it's the same thing ... how do you think so many kids get captured by these monsters? because they aren't with the parents.. the time frame matters not it's the same slip up.. these monsters are preying on the niave be... watching and waiting.. I see kids running around all over the place .. when I was a kid in the woods.. if I killed them would that be the parents fault ? i think theyre guilty of being daft nothing more I don't understand how you can't have sympathy for the parent of a murdered child mate. I never will ... nobody I repeat nobody deserves that outcome so it wasn't abdoment mate according to that info
We’ll never agree on this we are at opposite ends of the spectrum. The difference is 1. the time frame: minutes in comparison to hours and hours for 5 or 6 nights 2. the intent of the adult: one shopping the others drinking and eating with friends. Just because other parents do the same doesn’t make this any less serious. I agree Maddie didn’t deserve that outcome. The parents on the other hand should have known better. They were happy to take the risk not once, not twice but five or six times and not with their lives but with their children’s lives.
I agree , but I still don't understand why a person has no sympathy... be critical yes and perhaps even be disgusted, but no sympathy for that happening is my only real mystery mate anyway we must walk our walk mate good evening to you folders
Ok this German guy was basically in the same town as MM in May 2007. He was 58 miles away from the German girl that got taken in May 2015. He’s either very very VERY unlucky in life or he’s definitely the link between the two. Chaos you can now rest your case!
I appreciate that. But that’s why the police need the evidence. It’s basically so obvious. The chances of one rapist/***** being in the two places at exactly the same time in two different countries 8 years apart is basically ridiculous!
In a court of law is it not the jury who prosecuted someone based on the evidence. Even if it’s circumstantial? This is hypothetical here. If someone killled 100 people in 100 days and in every case the method was exactly the same. Then the suspect was proved to be in the exact area on each murder. But there is no evidence. Would the jury convict that person?
it's him .. you have to remember a large number of people have been accusing the parents for years, so despite being faced with this they will be in a state of denial rather than say " you know what I think I've had this wrong for years it's got to be this guy" .. it's just what people are like... .. in some cases even if they find a video of the event and a body in his boot they'd still say it was the Mccans.
Which is wrong. Look in some ways I still Think there’s more to it somehow. But this guy is clearly guilty. There’s just to much going on for him not to at least know what the crack is. It could quite easily be that he’s sold the girls on after he’s finished with them. He’s had money somehow or he wouldn’t be able to travel as much. He was renting two properties but sleeping in his van. Wtf would you do that?
I just don't see that.. the guy rapes young girls and looks like he's murdered at least 2 ... He's been driving around in a camper van his whole life ... god knows how many victims he's had ... I don't see this anything more than it is... a predator that captured her raped killed and disposed of her.. The guys a monster..
When you look at the sun do you think it’s someone shining a flashlight. Mate there’s people been convicted of murder even though they don’t have a body. How do you explain that!
And how would it not get to the jury? I’m interested to see why it wouldn’t. And honestly I’m not being a dick here but you clearly know more about legal process than me so rather than flippantly deny the comments we make can you please back them up with reasonable counter arguments! We can all be clever dicks if we want too!
That's all true , but let's be honest here .. at this point what seems likely? imo they'll find more than just a few things this guys done once they start digging.... seems they've had a good response already... they will already know it's just putting it all together and nailing it to him I hope
Because they had other evidence. You put your example case in court and there is no evidence at all. The judge would stop the case when the Defence submit there is no case to answer. Coincidence by itself is not evidence.
But that’s just total bollocks. You can’t say there is any evidence that a person is dead if they don’t have a dead body!
Evidence is in my argument. You where in 100 places at the same time as 100 people dying. The evidence is. They where there. In all 100 cases! There proof of that. Your just arguing for arguments sake.
