Have we learned anything new after almost 16 years?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Unless it was a deliberate conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by providing false alibis.
I believe criminals do it all the time.  Even MPs have been known to use  such antics.

and so there we have it.  A deliberate conspiracy amongst the Tapas 9  is really the only way that the Smith sighting can possibly be given legitimacy.  But how often are we told by sceptics on here that they don’t think there was any conspiracy?  Guys, you can’t have it both ways, sorry.

[Wonderfulspam]

So seven people giving someone an alibi are hardly likely to be lying.

They could have been mistaken about the exact time.

[Brietta]

Pass the sick bowl please.  This sort of repetitive nonsense requires one and another on standby.  Simply incredible!

[Brietta]

and so there we have it.  A deliberate conspiracy amongst the Tapas 9  is really the only way that the Smith sighting can possibly be given legitimacy.  But how often are we told by sceptics on here that they don’t think there was any conspiracy?  Guys, you can’t have it both ways, sorry.

I would have been less incredulous if Peter had remembered he wasn't dreaming it but may actually have lived it.

Some stereotypes are actually bolstered on occasion and I think this episode may well be one of them.

[Wonderfulspam]

Pass the sick bowl please.  This sort of repetitive nonsense requires one and another on standby.  Simply incredible!

It was easily avoidable. If Eleanor hadn't claimed there was no evidence at all against the McCanns I wouldn't have needed to remind her that there actually is.

[Eleanor]

It was easily avoidable. If Eleanor hadn't claimed there was no evidence at all against the McCanns I wouldn't have needed to remind her that there actually is.

There isn't. 

Mr. Smith never saw the man's face.  The rest of his large family disagreed with him and nearly five months later he saw Gerry carrying a sleeping child in the only way anyone would carry a sleeping child.  That is not evidence against either of The McCanns.

[Wonderfulspam]

There isn't. 

Mr. Smith never saw the man's face.  The rest of his large family disagreed with him and nearly five months later he saw Gerry carrying a sleeping child in the only way anyone would carry a sleeping child.  That is not evidence against either of The McCanns.

Davel has previously conceded Smiths ID of Gerry was 'very weak evidence', VS has now had the good grace to admit it is weak evidence.
If it isn't evidence IYO, can you explain what it is Then?

[Eleanor]

Davel has previously conceded Smiths ID of Gerry was 'very weak evidence', VS has now had the good grace to admit it is weak evidence.
If it isn't evidence IYO, can you explain what it is Then?

Speculation.

[Wonderfulspam]

Speculation.

It's Smiths witness testimony. Evidence, in other words. That's what witness statements are.

[Wonderfulspam]

If Tamsin S said she was 60-80% sure she saw Brueckner, that would be evidence against Brueckner. Wouldn't you Agree?

[Eleanor]

If Tamsin S said she was 60-80% sure she saw Brueckner, that would be evidence against Brueckner. Wouldn't you Agree?

No I wouldn't.

[Wonderfulspam]

No I wouldn't.

Ok dear. It's clear you haven't fully grasped the concept of evidence.
You go back to bleating that there's no evidence whatsoever against the McCanns if it makes you feel better. It doesn't make it true though.

[Eleanor]

Ok dear. It's clear you haven't fully grasped the concept of evidence.
You go back to bleating that there's no evidence whatsoever against the McCanns if it makes you feel better. It doesn't make it true though.

Why have The McCanns never been arrested?

[G-Unit]

Why have The McCanns never been arrested?

Insufficient (not 'no') evidence.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Insufficient (not 'no') evidence.

Same as Murat.  Insufficient (not "no") evidence.