So what actual searching was there?

[slartibartfast]

Indeed it was and not without a high risk factor for professional searchers and volunteers.  What her parents must have suffered throughout that time just doesn't bear thinking about.

Even for the experts, the search for April was treacherous from the start

How is this on topic.

[Mr Gray]

perpetrator confessed so your post is null and void

There is not a shred of. evidence that Madeleine was abducted, even if she was so deal with it

I think abduction is proved on the balance of probabilities

[stephen25000]

I think abduction is proved on the balance of probabilities

Mantra time.

Yet nothing has been found.

[Lace]

Do you enjoy going around in circles ?

The 'other things'  I was referring to, didn't include the police.

You know full well what I mean. I have mentioned on this thread already.

It's you who must enjoy going around in circles,  as every time you get a reply about the McCann's searching and what they did the following day,  you ignore it.  Then a few more posts along you post exactly the same thing 'the McCann's didn't search'.    It really does become quite tedious.

I haven't got a clue what you are talking about 'other things'   as they were helping the police.

[Lace]

Mantra time.

Yet nothing has been found.

Using the information from the parents,   Madeleine was left asleep in her bed,  the window was open,  Madeleine was not found.   Then abduction comes into the equation.   

SY have said that Madeleine was taken by a stranger,  so how can anyone say that there was no evidence of abduction?

I believe there was DNA evidence found that didn't match with anyone.

There doesn't have to be obvious signs of abduction such as a smashed window or a door that has been broken into,  finger prints etc.

The police use what evidence they have and they are investigating abduction.

[stephen25000]

Using the information from the parents,   Madeleine was left asleep in her bed,  the window was open,  Madeleine was not found.   Then abduction comes into the equation.   

SY have said that Madeleine was taken by a stranger,  so how can anyone say that there was no evidence of abduction?

I believe there was DNA evidence found that didn't match with anyone.

There doesn't have to be obvious signs of abduction such as a smashed window or a door that has been broken into,  finger prints etc.

The police use what evidence they have and they are investigating abduction.

Saying the window was open, does not mean it was.

As to lack of evidence !ace, that also applies to other scenarios as well.

Keep that in mind.

[Lace]

Saying the window was open, does not mean it was.

As to lack of evidence !ace, that also applies to other scenarios as well.

Keep that in mind.

It could be SY had no reason to disbelieve the McCann's with regard the window,   I don't know why they would say the window was open if it wasn't,   it didn't have to be the entrance for an abductor as they left the patio door open!!!

What scenarios?

[G-Unit]

Using the information from the parents,   Madeleine was left asleep in her bed,  the window was open,  Madeleine was not found.   Then abduction comes into the equation.   

SY have said that Madeleine was taken by a stranger,  so how can anyone say that there was no evidence of abduction?

I believe there was DNA evidence found that didn't match with anyone.

There doesn't have to be obvious signs of abduction such as a smashed window or a door that has been broken into,  finger prints etc.

The police use what evidence they have and they are investigating abduction.

I wonder if the police know that open and unlocked windows and doors often feature in staged abductions....? No, that wouldn't occur to them, would it? Their remit was to investigate an abduction, not to decide whether there was an abduction.

[stephen25000]

It's you who must enjoy going around in circles,  as every time you get a reply about the McCann's searching and what they did the following day,  you ignore it.  Then a few more posts along you post exactly the same thing 'the McCann's didn't search'.    It really does become quite tedious.

I haven't got a clue what you are talking about 'other things'   as they were helping the police.

It is already well known that the McCann's did not fully cooperate with the investigation.

As to the 'other things', as I said, they are  in my previous comments on this thread.

As a final reminder, the McCann's final search was for an hour the following morning. As to what they did on that 'search', were they watched or do we have only their words for what they did ?

and when it comes to tedious, a very apt description of those defending the McCann's.

[stephen25000]

It could be SY had no reason to disbelieve the McCann's with regard the window,   I don't know why they would say the window was open if it wasn't,   it didn't have to be the entrance for an abductor as they left the patio door open!!!

What scenarios?

Are you for real ?

[Mr Gray]

Are you for real ?

as SY said they were  not suspects then it follows they believe they are telling the truth

[stephen25000]

as SY said they were  not suspects then it follows they believe they are telling the truth

You mean like Jeffrey Archer ?

[Mr Gray]

You mean like Jeffrey Archer ?

no not like JA

[stephen25000]

no not like JA

I'm sure the police believed him as well.

and let's not forget the judge in the case before the appeal, who called Archer's wife fragrant.

[mercury]

SY have said that Madeleine was taken by a stranger,  so how can anyone say that there was no evidence of abduction?

No, we have been through this before, SY (aka Redwood ) did not categorically or less categorically state this,  what he did do was say it was a possibility