Goncalo Amaral.

[Venturi Swirl]

You are conflating two seperate arguments. One is whether there was any evidence of abduction. The other is whether there was opprtunity for an abduction.

I’m conflating nothing.  You repeatedly stated that abduction in your view was virtually impossible.  Why do you believe that?

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

Nope. Crimewatch got it right.
I was talking about the propaganda film that was 'Madeleine was here'.

That's crazy!! They portrayed Smithman as crucial 5 years too late and pretended it was a new breakthrough in the case!! Great e-fit though - I'll grant you that.

[Brietta]

Nope. Crimewatch got it right.
I was talking about the propaganda film that was 'Madeleine was here'.

'Madeleine was here' was not made by the McCanns ... it was a Channel 4 documentary.

[pathfinder73]

Their investigators did the reconstruction i.e. their team.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

I think you had better get that information to OG German Police and Portuguese Police

They know that already. I was talking about well known statistics. That’s why the OG investigation is flawed. You don’t start from a presumption that there is no family involvement.

[G-Unit]

They know that already. I was talking about well known statistics. That’s why the OG investigation is flawed. You don’t start from a presumption that there is no family involvement.

OG examined the evidence in the PJ files and deduced that the McCanns had been ruled out. The Portuguese Supreme Court explained in 2017 that they hadn't.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

OG examined the evidence in the PJ files and deduced that the McCanns had been ruled out. The Portuguese Supreme Court explained in 2017 that they hadn't.

Exactly!! So OG should have gone back to the possibility of family involvement - even if that's to rule it out. OG was totally flawed from the start.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

I think you had better get that information to OG German Police and Portuguese Police

This is from a research article in the BMJ:

Conclusion: Children face the highest risk of homicide by parents and someone they know. Increased investment into the compilation of routine data on child homicide, and the perpetrators of this homicide is imperative for understanding and ultimately reducing child homicide mortality worldwide.

Trial registration number PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015030125.

So OG was flawed from the outset. The parents should have been investigated to rule them out.

[Brietta]

They know that already. I was talking about well known statistics. That’s why the OG investigation is flawed. You don’t start from a presumption that there is no family involvement.

Apparently procedure is that you check out the family and anyone else in close contact for elimination purposes.  But according to his book Amaral suspected the parents from day one before any investigation was carried out and never deviated from that. Why don't you think that is devious and flawed when he was subsequently proved to be so wrong.

[Mr Gray]

Presuming she is dead and killed (which we can't actually say for sure) then statistically it's likely to be a family member that has committed the crime.

That is not true

[Mr Gray]

This is from a research article in the BMJ:

Conclusion: Children face the highest risk of homicide by parents and someone they know. Increased investment into the compilation of routine data on child homicide, and the perpetrators of this homicide is imperative for understanding and ultimately reducing child homicide mortality worldwide.

Trial registration number PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015030125.

So OG was flawed from the outset. The parents should have been investigated to rule them out.

SY said they looked at the involment of the family..they therefore have looked at the evidence and decided the parents are not involved. what further investigations do you think would be useful.

[Mr Gray]

That's crazy!! They portrayed Smithman as crucial 5 years too late and pretended it was a new breakthrough in the case!! Great e-fit though - I'll grant you that.

Could you expalin why you accept the smith sighting as being totally correct yet dismiss all the sightings of maddie as being suspect.

[pathfinder73]

SY said they looked at the involment of the family..they therefore have looked at the evidence and decided the parents are not involved. what further investigations do you think would be useful.

Simon Foy was talkiing a load of BS! No police force reviews an old case and rules anything out regardless of what a previous police force has done or not. They look at EVERYTHING with fresh eyes!

[Mr Gray]

Simon Foy was talkiing a load of BS! No police force reviews an old case and rules anything out regardless of what a previous police force has done or not. They look at EVERYTHING with fresh eyes!

I would say they have...perhaps you think thta's BS too...but who cares what you think

[Mr Gray]

Simon Foy was talkiing a load of BS! No police force reviews an old case and rules anything out regardless of what a previous police force has done or not. They look at EVERYTHING with fresh eyes!

look at what precisely.