Journalist Sonia Poulton promises "The untold story of Madeleine McCann".

[Mr Gray]

Yet you accept the McCann's have told the truth without knowing the actual cause of Madeleine's disappearance...........


So how do you know they have told the truth ?

Is it as many suspect, sheer blind faith ?

Looking at all the available evidence I believe the McCanns and so does Redwood

[stephen25000]

Looking at all the available evidence I believe the McCanns and so does Redwood

What evidence Dave ?

You need more than faith.

So tell me what evidence shows without any doubt abduction, since at the moment the crime is not ratified in any given direction ?

[Mr Gray]

What evidence Dave ?

You need more than faith.

So tell me what evidence shows without any doubt abduction, since at the moment the crime is not ratified in any given direction ?

off topic as usual.....

[stephen25000]

off topic as usual.....

I.e. You can't answer the questions, AS USUAL.

[Carana]

There are different ways of presenting a story. I'm sure two skillful writers could take the same basic information and portray it in completely different ways without crossing the libel line.

We regularly see this in action in the red top media

And the consquences of when red-top media journos have dodgy sources, an overactive imagination and have to file something - anything - to keep a revenue stream.

What's this "documentary" supposed to be about?

[Mr Gray]

I.e. You can't answer the questions, AS USUAL.

I can but resisted going off topic...evidence beyond any doubt would be proof...there is very rarely evidence beyond any doubt in any case....lets look at cipriano if you insist on going off topic...the evidence against her is certainly NOT beyond any doubt as one of the judges did not agree with the verdict...when I use the word evidence... I mean just that...evidence...
Don't get confused and think I mean proof

[slartibartfast]

Why is it naieve?   What can CR  - or anyone else do to 'intimidate' her if she doesn't break the law?

IMO Large Libel Lawyers can stop the publication of many statements which have not been tested in a court of law just by suggesting that they may be iffy and they have been instructed to represent someone. Money has a major impact on peoples decision to continue.

[Mr Gray]

IMO Large Libel Lawyers can stop the publication of many statements which have not been tested in a court of law just by suggesting that they may be iffy and they have been instructed to represent someone. Money has a major impact on peoples decision to continue.

most of us can see very clearly if something is libellous...SP can publish anything she wants on you tube and the lawyers will not be able to stop her...

[stephen25000]

I can but resisted going off topic...evidence beyond any doubt would be proof...there is very rarely evidence beyond any doubt in any case....lets look at cipriano if you insist on going off topic...the evidence against her is certainly NOT beyond any doubt as one of the judges did not agree with the verdict...when I use the word evidence... I mean just that...evidence...
Don't get confused and think I mean proof

I'm not confused.

So all you have to show is some evidence, quantitative or otherwise to show abduction.

[Mr Gray]

I'm not confused.

So all you have to show is some evidence, quantitative or otherwise to show abduction.

there is plenty ...but you don't understand what evidence means...you don't understand the difference between evidence and proof....

[jassi]

And the consquences of when red-top media journos have dodgy sources, an overactive imagination and have to file something - anything - to keep a revenue stream.

What's this "documentary" supposed to be about?

Red tops haven't gone astray very much from a legal viewpoint, though they regularly print the biggest amount of tosh. Presumably this doesn't offend the McCanns.

[Mr Gray]

Red tops haven't gone astray very much from a legal viewpoint, though they regularly print the biggest amount of tosh. Presumably this doesn't offend the McCanns.

as long as they don't commit libel

[stephen25000]

there is plenty ...but you don't understand what evidence means...you don't understand the difference between evidence and proof....

Oh I do dave.

As you fully realize, there is F.A. evidence, so your usual bluster emerges.

[Eleanor]

Exactly. All we see at present is the usual wild speculation.

It sounds to me as though it is Soya Poulton who is doing the speculating..

[Mr Gray]

Oh I do dave.

As you fully realize, there is F.A. evidence, so your usual bluster emerges.

there is evidence