Sceptics beliefs ?

[Erngath]

I don't suppose you have. It's the details of the disappearance where differences arise.

But all sceptics believe that her parents are involved.
The manner of the involvement does differ among sceptics.

[jassi]

But you do believe that there is enough evidence to satisfy your reasoning and view that Madeleine's parents are complicit in some way in her disappearance?

I see no evidence to discount their involvement.
I see no evidence to support their abduction claim.

[Erngath]

If you read both threads you'll understand or maybe not as the case may be.

If you find this thread to be a "sceptic bashing" thread, then just don't post on it.

[barrier]

If you find this thread to be a "sceptic bashing" thread, then just don't post on it.

What! and let you have all the fun.

[Erngath]

I see no evidence to discount their involvement.
I see no evidence to support their abduction claim.

But you do see enough evidence to point the finger at them?

[Erngath]

What! and let you have all the fun.

Unfortunately I'm signing off now.
A really busy day ahead.
I'll leave you to have "fun".

[jassi]

But you do see enough evidence to point the finger at them?

Until I see compelling evidence of an alternative culprit, of course. Who else is there in the frame?

[Erngath]

Until I see compelling evidence of an alternative culprit, of course. Who else is there in the frame?

Fingers crossed and hopefully you are never called to do jury duty!

[Brietta]

Until I see compelling evidence of an alternative culprit, of course. Who else is there in the frame?

OK ... burglars don't count.  An individual molesting children in their beds doesn't either.  Witness statements of men behaving oddly and on at least one occasion entering a property uninvited where there was a young child.

There seems to be a general belief among sceptics that none of this matters;  much as there is that Amaral's conduct of the Cipriano case was textbook excellence as was his conduct of the McCann case.

Only wee problem there is that no trace of either child has ever been found ... and the sceptic belief is that is entirely due to the parents.

[jassi]

OK ... burglars don't count.  An individual molesting children in their beds doesn't either. Witness statements of men behaving oddly and on at least one occasion entering a property uninvited where there was a young child.

There seems to be a general belief among sceptics that none of this matters;  much as there is that Amaral's conduct of the Cipriano case was textbook excellence as was his conduct of the McCann case.

Only wee problem there is that no trace of either child has ever been found ... and the sceptic belief is that is entirely due to the parents.

All discarded - apparently.

[G-Unit]

It's a pity you take that view of this thread.
It is more of an opportunity for sceptics to explain why they steadfastly hold to their belief that there is enough evidence for them to point the finger at Madeleine's parents when after years of two current police investigations , neither of these investigations have seen enough evidence to do a similar finger pointing exercise.

What makes you think aceptics wanted or needed an opportunity ro explain anything? Should I start a thread giving you a similar opportunity?

[faithlilly]

What makes you think aceptics wanted or needed an opportunity ro explain anything? Should I start a thread giving you a similar opportunity?

That would certainly be a very short thread.....because the parents said so....the end !

[Eleanor]

But all sceptics believe that her parents are involved.
The manner of the involvement does differ among sceptics.

But only to try to get around the obvious.

[G-Unit]

OK ... burglars don't count.  An individual molesting children in their beds doesn't either.  Witness statements of men behaving oddly and on at least one occasion entering a property uninvited where there was a young child.

There seems to be a general belief among sceptics that none of this matters;  much as there is that Amaral's conduct of the Cipriano case was textbook excellence as was his conduct of the McCann case.

Only wee problem there is that no trace of either child has ever been found ... and the sceptic belief is that is entirely due to the parents.

Is there any compelling evidence that any of these people were involved? If so it would be interesting to see it.

[Eleanor]

Is there any compelling evidence that any of these people were involved? If so it would be interesting to see it.

Is there any compelling evidence that The McCanns are involved?