Author Topic: So what is the evidence for abduction?  (Read 168132 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Brietta

Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #540 on: July 06, 2015, 11:45:21 AM »
Both The MPS and PJ refer to "a broad range of issues" or similar with respect to their investigations.
How do those statements reconcile with "they are only investigating an abduction"?
The latter being a narrowing down of the focus rather than opening up a broad range of issues.
Interesting.

Uh-Huh ... "a broad range of issues" investigation of which does not equate with investigation of Madeleine McCann's parents by either police authority both with the power to do so.

So what other issues do you think the PJ and SY are focusing on?  The woke and wandered is actually one which the initial investigation exhaustively pursued and SY in their search of drains seems to have eliminated too.

Why do you think persons of interest and witnesses have been interviewed?
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #541 on: July 06, 2015, 11:48:48 AM »
Abduction is the only option as far as I can see.  Nothing else adds up.

Why ?

Offline Mr Gray

Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #542 on: July 06, 2015, 11:52:58 AM »
Why ?

because falling off the sofa and dying within a short period doesn't happen....shame amaral didn't do some research

Offline Eleanor

Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #543 on: July 06, 2015, 11:53:22 AM »
Why ?

Common sense, basically.  Oh, and a fair bit of Logistics.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #544 on: July 06, 2015, 11:55:37 AM »
because falling off the sofa and dying within a short period doesn't happen....shame amaral didn't do some research


Cite the evidence to show it can't happen.

Then ally that with the fact that a child's skull is far more easier to damage, and the bones are much softer.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #545 on: July 06, 2015, 12:03:49 PM »
Common sense, basically.  Oh, and a fair bit of Logistics.


That's not an answer.

Why are other scenarios implausible exactly ?

The accounts of the mccanns and some of the associates were not consistent.

Offline Eleanor

Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #546 on: July 06, 2015, 12:18:18 PM »

That's not an answer.

Why are other scenarios implausible exactly ?

The accounts of the mccanns and some of the associates were not consistent.

Do you understand Logistics?

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #547 on: July 06, 2015, 12:20:39 PM »
Do you understand Logistics?

Indeed I do, and a great many other things.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #548 on: July 06, 2015, 12:34:17 PM »
Uh-Huh ... "a broad range of issues" investigation of which does not equate with investigation of Madeleine McCann's parents by either police authority both with the power to do so.

So what other issues do you think the PJ and SY are focusing on? The woke and wandered is actually one which the initial investigation exhaustively pursued and SY in their search of drains seems to have eliminated too.

Why do you think persons of interest and witnesses have been interviewed?
First bit:
How would I know, not being privy to their machinations? What I find interesting is that both investigative bodies state they are looking at a "broad range of issues". I have no reason to doubt they know what they are at, so a broad range of issues must by definition encompass more than just abduction.

Second bit:
Speculation on my part (based on no publicly announced arrests). "We know you were out and about in the vicinity of a potential crime within the appropriate time scale tell us what you saw".
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Alfred R Jones

  • Guest
Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #549 on: July 06, 2015, 12:43:04 PM »
Both The MPS and PJ refer to "a broad range of issues" or similar with respect to their investigations.
How do those statements reconcile with "they are only investigating an abduction"?
The latter being a narrowing down of the focus rather than opening up a broad range of issues.
Interesting.
Has "a broad range of issues" become the name of the latest straw to which you are now grasping by any chance?  "Issues" does not equal theories, in my opinion, though you seem to think otherwise.  Why is that?

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #550 on: July 06, 2015, 12:49:58 PM »
Hasn`t a "theory" been mentioned which includes the use of sedation by potential "perps" during the day which apparently explains Madeleine`s unusual fatigue?

Or was it allegedly administered on the night, during a window of opportunity between checks?

I reckon the exhaustion of the children could have an innocent and even healthy explanation, conscientious and dedicated workers in the clubs the children all attended organising fun-filled, but also hectic and exhausting days for the children to take part in and enjoy.

I reckon that, at the end of it all, they were just dog tired and exhausted, and so just slept and slept.

That would have played into the hands of Madeleine's abductor(s) and also accounted for why the twins just slept and slept

Offline Carew

Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #551 on: July 06, 2015, 01:13:39 PM »
I reckon the exhaustion of the children could have an innocent and even healthy explanation, conscientious and dedicated workers in the clubs the children all attended organising fun-filled, but also hectic and exhausting days for the children to take part in and enjoy.

I reckon that, at the end of it all, they were just dog tired and exhausted, and so just slept and slept.

That would have played into the hands of Madeleine's abductor(s) and also accounted for why the twins just slept and slept

That doesn`t tie in with Madeleine`s mother voicing concerns about her waking distressed whilst alone during the evening, as she had done previously, though.

The fatigue aspect making that prospect less likely wasn`t thought of at that time, perhaps.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #552 on: July 06, 2015, 01:21:57 PM »
That doesn`t tie in with Madeleine`s mother voicing concerns about her waking distressed whilst alone during the evening, as she had done previously, though.

The fatigue aspect making that prospect less likely wasn`t thought of at that time, perhaps.

No record of her waking distressed on the night she was abducted ...

Offline Carew

Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #553 on: July 06, 2015, 01:31:12 PM »
No record of her waking distressed on the night she was abducted ...

Concerns were voiced that she might......No prior mention, apparently, that her obvious exhaustion might lessen the possibility.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: So what is the evidence for abduction?
« Reply #554 on: July 06, 2015, 01:34:26 PM »
Has "a broad range of issues" become the name of the latest straw to which you are now grasping by any chance?  "Issues" does not equal theories, in my opinion, though you seem to think otherwise.  Why is that?

Rather not old stick.
It falls in the category, for you, "you can't have yer bun and yer 'apenny".
The broad issues bit comes in a Redwood video right at the beginning which you choose to ignore in favour of the bit at the end.
Why is that ?
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey