Wandering Off Topic

[Vertigo Swirl]

They admitted they haven't really investigated the McCanns VS.  How did they clarify the precise time the alarm was raised?  It is rather crucial to excluding Gerry as being Smithman. I myself cannot exclude him, because of this fact, & the fact the McCanns are very clearly liars & guilty as sin.

Because you?re fixated on Gerry being Smithman, because you hate him and need him to be guilty for your own self esteem and because you won?t listen to reason.

[Vertigo Swirl]

.......Almost certainly not because Police Man said, & Wolters said & the McCanns said & the very idea is incomprehensible to VS. Which is more a reflection of VS's mental limitations than evidence the McCanns couldn't possibly have done it really.

tbh I?m more interested in the views of people who are not full of hatred and prejudice against the McCanns, who can assess the evidence objectively and who have access to all the witnesses, the location itself and the full, properly translated files, as well of all the evidence gathered since.  To me, their collective knowledge of the case and what the evidence points to trumps yours by a factor of approximately a million percent.

[Wonderfulspam]

tbh I?m more interested in the views of people who are not full of hatred and prejudice against the McCanns, who can assess the evidence objectively and who have access to all the witnesses, the location itself and the full, properly translated files, as well of all the evidence gathered since.  To me, their collective knowledge of the case and what the evidence points to trumps yours by a factor of approximately a million percent.

Oh dear. You are unable to trust the evidence. You only trust the police. How utterly stupid.

[Wonderfulspam]

Because you?re fixated on Gerry being Smithman, because you hate him and need him to be guilty for your own self esteem and because you won?t listen to reason.

No, it's not that I need him to be guilty. It's just that there is evidence Gerry was Smithman, & thus, guilty.

[Wonderfulspam]

You claimed the Met have never said the McCanns are innocent.  This was as you must now admit, complete rubbish.

They haven't. Find me a quote where the police said 'the McCanns are innocent'.

You won't find one because, they've never said that, & also, because Gerry was seen by the Smiths.

[Wonderfulspam]

No.

Well that really debunks the evidence I presented. Well done you. Genius.

[Wonderfulspam]

How embarrassing for VS. When presented with a simple Yes/No option, she says no, ignoring the evidence presented today completely & appeals to the authority of the police. The police who admitted they hadn't even investigated the McCanns & have released e-fits of Gerry.

[Wonderfulspam]

You're an embarrassment to McCann supporters, Women & the wider human race really VS.

[Wonderfulspam]

Because you?re fixated on Gerry being Smithman, because you hate him and need him to be guilty for your own self esteem and because you won?t listen to reason.

Come on then dear. What reason is there to believe it impossible for Gerry to be Smithman?

We can exclude timing as the reason for one, because we established today, the timings are all estimates.

We know Gerry suggested they split up & search, as if she had wandered off, even though he knew that was impossible.

So, after the alarm was raised, at non specific time, Gerry was alone.

So, how can we exclude him as being Smithman, other than by appealing to authority, who didn't investigate the McCanns by their own admission & released the e-fits of Gerry?

[Wonderfulspam]

Poor VS, she's gone to lie down. The evidence doesn't really support her firmly held beliefs & she just can't handle it. Just a last gasp appeal to an authority, who, by their own admission, haven't investigated the McCanns, & released e-fits of Gerry. I think I'd go to bed too if I made a complete tw.. of myself like she has.

[Wonderfulspam]

It only took VS the last 19 years up until today to realise Matt gave a different time to the rest of the group.
That's progress I suppose.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Oh dear. You are unable to trust the evidence. You only trust the police. How utterly stupid.

I do trust the evidence but I don?t trust your interpretation of it because it is horribly biased based on your presumption from Day One before any evidence was revealed at all that the McCanns were guilty.  I would be utterly stupid to think that your interpretation of the evidence was objective and unbiased.

[Vertigo Swirl]

No, it's not that I need him to be guilty. It's just that there is evidence Gerry was Smithman, & thus, guilty.

What evidence supports Smith?s witness statement given 4 months after the brief encounter that the man he saw was Gerry?  Last time you answered I think you said ?because Madeleine wasn?t abducted? or some such nonsense.

[Vertigo Swirl]

They haven't. Find me a quote where the police said 'the McCanns are innocent'.

You won't find one because, they've never said that, & also, because Gerry was seen by the Smiths.

Do you think the Met think the McCanns are involved then, despite thrm categorically stating the McCanns are not being investigated and that they suspect a stranger abduction, by a burglar? 

[Wonderfulspam]

I do trust the evidence but I don?t trust your interpretation of it because it is horribly biased based on your presumption from Day One before any evidence was revealed at all that the McCanns were guilty.  I would be utterly stupid to think that your interpretation of the evidence was objective and unbiased.

What evidence don't you trust?

There is evidence via Matt that the alarm may have been raised prior to 10pm.

There is evidence Gerry suggested they split up & search as if she had just wandered off, as per Russells rog, even though Gerry knew Maddie's only means of escape was via the window.

There is evidence Gerry was seen by the Smiths.


Are any of these statements untrue?  Yes/No?