Author Topic: Sceptics beliefs ?  (Read 67852 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #600 on: April 08, 2019, 10:55:05 PM »
In the same way that any other evidence would, obviously.  It is an important part of the jigsaw as it potentially shows that the apartment was enetered illegally and shows how.  I canít believe I am having to explain it to you, frankly.  Letís turn this on its head.  Imagine Gerry McCann is charged with faking an abduction.  Would the open window and shutters be evidence of that, or not as there is no corroborating evidence?

It's not how that's important, it's who.
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #601 on: April 08, 2019, 11:11:23 PM »
It's not how that's important, it's who.
Of course how is important.  How the crime was committed.  Tell me why this is not important to establish in a court of law then?
"The answer is that no-one here believes the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance" - G-Unit.

Offline Robittybob1

  • Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 20867
  • Total likes: 3281
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
    • The Lord Jesus - search for Madeleine McCann
Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #602 on: April 08, 2019, 11:24:31 PM »
No it wouldn't be disallowed as it was an observation according to Kate McCann, problem is though that only her fingerprints were identified on the window.  A claimed open window is not evidence that any intruder entered the apartment and removed a child.
Yet we are told that the window was cleaned on Wednesday, so if the "burglar" wiped the window clean of their fingerprints who would be the wiser.  Wipe marks are wipe marks and no one can tell if they were done Thursday night or Wednesday.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #603 on: April 08, 2019, 11:31:26 PM »
Of course how is important.  How the crime was committed.  Tell me why this is not important to establish in a court of law then?

They are trying to prove abduction. If they can't place the accused in the apartment it doesn't matter how he gained entry, does it?
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline Robittybob1

  • Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 20867
  • Total likes: 3281
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
    • The Lord Jesus - search for Madeleine McCann
Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #604 on: April 08, 2019, 11:37:03 PM »
They are trying to prove abduction. If they can't place the accused in the apartment it doesn't matter how he gained entry, does it?
That is the reason I think the abduction was more a result of Madeleine being out on the footpath looking for Mum and Dad, rather than there being an intruder.  It would have only required some management type person to close the door at the reception (for security) to make it impossible for Madeleine to enter the Tapas area.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2019, 11:39:39 PM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #605 on: April 08, 2019, 11:49:20 PM »
They are trying to prove abduction. If they can't place the accused in the apartment it doesn't matter how he gained entry, does it?
What if he can be placed in the vicinity of the apartment?  What if the accused has a criminal history of breaking and entering ground floor flats in a similar manner? 

Let me ask you this:  you arrive home one evening to find the sash window in you bedroom pushed up, not how you left it.  Nothing in the bedroom appears to be disturbed but then you realise that your great grandadís gold pocket watch is missing from its place in your bedside table.  Do you discount the open window as evidence that the watch was stolen by an intruder because it cannot be corroborated by dna or fingerprints?  Must you keep all possibilities on the table, eg you slept walked and put the watch in the bin the night before, or one of your kids played with it, broke it and threw it away, the ghost of your great grandfather spirited it away, all possibilities being equally likely despite the fact the window was not found as you left it?
"The answer is that no-one here believes the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance" - G-Unit.

Offline Faithlilly

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #606 on: April 09, 2019, 12:09:05 AM »
More than enough given everything else that we know.

Not for me. The item the dogs were given to smell would have to be proved to have been Madeleineís and as she walked that way probably many times how could you be specific in regard to when the scent was left ?
« Last Edit: April 09, 2019, 12:59:58 AM by Faithlilly »
#Borishasfailed

Offline G-Unit

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #607 on: April 09, 2019, 12:24:30 AM »
What if he can be placed in the vicinity of the apartment?  What if the accused has a criminal history of breaking and entering ground floor flats in a similar manner? 

Let me ask you this:  you arrive home one evening to find the sash window in you bedroom pushed up, not how you left it.  Nothing in the bedroom appears to be disturbed but then you realise that your great grandadís gold pocket watch is missing from its place in your bedside table.  Do you discount the open window as evidence that the watch was stolen by an intruder because it cannot be corroborated by dna or fingerprints?  Must you keep all possibilities on the table, eg you slept walked and put the watch in the bin the night before, or one of your kids played with it, broke it and threw it away, the ghost of your great grandfather spirited it away, all possibilities being equally likely despite the fact the window was not found as you left it?

You seem to be moving the goalposts now. 
Accept nothing
Believe no-one
Confirm everything

Offline Robittybob1

  • Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 20867
  • Total likes: 3281
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
    • The Lord Jesus - search for Madeleine McCann
Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #608 on: April 09, 2019, 12:35:05 AM »
What if he can be placed in the vicinity of the apartment?  What if the accused has a criminal history of breaking and entering ground floor flats in a similar manner? 

Let me ask you this:  you arrive home one evening to find the sash window in you bedroom pushed up, not how you left it.  Nothing in the bedroom appears to be disturbed but then you realise that your great grandadís gold pocket watch is missing from its place in your bedside table.  Do you discount the open window as evidence that the watch was stolen by an intruder because it cannot be corroborated by dna or fingerprints?  Must you keep all possibilities on the table, eg you slept walked and put the watch in the bin the night before, or one of your kids played with it, broke it and threw it away, the ghost of your great grandfather spirited it away, all possibilities being equally likely despite the fact the window was not found as you left it?
Personally I think it would be a mistake to link the two observations together, if the watch was out of reach from the open window, and it appeared from forensic evidence no one accessed the open window.  The two events are coincidental and not linked by evidence.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #609 on: April 09, 2019, 07:14:09 AM »
You seem to be moving the goalposts now.
. Perhaps you eould like to explain how my scenario ďmoves the goalpostsĒ? It is exactly the same as the Madeleine case, only difference is what was taken.
"The answer is that no-one here believes the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance" - G-Unit.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #610 on: April 09, 2019, 07:15:39 AM »
Personally I think it would be a mistake to link the two observations together, if the watch was out of reach from the open window, and it appeared from forensic evidence no one accessed the open window.  The two events are coincidental and not linked by evidence.
So you would not cite the open (previously closed) window as evidence that you were robbed?
"The answer is that no-one here believes the parents were directly involved in MM's disappearance" - G-Unit.

Offline The General

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #611 on: April 09, 2019, 08:40:36 AM »
So you would not cite the open (previously closed) window as evidence that you were robbed?
Let's apply that logic to the case in question: wouldn't you cite the fact that there was a total absence of evidence of any sort that an abduction had taken place as evidence that an abduction had not taken place?
Something / someone is missing, there's circumstantial evidence in one, there's none in the other.
Most Deleted Posts 2019
Most Moderated Member 2019
Most Moderated Member 2020
On Perpetual Mod Watch

Offline Robittybob1

  • Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 20867
  • Total likes: 3281
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
    • The Lord Jesus - search for Madeleine McCann
Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #612 on: April 09, 2019, 08:58:35 AM »
So you would not cite the open (previously closed) window as evidence that you were robbed?
You might, but in reality I think you'd be blaming the wrong person.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Robittybob1

  • Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 20867
  • Total likes: 3281
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
    • The Lord Jesus - search for Madeleine McCann
Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #613 on: April 09, 2019, 09:00:45 AM »
Let's apply that logic to the case in question: wouldn't you cite the fact that there was a total absence of evidence of any sort that an abduction had taken place as evidence that an abduction had not taken place?
Something / someone is missing, there's circumstantial evidence in one, there's none in the other.
I for one do not get what you mean. 
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline jassi

Re: Sceptics beliefs ?
« Reply #614 on: April 09, 2019, 09:06:50 AM »
So you would not cite the open (previously closed) window as evidence that you were robbed?
You probably would , but it wouldn't exclude the possibility that you had staged the event and taken the watch for an insurance scam.
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -   Into year 13 and still no solution.