I got distracted, but I owe you a reply, so here I go:

I’ve read and reread his posts. And my conclusion about the point he was making stays unaltered: “the prosecutor uses the results of a lie detector test only if it suits them. A positive test [=not guilty of the crime] will be ignored, if necessary”.

But in fact, that wasn’t my point against [any/] a lie detector test. My point was: there are innocent people who went to jail and guilty people who escaped jail because they failed or passed the test [564 Totje]
In your post 572 you said you just heard that lie detector tests aren’t used in court. I guess you were teasing me. And I fell for it. They are used in criminal investigations in the USA:

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/690.php
Halsey failed a polygraph test. He confessed and got convicted.

So did Jeffrey Mark Deskovic
Nytimes Dot com /2006/09/21/nyregion/21dna.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Or Floyd Fay
Toledoblade dot com /apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070313/NEWS13/703130391

Gary Leon Ridgway passed the test….
Edition dot cnn dot com /2003/LAW/11/03/green.river.killings.ap/
[only one link allowed, so remove the spaces and replace the dots if you're interested to read about them]

As for the positive PR effects of taking such a test and passing it [hmm 60-70% success rate wasn’t it?] I still doubt it would change/have changed anything [may be your opinion but not mine, I thought it was a stupid emotional remark of her/them]. The lab results didn’t change anything. It’s all in the eyes of the beholder.

The only thing that will change anything imo is if the police charges someone. Evidence, witnesses, incriminating dna, experts testimony, that’s what does the work in court in Europe and that’s what I trust Rebelo is looking for.

I’m off to work now[late already]. Will check this evening if you responded. Bye.

Yep. Clarrie was on GMTV this morning live (rearranged spells ‘evil’) from Bristol.

I’m up researching 1960s German girl singers to put in a club night (we do really hard house and then chuck in some indie and ancient cheese), but then I’m going to bed.

I hope I didn’t get to jargony? Sometimes I forget that not everyone’s trapped on the same rubbish course as me.

The silent majority are actually quite happy not being mobilised. I think after watching the Russians mobilise themselves into the gulags and the Germans mobilise themselves into the Holocaust voting for Big Brother winners seems like the safer option.

I have a vague idea of what Machiavellian means. However the wheel that squeaks the loudest gets the oil.

If you could mobilise the silent majority you could do anything you wanted to.

The major problem we face is apathy, put a politician in Big Brother and if he looks good he will be PM at the next election.

Public opinion is expressed in everything they do and buy, everywhere they go, what they protest about, what they don’t bother with, who they vote for… all that kind of thing.

Minorities only seem to have the loudest voice because the Centre-Left can use them as leverage for Centre-Left policies (although I don’t mean they’re consciously Machiavellian about it) and because newspapers privilege the rare event or comparison over the routine.

If you could transfer public opinion, that is the real opinion. You could rule the world.

I appreciate your backing of Mr Bennett, however his track record in this case regarding facts leaves a little bit to be desired.

I am sure he means well, but that is no excuse for a blinkered view
Perhaps previous high profile cases he has been involved in have clouded his judgement.
**********************************
You may be right, but I think TB knows what he is doing, looking at previous work he seems to take the -throw the mud and see if it sticks type of approach-

I am sure he means well, but that is no excuse for a blinkered view.

Perhaps previous high profile cases he has been involved in have clouded his judgement.

Re. urine tests: they are routinely offered in cases when children behave in an inappropriately sleepy way. Mccanns would have claimed long ago “we were never offered tests by PJ” or “we have requested tests”, or “we immediately agreed to tests”. Absense of any of such claims proves by negative that they have refused urine tests. Bennett is right.
********************************
I was just imagining if it had happened in the UK I think the authorities would have taken the twins to hospital for observation, then again the first police on the ground thought she had wandered off because there was no sign of a break in………….more food for thought?

A lot of companies probably do pay people to make comments - it’s mostly a waste of money though.

The obsession with lies and spin comes from the nature of Democracy. In order to have authority public opinion needs to be by and large in your favour and any old demagogue or poster boy might come along and steal your followers.

I’ve heard it called Democratic Anxiety and Demographic Panic before but it doesn’t have an Academic High Priest as yet (they’ve been too busy with Marxism) so it not got any kind of official definition.

Nite RR better watch the others when they are in the ‘kill and attack mode’.
Why on earth is that necessary?

He does, and there is nothing wrong with it. He is a professional lawyer, they all have agendas, at the very least their professional promotion as a task. Fine. Bennett’s agenda coincides with finding the truth in this case.