Author Topic: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?  (Read 101649 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #945 on: February 07, 2017, 09:01:45 PM »
Not unless you can suggest a reason why the McCanns would want to deceive their friends and relatives.
Nope.  Glad that's finally put "jemmied shutters" to rest then. 8((()*/

Offline Eleanor

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #946 on: February 07, 2017, 10:04:12 PM »

"Jemmied" in Glaswegian just means forced.  I doesn't necessarily involve an instrument.  Although I could tell you a tale or to.

In the end none of this has anything to do with anything, and only fools would think it has.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #947 on: February 08, 2017, 06:40:18 AM »
"Jemmied" in Glaswegian just means forced.  I doesn't necessarily involve an instrument.  Although I could tell you a tale or to.

In the end none of this has anything to do with anything, and only fools would think it has.
We learn something new everyday.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline pathfinder73

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #948 on: February 08, 2017, 10:33:24 AM »
The only evidence of forced shutters are seen in the crime scene photos and that was done by Dianne Webster.

4078    “It’s all, you know, even at that early stage there wasn’t a lot more that you were able to say. Did you check the blind at Kate’s apartment on the window that obviously the relevant window? Did you go out and check the blind?”

 Reply    “Oh the shutter?”
 
4078    “Yeah, sorry.”

 Reply    “Yeah I mean I can remember going out there and in fact there was me and somebody else, I don’t know who else there was, to see if it could be raised from, from outside, I didn’t spend too long err trying it.”
 
4078    “And were you able to?”

 Reply    “I think, I think I got it up so far but it became sort of err twisted. But everybody was in such a panic really.”

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANE-WEBSTER-2.htm
Smithman carrying a child in his arms checked his watch after passing the Smith family and the time was 10:03. Both are still unidentified 10 years later.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #949 on: February 08, 2017, 02:28:41 PM »
"Jemmied" in Glaswegian just means forced.  I doesn't necessarily involve an instrument.  Although I could tell you a tale or to.

In the end none of this has anything to do with anything, and only fools would think it has.

Is there a cite for this Glaswegian understanding of the word? I remember it being fairly common years ago that a burglar's tool of choice was a jemmy. They still use them today, in fact;

In each report the offenders had tried to jemmy open windows in three different apartments within Melchbourne Park.

Read more at: http://www.bedfordtoday.co.uk/news/crime/series-of-burglaries-across-north-beds-are-connected-say-police-1-5886557


Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #950 on: February 08, 2017, 02:34:00 PM »
Can we take the jemmied shutters (which we've all agreed now are of no real significance) to one of the numerous "jemmied shutter" threads that already exist on this forum and get back to the reasons why some people think that the behaviour of an abductor in this case is "inexplicable".

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #951 on: February 08, 2017, 04:44:10 PM »
Can we take the jemmied shutters (which we've all agreed now are of no real significance) to one of the numerous "jemmied shutter" threads that already exist on this forum and get back to the reasons why some people think that the behaviour of an abductor in this case is "inexplicable".

It is on topic for this thread.
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #952 on: February 08, 2017, 05:09:33 PM »
Can we take the jemmied shutters (which we've all agreed now are of no real significance) to one of the numerous "jemmied shutter" threads that already exist on this forum and get back to the reasons why some people think that the behaviour of an abductor in this case is "inexplicable".

OK by me.
Now show us how he gained access through a door which may or may not have been locked depending upon which statement you choose to believe, delineating your reasoning for why you choose to believe one statement in preference to another which states the opposite; how he gained access through shutters that were up and down like Tower Bridge depending upon who you care to believe, why do you believe the window behind the shutter was unlatched?
All of these inexplicable events become congruent at the appropriate moment .............................. yeah right Nobby riiiight. Have some magic beans.


"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #953 on: February 08, 2017, 10:06:42 PM »
It is on topic for this thread.
No it is not.  What Gerry may or may not have said to his sister on the phone does not form part of a plausible and logical theory of abduction, it is completely off-topic, and you as a mod should be able to see past your allegiances and realise that.

Offline slartibartfast

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #954 on: February 08, 2017, 10:13:00 PM »
No it is not.  What Gerry may or may not have said to his sister on the phone does not form part of a plausible and logical theory of abduction, it is completely off-topic, and you as a mod should be able to see past your allegiances and realise that.

So you think jemmied shutters have nothing to do with a plausible logical theory of abduction?

You can't just say anything that casts doubt on a plausible logical theory of abduction is off topic...
“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #955 on: February 14, 2017, 09:25:22 AM »
So, to reiterate: 
Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Yes there is in my view, and here it is (bearing in mind it is all theoretical and I'm not claiming it actually happpened exactly as described):

The abductor (a predatory sex attacker with a penchant for young girls) selects his quarry based in part on the fact that he knows she is left unattended for several hours every night in an unlocked ground floor apartment, with parents and friends only checking every 20 - 30 minutes.  He strikes some time between 9.45pm and 9.55pm when eight of the nine Tapas group are sat at their table eating their meal, entering via the unlocked patio door, enters the children's bedroom, opens the shutter and window to make sure that the coast is clear for him to leave the apartment via the front door carrying the child, which he does within 2 to 3 minutes of first having entered the apartment.  It is possible that he has an accomplice who has also taken part in surveillance and in the get away, and this may offer further explanation for the opened shutter and window, as a means of look out and communication and  between the two individuals, and for passing out the child.

According to some the above actions of the abductor are considered "inexplicable", perhaps we could have some further understanding of what that means?

In what ways is this theory both implausible and illogical?
bumping for G-Unit.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #956 on: February 14, 2017, 09:45:01 AM »
bumping for G-Unit.

Already answered. There's no way he could have 'known' the children were alone because previously adults had remained in the apartments (Sunday, Tuesday and Wednesday).  Did he really watch 5A from 5.30om to 9.45 pm?
That's the only way he could deduce that no baby-sitter was in there. Did he pick Madeleine up and then squeeze between those cots to open the window, or open it first then pick her up?  8(>((
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Brietta

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #957 on: February 14, 2017, 11:10:04 AM »
Already answered. There's no way he could have 'known' the children were alone because previously adults had remained in the apartments (Sunday, Tuesday and Wednesday).  Did he really watch 5A from 5.30om to 9.45 pm?
That's the only way he could deduce that no baby-sitter was in there. Did he pick Madeleine up and then squeeze between those cots to open the window, or open it first then pick her up?  8(>((

If Madeleine McCann had been noticed by a potential abductor all he had to know is ...
  • where she was staying
  • which room in the apartment she was sleeping in

It is indisputable that in the environs of Luz and within Luz itself, it is perfectly possible for an intruder to enter premises occupied by children while adults are in attendance and exit those premises unobserved by the adults ~ with perhaps one exception when an adult disturbed and chased the intruder from the premises.
The presence or not of adults within the accommodation was no impediment to the intruder.

It is also indisputable that it was commonplace for Mark Warner apartments in the resort to be entered illicitly by intruders ~ two within the McCann apartment block in the weeks preceding Madeleine's disappearance.

There are no reports that as a result of these intrusions damage occurred to doors or windows of the apartments which had been raided.

The files are naked with regard to these compelling investigative opportunities.  Is it any wonder there is no evidence about what happened to Madeleine if that is an example of the lack of expertise of the investigators?
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #958 on: February 14, 2017, 11:21:32 AM »
If Madeleine McCann had been noticed by a potential abductor all he had to know is ...
  • where she was staying
  • which room in the apartment she was sleeping in

It is indisputable that in the environs of Luz and within Luz itself, it is perfectly possible for an intruder to enter premises occupied by children while adults are in attendance and exit those premises unobserved by the adults ~ with perhaps one exception when an adult disturbed and chased the intruder from the premises.
The presence or not of adults within the accommodation was no impediment to the intruder.

It is also indisputable that it was commonplace for Mark Warner apartments in the resort to be entered illicitly by intruders ~ two within the McCann apartment block in the weeks preceding Madeleine's disappearance.

There are no reports that as a result of these intrusions damage occurred to doors or windows of the apartments which had been raided.

The files are naked with regard to these compelling investigative opportunities.  Is it any wonder there is no evidence about what happened to Madeleine if that is an example of the lack of expertise of the investigators?
I take it you are talking about the Mrs Fenn incident as one of these.  Her apartment wasn't part of the OC so there's no reason to assume MW was aware of this.  From memory, she didn't raise it with the police until her statement in something like September.

That leaves one other incident, which may or may not have been reported to the OC or the police, but it first surfaces in the PJ Files long after the complainants had returned to the UK.

Unless there was an original report to the police, I'm not quite sure what you expect they should have done.

Most of the staff indicated nothing unusual occurred in the run-up, though at least one did mention petty thefts in the complex, without much elaboration.
What's up, old man?

Offline G-Unit

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #959 on: February 14, 2017, 11:28:21 AM »
If Madeleine McCann had been noticed by a potential abductor all he had to know is ...
  • where she was staying
  • which room in the apartment she was sleeping in

It is indisputable that in the environs of Luz and within Luz itself, it is perfectly possible for an intruder to enter premises occupied by children while adults are in attendance and exit those premises unobserved by the adults ~ with perhaps one exception when an adult disturbed and chased the intruder from the premises.
The presence or not of adults within the accommodation was no impediment to the intruder.

It is also indisputable that it was commonplace for Mark Warner apartments in the resort to be entered illicitly by intruders ~ two within the McCann apartment block in the weeks preceding Madeleine's disappearance.

There are no reports that as a result of these intrusions damage occurred to doors or windows of the apartments which had been raided.

The files are naked with regard to these compelling investigative opportunities.  Is it any wonder there is no evidence about what happened to Madeleine if that is an example of the lack of expertise of the investigators?

Had he intended entering at night when everyone was sleeping the knowledge you propose might have been enough. Entering when the pavement was being pounded practically non-stop by checkers suggests a little more planning would be needed.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0