The test of reasonableness

[patb]

As a new memebr to the forum, its clear that some members are very assertive in their feelings and own beleifs. Also, sometimes its easy to get bogged down in the small detail (not saying that these are not important) but it can be useful to step back. The test of reasonableness applies in that, even though we are talking about an extaordinary event, it took place within the context of our life and society as we know it with all of the norms that that implies.
So, for example, is it resonable to think that a child abductor would plan to take a young girl and carry her in his or her  arms in plain sight down the road? (compared to a car for example) compared to is it reasonable for a father to collect their child from a local late night creche and carry them back to their holiday accomadation The first concept was always exptremely unlikely IMHO (even before we had the evidence that the latter was true). Of course it was possible but with such little other evidence, the possible but unlikely was turned into a liklely until dissproven (which it now seems is).
If we carry this forward and applie this to the second possible sighting, we have to apply the same principle, even though we are still waiting to see if it is proved or disproved. It is just not reasonable under the circumstances for a child adbustor to plan and act that way. So it is rational to look at what is a reasonable explanation under those circumstances ie the second sighting is spurious (like the first) or it is the actions of someone who never had the opportunity to create a plan and/or it is the actions of someone who is behaving very stragely (even within that context) caused by stress/anger/guilt/panic etc
Ready to be shot down completely in flames as seems to be the trend with some on this forum.

[Puffin]

Interesting. 

[pathfinder73]

Agreed. If someone was to abduct a child they would want to getaway from the crime scene as quick as possible so a vehicle being involved would be my first thought.

[Carew]

Since it was usual for a parent to carry a sleepy child back to the holiday apartment at night from the night-time crèche .........it would not have been noticeable for an abductor to be in similar mode within the complex......Sort of "hiding in plain sight"

[pathfinder73]

With the risk of the child waking up and screaming for her parents. Very risky and doesn't make sense to me.

[icabodcrane]

I don't see how you can be  'shot down'  for making such a sensible suggestion patb

I take it you are asking us to apply common sense to those aspects of this case which remain  'unproven'

They will either be :

1  Unproven -   likely


Or


2  Unproven -   unlikely


This is a good measure of logic,  I think ... thankyou

[patb]

Since it was usual for a parent to carry a sleepy child back to the holiday apartment at night from the night-time crèche .........it would not have been noticeable for an abductor to be in similar mode within the complex......Sort of "hiding in plain sight"

Either trust that the child will remain asleep, or drug her (with all the complications that brings) or use a car. No matter which way you look at it, anyone with basic common sense and the luxury of planning in advance would use a car. Once you accept that logic, the next stage would be to say that its rational not to use a car that is registered in your name so then we must consider the use of a hire car (hired using false ID), stolen car, false plates or borrowed in some way.

[Angelo222]

Welcome pat.   I agree with you about being reasonable and also about a car or van being involved.

An opportunist in my opinion may very well have carried her off but would have been seen.  Nobody walks the length of a village without being seen by someone so that is why I feel it unreasonable to assume that just because the Tanner sighting has been discredited that the Smithman should be any different.  My view is that they are both not what they once seemed, they are both red herrings.

A professional child abductor would have planned the snatch to the finest detail.  A motor vehicle was essential as was creating a diversion for the only police patrol in the area.  A pretend robbery near Odiaxere would be perfect since it took the police to their outer patrol area and would distract them long enough for the perpetrators to get clean away.

[Angelo222]

With the risk of the child waking up and screaming for her parents. Very risky and doesn't make sense to me.

Very good point which nobody has yet mentioned. 

[AnneGuedes]

Very good point which nobody has yet mentioned. 

It has been mentioned, Angelo. In strange arms, in the cold and with nothing more than a pjm, even a toddler would wake up. SYman's child wasn't screaming because it was in his father's arms.

[AnneGuedes]

My view is that they are both not what they once seemed, they are both red herrings.

I don't agree with this, it is very likely that the 3/4yrs, medium blond white girl spotted by independent witnesses was Madeleine.
Smithman can't have gone very far after crossing the Smiths because he was entering a part of the PDL where he had more chances to meet people, whereas taking Escola Primaria the risks were weak (had he taken Primeiro de Maio he would certainly have been spotted).

[patb]

Not screaming due to:

1. she was awake/drowsy but it was father or someone she trusted who comforted her
2. she was drugged
3. it wasn't her
4. she was dead

cant think of any other options. We have no firm evidence re any of these other than there is no reasonable explanation as to why an abductor would put themselves at such great risk when cars are easy to come by. Therefore option 2 does not apply IMHO and option 4 does not apply to an abductor. Option 3 has to be the most likely with option 1 the next most likely. IMHO

 

[patb]

by saying it is lilely to be her, the implications are that it is lilely she was abducted by someone who thought the best plan was to drug her and carry her through the streets in plain sight (which in my view is very hard to beleive just on a common sense basis) or its likely she was being carried by someone she trusted. So therefore it was someone she trusted (with all that implies). Considering that the venue is popular with families, all you need are 2 or 3 kids being carried by men in that area and just by pure maths, even if she was in the area, its more likely that it was another kid.
On a roll here but am I right in saying that it was within the UK academic year? as this would have an effect on how many 3 to 4 year olds were in the area compared to school hols where, as a proportionan, many older kids would be around. Hols are so much cheaper during this time for young families.

[Cariad]

by saying it is lilely to be her, the implications are that it is lilely she was abducted by someone who thought the best plan was to drug her and carry her through the streets in plain sight (which in my view is very hard to beleive just on a common sense basis) or its likely she was being carried by someone she trusted. So therefore it was someone she trusted (with all that implies). Considering that the venue is popular with families, all you need are 2 or 3 kids being carried by men in that area and just by pure maths, even if she was in the area, its more likely that it was another kid.
On a roll here but am I right in saying that it was within the UK academic year? as this would have an effect on how many 3 to 4 year olds were in the area compared to school hols where, as a proportionan, many older kids would be around. Hols are so much cheaper during this time for young families.

Easter half term was really early in 2007. I remember that the children were off school on April the 3rd. I don't know if that was the beginning or end of the holidays, but it's only two weeks at Easter so they'd be back by may anyway.

That applies to England and Wales. Scotland has different Holidays. I don't know about Ireland or the rest of Europe.

[Carew]

With the risk of the child waking up and screaming for her parents. Very risky and doesn't make sense to me.

The risk of Madeleine waking and screaming for her parents during a "stranger abduction" was a risk from the word go though.........at any time...........and the prospect of being caught by "checkers" makes it all the more puzzling why Madeleine would be selected in the first place.