Jump to content

Alternative Title

Gold Members
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Alternative Title

  • Rank
    Sunday League Starter

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Edinburgh
  • My Team
    Hibernian

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It wasn't even admissable on Kyle latterly. After this length of time they could fool a polygraph, but there are certain questions they would struggle to answer under cross examination. A good PR stunt would be getting the DNA checked by more up to date analysis. Who knows, tgwr may be less of Madeleine's markers in it.
  2. Yeah, fair comment. I was being ironic with the guy, don't like being called a weirdo, and I'm sure others don't too.
  3. Nah, I just read this book. It's only available online in the UK, for some reason someone doesn't want it published here.. http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/Goncalo Amaral - Truth of the Lie - Madeleine McCann.pdf
  4. Pretty poor show really. Can I blame predictive text? https://www.glasgowcomascale.org/
  5. Almost as fucking weird as having a thread on the topic in the first place. If it's any comfort, I was pleased with Hibs performance against Newcastle the other night. Scott Allan is looking good. Newcastle were miles better though, but despite Joelinton looking a good signing , I reckon they are for the drop. Don't worry I'm one of the gang, can't stand people who push from the back though to ingratiate themselves to others though. Actually, commenting on other people's motivation for posting is really weird. It makes you sound slightly moralistic, or narrow minded. I'm not quite sure.
  6. I think the thing about this case is that all theories were explored by the Portuguese, with assistance from Scotland Yard. It was SY, who have the largest database of missing kids in the world, who advised to look at the parents in the July. This led to the dogs being brought over from South Yorkshire Police. It was the dogs alerts and the DNA found that were the catalyst for questioning then effectively under caution What is the mystery to me, is how they were able to leave the country when it was pretty obvious they were conspiring to obstruct the investigation. Maybe someone high up in Portugal didn't think it was worth the hassle they'd get from someone high up in Britain? They may well have been the price of something else that Portugal needed from Britain in the lead up to the Lisbon treaty. What is known is that Operation Grange had ruled out the wandering off theory as implausible, in light of everything else they know. Ps, only two couples were doing the checking. One couple had a baby monitor, the other had the father at home.
  7. Titter ye not, it's still on the front page of the official find Madeleine site. There is a cockamenny statement along the lines that this man has not officially been confirmed as the man Jane saw. So now there are two men carrying children at the same time. Although Gerry saw nobody and Jane only saw one. Still very quiet on the Smith sighting, and Smithman is not even on the front page. Instead he makes up an ID parade of the most unlikely looking artists impressions ever. Clearly they would rather we spoke about Tannerman than Smithman.
  8. Rather than debate what might have happened if there was no abduction. What evidence is there that an abduction took place? I don't think it is entirely reliable to go by the timeline provided. The last independent siting was 17:30. I think it was Oldfield who did the 21:30 check, yet he says he did not see Madeleine, as he didn't look. He would still have to get the child out in a two minute window, allowing for Gerry charting to Jez Wilkins on the way back, and the time that Jane Tanner spotted a man carrying a child. I am not a fan on speculating on their personality, however, I think they were more confident they could carry off the abduction story and thought it was a risk worth taking. I base this on the cock sure attitude from Gerry that suggests a man who looks down on other people as inferior However, that is not good enough to prove anything. What was required was a proper interrogation after the Cadaverine and the DNA was discovered Do they really suggest that Portugal would fit them up with the British media watching?
  9. Ok, I thought you said there was absolutely no evidence of drugging, sorry. I suppose the motivation for staging a kidnap would be to save their reputation and a possible prison sentence? You'd have to ask them. I am not a doctor, and I am not one of the McCanns, I can't tell you how or when you would give drugs. Bear in mind the last sighting of Madeleine was at 5:30. That gives four and a half hours for different scenarios to develop. Regarding cause of death, it's suggested she fell off the sofa, banged her head, and possibly died of a haemorrhage, causing minimal bleeding out of the ear. This is based on the splatter pattern on the wall, and blood underneath a floor tile. Other than that you are just mocking, and accepting their version of events without question. It might help you if you learned more about high functioning psychopaths, then you could see if they fit the bill. Meantime, can you tell me how the abductor managed to do the deed? (I can guess which points you will respond to.)
  10. The McCanns, of course, case closed! Of course there is more evidence than a couple of dogs barking (see what he did there?) Dogs who got it right 200 times out of 200 up until then. Then there is the pesky DNA in the flat and the hire car (result of bodily fluid, consistent with a body defrosting.) And there is the fact that it took them three attempts to come up with a time line. And that they refused to co operate with police. And that they have used the fund to promote their bollocks version of events ever since, repeating lies and suing anybody who dares to question their version of events. Now, how did the abductor do the deed in a window of less than two minutes again?
  11. With respect, there is no army of people, Operation Grange is down to two people, they have been at the job for seven years and have yet to come up with anything. At least one person knows what happened, it's a case of identifying them. I tend to follow the hypothesis of Goncalo Amaral who was the chief investigating officer on the case. I think he is as much an expert as a bunch of plods from the Met on a busman's holiday. There's a link to the book below, and he explains why he believes that the child died by accident, and this was covered up by her parents. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts and any flaws you can see in his argument. I agree, but I think the dog was named after the University. I provided better links lower down just in case. OK, all the other doctors that have killed people, but never faced trial then? No need for the hot shot jibe, you were the guy that said there was absolutely no evidence of poisoning - you said it with the certainty of, well, a hot shot on the case. I merely offered up information to save you the embarassment of repeating your mistake in future, namely that the girl's mother, a trained anaesthetist (sp?) thought the kids had been drugged. The best hypothesis I can offer you is the book by Goncalo Amaral, The Truth of the Lie, which is based on the extensive documentation released by the Policial Judicial in 2008. as well as his own recollections of the case, and a reflection on the way it was handled by the British Media. McScam tried to do him for libel, but the Portuguese Supreme Court found in his favour. Good job, as they had set out to ruin him. The book is available elsewhere in Europe, but English versions are only available online. http://truthofthelie.com/the-book/ It's easier to fool people than convince them they have been fooled.
  12. Or Dr. Harold Shipman? Although they do ask for peer reviewed research when it suits their agenda of rubbishing things they don't want to hear. Who said anything about guilt? Edit: your mate said there was no evidence that the kids were drugged, and I put you straight in my first sentence. However if you are happy that they continue to enjoy their liberty without these pertinent questions being answered, you are welcome to what you think is normality. When, faced with incontestable evidence the usual McCann tactic is to question the sanity or morality of the person delivering it. You are definitely on message with that, but black marks for not realising that Kate had admitted in her book "madeleine" that she thought the kids were drugged. While you are here, would you mind telling me how the abductor managed to drug the children, and get out of a window that is not large enough for a man to get through, without leaving any forensic trace? If arrested, I take it he will be innocent until proved guilty also. As, there is a cast iron defence built up, which would implicate the parents.
×
×
  • Create New...