Where does evidence end and speculation take over?

[Victoria]

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

Read my post again. I didn't say those conversations didn't take place. I said that he often includes small pieces of information that have no relevance other than to 'point' in a particular direction. They make the reader come to their own conclusions (or think that they are, when in fact they are being led down a certain path) without committing the author to spelling the conclusion out.

Whilst we're on the subject though, the dialog in his book is artificially constructed and he very rarely attributes a particular line to a particular person. There's a reason for that.

[Redblossom]

Read my post again. I didn't say those conversations didn't take place. I said that he often includes small pieces of information that have no relevance other than to 'point' in a particular direction. They make the reader come to their own conclusions (or think that they are, when in fact they are being led down a certain path) without committing the author to spelling the conclusion out.

Whilst we're on the subject though, the dialog in his book is artificially constructed and he very rarely attributes a particular line to a particular person. There's a reason for that.

Take it up with the appellant court who disagree with you


http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2168.0

[Victoria]

Take it up with the appellant court who disagree with you


http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2168.0

Disagrees with me about what?

[Lyall]

So do you find that phrase acceptable

It's just words. Clumsy perhaps, but just words. Insignificant when you're discussing a case of such seriousness, in my view.

[Lyall]

Read my post again. I didn't say those conversations didn't take place. I said that he often includes small pieces of information that have no relevance other than to 'point' in a particular direction. They make the reader come to their own conclusions (or think that they are, when in fact they are being led down a certain path) without committing the author to spelling the conclusion out.

Whilst we're on the subject though, the dialog in his book is artificially constructed and he very rarely attributes a particular line to a particular person. There's a reason for that.

It's a book, not a legal document?

[Redblossom]

Disagrees with me about what?

That there was anything wrong with the book.....and that it did actually portray a thesis based on the investigation....not their exact words, read it to see them.....

[Victoria]

That there was anything wrong with the book.....and that it did actually portray a thesis based on the investigation....not their exact words, read it to see them.....

Someone needs to tell the Judge in Lisbon she's wasting her time then. She appears to think she's presiding over a libel trial.

[jassi]

So do we keep speculating or not?

I would have thought so, though I have no evidence on which to base this opinion   

[Mr Gray]

It's just words. Clumsy perhaps, but just words. Insignificant when you're discussing a case of such seriousness, in my view.

 It amazes me what posters will accept just to support someone who has the same viewpoint

[Wonderfulspam]

It amazes me what posters will accept just to support someone who has the same viewpoint

No I think you will find they were defending my right to purport a theory, something we are often requested to do by those on here who share a different viewpoint.

Please tell me the terminology you would rather I had used to describe the action in question.

[Mr Gray]

No I think you will find they were defending my right to purport a theory, something we are often requested to do by those on here who share a different viewpoint.

Please tell me the terminology you would rather I had used to describe the action in question.

I think your "theory" oversteps the mark when you have no evidence to support it. I think its a vile thing to say and totally unreasonable...my theory is that it is the product of a disturbed mind... I could say a lot more but unfortunately I don't have the right to purport my theory re you...

[ferryman]

Furthermore

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

Quote out of  context and way before the files were released.

I'm amazed the board moderators tolerate such blatant deception.

[Lyall]

It amazes me what posters will accept just to support someone who has the same viewpoint

There are dozens and dozens of aspects to this case that amaze me a great deal more than words used on a forum.

Aren't you getting this a little out of perspective?

[Wonderfulspam]

I think your "theory" oversteps the mark when you have no evidence to support it. I think its a vile thing to say and totally unreasonable...my theory is that it is the product of a disturbed mind... I could say a lot more but unfortunately I don't have the right to purport my theory re you...

I think your "theory" oversteps the mark when you have no evidence to support it.

Where is this mark defined?


I think its a vile thing to say and totally unreasonable...

Abduction and sexual assault by paedophiles.


my theory is that it is the product of a disturbed mind...

Paedophiles tearing little girls private parts.

I could say a lot more but unfortunately I don't have the right to purport my theory re you...

Come on then princess do your worst, give me all you got. show us the real you.

[Cariad]

I think your "theory" oversteps the mark when you have no evidence to support it. I think its a vile thing to say and totally unreasonable...my theory is that it is the product of a disturbed mind... I could say a lot more but unfortunately I don't have the right to purport my theory re you...

So it's irritating when people don't put a theory forward, yet you are appalled when someone does?  You've complained that I won't theorize and now you've spent all day throwing WS's theory back in his face.

If I weren't such a sweet, trusting soul, I'd wonder whether you nag for a theory just to allow you to be repulsed at the workings of a mind that could produce such a thing.