Have we learned anything new after almost 16 years?

[Vertigo Swirl]

It's disappointment and regret for falling for the Convenient Hobo ruse AGAIN.
You'd have thought the'd be more wary, having been burnt by Tractorman, but no, they put Hansie on his own pedestal, idolised him through their keyboards and poured their bile and filth on any neigh sayers.

It will be galling and probably for a long time to come, to be hoodwinked in such a transparently inept manner.
CB is not your hobo. Hansie is not your idol.
Back to the drawing board for you, MACA, wipe it clean, start again, but maybe inclde the parents this time.

  god you're trying so, so hard to get a rise out of us so-called MACAs, but apart from a wry smile and a roll of the eyes that's about all you're provoking.  It must be a teensy bit frustrating for you, poor lad but full marks for trying. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

But tell you what, you stop smearing the McCanns and I’ll stop smearing the paedo / rapist, ‘kay?

Ah so is this your tactic...some sort of voluntary - self important shill it seems.

Voluntary??  Let me tell you something - I get paid good money for this, though demand for my services has tailed off in the last 10 years since more and more loony ol' sceptics either died of old age or lost interest. One or two even came to their senses and realised how dumb they'd been though they'll never admit it publicly of course....

[The General]

  god you're trying so, so hard to get a rise out of us so-called MACAs, but apart from a wry smile and a roll of the eyes that's about all you're provoking.  It must be a teensy bit frustrating for you, poor lad but full marks for trying.

Wait, do you still think he did it? Say it ain't so, Joe!

[Vertigo Swirl]

Wait, do you still think he did it? Say it ain't so, Joe!

Sure, why not?  You still think the McCanns did it and they’re even further away from ever being prosecuted than CB, so explain your logic.

[The General]

Sure, why not?  You still think the McCanns did it and they’re even further away from ever being prosecuted than CB, so explain your logic.

But he's essentially been cleared, they haven't, the pair of gets.

[Vertigo Swirl]

But he's essentially been cleared, they haven't, the pair of gets.

What absolute tripe. when was he cleared of involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance? Do tell.

[Wonderfulspam]

But he's essentially been cleared, they haven't, the pair of gets.

They went from 'enough evidence to charge' to 'no charges ever' during 7 years of investigation. It seems the more they investigate him the less convincing the evidence becomes. Extraordinary.

[Vertigo Swirl]

They went from 'enough evidence to charge' to 'no charges ever' during 7 years of investigation. It seems the more they investigate him the less convincing the evidence becomes. Extraordinary.

When did they announce “no charges ever”?  When did they announce thst the evidence had become less convincing over time?

[Wonderfulspam]

When did they announce “no charges ever”?  When did they announce thst the evidence had become less convincing over time?

No charges in the foreseeable future. That means ever. Wolters previously claimed they had enough evidence to charge. Now they don't.

[Wonderfulspam]

And there are still more sightings of Gerry abducting Maddie than there are of Christian Brueckner.

[Wonderfulspam]

It's a difficult task for Wolters. He needs to prove that someone other than the McCanns did it. It's easy to see why he's not getting anywhere.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It's a difficult task for Wolters. He needs to prove that someone other than the McCanns did it. It's easy to see why he's not getting anywhere.

No he doesn’t need to do that.  The only reason he’s involved in this case at all is because the chief and only suspect is a German, banged up in a German prison and about whom he has uncovered or been presented with compelling albeit circumstantial evidence.  It’s not his job to interview the McCanns, and why would he need to anyway?  They aren’t going to tell him anything he doesn’t already know about the case.  Nor is it his job to find an alternative suspect or theory.  The McCanns are innocent by the way. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

And there are still more sightings of Gerry abducting Maddie than there are of Christian Brueckner.

There’s more circumstantial evidence against Bruckner than there is against Gerry.  The sighting was only 60-80% and ruled out as being Gerry by all law enforcement agencies, including the PJ in their final report.

[Wonderfulspam]

There’s more circumstantial evidence against Bruckner than there is against Gerry.  The sighting was only 60-80% and ruled out as being Gerry by all law enforcement agencies, including the PJ in their final report.

There's no evidence Brueckner even knew of Madeleine's existence on May 3rd, or that he came into contact with her. Whereas there is plenty of evidence the McCanns did. So it's more likely it was them.

[Wonderfulspam]

No he doesn’t need to do that.  The only reason he’s involved in this case at all is because the chief and only suspect is a German, banged up in a German prison and about whom he has uncovered or been presented with compelling albeit circumstantial evidence.  It’s not his job to interview the McCanns, and why would he need to anyway?  They aren’t going to tell him anything he doesn’t already know about the case.  Nor is it his job to find an alternative suspect or theory.  The McCanns are innocent by the way.

Legally maybe. But are they innocent in Fact?