More money to find missing girl
Discussion
Dr Interceptor said:
Gadgetmac said:
I have no opinion
Has no opinion, but will deride anyone who dares suggest it was anything other than a simple abduction/kidnapping. 
Gadgetmac said:
Now lets apply that to all of those intimating the McCanns had a hand in this...
Let's apply "I consider it resonable to believe the possibility that.................."My view is the reasonable possibility that the McCanns overdosed the sleepy meds & covered it up. I can't prove it but many facts support the supposition.
Agammemnon said:
Gadgetmac said:
Now lets apply that to all of those intimating the McCanns had a hand in this...
Let's apply "I consider it resonable to believe the possibility that.................."My view is the reasonable possibility that the McCanns overdosed the sleepy meds & covered it up. I can't prove it but many facts support the supposition.
So, in a way, I do have an opinion I suppose.
Gadgetmac said:
And my even more reasonable possibility is that you don’t know what you’re talking about as you’ve no experience in criminal investigations, are not privy to all of the ‘facts’ and are basing your supposition solely on newspaper and other media reports with their own inbuilt biases.
So, in a way, I do have an opinion I suppose.
I won't be offended by your comments but would point out that as a theory it has at least as much to support it as an abduction theory or any other suggestion.So, in a way, I do have an opinion I suppose.
May I ask what evidence you have to support your ideas I have no experience, access to facts, etc? As it happens I don't but I wonder what evidence you had to lead you to your conclusion prior to me stating this? It's relevant as you cite others' lack of evidence.
Edited by Agammemnon on Friday 26th July 15:18
Agammemnon said:
Gadgetmac said:
And my even more reasonable possibility is that you don’t know what you’re talking about as you’ve no experience in criminal investigations, are not privy to all of the ‘facts’ and are basing your supposition solely on newspaper and other media reports with their own inbuilt biases.
So, in a way, I do have an opinion I suppose.
I won't be offended by your comments but would point out that as a theory it has at least as much to support it as an abduction theory or any other suggestion.So, in a way, I do have an opinion I suppose.
The final sentence of your post is incorrect as you cannot possibly know how much support your theory of ‘the McCanns as culpritts’ has. Only the investigating officers know that.
Agammemnon said:
May I ask what evidence you have to support your ideas I have no experience, access to facts, etc? As it happens I don't but I wonder what evidence you had to lead you to your conclusion prior to me stating this? It's relevant as you cite others' lack of evidence.
Sorry, missed this, you added it after I’d responded.The ‘evidence’ I have is that you haven’t declared any special insight into this that someone with evidence would have offered.
The odds on YOU having such evidence, whilst being in conversation with ME about this topic are astronomical. I have more chance of winning the lottery than randomly chatting to a stranger on the Internet with such inside knowledge.
A fact you’ve now confirmed I might add.
Agammemnon said:
Gadgetmac said:
And my even more reasonable possibility is that you don’t know what you’re talking about as you’ve no experience in criminal investigations, are not privy to all of the ‘facts’ and are basing your supposition solely on newspaper and other media reports with their own inbuilt biases.
So, in a way, I do have an opinion I suppose.
I won't be offended by your comments but would point out that as a theory it has at least as much to support it as an abduction theory or any other suggestion.So, in a way, I do have an opinion I suppose.
May I ask what evidence you have to support your ideas I have no experience, access to facts, etc? As it happens I don't but I wonder what evidence you had to lead you to your conclusion prior to me stating this? It's relevant as you cite others' lack of evidence.
If you don't know the full evidential strengths and weaknesses for each theory (as you admit in the second paragraph), then you aren't in a position to state X relevant theory has at least as much to support it as Y relevant theory.
La Liga said:
How can you draw that conclusion?
If you don't know the full evidential strengths and weaknesses for each theory (as you admit in the second paragraph), then you aren't in a position to state X relevant theory has at least as much to support it as Y relevant theory.
No resonable theory (eg excluding aliens, etc) has enough evidence to even start court proceedings or convince the majority of onlookers- on this basis they are all equally valid or invalid.If you don't know the full evidential strengths and weaknesses for each theory (as you admit in the second paragraph), then you aren't in a position to state X relevant theory has at least as much to support it as Y relevant theory.
HoHoHo said:
Blib said:
The original, Portugese detective wrote a book, didn't he?
What did he claim?
Didn't the McCanns sue and lost?
And the judge suggested that regardless of the fact the police removed the arguido status they were still not in the clear as far as he was concerned What did he claim?
Didn't the McCanns sue and lost?
“It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence."
Its not pertinent to the ongoing investigation in any way whatsoever.
Agammemnon said:
La Liga said:
How can you draw that conclusion?
If you don't know the full evidential strengths and weaknesses for each theory (as you admit in the second paragraph), then you aren't in a position to state X relevant theory has at least as much to support it as Y relevant theory.
No resonable theory (eg excluding aliens, etc) has enough evidence to even start court proceedings or convince the majority of onlookers- on this basis they are all equally valid or invalid.If you don't know the full evidential strengths and weaknesses for each theory (as you admit in the second paragraph), then you aren't in a position to state X relevant theory has at least as much to support it as Y relevant theory.
You do not know what is known by the investigators. They will have discounted many theories for reasons you cannot possibly know.
Agammemnon said:
La Liga said:
How can you draw that conclusion?
If you don't know the full evidential strengths and weaknesses for each theory (as you admit in the second paragraph), then you aren't in a position to state X relevant theory has at least as much to support it as Y relevant theory.
No resonable theory (eg excluding aliens, etc) has enough evidence to even start court proceedings or convince the majority of onlookers- on this basis they are all equally valid or invalid.If you don't know the full evidential strengths and weaknesses for each theory (as you admit in the second paragraph), then you aren't in a position to state X relevant theory has at least as much to support it as Y relevant theory.
Agammemnon said:
...but would point out that as a theory it has at least as much to support it as an abduction theory or any other suggestion.
Which you are not in a position to state, because as you admit, you don't have access to all the information the investigatory team do. "At least as much to support it", is open to everything that may or not exist to support each theory.
It wasn't limited to the reference points you've just made-up to try and justify what you wrote.
Regards lack of info and crap sources. Just checking you are aware most of us are basing our thoughts from the info in the PJ files. The actual police files, statements etc from the original investigation, not some random biased snippets from the Sun or Daily Mail.
If the PJ files don’t contain the full and accurate facts then you have to come to one of 2 conclusions.
That the parents and friends have been telling porkies / omitting info when supplying said statements in which case it seems they have something to hide, or the police have been messing about with evidence / bias etc. in which case you can’t use the line that the police have the full and accurate facts and must be trusted.
If the PJ files don’t contain the full and accurate facts then you have to come to one of 2 conclusions.
That the parents and friends have been telling porkies / omitting info when supplying said statements in which case it seems they have something to hide, or the police have been messing about with evidence / bias etc. in which case you can’t use the line that the police have the full and accurate facts and must be trusted.
Hmmm...... 
At this stage I'll go with the following hypothesis on this...
The Portuguese Police couldn't give a rats ass anymore. They're pretty sure who did it and they aren't going to rock up any time soon to undergo any further questioning. The girl's dead and one day there will be a corpse but until then, not their problem.
The Police in the UK don't want to cancel the inquiry because
a.) no one wants to take the responsibility for that just in case, no matter how ridiculous the whole thing has now become and also because of the massive media event that will be generated by the McCanns if they do. "How dare you abandon little Maddie!!!"
b.) the greens this time of year are astounding.
Maybe our new ruthless overlord of a Home Secretary will pull the plug?
And here's an extra thought. If the two people involved really have not nothing to hide, surely enough time has passed for them to go back to Portugal to film a "Memories of Maddie" documentary which they can then sell on to the highest bidder (all for the fund of course.)
"Here's table where we got pissed,"
"Here's the hammer we broke the shutters with,"
"Here's the phone we used to call our mates in the media,"
"Here's the hire car and the jet wash we cleaned it with. We always return things in the condition we found them,"
"Here's the pill bo...... oops that's not ours & WE HAVE NEVER SEEN IT BEFORE!!!"
At this stage I'll go with the following hypothesis on this...
The Portuguese Police couldn't give a rats ass anymore. They're pretty sure who did it and they aren't going to rock up any time soon to undergo any further questioning. The girl's dead and one day there will be a corpse but until then, not their problem.
The Police in the UK don't want to cancel the inquiry because
a.) no one wants to take the responsibility for that just in case, no matter how ridiculous the whole thing has now become and also because of the massive media event that will be generated by the McCanns if they do. "How dare you abandon little Maddie!!!"
b.) the greens this time of year are astounding.
Maybe our new ruthless overlord of a Home Secretary will pull the plug?
And here's an extra thought. If the two people involved really have not nothing to hide, surely enough time has passed for them to go back to Portugal to film a "Memories of Maddie" documentary which they can then sell on to the highest bidder (all for the fund of course.)
"Here's table where we got pissed,"
"Here's the hammer we broke the shutters with,"
"Here's the phone we used to call our mates in the media,"
"Here's the hire car and the jet wash we cleaned it with. We always return things in the condition we found them,"
"Here's the pill bo...... oops that's not ours & WE HAVE NEVER SEEN IT BEFORE!!!"
Edited by The Hypno-Toad on Saturday 27th July 12:41
Edited by The Hypno-Toad on Saturday 27th July 12:43
Updating this ancient thread.
In a surprise move, more bottles of Factor 30 sun cream and some new golf balls have been ordered by the Met.
Oh, and on a completely different subject, they are to be given a further £300,000 towards the investigation of a missing girl to top up the previous £13m already spent since 2007.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mc...
In a surprise move, more bottles of Factor 30 sun cream and some new golf balls have been ordered by the Met.
Oh, and on a completely different subject, they are to be given a further £300,000 towards the investigation of a missing girl to top up the previous £13m already spent since 2007.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mc...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff