Was there ever any evidence of criminality against the McCanns?

[debunker]

'The dog alerts represent evidence'

like they did in Jersey - eh? Same dogs, same handler, roughly the same pay cheque no doubt.

Same outcome, nada, zilch, rien, nichts

Evidence - my foot

Evidence means what the dictionary says, not what you want it to.

The evidence may be in error or just not of any use, but it is still evidence.

[debunker]

You guys are really cracking me up this evening...the entertainment value is spectacular.  Some of your comments are so witty and amusing.   Even Luz and debunker are speaking again! 

Keep it up...BRILLIANT   

I was not aware that I had communicated with Luz- must have been in my sleep. When I went to bed I was still awaiting her return to explain the PJ press release about Madeleine's coloboma.

[debunker]

I am looking forward to a post today in opposition to my contention, a post which uses evidence rather than claims, without foundation, that evidence means something different to what the three largest dictionaries of English say that it means.

As the saying goes

Cite please.

All that has been offered so far is special pleading for a personal use of the word.

[Chinagirl]

Actually, Debunker, it would be interesting to see you develop this contention you made earlier in this thread:

Means, motive, opportunity.

Dog alerts to  ?cadaver scent
Lack of alibi
Muddled time line
Smith sighting

All of that is included in the definition of evidence above.

It is pretty seriously deficient in probative force. But it is evidence all the same.

Given how long and hard - and cogently - you have argued in many threads on this board that without forensic corroboration the dog alerts produced nothing of evidential value, it would be interesting to see how you now argue against your own contentions.

[debunker]

Actually, Debunker, it would be interesting to see you develop this contention you made earlier in this thread:

Means, motive, opportunity.

Dog alerts to  ?cadaver scent
Lack of alibi
Muddled time line
Smith sighting

All of that is included in the definition of evidence above.

It is pretty seriously deficient in probative force. But it is evidence all the same.

Given how long and hard - and cogently - you have argued in many threads on this board that without forensic corroboration the dog alerts produced nothing of evidential value, it would be interesting to see how you now argue against your own contentions.

"Evidential Value" is just that- evidence that is weighed and found to be supportive of a case.

I think back to my draft dodging days in the USA. The draft board had to accept any 'evidence' that a person had to be classified as not fit for Army service. The rules said that they had to retain such evidence. Many of us acquired house bricks and gave them to the local Draft board requiring them to rent extra storage to retain this evidence. The way the law was written, requiring all evidence (not just evidence with a connection to the case or with supportive value) to be retained was soon changed to use the word in a different way to avoid having to store bricks!!!

[Angelo222]

'The dog alerts represent evidence'

like they did in Jersey - eh? Same dogs, same handler, roughly the same pay cheque no doubt.

Same outcome, nada, zilch, rien, nichts

Evidence - my foot

Evidence means what the dictionary says, not what you want it to.

The evidence may be in error or just not of any use, but it is still evidence.

Debunker.  Why are you labouring the term 'evidence' when this is not what this thread is about??   If I had wanted to discuss the evidence in the case I would have posted "What is the evidence in the McCann case?".

The thread is called "What is the evidence AGAINST" the McCanns" and it is my contention that there isn't any.

For the last time icabodcrane please stop using the dog alerts as if there is some association with the McCanns as this has never been proven. Stop making false claims.

The crying baby and the sightings of men carrying a child are all neutral evidence, again they have no proven connection to the McCanns.  Kate and Gerry also have an iron clad alibi spoken to by many witnesses so to say alibi is some sort of evidence against them is pretty pathetic.

So let's try again, what is this magical evidence against the McCanns, evidencve which even the PJ were unable to find???

[debunker]

'The dog alerts represent evidence'

like they did in Jersey - eh? Same dogs, same handler, roughly the same pay cheque no doubt.

Same outcome, nada, zilch, rien, nichts

Evidence - my foot

Evidence means what the dictionary says, not what you want it to.

The evidence may be in error or just not of any use, but it is still evidence.

Debunker.  Why are you labouring the term 'evidence' when this is not what this thread is about??   If I had wanted to discuss the evidence in the case I would have posted "What is the evidence in the McCann case?".

The thread is called "What is the evidence AGAINST" the McCanns" and it is my contention that there isn't any.

For the last time icabodcrane please stop using the dog alerts as if there is some association with the McCanns as this has never been proven. Stop making false claims.

The crying baby and the sightings of men carrying a child are all neutral evidence, again they have no proven connection to the McCanns.  Kate and Gerry also have an iron clad alibi spoken to by many witnesses so to say alibi is some sort of evidence against them is pretty pathetic.

So let's try again, what is this magical evidence against the McCanns, evidencve which even the PJ were unable to find???

You are still mis-using the word evidence.

Look in a dictionary.

The basic evidence against the McCanns is Means and Opportunity.

[Chinagirl]

The basic evidence against the McCanns is Means and Opportunity.

Right - so you have said earlier.  So let's be having these means and opportunity.  And what happened to motive?

[ferryman]

Is there, perhaps, a semantic distinction between evidence and suspicion?

If we concede Debunker's semantic point that there is evidence against the McCanns, can we say that there is no evidence leading to suspicion?

[debunker]

The basic evidence against the McCanns is Means and Opportunity.

Right - so you have said earlier.  So let's be having these means and opportunity.  And what happened to motive?

You don't need all three.

For instance, motive is totally missing from offences such as Manslaughter as there is no necessity to prove mens rea.

Means and opportunity are two pillars of evidence. There is such evidence against the McCanns.

[ferryman]

For instance, motive is totally missing from offences such as Manslaughter as there is no necessity to prove mens rea.

Untrue.

Manslaughter is not a crime of strict liability.

[debunker]

For instance, motive is totally missing from offences such as Manslaughter as there is no necessity to prove mens rea.

Untrue.

Manslaughter is not a crime of strict liability.

I really don't think the board would be interested in the rules applying the concept of mens rea to manslaughter which are somewhat arcane. Some Manslaughter verdicts require mens rea, some do not.

Strict liability is something altogether different- statutory rape for instance, or the Factory Act etc.

Please do not insist on a dialogue as I can bore for England on this subject which I used to teach as part of a Mental Illness and the Law course.

[ferryman]

Involuntary maslaughter, indeed, doesn't require mens rea:

Constructive manslaughter, a form of involuntary manslaughter, describes a death at another's hands during the course of an unlawful act. Though malice is involved in the crime, the killing was not the source of the malice. For example, a recently fired, disgruntled employee returns to his old office to destroy his old computer. If, as a result, someone is hit in the head with the baseball bat as he swings it at the computer, or someone is electrocuted when trying to repair the computer, that disgruntled employee can be charged with involuntary homicide.

[debunker]

Please don't encourage a debate on this subject. It is one of my specialties.

[registrar]

Please don't encourage a debate on this subject. It is one of my specialties.

Enough about YOU

reply to the post kindly