UK Justice Forum ~ Self-Isolate and Keep Safe!

Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Robittybob1 on January 18, 2017, 09:37:35 PM

Title: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 18, 2017, 09:37:35 PM
Who goes for an abduction as a possible solution?
I do, and I know Sadie does,
I know Stephen doesn't.
Alfie must think it is likely.

My theory was a two stage abduction.  There was the possible taking of Madeleine from her bed or walking and wandering part, and that is followed by the abduction.  So my initial thoughts were along the line that the "abductor" was never in the apartment.  It is really hard to build a workable scenario around these initial thoughts.

As I am exploring in another thread my findings so far are that none of the Tapas 9 (excluding Kate) initially thought Madeleine had been abducted.  Their initial thoughts were that she would be around the buildings or grounds somewhere, so they must have been thinking something like the woke and wandered scenario.
This is their thoughts even though they are generally aware that Kate and others had seen the window open and the shutters up.  (That in itself becomes quite contradictory.)

658
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 18, 2017, 10:58:25 PM
Take the primary effect as being the child disappearing from her room.
St Thomas Aquinas teaches us that every effect has at least two causes, he also implies that causes may be condition or action. So the basic principles ain’t exactly some new kind of Voodoo man.
Any theory must accommodate the available known evidence*.
*“the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid”.
Note facts not speculation.
Method:
1 Define the primary effect.
2 Determine the known causal relationships including the actions and conditions of each subsidiary effect.
3 Show the causal relationships to including specific action and conditional causes.
4 Show evidence to support the existence of each cause.
5 Determine if each set of causes is sufficient and necessary to cause the effect.

For there to have been an abduction the paths of the child and abductor must cross so either the child vacated the apartment or the abductor gained access to the apartment. Using known evidence show how either was possible.





Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on January 18, 2017, 11:03:13 PM
Who goes for an abduction as a possible solution?
I do, and I know Sadie does,
I know Stephen doesn't.
Alfie must think it is likely.

My theory was a two stage abduction.  There was the possible taking of Madeleine from her bed or walking and wandering part, and that is followed by the abduction.  So my initial thoughts were along the line that the "abductor" was never in the apartment.  It is really hard to build a workable scenario around these initial thoughts.

As I am exploring in another thread my findings so far are that none of the Tapas 9 (excluding Kate) initially thought Madeleine had been abducted.  Their initial thoughts were that she would be around the buildings or grounds somewhere, so they must have been thinking something like the woke and wandered scenario.
This is their thoughts even though they are generally aware that Kate and others had seen the window open and the shutters up.  (That in itself becomes quite contradictory.)

I'm not sure exactly how close you sail along buffeted by the winds of libel but you certainly have a knack of introducing apparently innocuous thought processes informed by every slanderous allegation in the lexicon and then some.

In my opinion you are inventive in adding to the wealth of misinformation by putting your own interpretation on events in a way which no-one else has even thought about.

Your factoid regarding the thought processes of the McCann companions being the current one.

Boy oh boy ... I really do take my hat off to you.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 18, 2017, 11:12:13 PM
I'm not sure exactly how close you sail along buffeted by the winds of libel but you certainly have a knack of introducing apparently innocuous thought processes informed by every slanderous allegation in the lexicon and then some.

In my opinion you are inventive in adding to the wealth of misinformation by putting your own interpretation on events in a way which no-one else has even thought about.

Your factoid regarding the thought processes of the McCann companions being the current one.

Boy oh boy ... I really do take my hat off to you.
I would hate to get a letter in the mail, so I sail as close to the wind as is safely possible.
I think exploring their thoughts and reactions could show something about what they know, but in the end no matter what we discover, there is still this other abductor out there.
I think Gerry said something like this in an interview, "there is still this abductor out there". 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 18, 2017, 11:33:51 PM
Take the primary effect as being the child disappearing from her room.
St Thomas Aquinas teaches us that every effect has at least two causes, he also implies that causes may be condition or action. So the basic principles ain’t exactly some new kind of Voodoo man.
Any theory must accommodate the available known evidence*.
*“the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid”.
Note facts not speculation.
Method:
1 Define the primary effect.
2 Determine the known causal relationships including the actions and conditions of each subsidiary effect.
3 Show the causal relationships to including specific action and conditional causes.
4 Show evidence to support the existence of each cause.
5 Determine if each set of causes is sufficient and necessary to cause the effect.

For there to have been an abduction the paths of the child and abductor must cross so either the child vacated the apartment or the abductor gained access to the apartment. Using known evidence show how either was possible.


I wouldn't comprehend anything Thomas Aquinas said but I do follow your line "For there to have been an abduction the paths of the child and abductor must cross so either the child vacated the apartment or the abductor gained access to the apartment. Using known evidence show how either was possible."

Known evidence:
For the " the child vacated the apartment" abduction theory.
1. it is dark and there is space and cover so an abductor could observe the McCann apartment without being seen.
2. if the child came to him as in a woke and wander situation he doesn't need to enter the apartment (evidence -no sign of forced entry)
3.  The tapas 8 (9-1) thought she is closeby and search the immediate areas without success. (Evidence in the statements)
4. Man seen carrying child by the Smith family (all Tapas 9 are accounted for so not one of them)  Potential abductor.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 09:25:22 AM
The door to the apartment was unlocked - known fact.
Therefore the apartment was not secure - known fact.
An abductor could gain access to the apartment without breaking and entering.
That's how it was possible.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy, and that's just using the known facts. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 09:38:04 AM
The door to the apartment was unlocked - known fact.
Therefore the apartment was not secure - known fact.
An abductor or anyone else interfering could gain access to the apartment without breaking and entering.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 19, 2017, 10:20:07 AM
The door to the apartment was unlocked - known fact.
Therefore the apartment was not secure - known fact.
An abductor could gain access to the apartment without breaking and entering.
That's how it was possible.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy, and that's just using the known facts.

And the constantly opening and closing door?

And the open window and shutters?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 11:27:13 AM
And the constantly opening and closing door?

And the open window and shutters?
Window and shutters could have been open from the inside to communicate with others, keep a look out, hand out the child.
Door could have moved as a result of air movement when the patio door was opened during checks, or perhaps abductor moved it or perhaps it didn't move at all and it was faulty recollection  I don't know.  But a door moving a few inches does not rule out stranger abduction.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 19, 2017, 11:59:12 AM
Window and shutters could have been open from the inside to communicate with others, keep a look out, hand out the child.
Door could have moved as a result of air movement when the patio door was opened during checks, or perhaps abductor moved it or perhaps it didn't move at all and it was faulty recollection  I don't know.  But a door moving a few inches does not rule out stranger abduction.

So do you think there was more than one person involved in the abduction? Don't you think Madeleine was abducted for nefarious reasons ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 19, 2017, 12:08:47 PM
A child was taken from her bath whilst her mother was in another room. Thats how easy an abduction can be. No need for complicated analyses....it is possible and very simple.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 12:16:51 PM
So do you think there was more than one person involved in the abduction? Don't you think Madeleine was abducted for nefarious reasons ?
1) It's possible
2) almost certainly.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 19, 2017, 12:17:40 PM
1) It's possible
2) almost certainly.

So why so many people ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 12:20:02 PM
So why so many people ?
Hang on.  You asked if more than one person may have been involved.  I said it's possible, now you're asking me why so many people were involved.  Would you care to re-phrase your question?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 19, 2017, 12:27:19 PM
Hang on.  You asked if more than one person may have been involved.  I said it's possible, now you're asking me why so many people were involved.  Would you care to re-phrase your question?

Fair enough. If you think that it's possible that more than one person is involved, in what way?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 12:53:48 PM
Fair enough. If you think that it's possible that more than one person is involved, in what way?
In the way of abducting a child, I don't know what other conclusions you expect me to be drawing at this stage.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 19, 2017, 02:16:00 PM
The door to the apartment was unlocked - known fact.
Therefore the apartment was not secure - known fact.
An abductor could gain access to the apartment without breaking and entering.
That's how it was possible.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy, and that's just using the known facts.

Sorry you have just failed.
You have failed to provide evidence of the existence of an abductor.
Also you have failed to consider the child vacating the apartment under her own steam.
The idea is to try to find out what happened not find anecdotal stuff that satisfies a preconceived idea.
You are falling into classic traps relating to "finding out what happened".
Too much linear thinking and "the five whys".


Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 19, 2017, 02:18:58 PM
In a report about the sex attacker who assaulted five British children in the Algarve this part is of interest to me -

In most cases there were no signs of forced entry to the property, nothing was taken, and the intruder appeared in the early hours of the morning between 2am and 5am.

No forced entry,  nothing taken.    So how did this man gain access to the properties?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 02:19:19 PM
The door to the apartment was unlocked - known fact.
Therefore the apartment was not secure - known fact.
An abductor could gain access to the apartment without breaking and entering.
That's how it was possible.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy, and that's just using the known facts.

Sorry, but the correct term is 'the door to the apartment was said to be unlocked'. But not all the time by everyone;

In this way, at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked,.........At about 22.00 it was his wife Kate who went to check on the children. She entered the apartment by the door using the key
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 02:22:43 PM
Sorry, but the correct term is 'the door to the apartment was said to be unlocked'. But not all the time by everyone;

In this way, at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked,.........At about 22.00 it was his wife Kate who went to check on the children. She entered the apartment by the door using the key
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm
Was the patio door unlockable with a key?  If the patio door was locked with a key how do you think madeleine dragged the chair to the railings to throw herself off?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 19, 2017, 02:28:03 PM
A child was taken from her bath whilst her mother was in another room. Thats how easy an abduction can be. No need for complicated a.nalyses....it is possible and very simple.

Totally irrelevant to this application.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 02:31:15 PM
How about a sceptic explain why this (Slarti's Simple Solutio) is neither plausible nor logical?

"Person A is around the OC, sees the McCanns leaving the apartment by the patio, knows it is unlocked. Waits until they gone into the tapas. Drive up to back entrance of 5a, nips into apartment, picks up Madeleine (if she wakes just tell her taking to Daddy), out to the car, drive off. Job done".

The McCanns leave their apartment closely followed/at the same time as Jane Tanner, she is followed by Matthew and Rachael, then Russell. Matthew comes back up and the Paynes are coming down. Not only are all these people passing by, it was still daylight and others may have been around; Jes Wilkins was, we know. Rather implausible that none of them bumped into him. Pretty illogical for anyone to try at that point. Who was Gery gazing proudly at at 9.05 pm also?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 02:32:57 PM
The McCanns leave their apartment closely followed/at the same time as Jane Tanner, she is followed by Matthew and Rachael, then Russell. Matthew comes back up and the Paynes are coming down. Not only are all these people passing by, it was still daylight and others may have been around; Jes Wilkins was, we know. Rather implausible that none of them bumped into him. Pretty illogical for anyone to try at that point. Who was Gery gazing proudly at at 9.05 pm also?
Who said it happened before 9.05pm?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 02:37:04 PM
Was the patio door unlockable with a key?  If the patio door was locked with a key how do you think madeleine dragged the chair to the railings to throw herself off?

It isn't possible to prove that the patio door was unlocked, therefore it can't be said to be a known fact.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 02:55:57 PM
Who said it happened before 9.05pm?

Your post made it sound like a continuous string of events;

"Person A is around the OC, sees the McCanns leaving the apartment by the patio, knows it is unlocked. Waits until they gone into the tapas. Drive up to back entrance of 5a, nips into apartment, picks up Madeleine (if she wakes just tell her taking to Daddy), out to the car, drive off. Job done".

How long after Person A wait after the McCanns entered the Tapas before driving up to the back entrance of 5A then? You never mentioned Gerry returning. Or Jane. When did it actually happen, Alfie?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 03:04:46 PM
It isn't possible to prove that the patio door was unlocked, therefore it can't be said to be a known fact.
Matt Oldfield rogatory

4078 'And you said when you went in you went in through the patio door''
Reply 'Yeah'
 
4078 'Or the poolside door''
Reply 'Yeah'.
 
4078 'How did you know to go through there''
Reply 'Well Kate said that that one was open'.
 
4078 'And when did she say that''
Reply 'When I offered to go and, erm, go and look'.
4078 'Okay'.
 
Reply 'Because I said do you want me to check the kids and she said yeah the patio door is open'.
 
4078 'Okay'.
Reply 'I mean, it was closed, it wasn't sort of open'.
 
4078 'And I am assuming it is a slide open door, is that correct''
Reply 'Yeah'.
 
00.33.23 4078 'So you slid the door open''
Reply 'Yeah'.
 
4078 'And you have walked through the apartment and you said there was a light on''
Reply 'Yeah'.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 03:06:23 PM
Your post made it sound like a continuous string of events;

"Person A is around the OC, sees the McCanns leaving the apartment by the patio, knows it is unlocked. Waits until they gone into the tapas. Drive up to back entrance of 5a, nips into apartment, picks up Madeleine (if she wakes just tell her taking to Daddy), out to the car, drive off. Job done".

How long after Person A wait after the McCanns entered the Tapas before driving up to the back entrance of 5A then? You never mentioned Gerry returning. Or Jane. When did it actually happen, Alfie?
It's Slarti's post originally but I reckon the abduction happened at some point after 9.30pm and before 10pm
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 03:13:14 PM
It's all pretty tight time wise, though. You've got Matt & Russell in transit after 9.30 then Matt coming back & going into 5A, Then shortly after that Jane leaps up and goes to her apartment and then Russell leaves to return to Tapas.
So time opportunity shrinks somewhat from 30 minutes for abductorman to carry out his dastardly task.

Then, of course, there might be other non-Tapas holiday makers passing by.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: slartibartfast on January 19, 2017, 03:21:10 PM
It's Slarti's post originally but I reckon the abduction happened at some point after 9.30pm and before 10pm

You seemed to start the original thread and put forward the scenario???
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 19, 2017, 03:23:26 PM
of course it was extremely tight timewise

What the sceptics dont understand is taht although it was hihgly unlikely taht Maddie WOULD be abducted it is highly likely that she WAS abducted
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 03:30:11 PM
You seemed to start the original thread and put forward the scenario???
I used your words though, I wouldn't have thought you'd have minded seeing as how you're keen on using my words as your own?  At least I credited you (twice).
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 03:31:32 PM
It's all pretty tight time wise, though. You've got Matt & Russell in transit after 9.30 then Matt coming back & going into 5A, Then shortly after that Jane leaps up and goes to her apartment and then Russell leaves to return to Tapas.
So time opportunity shrinks somewhat from 30 minutes for abductorman to carry out his dastardly task.

Then, of course, there might be other non-Tapas holiday makers passing by.
You do know that the Met identified a window of opportunity for an abductor to remove Madeleine from the apartment don't you?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 03:34:04 PM
Yes, did they specifically state what it was   - i.e. between X & Y times ?

I'm suggesting that the time window is smaller than your 30 minutes, possibly nearer 15
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 19, 2017, 03:41:07 PM
Sorry, but the correct term is 'the door to the apartment was said to be unlocked'. But not all the time by everyone;

In this way, at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked,.........At about 22.00 it was his wife Kate who went to check on the children. She entered the apartment by the door using the key
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm

Gerry corrected that statement.      We were never given his reason for doing that and IMO it was a misunderstanding between him, and/or the interpretor and/or the PJ officer taking down his statement  during the very first interview - which was  'new territory'  for everyone concerned and therefore understandably more open to error than in following interviews.
 
It is mentioned on more than one occasion that there was confusion in the beginning about the doors because some people described the patio door as the front door and some described the recessed door facing the carpark as the front door.

AIMHO

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 04:17:34 PM
It isn't possible to prove that the patio door was unlocked, therefore it can't be said to be a known fact.
I'm sure it is stated the patio door is only lockable from the inside, so there is no way a key is used to unlock it from the outside, therefore it was left unlocked.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 04:21:23 PM
Gerry corrected that statement.      We were never given his reason for doing that and IMO it was a misunderstanding between him, and/or the interpretor and/or the PJ officer taking down his statement  during the very first interview - which was  'new territory'  for everyone concerned and therefore understandably more open to error than in following interviews.
 
It is mentioned on more than one occasion that there was confusion in the beginning about the doors because some people described the patio door as the front door and some described the recessed door facing the carpark as the front door.

AIMHO

He did correct it, but it wasn't a misunderstanding because he admits in his second statement that he did indeed say that in his first statement; ''Despite what he said in his previous statements'' (10th May)

As he never mentioned front or back doors that isn't relevant, he just mentioned a 'key' and only one door had a key.

So he changed his account of how he entered the apartment at 9.05 pm.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 04:27:33 PM
I'm sure it is stated the patio door is only lockable from the inside, so there is no way a key is used to unlock it from the outside, therefore it was left unlocked.

If it was unlocked why did Gerry walk past the gate, up around the corner, along the passageway and unlock the main door with his key to get in?

In this way, at about 21.05 the witness came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked, [4th May]
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 04:35:16 PM
How does Matt say he gained entrance ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 04:49:44 PM
How does Matt say he gained entrance ?
From the place where he left Russell he had to go around the building to get into the McCanns.  So that means the patio door.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 19, 2017, 04:53:44 PM
He did correct it, but it wasn't a misunderstanding because he admits in his second statement that he did indeed say that in his first statement; ''Despite what he said in his previous statements'' (10th May)

As he never mentioned front or back doors that isn't relevant, he just mentioned a 'key' and only one door had a key.

So he changed his account of how he entered the apartment at 9.05 pm.

I disagree as there is no credible reason why Gerry should claim that he walked all the way round to the front door, in the full knowledge  that the patio door that was just a few feet away from him was open  (and he needed the loo).

That simply makes no sense.   But it does make sense that in that first interview when Gerry was hardly at his best and the PJ officer was not familiar with the layout of 5A that a mix-up occurred over which door Gerry meant.  We know there was a misunderstanding about the doors because the UK police officer mentioned it to JT  and suggested that to avoid a repetition of that error - the patio door should be referred to as the 'poolside' door and the other door as the 'roadside' door.

If the reason Gerry gave for correcting his statement had been of any importance or significance then IMO that reason would have been recorded in his statement.

Unless you can say what Gerry had to gain by deliberately lying about which door he used - them IMO it's obvious it was just a misunderstanding - due to the circumstances at the time. 

AIMHO

 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 19, 2017, 04:56:45 PM
I disagree as there is no credible reason why Gerry should claim that he walked all the way round to the front door, in the full knowledge  that the patio door that was just a few feet away from him was open  (and he needed the loo).

That simply makes no sense.   But it does make sense that in that first interview when Gerry was hardly at his best and the PJ officer was not familiar with the layout of 5A that a mix-up occurred over which door Gerry meant.  We know there was a misunderstanding about the doors because the UK police officer mentioned it to JT  and suggested that to avoid a repetition of that error - the patio door should be referred to as the 'poolside' door and the other door as the 'roadside' door.

If the reason Gerry gave for correcting his statement had been of any importance or significance then IMO that reason would have been recorded in his statement.

Unless you can say what Gerry had to gain by deliberately lying about which door he used - them IMO it's obvious it was just a misunderstanding - due to the circumstances at the time. 

AIMHO

There is no reason for Gerry to have lied about which door he used.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 04:58:17 PM
See my reply #32 above.  Either he is telling the truth and the patio door was unlocked, or he lied as part of some (highly implausible) cover-up - you choose!

No, I've no problem with that, thank you  8((()*/
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 05:02:45 PM
No, I've no problem with that, thank you  8((()*/
I have for when he offered to do the check on the McCanns kids he should have asked for the key, but he didn't, so that implies somehow he knew the patio door was unlocked without being told.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 19, 2017, 05:03:13 PM

 AIMHO means  'All in my honest opinion'  AFAIAC.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 05:04:49 PM
I have for when he offered to do the check on the McCanns kids he should have asked for the key, but he didn't, so that he implies somehow he knew the patio door was unlocked without being told.

No mention of any in this in his interview of the 4th , just that he entered the apartment.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 05:07:37 PM
No mention of any in this in his interview of the 4th , just that he entered the apartment.
Exactly; he didn't need keys otherwise there was more to say and he didn't say it.
But it still doesn't explain how he knew this.  Was it common knowledge among all those there?

Did John Hill and Silvia Batista know this too?  Were the McCanns putting their business reputation at risk and worse not asking for the babysitting service.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 05:42:49 PM
I have for when he offered to do the check on the McCanns kids he should have asked for the key, but he didn't, so that implies somehow he knew the patio door was unlocked without being told.
It would really help if you learned to read things carefully:
Matt Oldfield's Rog
4078 'And you said when you went in you went in through the patio door''
Reply 'Yeah'
 
4078 'Or the poolside door''
Reply 'Yeah'.
 
4078 'How did you know to go through there''
Reply 'Well Kate said that that one was open'.

 
4078 'And when did she say that''
Reply 'When I offered to go and, erm, go and look'.
4078 'Okay'.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 06:01:46 PM
This was well after the event of course. Plenty of time to have the old memory stimulated. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 19, 2017, 06:14:59 PM
He did correct it, but it wasn't a misunderstanding because he admits in his second statement that he did indeed say that in his first statement; ''Despite what he said in his previous statements'' (10th May)

As he never mentioned front or back doors that isn't relevant, he just mentioned a 'key' and only one door had a key.

So he changed his account of how he entered the apartment at 9.05 pm.

Despite what he said in a previous statement
Is not a quote from Gerry
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 06:16:03 PM
Yes, did they specifically state what it was   - i.e. between X & Y times ?

I'm suggesting that the time window is smaller than your 30 minutes, possibly nearer 15
15 minutes is ample time in which to enter an unlocked apartment, walk to the children's bedroom, pick up a sleeping child and leave the apartment again, I'm sure you'd agree.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 06:19:35 PM
I thought you had accepted that Matt was telling the truth?  Your comment above seems to imply otherwise.

Lets say I wasn't aware of the discrepancy at that time. I would tend to accept the details given in the earliest interview.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 06:21:06 PM
15 minutes is ample time in which to enter an unlocked apartment, walk to the children's bedroom, pick up a sleeping child and leave the apartment again, I'm sure you'd agree.

I would agree that 15 minutes would be long enough given favourable circumstances. Whether it happened like that remains to be seen.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 06:21:28 PM
Lets say I wasn't aware of the discrepancy at that time. I would tend to accept the details given in the earliest interview.
Oh.  So does he say the patio door was locked in the earlier interview?  No he doesn't.  So....
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 06:23:54 PM
I would agree that 15 minutes would be long enough given favourable circumstances. Whether it happened like that remains to be seen.
Right.  Well, there are some people on this forum who think that abduction is a highly implausible, illogical scenario, but now we have established that (in your view alone at least) there was opportunity. 

Well it's a start!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 06:26:31 PM
Right.  Well, there are some people on this forum who think that abduction is a highly implausible, illogical scenario, but now we have established that (in your view alone at least) there was opportunity. 

Well it's a start!

I never denied the possibility, so that's no breakthrough, I just don't accept that it is the only possibility.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 19, 2017, 06:33:45 PM
I disagree as there is no credible reason why Gerry should claim that he walked all the way round to the front door, in the full knowledge  that the patio door that was just a few feet away from him was open  (and he needed the loo).

That simply makes no sense.   But it does make sense that in that first interview when Gerry was hardly at his best and the PJ officer was not familiar with the layout of 5A that a mix-up occurred over which door Gerry meant.  We know there was a misunderstanding about the doors because the UK police officer mentioned it to JT  and suggested that to avoid a repetition of that error - the patio door should be referred to as the 'poolside' door and the other door as the 'roadside' door.

If the reason Gerry gave for correcting his statement had been of any importance or significance then IMO that reason would have been recorded in his statement.

Unless you can say what Gerry had to gain by deliberately lying about which door he used - them IMO it's obvious it was just a misunderstanding - due to the circumstances at the time. 

AIMHO

That's the point, Gerry didn't lie in his first statement. However between that statement and his subsequent one he realised that if he had used the main door he would have to have seen the open window so the claim had to be changed.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 06:42:50 PM
I disagree as there is no credible reason why Gerry should claim that he walked all the way round to the front door, in the full knowledge  that the patio door that was just a few feet away from him was open  (and he needed the loo).

That simply makes no sense.   But it does make sense that in that first interview when Gerry was hardly at his best and the PJ officer was not familiar with the layout of 5A that a mix-up occurred over which door Gerry meant.  We know there was a misunderstanding about the doors because the UK police officer mentioned it to JT  and suggested that to avoid a repetition of that error - the patio door should be referred to as the 'poolside' door and the other door as the 'roadside' door.

If the reason Gerry gave for correcting his statement had been of any importance or significance then IMO that reason would have been recorded in his statement.

Unless you can say what Gerry had to gain by deliberately lying about which door he used - them IMO it's obvious it was just a misunderstanding - due to the circumstances at the time. 

AIMHO

I agree there's no credible reason for Gerry to use the locked door if an unlocked door was nearer. The only reason he would use the locked door is if the other door was also locked. All the excuses about 'misunderstandings' are conjecture. The facts are in the statements and are not clarified therefore it can't be said that the patio door being open at 9.05 is a 'fact'.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 06:54:41 PM
Matt Oldfield confirmed the patio door was unlocked. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 19, 2017, 06:59:20 PM
I agree there's no credible reason for Gerry to use the locked door if an unlocked door was nearer. The only reason he would use the locked door is if the other door was also locked. All the excuses about 'misunderstandings' are conjecture. The facts are in the statements and are not clarified therefore it can't be said that the patio door being open at 9.05 is a 'fact'.

The most logical explanation is the statements are innaccurate
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 07:02:16 PM
Yes, did they specifically state what it was   - i.e. between X & Y times ?

I'm suggesting that the time window is smaller than your 30 minutes, possibly nearer 15

Where is this 15 minutes then?

2135: MO returns to restaurant table, by which time main courses are arriving or being eaten. MO tells JT that Evie unwell.
2140: JT returns to 5D to take over care of Evie from RJO.
2145: RJO returns to table to eat main course leaving JT in 5D.
2155: RMO asked time at table. RJO's main course arrives.
2200: (approx): KM leaves table to check children in 5A.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TIME_LINE_3_MAY_07.htm

Is it between 2145 and 2200 as in the group timeline? Those times are, of course, not guaranteed to be accurate; Russell's statement on 4th May differed widely;

At around 9.35/9.40, taking advantage of the lull [waiting pause] before being served with the first [main] course, the informant left the restaurant with Matthew to check the children. When he got there, his daughter **** was crying. He stayed in her bedroom with her. He supposes that Matthew checked his apartment. Matthew returned to the restaurant five minutes after leaving it. His partner came to take his place in ****'s bedroom around 15 minutes later after finishing dinner.

At around 9.55, he went back to the restaurant where his food had been waiting for 5 or 10 minutes. All the other adults had finished.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUSSELL-OBRIEN.htm

Here we have Matthew returning to the restaurant at 2140/45, Jane going back and Russell returning at 2155. Nothing can be deduced from the timeline because none of them could say with any accuracy what time anything happened.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 07:04:34 PM
Matt Oldfield confirmed the patio door was unlocked.

Maybe it was by the time he arrived. That has no bearing on the door's condition at 2105.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 07:05:52 PM
The most logical explanation is the statements are innaccurate

Why?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 07:06:00 PM
Maybe it was by the time he arrived. That has no bearing on the door's condition at 2105.
So the door was unlocked at the time of Matt's check, allowing time for an abductor to enter thereafter. Fine.  At least we can rule out the possibility of Madeleine plunging to her death before 9.05pm then!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 07:09:20 PM
So the door was unlocked at the time of Matt's check, allowing time for an abductor to enter thereafter. Fine.

Maybe.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 07:11:02 PM
Which leads to the conclusion that Tanner never saw Madeleine being carried away - as confirmed by SY, of course.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 07:13:08 PM
Maybe.
Surely not!  According to you there has never been an abduction theory that is plausible or logical so if the apartment was unlocked and there was a window of opportunity for an abductor to strike after Matt's check then your claim is looking less...er plausible. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 07:31:04 PM
Surely not!  According to you there has never been an abduction theory that is plausible or logical so if the apartment was unlocked and there was a window of opportunity for an abductor to strike after Matt's check then your claim is looking less...er plausible.

When someone can give me exact times for each check, verified by independent witnesses then there may be a window of opportunity. As no-one can do that no-one can claim the 'window' existed.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 07:42:05 PM
It would really help if you learned to read things carefully:
Matt Oldfield's Rog
4078 'And you said when you went in you went in through the patio door''
Reply 'Yeah'
 
4078 'Or the poolside door''
Reply 'Yeah'.
 
4078 'How did you know to go through there''
Reply 'Well Kate said that that one was open'.

 
4078 'And when did she say that''
Reply 'When I offered to go and, erm, go and look'.
4078 'Okay'.
They were very good questions by the interviewer, but as Jassie said  he has had plenty of time to offer that answer and it didn't come out without the prompting. I'm putting a question mark alongside that one.
I wonder if anyone can confirm that part of the conversation?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 07:55:02 PM
When someone can give me exact times for each check, verified by independent witnesses then there may be a window of opportunity. As no-one can do that no-one can claim the 'window' existed.
No matter when the checks occurred there will be time gaps between them.  Your argument seems pointless.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 07:59:07 PM
I never denied the possibility, so that's no breakthrough, I just don't accept that it is the only possibility.
We hardly know what others think so it is welcome to know what you are thinking.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 08:00:22 PM
That's the point, Gerry didn't lie in his first statement. However between that statement and his subsequent one he realised that if he had used the main door he would have to have seen the open window so the claim had to be changed.
That is the worst logic I've ever read.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 08:02:52 PM
I agree there's no credible reason for Gerry to use the locked door if an unlocked door was nearer. The only reason he would use the locked door is if the other door was also locked. All the excuses about 'misunderstandings' are conjecture. The facts are in the statements and are not clarified therefore it can't be said that the patio door being open at 9.05 is a 'fact'.
You mean closed but unlocked really don't you?  Open has the greater potential for Madeleine to have wandered.
Closing the door has the advantage of keeping the moths out.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 08:04:47 PM
Maybe it was by the time he arrived. That has no bearing on the door's condition at 2105.
How would Kate be able to tell him it was unlocked then if this was the case?  She would have needed to give him the keys for there was the uncertainty.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 08:24:10 PM
You mean closed but unlocked really don't you?  Open has the greater potential for Madeleine to have wandered.
Closing the door has the advantage of keeping the moths out.

I think that somewhere it is described as being slightly open so that fingers could be inserted to open it further, there being no handle on the outside.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 08:31:21 PM
I think that somewhere it is described as being slightly open so that fingers could be inserted to open it further, there being no handle on the outside.
Is that true?  Then Kate needed to explain that to Matt as well. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 08:31:31 PM
No matter when the checks occurred there will be time gaps between them.  Your argument seems pointless.

As we don't know with any accuracy what checks were done and when there's no point in trying to guess when these gaps occurred or their length. That's the point I'm making. No-one can say there was a fifteen minute gap at such a time, it'd impossible.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 08:35:37 PM
As we don't know with any accuracy what checks were done and when there's no point in trying to guess when these gaps occurred or their length. That's the point I'm making. No-one can say there was a fifteen minute gap at such a time, it'd impossible.
Do you agree that Matt and Russell go together? around 9:30 and Kate does her check around 10:00, all the other movements would be incidental to someone planning an abduction, so there has to be a gap between those two checks.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 08:36:04 PM
You mean closed but unlocked really don't you?  Open has the greater potential for Madeleine to have wandered.
Closing the door has the advantage of keeping the moths out.

I mean the patio door would logically have been locked if Gerry entered with his key at 2105.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 08:42:27 PM
I mean the patio door would logically have been locked if Gerry entered with his key at 2105.
I'm totally lost in all your arguments now.  There is no logical connection between the front door and the back door.
"the patio door would logically have been locked if Gerry entered with his key at 2105".  The use of the front door has nothing to do with the status of the back door.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 08:46:06 PM
Do you agree that Matt and Russell go together? around 9:30 and Kate does her check around 10:00, all the other movements would be incidental to someone planning an abduction, so there has to be a gap between those two checks.

Matt returns to bar - after 9.30
Jane goes to apartment - maybe 9.35 - 9.40 - whenever she had managed to scoff her food down
Russell returns to bar - maybe 9.45 -9.50 - after discussion with Jane regarding condition of child.
Kate goes apartment - 10.00 - abductor has to be gone & well clear by this time.

All unpredictable movements which tend to shrink usable duration of window as any abductor would need to ensure that no one was about when he wanted to leave.
All based on timings given by various players.

Not impossible, but very tight. He sure had the devil's luck if it happened.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 08:47:57 PM
I'm totally lost in all your arguments now.  There is no logical connection between the front door and the back door.
"the patio door would logically have been locked if Gerry entered with his key at 2105".  The use of the front door has nothing to do with the status of the back door.

Well it does in that had the patio door been open Gerry wouldn't need to use key in other door as he said.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 19, 2017, 08:50:33 PM
I'm totally lost in all your arguments now.  There is no logical connection between the front door and the back door.
"the patio door would logically have been locked if Gerry entered with his key at 2105".  The use of the front door has nothing to do with the status of the back door.

Would you pass an unlocked door and walk as far again to enter a locked door with your key? That would be illogical, you would use the nearest door if it wasn't locked.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 08:53:03 PM
Matt returns to bar - after 9.30
Jane goes to apartment - maybe 9.35 - 9.40 - whenever she had managed to scoff her food down
Russell returns to bar - maybe 9.45 -9.50 - after discussion with Jane regarding condition of child.
Kate goes apartment - 10.00 - abductor has to be gone & well clear by this time.

All unpredictable movements which tend to shrink usable duration of window as any abductor would need to ensure that no one was about when he wanted to leave.
All based on timings given by various players.

Not impossible, but very tight. He sure had the devil's luck if it happened.
True but Jane Russell movements - abductor would just wait a moment till they go inside their own apartments and then go back to business.


Well it does in that had the patio door been open Gerry wouldn't need to use key in other door as he said.
Only if he knew that Kate had left it open.  It could have been news to him too when Kate said the door was unlocked to Matt.

Would you pass an unlocked door and walk as far again to enter a locked door with your key? That would be illogical, you would use the nearest door if it wasn't locked.
You might if you didn't know it was unlocked.  If Gerry thought it was locked he might go the long way around.  But he does change his statement so there is a difficult argument to explain that in logic.  Some say he just wanted to make out that they left the apartment more secure by locking it.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 08:58:46 PM
True but Jane Russell movements - abductor would just wait a moment till they go inside their own apartments and then go back to business.

Only if he knew that Kate had left it open.  It could have been news to him too when Kate said the door was unlocked to Matt.
You might if you didn't know it was unlocked.  If Gerry thought it was locked he might go the long way around.

He would be uncertain if Jane was staying or quickly returning, so he would wait a while to make sure all was clear. These interruptions all eat into the available time.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 09:02:43 PM
He would be uncertain if Jane was staying or quickly returning, so he would wait a while to make sure all was clear. These interruptions all eat into the available time.
The best time to go for it would have been as soon as Jane had gone into her apartment, for no matter how long you wait you can't predict when Jane was going to reappear.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 09:05:56 PM
The best time to go for it would have been as soon as Jane had gone into her apartment, for no matter how long you wait you can't predict when Jane was going to reappear.

Yes, but then he would be likely to walk straight into Russell who was going for his belated meal.

That's why I said he had the luck of the devil to totally avoid all the passing traffic that evening.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 09:09:21 PM
Yes, but then he would be likely to walk straight into Russell who was going for his belated meal.

That's why I said he had the luck of the devil to totally avoid all the passing traffic that evening.
Well if he took that time there was a 5 minute gap between Russell returning , i.e. heaps of time to get away.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 19, 2017, 09:13:54 PM
Well if he took that time there was a 5 minute gap between Russell returning , i.e. heaps of time to get away.

All these times are guestimates provided by the players of this little drama.
We don't for certain just how much time there was so it is impossible to say 'plenty of time'
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 09:15:38 PM
All these times are guestimates provided by the players of this little drama.
We don't for certain just how much time there was so it is impossible to say 'plenty of time'
True for if it didn't happen then he could have waited till Russell cleared the scene.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 09:41:47 PM
When someone can give me exact times for each check, verified by independent witnesses then there may be a window of opportunity. As no-one can do that no-one can claim the 'window' existed.

Someone has already claimed a window exists - Andy Redwood.  Do you know better?

Is it your belief that there may have been a member of the Tapas group in or adjacent to apartment 5a for every minute of the 30 minutes between 9.30 pm and 10pm? 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 09:45:56 PM
Someone has already claimed a window exists - Andy Redwood.  Do you know better?

Is it your belief that there may have been a member of the Tapas group in or adjacent to apartment 5a for every minute of the 30 minutes between 9.30 pm and 10pm?
It wouldn't have mattered if they were, the job could still proceed.   The tenants would have needed to be outside and on the right side of the building to notice anything.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 19, 2017, 10:52:47 PM
There is no evidence an "abductor" was in the apartment.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 10:58:48 PM
There is no evidence an "abductor" was in the apartment.
But if there is an unlocked door to enter and exit from what evidence would you need to leave.  I recall there are unidentified hairs so that is possible evidence left behind.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 19, 2017, 11:03:03 PM
A plausible, logical theory of abduction does not require proof of an abductor.  If there was proof of an abductor it wouldn't be a theory.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 11:14:16 PM
A plausible, logical theory of abduction does not require proof of an abductor.  If there was proof of an abductor it wouldn't be a theory.
It would be a fact.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 11:27:27 PM
I spent some minutes thinking through different indicators that an abduction occurred and everything you can think of could have be faked or have an alternative cause.
The PJ were waiting for a ransom demand, and there seem to have been some demands.  Were they all considered hoaxes?
I don't know if this qualifies "
1901  Information about anonymous phone call received by OC employee.
Anonymous calls regarding Madeleine's disappearance  2007.06.24
07 Processos Vol VII, Page 1901
07_VOLUME_VI1a_Page_1901
 ervice Information

Date: 2007.06.24

To: The Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation
From: Inspector Joao Correia


RE: Telephone call received by this police station


I am writing write to inform you that today, at 12H00, this police station was contacted by telephone by Maria Fernandes, an employee of the ''Ocean Club", situated in Praia da Luz- Lagos, who told us the following: She became aware that one of her colleagues, Paula Cristina Vieira, had received a message on her mobile phone, (where she could hear a child speaking in English) and in which someone asked for a million pounds.

She adds that the message was received on the 22nd of the current month and year and that the message is still available on her colleague's mobile.

She was asked to save the message so that the relevant inquiries to the investigation could be made

For your information.

Signed

Inspector
Joao Correia"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ANONYMOUS_CALLS.htm#ac1901
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 11:53:15 PM
Even this demand doesn't really meet the criteria:
"
2716 - Email re sighting in Morocco
12 Apensos 12 Page 2716
 apenso5_vol_12_p2716
 

To Portimao DIC

Forwarded by Olegario da Sousa

(From French)


From: (xxxxxxxxxxx)

Subject: She's in Morocco

Date: 13th August 2007

The little girl is in Morocco in a town called Beni Mellal, which is about 100 km from Marrakesh, with a non-Moroccan man (tourist).

I saw them at a Beni Mellal monument.

He has a Mercedes 190 car.

If you want more information phone ***************** and come with 500000$ for him who will lead you to her.

I swear this is no joke.

I work and have no time for jokes.

You have another choice and that is not to come and never to see poor little Madeleine again."
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 19, 2017, 11:56:49 PM
This account of a ransom demand makes you think:
"
1922  Information 5 July 2007 re: emails received by Gerry and Kate McCann from Holland
07 Processos Vol VII Page 1922
07_VOLUME_VI1a_Page_1922
 
Date: 2007/07/05

Service Information

To: The Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation, G. Amaral

From: Ricardo Paiva

Subject: Emails about the whereabouts of Madeleine McCann

I compliance with your instructions, during the course of last week, the undersigned officer went to Praia da Luz to offer support and to accompany the couple Gerry and Kate McCann, parents of missing Madeleine McCann, following various emails received by the couple during the last two weeks coming from Holland, sent from the email address AMSTERDAMVU@gnail.com reporting supposed information about the whereabouts of the girl as well as about the identity and location of the abductors and referring that the author was prepared to provide this information in exchange for a large financial compensation.

The stress and anxiety of the McCann couple was visible and notable with regard to the situation, they replied quickly to the emails, which, from the beginning they believed to be genuine, given the fact that Gerry had lived in Holland and because of this the couple attributed greater importance to the emails, both expressing their conviction that the information in the emails would certainly help them to get their daughter back, even if it where necessary to spend the sum of 2 million euros demanded by the author in exchange for information about Madeleine McCann's whereabouts.

I bring this to your attention.

Signed

Inspector Ricardo Paiva
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 20, 2017, 06:21:34 AM
Someone has already claimed a window exists - Andy Redwood.  Do you know better?

Is it your belief that there may have been a member of the Tapas group in or adjacent to apartment 5a for every minute of the 30 minutes between 9.30 pm and 10pm?

Has he?

The timeline can't be relied on because the times are approximate. There are indications that the alarm may have been earlier than the T9 said. The times in the timeline are not facts.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 20, 2017, 07:41:07 AM
Has he?

The timeline can't be relied on because the times are approximate. There are indications that the alarm may have been earlier than the T9 said. The times in the timeline are not facts.

I find that all of the OC and Mark Warner staff do not mention the period between 9:00 and 10:00 at all. 

There are many more inconsistencies in the MW and OC staff statements compared to the few in the T9.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 20, 2017, 08:16:29 AM
Has he?

The timeline can't be relied on because the times are approximate. There are indications that the alarm may have been earlier than the T9 said. The times in the timeline are not facts.
Yes he has, how many times is it necessary for me to provide this cite before you accept it?

Redwood: "Yes, I mean, you know, we have conducted a forensic analysis of the timeline, and there is clearly opportunity there - for Madeleine McCann to have been removed from that apartment alive - and it is our belief, as experienced investigators - on the evidence, that, um that you know, that that, is a criminal act - and that has been, you know, undertaken by... by...a stranger, and so from that - she’s… and there are other cases around the world, as you know where, many years later, people have been taken and been found alive".
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 20, 2017, 10:30:58 AM
A plausible, logical theory of abduction does not require proof of an abductor.  If there was proof of an abductor it wouldn't be a theory.

To quote The Killer..................think about it.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 20, 2017, 10:58:53 AM
To quote The Killer..................think about it.
To quote the abductor ........... run with it.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 20, 2017, 12:16:52 PM
There is no evidence an "abductor" was in the apartment.

There may well have been evidence but it wasn't found
The bed sheets were not properly examined for DNA and sent to the laundry days later
That is appalling police work and cannot be defended
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 20, 2017, 12:27:04 PM
Yes he has, how many times is it necessary for me to provide this cite before you accept it?

Redwood: "Yes, I mean, you know, we have conducted a forensic analysis of the timeline, and there is clearly opportunity there - for Madeleine McCann to have been removed from that apartment alive - and it is our belief, as experienced investigators - on the evidence, that, um that you know, that that, is a criminal act - and that has been, you know, undertaken by... by...a stranger, and so from that - she’s… and there are other cases around the world, as you know where, many years later, people have been taken and been found alive".

The timeline that was never verified? The timeline that had different times for when something happened depending which witness statement you happened to be reading at the time? According to the statements Gerry McCann could have gone to check his children as early as 2100 and returned as late as 2130. The timeline isn't a cohesive, forensically examinable narrative whatever Redwood proclaimed.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 20, 2017, 12:37:20 PM
The timeline that was never verified? The timeline that had different times for when something happened depending which witness statement you happened to be reading at the time? According to the statements Gerry McCann could have gone to check his children as early as 2100 and returned as late as 2130. The timeline isn't a cohesive, forensically examinable narrative whatever Redwood proclaimed.

So you think Redwood doesn't know what he's talking about
How predictable
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 20, 2017, 01:10:41 PM
The timeline that was never verified? The timeline that had different times for when something happened depending which witness statement you happened to be reading at the time? According to the statements Gerry McCann could have gone to check his children as early as 2100 and returned as late as 2130. The timeline isn't a cohesive, forensically examinable narrative whatever Redwood proclaimed.
So we get to the crux of it  - you think you know better than the professionals charged with leading the investigation.  I thought as much.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 20, 2017, 02:45:17 PM
There may well have been evidence but it wasn't found
The bed sheets were not properly examined for DNA and sent to the laundry days later
That is appalling police work and cannot be defended

So if in doubt blame the Portuguese or guess.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 20, 2017, 02:48:25 PM
To quote the abductor ........... run with it.

Yeah OK then. After eight pages of rabbiting no one has established the first causal set. Real progress that is.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 20, 2017, 06:06:09 PM
Yeah OK then. After eight pages of rabbiting no one has established the first causal set. Real progress that is.
Did you offer an example of a casual set?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 20, 2017, 06:12:59 PM
So if in doubt blame the Portuguese or guess.

Im stating a fact.....the forensic examination of the crime sceene was pathetically poor
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 20, 2017, 07:25:48 PM
Im stating a fact.....the forensic examination of the crime sceene was pathetically poor

Provide a cite that confirms that fact then.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 20, 2017, 07:31:23 PM
Provide a cite that confirms that fact then.

1 The crime-scene was not sealed off (indeed, hired out as a holiday apartment after the crime).

2 Madeleine's DNA was not secured until 3 months after the crime.

3. The woman who took finger prints from the apartments was not wearing gloves and had nothing covering her hair.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 20, 2017, 07:35:22 PM
1 The crime-scene was not sealed off (indeed, hired out as a holiday apartment after the crime).

2 Madeleine's DNA was not secured until 3 months after the crime.

3. The woman who took finger prints from the apartments was not wearing gloves and had nothing covering her hair.
#3 is close but even that does not warrant the description "pathetically poor".  The other two are also debatable.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 20, 2017, 07:50:35 PM
1 The crime-scene was not sealed off (indeed, hired out as a holiday apartment after the crime).

2 Madeleine's DNA was not secured until 3 months after the crime.

3. The woman who took finger prints from the apartments was not wearing gloves and had nothing covering her hair.
The scene was sealed off at the time the McCanns relocated.  Forensic examinations were conducted.  Then the apartment was returned to the use chosen by the owner, holiday rental to provide her with income.  It's only in fiction that examined incident scenes are sealed off for evermore.

Madeleine's DNA had to come from a source not in Portugal.  Perhaps the Portuguese should have bashed the McCanns or Leicestershire police for a tardy delivery.

Irene Trovão left a single hair within 5A, and it was identified as hers by the Portuguese authorities.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 20, 2017, 08:01:06 PM
The scene was sealed off at the time the McCanns relocated.  Forensic examinations were conducted.  Then the apartment was returned to the use chosen by the owner, holiday rental to provide her with income.  It's only in fiction that examined incident scenes are sealed off for evermore.

Madeleine's DNA had to come from a source not in Portugal.  Perhaps the Portuguese should have bashed the McCanns or Leicestershire police for a tardy delivery.

Irene Trovão left a single hair within 5A, and it was identified as hers by the Portuguese authorities.

In England, a crime-scene would be sealed off at least until all forensic examinations had been completed.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 20, 2017, 08:05:33 PM
The scene was sealed off at the time the McCanns relocated.  Forensic examinations were conducted.  Then the apartment was returned to the use chosen by the owner, holiday rental to provide her with income.  It's only in fiction that examined incident scenes are sealed off for evermore.

Madeleine's DNA had to come from a source not in Portugal.  Perhaps the Portuguese should have bashed the McCanns or Leicestershire police for a tardy delivery.

Irene Trovão left a single hair within 5A, and it was identified as hers by the Portuguese authorities.

I think it would be accepted that the English forensic analysis of the apartment was much more thorough than the Portuguese; but came 3 months after the crime, and after the apartment had already been let out to other holiday-makers.

What the English did (3 months after the crime) is what ought to have been done in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 20, 2017, 08:11:00 PM
In England, a crime-scene would be sealed off at least until all forensic examinations had been completed.
The idea that cadaver dogs were needed was an afterthought. The cadaver dog alerts have caused confusion ever since.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 20, 2017, 08:16:31 PM
The idea that cadaver dogs were needed was an afterthought. The cadaver dog alerts have caused confusion ever since.

Harrison was handed a brief to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered and, accordingly, recommended the canine resources he felt right to investigate that scenario.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 20, 2017, 08:20:09 PM
Harrison was handed a brief to investigate that Madeleine had been murdered and, accordingly, recommended the canine resources he felt right to investigate that scenario.
Could that use of cadaver dogs in the apartment be described as an afterthought?   It seems to be after Danie Krugel had been to PDL.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 20, 2017, 08:42:15 PM
So we get to the crux of it  - you think you know better than the professionals charged with leading the investigation.  I thought as much.

They may have a different timeline than the one the Portuguese were given. They may have uncovered witnesses that stood, watched, and noted down the exact movements and times of the T9. If they didn't verify it by such additional information the times given were guesses by the witnesses. No matter how closely it was examined they were still examining guesses. I don't care how expert these professionals charged with assisting the Portuguese were, they can't make assumptions from something which was guessed at in the first place.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 20, 2017, 08:47:35 PM
I think it would be accepted that the English forensic analysis of the apartment was much more thorough than the Portuguese; but came 3 months after the crime, and after the apartment had already been let out to other holiday-makers.

What the English did (3 months after the crime) is what ought to have been done in the immediate aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance.

What English forensic analysis?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 20, 2017, 08:49:16 PM
What English forensic analysis?

Have you not read John Lowe's report?

Or the work that went in to forwarding the material he was provided to work with?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 20, 2017, 08:55:06 PM
Provide a cite that confirms that fact then.

the fact that the bedsheets were sent to the laundry has been produced many times here....have you not seem it...

from photos none of teh officers wore protective suits....the car was driven by an officer without a protectve suit

the crime scenne was not sealed
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 20, 2017, 08:59:28 PM
the fact that the bedsheets were sent to the laundry has been produced many times here....have you not seem it...

from photos none of teh officers wore protective suits....the car was driven by an officer without a protectve suit

the crime scenne was not sealed

The woman who took finger prints and had long, flowing hair completely uncovered.

John Stalker commented that the approach to forensic-gathering transported him back to policing of the 70s
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 20, 2017, 09:01:16 PM
In England, a crime-scene would be sealed off at least until all forensic examinations had been completed.
The incident didn't happen in England.

From the time that the McCanns were relocated and all forensic examinations had been completed, was it or was it not sealed off?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 20, 2017, 09:06:10 PM
They may have a different timeline than the one the Portuguese were given. They may have uncovered witnesses that stood, watched, and noted down the exact movements and times of the T9. If they didn't verify it by such additional information the times given were guesses by the witnesses. No matter how closely it was examined they were still examining guesses. I don't care how expert these professionals charged with assisting the Portuguese were, they can't make assumptions from something which was guessed at in the first place.
I think they can and I think they are far better equipped to do so and to know what's what than you are.  They don't just look at the times people give for when things happened but look at how each action interlinks with other known actions and events.  It's compex but when woven together a reasonably accurate timelime can be created.  There was certainly a window of opportunity for an abductor to strike, no doubt about it.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 20, 2017, 09:08:38 PM
Have you not read John Lowe's report?

Or the work that went in to forwarding the material he was provided to work with?

Oh, you mean the forensic collections arising from the English dog alerts? The ones taken because  death was suspected? I thought you meant they did a similar investigation to the Portuguese one, who were looking for evidence of an intruder.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 20, 2017, 09:09:22 PM
The incident didn't happen in England.

From the time that the McCanns were relocated and all forensic examinations had been completed, was it or was it not sealed off?

There was some forensic work done.  I don't dispute that.  But the English forensic sweep was more thorough.

I readily acknowledge (and always have) that a great deal of (genuinely) fine work was put in by Portuguese police on the ground.  But I think that the approach to the initial forensic sweep was not the best.

Not taking cuddle-cat for forensic analysis was one thing.  Portugal has a good forensic laboratory, but even the best laboratory is only as good as the material it is provided to work with.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 20, 2017, 09:10:28 PM
The incident didn't happen in England.

From the time that the McCanns were relocated and all forensic examinations had been completed, was it or was it not sealed off?
in the UK the bed sheets would not have been sent to the laundry
officers would have worn protective suits
5a will DEFINITELY have been contaminated by the portuguese police as will the McCanns hire car
All we need is one of those policemen to have been in contact with a cadaver....there is no record of this being checked
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 20, 2017, 09:34:53 PM
the fact that the bedsheets were sent to the laundry has been produced many times here....have you not seem it...

from photos none of teh officers wore protective suits....the car was driven by an officer without a protectve suit

the crime scenne was not sealed

I seem to recall reading that the scene had been "rummaged" before the GNR arrived.
However the issue I raised first off is that there is no evidence of an "abductor" having been in the apartment.
You have failed to address that specific point with arguments along the line of "well if a sewing machine had bigger wheels it might be a car".
Nuff said.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 20, 2017, 09:46:20 PM
I think they can and I think they are far better equipped to do so and to know what's what than you are.  They don't just look at the times people give for when things happened but look at how each action interlinks with other known actions and events.  It's compex but when woven together a reasonably accurate timelime can be created.  There was certainly a window of opportunity for an abductor to strike, no doubt about it.

Had they interviewed the restaurant staff and found out the time it took to serve the meals they might have learned a lot, because the T9 constantly referred to the different courses. But they didn't. What other known events could they have looked at? If Bridget O'Donnell was correct her husband got in at 9.30. Did they time how long it took to reach his apartment after he left Gerry? I doubt it, but it couldn't have been much more than 5 minutes, so did he meet Gerry at 9.20 at the earliest? What was Gerry doing in his apartment for 15-20 minutes I wonder?  Why did Russell do another check just as/after Jane returned?

The timeline raises a lot of questions that needed to be clarified before it was possible to infer anything. Do you have cites upholding your belief in the powers of these experts?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 20, 2017, 09:50:03 PM
Had they interviewed the restaurant staff and found out the time it took to serve the meals they might have learned a lot, because the T9 constantly referred to the different courses. But they didn't. What other known events could they have looked at? If Bridget O'Donnell was correct her husband got in at 9.30. Did they time how long it took to reach his apartment after he left Gerry? I doubt it, but it couldn't have been much more than 5 minutes, so did he meet Gerry at 9.20 at the earliest? What was Gerry doing in his apartment for 15-20 minutes I wonder?  Why did Russell do another check just as/after Jane returned?

The timeline raises a lot of questions that needed to be clarified before it was possible to infer anything. Do you have cites upholding your belief in the powers of these experts?
You are in trouble if you use JW as a baseline in your timings.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 20, 2017, 09:50:48 PM
Had they interviewed the restaurant staff and found out the time it took to serve the meals they might have learned a lot, because the T9 constantly referred to the different courses. But they didn't. What other known events could they have looked at? If Bridget O'Donnell was correct her husband got in at 9.30. Did they time how long it took to reach his apartment after he left Gerry? I doubt it, but it couldn't have been much more than 5 minutes, so did he meet Gerry at 9.20 at the earliest? What was Gerry doing in his apartment for 15-20 minutes I wonder?  Why did Russell do another check just as/after Jane returned?

The timeline raises a lot of questions that needed to be clarified before it was possible to infer anything. Do you have cites upholding your belief in the powers of these experts?
LOL.  You want a cite for my opinion?  Erm....  Do you have a cite that the Met don't know how to forensically examine a timeline?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 21, 2017, 08:15:54 AM
LOL.  You want a cite for my opinion?  Erm....  Do you have a cite that the Met don't know how to forensically examine a timeline?

I'm sure theres articles or stories around telling how police have solved a case by working on a timeline. I read something that said it's a key part of any investigation, especially when verified. Make an effort to justify your opinion Alfie.

The statements tell me that this timeline can't be verified because of the lack of witnesses, and I have quoted from them. However expert they are the Met can't verify the timeline due to this lack of witnesses.

None of the witnesses there reported any women leaving the table, for example, although one witness mentioned Kate checking when she didn't. The timeline is an unverified story.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 21, 2017, 08:38:25 AM
I'm sure theres articles or stories around telling how police have solved a case by working on a timeline. I read something that said it's a key part of any investigation, especially when verified. Make an effort to justify your opinion Alfie.

The statements tell me that this timeline can't be verified because of the lack of witnesses, and I have quoted from them. However expert they are the Met can't verify the timeline due to this lack of witnesses.

None of the witnesses there reported any women leaving the table, for example, although one witness mentioned Kate checking when she didn't. The timeline is an unverified story.
There are numerous witnesses, however just because you take the position of disbelieving them all doesn't mean that the Met shares your view.  Most timelines rely on information from memory and when there is input from a number of sources there are bound to be discrepancies.  The Met use their experience and tools at their disposal to come up with as accurate a timeline as possible.  OK, you don't accept that, your choice.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 21, 2017, 09:01:53 AM
Of course there is a plausible logical theory for abduction and it's laughable that some posters here are going to such lengths to try and pretend there isn't
Because there isn't absolute proof of abduction doesn't mean it didn't happen
It's odds on the most probable explanation of what happened to maddie
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 21, 2017, 09:12:25 AM
Going back to forensics, I've used this example before, and I think it bears repeating:

From the Portuguese scientific laboratory:

Quote
To: Police Scientific Laboratory
Lisbon

5th June 2007

Subject: Sending of Pyjamas

The present inquiry investigates the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on 3rd May 2007. I am herewith delivering to the Police Scientific Laboratory a pair of girl's pyjamas.

The Pyjamas are from Marks and Spencers, size 2 to 3 years -97 cm.

The pyjamas are composed of two pieces: camisole type without buttons and half sleeves, pink with designs, letters and tracing in white with (small) floral patterns, the right pyjama bottom leg has a design (smaller size) which is identical to that of the camisole.

The pyjamas being sent are 'equal' in make, model, size, colours and designs as well as presumably the texture, to those the little girl was wearing at the time of her disappearance. The article sent serves for eventual comparisons with fibres collected by the competent officers of the Police Scientific Lab, within the scope of the current investigation.

With compliments

Signed

The Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation

Goncalo Amaral

And the bewildered response of the laboratory:

Quote
1723 to 1725  Letter 15 March 2007 from LPC to PJ Portimao asking what should be done with the pyjamas there having been no fibres collected during the Inquiry
07 Processos Vol VII Page 1723 to 1725
07_VOLUME_VI1a_Page_1723
 Letter
To: The Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation

Date: 2007/03/15 (sic)

Ref: NUIPC 201/07 GALGS

Your communication: 2007/06/05

Ref no. 15971 Reg Correspondence 6429/07

Subject: Information

With reference to the abovementioned letter and in compliance with the despatch, we request you to provide us with information with regard to what should be done with the material sent, given that in this Scientific Police Laboratory there are no fibres that have been collected within the scope of the investigation mentioned above.
With compliments.

PP The Director of the SPL

Armando Santos
(Haed of Sector)
07 Processos Vol VII Page 1724
 also Outros Apensos I, Vol I Page 33
07_VOLUME_VI1a_Page_1724

Amaral repeats:
 
Quote
Letter

To: Scientific Police Laboratory

Date: 5th June 2007

Subject: Sending of Pyjamas

The present inquiry investigates the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on 3rd May 2007 from P da L.

By means of this note I am sending a set of child's pyjamas to the Scientific Police Laboratory.

The pyjamas are of Marks $ Spencers make and size 2/3 years, 97 cm.

The pyjamas are composed of two pieces, a camisole without buttons and half length sleeves, pink in colour with designs and letters and white trousers with floral motifs (small), on the right leg there is a design (smaller size) that is the same as the design on the camisole.

The pyjamas being sent are 'equal' in make, model, size, colours and designs and presumably texture, as those the girl was wearing at the moment of her disappearance.

The article sent serves for eventual comparison with 'fibres' collected during the competent examinations carried out by staff from the SPL, within this inquiry.

Compliments.

G. Amaral

(Note: there is handwriting over the text which I can't fully make out).
 
07 Processos Vol II Page 1725
 also Outros Apensos I, Vol I Page 34
07_VOLUME_VI1a_Page_1725
 
Handwritten)

Examinations Carried Out

BG - 200708360

8359
8357
7143

CR/L - 200708272

8271
8270
8269
8268
7357
7356
7116

What's to say?

The laboratory gave up.

In the Cipriano case, a fridge said to have been used to store Joana's body was identified but never forensically examined.

Had it, actually, been used to store a body, it would have been teeming with that person's DNA.

In court, photographs of tools, said to have been used to dismember Joana's body were produced. 

The tools themselves, had they actually been used for that purpose, again, would have been teeming with Joana's DNA.

Returning to the Madeleine investigation, Kate was roundly excoriated on-line for washing cuddle-cat.  Cuddle-cat (conceivably) might have yielded forensic clues and certainly should have been taken in the initial Portuguese forensic sweep.  But it never was.  3 months later was too late.

I think it fair to say that the Portuguese approach to forensic work in the aftermath of a crime is not as thorough as the British.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 21, 2017, 10:52:23 AM
Going back to forensics, I've used this example before, and I think it bears repeating:

From the Portuguese scientific laboratory:

And the bewildered response of the laboratory:

Amaral repeats:
 
What's to say?

The laboratory gave up.

In the Cipriano case, a fridge said to have been used to store Joana's body was identified but never forensically examined.

Had it, actually, been used to store a body, it would have been teeming with that person's DNA.

In court, photographs of tools, said to have been used to dismember Joana's body were produced. 

The tools themselves, had they actually been used for that purpose, again, would have been teeming with Joana's DNA.

Returning to the Madeleine investigation, Kate was roundly excoriated on-line for washing cuddle-cat.  Cuddle-cat (conceivably) might have yielded forensic clues and certainly should have been taken in the initial Portuguese forensic sweep.  But it never was.  3 months later was too late.

I think it fair to say that the Portuguese approach to forensic work in the aftermath of a crime is not as thorough as the British.

Cuddlecat was deemed to have no forensic significance.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 21, 2017, 10:58:14 AM
Going back to forensics, I've used this example before, and I think it bears repeating:

From the Portuguese scientific laboratory:

And the bewildered response of the laboratory:

Amaral repeats:
 
What's to say?

The laboratory gave up.

In the Cipriano case, a fridge said to have been used to store Joana's body was identified but never forensically examined.

Had it, actually, been used to store a body, it would have been teeming with that person's DNA.

In court, photographs of tools, said to have been used to dismember Joana's body were produced. 

The tools themselves, had they actually been used for that purpose, again, would have been teeming with Joana's DNA.

Returning to the Madeleine investigation, Kate was roundly excoriated on-line for washing cuddle-cat.  Cuddle-cat (conceivably) might have yielded forensic clues and certainly should have been taken in the initial Portuguese forensic sweep.  But it never was.  3 months later was too late.

I think it fair to say that the Portuguese approach to forensic work in the aftermath of a crime is not as thorough as the British.

Also the Portuguese forensic department said they should have had Madeleine's bedding [I think they should have had the twins bedding too]   they said they might have found evidence on the bedding.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 21, 2017, 11:17:26 AM
Also the Portuguese forensic department said they should have had Madeleine's bedding [I think they should have had the twins bedding too]   they said they might have found evidence on the bedding.
Isn't this just due that they had not considered an abduction. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 21, 2017, 11:23:43 AM
Isn't this just due that they had not considered an abduction.

If they hadn't considered an abduction why test the bed for sedative?   Why check the window for prints?   Why say
there was no evidence anyone had trodden on the bed?

They messed up the forensics.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 21, 2017, 11:38:46 AM
If they hadn't considered an abduction why test the bed for sedative?   Why check the window for prints?   Why say
there was no evidence anyone had trodden on the bed?

They messed up the forensics.
We had a thread about the use of sedatives and no one brought up that they tested the bed for sedatives.
The window didn't they only find Kate's prints.
No footprints on the bed - what did that suggest?

None of this proves they even considered an abduction occurred.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 21, 2017, 11:59:52 AM
If they hadn't considered an abduction why test the bed for sedative?   Why check the window for prints?   Why say
there was no evidence anyone had trodden on the bed?

They messed up the forensics.

I disagree, the indications were that the window held no forensic significance.  Clearly nobody had climbed through it and entered the bedroom.  That raised the question as to why the shutter was up and the window open.  Maybe Kate McCann in sheer panic opened them to look outside when she found Maddie gone and has a temporary amnesia or transient memory loss. Memory loss resulting from emotional shock or trauma is called psychogenic or dissociative amnesia.  Remember also that consumption of alcohol increases this phenomena. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 21, 2017, 12:14:50 PM
I disagree, the indications were that the window held no forensic significance.  Clearly nobody had climbed through it and entered the bedroom.  That raised the question as to why the shutter was up and the window open.  Maybe Kate McCann in sheer panic opened them to look outside when she found Maddie gone and has a temporary amnesia or transient memory loss. Memory loss resulting from emotional shock or trauma is called psychogenic or dissociative amnesia.  Remember also that consumption of alcohol increases this phenomena.

But Kate knew it was an abduction because the window and shutters were open.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 21, 2017, 12:15:04 PM
Cuddlecat was deemed to have no forensic significance.

grime was clear he considered that the dog alerted to cuddle cat....yet it wasnt even tested...bizarre...what a load of BS the alerts were
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 21, 2017, 12:22:21 PM
Was this before or after he was washed?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 21, 2017, 01:44:19 PM
But Kate knew it was an abduction because the window and shutters were open.
exactly
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 21, 2017, 02:28:15 PM
Of course there is a plausible logical theory for abduction and it's laughable that some posters here are going to such lengths to try and pretend there isn't
Because there isn't absolute proof of abduction doesn't mean it didn't happen
It's odds on the most probable explanation of what happened to maddie

OK show us the maths and full SP then.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: sadie on January 21, 2017, 04:04:07 PM
grime was clear he considered that the dog alerted to cuddle cat....yet it wasnt even tested...bizarre...what a load of BS the alerts were
and anyone who examies the video will soon realise that Grime was totally wrong on that. 

Eddie did NOT alert to cCat but to the pile of papers/ folders on top of the cupboard
Additionally he had already played with cCat without alerting. 
I can sort of understand Grime not realizing that Eddie was alerting to the ?folders on top of the cupboard
But forgetting that prior to that, Eddie had played with cCat, even tossing him in the air, and not alerting then, was a big BOO BOO

IMHO.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 21, 2017, 05:53:19 PM
This thread must be somekind of record.
10 pages before it is sidelined up the Dogs, Amaral and Grime dead end by the usual suspects.
Oh well it is Saturday I suppose... the traditional 5B's day. Birds, Booze, Brawls,Baths(Tukish type)and B--- U--.
 *&*%£
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 21, 2017, 06:08:16 PM
and anyone who examies the video will soon realise that Grime was totally wrong on that. 

Eddie did NOT alert to cCat but to the pile of papers/ folders on top of the cupboard
Additionally he had already played with cCat without alerting. 
I can sort of understand Grime not realizing that Eddie was alerting to the ?folders on top of the cupboard
But forgetting that prior to that, Eddie had played with cCat, even tossing him in the air, and not alerting then, was a big BOO BOO

IMHO.


yes angelo has agreed that grime was wrong re the alert to cuddle cat so what other alerts were wrong
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 21, 2017, 09:55:19 PM

yes angelo has agreed that grime was wrong re the alert to cuddle cat so what other alerts were wrong
The alert to Sean's "Up up and away" top that was claimed to be Madeleine's without proof elicited an alert but it was the last item placed on the ground and never seen to be removed from the cardboard box so that was a likely ruse too.  No forensic tests were done on it either.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 21, 2017, 10:59:38 PM
Did you offer an example of a casual set?

It is in post one on this very thread.
To make it simple however:
A causal set is an effect and its immediate causes. As a minimum there will be one action cause and one condition cause. There may be more of each. The whole has no beginning or end but you may decide where you wish to start, in which direction you wish to go and where you wish to stop. It is a relative norm to start at the undesirable effect and work from it.
In this instance the chosen start point would be the absence of the girl in the apartment, the "undesirable effect". There are two obvious condition causes to satisfy but we are light on action causes and without an action cause nothing happens. All causes require supporting evidence or a question mark indicating a lack of essential information for whatever reason.
Easy peasy as someone once said.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 21, 2017, 11:02:29 PM
It is in post one on this very thread.
To make it simple however:
A causal set is an effect and its immediate causes. As a minimum there will be one action cause and one condition cause. There may be more of each. The whole has no beginning or end but you may decide where you wish to start, in which direction you wish to go and where you wish to stop. It is a relative norm to start at the undesirable effect and work from it.
In this instance the chosen start point would be the absence of the girl in the apartment, the "undesirable effect". There are two obvious condition causes to satisfy but we are light on action causes and without an action cause nothing happens. All causes require supporting evidence or a question mark indicating a lack of essential information for whatever reason.
Easy peasy as someone once said.
A causal set is an effect and its immediate causes.  Casual set = cause and effect.

Wikipedia on Causality ".... the chicken or the egg causality dilemma, i.e. "which came first, the chicken or the egg?".
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 21, 2017, 11:20:37 PM
A causal set is an effect and its immediate causes.  Casual set = cause and effect.

Wikipedia on Causality ".... the chicken or the egg causality dilemma, i.e. "which came first, the chicken or the egg?".

So?
What yer tryin' to say Cobber.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 21, 2017, 11:25:17 PM
So?
What yer tryin' to say Cobber.
I think I was confirming I now know what you meant by "causal set".   I should have Googled it and not bothered you.  I should of course say thanks for replying.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: sadie on January 22, 2017, 12:32:38 AM
The alert to Sean's "Up up and away" top that was claimed to be Madeleine's without proof elicited an alert but it was the last item placed on the ground and never seen to be removed from the cardboard box so that was a likely ruse too.  No forensic tests were done on it either.
Eddie only gave an alert to either blood from a living person, Cadaver Odour or pork.   

It was essential that Keela be used to determine which of these Eddie was alerting to.  However Keela was not used to decide which of these Eddie was alerting to.   So it was an indeterminate alert. 

Therefore no conclusions, Eddie could have been any one of the three above.



And then, of course, no forensics either.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 22, 2017, 12:36:35 AM
It only elicited an alert of either blood from a living person, Cadaver Odour or pork.   

Keela was not used to decide which of these Eddie was alerting to.   So it was an indeterminate alert.  Could have been any one of the three above.
Even more support that it might have been a ruse then, for it wasn't double checked.  In my theory they simply wanted the video image of Eddie alerting to the top to shock Kate into confessing (ruse).
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 22, 2017, 10:18:43 AM
Even more support that it might have been a ruse then, for it wasn't double checked.  In my theory they simply wanted the video image of Eddie alerting to the top to shock Kate into confessing (ruse).
Hey now, there's a thought.  After all some believe crecheman was invented by the police to put pressure on the McCanns, why not invent dog alerts for the same reason?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 22, 2017, 11:09:16 AM
Hey now, there's a thought.  After all some believe crecheman was invented by the police to put pressure on the McCanns, why not invent dog alerts for the same reason?
Does that increase the pressure on the McCanns?  I don't see how that works.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 22, 2017, 11:16:46 AM
Does that increase the pressure on the McCanns?  I don't see how that works.
Which - the dog alerts or the supposed invention of Crecheman?  If the former I would have thought that was obvious, if the latter then you'd have to ask those who actually believe it to explain.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 22, 2017, 11:21:11 AM
Which - the dog alerts or the supposed invention of Crecheman?  If the former I would have thought that was obvious, if the latter then you'd have to ask those who actually believe it to explain.
Well I off to bed so maybe someone explains.  Cheers.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 22, 2017, 05:28:56 PM
Does that increase the pressure on the McCanns?  I don't see how that works.
How does "crecheman was invented by the police" increase the pressure on the McCanns?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 22, 2017, 05:45:20 PM
If there were lost keys to Block G5 any incident points toward an abduction.

http://textusa1.rssing.com/chan-26005015/all_p4.html and other sources mentioned.
"The Sunday Express tracked down the maintenance worker who allegedly lost the keys, 29-year-old Tiago da Silva, who lives a few miles from Luz in Lagos, a pretty coastal town.

When we put it to him that keys were lost, he paused momentarily before saying: “That is not the case. I can’t remember any keys going missing. The keys in maintenance were kept in a safe and nobody could get to them.””

However an unnamed colleague insisted:

“I know what he told me at the time. The keys for all the blocks were kept on a cable and clearly marked.

He said he had lost the keys to block five. He told me in the same week when the little girl went missing. I am sure of this.

From my memory I think they were replaced with duplicate keys for the apartments which were held at reception. I remember all this very clearly. He did not want us to tell people about it, so we didn’t say anything.”

This, according to Sunday Express suggested “the kidnap was well planned and executed using stolen keys.”

Tiago da Silva, is in our opinion, the green plant in this group’s bouquet. To show Swinging BH Deciders that the burglary thesis hasn’t been abandoned completely.

But another way to look at Tiago da Silva being part of the list would be to highlight that from the Ocean Club 2 managers and 2 maintenance personnel were questioned, thus highlighting the maintenance area. You know, shutter fixings and washing machine operation lessons."
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 22, 2017, 08:36:45 PM
There are those who passionately uphold the abduction theory despite the terrible odds against an abducted child surviving. It may be understandable for parents to hope, but the uninvolved must realise that it's not likely to have a happy ending.

Abduction by strangers is rare, but who does it? Statistically men commit most stranger abductions and 89% of the time they abduct children over 5 years of age. Often the desire has developed over time, so there may be some background offences. There is the impulsive abductor who is likely to be poorly educated, isolated and bad at planning. He is looking to connect and may think the victim will have a relationship with him. The planner is better educated, possibly married, but with desires he can't satisfy in the normal ways. He is ruthless and interested only in his own satisfaction.

Around 50% of stranger abductors assault their victims sexually and 88% kill within the first 24 hours.
http://ripleeforensicpsych.umwblogs.org/2011/12/15/child-abduction-a-theory-of-criminal-behavior/

 Child abduction only makes up 2% of all violent crimes against children and juveniles

So if 2% = 20 children then 10 of those will be family abductions. 5 will be acquaintances and 5 strangers. Of the stranger abductions 89% of the victims will be over 5. Few of those taken by non-family members will survive unscathed and the odds are that the child will come to serious harm.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 22, 2017, 08:59:13 PM

I believe that Madeleine was abducted to be sold to a family.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 22, 2017, 09:02:14 PM
I believe that Madeleine was abducted to be sold to a family.

quite possible and something john was suggesting a few weeks ago
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 22, 2017, 09:15:27 PM
If there were lost keys to Block G5 any incident points toward an abduction.

http://textusa1.rssing.com/chan-26005015/all_p4.html and other sources mentioned.
"The Sunday Express tracked down the maintenance worker who allegedly lost the keys, 29-year-old Tiago da Silva, who lives a few miles from Luz in Lagos, a pretty coastal town.

When we put it to him that keys were lost, he paused momentarily before saying: “That is not the case. I can’t remember any keys going missing. The keys in maintenance were kept in a safe and nobody could get to them.””

However an unnamed colleague insisted:

“I know what he told me at the time. The keys for all the blocks were kept on a cable and clearly marked.

He said he had lost the keys to block five. He told me in the same week when the little girl went missing. I am sure of this.

From my memory I think they were replaced with duplicate keys for the apartments which were held at reception. I remember all this very clearly. He did not want us to tell people about it, so we didn’t say anything.”

This, according to Sunday Express suggested “the kidnap was well planned and executed using stolen keys.”

Tiago da Silva, is in our opinion, the green plant in this group’s bouquet. To show Swinging BH Deciders that the burglary thesis hasn’t been abandoned completely.

But another way to look at Tiago da Silva being part of the list would be to highlight that from the Ocean Club 2 managers and 2 maintenance personnel were questioned, thus highlighting the maintenance area. You know, shutter fixings and washing machine operation lessons."

1.Why?
2. I do not find that surprising or indicative of anything but the obvious.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 22, 2017, 09:41:56 PM
I believe that Madeleine was abducted to be sold to a family.

Why that child in particular?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 22, 2017, 09:43:34 PM
1.Why?
2. I do not find that surprising or indicative of anything but the obvious.
It is hard to look back and see if there is a connection but certainly if there has been an abduction people like servicemen, that have entered the apartment that week, need to be reinterviewed.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 22, 2017, 09:44:27 PM
Why that child in particular?

you would need to ask those who took her
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 22, 2017, 10:47:27 PM
It is odd how the conscience of a killer plays on their mind and in the end they confess before they die.  Why do humans do this?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/blame-the-amygdala/201212/when-serial-killers-commit-suicide
"Most serial killers fit the description of a psychopath; they are without conscience, have a very limited capacity for emotion and empathy, and are often tremendously narcissistic. With no conscience the serial killer will not be haunted by what they have done, meaning that they will not feel the huge amount of pain or anguish that those involved in crimes of passion or those in the military could feel after taking a life. Therefore, a guilty conscience is not going to drive them to suicide. A lack of empathy, too, means that they will not recreate and experience the suffering of their victims or their families."
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 22, 2017, 10:59:19 PM
It is odd how the conscience of a killer plays on their mind and in the end they confess before they die.  Why do humans do this?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/blame-the-amygdala/201212/when-serial-killers-commit-suicide
"Most serial killers fit the description of a psychopath; they are without conscience, have a very limited capacity for emotion and empathy, and are often tremendously narcissistic. With no conscience the serial killer will not be haunted by what they have done, meaning that they will not feel the huge amount of pain or anguish that those involved in crimes of passion or those in the military could feel after taking a life. Therefore, a guilty conscience is not going to drive them to suicide. A lack of empathy, too, means that they will not recreate and experience the suffering of their victims or their families."

one doesnt have to believe in a god to have a conscience
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 22, 2017, 11:11:19 PM
There are those who passionately uphold the abduction theory despite the terrible odds against an abducted child surviving. It may be understandable for parents to hope, but the uninvolved must realise that it's not likely to have a happy ending.

Abduction by strangers is rare, but who does it? Statistically men commit most stranger abductions and 89% of the time they abduct children over 5 years of age. Often the desire has developed over time, so there may be some background offences. There is the impulsive abductor who is likely to be poorly educated, isolated and bad at planning. He is looking to connect and may think the victim will have a relationship with him. The planner is better educated, possibly married, but with desires he can't satisfy in the normal ways. He is ruthless and interested only in his own satisfaction.

Around 50% of stranger abductors assault their victims sexually and 88% kill within the first 24 hours.
http://ripleeforensicpsych.umwblogs.org/2011/12/15/child-abduction-a-theory-of-criminal-behavior/

 Child abduction only makes up 2% of all violent crimes against children and juveniles

So if 2% = 20 children then 10 of those will be family abductions. 5 will be acquaintances and 5 strangers. Of the stranger abductions 89% of the victims will be over 5. Few of those taken by non-family members will survive unscathed and the odds are that the child will come to serious harm.
What an odd post.  You seem to be under the impression that those of us who are believe Madeleine was abducted do so because we hope she is still alive.  That is not the reason why I believe she was abducted nor do I think it very likely that she is still alive.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 22, 2017, 11:14:05 PM
one doesnt have to believe in a god to have a conscience
How does a conscience evolve?  I never mentioned deities.  I'm just wondering how a child develops a conscience.
Are we taught to have a conscience or are we born with it?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 23, 2017, 12:57:52 AM
How does a conscience evolve?  I never mentioned deities.  I'm just wondering how a child develops a conscience.
Are we taught to have a conscience or are we born with it?

Human instinct.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 06:10:24 AM
Human instinct.
Did you know I have tried to discuss instinct on the science forums and no one could explain it, for to me instinct is passed on in the genes and no one could comprehend how that is encoded in the DNA.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 07:08:54 AM
I have no idea...the evidence points to stranger abduction but is not that specific

So you don't have a plausible logical theory of abduction, just a belief that it happened.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 07:13:33 AM
What an odd post.  You seem to be under the impression that those of us who are believe Madeleine was abducted do so because we hope she is still alive.  That is not the reason why I believe she was abducted nor do I think it very likely that she is still alive.

Some think she is, but the odds are very much against that.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 07:18:10 AM
How does a conscience evolve?  I never mentioned deities.  I'm just wondering how a child develops a conscience.
Are we taught to have a conscience or are we born with it?

A child has to be taught to consider the feelings of others.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 08:08:53 AM
Some think she is, but the odds are very much against that.
Few dispute that.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 08:25:07 AM

So you don't have a plausible logical theory of abduction, just a belief that it happened.

no like SY looking at all the evidence i have come to the conclusion that abduction is by far the most probable solution
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 08:26:12 AM
A child has to be taught to consider the feelings of others.

i think Richard dawkins has shown taht a conscience is genetic
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 08:28:48 AM
How does a conscience evolve?  I never mentioned deities.  I'm just wondering how a child develops a conscience.
Are we taught to have a conscience or are we born with it?

you mentioned a maker....thas a deity
conscience is a bit of both
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 10:03:32 AM
A child has to be taught to consider the feelings of others.
So it is a meme rather than a gene.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 10:09:57 AM
i think Richard dawkins has shown taht a conscience is genetic
I'll have to have another look at it for I'd love to solve that puzzle.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 23, 2017, 10:16:19 AM
It is hard to look back and see if there is a connection but certainly if there has been an abduction people like servicemen, that have entered the apartment that week, need to be reinterviewed.

Why?
Are you suggesting there is something wanting in the interview(s) originally carried out?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 10:29:51 AM
Why?
Are you suggesting there is something wanting in the interview(s) originally carried out?
The re-interviews may have already happened.  The amount of information is greater now so the questions asked would be different. With greater emphasis on cross checking the others in the maintenance team so inconsistencies are followed up and not just left.
You must admit that there were inconsistencies in Silvia's account of who rang her. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7864.msg377473#msg377473
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 23, 2017, 10:53:47 AM
A child has to be taught to consider the feelings of others.

Not all children.  Some children are naturally kind and considerate.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 10:57:08 AM
Not all children.  Some children are naturally kind and considerate.
All my children are
Is it genetic or have they picked it up from me
Who knows
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 23, 2017, 11:03:34 AM
All my children are
Is it genetic or have they picked it up from me
Who knows

I don't know either, but all of mine are kind and considerate as well.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 11:04:54 AM
I don't know either, but all of mine are kind and considerate as well.
It must be good genes.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 23, 2017, 11:14:26 AM
It must be good genes.

One of mine takes after Gene Vincent.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 11:17:24 AM
From personal experience I would say there is a strong genetic element
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 23, 2017, 11:23:05 AM
From personal experience I would say there is a strong genetic element

So would I.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 11:34:55 AM
One of mine takes after Gene Vincent.

 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 23, 2017, 11:36:12 AM
I believe that Madeleine was abducted to be sold to a family.

Strictly by comparison with other (possible) scenarios that would be fantastic if true.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 23, 2017, 11:41:44 AM
Strictly by comparison with other (possible) scenarios that would be fantastic if true.

It would be fantastic.  And I'm not giving up hope.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 23, 2017, 12:18:30 PM
I believe that Madeleine was abducted to be sold to a family.


You mean like a slave ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 23, 2017, 12:23:26 PM

You mean like a slave ?

Please don't be ridiculous.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 23, 2017, 12:26:05 PM
Please don't be ridiculous.

Why is it ridiculous?  People are still sold into slavery in certain countries.
Why should you assume that Madeleine was taken for any pleasant purpose?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 23, 2017, 01:04:52 PM
Why is it ridiculous?  People are still sold into slavery in certain countries.
Why should you assume that Madeleine was taken for any pleasant purpose?

You know very well what I meant.  But if you think that there is a possibility that Madeleine was abducted to become a slave to a family then please do feel free to try starting a Topic on the subject.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 01:05:06 PM
It seems those who believe that Madeleine was abducted don't have a logical plausible theory showing who, how or why it happened. They just 'believe' it happened and some even hope she's alive, despite the statistical unlikelihood that she would be. It seems no-one is prepared to put any work in to support their beliefs.



Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 23, 2017, 01:09:39 PM
It seems those who believe that Madeleine was abducted don't have a logical plausible theory showing who, how or why it happened. They just 'believe' it happened and some even hope she's alive, despite the statistical unlikelihood that she would be. It seems no-one is prepared to put any work in to support their beliefs.

Nothing to do with not putting any work in to support my beliefs.  I have done that.  I just don't feel inclined to share.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 01:24:22 PM
It seems those who believe that Madeleine was abducted don't have a logical plausible theory showing who, how or why it happened. They just 'believe' it happened and some even hope she's alive, despite the statistical unlikelihood that she would be. It seems no-one is prepared to put any work in to support their beliefs.
I have a logical, plausible theory of abduction naming at least one of the participants.  There are two easy ways to implement such an abduction.  As to why, that would be conjecture given the absence of evidence.

And since I cannot prove that this is what happened, I would be well into libel land in laying out all of the components.

The core information was sent to Operation Grange some months ago, together with a simple check that can only be carried out by a recognised legal authority.

In the usual absence of feedback from OG, I cannot tell whether this simple test was conducted, or not.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 23, 2017, 01:28:45 PM
I have a logical, plausible theory of abduction naming at least one of the participants.  There are two easy ways to implement such an abduction.  As to why, that would be conjecture given the absence of evidence.

And since I cannot prove that this is what happened, I would be well into libel land in laying out all of the components.

The core information was sent to Operation Grange some months ago, together with a simple check that can only be carried out by a recognised legal authority.

In the usual absence of feedback from OG, I cannot tell whether this simple test was conducted, or not.

My thoughts also.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 01:37:01 PM
It seems those who believe that Madeleine was abducted don't have a logical plausible theory showing who, how or why it happened. They just 'believe' it happened and some even hope she's alive, despite the statistical unlikelihood that she would be. It seems no-one is prepared to put any work in to support their beliefs.
Are you serious?!  If she was abducted by a stranger then no one here would have any idea who took her or why it happened.  We have demonstrated however that there was opportunity for her to have been taken.  I can  speculate that she was taken to be raped or abused and then disposed of by a paedophile, which is a perfectly plausible (if unpalatable) theory.  I can also speculate that she was disposed of not that far from the place she was taken and murdered.  But to say that abduction is neither logical or plausible is patently absurd.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 01:49:08 PM
It seems those who believe that Madeleine was abducted don't have a logical plausible theory showing who, how or why it happened. They just 'believe' it happened and some even hope she's alive, despite the statistical unlikelihood that she would be. It seems no-one is prepared to put any work in to support their beliefs.

What utter rubbish
That's what you would like to believe
According to SY abduction is possible and probable
You have agreed SY think it possible
You are in total denial
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 23, 2017, 01:52:51 PM
It seems those who believe that Madeleine was abductd don't have a logical plausible theory showing who, how or why it happened. They just 'believe' it happened and some even hope she's alive, despite the statistical unlikelihood that she would be. It seems no-one is prepared to put any work in to support their beliefs.

All I can say is that you must have missed an awful lot of posts then G.

My own main theory is that it was pre-planned and the abductor(s) entered and left 5A via the front door.  It was all over and done with in a couple of minutes and he/they were miles away by car long before the police were called.    I think Madeleine is probably dead and buried somewhere in Portugal - but until evidence of her death is found, I'll carry on hoping that she is alive.

There are lots of reasons why Portugal and PdL were attractive places for an abductor to choose - all posted on here at various times, including the main reason -  which IMO -  was the PJ policy to keep any immediate information from the public. ie. 'No Press'  -  which was a major advantage to any would-be perpetrator.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 01:57:45 PM
It seems those who believe that Madeleine was abducted don't have a logical plausible theory showing who, how or why it happened. They just 'believe' it happened and some even hope she's alive, despite the statistical unlikelihood that she would be. It seems no-one is prepared to put any work in to support their beliefs.

I think it's called blind faith G.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 23, 2017, 02:06:35 PM
Are you serious?!  If she was abducted by a stranger then no one here would have any idea who took her or why it happened.  We have demonstrated however that there was opportunity for her to have been taken. I can  speculate that she was taken to be raped or abused and then disposed of by a paedophile, which is a perfectly plausible (if unpalatable) theory.  I can also speculate that she was disposed of not that far from the place she was taken and murdered.  But to say that abduction is neither logical or plausible is patently absurd.

No one disputed that did they?
What I would like to see is a well thought out analysis of how the "abduction" was executed taking into consideration all the available evidence relating to the ambient conditions at the time.
So far no takers.
 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 23, 2017, 02:47:46 PM
No one disputed that did they?
What I would like to see is a well thought out analysis of how the "abduction" was executed taking into consideration all the available evidence relating to the ambient conditions at the time.
So far no takers.

I'm not sure you could draw up a well-thought-out analysis of how Peter Voisey carried out his crime.

The one fact beyond dispute is that he did.

And that more difficult, I would say, than the crime of which Madeleine was a victim.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 23, 2017, 02:59:20 PM
I think it's called blind faith G.

I doubt if the Portuguese AG was using 'blind faith' Faith - when, after studying and pondering all the evidence  he removed their arguido status on the grounds that there was no evidence of any involvement by them in Madeleine's disappearance.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 03:12:35 PM
I doubt if the Portuguese AG was using 'blind faith' Faith - when, after studying and pondering all the evidence  he removed their arguido status on the grounds that there was no evidence of any involvement by them in Madeleine's disappearance.

Be honest Benice you thought the McCanns innocent even before the release of the files?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 03:13:41 PM
If no one is disputing that there was clear opportunity for Madeleine to be taken by a stranger then that's really all that needs to be said - considering the child has disappeared never to be seen again, and considering there was opportunity to take her from an unlocked apartement, and considering there has been no indication of any crime committed by the parents with regard to her disappearance, then stranger abduction is both a plausible and logical explanation for her disappearance.  All the rest is guesswork. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 03:27:04 PM
No one disputed that did they?
What I would like to see is a well thought out analysis of how the "abduction" was executed taking into consideration all the available evidence relating to the ambient conditions at the time.
So far no takers.
The mechanics of an abduction are ridiculously simple and the degree of risk involved using either potential method is ridiculously low.  It matters not a jot whether the timeline of checks that night is accurate or whether it is inaccurate.  It happens to get even easier with less frequent checks but it does not require them.  And both methods can be done by a single person.  Neither requires a team effort.

A while back I started from this point.  Given what we know of the checking, is it possible to mount an operation that results in the abduction of Madeleine, and better still, is low risk?  The answer is that there are two ways that satisfy both criteria.

There was low or zero risk until such times as an abductor entered the front door of apartment 5A or until an abductor passed through the unlocked patio doors.  From that point on it is simply a question of speed.

However, in the absence of evidence to support these two methods, I cannot claim that this is what happened, merely that both are feasible logistically.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 03:30:19 PM
If no one is disputing that there was clear opportunity for Madeleine to be taken by a stranger then that's really all that needs to be said - considering the child has disappeared never to be seen again, and considering there was opportunity to take her from an unlocked apartement, and considering there has been no indication of any crime committed by the parents with regard to her disappearance, then stranger abduction is both a plausible and logical explanation for her disappearance.  All the rest is guesswork.

No indication to this point.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 03:32:47 PM
If no one is disputing that there was clear opportunity for Madeleine to be taken by a stranger then that's really all that needs to be said - considering the child has disappeared never to be seen again, and considering there was opportunity to take her from an unlocked apartement, and considering there has been no indication of any crime committed by the parents with regard to her disappearance, then stranger abduction is both a plausible and logical explanation for her disappearance.  All the rest is guesswork.
You haven't solved the issues of how said perpetrator knew Madeleine was in there and method of entry.  Until you do, you cannot claim logical and plausible.

I have solved both, but those are the bits I can't post due to libel restrictions, given that I cannot support such a hypothesis with irrefutable evidence.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 23, 2017, 03:46:59 PM
i have come to the conclusion that abduction is by far the most probable solution

And what are you basing that on?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 03:49:53 PM
You haven't solved the issues of how said perpetrator knew Madeleine was in there and method of entry.  Until you do, you cannot claim logical and plausible.

I have solved both, but those are the bits I can't post due to libel restrictions, given that I cannot support such a hypothesis with irrefutable evidence.
It is plausible and logical to suggest that an abductor would have chosen his quarry prior to abduction and through a process of observation / reconnaissance / tip-off ascertained where and when to strike.  Method of entry is simple.  There was an unlocked patio door and an open window - take your pick.  alternatively we know that burglaries had taken place in the same complex with no sign of a break in, so it is plausible and logical to suggest that spare or skeleton keys could have been used to gain entry to the apartment.  All perfectly plausible, all perfectly logical. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 23, 2017, 03:50:48 PM
You haven't solved the issues of how said perpetrator knew Madeleine was in there and method of entry.  Until you do, you cannot claim logical and plausible.

I have solved both, but those are the bits I can't post due to libel restrictions, given that I cannot support such a hypothesis with irrefutable evidence.

So long as you don't name anyone, neither are you libelling anyone, by merely posting a theory.

ETA: So long as nothing you say makes anyone (named and known!) identifiable.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 23, 2017, 03:52:01 PM
Are you serious?!  If she was abducted by a stranger then no one here would have any idea who took her or why it happened.  We have demonstrated however that there was opportunity for her to have been taken.  I can  speculate that she was taken to be raped or abused and then disposed of by a paedophile, which is a perfectly plausible (if unpalatable) theory.  I can also speculate that she was disposed of not that far from the place she was taken and murdered.  But to say that abduction is neither logical or plausible is patently absurd.

Then again she may have woken up, heard her fathers voice outside and tried to follow him only to be run over and carried off.  Point is, both scenarios are possible and plausible.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 23, 2017, 03:53:39 PM
Then again she may have woken up, heard her fathers voice outside and tried to follow him only to be run over and carried off.  Point is, both scenarios are possible and plausible.

Not according to the final PJ report.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 23, 2017, 03:53:42 PM
So long as you don't name anyone, neither are you libelling anyone, by merely posting a theory.

ETA: So long as nothing you say makes anyone (named and known!) identifiable.

I hope you remember that next time you post that a certain unmentionable dog handler was incompetent.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 23, 2017, 03:55:55 PM
Not according to the final PJ report.

Rubbish, the final Report drew no conclusions other than to state that the parents lost the opportunity to demonstrate their innocence by the refusal of the group to partake in an official reconstruction.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 23, 2017, 04:02:35 PM
Rubbish, the final Report drew no conclusions other than to state that the parents lost the opportunity to demonstrate their innocence by the refusal of the group to partake in an official reconstruction.

You are confusing the final PJ report (which ruled out 'woke and wandered') with the archiving dispatch, written by the prosecutors, which said the McCanns have no case to answer, and that Madeleine was victim of an abduction

I've often wondered why that part of the archiving dispatch which said there is no place, in a real criminal investigation, for the type of hypothesising typical of Sherlock Holmes or Poirot, never made it into the files that we read on line.

From Joao Carlos' final report:

Quote
As a remote hypothesis, the possibility of the minor leaving the apartment by her own means was explored – that would be highly unlikely physically – and after, because of an accident or by a third person intervention, she would have disappeared.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 04:13:24 PM
So long as you don't name anyone, neither are you libelling anyone, by merely posting a theory.

ETA: So long as nothing you say makes anyone (named and known!) identifiable.
I cannot post the known facts without pointing a finger at one or more identifiable individuals, and since I lack clear evidence/proof, it would definitely be libel.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 04:17:57 PM
Then again she may have woken up, heard her fathers voice outside and tried to follow him only to be run over and carried off.  Point is, both scenarios are possible and plausible.
Your scenario is possible, but less likely as it doesn't explain the open window.  It is also problematic in that we would have to accept Madeleine was able to open and close the door behind her, including the stair gate if that was her means of exit.  She needn't have been run over to have been abducted in your scenario however. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 23, 2017, 04:27:40 PM
I'm not sure you could draw up a well-thought-out analysis of how Peter Voisey carried out his crime.

The one fact beyond dispute is that he did.

And that more difficult, I would say, than the crime of which Madeleine was a victim.

How is that relevant to the case in point ?
So far I have not seen anyone get off first base with this conundrum. The best that is offered is "it happened cos we say it happened"  the start point being the prejudgement it was an abduction.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 04:28:47 PM
I cannot post the known facts without pointing a finger at one or more identifiable individuals, and since I lack clear evidence/proof, it would definitely be libel.
If you don't have clear evidence or proof then they can't be known facts. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 04:32:06 PM
It is plausible and logical to suggest that an abductor would have chosen his quarry prior to abduction and through a process of observation / reconnaissance / tip-off ascertained where and when to strike.  Method of entry is simple.  There was an unlocked patio door and an open window - take your pick.  alternatively we know that burglaries had taken place in the same complex with no sign of a break in, so it is plausible and logical to suggest that spare or skeleton keys could have been used to gain entry to the apartment.  All perfectly plausible, all perfectly logical.

Do we know if the other burglary victims had left windows open because it would seem that certainly Mrs Fenn's burglary was by way of an open window ?

How do you think things played out? Did the abductor set his sights on Madeleine and was just extremely lucky that her parents were virtually the only couple in the whole resort to leave their patio doors unlocked or did the unlocked patio doors offer the abductor the opportunity to steal a child, any child?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 23, 2017, 04:34:29 PM
You are confusing the final PJ report (which ruled out 'woke and wandered') with the archiving dispatch, written by the prosecutors, which said the McCanns have no case to answer, and that Madeleine was victim of an abduction

I've often wondered why that part of the archiving dispatch which said there is no place, in a real criminal investigation, for the type of hypothesising typical of Sherlock Holmes or Poirot, never made it into the files that we read on line.

From Joao Carlos' final report:

A conclusion reached in 2007 has little validity in 2016 when we know so much more.  In any event several very senior British detectives have looked at the three scenarios in great detail and rightly don't rule woke and wandered out.  In fact, given the forensics or should I say the absence of any forensic evidence which could support a stranger abduction I see the woke and wandered scenario as the leading contender.  I hasten to add there could have been a live or dead abduction thereafter.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 23, 2017, 04:37:04 PM
I cannot post the known facts without pointing a finger at one or more identifiable individuals, and since I lack clear evidence/proof, it would definitely be libel.

OK
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 04:42:07 PM
I cannot post the known facts without pointing a finger at one or more identifiable individuals, and since I lack clear evidence/proof, it would definitely be libel.

#the fact that you lack clear evidence means your theory has no real basis in reality
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 04:42:10 PM
Do we know if the other burglary victims had left windows open because it would seem that certainly Mrs Fenn's burglary was by way of an open window ?

How do you think things played out? Did the abductor set his sights on Madeleine and was just extremely lucky that her parents were virtually the only couple in the whole resort to leave their patio doors unlocked or did the unlocked patio doors offer the abductor the opportunity to steal a child, any child?
To answer your first question - I don't know.  What is the evidence for the burglary of Mrs Fenn's being by way of an open window and if so, who left the window open?
To answer your second question - I don't know, but I would guess that the abductor, acting either on a tip-off or by observation, ascertained which child or children were the most vulnerable and easy to abduct.   Let's not forget that there had been a spate of break-ins to holiday apartments / bedrooms on the algarve in which children were targeted for the purposes of sexual molestation, so the concept is not that far-fetched.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 04:43:40 PM
A conclusion reached in 2007 has little validity in 2016 when we know so much more.  In any event several very senior British detectives have looked at the three scenarios in great detail and rightly don't rule woke and wandered out.  In fact, given the forensics or should I say the absence of any forensic evidence which could support a stranger abduction I see the woke and wandered scenario as the leading contender.  I hasten to add there could have been a live or dead abduction thereafter.

so you think maddie opened the windows and shutters
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 23, 2017, 05:03:35 PM
Be honest Benice you thought the McCanns innocent even before the release of the files?

Yes - I've always thought they were innocent Faith - not because I like them particularly,  but because  I have never found anything to make me think otherwise.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: misty on January 23, 2017, 05:11:40 PM
There were 4 apartments with unsupervised children in them, not just the one. Anyone observing the front of Block 5 during the day & evening would have been aware of the comings & goings, maybe noting that not one was seen to have a babysitter arriving as the adults left for dinner.
 I think that is why Robitty wanted to know how the arrangements for babysitting guests' children by the nannies was made. For Sylvia Batista to say that she personally had offered the babysitting service to the parents indicates that she, too, was aware of the supervision issue prior to the 3rd. How did she know, since the standing arrangement for the Tapas dining was made on the previous Sunday, or had there been an open discussion amongst staff about it?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 05:14:25 PM
If you don't have clear evidence or proof then they can't be known facts.
You are mixing up two different requirements. 

The known facts of which I speak are contained in about a dozen pages of the PJ files and so are in the public domain.  These known facts do not constitute clear evidence or proof, a point I made crystal clear at the start of this exchange.

I cannot get my hands on one or more pieces of information that would be sufficient to change the situation from known facts to sufficient evidence to turn a named person or persons into arguidos.

I have discussed these known facts with visitors on my Luz Tours and on each occasion I have been urged to bring this material to the attention of Operation Grange

I finally got round to doing just that in November 2016.  I don't know what became of this communication.  The information could be sitting disregarded in a in-box in OG.  It could be that the simple test I suggested was carried out, and the individuals got the all-clear.  It could be that the individuals failed the test and Operation Grange is pursuing the matter further.

OG does not keep me in the loop, so I have no way of telling which it is.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 05:23:46 PM
You are mixing up two different requirements. 

The known facts of which I speak are contained in about a dozen pages of the PJ files and so are in the public domain.  These known facts do not constitute clear evidence or proof, a point I made crystal clear at the start of this exchange.

I cannot get my hands on one or more pieces of information that would be sufficient to change the situation from known facts to sufficient evidence to turn a named person or persons into arguidos.

I have discussed these known facts with visitors on my Luz Tours and on each occasion I have been urged to bring this material to the attention of Operation Grange

I finally got round to doing just that in November 2016.  I don't know what became of this communication.  The information could be sitting disregarded in a in-box in OG.  It could be that the simple test I suggested was carried out, and the individuals got the all-clear.  It could be that the individuals failed the test and Operation Grange is pursuing the matter further.

OG does not keep me in the loop, so I have no way of telling which it is.
Take us through the logic of the file references instead then and see if someone else comes to the same conclusion.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 05:28:49 PM

I think you have everything wrong in your rather bizarre post. It has been establishef by SY that the McCanns are not suspects and that a stranger abduction is a possibility.
There is no evidence whatsoever that OG has established that the McCanns are not suspects.  The remit appears to exclude the McCanns but I have yet to see evidence as to how that remit was arrived at, only pure speculation on that point.

The simple fact of the matter is that Alfie's argument leads to the possibility of others, including the McCanns, having 'dunnit' in a simple and straight-forward manner that cannot be disproved by OG.

The fact that it cannot be disproved is not proof that it did or did not happen that way.  It simply means it cannot be disproved.  And that same fatal flaw exists within Alfie's reasoning.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 23, 2017, 05:33:12 PM

What is the name of the place to which the GNR were called on the evening that Madeleine disappeared?

Thanks for any help on this.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: misty on January 23, 2017, 05:35:59 PM
What is the name of the place to which the GNR were called on the evening that Madeleine disappeared?

Thanks for any help on this.

Odiaxere.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 05:38:09 PM
There is no evidence whatsoever that OG has established that the McCanns are not suspects.  The remit appears to exclude the McCanns but I have yet to see evidence as to how that remit was arrived at, only pure speculation on that point.

The simple fact of the matter is that Alfie's argument leads to the possibility of others, including the McCanns, having 'dunnit' in a simple and straight-forward manner that cannot be disproved by OG.

The fact that it cannot be disproved is not proof that it did or did not happen that way.  It simply means it cannot be disproved.  And that same fatal flaw exists within Alfie's reasoning.
Try and take us through the logic of the 12 file references and see if someone else comes to the same conclusion.   Sounds interesting.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 05:42:22 PM
Well that was fun. Abduction is logical and plausible because;

there was space in the timeline (which can't be proved)
there was an open window (which no-one saw)
there had been burglars and child molestors in the area (allegedly, but so what?)
SY said the parent's aren't suspects (true, ages ago)
The McCann's have never done or said anything suspicious (ha ha ha)
The PJ thought woke and wandered was unlikely (when did they become the experts?)




Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 05:53:25 PM
Well that was fun. Abduction is logical and plausible because;

there was space in the timeline (which can't be proved)
there was an open window (which no-one saw)
there had been burglars and child molestors in the area (allegedly, but so what?)
SY said the parent's aren't suspects (true, ages ago)
The McCann's have never done or said anything suspicious (ha ha ha)
The PJ thought woke and wandered was unlikely (when did they become the experts?)
Great, you've rubbished all the evidence quite successfully.  So now tell us why abduction is neither logical, nor plausible. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 05:53:59 PM
There were 4 apartments with unsupervised children in them, not just the one. Anyone observing the front of Block 5 during the day & evening would have been aware of the comings & goings, maybe noting that not one was seen to have a babysitter arriving as the adults left for dinner.
 I think that is why Robitty wanted to know how the arrangements for babysitting guests' children by the nannies was made. For Sylvia Batista to say that she personally had offered the babysitting service to the parents indicates that she, too, was aware of the supervision issue prior to the 3rd. How did she know, since the standing arrangement for the Tapas dining was made on the previous Sunday, or had there been an open discussion amongst staff about it?
My issue with this is it requires a couple of dollops of speculation.

First, to have the inclination to monitor block 5 for extended periods of time, during both the day and evening.  The daytime is to twig block 5 is stuffed with kids deemed to be tasty (desculpe) and the locations thereof (which apartments in detail).  The evening time is to twig the parents are leaving the children alone, and further that there is a pattern to this.  It probably also requires observing the McCanns using the patio doors in the evenings, to know that this was an entry point.  It is a lot of effort on an off-chance.

Second, the issue of the block booking is troublesome.  I know Kate covers it in her book.  The trouble is, I can see no reference to it in the PJ Files, beyond the receptionist noting such a booking was made.  Kate's open note, viewable by Tapas staff and possibly visitors, does not appear to be in the PJ Files.  I am struggling to think why the receptionist would make such a note.  The only reason I can think of for this being done or discussed with other staff is that it may have been to forewarn of a heavier than normal number of diners, but since I don't know the usual number, I cannot rely on that.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 06:04:21 PM
G-Unit's rubbishing of the abduction theory, and my responses in red.

there was space in the timeline (which can't be proved)

The Met are satisfied that there was an opportunity in the timeline for Madeleine to have been taken.  This was after careful and forensic examination of the timeline, by professionals.  you refuse to accept this, your problem.

there was an open window (which no-one saw)
Didn't they?  Are you sure?  I'm sure Kate saw an open window.  Is she a no one now?

there had been burglars and child molestors in the area (allegedly, but so what?)
Allegedly?  Are you calling the parents of these children or the children themselves liars?

SY said the parent's aren't suspects (true, ages ago)
And they have said nothing to the contrary since, nor even hinted at it.

The McCann's have never done or said anything suspicious (ha ha ha)
Purely subjective -your opinion.  Doesn't count.

The PJ thought woke and wandered was unlikely (when did they become the experts?)
When did you?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 06:07:57 PM
Point 1. How would a would-be abductor know there were children alone in 5A?

Unless he was able to observe both front and back doors continuously from 5.30pm to 8.30pm or he had inside knowledge he wouldn't.



Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 06:08:05 PM
There is no evidence whatsoever that OG has established that the McCanns are not suspects.  The remit appears to exclude the McCanns but I have yet to see evidence as to how that remit was arrived at, only pure speculation on that point.

The simple fact of the matter is that Alfie's argument leads to the possibility of others, including the McCanns, having 'dunnit' in a simple and straight-forward manner that cannot be disproved by OG.

The fact that it cannot be disproved is not proof that it did or did not happen that way.  It simply means it cannot be disproved.  And that same fatal flaw exists within Alfie's reasoning.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.  I was under the impression that you viewed abduction by stranger as the most pausible and logical explanation for Madeleine's disappearance. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 06:08:21 PM
Take us through the logic of the file references instead then and see if someone else comes to the same conclusion.
Again, I do not mean to be rude, but I consider the only poster on here to be of sufficient capability and case experience to understand the known facts and come to an informed conclusion to be G-Unit.  Now possibly having insulted other posters on here, including the forum owner, let me explain why I am not going down this path.

It requires not only the page numbers but an interchange to ask pertinent questions and to point out both the presence of fact and the absence of fact, where relevant.

I am not going to do that on open forum, because it constitutes libel.  I am not going to do it via PM because it still constitutes libel.

I am safe in bringing the matter to the attention of OG, a recognised legal authority.

I am on stonier ground in discussing it with visitors, though I doubt there is a real issue with this.  I always make clear what can be proved and what can't, so people's reputations are not impugned.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 06:09:18 PM
Point 1. How would a would-be abductor know there were children alone in 5A?

Unless he was able to observe both front and back doors continuously from 5.30pm to 8.30pm or he had inside knowledge he wouldn't.
It wouldn't be rocket science to work out that if the parents were in the Tapas restaurant that the children were probably unattended.

Here's how it could be done, for example
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/kidnapper-spied-madeleine-mccann-police-1897649
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 06:11:24 PM
Again, I do not mean to be rude, but I consider the only poster on here to be of sufficient capability and case experience to understand the known facts and come to an informed conclusion to be G-Unit.  Now possibly having insulted other posters on here, including the forum owner, let me explain why I am not going down this path.

It requires not only the page numbers but an interchange to ask pertinent questions and to point out both the presence of fact and the absence of fact, where relevant.

I am not going to do that on open forum, because it constitutes libel.  I am not going to do it via PM because it still constitutes libel.


I am safe in bringing the matter to the attention of OG, a recognised legal authority.

I am on stonier ground in discussing it with visitors, though I doubt there is a real issue with this.  I always make clear what can be proved and what can't, so people's reputations are not impugned.
WE'RE NOT WORTHY!!!! @)(++(*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 06:20:12 PM
Please correct me if I'm wrong.  I was under the impression that you viewed abduction by stranger as the most pausible and logical explanation for Madeleine's disappearance.
Is there a relevance to this?  Are we participating in a democratic vote?  And whichever side wins gets a prize?

Your argument is both fatally flawed and raises the possibility that the MCCanns and/or other members of the Tapas 9 'dunnit'.

You are trying to have your cake and eat it.  That approach doesn't work.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 23, 2017, 06:28:41 PM
Odiaxere.

Thanks, Misty.

Am I correct in thinking that this was a false crime report?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 06:29:03 PM
Is there a relevance to this?  Are we participating in a democratic vote?  And whichever side wins gets a prize?

Your argument is both fatally flawed and raises the possibility that the MCCanns and/or other members of the Tapas 9 'dunnit'.

You are trying to have your cake and eat it.  That approach doesn't work.
I asked you a simple question, why are you refusing to answer?  It is an extremely relevant question considering the fact that you are attempting to rip my argument to shreds, when as far as I recall you actually share my opinion that abduction is the most likely explanation for Madeleine's disappearance.  Indeed you presented some bizarre little maths equation not long back in which (IIRC) you put abduction at the top at 20% or something (even though with the other two possibilities the sum did not add up to a hundred). 

I'm seriously wondering what I'm doing even attempting to engage with you as you appear so outwith the realms of reasonable, rational discussion it hardly seems worth the bother.  Sorry if this seems rude.   8(8-))
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 23, 2017, 06:29:22 PM

I am safe in bringing the matter to the attention of OG, a recognised legal authority.



Are you ignoring the PJ who after all have primacy over the investigation.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 06:31:03 PM
My issue with this is it requires a couple of dollops of speculation.

First, to have the inclination to monitor block 5 for extended periods of time, during both the day and evening.  The daytime is to twig block 5 is stuffed with kids deemed to be tasty (desculpe) and the locations thereof (which apartments in detail).  The evening time is to twig the parents are leaving the children alone, and further that there is a pattern to this.  It probably also requires observing the McCanns using the patio doors in the evenings, to know that this was an entry point.  It is a lot of effort on an off-chance.

Second, the issue of the block booking is troublesome.  I know Kate covers it in her book.  The trouble is, I can see no reference to it in the PJ Files, beyond the receptionist noting such a booking was made.  Kate's open note, viewable by Tapas staff and possibly visitors, does not appear to be in the PJ Files.  I am struggling to think why the receptionist would make such a note.  The only reason I can think of for this being done or discussed with other staff is that it may have been to forewarn of a heavier than normal number of diners, but since I don't know the usual number, I cannot rely on that.

I also cannot find that note, so who knew the children were being left at night?

The Mark Warner booking team (based in the UK, I assume)
The person who arranged for the apartments to be together, if he was given the reason. (Vitor Santos)
The receptionist who took the booking (Luisa Coutinho)
The Wilkins.



Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 23, 2017, 06:44:25 PM
Point 1. How would a would-be abductor know there were children alone in 5A?

Unless he was able to observe both front and back doors continuously from 5.30pm to 8.30pm or he had inside knowledge he wouldn't.

Most arguments appear to be based on a different thread title. The words plausible and logical being totally ignored.

Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
The incident happened some time May 3rd 2007 but in discussions on here it's not long before Messrs Grime Amaral and sundry dawgs come into the conversation..............time lords all.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 06:45:12 PM
It wouldn't be rocket science to work out that if the parents were in the Tapas restaurant that the children were probably unattended.

Here's how it could be done, for example
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/kidnapper-spied-madeleine-mccann-police-1897649

Really? So glib. Just because the parents are in the Tapas? The children could all be together in one apartment with the baby monitor being used. They could all be together in one apartment with a baby-sitter. They could all be in their own apartments with between one and four baby-sitters caring for them. One of the group could be baby-sitting (Sun Matt, Tues Russ, Wed Rachael were all absent). They could be in the night cheche.

Please identify the viewpoints in those four blocks which would enable someone to watch the front and back doors of 5A from 5.30 to 8.30?

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 06:50:49 PM
Really? So glib. Just because the parents are in the Tapas? The children could all be together in one apartment with the baby monitor being used. They could all be together in one apartment with a baby-sitter. They could all be in their own apartments with between one and four baby-sitters caring for them. One of the group could be baby-sitting (Sun Matt, Tues Russ, Wed Rachael were all absent). They could be in the night cheche.

Please identify the viewpoints in those four blocks which would enable someone to watch the front and back doors of 5A from 5.30 to 8.30?
SO you don't think it would have been possible for a would be abductor to figure out that the children were left in their own apartments?  What babysitters?  Were there any in evidence seen entering apartments? 

But perhaps you're right.  Perhaps they chanced it, Apartment 5a being the easiest to access, nothing ventured, nothing gained, they got lucky, Madeleine didn't.  Who knows?  Intruders have entered apartments that were known to contain parents, after all....
As for your other question - no idea.  Ask the resident expert.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 07:04:03 PM
Again, I do not mean to be rude, but I consider the only poster on here to be of sufficient capability and case experience to understand the known facts and come to an informed conclusion to be G-Unit.  Now possibly having insulted other posters on here, including the forum owner, let me explain why I am not going down this path.

It requires not only the page numbers but an interchange to ask pertinent questions and to point out both the presence of fact and the absence of fact, where relevant.

I am not going to do that on open forum, because it constitutes libel.  I am not going to do it via PM because it still constitutes libel.

I am safe in bringing the matter to the attention of OG, a recognised legal authority.

I am on stonier ground in discussing it with visitors, though I doubt there is a real issue with this.  I always make clear what can be proved and what can't, so people's reputations are not impugned.

you are not being rude but simply showing your prejudice. I find gunits posts and your posts to be quite lacking in understanding the evidence. You have stated that there is no evidence that the McCannns are not suspects totally ridiculous. The statement by SY that they are not suspects is evidence in itself. Add to that they have never been arrested and i think we can a ssume never interviewed under caution.

gunit maintains that the twice translated non verbatim statements are accurate when anyone who knows anything about translations understands that errors will be made.....particularly when the pj were not using professional translators
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 23, 2017, 07:04:28 PM
The mechanics of an abduction are ridiculously simple and the degree of risk involved using either potential method is ridiculously low.  It matters not a jot whether the timeline of checks that night is accurate or whether it is inaccurate.  It happens to get even easier with less frequent checks but it does not require them.  And both methods can be done by a single person.  Neither requires a team effort.

A while back I started from this point.  Given what we know of the checking, is it possible to mount an operation that results in the abduction of Madeleine, and better still, is low risk?  The answer is that there are two ways that satisfy both criteria.

There was low or zero risk until such times as an abductor entered the front door of apartment 5A or until an abductor passed through the unlocked patio doors.  From that point on it is simply a question of speed.

However, in the absence of evidence to support these two methods, I cannot claim that this is what happened, merely that both are feasible logistically.

Yeah the child got out and bumped into an itinerant abductor or the abductor gained access to the apartment.
That much is apparent if you have prejudged the state of abduction. Clarence Mitchell said there was no evidence of break in. There is no evidence whether the patio door was open or closed as that seems to have been a moveable feast. Over to you with the simple logistics. Start with the easy one : which door ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 07:07:44 PM
Is there a relevance to this?  Are we participating in a democratic vote?  And whichever side wins gets a prize?

Your argument is both fatally flawed and raises the possibility that the MCCanns and/or other members of the Tapas 9 'dunnit'.

You are trying to have your cake and eat it.  That approach doesn't work.

Your reasoning is totally flawed. If we were to say it is most likely that the abductor was male that does not mean we are pointing the finger at Gerry
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 07:18:11 PM
Oddly, SIL has made numerous posts on the thread below arguing how easy it would be to abduct a child from Apartment 5a, and how the conditions in PdL at the time of the disappearance supported the possibility of an abduction, and yet when I say the same things apparently I am supposedly pointing the finger at the  McCanns!  Bloody bizarre.

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7173.780
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 07:24:09 PM
SO you don't think it would have been possible for a would be abductor to figure out that the children were left in their own apartments?  What babysitters?  Were there any in evidence seen entering apartments? 

But perhaps you're right.  Perhaps they chanced it, Apartment 5a being the easiest to access, nothing ventured, nothing gained, they got lucky, Madeleine didn't.  Who knows?  Intruders have entered apartments that were known to contain parents, after all....
As for your other question - no idea.  Ask the resident expert.

You said;

It wouldn't be rocket science to work out that if the parents were in the Tapas restaurant that the children were probably unattended.

I answered pointing out it wasn't so simple.

Are you able to explain how seeing the parents in the Tapas tells the would-be abductor the kids are home alone or not?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 07:26:44 PM
You said;

It wouldn't be rocket science to work out that if the parents were in the Tapas restaurant that the children were probably unattended.

I answered pointing out it wasn't so simple.

Are you able to explain how seeing the parents in the Tapas tells the would-be abductor the kids are home alone or not?
Did you not read my post?  Also, I suggest you read the Mirror article I linked to, it may shed some light.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 07:33:57 PM
if an abductor can walk into a house where the mother is present and take a child out of a bath then Maddie could have been abducted
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 07:45:09 PM
You said;

It wouldn't be rocket science to work out that if the parents were in the Tapas restaurant that the children were probably unattended.

I answered pointing out it wasn't so simple.

Are you able to explain how seeing the parents in the Tapas tells the would-be abductor the kids are home alone or not?
If they had spoken to Silvia Batista they would know the McCanns didn't have a babysitter that night , and if they could see both Gerry and Kate seated at the restaurant they would be correct in assuming the kids were home alone.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 07:45:25 PM
if an abductor can walk into a house where the mother is present and take a child out of a bath then Maddie could have been abducted
The abduction by a stranger of Elizabeth Smart from her bedroom and in front of her awake sister is another example.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: misty on January 23, 2017, 07:56:12 PM
Anyone sitting on the balconies of the upper floor apartments on the east end of block 2 can see both the front of block 5 & the side gate of 5a.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 08:01:33 PM
Did you not read my post?  Also, I suggest you read the Mirror article I linked to, it may shed some light.

As you prefer not to answer I will assume you have realised that parents being in the Tapas does not mean their kids are home alone.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: misty on January 23, 2017, 08:02:37 PM
Thanks, Misty.

Am I correct in thinking that this was a false crime report?

I think it was a false alarm, Eleanor, although whether it was just an alarm going off I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 08:06:19 PM
If they had spoken to Silvia Batista they would know the McCanns didn't have a babysitter that night , and if they could see both Gerry and Kate seated at the restaurant they would be correct in assuming the kids were home alone.

Do you have a cite for Silvia knowing the McCann's didn't have a babysitter on 3rd? How would they know the kids weren't at the night creche? How would they know they were in 5A? Honestly!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: misty on January 23, 2017, 08:29:04 PM
There are some links to alleged comments made by SB on this site (sorry Mods!)
http://3as.madeleinemccann.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14070&sid=7c0d0c8ed6dd8ecedb83682290d29550


A comment probably correct back in the day..
"From MW Website

Baby Sitting........Extra baby sitting can be arranged in the resort through our Childcare Manager from 12 euros per hour.....24 hour notice required."
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 08:35:54 PM
Do you have a cite for Silvia knowing the McCann's didn't have a babysitter on 3rd? How would they know the kids weren't at the night creche? How would they know they were in 5A? Honestly!
Haven't you been following the thread on Silvia, she had an interview in Portugal where she made that claim.  It had been discussed on this forum before.  Here is an early reference http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4538.msg187136#msg187136  They might know it is impossible to take 3 kids to night creche successfully with all the rules and carrying kids to and fro. 
They might not know for certain but take the punt that they were on target.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 08:37:53 PM
I asked you a simple question, why are you refusing to answer?  It is an extremely relevant question considering the fact that you are attempting to rip my argument to shreds, when as far as I recall you actually share my opinion that abduction is the most likely explanation for Madeleine's disappearance.  Indeed you presented some bizarre little maths equation not long back in which (IIRC) you put abduction at the top at 20% or something (even though with the other two possibilities the sum did not add up to a hundred). 

I'm seriously wondering what I'm doing even attempting to engage with you as you appear so outwith the realms of reasonable, rational discussion it hardly seems worth the bother.  Sorry if this seems rude.   8(8-))
You didn't engage, Alfie. Taking a detailed post and simply labelling it as bizarre, a la Davel, is not engaging.

If you want to engage, you need to explain why your line of reasoning precludes the McCanns dunit, Oldfield dunnit, and the potential involvement of others in the Tapas 9.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 08:40:00 PM
There are some links to alleged comments made by SB on this site (sorry Mods!)
http://3as.madeleinemccann.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14070&sid=7c0d0c8ed6dd8ecedb83682290d29550


A comment probably correct back in the day..
"From MW Website

Baby Sitting........Extra baby sitting can be arranged in the resort through our Childcare Manager from 12 euros per hour.....24 hour notice required."
Unfortunately the links are broken but there has been so much discussion parts of that interview are still available

"http://www.terra.com.pe/noticias/articu ... 934149.htm

La directora de servicios t├®cnicos del resort Ocean Club, Silvia Batista, afirm├│ que la misma noche en que Madeleine desapareci├│, ella en persona le ofreci├│ el servicio de cuidado de ni├▒os "porque el hotel es responsable por los hijos de los clientes, pero ellos lo rechazaron"



Translation:

The director of the Ocean Club's technical services, Silvia Batista, confirmed that on the same night Madeleine disappeared, she in person offered them the babysitting service, because the hotel is responsible for its guests, but they rejected her offer."


Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 08:44:22 PM
You didn't engage, Alfie. Taking a detailed post and simply labelling it as bizarre, a la Davel, is not engaging.

If you want to engage, you need to explain why your line of reasoning precludes the McCanns dunit, Oldfield dunnit, and the potential involvement of others in the Tapas 9.
I don't believe that can be done on here as we'd be stopped because of "libel", even if we proposed it as a theory.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 08:46:28 PM
Thanks, Misty.

Am I correct in thinking that this was a false crime report?
I believe not.  There was a 'report' (actually 3 phone calls to Lagos GNR) on the night.  Having just hacked my way through the 'were the GNR distracted' thread from 2014, there is speculation that it was false and that it might have been a diversion.  But there is nothing I read in the thread that evidences 'false'.

topic=5112.0  Enjoy!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 23, 2017, 08:48:40 PM
There are some links to alleged comments made by SB on this site (sorry Mods!)
http://3as.madeleinemccann.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14070&sid=7c0d0c8ed6dd8ecedb83682290d29550


A comment probably correct back in the day..
"From MW Website

Baby Sitting........Extra baby sitting can be arranged in the resort through our Childcare Manager from 12 euros per hour.....24 hour notice required."

There's some very interesting comments on that site, do you believe all of them? The McCanns in Caplins and having to be brought back because of crying children, all the staff gossiping about them the morning after? No wonder they were offered a baby-sitter! If they were, of course. Silvia said nothing of that in her official statements. They knew there were baby-sitters, but preferred leaving the kids home alone.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 23, 2017, 08:53:43 PM
There's some very interesting comments on that site, do you believe all of them? The McCanns in Caplins and having to be brought back because of crying children, all the staff gossiping about them the morning after? No wonder they were offered a baby-sitter! If they were, of course. Silvia said nothing of that in her official statements. They knew there were baby-sitters, but preferred leaving the kids home alone.
So are you denying that Silvia ever made a comment where it was reported (after translation :The director of the Ocean Club's technical services, Silvia Batista, confirmed that on the same night Madeleine disappeared, she in person offered them the babysitting service, because the hotel is responsible for its guests, but they rejected her offer.")?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 08:57:35 PM
You didn't engage, Alfie. Taking a detailed post and simply labelling it as bizarre, a la Davel, is not engaging.

If you want to engage, you need to explain why your line of reasoning precludes the McCanns dunit, Oldfield dunnit, and the potential involvement of others in the Tapas 9.

perhaps you could take your own advice and address the post... I challenged your assertion that there is no evidence that the mccanns are not suspects....you are wrong...there is

to say therefore I simply labellled your post as bizarre is also wrong...attention to detail....c minus must do better
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 09:02:06 PM
Are you ignoring the PJ who after all have primacy over the investigation.
Yes.

My understanding of the PJ involvement is that it consists of 2 parts.  The first is the effort in Oporto.  I know only a little about this, but its focus seems to be outside Portugal.  The second is the effort on the Algarve, which despite the primacy quote is merely a unit to handle legitimate requests emanating from Operation Grange.

If I went to the PJ I would get hauled down to Portimão or Faro for a day in their company.  This would be the excruciating routine of questions in Portuguese, translated into English, response in English and typed up in Portuguese. 

Then what would happen to the information?  At best, it would get sent to OG, which I have already done.  At worst, it would get sent to Oporto, upon which I could get hauled to either Faro or Oporto.  Such jolly times.

And then when the case gets archived, my personal and contact details will get revealed for every aspiring journalist to see.

The information has already been communicated to the UK team.  I will not get invited to Belgravia.  And my personal details will not ever become public.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 09:04:51 PM
Yes.

My understanding of the PJ involvement is that it consists of 2 parts.  The first is the effort in Oporto.  I know only a little about this, but its focus seems to be outside Portugal.  The second is the effort on the Algarve, which despite the primacy quote is merely a unit to handle legitimate requests emanating from Operation Grange.

If I went to the PJ I would get hauled down to Portimão or Faro for a day in their company.  This would be the excruciating routine of questions in Portuguese, translated into English, response in English and typed up in Portuguese. 

Then what would happen to the information?  At best, it would get sent to OG, which I have already done.  At worst, it would get sent to Oporto, upon which I could get hauled to either Faro or Oporto.  Such jolly times.

And then when the case gets archived, my personal and contact details will get revealed for every aspiring journalist to see.

The information has already been communicated to the UK team.  I will not get invited to Belgravia.  And my personal details will not ever become public.

judging by your posts on here I have a good idea how your information has been received
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: misty on January 23, 2017, 10:10:47 PM
There's some very interesting comments on that site, do you believe all of them? The McCanns in Caplins and having to be brought back because of crying children, all the staff gossiping about them the morning after? No wonder they were offered a baby-sitter! If they were, of course. Silvia said nothing of that in her official statements. They knew there were baby-sitters, but preferred leaving the kids home alone.

No, I don't believe all of them. Vera from Essex was totally unreliable according to internet research.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 10:19:47 PM
Yes - I've always thought they were innocent Faith - not because I like them particularly,  but because  I have never found anything to make me think otherwise.

But you thought them innocent before you even knew what the police had and that's what I mean by blind faith. It wouldn't matter what evidence the police had or, indeed, if it had gone to trial. You would still have argued for their innocence. Be honest.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 10:21:50 PM
But you thought them innocent before you even knew what the police had and that's what I mean by blind faith. It wouldn't matter what evidence the police had or, indeed, if it had gone to trial. You would still have argued for their innocence. Be honest.
this shows just how deluded some sceptics are....like Benice my opinions are based on evidence not blind faith
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 10:23:21 PM
judging by your posts on here I have a good idea how your information has been received
So, on a par with your regular form then.  Nothing constructive with a splash of goading.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 10:27:08 PM
I don't believe that can be done on here as we'd be stopped because of "libel", even if we proposed it as a theory.
It can.  And I'm not proposing it as a theory.  I am proposing that Alfie's flawed logic permits such options.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 23, 2017, 10:31:45 PM
perhaps you could take your own advice and address the post... I challenged your assertion that there is no evidence that the mccanns are not suspects....you are wrong...there is

to say therefore I simply labellled your post as bizarre is also wrong...attention to detail....c minus must do better
Since you simply labelled the post and did not address its contents I can claim that you simply labelled the post and did not address it contents.

I see we have another splash of goading.  Can the supporters rise above this?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 10:33:20 PM
So, on a par with your regular form then.  Nothing constructive with a splash of goading.
plenty in my other posts but it seems you choose to ignore them because you dont have any answers
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 10:35:49 PM
Since you simply labelled the post and did not address its contents I can claim that you simply labelled the post and did not address it contents.

I see we have another splash of goading.  Can the supporters rise above this?

#again you have claimed there is no evidence that SY do not consider the mccanns suspects....you seem to be delibrately avoiding engaging and not  actually addressing the issue.... i wonder why
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 10:39:42 PM
You didn't engage, Alfie. Taking a detailed post and simply labelling it as bizarre, a la Davel, is not engaging.

If you want to engage, you need to explain why your line of reasoning precludes the McCanns dunit, Oldfield dunnit, and the potential involvement of others in the Tapas 9.
No I don't need to preclude anything, I am simply demonstrating that abduction is both a logical and plausible theory, just as you have done on this forum previously.  You assertiing that I am somehow dobbing the McCanns in it  in my posts is utter horsehit, sorry if this sounds rude.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: slartibartfast on January 23, 2017, 10:40:59 PM
judging by your posts on here I have a good idea how your information has been received

Same way as Sadie's?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 10:41:10 PM
As you prefer not to answer I will assume you have realised that parents being in the Tapas does not mean their kids are home alone.
You obviously didn't read the post I wrote which answered your question.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 10:42:15 PM
Same way as Sadie's?

so thats your opinion...
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 10:50:44 PM
It can.  And I'm not proposing it as a theory.  I am proposing that Alfie's flawed logic permits such options.
My logic is not flawed.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 23, 2017, 10:55:56 PM


http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/kidnapper-spied-madeleine-mccann-police-1897649

If you have had a long hard day this will provide some light entertainment before you turn in.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 11:04:03 PM
My logic is not flawed.

You logic is absolutely flawed. Just because an occurrence is more improbable than another does not mean it couldn't have happened. Peter Voisey is just such a case. It was highly improbable that an individual unknown to the family would have taken the risk of entering a house which he knew to be occupied and finding a child, alone and vulnerable, and having the nerve to abduct her, but it happened. A number of improbable events leading to a criminal offence.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 11:07:18 PM

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/kidnapper-spied-madeleine-mccann-police-1897649

If you have had a long hard day this will provide some light entertainment before you turn in.

Thanks Alice that's cheered me right up ! @)(++(*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 11:07:58 PM
You logic is absolutely flawed. Just because an occurrence is more improbable than another does not mean it couldn't have happened. Peter Voisey is just such a case. It was highly improbable that an individual unknown to the family would have taken the risk of entering a house which he knew to be occupied and finding a child, alone and vulnerable, and having the nerve to abduct her, but it happened. A number of improbable events leading to a criminal offence.
Er, if that is what I had ever asserted then you'd be right - my logic would be flawed.  But as I've never said that then I'm aftaid it's back to the drawing board for you, but thanks for highlighting the case of a sucessful child abduction from a house by a complete stranger.  So, as in this case, abduction is both possible and plausible.   
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 11:09:58 PM
Thanks Alice that's cheered me right up ! @)(++(*
What a strange pair you are, to find that article so amusing. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 11:11:49 PM
Er, if that is what I had ever asserted then you'd be right - my logic would be flawed.  But as I've never said that then I'm aftaid it's back to the drawing board for you, but thanks for highlighting the case of a sucessful child abduction from a house by a complete stranger.  So, as in this case, abduction is both possible and plausible.

Is possible and plausible per se, there was time, but the surrounding importable events make it unlikely.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 11:13:03 PM
What a strange pair you are, to find that article so amusing.

It would be hilarious if it wasn't so contemptible.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 11:13:50 PM
Is possible and plausible per se, there was time, but the surrounding importable events make it unlikely.
Name one surrounding event that makes abduction unlikely.  Also, by "importable" did you mean "improbable", and if so did you not just write this?
"Just because an occurrence is more improbable than another does not mean it couldn't have happened"?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 11:15:24 PM
It would be hilarious if it wasn't so contemptible.
You found it so hilarious it "cheered you up" - an article about potential vantage points of a child abducutor - you've got to admit that's a bit sick.  What is so contemptible about that article?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 23, 2017, 11:19:48 PM
You found it so hilarious it "cheered you up" - an article about potential vantage points of a child abducutor - you've got to admit that's a bit sick.  What is so contemptible about that article?

If you really don't know Alfie then I'm not going to waste my time explain it to you.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 23, 2017, 11:28:29 PM
If you really don't know Alfie then I'm not going to waste my time explain it to you.
I know the article doesnt suit your agenda, and also that you seem to get your jollies by ridiculing the idea that Madeleine may have been abducted by a stranger, and also that you are firmly convinced that every article in the MSM that seems to support the idea that the Met are pursuing the abduction angle has been written by the McCanns, but beyond that no, I really don't know what you find so funny. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 23, 2017, 11:30:00 PM
The sceptcis have claimed for a long long time that SY have not said that they believe maddie was abducted but they merely believed that an abduction was possible....now they are trying to claim that an abduction was not possible....

that is a perfect example of totally flawed logic....
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 23, 2017, 11:44:23 PM
I know this is a hot topic but could all posters please moderate their language. TY
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 24, 2017, 12:03:25 AM
I know the article doesnt suit your agenda, and also that you seem to get your jollies by ridiculing the idea that Madeleine may have been abducted by a stranger, and also that you are firmly convinced that every article in the MSM that seems to support the idea that the Met are pursuing the abduction angle has been written by the McCanns, but beyond that no, I really don't know what you find so funny.

And while the MSM have done Madeleine and the McCanns such a disservice in the past I'm not at all sure why you're such a big fan.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2017, 12:22:37 AM
The denial of the plausibility or logic of stranger abduction in Madeleine McCann's case as discussed by some on this thread ... in my opinion ... is akin to denying that child abduction by strangers does not happen.
Would that we lived in such enlightened times. 

O tempora o mores! "A British property owner in the resort of Praia Da Luz said the police had pinpointed “persons of interest” to the blocks" http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/kidnapper-spied-madeleine-mccann-police-1897649 is unashamedly and mockingly posted and unashamedly lauded.
Not a thought is given to the investigators who in 2007 failed to investigated ... while the investigators who did investigate in 2013 are derided.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7884.msg377825#msg377825
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7884.msg377832#msg377832
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 24, 2017, 12:32:04 AM
To be perfectly blunt, I find this quite objectionable.

I have made it 100% crystal clear that I cannot provide sufficient evidence to support any particular scenario.

I have not explained how a scenario involving some or several of the Tapas 9 is feasible.  Further, I have accepted that other scenarios are possible.

IMO, you have done yourself a disservice with this post.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 24, 2017, 12:40:08 AM
The denial of the plausibility or logic of stranger abduction in Madeleine McCann's case as discussed by some on this thread ... in my opinion ... is akin to denying that child abduction by strangers does not happen.
Would that we lived in such enlightened times. 

O tempora o mores! "A British property owner in the resort of Praia Da Luz said the police had pinpointed “persons of interest” to the blocks" http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/kidnapper-spied-madeleine-mccann-police-1897649 is unashamedly and mockingly posted and unashamedly lauded.
Not a thought is given to the investigators who in 2007 failed to investigated ... while the investigators who did investigate in 2013 are derided.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7884.msg377825#msg377825
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7884.msg377832#msg377832

No one is deriding the present investigators because there is no evidence that these stories have anything to do with the present investigation. A unnamed British  ( aren't they always British)  property owner allegedly showed the churnalist a letter from an unnamed Met officer. Really ?  Haven't you supporters learned anything in the last 10 years ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2017, 01:27:27 AM
To be perfectly blunt, I find this quite objectionable.

I have made it 100% crystal clear that I cannot provide sufficient evidence to support any particular scenario.

I have not explained how a scenario involving some or several of the Tapas 9 is feasible.  Further, I have accepted that other scenarios are possible.

IMO, you have done yourself a disservice with this post.

A child is missing.

When she first disappeared the main opportunities for recovering her or finding out what had become of her were missed because of incompetent investigation.
I have mentioned one example of that on this thread tonight and the amusement it engendered.

The old myths still hold sway mainly I think because they are necessary to keep the opprobrium going against the parents of a missing child.

On this forum we have the privilege of being able to express our opinions within the bounds of the forum rules.  Members are welcome to disagree ... and I have pointed out exactly how I think your posts have offended against objectivity when one set of named individuals are brought into the equation.
 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 24, 2017, 02:03:00 AM
A child is missing.

When she first disappeared the main opportunities for recovering her or finding out what had become of her were missed because of incompetent investigation.
I have mentioned one example of that on this thread tonight and the amusement it engendered.

The old myths still hold sway mainly I think because they are necessary to keep the opprobrium going against the parents of a missing child.

On this forum we have the privilege of being able to express our opinions within the bounds of the forum rules.  Members are welcome to disagree ... and I have pointed out exactly how I think your posts have offended against objectivity when one set of named individuals are brought into the equation.
And yet again to be perfectly clear, I have not argued for one camp or the other. If you think I have, re-read the thread and post the evidence.

You haven't got a clue, based on factual evidence, who is innocent and who is guilty.

Other than a belief, without a shred of evidence, that no one in the T9 was involved.  Mea culpa, that the McCans were not involved, since that seems to be the bit that is twinging a nerve at the moment

Why does it always boil down to the McCanns from McCann supporters?

Is there no room for Madeleine?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2017, 03:02:31 AM
And yet again to be perfectly clear, I have not argued for one camp or the other. If you think I have, re-read the thread and post the evidence.

You haven't got a clue, based on factual evidence, who is innocent and who is guilty.

Other than a belief, without a shred of evidence, that no one in the T9 was involved.  Mea culpa, that the McCans were not involved, since that seems to be the bit that is twinging a nerve at the moment

Why does it always boil down to the McCanns from McCann supporters?

Is there no room for Madeleine?

Starting with the investigating team at the time and continuing through the years until the present day is the theme that Madeleine was not abducted and that Madeleine is dead.
That truly helped her case ~ I think not. 
Time was squandered when the focus should have been on the recovery of a living breathing child and not trying to fit one even more ludicrous fantasy on top of another to justify yet another allegation of child murder where the remains had vanished in a puff of smoke.

How exactly did that leave room for any thought of Madeleine ... particularly the thought that she might be alive and had the right to be looked for ... particularly since there is not one single indication of her death?

I have as much of a clue who is guilty and who is innocent as you have.  The difference being that I respect the right of people to the presumption of innocence and deplore individuals being subjected to years of character assassination based on proven lies.

Have you never wondered why the vitriol directed against the McCanns and how it is in proportion to their efforts to keep the search for Madeleine McCann going?
In my opinion the consciences of those who wish them well in that (McCann supporters aka Madeleine supporters %£&)**#) are clear.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 24, 2017, 03:20:56 AM
...

Have you never wondered why the vitriol directed against the McCanns and how it is in proportion to their efforts to keep the search for Madeleine McCann going?

...
This is the bit I object to.  The implication is that I have directed vitriol against the McCanns.  I have not.  The McCanns would be more than welcome in my home and I would be also be happy to cook one of my (famous) dinners and engage in interesting discussion with them.

I predict this is not going to happen on so many levels, but that is how life works.

I hope to offer the McCanns an opportunity in the next three months to participate in an event which will clarify what happened to Madeleine.  I fully expect this invitation to be ignored.

Madeleine v the McCanns.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2017, 03:51:52 AM
This is the bit I object to.  The implication is that I have directed vitriol against the McCanns.  I have not.  The McCanns would be more than welcome in my home and I would be also be happy to cook one of my (famous) dinners and engage in interesting discussion with them.

I predict this is not going to happen on so many levels, but that is how life works.

I hope to offer the McCanns an opportunity in the next three months to participate in an event which will clarify what happened to Madeleine.  I fully expect this invitation to be ignored.

Madeleine v the McCanns.

It is disingenuous to suggest that I have made any such allegation.  I do however concede that the McCanns may very well ignore any such invitation you may wish to extend to them. 
This is their life as they have to live it not the distraction in which we participate ... but good luck with your endeavours ... I await with interest your solution.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 06:53:36 AM
So are you denying that Silvia ever made a comment where it was reported (after translation :The director of the Ocean Club's technical services, Silvia Batista, confirmed that on the same night Madeleine disappeared, she in person offered them the babysitting service, because the hotel is responsible for its guests, but they rejected her offer.")?

There were various reports as to what Silvia said.

But I do not think that was our fault. The resort is not responsible for the children of clients. We advise all to take care of security because of robbery only. And we offer the service of baby sitter (babysitter), which was not requested by the couple.

 "every month registries of robberies in the area are kept, and we therefore advise the service of a child-minder", but even knowing this, Maddie's parents did not accept it.

"We did not bear the blame for the disappearance of the little girl, it couldn't be said whose fault it was, but certainly not ours", assured the director and indicated that "the parents of the girl that night were very unconcerned", and there was no reason they should not have requested the service of a child-minder.
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic10908.html

She seems to be defending OC and pointing out that guests are responsible for the safety of their children, not the resort. I can't imagine why she would be offering people baby-sitters because child care services were nothing to do with her.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 24, 2017, 07:33:56 AM
This is the bit I object to.  The implication is that I have directed vitriol against the McCanns.  I have not.  The McCanns would be more than welcome in my home and I would be also be happy to cook one of my (famous) dinners and engage in interesting discussion with them.

I predict this is not going to happen on so many levels, but that is how life works.

I hope to offer the McCanns an opportunity in the next three months to participate in an event which will clarify what happened to Madeleine.  I fully expect this invitation to be ignored.

Madeleine v the McCanns.
Could you give us any reason why the McCanns should or would want to engage with you
I find the idea ridiculous
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 08:05:35 AM
Someone has a good memory or keeps good records.

Just as in the post you have quoted, I have no intention here of explaining precisely why multiple people in the Tapas 9 were able logically and plausibly to have dunnit.  That avenue is called libel boulevard.

It's simply that the logic you are using is seriously flawed, to the extent it is akin to McCann propaganda.  The light it sheds on the case is zero.

It is in the vein of could, should, must have, possibly, and other speculation that is not evidence-based.
One minute you're accusing me of dobbing the McCanns in it, the next of spreading McCann propaganda.  Please explain why what I have written on this thread is"flawed logic" by comparison to the post of yours I quoted in which you put forward an abduction theory.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 24, 2017, 08:16:01 AM
But you thought them innocent before you even knew what the police had and that's what I mean by blind faith. It wouldn't matter what evidence the police had or, indeed, if it had gone to trial. You would still have argued for their innocence. Be honest.

Why do you keep asking me to be honest - I don't lie.   When I first heard Madeleine had disappeared,  I - ( along with everyone else I knew) thought she had probably been taken by a paedaphile.      As there is a history of little girls being abducted for that reason -  that is not 'blind belief'.       It was not until several years later when I was shocked to discover that there were people on the internet claiming it was the parents 'wot dunnit' that I started to look into the case -   mainly because  I was so appalled at the level of cruelty and venom being directed at the McCanns and anyone associated with them.    I still am.

Since then - along with SY and in line with the other real experts involved in this case -   nothing has happened to make me change my mind.      The behaviour of the McCanns in the last 10 years is the complete opposite of how guilty people would behave IMO  - and that has confirmed my belief in their innocence.

You are completely wrong Faith -  if you think I would 'argue for their innocence' if I had any doubts about it - as I most certainly would not.

Why you are soooo determined for them to be guilty - I have no idea.


Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 24, 2017, 08:28:24 AM
There's some very interesting comments on that site, do you believe all of them? The McCanns in Caplins and having to be brought back because of crying children, all the staff gossiping about them the morning after? No wonder they were offered a baby-sitter! If they were, of course. Silvia said nothing of that in her official statements. They knew there were baby-sitters, but preferred leaving the kids home alone.

This has been discussed before on here.        IIRC there was a statement by Silvia - giving all her movements for 3rd May - which did not include speaking to or meeting the McCanns at any time until after Madeleine's disappearance.  I'm sure if she had - she would have mentioned it in that statement. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 08:38:58 AM
Why do you keep asking me to be honest - I don't lie.   When I first heard Madeleine had disappeared,  I - ( along with everyone else I knew) thought she had probably been taken by a paedaphile.      As there is a history of little girls being abducted for that reason -  that is not 'blind belief'.       It was not until several years later when I was shocked to discover that there were people on the internet claiming it was the parents 'wot dunnit' that I started to look into the case -   mainly because  I was so appalled at the level of cruelty and venom being directed at the McCanns and anyone associated with them.    I still am.

Since then - along with SY and in line with the other real experts involved in this case -   nothing has happened to make me change my mind.      The behaviour of the McCanns in the last 10 years is the complete opposite of how guilty people would behave IMO  - and that has confirmed my belief in their innocence.

You are completely wrong Faith -  if you think I would 'argue for their innocence' if I had any doubts about it - as I most certainly would not.

Why you are soooo determined for them to be guilty - I have no idea.

The problem with basing your opinion on someone's behaviour is that it can be interpreted in different ways. There's no set pattern of behaviour for the innocent or for the guilty. You have chosen to interpret their behaviour in a particular way, but that doesn't mean you're right.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 09:19:16 AM
The problem with basing your opinion on someone's behaviour is that it can be interpreted in different ways. There's no set pattern of behaviour for the innocent or for the guilty. You have chosen to interpret their behaviour in a particular way, but that doesn't mean you're right.
Perhaps you'd like to be reminded of this post next time you tell us how the McCanns should have behaved and what they should have done in the circumstances, and about their alleged "odd" behaviour?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 09:28:20 AM
Perhaps you'd like to be reminded of this post next time you tell us how the McCanns should have behaved and what they should have done in the circumstances, and about their alleged "odd" behaviour?

Have you worked out yet how a would-be abductor would know the McCann kids were home alone purely by seeing their parents in the Tapas restaurant? By your illogical reasoning all the unaccompanied parents in the restaurant that night must also have left their kids home alone.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2017, 10:07:31 AM
Have you worked out yet how a would-be abductor would know the McCann kids were home alone purely by seeing their parents in the Tapas restaurant? By your illogical reasoning all the unaccompanied parents in the restaurant that night must also have left their kids home alone.

They were being observed,   witnesses saw men observing the apartment.   Also there were charity collectors collecting for a bogus charity,   a bit of a coincidence they happened to be around at the time. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 24, 2017, 10:31:21 AM
They were being observed,   witnesses saw men observing the apartment.   Also there were charity collectors collecting for a bogus charity,   a bit of a coincidence they happened to be around at the time.

Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the man allegedly seen watching the apartment spotted during the day ? With the McCanns involved in tennis and the children at the crèche at that time exactly what do you think he would have gleaned from 'watching'? As to the charity collectors, the same question. Were the McCanns bothered by anyone collecting for charity or did any of the witnesss who were have their child abducted?  Further wouldn't it be very strange for someone who intended to be part of a child abduction to make their face known to the parents of the intended victim and again what do you think a would be abductor would gain from standing on an apartment doorstep?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2017, 10:45:04 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the man allegedly seen watching the apartment spotted during the day ? With the McCanns involved in tennis and the children at the crèche at that time exactly what do you think he would have gleaned from 'watching'? As to the charity collectors, the same question. Were the McCanns bothered by anyone collecting for charity or did any of the witnesss who were have their child abducted?  Further wouldn't it be very strange for someone who intended to be part of a child abduction to make their face known to the parents of the intended victim and again what do you think a would be abductor would gain from standing on an apartment doorstep?

The charity collectors could have been out looking for a child like Madeleine,   one of the witnesses said the man seemed more interested in her children than collecting money.

They could have been watching day and night,  to observe the McCann's daily activities,  what time they came back for lunch etc.   was Madeleine the right child that had been chosen,   they were making sure.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 24, 2017, 10:54:52 AM
The charity collectors could have been out looking for a child like Madeleine,   one of the witnesses said the man seemed more interested in her children than collecting money.

They could have been watching day and night,  to observe the McCann's daily activities,  what time they came back for lunch etc.   was Madeleine the right child that had been chosen,   they were making sure.

Gail Cooper's statement said nothing about the charity collector being more interested in her children. It was only when her story was given the usual tabloid twist that that appeared. I wonder how much she was paid by the newspaper?

Further if they were watching day and night why did no one report seeing anyone watching at night? Why make yourself noticeable during the day but hide away at nigh and if they were going to snatch her at night, presumably while the parents were at dinner, why would they need to know when they came back for lunch?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 24, 2017, 11:02:07 AM
This is the bit I object to.  The implication is that I have directed vitriol against the McCanns.  I have not.  The McCanns would be more than welcome in my home and I would be also be happy to cook one of my (famous) dinners and engage in interesting discussion with them.

I predict this is not going to happen on so many levels, but that is how life works.

I hope to offer the McCanns an opportunity in the next three months to participate in an event which will clarify what happened to Madeleine.  I fully expect this invitation to be ignored.

Madeleine v the McCanns.

Ignored appears to be a common theme reported by numerous people who have contacted them.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 11:14:31 AM
Perhaps you'd like to be reminded of this post next time you tell us how the McCanns should have behaved and what they should have done in the circumstances, and about their alleged "odd" behaviour?

Anyone who supports or excuses the McCann's self confessed careless attitude to childcare and child safety is, in my opinion. attempting to normalise unacceptable behaviour. I am not the only one holding that opinion, which is factually based and nothing to do with judging whether they behave 'innocently' or 'guiltily'.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 24, 2017, 11:15:29 AM
Have you worked out yet how a would-be abductor would know the McCann kids were home alone purely by seeing their parents in the Tapas restaurant? By your illogical reasoning all the unaccompanied parents in the restaurant that night must also have left their kids home alone.

I believe we have covered that at length weeks ago.  Fully cooperating with those charged with finding out what happened to your missing daughter would have been a good starting point.  Then we have the launching of a private investigation contrary to Portuguese Law not to mention the Marcos Correia/ Amaral / Cipriano affair.  In missing children cases the parents are always the first to be investigated because in most cases it is the parents or another family member who is involved.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2017, 11:18:09 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't the man allegedly seen watching the apartment spotted during the day ? With the McCanns involved in tennis and the children at the crèche at that time exactly what do you think he would have gleaned from 'watching'? As to the charity collectors, the same question. Were the McCanns bothered by anyone collecting for charity or did any of the witnesss who were have their child abducted?  Further wouldn't it be very strange for someone who intended to be part of a child abduction to make their face known to the parents of the intended victim and again what do you think a would be abductor would gain from standing on an apartment doorstep?

They would only see Madeleine during the day wouldn't they?   How would they know the children were in the crèche and the McCann's were playing tennis unless they observed their day to day activities.   They were making sure Madeleine was the right child.

I wasn't talking about Gail Cooper either I was talking about this mother in this article -
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/508106/Madeleine-McCann-book-claims-prowler-seen-stalking-apartments
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 24, 2017, 11:33:24 AM
Anyone who supports or excuses the McCann's self confessed careless attitude to childcare and child safety is, in my opinion. attempting to normalise unacceptable behaviour. I am not the only one holding that opinion, which is factually based and nothing to do with judging whether they behave 'innocently' or 'guiltily'.

'Understanding' why they thought their childcare arrangements were OK is not the same as 'supporting' it.

The listening method of childcare may be unacceptable behaviour in your opinion and many others,  but it is not an opinion held by everyone, including all those parents who adopted the same childcare arrangements themselves when they went on holiday or those parents who use baby monitors for the same purpose.    In both cases children are left alone in their rooms while their parents go to dinner.

Pretending these people do not exist in their thousands is unrealistic IMO.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 24, 2017, 11:46:56 AM
&%+((£gCould you give us any reason why the McCanns should or would want to engage with you
I find the idea ridiculous
Did you miss this bit?  "I hope to offer the McCanns an opportunity in the next three months to participate in an event which will clarify what happened to Madeleine.  I fully expect this invitation to be ignored."

I find the attitude of those who elevate the McCann interests above the interests of Madeleine to be unfortunate, to put it mildly.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 24, 2017, 12:02:31 PM
One minute you're accusing me of dobbing the McCanns in it, the next of spreading McCann propaganda.  Please explain why what I have written on this thread is"flawed logic" by comparison to the post of yours I quoted in which you put forward an abduction theory.
Mine is based on facts in the files.

Yours isn't.  I assume it is based on belief, but that of course is an assumption.

As explained at least twice, my hypothesis is checkable by OG using a simple test.

Yours isn't.  It is not possible to test a pile of assumptions and hopes.

The theorem opened up using your flawed logic is that the McCanns had the ability to do it, therefore it is plausible and logical that they did.  This pile of crock builds in assumptions, and is non-testable.

I note for the record that although I have said this applies to those in the Tapas 9 who were conducting checks, you continually narrow this down to merely the McCanns.

We are back into the issue of which camp you fall into.  McCann supporter or Madeleine supporter.  Based on this thread, you appear to prioritise the McCanns at the expense of Madeleine.

Whereas I prioritise Madeleine.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 24, 2017, 12:04:09 PM
They would only see Madeleine during the day wouldn't they?   How would they know the children were in the crèche and the McCann's were playing tennis unless they observed their day to day activities.   They were making sure Madeleine was the right child.

I wasn't talking about Gail Cooper either I was talking about this mother in this article -
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/508106/Madeleine-McCann-book-claims-prowler-seen-stalking-apartments

The right child? For what?

As to the link the mother wasn't even sure the two men were the same. Sounds rather more like an opportunist burglar to me than a child snatcher.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 24, 2017, 12:12:51 PM
What a strange pair you are, to find that article so amusing.

It wasn't so much the article which was funny, both haha and peculiar, but what the article was being passed off as evidence of. That was haha and peculiar as well.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 24, 2017, 12:16:26 PM
You logic is absolutely flawed. Just because an occurrence is more improbable than another does not mean it couldn't have happened. Peter Voisey is just such a case. It was highly improbable that an individual unknown to the family would have taken the risk of entering a house which he knew to be occupied and finding a child, alone and vulnerable, and having the nerve to abduct her, but it happened. A number of improbable events leading to a criminal offence.

Voisey had form for high risk burglary.
He also left a bloody great boot print behind him in the bathroom in the much quoted case.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 24, 2017, 12:26:18 PM
Did you miss this bit?  "I hope to offer the McCanns an opportunity in the next three months to participate in an event which will clarify what happened to Madeleine.  I fully expect this invitation to be ignored."

I find the attitude of those who elevate the McCann interests above the interests of Madeleine to be unfortunate, to put it mildly.

They should be grateful for any help they can get from people who actualy live in the area.  Time will tell!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 24, 2017, 12:35:15 PM
They were being observed,   witnesses saw men observing the apartment.   Also there were charity collectors collecting for a bogus charity,   a bit of a coincidence they happened to be around at the time.
I have now been approached on 4 occasions by a total of 5 charity collectors, all within Luz.

Based on behaviour and conversation, I believe 3 of these occasions (4 collectors) to be bogus.  It is a common, frequent scam perpetrated (I believe) on non-Portuguese residents.  The last time I checked the minimum wage in Portugal, it was €5.70 per hour.  Getting €10 off a gullible foreigner is therefore a worthwhile activity.

The last time I was approached was in October 2016.  I had a visitor doing a Luz Tour and we were sitting outside Kellys, in fine sunshine, discussing the case, when a man approached us.  Thinking back on his behaviour and conversation, I believe he was genuine, but at the time, being aware of the charity collector scam, we declined to contribute. 

To be honest, I feel somewhat guilty about this now because frankly I can afford to donate €10 to a good cause.  The man was finding it tough going to get contributions, partly because of the scam awareness, and partly because workers in bars etc often get employed for a cash-in-hand rate of 4 or 5€ per hour i.e. they are trying to scrape a living themselves.

Now the fact that this approach occurred in the midst of a Luz Tour is sheer coincidence, but the fact is such coincidences do happen.

Since no child went missing on the 3 bogus events, and since these events were splattered across 3 different locations in Luz, and sine there was never a hint of burglary or robbery, I ascribe these 3 events as simplistic attempts at a scam, nothing more.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 24, 2017, 12:37:21 PM
Did you miss this bit?  "I hope to offer the McCanns an opportunity in the next three months to participate in an event which will clarify what happened to Madeleine.  I fully expect this invitation to be ignored."

I find the attitude of those who elevate the McCann interests above the interests of Madeleine to be unfortunate, to put it mildly.

You accuse me of putting the McCanns interest above Maddies then once again you are woefully wrong
The McCanns are the ones who have kept the search alive when others wanted to insist she was dead
You still haven't answered the question
What do you feel you have to offer to the McCanns
I would say nothing but I am happy to be corected
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2017, 01:27:10 PM
The right child? For what?

As to the link the mother wasn't even sure the two men were the same. Sounds rather more like an opportunist burglar to me than a child snatcher.

If Madeleine had been seen say on the beach and a photo taken,   then the men observing the McCann apartment would be making sure that the person they had a photo of was the same child as the one in 5a.

I don't think that was a random burglar,   the woman said he was staring intently at her child and was watching the apartment in the afternoon,   then coincidently a man comes into her apartment,  into the room where her child was,   she sees him and he runs off.   This was weeks before Madeleine was taken.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2017, 01:30:53 PM
I have now been approached on 4 occasions by a total of 5 charity collectors, all within Luz.

Based on behaviour and conversation, I believe 3 of these occasions (4 collectors) to be bogus.  It is a common, frequent scam perpetrated (I believe) on non-Portuguese residents.  The last time I checked the minimum wage in Portugal, it was €5.70 per hour.  Getting €10 off a gullible foreigner is therefore a worthwhile activity.

The last time I was approached was in October 2016.  I had a visitor doing a Luz Tour and we were sitting outside Kellys, in fine sunshine, discussing the case, when a man approached us.  Thinking back on his behaviour and conversation, I believe he was genuine, but at the time, being aware of the charity collector scam, we declined to contribute. 

To be honest, I feel somewhat guilty about this now because frankly I can afford to donate €10 to a good cause.  The man was finding it tough going to get contributions, partly because of the scam awareness, and partly because workers in bars etc often get employed for a cash-in-hand rate of 4 or 5€ per hour i.e. they are trying to scrape a living themselves.

Now the fact that this approach occurred in the midst of a Luz Tour is sheer coincidence, but the fact is such coincidences do happen.

Since no child went missing on the 3 bogus events, and since these events were splattered across 3 different locations in Luz, and sine there was never a hint of burglary or robbery, I ascribe these 3 events as simplistic attempts at a scam, nothing more.

I am sure there are a lot of scam charity collectors they are everywhere not just in Luz.   Though what a great cover to find out where children were in the apartments.   Don't you think the woman who had a man collecting for charity weeks before Madeleine went missing,  who was staring at her child and was then watching her apartment in the afternoon,   sounds a bit dodgy?    Then a man comes into her apartment the next day into the room where her child was and she scared him off,   probably the same man.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 24, 2017, 02:02:21 PM
You have not told us why you think YOU can help the investigation when we have professionals involved
I think you are way overestimating your abilities to the point of delusion
Again I am happy for you to correct me

There is no need to be rude davel, you know our rules.

Why do you think Jenny Murat set up an information desk?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on January 24, 2017, 02:34:05 PM
There is no need to be rude davel, you know our rules.

Why do you think Jenny Murat set up an information desk?

I have often wondered about that.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 24, 2017, 02:38:12 PM
There is no need to be rude davel, you know our rules.

Why do you think Jenny Murat set up an information desk?

I think it's very odd a member of the public expecting the McCanns to meet and engage with them
Not rude at all...... just reality
That's why I've asked sil why she thinks the McCanns should meet her but she has not answered the question
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 02:50:48 PM
Have you worked out yet how a would-be abductor would know the McCann kids were home alone purely by seeing their parents in the Tapas restaurant? By your illogical reasoning all the unaccompanied parents in the restaurant that night must also have left their kids home alone.
There is nothing illogical about my reasoning.  Did the Tapas group leave their kids unattended most nights of the holiday?  How difficult would it have been for an abductor intent on stealing a child to work this out, by day 6 of the holiday, either through observation, reconnaissance or tip-off?   I have also already conceded that maybe the abductor DIDN'T know that the children were unattended and entered the apartment on the off-chance, as has happened in other abductions and abduction attempts, also break-ins to the bedrooms of  children holiday makers on the Algarve.  I have said this all before on this thread so please don't claim again that I have not answered your question or get me to repeat it for the third time.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 02:57:05 PM
'Understanding' why they thought their childcare arrangements were OK is not the same as 'supporting' it.

The listening method of childcare may be unacceptable behaviour in your opinion and many others,  but it is not an opinion held by everyone, including all those parents who adopted the same childcare arrangements themselves when they went on holiday or those parents who use baby monitors for the same purpose.    In both cases children are left alone in their rooms while their parents go to dinner.

Pretending these people do not exist in their thousands is unrealistic IMO.

I don't know how many times it's been pointed out, but you seem happy to ignore it. The listening method offered by hotels and holiday complexes is not, by any stretch of your imagination, the same as that practised by the T6.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 24, 2017, 03:08:01 PM
If Madeleine had been seen say on the beach and a photo taken,   then the men observing the McCann apartment would be making sure that the person they had a photo of was the same child as the one in 5a.

I don't think that was a random burglar,   the woman said he was staring intently at her child and was watching the apartment in the afternoon,   then coincidently a man comes into her apartment,  into the room where her child was,   she sees him and he runs off.   This was weeks before Madeleine was taken.

Have we any evidence that anyone was watching Madeleine on the beach?Have we any evidence that anyone was watching Madeleine anywhere?

You don't think it was a random burglar, I do. So there we go.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 03:11:15 PM
If Madeleine had been seen say on the beach and a photo taken,   then the men observing the McCann apartment would be making sure that the person they had a photo of was the same child as the one in 5a.

I don't think that was a random burglar,   the woman said he was staring intently at her child and was watching the apartment in the afternoon,   then coincidently a man comes into her apartment,  into the room where her child was,   she sees him and he runs off.   This was weeks before Madeleine was taken.

There were no reports by the people caring for the children of anyone taking photos of children on the beach, but we can pretend it happened if you like. Then various men lurk in full view in broad daylight fixing their gaze on 5A for all to see. They take no notice of passer's by who sound like they cast curious looks at them, not even to the mother who drew her child away from one of them. Were they trying to be noticed, do you think? Speaking for myself I would have had difficulty distinguishing between two of those children if I had only seen a photo;

(http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy69/HiDeHo1/Madeleine%20private/madeleinet7.jpg)
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 03:26:22 PM
There is nothing illogical about my reasoning.  Did the Tapas group leave their kids unattended most nights of the holiday?  How difficult would it have been for an abductor intent on stealing a child to work this out, by day 6 of the holiday, either through observation, reconnaissance or tip-off?   I have also already conceded that maybe the abductor DIDN'T know that the children were unattended and entered the apartment on the off-chance, as has happened in other abductions and abduction attempts, also break-ins to the bedrooms of  children holiday makers on the Algarve.  I have said this all before on this thread so please don't claim again that I have not answered your question or get me to repeat it for the third time.

So you are now saying he didn't work it out just from seeing the parents in the restaurant? OK.

If he watched for six nights how long would he need to watch each night?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 24, 2017, 03:56:50 PM
Are we back to that old potato again?

There is no evidence of any abduction from the apartment, good old forensics nipped that one in the bud.  All that is left is the claim by the McCanns that Maddie was left in the apartment at 8.30, seen by Gerry again at 9.15 and wasn't there when Kate decided to check them at 10.  Not a lot to go on eh?   In addition, nobody saw an abductor, no ransom demand has ever been made or at least nobody is admitting to having received one and no confirmed sightings of her in nearly 10 years.

What you are asking us to do is to throw common sense to the wind in favour of some totally unfounded claim.

The only plausible logical theory is that she got out and was lifted by someone.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 24, 2017, 04:04:30 PM
Are we back to that old potato again?

There is no evidence of any abduction from the apartment, good old forensics nipped that one in the bud.  All that is left is the claim by the McCanns that Maddie was left in the apartment at 8.30, seen by Gerry again at 9.15 and wasn't there when Kate decided to check them at 10.  Not a lot to go on eh?   In addition, nobody saw an abductor, no ransom demand has ever been made or at least nobody is admitting to having received one and no confirmed sightings of her in nearly 10 years.

What you are asking us to do is to throw common sense to the wind in favour of some totally unfounded claim.

The only plausible logical theory is that she got out and was lifted by someone.

What 'evidence' of abduction from the apartment would you expect?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2017, 04:23:52 PM
There were no reports by the people caring for the children of anyone taking photos of children on the beach, but we can pretend it happened if you like. Then various men lurk in full view in broad daylight fixing their gaze on 5A for all to see. They take no notice of passer's by who sound like they cast curious looks at them, not even to the mother who drew her child away from one of them. Were they trying to be noticed, do you think? Speaking for myself I would have had difficulty distinguishing between two of those children if I had only seen a photo;

(http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy69/HiDeHo1/Madeleine%20private/madeleinet7.jpg)

Well these men existed G Unit there are witnesses who saw them,  are you trying to say they are wrong? No they didn't take any notice of passers by even though they thought the man scary,   read the witnesses statements.

Similar child?   That is why they had to be certain.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 24, 2017, 04:27:28 PM
Have we any evidence that anyone was watching Madeleine on the beach?Have we any evidence that anyone was watching Madeleine anywhere?

You don't think it was a random burglar, I do. So there we go.


Gale Cooper saw the bogus charity collector who came to her apartment,  following the children from the crech on the beach.   Why are you dismissing all this,  you don't know if someone was watching Madeleine or not,  the Police have to go with evidence and witnesses.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 24, 2017, 04:35:00 PM
What 'evidence' of abduction from the apartment would you expect?

Oh just the normal stuff like boot marks on the outside wall, the window sills outside and inside, marks on the wall inside, dirt on the carpet between the childs bed and the window, marks on the bedspread by the window, fingerprints on the window or window frame, stuff knocked over even stolen or even signs of a forced entry.  Need I go on?

Its ironic for sure that the one single bit of evidence ie what Tanner said she saw has been discounted by SY.  Oops there goes the abduction theory, own goal for Redwood on that on me thinks.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 24, 2017, 04:53:45 PM
I don't know how many times it's been pointed out, but you seem happy to ignore it. The listening method offered by hotels and holiday complexes is not, by any stretch of your imagination, the same as that practised by the T6.

The listening service, either offered as a service or mirrored by parents, always involves the one same principle - and that is that children are left alone and asleep in their rooms while their parents go out - having arranged for regular listening checks to be made.

The only difference which may exist is that in some cases the parents do the checking and in other cases members of staff do the checking.   

Then we have those parents who do no regular checking themselves but rely on baby alarms to act as babysitters.

None of the above alters the one thing that all those parents have in common with the McCanns and their friends, and that is  they have all decided it is acceptable and safe to leave their children alone and asleep in their rooms and go out to dinner.

All the wishful thinking in the world won't change that fact.

IMO

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 05:09:19 PM
Oh just the normal stuff like boot marks on the outside wall, the window sills outside and inside, marks on the wall inside, dirt on the carpet between the childs bed and the window, marks on the bedspread by the window, fingerprints on the window or window frame, stuff knocked over even stolen or even signs of a forced entry.  Need I go on?

Its ironic for sure that the one single bit of evidence ie what Tanner said she saw has been discounted by SY.  Oops there goes the abduction theory, own goal for Redwood on that on me thinks.
LOL.  So, in your opinion for an abduction to have occurred there MUST be forensic evidence left at the scene, and if none is found then it couldn't have been abduction, that's your view is it?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 05:26:37 PM
The listening service, either offered as a service or mirrored by parents, always involves the one same principle - and that is that children are left alone and asleep in their rooms while their parents go out - having arranged for regular listening checks to be made.

The only difference which may exist is that in some cases the parents do the checking and in other cases members of staff do the checking.   

Then we have those parents who do no regular checking themselves but rely on baby alarms to act as babysitters.

None of the above alters the one thing that all those parents have in common with the McCanns and their friends, and that is  they have all decided it is acceptable and safe to leave their children alone and asleep in their rooms and go out to dinner.

All the wishful thinking in the world won't change that fact.

IMO

Can you cite one official listening service which is offered not in an hotel or a complex but in a village which anyone can access and where there are a mixture of privately owned and holiday rental properties?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 24, 2017, 05:47:07 PM
There is nothing illogical about my reasoning.  Did the Tapas group leave their kids unattended most nights of the holiday?  How difficult would it have been for an abductor intent on stealing a child to work this out, by day 6 of the holiday, either through observation, reconnaissance or tip-off?   

I have also already conceded that maybe the abductor DIDN'T know that the children were unattended and entered the apartment on the off-chance, as has happened in other abductions and abduction attempts, also break-ins to the bedrooms of  children holiday makers on the Algarve.  I have said this all before on this thread so please don't claim again that I have not answered your question or get me to repeat it for the third time.
How difficult?  By observation or recon?  I can't prove it impossible, but it would not pass a test of 'beyond all reasonable doubt'.  Unless you overcome your distaste for visiting Luz I will not be able to demonstrate this to you by first-hand experience.

By tip off?  This requires that someone in the know is already aware of someone who wants to nick a child and is willing to pass on such information, presumably for cash though there could be a different motivation.  I am trying to envisage the pub conversation that took place.  Would it be 'hi, I've heard you are interested in nicking a kid, and I know where you can get one, if you have the required readies.'?  Or would it be 'we both have an interest in nicking a kid, and I know where we can get one.'?  That don't impress me much.

Opportunistic snatcher?  Madeleine could have been snatched in such an incident.  All that remains is means of entry and motivation.  And lack of evidence.  And those darn pesky dogs.  The key word in your post re this point was 'maybe', thus sheer speculation.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 24, 2017, 05:49:27 PM
How difficult?  By observation or recon?  I can't prove it impossible, but it would not pass a test of 'beyond all reasonable doubt'.  Unless you overcome your distaste for visiting Luz I will not be able to demonstrate this to you by first-hand experience.

By tip off?  This requires that someone in the know is already aware of someone who wants to nick a child and is willing to pass on such information, presumably for cash though there could be a different motivation.  I am trying to envisage the pub conversation that took place.  Would it be 'hi, I've heard you are interested in nicking a kid, and I know where you can get one, if you have the required readies.'?  Or would it be 'we both have an interest in nicking a kid, and I know where we can get one.'?  That don't impress me much.

Opportunistic snatcher?  Madeleine could have been snatched in such an incident.  All that remains is means of entry and motivation.  And lack of evidence.  And those darn pesky dogs.  The key word in your post re this point was 'maybe', thus sheer speculation.


do you still not understand that no inference can be drawn from the alerts which proves your logic is totally flawed
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: misty on January 24, 2017, 05:53:05 PM
Can you cite one official listening service which is offered not in an hotel or a complex but in a village which anyone can access and where there are a mixture of privately owned and holiday rental properties?

Why does it make such a difference if the complex is a mixture of public & privately owned apartments? People are people the world over and, if they have bad intentions, a listening service in operation where they happen to be on vacation is not going to prevent them seizing an opportunity. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: misty on January 24, 2017, 05:57:09 PM
How difficult?  By observation or recon?  I can't prove it impossible, but it would not pass a test of 'beyond all reasonable doubt'.  Unless you overcome your distaste for visiting Luz I will not be able to demonstrate this to you by first-hand experience.

By tip off?  This requires that someone in the know is already aware of someone who wants to nick a child and is willing to pass on such information, presumably for cash though there could be a different motivation. I am trying to envisage the pub conversation that took place.  Would it be 'hi, I've heard you are interested in nicking a kid, and I know where you can get one, if you have the required readies.'?  Or would it be 'we both have an interest in nicking a kid, and I know where we can get one.'?  That don't impress me much.

Opportunistic snatcher?  Madeleine could have been snatched in such an incident.  All that remains is means of entry and motivation.  And lack of evidence.  And those darn pesky dogs.  The key word in your post re this point was 'maybe', thus sheer speculation.

Those sort of people don't chat in the pub these days; they use the Dark Web.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 06:02:38 PM
How difficult?  By observation or recon?  I can't prove it impossible, but it would not pass a test of 'beyond all reasonable doubt'.  Unless you overcome your distaste for visiting Luz I will not be able to demonstrate this to you by first-hand experience.

By tip off?  This requires that someone in the know is already aware of someone who wants to nick a child and is willing to pass on such information, presumably for cash though there could be a different motivation.  I am trying to envisage the pub conversation that took place.  Would it be 'hi, I've heard you are interested in nicking a kid, and I know where you can get one, if you have the required readies.'?  Or would it be 'we both have an interest in nicking a kid, and I know where we can get one.'?  That don't impress me much.

Opportunistic snatcher?  Madeleine could have been snatched in such an incident.  All that remains is means of entry and motivation.  And lack of evidence.  And those darn pesky dogs.  The key word in your post re this point was 'maybe', thus sheer speculation.
You seem to be under the impression that I am trying to prove beyond reasonable doubt that my theory  (which is pretty close to your theory, let's face it) is actually what happened and not simply one plausible logical theory of abduction that may have happened.  Perhaps that is why you are getting so aerated with me, I dunno.  I'm still finding this exchange with you quite mystifying otherwise. &%+((£
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 06:14:03 PM
So you are now saying he didn't work it out just from seeing the parents in the restaurant? OK.

If he watched for six nights how long would he need to watch each night?
I don't think I ever did say that did I?
I think once a pattern had been established of the Tapas group leaving their kids alone to go and dine had been established, perhaps after 3 nights or so, a would-be abductor would have a pretty good idea of the risks involved, when was the best time to strike, etc.   That said, it could just as well have been a spur of the moment decision, by someone who knew there were kids in the apartment, just as the break-ins of children in holiday apartments had occurred elsewhere on the Algarve. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 06:20:40 PM
Well these men existed G Unit there are witnesses who saw them,  are you trying to say they are wrong? No they didn't take any notice of passers by even though they thought the man scary,   read the witnesses statements.

Similar child?   That is why they had to be certain.

I'm sure the men did exist, but much less sure that they were doing anything wrong. If they were they were very careless about the possibility of being seen, reported and possibly caught later.

If the child was photographed on the beach why watch for her in R Dr A da Silva? She could have been collected from the main reception and taken to any one of the OC apartments, many of them nowhere near there.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2017, 06:29:40 PM
.........
 Speaking for myself I would have had difficulty distinguishing between two of those children if I had only seen a photo;

(http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy69/HiDeHo1/Madeleine%20private/madeleinet7.jpg)
Which one is Madeleine?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 06:32:37 PM
I don't think I ever did say that did I?
I think once a pattern had been established of the Tapas group leaving their kids alone to go and dine had been established, perhaps after 3 nights or so, a would-be abductor would have a pretty good idea of the risks involved, when was the best time to strike, etc.   That said, it could just as well have been a spur of the moment decision, by someone who knew there were kids in the apartment, just as the break-ins of children in holiday apartments had occurred elsewhere on the Algarve.

What pattern was that then?
Saturday; no children left.
Sunday; only 8 of the group went to the Tapas to dine.
Tuesday; ditto
Wednesday; ditto.

The only night they were all at the Tapas was Monday. No pattern there of all being out every night Alfie.

How would a spur of the moment abductor know there were children alone in the apartment?

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 06:34:54 PM
Which one is Madeleine?

Nice one.  *&*%£
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 24, 2017, 06:41:36 PM
Nice one.  *&*%£
I'm being serious.   Which one is Madeleine?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 06:42:08 PM
What pattern was that then?
Saturday; no children left.
Sunday; only 8 of the group went to the Tapas to dine.
Tuesday; ditto
Wednesday; ditto.

The only night they were all at the Tapas was Monday. No pattern there of all being out every night Alfie.

How would a spur of the moment abductor know there were children alone in the apartment?
How many nights in a row did the McCanns leave the kids to dine at the Tapas? 
Second question - I didn't say he knew they were alone.  When the sex attacks happened on other children in the Algarve holiday apartments the children had not been left alone as far as I'm aware.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Erngath on January 24, 2017, 06:42:49 PM
Which one is Madeleine?

Do you really not know?
Or just making a light-hearted quip at the expense of a missing child?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Erngath on January 24, 2017, 06:43:50 PM
Nice one.  *&*%£

Hysterically funny.  8(8-))
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 24, 2017, 06:44:31 PM
when the little girl in the UK was taken from her bath....how did the abductor know she was on her own....think about it

the level of denial by the sceptics is amazing....an abduction would have been very simple
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 24, 2017, 06:49:38 PM
when the little girl in the UK was taken from her bath....how did the abductor know she was on her own....think about it

the level of denial by the sceptics is amazing....an abduction would have been very simple

You been asked often enough and had more than enough time to give us the full SP but thus far your contribution is simple statements with no detail.
Detail out how simple it would be then under the conditions obtaining at the time.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 06:50:11 PM
when the little girl in the UK was taken from her bath....how did the abductor know she was on her own....think about it

the level of denial by the sceptics is amazing....an abduction would have been very simple
Elizabeth Smart was abducted from her bedroom, her parents were present in the house at the time, her sister present in the same room.  Apparently this means her abduction was neither plausible, nor logical, yet it happened.   Go figure.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 24, 2017, 07:08:53 PM
You been asked often enough and had more than enough time to give us the full SP but thus far your contribution is simple statements with no detail.
Detail out how simple it would be then under the conditions obtaining at the time.

abduction is quite possible as evidenced by my previous post...that is all that is needed
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 07:26:00 PM
I'm being serious.   Which one is Madeleine?

Thank you for helping me to make my point. It's not so easy deciding which one is her, is it?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 24, 2017, 07:27:30 PM
abduction is quite possible as evidenced by my previous post...that is all that is needed

We are talking about Madeleine McCanns disappearance.
Detail that out if you can.
Also spot the difference between the case you quoted and the McCann case.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 24, 2017, 07:30:22 PM
Elizabeth Smart was abducted from her bedroom, her parents were present in the house at the time, her sister present in the same room.  Apparently this means her abduction was neither plausible, nor logical, yet it happened.   Go figure.

No it doesn't. It means you have chosen a poor example to illustrate your point.........because the example bears no resemblance to the MM case.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 24, 2017, 07:37:17 PM
We are talking about Madeleine McCanns disappearance.
Detail that out if you can.
Also spot the difference between the case you quoted and the McCann case.

lots of diferences but both stranger abduction showing just how easy it is to take a child from under the noses of parents
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 07:38:33 PM
If an abductor can take a child from a locked house in which her parents are sleeping, how much easier to take a child from an unlocked house in which the parents are not present?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1988653/chilling-footage-of-serial-child-abductor-who-entered-victims-homes-in-early-hours-as-parents-slept/
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 24, 2017, 07:58:30 PM
How many nights in a row did the McCanns leave the kids to dine at the Tapas? 
Second question - I didn't say he knew they were alone.  When the sex attacks happened on other children in the Algarve holiday apartments the children had not been left alone as far as I'm aware.

Now it's not 'the group' it's just the McCanns. I hope you don't play football, you'll never find the goalposts. Does he notice one person seems to stay in most nights? Does he wonder what they're doing, if they are checking the kids? There's a group here, you can't ignore what the others are doing if there's a chance they will appear behind you.

So he's strolling past 5A before 10pm and decides to pop in on the off chance that there are children alone in there? Rubbish! The sex attacks you are referring to were much later when all were sleeping.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 24, 2017, 08:16:10 PM
lots of diferences but both stranger abduction showing just how easy it is to take a child from under the noses of parents

I am still waiting for your detailed explanation. YOu seem to either have not spotted the main difference or are deliberately ignoring it despite my having posted it earlier today.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 24, 2017, 09:39:31 PM
If an abductor can take a child from a locked house in which her parents are sleeping, how much easier to take a child from an unlocked house in which the parents are not present?

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1988653/chilling-footage-of-serial-child-abductor-who-entered-victims-homes-in-early-hours-as-parents-slept/

The Sun.
You're 'avin' a larf ........................ @)(++(*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 10:04:17 PM
Now it's not 'the group' it's just the McCanns. I hope you don't play football, you'll never find the goalposts. Does he notice one person seems to stay in most nights? Does he wonder what they're doing, if they are checking the kids? There's a group here, you can't ignore what the others are doing if there's a chance they will appear behind you.

So he's strolling past 5A before 10pm and decides to pop in on the off chance that there are children alone in there? Rubbish! The sex attacks you are referring to were much later when all were sleeping.
I'm sorry but it WAS the McCanns' child that was abducted, wasn't it?  Surely it is relevant as it was their child that was taken what pattern THEIR evenings took as opposed to anyone else's, if not perhaps you could explain why not?  As for your second argument, I find it rather droll that you think it's somehow more understandable that an abductor would strike when parents are on the premises asleep, than when they are dining 50 metres away.  Haven't you spent the last 10 years lambasting the parents for leaving the kids alone when "anything" could have happened and telling us how much safer they would have been if their parents had remained under the same roof as them all night?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 24, 2017, 10:26:54 PM
Elizabeth Smart was abducted from her bedroom, her parents were present in the house at the time, her sister present in the same room.  Apparently this means her abduction was neither plausible, nor logical, yet it happened.   Go figure.

And it was witnessed too which rendered it a true abduction from the off.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 10:29:29 PM
And it was witnessed too which rendered it a true abduction from the off.
you do know that some McCann sceptics also think Smart's own father was involved in her abduction don't you?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 24, 2017, 10:36:53 PM
you do know that some McCann sceptics also think Smart's own father was involved in her abduction don't you?

Yet again this abductor turned out to be a close family trusted friend.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 24, 2017, 10:45:40 PM
Yet again this abductor turned out to be a close family trusted friend.
I think you've got that wrong John.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 25, 2017, 07:26:43 AM
I think you've got that wrong John.

The abductor simply worked for the family for a short while, doing odd jobs.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 25, 2017, 09:01:57 AM
There is always a possibility of discovery when you enter a home to commit a criminal act, it's a known risk which can be minimised but not completely prevented, I can refer you to any number of cases of burglars or would-be abductors caught in the act by home-owners or parents.  The known risk does not act as a deterrent in all cases, if it did there would never be a burglary or abduction when homeowners or parents were in the near vicinity.
Can I ask you - if you went out to dinner at your neighbours and left the side door unlocked whilst you were out would you think it implausible and illogical if you came home and discovered some of your valuables had been stolen?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 25, 2017, 10:13:59 AM
For an abduction to have taken place the paths of the child and the abductor must have crossed.
Therefore the child exited the apartment or the abductor gained entrance to the apartment. All within the constraints of he case evidence.
30 pages plus and we haven't progreesed very far have we?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on January 25, 2017, 10:24:43 AM
its quite a stupid question.....the sample was poor and could not confirm or discount the presence of maddie's DNA in the vehicle...so it tells us nothing

Not a stupid question at all.

Your mate ferryman says it discounts Madeleine.

Would you  care to correct him. 8((()*/
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 25, 2017, 10:35:28 AM
Given that we've reached that stage in the thread where we have to resort to repeating ourselves:

The door to the apartment was unlocked - known fact.
Therefore the apartment was not secure - known fact.
An abductor could gain access to the apartment without breaking and entering.
That's how it was possible.

And before I'm sniffily informed that I have not provided evidence of an abductor, well if you ask for a plausible, logical theory of abduction an abductor is somewhat of a pre-requisite to the theory. 

So - a (theoretical) abductor (identity unknown) entered the unlocked apartment when he or she considered the risk of discovery to be at its lowest point during a window of opportunity (as confirmed as existing by the Met) and removed the child, for reasons unknown.  During the (theroretical) abduction the (theoretical) abductor opened the window to the children's bedroom for reasons unknown.  The (theoretical) abductor and Madeleine disappear into the night by means unknown, never to be seen again. 

It's a theory short on detail and we can make up stuff to fill the gaps, but that's the bare bones of it.  Plausible.  Logical IMO. 

Cue the chorus of indignation and cries of "it's totally illogical!!"
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 25, 2017, 11:48:49 AM
Parents using a service offered by a hotel or holiday complex can justify their decision by pointing out that it is part of the service, so those offering it are recommending it as acceptable.

Parents creating their own ad hoc listening service in a resort where it's NOT PROVIDED BECAUSE THE RESORT ISN'T SUITABLE cannot justify their decision in that way.

Two different things, no matter how much you attempt to pretend they're the same. Even Kate McCann's mother struggled to understand what they were thinking;

 “I can read articles that say Kate and Gerry should never have left their children and I can accept that. You find yourself over and over again in your head thinking: ‘Why did they think it would be all right?’

“Why did they think – ALL of them – it was OK to do this?
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/madeleine-mccanns-grandparents-ask-leave-3490016
So, what was it about the OC resort that meant the dangers to children left alone were far greater than in those resorts in which a listening service is offered?  Presumably the dangers WITHIN the apartment were not far greater than those in other places with a listening service, so what was it in particular that made the OC unsuitable?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 25, 2017, 12:52:03 PM
Elizabeth Smart was abducted from her bedroom, her parents were present in the house at the time, her sister present in the same room.  Apparently this means her abduction was neither plausible, nor logical, yet it happened.   Go figure.

Elizabeth Smart's kidnapper was known to her family and had worked for them. He would have known the layout of the house.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 25, 2017, 01:06:04 PM
Elizabeth Smart's kidnapper was known to her family and had worked for them. He would have known the layout of the house.
Really?

"He worked at the Smarts' home for five hours, helping on the roof and raking leaves".

So what?  How much detailed knowledge of a house you are about to illegally enter do you need to know, especially a small apartment on the ground floor?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 25, 2017, 01:44:11 PM
Given that we've reached that stage in the thread where we have to resort to repeating ourselves:

The door to the apartment was unlocked - known fact.
Therefore the apartment was not secure - known fact.
An abductor could gain access to the apartment without breaking and entering.
That's how it was possible.

And before I'm sniffily informed that I have not provided evidence of an abductor, well if you ask for a plausible, logical theory of abduction an abductor is somewhat of a pre-requisite to the theory. 

So - a (theoretical) abductor (identity unknown) entered the unlocked apartment when he or she considered the risk of discovery to be at its lowest point during a window of opportunity (as confirmed as existing by the Met) and removed the child, for reasons unknown.  During the (theroretical) abduction the (theoretical) abductor opened the window to the children's bedroom for reasons unknown.  The (theoretical) abductor and Madeleine disappear into the night by means unknown, never to be seen again. 

It's a theory short on detail and we can make up stuff to fill the gaps, but that's the bare bones of it.  Plausible.  Logical IMO. 

Cue the chorus of indignation and cries of "it's totally illogical!!"

Whether the patio door was open or closed is open to debate. One statement implies it was locked another says it was not. Therefore the security status of the apartment is unknown.
Which do you wish to believe and why?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 25, 2017, 07:11:20 PM
Did I? Or did I say no-one has managed to come up with a plausible and logical theory of who, how and when one particular 'abduction' happened?
Of course no one can say WHO conducted the abduction, that goes without saying, but I have told you my theory for how and when, and it is both plausible and logical.  If you disagree then perhaps you can tell me what it is that makes it both implausible and illogical.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 25, 2017, 09:26:15 PM

IIRC the resort was not suitable from Mark Warners point of view only because a listening service could not be easily performed due to the layout of the site.     That logistical problem did not exist for the McCanns (or their friends) as they only had one check each to make and not multiple checks.

However, whether you like it or not  - nothing alters the fact that all parents who make the decision to use the 'listening' type of childcare do so for exactly the same reason - and that is because they genuinely believe it to be a safe method.   Otherwise they wouldn't do it.        The McCanns are no different - they also believed it to be safe and according to the Portuguese AG - they were entitled to hold that view.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing and it's so easy to be wise after the event.    That applies to everyone including the McCanns who will never forgive themselves for also holding that genuine belief that it was safe.

Attempts to single them out as being completely different to all other parents who made exactly the same decision for exactly the same reasons don't hold water IMO.   The only difference is those other parents were the lucky ones.

AIMHO

I like the whole of the post.

But the part I embolden is what makes a mockery of the appeal court ruling in the libel trial.

All talk of something nefarious covered up by the McCanns (almost) a distant memory ....
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on January 25, 2017, 10:08:41 PM
I like the whole of the post.

But the part I embolden is what makes a mockery of the appeal court ruling in the libel trial.

All talk of something nefarious covered up by the McCanns (almost) a distant memory ....

Illogical.

They locked the apartment during the day, thereby indicating the resort wasn't safe.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 26, 2017, 03:01:24 AM
Illogical.

They locked the apartment during the day, thereby indicating the resort wasn't safe.
But they aren't going to go back to the apartment every half hour either.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 06:55:50 AM
Of course no one can say WHO conducted the abduction, that goes without saying, but I have told you my theory for how and when, and it is both plausible and logical.  If you disagree then perhaps you can tell me what it is that makes it both implausible and illogical.

As I recall you were unable to come up with an explanation as to why, not knowing who was in the apartment, an 'abductor' took a chance and went in, let alone how he got in. Did you come up with a time?

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 08:17:39 AM
As I recall you were unable to come up with an explanation as to why, not knowing who was in the apartment, an 'abductor' took a chance and went in, let alone how he got in. Did you come up with a time?
When you've answered my question, I will answer yours, in full (although I think I have already addressed these points more than once).
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 09:30:50 AM
When you've answered my question, I will answer yours, in full (although I think I have already addressed these points more than once).

Sorry, but I have seen nothing which explains why a would-be abductor would target 5A, what time he went in and why he chose to go in at that time.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 26, 2017, 09:35:38 AM
But they aren't going to go back to the apartment every half hour either.

If the resort was safe, then that wouldn't matter  and a lot can happen in 30 minutes.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 26, 2017, 10:07:35 AM
Sorry, but I have seen nothing which explains why a would-be abductor would target 5A, what time he went in and why he chose to go in at that time.

Apartment 5A was described by the UK police as a 'burglar's dream' (words to that effect).   If an abduction was being seriously and carefully pre-planned by more than one person,  it could be that 5A had already been taragetted as extremely suitable and they were just waiting and watching for a 'suitable' family to come along.

It would only take a couple of days to become familiarised with the regular evening movements of the McCanns, who IIRC liked routine.  Prior knowledge of a regular routine which involved leaving the children asleep in their apartment for periods of time, would be extremely helpful to any would-be abductor.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 26, 2017, 10:16:36 AM
Apartment 5A was described by the UK police as a 'burglar's dream' (words to that effect).   If an abduction was being seriously and carefully pre-planned by more than one person,  it could be that 5A had already been taragetted as extremely suitable and they were just waiting and watching for a 'suitable' family to come along.

It would only take a couple of days to become familiarised with the regular evening movements of the McCanns, who IIRC liked routine.  Prior knowledge of a regular routine which involved leaving the children asleep in their apartment for periods of time, would be extremely helpful to any would-be abductor.

And a bit of a coincidence.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 10:23:59 AM
Sorry, but I have seen nothing which explains why a would-be abductor would target 5A, what time he went in and why he chose to go in at that time.
I see once again you have refused to answer my question - what makes abduction both illogical and implausible in your view.  However, despite this refusal on your part I will answer yours. 
Why would an abductor target 5a?  Because it was an easy target, ground floor, easy get away and above all unlocked.  How many more reasons would you like?
What time did he go in?  Can't be certain but a window of opportunity was identified by the Met and I would hazard a guess that that window was some time between 9.30ish and 10pm.  Unless you are claiming that the Tapas group was so attentive that there was someone from it in or within the near vicinity of the apartment at all times you would have to allow for the possibility that there were several minutes together when no one was around which would have provided that window of opportunity.  Why did he choose the time he did?  Well I guess it was because he considered the coast to be clear.  Now, what is implausible or illogical about that?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 26, 2017, 10:52:33 AM
Quote from: Alfie link=topic=7884.msg378300#msg378300 date=14854g26239
I see once again you have refused to answer my question - what makes abduction both illogical and implausible in your view.  However, despite this refusal on your part I will answer yours. 
Why would an abductor target 5a?  Because it was an easy target, ground floor, easy get away and above all unlocked.  How many more reasons would you like?
What time did he go in?  Can't be certain but a window of opportunity was identified by the Met and I would hazard a guess that that window was some time between 9.30ish and 10pm.  Unless you are claiming that the Tapas group was so attentive that there was someone from it in or within the near vicinity of the apartment at all times you would have to allow for the possibility that there were several minutes together when no one was around which would have provided that window of opportunity.  Why did he choose the time he did?  Well I guess it was because he considered the coast to be clear.  Now, what is implausible or illogical about that?

It's interesting that while the apartment seemed to be so vulnerable no former resident had ever actually been burgled.

It is also interesting that the 'bogus charity collector' angle seems to have been pushed quite forceably by the McCanns and their agents, and no one else, even though they themselves where never approached by charity collectors at any time during their stay.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 26, 2017, 11:08:15 AM
It's interesting that while the apartment seemed to be so vulnerable no former resident had ever actually been burgled.

It is also interesting that the 'bogus charity collector' angle seems to have been pushed quite forceably by the McCanns and their agents, and no one else, even though they themselves where never approached by charity collectors at any time during their stay.

As they were out of the apartment for many hours during the day  - it's not possible to say whether charity collectors called at 5A or not IMO.

(must dash)
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 26, 2017, 11:27:33 AM
As they were out of the apartment for many hours during the day  - it's not possible to say whether charity collectors called at 5A or not IMO.

(must dash)

Certainly the parents were back at the apartment for some of the day. I believe none of their friends relate being approached by charity collectors either.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 26, 2017, 12:14:30 PM
Certainly the parents were back at the apartment for some of the day. I believe none of their friends relate being approached by charity collectors either.
I hadn't thought of it like that before.  But now that you mention it, none of the T9 reported any of the odd goings on subsequently added to the mix.  No men monitoring 5A.  No one checking out 5C.  Hence a feeling of security sufficient to go out at night with the patio doors unlocked.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 26, 2017, 12:45:34 PM
As they were out of the apartment for many hours during the day  - it's not possible to say whether charity collectors called at 5A or not IMO.

(must dash)

It is the perfect ruse for being on someone's property.  These so-called charity collectors would most probably know the Luz area extremely well and would know when new guests had arrived.  The locals on the other hand being permanent residents would be well aware of their activities.

So are we agreed, there is no plausible logical theory of abduction from 5a?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 12:45:50 PM
Apartment 5A was described by the UK police as a 'burglar's dream' (words to that effect).   If an abduction was being seriously and carefully pre-planned by more than one person,  it could be that 5A had already been taragetted as extremely suitable and they were just waiting and watching for a 'suitable' family to come along.

It would only take a couple of days to become familiarised with the regular evening movements of the McCanns, who IIRC liked routine.  Prior knowledge of a regular routine which involved leaving the children asleep in their apartment for periods of time, would be extremely helpful to any would-be abductor.

According to Kate McCann;

Later, we were told by the British police that the ground-floor location, access to roads front and side, secluded entrance and partial tree cover made our apartment a prime target for burglars and other criminals. [Madeleine]

According to burglars, their first priority when choosing a property to target is the expected yield. Therefore well-kept properties were attractive.
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http:/rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/r249.pdf

Choosing the property first and then waiting for a suitable family suggests people who either live nearby or work close by. Choosing a 3/4 year old is not typical.

Observing the family has to include observing the group because they all went back and forth. As already posted,
the only night all the group were at the Tapas was Monday, so a couple of day's observation might not have given them the information they needed to be sure of enough undisturbed time.



Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 26, 2017, 12:50:09 PM
It is the perfect ruse for being on someone's property.  These so-called charity collectors would most probably know the Luz area extremely well and would know when new guests had arrived.  The locals on the other hand being permanent residents would be well aware of their activities.

So are we agreed, there is no plausible logical theory of abduction from 5a?

  No, we aren't.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 01:58:09 PM
It is the perfect ruse for being on someone's property.  These so-called charity collectors would most probably know the Luz area extremely well and would know when new guests had arrived.  The locals on the other hand being permanent residents would be well aware of their activities.

So are we agreed, there is no plausible logical theory of abduction from 5a?
On what basis?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 02:00:24 PM
It's interesting that while the apartment seemed to be so vulnerable no former resident had ever actually been burgled.

It is also interesting that the 'bogus charity collector' angle seems to have been pushed quite forceably by the McCanns and their agents, and no one else, even though they themselves where never approached by charity collectors at any time during their stay.
So, would you consider apartment 5a, on the corner and next to two roads, ground floor and unlocked not to be particularly vulnerable then?  And yet hasn't this argument been used against the McCanns by those pushing the neglect angle, ie: that they left their children in such a vulnerable location?  Vulnerable to outside forces, or not really, in your view?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 02:02:28 PM
According to Kate McCann;

Later, we were told by the British police that the ground-floor location, access to roads front and side, secluded entrance and partial tree cover made our apartment a prime target for burglars and other criminals. [Madeleine]

According to burglars, their first priority when choosing a property to target is the expected yield. Therefore well-kept properties were attractive.
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218135832/http:/rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs04/r249.pdf

Choosing the property first and then waiting for a suitable family suggests people who either live nearby or work close by. Choosing a 3/4 year old is not typical.

Observing the family has to include observing the group because they all went back and forth. As already posted,
the only night all the group were at the Tapas was Monday, so a couple of day's observation might not have given them the information they needed to be sure of enough undisturbed time.
As the apartment (and the missing child) pertained to the McCanns, what information might have been gleaned by observer(s) about their evening routine over the six days or so prior to the disappearance?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 26, 2017, 02:10:59 PM
So, would you consider apartment 5a, on the corner and next to two roads, ground floor and unlocked not to be particularly vulnerable then?  And yet hasn't this argument been used against the McCanns by those pushing the neglect angle, ie: that they left their children in such a vulnerable location?  Vulnerable to outside forces, or not really, in your view?

Read my post again. I didn't say the apartment isn't vulnerable simply that no one had reported being broken into.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 26, 2017, 02:17:07 PM
So, would you consider apartment 5a, on the corner and next to two roads, ground floor and unlocked not to be particularly vulnerable then?  And yet hasn't this argument been used against the McCanns by those pushing the neglect angle, ie: that they left their children in such a vulnerable location?  Vulnerable to outside forces, or not really, in your view?
Hasn't this been raised before?  Bit of a hoisted-by-ones-own-petard here, IMO.

Was Luz safe enough that leaving a patio door both unlocked and obviously unlocked made sense?

Or was 5A simply ripe for the plucking and two highly educated people acted as thick as two short planks?

And the hindsight view of some 'expert' pontificating after Madeleine had vanished is of no importance.  Goodness only knows how many supposed experts have spouted rubbish even with the benefit of hindsight.

So, should the undoubtedly intelligent McCanns be castigated for failing to recognise the alleged security issues of 5A?  Was 5A inherently less secure than 5B or 5D?  Both were ground floor, had a front door, the same shutter mechanism, and a rear patio door that locked from the inside only.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 26, 2017, 02:19:09 PM
  No, we aren't.
Stop beating about the bush, Eleanor.   8((()*/
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 26, 2017, 02:32:07 PM
  No, we aren't.

Easy to say but I haven't seen you offer any plausible logical theory based on evidence?   Semantics just don't cut the mustard, its evidence which counts.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 26, 2017, 02:37:30 PM
On what basis?

On the very simple basis that nobody has been able to point to any evidence to support an abduction from the apartment.  The McCanns saying oh she was there when we left but is now gone carries little weight imo.

Abduction from the street is another matter. A child who has been shown to be unsettled at night when her parents are out enjoying themselves, a patio door left unlocked, an unlocked gate leading to a public road just metres away.  Then we have an established FRESH scent trail from the apartment down the street, across it to a car park where it mysteriously stops. That all adds up to me.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 26, 2017, 02:57:15 PM
Stop beating about the bush, Eleanor.   8((()*/

Sorry, sorry.  I'll be a bit more definite in future.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 26, 2017, 02:58:36 PM
Easy to say but I haven't seen you offer any plausible logical theory based on evidence?   Semantics just don't cut the mustard, its evidence which counts.

It has already been explained by Shining that this could involve Libel, and we don't want that.  Do we?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 26, 2017, 03:12:25 PM
It has already been explained by Shining that this could involve Libel, and we don't want that.  Do we?

Don't be silly. The parents only think she was abducted from the apartment so pointing out that the evidence doesn't support that proposition isn't libel.  I for one believe that they are as much in the dark about the disappearance as everyone is but I don't hold with an abduction from the apartment.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 03:24:42 PM
On the very simple basis that nobody has been able to point to any evidence to support an abduction from the apartment.  The McCanns saying oh she was there when we left but is now gone carries little weight imo.

Abduction from the street is another matter. A child who has been shown to be unsettled at night when her parents are out enjoying themselves, a patio door left unlocked, an unlocked gate leading to a public road just metres away.  Then we have an established FRESH scent trail from the apartment down the street, across it to a car park where it mysteriously stops. That all adds up to me.
I'm sorry Angelo but simply saying there is no evidence of abduction doesn't make a theory of abduction implausible or illogical.  You would need a positive reason (ie not an absence of evidence, but evidence of something else that could help rule it out) to demonstrate that abduction was neither plausible nor logical.    Your theory relies on the McCanns staging an abduction (opening the window) as well as there being an actual abduction which is IMO highly implausible. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 03:25:49 PM
Read my post again. I didn't say the apartment isn't vulnerable simply that no one had reported being broken into.
So is it vulnerable or not, in your opinion?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 26, 2017, 03:28:18 PM
I'm sorry Angelo but simply saying there is no evidence of abduction doesn't make a theory of abduction implausible or illogical.  You would need a positive reason (ie not an absence of evidence, but evidence of something else that could help rule it out) to demonstrate that abduction was neither plausible nor logical.    Your theory relies on the McCanns staging an abduction (opening the window) as well as there being an actual abduction which is IMO highly implausible.

It most certainly doesn't as has been explained already a few days ago.  Kate probably opened the window and shutter in her panic but has a mental block of having done so.  Just as Gerry couldn't remember which door he used or what side of the street he was on when he met Jez.  My theory is based on evidence but yours is disproved by other evidence.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 26, 2017, 03:35:35 PM
I'm sorry Angelo but simply saying there is no evidence of abduction doesn't make a theory of abduction implausible or illogical.  You would need a positive reason (ie not an absence of evidence, but evidence of something else that could help rule it out) to demonstrate that abduction was neither plausible nor logical.    Your theory relies on the McCanns staging an abduction (opening the window) as well as there being an actual abduction which is IMO highly implausible.
Woke and wandered plus ..., does not depend on scene staging by the McCanns.  I have done Madeleine by height and Madeleine by weight on my blog and she was perfectly capable of opening the window, raising the shutter and exiting 5A.

She had the capability.

That does not mean this is what happened.

It means woke and wandered, fitting all known evidence, does not require shenanigans on the part of Kate, or Gerry, or anyone in the Tapas 9.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 03:39:35 PM
Woke and wandered plus ..., does not depend on scene staging by the McCanns.  I have done Madeleine by height and Madeleine by weight on my blog and she was perfectly capable of opening the window, raising the shutter and exiting 5A.

She had the capability.

That does not mean this is what happened.

It means woke and wandered, fitting all known evidence, does not require shenanigans on the part of Kate, or Gerry, or anyone in the Tapas 9.
How would Madeleine exit via the window without leaving any finger prints on any of the surfaces?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 26, 2017, 03:42:40 PM
Why should the McCanns be "as thick as two short planks" for failing to recognise the security issues, or to have known about previous break-ins at the resort?  Careless perhaps, lulled into a false sense of security perhaps, castigate them all you like but I don't think it makes them "thick" anymore than it makes you thick for relocating to a town on the Algarve without realising that it was the site of the most famous child abduction in history.   Unless you're seriously suggesting that these 2 doctors have very low IQs?   
I didn't castigate them though, did I?

Careless and leaving/using unlocked patio doors are concepts that are uneasy bedfellows.

By the way, I didn't choose to relocate to the Algarve.  That outcome was decided by my better half without consulting me.  I always wanted to go to Spain.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 03:43:14 PM
It most certainly doesn't as has been explained already a few days ago.  Kate probably opened the window and shutter in her panic but has a mental block of having done so.  Just as Gerry couldn't remember which door he used or what side of the street he was on when he met Jez.  My theory is based on evidence but yours is disproved by other evidence.
Great - then you'll be able to tell us what evidence disproves abduction.  I'm looking forward to reading it....
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 26, 2017, 03:46:08 PM
The factor which raises much doubt for me when anyone claims an abduction from the apartment is that Madeleine was a light sleeper.  If some stranger had presented himself at the bedroom window or even in the bedroom itself she would have made such a racket it would have been heard.  We are then asked to believe that this abductor carried a live Madeleine out of the apartment and off into the night without as much as a squeak from her?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 26, 2017, 03:46:46 PM
How would Madeleine exit via the window without leaving any finger prints on any of the surfaces?
Subjecting this to logic you appear to be saying that as the only fingerprint identified on the window was Kate's, this means Kate exited 5A by the children's window.

That idea does not get off the ground.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 03:58:29 PM
Its already been posted by me and what's more you replied to it.
LOL.  So, in your opinion for an abduction to have occurred there MUST be forensic evidence left at the scene, and if none is found then it couldn't have been abduction, that's your view is it?
Angelo - I asked for evidence that rules out abduction, you have cited a lack of evidence which won't do I'm afraid. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on January 26, 2017, 03:59:41 PM
Luz was at the start of the season and has been described as being very quiet.  One only has to look at the bar takings from Kelly's to see how quiet.  Gerry McCann said that apart from Jeremy Wilkins he had met no-one else on the street when making checks on the children.

Did the tour operator warn about burglaries within the resort?

Did the police warn tourists that premises were being entered and children assaulted?

Unfortunately the McCanns and their party were taken in by the ambience of the resort ... which was and is promoted as family friendly ... and it would only have taken one observer with evil intent to take note of that.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 26, 2017, 04:00:12 PM
Great - then you'll be able to tell us what evidence disproves abduction.  I'm looking forward to reading it....

Its already been posted by me days ago and what's more you replied to it.

Oh just the normal stuff like boot marks on the outside wall, the window sills outside and inside, marks on the wall inside, dirt on the carpet between the childs bed and the window, marks on the bedspread by the window, fingerprints on the window or window frame, stuff knocked over even stolen or even signs of a forced entry.  Need I go on?

Its ironic for sure that the one single bit of evidence ie what Tanner said she saw has been discounted by SY.  Oops there goes the abduction theory, own goal for Redwood on that on me thinks.
LOL.  So, in your opinion for an abduction to have occurred there MUST be forensic evidence left at the scene, and if none is found then it couldn't have been abduction, that's your view is it?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 04:02:16 PM
The factor which raises much doubt for me when anyone claims an abduction from the apartment is that Madeleine was a light sleeper.  If some stranger had presented himself at the bedroom window or even in the bedroom itself she would have made such a racket it would have been heard. We are then asked to believe that this abductor carried a live Madeleine out of the apartment and off into the night without as much as a squeak from her?
I seriously dispute this.  Go and pick up a sleeping child tonight (preferably with the permission of the child's parents).  The child will not wake up and instantly start shrieking.   
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Angelo222 on January 26, 2017, 04:02:27 PM
Angelo - I asked for evidence that rules out abduction, you have cited a lack of evidence which won't do I'm afraid.

That's exactly it, forensic analyses which came up negative.  One cannot provide evidence which doesn't exist!  You claim an abduction from the bedroom theory so let's see your evidence?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 04:07:06 PM
That's exactly it, forensic analyses which came up negative.  One cannot provide evidence which doesn't exist!
You are saying that abduction from the room is implausible and illogical.  Therefore we need evidence which supports your argument.  A lack of evidence does not support your argument.  Why is it not plausible or logical that someone may have entered the apartment via an unlocked door and removed the child.  Why should there have to be a trail of muddy boot prints on the floor or dirty handprints on the walls?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 04:08:35 PM
As the apartment (and the missing child) pertained to the McCanns, what information might have been gleaned by observer(s) about their evening routine over the six days or so prior to the disappearance?

It's your theory, you tell me.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 26, 2017, 04:09:23 PM
I seriously dispute this.  Go and pick up a sleeping child tonight (preferably with the permission of the child's parents).  The child will not wake up and instantly start shrieking.

A four-year-old will react very differently to a younger child and especially if she is startled by an intruder in strange surroundings.  Every child is different though so your experiment would be futile.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 04:10:10 PM
Subjecting this to logic you appear to be saying that as the only fingerprint identified on the window was Kate's, this means Kate exited 5A by the children's window.

That idea does not get off the ground.
You sure do some twisted logic.  You claim it is possible for Madeleine to have raised the shutter, and slide open the window.  I am asking how she achieved this without leaving fingerprints behind, nothing to do with Kate.  Do you think it's possible for a small child to achieve these things without leaving fingerprints, or do you think its possible that she left fingerprints but these were not discovered by the forensic team?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 04:12:27 PM
It's your theory, you tell me.
Well for one thing they would have observed that the McCanns left their children alone every night for several nights in a row to have dinner in the Tapas Restaurant. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 04:13:22 PM
A four-year-old will react very differently to a younger child and especially if she is startled by an intruder in strange surroundings.  Every child is different though so your experiment would be futile.
If every child is different how do you know for certain that madeleine would scream the place down on being picked up from her bed while asleep?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 26, 2017, 04:25:11 PM
If every child is different how do you know for certain that madeleine would scream the place down on being picked up from her bed while asleep?

Admittedly we can't be sure.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 26, 2017, 04:29:09 PM
You sure do some twisted logic.  You claim it is possible for Madeleine to have raised the shutter, and slide open the window.  I am asking how she achieved this without leaving fingerprints behind, nothing to do with Kate.  Do you think it's possible for a small child to achieve these things without leaving fingerprints, or do you think its possible that she left fingerprints but these were not discovered by the forensic team?
I don't think that Madeleine had the capability.  I know that Madeleine had the capability.

What I don't know is whether Madeleine exercised this capability.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 04:40:37 PM
I don't think that Madeleine had the capability.  I know that Madeleine had the capability.

What I don't know is whether Madeleine exercised this capability.
IMO it is arrogance personified to presume to know what someone else's child can and cannot do, especially in a room that you have never entered, and a window and shutters you have not personally tested.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 04:50:41 PM
Well for one thing they would have observed that the McCanns left their children alone every night for several nights in a row to have dinner in the Tapas Restaurant.

To deduce that they would need to have observed both entrances to 5A from the time the McCann family returned before bed to the time the couple left for the restaurant. One person wouldn't be able to watch both doors, so there must have been two people lurking about for a couple of hours every evening in daylight. No-one noticed them, though.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 26, 2017, 04:58:57 PM
To deduce that they would need to have observed both entrances to 5A from the time the McCann family returned before bed to the time the couple left for the restaurant. One person wouldn't be able to watch both doors, so there must have been two people lurking about for a couple of hours every evening in daylight. No-one noticed them, though.

The balcony across the road where all of the cigarette buts were found.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 26, 2017, 05:20:44 PM
The balcony across the road where all of the cigarette buts were found.

This would appear to be a view from the block opposite where both front and back doors can be observed at the same time.

(http://i.imgur.com/VQIKUHf.jpg)

Night-time view to the rear door and car park.  Front entrance gate to the left just out of shot.

(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/1may7/GUARDIAN-15-5-7/GD3301579@A-Police-officer-stan-9167.jpg)

Day-time and same view towards front gate and patio entrance.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 26, 2017, 05:40:01 PM
This would appear to be a view from the block opposite where both front and back doors can be observed at the same time.

(http://i.imgur.com/VQIKUHf.jpg)

Night-time view to the rear door and car park.  Front entrance gate to the left just out of shot.

(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/1may7/GUARDIAN-15-5-7/GD3301579@A-Police-officer-stan-9167.jpg)

Day-time and same view towards front gate and patio entrance.

Can you show the lines of sight on a plan view which includes the front door?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 26, 2017, 05:42:57 PM
IMO it is arrogance personified to presume to know what someone else's child can and cannot do, especially in a room that you have never entered, and a window and shutters you have not personally tested.
Simple mechanics.

"Don't you forget about me."

Sorry, I can't do a relevant song about arrogance personified.  "A little less conversation, a little more action" springs to mind.

The problem with this is that today's key development took place in a conversation over breakfast and coffee in Burgau.

And just for the record, it is/was not ShiningInLuz.  It has been chucking it down all day in Luz and Burgau, and it still is.  Breakfast and coffee were indoors, due to the rain and wind.

No doubt the farmers of the Algarve were loving it as the reservoirs got topped up for 2017.  In my personal case, I do not need to water my strawberry plants or our miniature olive tree.  "Always look on the bright side of life."

I learned a lot of new information today.  What I haven't yet worked out is how to put this into the public domain without disrespecting the source.

Cue the theme from "The Sweeney".
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 26, 2017, 05:46:36 PM
Well for one thing they would have observed that the McCanns left their children alone every night for several nights in a row to have dinner in the Tapas Restaurant.

What is the incidence of child abduction by stranger from an apartment, following several days observation?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 26, 2017, 05:51:13 PM
What is the incidence of child abduction by stranger from an apartment, following several days observation?

I doubt it's happened more than once that a little girl was abducted from the bath of her home while all the family was at home.

But it's certainly happened.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 26, 2017, 05:51:35 PM
On the very simple basis that nobody has been able to point to any evidence to support an abduction from the apartment.  The McCanns saying oh she was there when we left but is now gone carries little weight imo.

Abduction from the street is another matter. A child who has been shown to be unsettled at night when her parents are out enjoying themselves, a patio door left unlocked, an unlocked gate leading to a public road just metres away.  Then we have an established FRESH scent trail from the apartment down the street, across it to a car park where it mysteriously stops. That all adds up to me.

According to Kate -  Madeleine only ever woke up and went into their room late into the night and never woke up during the first few hours after first going to sleep.  That is one of the main reasons IMO why they felt confident in leaving her for short periods of time.      That pattern of not waking up in the hours immediately after going to bed was confirmed by the babysitters back in Rothley.

I totally believe Kate when she said she found the shutters and window open, and I don't believe Madeleine was capable of doing that, so for me - abduction is the only possibility.   If it was staged  to convince the police that an intruder had broken in via that way -  then imo two intelligent people would have made a much better job of the staging, and they would not have allowed the window/shutters to be closed before the police arrived.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 05:52:23 PM
Simple mechanics.

"Don't you forget about me."

Sorry, I can't do a relevant song about arrogance personified.  "A little less conversation, a little more action" springs to mind.

The problem with this is that today's key development took place in a conversation over breakfast and coffee in Burgau.

And just for the record, it is/was not ShiningInLuz.  It has been chucking it down all day in Luz and Burgau, and it still is.  Breakfast and coffee were indoors, due to the rain and wind.

No doubt the farmers of the Algarve were loving it as the reservoirs got topped up for 2017.  In my personal case, I do not need to water my strawberry plants or our miniature olive tree.  "Always look on the bright side of life."

I learned a lot of new information today.  What I haven't yet worked out is how to put this into the public domain without disrespecting the source.

Cue the theme from "The Sweeney".
What a load of off-topic waffle. 

Tell me, do you know what Madeleine is and isn't capable of better than her own mother, if so why?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 05:55:00 PM
Thanks for the pics. One of them is from the balcony mentioned by Eleanor (the daytime one), but the other is taken from further north. I'm not convinced that the main door could be observed from that balcony clearly enough to be sure no-one had entered or left that way.

(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/08/16/article-0-008627AB000004B0-316_468x317.jpg)
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 05:59:17 PM
To deduce that they would need to have observed both entrances to 5A from the time the McCann family returned before bed to the time the couple left for the restaurant. One person wouldn't be able to watch both doors, so there must have been two people lurking about for a couple of hours every evening in daylight. No-one noticed them, though.
I don't think the apartment would need to have been under constant surveillance night after night.  If you' seen them dining in the tapas restaurant at the same time every evening that would be enough information to let you know they weren't in the apartment.  No need to watch both entrances for hours at a time, day after day.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 26, 2017, 06:00:05 PM
You are saying that abduction from the room is implausible and illogical.  Therefore we need evidence which supports your argument.  A lack of evidence does not support your argument.  Why is it not plausible or logical that someone may have entered the apartment via an unlocked door and removed the child.  Why should there have to be a trail of muddy boot prints on the floor or dirty handprints on the walls?

There may have been footprints or other evidence which was destroyed by the traffic of people and dogs throughout 5a in the immediate aftermath.    IIRC  partial fingerprints and hairs are amongst the evidence that was retrieved and whose owners have never been identified.



Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 06:00:52 PM
I doubt it's happened more than once that a little girl was abducted from the bath of her home while all the family was at home.

But it's certainly happened.
II posted a link to an abduction in America in which a child was abducted after a stake-out but because it was from the Sun website it was deemed hilarious.  I'll have to see if I can find another cite that doesn't provoke such mirth.

ETA: there we go, for Trump fan Alice, a report of the same abduction but this time from Fox News.  Hope it doesn't provoke quite the same outbreak of hilarity.  http://fox8.com/2016/05/24/police-fbi-to-give-update-on-abduction-case-involving-rescued-6-year-old-cleveland-girl/
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 26, 2017, 06:12:36 PM
Luz was at the start of the season and has been described as being very quiet.  One only has to look at the bar takings from Kelly's to see how quiet.  Gerry McCann said that apart from Jeremy Wilkins he had met no-one else on the street when making checks on the children.

Did the tour operator warn about burglaries within the resort?

Did the police warn tourists that premises were being entered and children assaulted?

Unfortunately the McCanns and their party were taken in by the ambience of the resort ... which was and is promoted as family friendly ... and it would only have taken one observer with evil intent to take note of that.

Would that be the same burglaries that were going to lead to imminent arrest's back in Jan 2014.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 26, 2017, 06:18:44 PM
On the very simple basis that nobody has been able to point to any evidence to support an abduction from the apartment.  The McCanns saying oh she was there when we left but is now gone carries little weight imo.

Abduction from the street is another matter. A child who has been shown to be unsettled at night when her parents are out enjoying themselves, a patio door left unlocked, an unlocked gate leading to a public road just metres away.  Then we have an established FRESH scent trail from the apartment down the street, across it to a car park where it mysteriously stops. That all adds up to me.

the McCanns statements are evidence
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 26, 2017, 06:26:38 PM
I hadn't thought of it like that before.  But now that you mention it, none of the T9 reported any of the odd goings on subsequently added to the mix.  No men monitoring 5A.  No one checking out 5C.  Hence a feeling of security sufficient to go out at night with the patio doors unlocked.

Jayne Jensen and Annie Wiltshire saw two men on the patio of the empty apartment 2 doors down from 5A.   Mrs Fenns niece also saw a man leaving by the gate below -  from her aunts patio area.   Despite world wide publicity  none of these men have ever come forward to be eliminated.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-504950/British-witnesses-We-saw-blond-men-balcony-Madeleine-apartment.html#ixzz2TkhXcjDx



Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 06:27:43 PM
I don't think the apartment would need to have been under constant surveillance night after night.  If you' seen them dining in the tapas restaurant at the same time every evening that would be enough information to let you know they weren't in the apartment.  No need to watch both entrances for hours at a time, day after day.

It doesn't tell you if the children are there, or if they're alone there.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 06:32:49 PM
It doesn't tell you if the children are there, or if they're alone there.
So what?  If the kids are not there, then nothing is lost, but enter the apartment anyway on the assumption that they are.  As for someone else being there, who?  A quick glance at the dining table  to count 9 people will tell you all you need to know before entering the apartment. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 26, 2017, 06:35:26 PM
So what?  If the kids are not there, then nothing is lost, but enter the apartment anyway on the assumption that they are.  As for someone else being there, who?  A quick glance at the dining table  to count 9 people will tell you all you need to know before entering the apartment.

Were the 9 actually all there at the same time?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 26, 2017, 06:38:00 PM
Jayne Jensen and Annie Wiltshire saw two men on the patio of the empty apartment 2 doors down from 5A.   Mrs Fenns niece also saw a man leaving by the gate below -  from her aunts patio area.   Despite world wide publicity  none of these men have ever come forward to be eliminated.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-504950/British-witnesses-We-saw-blond-men-balcony-Madeleine-apartment.html#ixzz2TkhXcjDx

Were the women paid for this 'exclusive' ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 26, 2017, 06:38:11 PM
Were the 9 actually all there at the same time?

Briefly at 9.00. After that someone was always  absent somewhere or other - if we can believe the times given.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 26, 2017, 06:41:31 PM

So what?  If the kids are not there, then nothing is lost, but enter the apartment anyway on the assumption that they are.  As for someone else being there, who?  A quick glance at the dining table  to count 9 people will tell you all you need to know before entering the apartment.

Were the 9 actually all there at the same time?

Briefly at 9.00. After that someone was always  absent somewhere or other - if we can believe the times given.

So that theory has no legs.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 26, 2017, 06:41:51 PM
Were the women paid for this 'exclusive' ?

I don't know, why do you ask?

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 26, 2017, 06:44:10 PM
I doubt it's happened more than once that a little girl was abducted from the bath of her home while all the family was at home.

But it's certainly happened.

I am sure if you think about it you will understand how irrelevant your response is.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 06:47:10 PM
Were the women paid for this 'exclusive' ?
LOL.  Here we go again.... @)(++(*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 06:48:30 PM
So that theory has no legs.
Who was absent from the table between 9.30 and 10pm?  Jane Tanner I think - anyone else?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 26, 2017, 06:49:06 PM
II posted a link to an abduction in America in which a child was abducted after a stake-out but because it was from the Sun website it was deemed hilarious.  I'll have to see if I can find another cite that doesn't provoke such mirth.

ETA: there we go, for Trump fan Alice, a report of the same abduction but this time from Fox News.  Hope it doesn't provoke quite the same outbreak of hilarity.  http://fox8.com/2016/05/24/police-fbi-to-give-update-on-abduction-case-involving-rescued-6-year-old-cleveland-girl/

How do you figure I am a "Trump Fan" ? You can do it on the appropriate thread so we are not off topic.
I look forward to the helical explanation.
Thanks for reposting the hilarious article.


Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 26, 2017, 06:49:39 PM
Who was absent from the table between 9.30 and 10pm?  Jane Tanner I think - anyone else?

Her partner was also absent part of that time.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 06:50:14 PM
Her partner was also absent part of that time.
but at the table for the most part, yes?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 26, 2017, 06:57:35 PM
but at the table for the most part, yes?

Agreed. Absent for about 10/15 minutes by  best estimate. Long enough to load a washing machine.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 26, 2017, 07:01:09 PM
Who was absent from the table between 9.30 and 10pm?  Jane Tanner I think - anyone else?

Who checked on the McCann apartment at 9-30 ish and how long was he away?the time is narrowing considerably.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 26, 2017, 07:04:15 PM
I don't know, why do you ask?

Because if they had surely even you can see that it taints their story, rightly or wrongly.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 07:06:49 PM
Jayne Jensen and Annie Wiltshire saw two men on the patio of the empty apartment 2 doors down from 5A.   Mrs Fenns niece also saw a man leaving by the gate below -  from her aunts patio area.   Despite world wide publicity  none of these men have ever come forward to be eliminated.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-504950/British-witnesses-We-saw-blond-men-balcony-Madeleine-apartment.html#ixzz2TkhXcjDx

Jensen and Wiltshire raise more questions than answers. Leicestershire police took an 11 hour statement from the two women in November 2007. Now where did that go?

Were their names 'leaked to a Portuguese newspaper'? By whom? The PJ don't seem to have any record of their statements, so it's unlikely to have been them. That leaves LP, Metodo 3 or Mr Mitchell.

The sisters ate at the Tapas on 3rd May, did they? They're not on the booking sheets, but they were Mark Warner guests because they were in Gerry's tennis group. They were in the Bar earlier with Balu and Berry.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 07:13:49 PM
So what?  If the kids are not there, then nothing is lost, but enter the apartment anyway on the assumption that they are.  As for someone else being there, who?  A quick glance at the dining table  to count 9 people will tell you all you need to know before entering the apartment.

Unless you have observed the apartment in the time leading up to the departure of the parents you could run straight into a baby-sitter.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 07:23:56 PM
Unless you have observed the apartment in the time leading up to the departure of the parents you could run straight into a baby-sitter.
If you'd observed the apartment once or twice and seen the parents leaving the kids alone, and no sign of any babysitter ever coming or going, you might very well work on the assumption there was no babysitter on the evening of the 3rd either.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 26, 2017, 07:35:04 PM
If you'd observed the apartment once or twice and seen the parents leaving the kids alone, and no sign of any babysitter ever coming or going, you might very well work on the assumption there was no babysitter on the evening of the 3rd either.

How would you know the babysitter hadn't arrived while you weren't watching?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 08:28:25 PM
If you'd observed the apartment once or twice and seen the parents leaving the kids alone, and no sign of any babysitter ever coming or going, you might very well work on the assumption there was no babysitter on the evening of the 3rd either.

I don't know about your theory, but you are pretty illogical. First you say the would-be abductors need to watch the apartment 'for several nights', then you say they just need to see the McCanns at the Tapas to know they've left the kids home alone, now they're watching again. I think you're having me on Alfie. You have no theory whatsoever, own up!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 26, 2017, 08:55:34 PM
From several posts ago.

"How tall was Madeleine, according to both parents?  What size were her pyjamas?"

They said she was 90cms tall. The average height for 3 year old girls is 94 cm. Madeleine should have been approaching 100.4 cms by her fourth birthday. The difference of 10.4 cms places her at the very lowest edge of average for her age. It's not a serious problem but she was pretty small for her age. I don't know what size her pyjamas were, but I know Kate dressed Amelie in Madeleine's pyjamas shortly after Madeleine disappeared. Was Amelie big for her age?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 10:30:33 PM
I don't know about your theory, but you are pretty illogical. First you say the would-be abductors need to watch the apartment 'for several nights', then you say they just need to see the McCanns at the Tapas to know they've left the kids home alone, now they're watching again. I think you're having me on Alfie. You have no theory whatsoever, own up!
So you're reduced to ridiculing me by deliberately misrepresenting and twisting my posts.  Nothing I have written today is illogical.  It doesn't have to be soley one thing or the other, it can be a combination  of actions  observing the McCanns leaving their kids unattended, monitoring their movements over a couple of evenings, checking when they are both seated at dinner before entering the apartment, that is a perfectly reasonable explanation of how an abductor might have acted prior to abduction, if it is not perhaps you can tell me why not.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 10:39:44 PM
How would you know the babysitter hadn't arrived while you weren't watching?
what babysitter?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 26, 2017, 10:57:15 PM
what babysitter?

The one you said the abductor hadn't seen.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 11:23:41 PM
The one you said the abductor hadn't seen.
G-unit brought up the subject of a babysitter first, not me.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 26, 2017, 11:38:08 PM
G-unit brought up the subject of a babysitter first, not me.

I didn't say she hadn't. What I said that if you had only sporadically watched the apartment, as you speculated the abductor may have, then you could have no idea whether the McCanns had a babysitter or not.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 26, 2017, 11:59:31 PM
I didn't say she hadn't. What I said that if you had only sporadically watched the apartment, as you speculated the abductor may have, then you could have no idea whether the McCanns had a babysitter or not.
If it was observed on the first night and the second night that the children were left alone without a babysitter, then it would be a fair assumption that the children would be left alone without a babysitter every night.  There would be no need to watch the comings and goings at the apartment every single night. 
That said, we know of cases where abductors have entered premises to steal  or interfere with children in which adults have been known to be present (and even awake, such as the child stolen from the bath) and that hasn't acted as a deterrent.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 12:12:22 AM
Can I ask the abduction doubters here - do you think that ALL burglaries of holiday apartments when the residents are out are implausible and illogical, or only this one because it involved the taking of a child rather than money and jewellery, etc? 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 27, 2017, 12:30:23 AM
Can I ask the abduction doubters here - do you think that ALL burglaries of holiday apartments when the residents are out are implausible and illogical, or only this one because it involved the taking of a child rather than money and jewellery, etc?

Trying to divert are we?
I prefer to stick with apartment 5A on May 3rd 2007 together with all the known* conditions that obtained at that time.

* ie confirmed to be true not interpollated, guessed or sujbject to any "well it's common sense innit" type blx.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 12:33:29 AM
If it was observed on the first night and the second night that the children were left alone without a babysitter, then it would be a fair assumption that the children would be left alone without a babysitter every night.  There would be no need to watch the comings and goings at the apartment every single night. 
That said, we know of cases where abductors have entered premises to steal  or interfere with children in which adults have been known to be present (and even awake, such as the child stolen from the bath) and that hasn't acted as a deterrent.

Even if an abductor watched the premises 25/7 they would still be unable to see who was entering and leaving both entrances. A babysitter could easily have entered the property without him even noticing, perhaps at a different time to the McCanns and their children.

He would also probably be under the assumption that the parents wouldn't leave their children completely alone at night and while I agree that children have been stolen while their parents are in the house that seems to happen in the main after everyone has retired for the night.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on January 27, 2017, 12:48:33 AM
Even if an abductor watched the premises 25/7 they would still be unable to see who was entering and leaving both entrances. A babysitter could easily have entered the property without him even noticing, perhaps at a different time to the McCanns and their children.

He would also probably be under the assumption that the parents wouldn't leave their children completely alone at night and while I agree that children have been stolen while their parents are in the house that seems to happen in the main after everyone has retired for the night.

The individual who invaded the homes where children were assaulted didn't seem to be too bothered who might be at home.  Nor were the burglars who were operating in the area.  Some of whom burgled in Block 5 as well as adjoining ones.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 01:11:38 AM
The individual who invaded the homes where children were assaulted didn't seem to be too bothered who might be at home.  Nor were the burglars who were operating in the area.  Some of whom burgled in Block 5 as well as adjoining ones.

The individual who entered the homes of the children he assaulted did so at night when he would counted on everyone being in bed. The burglars entered in the daytime when they would have counted on families on holiday being out and about.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on January 27, 2017, 01:56:59 AM
The individual who entered the homes of the children he assaulted did so at night when he would counted on everyone being in bed. The burglars entered in the daytime when they would have counted on families on holiday being out and about.

At least one burglar appears to have got it wrong when he invaded Mrs Fenn's apartment if not via the window most certainly using it as an exit.

Don't you think it a rather risky endeavour to target children in their beds while their parents may or may not be asleep in an adjoining room?
I would have thought far less risk in entering premises and leaving with a child within the space of seconds and no-one any the wiser until an abduction was accomplished and abductor and abductee heading towards or even cruising along the nearest motorway.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 08:08:47 AM
Even if an abductor watched the premises 25/7 they would still be unable to see who was entering and leaving both entrances. A babysitter could easily have entered the property without him even noticing, perhaps at a different time to the McCanns and their children.

He would also probably be under the assumption that the parents wouldn't leave their children completely alone at night and while I agree that children have been stolen while their parents are in the house that seems to happen in the main after everyone has retired for the night.
Two things 1) before entering the apartment via the (I presume) transparent sliding patio door the abductor would have a chance to assess if there was anyone in the living quarters. 2) if the abductor observed the parents coming and going from the apartment at regular intervals on the night of the abduction it would be safe to assume they were doing so to check on their kids because they had been left alone.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 08:12:25 AM
Can I ask the abduction doubters here - do you think that ALL burglaries of holiday apartments when the residents are out are implausible and illogical, or only this one because it involved the taking of a child rather than money and jewellery, etc?
OK I'll ask again.  If a holiday apartment is robbed while the occupants are out having dinner elsewhere on the complex how is that possible?  How does the burglar know for certain there is no one left in the apartment, or that the residents aren't about to return at any time?  Do these last two factors make burglary of holiday apartments neither plausible nor logical, and if so how do you account for the fact that they happen on a regular basis at many holiday resorts?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 27, 2017, 08:54:52 AM
OK I'll ask again.  If a holiday apartment is robbed while the occupants are out having dinner elsewhere on the complex how is that possible?  How does the burglar know for certain there is no one left in the apartment, or that the residents aren't about to return at any time?  Do these last two factors make burglary of holiday apartments neither plausible nor logical, and if so how do you account for the fact that they happen on a regular basis at many holiday resorts?

Stealing a few quid is one thing. Stealing a child is another. The motivations are quite different, as are the punishments if caught. If Madeleine was abducted by someone acting on the spur of the moment without any planning her chances of surviving would be extremely small as there would be no forward planning for afterwards either. That's why those who hope she is alive need to develop a logical plausible theory of how the abduction was planned and executed.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 27, 2017, 09:36:03 AM
Stealing a few quid is one thing. Stealing a child is another. The motivations are quite different, as are the punishments if caught. If Madeleine was abducted by someone acting on the spur of the moment without any planning her chances of surviving would be extremely small as there would be no forward planning for afterwards either. That's why those who hope she is alive need to develop a logical plausible theory of how the abduction was planned and executed.

I hope Maddie is alive and well
I don't have to do any mental gymnastics to support my hope
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 27, 2017, 09:36:54 AM
Because if they had surely even you can see that it taints their story, rightly or wrongly.

No I don't -  because I don't immediately assume that if someone is paid for giving a statement to the press - then that automatically proves they must be  liars.  If that is what you are inferring.     Neither am I desperately trying to find a reason to discredit these people because I don't like what they said.   IMO they are a couple of normal, respectable ladies who had no reason whatsoever to lie about anything.

There is no evidence that they were paid -  and the reason they gave for the interview is because of the lies which had been  printed about them in the Portuguese press in an attempt to discredit them.   If it had not been for those false accusations there would have been no press interview.       As the accusations in the PT press could not have been further from the truth I don't blame them for taking the opportunity to put the record straight. 

Quote
They intended to remain anonymous but when their names were leaked to a Portuguese newspaper and they found themselves wrongly accused of waiting eight months before coming forward, they decided to reveal the truth.
unquote


 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-504950/British-witnesses-We-saw-blond-men-balcony-Madeleine-apartment.html#ixzz4WwsXykqQ

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 10:29:04 AM
Stealing a few quid is one thing. Stealing a child is another. The motivations are quite different, as are the punishments if caught. If Madeleine was abducted by someone acting on the spur of the moment without any planning her chances of surviving would be extremely small as there would be no forward planning for afterwards either. That's why those who hope she is alive need to develop a logical plausible theory of how the abduction was planned and executed.
Who mentioned "a few quid" or "spur of the moment"?  A burglary from a holiday home could be planned and could include the theft of valuable and sentimental items, jewellery, passports, camera and electronic devices, the motivation and the method of observation and monitoring could be much the same as in the case of an abduction.  A burglar caught in the act is still likely to face criminal charges, and if he has a previous record his punishment would almost certainly involve incarceration for a considerable length of time.
As for your last sentence it is somewhat illogical IMO.  We all hope she is alive but most think the chances of that are very slim.  It is not a necessary part of any logical or plausible abduction theory to take into account a post abduction scenario with Madeleine living for years after the event.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 10:43:46 AM
At least one burglar appears to have got it wrong when he invaded Mrs Fenn's apartment if not via the window most certainly using it as an exit.

Don't you think it a rather risky endeavour to target children in their beds while their parents may or may not be asleep in an adjoining room?
I would have thought far less risk in entering premises and leaving with a child within the space of seconds and no-one any the wiser until an abduction was accomplished and abductor and abductee heading towards or even cruising along the nearest motorway.

One burglar certainly did get it wrong and that is why they try to make sure there is no one in the apartment by burglarising properties during the day and of course it's a risky endeavour to target children while their parents are at home but as parents, on the whole, do not leave their children alone, targeting the children in the early hours while, it is hoped, the parents are asleep is the molester's only option.

As to your last sentence very, very few parents would have left their children alone and vulnerable to such an event so I'd have thought it would be a scenario an abductor would not have considered likely and would not have taken advantage of.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 10:48:39 AM
Two things 1) before entering the apartment via the (I presume) transparent sliding patio door the abductor would have a chance to assess if there was anyone in the living quarters. 2) if the abductor observed the parents coming and going from the apartment at regular intervals on the night of the abduction it would be safe to assume they were doing so to check on their kids because they had been left alone.

Two things

1) A babysitter could have been in the bedroom reading the children a story indeed in the bathroom.
2) If the 1st and the archiving report is anything to go by the McCanns certainly didn't check the children at regular intervals so it's a moot point.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 11:01:23 AM
No I don't -  because I don't immediately assume that if someone is paid for giving a statement to the press - then that automatically proves they must be  liars.  If that is what you are inferring.     Neither am I desperately trying to find a reason to discredit these people because I don't like what they said.   IMO they are a couple of normal, respectable ladies who had no reason whatsoever to lie about anything.

There is no evidence that they were paid -  and the reason they gave for the interview is because of the lies which had been  printed about them in the Portuguese press in an attempt to discredit them.   If it had not been for those false accusations there would have been no press interview.       As the accusations in the PT press could not have been further from the truth I don't blame them for taking the opportunity to put the record straight. 

Quote
They intended to remain anonymous but when their names were leaked to a Portuguese newspaper and they found themselves wrongly accused of waiting eight months before coming forward, they decided to reveal the truth.
unquote


 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-504950/British-witnesses-We-saw-blond-men-balcony-Madeleine-apartment.html#ixzz4WwsXykqQ

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.




Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 11:30:38 AM
Two things

1) A babysitter could have been in the bedroom reading the children a story indeed in the bathroom.
2) If the 1st and the archiving report is anything to go by the McCanns certainly didn't check the children at regular intervals so it's a moot point.
On the night of the abduction the tapas group were observed going back and forth to their apartments throughtout the evening, behaviour that the McCanns had engaged in throughout that week, whether at regular intervals or not.   Why would they be doing this if they had employed babysitters?  Abductors, like burglars, are not risk averse.  Yes, a babysitter could have been elsewhere in the apartment but they weren't.  Had one been in the bedroom reading the kids a story then an abductor would have been aware of that before entering the bedroom as the light would have been on and there would be the sound of talking, so he would probably have left again.  Ditto for the bathroom - light on, noises from within.  Or he might have attacked the babysitter, who knows?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 11:56:14 AM
On the night of the abduction the tapas group were observed going back and forth to their apartments throughtout the evening, behaviour that the McCanns had engaged in throughout that week, whether at regular intervals or not.   Why would they be doing this if they had employed babysitters?  Abductors, like burglars, are not risk averse.  Yes, a babysitter could have been elsewhere in the apartment but they weren't.  Had one been in the bedroom reading the kids a story then an abductor would have been aware of that before entering the bedroom as the light would have been on and there would be the sound of talking, so he would probably have left again.  Ditto for the bathroom - light on, noises from within.  Or he might have attacked the babysitter, who knows?

On the night of Madeleine's disappearance the checking routine bore no similarity to the routine the tapas group say had been in place the rest of the week so I'm not sure how that would have helped the would-be abductor in his task and there wasn't a babysitter in the apartment but as it seems on the first the children were left for at least an hour and a quarter if he had been watching then it would be logical for him to assume that such small children were not being left alone for that amount of time.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 27, 2017, 11:59:42 AM
I hope Maddie is alive and well
I don't have to do any mental gymnastics to support my hope

Some hopes are realistic, some aren't.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 27, 2017, 12:09:07 PM
Some hopes are realistic, some aren't.

There is a very slim chance Maddie is still alive
That is a fact
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 27, 2017, 12:20:04 PM
Some hopes are realistic, some aren't.

Hope doesn't have to be realistic.  That's why it is hope.  I always feel sorry for people who don't have it.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 27, 2017, 12:27:40 PM
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.

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?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on January 27, 2017, 02:08:15 PM
One burglar certainly did get it wrong and that is why they try to make sure there is no one in the apartment by burglarising properties during the day and of course it's a risky endeavour to target children while their parents are at home but as parents, on the whole, do not leave their children alone, targeting the children in the early hours while, it is hoped, the parents are asleep is the molester's only option.

As to your last sentence very, very few parents would have left their children alone and vulnerable to such an event so I'd have thought it would be a scenario an abductor would not have considered likely and would not have taken advantage of.

Never heard of "casing the joint"?
There is quite a lot of anecdotal evidence that may well have been done ... in broad daylight.
Who knows who was smoking on the apartment block six balcony which overlooked block five and the approaches to it ... all we can probably be certain of is that it was not an Irish teenager not seeing a possible abductor while seeing Jez and Gerry chatting in the street.
If only someone had had the foresight to collect those cigarette ends and bag them for forensic testing.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 27, 2017, 02:11:39 PM
Who was absent from the table between 9.30 and 10pm?  Jane Tanner I think - anyone else?

RO left the same time as MO,after checking in the McCann apartment MO returned,RO stayed in his apartment with his sick daughter until his wife JT came to let him return for his meal,the time is narrowing even further.So in answer to the following quoted post  it appears as if any one having a quick glance would have to be very quick, one blink and they would miss all 9 being there at one time on the night of 3/05/2007.

So what?  If the kids are not there, then nothing is lost, but enter the apartment anyway on the assumption that they are.  As for someone else being there, who?  A quick glance at the dining table  to count 9 people will tell you all you need to know before entering the apartment.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 02:14:50 PM
On the night of Madeleine's disappearance the checking routine bore no similarity to the routine the tapas group say had been in place the rest of the week so I'm not sure how that would have helped the would-be abductor in his task and there wasn't a babysitter in the apartment but as it seems on the first the children were left for at least an hour and a quarter if he had been watching then it would be logical for him to assume that such small children were not being left alone for that amount of time.
Your post is quite difficult to follow as it is one long sentence but I think just about get the gist, apologies in advance if I have misunderstood however.  You say that on the night of Madeleine's disappearance the McCanns' routine bore "no similarity" to their behaviour on the previous nights.  Really?  So they didn't dine in the same place, at the same time, without children and performing checks at intervals  throughout the evenings?  Perhaps you could itemise all the dissimilarities then, with cites.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 27, 2017, 02:15:41 PM
Never heard of "casing the joint"?
There is quite a lot of anecdotal evidence that may well have been done ... in broad daylight.
Who knows who was smoking on the apartment block six balcony which overlooked block five and the approaches to it ... all we can probably be certain of is that it was not an Irish teenager not seeing a possible abductor while seeing Jez and Gerry chatting in the street.
If only someone had had the foresight to collect those cigarette ends and bag them for forensic testing.

So some one who smokes is suspicious,perhaps they were banished to smoke out side because their partner didn't like them smoking in the apartment or maybe the smoker even had a conscience about tainting the apartment with smoke.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 27, 2017, 02:31:26 PM
So some one who smokes is suspicious,perhaps they were banished to smoke out side because their partner didn't like them smoking in the apartment or maybe the smoker even had a conscience about tainting the apartment with smoke.

Too bleedin' obvious and simple, Barrier.
I was going to list all the dodgy ne'er do wells, police officers, passers by and strange inexplicable [to whom?]occurrences which form part of the vast conspiracy which contrived the disappearance....  8(>((
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 02:34:15 PM
RO left the same time as MO,after checking in the McCann apartment MO returned,RO stayed in his apartment with his sick daughter until his wife JT came to let him return for his meal,the time is narrowing even further.So in answer to the following quoted post  it appears as if any one having a quick glance would have to be very quick, one blink and they would miss all 9 being there at one time on the night of 3/05/2007.
Once JT had been observed leaving the table to return to her apartment that would have left 10 minutes with 8 people sat around the table eating - a quick glance would have verified this, and would have confirmed that the apartment 5a residents were sat put.  You can blink hundreds of times in 10 minutes, and no doubt steal a kid too. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 27, 2017, 02:37:17 PM
Once JT had been observed leaving the table to return to her apartment that would have left 10 minutes with 8 people sat around the table eating - a quick glance would have verified this, and would have confirmed that the apartment 5a residents were sat put.  You can blink hundreds of times in 10 minutes, and no doubt steal a kid too.

7 don't forget RO was still with his sick child,the time is even narrower.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: misty on January 27, 2017, 02:42:14 PM
7 don't forget RO was still with his sick child,the time is even narrower.

Which makes a time frame of between 9.05pm & 9.30 pm the most likely time an abductor would have struck - immediately after all the group had been seen to head off to the bar for dinner.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 27, 2017, 02:45:08 PM
Bump this for Alfie from one of my earlier posts.

The statements to PJ on 4th May 2007 are at variance with later accounts. Both cannot be right therefore the status of the appartment's security remains unknown. Any postulation based on a specific security condition will be fundamentally flawed.
Why have you discounted the 4th May 2007 statements ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on January 27, 2017, 02:50:21 PM
Which makes a time frame of between 9.05pm & 9.30 pm the most likely time an abductor would have struck - immediately after all the group had been seen to head off to the bar for dinner.

This is what I believe the correct time frame to be.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 27, 2017, 03:05:12 PM
Which makes a time frame of between 9.05pm & 9.30 pm the most likely time an abductor would have struck - immediately after all the group had been seen to head off to the bar for dinner.

But they weren't all there at one go after 9.05,lots of toing and throwing.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 27, 2017, 03:11:04 PM
Which makes a time frame of between 9.05pm & 9.30 pm the most likely time an abductor would have struck - immediately after all the group had been seen to head off to the bar for dinner.

Why that narrow time frame,GM left the apartment at about 9-10/15,no one bothered to check on Madeleine again before 10 again.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 27, 2017, 03:19:11 PM
Supposing Smithman is THE man, what is the latest time he could have left 5A and get to the place that he was seen  ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 03:19:17 PM
7 don't forget RO was still with his sick child,the time is even narrower.
2145: RJO returns to table to eat main course leaving JT in 5D.
8
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 27, 2017, 03:27:56 PM
Once JT had been observed leaving the table to return to her apartment that would have left 10 minutes with 8 people sat around the table eating - a quick glance would have verified this, and would have confirmed that the apartment 5a residents were sat put.  You can blink hundreds of times in 10 minutes, and no doubt steal a kid too.


2145: RJO returns to table to eat main course leaving JT in 5D.
8

So the quick glance is taken from where? at night,  to identify the occupiers of 5a were in the restaurant?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 27, 2017, 03:39:13 PM
That's quite interesting. Where would a watcher need to be to see both the patio area of 5A and the Tapas restaurant table ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 27, 2017, 03:57:56 PM
That's quite interesting. Where would a watcher need to be to see both the patio area of 5A and the Tapas restaurant table ?
I have covered this on a Luz Tour.  The passageway to the south of block 4 is ideal.  It has no through traffic (pedestrian) because it is blocked at the west end.

The lighting arrangement means this location is in darkness while the Tapas was in light.  One can see but not be seen.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 04:28:07 PM
So the quick glance is taken from where? at night,  to identify the occupiers of 5a were in the restaurant?
From a vantage point which affords a quick glance of the Tapas restaurant, I would have thought.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 27, 2017, 04:44:35 PM
I have covered this on a Luz Tour.  The passageway to the south of block 4 is ideal.  It has no through traffic (pedestrian) because it is blocked at the west end.

The lighting arrangement means this location is in darkness while the Tapas was in light.  One can see but not be seen.

What sort of distance from Tapas?
Is the area sufficiently elevated to see over the wall?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 27, 2017, 05:29:00 PM
Supposing Smithman is THE man, what is the latest time he could have left 5A and get to the place that he was seen  ?
What route did he take and then get Sadie to measure it on Google Earth.  At best it is a few hundred meters.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 27, 2017, 05:39:27 PM
What sort of distance from Tapas?
Is the area sufficiently elevated to see over the wall?
That point is probably about 50m or so from the Tapas - say half the length of a football pitch.

And yes, you can see the Tapas clearly and easily.

I have not been able to check whether the Tapas layout on the evening of 3 May would allow one to recognise individuals, but I'm confident one could do a headcount of people at a big round table.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 27, 2017, 05:47:49 PM
What route did he take and then get Sadie to measure it on Google Earth. At best it is a few hundred meters.

As little as that ?  It looks further on a map.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 05:55:04 PM
In the window of opportunity between 9.45 and 9.55 that makes the idea of the abductor being Smithman far more plausible (although personally I still think Smithman was an innocent passerby with child).
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 06:23:27 PM
Your post is quite difficult to follow as it is one long sentence but I think just about get the gist, apologies in advance if I have misunderstood however.  You say that on the night of Madeleine's disappearance the McCanns' routine bore "no similarity" to their behaviour on the previous nights.  Really?  So they didn't dine in the same place, at the same time, without children and performing checks at intervals  throughout the evenings?  Perhaps you could itemise all the dissimilarities then, with cites.

Only one dissimilarity but crucial, the time between checks.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 06:29:01 PM
In the window of opportunity between 9.45 and 9.55 that makes the idea of the abductor being Smithman far more plausible (although personally I still think Smithman was an innocent passerby with child).

So two passersby wearing almost identical clothes and carrying almost identical children with no shoes on. What did you say about improbable events Alfie ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 06:31:18 PM
Only one dissimilarity but crucial, the time between checks.
It's not crucial.  The McCanns established a pattern of leaving their kids in the apartment and checking on them at intervals - that is the principle that was established, enabling an abductor to know that there was no babysitter inside looking after them.  It doesn't matter if there was an hour interval between checks on one day or a half hour interval between checks the next, the action of leaving kids unattended remains the same, as does occasional checking.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 06:37:24 PM
So two passersby wearing almost identical clothes and carrying almost identical children with no shoes on. What did you say about improbable events Alfie ?
Yes it's a bit of a mystery I admit, but what other explanation have you got Faith?  We know that it is not an uncommon sight to see parents carrying sleeping children back from the creche in PdL.  Sleeping children usually go to bed without their shoes on and putting shoes on them could risk waking them, so I don't see that as a major problem.  The descriptions of the man are puzzlingly similar however.  Coincidence?  Possibly.  I can't explain it otherwise, though I know you think you can, but that explanation is twice as implausible in my view.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 27, 2017, 06:47:00 PM
It's not crucial.  The McCanns established a pattern of leaving their kids in the apartment and checking on them at intervals - that is the principle that was established, enabling an abductor to know that there was no babysitter inside looking after them.  It doesn't matter if there was an hour interval between checks on one day or a half hour interval between checks the next, the action of leaving kids unattended remains the same, as does occasional checking.

Despite your attempts to keep them out of the equation the others in the group have to be taken into account because they pass by the apartment when they check. Bumping into one of them is just as bad as bumping into a McCann from a would-be abductor's point of view.

Russell stayed in his apartment after the 9.30 pm check. A watcher wouldn't know why, therefore he wouldn't know if Russell would emerge and catch him. Then Jane arrives. The same problem faces the watcher; what's going to happen next? Russell emerges and goes to the Tapas. Is Jane going to come out too? The watcher has no way of knowing.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 06:48:17 PM
It's not crucial.  The McCanns established a pattern of leaving their kids in the apartment and checking on them at intervals - that is the principle that was established, enabling an abductor to know that there was no babysitter inside looking after them.  It doesn't matter if there was an hour interval between checks on one day or a half hour interval between checks the next, the action of leaving kids unattended remains the same, as does occasional checking.

So why do you suppose the abductor didn't strike as soon as he'd established their routine? After all the routine could have changed at any time. The children could have started crying while alone ( oh wait ! ) and the parents could have stayed in after that. Do you really think an abductor would hang around until Thursday to strike?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 06:49:05 PM
Yes it's a bit of a mystery I admit, but what other explanation have you got Faith?  We know that it is not an uncommon sight to see parents carrying sleeping children back from the creche in PdL.  Sleeping children usually go to bed without their shoes on and putting shoes on them could risk waking them, so I don't see that as a major problem.  The descriptions of the man are puzzlingly similar however.  Coincidence?  Possibly.  I can't explain it otherwise, though I know you think you can, but that explanation is twice as implausible in my view.

An improbable event even?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 06:49:43 PM
Despite your attempts to keep them out of the equation the others in the group have to be taken into account because they pass by the apartment when they check. Bumping into one of them is just as bad as bumping into a McCann from a would-be abductor's point of view.

Russell stayed in his apartment after the 9.30 pm check. A watcher wouldn't know why, therefore he wouldn't know if Russell would emerge and catch him. Then Jane arrives. The same problem faces the watcher; what's going to happen next? Russell emerges and goes to the Tapas. Is Jane going to come out too? The watcher has no way of knowing.
What are the movements of these people between 9.45pm and 9.55pm?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 06:50:52 PM
So why do you suppose the abductor didn't strike as soon as he'd established their routine? After all the routine could have changed at any time. The children could have started crying while alone ( oh wait ! ) and the parents could have stayed in after that. Do you really think an abductor would hang around until Thursday to strike?
Maybe an attempt was made earlier in the week.  We don't know do we?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 06:51:39 PM
What are the movements of these people between 9.45pm and 9.55pm?

So you don't think Tannerman was the abductor?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 06:51:52 PM
An improbable event even?
Singular.  Unlike a series of 15+ improbable events in the space of a couple of hours.   8(0(*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 06:52:16 PM
So you don't think Tannerman was the abductor?
No I don't.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 27, 2017, 06:54:09 PM
So two passersby wearing almost identical clothes and carrying almost identical children with no shoes on. What did you say about improbable events Alfie ?

Although the men wore similar clothes they had different hair lengths. The children can't be described as similar as the first child wasn't seen, only the feet. The second child did resemble Madeleine, but the pyjamas were a little different from the ones described by her parents.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 06:54:48 PM
Although the men wore similar clothes they had different hair lengths. The children can't be described as similar as the first child wasn't seen, only the feet. The second child did resemble Madeleine, but the pyjamas were a little different from the ones described by her parents.
Well there you go then!  That mystery explained.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 07:09:48 PM
It strikes me that people like G-Unit and Faithlilly are very risk-averse.  I don't mean this as a dig or a criticism, just that you have both expressed views such as you would never leave a young child unattended for a minute and have worried about the risks posed to young children by the balcony, the kitchen, etc etc.  That's quite normal, but someone who plans to abduct a child is very likely not to be so risk-averse.  Committing a serious criminal act of this nature is fraught with risk and for some criminally-minded individuals that is part of the thrill of committing the act.  If a would-be abductor stopped to consider all the possible opportunities for him to be caught, the possibility of bumping into someone whilst coming out of the building, the possibility of the child screaming and being heard, the possibility of being caught and imprisoned for 5 years, the possibility of being shunned by family and friends and  losing job, home etc then it's very likely that these crimes would never be committed in the first place.  Criminals often take big risks, they obviously feel the rewards are worth it. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 07:15:56 PM
Singular.  Unlike a series of 15+ improbable events in the space of a couple of hours.   8(0(*

Singular? Okaaaaay !  @)(++(*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 27, 2017, 09:28:32 PM
It strikes me that people like G-Unit and Faithlilly are very risk-averse.  I don't mean this as a dig or a criticism, just that you have both expressed views such as you would never leave a young child unattended for a minute and have worried about the risks posed to young children by the balcony, the kitchen, etc etc.  That's quite normal, but someone who plans to abduct a child is very likely not to be so risk-averse.  Committing a serious criminal act of this nature is fraught with risk and for some criminally-minded individuals that is part of the thrill of committing the act.  If a would-be abductor stopped to consider all the possible opportunities for him to be caught, the possibility of bumping into someone whilst coming out of the building, the possibility of the child screaming and being heard, the possibility of being caught and imprisoned for 5 years, the possibility of being shunned by family and friends and  losing job, home etc then it's very likely that these crimes would never be committed in the first place.  Criminals often take big risks, they obviously feel the rewards are worth it.

If the abductor was doing it for kicks that would preclude the targeted for a specific client then.
You can't have that one both ways. The objectives are different.
Oh hang on a minute I forgot about the PdL Bubble.................... as you were back on yer 'eads... @)(++(*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 10:01:02 PM
It strikes me that people like G-Unit and Faithlilly are very risk-averse.  I don't mean this as a dig or a criticism, just that you have both expressed views such as you would never leave a young child unattended for a minute and have worried about the risks posed to young children by the balcony, the kitchen, etc etc.  That's quite normal, but someone who plans to abduct a child is very likely not to be so risk-averse.  Committing a serious criminal act of this nature is fraught with risk and for some criminally-minded individuals that is part of the thrill of committing the act.  If a would-be abductor stopped to consider all the possible opportunities for him to be caught, the possibility of bumping into someone whilst coming out of the building, the possibility of the child screaming and being heard, the possibility of being caught and imprisoned for 5 years, the possibility of being shunned by family and friends and  losing job, home etc then it's very likely that these crimes would never be committed in the first place.  Criminals often take big risks, they obviously feel the rewards are worth it.

Obviously you have more experience of criminal endeavours than I therefore I bow to your  superior knowledge.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 10:09:53 PM
"When committing crimes, psychopaths carefully plan out every detail in advance and often have contingency plans in place"

https://www.sott.net/article/292891-Basic-distinctions-between-criminal-sociopaths-and-psychopaths

"A psychopath does have not a few psychopathic traits. He or she has, as the Society for the Scientific Study of Psychopathy explains, “a constellation of traits.” And the image outlined by that constellation doesn’t evoke confidence over the long term: lack of empathy and guilt, an inability to form meaningful emotional bonds; narcissism and superficial charm; dishonesty, manipulativeness, and reckless risk-taking".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dean-a-haycock/6-incredibly-common-misco_b_5082723.html
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 27, 2017, 10:41:13 PM
"When committing crimes, psychopaths carefully plan out every detail in advance and often have contingency plans in place"

https://www.sott.net/article/292891-Basic-distinctions-between-criminal-sociopaths-and-psychopaths

"A psychopath does have not a few psychopathic traits. He or she has, as the Society for the Scientific Study of Psychopathy explains, “a constellation of traits.” And the image outlined by that constellation doesn’t evoke confidence over the long term: lack of empathy and guilt, an inability to form meaningful emotional bonds; narcissism and superficial charm; dishonesty, manipulativeness, and reckless risk-taking".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dean-a-haycock/6-incredibly-common-misco_b_5082723.html

And I thought you were a supporter !  8(0(*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 11:34:28 PM
And I thought you were a supporter !  8(0(*
I would have put a large sum of money on you making a silly comment like that in reply.  So predictabubble.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 27, 2017, 11:45:28 PM
An interesting article which reinforces what I have posted before:

https://leb.fbi.gov/2012/july/perspective-the-predator-when-the-stalker-is-a-psychopath
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 28, 2017, 01:07:54 AM
An interesting article which reinforces what I have posted before:

https://leb.fbi.gov/2012/july/perspective-the-predator-when-the-stalker-is-a-psychopath

Not sure how this relates to the case being discussed. Please explain?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 28, 2017, 08:32:46 AM
Not sure how this relates to the case being discussed. Please explain?
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. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 28, 2017, 09:11:21 AM
Maybe an attempt was made earlier in the week.  We don't know do we?

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.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 28, 2017, 09:55:01 AM
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.

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
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 28, 2017, 10:01:56 AM
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.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 28, 2017, 10:08:16 AM
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

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on January 28, 2017, 10:44:00 AM
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. 

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 28, 2017, 11:31:00 AM
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.


Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 28, 2017, 11:41:40 AM
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.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 28, 2017, 11:45:26 AM
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.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 28, 2017, 12:39:53 PM
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.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 28, 2017, 12:47:29 PM
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?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 28, 2017, 12:50:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 28, 2017, 01:02:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 28, 2017, 01:07:39 PM
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.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 28, 2017, 01:12:12 PM
I consider the latter an impossibility.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 28, 2017, 01:13:59 PM
I consider the latter an impossibility.

I hope you are wrong.

I will accord you the courtesy of assuming you hope you are, too.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 28, 2017, 01:29:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 28, 2017, 01:43:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 28, 2017, 01:44:26 PM
I consider the latter an impossibility.
Why impossible? 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 28, 2017, 01:52:50 PM
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.

Very true Alfie no one does really know what OG has come up with and while abduction may be plausible and logical it doesn't mean that's what happened. Look at the Shannon Mathews case. The most plausible and logical explanation  there was that she had been targeted by an abductor and stolen away while walking from school. How many improbable events made up the true outcome, that her mum and uncle hid her under a bed for weeks simply to enable them to claim the reward money on offer?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on January 28, 2017, 02:00:04 PM
Go on then you seem to have an intimate knowledge of such, what is it that prevents any move forward,if the evidence was there in 2007 its there now what is it?

I am not privy to details of the investigation.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 28, 2017, 02:01:33 PM
Very true Alfie no one does really know what OG has come up with and while abduction may be plausible and logical it doesn't mean that's what happened. Look at the Shannon Mathews case. The most plausible and logical explanation  there was that she had been targeted by an abductor and stolen away while walking from school. How many improbable events made up the true outcome, that her mum and uncle hid her under a bed for weeks simply to enable them to claim the reward money on offer?
At last, some acknowledgement from a "sceptic" that stranger abduction is a plausible and logical explanation for Madeleine's disappearance!  Hallelujah!  That's all I wanted.  I can die happy now.  8)--))
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 28, 2017, 02:41:19 PM
At last, some acknowledgement from a "sceptic" that stranger abduction is a plausible and logical explanation for Madeleine's disappearance!  Hallelujah!  That's all I wanted.  I can die happy now.  8)--))

Oh don't do that Alfie. We don't want to start talk of another conspiracy  8(0(*

As to the abduction. The known timeline allows it, it is plausible and there's nothing that makes it illogical. It doesn't however make it true.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 28, 2017, 03:09:20 PM
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.

I think you'll find that abduction was not the only option considered by Operation Grange, so using them to support your 'logical and plausible' argument is not valid;

''Redwood said McCann might have long been dead.

"There is always the potential that she didn't leave the apartment alive. What is important for us to do is consider all the options," he said.''
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-mccann-idUSBREA2I1D220140319

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 28, 2017, 03:26:04 PM
I think you'll find that abduction was not the only option considered by Operation Grange, so using them to support your 'logical and plausible' argument is not valid;

''Redwood said McCann might have long been dead.

"There is always the potential that she didn't leave the apartment alive. What is important for us to do is consider all the options," he said.''
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-mccann-idUSBREA2I1D220140319

so abduction was considered possible by redwood...he made that quite clear
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 28, 2017, 03:28:03 PM
I think you'll find that abduction was not the only option considered by Operation Grange, so using them to support your 'logical and plausible' argument is not valid;

''Redwood said McCann might have long been dead.

"There is always the potential that she didn't leave the apartment alive. What is important for us to do is consider all the options," he said.''
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-mccann-idUSBREA2I1D220140319

that is pretty much proof that OG was not limited to the remit of abduction
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 28, 2017, 03:37:20 PM
that is pretty much proof that OG was not limited to the remit of abduction
I guess your definition of proof is quite different to mine.

I take that statement by Redwood to mean OG was considering both Madeleine leaving the apartment alive and Madeleine leaving the apartment dead.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 28, 2017, 04:09:57 PM
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

It is alleged that a story appeared in the Portuguese press saying these women didn't come forward until November 2007. I would like to see that confirmed.

It is alleged that the women were ignored by the PJ and by the UK police. Why would either police force do that?

It is alleged that statements were taken by UK police, but they are not in the PJ files although other similar statements are. Why would that be?

It is alleged the women ate at the Tapas restaurant, but they are not on the booking sheets. It's highly unlikely given the hoops people had to jump through to eat at the Tapas that anyone was able to wander in and get a table. If they could, why bother with the paperwork in the first place? If it was so lax, the booking sheets can no longer be seen as evidence because unbooked people could be there and booked people might not have been
there.

I can think of no reason why UK police would leak to the Portuguese press but I can think of reasons why Metodo 3 or Mr Mitchell might. I can also think of a reason why they might then tell the UK press about the story. Who did tell the women that the Portuguese press had a story about them?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 28, 2017, 04:26:09 PM
I guess your definition of proof is quite different to mine.

I take that statement by Redwood to mean OG was considering both Madeleine leaving the apartment alive and Madeleine leaving the apartment dead.

Quite strange, really, because the parents have always insisted there's absolutely no evidence that Madeleine was harmed (apart from being abducted from her bed, that is). I wonder why Redwood was prepared to speculate about death in the apartment when there was allegedly nothing to suggest that it happened? Taking a body isn't abduction either, is it?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 28, 2017, 04:30:03 PM
Quite strange, really, because the parents have always insisted there's absolutely no evidence that Madeleine was harmed (apart from being abducted from her bed, that is). I wonder why Redwood was prepared to speculate about death in the apartment when there was allegedly nothing to suggest that it happened? Taking a body isn't abduction either, is it?

Absolutely not. Different charge altogether, I believe.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 28, 2017, 06:01:29 PM
Quite strange, really, because the parents have always insisted there's absolutely no evidence that Madeleine was harmed (apart from being abducted from her bed, that is). I wonder why Redwood was prepared to speculate about death in the apartment when there was allegedly nothing to suggest that it happened? Taking a body isn't abduction either, is it?

Quite simply because it is a possibility
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 28, 2017, 06:17:43 PM
I think you'll find that abduction was not the only option considered by Operation Grange, so using them to support your 'logical and plausible' argument is not valid;

''Redwood said McCann might have long been dead.

"There is always the potential that she didn't leave the apartment alive. What is important for us to do is consider all the options," he said.''
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-mccann-idUSBREA2I1D220140319
Again and again this quote is used as if it were a case of EITHER Abducted OR Dead, as if the latter precludes the possibility of removed from the apartment in a criminal act by a stranger.  I just don't understand the logic of people who think this way.  Perhaps you can explain. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 28, 2017, 07:59:35 PM
I guess your definition of proof is quite different to mine.

I take that statement by Redwood to mean OG was considering both Madeleine leaving the apartment alive and Madeleine leaving the apartment dead.

then if maddie left the apartment dead she was not abducted
proof that OG are not limited to the remit of abduction
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 28, 2017, 10:47:01 PM
51 pages and there is an apartment where the doors may or may not have been locked dependant upon which statements one chooses to believe, so how any abductor entered or left is unkown, the latter backed up by the forensic evidence or rather lack of it.
An unknown number of perps in unknown locations casing the apartment and Tapas bar simultaneously but no graphics to demonstrate evidence of sight lines. Not to mention any evidence of perps.


Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 29, 2017, 09:06:23 AM
then if maddie left the apartment dead she was not abducted
proof that OG are not limited to the remit of abduction

How does that account for OG drawing up the remit before a word of the original investigation was translated and read?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 09:33:28 AM
How does that account for OG drawing up the remit before a word of the original investigation was translated and read?

The remit was drawn up FOR  OG, by someone with far higher authority than a mere  DCI
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 29, 2017, 09:40:20 AM
The remit was drawn up FOR  OG, by someone with far higher authority than a mere  DCI

Exactly,it's a hole that was dug for them and there's no way out imo.A simple statement in the not too distant future about lack of evidence to proceed will be forthcoming.Back to topic,leaving the probable and plausible just a theory.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 09:52:58 AM
Exactly,it's a hole that was dug for them and there's no way out imo.A simple statement in the not too distant future about lack of evidence to proceed will be forthcoming.Back to topic,leaving the probable and plausible just a theory.

That would be an interesting position as it would mean that they had progressed not a jot beyond the conclusions of the PJ, despite all the extra money spent.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 29, 2017, 10:34:19 AM
That would be an interesting position as it would mean that they had progressed not a jot beyond the conclusions of the PJ, despite all the extra money spent.

It would also mean that the McCanns would be in exactly the same position as they were in August 2008. Insisting on abduction without a shred of evidence to support it. Not even a logical plausible theory of how it was done.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 10:37:09 AM
It would also mean that the McCanns would be in exactly the same position as they were in August 2008. Insisting on abduction without a shred of evidence to support it. Not even a logical plausible theory of how it was done.


Oh dear me, what a shame.  All that effort for nothing.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 10:52:09 AM
It would also mean that the McCanns would be in exactly the same position as they were in August 2008. Insisting on abduction without a shred of evidence to support it. Not even a logical plausible theory of how it was done.
Are you still denying that there is a plausible and logical theory of stranger abduction?  Why so?!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 10:54:35 AM
I reckon they will, when the case is closed or shelved again, and I reckon they will conclude Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger and I reckon sceptics will be shocked and dismayed for 24 hours and then twist it into "that's what they say publicly, but secretly they think the McCanns dunnit but can't prove it".  How much do you wanna bet on this outcome?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 10:58:32 AM
I reckon they will, when the case is closed or shelved again, and I reckon they will conclude Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger and I reckon sceptics will be shocked and dismayed for 24 hours and then twist it into "that's what they say publicly, but secretly they think the McCanns dunnit but can't prove it".  How much do you wanna bet on this outcome?

Which outcome ?

I think it quite likely there will be no conclusive answer, though OG might say that 'in their professional belief'  blah blah blah. I.E. no evidence.
Now where have we heard that before just recently ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 11:05:44 AM
Which outcome ?

I think it quite likely there will be no conclusive answer, though OG might say that 'in their professional belief'  blah blah blah. I.E. no evidence.
Now where have we heard that before just recently ?
D'oh, the outcome I just described of course!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 11:06:36 AM
Which outcome ?

I think it quite likely there will be no conclusive answer, though OG might say that 'in their professional belief'  blah blah blah. I.E. no evidence.
Now where have we heard that before just recently ?
Ben Needham? 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 11:08:12 AM
Ben Needham?


That's the chap. Something to do with diggers and toy cars, but nothing conclusive.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 29, 2017, 11:12:18 AM
I reckon they will, when the case is closed or shelved again, and I reckon they will conclude Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger and I reckon sceptics will be shocked and dismayed for 24 hours and then twist it into "that's what they say publicly, but secretly they think the McCanns dunnit but can't prove it".  How much do you wanna bet on this outcome?

The PJ have primacy and that being so it'll be interesting to see just what OG were doing if the PJ release files again.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Lace on January 29, 2017, 11:21:37 AM

That's the chap. Something to do with diggers and toy cars, but nothing conclusive.

They found the toy car Ben had been playing with,   in rubble that had been dumped in another area.   Ben's Grandmother identified the car as the one she had bought for Ben he had taken it with him when they visited that day.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 02:42:09 PM
Back on topic.  Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?  Yes.  Is there a plausible, logical theory of parental involvement?  Never seen one yet. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 29, 2017, 02:47:38 PM
are there really posters on here who do not believe an abduction was possible.....that is ridiculous
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 02:51:06 PM
I think we can all see it as a possibility, though not necessarily as a strong probability.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 03:12:33 PM
Alfie seems to believe that Madeleine was abducted for nefarious reasons. I wonder how death in the apartment accords with his theory?
ERm...do you know what nefarious means?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 03:14:25 PM
Once again we have this ludicrous belief that "she may have died in the apartment" is the opposite of "taken in a criminal act by a stranger."  Can someone who believes this to be the case kindly explain their logic, ta.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 29, 2017, 03:21:01 PM
ERm...do you know what nefarious means?

Absolutely. In the context of your theory are you saying the abductor took a dead body away and if so why? Was he a necrophile as he certainly didn't have time to carry out anything of a nefarious nature in the apartment?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 03:28:01 PM
Absolutely. In the context of your theory are you saying the abductor took a dead body away and if so why? Was he a necrophile as he certainly didn't have time to carry out anything of a nefarious nature in the apartment?
I'm not going to come out and say it on the board because it could upset someone reading.  Suffice it to say, you're going to have to work that one out for yourself.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 03:38:19 PM
You mean you can't accept the possibility of her dying in the apartment?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 03:38:57 PM
You mean you can't accept the possibility of her dying in the apartment?
What makes you say that?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 03:40:46 PM
What makes you say that?

You mean you do accept the possibility ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 03:51:12 PM
You mean you do accept the possibility ?
I think if you bother to read my posts you will see that I do, unfortunately. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 29, 2017, 05:43:41 PM
Once again we have this ludicrous belief that "she may have died in the apartment" is the opposite of "taken in a criminal act by a stranger."  Can someone who believes this to be the case kindly explain their logic, ta.

I posted the comment, but not in opposition to the abduction possibility, as an alternative to it. The only person thinking the two possibilities are 'opposites' is you. Perhaps it is you who should explain the logic of that? Ta.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 29, 2017, 06:00:18 PM
Where was the time?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 06:05:25 PM
I posted the comment, but not in opposition to the abduction possibility, as an alternative to it. The only person thinking the two possibilities are 'opposites' is you. Perhaps it is you who should explain the logic of that? Ta.
Because clearly you believe that when Redwood says he thinks MAdeleine died in the apartment you think it means he is pointing the finger of suspicion at the parents. Now tell me I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 06:18:34 PM
 There must have been something to suggest that as a possibility otherwise he wouldn't have put the possibility forward.
What led him, or members of his team, to the conclusion that she might have been dead before removal ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 29, 2017, 06:22:15 PM
Because clearly you believe that when Redwood says he thinks MAdeleine died in the apartment you think it means he is pointing the finger of suspicion at the parents. Now tell me I'm wrong.

Oh, I see,it's Alfie the amazing mind reader act again. Instead of telling me what I think try reading what I say. I merely pointed out that abduction was not the only thought in Redwood's head. I have no idea why he mentioned that possibility, how or why he thought it could have happened or who he thought may have done it. I was discussing Redwood, not myself.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 29, 2017, 06:25:43 PM
There must have been something to suggest that as a possibility otherwise he wouldn't have put the possibility forward.
What led him, or members of his team, to the conclusion that she might have been dead before removal ?

The dogs perhaps?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 06:26:43 PM
Oh, I see,it's Alfie the amazing mind reader act again. Instead of telling me what I think try reading what I say. I merely pointed out that abduction was not the only thought in Redwood's head. I have no idea why he mentioned that possibility, how or why he thought it could have happened or who he thought may have done it. I was discussing Redwood, not myself.
So I'm wrong then? When I say "Redwood believes Madeleine was abducted by a stranger" and you counter with "he also said she may have died in the apartment" then there is no underlying point you are trying to make?  You are not for one minute suggesting that Redwood considers "death in the apartment" points to the McCanns involvement and that he means merely that she could have been taken from the apartment dead in a criminal act by a stranger?  OK, I apologise and stand corrected then. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 06:31:21 PM
The dogs perhaps?


But... but... but we have it constant shoved down our throats that the dogs are of no significance.
 How could an experienced middle rank detective possibly go against this opinion ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 06:31:43 PM
There must have been something to suggest that as a possibility otherwise he wouldn't have put the possibility forward.
What led him, or members of his team, to the conclusion that she might have been dead before removal ?
Whatever it was, he couldn't have been that convinced of it, as he seemed to consider it quite possible that she was still alive and findable.  But of course you don't need a dog to tell you that when a stranger enters a child's bedroom intent on doing them harm that there is a possibility of the child being killed and removed.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 06:32:37 PM
Except that there is nothing to indicate that any stranger did any such thing.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 06:42:00 PM
Except that there is nothing to indicate that any stranger did any such thing.
there is no indication that the parents did any such thing either.  So....
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 06:43:34 PM
So case remains unresolved, possibly for ever.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 29, 2017, 07:01:50 PM
So I'm wrong then? When I say "Redwood believes Madeleine was abducted by a stranger" and you counter with "he also said she may have died in the apartment" then there is no underlying point you are trying to make?  You are not for one minute suggesting that Redwood considers "death in the apartment" points to the McCanns involvement and that he means merely that she could have been taken from the apartment dead in a criminal act by a stranger?  OK, I apologise and stand corrected then.

Good. Does that mean that both of Redwood's thoughts will be quoted in future or will the 'abduction' possibility continue to be quoted as if it was the only possibility he ever considered? I've seen it quoted by some as 'evidence' that abduction happened, which is obviously ludicrous.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 29, 2017, 07:04:09 PM
Good. Does that mean that both of Redwood's thoughts will be quoted in future or will the 'abduction' possibility continue to be quoted as if it was the only possibility he ever considered? I've seen it quoted by some as 'evidence' that abduction happened, which is obviously ludicrous.

it is evidence to support abduction but not proof obviously
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 07:22:35 PM
Good. Does that mean that both of Redwood's thoughts will be quoted in future or will the 'abduction' possibility continue to be quoted as if it was the only possibility he ever considered? I've seen it quoted by some as 'evidence' that abduction happened, which is obviously ludicrous.
It's clear from what he said that Redwood believed Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger, whether alive or dead.  Do you not agree?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 29, 2017, 07:56:39 PM
It's clear from what he said that Redwood believed Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger, whether alive or dead.  Do you not agree?

Is Redwood still leading the investigation then? What does DCI Wall think ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 07:59:04 PM
Is Redwood still leading the investigation then? What does DCI Wall think ?
No, why do you ask?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 08:05:01 PM
Is Redwood still leading the investigation then? What does DCI Wall think ?

Ms Wall is notable for her silence in this matter. As the OG  team is reduced to about 4 people. it is more than likely that most of her  time spent on other cases.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 29, 2017, 08:47:39 PM
No, why do you ask?

Well if Redwood isn't leading the case his opinion is no longer relevant.

More relevant at this time is what DCI Wall thinks. Do we know? What leads is she following and, some will think more importantly, why her progress wasn't worthy of a mention in Kate's Christmas message?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 29, 2017, 08:50:00 PM
Is Redwood still leading the investigation then? What does DCI Wall think ?

The last time any thing of note from OG was back in October 2015 when announcing the cutting back of personal, since then its been mere press speculation.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 09:03:29 PM
Well if Redwood isn't leading the case his opinion is no longer relevant.

More relevant at this time is what DCI Wall thinks. Do we know? What leads is she following and, some will think more importantly, why her progress wasn't worthy of a mention in Kate's Christmas message?
Do you think Redwood was expressing a personal opinion, or the opinion of the team working on Operation Grange?  There is no reason to think DCI Wall has taken the case down a different route, and if you are still pinning all your hopes on the lack of an acknowledgment of her efforts in the McCanns Christmas message then I can't help but feel a bit sorry for you.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on January 29, 2017, 09:10:17 PM
It's clear from what he said that Redwood believed Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger, whether alive or dead.  Do you not agree?

I do not, as you well know. Saying there was 'an opportunity' in the timeline isn't saying someone took advantage of that opportunity.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 29, 2017, 09:12:40 PM
I do not, as you well know. Saying there was 'an opportunity' in the timeline isn't saying someone took advantage of that opportunity.

But it is certainly saying it was possible
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 29, 2017, 09:19:37 PM
Do you think Redwood was expressing a personal opinion, or the opinion of the team working on Operation Grange?  There is no reason to think DCI Wall has taken the case down a different route, and if you are still pinning all your hopes on the lack of an acknowledgment of her efforts in the McCanns Christmas message then I can't help but feel a bit sorry for you.

We have no idea what direction DCI Wall has taken the investigation in as she certainly isn't telling us. Perhaps Kate, by her omission, is. Either that or she is one ungrateful individual.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 09:26:39 PM
 There never seems to have been any urgency to solve the case so I suppose this could sit on the back burner for years. Only a handful of people involved, maybe less than in 2015, so cheap to finance indefinitely.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 29, 2017, 09:35:24 PM
There never seems to have been any urgency to solve the case so I suppose this could sit on the back burner for years. Only a handful of people involved, maybe less than in 2015, so cheap to finance indefinitely.

I don't think they have achieved anything which can justify the £ millions spent on the case.  And when Redwood blew Tannerman out of the water he inadvertently destroyed the principal witness to the claimed abduction.  Smithman is all that is left but trying to discover his identity appears to have been lost somewhere along the line.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 29, 2017, 09:37:01 PM
You think it was inadvertent ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 29, 2017, 09:40:41 PM
You think it was inadvertent ?

Possibly. That was his eureka moment but in solving one element of the case he opened up a whole new debate.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 10:12:47 PM
I do not, as you well know. Saying there was 'an opportunity' in the timeline isn't saying someone took advantage of that opportunity.
Did he ever venture an alternative theory?  No. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 10:15:00 PM
We have no idea what direction DCI Wall has taken the investigation in as she certainly isn't telling us. Perhaps Kate, by her omission, is. Either that or she is one ungrateful individual.
Keep on straw-clutching.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 29, 2017, 10:15:25 PM
Did he ever venture an alternative theory?  No.

He's yesterday's man.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 29, 2017, 10:17:06 PM
He's yesterday's man.
Seriously, do you actually envisage a day when the McCanns are arrested and tried for hiding their child's body?  Do you think it's likely?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 29, 2017, 10:18:06 PM
Keep on straw-clutching.

So has Nicola Wall told us what direction she has taken the investigation in ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on January 30, 2017, 01:00:52 AM
Could we stay on topic please.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: G-Unit on January 30, 2017, 05:56:03 AM
Did he ever venture an alternative theory?  No.

He never gave any theory. He said there was an opportunity in the timeline for Madeleine to be abducted. He said she could have died in the apartment. More ideas than theories imo.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 30, 2017, 06:38:47 AM
He never gave any theory. He said there was an opportunity in the timeline for Madeleine to be abducted. He said she could have died in the apartment. More ideas than theories imo.
Interesting idea.  When is an idea just an idea and when does it become a theory?  A theory of abduction needs to be something that accounts for all the intelligence.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 08:08:41 AM
He never gave any theory. He said there was an opportunity in the timeline for Madeleine to be abducted. He said she could have died in the apartment. More ideas than theories imo.
Did he venture any alternative "ideas" then, such as woke and wandered?  Because all I've heard from Op Grange supports the view that they are investigating a criminal act by a stranger.  There is nothing (apart from the lack of an acknowledgment in the McCann Christmas message - lol) to suggest they are pursuing any other "ideas".
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Davel on January 30, 2017, 08:22:05 AM
He never gave any theory. He said there was an opportunity in the timeline for Madeleine to be abducted. He said she could have died in the apartment. More ideas than theories imo.

which confirms that they think an abduction was possible
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: ferryman on January 30, 2017, 10:43:31 AM
Did he venture any alternative "ideas" then, such as woke and wandered?  Because all I've heard from Op Grange supports the view that they are investigating a criminal act by a stranger.  There is nothing (apart from the lack of an acknowledgment in the McCann Christmas message - lol) to suggest they are pursuing any other "ideas".

My understanding, too.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 11:19:46 AM
Did he venture any alternative "ideas" then, such as woke and wandered?  Because all I've heard from Op Grange supports the view that they are investigating a criminal act by a stranger.  There is nothing (apart from the lack of an acknowledgment in the McCann Christmas message - lol) to suggest they are pursuing any other "ideas".

There  is nothing since DCI Wall was apponted to suggest what theory they are pursuing. She has remained remarkably tight lipped as have the PJ over the two or so years, no appeals, no updated age progression photos of Madeleine, in fact nothing to suggest what their thinking is.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: G-Unit on January 30, 2017, 11:44:08 AM
which confirms that they think an abduction was possible

Of course it was, but not the only possibility as some like to insist
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 12:35:07 PM
There  is nothing since DCI Wall was apponted to suggest what theory they are pursuing. She has remained remarkably tight lipped as have the PJ over the two or so years, no appeals, no updated age progression photos of Madeleine, in fact nothing to suggest what their thinking is.
So you agree then - nothing whatsoever to suggest the parents are suspects.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 01:24:19 PM
So you agree then - nothing whatsoever to suggest the parents are suspects.

Nothing to suggest which way she's taking the investigation.

I've heard it said time and time again by supporters that after Amaral Rebelo took the investigation in a completely different direction so why are you so loath to believe that DCI Wall couldn't or hasn't done the same?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 02:47:20 PM
Nothing to suggest which way she's taking the investigation.

I've heard it said time and time again by supporters that after Amaral Rebelo took the investigation in a completely different direction so why are you so loath to believe that DCI Wall couldn't or hasn't done the same?
A different direction?  I thought you were absolutely convinced that Redwood had the mcCanns in his "crosshairs" and that Crimewatch was his coup de theatre designed to secretly let them know that he was on to them!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 02:50:55 PM
A different direction?  I thought you were absolutely convinced that Redwood had the mcCanns in his "crosshairs" and that Crimewatch was his coup de theatre designed to secretly let them know that he was on to them!

I'm looking at it from your point of view.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 03:04:47 PM
I'm looking at it from your point of view.
so looking at it from your point of view, the parents have always been suspects as far as Andy Redwood and Operation Grange have been concerned, even when they were investigating sex attacks and interviewing PT nationals in PdL, right?  %&5%£
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 03:29:43 PM
so looking at it from your point of view, the parents have always been suspects as far as Andy Redwood and Operation Grange have been concerned, even when they were investigating sex attacks and interviewing PT nationals in PdL, right?  %&5%£

Is that what DCI Wall is doing?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: jassi on January 30, 2017, 03:34:56 PM
so looking at it from your point of view, the parents have always been suspects as far as Andy Redwood and Operation Grange have been concerned, even when they were investigating sex attacks and interviewing PT nationals in PdL, right?  %&5%£

Probably checking each and every possibility however tenuous so they can't be accused of negligence by armchair judges
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 03:39:01 PM
Is that what DCI Wall is doing?
What, this? %&5%£
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 04:27:02 PM
Probably checking each and every possibility however tenuous so they can't be accused of negligence by armchair judges

You may well be right jassi.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 04:41:02 PM
Probably checking each and every possibility however tenuous so they can't be accused of negligence by armchair judges
who cares about armchair judges?  Do you HONESTLY believe the Met sent letters of request for a number of people to be made arguidos simply to satisfy people on the internet?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 30, 2017, 04:48:00 PM
who cares about armchair judges?  Do you HONESTLY believe the Met sent letters of request for a number of people to be made arguidos simply to satisfy people on the internet?
Not simply to satisfy people on the Internet.

But the known actions from Oct 13 through to Dec 14 clearly indicate OG ticking off all the possibilities covered by the remit.

And presumably the reason for that was to justify the expenditure on OG to those controlling the cash.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 04:49:30 PM
who cares about armchair judges?  Do you HONESTLY believe the Met sent letters of request for a number of people to be made arguidos simply to satisfy people on the internet?

I think it's called clearing the ground beneath their feet. Besides as I have already pointed out they don't seem to be arguidos now.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Eleanor on January 30, 2017, 05:30:27 PM
I think it's called clearing the ground beneath their feet. Besides as I have already pointed out they don't seem to be arguidos now.

Are we absolutely sure that these people are no longer Arguidos?  I have seen nothing to suggest that they aren't.

Perhaps you can provide a Cite.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 05:45:41 PM
I think it's called clearing the ground beneath their feet. Besides as I have already pointed out they don't seem to be arguidos now.
So you wouldn't describe them as some of the 195 new investigative opportunities that Redwood referred to then?  Merely clearing the way to concentrating on the real business ie: investigating the parents?  *&*%£
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 30, 2017, 05:47:59 PM
Remove the dross, concentrate on what's left. Right?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Brietta on January 30, 2017, 05:48:14 PM
who cares about armchair judges?  Do you HONESTLY believe the Met sent letters of request for a number of people to be made arguidos simply to satisfy people on the internet?

One thing which is apparent is that neither Madeleine's parents or their friends are either suspects or persons of interest to the Portuguese authorities.  Instead of them being constituted arguidos in the present Portuguese investigation they appear to have been totally ignored (apart from Madeleine's parents being kept in the loop as far as the investigation is concerned) http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6060.280;wap2  while the police concentrate on stranger abduction http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2484011/Main-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-heroin-addict-used-rob-holiday-apartments.html

Isn't it odd that the police forces of two countries, after analysing all the information to which they are privy, have arrived at stranger abduction in Madeleine's case appearing to have totally disregarded the failed cop's synopsis in the process?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 05:51:23 PM
Remove the dross, concentrate on what's left. Right?
I don't really think that's how it works.  You concentrate on areas of investigation you think will deliver results quickest, not pussyfoot around for years until eventually turning your attention to your main suspects.  FGS, I can't believe I'm even having to point this out, it's so obvious.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 05:53:10 PM
Are we absolutely sure that these people are no longer Arguidos?  I have seen nothing to suggest that they aren't.

Perhaps you can provide a Cite.

I can't provide a cite as I don't have one but I very much doubt they still have that status after 2 years.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: ferryman on January 30, 2017, 05:54:07 PM
One thing which is apparent is that neither Madeleine's parents or their friends are either suspects or persons of interest to the Portuguese authorities.  Instead of them being constituted arguidos in the present Portuguese investigation they appear to have been totally ignored (apart from Madeleine's parents being kept in the loop as far as the investigation is concerned) http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6060.280;wap2  while the police concentrate on stranger abduction http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2484011/Main-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-heroin-addict-used-rob-holiday-apartments.html

Isn't it odd that the police forces of two countries, after analysing all the information to which they are privy, have arrived at stranger abduction in Madeleine's case appearing to have totally disregarded the failed cop's synopsis in the process?

Still more odd that a book written by the first coordinator of the (shelved) enquiry accusing Madeleine's parents of direct responsibility for Madeleine's (taken as if fact by its author) death is deemed something other than libellous ....
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 05:54:42 PM
"Right chaps, what we;ll do is spend the first two years investigating all the people we don't really think had anything to do with it and a theory of stranger abduction that we don't actually believe in, and then when we've finished that, we'll start investigating the main suspects and parental abduction cos we all know they dunnit but let's make them sweat for a few years, OK chaps"?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 05:55:00 PM
One thing which is apparent is that neither Madeleine's parents or their friends are either suspects or persons of interest to the Portuguese authorities.  Instead of them being constituted arguidos in the present Portuguese investigation they appear to have been totally ignored (apart from Madeleine's parents being kept in the loop as far as the investigation is concerned) http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6060.280;wap2  while the police concentrate on stranger abduction http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2484011/Main-Madeleine-McCann-suspect-heroin-addict-used-rob-holiday-apartments.html

Isn't it odd that the police forces of two countries, after analysing all the information to which they are privy, have arrived at stranger abduction in Madeleine's case appearing to have totally disregarded the failed cop's synopsis in the process?

As we haven't heard from either force for two years we have no idea what direction the case is taking.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Davel on January 30, 2017, 06:03:12 PM
Not simply to satisfy people on the Internet.

But the known actions from Oct 13 through to Dec 14 clearly indicate OG ticking off all the possibilities covered by the remit.

And presumably the reason for that was to justify the expenditure on OG to those controlling the cash.

so you really believe the met sent the ILORs simply to justify their expenditure
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Brietta on January 30, 2017, 06:04:49 PM
As we haven't heard from either force for two years we have no idea what direction the case is taking.

The thread title is ... "Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?".  It appears that the Policia Judicairia and Scotland Yard independent of each other reached the conclusion that there is after finding enough new evidence to justify the conclusion.
Let's leave them to it to see where that will take them in their job of trying to find out what may have become of Madeleine. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 06:06:29 PM
so you really believe the met sent the ILORs simply to justify their expenditure
Furthermore the Portuguese authorities constituted PT nationals as arguidos and subjected them to the scrutiny of the press just for something to do whilst they got down to the real business of investigating the McCanns.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 06:13:41 PM
The thread title is ... "Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?".  It appears that the Policia Judicairia and Scotland Yard independent of each other reached the conclusion that there is after finding enough new evidence to justify the conclusion.
Let's leave them to it to see where that will take them in their job of trying to find out what may have become of Madeleine.

I concur absolutely with your final sentence.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Eleanor on January 30, 2017, 06:19:14 PM
I can't provide a cite as I don't have one but I very much doubt they still have that status after 2 years.

Why not?  Arguido Status can be extended if The PJ thinks there is jut cause.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 06:19:22 PM
I concur absolutely with your final sentence.
If only.  Instead you spend your days posing impossible questions like "Is DCI Investigating A Different Theory?" inviting us all to guess what's going on. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 06:25:41 PM
I have posted this before, but here it is again:

The 'arguido' status of the four men questioned in July 2014 was lifted under Portuguese law when the rogatory letter relating to the questioning was returned.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4001976/Madeleine-McCann-kidnapped-European-child-trafficking-ring-fear-British-Portuguese-police-forces-say-focusing-theory.html#ixzz4XGqKTs93
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Bear in mind however that this article's headline is
Madeleine McCann was kidnapped by European child trafficking ring, fear British and Portuguese police as BOTH forces say they are focusing on that theory

which surely means by Faithlilly's rules that a) it was written by Clarence Mitchell and b) it has no value as a source of information whatsoever. @)(++(*

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 07:19:47 PM
Why not?  Arguido Status can be extended if The PJ thinks there is jut cause.

For two years? Do you have a cite for that?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 07:20:57 PM
I have posted this before, but here it is again:

The 'arguido' status of the four men questioned in July 2014 was lifted under Portuguese law when the rogatory letter relating to the questioning was returned.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4001976/Madeleine-McCann-kidnapped-European-child-trafficking-ring-fear-British-Portuguese-police-forces-say-focusing-theory.html#ixzz4XGqKTs93
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Bear in mind however that this article's headline is
Madeleine McCann was kidnapped by European child trafficking ring, fear British and Portuguese police as BOTH forces say they are focusing on that theory

which surely means by Faithlilly's rules that a) it was written by Clarence Mitchell and b) it has no value as a source of information whatsoever. @)(++(*

No official source. You should be taking it with a pinch of salt too.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 30, 2017, 07:25:13 PM
so you really believe the met sent the ILORs simply to justify their expenditure
No.  I didn't say anything like that.

I said OG was ticking off all possibilities within their remit.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Brietta on January 30, 2017, 07:28:49 PM
For two years? Do you have a cite for that?

It is tiresome when you apparently feel duty bound to obfuscate what a poster has actually said in his or her post.

For the record ...
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Davel on January 30, 2017, 07:30:22 PM
No.  I didn't say anything like that.

I said OG was ticking off all possibilities within their remit.

you posted...

Not simply to satisfy people on the Internet.

But the known actions from Oct 13 through to Dec 14 clearly indicate OG ticking off all the possibilities covered by the remit.

And presumably the reason for that was to justify the expenditure on OG to those controlling the cash.



it was the third line i was referring to and it looks like you said pretty well exactly that



do you really think the ilors were issued by the met just to justify their expenditure of grange
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 30, 2017, 07:55:20 PM
I have posted this before, but here it is again:

The 'arguido' status of the four men questioned in July 2014 was lifted under Portuguese law when the rogatory letter relating to the questioning was returned.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4001976/Madeleine-McCann-kidnapped-European-child-trafficking-ring-fear-British-Portuguese-police-forces-say-focusing-theory.html#ixzz4XGqKTs93
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Bear in mind however that this article's headline is
Madeleine McCann was kidnapped by European child trafficking ring, fear British and Portuguese police as BOTH forces say they are focusing on that theory

which surely means by Faithlilly's rules that a) it was written by Clarence Mitchell and b) it has no value as a source of information whatsoever. @)(++(*

That should tell you something.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 08:36:41 PM
It is tiresome when you apparently feel duty bound to obfuscate what a poster has actually said in his or her post.

For the record ...
  • you said two years
  • Eleanor did not

Perhaps you should try reading before you attack. A cite for Eleanor's claim about the extension to the status of arguidos.

My, my I must be hitting a nerve.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 08:43:18 PM
No official source. You should be taking it with a pinch of salt too.
So the arguido status may not have been lifted, contrary to what the article says?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Brietta on January 30, 2017, 08:55:36 PM
Perhaps you should try reading before you attack. A cite for Eleanor's claim about the extension to the status of arguidos.

My, my I must be hitting a nerve.


I read your post with the same care you composed it.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: slartibartfast on January 30, 2017, 09:05:33 PM
That should tell you something.

The Met was said to be ...
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 30, 2017, 09:07:50 PM
I have posted this before, but here it is again:

The 'arguido' status of the four men questioned in July 2014 was lifted under Portuguese law when the rogatory letter relating to the questioning was returned.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4001976/Madeleine-McCann-kidnapped-European-child-trafficking-ring-fear-British-Portuguese-police-forces-say-focusing-theory.html#ixzz4XGqKTs93
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Bear in mind however that this article's headline is
Madeleine McCann was kidnapped by European child trafficking ring, fear British and Portuguese police as BOTH forces say they are focusing on that theory

which surely means by Faithlilly's rules that a) it was written by Clarence Mitchell and b) it has no value as a source of information whatsoever. @)(++(*

Is that what this board and thread relies on,I'll match that with a ridiculous headline,Jan 2014.

Quote
Madeleine McCann: Phone records between burglars mean 'arrests are imminent' after British police request assistance from Portuguese authorities

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/madeleine-mccann-arrests-imminent-after-british-police-request-assistance-from-portuguese-9056176.html
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 09:19:02 PM
Is that what this board and thread relies on,I'll match that with a ridiculous headline,Jan 2014.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/madeleine-mccann-arrests-imminent-after-british-police-request-assistance-from-portuguese-9056176.html
Nor completely ridiculous, several individuals WERE made arguidos and interviewed, but the term arguido would be mystifying to most if used in a headline.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 30, 2017, 09:23:32 PM
Nor completely ridiculous, several individuals WERE made arguidos and interviewed, but the term arguido would be mystifying to most if used in a headline.

How many requested it rather then "were made". Do you know?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 30, 2017, 09:32:11 PM
Nor completely ridiculous, several individuals WERE made arguidos and interviewed, but the term arguido would be mystifying to most if used in a headline.

Jan headlines November questioning,yep ridiculous headline.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 09:33:13 PM
Jan headlines November questioning,yep ridiculous headline.
In your opinion.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 30, 2017, 09:40:22 PM
you posted...

Not simply to satisfy people on the Internet.

But the known actions from Oct 13 through to Dec 14 clearly indicate OG ticking off all the possibilities covered by the remit.

And presumably the reason for that was to justify the expenditure on OG to those controlling the cash.


it was the third line i was referring to and it looks like you said pretty well exactly that

do you really think the ilors were issued by the met just to justify their expenditure of grange
"so you really believe the met sent the ILORs simply to justify their expenditure"

"Not simply to satisfy people on the Internet.

But the known actions from Oct 13 through to Dec 14 clearly indicate OG ticking off all the possibilities covered by the remit.

And presumably the reason for that was to justify the expenditure on OG to those controlling the cash."

Why issue an ILOR simply to justify expenditure?  It works the other way round.  Ask for cash with a project plan in hand, get cash, conduct project, explain the expenditure.

By the known actions from Oct 13 through to Dec 14, OG was ticking off all the possibilities covered by the remit.

I cannot make it more KISS than this.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 30, 2017, 09:51:43 PM
Jan headlines November questioning,yep ridiculous headline.
The 4 people were made arguidos and questioned in July 2014.

The next batch of questioning, of people, as witnesses, was Dec 2014.

However, I will run with your general sentiment.  That 4 men were about to be made arguidos, and arrested, in a report in the Independent base on a story in the Mirror, is hardly the stuff to rely on.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Davel on January 30, 2017, 09:53:44 PM
"so you really believe the met sent the ILORs simply to justify their expenditure"

"Not simply to satisfy people on the Internet.

But the known actions from Oct 13 through to Dec 14 clearly indicate OG ticking off all the possibilities covered by the remit.

And presumably the reason for that was to justify the expenditure on OG to those controlling the cash."

Why issue an ILOR simply to justify expenditure?  It works the other way round.  Ask for cash with a project plan in hand, get cash, conduct project, explain the expenditure.

By the known actions from Oct 13 through to Dec 14, OG was ticking off all the possibilities covered by the remit.

I cannot make it more KISS than this.

It all comes over as a bit muddled
Let's KIS
SY issued Ilors in order to take the investigation forward and on good faith

Do you agree
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 30, 2017, 09:54:10 PM
The 4 people were made arguidos and questioned in July 2014.

The next batch of questioning, of people, as witnesses, was Dec 2014.

However, I will run with your general sentiment.  That 4 men were about to be made arguidos, and arrested, in a report in the Independent base on a story in the Mirror, is hardly the stuff to rely on.

Thanks,I stand corrected. 8((()*/
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 30, 2017, 10:01:24 PM
It all comes over as a bit muddled
Let's KIS
SY issued Ilors in order to take the investigation forward and on good faith

Do you agree
Do you mean, in order to cover all the possibilities involved in a remit of an alleged abduction within Portugal, OG was obliged to issue ILORs?

I certainly hope so.  If they flew into Portugal and conducted a ground search of central Luz without an ILOR I would be incandescent.

ILORs were issued.  I believe the talk in the media is about 6 such beasties, but I have not tracked the number, who requested them, the contents, who approved them, or whether all have been carried out.

Have you?

Does this relate to the thread title?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Davel on January 30, 2017, 10:04:15 PM
Do you mean, in order to cover all the possibilities involved in a remit of an alleged abduction within Portugal, OG was obliged to issue ILORs?

I certainly hope so.  If they flew into Portugal and conducted a ground search of central Luz without an ILOR I would be incandescent.

ILORs were issued.  I believe the talk in the media is about 6 such beasties, but I have not tracked the number, who requested them, the contents, who approved them, or whether all have been carried out.

Have you?

Does this relate to the thread title?

As I was responding to your post on the ilors perhaps you can answer the question
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 30, 2017, 10:20:21 PM
As I was responding to your post on the ilors perhaps you can answer the question
Why?

The issue of ILORs was raised by a poster called davel earlier this evening.

The possible notion that ILORs were sent in order to justify OG expenditure was raised by a poster called davel, earlier this evening.  Strange but true.

Poster davel asked a question about ILORs, to which I have already dumped in 90% of the 'facts' I know about ILORs.

What relevance do ILORs have to the topic title?

I reckon that by morning, this entire rather odd exchange will have been wiped by the forum elders.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Davel on January 30, 2017, 10:21:54 PM
Why?

The issue of ILORs was raised by a poster called davel earlier this evening.

The possible notion that ILORs were sent in order to justify OG expenditure was raised by a poster called davel, earlier this evening.  Strange but true.

Poster davel asked a question about ILORs, to which I have already dumped in 90% of the 'facts' I know about ILORs.

What relevance do ILORs have to the topic title?

I reckon that by morning, this entire rather odd exchange will have been wiped by the forum elders.


you are mistaken....the posts are all there we can check
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 10:24:59 PM
Thanks,I stand corrected. 8((()*/
The fact is the article predicted that some fairly dodgy individuals of interest had been identified and that the Met had requested to have them questioned as soon as possible.  Now, where did the info come from?  We've been reliably informed by Faithlilly that all these articles that quote unnamed sources originate from the desk of Clarence Mitchell or are entirely made up by the MSM, so was this article just a lucky guess, or is Clarence (and by extension the McCanns) privy to the machinations of Op Grange before the rest of us or could it simply be that someone within the investigation (on the Portuguese side?) leaked this information?  Apparently it's very harmful to suggest this so I do apologise in advance for any harm this post causes.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?t
Post by: Davel on January 30, 2017, 10:26:09 PM
Why?

The issue of ILORs was raised by a poster called davel earlier this evening.

The possible notion that ILORs were sent in order to justify OG expenditure was raised by a poster called davel, earlier this evening.  Strange but true.

Poster davel asked a question about ILORs, to which I have already dumped in 90% of the 'facts' I know about ILORs.

What relevance do ILORs have to the topic title?

I reckon that by morning, this entire rather odd exchange will have been wiped by the forum elders.


raised by alf at 4.40 something ...a post to which you replied and which i commented on....so yes

you are absolutely wrong....it was alf who raised the question of ilors....you are absolutely wrong
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 10:54:28 PM
The fact is the article predicted that some fairly dodgy individuals of interest had been identified and that the Met had requested to have them questioned as soon as possible.  Now, where did the info come from?  We've been reliably informed by Faithlilly that all these articles that quote unnamed sources originate from the desk of Clarence Mitchell or are entirely made up by the MSM, so was this article just a lucky guess, or is Clarence (and by extension the McCanns) privy to the machinations of Op Grange before the rest of us or could it simply be that someone within the investigation (on the Portuguese side?) leaked this information?  Apparently it's very harmful to suggest this so I do apologise in advance for any harm this post causes.

I'm sure OG told the McCanns they were questioning individuals in Portugal. Why wouldn't they?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 30, 2017, 11:08:47 PM
I'm sure OG told the McCanns they were questioning individuals in Portugal. Why wouldn't they?
because they are the Met's prime suspects according to you, so why would they?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on January 30, 2017, 11:11:22 PM
Is that what this board and thread relies on,I'll match that with a ridiculous headline,Jan 2014.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/madeleine-mccann-arrests-imminent-after-british-police-request-assistance-from-portuguese-9056176.html

International child trafficking ?
Looking at what happened afterwards that was obviously a gold mine full of iron pyrites.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 30, 2017, 11:53:44 PM
because they are the Met's prime suspects according to you, so why would they?

I'm sure even Karen Matthews was kept in the loop to some  extent.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: barrier on January 31, 2017, 07:24:03 AM
The fact is the article predicted that some fairly dodgy individuals of interest had been identified and that the Met had requested to have them questioned as soon as possible.  Now, where did the info come from?  We've been reliably informed by Faithlilly that all these articles that quote unnamed sources originate from the desk of Clarence Mitchell or are entirely made up by the MSM, so was this article just a lucky guess, or is Clarence (and by extension the McCanns) privy to the machinations of Op Grange before the rest of us or could it simply be that someone within the investigation (on the Portuguese side?) leaked this information?  Apparently it's very harmful to suggest this so I do apologise in advance for any harm this post causes.
Would that be the same Mitchell who had every confidence in the private investigation agency who promised to have Madeleine home by Christmas?In defence of that it could be argued what Christmas was never mentioned.Ten years on,coming up to 6 yrs of OG,multi millions spent,the plausible and logical seems a hard circle to square for the mighty MET.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: slartibartfast on January 31, 2017, 08:02:10 AM
The fact is the article predicted that some fairly dodgy individuals of interest had been identified and that the Met had requested to have them questioned as soon as possible.  Now, where did the info come from?  We've been reliably informed by Faithlilly that all these articles that quote unnamed sources originate from the desk of Clarence Mitchell or are entirely made up by the MSM, so was this article just a lucky guess, or is Clarence (and by extension the McCanns) privy to the machinations of Op Grange before the rest of us or could it simply be that someone within the investigation (on the Portuguese side?) leaked this information?  Apparently it's very harmful to suggest this so I do apologise in advance for any harm this post causes.

Dodgy, cite?

Police statement.

Quote
A statement from Scotland Yard during the searches said there was "still a substantial amount of work yet to be completed in the coming weeks and months''.

''This recent work is part of ensuring that all lines of inquiry are progressed in a systematic manner and covers just the one hypothesis that she was killed and buried locally,'' the statement said.

''This is the same as would be done in the UK for a murder or high-risk missing person inquiry.''
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 31, 2017, 08:19:56 AM
Dodgy, cite?

Police statement.
What is your point?  Did the article predict the questioning of dodgy indiviuals in PdL or not?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 31, 2017, 08:21:58 AM
I'm sure even Karen Matthews was kept in the loop to some  extent.
Would it be accurate to say that when this article came out in January 2014 that your first reaction was "another ridiculous made up story from Team McCann"?  If not, perhaps you could tell us why not, thanks.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: slartibartfast on January 31, 2017, 08:31:03 AM
What is your point?  Did the article predict the questioning of dodgy indiviuals in PdL or not?

I'm asking you to provide some evidence that they were "dodgy" individual's.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 31, 2017, 09:23:48 AM
I'm asking you to provide some evidence that they were "dodgy" individual's.

From the Wikipedia page on the case, which you can cross-reference with the cites provided at the bottom of the page:

Several interviews took place in Praia da Luz in July and December 2014, conducted by the Polícia Judiciária at the request of Scotland Yard, with the latter in attendance. In July four Portuguese citizens were interviewed; one, an associate of Robert Murat (an arguido in 2007), was first questioned shortly after the disappearance.[97][186] Eleven people were interviewed in December. They included Robert Murat, his wife and her ex-husband; a 30-year-old former tourist-bus driver for the Ocean Club; and the former driver's 24-year-old and 53-year-old associates. The latter three men had telephoned or texted each other near the Ocean Club around the time of the disappearance.[187] They admitted having broken into Ocean Club apartments but denied having taken Madeleine.[98][188][189]

So like I said - dodgy.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 31, 2017, 09:29:20 AM
There seem to be quite a lot of McCann-related Wiki pages.  Can you provide a link to the one you are quoting from ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 31, 2017, 11:08:27 AM
There seem to be quite a lot of McCann-related Wiki pages.  Can you provide a link to the one you are quoting from ?
This one, obviously - the first one that comes up when you google it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: slartibartfast on January 31, 2017, 02:07:48 PM
From the Wikipedia page on the case, which you can cross-reference with the cites provided at the bottom of the page:

Several interviews took place in Praia da Luz in July and December 2014, conducted by the Polícia Judiciária at the request of Scotland Yard, with the latter in attendance. In July four Portuguese citizens were interviewed; one, an associate of Robert Murat (an arguido in 2007), was first questioned shortly after the disappearance.[97][186] Eleven people were interviewed in December. They included Robert Murat, his wife and her ex-husband; a 30-year-old former tourist-bus driver for the Ocean Club; and the former driver's 24-year-old and 53-year-old associates. The latter three men had telephoned or texted each other near the Ocean Club around the time of the disappearance.[187] They admitted having broken into Ocean Club apartments but denied having taken Madeleine.[98][188][189]

So like I said - dodgy.

The joys of Wiki, 3 references none relating to the quote.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on January 31, 2017, 02:17:02 PM
The joys of Wiki, 3 references none relating to the quote.

Notice also that the information comes from various newspapers, not the police.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 31, 2017, 02:28:20 PM
The joys of Wiki, 3 references none relating to the quote.
Relating to what quote?  Are you disputing that three of the arguidos were burglars who admitted to breaking in to the OC?  Were they just random PT Nationals that the PJ made arguidos for fun?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 31, 2017, 02:38:00 PM
Relating to what quote?  Are you disputing that three of the arguidos were burglars who admitted to breaking in to the OC?  Were they just random PT Nationals that the PJ made arguidos for fun?

If they were being asked questions that would incriminate them in some way they would have to be made arguidos, even if only because they may have seen something while going about their criminal activities. This has been explained to you before.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 31, 2017, 02:44:03 PM
The joys of Wiki, 3 references none relating to the quote.
To be fair, I consider the middle one does tie 3 names to alleged admissions of theft from the OC, albeit there is no indication as to the source of these alleged admissions.

And the article contains errors, which does not fill me with trust that the rest is higher quality.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on January 31, 2017, 02:50:43 PM
If they were being asked questions that would incriminate them in some way they would have to be made arguidos, even if only because they may have seen something while going about their criminal activities. This has been explained to you before.
Right!  Their CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES.  Slarti is trying to take this thread off topic by demanding I provide a cite for my earlier comment that they were dodgy.  Thanks for backing me up, it's much appreciated.  Also of course there was the dodgy rapist who was questioned too, am I allowed to refer to him as dodgy or must I provide a cite for his rape conviction slarti?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 31, 2017, 03:00:23 PM
If they were being asked questions that would incriminate them in some way they would have to be made arguidos, even if only because they may have seen something while going about their criminal activities. This has been explained to you before.
If they were to be asked questions that might (or might) not incriminate them, they would either have to made arguidos, or request arguido status themselves.  It does not follow that they were actually going about criminal activities.

If they were made arguidos by the Portuguese legal authorities, it means that someone thought the OG line of questioning could lead to them being incriminated.  And that could be anything, such as a prior criminal record or OG asking about criminal activity.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 31, 2017, 03:18:48 PM
If they were to be asked questions that might (or might) not incriminate them, they would either have to made arguidos, or request arguido status themselves.  It does not follow that they were actually going about criminal activities.

If they were made arguidos by the Portuguese legal authorities, it means that someone thought the OG line of questioning could lead to them being incriminated.  And that could be anything, such as a prior criminal record or OG asking about criminal activity.

Arguidos status seems to be the same as being interviewed under caution
It means the evidence can be used against you
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on January 31, 2017, 03:20:07 PM
If they were to be asked questions that might (or might) not incriminate them, they would either have to made arguidos, or request arguido status themselves.  It does not follow that they were actually going about criminal activities.

If they were made arguidos by the Portuguese legal authorities, it means that someone thought the OG line of questioning could lead to them being incriminated.  And that could be anything, such as a prior criminal record or OG asking about criminal activity.

Thank you for the clarification Shining.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 31, 2017, 03:27:58 PM
Arguidos status seems to be the same as being interviewed under caution
It means the evidence can be used against you
It means an awful lot more than that.  I don't think we should derail Alfie's pursuit of logical/plausible abduction theory with a consideration of the rights and responsibilities of witnesses v arguidos.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 31, 2017, 03:39:53 PM
It means an awful lot more than that.  I don't think we should derail Alfie's pursuit of logical/plausible abduction theory with a consideration of the rights and responsibilities of witnesses v arguidos.

the McCanns were asked questions that could have incriminated them before being made arguido so your explanation does not hold water
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on January 31, 2017, 03:42:13 PM
the McCanns were asked questions that could have incriminated them before being made arguido so your explanation does not hold water

Well, events have taken over now.

The Supreme Court has made it's decision.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on January 31, 2017, 03:47:45 PM
It means an awful lot more than that.  I don't think we should derail Alfie's pursuit of logical/plausible abduction theory with a consideration of the rights and responsibilities of witnesses v arguidos.

not according to this

Comparison with common-law administrations[edit]
The status is very similar to that of being "questioned under caution" under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act in the United Kingdom or being questioned after being read one's "Miranda Rights" in the USA, specifically the right to legal representation, the liberty to refuse to answer questions, and the admissibility in court of statements taken whilst in those statuses.[12]
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 31, 2017, 04:04:12 PM
Off-topic posts are going to get deleted.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: slartibartfast on January 31, 2017, 04:09:53 PM
To be fair, I consider the middle one does tie 3 names to alleged admissions of theft from the OC, albeit there is no indication as to the source of these alleged admissions.

And the article contains errors, which does not fill me with trust that the rest is higher quality.

...nothing in the files.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ShiningInLuz on January 31, 2017, 04:58:25 PM
...nothing in the files.
This made me think as to whether there is anything in the PJ Files and there is.

A printout of staff was used to control interviews, to know whether everyone had been talked to.

This document is hand scribbled with details of criminal records.  Presumably someone in the PJ wrote these notes, but obviously I am far from certain.

One of the 3 arguidos is José da Silva, a driver at the Ocean Club.  On the staff interview control sheet, someone has written the word 'furto', which means theft.

As to whether this was enough to make him an arguido, I cannot tell.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on January 31, 2017, 05:45:51 PM
Well, events have taken over now.

The Supreme Court has made it's decision.
The Supreme Court decision has no bearing on the actual scenario of Madeleine going missing.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 03, 2017, 07:41:01 PM
This case has similarities to the McCann case.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOZEkcLoeSs
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on February 03, 2017, 08:04:17 PM
The Supreme Court decision has no bearing on the actual scenario of Madeleine going missing.

I'm glad to see you say that. This trial was all about the McCanns and their sense of entitlement, no one else.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 03, 2017, 09:34:32 PM
Worthy of a read:
https://www.osac.gov/pages/ContentReportDetails.aspx?cid=19061
"Tips on How to Avoid Becoming a Victim

Scams

Small groups of adolescents/young adults/women occasionally commit petty thefts and vehicle burglaries around common tourist spots (plazas, beaches, cafes, etc.)".

The interesting bit is what is NOT mentioned.

ETA I meant in the whole document for those with the attention span of a goldfish..... 8(>((
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 03, 2017, 09:37:09 PM
This case has similarities to the McCann case.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOZEkcLoeSs
Interesting Rob.  A burglar who breaks into a home and decides to steal a child instead. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: ferryman on February 03, 2017, 10:41:23 PM
Interesting Rob.  A burglar who breaks into a home and decides to steal a child instead.

Nah!

That sort of thing never happens ....

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 03, 2017, 10:52:56 PM
Nah!

That sort of thing never happens ....

Did he sell her to child traffickers or a childless couple who wanted a child?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 03, 2017, 11:10:00 PM
I'm glad to see you say that. This trial was all about the McCanns and their sense of entitlement, no one else.
That is what libel cases are all about.  I tend to think people have taken the trial to be a de facto criminal case.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 03, 2017, 11:12:20 PM
Interesting Rob.  A burglar who breaks into a home and decides to steal a child instead.
Not only that but the police offering the parent a plea deal to admit it was an accidental death.  Final outcome was a huge payout for damages.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 03, 2017, 11:35:20 PM
Did he sell her to child traffickers or a childless couple who wanted a child?
No.  He broke into a house with the intent to burgle it, stole a three year year old girl instead while her father was asleep upstairs, sexually assaulted and murdered her, and her innocent father was the chief suspect in a botched police investigation.  A tragic case which busts a few preconceptions which I've seen voiced on this forum.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 03, 2017, 11:40:19 PM
No.  He broke into a house with the intent to burgle it, stole a three year year old girl instead while her father was asleep upstairs, sexually assaulted and murdered her, and her innocent father was the chief suspect in a botched police investigation.  A tragic case which busts a few preconceptions which I've seen voiced on this forum.

So no child traffickers then ? I thought that was the lead OG were working on?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 03, 2017, 11:42:21 PM
So no child traffickers then ? I thought that was the lead OG were working on?
Is it?  I thought the parents were the chief suspects, do make up your mind!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 03, 2017, 11:43:03 PM
No.  He broke into a house with the intent to burgle it, stole a three year year old girl instead while her father was asleep upstairs, sexually assaulted and murdered her, and her innocent father was the chief suspect in a botched police investigation.  A tragic case which busts a few preconceptions which I've seen voiced on this forum.

so that rather answers the question re  a plausible theory for abduction....nice
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 03, 2017, 11:51:26 PM
Is it?  I thought the parents were the chief suspects, do make up your mind!

Well you said last week that you had no reason not to believe that the tabloid article that OG were following a lead which involved child traffickers was true. I think it may be you who needs to make your mind up Alfie.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 03, 2017, 11:52:13 PM
Well you said last week that you had no reason not to believe that the tabloid article that OG were following a lead which involved child traffickers was true. I think it may be you who needs to make your mind up Alfie.
I have no reason to disbelieve it still, and your point is?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 03, 2017, 11:56:07 PM
I have no reason to disbelieve it still, and your point is?

So the case posted by RB is actually nothing like Madeleine's case because ( according to what you believe) it is not a burglary gone wrong.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 04, 2017, 12:03:49 AM
So the case posted by RB is actually nothing like Madeleine's case because ( according to what you believe) it is not a burglary gone wrong.
Err...are you mistaking me for Operation Grange?  Personally I think Madeleine was stolen by a predatory paedophile, murdered and dumped in the local vicinity, very much like the case Rob cited.  If Operation Grange believe something else then that must be because  they have information I have not been privy to.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 04, 2017, 12:03:57 AM
Well you said last week that you had no reason not to believe that the tabloid article that OG were following a lead which involved child traffickers was true. I think it may be you who needs to make your mind up Alfie.

Yeah! a likely tale if the victim was British.
The Portuguese police silent and the Met reducing the squad to a couple of men and a dog.
International Child Trafficking would be a full blooded Europol Job with a real JIT.
Except in this case where different rules obtain cos what you has to realise is we is in de PdL Bubble.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 04, 2017, 12:06:36 AM
Yeah! a likely tale if the victim was British.
The Portuguese police silent and the Met reducing the squad to a couple of men and a dog.
International Child Trafficking would be a full blooded Europol Job with a real JIT.
Except in this case where different rules obtain cos what you has to realise is we is in de PdL Bubble.

But...but the Home Office has been informed so surely that has to mean something Alice, surely goddammit !!!
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 12:07:53 AM
Yeah! a likely tale if the victim was British.
The Portuguese police silent and the Met reducing the squad to a couple of men and a dog.
International Child Trafficking would be a full blooded Europol Job with a real JIT.
Except in this case where different rules obtain cos what you has to realise is we is in de PdL Bubble.

you have to undrstand portugal believes it was the parents wot dun it....so no invesigation...

Kate will tell you all about it next week
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 04, 2017, 12:08:45 AM
Err...are you mistaking me for Operation Grange?  Personally I think Madeleine was stolen by a predatory paedophile, murdered and dumped in the local vicinity, very much like the case Rob cited.  If Operation Grange believe something else then that must be because  they have information I have not been privy to.

So you don't have a lot of faith in OG I take it ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 04, 2017, 12:11:38 AM
So you don't have a lot of faith in OG I take it ?
If only you could stop putting words in my mouth with every post you make and actually read what I wrote it would make for far greater understanding.  But you don't really want to understand my point of view do you? You just troll the hell out of me instead.   goodnight.

  If Operation Grange believe something else then that must be because  they have information I have not been privy to.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 04, 2017, 12:14:27 AM
But...but the Home Office has been informed so surely that has to mean something Alice, surely goddammit !!!

Indeed. It is strange that no advice is given about these gangs by any other country...............or the UK for that matter. Now I would say if the Yanks don't give advice to their citizens about such gangs they are unlikely to be active. Dave Edgar and the lawless hinterland notwithstanding.
I'm off to harvest my magic beans. I feel sales will increase over the next few weeks.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 04, 2017, 12:26:45 AM
If only you could stop putting words in my mouth with every post you make and actually read what I wrote it would make for far greater understanding.  But you don't really want to understand my point of view do you? You just troll the hell out of me instead.   goodnight.

  If Operation Grange believe something else then that must be because  they have information I have not been privy to.

Asking you to explain what your posts is not trolling.

You believe OG are following the wrong lead. Nothing difficult about that.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: misty on February 04, 2017, 12:31:37 AM
This case has similarities to the McCann case.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOZEkcLoeSs

That's a great find RB on a very tragic case. A massive payout for breach of civil liberties.
(It would be a great addition to the Cipriano thread).
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 04, 2017, 01:39:26 AM
That's a great find RB on a very tragic case. A massive payout for breach of civil liberties.
(It would be a great addition to the Cipriano thread).

Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 03, 2017, 07:41:01 PM
This case has similarities to the McCann case.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOZEkcLoeSs



WOW! That is one powerful, heartbreaking video.  It ticks practically every box which is pertinent to the McCann case. 

Entry with the intent to burglarise ~ the silent child being carried out.

The simulated abduction.

If anyone ever asks about the forty nine questions ... the answer lies right here. 

If a polygraph is mentioned ... the answer lies right here. 

The lesser charge being the subject of "confession" and how that turned out.

The perpetrator being left to roam and free to offend again because the investigators focused on the parent to the exclusion of all else.

The similarities are uncanny.

Riley Fox's case is a master class for those who insist that Madeleine McCann could not have been abducted.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on February 04, 2017, 07:23:47 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 03, 2017, 07:41:01 PM
This case has similarities to the McCann case.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOZEkcLoeSs



WOW! That is one powerful, heartbreaking video.  It ticks practically every box which is pertinent to the McCann case. 

Entry with the intent to burglarise ~ the silent child being carried out.

The simulated abduction.

If anyone ever asks about the forty nine questions ... the answer lies right here. 

If a polygraph is mentioned ... the answer lies right here. 

The lesser charge being the subject of "confession" and how that turned out.

The perpetrator being left to roam and free to offend again because the investigators focused on the parent to the exclusion of all else.

The similarities are uncanny.

Riley Fox's case is a master class for those who insist that Madeleine McCann could not have been abducted.

OMG, that video is horrific, but well worth the watch.

A perfect example of how a three year old child can be abducted during a burglary.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 04, 2017, 08:31:51 AM
Quote from: Robittybob1 on February 03, 2017, 07:41:01 PM
This case has similarities to the McCann case.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOZEkcLoeSs



WOW! That is one powerful, heartbreaking video.  It ticks practically every box which is pertinent to the McCann case. 

Entry with the intent to burglarise ~ the silent child being carried out.

The simulated abduction.

If anyone ever asks about the forty nine questions ... the answer lies right here. 

If a polygraph is mentioned ... the answer lies right here. 

The lesser charge being the subject of "confession" and how that turned out.

The perpetrator being left to roam and free to offend again because the investigators focused on the parent to the exclusion of all else.

The similarities are uncanny.

Riley Fox's case is a master class for those who insist that Madeleine McCann could not have been abducted.

The similarities are the age of the child and the fact that the police suspected her parent. There are also differences.

One of the first things said is that in cases where a child disappears the first thing to be done is to examine those close to her. In this case they looked at her father because he was the last person to see her.

The PJ did not begin by examining those close to Madeleine. Allegedly because the British diplomats asked them not to.

When their attention did turn to the parents they behaved entirely properly, unlike the policemen in this case. The McCanns had a lawyer present, this father did not.

Who has said Madeleine could not have been abducted? Obviously she could have, but it's also obvious that there are other possibilities.

It was noticeable that the child's father didn't assume abduction immediately. He looked for her then called the police who did exactly the same as the PJ; they searched. This abductor did exactly what this type of offender typically does; he killed the child and disposed of her nearby.

The explanation for 'inconclusive' DNA results was interesting. Apparently that's forensic science speak for 'we don't have the equipment to get a result from this sample'. In this case a private laboratory did have the necessary equipment and were able to find the offender's DNA.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 04, 2017, 08:38:24 AM
The similarities are the age of the child and the fact that the police suspected her parent. There are also differences.

One of the first things said is that in cases where a child disappears the first thing to be done is to examine those close to her. In this case they looked at her father because he was the last person to see her.

The PJ did not begin by examining those close to Madeleine. Allegedly because the British diplomats asked them not to.

When their attention did turn to the parents they behaved entirely properly, unlike the policemen in this case. The McCanns had a lawyer present, this father did not.

Who has said Madeleine could not have been abducted? Obviously she could have, but it's also obvious that there are other possibilities.

It was noticeable that the child's father didn't assume abduction immediately. He looked for her then called the police who did exactly the same as the PJ; they searched. This abductor did exactly what this type of offender typically does; he killed the child and disposed of her nearby.

The explanation for 'inconclusive' DNA results was interesting. Apparently that's forensic science speak for 'we don't have the equipment to get a result from this sample'. In this case a private laboratory did have the necessary equipment and were able to find the offender's DNA.
and yet you still maintain there is no plausible, logical theory of abduction in the McCann case, perhaps you could remind us why you think that?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 04, 2017, 09:15:44 AM
The similarities are the age of the child and the fact that the police suspected her parent. There are also differences.

One of the first things said is that in cases where a child disappears the first thing to be done is to examine those close to her. In this case they looked at her father because he was the last person to see her.

The PJ did not begin by examining those close to Madeleine. Allegedly because the British diplomats asked them not to.

When their attention did turn to the parents they behaved entirely properly, unlike the policemen in this case. The McCanns had a lawyer present, this father did not.

Who has said Madeleine could not have been abducted? Obviously she could have, but it's also obvious that there are other possibilities.

It was noticeable that the child's father didn't assume abduction immediately. He looked for her then called the police who did exactly the same as the PJ; they searched. This abductor did exactly what this type of offender typically does; he killed the child and disposed of her nearby.

The explanation for 'inconclusive' DNA results was interesting. Apparently that's forensic science speak for 'we don't have the equipment to get a result from this sample'. In this case a private laboratory did have the necessary equipment and were able to find the offender's DNA.

I think the problem is if they declared they suspect the parents they needed to make them arguidos, but then they would have lawyers present.  I could be wrong but there seemed to be far too few interviews with Kate right from the beginning.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 04, 2017, 10:19:47 AM
I think the problem is if they declared they suspect the parents they needed to make them arguidos, but then they would have lawyers present.  I could be wrong but there seemed to be far too few interviews with Kate right from the beginning.

There was the immediate determination of the lead investigators in Riley's case ... " ... the moment he walked up, he knew what had happened ... this is not a kidnapping and murder ... this is a staged crime scene."
The only difficulty with that ... was that he was wrong!  Just as Goncalo Amaral was wrong in Madeleine's case.  But in both cases the lead operatives determined the path the investigation was to take which led to botched inquiries.

Another parallel was that both children were removed from where they were sleeping without apparently making a sound.
No-one witnessed either little girl being carried from the safety of their home.

We now know without a shadow of doubt what happened to Riley.  No-one knows what happened to Madeleine but the parallels with Riley's allegedly staged abduction are too compelling to be dismissed.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 04, 2017, 10:33:36 AM
Asking you to explain what your posts is not trolling.

You believe OG are following the wrong lead. Nothing difficult about that.
I keep being denied my right to reply.  I will try again.  I did NOT say what you are saying above.  Please read what I wrote above in bold enlarged text again and see if finally you will understand what I DID write. 

PS: Would the Mod who keeps deleting my posts kindly explain why.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 04, 2017, 11:24:45 AM
and yet you still maintain there is no plausible, logical theory of abduction in the McCann case, perhaps you could remind us why you think that?

I have seen no plausible logical theory of abduction set out on this thread or anywhere else. Does that mean there isn't one? Not at all, just that no-one has set one out. The ones attempted on the thread weren't convincing. It's perfectly possible that a wandering nutter went into the apartment, saw Madeleine and took her. But. He didn't leave  his exit point wide open like the Fox abductor, he closed the door behind him. [also two gates if he left by the patio door]. He also picked his way past the sleeping twins to open a window and raise some noisy shutters, allegedly. The McCann abduction story has features which make the behaviour of their abductor inexplicable imo.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 04, 2017, 11:33:48 AM
I have seen no plausible logical theory of abduction set out on this thread or anywhere else. Does that mean there isn't one? Not at all, just that no-one has set one out. The ones attempted on the thread weren't convincing. It's perfectly possible that a wandering nutter went into the apartment, saw Madeleine and took her. But. He didn't leave  his exit point wide open like the Fox abductor, he closed the door behind him. [also two gates if he left by the patio door]. He also picked his way past the sleeping twins to open a window and raise some noisy shutters, allegedly. The McCann abduction story has features which make the behaviour of their abductor inexplicable imo.

That is a very good point. The McCanns claimed they started using the patio doors for fear that using the front door would wake the children. Similarly Kate said she didn't put on the light in order not to wake the children. Yet the abductor allegedly raised the noisy shutters yet failed to wake any of them. Most odd.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 04, 2017, 12:01:45 PM
I have seen no plausible logical theory of abduction set out on this thread or anywhere else. Does that mean there isn't one? Not at all, just that no-one has set one out. The ones attempted on the thread weren't convincing. It's perfectly possible that a wandering nutter went into the apartment, saw Madeleine and took her. But. He didn't leave  his exit point wide open like the Fox abductor, he closed the door behind him. [also two gates if he left by the patio door]. He also picked his way past the sleeping twins to open a window and raise some noisy shutters, allegedly. The McCann abduction story has features which make the behaviour of their abductor inexplicable imo.

In my opinion the actions of any fiend who would abduct a child are inexplicable.

You really are clutching at straws with mention of Riley Fox's case.

Riley's father clearly remembered locking the front door at night and finding it open in the morning ... the police clearly did not believe his version of events.

Riley was lifted from the couch where she was sleeping alongside her brother ... the police clearly did not believe her father's version of events.

Riley was abducted by a stranger ... the police did not believe that version of events.

What the police did believe was that Riley's abduction was staged ... they were wrong despite their beliefs.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 04, 2017, 12:08:47 PM
I have seen no plausible logical theory of abduction set out on this thread or anywhere else. Does that mean there isn't one? Not at all, just that no-one has set one out. The ones attempted on the thread weren't convincing. It's perfectly possible that a wandering nutter went into the apartment, saw Madeleine and took her. But. He didn't leave  his exit point wide open like the Fox abductor, he closed the door behind him. [also two gates if he left by the patio door]. He also picked his way past the sleeping twins to open a window and raise some noisy shutters, allegedly. The McCann abduction story has features which make the behaviour of their abductor inexplicable imo.
All very poor reasons for claiming the abduction theory is implausible or illogical.  The window was left open, a possible exit point.  If he left by the front door then closing it behind him does not make abduction implausible or illogical.  In the Fox case Riley was abducted from next to her sleeping sibling and with her sleeping father also on the premises.  How noisy were these shutters exactly?  We know the twins slept through a lot of noise so why is the fact that they didn't stir when he did this both implausible and illogical? What other features make the behaviour of the abductor inexplicable?  Please let us know.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on February 04, 2017, 12:10:14 PM
What is there to discuss?
Although there is a theoretical time opportunity, there is nothing to show that anyone took advantage of it.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on February 04, 2017, 12:33:08 PM
What is there to discuss?
Although there is a theoretical time opportunity, there is nothing to show that anyone took advantage of it.

Time and opportunity.  Thanks for that.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on February 04, 2017, 12:48:20 PM
No problem. Doesn't mean it happened.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 04, 2017, 12:58:10 PM
All very poor reasons for claiming the abduction theory is implausible or illogical.  The window was left open, a possible exit point.  If he left by the front door then closing it behind him does not make abduction implausible or illogical.  In the Fox case Riley was abducted from next to her sleeping sibling and with her sleeping father also on the premises.  How noisy were these shutters exactly?  We know the twins slept through a lot of noise so why is the fact that they didn't stir when he did this both implausible and illogical? What other features make the behaviour of the abductor inexplicable?  Please let us know.

You are entitled to your opinion as am I.  I have given my opinion and have no intention of answering interminable questions about it. All I will say is that we know the twins slept through lots of noise that night with hindsight. There was no way to know they were in such a deep sleep in advance.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 04, 2017, 02:15:21 PM
You are entitled to your opinion as am I.  I have given my opinion and have no intention of answering interminable questions about it. All I will say is that we know the twins slept through lots of noise that night with hindsight. There was no way to know they were in such a deep sleep in advance.
You seem to be under the impression that child abductors generally are terrifically timid and risk averse individuals that aren't prepared to risk opening a shutter for fear of upsetting their quarry.  I really don't know where you got that idea from?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on February 04, 2017, 03:00:52 PM
No problem. Doesn't mean it happened.

I am just pleased that you think it could have done.

We have all been doing this for quite some time now, and I hope that it has in some way become a familial thing, and that perhaps we don't seriously dislike each other.  Although I suspect that I might be on a wing and a prayer here.

The Court Judgement hasn't gone in the way I would have liked it to have done, but none of it said that Amaral's Theory was correct.

I so dislike the expression that we will have to wait and see.  But this is what we will have to do.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 04, 2017, 05:02:01 PM
All very poor reasons for claiming the abduction theory is implausible or illogical.  The window was left open, a possible exit point.  If he left by the front door then closing it behind him does not make abduction implausible or illogical.  In the Fox case Riley was abducted from next to her sleeping sibling and with her sleeping father also on the premises.  How noisy were these shutters exactly?  We know the twins slept through a lot of noise so why is the fact that they didn't stir when he did this both implausible and illogical? What other features make the behaviour of the abductor inexplicable?  Please let us know.
If we take the Riley Fox case as an example of how the perpetrator thinks it is possible the noise of opening the shutters woke Madeleine so she is then abducted to stop her identifying the abductor to her parents.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 04, 2017, 05:05:09 PM
That is a very good point. The McCanns claimed they started using the patio doors for fear that using the front door would wake the children. Similarly Kate said she didn't put on the light in order not to wake the children. Yet the abductor allegedly raised the noisy shutters yet failed to wake any of them. Most odd.
No the noise may have woken Madeleine therefore she was abducted i.e.(burglary gone wrong).
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 04, 2017, 06:02:34 PM
You seem to be under the impression that child abductors generally are terrifically timid and risk averse individuals that aren't prepared to risk opening a shutter for fear of upsetting their quarry.  I really don't know where you got that idea from?

We're told by you that the abductor was probably watching the McCanns and planning when best to strike therefore he would have know that they had three small children who very likely slept in the same room. Do you really think that once in the apartment he'd risk waking all three and them screaming merry hell by opening the noisy shutters ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on February 04, 2017, 06:12:51 PM
No the noise may have woken Madeleine therefore she was abducted i.e.(burglary gone wrong).

There is no 'therefore' about it. Why take a noisy child when the answer is just a quick exit?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 04, 2017, 06:16:48 PM
We're told by you that the abductor was probably watching the McCanns and planning when best to strike therefore he would have know that they had three small children who very likely slept in the same room. Do you really think that once in the apartment he'd risk waking all three and them screaming merry hell by opening the noisy shutters ?
Yes I do.  Children don't go from fast asleep to screaming merry hell instantly.   And so what if they had?  Apparently the McCann children screamed at the top of their lungs for 80 minutes and no one came, remember?  If an abductor had been observing the apartment he may have known this. 
BTW: This is a person who most probably raped and murdered a child - do you think he would think twice about murdering a couple of screaming children if it was necessary to his plans?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 04, 2017, 06:18:29 PM
You seem to be under the impression that child abductors generally are terrifically timid and risk averse individuals that aren't prepared to risk opening a shutter for fear of upsetting their quarry.  I really don't know where you got that idea from?

That's the idea you are putting about that you believe others believe.
What makes you think criminals committing burglary for whatever purpose and breaking and entering, run around like the Wild Man of Borneo creating as much racket as they can?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 06:36:49 PM
I have seen no plausible logical theory of abduction set out on this thread or anywhere else. Does that mean there isn't one? Not at all, just that no-one has set one out. The ones attempted on the thread weren't convincing. It's perfectly possible that a wandering nutter went into the apartment, saw Madeleine and took her. But. He didn't leave  his exit point wide open like the Fox abductor, he closed the door behind him. [also two gates if he left by the patio door]. He also picked his way past the sleeping twins to open a window and raise some noisy shutters, allegedly. The McCann abduction story has features which make the behaviour of their abductor inexplicable imo.

I for one could not bothered to spend time working out a theory...we know its possible so thats enough
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 04, 2017, 07:15:45 PM

Haven't you already asked me this rather unpleasant question?  I have already given you my theory, I suggest you read back if you have forgotten.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on February 04, 2017, 07:21:35 PM
Why do you find it unpleasant? Why shy away from what is a likely possibility?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 07:25:20 PM
Why do you find it unpleasant? Why shy away from what is a likely possibility?

this is unfortunately very possible...its easy for me to accept taht because I am not involved
the mccanns will have been told not to even consider it but to beleive maddie is still alive and being treated well...its called the power of positive thinking...its a coping mechanism and entirely consistent with the abduction scenario
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 04, 2017, 07:46:18 PM
What abduction ?

There is no evidence, certainly no forensics to support it.

Absolutely no evidence, of a third party in the apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared, and Mitchell admitted that.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 04, 2017, 07:54:01 PM
Distasteful

If we shied away from everything distasteful, which is purely a subjective term anyway, in life then we might as well dig a hole jump in it and pull it in after us.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 07:54:32 PM
What abduction ?

There is no evidence, certainly no forensics to support it.

Absolutely no evidence, of a third party in the apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared, and Mitchell admitted that.

there is evidence as confirmed by SY....cite for mitchells admission ....you are wrong
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 07:56:53 PM
If we shied away from everything distasteful, which is purely a subjective term anyway, in life then we might as well dig a hole jump in it and pull it in after us.


what you are saying is...life is difficult...and when we accept life is difficult it no longer matters
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 04, 2017, 08:02:18 PM
there is evidence as confirmed by SY....cite for mitchells admission ....you are wrong

This has been cited on numerous occasions. You appear to have a short memory.

So once again.............


' “There was no evidence of a break-in. I'm not going into the detail, but I can say that Kate and Gerry are firmly of the view that somebody got into the apartment and took Madeleine out the window as their means of escape. To do that they did not necessarily have to tamper with anything. They got out of the window fairly easily”.

...and absolutely no evidence at all anyone went into or out of the window.

The only identified fingerprints are Kate McCann's. FACT.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 08:06:45 PM
This has been cited on numerous occasions. You appear to have a short memory.

So once again.............


' “There was no evidence of a break-in. I'm not going into the detail, but I can say that Kate and Gerry are firmly of the view that somebody got into the apartment and took Madeleine out the window as their means of escape. To do that they did not necessarily have to tamper with anything. They got out of the window fairly easily”.

...and absolutely no evidence at all anyone went into or out of the window.

The only identified fingerprints are Kate McCann's. FACT.


first sniping post of the night

you have shown yourself to be wrong
mitchel said there was no evidence of a break in not that there was no a third party being in the apartment

a third party could have entered with a key and there would be no evidence of a break in
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 04, 2017, 08:11:20 PM

first sniping post of the night

you have shown yourself to be wrong
mitchel said there was no evidence of a break in not that there was no a third party being in the apartment

a third party could have entered with a key and there would be no evidence of a break in

The sniping is yours.


This is what I said.


'Absolutely no evidence, of a third party in the apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared, and Mitchell admitted that.'

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 08:14:36 PM
The sniping is yours.


This is what I said.


'Absolutely no evidence, of a third party in the apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared, and Mitchell admitted that.'


you quoted...

firmly of the view that somebody got into the apartment and took Madeleine out the window as their means of escape. To do that they did not necessarily have to tamper with anything. They got out of the window fairly easily”.


that is mitchel stating that they believe there was a third party in the apartment...seriously can you not see taht it is stated very clearly
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 04, 2017, 08:18:10 PM

you quoted...

firmly of the view that somebody got into the apartment and took Madeleine out the window as their means of escape. To do that they did not necessarily have to tamper with anything. They got out of the window fairly easily”.


that is mitchel stating that they believe there was a third party in the apartment...seriously can you not see taht it is stated very clearly

His biased view. he was and is representing the McCann's.

Bottom line remains, there remains no evidence a third party was in the apartment that night.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 04, 2017, 08:24:32 PM
This has been cited on numerous occasions. You appear to have a short memory.

So once again.............


' “There was no evidence of a break-in. I'm not going into the detail, but I can say that Kate and Gerry are firmly of the view that somebody got into the apartment and took Madeleine out the window as their means of escape. To do that they did not necessarily have to tamper with anything. They got out of the window fairly easily”.

...and absolutely no evidence at all anyone went into or out of the window.

The only identified fingerprints are Kate McCann's. FACT.

That was his public denial of the various 'jemmied' and 'door lying open' stories told ny the McCann's friends and family, wasn't it?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 08:25:55 PM
His biased view. he was and is representing the McCann's.

Bottom line remains, there remains no evidence a third party was in the apartment that night.

so now you have corrected yourself
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 04, 2017, 08:28:58 PM
so now you have corrected yourself

I haven't changed a thing.

Read again.

Anyone reading this forum can ascertain the known facts for themselves.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 04, 2017, 08:32:01 PM
What abduction ?

There is no evidence, certainly no forensics to support it.

Absolutely no evidence, of a third party in the apartment on the night Madeleine disappeared, and Mitchell admitted that.

The evidence in the Fox home which pointed to Riley's abduction was a damaged back door an open front door and a missing child.
However, the police had decided that was mere staging of an abduction and didn't bother to check much further than the depths of their own opinions.

For that reason they missed ~ along with other evidence ~ the shoes the perpetrator had been wearing which had been left at the creek where Riley was found ... they were actually called to his residence on the day Riley's body was discovered.  But they didn't have open minds which would have allowed them to be open to all possibilities for the simple reason their target was Riley's father. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/16/riley-fox-murder-killer-l_n_614239.html

Who knows what was overlooked when police suspicions of Madeleine's parents concentrated all investigative opportunities.

Confirmation that Riley was the victim of abduction by a stranger was only obtained after her father had been in prison for some months.

By the time a proper police investigation into Madeleine's disappearance was conducted the physical evidence missed by the original investigation was long gone.

However the fact that the Policia Judiciaria and Scotland Yard are concentrating their efforts in Madeleine's case on stranger abduction ~ however unpalatable that is to some ~ is confirmation that Madeleine was indeed the victim of abduction.

The fact that despite the effort put into finding a body by the initial investigation none was found leaves the possibility that Madeleine might still be alive.  That is, in my opinion, something to be hoped for.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 08:34:12 PM
I haven't changed a thing.

Read again.

Anyone reading this forum can ascertain the known facts for themselves.


you have changed...you said mitchel confirmed and have had to admit he didnt
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 04, 2017, 08:50:07 PM
That was his public denial of the various 'jemmied' and 'door lying open' stories told ny the McCann's friends and family, wasn't it?

Yes, indeed it was.

However, no matter what he said, some will deny it.

More of the 'alternative facts' Trump is fond of.   8**8:/:
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 09:01:20 PM
Yes, indeed it was.

However, no matter what he said, some will deny it.

More of the 'alternative facts' Trump is fond of.   8**8:/:

gerry nor kate said the windows ahd been gemmied...proof that both you and gunit are basing your conclusions on things taht are not true,,,...thats why your conclusions are wrong
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 04, 2017, 09:02:44 PM
Haven't you already asked me this rather unpleasant question?  I have already given you my theory, I suggest you read back if you have forgotten.

Your scenario seems to jar with Brietta's sensibilities so let me rephrase. Do you think the criminal act you envisage happening to Madeleine happened in or away from the apartment? It really is a simple enough question.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 09:04:58 PM
Your scenario seems to jar with Brietta's sensibilities so let me rephrase. Do you think the criminal act you envisage happening to Madeleine happened in or away from the apartment? It really is a simple enough question.

away so as not to leave forensic evidence
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 04, 2017, 09:07:21 PM
gerry nor kate said the windows ahd been gemmied...proof that both you and gunit are basing your conclusions on things taht are not true,,,...thats why your conclusions are wrong

The claim came from members of the McCann family.

Specifically McCann's sister.

On the record.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 04, 2017, 09:10:50 PM

what you are saying is...life is difficult...and when we accept life is difficult it no longer matters

What I am saying is you play the hand you have have been dealt. You ain't getting another. Whining whingeing poor meing and all that bollox is counter productive because whether you like it or not that's the hand that has to be played, by you no one else and no deferment. If you don't like it top yourself 'cos it aint gonna change.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 09:11:08 PM
The claim came from members of the McCann family.

Specifically McCann's sister.

On the record.

on the record...its called hearsay stephen...nothing on the record that gerry or Kate said it...we have been through this in detail before
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 09:12:42 PM
What I am saying is you play the hand you have have been dealt. You ain't getting another. Whining whingeing poor meing and all that bollox is counter productive because whether you like it or not that's the hand that has to be played, by you no one else and no deferment. If you don't like it top yourself 'cos it aint gonna change.


you obviously didnt understand or recognise the quote then...my quote is just so much much more elegant
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 04, 2017, 09:13:12 PM
on the record...its called hearsay stephen...nothing on the record that gerry or Kate said it...we have been through this in detail before

I suggest you read the files again.

The claim came from members of the Mccann family.

It is not hearsay.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 09:15:22 PM

it is hearsay...you need to google it...there is absolutely no record of gerry or Kate using the word gemmied

you are claiming K or G used the word gemmied based on someone elses testimony...thats about as clear a defn of hearsay you will get...what you are showing is that you do not even understand the basics
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 04, 2017, 09:24:49 PM
gerry nor kate said the windows ahd been gemmied...proof that both you and gunit are basing your conclusions on things taht are not true,,,...thats why your conclusions are wrong

Who said they did? Oh yes, their family and friends, not me.

Brian Healey 05/05/07: "Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone. She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open."


Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 04, 2017, 09:28:40 PM

you obviously didnt understand or recognise the quote then...my quote is just so much much more elegant

Well it would be wouldn't it?
Mine is aimed at the posers on here who indulge in faux outrage.
Those who have the experience are obvious by the way they write . Others are no account bullshitters equally obvious by the way they write.

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 09:29:40 PM
Who said they did? Oh yes, their family and friends, not me.

Brian Healey 05/05/07: "Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone. She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open."

thats called hearsay evidence ...non verbatim....when someone repeats what they have been told they may not use the same words but substitute  words they are used to...are you aware of the term chinese whisper
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 09:31:22 PM
Well it would be wouldn't it?
Mine is aimed at the posers on here who indulge in faux outrage.
Those who have the experience are obvious by the way they write . Others are no account bullshitters equally obvious by the way they write.


of course it is...much more elegant
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 04, 2017, 10:22:59 PM
thats called hearsay evidence ...non verbatim....when someone repeats what they have been told they may not use the same words but substitute  words they are used to...are you aware of the term chinese whisper

A jemmy, by the way is a short crowbar. What do you think Gerry said which made Mr Healy think of the word 'jemmied'? Whatever it was it made Trish think of the same word. Perhaps he said 'crowbar'.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 10:23:54 PM
A jemmy, by the way is a short crowbar. What do you think Gerry said which made Mr Healy think of the word 'jemmied'? Whatever it was it made Trish think of the same word. Perhaps he said 'crowbar'.


so now its perhaps ...you dont know
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 04, 2017, 10:29:57 PM
Back to the jemmied shutters again I see.  *Groundhog Day Klaxon*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 04, 2017, 10:54:28 PM

so now its perhaps ...you dont know

It was you who said friends and family inserted their own familiar words, so which word used by Gerry made them substitute 'jemmied'?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 10:59:23 PM
It was you who said friends and family inserted their own familiar words, so which word used by Gerry made them substitute 'jemmied'?

forced....
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on February 04, 2017, 11:09:27 PM
forced....

That's what "Jemmied" means in Glasgow.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 04, 2017, 11:11:10 PM
That's what "Jemmied" means in Glasgow.


I know.......another piece of evidence falls apart
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 04, 2017, 11:12:43 PM
It was you who said friends and family inserted their own familiar words, so which word used by Gerry made them substitute 'jemmied'?
Can we get back on topic?  Not sure if you saw my earlier question, I may have missed your reply if so, please forgive me from asking again, but could you elaborate on this please?

"The McCann abduction story has features which make the behaviour of their abductor inexplicable imo".

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: puglove on February 04, 2017, 11:36:14 PM
Can we get back on topic?  Not sure if you saw my earlier question, I may have missed your reply if so, please forgive me from asking again, but could you elaborate on this please?

"The McCann abduction story has features which make the behaviour of their abductor inexplicable imo".

Hey, Alf. Sorry if I've missed something here, but has anyone picked up on Kate McCann auditioning for BGT?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 04, 2017, 11:44:51 PM
Can we get back on topic?  Not sure if you saw my earlier question, I may have missed your reply if so, please forgive me from asking again, but could you elaborate on this please?

"The McCann abduction story has features which make the behaviour of their abductor inexplicable imo".
what points exactly?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 05, 2017, 01:58:46 AM
Hey, Alf. Sorry if I've missed something here, but has anyone picked up on Kate McCann auditioning for BGT?

It would appear that she's only actually getting involved if the choir ends up on the telly. Sort of letting everyone else do the legwork and she rakes the plaudits.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on February 05, 2017, 09:29:21 AM
It would appear that she's only actually getting involved if the choir ends up on the telly. Sort of letting everyone else do the legwork and she rakes the plaudits.

That would figure
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 05, 2017, 10:47:06 AM
what points exactly?
It seems this thread has now changed tack to discuss Kate's involvement in Britains Got Talent,  a subject which as we can already observe provides plenty more opportunities for bitchy comments. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 05, 2017, 12:14:21 PM
It seems this thread has now changed tack to discuss Kate's involvement in Britains Got Talent,  a subject which as we can already observe provides plenty more opportunities for bitchy comments.

It will not be long before it morphs into The Three Amigos [Grime, Amaral & Eddie] at Crufts. Ole
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 05, 2017, 12:19:15 PM
It will not be long before it morphs into The Three Amigos [Grime, Amaral & Eddie] at Crufts. Ole

 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 05, 2017, 02:33:11 PM
It seems this thread has now changed tack to discuss Kate's involvement in Britains Got Talent,  a subject which as we can already observe provides plenty more opportunities for bitchy comments.

The comments are far more than bitchy. 

One video link in particular which I had the misfortune to open began with a tirade of vitriolic hatred couched in the foulest language imaginable.
Lie down with dogs get up with fleas. Anyone who condones and promotes such diatribe ... and the link I followed came from this forum ... really needs to indulge in a serious examination of conscience.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 05, 2017, 02:41:12 PM
It will not be long before it morphs into The Three Amigos [Grime, Amaral & Eddie] at Crufts. Ole

Part of the problem may lie with the members themselves.  We are all over the place as far as thread topics are concerned but sometimes an OT discussion can take off with interesting posts which it is a shame to delete.

The editors try their best to preserve these.

I think the lesson may be to try to post as near to topic as possible and try to avoid deflection ... and if there is something you feel merits separate discussion, start a new thread.

Mea culpa ... I tend to off topic posts myself, so I include myself in the criticism.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 05, 2017, 02:49:04 PM
So, to reiterate: 
Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Yes there is in my view, and here it is (bearing in mind it is all theoretical and I'm not claiming it actually happpened exactly as described):

The abductor (a predatory sex attacker with a penchant for young girls) selects his quarry based in part on the fact that he knows she is left unattended for several hours every night in an unlocked ground floor apartment, with parents and friends only checking every 20 - 30 minutes.  He strikes some time between 9.45pm and 9.55pm when eight of the nine Tapas group are sat at their table eating their meal, entering via the unlocked patio door, enters the children's bedroom, opens the shutter and window to make sure that the coast is clear for him to leave the apartment via the front door carrying the child, which he does within 2 to 3 minutes of first having entered the apartment.  It is possible that he has an accomplice who has also taken part in surveillance and in the get away, and this may offer further explanation for the opened shutter and window, as a means of look out and communication and  between the two individuals, and for passing out the child.

According to some the above actions of the abductor are considered "inexplicable", perhaps we could have some further understanding of what that means?

In what ways is this theory both implausible and illogical?   
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 05, 2017, 04:18:29 PM
So, to reiterate: 
Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Yes there is in my view, and here it is (bearing in mind it is all theoretical and I'm not claiming it actually happpened exactly as described):

The abductor (a predatory sex attacker with a penchant for young girls) selects his quarry based in part on the fact that he knows she is left unattended for several hours every night in an unlocked ground floor apartment, with parents and friends only checking every 20 - 30 minutes.  He strikes some time between 9.45pm and 9.55pm when eight of the nine Tapas group are sat at their table eating their meal, entering via the unlocked patio door, enters the children's bedroom, opens the shutter and window to make sure that the coast is clear for him to leave the apartment via the front door carrying the child, which he does within 2 to 3 minutes of first having entered the apartment.  It is possible that he has an accomplice who has also taken part in surveillance and in the get away, and this may offer further explanation for the opened shutter and window, as a means of look out and communication and  between the two individuals, and for passing out the child.

According to some the above actions of the abductor are considered "inexplicable", perhaps we could have some further understanding of what that means?

In what ways is this theory both implausible and illogical?

So the abductor killed Madeleine, according to your theory. Do you believe the cadaver dog's alerted to this death?

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 05, 2017, 04:31:53 PM
So the abductor killed Madeleine, according to your theory. Do you believe the cadaver dog's alerted to this death?
No.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 05, 2017, 04:36:58 PM
No.

So you believe Madeleine was killed somewhere else and the alerts are just a coincidence?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 05, 2017, 04:41:29 PM
So you believe Madeleine was killed somewhere else and the alerts are just a coincidence?
Coincidence...?   &%+((£  Maybe...  a bit like the coincidence in the Shannon Matthews case perhaps?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 05, 2017, 05:42:00 PM
So, to reiterate: 
Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Yes there is in my view, and here it is (bearing in mind it is all theoretical and I'm not claiming it actually happpened exactly as described):

The abductor (a predatory sex attacker with a penchant for young girls) selects his quarry based in part on the fact that he knows she is left unattended for several hours every night in an unlocked ground floor apartment, with parents and friends only checking every 20 - 30 minutes.  He strikes some time between 9.45pm and 9.55pm when eight of the nine Tapas group are sat at their table eating their meal, entering via the unlocked patio door, enters the children's bedroom, opens the shutter and window to make sure that the coast is clear for him to leave the apartment via the front door carrying the child, which he does within 2 to 3 minutes of first having entered the apartment.  It is possible that he has an accomplice who has also taken part in surveillance and in the get away, and this may offer further explanation for the opened shutter and window, as a means of look out and communication and  between the two individuals, and for passing out the child.

According to some the above actions of the abductor are considered "inexplicable", perhaps we could have some further understanding of what that means?

In what ways is this theory both implausible and illogical?

How goes he know?

Bear in mind they don't all check at the same time, there are not gaps of 20-30 minutes without checkers.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 05, 2017, 06:13:12 PM
The question I would ask the abduction doubters is - do you believe it is illogical and implausible for a predatory sex attacker to enter an unlocked ground floor apartment at night and take a sleeping child?  If so please give your reasons why.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 05, 2017, 06:20:25 PM
It is ridiculous in the extreme to suppose that the individuals who target children in their own homes are ruled by logic or the thought processes of those to whom such aberrant behaviour is foreign.

These are not normal people who would be deterred by a situation of personal risk ... in fact the risk might be a motivating factor of it for some.

Quote
 ...  arrested on charges of second-degree burglary, aggravated assault and kidnapping.

Upon investigating the family’s apartment for clues, cops said they found Cohen’s shoes in the two-year-old’s bedroom.

His coat was wedged between her mattress and the wall, and his passport was on the floor near the foot of her bed.

Cops said Cohen had also used the bathroom while in the apartment, and drank some of the family’s orange juice.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2430255/dad-gets-shock-of-his-life-when-he-finds-strange-man-holding-his-daughter-two-after-checking-on-her-at-2am/

All while he knew the little girl's family were asleep in the same house.

If he had decided to remove the child from the residence instead of spending the amount of time there he did, that little girl and her family might have had a far worse outcome.

Interesting to note that one of the charges was kidnapping despite the fact the little girl had not been removed from the premises.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 05, 2017, 07:21:57 PM
So, to reiterate: 
Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Yes there is in my view, and here it is (bearing in mind it is all theoretical and I'm not claiming it actually happpened exactly as described):

The abductor (a predatory sex attacker with a penchant for young girls) selects his quarry based in part on the fact that he knows she is left unattended for several hours every night in an unlocked ground floor apartment, with parents and friends only checking every 20 - 30 minutes.  He strikes some time between 9.45pm and 9.55pm when eight of the nine Tapas group are sat at their table eating their meal, entering via the unlocked patio door, enters the children's bedroom, opens the shutter and window to make sure that the coast is clear for him to leave the apartment via the front door carrying the child, which he does within 2 to 3 minutes of first having entered the apartment.  It is possible that he has an accomplice who has also taken part in surveillance and in the get away, and this may offer further explanation for the opened shutter and window, as a means of look out and communication and  between the two individuals, and for passing out the child.

According to some the above actions of the abductor are considered "inexplicable", perhaps we could have some further understanding of what that means?

In what ways is this theory both implausible and illogical?

1.Motivation: ??? what is the motivation here and how does it compare with research into the behaviour of sexual predators preying on children? How do the presumed actions compare with the accepted behavioural research ?
2.Means: How did he/she get in and out/gain access to the child ?*
3.Opportunity: A few minutes between 21:40 and 22:00 (from memory).

One and two need to be nailed down a little more substantially than they are at present.
 
* gross assumption the patio door is unlocked as there is no evidence to support that assertion. Statements regarding the status of that door are contradictory so cannot be relied upon.

In incident investigation we would call this "Story Telling".

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 05, 2017, 07:34:53 PM
1.Motivation: ??? what is the motivation here and how does it compare with research into the behaviour of sexual predators preying on children? How do the presumed actions compare with the accepted behavioural research ?
2.Means: How did he/she get in and out/gain access to the child ?*
3.Opportunity: A few minutes between 21:40 and 22:00 (from memory).

One and two need to be nailed down a little more substantially than they are at present.
 
* gross assumption the patio door is unlocked as there is no evidence to support that assertion. Statements regarding the status of that door are contradictory so cannot be relied upon.

In incident investigation we would call this "Story Telling".

If Kate is telling the truth...the window was open which proves third party involvemnent.....its a simple as that
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: jassi on February 05, 2017, 07:36:04 PM
If
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 05, 2017, 07:37:42 PM
If

of course if......so that is THE most important question...it seems SY believe her
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 05, 2017, 10:18:09 PM
How goes he know?

Bear in mind they don't all check at the same time, there are not gaps of 20-30 minutes without checkers.
there hardly seems any point attempting to reply to questions now as my responses have a tendency to disappear with alarming regularity.  I suggest anyone who wants to ask me a question PM me in future.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 05, 2017, 10:48:42 PM
If Kate is telling the truth...the window was open which proves third party involvemnent.....its a simple as that

Only in your simple mind.
Ok the window is found open .......................................... now fill in the full SP how the window was opened how the shutter was raised* and an abduction effected allowing for all other conditions that were found to obtain at the time.

* please not the videos as they have been "topped and tailed" to remove the most instructive parts.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 05, 2017, 10:50:30 PM
there hardly seems any point attempting to reply to questions now as my responses have a tendency to disappear with alarming regularity. I suggest anyone who wants to ask me a question PM me in future.

No chance on an open forum. Learn to keep within the rules................simples
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 05, 2017, 10:54:03 PM
Only in your simple mind.
Ok the window is found open .......................................... now fill in the full SP how the window was opened how the shutter was raised* and an abduction effected allowing for all other conditions that were found to obtain at the time.

* please not the videos as they have been "topped and tailed" to remove the most instructive parts.

if my mind was simple you would have a valid point...as it isnt ...you dont


an open window and a truthful Kate proves  a third party involvement ....a criminl unless you have an alternative expalnation


Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alice Purjorick on February 05, 2017, 11:02:41 PM
if my mind was simple you would have a valid point...as it isnt ...you dont


an open window and a truthful Kate proves  a third party involvement ....a criminl unless you have an alternative expalnation

Third party involvement in what precisely ?

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 05, 2017, 11:04:10 PM
Third party involvement in what precisely ?

in opening the widow and shutters
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: slartibartfast on February 05, 2017, 11:09:01 PM
if my mind was simple you would have a valid point...as it isnt ...you dont


an open window and a truthful Kate proves  a third party involvement ....a criminl unless you have an alternative expalnation

Just classic circular reasoning.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 05, 2017, 11:17:02 PM
Just classic circular reasoning.

yes classic
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 06, 2017, 01:47:13 AM
Coincidence...?   &%+((£  Maybe...  a bit like the coincidence in the Shannon Matthews case perhaps?

But Shannon Matthews hadn't actually been kidnapped.

Add this to the coincidence that two men were seen in PDL on the 3rd of May, both with identical children wearing identical clothing and you have a rather strange set of events.

Of course you do know what Kate says about coincidences ?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 06, 2017, 05:51:09 AM
But Shannon Matthews hadn't actually been kidnapped.

Add this to the coincidence that two men were seen in PDL on the 3rd of May, both with identical children wearing identical clothing and you have a rather strange set of events.

Of course you do know what Kate says about coincidences ?
which file is that in?  I haven't heard that before.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 06, 2017, 08:19:23 AM
But Shannon Matthews hadn't actually been kidnapped.

Add this to the coincidence that two men were seen in PDL on the 3rd of May, both with identical children wearing identical clothing and you have a rather strange set of events.

Of course you do know what Kate says about coincidences ?
As G-Unit pointed out earlier in this thread there were differences between the two men seen carrying children.  As for the Shannon Matthews case it was a HUGE coincidence that the dogs alerted in the house of the man who was suspected of taking her, particularly as she was still alive at the time, don't you think?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: slartibartfast on February 06, 2017, 09:04:40 AM
As G-Unit pointed out earlier in this thread there were differences between the two men seen carrying children.  As for the Shannon Matthews case it was a HUGE coincidence that the dogs alerted in the house of the man who was suspected of taking her, particularly as she was still alive at the time, don't you think?

Well they did find the cause.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 06, 2017, 09:19:21 AM
Well they did find the cause.
And your point is...?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 06, 2017, 09:20:42 AM
But Shannon Matthews hadn't actually been kidnapped.

Add this to the coincidence that two men were seen in PDL on the 3rd of May, both with identical children wearing identical clothing and you have a rather strange set of events.

Of course you do know what Kate says about coincidences ?
BTW: On 4 December 2008 Karen Matthews and Michael Donovan were found guilty of kidnapping, false imprisonment and perverting the course of justice
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 06, 2017, 09:54:24 AM
As G-Unit pointed out earlier in this thread there were differences between the two men seen carrying children.  As for the Shannon Matthews case it was a HUGE coincidence that the dogs alerted in the house of the man who was suspected of taking her, particularly as she was still alive at the time, don't you think?

But the found of the scent was found and the dogs were found to have been correct. A gentleman had indeed died in the mattress the dog alerted to. Has that happened in the McCann case?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 06, 2017, 09:55:31 AM
BTW: On 4 December 2008 Karen Matthews and Michael Donovan were found guilty of kidnapping, false imprisonment and perverting the course of justice

Then let me clarify. Shannon hadn't been kidnapped by a stranger.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 06, 2017, 10:00:21 AM
Well they did find the cause.

All this finding the cause reminds me of the stage clairvoyants
They will always find something to fit their predictions
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Robittybob1 on February 06, 2017, 10:14:22 AM
But Shannon Matthews hadn't actually been kidnapped.

Add this to the coincidence that two men were seen in PDL on the 3rd of May, both with identical children wearing identical clothing and you have a rather strange set of events.

Of course you do know what Kate says about coincidences ?
Cite please.  which file is that in?  I haven't heard that before.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on February 06, 2017, 10:30:34 AM
Who said they did? Oh yes, their family and friends, not me.

Brian Healey 05/05/07: "Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone. She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open."

 To my knowledge Gerry has never described 5A as a chalet, and IMO he was talking about the Bedroom door being found open - but that was wrongly interpreted by some as the front door,  In fact I believe another family member went as far as to say it was the front door that was found open.  Neither Kate or Gerry have ever made that claim.

This is perfect example of Chinese whispers - where words and facts get changed as a result of a person putting their own interpretation on what has been said to them and then repeating what they genuinely believe to be true to another person - who then puts their interpretation on it.   The result is often an account which bears little resemblance to the original conversation.       It's not done in a malicious way but it happens all the time.   It's a very common human fact of life.    But I'm sure you already know that G. 

Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 06, 2017, 10:48:32 AM
But the found of the scent was found and the dogs were found to have been correct. A gentleman had indeed died in the mattress the dog alerted to. Has that happened in the McCann case?
Who knows?  Apartment 5a was also subject to the attentions of numerous police officers and a forensic team (none of whom was wearing protective clothing afaik) before the dogs searches, one or more of whom may have come into close contact with dead body(ies) leading to cross contamination.  Now tell me that is not possible.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 06, 2017, 11:31:52 AM
To my knowledge Gerry has never described 5A as a chalet, and IMO he was talking about the Bedroom door being found open - but that was wrongly interpreted by some as the front door,  In fact I believe another family member went as far as to say it was the front door that was found open.  Neither Kate or Gerry have ever made that claim.

This is perfect example of Chinese whispers - where words and facts get changed as a result of a person putting their own interpretation on what has been said to them and then repeating what they genuinely believe to be true to another person - who then puts their interpretation on it.   The result is often an account which bears little resemblance to the original conversation.       It's not done in a malicious way but it happens all the time.   It's a very common human fact of life.    But I'm sure you already know that G.

To my knowledge neither Gerry nor Kate has corrected what their friends and family told the media. Even in her book Kate doesn't take the opportunity;

We were quite surprised that people were giving interviews but it was understandable. After all, we’d been on the phone half the night to our friends and relatives, sobbing that nothing was being done and begging for their help.
[Madeleine]

That was the perfect opportunity to mention it if she and her husband had been misquoted.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 06, 2017, 12:24:54 PM
To my knowledge neither Gerry nor Kate has corrected what their friends and family told the media. Even in her book Kate doesn't take the opportunity;

We were quite surprised that people were giving interviews but it was understandable. After all, we’d been on the phone half the night to our friends and relatives, sobbing that nothing was being done and begging for their help.
[Madeleine]

That was the perfect opportunity to mention it if she and her husband had been misquoted.
That's because it's such a trivial point, that is only of significance to those people who have to read something into every little thing.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 06, 2017, 12:29:58 PM
Who knows?  Apartment 5a was also subject to the attentions of numerous police officers and a forensic team (none of whom was wearing protective clothing afaik) before the dogs searches, one or more of whom may have come into close contact with dead body(ies) leading to cross contamination.  Now tell me that is not possible.

The same police officers and forensic team who were all over Murat's home and car like a rash and not one alert.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 06, 2017, 12:32:36 PM
That's because it's such a trivial point, that is only of significance to those people who have to read something into every little thing.

Every word and movement of all the main protagonists in an inquiry are important.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 06, 2017, 12:42:37 PM
Every word and movement of all the main protagonists in an inquiry are important.
including family members back home, speaking to the media?  Every word?  Really??
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 06, 2017, 12:45:43 PM
The same police officers and forensic team who were all over Murat's home and car like a rash and not one alert.
Really?  The exact same ones that were in Apartment 5a when the disappearance occurred, and during the immediate aftermath?  How do you know this?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 06, 2017, 01:46:21 PM
Cite please.  which file is that in?  I haven't heard that before.

If I guess correctly the reference may be to Jane Tanner's sighting and a fortnight after the event, the Smith sighting.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 06, 2017, 02:50:58 PM
including family members back home, speaking to the media?  Every word?  Really??


I believe the Philpots were bugged for exactly that reason.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 06, 2017, 02:52:12 PM

I believe the Philpots were bugged for exactly that reason.
Pardin? %&5%£
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 06, 2017, 02:56:26 PM
Really?  The exact same ones that were in Apartment 5a when the disappearance occurred, and during the immediate aftermath?  How do you know this?

But then if they weren't that would have to be another one of those damned coincidences wouldn't it Alfie. The McCann's apartment being the only one the cadaver infused operative attended. God they're unlucky !

Do you ever read what you write ? Honestly?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Faithlilly on February 06, 2017, 02:57:50 PM
Pardin? %&5%£

Further I believe much of the conversations captured by that surveillance were used in the case against them.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 06, 2017, 03:10:33 PM
Further I believe much of the conversations captured by that surveillance were used in the case against them.
I'm not sure quite what this all has to do with my contention that the use of the word "jemmied" by a couple of the McCanns family / friends on the night Madeleine was abducted is of such low significance as to be a) not worthy of a mention in Kate's book and b) not even worthy of a question by the police at any point in the initial investigation. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 06, 2017, 03:15:52 PM
But then if they weren't that would have to be another one of those damned coincidences wouldn't it Alfie. The McCann's apartment being the only one the cadaver infused operative attended. God they're unlucky !

Do you ever read what you write ? Honestly?
You asked if it could be a coincidence a few pages pack and I replied "maybe.... &%+((£"  so yes I do read what I type, thanks for asking. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 06, 2017, 05:41:47 PM
I'm not sure quite what this all has to do with my contention that the use of the word "jemmied" by a couple of the McCanns family / friends on the night Madeleine was abducted is of such low significance as to be a) not worthy of a mention in Kate's book and b) not even worthy of a question by the police at any point in the initial investigation.

John Hill certainly noticed the assertions of a break-in;

Mr Hill said that despite the report by a family friend that the shutters to the couple's apartment were broken, there was no sign that anyone had forced their way in while the McCanns ate at the tapas restaurant 200 yards away.
https://hypocriteandliar.wordpress.com/tag/john-hill/
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 06, 2017, 06:16:22 PM
John Hill certainly noticed the assertions of a break-in;

Mr Hill said that despite the report by a family friend that the shutters to the couple's apartment were broken, there was no sign that anyone had forced their way in while the McCanns ate at the tapas restaurant 200 yards away.
https://hypocriteandliar.wordpress.com/tag/john-hill/


report by a family friend....not by the mccanns
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 06, 2017, 06:26:21 PM

report by a family friend....not by the mccanns

A family friend making up stories! Whatever next! We can discard all they say in their official interviews/further newspaper interviews then. Completely unreliable.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 06, 2017, 06:56:43 PM
A family friend making up stories! Whatever next! We can discard all they say in their official interviews/further newspaper interviews then. Completely unreliable.

chinese whispers
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Eleanor on February 06, 2017, 07:35:59 PM
John Hill certainly noticed the assertions of a break-in;

Mr Hill said that despite the report by a family friend that the shutters to the couple's apartment were broken, there was no sign that anyone had forced their way in while the McCanns ate at the tapas restaurant 200 yards away.
https://hypocriteandliar.wordpress.com/tag/john-hill/

Had he forgotten about the missing keys, do you think?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 06, 2017, 08:29:36 PM
A family friend making up stories! Whatever next! We can discard all they say in their official interviews/further newspaper interviews then. Completely unreliable.


yesterday we saw how the phrase
the top cop....repeated as

a top cop...has its meaning totally changed

thats how sensitive language can be....
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 06, 2017, 08:35:17 PM

yesterday we saw how the phrase
the top cop....repeated as

a top cop...has its meaning totally changed

thats how sensitive language can be....

In your biased and irrelevant opinion.

Amaral's victory in court against Gerry and Kate McCann.

Never lose sight of that.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 06, 2017, 08:41:23 PM
chinese whispers

That only works if all the ones who mentioned a break-in a) knew each other b) spoke to each other in the night of 3/4th May. Cites?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 06, 2017, 08:55:04 PM
That only works if all the ones who mentioned a break-in a) knew each other b) spoke to each other in the night of 3/4th May. Cites?

it is quite possible that they all discussed the shutters and thats why they came up with the same word....in fact in the situation its fairly certain they would have discussed it
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 06, 2017, 09:04:41 PM
it is quite possible that they all discussed the shutters and thats why they came up with the same word....in fact in the situation its fairly certain they would have discussed it

You don't know if they knew each other or if they spoke to each other then? They didn't all use the same word, by the way, only those who spoke to Gerry. Those who spoke to Kate used other words.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 06, 2017, 09:10:58 PM
You don't know if they knew each other or if they spoke to each other then? They didn't all use the same word, by the way, only those who spoke to Gerry. Those who spoke to Kate used other words.

your claim is speculation...there is no record of Kate or Gerry using those words
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2017, 07:28:47 AM
your claim is speculation...there is no record of Kate or Gerry using those words

All we have is the reports by their friends and relatives. 'Kate said' and Gerry said'. If they lied so be it.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 07, 2017, 08:14:48 AM
All we have is the reports by their friends and relatives. 'Kate said' and Gerry said'. If they lied so be it.
You need to learn the difference between a lie and a misinterpretation.  In the phenomenon known as Chinese Whispers is each person recounting the information slightly differently lying?
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: slartibartfast on February 07, 2017, 08:58:15 AM
You need to learn the difference between a lie and a misinterpretation.  In the phenomenon known as Chinese Whispers is each person recounting the information slightly differently lying?

Difficult to go from the Window had been opened to the Window had been jemmied in one jump.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 07, 2017, 09:21:56 AM
Difficult to go from the Window had been opened to the Window had been jemmied in one jump.
Sigh.  In the immediate aftermath of the incident Gerry presumably thought the window had been open using force, or broken into, so it's less of a leap from that to jemmied, I'm sure you'll agree.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 07, 2017, 09:25:29 AM
Difficult to go from the Window had been opened to the Window had been jemmied in one jump.

...and that is on the assumption the window was open before 10 pm.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on February 07, 2017, 09:36:38 AM
You need to learn the difference between a lie and a misinterpretation.  In the phenomenon known as Chinese Whispers is each person recounting the information slightly differently lying?

Of course they're not lying - that's why they are called Chinese whispers.

Chinese whispers are not lies - they are misinterpretations/misunderstandings.     Also they are far more likely to occur as a result of conversations over the phone - because when people are talking face to face they can correct anything the other person may have obviously misunderstood or misinterpreted as they go along.    Not so once you have put the phone down and the other person is then phoning others - and so increasing the chances that even more chinese whispers can accrue.       For instance 'Gerry said the door was open' (meaning the bedroom door) becomes 'Gerry said the front door was open'.

It's clear that the McCanns never told the PJ that that the shutters were broken or smashed - otherwise Amaral would have mentioned it in his book and surely it would have been one of the 48 questions? 

And anyway  -  what would be the purpose of having a  'cunning' plan to lie to their friends and family?  What did they have to gain?  All that would do is prove to the PJ what massive liars they were once it was discovered that the shutters were undamaged.  So the answer is 'Zilch'.    They would have to be verging on the simple-minded to think that lying about the shutters was a good idea.

Unless people are so desperate to believe the McCanns lied they are prepared to throw all semblance of common sense and logic out of the window  - then to claim the McCanns OR their friends and family deliberately lied about the shutters is plainly ludicrous IMO. 


Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 07, 2017, 10:06:37 AM
Of course they're not lying - that's why they are called Chinese whispers.

Chinese whispers are not lies - they are misinterpretations/misunderstandings.     Also they are far more likely to occur as a result of conversations over the phone - because when people are talking face to face they can correct anything the other person may have obviously misunderstood or misinterpreted as they go along.    Not so once you have put the phone down and the other person is then phoning others - and so increasing the chances that even more chinese whispers can accrue.       For instance 'Gerry said the door was open' (meaning the bedroom door) becomes 'Gerry said the front door was open'.

It's clear that the McCanns never told the PJ that that the shutters were broken or smashed - otherwise Amaral would have mentioned it in his book and surely it would have been one of the 48 questions? 

And anyway  -  what would be the purpose of having a  'cunning' plan to lie to their friends and family?  What did they have to gain?  All that would do is prove to the PJ what massive liars they were once it was discovered that the shutters were undamaged.  So the answer is 'Zilch'.    They would have to be verging on the simple-minded to think that lying about the shutters was a good idea.

Unless people are so desperate to believe the McCanns lied they are prepared to throw all semblance of common sense and logic out of the window  - then to claim the McCanns OR their friends and family deliberately lied about the shutters is plainly ludicrous IMO.

Are you seriously proposing that people are incapable of lying in any potential crime.

The bottom line remains, there is no independent verification of the window being opened before 10 pm.

No scuff marks on the walls or forensic evidence, that someone went in or out of that window.

Likewise, we already know whose fingerprints were identified.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 07, 2017, 10:19:18 AM
There is no obligation to believe her story, unless it has backup.

Her's doesn't as regards the window, and NOTHING you type will convince me otherwise.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Davel on February 07, 2017, 10:25:29 AM
There is no obligation to believe her story, unless it has backup.

Her's doesn't as regards the window, and NOTHING you type will convince me otherwise.

I'm not trying to convince you
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 07, 2017, 10:31:37 AM
Are you seriously proposing that people are incapable of lying in any potential crime.

The bottom line remains, there is no independent verification of the window being opened before 10 pm.

No scuff marks on the walls or forensic evidence, that someone went in or out of that window.

Likewise, we already know whose fingerprints were identified.

Quote
Five fingerprints on the inside of the window were identified as belonging to Kate McCann. The PJ's report doesn't mention how many inadequate fingerprints were found on the inside or the outside of the window. In fact it doesn't even mention if the outside of the window was checked. There are a number of unidentified/inadequate fingerprints recovered from the patio doors and the shutters. After a two week period, there was also a fingerprint found, identified as belonging to a GNR officer.
http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39077415/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%201


There is nothing at all suspicious about the presence of Kate McCann's fingerprints on the inside of the window glass. Not a thing!
Unless you take it one step further and analyse the reason for the presence of the fingerprints left by the GNR officer.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Benice on February 07, 2017, 10:32:43 AM
SY obviously believe she was telling the truth - because if they didn't it would have been impossible for them to rule her out as a suspect or even a person of interest.   SY have ruled her out.  The end.   
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 07, 2017, 10:34:00 AM
She may have been mistaken, therefore she told the truth as she remembers it, unless you wish to dispute this fact and suggest otherwise.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 07, 2017, 10:36:51 AM
There is no obligation to believe her story, unless it has backup.

Her's doesn't as regards the window, and NOTHING you type will convince me otherwise.

People can be very selective what statements they choose to believe many of which do not have the benefit of backup from an independent source.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: John on February 07, 2017, 10:41:14 AM
It's not the first time someone has had temporary memory lapse, I believe there is a medical name for this phenomena which is attributable to shock and trauma.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 07, 2017, 10:52:45 AM
Quote
Five fingerprints on the inside of the window were identified as belonging to Kate McCann. The PJ's report doesn't mention how many inadequate fingerprints were found on the inside or the outside of the window. In fact it doesn't even mention if the outside of the window was checked. There are a number of unidentified/inadequate fingerprints recovered from the patio doors and the shutters. After a two week period, there was also a fingerprint found, identified as belonging to a GNR officer.
http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39077415/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%201


There is nothing at all suspicious about the presence of Kate McCann's fingerprints on the inside of the window glass. Not a thing!
Unless you take it one step further and analyse the reason for the presence of the fingerprints left by the GNR officer.

That Brietta is a matter of opinion.

I don't believe the abduction story, and I have seen no evidence to persuade me that it has any more to back it up   than any other of the possibilities.

At the moment, none of the scenarios, with the evidence available could be taken to court.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: stephen25000 on February 07, 2017, 10:56:17 AM
People can be very selective what statements they choose to believe many of which do not have the benefit of backup from an independent source.

Bottom line.

No verification of the window being open before 10 pm.

No scratch or scuff marks on the window, or surroundings.

That won't change.
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: G-Unit on February 07, 2017, 10:59:43 AM
You need to learn the difference between a lie and a misinterpretation.  In the phenomenon known as Chinese Whispers is each person recounting the information slightly differently lying?

You need to understand the difference between the game of chinese whispers and reports of a one to one non whispered conversation.

Jon Corner reporting what Kate told him;

She said, 'They’ve broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl'.

Trish Cameron;

Gerry said the window was open, the shutters broken
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Alfie on February 07, 2017, 11:07:34 AM
You need to understand the difference between the game of chinese whispers and reports of a one to one non whispered conversation.

Jon Corner reporting what Kate told him;

She said, 'They’ve broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl'.

Trish Cameron;

Gerry said the window was open, the shutters broken
I think you need to stop deliberately misunderstanding MY meaning if you think by using the phrase "Chinese Whispers" I meant Gerry was engaged with a game with his family members that night, FGS.   You know damn well what I meant. 
Title: Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
Post by: Brietta on February 07, 2017, 11:13:36 AM
Bottom line.

No verification of the window being open before 10 pm.

No scratch or scuff marks on the window, or surroundings.

That won't change.

You mean the green algae wasn't scuffed?  LOL  Thought that one had finally been laid to rest.  It was a concrete window ledge ... why on earth would it be scratched o