Wandering Off Topic

[Eleanor]

Of course not. I think they believed in the abduction and in the McCann's non-involvement in any wrongdoing. Maybe basing a police investigation upon belief rather than evidence isn't the way to proceed, however.

Their beliefs or yours?  Presumably you think that your beliefs are more pertinent than theirs.  And so you would not have allowed The Review.

And just as a matter of interest, what Evidence do you have?

[Eleanor]

So, if I understand you correctly you believe (based on no evidence whatsoever) that the government ordered the Met to review the investigation but to only consider stranger abduction as the reason for Madeleine's disappearance, is that right?

It would seem so.  But then Gunit thinks she is awfully good at deciding who dunnit without a scrap of evidence.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It would seem so.  But then Gunit thinks she is awfully good at deciding who dunnit without a scrap of evidence.

What G-Unit doesn't seem to understand is that the police have to apply reasoning and opinion to whatever evidence is available to come to reasoned conclusions.  She may prefer to call it belief but it amounts to the same thing - "we have reason to believe that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger" for example.  That reason to believe will have been based not on the fact the McCanns are nice white middle class doctors, or that David Cameron quite fancied Kate but because of the case evidence. 

[Eleanor]

What G-Unit doesn't seem to understand is that the police have to apply reasoning and opinion to whatever evidence is available to come to reasoned conclusions.  She may prefer to call it belief but it amounts to the same thing - "we have reason to believe that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger" for example.  That reason to believe will have been based not on the fact the McCanns are nice white middle class doctors, or that David Cameron quite fancied Kate but because of the case evidence.

.

Let's face it.  Gunit can't even produce a reasonable argument in favour of her beliefs.

[Vertigo Swirl]

.

Let's face it.  Gunit can't even produce a reasonable argument in favour of her beliefs.

G-Unit refuses to admit she even has any beliefs.  It would seem that having beliefs is utterly beyond the pale.  She is above having beliefs,  beliefs are for plebs like us.  Same thing with Jassi and "hope" - don't get her started on hope.  Ugh.  Awful stuff, hope - strictly for the birds. 
 

[Brietta]

They did a review of the case.  They started at the beginning.   They used the Portuguese statements so as they said there was no need to repeat these.   They ruled the McCann's out.

Even though Colin Sutton says he would have questioned the McCann's his conclusion was that Madeleine was abducted.

The German Police say Madeleine was abducted,  I didn't see any interference by the British Police for them to come to their conclusion.

The claim made that the MET was confined to one avenue of investigation is

• idiotic on the part of those who actually believe or more likely, purport to believe it
• insulting to those professionals tasked with investigating if there were any more leads to be followed which either had not been followed, or which had developed during investigation by the McCann detectives

Nobody in their right minds would recommend initiating any sort of investigative procedure without first of all investigating everything piece of minutiae which had gone before.

This includes the 'evidence' which did not stand up against constituting Murat and Kate and Gerry McCann as arguidos; in the latter case the false dog indications which form the cornerstone of the sceptic belief system.

[Lace]

In my opinion the decision to rule out the parents pre-dated the Op Grange review. Those who instigated the review; PM Cameron and Home Secretary May made their motive clear; to help the McCanns.

To help the McCann's by agreeing to a review of the case,  not to find them innocent.

[Brietta]

In my opinion the decision to rule out the parents pre-dated the Op Grange review. Those who instigated the review; PM Cameron and Home Secretary May made their motive clear; to help the McCanns.

I was under the impression that the previous Home Secretary had ordered a fresh look in response to the McCann plea that Madeleine's case, so long neglected by investigative authorities should be looked at.  https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg649066#msg649066

But you already know this if only your predilection for 'groundhog day' didn't keep elbowing in. 

What is it that you have against Kate and Gerry McCann that you apparently abhor their diligence in approaching the only individuals capable of directing the assistance required to progress Madeleine's investigation.

[faithlilly]

I was under the impression that the previous Home Secretary had ordered a fresh look in response to the McCann plea that Madeleine's case, so long neglected by investigative authorities should be looked at.  https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7060.msg649066#msg649066

But you already know this if only your predilection for 'groundhog day' didn't keep elbowing in. 

What is it that you have against Kate and Gerry McCann that you apparently abhor their diligence in approaching the only individuals capable of directing the assistance required to progress Madeleine's investigation.

The Labour Home Secretary Alan Johnson told the parents that he would look into the case. Unfortunately Labour lost power before he did and the parents said in a channel 4 interview that Theresa May wasn’t keen too do anything with regard to their case.

Then Brooks got involved and the rest is history.

[faithlilly]

"It's said" - by whom?  What did Rebecca Brooks have to say on the matter at Leveson?  Do you think she might have had a hand in writing the Met's remit too?

“ Jay says he has been told that Brooks intervened personally with the prime minister and said the Sun would put Theresa May on the front page every day until the paper's demands were met.”

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/61may12/GUARDIAN1_11_05_2012.htm

[Vertigo Swirl]

“ Jay says he has been told that Brooks intervened personally with the prime minister and said the Sun would put Theresa May on the front page every day until the paper's demands were met.”

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/61may12/GUARDIAN1_11_05_2012.htm

Hearsay, denied by Brooks. 

[faithlilly]

Hearsay, denied by Brooks.

To paraphrase Miss Rice Davies “well she would say that, wouldn’t she”.

[Vertigo Swirl]

To paraphrase Miss Rice Davies “well she would say that, wouldn’t she”.

You do love that quote don’t you?  Fact is, there’s no evidence to support the claim apart from anonymous tittle-tattle.

[faithlilly]

You do love that quote don’t you?  Fact is, there’s no evidence to support the claim apart from anonymous tittle-tattle.

Are you saying that Sir Robert Jay was merely repeating any old gossip and that Brooks, the individual who sanctioned the hacking of murder victim Milly Dowler’s voicemail, is to blindly be believed?

Next you’ll be telling me that newspapers don’t pay money-grabbing individuals money for dubious stories.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Are you saying that Sir Robert Jay was merely repeating any old gossip and that Brooks, the individual who sanctioned the hacking of murder victim Milly Dowler’s voicemail, is to blindly be believed?

Next you’ll be telling me that newspapers don’t pay money-grabbing individuals money for dubious stories.

No, I’m saying there’s no evidence to support the claim apart from anonymous tittle-tattle.  I think you will find that what I have written is factually correct, and you can stop goading right now.