UK paedophile probed over Madeleine

[loopylou6]

here
thoughts?

...and longtall it is great to have someone who can clarify specifics about the law.

Ok Izy, I will try to make sense of it somehow and answer but forgive me if I misunderstand.

'I am questioning whether it is indeed libelous/ immoral to 'mention' whether people have lied to 'cover up' accidental or unplanned circumstances surrounding a little girl's murder.'

Ok. Firstly I didn't 'mention' that this had taken place. I said that I could more easily imagine that lies had been told regarding the events that night than that the events had themselves been caused by a deliberate attempt to hurt a child.

This is what I termed 'putting a more positive angle' on some of the earlier suggestions of what may have taken place, mainly if not solely put forward by others.

I was trying to say that I didn't think the people in question had intended to harm their child. I added a disclaimer that stated I had no idea whether I was correct or not, but it was my feeling, and therefore worthless of course, to all intents and purposes.

'See I am not sure you can put a 'positive angle' on such a suggestion.' please see previous answer.

' Also why even suggest in the first place if you are not 'presuming' it to be true?' This is the bit that doesn't make sense to me. What is there to prevent someone suggesting something whilst not presuming it to be true? The two are not incompatible.

I hope the first part of this helps - if I have understood your meaning correctly.

Ok you've clarified yourself NF that's good - whether or not your original post is still libelous, maybe longtall can shed further light? (totally understand if you've had enough now longtall.)Or even MNHQ as I originally suggested.

'Why bother posting in the first place if you are not 'presuming' it to be true?'

Well, by your own admission you had a 'feeling' what is this other than a presumption or if you like a 'presupposing' that there must be some truth in your suggestions.

It really seems pointless to have commented that people may be 'lying' unless you believe there is some truth in your post(as you suggest there is by your 'feeling'). Of course you could be playing 'devils advocate' but you have not said this is the case.

I have not spellchecked but I am sure you'll get my drift.

..so you see my question was clear enough for you to answer perfectly adequately NF. Well done!

I originally suggested MNHQ.

A feeling is by definition other than a presumption.

It does not presuppose anything. You are making that bit up.

I have stated many times on this thread that my feelings and thoughts are indeed pointless.

I think I've had enough - whether Josie has or not, I can't tell you. But I'm interested in her thoughts as I said.

And I personally consider there are far more libellous posts around to pick on than mine, if you will.

I am not making anything up NF but indeed certain people are on this thread. Well it seems you are now trying to cover your tracks, so would I if I had thought something I said could be libelous.

Oh that's just silly. I'm not sticking around to have snidey rows with people. It's not getting us anywhere. I don't understand how I am tryig to cover anything.

Go and take your frustrations out on someone else, please.

Oh NF dont flounce!! lol

the pleasure that some of us seem to get from this tragedy is a little perverse, isn't it. rest assured that the police routinely keep their eyes on the victim relatives for clues so we aren't really uncovering anything here. All the accusations about how that family is spending money seems vulgar and insensitive? Do we know if any of the extended family is a MNer, for example. This is all so wrong.

oh fgs who is making things up? Why is your word law We can think and feel what we like.NF is correct by its very definition a feeling is not presumptious and is in fact quite meaningless and pointless wrt the law etc

Izyboy, do you have something personally against me because I feel your posts are becoming quite pointed.

I think I may have to set Kylie on you.

This is what I dont understand, it's ok to 'gossip' about real life people, but not ok to just question certain posts and suggest that they may be libelous.

This is considered being 'snidey' and not 'getting us anywhere'. Well actually this is exactly what is happening on this thread full stop. We are not 'getting anywhere'.

I've been trying to find your original post - is it the one of 1624?

Taking that one in isolation, you do not state in it who you think might have been at fault. You would need to identify someone to libel them. That said, if in later posts, you clarify who you think might have done, it wouldn't be ideal.

But I'm not a lawyer, I should add. I'm a journalist.

Who's Kylie? Kylie actual Minogue?

Who's Kylie? Kylie actual Minogue? I always thought she'd be quite nice. Not much of a threat there?

Noddyholder at no point have I said you must stop, I am all for debate, that is what I am doing debating. To have a 'feeling' you must of course 'feel' there is some truth .

The law of course is another matter and the law is that we should presume innocence until provens guilty 'fgs'. No I have no personal grudge NF, you are picking up on things I say ...ditto..

Actually I think Kylie looks pretty scary now since ..whispers..the bottox...but I dont want to be libelous..

Not to mention Pete Docherty, Georgina whatshername...do you get what I am saying Izy...I seem to recall some stonking posts on those threads.

Have any of you read the interviews?They are facts so no libel there they are signed statements and there is nothing here half as incriminating as what they say themselves.

Night noddy thanks btw

Sorry NF I'm a bit confused now.. oh well.. Nholder, when I have watched interviews by the MCCanns I have been struck by the terrible pain etched on that woman's face, that to me says enough...that and the fact that there is not enough incriminating evidence to bring a court case against them. Oh, have I mentioned they must be presumed innocent before proven guilty?

Actually I am fine re libel because Kylie admits to botox herself.

She doesn't admit to bottox though

btw one mans etched pain is anothers guilt ridden?

Is bottox a special formula of botox that's applied to bottoms?

Nice to see TD emerging from retirement. Can I just pick you up on this> "All the accusations about how that family is spending money seems vulgar and insensitive". These aren't unfounded accusations btw - it's clearly stated in the funds publicity (now) that the donations can be used for the upkeep of the family and they've said that that's what they've used part of the money for.