Examples of Gerry McCanns Selective Memories

[barrier]

Incidentally I am under no illusions that anything I write will convince you of anything - despite your self-proclaimed open mindedness, I believe you made your mind up about the McCanns years ago.

Why do you think you need to convince any one of anything? genuine question.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Why do you think you need to convince any one of anything? genuine question.

Here's a genuine question - where did I write that I need to convince anyone of anything?  Once you have found the relevant cite, then I will reply to your question, genuinely.

[faithlilly]

Here's a genuine question - where did I write that I need to convince anyone of anything?  Once you have found the relevant cite, then I will reply to your question, genuinely.

You have been using the ‘I’m not answering you until you answer me strategy’ frequently lately and usually when you are in a corner. It is becoming rather obvious.

[barrier]

Incidentally I am under no illusions that anything I write will convince you of anything - despite your self-proclaimed open mindedness, I believe you made your mind up about the McCanns years ago.

Here's a genuine question - where did I write that I need to convince anyone of anything?  Once you have found the relevant cite, then I will reply to your question, genuinely.

[Vertigo Swirl]

You have been using the ‘I’m not answering you until you answer me strategy’ frequently lately and usually when you are in a corner. It is becoming rather obvious.

Then why does no one call me out on it and actually answer my question first?  Then we would get somewhere and see if I really am in a corner or not.  What I don't do is cave into others demands that I answer their questions when they don't do me the courtesy of answering mine.  Tell me why should I do that? 

[Vertigo Swirl]

That's a fail, did I say I needed to convince G-Unit?  No.  Next!

[Robittybob1]

Back to the topic please.

[G-Unit]

Then why does no one call me out on it and actually answer my question first?  Then we would get somewhere and see if I really am in a corner or not.  What I don't do is cave into others demands that I answer their questions when they don't do me the courtesy of answering mine.  Tell me why should I do that?

Asking someone to explain their conclusions when they haven't claimed to have reached any isn't a valid question. Asking someone to explain their conclusions when they have posted those conclusions and claimed they have reached them by 'reasoned rationale' is a valid question.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Asking someone to explain their conclusions when they haven't claimed to have reached any isn't a valid question. Asking someone to explain their conclusions when they have posted those conclusions and claimed they have reached them by 'reasoned rationale' is a valid question.

I didn't ask you to 'explain your conclusions, I wanted to know what conclusions you had drawn from all this hugely detailed research (your term), and following on from your refusal to answer, what is the point of it all if you refuse to draw any conclusions, or be drawn on them?  Seriously, what is the point of this exercise?  Research only has a point IMO if it is used to draw conclusions from the facts being researched.  That's what research is for isn't it?  Otherwise it's just posting excerpts from statements and leaving us all hanging as to what point you are trying to make. 

[Mr Gray]

Asking someone to explain their conclusions when they haven't claimed to have reached any isn't a valid question. Asking someone to explain their conclusions when they have posted those conclusions and claimed they have reached them by 'reasoned rationale' is a valid question.

You might not think you have reached any conclusions but you have IMO

[G-Unit]

I didn't ask you to 'explain your conclusions, I wanted to know what conclusions you had drawn from all this hugely detailed research (your term), and following on from your refusal to answer, what is the point of it all if you refuse to draw any conclusions, or be drawn on them?  Seriously, what is the point of this exercise?  Research only has a point IMO if it is used to draw conclusions from the facts being researched.  That's what research is for isn't it?  Otherwise it's just posting excerpts from statements and leaving us all hanging as to what point you are trying to make.

I did reach a conclusion; someone's evidence was incorrect. You chose to give us your opinion as to why the evidence was incorrect. I chose not to speculate as to why because I don't know the answer. I asked you to explain why you thought you did and you refused.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I did reach a conclusion; someone's evidence was incorrect. You chose to give us your opinion as to why the evidence was incorrect. I chose not to speculate as to why because I don't know the answer. I asked you to explain why you thought you did and you refused.

Perhaps this will help with your research.  It’s a long read but I’d be interested in your thoughts on it and whether or not you have considered the possibility that human error (non-deliberate by both witnesses and witness evidence takers) is responsible for most if not all the anomalies you find so very puzzling in the witness statements of the Tapas group. 

http://library.college.police.uk/docs/theses/ALBRIGHTON-nature-of-witness-statement-2013.pdf

[G-Unit]

Perhaps this will help with your research.  It’s a long read but I’d be interested in your thoughts on it and whether or not you have considered the possibility that human error (non-deliberate by both witnesses and witness evidence takers) is responsible for most if not all the anomalies you find so very puzzling in the witness statements of the Tapas group. 

http://library.college.police.uk/docs/theses/ALBRIGHTON-nature-of-witness-statement-2013.pdf

It's one possible explanation, but I see no reason to believe that it's the explanation.

[Robittybob1]

It's one possible explanation, but I see no reason to believe that it's the explanation.

That is a good start to some reconciliation.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It's one possible explanation, but I see no reason to believe that it's the explanation.

No reason at all?!  I posted a link to an article which gives plenty of reasons why witness statements are often inaccurate and unreliable, and not because the witness is dishonest, but you can see NO reason to believe it’s the explanation, seriously?  Why not?