[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Jigs

In that case, I think your issues need to be redirected to members of the World's police forces who have failed to act on this seemingly obvious case of murder, instead of people in this thread who disagree with your opinion.

The police have been following up leads/sightings for over a decade and she still hasn't been found. Considering the McCann parents have been at the epicenter of the entire series of investigative endeavors for the entirety of this period and still haven't been incriminated with concrete evidence surely goes to suggest that police forces across the globe have been sleeping on these leads. OR!!! PERHAPS!!! The McCann parents genuinely had no involvement in this abduction/murder whatsoever! Imagine!

Oh I'm sorry for having an opinion on a topic in a Debate forum, how silly of me

Maybe they are innocent and maybe they're not but to say the fact that the PJ didn't have enough evidence to charge them means they're innocent is simply not correct.

[Jigs]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Oh I'm sorry for having an opinion on a topic in a Debate forum, how silly of me

LMFAOOOOOOO yeah we get it. Thanks! Anyone else wanna echo these same sentiments while we're at it?~

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Maybe they are innocent and maybe they're not but to say the fact that the PJ didn't have enough evidence to charge them means they're innocent is simply not correct.

well yeah because when someone gets convicted for a crime we all believe the police are doing what they're supposed to be doing: gathering conclusive evidence and acting accordingly. Why, if a rapist is jailed for his actions do we have faith in the police but when the McCanns continue to walk free 12 years after the Madeleine crime we lose that faith? You can't have it both ways. Like I said the McCanns have been at the center of this entire investigation for the whole case so I think if anything concrete was to be found the police would have acted on it by now, especially considering they've become pariahs of society through all the speculation.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Jigs

LMFAOOOOOOO yeah we get it. Thanks! Anyone else wanna echo these same sentiments while we're at it?~



well yeah because when someone gets convicted for a crime we all believe the police are doing what they're supposed to be doing: gathering conclusive evidence and acting accordingly. Why, if a rapist is jailed for his actions do we have faith in the police but when the McCanns continue to walk free 12 years after the Madeleine crime we lose that faith? You can't have it both ways. Like I said the McCanns have been at the center of this entire investigation for the whole case so I think if anything concrete was to be found the police would have acted on it by now, especially considering they've become pariahs of society through all the speculation.

Oj is innocent too I suppose? "I Can't have it both ways" so I have to believe that either the Police are always right or else they are never right?

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Jigs

LMFAOOOOOOO yeah we get it. Thanks! Anyone else wanna echo these same sentiments while we're at it?~

Do we? Great news

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Jigs

LMFAOOOOOOO yeah we get it. Thanks! Anyone else wanna echo these same sentiments while we're at it?~



well yeah because when someone gets convicted for a crime we all believe the police are doing what they're supposed to be doing: gathering conclusive evidence and acting accordingly. Why, if a rapist is jailed for his actions do we have faith in the police but when the McCanns continue to walk free 12 years after the Madeleine crime we lose that faith? You can't have it both ways. Like I said the McCanns have been at the center of this entire investigation for the whole case so I think if anything concrete was to be found the police would have acted on it by now, especially considering they've become pariahs of society through all the speculation.

That's two different things though.

Someone who is found guilty in a court of law and jailed, there was evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convict them. Someone walking free with a "not guilty" verdict isn't "proven innocent" and a lot of cases won't make it to court, not because someone is innocent but because there is insufficient evidence to prove they did it. Surely, you know the difference?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Someone walking free with a "not guilty" verdict isn't "proven innocent" and a lot of cases won't make it to court, not because someone is innocent but because there is insufficient evidence to prove they did it. Surely, you know the difference?

But it mostly especially usually means that their accuser was greedy.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

But it mostly especially usually means that their accuser was greedy.

Not really.