Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 212 comments are related to the topic:
McCanns vs Amaral verdict soon
McCanns vs Amaral verdict soon
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 212
|
By:
 , fair enough, we may have been at cross purposes.I felt you were using the terms 'disappearance' and 'abduction' as disparate rather than concentric terms. |
|
By:
Awarded £357,000 damages...could set up a baby sitting agency with that kind of money.
|
|
By:
Further to my post of 8th Feb @ 17:35...my bet is that Amaral faces charges (eventually).
|
|
By:
leazes67
28 Apr 15 15:56 Awarded £357,000 damages...could set up a baby sitting agency with that kind of money.  |
|
By:
Lets lock that incmpetent b@stard Amaral up!
|
|
By:
oh dear conspiracy loons and associated haters in disarray.
|
|
By:
What about incompetent parents Ozy? Should we lock them up as well?
|
|
By:
No, the loss of a child is more than enough punishment.
|
|
By:
Ozymandius
28 Apr 15 19:06 No, the loss of a child is more than enough punishment. Not if you didn't care enough to look after it properly it isn't. |
|
By:
Righto.
|
|
By:
I think Mr Amaral is responsible for things far more serious than incompetence.
 FAR more serious. |
|
By:
Write a book Naydam.. could make a fortune :)
|
|
By:
naydam 28 Apr 15 20:05
I think Mr Amaral is responsible for things far more serious than incompetence. FAR more serious. There is an argument that says for Mr Armaral, substitute the McCanns in your statement. |
|
By:
Pity the mccanns haven't had to answer to child neglect charges in court.
|
|
By:
How do you put a price on the 'damage' you received because of Amaral's book?
The McCanns did, according to the BBC they asked for almost twice what they eventually received. |
|
By:
I think they simply wanted to make sure that he didn't profit from his evil, unfounded accusations.
The damage done by Amaral is huge. His claims, and some very naughty 'inside information' released from 'an unidentified source close to the investigation' Have managed to convince many people around the world that this child was killed by her parents...with absolutely no evidence whatsoever. Please, somebody, answer me one question: If the kid was killed. Where was she killed? |
|
By:
naydam you don't know whether the kid was killed in the flat or abducted so why try to act as if you do know?
|
|
By:
I don't act as if I know, but I do try to apply a little bit of logic. We can discuss possible abduction later. At the present we (I) are considering the case for Mr Amaral's opinion.
So, where was she killed and when, time-wise, would (or could) this have occurred? |
|
By:
Time wise nothing adds up. I'm on the side of an abduction although, like everyone else, not really sure what happened.
The mccanns constantly complain about this conjecture and the lies* passed as fact. (*their word not mine) But they've added to this by their behaviour when interviewed. Who know's? Maybe there is more truth in Amarals book than the judge says. |
|
By:
Their behaviour when interviewed? Do you mean they looked at the floor or seemed uncomfortable? Maybe the seemed to be too.......too what? Or maybe not enough......not enough what?
What have they added? To be honest, my original questions were directed toward those who maintain that the McCanns are guilty of that which Amaral accuses them. But every time I try to ask one of the "Why-was-he-playing-tennis?" brigade, they seem to disappear. Them and the "What-about-the 48-questions?" mob. Anyway, I give up. Hopefully the book will be banned and he'll make no more from it. |
|
By:
In one interview in particular (fact as I saw and heard it with my own eyes and ears) the interviewer asked Gerry a question about the dogs to which he replied (maybe not verbatim but along these lines) I don't know, why don't you ask the dogs.
He's arrogant in the extreme and is never slow to use journalists to help get financial help from the general public but treats them with contempt otherwise. |
|
By:
akabula, I think it's time to let this drop, nothing left to be said is there?
|
|
By:
I was responding to naydam. If you think like that why visit the thread?
|
|
By:
cos it's boring seeing yet another mccann thread tbh, done to death and you're all going round in the same circles
|
|
By:
Like I said, why visit the thread?
|
|
By:
naydam
29 Apr 15 14:50 I don't act as if I know, but I do try to apply a little bit of logic. We can discuss possible abduction later. Nothing the McCanns said, or what the Tapas bar witness said, or what the man in the street said that Mr McCann stopped and spoke to, ties in with any witness report of a man carrying a child. In the words of a certain chap named Arthur Conan Doyle, once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth. Portuguese police, British police out there on a 'jolly-up', and private investigators, have no proof of abduction. In which case, I say there was no abduction. Now we can get the CCDA back in to solve whether she wandered off on her own after waking up crying, trying to find her 'parents', and was never seen again, or she was murdered some time before she was reported missing. There is a lot more to this case than meets the eye. |
|
By:
Akabula. To be honest, Gerry McCann might have been very close to the truth with that statement...I've said it myself before that Eddie (the cadaver dog) would tell you what he found if he could speak.
Unfortunately, he was only trained to detect cadaver odour. ANY cadaver odour. |
|
By:
There was never 'a man carrying a child'. That is the product of barely-recalled memory of somebody trying to help. I would bet that Amaral actively encouraged her when constructing the artist's impression. The more ridicule and scorn he could pour on any 'evidence' that disagreed with his theory, the better his story looked.
|
|
By:
@naydam I wasn't making any point about the cadaver only GMcCs response to the journalist. Arrogant cant of a man.
|
|
By:
Spelling. What proof of an abduction would you expect to find? Particularly in the case of a planned abduction, for this was surely no opportunistic burglary with a twist.
|
|
By:
Amaral is a good friend of my family. He's a good man and this case has destroyed his career and his life.
|
|
By:
You know he has many supporters in the many fora... drawn into circumstances beyond his control imo.
|
|
By:
TheFifthEmpire. Obviously you know Mr Amaral much better than I do. Perhaps you could throw a little light on a couple of interesting questions.
Was he close to the 'unnamed source' who supplied the snippets of information that were leaked to the press? Are you, or your family, members of the Portuguese police? I realise that it is wrong of me to ask such detailed, personal questions, and I do not really expect you to answer. It just seemed like an opportunity that I would regret if I didn't ask while I had the opportunity. As I said...I shouldn't ask and you shouldn't reply. The old T&C regulations frowned upon gathering data on other forumites. I don't know if it still applies or not. |
|
By:
Naydam
Similarly do you or anyone you know have any connection with the McCanns or the people involved in this case? On another subject. Are the records of the "Madeleine McCann Fund" (not the award from the libel case)in the public domain for all to see how the money has been appopriated? |
|
By:
Bix. No.
|
|
By:
You can't get a proper opinion on these forums.
No matter what question you ask, and state at the start - 'yes or no, no long posts' it isn't long before they descend into argument again. Nobody ever changes their mind. Nobody ever admits they were wrong. But just a 'yes' or a 'no' is beyond most. If nobody believes it, try starting a thread on anything and ask for a 'yes' or 'no' answer, and nothing else. Should we have Trident? Will The Tories get back into power? Were the McCanns involved in the disappearance of their daughter. Are Chelsea the best footie team in London? Is the Special One a moron? (it may work with this one) |
|
By:
I'd have to think about the first 4 but the last is unquestionably yes
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Is the Special One a moron? (it may work with this one)
YES! |
|
By:
 |