Wandering Off Topic

[Icanhandlethetruth]

The original files contained hundreds of thousands of pages of evidence.  Are you suggesting that Operation Grange should have started from scratch, ignored “someone else’s evidence” and gathered their own hundreds of thousands of pages of evidence?  Re-interview hundreds of witnesses?  Revisit hundreds of houses? Redeploy dogs in Apat 5 A and the hire car?  Send in forensics?    Or just do a bit of this and if so which bits to re-do and which bits of the original investigation to rely on?   Or how about they take a fresh look at all the evidence gathered, use HOLMES to make some sense of it, unearth dozens of previously unfollowed up leads and missed investigative opportunities?  Would that not rather make better use of time and resources?

I don't believe there is anything in the PJ files that exonerates the parents, do you? SY have said they have gone through the PJ evidence and that has all been dealt with by the PJ and no need to re open any investigation of the parents. That's fine for you I understand, but wouldn't it be good if they did investigate and then come out and say the parents are innocent and we have all this wealth of evidence to prove it, why wouldn't you want that? 

[Mr Gray]

I am well aware of the statements but nowhere does it say that either of them express the opinion that the alerts are valueless. Regardless of whether Dawkings is agnostic or atheist, if you believe there is even the tiniest chance that the parents were involved, shouldn't that be investigated, they have been working on it for 9 years now.

So what more could SY do... What investigation could they carry out

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Afaiac SY have looked at the evidence and decided the parents are not involved.  You can't accept  it because you give thr alerts credibilty they do not deserve ..imo

No That's exactly what I do accept. But I still believe they have a duty to investigate all scenarios. I don't understand yours and VS disagreement that parental involvement shouldn't be investigated, it may exonerate them, wouldn't that be good.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

After the conclusion of the searches, a meeting in the Portimao offices of the PJ took place in the cabinet of Goncalo AMARAL and those present included Guilermino ENCARNACO, an official representative from the Leicestershire police, Martin GRIME and myself. During the meeting were exhibited videos with the details of search activities including the sniffer dogs lead by Martin GRIME. GRIME commented on the actions of the dogs and added that no confirmed evidence or information could be taken from the alerts by the dogs but needed to be confirmed with physical evidence.

 I am not going round in circles with you. You know Grime has said uncorroborated alerts can be used as evidence in his 2018 white paper you posted it yourself.

[Icanhandlethetruth]

So what more could SY do... What investigation could they carry out

I didn't think I would have to spell it out but here goes.
They have run their investigation from the point of view that the act was an abduction, take a step back and investigate if the act was parental involvement and gather information using that premise as a framework. Thats generally how it works.

[Mr Gray]

I am not going round in circles with you. You know Grime has said uncorroborated alerts can be used as evidence in his 2018 white paper you posted it yourself.

Thr fact that he has now changed his mind gives him even less credibility imo. I haven't heard Harrison's virws but I know Prof Cassella... Grimes academic lead... Disagrees with him.  Was Grime flown to the US because of his skill or because of what he was now prepared to say.  To say that alerts can be confirmed by anectdotal evidence is preposterous imo.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I don't believe there is anything in the PJ files that exonerates the parents, do you? SY have said they have gone through the PJ evidence and that has all been dealt with by the PJ and no need to re open any investigation of the parents. That's fine for you I understand, but wouldn't it be good if they did investigate and then come out and say the parents are innocent and we have all this wealth of evidence to prove it, why wouldn't you want that?

There is no amount of investigating the parent that could have proved their innocence, don’t you get that?  They could have spent the last 10 years focusing solely on the parents and where do you think that would have got them?  If their hypothesis based on the known facts is abduction (and clearly it is thr only logical and plausible theory IMO, and in theirs) why would they waste all that time trying to prove the unproveable, ie the McCanns innocence?   What do you think they could uncover that would prove innocence?

[Mr Gray]

I didn't think I would have to spell it out but here goes.
They have run their investigation from the point of view that the act was an abduction, take a step back and investigate if the act was parental involvement and gather information using that premise as a framework. Thats generally how it works.

What information do you think they could possibly gather... On the evidence they had.... They consider the parents innocent.  It really hinges on the alerts...and they have no evidential reliability  or value... You seem to think they do... And you are quite wrong imo

[Icanhandlethetruth]

Thr fact that he has now changed his mind gives him even less credibility imo. I haven't heard Harrison's virws but I know Prof Cassella... Grimes academic lead... Disagrees with him.  Was Grime flown to the US because of his skill or because of what he was now prepared to say.  To say that alerts can be confirmed by anectdotal evidence is preposterous imo.

I already answered that on the appropriate thread.
"Grime has changed his opinion and uncorroborated dog alerts can be heard in court. You say this raises questions about his credibility. I say he is smart enough to see himself giving evidence of uncorroborated dog alerts and realises that his opinion in Luz was wrong. He would be an abject fool if he didn’t change his opinion after appearing several times himself, wouldn’t he?"  If you want to talk dogs take it to the correct thread.

[Mr Gray]

I already answered that on the appropriate thread.
"Grime has changed his opinion and uncorroborated dog alerts can be heard in court. You say this raises questions about his credibility. I say he is smart enough to see himself giving evidence of uncorroborated dog alerts and realises that his opinion in Luz was wrong. He would be an abject fool if he didn’t change his opinion after appearing several times himself, wouldn’t he?"  If you want to talk dogs take it to the correct thread.

You think Grime is now right having got it wrong in Luz.... Prof Cassella does not agree.. Alerts never admitted in England and only once or twice in Scotland... I think DY have got it just right

[Icanhandlethetruth]

What information do you think they could possibly gather... On the evidence they had.... They consider the parents innocent.  It really hinges on the alerts...and they have no evidential reliability  or value... You seem to think they do... And you are quite wrong imo

Double team time. If you believe that after reading the PJ files there is evidence that would exonerate the parents ie make them not even worthy for investigations than there is nothing I can say to either of you. Its pointless to argue, you hold your opinion and I will hold mine. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

The only way people get exonerated is of the evidence used to convict them is dodgy and a court decides to overturn the conviction, or if someone else confesses to the crime or enough solid evidence is found to convict another person.  Therfore the only way the McCanns could ever be completely exonerated is if one of the above scenarios came to pass.  They cannot be exonerated by being further investigated themselves IMO.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Double team time. If you believe that after reading the PJ files there is evidence that would exonerate the parents ie make them not even worthy for investigations than there is nothing I can say to either of you. Its pointless to argue, you hold your opinion and I will hold mine.

I’m saying quite the reverse, but hey ho.

[Mr Gray]

Double team time. If you believe that after reading the PJ files there is evidence that would exonerate the parents ie make them not even worthy for investigations than there is nothing I can say to either of you. Its pointless to argue, you hold your opinion and I will hold mine.

I've not said there is evidence that exonerates them.. They don't need that... I don't see evidence that incriminates them.. And it seems SY agree

[barrier]

I've not said there is evidence that exonerates them.. They don't need that... I don't see evidence that incrimminates them.. And it seems SY agree

There's nothing that incriminates CB either from SY's point of view, allegedly.