While I do not think that burglars would have stolen Madeleine it is possible that petty thieves operating in the area might lead to some clues as to what happened. They may have knowingly or otherwise been involved in some aspect of Madeleine's disappearance.
And I agree that a criminal would not necessarily stop at one particular type of crime. That goes for petty criminals and more sophisticated criminals who might be protected by the State, for whatever reason.
But to return to the issue of Kate wanting us to believe that Jane Tanner's 'sighting' (which I believe to be fictitious) was similar to that of the Smiths. This is an absurd suggestion. Why? Well, apart from the fact that the descriptions are not that similar and the man held the child in a very different way, there is the little issue of a 45 minute gap.
I mean what abductor worth his salt wanders around a tiny resort holding the abducted child for a minimum of 45 minutes? I mean, that it just nuts....what happened, did the abductor lose his spectacles and get lost, did the get-away car get stuck in mud....did he want to get caught? It's just such a stupid suggestion.
I suppose the Smith sighting was more than a little inconvenient for the McCanns.....so they attempted to merge it together with Jane Tanner's mystery bogey-man.
It's all become more than ridiculous - a right royal McMess with McMurdoch, McMitchell and Farter Cuck looking increasingly demented
Madeleine, RIP.
