there should be no need for anyone to attack other people for asking ..whats going on here ?

my questions related more to the authorities and governments involved and responsible for solving this and also the media which has been very widely used .

why has the British Government spent so much on this one missing child ?

why if the British police claim to be going back to scratch are they seemingly discarding much of the evidence and statements given in the past ? 

why is it the the McCanns have so much power to silence others who discuss a different conclusion to those which they keep broadcasting to the world ?

why were the dogs evidence discarded seemingly as if they mean nothing ...when they have been and are used as vital evidence in criminal courts ?

Are we doing the child justice by ignoring these things ?

She should be No1.

---

@the_great_she_elephant wrote:

it's 50/50...and the important thing as Gerry says  is that there is no evidence

 

I imagine all the staff on duty that night were interviewed and ruled out as suspects.  - does Goncala Amaral's book suggest there is a 50/50 chance one of them was responsible? After  all, Im sure the finger prints of one or two staff memebers must have been found in the apartment.

---

that's true..anyone could be responsible.

If it is to be believed many staff did not have their contracts renewed after this and one poor women who was the maid  has suffered a great deal of emotional as well as financial torment since this event.It haunts her and she too would like for the case to be solved.

There have been plenty of links posted from official reliable sources from posters other than the OP that answer most of those questions and debunk the myths spread in the blog quoted posts from people who are anti the McCanns.

The OP suggested the parents prove their innocence. It was pointed out neither of the parents have been arrested or charged  let alone conviceted for any crime so it is ridiculous to suggest they have to prove their innocence to anyone.

The more I have read on this thread, the more I believe the parents have had nothing to do with their daughters dissappearance.

The Brown (?) blog, where they suggested the body was dumped at the beach, carted up the hill and hid there for a few weeks, then tranported to UK and buried in a relatives garden.. sums up how these bloggers think...ridiculous assumptions, with not a jot of any proof that even occured.

why if the British police claim to be going back to scratch are they seemingly discarding much of the evidence and statements given in the past ?

We already covered that. The British police tracked down the man seen at 9.15pm and removed him from being a suspect.

This changed their previous timelilne. They interviewed the Smiths (which hadn't been done before, they just made statements) who saw a man carrying a child at 10pm.

The police timeframe is now 8.30pm - 10pm. There is nothing suspicious about that.

The British police were not involved in past investigations. The Portugese police did the initial investigation which they closed 12 months later.

The McCanns had to lobby to get the case reopened/get the British police to do an investigation.

why is it the the McCanns have so much power to silence others who discuss a different conclusion to those which they keep broadcasting to the world ?

If the McCanns are suing people in the Courts for defamation and they are successful... that shows the Law is being observed as it should be.

If I was that parent or anyone else here was and  we took the same action, the result would be the same.

Those with different conclusion - that must mean they think the parents commited the crime, they have no proof of that, they have not been charged.. so why are they allowed to spread that? defame the parents?

If others are allowed to defame the parents, spread it around that they killed their child, then gullible people may believe them.

why were the dogs evidence discarded seemingly as if they mean nothing ...when they have been and are used as vital evidence in criminal courts ?

Because other evidence has been found apart from the dogs evidence.. human bones, DNA etc... I am pretty sure no-one has been convicted going by the dogs evidence alone.. as posted earlier.. the dogs are used as a 'guide'.

---

@izabsmiling wrote:

---

@am*3 wrote:

Complaints were brought on behalf of the child's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, against The Daily Express, The Daily Star and their sister Sunday newspapers over stories that suggested that the parents may have been involved in Madeleine's disappearance. The complaints led to the publication of unprecedented front-page apologies to Kate and Gerry McCann, in addition to the payment of £550,000 in damages, which was donated to the fund to find Madeleine

 

I can't see anything wrong with that. A legal process. Newspapers publishing untrue stories..defaming the parents? Parents won the case.

 

Are you basing your train of thought on conspiracy theories like this: 

More than £2million was ploughed into the Find Madeleine fund ... you covered up your child's death and then sought to make money out of it.

 

Rather than on the legal judgements so far?

---

why wouldn't it be OK for the media to say 'may be' ?

They may not not be proven guilty but they have not been proven innocent either have they ?

there version of fact isn't necessarily fact is it ?

 

 _______________________________________________________________________________

 

Care to explain how the 2 parents (or any other person) who have not been charged with any offence (and therefore will never have a guilty verdict handed down), could prove themselves innocent? And why would they be required to?

 

 

Full kudos to you am*3, you are the steady realistic voice of reason ..

Thank you tas.