually killed the girl, if so why can't he lay charges, think it through.

Because he doesn't have proof, and therefore the charges may not stick.

[Wonderfulspam]

Because he doesn't have proof, and therefore the charges may not stick.

He doesn't even have evidence.

[Vertigo Swirl]

The police have spent 14 years investigating & have presented no abduction evidence, other than a sighting of Gerry, it's not unreasonable therefore to believe they have sod all.

a proven sighting of Gerry or a doubtful one?

[Vertigo Swirl]

He doesn't even have evidence.

How do you know?