Have we learned anything new after almost 16 years?

[Eleanor]

I'm not asking you to prove anything. I asked you what you base your belief on. Can you even Read?

Much too clever for you.  I only deal in logic.

[Wonderfulspam]

Much too clever for you.  I only deal in logic.

Ok, using logic, explain what you base your belief Madeleine was abducted upon?

[Wonderfulspam]

Perhaps you should inform all the police forces wordwide who are busy collecting evidence that there's no point then.

It is a puzzler isn't it. What is it the police spend their time gathering, if not evidence?

[Eleanor]

Perhaps you should inform all the police forces wordwide who are busy collecting evidence that there's no point then.

These Police Forces collect whatever and then someone has to decide if it is relevant.  I don't have a problem with that.  But you obviously do.

[Eleanor]

Ok, using logic, explain what you base your belief Madeleine was abducted upon?

Logic.

[Wonderfulspam]

These Police Forces collect whatever and then someone has to decide if it is relevant.  I don't have a problem with that.  But you obviously do.

They collect whatever. That's a good one. The bloodied knife at the murder scene is 'whatever' until a judge decides if it is evidence or not. Brilliant 

[Wonderfulspam]

Logic.

So you say. But talk me through it. There's no evidence whatsoever Madeleine was in the apartment available to be abducted, so how does logic dictate she was abducted from within it?

[Eleanor]

They collect whatever. That's a good one. The bloodied knife at the murder scene is 'whatever' until a judge decides if it is evidence or not. Brilliant 

What a very silly comment.

[Wonderfulspam]

What a very silly comment.

It's of your creation. You seem to believe evidence is just whatever ,until a judge deems it is evidence.

[Eleanor]

So you say. But talk me through it. There's no evidence whatsoever Madeleine was in the apartment available to be abducted, so how does logic dictate she was abducted from within it?

I presume that you can prove that Madeleine wasn't in The Appartment.  Of course you can't.  I think that you are losing the plot.

[Eleanor]

It's of your creation. You seem to believe evidence is just whatever ,until a judge deems it is evidence.

I really can't be bothered.  I shall have to go back to ignoring you.

[Mr Gray]

Thank You.  Good stuff is that, which entirely proves my point.

As it is, The McCanns have never appeared In Court on this matter, or even been charged.  Consequently your Cite is irrelevant.  There is still No Evidence against The McCanns as only A Court can decide what is Evidence and what Isn't.

As for Brueckner, the same applies.  And I shall continue to support his right to Innocence Until Proven Guilty.

Just as a matter of interest, do you ever actually read the Cites you produce?

As there is insufficient evidence to take the McCanns to court
..if they were taken they would be found not guilty....and therefore cleared.

[Eleanor]

As there is insufficient evidence to take the McCanns to court
..if they were taken they would be found not guilty....and therefore cleared.

Has anyone ever stated what that Insufficient Evidence is?

Thought not.

[G-Unit]

Has anyone ever stated what that Insufficient Evidence is?

Thought not.

It's not difficult. HCW seems to be heading in the same direction; not enough evidence to bring charges.

[Eleanor]

As there is insufficient evidence to take the McCanns to court
..if they were taken they would be found not guilty....and therefore cleared.

You and I might somewhat disagree on what is Evidence, but not by very much.

However, the game has changed a bit because Sceptics as ever are losing the argument and so semantics come into play.  But they aren't very good at that either and therefor continue to make fools of themselves with their downright nasty innuendos which are often bordering on Libel.

The bottom line is that The McCanns will never be implicated in the disappearance of their daughter.  Because there is No Evidence, let alone Proof.