The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hi,

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and start chatting with us!

Enjoy your day,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Page 9 of 12 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Daryl Dixon on 03.02.15 10:40

@j.rob wrote:woodfortrees wrote: 


Fact is, if they though it was them (which they don't), why spend all that time and money looking for NOT the McCanns, whilst having the McCanns on their doorstep. The answer...they hold evidence which exonerates them.


------


How do you know? There is very little public support now for the McCanns and a great many people seem to mistrust their version of events. The police can't be so thick that they believe the Mcs version of events. 


They know they are lying, imo, but are carrying on with a charade. It's a disgrace.

Whether there is little public support for the McCanns, or public mistrust of their version of events, is immaterial. DCI Andy Redwood stated clearly that neither Madeleine's parents, or any of the members of the group that were with her, are either persons of interest or suspects. I personally do not believe that SY are corrupt, or involved in a whitewash. They will have information we are not privy to and their investigation will be based on this, and this alone.

Daryl Dixon

Posts : 69
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2014-06-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Joss on 03.02.15 10:47

@woodforthetrees wrote:
@j.rob wrote:woodfortrees wrote: 


Fact is, if they though it was them (which they don't), why spend all that time and money looking for NOT the McCanns, whilst having the McCanns on their doorstep. The answer...they hold evidence which exonerates them.


------


How do you know? There is very little public support now for the McCanns and a great many people seem to mistrust their version of events. The police can't be so thick that they believe the Mcs version of events. 


They know they are lying, imo, but are carrying on with a charade. It's a disgrace.
How do I know? Read previous posts, no sense in repeating it all again,

Less public support would give SY more reason to bring them in if they thought they were guilty. They do not, hence they are looking for a lone paedo.

Agreed, SY know they have lied in their statements, particularly regarding the rota for checking the kids, however, this does not automatically then mean they killed their daughter and disposed of the body, it simply means they thought they had to cover their arses against neglect charges.
If SY have no evidence of a burglar/paedo or whatever, which they haven't, and they have no firm evidence against the McC's in the death & disposal of Madeleine either, only that they lied to the police, then is it just a game to SY of pin the tail on the donkey as to who killed and got rid of Maddie? In a wild goose chase to the tune of a cool $10 million? Then i guess this BS will just go on forever?

____________________

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by woodforthetrees on 03.02.15 10:47

@Daryl Dixon wrote:
@j.rob wrote:woodfortrees wrote: 


Fact is, if they though it was them (which they don't), why spend all that time and money looking for NOT the McCanns, whilst having the McCanns on their doorstep. The answer...they hold evidence which exonerates them.


------


How do you know? There is very little public support now for the McCanns and a great many people seem to mistrust their version of events. The police can't be so thick that they believe the Mcs version of events. 


They know they are lying, imo, but are carrying on with a charade. It's a disgrace.

Whether there is little public support for the McCanns, or public mistrust of their version of events, is immaterial. DCI Andy Redwood stated clearly that neither Madeleine's parents, or any of the members of the group that were with her, are either persons of interest or suspects. I personally do not believe that SY are corrupt, or involved in a whitewash. They will have information we are not privy to and their investigation will be based on this, and this alone.
Exactly Daryl Dixon, thank you.

As much as we all would like to believe they are secretly looking at the McCanns, they have evidence which is pointing them to someone else.

thumbsup

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by woodforthetrees on 03.02.15 10:49

@Joss wrote:
@woodforthetrees wrote:
@j.rob wrote:woodfortrees wrote: 


Fact is, if they though it was them (which they don't), why spend all that time and money looking for NOT the McCanns, whilst having the McCanns on their doorstep. The answer...they hold evidence which exonerates them.


------


How do you know? There is very little public support now for the McCanns and a great many people seem to mistrust their version of events. The police can't be so thick that they believe the Mcs version of events. 


They know they are lying, imo, but are carrying on with a charade. It's a disgrace.
How do I know? Read previous posts, no sense in repeating it all again,

Less public support would give SY more reason to bring them in if they thought they were guilty. They do not, hence they are looking for a lone paedo.

Agreed, SY know they have lied in their statements, particularly regarding the rota for checking the kids, however, this does not automatically then mean they killed their daughter and disposed of the body, it simply means they thought they had to cover their arses against neglect charges.
If SY have no evidence of a burglar/paedo or whatever, which they haven't, and they have no firm evidence against the McC's in the death & disposal of Madeleine either, only that they lied to the police, then is it just a game to SY of pin the tail on the donkey as to who killed and got rid of Maddie? In a wild goose chase to the tune of a cool $10 million? Then i guess this BS will just go on forever?
I never said they don't have evidence, quite the opposite. I said they don't have evidence which implicates the McCanns or a live abduction. Which means......

They do have evidence for something else...

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Joss on 03.02.15 11:00

@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Joss wrote:
@woodforthetrees wrote:
@j.rob wrote:woodfortrees wrote: 


Fact is, if they though it was them (which they don't), why spend all that time and money looking for NOT the McCanns, whilst having the McCanns on their doorstep. The answer...they hold evidence which exonerates them.


------


How do you know? There is very little public support now for the McCanns and a great many people seem to mistrust their version of events. The police can't be so thick that they believe the Mcs version of events. 


They know they are lying, imo, but are carrying on with a charade. It's a disgrace.
How do I know? Read previous posts, no sense in repeating it all again,

Less public support would give SY more reason to bring them in if they thought they were guilty. They do not, hence they are looking for a lone paedo.

Agreed, SY know they have lied in their statements, particularly regarding the rota for checking the kids, however, this does not automatically then mean they killed their daughter and disposed of the body, it simply means they thought they had to cover their arses against neglect charges.
If SY have no evidence of a burglar/paedo or whatever, which they haven't, and they have no firm evidence against the McC's in the death & disposal of Madeleine either, only that they lied to the police, then is it just a game to SY of pin the tail on the donkey as to who killed and got rid of Maddie? In a wild goose chase to the tune of a cool $10 million? Then i guess this BS will just go on forever?
I never said they don't have evidence, quite the opposite. I said they don't have evidence which implicates the McCanns or a live abduction. Which means......

They do have evidence for something else...
If they had evidence against some lone paedo, don't you think we would of heard about it by now? I can't see them as having anything other than DNA evidence that they would of tried to match into their DNA database, and if that didn't turn up anyone, who are they going to pin it on? If they really had someone else by now, there would of been charges or an arrest. God knows they have had plenty of time to investigate this and come up with something.
Why don't they just cold case the investigation until they really have something and save the U.K. taxpayer all that money and place the money into much needed other missing child investigations? Or don't other missing children deserve that? This case is in its 8th year now, time to give it a break IMO, until they have something more solid like catch the perp/s.

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by j.rob on 03.02.15 11:03

@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Daryl Dixon wrote:
@j.rob wrote:woodfortrees wrote: 


Fact is, if they though it was them (which they don't), why spend all that time and money looking for NOT the McCanns, whilst having the McCanns on their doorstep. The answer...they hold evidence which exonerates them.


------


How do you know? There is very little public support now for the McCanns and a great many people seem to mistrust their version of events. The police can't be so thick that they believe the Mcs version of events. 


They know they are lying, imo, but are carrying on with a charade. It's a disgrace.

Whether there is little public support for the McCanns, or public mistrust of their version of events, is immaterial. DCI Andy Redwood stated clearly that neither Madeleine's parents, or any of the members of the group that were with her, are either persons of interest or suspects. I personally do not believe that SY are corrupt, or involved in a whitewash. They will have information we are not privy to and their investigation will be based on this, and this alone.
Exactly Daryl Dixon, thank you.

As much as we all would like to believe they are secretly looking at the McCanns, they have evidence which is pointing them to someone else.

thumbsup
I don't agree. The police can't be that thick. What I suspect is that there was a peado network. So I do not believe they are looking for a lone paedo. However it may be there is someone/several people who might squeal. And that, imo, could be very incriminating for the Mcs and their friends. 

Obviously, the parents and their friends are going to be 'people of interest' as they are they last people who saw her alive. And in cases where children disappear mysteriously, it is very often something to do with family and/or close friends and those known to the child.

There is no evidence that the Madeleine McCann case does not fit into the typical scenario. When parents cry 'abduction' and refuse to entertain any other scenario, it is highly suggestive that they have faked an abduction in order to cover up what happened.

This is precisely what happened in this case, imo. It's what Detective Amaral thought. SY know this too. Of course they do.

Who knows what the police are up to? Wasting public money and engaging in a charade I would say.

A complete farce.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 225
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by j.rob on 03.02.15 11:07

DCI Andy Redwood stated clearly that neither Madeleine's parents, or any of the members of the group that were with her, are either persons of interest or suspects. I personally do not believe that SY are corrupt, or involved in a whitewash.


------




What a stupid thing to say, if he said it.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 225
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Joss on 03.02.15 11:10

@j.rob wrote:
@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Daryl Dixon wrote:
@j.rob wrote:woodfortrees wrote: 


Fact is, if they though it was them (which they don't), why spend all that time and money looking for NOT the McCanns, whilst having the McCanns on their doorstep. The answer...they hold evidence which exonerates them.


------


How do you know? There is very little public support now for the McCanns and a great many people seem to mistrust their version of events. The police can't be so thick that they believe the Mcs version of events. 


They know they are lying, imo, but are carrying on with a charade. It's a disgrace.

Whether there is little public support for the McCanns, or public mistrust of their version of events, is immaterial. DCI Andy Redwood stated clearly that neither Madeleine's parents, or any of the members of the group that were with her, are either persons of interest or suspects. I personally do not believe that SY are corrupt, or involved in a whitewash. They will have information we are not privy to and their investigation will be based on this, and this alone.
Exactly Daryl Dixon, thank you.

As much as we all would like to believe they are secretly looking at the McCanns, they have evidence which is pointing them to someone else.

thumbsup
I don't agree. The police can't be that thick. What I suspect is that there was a peado network. So I do not believe they are looking for a lone paedo. However it may be there is someone/several people who might squeal. And that, imo, could be very incriminating for the Mcs and their friends. 

Obviously, the parents and their friends are going to be 'people of interest' as they are they last people who saw her alive. And in cases where children disappear mysteriously, it is very often something to do with family and/or close friends and those known to the child.

There is no evidence that the Madeleine McCann case does not fit into the typical scenario. When parents cry 'abduction' and refuse to entertain any other scenario, it is highly suggestive that they have faked an abduction in order to cover up what happened.

This is precisely what happened in this case, imo. It's what Detective Amaral thought. SY know this too. Of course they do.

Who knows what the police are up to? Wasting public money and engaging in a charade I would say.

A complete farce.
ITA. Just because SY say the McC's aren't suspects in the case, do they even have jurisdiction over a crime that took place in Portugal? I would imagine if any charges against the McC are forthcoming it would be from Portugal authorities, not the U.K.? Wonder what the Portugese side of the investigation has found in this case to date?

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 03.02.15 11:10

@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Daryl Dixon wrote:
@j.rob wrote:woodfortrees wrote: 


Fact is, if they though it was them (which they don't), why spend all that time and money looking for NOT the McCanns, whilst having the McCanns on their doorstep. The answer...they hold evidence which exonerates them.


------


How do you know? There is very little public support now for the McCanns and a great many people seem to mistrust their version of events. The police can't be so thick that they believe the Mcs version of events. 


They know they are lying, imo, but are carrying on with a charade. It's a disgrace.

Whether there is little public support for the McCanns, or public mistrust of their version of events, is immaterial. DCI Andy Redwood stated clearly that neither Madeleine's parents, or any of the members of the group that were with her, are either persons of interest or suspects. I personally do not believe that SY are corrupt, or involved in a whitewash. They will have information we are not privy to and their investigation will be based on this, and this alone.
Exactly Daryl Dixon, thank you.

As much as we all would like to believe they are secretly looking at the McCanns, they have evidence which is pointing them to someone else.

thumbsup
Please can you provide details of what evidence? And would you be kind enough to answer my earlier questions for clarity.

____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Jamming on 03.02.15 11:22

@woodforthetrees wrote:

I never said they don't have evidence, quite the opposite. I said they don't have evidence which implicates the McCanns or a live abduction. Which means......

They do have evidence for something else...

Do you KNOW this or is it a theory ? And if you know this, how do you know this, or are you purely going on what has been reported ? Because the only evidence that to my knowledge that has ever been in the public domain points at TM's involvement 

And this evidence, is it circumstantial, hard evidence or perhaps something else, planted maybe ?

Jamming

Posts : 134
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-06-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Joss on 03.02.15 11:35

I think these are just WFTT's theories, unless he/she has some insider intel?

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Dr What on 03.02.15 11:51

As far as I am aware, the only evidence that has been gathered and resulted in official conclusions, has been the report from the PJ.

I have not yet heard that SY, after their long and expensive investigation, have dismissed these original findings as rubbish.I have not heard either that the PJ have changed their original findings as a result of the 'work' of SY.

So, all I know suggests that the child still died in the apartment, the result possibly of an accident, and the McCanns not only assisted in removing the body but also engaged in a simulation of an abduction.

I am not aware of any other official report from either police force that has been produced that supercedes these findings.

Is anyone else aware of one?

Dr What

Posts : 241
Reputation : 17
Join date : 2012-10-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 03.02.15 12:05

@Joss wrote:I think these are just WFTT's theories, unless he/she has some insider intel?

Probably, but unless WFTT can expand or clarify WHY they are stating it is fact there posts will be moderated.

____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Joss on 03.02.15 12:17

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@Joss wrote:I think these are just WFTT's theories, unless he/she has some insider intel?

Probably, but unless WFTT can expand or clarify WHY they are stating it is fact there posts will be moderated.
Fair enough.

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Joss on 03.02.15 12:25

@Dr What wrote:As far as I am aware, the only evidence that has been gathered and resulted in official conclusions, has been the report from the PJ.

I have not yet heard that SY, after their long and expensive investigation, have dismissed these original findings as rubbish.I have not heard either that the PJ have changed their original findings as a result of the 'work' of SY.

So, all I know suggests that the child still died in the apartment, the result possibly of an accident, and the McCanns not only assisted in removing the body but also engaged in a simulation of an abduction.

I am not aware of any other official report from either police force that has been produced that supercedes these findings.

Is anyone else aware of one?
No.

Joss

Posts : 1899
Reputation : 146
Join date : 2011-09-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by woodforthetrees on 03.02.15 16:32

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Daryl Dixon wrote:
@j.rob wrote:woodfortrees wrote: 


Fact is, if they though it was them (which they don't), why spend all that time and money looking for NOT the McCanns, whilst having the McCanns on their doorstep. The answer...they hold evidence which exonerates them.


------


How do you know? There is very little public support now for the McCanns and a great many people seem to mistrust their version of events. The police can't be so thick that they believe the Mcs version of events. 


They know they are lying, imo, but are carrying on with a charade. It's a disgrace.

Whether there is little public support for the McCanns, or public mistrust of their version of events, is immaterial. DCI Andy Redwood stated clearly that neither Madeleine's parents, or any of the members of the group that were with her, are either persons of interest or suspects. I personally do not believe that SY are corrupt, or involved in a whitewash. They will have information we are not privy to and their investigation will be based on this, and this alone.
Exactly Daryl Dixon, thank you.

As much as we all would like to believe they are secretly looking at the McCanns, they have evidence which is pointing them to someone else.

thumbsup
Please can you provide details of what evidence? And would you be kind enough to answer my earlier questions for clarity.
No, I cannot give you details of the evidence SY have on their filed as I do not have access to their files

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by woodforthetrees on 03.02.15 16:35

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@Joss wrote:I think these are just WFTT's theories, unless he/she has some insider intel?

Probably, but unless WFTT can expand or clarify WHY they are stating it is fact there posts will be moderated.
No, I cannot speak on behalf of SY I'm afraid, they speak for themselves.

Not sure why my posts would be moderated? Just because my posts regarding the McCanns not being suspects don't make for easy reading for those intent on their guilt, rather than focusing on the truth for Madeleine.

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Jamming on 03.02.15 16:42

@woodforthetrees wrote:No, I cannot speak on behalf of SY I'm afraid, they speak for themselves.

Not sure why my posts would be moderated? Just because my posts regarding the McCanns not being suspects don't make for easy reading for those intent on their guilt, rather than focusing on the truth for Madeleine.

I cant speak for the moderating part, but you do put your points across as facts known to you rather than your theories/beliefs based on what is being reported re Grange. If they are facts perhaps you could enlighten us on how you know them to be facts?

Jamming

Posts : 134
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-06-04

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Smokeandmirrors on 03.02.15 16:53

@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@Joss wrote:I think these are just WFTT's theories, unless he/she has some insider intel?

Probably, but unless WFTT can expand or clarify WHY they are stating it is fact there posts will be moderated.
No, I cannot speak on behalf of SY I'm afraid, they speak for themselves.

Not sure why my posts would be moderated? Just because my posts regarding the McCanns not being suspects don't make for easy reading for those intent on their guilt, rather than focusing on the truth for Madeleine.
You have stated something as fact for which you provide no backup. Your posts have nothing to do with "easy reading" or otherwise. You are making unsubstantiated claims as if they are fact, which is disruptive unless you state it is an opinion only.

____________________
The truth will out.

Smokeandmirrors
Moderator

Posts : 2428
Reputation : 5
Join date : 2011-07-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by j.rob on 03.02.15 17:33

Not sure why my posts would be moderated? Just because my posts regarding the McCanns not being suspects don't make for easy reading for those intent on their guilt, rather than focusing on the truth for Madeleine.


-----


Focusing on the truth of what happened to Madeleine would mean focusing closely on what the McCanns, their friends, acquaintances and wider networks  were up to not just that week, but in the weeks and months both before and after that fateful 'holiday'.

j.rob

Posts : 2243
Reputation : 225
Join date : 2014-02-02

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by woodforthetrees on 03.02.15 17:49

@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@woodforthetrees wrote:
@Smokeandmirrors wrote:
@Joss wrote:I think these are just WFTT's theories, unless he/she has some insider intel?

Probably, but unless WFTT can expand or clarify WHY they are stating it is fact there posts will be moderated.
No, I cannot speak on behalf of SY I'm afraid, they speak for themselves.

Not sure why my posts would be moderated? Just because my posts regarding the McCanns not being suspects don't make for easy reading for those intent on their guilt, rather than focusing on the truth for Madeleine.
You have stated something as fact for which you provide no backup. Your posts have nothing to do with "easy reading" or otherwise. You are making unsubstantiated claims as if they are fact, which is disruptive unless you state it is an opinion only.
Dear oh dear...

Ok, I'll state that they are 'opinion only' to allow people to continue to believe that SY are still looking at the McCanns. I'm not here to convince people who have strong beliefs, each to their own.

As you were...

woodforthetrees

Posts : 270
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2014-03-19

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by ChippyM on 03.02.15 17:53

@woodforthetrees wrote:
@noseyparker wrote:agree WOODFOR THE TREES...Point to one single piece of evidence to support your pedo theory

Known paedos operating in the area
Witness reports of the apartment being watched throughout the week
Cleaned scene/prepared perp = expert, not a novice, or an accident
Targeted one child of a certain age, leaving the twins alone, shows the 'event' and the victim were specifically targeted
and here is the most obvious one....................

That SY are searching for an intruder who acted alone, killed Madeleine 'most likely not alive when left the apartment'...whilst also interviewing  paedos who are known to know other paedos who were operating in the area at the time.

They do not do that without having evidence to back that up.


You are contradicting yourself. Why would an 'expert' lone paedo plan to go into a house and kill the child whilst in there? As has been repeated time and again, breaking in to a house and assaulting a child there is the riskiest type of assault there can be but you are saying it WAS planned that way?!.  If he was so good at cleaning up then no need to take the body. If he killed the child by accident then how was he an 'expert'?   It is sadly more likely that any sex offenders possibly connected to MM knew her and weren't strangers, that would logically explain how the offender left 'no trace', as their DNA would already be there.

We have no idea what SY are doing behind closed doors,  that they are looking for one person or 2 or 3.  Anything else is speculation but usually at least backed up by logic.

ChippyM

Posts : 910
Reputation : 129
Join date : 2013-06-15

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Garrincha on 03.02.15 20:44

This just gone on too long

Garrincha

Posts : 136
Reputation : 11
Join date : 2013-06-05

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by Maggs Shaw on 03.02.15 21:54

Whether or not, and of course it remains to be seen, the debacle with The Sun newspaper was intentionally designed to aid the McCanns and their entourage, and give strength to their long list of reasons people should just shut up, we will never know.  But is has played right into their hands and consequently will give them more ammunition to to portray themselves as victims.

The McCanns have evaded questions from the Portugese Police, Scotland Yard, and numerous interviewers that dared to step out of line occasionally and pose the more difficult searching questions.  They have have had copious amounts of 'protection'    They have been so far, and appear to be, totally untouchable.  

The day will come, without a doubt, when K and G ARE questioned, and WILL have to answer, and it will not be from any of the above mentioned.   It will be from their own flesh and blood, from their children. The questions their children will ask, will far outweigh ANY they have previously been asked.  But...they will not have the option to reply with 'no comment'!  When, and the day will come, they are both interrogated by their children will be the day K and G will have to face their demons.

Maggs Shaw

Posts : 121
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-08-09

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: This just gone on to Daily Mail.

Post by ScarletLaw on 04.02.15 8:48

Fact is, if they though it was them (which they don't), why spend all that time and money looking for NOT the McCanns, whilst having the McCanns on their doorstep. The answer...they hold evidence which exonerates them.




In reply to this question IMO (in the purpose of the evidence I supplied yesterday to their fitting up of people in the past) will be something that they find on a person. I have looked into Granges statements and there seems to be a definite plant to our press where they grumble about not being able to get access to various burglars and misfits homes. I don't know yet, because I haven't looked into this fully yet, (maybe someone can enlighten me) but as far as I know they still haven't been able to search a home because the Portugese's legal system of only being able to search if they're a proper suspect is stopping them.
  My instinct is the Portugese are being very clever with the Yard and are very aware that a hairbrush; an item of clothing, a speck of the little girls dna etc, could be planted in order by these people with the purpose of setting them up. Because these people have a firm, history where they've done this in the past.
 The stories that Grange give out and the fact that their feeding and leading us to believe that they have some mysterious evidence, plus like others on here have said-we have no proof of, shows that it doesn't exist and it's their purpose for us to think this because much later, it will be found on a thoroughly dishonest person. Who I expect will be someone with a history of lying and again, the perfect patsy.
 What the Yard are actually searching for is someone who is very dodgy; in the area on the night the little girl, has connections to breaking in houses etc, or has a penchant for child pornography, or just generally being violent. Unfortunately they can't do this because so far there isn't one person who fits into the criteria, hence in seven years they haven't bee able to find someone who was there.
    So they're grasping at straws and double checking every person there that night, hence the round up of lots of suspects before Christmas, and desperately searching for someone who fits this remit. Somebody who was say, sat up home alone and doesn't have any collaborative alibi to prove this theory.
   If they did have specific evidence then they would purposely be going in one direction at this point, say a small group of individuals. But they're not, they're simply grasping at straws in the hope something sticks.

 IMO the fact that the Portugese are smart enough to know this is going on and stopping them, is the reason this case hasn't been concluded yet.

ScarletLaw

Posts : 236
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2014-12-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Page 9 of 12 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum