Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Madeleine McCann

1…228229231233234…264

Comments

  • #6902
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    Rock77 wrote: »
    Could an abductor have killed the child in the apt and taken the body? Dogs would still get a scent.

    It was a hire car, could there have been a body in it before the McCanns hired it?

    So could the dogs be nothing against the McCanns?

    Of course. There are many possibilities. Makes it stranger as to why the McCanns tried to discredit the dogs instead of chasing up these possibilities.


  • #6903
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    callmehal wrote: »
    Of course. There are many possibilities. Makes it stranger as to why the McCanns tried to discredit the dogs instead of chasing up these possibilities.

    Grand, so there’s nothing against the McCanns


  • #6904
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    Rock77 wrote: »
    Grand, so there’s nothing against the McCanns

    Apart from the dogs, the lies, deleting phone records etc. More evidence against the McCanns than anyone else. As I claimed.


  • #6905
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    Yes.

    You honestly believe that these parents would rather have their child taken than their money... I know I shouldn’t be surprised by things I read on the internet but... I can only assume that your extracting urine...


  • #6906
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    callmehal wrote: »
    So again, you can't list one piece of evidence against anyone else.

    The dogs don't provide hard evidence but they can't be completely dismissed. You can't convict on what the dogs found or anything like that, it's just pointing more to the McCanns being responsible than any other evidence available.

    Why would I have any timeline of events?

    So again, you are deliberately choosing to ignore the multitude of points I am making.
    Fair enough if you see no merit in them, that’s your prerogative, but you can’t keep saying I’m offering up nothing when I’m going to the effort of constructing lengthy responses to you.
    4 times this evening I have listed several pieces of evidence that I feel indicate an abduction and your only reply has been to say ‘So you have nothing’, you aren’t even refuting anything.
    It’s quite dishonest and very transparent.

    Why wouldn’t you have a timeline of events? You think they did it, so how did they do it? When? Why? Where? Surely you have a theory?


  • Advertisement
  • #6907
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    callmehal wrote: »
    Apart from the dogs, the lies, deleting phone records etc. More evidence against the McCanns than anyone else. As I claimed.

    But you just said the dogs may not be evidence against them? The deleted phone records were retrieved, there are always inconsistencies in statements, it would be more suspicious if there wasn’t!

    So that leaves.... nothing... right where you started,

    There is no hard evidence on anyone


  • #6908
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    SusieBlue wrote: »
    So again, you are deliberately choosing to ignore the multitude of points I am making.
    Fair enough if you see no merit in them, that’s your prerogative, but you can’t keep saying I’m offering up nothing when I’m going to the effort of constructing lengthy responses to you.
    4 times this evening I have listed several pieces of evidence that I feel indicate an abduction and your only reply has been to say ‘So you have nothing’, you aren’t even refuting anything.
    It’s quite dishonest and very transparent.

    Why wouldn’t you have a timeline of events? You think they did it, so how did they do it? When? Why? Where? Surely you have a theory?

    I just want you to point out some of the evidence there is to support the theory of abduction, so far you have provided zilch. Not one piece of evidence.

    Where are you getting that from? Where did I say I think they did it? There's just more evidence against them than anyone else. I've proven that correct.


  • #6909
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    Rock77 wrote: »
    But you just said the dogs may not be evidence against them? The deleted phone records were retrieved, there are always inconsistencies in statements, it would be more suspicious if there wasn’t!

    So that leaves.... nothing... right where you started,

    There is no hard evidence on anyone

    Yes, it may not be but it's more evidence against them than anyone else. I don't think this is very hard to understand.

    There is some evidence pointing towards the McCanns, what evidence is there against anyone else?


  • #6910
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    callmehal wrote: »
    I just want you to point out some of the evidence there is to support the theory of abduction, so far you have provided zilch. Not one piece of evidence.

    Where are you getting that from? Where did I say I think they did it? There's just more evidence against them than anyone else. I've proven that correct.

    You certainly have not proved that, what you have done is taken some facts and interpreted them in a certain way. I asked you about the dogs and you’ve agreed they may not be evidence against the parents so why do you still insist they are?


  • #6911
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    callmehal wrote: »
    I just want you to point out some of the evidence there is to support the theory of abduction, so far you have provided zilch. Not one piece of evidence.

    Where are you getting that from? Where did I say I think they did it? There's just more evidence against them than anyone else. I've proven that correct.

    Not one piece? Zilch?
    You’re seeing what you want to see. I went to the trouble of taking time to reply to you, the least you could do is have the manners to acknowledge that.
    Again, if you see no merit and want to refute the points I’m making then fair enough. But that’s 3 times now you’ve said that I’ve offered up absolutely zilch, and that’s a complete lie.
    I’ll quote myself because I can only assume you must have missed these replies to say you are still insisting I have offered up absolutely no evidence whatsoever, when I very clearly have.
    SusieBlue wrote: »
    I just listed it, I’m not typing it out for a third time because you are choosing to ignore it.
    A brief synopsis: unsupervised, unlocked apartment with roadside access, the fact that a bunch of kids were being left unattended by a gang of Brits every night was common knowledge with hotel staff, the area was rife with pedophiles & sex attackers.
    13 sets of unidentified fingerprints, hundreds of samples of unidentified hair, and an unpreserved crime scene meaning any evidence left behind was completely destroyed.
    Not to mention the biggest issue of all: there is no conclusive timeline in which they did it. You haven’t even offered up one.

    SusieBlue wrote: »
    That’s extremely disingenuous to say the parents were the only ones with an opportunity, particularly when not one person has been able to come up with a conclusive timeline in which the parents could have done it anyway.

    One of the most common theories is that they were being watched, their apartment was accessible from the street and they left the door unlocked.
    It was common knowledge around the hotel that a group of Brits were leaving their kids alone while they dined every night, and they booked the same table at the same restaurant for the same time every night to facilitate this.
    Again, common knowledge among hotel staff.

    The general area was rife with rapists, sex attackers pedophiles and other degenerates at that time.
    All it would take would be one person noticing their routine and taking their opportunity to take Madeleine in between checks.
    There is plenty of evidence to support her being abducted if you are open to it.
    SusieBlue wrote: »
    The fact that there is no conclusive timeline in which the McCanns could have done it? Unless you can offer up one?
    The fact that the door was open, and the children were unsupervised in an apartment with roadside access in an area rife with pedophiles?


  • Advertisement
  • #6912
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    callmehal wrote: »
    Yes, it may not be but it's more evidence against them than anyone else. I don't think this is very hard to understand.

    There is some evidence pointing towards the McCanns, what evidence is there against anyone else?


    I understand you are saying the dogs are not HARD evidence but you believe they are evidence.

    But you have also said that this evidence may not be ‘against’ the McCanns so why are you still treating it as evidence against them?


  • #6913
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,129 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Rock77 wrote: »
    You honestly believe that these parents would rather have their child taken than their money... I know I shouldn’t be surprised by things I read on the internet but... I can only assume that your extracting urine...

    That is not what I said. but pick and choose for your own agenda.

    Leaving that apartment for dinner and mucho drinkos I suppose, and scooping up the wallet was obviously more important than looking after their little babes. But whatever.


  • #6914
    listermint
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,410 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Rock77 wrote: »
    But you just said the dogs may not be evidence against them? The deleted phone records were retrieved, there are always inconsistencies in statements, it would be more suspicious if there wasn’t!

    So that leaves.... nothing... right where you started,

    There is no hard evidence on anyone

    You have absolutely no access to any evidence.


    Making stupid statements like that when you will disappear when evidence comes out in a few months is silly.

    Why would anyone want to make stupid blanket statement's when they have absolutely no access or information to anything to do with the case. Is this an internet thing or a Tuesday thing.


    I'd love to see you sit through 8000 plus images of what they found in your man's stash ... Oh wait I wouldn't because it's sick and it would take two years.


    People just love to be contrary to get themselves heard .


  • #6915
    listermint
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,410 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    That is not what I said. but pick and choose for your own agenda.

    Leaving that apartment for dinner and mucho drinkos I suppose, and scooping up the wallet was obviously more important than looking after their little babes. But whatever.

    Beautiful commentary, I'm sure your entire existence had been exemplary.

    You'll thank whatever savour you have for forgiving you if you ever have the worlds media pouring over 1 stupid decision you made one day I'm sure


  • #6916
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    listermint wrote: »
    You have absolutely no access to any evidence.


    Making stupid statements like that when you will disappear when evidence comes out in a few months is silly.

    Why would anyone want to make stupid blanket statement's when they have absolutely no access or information to anything to do with the case. Is this an internet thing or a Tuesday thing.


    I'd love to see you sit through 8000 plus images of what they found in your man's stash ... Oh wait I wouldn't because it's sick and it would take two years.


    People just love to be contrary to get themselves heard .

    I think you’ve taken that post completely the wrong way.


  • #6917
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    That is not what I said. but pick and choose for your own agenda.

    Leaving that apartment for dinner and mucho drinkos I suppose, and scooping up the wallet was obviously more important than looking after their little babes. But whatever.

    Ah here, why can’t you just talk about it. This is an internet chat site!

    I asked you if you thought they would rather have their child taken than there money as that’s what you implied and you said ‘yes’

    So how do you think I’m picking and choosing???? There was only one answer from you!

    And yeah I agree with you, they certainly should not have left their kids alone when they went drinking.


  • #6918
    listermint
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,410 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    SusieBlue wrote: »
    I think you’ve taken that post completely the wrong way.

    There's not hard evidence on anyone?


    There is... The Germans have it. They are going through their legal process.

    No one here has or should have access to it until that's done


  • #6919
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    callmehal wrote: »
    I just want you to point out some of the evidence there is to support the theory of abduction, so far you have provided zilch. Not one piece of evidence.

    Where are you getting that from? Where did I say I think they did it? There's just more evidence against them than anyone else. I've proven that correct.

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


  • #6920
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    listermint wrote: »
    You have absolutely no access to any evidence.


    Making stupid statements like that when you will disappear when evidence comes out in a few months is silly.

    Why would anyone want to make stupid blanket statement's when they have absolutely no access or information to anything to do with the case. Is this an internet thing or a Tuesday thing.


    I'd love to see you sit through 8000 plus images of what they found in your man's stash ... Oh wait I wouldn't because it's sick and it would take two years.


    People just love to be contrary to get themselves heard .

    Did you reply to the wrong post there pal? I have stated many times over the last few pages that there is no evidence whatsoever to implicate the parents.. I was arguing with a poster that believes there is evidence against the parents??


  • #6921
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    listermint wrote: »
    There's not hard evidence on anyone?


    There is... The Germans have it. They are going through their legal process.

    No one here has or should have access to it until that's done

    I don’t disagree with you. I think the person you were replying to believes the same.
    The person they were replying to believes there is absolutely not one single shred of evidence against anyone bar the McCanns.


  • Advertisement
  • #6922
    Banana Republic.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭Banana Republic.


    The dogs are world renowned and they could of sniffed out death or blood which can be from a nose bleed or there may have been a death there at some stage in the past. I wouldn’t discount the dogs at all. If you watch the documentary on CB then you realise there’s a big chance it was him, he was active in the area and all good actions are very very suspicious in that timeframe


  • #6923
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    listermint wrote: »
    There's not hard evidence on anyone?


    There is... The Germans have it. They are going through their legal process.

    No one here has or should have access to it until that's done

    Sorry Listermint, you must have missed most of the argument. The poster believes there’s more evidence against the parents than anyone else.

    I believe there is no evidence whatsoever against the parents.

    I also believe they have some sort of evidence on this German guy but they obviously haven’t made it public.

    My comment ‘there’s no hard evidence on anyone’ was used because that’s what the poster I was arguing with said!


  • #6924
    SusieBlue
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,029 ✭✭✭SusieBlue


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Banana Republic. wrote: »
    The dogs are world renowned and they could of sniffed out death or blood which can be from a nose bleed or there may have been a death there at some stage in the past. I wouldn’t discount the dogs at all. If you watch the documentary on CB then you realise there’s a big chance it was him, he was active in the area and all good actions are very very suspicious in that timeframe

    The dogs also mistook a coconut shell for a child’s skull, if they have potential to get it wrong even once I wouldn’t be completely trusting of them. Particularly when there’s no physical evidence to support their reaction.

    I would discount them based on both those facts alone.


  • #6925
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,129 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Rock77 wrote: »
    You honestly believe that these parents would rather have their child taken than their money... I know I shouldn’t be surprised by things I read on the internet but... I can only assume that your extracting urine...

    I won't be able to change your mind, but honestly if you had three babies would you leave them alone night after night and still take the means (card/cash) to buy food and drink and have a hoot with your friends out of sight of your babes?

    Should have paid for a sitter, but that was costly. oops.


  • #6926
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    I won't be able to change your mind, but honestly if you had three babies would you leave them alone night after night and still take the means (card/cash) to buy food and drink and have a hoot with your friends out of sight of your babes?

    Should have paid for a sitter, but that was costly. oops.

    Again no I wouldn’t and I don’t think it was ok that they did. But I also don’t believe for one second they would rather their child was taken than their money.


  • #6927
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    SusieBlue wrote: »
    Not one piece? Zilch?
    You’re seeing what you want to see. I went to the trouble of taking time to reply to you, the least you could do is have the manners to acknowledge that.
    Again, if you see no merit and want to refute the points I’m making then fair enough. But that’s 3 times now you’ve said that I’ve offered up absolutely zilch, and that’s a complete lie.
    I’ll quote myself because I can only assume you must have missed these replies to say you are still insisting I have offered up absolutely no evidence whatsoever, when I very clearly have.

    You said there was evidence, I asked for the evidence, you provided no evidence.


  • #6928
    limnam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,345 ✭✭✭limnam


    I wonder if 60 minutes were flooded with angry letters for calling her maddie.


  • #6929
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    Rock77 wrote: »
    You certainly have not proved that, what you have done is taken some facts and interpreted them in a certain way. I asked you about the dogs and you’ve agreed they may not be evidence against the parents so why do you still insist they are?

    Yes, the dogs point towards the McCanns. I have a feeling you haven't read up on this case. You can read about the dogs if you'd like.


  • #6930
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    Rock77 wrote: »
    I understand you are saying the dogs are not HARD evidence but you believe they are evidence.

    But you have also said that this evidence may not be ‘against’ the McCanns so why are you still treating it as evidence against them?

    Because it points towards them, again, read up on the case.


  • Advertisement
  • #6931
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »
    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

    The only evidence points towards the McCann's. Or are you able to point towards evidence against someone else?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement