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

[Mr Gray]

Where's the evidence davel ?

That's all you have to do.

Give me a definition of evidence first to show you understand the word..ive given mine...you cant debate without ground rules...we need an accepted definition of evidence

[stephen25000]

Look here Stephen, Kate say's she was abducted, so does Gerry. If that is evidence enough for the 'support group' then it should be evidence enough for you too.

 

[stephen25000]

Give me a definition of evidence first to show you understand the word..ive given mine...you cant debate without ground rules...we need an accepted definition of evidence

i.e. There isn't any.

[Mr Gray]

i.e. There isn't any.

isn't any what..evidence ..there is..its just that you don't understand the word...how many times do I have to tell you...whats  YOUR definition of evidence..you haven't got one

[stephen25000]

isn't any what..evidence ..there is..its just that you don't understand the word...how many times do I have to tell you...whats  YOUR definition of evidence..you haven't got one

Your wasting time davel.

[Mr Gray]

Your wasting time davel.

if you cant give a definition of evidence...don't bother replying..of to take the kids to school

[stephen25000]

if you cant give a definition of evidence...don't bother replying..of to take the kids to school

There's nae evidence of abduction davel.

[Cariad]

if you cant give a definition of evidence...don't bother replying..of to take the kids to school

evidence

the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid:

That's what the internet says and I'm happy to agree that it's a valid definition. So what's the evidence?

[sadie]

You really need to stop googling.

Now where is evidence of abduction ?

Others asked  the same question.

P.S. A brief reminder, yet again. A child being carried is not evidence of abduction.

It may not be evidence per se, but it is a strong pointer, having Matt commenting that at 9.30ish, when he checked the Mccann children, he thought a little light was coming through the window.   
For ANY light to come through, the shutters had to be open at that time.


So pointers for your perusal
1.  Gerry checked at about 9.10.  All appeared well.
2.  Jane witnessed a rapidly moving man carrying a child dressed like Madeleine ... and of the same age group.   That was at about 9.15ish  
3.  This man kept his head averted away from Jane all the time, it seems.  Strange !
4.  The way this man was carrying the child was exhausting, so they had NOT come far.
5.  Mrs Caroline Carpenter heard a man whisper / murmur the words "Madeleine, Madeleine".  This was heard en route to their flat, which was in the general direction that Bundleman /Tannerman walked.  Seems it was in the alleyways or near.  This happened at about 9.25ish.  I am doing the time from memory, but it was before 9.30 anyway.
6.  Matt went into 5A at about 9.30ish (memory again).  He recorded that there seemed to be a faint light coming from the window.  No light could have penetrated closed shutters ... so seems that the abduction had already taken place
7.  There are an abundance of statements confirming all these things. 

Such a pity that your record is so stuck, Stephen, that you are totally unable to accept that 8 professionals, all demonstrably loving parents and all free from any criminal involvement, are likely to be telling the truth.

Unexplainably sad that you prefer to believe the words of a proven perjurer (liar), a convicted criminal, than those of a quite large group of almost certainly totally innocent people.  Bereaved people, to boot.

So, Stephen, here we have seven pointers to an abduction having taken place between 9.10 and 9.30ish.  They cannot be ignored.  Too many.... and all referring to a specific 20 minute period

[stephen25000]

It may not be evidence per se, but it is a strong pointer, having Matt commenting that at 9.30ish, when he checked the Mccann children, he thought a little light was coming through the window.   
For ANY light to come through, the shutters had to be open at that time.


So pointers for your perusal
1.  Gerry checked at about 9.10.  All appeared well.
2.  Jane witnessed a rapidly moving man carrying a child dressed like Madeleine ... and of the same age group.   That was at about 9.15ish  
3.  This man kept his head averted away from Jane all the time, it seems.  Strange !
4.  The way this man was carrying the child was exhausting, so they had NOT come far.
5.  Mrs Caroline Carpenter heard a man whisper / murmur the words "Madeleine, Madeleine".  This was heard en route to their flat, which was in the general direction that Bundleman /Tannerman walked.  Seems it was in the alleyways or near.  This happened at about 9.25ish.  I am doing the time from memory, but it was before 9.30 anyway.
6.  Matt went into 5A at about 9.30ish (memory again).  He recorded that there seemed to be a faint light coming from the window.  No light could have penetrated closed shutters ... so seems that the abduction had already taken place
7.  There are an abundance of statements confirming all these things. 

Such a pity that your record is so stuck, Stephen, that you are totally unable to accept that 8 professionals, all demonstrably loving parents and all free from any criminal involvement, are likely to be telling the truth.

Unexplainably sad that you prefer to believe the words of a proven perjurer (liar), a convicted criminal, than those of a quite large group of almost certainly totally innocent people.  Bereaved people, to boot.

So, Stephen, here we have seven pointers to an abduction having taken place between 9.10 and 9.30ish.  They cannot be ignored.  Too many.... and all referring to a specific 20 minute period

Sorry to say sadie.

I'm not interested in your fantasies of defending the mccanns and associates.

As you are blinded for your hate/loathing of Amaral, as you are by your adoration of the mccanns.

Why do you keep referring to the Tanner sighting when it has been refuted ?

The man averted his eyes ?

Any light coming through the shutters ?

Were the shutters perfectly sealed ?


Were any lights on in the apartment ?


Murmur words ???

The power of imagination  ??

[sadie]

No garden sadie.

They were at the Tapas , but you know that.

They were in a superior semi permanent tent like building in the garden, just a wee bit over 50 metres away from their apartment.   The Tapas group were able to see the apartment and patio windows and within hailing distance.    It is an outside restaurant with largely open ends.  Have you been there, Stephen?

[stephen25000]

They were in a superior semi permanent tent like building in the garden, just a wee bit over 50 metres away from their apartment.   The Tapas group were able to see the apartment and patio windows and within hailing distance.    It is an outside restaurant with largely open ends.  Have you been there, Stephen?

You seem to occupy a fantasy world.

It has already been recounted they weren't looking towards thew apartment.

It was dark.

Hailing distance ????

This isn't Star Trek.

[slartibartfast]

sorry dogs alerts arent evidence...according to grime

You have to understand the difference between evidence and Legally admissible evidence. Nothing Sadie mentions is what would be classed as Legal evidence.

[sadie]

You seem to occupy a fantasy world.

It has already been recounted they weren't looking towards thew apartment.

It was dark.

Hailing distance ????

This isn't Star Trek.

The Tapas group were.  They all looked out for each other.  Friends do you know.

Yep.  How many times do I have to tell you that our garden was 50 metres long and our children had no problem making us hear when we were chatting to neighbours over the fence.  None at all.  And Madeleine isn't a shrinking violet, is she?

[stephen25000]

The Tapas group were.  They all looked out for each other.  Friends do you know.

Yep.  How many times do I have to tell you that our garden was 50 metres long and our children had no problem making us hear when we were chatting to neighbours over the fence.  None at all.  And Madeleine isn't a shrinking violet, is she?

You just don't get it, do you ?

They were seated in a direction away from the apartment.

It was night.

Visibility was poor.

They were distracted by talking,eating and drinking.

i.e. Their attention was elsewhere.

As to your last paragraph, what relevance is that ?

Were you boozing and eating as well  ?

Was it at night ?

Get real.