Its ooh soo quiet!

Bobsy wrote:

Fern wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

Fern wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

For the past 5yrs, Gerry McCann has threatened to have forums closed down, where "lies" are spread about them. He knows the truth about them is being discussed and this is what he and his wife don't want. They want everyone who speaks out about them silenced and they will do anything they can to have them silenced. Maybe measures are already being taken to silence the McCanns critics, by the people who have been protecting the McCanns for the past 5yrs.

I suppose it comes down to what IS the actual truth and what is being assumed to be the truth without enough evidence to support the said allegations.

Given an opinion of what may have occured is one thing however stating it as an absolute fact is an entirely different ball-game altogether.

When I say truth, I'm talking about what the McCanns have said, what Goncalo Amaral has said and what other people involved with the case have said. I very rarely quote what is in the media, because I know how the media can bend the truth and add things to sell newspapers.

I would imagine most of the McCanns critics feel the same way as me.

You may not like what I am about write, but I have to write it because I need to be honest with you. You don't appear to have followed this case at all, because you are implying that there is not enough evidenct to convict the McCanns. The PJ were about to bring charges against the McCanns when a higher authority stopped them.

I am a complete 'newbie' to this case Kathy and most certainly haven't followed it since 4th May 07 to an almost obsessive level. I haven't spent any time whatsoever reading the official PJ files, which also includes the final summary of José de Magalhães e Menezes and João Melchior Gomes, who no doubt had complete access to the entire case files some of which may or may not have been withheld from ourselves.

Given this, I would be most grateful if you could simply provide the evidence that in your opinion is enough to convict the McCanns of being directly involved in Madeleines disapearance from 5A whilst of course keeping in mind that the PJ allowed them to go free without any charge at all.

I suspect many people have followed this case for many years and although they would agree that there are numerous questions unanswered, contained within the files there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time, although advances in DNA analysis may alter this either way eventually.

Snip, I am a complete 'newbie' to this case Kathy........Fern I first met you on OnlyMadeleine in 2007. Your name wasn't Fern, and mine wasn't Bobsy. Let's have some truths.

Of course I'm not new to this case however thanks for confirming this. I was being sarcastic to the comment below (of which I have yet to receive a reply to in my previous post).

"You don't appear to have followed this case at all, because you are implying that there is not enough evidenct to convict the McCanns."

Fern wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

Fern wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

For the past 5yrs, Gerry McCann has threatened to have forums closed down, where "lies" are spread about them. He knows the truth about them is being discussed and this is what he and his wife don't want. They want everyone who speaks out about them silenced and they will do anything they can to have them silenced. Maybe measures are already being taken to silence the McCanns critics, by the people who have been protecting the McCanns for the past 5yrs.

I suppose it comes down to what IS the actual truth and what is being assumed to be the truth without enough evidence to support the said allegations.

Given an opinion of what may have occured is one thing however stating it as an absolute fact is an entirely different ball-game altogether.

When I say truth, I'm talking about what the McCanns have said, what Goncalo Amaral has said and what other people involved with the case have said. I very rarely quote what is in the media, because I know how the media can bend the truth and add things to sell newspapers.

I would imagine most of the McCanns critics feel the same way as me.

You may not like what I am about write, but I have to write it because I need to be honest with you. You don't appear to have followed this case at all, because you are implying that there is not enough evidenct to convict the McCanns. The PJ were about to bring charges against the McCanns when a higher authority stopped them.

I am a complete 'newbie' to this case Kathy and most certainly haven't followed it since 4th May 07 to an almost obsessive level. I haven't spent any time whatsoever reading the official PJ files, which also includes the final summary of José de Magalhães e Menezes and João Melchior Gomes, who no doubt had complete access to the entire case files some of which may or may not have been withheld from ourselves.

Given this, I would be most grateful if you could simply provide the evidence that in your opinion is enough to convict the McCanns of being directly involved in Madeleines disapearance from 5A whilst of course keeping in mind that the PJ allowed them to go free without any charge at all.

I suspect many people have followed this case for many years and although they would agree that there are numerous questions unanswered, contained within the files there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time, although advances in DNA analysis may alter this either way eventually.

I remind you that the judges who ordered GA's book to return to the shelves disagree with you. They stated clearly that another public prosecutor, confronted with the exact same evidence, could have decided in a complete different way. In other words, that specific person thought there was not enough evidence. Others (and there are others, believe me) completely disagree(d).

Fern wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

Fern wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

For the past 5yrs, Gerry McCann has threatened to have forums closed down, where "lies" are spread about them. He knows the truth about them is being discussed and this is what he and his wife don't want. They want everyone who speaks out about them silenced and they will do anything they can to have them silenced. Maybe measures are already being taken to silence the McCanns critics, by the people who have been protecting the McCanns for the past 5yrs.

I suppose it comes down to what IS the actual truth and what is being assumed to be the truth without enough evidence to support the said allegations.

Given an opinion of what may have occured is one thing however stating it as an absolute fact is an entirely different ball-game altogether.

When I say truth, I'm talking about what the McCanns have said, what Goncalo Amaral has said and what other people involved with the case have said. I very rarely quote what is in the media, because I know how the media can bend the truth and add things to sell newspapers.

I would imagine most of the McCanns critics feel the same way as me.

You may not like what I am about write, but I have to write it because I need to be honest with you. You don't appear to have followed this case at all, because you are implying that there is not enough evidenct to convict the McCanns. The PJ were about to bring charges against the McCanns when a higher authority stopped them.

I am a complete 'newbie' to this case Kathy and most certainly haven't followed it since 4th May 07 to an almost obsessive level. I haven't spent any time whatsoever reading the official PJ files, which also includes the final summary of José de Magalhães e Menezes and João Melchior Gomes, who no doubt had complete access to the entire case files some of which may or may not have been withheld from ourselves.

Given this, I would be most grateful if you could simply provide the evidence that in your opinion is enough to convict the McCanns of being directly involved in Madeleines disapearance from 5A whilst of course keeping in mind that the PJ allowed them to go free without any charge at all.

I suspect many people have followed this case for many years and although they would agree that there are numerous questions unanswered, contained within the files there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time, although advances in DNA analysis may alter this either way eventually.

Forgive me for saying this Fern, but the first paragraph of your post, makes no sense at all. First of all you say you are a complete newbie to the case, then you say you haven't followed the case since 04 May 2007, to an obsessive level. If you were a complete newbie, you wouldn't have followed this case at any level, let alone an obsessive level.

Secondly you say you haven't spent any time whatsoever, reading the official PJ files, then you quote something that you say is in the PJ files. I don't know what your motive for posting on this forum is, but you are certainly not here to discuss the case. In my opinion, you are here purely and simply, to pick holes in posters posts and make sarcastic remarks.

Take another look at your post and you'll see what I mean then take another look at one of your other posts, where you are implying that certain posters are posting 24/7 on various forums. Why make this sarcastic comment, when you know full well that with the best will in the world, the most ardent follower of this case, would not be able to post on any forum 24/7.

I'm sorry Fern I just don't get why you are on here and for that reason, I'm not giving you any answers to the rest of your post.

This is the full comment from StellMagnolia's site.

"http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/
I took the decision to close this blog following my conversation with an officer at Scotland Yard.The conversation that took place left me cold and made me realize I am wasting my time but more importantly, yours. However, many people still visit and it is no hardship for me to post links as and when they become available.  

I think I should make it clear that the officer I spoke with at Scotland Yard had nothing to do with the so called 'Operation Grange Review' which is why our conversation was so interesting. The officer concerned gave me his name and a reference number if I should ever wish to contact him again. But there really is no need."


If someone on here can translate what this means and if it will affect Goncalo Amaral and/or the Portuguese Police position regarding any possible future prosecution and/or EAW if one would be necessary I would be very grateful.

TBH I am feeling pretty sick about this if it means what I think it means.

Kathybelle, I agree with your post about Fern - who I believe is also on the Jill Havern site in a different name but operates in a similarly disruptive way - and my advice to everyone is

Not Born Yesterday wrote:Kathybelle, I agree with your post about Fern - who I believe is also on the Jill Havern site in a different name but operates in a similarly disruptive way - and my advice to everyone is

Good morning NBY

Good advice I will be following your advice the next time I get grief on You Tube, from the trolls that reside on there. I've always given back, what they've given me, but not anymore.

kathybelle wrote:

Fern wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

Fern wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

For the past 5yrs, Gerry McCann has threatened to have forums closed down, where "lies" are spread about them. He knows the truth about them is being discussed and this is what he and his wife don't want. They want everyone who speaks out about them silenced and they will do anything they can to have them silenced. Maybe measures are already being taken to silence the McCanns critics, by the people who have been protecting the McCanns for the past 5yrs.

I suppose it comes down to what IS the actual truth and what is being assumed to be the truth without enough evidence to support the said allegations.

Given an opinion of what may have occured is one thing however stating it as an absolute fact is an entirely different ball-game altogether.

When I say truth, I'm talking about what the McCanns have said, what Goncalo Amaral has said and what other people involved with the case have said. I very rarely quote what is in the media, because I know how the media can bend the truth and add things to sell newspapers.

I would imagine most of the McCanns critics feel the same way as me.

You may not like what I am about write, but I have to write it because I need to be honest with you. You don't appear to have followed this case at all, because you are implying that there is not enough evidenct to convict the McCanns. The PJ were about to bring charges against the McCanns when a higher authority stopped them.

I am a complete 'newbie' to this case Kathy and most certainly haven't followed it since 4th May 07 to an almost obsessive level. I haven't spent any time whatsoever reading the official PJ files, which also includes the final summary of José de Magalhães e Menezes and João Melchior Gomes, who no doubt had complete access to the entire case files some of which may or may not have been withheld from ourselves.

Given this, I would be most grateful if you could simply provide the evidence that in your opinion is enough to convict the McCanns of being directly involved in Madeleines disapearance from 5A whilst of course keeping in mind that the PJ allowed them to go free without any charge at all.

I suspect many people have followed this case for many years and although they would agree that there are numerous questions unanswered, contained within the files there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time, although advances in DNA analysis may alter this either way eventually.

Forgive me for saying this Fern, but the first paragraph of your post, makes no sense at all. First of all you say you are a complete newbie to the case, then you say you haven't followed the case since 04 May 2007, to an obsessive level. If you were a complete newbie, you wouldn't have followed this case at any level, let alone an obsessive level.

Secondly you say you haven't spent any time whatsoever, reading the official PJ files, then you quote something that you say is in the PJ files. I don't know what your motive for posting on this forum is, but you are certainly not here to discuss the case. In my opinion, you are here purely and simply, to pick holes in posters posts and make sarcastic remarks.

Take another look at your post and you'll see what I mean then take another look at one of your other posts, where you are implying that certain posters are posting 24/7 on various forums. Why make this sarcastic comment, when you know full well that with the best will in the world, the most ardent follower of this case, would not be able to post on any forum 24/7.

I'm sorry Fern I just don't get why you are on here and for that reason, I'm not giving you any answers to the rest of your post.

As already said....

Another one to my ignore list

I think that this clip is amusing and I hope that others enjoy it too - even the trolls, though the very dedicated McCann ones seem to have no sense of humour whatever!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMEe7JqBgvg

Not Born Yesterday wrote:Kathybelle, I agree with your post about Fern - who I believe is also on the Jill Havern site in a different name but operates in a similarly disruptive way - and my advice to everyone is

Quite surprised I managed to remember my password actually as I never visit that forum any more however whoever you are asssuming is me over there clearly isn't therefore you are wrong with your accusation.

"Posts : 44 (0.05% of total)
Posts per day : 0.07
Latest post : Sat 21 May 2011 - 22:22"

Claudia79 wrote:

I remind you that the judges who ordered GA's book to return to the shelves disagree with you. They stated clearly that another public prosecutor, confronted with the exact same evidence, could have decided in a complete different way. In other words, that specific person thought there was not enough evidence. Others (and there are others, believe me) completely disagree(d).

They COULD have yes Claudia however would this evidence stand up in court when challenged by the McCanns legal team, I really don't believe it would.

WHO would they hold directly responsible for Madeleines death and why ?

What was the motive ?

Prior to any sort of charges being made, surely there would have to be proof that Madeleine was in fact dead in order to charge the McCanns ?

Fern wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

I remind you that the judges who ordered GA's book to return to the shelves disagree with you. They stated clearly that another public prosecutor, confronted with the exact same evidence, could have decided in a complete different way. In other words, that specific person thought there was not enough evidence. Others (and there are others, believe me) completely disagree(d).

They COULD have yes Claudia however would this evidence stand up in court when challenged by the McCanns legal team, I really don't believe it would.

WHO would they hold directly responsible for Madeleines death and why ?

What was the motive ?

Prior to any sort of charges being made, surely there would have to be proof that Madeleine was in fact dead in order to charge the McCanns ?

There have been plenty of murder cases where a body has never been found and people have been found guilty on the balance of probabilities.

kathybelle wrote:

Fern wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

Fern wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

For the past 5yrs, Gerry McCann has threatened to have forums closed down, where "lies" are spread about them. He knows the truth about them is being discussed and this is what he and his wife don't want. They want everyone who speaks out about them silenced and they will do anything they can to have them silenced. Maybe measures are already being taken to silence the McCanns critics, by the people who have been protecting the McCanns for the past 5yrs.

I suppose it comes down to what IS the actual truth and what is being assumed to be the truth without enough evidence to support the said allegations.

Given an opinion of what may have occured is one thing however stating it as an absolute fact is an entirely different ball-game altogether.

When I say truth, I'm talking about what the McCanns have said, what Goncalo Amaral has said and what other people involved with the case have said. I very rarely quote what is in the media, because I know how the media can bend the truth and add things to sell newspapers.

I would imagine most of the McCanns critics feel the same way as me.

You may not like what I am about write, but I have to write it because I need to be honest with you. You don't appear to have followed this case at all, because you are implying that there is not enough evidenct to convict the McCanns. The PJ were about to bring charges against the McCanns when a higher authority stopped them.

I am a complete 'newbie' to this case Kathy and most certainly haven't followed it since 4th May 07 to an almost obsessive level. I haven't spent any time whatsoever reading the official PJ files, which also includes the final summary of José de Magalhães e Menezes and João Melchior Gomes, who no doubt had complete access to the entire case files some of which may or may not have been withheld from ourselves.

Given this, I would be most grateful if you could simply provide the evidence that in your opinion is enough to convict the McCanns of being directly involved in Madeleines disapearance from 5A whilst of course keeping in mind that the PJ allowed them to go free without any charge at all.

I suspect many people have followed this case for many years and although they would agree that there are numerous questions unanswered, contained within the files there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time, although advances in DNA analysis may alter this either way eventually.

Forgive me for saying this Fern, but the first paragraph of your post, makes no sense at all. First of all you say you are a complete newbie to the case, then you say you haven't followed the case since 04 May 2007, to an obsessive level. If you were a complete newbie, you wouldn't have followed this case at any level, let alone an obsessive level.

Secondly you say you haven't spent any time whatsoever, reading the official PJ files, then you quote something that you say is in the PJ files. I don't know what your motive for posting on this forum is, but you are certainly not here to discuss the case. In my opinion, you are here purely and simply, to pick holes in posters posts and make sarcastic remarks.

Take another look at your post and you'll see what I mean then take another look at one of your other posts, where you are implying that certain posters are posting 24/7 on various forums. Why make this sarcastic comment, when you know full well that with the best will in the world, the most ardent follower of this case, would not be able to post on any forum 24/7.

I'm sorry Fern I just don't get why you are on here and for that reason, I'm not giving you any answers to the rest of your post.

I have already explained that I was being sarcastic given your initial reply to me which was:

"You don't appear to have followed this case at all, because you are implying that there is not enough evidenct to convict the McCanns"

Perhaps had you not felt the need to respond with this above comment initially then I'd not have replied in the manner in which I did.

Moving back on topic, I gather you are unable to answer my question for whatever reason although it does seem to pose difficulty for those that do believe there is enough evidence to convict the McCanns.

"Given this, I would be most grateful if you could simply provide the evidence that in your opinion is enough to convict the McCanns of being directly involved in Madeleines disapearance from 5A whilst of course keeping in mind that the PJ allowed them to go free without any charge at all."

AnnaEsse wrote:

Fern wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

I remind you that the judges who ordered GA's book to return to the shelves disagree with you. They stated clearly that another public prosecutor, confronted with the exact same evidence, could have decided in a complete different way. In other words, that specific person thought there was not enough evidence. Others (and there are others, believe me) completely disagree(d).

They COULD have yes Claudia however would this evidence stand up in court when challenged by the McCanns legal team, I really don't believe it would.

WHO would they hold directly responsible for Madeleines death and why ?

What was the motive ?

Prior to any sort of charges being made, surely there would have to be proof that Madeleine was in fact dead in order to charge the McCanns ?

There have been plenty of murder cases where a body has never been found and people have been found guilty on the balance of probabilities.

Thats correct and one case recently this occured IIRC.

Lets just say for arguments sake that the proof was there without doubt that Madeleine had died in 5A.

Who exactly would they charge and on what evidence ?

Would it be Gerry McCann as he entered the apartment at approx 9.10pm, would it be MO as he entered the apt at approx 9.30pm or Kate McCann for example ?

Someone surely would have to be held exclusively responsible ?

Angelique wrote:This is the full comment from StellMagnolia's site.

"http://steelmagnolia-steelmagnolia.blogspot.co.uk/
I took the decision to close this blog following my conversation with an officer at Scotland Yard.The conversation that took place left me cold and made me realize I am wasting my time but more importantly, yours. However, many people still visit and it is no hardship for me to post links as and when they become available.  

I think I should make it clear that the officer I spoke with at Scotland Yard had nothing to do with the so called 'Operation Grange Review' which is why our conversation was so interesting. The officer concerned gave me his name and a reference number if I should ever wish to contact him again. But there really is no need."


If someone on here can translate what this means and if it will affect Goncalo Amaral and/or the Portuguese Police position regarding any possible future prosecution and/or EAW if one would be necessary I would be very grateful.

TBH I am feeling pretty sick about this if it means what I think it means.

This could mean a couple of things I suppose.

Interesting.

Ask the dogs Sandra....

Fern wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

I remind you that the judges who ordered GA's book to return to the shelves disagree with you. They stated clearly that another public prosecutor, confronted with the exact same evidence, could have decided in a complete different way. In other words, that specific person thought there was not enough evidence. Others (and there are others, believe me) completely disagree(d).

They COULD have yes Claudia however would this evidence stand up in court when challenged by the McCanns legal team, I really don't believe it would.

WHO would they hold directly responsible for Madeleines death and why ?

What was the motive ?

Prior to any sort of charges being made, surely there would have to be proof that Madeleine was in fact dead in order to charge the McCanns ?

Those questions are not for us to answer. You said and I quote:

there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time

. I'm just telling you that is not so. Other judges have clearly stated that other public prosecutors could have decided differently when confronted with the exact same evidence. What some find insufficient, others find enough. Of course there is always a risk. But those things are meant to be decided inside a court of law. It seems that the judges who overturned the previous decision re the book did not agree with the shelving. Let's not forget there could have been other charges related to their parental behaviour too.

Claudia79 wrote:

Fern wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

I remind you that the judges who ordered GA's book to return to the shelves disagree with you. They stated clearly that another public prosecutor, confronted with the exact same evidence, could have decided in a complete different way. In other words, that specific person thought there was not enough evidence. Others (and there are others, believe me) completely disagree(d).

They COULD have yes Claudia however would this evidence stand up in court when challenged by the McCanns legal team, I really don't believe it would.

WHO would they hold directly responsible for Madeleines death and why ?

What was the motive ?

Prior to any sort of charges being made, surely there would have to be proof that Madeleine was in fact dead in order to charge the McCanns ?

Those questions are not for us to answer. You said and I quote:

there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time

. I'm just telling you that is not so. Other judges have clearly stated that other public prosecutors could have decided differently when confronted with the exact same evidence. What some find insufficient, others find enough. Of course there is always a risk. But those things are meant to be decided inside a court of law. It seems that the judges who overturned the previous decision re the book did not agree with the shelving. Let's not forget there could have been other charges related to their parental behaviour too.

Hello Claudia,

Well said, you are Portuguese and you know above any of us the laws in your country and the charges that the McCanns could have faced, due to their parent behaviour in PDL. When I used to post on an AOL boards, a Portuguse lady put information on the board, that showed how a man was prosecuted, for leaving his child in a pram outside a shop, when he nipped in to buy a product.

In my opinion these are charges the McCanns escaped, because if they were speaking the truth, they left their children unsupervised 5 out of 6 evenings, when they went out. The 30 minute checks they said they made, were not good enough, they should never have left their children unsupervised at all, when they went out.

Can you please tell me what the McCanns chances are of winning their lawsuit against Goncalo Amaral? Personally I can't see how they can win this lawsuit, after the ban on Dr Amaral's book was overturned in the Appeals and the Supreme Courts.

kathybelle wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

Fern wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

I remind you that the judges who ordered GA's book to return to the shelves disagree with you. They stated clearly that another public prosecutor, confronted with the exact same evidence, could have decided in a complete different way. In other words, that specific person thought there was not enough evidence. Others (and there are others, believe me) completely disagree(d).

They COULD have yes Claudia however would this evidence stand up in court when challenged by the McCanns legal team, I really don't believe it would.

WHO would they hold directly responsible for Madeleines death and why ?

What was the motive ?

Prior to any sort of charges being made, surely there would have to be proof that Madeleine was in fact dead in order to charge the McCanns ?

Those questions are not for us to answer. You said and I quote:

there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time

. I'm just telling you that is not so. Other judges have clearly stated that other public prosecutors could have decided differently when confronted with the exact same evidence. What some find insufficient, others find enough. Of course there is always a risk. But those things are meant to be decided inside a court of law. It seems that the judges who overturned the previous decision re the book did not agree with the shelving. Let's not forget there could have been other charges related to their parental behaviour too.

Hello Claudia,

Well said, you are Portuguese and you know above any of us the laws in your country and the charges that the McCanns could have faced, due to their parent behaviour in PDL. When I used to post on an AOL boards, a Portuguse lady put information on the board, that showed how a man was prosecuted, for leaving his child in a pram outside a shop, when he nipped in to buy a product.

In my opinion these are charges the McCanns escaped, because if they were speaking the truth, they left their children unsupervised 5 out of 6 evenings, when they went out. The 30 minute checks they said they made, were not good enough, they should never have left their children unsupervised at all, when they went out.

Can you please tell me what the McCanns chances are of winning their lawsuit against Goncalo Amaral? Personally I can't see how they can win this lawsuit, the ban on Dr Amaral's book was overturned in the Appeals and the Supreme Courts.

I have no idea about their or GA's chances. But no matter what result there will certainly be appeals. The losing side will certainly appeal so we can expect this to last years.

Claudia79 wrote:

kathybelle wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

Fern wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

I remind you that the judges who ordered GA's book to return to the shelves disagree with you. They stated clearly that another public prosecutor, confronted with the exact same evidence, could have decided in a complete different way. In other words, that specific person thought there was not enough evidence. Others (and there are others, believe me) completely disagree(d).

They COULD have yes Claudia however would this evidence stand up in court when challenged by the McCanns legal team, I really don't believe it would.

WHO would they hold directly responsible for Madeleines death and why ?

What was the motive ?

Prior to any sort of charges being made, surely there would have to be proof that Madeleine was in fact dead in order to charge the McCanns ?

Those questions are not for us to answer. You said and I quote:

there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time

. I'm just telling you that is not so. Other judges have clearly stated that other public prosecutors could have decided differently when confronted with the exact same evidence. What some find insufficient, others find enough. Of course there is always a risk. But those things are meant to be decided inside a court of law. It seems that the judges who overturned the previous decision re the book did not agree with the shelving. Let's not forget there could have been other charges related to their parental behaviour too.

Hello Claudia,

Well said, you are Portuguese and you know above any of us the laws in your country and the charges that the McCanns could have faced, due to their parent behaviour in PDL. When I used to post on an AOL boards, a Portuguse lady put information on the board, that showed how a man was prosecuted, for leaving his child in a pram outside a shop, when he nipped in to buy a product.

In my opinion these are charges the McCanns escaped, because if they were speaking the truth, they left their children unsupervised 5 out of 6 evenings, when they went out. The 30 minute checks they said they made, were not good enough, they should never have left their children unsupervised at all, when they went out.

Can you please tell me what the McCanns chances are of winning their lawsuit against Goncalo Amaral? Personally I can't see how they can win this lawsuit, the ban on Dr Amaral's book was overturned in the Appeals and the Supreme Courts.

I have no idea about their or GA's chances. But no matter what result there will certainly be appeals. The losing side will certainly appeal so we can expect this to last years.

I suppose Goncalo Amaral was lucky that the McCanns conceded defeat, when he won the right to have the ban on his book overturned, in the Supreme Court. It only took just over a year, from the start of the McCanns action to have the book permanently banned, to the Supreme Court Judge's decision to have the ban overturned.

Posted twice

"Given this, I would be most grateful if you could simply provide the evidence that in your opinion is enough to convict the McCanns of being directly involved in Madeleines disapearance from 5A whilst of course keeping in mind that the PJ allowed them to go free without any charge at all."

Fern no one needs to provide you with any evidence. We all have a right to our opinion and to say what we believe. Please remember you are not Judge or Jury so stop demanding that posters give you evidence of their opinion.The McCanns could have been charged with neglect had the PJ wanted to to but they hightailed it out of PDL once their Arguido's was lifted, yet Kate said she would stay there as she felt nearer to Madeleine but they couldn't get back to the UK quick enough.

Claudia79 wrote:

Fern wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

I remind you that the judges who ordered GA's book to return to the shelves disagree with you. They stated clearly that another public prosecutor, confronted with the exact same evidence, could have decided in a complete different way. In other words, that specific person thought there was not enough evidence. Others (and there are others, believe me) completely disagree(d).

They COULD have yes Claudia however would this evidence stand up in court when challenged by the McCanns legal team, I really don't believe it would.

WHO would they hold directly responsible for Madeleines death and why ?

What was the motive ?

Prior to any sort of charges being made, surely there would have to be proof that Madeleine was in fact dead in order to charge the McCanns ?

Those questions are not for us to answer. You said and I quote:

there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time

. I'm just telling you that is not so. Other judges have clearly stated that other public prosecutors could have decided differently when confronted with the exact same evidence. What some find insufficient, others find enough. Of course there is always a risk. But those things are meant to be decided inside a court of law. It seems that the judges who overturned the previous decision re the book did not agree with the shelving. Let's not forget there could have been other charges related to their parental behaviour too.

With regards to the charges relating to parental behaviour ie leaving them alone, in my opinion there was enough evidence along with confessions from the Tapas group to have taken the case into court at least.

Having read through the files time and time again, I honestly don't believe the evidence exisits against the McCanns in order to obtain a safe conviction without any doubt involving Madeleines possible death.

Just my opinion and of course I may be completely wrong however after 5 years, unless new evidence emerges, this is how I view the case as its stands at the moment. The McCanns could be involved however they may be completely innocent. I really have no theory at all based on what little facts we have been given to date.

As I mentioned in a previous post, hopefuly the review will throw up some clues for NSY and even if we don't get to hear about these at the moment, at least there may be a (very small) chance that something will lead them to Madeleine wherever she may be.

Fern wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

Fern wrote:

Claudia79 wrote:

I remind you that the judges who ordered GA's book to return to the shelves disagree with you. They stated clearly that another public prosecutor, confronted with the exact same evidence, could have decided in a complete different way. In other words, that specific person thought there was not enough evidence. Others (and there are others, believe me) completely disagree(d).

They COULD have yes Claudia however would this evidence stand up in court when challenged by the McCanns legal team, I really don't believe it would.

WHO would they hold directly responsible for Madeleines death and why ?

What was the motive ?

Prior to any sort of charges being made, surely there would have to be proof that Madeleine was in fact dead in order to charge the McCanns ?

Those questions are not for us to answer. You said and I quote:

there is simply not enough evidence against the McCanns in a court of law at the present time

. I'm just telling you that is not so. Other judges have clearly stated that other public prosecutors could have decided differently when confronted with the exact same evidence. What some find insufficient, others find enough. Of course there is always a risk. But those things are meant to be decided inside a court of law. It seems that the judges who overturned the previous decision re the book did not agree with the shelving. Let's not forget there could have been other charges related to their parental behaviour too.

With regards to the charges relating to parental behaviour ie leaving them alone, in my opinion there was enough evidence along with confessions from the Tapas group to have taken the case into court at least.

Having read through the files time and time again, I honestly don't believe the evidence exisits against the McCanns in order to obtain a safe conviction without any doubt involving Madeleines possible death.

Just my opinion and of course I may be completely wrong however after 5 years, unless new evidence emerges, this is how I view the case as its stands at the moment. The McCanns could be involved however they may be completely innocent. I really have no theory at all based on what little facts we have been given to date.

As I mentioned in a previous post, hopefuly the review will throw up some clues for NSY and even if we don't get to hear about these at the moment, at least there may be a (very small) chance that something will lead them to Madeleine wherever she may be.

That's your opinion and you are as entitled to it as anyone else. You opinion, however, has nothing to do with the opinions of those who have all the information, including the info most of us are not aware of. The Public Prosecutor in charge of the case decided to shelve. Others disagree and state another person could have decided differently (which had been also said by many people from the legal field long before those judges put it down in words!).

Claudia79 wrote:

That's your opinion and you are as entitled to it as anyone else. You opinion, however, has nothing to do with the opinions of those who have all the information, including the info most of us are not aware of. The Public Prosecutor in charge of the case decided to shelve. Others disagree and state another person could have decided differently (which had been also said by many people from the legal field long before those judges put it down in words!).

The Public Prosecutor still decided to shelve the case though despite having full access to the entire case files therefore whatever is being withheld cannot in my opinion contain enough to evidence to convict the McCanns.

It would be interesting to know just what was being withheld though and why and whether this information was directly linked to Madeleines fate in 5A or whether its more connected to either of the McCanns in general.