Statistically...what are the chances that Maddie was abducted..

[Sherlock Holmes]

Certainly, if "sick" means a disturbed mind. But disturbed minds don't orchestrate campaigns unless they have all powers.
The McCanns don't fit in here. Actually who sees them first doesn't notice them and then finds them quite modest, very different of what they are in interviews. They have learnt how to behave in front of cameras and they obviously like it, not because they enjoy their celebrity, but because they have an opportunity to enact verbally their story. Imo.

Interesting point Anne. I will ask the higher-ups to move it onto the new thread. (Though mercifully John appears to be quite busy at the moment!)

[Mr Gray]

Certainly, if "sick" means a disturbed mind. But disturbed minds don't orchestrate campaigns unless they have all powers.
The McCanns don't fit in here. Actually who sees them first doesn't notice them and then finds them quite modest, very different of what they are in interviews. They have learnt how to behave in front of cameras and they obviously like it, not because they enjoy their celebrity, but because they have an opportunity to enact verbally their story. Imo.

I think you have everything back to front...they have learnt to behave in front of a camera because they want to find out what has happened to their daughter

[Eleanor]

True... but we already saw their very weak choice of witnesses, for example. Didn't seem to advance their arguments much.

And all of Amaral's witnesses bar one were personal friends.  Which The Judge made a point of establishing.

But this is all beside the point.  Proving Distress and proving Bias of Witnesses are two different things.

And who would you expect The McCanns to call to prove their distress?

Or perhaps more to the point, who would you expect Amaral to call?

[Mr Gray]

True... but we already saw their very weak choice of witnesses, for example. Didn't seem to advance their arguments much.

 those who seemed to understand what is going on have said that much of the evidence has already been submitted to the judge. Amarals witnesses were very poor from what I read of the reports

[Redblossom]

This is a much abused statistic,,,adults who harm children are rarely the biological parents...have alcohol/drug issues...are in abusive relationships and so on....The McCanns do not fit this profile

Tosh

[Redblossom]

those who seemed to understand what is going on have said that much of the evidence has already been submitted to the judge. Amarals witnesses were very poor from what I read of the reports

Youre in for a massive shock by the looks...oh well........

[Mr Gray]

Tosh

 you really haven't  a clue re statistics of  harm by family...no wonder all your conclusions are so far out

[Redblossom]

you really haven't  a clue re statistics of  harm by family...no wonder all your conclusions are so far out

Post them then.......all statistics say strangers are in the minute mnority...you cant change facts much as you would like to....its you who is back to front

[Redblossom]

And all of Amaral's witnesses bar one were personal friends.  Which The Judge made a point of establishing.

But this is all beside the point.  Proving Distress and proving Bias of Witnesses are two different things.

And who would you expect The McCanns to call to prove their distress?

Or perhaps more to the point, who would you expect Amaral to call?

All of the mccanns witnesses were a joke.....look forward to the spin on their loss

[Mr Gray]

Post them then.......all statistics say strangers are in the minute mnority...you cant change facts much as you would like to....its you who is back to front

 the reason children are rarely harmed by strangers is that they are normally under the protection of their loving family. When the family is not loving...moms new boyfriend is abusive and takes heroin then this is where most of the harm occurs.
If a child is not under the care of their family...asleep  in a holiday appt....then the chances of harm from  a stranger is far greater

[Redblossom]

the reason children are rarely harmed by strangers is that they are normally under the protection of their loving family. When the family is not loving...moms new boyfriend is abusive and takes heroin then this is where most of the harm occurs.
If a child is not under the care of their family...asleep  in a holiday appt....then the chances of harm from  a stranger is far greater

most harm is from family and family friends and not strangers..yu got it back to front.......again

[Mr Gray]

most harm is from family and family friends and not strangers..yu got it back to front.......again

Most harm is from a small group of dysfunctional families and friends..

[Redblossom]

Most harm is from a small group of dysfunctional families and friends..

No not a small group 90 per cent plus of all abuse and or kidnap victims......so hot small, but a MAJORITY ie parents family and or family friends...fact

[slartibartfast]

Most harm is from a small group of dysfunctional families and friends..

Very true...

[Angelo222]

And all of Amaral's witnesses bar one were personal friends.  Which The Judge made a point of establishing.

But this is all beside the point.  Proving Distress and proving Bias of Witnesses are two different things.

And who would you expect The McCanns to call to prove their distress?

Or perhaps more to the point, who would you expect Amaral to call?

It is a libel case, it has nothing to do with distress.  The McCanns have to prove that what Mr Amaral published in his book was untruthful and damaged their reputations.  I have seen and heard nothing from any McCann witness which could in any way support this claim.

If Madeleine was found alive and well tomorrow he would be screwed but as it is his theory is no more or no less valid than the McCanns is.