Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Murder Casefile Collection - Now Available from The House of Ghoul Publishing.


18 grisly and abominable occurrences, fully documented for your pleasure. Part two FREE with part one. Stunning binder FREE with part five - featuring clipart graphics of a fingerprint, shelock homes in silhouette and one of Fred West. Collect all 18 and send off for your FREE vial of victim's tears.

Chillaxed Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Fook me, just read the other thread on this.

>

> Not sure whether I'm more or less informed on the

> case now.


xxxxx


What other thread?


The previous thread which was on this forum a year or so back turned into a repetitive head-against-a-brick-wall farce, and was eventually deleted - if memory serves, after a newly registered troll started posting stuff which was almost certainly libellous.

Probably this one which was all pretty reasonable and measured really.

Aah how I mourn the lost innocence of 2007, even if pretty much everybody there is still on it apart from dulwichmum, unless she has a pseudonym and ditched the persona, which I guess is entirely possible.


Chillaxed, consider yourself lucky the other one is gone forever, though like japanese knotweed it is a persistent little sod.

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


>

> Chillaxed, consider yourself lucky the other one

> is gone forever, though like japanese knotweed it

> is a persistent little sod.


xxxxxxx


For someone who has been urging others to "just walk away", you yourself also seem to be a "persistent little sod" on this thread, El Pibe :)

Chillaxed Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Nope, the one Sue refers to above where she went

> toe to toe with DJKQ for 9 pages. No idea how to

> link threads and maybe shouldn't if it was deleted

> for legal reasons.


xxxxxx


Yes that was the one, and I have no wish to repeat the soul-destroying experience.


I was ripped to shreds by a number of people (some of whom subsequently apologised) for posting facts which were already in the public domain. It all became very personal and some very nasty verging on offensive comments were made about me.


Sadly some people will always believe what they want to believe, and others will pursue their own irrelevant agendas regardless of the subject matter of the thread.


Human nature, innit.


The thread was either deleted or blocked (is that the technical term, can't remember, anyway nobody able to post on it again) at my request (I started the thread in the first place).


I requested the deletion because of the afore-mentioned troll, who made probably libellous accusations instead of sticking to facts, and could have got the forum into trouble, especially considering the litigious nature of the persons under discussion.

> Chick - you were one of the people who seemed to

> take great pleasure in goading me on the previous

> thread, which eventually had to be deleted.



I took no pleasure from the last sick thread about this. I didn?t goad you, just asked you to drop it several times, as did other people.


As for schadenfreude, if the cap fits.


I wont be posting again on this.

Chick Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> I took no pleasure from the last sick thread about

> this. I didn?t goad you, just asked you to drop

> it several times, as did other people.

>


xxxxxxx


You told me that I was sick, amongst other things, for daring to suggest that some things in the case were not as they had been portrayed.


Perhaps you have forgotten.


And why do you think I would "drop" something just because you (or others) thought I should? What do you think gives you the right to police what I post?


And why has this turned into some kind of meta-thread about a past thread? Bizarre.

Because I absolutely don't think they did it, both from their demeanours, their behaviour since and the evidence.


As for whether they should have been charged with child neglect then so should my loving parents in that case - we were left in bedrooms in Pontins like the other nippers whilst the parents were out in the entertainments areas, nothing was thought of it. Still really hope that Madeline and any other missing kids are found - can't imagine anyone else thinking otherwise.

Well hopefully after all this time there will soon be some kind of resolution.


It has all been going on long enough.


I do not normally read about cases like this, in fact I go out of my way not to as I find them very upsetting, particularly where children are involved.


I do not believe that I am either ghoulish or icky, but for some reason this case has continued to interest me. Well, I do know what sparked my interest in the first place, but I'm not going to risk another full-on attack by the forum police for saying what it was :(


Anyway, hopefully as I say there will soon be some kind of closure.

Voyageur Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

Still really hope that Madeline and any

> other missing kids are found - can't imagine

> anyone else thinking otherwise.


xxxxxx


Who has ever suggested that anyone hopes any missing kids won't be found?


Not me.


Voyageur, what evidence exactly are you talking about in your post? I don't understand.

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Voyageur Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> Still really hope that Madeline and any

> > other missing kids are found - can't imagine

> > anyone else thinking otherwise.

>

> xxxxxx

>

> Who has ever suggested that anyone hopes any

> missing kids won't be found?

>

> Not me.

>

> Voyageur, what evidence exactly are you talking

> about in your post? I don't understand.


I didn't suggest you had, did I?


Evidence presented via the media natch - like all of us I have no other knowledge base.

I have done. The examiner thought the parents did it.


Voyageur Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Salsaboy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I've always thought that the parents did it.

>

> I've always thought that people who thought the

> parents did it needed their heads examining.

Hmm libellous is a 'theory' being presented as fact, that a portuguese judge (in 2009) described as being supported by no evidence whatsoever (a judges words) before banning the sale of the Amaral book and DVD (later overturned because lawyers successfully argued that banning it was an infringement of free speech).


On which note, I am free to enter into debate on any thread where I have something relavant to add to the debate, and am very capable of doing that without being rude or offensive to those that don't agree with my views.


There are plenty of theories, but there is no conclusive hard evidence wholy supporting any of them. If there was, arrests would have be made and convictions seccurred. It is a fact that no forensic evidence has ever been found to support cadaver or blood from Madeleine in that appartment or anywhere else.


http://exposingthemyths.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/analogy-why-cadaver-dogs-are-not.html


Edited to add, there is a very good reason why indicatve evidence is not grounds for conviction (and rightly so) as it makes possible wronged conviction and miscarriages of justice.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
    • Niko 07818 607 583 has been doing jobs for us for several years, he is reliable, always there for us, highly recommended! 
    • I am keeping my fingers crossed the next few days are not so loud. I honestly think it is the private, back garden displays that are most problematic as, in general, there is no way of knowing when and where they might happen. For those letting off a few bangers in the garden I get it is tempting to think what's the harm in a few minutes of 'fun', but it is the absolute randomness of sudden bangs that can do irreparable damage to people and animals. With organised events that are well advertised there is some forewarning at least, and the hope is that organisers of such events can be persuaded to adopt and make a virtue of using only low noise displays in future.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...