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…232233235237238…264

Comments

  • #7022
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Something Else
    Rock77 wrote: »
    Just read that out loud to yourself....

    ‘There is no hard evidence against anyone, but there is more against the McCanns than anyone else’

    See anything wrong there?

    There is circumstantial evidence against the McCanns. There is zero evidence against anyone else.


  • #7023
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Strange that they were so routinely the night she disappeared, yet the night before

    Pamela Fenn
    She also refers to the day of the 1st May 2007, when she was at home alone, at approximately 22.30 she heard a child cry, and that due the tone of the crying seemed to be a young child and not a baby of two years of age or younger. Apart from the crying that continued for approximately one hour and fifteen minutes, and which got louder and more expressive, the child shouted ?Daddy, Daddy?, the witness had no doubt that the noise came from the floor below. At about 23.45, an hour and fifteen minutes after the crying began, she heard the parents arrive, she did not see them, but she heard the patio doors open, she was quite worried as the crying had gone on for more than an hour and had gradually got worse.

    That means absolutely nothing.


  • #7024
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Something Else
    SusieBlue wrote: »
    So you have nothing to counter any of the points I made except more screams of ‘no evidence’? Nothing to refute at all?
    Even though I just gave you a list of relevant points that most people on both side of the debate can agree are pertinent to the investigation?
    Ok then. :pac: :pac:

    So to sum it up, you think the fact that it was locally common knowledge that a bunch of children were being left unsupervised in an unlocked apartment every night with roadside access in an area rife with pedophiles is completely irrelevant?
    Thank god you aren’t in charge of this investigation anyway if you think that’s irrelevant.

    How do you know this? It sounds like baseless speculation


  • #7025
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    There is circumstantial evidence against the McCanns. There is zero evidence against anyone else.

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of abscence.

    What evidence is there against the McCann's btw?


  • #7026
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Something Else
    Rock77 wrote: »
    Again, the dogs picked up a scent from inside the apt. (An abductor could have killed the child in the apt before removing the body)

    The dogs picked up a scent from a hired car ( there could have been a body in there from the hundreds if not thousands of people that have hired that car recently)

    Now you have admitted already that this could be the case, so the dogs may not point to the parents at all.

    So again, if you have already admitted that the dogs may not be evidence against the parents, why are you still presenting them as evidence against the parents?

    Didn't the cadavar dog signal on some of Kates clothes also? Amongst other things in the apartment?


  • Advertisement
  • #7027
    v638sg7k1a92bx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,913 ✭✭✭v638sg7k1a92bx


    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Didn't the cadavar dog signal on some of Kates clothes also? Amongst other things in the apartment?

    Please stop with the dogs. This has been done soooo many times. The dogs mean nothing. They rented that car after she went missing and they stayed in the same apartment. The DNA could have been anybody and was used to try and implicate the McCann's.


  • #7028
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Something Else
    SusieBlue wrote: »
    13 unidentified finger prints? The many unidentified hair samples? Both support the abduction theory.
    I’ve already mentioned both of these things three times tonight, again, I can only assume you missed them.
    Any thoughts? Or do unidentifiable finger prints mean nothing either?

    Also quite hilarious that you aren’t interested in my points yet you keep posting about the dogs & phone records ad nauseum, even though neither of those things count as evidence either.

    It was a holiday villa. I'm fairly sure if you dusted 50 random hotel rooms in Dublin today you'd get 10-20 unidentifiable prints or more in each one. If you brought a blacklight, you'd probably get a hell of a lot more unidentifiable stains too. Would that point to mass abductions in Dublin??


  • #7029
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Something Else
    SusieBlue wrote: »
    It supports the fact that an unknown person was in the apartment that night, and took her.
    You can just admit you’re being deliberately obtuse now, it’s completely ok.

    You can’t just keep shouting ‘no evidence’ over and over again without actually refuting anything.

    Are you under the impression that fingerprints last 24 hours or something??


  • #7030
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Something Else
    Rock77 wrote: »
    Evidence against CB.

    He is a known paedophile who was spotted in the area at the time. - Not evidence.

    Unidentified fingerprints are the scene, could have been his. - Not evidence

    He told a friend he knew what happened to Madeleine. - Hearsay. Has he admitted to this? Were there witnesses to him stating it to his friend?

    He told his girlfriend the night before she vanished that he had a horrible job to do in PDL - Not evidence

    The dogs- CB could have killed the child in the apt before removing the body. - Speculation. No evidence of this, no blood, no evidence of a struggle etc

    To quote yourself, it’s not hard evidence but evidence none the less.

    You may say this ‘evidence’ doesn’t point to CB but you are saying things like the deleted phone records are evidence against the parents when it has been pointed out to you that because of the lack of storage on the phones it was common to delete to free up space. The phone records were also retrieved with nothing incriminating found.

    None of what you have posted is evidence in any way, shape or form.


  • #7031
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    weldoninhio wrote: »
    None of what you have posted is evidence in any way, shape or form.

    I know..

    I was arguing in a round about way.

    The poster was saying there was more evidence the parents did it than anyone.

    When in fact we all know there is no evidence whatsoever that has been released.

    Deleted phone records, inconsistencies in statements and the dogs are NOT evidence.

    There is NO evidence

    There are things that happened that people can choose to view in a way that backs up their theory.. that’s all


  • Advertisement
  • #7032
    Banana Republic.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭Banana Republic.


    Rock77 wrote: »
    The fact that his phone pinged the tower at the apt Madeleine was staying (I didn’t know this)

    The fact there were unidentifiable fingerprints found at the scene

    The fact that he said he knew what happened

    The fact that the night before he said he had a horrible job to do

    The fact that the police said he is their main suspect at the moment

    Like you say, no concrete evidence but certainly facts that support a theory.

    Now, again... what do you think the McCann deleted phone records and ‘lies’ are evidence of?

    Thanks I didn’t know these “facts” either


  • #7033
    Banana Republic.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭Banana Republic.


    I’m absolutely fed up with this constant page after page of arguments. Nobody talks about the current suspects or documentaries. There’s certain posters who just argue all day who do contribute in many good ways but to constantly argue the same stuff with distant posters is killing any current news. Someone had to say it. I’ll stay in the page with the hope of someone actually watching these new documentaries and discussing them in a reasoned way.


  • #7034
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Banana Republic. wrote: »
    I’m absolutely fed up with this constant page after page of arguments. Nobody talks about the current suspects or documentaries. There’s certain posters who just argue all day who do contribute in many good ways but to constantly argue the same stuff with distant posters is killing any current news. Someone had to say it. I’ll stay in the page with the hope of someone actually watching these new documentaries and discussing them in a reasoned way.

    What happens is every now and then people try to say there is evidence of something... there isn’t. If there is then the police have not released it yet.

    You will see people say things like ‘there’s more evidence the parents did it than anyone else’ when in fact there is NO evidence whatsoever that the parents did it.

    When people see things like this written they have every right to call it out


  • #7035
    Banana Republic.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭Banana Republic.


    Rock77 wrote: »
    What happens is every now and then people try to say there is evidence of something... there isn’t. If there is then the police have not released it yet.

    You will see people say things like ‘there’s more evidence the parents did it than anyone else’ when in fact there is NO evidence whatsoever that the parents did it.

    When people see things like this written they have every right to call it out

    Absolutely but it rages on for 5/6 pages. Watch this https://youtu.be/WgHBiJqwloA it’s a very good documentary from 2 months ago. More on the dogs and examines everything.


  • #7036
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Something Else
    Rock77 wrote: »
    The fact that his phone pinged the tower at the apt Madeleine was staying (I didn’t know this)

    The fact there were unidentifiable fingerprints found at the scene

    The fact that he said he knew what happened

    The fact that the night before he said he had a horrible job to do

    The fact that the police said he is their main suspect at the moment

    Like you say, no concrete evidence but certainly facts that support a theory.

    Now, again... what do you think the McCann deleted phone records and ‘lies’ are evidence of?

    There is no "tower at the apartment Madeline was staying". There is one cell tower covering the entire resort of PdeL. It's a good 2-3kms from the apartment. It's in a field close to the Alta Vista Surf and Adventure Lodge. So anyone in any part of PdeL who used a mobile would ping off this tower.


  • #7037
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Banana Republic. wrote: »
    Absolutely but it rages on for 5/6 pages. Watch this https://youtu.be/WgHBiJqwloA it’s a very good documentary from 2 months ago. More on the dogs and examines everything.

    I totally get your frustration but to be honest some people like to have the debate.

    Thanks for the video


  • #7038
    Banana Republic.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭Banana Republic.


    Rock77 wrote: »
    I totally get your frustration but to be honest some people like to have the debate.

    Thanks for the video

    A debate is a debate but when it gets personal MOD’s should step in. Love a good debate myself but that’s missing.


  • #7039
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    weldoninhio wrote: »
    There is no "tower at the apartment Madeline was staying". There is one cell tower covering the entire resort of PdeL. It's a good 2-3kms from the apartment. It's in a field close to the Alta Vista Surf and Adventure Lodge.

    Like I said, I know there is no evidence that has been made available.

    The only difference between me and you is I can admit there is no evidence


  • #7040
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,068 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Didn't the cadavar dog signal on some of Kates clothes also? Amongst other things in the apartment?

    I have yet to see one of the cadaver dog believers explain why the numerous tracker and SAR dogs the GNR brought in within 24 hrs of Madeleine going missing, didn't find the body? Why do you only believe the UK unproven hype about the excellence of their dogs and are seemingly dismissive of the capabilities of the noses of the Portugese dogs?

    The dogs used by the GNR would have been working with fresh scents. When given madeleine's scent, they did actually seem to find two possible trails, one leading to the door of another apartment and the other to a car park, I think.

    Why dismiss these pooches?

    catalog.jpg

    As you can see, these dogs were all over the resort, PDL and surrounding environs, even inside some apartments. How do a couple of non-locals without a car hide a body so well that SAR dogs and locals who would know all the nooks and crannies couldn't find it?

    Contrary to seemingly popular belief, the time eddie and Keela were brought in was so long after possible events that even had there been a body in the apartment or car, it's doubtful they would have been able to detect anything because the cadaver scent fades:
    One former Scotland Yard dog handler talking about the McCann case hypothesized that the scent wouldn’t last more than a month.
    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2007/09/can-you-trust-a-cadaver-dog-if-there-s-no-cadaver.html

    Madeline McCann disappeared on the 3rd of May, the dogs were taken to the apartment on 31st July - nearly 3 months later, and supposedly found the scent of death.

    If you believe the cadaver dogs, then you must believe that the SAR dogs, local police and other locals were bettered by a couple blow-ins who didn't know the area. Not to mention believing the dogs capable of detecting scents months after another dog handler believss the scent wouldn't have been detectable.

    It's preposterous.


  • #7041
    Banana Republic.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭Banana Republic.


    There’s multiple accounts of watchers in the days before her disappearance and I think that’s stood out to me along with the false orphanage collectors which one was staring straight at a child over the mothers shoulder. Has to be the connections that could be part of Christian B’s suspect status.


  • Advertisement
  • #7042
    Banana Republic.
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,587 ✭✭✭Banana Republic.


    There’s multiple accounts of watchers in the days before her disappearance and I think that’s stood out to me along with the false orphanage collectors which one was staring straight at a child over the mothers shoulder. Has to be the connections that could be part of Christian B’s suspect status.


  • #7043
    cnocbui
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,068 ✭✭✭✭cnocbui


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    weldoninhio wrote: »
    Strange that they were so routinely the night she disappeared, yet the night before

    Pamela Fenn
    She also refers to the day of the 1st May 2007, when she was at home alone, at approximately 22.30 she heard a child cry, and that due the tone of the crying seemed to be a young child and not a baby of two years of age or younger. Apart from the crying that continued for approximately one hour and fifteen minutes, and which got louder and more expressive, the child shouted ?Daddy, Daddy?, the witness had no doubt that the noise came from the floor below. At about 23.45, an hour and fifteen minutes after the crying began, she heard the parents arrive, she did not see them, but she heard the patio doors open, she was quite worried as the crying had gone on for more than an hour and had gradually got worse.

    You sure about that: FF to 1:17



  • #7044
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    Rock77 wrote: »
    Ok Zero evidence there was an intruder.

    1. Deleted phone records which were later retrieved is NOT evidence against the parents

    2. Inconsistencies in statements is NOT evidence against the parents

    3. The dogs can only be used to point towards evidence. None was found. So as the dog handler says. The dogs CANNOT be used as evidence.

    So we are back where we started, there is no evidence against anyone, none that we know of anyway.

    So please stop saying there is more evidence that points towards the parents because there is none.

    And for the fifth time before you conveniently take a break... What do you think your so called ‘evidence’ against the parents suggests they did?

    Evidence that points to the parents doing what?

    At least you can admit there's no evidence for an intruder like you and others claimed.
    Rock77 wrote: »
    To be fair, more than one person has posted lots of facts that support the theory CB was involved.

    Again, evidence is.. facts that support a theory.

    The evidence against the McCanns is circumstantial evidence. No hard evidence is available but there's more on the McCanns than anyone else. The dogs, lies, phone records etc is more than on anyone else, as you've accepted, there's nothing on anyone else.


  • #7045
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    callmehal wrote: »
    At least you can admit there's no evidence for an intruder like you and others claimed.



    The evidence against the McCanns is circumstantial evidence. No hard evidence is available but there's more on the McCanns than anyone else. The dogs, lies, phone records etc is more than on anyone else, as you've accepted, there's nothing on anyone else.

    So, for the 6th time... the dogs, the lies and the phone records are evidence that the parents did what?


  • #7046
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    cnocbui wrote: »
    I have yet to see one of the cadaver dog believers explain why the numerous tracker and SAR dogs the GNR brought in within 24 hrs of Madeleine going missing, didn't find the body? Why do you only believe the UK unproven hype about the excellence of their dogs and are seemingly dismissive of the capabilities of the noses of the Portugese dogs?

    The dogs used by the GNR would have been working with fresh scents. When given madeleine's scent, they did actually seem to find two possible trails, one leading to the door of another apartment and the other to a car park, I think.

    Why dismiss these pooches?

    catalog.jpg

    As you can see, these dogs were all over the resort, PDL and surrounding environs, even inside some apartments. How do a couple of non-locals without a car hide a body so well that SAR dogs and locals who would know all the nooks and crannies couldn't find it?

    Contrary to seemingly popular belief, the time eddie and Keela were brought in was so long after possible events that even had there been a body in the apartment or car, it's doubtful they would have been able to detect anything because the cadaver scent fades:

    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2007/09/can-you-trust-a-cadaver-dog-if-there-s-no-cadaver.html

    Madeline McCann disappeared on the 3rd of May, the dogs were taken to the apartment on 31st July - nearly 3 months later, and supposedly found the scent of death.

    If you believe the cadaver dogs, then you must believe that the SAR dogs, local police and other locals were bettered by a couple blow-ins who didn't know the area. Not to mention believing the dogs capable of detecting scents months after another dog handler believss the scent wouldn't have been detectable.

    It's preposterous.

    I have a feeling you won’t get a reply to this.....


  • #7047
    callmehal
    Site Banned Posts: 461 ✭✭callmehal


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    Rock77 wrote: »
    So, for the 6th time... the dogs, the lies and the phone records are evidence that the parents did what?

    Of involvement in the disappearance of their child. That's why they became suspects. There's more on them than anyone else.


  • #7048
    Rock77
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭Rock77


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    callmehal wrote: »
    At least you can admit there's no evidence for an intruder like you and others claimed.



    The evidence against the McCanns is circumstantial evidence. No hard evidence is available but there's more on the McCanns than anyone else. The dogs, lies, phone records etc is more than on anyone else, as you've accepted, there's nothing on anyone else.

    By the way, If you are using deleted phone records as ‘evidence’ against the parents then surely it’s not much of a stretch to use CB’s phone activity as ‘evidence’ against him.


  • #7049
    flasher0030
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,069 ✭✭✭flasher0030


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    I'd say CallMeHal is some crack on a night out.
    The dude (or dudette) that everyone shifts around from to make sure they don'e get stuck beside.
    How can one person mention evidence so many times ion a couple of posts, and yet not know the correct definition of what it is.
    If he swapped the word suspicion for evidence, the posts would have been tolerable.
    The only poster that has talked sense is Rock77. Most other posters have gone off their rockers to some extent.

    There's a certain subconsciousness with many people that wants the parents to be guilty. And I don't mean in a completely evil way. It's just that it is more sensationalist. i.e. than the more straightforward action of a paedo adducting a child. I don't mean to trivialise the latter by the way, as if its a common occurrence. But the parents being guilty adds a dramatic "twist" to the whole episode.

    Most people realise that the parents didn't do it. And this Christian B is guilty. There is no way the Germans would be so direct with their press releases if there wasn't something concrete - unlike the rubbish that has been spouted here over and over again - dogs, phones, neighbour upstairs,deceit etc. etc.


  • #7050
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Something Else
    cnocbui wrote: »
    I have yet to see one of the cadaver dog believers explain why the numerous tracker and SAR dogs the GNR brought in within 24 hrs of Madeleine going missing, didn't find the body? Why do you only believe the UK unproven hype about the excellence of their dogs and are seemingly dismissive of the capabilities of the noses of the Portugese dogs?

    The dogs used by the GNR would have been working with fresh scents. When given madeleine's scent, they did actually seem to find two possible trails, one leading to the door of another apartment and the other to a car park, I think.

    Why dismiss these pooches?

    catalog.jpg

    As you can see, these dogs were all over the resort, PDL and surrounding environs, even inside some apartments. How do a couple of non-locals without a car hide a body so well that SAR dogs and locals who would know all the nooks and crannies couldn't find it?

    Contrary to seemingly popular belief, the time eddie and Keela were brought in was so long after possible events that even had there been a body in the apartment or car, it's doubtful they would have been able to detect anything because the cadaver scent fades:

    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2007/09/can-you-trust-a-cadaver-dog-if-there-s-no-cadaver.html

    Madeline McCann disappeared on the 3rd of May, the dogs were taken to the apartment on 31st July - nearly 3 months later, and supposedly found the scent of death.

    If you believe the cadaver dogs, then you must believe that the SAR dogs, local police and other locals were bettered by a couple blow-ins who didn't know the area. Not to mention believing the dogs capable of detecting scents months after another dog handler believss the scent wouldn't have been detectable.

    It's preposterous.

    What sort of training had the PdeL dogs gotten??


  • Advertisement
  • #7051
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    Something Else
    Rock77 wrote: »
    By the way, If you are using deleted phone records as ‘evidence’ against the parents then surely it’s not much of a stretch to use CB’s phone activity as ‘evidence’ against him.

    All his activity proves is that he was in the town. There is 1 cell tower covering the whole area. Anyone in any part of PdeL would have pinged that tower with their mobile.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement