The facts: Madeleine McCann is alive and well or a long time deceased.

[faithlilly]

I'm not disputing that - in fact I agree, but that's not what you said. 

You don't appear to have any faith (no pun intended) in the review because of what you perceive as SY's 'inexperience' in these cases, and yet you are encouraging the public to demand exactly the same review for Ben by exactly the same people - who you have no faith in.   That makes no sense to me.


I don't have any faith in the review because I don't believe that Redwood and his team have any real evidence to justify the claim that Madeleine is alive. That is not to say that reviewing the case was not appropriate.

 

 


   

[Benice]

Faithlilly said:-
I don't have any faith in the review because I don't believe that Redwood and his team have any real evidence to justify the claim that Madeleine is alive. That is not to say that reviewing the case was not appropriate.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IIRC there is no actual evidence that Ben was abducted,  but as there is also no evidence that he is dead, then IMO Andy Redwod would hold the same opinion about him as he does about Madeleine -  for the same reasons.   

[faithlilly]

Faithlilly said:-
I don't have any faith in the review because I don't believe that Redwood and his team have any real evidence to justify the claim that Madeleine is alive. That is not to say that reviewing the case was not appropriate.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IIRC there is no actual evidence that Ben was abducted,  but as there is also no evidence that he is dead, then IMO Andy Redwod would hold the same opinion about him as he does about Madeleine -  for the same reasons.

Until there is a review of Ben's case we have no idea what evidence there already is or what evidence the review will uncover.

In the case of the SY review however Redwood and his team have already spent over two years trawling through the amassed evidence and found absolutely nothing to definitively prove Madeleine is alive therefore with his undoubted experience in such cases why is he publicly claiming there is a good chance the child is alive when, in all likelihood, she is long dead.

[John]

Faithlilly said:-
I don't have any faith in the review because I don't believe that Redwood and his team have any real evidence to justify the claim that Madeleine is alive. That is not to say that reviewing the case was not appropriate.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IIRC there is no actual evidence that Ben was abducted,  but as there is also no evidence that he is dead, then IMO Andy Redwod would hold the same opinion about him as he does about Madeleine -  for the same reasons.

I agree with your comments to some extent but there is a huge difference between Ben and Madeleine and that is that the latter has a very distinctive eye defect which can never be covered up.  That fact alone means that she can never integrate with the general population for fear of being discovered.

[sadie]

I agree with your comments to some extent but there is a huge difference between Ben and Madeleine and that is that the latter has a very distinctive eye defect which can never be covered up.  That fact alone means that she can never integrate with the general population for fear of being discovered.

It can be covered, and regularly is by people with that defect, using special lenses.  SY are aware

[AnneGuedes]

I don't have any faith in the review because I don't believe that Redwood and his team have any real evidence to justify the claim that Madeleine is alive. That is not to say that reviewing the case was not appropriate.

I don't have either, simply because the dice were loaded from the very beginning. No decent review would not only bypass the conclusions of the AG but ignore the rejected reconstruction he requested.
The politically correct answer to the PM's order was to find an abducted child who was, as her parents said, very likely alive. It wasn't to keep an open mind.
I observe that more than 2 years after, SY's tone isn't as firm as it was on the alive topic, though the tax payers' opinion requires Mr Redwood's claiming there's a big chance Madeleine's alive (since there's no evidence of her being harmed by the Big Bad Woolf et patati et patata).

[sadie]

I don't have either, simply because the dice were loaded from the very beginning. No decent review would not only bypass the conclusions of the AG but ignore the rejected reconstruction he requested.
The politically correct answer to the PM's order was to find an abducted child who was, as her parents said, very likely alive. It wasn't to keep an open mind.
I observe that more than 2 years after, SY's tone isn't as firm as it was on the alive topic, though the tax payers' opinion requires Mr Redwood's claiming there's a big chance Madeleine's alive (since there's no evidence of her being harmed by the Big Bad Woolf et patati et patata).

None of us know for sure whether Madeleine is alive, but there is no reason to believe her dead. 

She must be looked for properly ... which is something which didn't happen under Amarals leadership cos he immediately decided that the Mccanns had done it .  Idiot with such golden witnesses.
That's the reason he gives us anyhow.

[AnneGuedes]

If Madeleine wasn't abducted is there any chance she's alive ? No, unless some she-woolf took her in and she became a wild child.
Is there a problem if she wasn't abducted and unfortunately died ? A big problem.
Who has the courage to face it ?

[sadie]

If Madeleine wasn't abducted is there any chance she's alive ? No, unless some she-woolf took her in and she became a wild child.
Is there a problem if she wasn't abducted and unfortunately died ? A big problem.
Who has the courage to face it ?

Rubbish Anne.  None of us know for sure whether she is alive, or not.  Cant think why you are pushing that unless you dont want her searched for?

Everyone in authority accepts that there is nothing to point to her having been killed, or died .... so why do you keep on?
What's in it for you to keep pushing it? 

There has to be a reason for pushing it.    There is a reason for everything

Care to enlighten us?

[Benice]

I don't have either, simply because the dice were loaded from the very beginning. No decent review would not only bypass the conclusions of the AG but ignore the rejected reconstruction he requested.The politically correct answer to the PM's order was to find an abducted child who was, as her parents said, very likely alive. It wasn't to keep an open mind.
I observe that more than 2 years after, SY's tone isn't as firm as it was on the alive topic, though the tax payers' opinion requires Mr Redwood's claiming there's a big chance Madeleine's alive (since there's no evidence of her being harmed by the Big Bad Woolf et patati et patata).

It would seem that SY agreed with the AG, insomuch as there is no evidence against the McCanns - which is why the status of Arguido was lifted and why SY have ruled them and their friends out of the equation.  The same goes for Robert Murat.

SY have done their own 'virtual' reconstruction which has proved there was a window of opportunity for an abduction to have happened.   They have the equipment/softwear to do that - so what is the problem?

Personally I would love to know how they do these virtual reconstructions - I remember being very impressed by one many years ago abut JFK's assassination.      I'm also presuming the equipment used by SY today is even more superior to what it was then.

[faithlilly]

Rubbish Anne.  None of us know for sure whether she is alive, or not.  Cant think why you are pushing that unless you dont want her searched for?

Everyone in authority accepts that there is nothing to point to her having been killed, or died .... so why do you keep on?
What's in it for you to keep pushing it? 

There has to be a reason for pushing it.    There is a reason for everything

Care to enlighten us?

Can't think why you are defending the McCanns if they are no longer accused of anything.

Care to enlighten us ?

[sadie]

Can't think why you are defending the McCanns if they are no longer accused of anything.

Care to enlighten us ?

Sure, my pleasure

I see people deliberately besmirching their names.  With absolutely nothing to go on, except feelings and myths.

I believe in justice.  If the Mccanns did it then they should be taken to task

BUT there is nothing at all to point to them being implicated in any way.  In fact the pointers are to an abductor

They are innocent of any wrong doing.  FULL stop.

I always will support peeps against injustice.  That is my MO.

[sadie]

Anne, or Faith

Your turn. 

None of us know for sure whether Madeleine is alive, or not.  Anne, cant think why you are pushing that unless you dont want her searched for?

Everyone in authority accepts that there is nothing to point to her having been killed, or died .... so why do you keep on?
What's in it for you to keep pushing it? 

There has to be a reason for pushing it.    There is a reason for everything

Care to enlighten us?

Your turn .......

[sadie]

Anne, or Faith

Your turn. 

None of us know for sure whether Madeleine is alive, or not.  Anne, cant think why you are pushing that unless you dont want her searched for?

Everyone in authority accepts that there is nothing to point to her having been killed, or died .... so why do you keep on?
What's in it for you to keep pushing it? 

There has to be a reason for pushing it.    There is a reason for everything

Care to enlighten us?

Your turn .......

I enlightened you an hour ago and asked the initial question before that


Care to enlighten us? 

Or would you find that too difficult?

[faithlilly]

I enlightened you an hour ago and asked the initial question before that


Care to enlighten us? 

Or would you find that too difficult?

No and err no.