Wandering Off Topic

[faithlilly]

I have no idea.  Are you telling me the PJ have no powers to obtain a warrant to search a known paedophile’s premises when a child goes missing in the area?  If that’s the case then like I said at the outset, why even bother knocking on his door in the first place? BTW, didn’t you like my suggestion?  I suppose that’s not allowed in Portugal either.

You really don’t understand the law, do you, whether Portuguese or British?

[Vertigo Swirl]

You really don’t understand the law, do you, whether Portuguese or British?

Explain it to me then.  Tell me what point there is for the police to go specifically to visit local criminals and paedophiles in a missing child case if the most they can hope for is knock on the door and be told to eff off or to be greeted by silence?

[faithlilly]

Explain it to me then.  Tell me what point there is for the police to go specifically to visit local criminals and paedophiles in a missing child case if the most they can hope for is knock on the door and be told to eff off or to be greeted by silence?

Even paedophiles have rights, unfortunate I know.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Even paedophiles have rights, unfortunate I know.

I realise that but you haven't answered my question.  Why bother paying them a visit in the first place if it was a complete waste of time?  If as a police officer you ask a paedophile if you can come in and have a chat with them about a missing child and they refuse to let you in, would you consider that fair enough and walk away letting them get on with it, or might it raise a tiny glimmer of suspicion?  Similarly if you knock on a paedo's door and there is no reply, would you consider that to be enough to rule them out of any further investigation?

[faithlilly]

I realise that but you haven't answered my question.  Why bother paying them a visit in the first place if it was a complete waste of time?  If as a police officer you ask a paedophile if you can come in and have a chat with them about a missing child and they refuse to let you in, would you consider that fair enough and walk away letting them get on with it, or might it raise a tiny glimmer of suspicion?  Similarly if you knock on a paedo's door and there is no reply, would you consider that to be enough to rule them out of any further investigation?

It would appear that every police force had access to Brueckner’s criminal record, OG certainly did in 2011, but he was allowed to slip through the net again and again.

[Wonderfulspam]

It would appear that every police force had access to Brueckner’s criminal record, OG certainly did in 2011, but he was allowed to slip through the net again and again.

To be fair, they had no evidence Brueckner, or paedophiles in general really, were in any way responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It would appear that every police force had access to Brueckner’s criminal record, OG certainly did in 2011, but he was allowed to slip through the net again and again.

Once more you have avoided answering my questions.  I guess that's the end of that discussion then. 

[faithlilly]

Once more you have avoided answering my questions.  I guess that's the end of that discussion then.

A tactic that’s becoming all too familiar from you but no problem…end of discussion.

[G-Unit]

I realise that but you haven't answered my question.  Why bother paying them a visit in the first place if it was a complete waste of time?  If as a police officer you ask a paedophile if you can come in and have a chat with them about a missing child and they refuse to let you in, would you consider that fair enough and walk away letting them get on with it, or might it raise a tiny glimmer of suspicion?  Similarly if you knock on a paedo's door and there is no reply, would you consider that to be enough to rule them out of any further investigation?

I've seen no evidence that any police officers knocked on any doors connected to CB.

[Vertigo Swirl]

A tactic that’s becoming all too familiar from you but no problem…end of discussion.

I was fully engaged in the discussion, even asked you to explain Portuguese and English law to me, but when you suddenly refuse to address the questions I put to you it ceases to be a discussion so the tactic (if you want to call it that) is all yours - I believe its called deflection, or evasion, or stonewalling. 

[Vertigo Swirl]

I've seen no evidence that any police officers knocked on any doors connected to CB.

- go back to sleep then.

[faithlilly]

I was fully engaged in the discussion, even asked you to explain Portuguese and English law to me, but when you suddenly refuse to address the questions I put to you it ceases to be a discussion so the tactic (if you want to call it that) is all yours - I believe its called deflection, or evasion, or stonewalling.

Explain English and Portuguese law? Why ever would I ? Surely if you want make points on police procedure you should already know what you’re talking about…then looking at your previous postings maybe not.

[Eleanor]

You really don’t understand the law, do you, whether Portuguese or British?

There is a teensy bit of difference between the two.  Portuguese Law remains a mystery to me, wherein they can beat a suspect into confessing and then get a conviction.

[faithlilly]

There is a teensy bit of difference between the two.  Portuguese Law remains a mystery to me, wherein they can beat a suspect into confessing and then get a conviction.

I think you’ll find the British law allows that too…hell even death in custodies are allowed without censure.

[Eleanor]

I've seen no evidence that any police officers knocked on any doors connected to CB.

Gosh.  I thought that Amaral said that they did.  Am I wrong about that?