Does Wolters have photographic evidence?

[Mr Gray]

Your first mistake is thinking that I wrote  some say he has, I wrote some like to think, (actually they dont) nil point for you there.

Read it again... Its some think he May heve photo evidence.. Not that he has. There are 4 or 5 statements that suggest photographic evidence... I think he may well have photos/video... But I'm certainly not sure. I'm very  confident he has some very strong evidence of of abduction and death

[Mr Gray]

If true, not a big enough one, CB isn't one of those arrested is he?

HCW has explained that CB will only be arrested and questioned when his investigation is complete

[The General]

Read it again... Its some think he May heve photo evidence.. Not that he has. There are 4 or 5 statements that suggest photographic evidence... I think he may well have photos/video... But I'm certainly not sure. I'm very  confident he has some very strong evidence of of abduction and death

We know what it isn't.
We also know it's not enough.
We also know CB can't be physically linked.
Ergo, we know what it is. He's told us by not telling us.

[Brietta]

Your first mistake is thinking that I wrote  some say he has, I wrote some like to think, (actually they dont) nil point for you there.

I think your mistake is in thinking that anyone pays much attention to what sceptics are saying in their ongoing retreat from reality.

Ostriches don't really bury their heads in the sand you know.  It is an illusion.  It just looks as though they do because they think if they get their heads low enough and can't see what's coming - it won't see them either and pass them by.

Amaral has made an absolute prat of himself in ways that cannot be explained or justified.

The investigation into what happened to Madeleine carries on apace and on this thread the discussion is the photographic evidence Wolters has accumulated.
There is no question he has photographic evidence the only question is what does it contain.

Whatever is going to be revealed will be in the fullness of time; deflecting from what is presently happening just won't make it go away and if it weren't such a heart breaking issue the obvious discomfiture of sceptics would be a joy to behold.

[Mr Gray]

We know what it isn't.
We also know it's not enough.
We also know CB can't be physically linked.
Ergo, we know what it is. He's told us by not telling us.

We don't know what it is as you claim.. I know what it might be... He's told us without telling us perhaps

[kizzy]

I think your mistake is in thinking that anyone pays much attention to what sceptics are saying in their ongoing retreat from reality.

Ostriches don't really bury their heads in the sand you know.  It is an illusion.  It just looks as though they do because they think if they get their heads low enough and can't see what's coming - it won't see them either and pass them by.

Amaral has made an absolute prat of himself in ways that cannot be explained or justified.

The investigation into what happened to Madeleine carries on apace and on this thread the discussion is the photographic evidence Wolters has accumulated.
There is no question he has photographic evidence the only question is what does it contain.

Whatever is going to be revealed will be in the fullness of time; deflecting from what is presently happening just won't make it go away and if it weren't such a heart breaking issue the obvious discomfiture of sceptics would be a joy to behold.

Amaral has made an absolute prat of himself in ways that cannot be explained or justified.

 ......What makes you think wolt isn't going to do the same.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

I think your mistake is in thinking that anyone pays much attention to what sceptics are saying in their ongoing retreat from reality.

Ostriches don't really bury their heads in the sand you know.  It is an illusion.  It just looks as though they do because they think if they get their heads low enough and can't see what's coming - it won't see them either and pass them by.

Amaral has made an absolute prat of himself in ways that cannot be explained or justified.

The investigation into what happened to Madeleine carries on apace and on this thread the discussion is the photographic evidence Wolters has accumulated.
There is no question he has photographic evidence the only question is what does it contain.

Whatever is going to be revealed will be in the fullness of time; deflecting from what is presently happening just won't make it go away and if it weren't such a heart breaking issue the obvious discomfiture of sceptics would be a joy to behold.

This post contains an absolute falsehood.

In evolutionary terms if ostriches really did apply the strategy you suggest they would be an easy meal for any predator large enough to take them down. They do in fact run very fast to escape predators, the head in the sand adage comes from their behaviour after they have laid their eggs in a hollow in the sand and they turn the eggs regularly.

Sheesh, there is enough misinformation on this forum without starting on the ostriches.

[Brietta]

This post contains an absolute falsehood.

In evolutionary terms if ostriches really did apply the strategy you suggest they would be an easy meal for any predator large enough to take them down. They do in fact run very fast to escape predators, the head in the sand adage comes from their behaviour after they have laid their eggs in a hollow in the sand and they turn the eggs regularly.

Sheesh, there is enough misinformation on this forum without starting on the ostriches.

The myth is that ostriches bury their heads in the sand - it is no myth that sceptics actually do.
             Absolutely correct that lifting a huge egg and running with it wouldn't help the reproduction process - glad you set the record straight on that very important issue 🤓 but it goes nowhere near scratching the surface of the quandary that sceptics have trapped themselves in as they continue their unfavourable assessment of Wolters v eulogising the expertise of Amaral and his botched investigation.

Much of the evidence 'discovered' by Redwood and later reinforced by Wolters was there in 2007 if Amaral et al had bothered looking beyond their navels and the McCann phone records to see it.

Why I wonder is there such sceptic resistance to the fact that Wolters might have the evidence which will crack this crime.  One could be forgiven for thinking they don't want it solved ~ certainly 'dreadlocks man' Amaral seems to be cheerleading that camp.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

The myth is that ostriches bury their heads in the sand - it is no myth that sceptics actually do.
             Absolutely correct that lifting a huge egg and running with it wouldn't help the reproduction process - glad you set the record straight on that very important issue 🤓 but it goes nowhere near scratching the surface of the quandary that sceptics have trapped themselves in as they continue their unfavourable assessment of Wolters v eulogising the expertise of Amaral and his botched investigation.

Much of the evidence 'discovered' by Redwood and later reinforced by Wolters was there in 2007 if Amaral et al had bothered looking beyond their navels and the McCann phone records to see it.

Why I wonder is there such sceptic resistance to the fact that Wolters might have the evidence which will crack this crime.  One could be forgiven for thinking they don't want it solved ~ certainly 'dreadlocks man' Amaral seems to be cheerleading that camp.

I am guessing that you are including me in this cabal of sceptics, do you believe I have my head in the sand?

[Mr Gray]

I am guessing that you are including me in this cabal of sceptics, do you believe I have my head in the sand?

I think anyone who has written HCW off has their head in the sand

[Angelo222]

The myth is that ostriches bury their heads in the sand - it is no myth that sceptics actually do.
             Absolutely correct that lifting a huge egg and running with it wouldn't help the reproduction process - glad you set the record straight on that very important issue  but it goes nowhere near scratching the surface of the quandary that sceptics have trapped themselves in as they continue their unfavourable assessment of Wolters v eulogising the expertise of Amaral and his botched investigation.

Much of the evidence 'discovered' by Redwood and later reinforced by Wolters was there in 2007 if Amaral et al had bothered looking beyond their navels and the McCann phone records to see it.

Why I wonder is there such sceptic resistance to the fact that Wolters might have the evidence which will crack this crime.  One could be forgiven for thinking they don't want it solved ~ certainly 'dreadlocks man' Amaral seems to be cheerleading that camp.

I think that you will find that Redwood found nothing really. All he did was spend a pile of public money on yet another wild goose chase. Wolters too has nothing imo but then, time will tell.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

I think anyone who has written HCW off has their head in the sand

But I haven't written him off, I am waiting to hear him present his evidence. Not soundbites, but evidence.
Nothing so far has convinced me he has any tangible evidence but he may well have, we will see in the fullness of time.
Quick question, how long do you give HCW?, 1 more year, 5 years, 20 years?

[jassi]

Has Wolters been written off ? I don't think so.
It's just that he's not proving to be a man of action at the moment, so it's more a case of 'wait and see', rather than relying on blind faith.

IMO

[jassi]

But I haven't written him off, I am waiting to hear him present his evidence. Not soundbites, but evidence.
Nothing so far has convinced me he has any tangible evidence but he may well have, we will see in the fullness of time.
Quick question, how long do you give HCW?, 1 more year, 5 years, 20 years?

If he follows the Grange model of funding, it will be when the money runs out.

[Brietta]

I think that you will find that Redwood found nothing really. All he did was spend a pile of public money on yet another wild goose chase. Wolters too has nothing imo but then, time will tell.

Redwood pointed the investigation towards burglars and criminal phones in use in Luz on the night Madeleine disappeared.

He acknowledged that the attacks on children under their own roofs which were commonplace occurrences in the Algarve merited investigation.  Not only in relation to Madeleine but because serious crimes had been committed on other little girls.

What he didn't have was access to Portuguese records on Brueckner;  the Portuguese did had they wanted and the opportunity to scrutinise them was squandered in favour of the unfounded and ill thought theories of an incompetent.

It took till 2013 before anyone bothered to broaden their horizons - all Wolters has done is to follow the evidence as it developed to its logical conclusion - and that process isn't finished yet.