SternAAlbifrons wrote: ↑Tue Jul 14, 2020 10:08 am I was not looking for congrats, Rozz.
once again you totally miss my point

And that ^^^ back there, is not professional journalism.
imo
' a totally diferent kettle of fish.

But if your particular journalistic standards think this kind of stuff is all perfectly valid, go ahead, publish where you can.
Free press.
But as you know, large parts of the population and the jouralistic profession think it is pretty foul - and will call it out as such.
Dont expect to persecute a case like this and not expect some pretty harsh judgement yourself. (but NOthing like what you are serving up to them)
imo, only

Asking questions IS professional journalism. Doing research IS professional journalism.
You ask questions until you get answers that make sense.
You don't stop asking until that happens.

I am not lying about anything, I am not pointing out anything that isn't on public record - why are you so emotional about this?

I just do not like gutter journalism.
Simple as that.

I reckon, as do many others, including the kind of journalists i respect, that your new mate Sonia Poulson's, et al, work is foul.

Since you asked, i was going to say mo more.
No further comment even if you want to camp on my doorstep like these kind of mongrels do to innocencent people undergoing great tragedy.

How is this gutter journalism? These are legitimate questions about evidence that has been ignored. These are NOT LIES, this is documented, on the record information that is out there for anyone who wants to do a bit of research and ask some tough questions.

Have you actually looked at some of the questions or have you just decided that the McCann's can't possibly be lying?
There are things that don't make sense - you can't just dismiss them with a flick of your hand because they make you uncomfortable.

whether they are or aren't
i don't think it's the place of the press to 'investigate' aka speculate innocence or quilt
except regarding the police's performance and handling of the case

genuine information and questions concerning the actual case should be passed to the police

Phnom Poon wrote: ↑Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:29 am whether they are or aren't
i don't think it's the place of the press to 'investigate' aka speculate innocence or quilt
except regarding the police's performance and handling of the case

genuine information and questions concerning the actual case should be passed to the police

The evidence has been ignored by the authorities and people are asking questions.
It's the media's job to ask those questions on behalf of the public - investigative journalism is about investigating.
That involves asking questions until satisfactory answers are given.

Read some of the links, you'll see how much has been overlooked and / or covered up.
Don't assume anything about this case, don't assume the police did this or the police did that.

Don't assume anything about this case, don't assume the police did this or the police did that.

LOL did you see his movie The Party?
So damn funny.

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/a ... d=11819000

A crime expert who has analysed the high profile case of missing child Madeleine McCann claims the 3-year-old was not abducted.

Investigative criminal profiler and Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann author Pat Brown told news.com.au that Scotland Yard bungled the investigation and slammed the agency for "wasting time and money" on Madeleine's case.

"Madeleine is dead," Brown said.

"There's no point spending all of this money as nothing they do is going to make that child alive."

While profiling the case, Brown developed a theory about what happened to Madeleine.

"When I do a crime scene analysis it is a theory based on evidence to then be given to police and used to look for more proof and evidence suitable for prosecution," she said.

"When I analysed [Madeleine's] case, it led me to believe evidence does not support an abduction.

"An abduction was extremely unlikely based on the amount of time, evidence at the scene, and every other shred of evidence there has ever been."

Brown said Madeleine most likely died in an accident that was "covered up".

"The evidence supports the theory of an accident occurring through neglect and possible medication," she said.

Don't apologise, it's brilliant.