According to some, there is certainly circumstantial evidence of abduction.

[Eleanor]

Gin on special offer was it Eleanor? Couldn’t resist eh ?

Oh Dear, silly you.  I don't even like Gin.  But you had to piss on the head of Stephen and his ghastly Forum to score a point, even after the death of his wife.

Just how pathetic can this be.

[Eleanor]

Are you teetotal Faithlilly?
You do seem preoccupied by what may or may not be Eleanor's drink of choice.

Don't worry about it,  Erngath.  I never actually drink Gin.  Although I would if I wanted to.  Faithlilly probably has her own problems.

[ShiningInLuz]

Okay.  Fine.  Do we have to get off on this?

You are always absolute, so why should Davel not be?

Personally, I don't care, although I remain convinced of the innocence to The McCanns.

I so love France, and you so love Portugal.  This is what the likes of you and me do.  But I didn't lose my marbles when I moved to France.

I could quite happily move to many an other country in Europe and be perfectly happy there.  I make the most of my life in Portugal because time is not on my side.  I am making the best of the hand I have been dealt.

Your last sentence is an ad-hom.  Whilst I could report it, I would prefer if you would desist from such comments in future.

 

[Eleanor]

I could quite happily move to many an other country in Europe and be perfectly happy there.  I make the most of my life in Portugal because time is not on my side.  I am making the best of the hand I have been dealt.

Your last sentence is an ad-hom.  Whilst I could report it, I would prefer if you would desist from such comments in future.

 

Oh Dear, how sad.  No Ad Hom from me, unless you are paranoid..

[Robittybob1]

It seems that the forum has, in Eleanor's opinion, so little credibility that it would be difficult to detract from it.

And here's me thinking how good everyone is behaving!

[Robittybob1]

That is your opinion, to which you are entitled.  Just not a fact.

I tend to favour Davel on those two points.

[Robittybob1]

Your claim was that Amaral had said he would prove that Madeleine died in 5A, and that he didn't.

Such was your opinion.  You can't claim it as fact unless
1 you prove that Madeleine did not die in 5A, which you can't
or
2 you prove that Amaral did not prove it.  Thus far you have failed on this route.

I have no interest in being diverted onto the dogs.  There must dozens of dog threads.  Kindly stop deflecting.

 

I have a feeling if it had been proven that Madeleine had died in the apartment we would all know about it by now.   I haven't seen any proof presented by GA therefore I'm satisfied it is a fact that there is  no proof as such.

[ShiningInLuz]

I tend to favour Davel on those two points.

Which two points?

[sadie]

Well, we don't seem to have found convincing circumstantial evidence of abduction. A C Rowley seemed to believe in it, but the PJ don't, they say they don't know what happened.

If you ruthlessly dismiss every thing that Kate and Gerry have stated, their emotional state, the way that they have thrown themselves into the search, taken the case to SY etc then you are missing vital information imo.  Information that most people would recognise because they are not blinded by their adoration of Amaral and apparent hatred of The Mccanns

It can be proven that Gerry did NOT have the time, or opportunity (or motive) to do anything that people on here are intimating .... and I feel sure that both the PJ and SY will have double checked all this



Additionally, at least 3 credible witnesses saw a man watching 5A in the run up to that fateful evening.



I am about to post a list of pointers that imo demonstrate that neither Gerry nor Kate was involved and the likelyhood was that a stranger/strangers abducted Madeleine.

I would be grateful if you would allow the run of these posts to stay together before
commenting.  There are 12 posts.

Thank you

Please Note:  All 12 posts are in my honest opinion, where opinion is needed .... BUT GENERALLY MOST IS FACT

[sadie]

If you ruthlessly dismiss every thing that Kate and Gerry have stated, their emotional state, the way that they have thrown themselves into the search, taken the case to SY etc then you are missing vital information imo.  Information that most people would recognise because they are not blinded by their adoration of Amaral and apparent hatred of The Mccanns

It can be proven that Gerry did NOT have the time, or opportunity (or motive) to do anything that people on here are intimating .... and I feel sure that both the PJ and SY will have double checked all this



Additionally, at least 3 credible witnesses saw a man watching 5A in the run up to that fateful evening.



I am about to post a list of pointers that imo demonstrate that neither Gerry nor Kate was involved and the likelyhood was that a stranger/strangers abducted Madeleine.

I would be grateful if you would allow the run of these posts to stay together before
commenting.  There are 11 or 12 posts.

Thank you

Post 1

     Gerry and Kate saw the window open and the shutters up and wrote statements to that effect.  Are you calling them liars?  Are you accusing them of some heinous deed?

[sadie]

>     Gerry and Kate saw the window open and the shutters up and wrote statements to that effect.  Are you calling them liars?  Are you accusing them of some heinous deed?

Post 2.

    No Madeleine fingerprints on (a)the window, frame, glass or shutters ... (b) the front door and presumably the outside knob and inner mechanism were checked. ....(c) The patio door                                                                How could she have walked out via the front door, the patio door or the via the window without leaving fingerprints?

Also no fingerprints found on the outside gate, the child gate.

 

Additionally to no Madeleine fingerprints, no skin, blood or fibres were found at any of these places.

 

Madeleine had to have been carried out, abducted, because of the lack of the above evidence.  With no signs of Madeleine, finger prints etc., on any of the exits she could not have walked out on her own volition

 

[sadie]

    No Madeleine fingerprints on (a)the window, frame, glass or shutters ... (b) the front door and presumably the outside knob and inner mechanism were checked. ....(c) The patio door                                                                How could she have walked out via the front door, the patio door or the via the window without leaving fingerprints?

Also no fingerprints found on the outside gate, the child gate.

 

Additionally to no Madeleine fingerprints, no skin, blood or fibres were found at any of these places.

 

Madeleine had to have been carried out, abducted, because of the lack of the above evidence.  With no signs of Madeleine, finger prints etc., on any of the exits she could not have walked out on her own volition

Post3

    * IF*  Gerry had done something wrong, he had to have left window and shutter open.  According to YOU guys, several passers by since 9.15pm would have noticed, yet no-one did.  [please note that personally, I don’t think anyone would have noticed unless the shutters were well raised and the curtains fluttering; it was beyond their peripheral vision]                                           

 

The only time that Gerry left the table according to many witnesses was between about 9 and 9.15(ish)

 

So Gerry wasn’t involved, according to YOU guys cos others, who passed, would have seen the shutters up and window open and no-one did despite several passing by.

[sadie]

    * IF*  Gerry had done something wrong, he had to have left window and shutter open.  According to YOU guys, several passers by since 9.15pm would have noticed, yet no-one did.  [please note that personally, I don’t think anyone would have noticed unless the shutters were well raised and the curtains fluttering; it was beyond their peripheral vision]                                           

 

The only time that Gerry left the table according to many witnesses was between about 9 and 9.15(ish)

 

So Gerry wasn’t involved, according to YOU guys cos others, who passed, would have seen the shutters up and window open and no-one did despite several passing by.

Post 4

     Historically, there had been a string of 8 abductions in first the Porto area and then the PdL area.  All within 25 milesish of each place.   The Porto ones stopped after the son of an elite was given a talking to and a warning from the Porto police.  Someone pretty impressive must have stepped in here IMO to get him off so lightly.  There was a gap of 5 years after an abduction approx. every 18 months, but with one little girl going in Madeira.

 

The last one was of Carolina Santos, a pretty blond 3 year old girl from Silves>  She was just 3 years old, but the abduction was prevented by the parents looking out and seeing her in the distance walking off hand in hand with a stranger.  They called her and she came running back.  He vanished around the corner.

 

This was just 4 months before Madeleine Vanished !!

Had the abduction of Carolina succeeded, would Madeleine have vanished 4 months later?

[sadie]

post 4

    Historically, there had been a string of 8 abductions in first the Porto area and then the PdL area.  All within 25 milesish of each place.   The Porto ones stopped after the son of an elite was given a talking to and a warning from the Porto police.  Someone pretty impressive must have stepped in here IMO to get him off so lightly.  There was a gap of 5 years after an abduction approx. every 18 months, but with one little girl going in Madeira.



 

The last one was of Carolina Santos, a pretty blond 3 year old girl from Silves>  She was just 3 years old, but the abduction was prevented by the parents looking out and seeing her in the distance walking off hand in hand with a stranger.  They called her and she came running back.  He vanished around the corner.

 

This was just 4 months before Madeleine Vanished !!

Had the abduction of Carolina succeeded, would Madeleine have vanished 4 months later?

post 5

    A man was witnessed by Jane Tanner walking away in a hurry, carrying a little girl.  We call him Tannerman. 

Where did he come from, if not block A ?  There are no creches in the direction he came from, are there ?                                                       

If an innocent man, why hasn’t he come forward?

If a loving Father, why hadn’t he wrapped his daughter up more warmly on a chilly night?

If he was Crecheman carrying his own daughter back to their apartment in block 6, why was he walking in the wrong direction ?

 

So Jane Tanner saw a man hurrying away carrying a little girl.  Said man, previously called Tannerman and now sometimes called Crechman was in a hurry and carrying a little girl who was of the correct size  and wearing very similarly described  clothes to Madeleine.

 

Sounds like an abductor to me, especially as he hasn’t come forward

 

Faith, I got in a mess because you interupted my posts.  I would be pleased if could you hold off for a while.  Thanks

[sadie]

    A man was witnessed by Jane Tanner walking away in a hurry, carrying a little girl.  We call him Tannerman. 

Where did he come from, if not block A ?  There are no creches in the direction he came from, are there ?                                                       

If an innocent man, why hasn’t he come forward?

If a loving Father, why hadn’t he wrapped his daughter up more warmly on a chilly night?

If he was Crecheman carrying his daughter, why was he walking in the wrong direction ?

 

So Jane Tanner saw a man hurrying away carrying a little girl.  Said man, now called Tannerman was in a hurry and carrying a little girl who was of the correct size  and wearing very similarly described  clothes to Madeleine.

 

Sounds like an abductor to me, especially as he hasn’t come forward

 

Faith, I got in a mess because you interupted my posts.  I would be pleased if you could you hold off for a while.  Thanks

Post 6
   
Some have pointed the finger at Gerry as being the man that the Smiths saw.   Put yourself in such a position.

If you wanted to dispose of your dead daughter, would you carry her through the public streets, completely openly?   

Of course you wouldn’t, you would get a  bag to hide her body, or at least a blamket..  Such a silly thing to suggest imo.

 

Now an abductor who had been let down by his pick up, was in a very different position IMO.   If he had been commissioned, as I believe, to abduct Madeleine, he had a very valuable commodity and he was out of the apartment, already on his way to pick up, when he realised that the pick up wasn’t coming, IMO

He had to hoof it.  No going back for a bag then.

 

*If * this man was the abductor and his getaway vehicle hadn’t arrived, he was forced to carry this little girl openly.    Seems that he chose a quiet route and called in somewhere to get something warm for his valuable “Commodity”.  When this man was seen by The Smiths,, if indeed they did see Tannerman, he appeared from the direction of the Staff quarters which was just about 40 metres up Rua d’Escola from the top group of the Smiths.

According to a source on the 3A's Forum, a scream was heard coming from the Staff Quarters.  [I am sorry, but I cannot provide a cite for the scream because The 3A's forum is no longer with us, it has been deleted.]