No evidence of any crime by the parents and no evidence of an abduction?

[jassi]

I'm afraid it does require the invention of a T9 conspiracy if the "kid" being "dumped" occurred at the time of the Smiths sighting.

In what way?

[Wonderfulspam]

I'm afraid it does require the invention of a T9 conspiracy if the "kid" being "dumped" occurred at the time of the Smiths sighting.

No, it doesn't.

[Wonderfulspam]

SO you're ruling out the sliding door (for reasons I haven't fully investigated but never mind) but don't say why it is impossible for someone to have gained entry with a spare set of keys or via the window.
 
How about elaborating somewhat on your simple scenario, eg: when was "the kid" dumped?

Do you imagine there was an abductor & that he/she also had some keys?


when was "the kid" dumped?

Probably some time after her death.

[Albertini]

Let us be clear that there was no evidence found (in the opinion of a bureaucrat) to implicate the McCann's in an INCOMPLETE investigation.

Why was that investigation incomplete? Because the McCann's lawyers (helpfully admitted by Clarence Mitchell) blocked them and the group from going back to perform a reconstitution which was required by the Portuguese in order to further the investigation, because the Portuguese police quite rightly required clarification of the events of that night in order to satisfy themselves that the parents and the group were not involved, to then open up the investigation into other areas. 

As a result of this the case is a big box of loose ends.  But that box was created and left there by the McCann's and their friends.

There is a huge difference between saying no evidence was found against the parents at the end of an investigation as opposed to no evidence found in an incomplete one.

Now McCann supporters state that they were right not to go back because they suspected they were being fitted up.

However an even more plausible explanation (given the fact that Portugal is not North Korea and could "fit up" the parents of the most famous missing girl in the world) is that the parents deliberately did not want to perform the reconstitution because they did not want to have to explain the discrepancies to the police.

This is not evidence against the McCann's but it is an "indication" that something is amiss and needs further investigating. In much the same way that the dog alerts were an "indication".

Indications and hypotheses are what police forces work on, which develop or change as more evidence is uncovered.

The ability to uncover more evidence was stopped by the decisions of the McCann's friends in halting the investigation.

[Wonderfulspam]

Let us be clear that there was no evidence found (in the opinion of a bureaucrat) to implicate the McCann's in an INCOMPLETE investigation.

Why was that investigation incomplete? Because the McCann's lawyers (helpfully admitted by Clarence Mitchell) blocked them and the group from going back to perform a reconstitution which was required by the Portuguese in order to further the investigation, because the Portuguese police quite rightly required clarification of the events of that night in order to satisfy themselves that the parents and the group were not involved, to then open up the investigation into other areas. 

As a result of this the case is a big box of loose ends.  But that box was created and left there by the McCann's and their friends.

There is a huge difference between saying no evidence was found against the parents at the end of an investigation as opposed to no evidence found in an incomplete one.

Now McCann supporters state that they were right not to go back because they suspected they were being fitted up.

However an even more plausible explanation (given the fact that Portugal is not North Korea and could "fit up" the parents of the most famous missing girl in the world) is that the parents deliberately did not want to perform the reconstitution because they did not want to have to explain the discrepancies to the police.

This is not evidence against the McCann's but it is an "indication" that something is amiss and needs further investigating. In much the same way that the dog alerts were an "indication".

Indications and hypotheses are what police forces work on, which develop or change as more evidence is uncovered.

The ability to uncover more evidence was stopped by the decisions of the McCann's friends in halting the investigation.

Amen.

[sadie]

Surely you know Sadie the dogs findings needs to be confirmed with corroborating evidence. So the dogs evidence can still be an important part of this case so don't forget it.

But there is none Pathfinder.  NONE

[gilet]

Well of course no-one here can provide evidence that the McCanns are   guilty  of any crime  ...  but you knew that before asking didn't you  ?

What might be more interesting,  I think,   would be a discussion as to whether there is any evidence which might be seen to  implicate  the McCanns   

What do you  think  ?   ...  do you think there is any evidence which might be   'suggestive'  of the McCanns being involved in a crime  ?

Please start a thread on that entirely separate topic and I will be prepared to discuss it there.

[gilet]

Surely you know Sadie the dogs findings needs to be confirmed with corroborating evidence. So the dogs evidence can still be an important part of this case so don't forget it.

A perfect example of the muddled thinking which prevails about the non-existent evidence.

Pathfinder tells us that the dog alerts need to be corroborated with actual forensic evidence.

But he then describes those alerts as "the dogs evidence" (sic).

When people actually bother to read the full report submitted by Grime they appreciate that the dog alerts "have no evidential value" and are just pointers to where forensic specialists might possibly find such evidence.

We all know that the forensic experts found absolutely no evidence to demonstrate either that a cadaver had ever been present in Apartment 5A or that the suggestion of cadaver scent was even related to Madeleine McCann.

There is no evidence related to the dogs which points to any guilt in any crime by the McCanns.

There isn't even any evidence related to the dog alerts which is even linked to Madeleine McCann.

It is a shame that Amaral (that PJ officer who got himself booted off the case because he could not stick to the rules) was one of the first to completely misinterpret the dog alerts and confuse them with evidence. Others have latched onto his failure to understand and have continued the myth that the dog alerts constitute evidence.

[Brietta]

The responding officers seem to have abrogated all responsibility for taking control of the crime scene. 
They allowed the scene to become contaminated by all and sundry walking through it leaving prints and DNA in their wake. 
Not content with that they added to it by smoking and dropping cigarette ash on the floor.

Surely they did not have to wait for the arrival of the Portuguese Judiciary on the morning of the 4th to secure the crime scene, should they not have done that on arrival?


Breaking the code of silence that Portuguese police are normally expected to adhere to, the pair said they were among the first to arrive on the scene and watched, appalled, as people went in and out of the two-bedroom flat.
 
"It was chaos," one said. "The world and his dog were in that room just to look under a bed. It was crazy allowing so many people to trample through.
"There was nothing we could do. The damage had already been done."
 
His colleague added: "It's not brain surgery and probably, in this case, could have saved a lot of speculation, heartache and unnecessary investigation time and money.
"The world's eyes are on us and we mucked up big and there's nothing they can do to change things - it's too late."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1568477/Portuguese-police-admit-Madeleine-circus.html

IMO the victims of this crime, Madeleine and her family were badly let down in the first hours and days after Madeleine’s disappearance, when evidence was fresh and might have been there to be found if looked for.

For example, the bedclothes were allowed to be removed by housekeeping and washed!! no thought was given that the DNA or other traces of an intruder could have been present.
 
It could even have been considered appropriate to make the Drs McCann arguidos at this point when it might have afforded them the full protection of the law without prejudice.

Doing it at a later date when everything else had failed and based on misinterpretation of forensics caused a media frenzy and unwarranted suspicion which has lasted to the present day.

[slartibartfast]

Do you think so?

I think that you have been persuaded by propaganda and you are being naive.

That is unless you are one of the originators of the propaganda, myths and false informatiion put out against The Doctors Mccann .... and to be fair to you, I doubt that.

IMHO, The web of deceit is so wide and so deep that I suspect a team have developed it and taken a great deal of care to spread it to unsuspecting posters .. ordinary folk.

Ordinary folk who have been cleverly whipped up into anger ... people believing that given out propaganda / disinformation are now propogating it.

Very clever. 
THe whole thing is very clever imo. 
It allows the ordinary people who have been DUPED to do much of the dirty work, whilst the originators quietly slide away, out of sight. ............ Only my opinion, but the pointers are there..

Such is the power of propaganda, along with the internet and the Media. 
And Fascism.



It is not looking good for future Justice, is it?

I apologise to Sadie for quoting this earlier and altering "against" to "for" to show that the arguments used by the different sides can be so similar that the alteration of one word can make the statement applicable to either.

I had assumed that the context would have made it clear that this was the case.

In no way was I suggesting that this was Sadie's view.

[gilet]

Let us be clear that there was no evidence found (in the opinion of a bureaucrat) to implicate the McCann's in an INCOMPLETE investigation.

Why was that investigation incomplete? Because the McCann's lawyers (helpfully admitted by Clarence Mitchell) blocked them and the group from going back to perform a reconstitution which was required by the Portuguese in order to further the investigation, because the Portuguese police quite rightly required clarification of the events of that night in order to satisfy themselves that the parents and the group were not involved, to then open up the investigation into other areas. 

As a result of this the case is a big box of loose ends.  But that box was created and left there by the McCann's and their friends.

There is a huge difference between saying no evidence was found against the parents at the end of an investigation as opposed to no evidence found in an incomplete one.

Now McCann supporters state that they were right not to go back because they suspected they were being fitted up.

However an even more plausible explanation (given the fact that Portugal is not North Korea and could "fit up" the parents of the most famous missing girl in the world) is that the parents deliberately did not want to perform the reconstitution because they did not want to have to explain the discrepancies to the police.

This is not evidence against the McCann's but it is an "indication" that something is amiss and needs further investigating. In much the same way that the dog alerts were an "indication".

Indications and hypotheses are what police forces work on, which develop or change as more evidence is uncovered.

The ability to uncover more evidence was stopped by the decisions of the McCann's friends in halting the investigation.

Good, another person who admits that there is no evidence which shows that the McCanns are guilty of any crime.

There may well be indications, suggestions or other such and these can be discussed in another thread which I have suggested Icabodcrane should start as they are a separate issue. This thread has shown without doubt that there is no actual evidence against the McCanns.


And just to refer to your comment about the incompleteness of the case.

Let's not forget that the comment by SY that neither the McCanns, nor their friends are suspects or persons of interest was made after SY had done a complete review of the case and had done a partial further investigation of the case which may even have included re-interviewing relevant witnesses.

It was not a statement made in jest as is the wont of certain posters here, but it was a serious statement made in public which indicated the clear direction, based on review and further investigation which experienced police officers were taking.

It is also perfectly clear that the PJ in their further investigation are not chasing shadows regarding the McCanns and are concentrating on other issues.

None of this if proof that the McCanns are not guilty of a crime but it is suggestive of such and might make a good future thread.

The fact remains that after a lengthy police investigation, after a full SY review, after a full PJ review, after a partial re-investigation by the PJ and after a partial re-investigation by SY, there is not a shred of known evidence which shows the McCanns guilty of any crime.

That has been demonstrated on this thread where people have attempted to offer such evidence and failed.

[Wonderfulspam]

Good, another person who admits that there is no evidence which shows that the McCanns are guilty of any crime.

There may well be indications, suggestions or other such and these can be discussed in another thread which I have suggested Icabodcrane should start as they are a separate issue. This thread has shown without doubt that there is no actual evidence against the McCanns.


And just to refer to your comment about the incompleteness of the case.

Let's not forget that the comment by SY that neither the McCanns, nor their friends are suspects or persons of interest was made after SY had done a complete review of the case and had done a partial further investigation of the case which may even have included re-interviewing relevant witnesses.

It was not a statement made in jest as is the wont of certain posters here, but it was a serious statement made in public which indicated the clear direction, based on review and further investigation which experienced police officers were taking.

It is also perfectly clear that the PJ in their further investigation are not chasing shadows regarding the McCanns and are concentrating on other issues.

None of this if proof that the McCanns are not guilty of a crime but it is suggestive of such and might make a good future thread.

The fact remains that after a lengthy police investigation, after a full SY review, after a full PJ review, after a partial re-investigation by the PJ and after a partial re-investigation by SY, there is not a shred of known evidence which shows the McCanns guilty of any crime.

That has been demonstrated on this thread where people have attempted to offer such evidence and failed.

When?

[stephen25000]

Let us be clear that there was no evidence found (in the opinion of a bureaucrat) to implicate the McCann's in an INCOMPLETE investigation.

Why was that investigation incomplete? Because the McCann's lawyers (helpfully admitted by Clarence Mitchell) blocked them and the group from going back to perform a reconstitution which was required by the Portuguese in order to further the investigation, because the Portuguese police quite rightly required clarification of the events of that night in order to satisfy themselves that the parents and the group were not involved, to then open up the investigation into other areas. 

As a result of this the case is a big box of loose ends.  But that box was created and left there by the McCann's and their friends.

There is a huge difference between saying no evidence was found against the parents at the end of an investigation as opposed to no evidence found in an incomplete one.

Now McCann supporters state that they were right not to go back because they suspected they were being fitted up.

However an even more plausible explanation (given the fact that Portugal is not North Korea and could "fit up" the parents of the most famous missing girl in the world) is that the parents deliberately did not want to perform the reconstitution because they did not want to have to explain the discrepancies to the police.

This is not evidence against the McCann's but it is an "indication" that something is amiss and needs further investigating. In much the same way that the dog alerts were an "indication".

Indications and hypotheses are what police forces work on, which develop or change as more evidence is uncovered.

The ability to uncover more evidence was stopped by the decisions of the McCann's friends in halting the investigation.

 

[gilet]

I believe that this thread has served its purpose.

Every contributor when dealing with the question posed has admitted that there is absolutely no evidence which shows the McCanns guilty of any crime whatsoever.

And equally, there is no evidence of abduction.

Anyone who claims to know for certain what happened in PDL or who claims the McCanns are definitely guilty of any crime is simply fooling him or her self and relying on indicators or suggestions rather than actual evidence.

[stephen25000]

Your mantra may be truthful or not. It does not in any way further the discussion on this thread. Your disruption of every thread with that same mantra is quite pathetic and indicates an obsession.

Please open a thread to discuss the matter.

This thread has demonstrated that there is no evidence of any crime by the McCanns.

Can you contribute to the topic of this thread or will you continue with your off-topic mantra?

For goodness sake gilet, this forum is not about your ego and  your vain attempts to dominate the conversations and the issues being discussed.

As to MANTRA, don't try that old cliche, it's become exceedingly boring.

What the mccanns failed to do is obvious, as is your defense of the indefensible.