Sherlock. The psychological aspects of bundleman.

[sadie]

Hi Sherlock

I am truly interested on your take, as a keen ameteur psychologist, on bundleman.


As you say, you are attempting to enter the mind of the abductor, trying to construct a psychological profile of bundleman based partly on his apparently erratic movements that fated night


I would be interested in seeing the devils advocate, as you called yourself, disecting this mans mind and his likely methodology. 


What are his main driving forces and reasons for acting as he does?

[stephen25000]

Hi Sherlock

I am truly interested on your take, as a keen ameteur psychologist, on bundleman.


As you say, you are attempting to enter the mind of the abductor, trying to construct a psychological profile of bundleman based partly on his apparently erratic movements that fated night


I would be interested in seeing the devils advocate, as you called yourself, disecting this mans mind and his likely methodology. 


What are his main driving forces and reasons for acting as he does?

How can you give a psychological profile of someone that has not been proven to exist, other than a few weird drawings  ?

[sadie]

How can you give a psychological profile of someone that has not been proven to exist, other than a few weird drawings  ?

Stephen please do not interfere. 

Sherlock has stated that he is doing a psychological profile of bundleman.  That should be enough for you.  It is for me.  I believe him.

Sherlock

Being somewhat of a psychology buff - more Dr Watson's line, I know, but his writings are rubbing off on me - one thing I am doing is attempting to enter the mind of the abductor, trying to construct a psychological profile of bundleman based partly on his apparently erratic movements that fated night.

I am looking forward to his considered opinion.

[Carana]

How can you give a psychological profile of someone that has not been proven to exist, other than a few weird drawings  ?

You could say the same of many abductions, though. Precious few are known to exist unless someone happened to witness the actual abduction or was caught on CCTV.

What about all the kids last seen walking to or from a bus stop or playing outside and then... nothing?



Who would have believed the mother of the little girl snatched from the bathtub if she hadn't been found quickly, with the mother just next door?

What was the proof in the Soham case that they'd been abducted? Or the little Belgian girls?

[stephen25000]

Stephen please do not interfere. 

Sherlock has stated that he is doing a psychological profile of bundleman.  That should be enough for you.  It is for me.  I believe him.

Sherlock
I am looking forward to his considered opinion.

Interfering hardly.

Just asking a logical question, and how does that interfere with a profile exactly ?

P.S. This is an open forum and I do not follow orders ( German accent omitted    )

[stephen25000]

You could say the same of many abductions, though. Precious few are known to exist unless someone happened to witness the actual abduction or was caught on CCTV.

What about all the kids last seen walking to or from a bus stop or playing outside and then... nothing?



Who would have believed the mother of the little girl snatched from the bathtub if she hadn't been found quickly, with the mother just next door?

What was the proof in the Soham case that they'd been abducted? Or the little Belgian girls?

T

[stephen25000]

You could say the same of many abductions, though. Precious few are known to exist unless someone happened to witness the actual abduction or was caught on CCTV.

What about all the kids last seen walking to or from a bus stop or playing outside and then... nothing?



Who would have believed the mother of the little girl snatched from the bathtub if she hadn't been found quickly, with the mother just next door?

What was the proof in the Soham case that they'd been abducted? Or the little Belgian girls?

Trouble is, I've never believed this was an abduction.

Unless someone can provide incontrovertible proof that it was.

[Carana]

An interesting topic, Sadie. I find that here might not be just one profile though, depending on what actually happened, e.g. a burglar who'd perhaps accidentally injured her (or worse) to stop her screaming if she'd woken up, wouldn't necessarily be the same as an opportunistic paedophile, nor the same as someone who was simply paid to find a specific type of child for whatever reason.

[Carana]

Trouble is, I've never believed this was an abduction.

Unless someone can provide incontrovertible proof that it was.

I think we're all more than aware of that by now, Stephen.

Sadie was interested in Sherlock's perspective.

[Mr Gray]

Trouble is, I've never believed this was an abduction.

Unless someone can provide incontrovertible proof that it was.

There is no proof that Ben Needham was abducted, none whatsoever but people seem to accept it as I do.
I don't accept Amaral's theory. Full of flaws, and no incontrovertible proof to support it . lets hope SY find some proof. There is no incontrovertible proof that Maddie was not abducted so each opinion is valid. that's all we have, opinions.

[stephen25000]

I think we're all more than aware of that by now, Stephen.

Sadie was interested in Sherlock's perspective.

Since you referred to an abduction in your answer to me, it is an important point.

The abduction is no more than a loose thesis, with no proof to back it up.

[Mr Gray]

Since you referred to an abduction in your answer to me, it is an important point.

The abduction is no more than a loose thesis, with no proof to back it up.

As the final report states , there is no proof to support any of the possible reasons for Maddies. disappearance.
However having reviewed the files, SY are going with an abduction, they must have their reasons. For me that is a massive vote for abduction.

[Carana]

Since you referred to an abduction in your answer to me, it is an important point.

The abduction is no more than a loose thesis, with no proof to back it up.

Just like parental involvement is no more than a loose thesis, with no proof to back it up.

I'm more interested in research on the subject.

[stephen25000]

Just like parental involvement is no more than a loose thesis, with no proof to back it up.

I'm more interested in research on the subject.

I do know that there is no forensic proof of that.

However, I don't type the word 'abduction' as some posters do as an absolute fact. >@@(*&)

[Mr Gray]

I do know that there is no forensic proof of that.

However, I don't type the word 'abduction' as some posters do as an absolute fact. >@@(*&)

There are no absolute facts.