Would the abductors have handed Madeleine over to others some distance away?

[Mrs. B]

I think it was a pre-planned abduction, I don't think the person who abducted her was the same person that took her out of the country. They had to meet somewhere, meeting place & time had been pre-arranged.

[John]

I think it was a pre-planned abduction, I don't think the person who abducted her was the same person that took her out of the country. They had to meet somewhere, meeting place & time had been pre-arranged.

An interesting thought Mrs B.  Certainly worthy of its own thread.

Handing his prize over to others from out with the immediate vicinity would certainly have allowed the abductor to return to the scene but what of his identity?  He knew he had been seen!

[stephen25000]

Yet again, this presumption, an abductor.

No proof for, just a couple of sightings of a person(s) carrying a child in their arms, which contradict each other.

So having seen a man tonight carrying a young child in his arms, I therefore must presume logically they are an abductor ?

Have any people ion this forum never see an adult carrying a child in their arms ?

It beggars belief that the cornerstone of the abduction theory comes down to this.

[Mrs. B]

I don't think the abductor returned to the scene of the crime afterwards, he'd already been paid by then - job done. I think he quietly slipped away & made sure he was not seen in the area again. If it was the same person as the Smith's saw, he'd been seen not only once, but twice. Far too risky for him to stay around.

ETA Having ONE person identified as carrying a child & not coming forward to identify himself in a major criminal investigation is odd enough, but TWO?

[DCI]

I don't think the abductor returned to the scene of the crime afterwards, he'd already been paid by then - job done. I think he quietly slipped away & made sure he was not seen in the area again. If it was the same person as the Smith's saw, he'd been seen not only once, but twice. Far too risky for him to stay around.

ETA Having ONE person identified as carrying a child & not coming forward to identify himself in a major criminal investigation is odd enough, but TWO?

Even if it was the same child, being carried, they still had time to get to the boarder before the GNR, got their ass's in gear.
They obviously knew the area well, so would know all the short cuts.

[stephen25000]

Even if it was the same child, being carried, they still had time to get to the boarder before the GNR, got their ass's in gear.
They obviously knew the area well, so would know all the short cuts.

Any evidence for all this hyperbola ?

Another old cherry, but relevant.

Why didn't the 'abductor' take Madeleine's younger sister, smaller and surely easier to carry.

[DCI]

Any evidence for all this hyperbola ?

Another old cherry, but relevant.

Why didn't the 'abductor' take Madeleine's younger sister, smaller and surely easier to carry.

Ask a friend  8-)(--)

[Mrs. B]

Even if it was the same child, being carried, they still had time to get to the boarder before the GNR, got their ass's in gear.
They obviously knew the area well, so would know all the short cuts.

The border is only 150 km away, before midnight you'd been in Spain.

[stephen25000]

Ask a friend  8-)(--)

I see you already have.

[Mrs. B]

Ask a friend  8-)(--)

LOL Some day they really do have to realise that Scotland Yard are of the opinion that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger. Therefore it's perfectly legitimate to discuss the ABDUCTION of Madeleine.

[icabodcrane]

I think it was a pre-planned abduction, I don't think the person who abducted her was the same person that took her out of the country. They had to meet somewhere, meeting place & time had been pre-arranged.

Are you alluding to the fact that the  'abductor'  was still hanging around PDL almost an hour after having snatched a child in order to connect Jane Tanner's statement to that of the Smith family  ?

I don't think it makes much sense

If the abductor had pre-arranged to meet someone  (  in order to hand over the child )  then the meeting would surely have taken place some distance away from the resort.  The abductor would almost certainly have gone directly to the meeting place immediately after taking the child  (  even if it meant he had to wait there for his accomplice to arrive  )

Which then begs the question,  why would his accomplice  not already  be waiting there  ?   

 

[stephen25000]

LOL Some day they really do have to realise that Scotland Yard are of the opinion that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger. Therefore it's perfectly legitimate to discuss the ABDUCTION of Madeleine.

An opinion is merely that, not a fact.

Redwood and co., thought they had Barry George banged to rights.

Wrong on that too.

[Mrs. B]

Makes perfect sense if the child was taken on order, the people involved would be careful not to have close contact. The abductor could not have known the exact time when the opportunity to enter the apartment & take the child away would present itself. He had to take the opportunity when it arose. A pre-planned meeting at a specific time & place to hand over the child to person/s unknown, receive payment & be on his way. The people responsible for transporting the victim may not have been the people who ordered a child matching Madeleine's age & description be taken.

It's called human trafficking, & interestingly enough, Alison Saunders of CPS who travelled to Portugal, has been dealing with these types of crimes before.

[AnneGuedes]

It's called human trafficking, & interestingly enough, Alison Saunders of CPS who travelled to Portugal, has been dealing with these types of crimes before.

Have you a link ?

[AnneGuedes]

Are you alluding to the fact that the  'abductor'  was still hanging around PDL almost an hour after having snatched a child in order to connect Jane Tanner's statement to that of the Smith family  ?

I don't think it makes much sense

If the abductor had pre-arranged to meet someone  (  in order to hand over the child )  then the meeting would surely have taken place some distance away from the resort.  The abductor would almost certainly have gone directly to the meeting place immediately after taking the child  (  even if it meant he had to wait there for his accomplice to arrive  )

Which then begs the question,  why would his accomplice  not already  be waiting there  ?

The exit from PDL is up north on Primeiro de Maio, at the junction with west extremity of Agostinho da Silva, very close to the G5. JTabductor walked east and not west and MSabductor walked south and not north. How can this be explained and what likely happened in the 50 minutes between the two sightings ?