Where does evidence end and speculation take over?

[colombosstogey]

Good idea...I will see how this can be achieved.

Thanks it would help as a lot of it is forum myths.

[colombosstogey]

You say accuse but that is untrue.  Speculating as to someone's involvement in a yet as unknown crime is a speculation and not an accusation.

Personally i think every one should be suspect until there is evidence to eliminate people. Personally i do not see EVIDENCE, clear substantiated evidence that is it, EITHER way.

[Wonderfulspam]

If all we can deal with is evidence then we may as well pack up now and declare every living soul on earth innocent.

The McCanns come in for so much criticism because there is CLEAR AND UNDISPUTED evidence based on witness statements that they left Madeleine and the twins alone and vulnerable.

Furthermore

"While one or both of them may be innocent, there is no clear evidence that eliminates them from involvement in Madeleine's disappearance."

[slartibartfast]

It brings to mind a quite from a TV series...

I'm not crazy. My mother had me tested!

Everyone is in an undetermined state of Guilt/Innocence until they are tested. We have to remember that legally it is a presumption of innocence and not a statement of innocence.

[Mr Gray]

You say accuse but that is untrue.  Speculating as to someone's involvement in a yet as unknown crime is a speculation and not an accusation.

 I would agree with that in principle John but saying someone is lying is not speculation its an accusation. Amaral hasn't speculated hes accused...posters on here have accused

[Victoria]

I think if you want to speculate then you need to clearly state what FACTS you are basing your speculation upon.

From a legal point of view, speculation that doesn't clearly set out what facts it is based upon whilst also making it clear where the line between facts and speculation ends, runs the risk of being defamatory. Obviously, in the UK, even taking such precautions can be defamatory because we have such stringent laws.

The problem all too often on forums is that people speculate based on suppositions, fictions and sometimes previous speculation that has been taken as fact because it's been repeated so often.

[ferryman]

I would agree with that in principle John but saying someone is lying is not speculation its an accusation. Amaral hasn't speculated hes accused...posters on here have accused

Amaral has done worse than that.  He has accused on the basis of misrepresentation.

If he had kept that confined to the process, he'd have been OK

He didn't ...

[stephen25000]

Amaral has done worse than that.  He has accused on the basis of misrepresentation.

If he had kept that confined to the process, he'd have been OK

He didn't ...

and what have you done to Martin Grimes, based upon your 'googling' and nothing more ?

[Victoria]

Amaral has done worse than that.  He has accused on the basis of misrepresentation.

If he had kept that confined to the process, he'd have been OK

He didn't ...

Amaral's book also does a lot of pointing towards certain suggestions, but allowing the reader to read between the lines. There are certain events and 'conversations' which he mentions that can have been put there to try and nudge the reader into reaching certain conclusions. It's a tabloid tactic used by the gutter press when they want to throw a lot of mud without actually having any facts to bring to the table, so I wasn't surprised to see it in Amaral's work.

[ferryman]

and what have you done to Martin Grimes, based upon your 'googling' and nothing more ?

Pointed out obvious and glaring discrepancies between principles in what Grime himself has written and what Grime has done.

It's not rocket science.

[stephen25000]

Pointed out obvious and glaring discrepancies between principles in what Grime himself has written and what Grime has done.

It's not rocket science.

In your opinion, which is of no more importance than the man in the street.

[Lyall]

Amaral's book also does a lot of pointing towards certain suggestions, but allowing the reader to read between the lines. There are certain events and 'conversations' which he mentions that can have been put there to try and nudge the reader into reaching certain conclusions. It's a tabloid tactic used by the gutter press when they want to throw a lot of mud without actually having any facts to bring to the table, so I wasn't surprised to see it in Amaral's work.

But how can you know those conversations didn't take place?

[Lyall]

well I object to his phrase "chucked her in the bin"..you don't , so that says a lot about you.

Dave, you and others do keep goading people with the line "you never tell us your theories" - an obvious trap I think because as soon as someone does you complain vehemently about the language they've used. >@@(*&)

[Mr Gray]

Dave, you and others do keep goading people with the line "you never tell us your theories" - an obvious trap I think because as soon as someone does you complain vehemently about the language they've used. >@@(*&)

So do you find that phrase acceptable

[Wonderfulspam]

So do you find that phrase acceptable

Forgive me dave, I should have said " he gently lowered her body into the waste receptacle"