- "No evidence was found for abduction, as remains the case."
Madeleine McCann's case is a perfect example of insufficient investigation resulting in the retrieval of insufficient information to prove anything either way.
It is in direct correlation to the disastrously botched primary collection of evidence by the forensic team, perhaps aligned to the delay in making the apartment a crime scene. - "Investigation of the parents was a logical step."
It is my understanding that a competent investigation eliminates those with opportunity and access to the victim right at the start of an investigation.
Generally if suspicions are raised as a result these are evidence based.
Months into the investigation when all else had failed, there was absolutely no evidence which justified the Drs McCann being constituted arguidos in Madeleine's disappearance - competent law enforcement generally disregards alleged dreams as appropriate probable cause. - "Accidental death has not been disproved."
No death has been proved accidental or otherwise. - "Remember the dogs."
Whether you like it or not it rather behoves you to remember exactly what the significance of the dogs was and their value to finding out what happened to Madeleine
Your understanding is tainted for the reason you are on this forum.
To protect the mccanns.
You can say what you wish, but the facts are simple.
Madeleine was extensively searched for weeks, with no result.
No evidence supports abduction, which could not be explained by other possibilities.
Do you think by your repetition of the mccann abduction mantra ad nauseum, people will believe you. other than your fellow believers ?
Then dream on.
