Was it really just like being in the garden while kids slept upstairs?.

[John]

How is it sexist Sadie?  It is a factual comment followed by a speculation.

[icabodcrane]

Have you no reasoning skills, Icabod?

Entry to an upstairs flat, necessarily via the front door cos the windows were inaccessible.  The door was undamaged.  Do you think the burglars were wizards, or something?  Out of Harry potter?

How the hell do you think they got in via a locked door with no damage to the door?  Either keys or a skilled lock picker .... abit risking to be in a block of flats picking locks, dont you think?  Especially as in holiday flats the pickings were likely to be poor.

Use that brain of yours.  You are no idiot, but seems you like to appear one.

ahh,   I see 

There  IS  no actual evidence that front door keys were used in burglaries in the resort   ....  that is just something else you  'imagine'  happened 

Which is fine sadie  ...  you are free to imagine anything you like,  but you really shouldn't  present it as  though it were  something that has been established as fact 

[sadie]

ahh,   I see 

There  IS  no actual evidence that front door keys were used in burglaries in the resort   ....  that is just something else you  'imagine'  happened 

Which is fine sadie  ...  you are free to imagine anything you like,  but you really shouldn't  present it as  though it were  something that has been established as fact

Time to use your brains, Icabod.

Have realised that you dont have much logic, but now you are being silly.

Nit picking ... very silly.

Somebody picking locks in a block of flats with little to gain?  Potentially trapped on an upper floor, whilst you are trying to pick those locks?  You have seen the keys?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/notwkey.jpg

Would be rather tricky, dont you think, with all those levers around the central shaft.
Use those brains, Icabod.



Why is it that you are so keen that the front door wasn't used?  You haven't properly explained that ... you have just waffled.

Some sound reason please Icabod.

[John]

Please behave girls...some of us are trying to sleep!!!!   

[icabodcrane]

Time to use your brains, Icabod.

Have realised that you dont have much logic, but now you are being silly.

Nit picking ... very silly.

Somebody picking locks in a block of flats with little to gain?  Potentially trapped on an upper floor, whilst you are trying to pick those locks?  You have seen the keys?

http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/notwkey.jpg

Would be rather tricky, dont you think, with all those levers around the central shaft.
Use those brains, Icabod.



Why is it that you are so keen that the front door wasn't used?  You haven't properly explained that ... you have just waffled.

Some sound reason please Icabod.

I am not  'keen'  that the front door wasn't used  ...  I am simply pointing out that there is not a shred of evidence that proves it was

You just  'imagine'  it was  ... that is all

[icabodcrane]

Please behave girls...some of us are trying to sleep!!!!   

Get your head down John  ...  you deserve some kip after all the work you've been doing with Anne's reports

very grateful here   

[Lyall]

.
What are you going on about Lyall?  More silly wwumming?  Time wasting?

You said:

Even Amaral, your GOD, said that Kate and Gerry and group were so close that no-body would risk going in that way

You've been asked to provide evidence he said this, but you haven't. >@@(*&)

[Lyall]

I have answered this three or four times already on this thread.  Just stop the wumming

Large rectangles of ight suddenly appearing would attract attention

Just stop the time wasting.

As I have explained evidence (i.e. police statements, all of them) suggest this isn't true, because nobody saw Oldfield using the patio doors.

Your claims about 'rectangles of light' isn't evidence, it's just your opinion, and an opinion shared by nobody else - including the McCanns themselves.

Give it up Sadie. Go back to your other magic bullet theory about how an observer could see G McCann coming down the stairs from the apartment, but couldn't see him talking to JW a few feet away. Or hear him.

[sadie]

I am not  'keen'  that the front door wasn't used  ...  I am simply pointing out that there is not a shred of evidence that proves it was

You just  'imagine'  it was  ... that is all

Nobody is talking about actual evidence, but there are loads of pointers that the front door is far more likely than the patio doors.  Yet you guys keep on, and on, about the Patio doors and ignore the likely

It is silly to talk about evidence per se, because if there was any solid evidence then the Police would have found their job much more easy.

One has to analyse the pros and cons for each entrance and when the pointers stack up in favour of the front door and the cons stack up against the patio door, one has to take notice ... or just back off.  That is if one is interested.

You purport to be interested, yet won't make the necessary effort to analyse ... or listen ... and take pointers on board.

I cant understand why you dont make the effort.  Maybe all you want to do is pull me down and waste my time ... just as a silly exercise?

[C.Edwards]

Nobody is talking about actual evidence, but there are loads of pointers that the front door is far more likely than the patio doors.  Yet you guys keep on, and on, about the Patio doors and ignore the likely

It is silly to talk about evidence per se, because if there was any solid evidence then the Police would have found their job much more easy.

One has to analyse the pros and cons for each entrance and when the pointers stack up in favour of the front door and the cons stack up against the patio door, one has to take notice ... or just back off.  That is if one is interested.

You purport to be interested, yet won't make the necessary effort to analyse ... or listen ... and take pointers on board.

I cant understand why you dont make the effort.  Maybe all you want to do is pull me down and waste my time ... just as a silly exercise?

No, it's because you have pet theories that you like to present as facts because they fit your agenda. No-one else has to find your "most likely" (and unevidenced) theories to be the most likely to them.  If you could just accept this (you've been doing this ever since I was first on here and show no signs of stopping) you'd get embroiled in far less knicker twisting.

[sadie]

You said:

Even Amaral, your GOD, said that Kate and Gerry and group were so close that no-body would risk going in that way

You've been asked to provide evidence he said this, but you haven't. >@@(*&)

I am not going to waste the time to search.  It was on record, many people saw it.  It's up to you whether you believe it or not.

Others who have seen it will know it is true.

As a clue if you wish to see it, it was at the time when Amaral suddenly said nobody could have got into apartment 5A, therefore Madeleine must have died in there ... and all sorts of silly twaddle like that.


This was immediately after he had been "shouting from the rooftops" that Jane Tanner didn't see bundleman cos the abductor went off in a westerly direction. 

Eyes roll ! 

Jeez!  Amaral was a genius at changing facts to suit his latest theory

Either he left

[sadie]

No, it's because you have pet theories that you like to present as facts because they fit your agenda. No-one else has to find your "most likely" (and unevidenced) theories to be the most likely to them.  If you could just accept this (you've been doing this ever since I was first on here and show no signs of stopping) you'd get embroiled in far less knicker twisting.

Nice one Ced ... knicker twisting ... gutter language


Everything I say, has facts behind it.

Am I to sit her day in and day out reading lies from a group whose seemingly only concern is to put me down?  To destroy hard facts and pointers that emolate from them?  So that they can flood the internet with more lies and myths?

Still I remember you from before

[Lyall]

I am not going to waste the time to search.  It was on record, many people saw it.  It's up to you whether you believe it or not.

Others who have seen it will know it is true.

As a clue if you wish to see it, it was at the time when Amaral suddenly said nobody could have got into apartment 5A, therefore Madeleine must have died in there ... and all sorts of silly twaddle like that.


This was immediately after he had been "shouting from the rooftops" that Jane Tanner didn't see bundleman cos the abductor went off in a westerly direction. 

Eyes roll ! 

Jeez!  Amaral was a genius at changing facts to suit his latest theory

Either he left

You need this information at your fingertips, Sadie

[icabodcrane]

Nobody is talking about actual evidence, but there are loads of pointers that the front door is far more likely than the patio doors.  Yet you guys keep on, and on, about the Patio doors and ignore the likely

It is silly to talk about evidence per se, because if there was any solid evidence then the Police would have found their job much more easy.

One has to analyse the pros and cons for each entrance and when the pointers stack up in favour of the front door and the cons stack up against the patio door, one has to take notice ... or just back off.  That is if one is interested.

You purport to be interested, yet won't make the necessary effort to analyse ... or listen ... and take pointers on board.

I cant understand why you dont make the effort.  Maybe all you want to do is pull me down and waste my time ... just as a silly exercise?

But sadie,  if you are going to take that approach  (  that  'pointers'   rather than  'actual evidence'  are relevant  ),     then we must acknowledge that the cadaver dog's alerts  probably  'pointed'  to a dead body having been in the apartment    (  and just ignore the fact there is no  'actual evidence'  to support  it  ) 

You cannot cherry-pick which  'pointers'  to accept and which to reject