So what is the evidence for abduction?

[Mr Gray]

Abductor ???

Not proven  I would say.

What do you think ?

evidence not proof...there is a difference

[stephen25000]

evidence not proof...there is a difference

Tell me precisely davel, if you can of course, explain why Madeleine's disappearance from the apartment is evidence of abduction ?

Her disappearance means just that.

Cause unknown, until proven in court.

[Mr Gray]

That is not what you said in the first instance. Read your own post again.
Y'all are a sore loser boy!

I didn't give the whole of the explanation in the first post

[icabodcrane]

perhaps you cant understand it...doesn't matter...

davel,  you said  the fact Madeleine is missing is evidence that she was abducted

It simply is not

You are wrong

[Mr Gray]

davel,  you said  the fact Madeleine is missing is evidence that she was abducted

It simply is not

You are wrong

it is and I am right...you are confusing evidence with proof

[Mr Moderator]

Mr Moderator,
You post that;

"The dog alerts are evidence of something but what may never be known.  Mr Grime stated they were of no evidential value on their own, the key word being value."

If the key word is "value", could you please, provide a link to where Mr Grimes stated that the alerts were of no evidential value on their own.

It is in the final Report, he stated that the dog alerts had no evidential value unless corroborated by forensics. In this case the forensics were inconclusive thus meaningless. Consequently, the dog alerts are evidence without a value. They are not proof.

[icabodcrane]

it is and I am right...you are confusing evidence with proof

Madeleine being missing is neither proof  nor  evidence that she was abducted  ...  the distinction is, therefore,  irrelevant 

I really don't understand  why you can't understand the simple fact that Madeleine being missing is evidence of nothing more than the fact that she  is  'missing'

'Missing'  does not equate with  'Abducted'.  Saying  "Madeleine is missing, therefore she was abducted"   (  which is what you are saying  )   is not just wrong,  it is nonsense
 
You now have the opportunity to present what evidence exists to support the proposition that Madeleine is missing  because  she was abducted

[Alfred R Jones]

I guess then that when Claudia Lawrence went missing it was not evidence of abduction either?  What other evidence was there in the first few years of the investigation into her disappearance was there of abduction?  Nothing physical or tangible, so why have the police always treated her disappearance as an abduction?

[Anna]

Abduction?
If a child is removed from her residence against her will, what is the description of this action, by persons not yet named ?

Do you think that it was possible that She walked out of the apartment of her free will?... that would not be abduction, until she was taken from the streets against her will, which then, would be abduction.

If she died in the apartment and was removed, obviously against her will, Is that abduction too?
 

[stephen25000]

Abduction?
If a child is removed from her residence against her will, what is the description of this action, by persons not yet named ?

Do you think that it was possible that She walked out of the apartment of her free will?... that would not be abduction, until she was taken from the streets against her will, which then, would be abduction.

If she died in the apartment and was removed, obviously against her will, Is that abduction too?

'If she died in the apartment and was removed, obviously against her will, Is that abduction too?'

how would she know if she's dead ???
 

[Anna]

'If she died in the apartment and was removed, obviously against her will, Is that abduction too?'

how would she know if she's dead ???

Well she most certainly couldn't have agreed to be removed

[icabodcrane]

I guess then that when Claudia Lawrence went missing it was not evidence of abduction either?  What other evidence was there in the first few years of the investigation into her disappearance was there of abduction?  Nothing physical or tangible, so why have the police always treated her disappearance as an abduction?

This thread asks what evidence exists that supports the theory that Madeleine was abducted

As far as I can see,  there isn't any 

The open window might be presented as 'potentially'  being evidence of abduction,  I think,   but it is weak evidence in a much as it can equally be presented as potential evidence of a 'staged'  abduction

Can you think of anything else ?

[Silkywhiskers]

You CANNOT abduct a dead body.

You can steal it, but abduction requires a live victim.

[Mr Gray]

Madeleine being missing is neither proof  nor  evidence that she was abducted  ...  the distinction is, therefore,  irrelevant 

The distinction is important....the fact that madeleine is missing is evidence but not proof of abduction...you just don't understand what evidence is

I really don't understand  why you can't understand the simple fact that Madeleine being missing is evidence of nothing more than the fact that she  is  'missing'

the fact that she is missing means tah one of several things ahave happened and hence is evidence to support all these possibilities

'Missing'  does not equate with  'Abducted'.  Saying  "Madeleine is missing, therefore she was abducted"   (  which is what you are saying  )   is not just wrong,  it is nonsense

I  haven't said missing equates with abduction
 
You now have the opportunity to present what evidence exists to support the proposition that Madeleine is missing  because  she was abducted

Finally as was pointed out re the missing car...the fact that the car is missing is evidence of several possibilities. If you discard the possibilities that are not true and are left with only one...then the fact that the car is missing is evidence to support the final outcome

[Alfred R Jones]

This thread asks what evidence exists that supports the theory that Madeleine was abducted

As far as I can see,  there isn't any 

The open window might be presented as 'potentially'  being evidence of abduction,  I think,   but it is weak evidence in a much as it can equally be presented as potential evidence of a 'staged'  abduction

Can you think of anything else ?

Yes the absence of the child is evidence, same as the absence of Claudia Lawrence is evidence that she too has been abducted.