Madeleine McCann found?

[Clutchbag]

It was in a press conference a couple of weeks ago, Scotland yard said in an official statement that neither the McCann's or their friends were suspects or persons of interest. If you go to bbc it might still be on their site otherwise try YouTube.

The final report states that there was no evidence that either the McCann's or Murat practised any crime. It did not state the McCann's may be guilty at all.

For the umpteenth time, if Scotland Yard have suspicions about the the group, they are NOT going to publically say, yes, they are persons of interest. The same happend in Portugal in 2007. The police publicqlly said one week before they were made official suspects, that they were NOT persons of interest.

The final report did not say they are not guiilty, or may be guilty, no lawyer can state that, that is for a court and judges. but it did say by refusing to cooperate with the police by not going back to do a reconstruction, they lost the chance to prove their innocence!

 

[gord]

here we go again !!

If the McCann's and the Tapas lot are still suspects then you would think that the police would have maybe just done something by now ?

Come on SY have been looking at all the files in detail for two years - they have gone through every statement and more. If they had anything atall on them anything they would have acted way before now .

All the tapas were interviewed many times both in Portugal and back in the UK by Leicestershire police .

all this slowly slowly catchee monkee stuff won't wash any more . Its not a game - it is about finding out what actually happened if possible.

SY have stated in a live interview that the parents and friends are not persons of interest

 

[gord]

For the umpteenth time, if Scotland Yard have suspicions about the the group, they are NOT going to publically say, yes, they are persons of interest. The same happend in Portugal in 2007. The police publicqlly said one week before they were made official suspects, that they were NOT persons of interest.

The final report did not say they are not guiilty, or may be guilty, no lawyer can state that, that is for a court and judges. but it did say by refusing to cooperate with the police by not going back to do a reconstruction, they lost the chance to prove their innocence!

the McCann's were never charged of any offence - I am just confused how you have to prove your innocence unless you are actually charged. ? and in any case only a court and jury can declare innocence or guilt. I think you are confusing what you think from the actual reality.

Your interpretation about what the SY have said is just that - your interpretation. All we can go with is official statements - the police have said they have unearthed 38 new leads after going through thousands of files and interviews - way more than the files that have been released to the public. They have 38 new leads and people of interest. That is it . The McCann's are not suspects

I for one think that it is great that SY have opened the case to find the truth and take it forward .

 

[Cherry]

Sorry but that is total rubbish

Murat was exonerated in black and white

The final legal summary said there were unanswered questions around the Mccanns

As I posted before, they have never been exonerated by any legal body, that is a fact, and thatincludes the British LE saying they were not, you cannog dispute black and white words from them just because you want to

and again, if ey were persons of interest, scotland Yard would NOT say they are, doh

I agree 100% and believe they need look no further than the McCann's themselves. That's always been my most humble opinion. And by that I mean Kate McCann.

 

[brit1981]

Have you thought about contacting Scotland yard with this opinion, as they have stated she is not a suspect. She did not have motive or opportunity to cover up a death and she has campaigned to have the case investigated by police after it was shelved.

And it is for the courts to state guilty or not, but not innocence. Innocence is automatic unless proven guilty. So as the McCann's have never been found guilty, have never been charged, have the attorney generals saying there is no evidence against them, Scotland yard saying they are not suspects it is a fact they are innocent. The only people who think they are guilty are conspiracy theorists on the internet

 

[brit1981]

here we go again !!

If the McCann's and the Tapas lot are still suspects then you would think that the police would have maybe just done something by now ?

Come on SY have been looking at all the files in detail for two years - they have gone through every statement and more. If they had anything atall on them anything they would have acted way before now .

All the tapas were interviewed many times both in Portugal and back in the UK by Leicestershire police .

all this slowly slowly catchee monkee stuff won't wash any more . Its not a game - it is about finding out what actually happened if possible.

SY have stated in a live interview that the parents and friends are not persons of interest

A small group of conspiracy theorists are desperate for the McCann's to be guilty for some reason. They therefore see everything as a sign of guilt even Scotland yard saying they are not suspects is seen as a secret message to anti McCann's that they are suspects. Not one anti McCann can come up with a theory backed by actual evidence to show McCann guilt, which makes me wonder why they are claiming to be certain of therir guilt. Fact is police have stated McCann's are not suspects, and they could not have hidden her body anyway.

 

[brit1981]

Let's remember if Scotland yard did not want to say the McCann's were suspects they did not need to mention anything about their status, and if McCann's wanted to get away with a crime they could have left it closed.

 

[Donjeta]

Have you thought that the same applies to whoever did something to Madelene? They have never been charged, they haven't been named suspects, there is no evidence against them, they are presumed innocent becase they haven't been charged and proven guilty. So , in fact by your reasoning you will have to conclude that no one ever did anything to Madeleine and everybody thinking so is just a silly conspiracy theorist. If no one has been convicted of a crime the crime simply did not take place. Because everyone is presumed innocent and thus no one did it.

 

[brit1981]

Have you thought that the same applies to whoever did something to Madelene? They have never been charged, they haven't been named suspects, there is no evidence against them, they are presumed innocent becase they haven't been charged and proven guilty. So , in fact by your reasoning you will have to conclude that no one ever did anything to Madeleine and everybody thinking so is just a silly conspiracy theorist. If no one has been convicted of a crime the crime simply did not take place. Because everyone is presumed innocent and thus no one did it.

No, unnamed person or persons took Madeleine, but it is for the courts to prove their guilt. The idea that people have to prove their innocence is right up their with witch dunking, especially as in this case the few accusing the McCann's shout conspiracy every time the evidence does not implicate the family. Could you prove your innocence if every piece of evidence was accused of being a cover up. Fact is not one person has come up with a theory as to how the McCann's did it that does not rely on myths and conspiracies.

 

[Clutchbag]

it is a myth that scotland yard have declared that there was an abduction...it is totally untrue, andy redwood, who leads the case, by the way he is the officer who fitted up a man for tyr murder of jill dando in the uk, whose conviction was quashed.....has only said the following


There was an opportunity for an abduction to take place and that would be a criminal act by a stranger, doh! at NO TIME did he say that is what he or any other police officer believes is what happened, its that simple

 

[Clutchbag]

No, unnamed person or persons took Madeleine, but it is for the courts to prove their guilt. The idea that people have to prove their innocence is right up their with witch dunking, especially as in this case the few accusing the McCann's shout conspiracy every time the evidence does not implicate the family. Could you prove your innocence if every piece of evidence was accused of being a cover up. Fact is not one person has come up with a theory as to how the McCann's did it that does not rely on myths and conspiracies.

No evidence that any strangers took her, and no, the prosecutors final report said they refused to take the chance to back up their statements, which is in fact what all nine of them did, refuse to cooperate, and in quite an aggressive way as well, whilst bleating for months they would do anything at all, and leave no stone unturned. They lied.

 

[Donjeta]

No, unnamed person or persons took Madeleine, but it is for the courts to prove their guilt. The idea that people have to prove their innocence is right up their with witch dunking, especially as in this case the few accusing the McCann's shout conspiracy every time the evidence does not implicate the family. Could you prove your innocence if every piece of evidence was accused of being a cover up. Fact is not one person has come up with a theory as to how the McCann's did it that does not rely on myths and conspiracies.

How could anyone ever prove them guilty if the response to every theory is to shout witchhunt and conspiracy and silly you for Thinking Wrong Thoughts? I have seen theories without conspiracies even if you haven't. Say, if they dumped a bag in a dumpster before going to dinner. I don't see what conspiracy would be needed.


Lgically, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If there is no evidence aganst me it may be because A) I'm actually innocent, but also maybe because B) I am guilty but clever and left none, got lucky and evidence was destroyed, no one just looked in the right places or did but they misinterpreted it. There are so many crimes that go unsolved that option B) does not seem unusual at all.

My point is not that they're guilty. My point is that it is not logical to bring up the legal presumption of innocence as if it is evidence of factual innocence. It is not because the same presumption of innocence is afforded in exactly the same degree to the actual guilty party, since no one's been convicted. So you can't say that it is a fact that the McCanns are innocent because they're legally presumed to be so and haven't been charged and convicted for anything because if you use that reasoning then you would also have to accept that it s a fact that the person who took Madeleine is innocent.

The logical conclusion of using this reasoning is patently absurd. So, better not use it.

 

[SapphireSteel]

How could anyone ever prove them guilty if the response to every theory is to shout witchhunt and conspiracy and silly you for Thinking Wrong Thoughts? I have seen theories without conspiracies even if you haven't. Say, if they dumped a bag in a dumpster before going to dinner. I don't see what conspiracy would be needed.


Lgically, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If there is no evidence aganst me it may be because A) I'm actually innocent, but also maybe because B) I am guilty but clever and left none, got lucky and evidence was destroyed, no one just looked in the right places or did but they misinterpreted it. There are so many crimes that go unsolved that option B) does not seem unusual at all.

My point is not that they're guilty. My point is that it is not logical to bring up the legal presumption of innocence as if it is evidence of factual innocence. It is not because the same presumption of innocence is afforded in exactly the same degree to the actual guilty party, since no one's been convicted. So you can't say that it is a fact that the McCanns are innocent because they're legally presumed to be so and haven't been charged and convicted for anything because if you use that reasoning then you would also have to accept that it s a fact that the person who took Madeleine is innocent.

The logical conclusion of using this reasoning is patently absurd. So, better not use it.

:goodpost:

Amen.

The fact is, no one knows what happened to Madeleine.

Some McCann supporters speak as if they have her in their own garden shed, so convinced are they of the McCann innocence.

No one has the right to declare anyone exonerated until LE do - so far, this hasn't actually happened, despite all the opining and sound bites.

 

[gord]

How could anyone ever prove them guilty if the response to every theory is to shout witchhunt and conspiracy and silly you for Thinking Wrong Thoughts? I have seen theories without conspiracies even if you haven't. Say, if they dumped a bag in a dumpster before going to dinner. I don't see what conspiracy would be needed.


Lgically, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If there is no evidence aganst me it may be because A) I'm actually innocent, but also maybe because B) I am guilty but clever and left none, got lucky and evidence was destroyed, no one just looked in the right places or did but they misinterpreted it. There are so many crimes that go unsolved that option B) does not seem unusual at all.

My point is not that they're guilty. My point is that it is not logical to bring up the legal presumption of innocence as if it is evidence of factual innocence. It is not because the same presumption of innocence is afforded in exactly the same degree to the actual guilty party, since no one's been convicted. So you can't say that it is a fact that the McCanns are innocent because they're legally presumed to be so and haven't been charged and convicted for anything because if you use that reasoning then you would also have to accept that it s a fact that the person who took Madeleine is innocent.

The logical conclusion of using this reasoning is patently absurd. So, better not use it.

sorry but for me it is simple - every one is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law

that is the basis of most modern democracies and individual human rights

forget all the spin that goes on - it comes down to this simple premise innocent until proven guilty

 

[Donjeta]

sorry but for me it is simple - every one is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law

that is the basis of most modern democracies and individual human rights

forget all the spin that goes on - it comes down to this simple premise innocent until proven guilty

Yes this is how the legal system works and how t should.

However, whenever a crime took place, for someone this presumption of innocence is just a legal presumption and not a fact.

This does not take away anyone's human rights. Just pointing out what should be very obvious but apparently is not: that even the actual person who kidnapped Madeleine and a number of heinous child murderers and serial killers and pedophiles and other criminals currently have this right so it is not evidence of not having done anything wrong.

The human right to be considered innocent in a court of law before being convicted of a crime is automatic and belongs to EVERYBODY, regardless of whether you actually committed crimes or not.

 

[brit1981]

How could anyone ever prove them guilty if the response to every theory is to shout witchhunt and conspiracy and silly you for Thinking Wrong Thoughts? I have seen theories without conspiracies even if you haven't. Say, if they dumped a bag in a dumpster before going to dinner. I don't see what conspiracy would be needed.


Lgically, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If there is no evidence aganst me it may be because A) I'm actually innocent, but also maybe because B) I am guilty but clever and left none, got lucky and evidence was destroyed, no one just looked in the right places or did but they misinterpreted it. There are so many crimes that go unsolved that option B) does not seem unusual at all.

My point is not that they're guilty. My point is that it is not logical to bring up the legal presumption of innocence as if it is evidence of factual innocence. It is not because the same presumption of innocence is afforded in exactly the same degree to the actual guilty party, since no one's been convicted. So you can't say that it is a fact that the McCanns are innocent because they're legally presumed to be so and haven't been charged and convicted for anything because if you use that reasoning then you would also have to accept that it s a fact that the person who took Madeleine is innocent.

The logical conclusion of using this reasoning is patently absurd. So, better not use it.

It is logical to bring it up when people claim they have to prove innocence. Innocence does not have to be proven.

And yes the bin theory means a huge jump of logic first and foremost because they would have known that the bins were emptied every night at twelve and that normally police would check them. So why raise alarm before they were emptied.

 

[Donjeta]

The McCanns do not have to be able to prove their innocence in a court of law or anywhere else but since you claim for a fact that they're innocent you do have to be able to prove it. It's WS rules.

You also would have to prove that they knew what time the bins were emptied (really, all bins everywhere around them were emptied at the same time??) if you claim this for a fact.

And perhaps they would have preferred for her to be found to be able to bury her. You could still blame it on an unknown attacker if there was nothing obvious about the COD to tie it to the family.

 

[brit1981]

The McCanns do not have to be able to prove their innocence in a court of law or anywhere else but since you claim for a fact that they're innocent you do have to be able to prove it. It's WS rules.

You also would have to prove that they knew what time the bins were emptied (really, all bins everywhere around them were emptied at the same time??) if you claim this for a fact.

And perhaps they would have preferred for her to be found to be able to bury her. You could still blame it on an unknown attacker if there was nothing obvious about the COD to tie it to the family.

In that case anyone who says they are guilty has to prove it, but notice that never happens.

The fact is no one has provided a theory as to how and why the mccanns covered up the death of their eldest child. Why would they cover up her death, there is no evidence of a motive and it was the McCann's who first suggested sedation by an abductor but there has been no evidence of this, no one saw anything, and once they were at dinner there was no opportunity to dispose of a body. When forensics were carried out nothing was found, no excessive cleaning, no blood, no expulsion of bodily fluids. The idea that in such a short space of time Madeleine died, and her parents decided to dump her like a piece of rubbish then go out to dinner as normal then campaign for the case to be reopened is just not credible. The fact that both the attorney general of Portugal said there was NO evidence against the mccanns and Scotland yard say they are not suspects should give people pause for thought instead of howling that Scotland yard is wrong, speaking in code, part of a conspiracy etc.

 

[dotr]

Another alleged pedophile with a connection to UK arrested..
Bbm.
http://www.ottawasun.com/2013/07/19...curator-arrested-on-child-🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬-charges

"After cops finished with his apartment, they raided his office around noon Thursday.

Nearly a dozen plain-clothes officers in a variety of unmarked vehicles went in an out of the office as parents and their young children walked under Klingender’s office window.

The Sun was aware of both raids, but didn’t report on the incidents until police located their suspect.

When Klingender was picked up at Pearson airport, he was about to board a flight to England for a business trip.

Multiple police sources say Klingender is suspected to be a “big fish” and a “prolific” distributor of child . He’s not suspected of creating the material, just making it available.

The raids and investigation were and continue to be carried out by the Internet Child Exploitation and High Tech Crime unit"s

 

[dotr]

July 19 2013

Madeleine McCann Family Believes Missing Girl Still Alive - YouTube