Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Quite a few people have done this id imagine. Left the children in what they thought was a safe place if they were only across the road. They’ll have to live with that.
Ya ya ya, we know no one from Just Chat would have done it cause youre all fu.cking perfect Saints who have never make a mistake in your lives.
@forumhostpb wrote:
I think that you have a really interesting point there Sharon – although there is a fine line between ‘causation’ and ‘criminal responsibility’.
May I just clarify something. I don’t think that anybody on this or other threads have actually stated their belief that the revered and sainted McCanns actually murdered their child themselves.
What has been most strongly implied is the belief that they somehow had a part to play in her ‘disappearance’ – other than leaving her alone and unprotected in the apartment that is.
The difficulty with this theory is that the timeline of visits to the apartment prior to the 9.05pm visit (by Mother McCann?????) and the first report of Maddie being missed at 10.00pm (by Mother McCann) is seemingly unknown.
If it was only the McCanns that allegedly visited their children, when the whim took them, prior to 9.05pm then we only have their word for it that Maddie was there at all during the whole of the evening.
I do find it difficult to believe that somehow a mystery stalker / paedophile just happened to know that on that particular evening a child would be left unattended in that particular apartment and that they could enter and take her (apparently soundlessly) without the risk of being caught because they somehow just happened to know that the adults would not be visiting.
As I’ve said before there could have been people watching them. People that knew they were out that night, or someone that obsevered them going out I dont quite get what part of that you find difficult to imagine PB?
@fastcars wrote:
Do you two actually believe all this cr*ap you type… :lol:
Ennit. :roll: Just a load of Drivel and sheer utter speculation without knowing one hard cold fact.
A hand over a mouth is gonna stop screaming. A gag over a mouth is certainly gonna stop screaming.
I presume that these are people who knew what they were doing.Far tougher draw for Rangers than Celtic. :D
Shakhtar Donetsk is a tricky one for a 4th seed team though. I can see Celtic qualifying, and Rangers going on their Jacksy. :D
Cant see many problems in any of the English teams qualifying. Arsenal couldent have hand picked an easier draw.
Yup. Great night at Parkhead.
Well done to Rangers too. :-…
@forumhostpb wrote:
i see from today’s press that Gerry McCann (husband of the sainted Kate McCann) stormed out of an interview ‘live’ on spanish TV. they were being interviewed on a prime-time current affairs programme (La Noria) when the interviewer asked Mr McCann “You were the last people to see Madeleine alive, is that correct?”
McCann replied “That’s part of the investigation and we’re not going to divulge anything that might get in the way of the investigation.”
The interviewer then responded with “This investigation took a new turn this month when traces of blood were discovered in the room. When you heard that, how did you react?”
It was at this point that McCann snapped, tore off his microphone and stormed out of the interview refusing to comment.
What strange behaviour eh??? I wonder why???
Oh Yes, very strange behaviour indeed.
The only thing that’s strange is that one of them hasnt snapped before now with all the innuendo, bile, and vulgarity that’s flowed in their direction. :roll:
These interviewers know beforehand that these questions are out of bounds, due to the legal issues involving an ongoing investigation. The guy should have went further and gave the interviewer a damned good smacking.Aint even funny. Just making a mockery of a serious thread. A/holes.
@ubermik wrote:
@Bad Manners wrote:
[
So what? . The worst case scenario is that the little girl’s dead. If she is dead she could be buried. Therefore its hardly baffling that the body hasnt been found yet is it?
She could still be alive though even though no trace of her has been found. How about that little girl from Poland or somewhere that recently was found. She was missing for 7 years or something. How does that fit into your theory PB.
PB you keep going on about these statistics. 90 percent of cases are found to be someone connected to the family or whatever. It still leaves 10 percent of cases where that isnt the case. Chelsea win most of their games, doesnt mean they win them all. These people cant be put under suspicion because of some statistic.“These people cant be put under suspicion because of some statistic”
Why not?
If they only have a 1 in 10 chance of being innocent then they are 9 times more likely to be guilty so common sense alone would suggest you start by playing the odds and PROVE theyre innocent rather than just tip toe around them and hope they are
If you HAD to cross a lava pit and only had a choice of two bridges to do so, one of which collapsed 90% of the time it was used and one that only collapsed 10% of the time with each collapse causing the death of those crossing are you really expecting people to believe you would go with the one that collapsed 9 times as many times as the other lol?
Course not, you’d start with the one that presented the best odds of success (well a sane person would)
So I dont see how a 1 in 10 chance of innocence is reason to NOT see them as possible suspects, thats not a very “real world” application of probability
LOL
As Fastcars has mentioned people are innocent until proven guilty. Even if the statistic was 99.99 percent, these people would still be innocent until proven guilty.@ubermik wrote:
@Bad Manners wrote:
@forumhostpb wrote:
In theory it would. However it then poses far more questions than it answers.
How would a total stranger decide to select that particular apartment, somehow ‘know’ that it was unlocked; again somehow ‘know’ that a young girl was left in there alone and unprotected; then somehow spirit the little girl away to somewhere so that literally nobody in the world ever sees her again;and so on.
The ‘stranger’ version seems to pose more unanswerable questions than the other ‘family’ version ….. which is possibly why the media have now turned on the sainted McCanns.
Sorry dude, but youre fair game tonight.
They could have been watching the family’s movements for days, and could have been watching their movements on that particular day. If they were doing that then they would hardly “know” all that by guesswork would they.
It’s hardly Rocket Science is it? Cant believe that you put this one forward.LOL
WOW, such gifted and talented abductors eh? They just happened to pick the one family who WOULDNT be keeping an eye on their kids constantly whilst in a foreign country, how amazing is THAT then lol, was it a “guess” dya reckon or do the MCanns have “cheap wine poor parent” tattooed on their foreheads?
Hardly likely that a team (coz it would HAVE to be a team) of abductors would just pick THIS family at random and then meticulously watch them to suss out a pattern in what would most likely be an irregular itenary anyway JUST on the offchance that they MIGHT leave their kids unnattended for a long period of time like hardly anyone ever does whilst on holiday
AND, lets suppose despite the total lack of any logic whatsoever that that WAS the case, after going to all that trouble I am sure they would have really taken all three kids to make it worth their while rather than just the one considering they did ALL that “planning” and surveillance eh?
LOL
Maybe they only had the chance to take one of them eh? Maybe that’s all they/he/she had time for eh?.
Maybe it was someone who was vaguely farmiliar with the McCanns, and who noticed that they were out without their kids, and who took what they saw was an opportunity.
