Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?

[Alfie]

To be perfectly honest its not even known what crime was committed on the night of 3/05/2007 is it? so maybe  no attempt or even an abduction was made.

This thread is to argue whether or not abduction is a plausible and logical explanation for Madeleine's disappearance.  No one has yet been able to give one good reason why it is not.  There was certainly opportunity for Madeleine to have been taken by a stranger, and that is certainly a (the IMO) theory that Op Grange have been pursuing for the last few years.

[Benice]

I find the story interesting because it seems to show that the PJ weren't always responsible for leaking to the Portuguese press. If the sisters were discussed in a Portuguese newspaper how did they get the story? There's no evidence that the PJ had even heard of them as their police statement isn't in the files.

The assertion that the Portuguese ignored them is questionable because they interviewed others with similar information; Mr Flack and Miss Silence for example.

If they dined at the Tapas that night why is there no booking for them?

UK police took statements from these 2 ladies six months after Madeleine disappeared.  The McCanns were arguidos at the time so surely these statements would have forwarded to the PJ - who could have then leaked them to the press- who in their turn attempted to discredit them as part of their ongoing smear campaign against the McCanns.

The fact that their statements are not in the files proves nothing, as we do not have access to all of the information contained in the files.

I can think of no reason whatsoever why the UK police would leak information about these ladies to the PT media, but it's not difficult to believe the PJ did so -  as evidence shows it to be a common practice employed by them - and not only in the McCann case.   e.g. L. Cipriano was tried and found guilty in the media before she even got to court.

Not having previously booked a meal doesn't mean you would be turned away if tables were available.

IMO

[Benice]

Benice I'm sure you're a lovely person who doesn't like to think ill of anyone but if this case ever came to court these women's evidence would be tainted because they, more than likely, sold their story to a tabloid and we must look at it with the same scepticism.

Thank you for those kind words Faith.  Much appreciated.

If they were only interested in selling their 'story' to the press - they could have contacted the press relating how they had been ignored by the PT police etc etc. -  way before they were smeared in the PT media.

IMO being able to publicly put the record straight and clear their names was payment enough for these two ladies. 

[Alice Purjorick]

It relates to my previous comments that an abductor would not be risk averse whether the abduction was planned or not.  It was mooted by another forum member that he couldn't be a planner and a risk taker at the same time. This article shows the reverse.  Meticulous planning plus extreme risk taking within the same criminal event.

I guess Alfie was referring to my post which in fact suggested no such thing.

[barrier]

The prosecutors are in no doubt that an abduction occurred, said so in the archiving dispatch.

They also say (sadly common sense) that murder cannot be ruled out

More importantly which court of law determined this to be the case.

[barrier]

This thread is to argue whether or not abduction is a plausible and logical explanation for Madeleine's disappearance.  No one has yet been able to give one good reason why it is not.  There was certainly opportunity for Madeleine to have been taken by a stranger, and that is certainly a (the IMO) theory that Op Grange have been pursuing for the last few years.

It could be argued that the police so far have not come up with the plausible and logical, why should any one here think otherwise.
OG may well have pursued this theory,possibly explains the reasons for non arrest and the winding down.

[ferryman]

More importantly which court of law determined this to be the case.

Daft question.

There needs to be a case to present to a court before one is presented.

[faithlilly]

UK police took statements from these 2 ladies six months after Madeleine disappeared.  The McCanns were arguidos at the time so surely these statements would have forwarded to the PJ - who could have then leaked them to the press- who in their turn attempted to discredit them as part of their ongoing smear campaign against the McCanns.

The fact that their statements are not in the files proves nothing, as we do not have access to all of the information contained in the files.

I can think of no reason whatsoever why the UK police would leak information about these ladies to the PT media, but it's not difficult to believe the PJ did so -  as evidence shows it to be a common practice employed by them - and not only in the McCann case.   e.g. L. Cipriano was tried and found guilty in the media before she even got to court.

Not having previously booked a meal doesn't mean you would be turned away if tables were available.

IMO

I'm not sure how the story smeared the McCanns Benice. For me it seems very McCann-friendly. Also did this story actually appear in the PT newspapers or merely the UK ones?

[barrier]

Daft question.

There needs to be a case to present to a court before one is presented.

Quite,its clear that OG and possibly the PJ are struggling with this,so in relation to you saying the prosecutors are in no doubt, its clear its based on very  little, else it would have been solved long ago, it wasn't worth the paper its written on.

[ferryman]

Quite,its clear that OG and possibly the PJ are struggling with this,so in relation to you saying the prosecutors are in no doubt, its clear its based on very  little, else it would have been solved long ago, it wasn't worth the paper its written on.

No court of law has considered the question.

[barrier]

No court of law has considered the question.

There you go my point exactly,if the evidence was there when the report was written its still there now.So why can't the mighty MET find it.

[jassi]

I consider the latter an impossibility.

[ferryman]

I consider the latter an impossibility.

I hope you are wrong.

I will accord you the courtesy of assuming you hope you are, too.

[faithlilly]

The AG seems to be at odds with you there. From the archiving report:

'- Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.

But therefore we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is requested, which was or were the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practised on the person of the minor Madeleine McCann - apart from the supposed but dismissed crime of exposure or abandonment - or to hold anyone responsible over its authorship.'

This is the only report to give an official opinion and it states categorically that abduction was not proved. As far as I am aware the NPIA and Leceistershire police have never given an opinion and the Met are yet to conclude their investigation so who knows what the outcome of that will be.

[Alfie]

It could be argued that the police so far have not come up with the plausible and logical, why should any one here think otherwise.
OG may well have pursued this theory,possibly explains the reasons for non arrest and the winding down.

Let's be honest - no one here really knows what the police have come up with, but that's beside the point. Stranger abduction is a perfectly plausible and logical theory for Madeleine's disappearance, and that's why OG have investigated it.  If it was neither plausible nor logical then they wouldn't have even considered it in the first place IMO.