Was Madeleine's disappearance the result of a burglary gone wrong?

[Mr Gray]

Hardly.

There are the dogs indications.

There is NOTHING for an abduction and/or paedophile, and/or burglary.

Just a story.

P.S. I do know the forensics were inconclusive.

Then of course we have kate mccanns words outside court in Portugal.........

'I know, I was there'

Well she wasn't , was she ? &%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+

So no proof...unless you understand so little that you think what you have provided is proof

[stephen25000]

So no proof...unless you understand so little that you think what you have provided is proof

 %£&)**# %£&)**# %£&)**#

There is nothing else in this case, but the dogs indications.

Now you tell me , where does Martin Grime discount that a death took place in the apartment ?

[stephen25000]

Ah, that could be difficult since every criminal is only too aware of DNA these days.  And actually not that difficult to guard against, providing there is no actual body contact.
But surely this theory cannot be discarded.

Then neither should be accidental death in the apartment.   

[Eleanor]

Then neither should be accidental death in the apartment.   

Absolutely, Stephen.  I thought you knew that about me.  I just don't bore the arse off people by repeating my self.

[stephen25000]

Absolutely, Stephen.  I thought you knew that about me.  I just don't bore the arse off people by repeating my self.

A lot of people bore the arses of others on different sides of the fence in this case.

It's par for the course, and it's par for life.

Just try listening to a speech by William Hague. %£&)**# %£&)**# %£&)**#

[Eleanor]

A lot of people bore the arses of others on different sides of the fence in this case.

It's par for the course, and it's par for life.

Just try listening to a speech by William Hague. %£&)**# %£&)**# %£&)**#

Is he a Scotland Yard Suspect?

[sadie]

Hardly.

There are the dogs indications.

There is NOTHING for an abduction and/or paedophile, and/or burglary.

Just a story.

P.S. I do know the forensics were inconclusive.

Then of course we have kate mccanns words outside court in Portugal.........

'I know, I was there'

Well she wasn't , was she ? &%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+

But there are indications.  You chose to ignore them

1)  The place being watched
2)  Open shutter and window
3)  Other children in area sexually molested
4)  A run of abductions including two in the close area in the previous 3 years ... all 3 young fair haied and pretty little girls.
5)  At least two other apartments in OC being burgled via the front door in the preceeding weeks
One being Mrs Fenns, immediately above 5A.

You chose to ignore all the indications and believe a cop who is a twice Court proven liar: a man who has NO evidence and has told lies in the case.   You chose to believe him  and disbelieve everything that 9 people say ... not one of them has any record of lies against their names.

You now know that Amaral based his case upon false premises,   He misunderstood what Keela and Eddies Alerts did or did not mean.  HE ATRIBUTED BLAME FROM nothing.  Why dont you sort your ideas out Stephen?

[stephen25000]

But there are indications.  You chose to ignore them

1)  The place being watched
2)  Open shutter and window
3)  Other children in area sexually molested
4)  A run of abductions including two in the close area in the previous 3 years ... all 3 young fair haied and pretty little girls.
5)  At least two other apartments in OC being burgled via the front door in the preceeding weeks
One being Mrs Fenns, immediately above 5A.

You chose to ignore all the indications and believe a cop who is a twice Court proven liar: a man who has NO evidence and has told lies in the case.   You chose to believe him  and disbelieve everything that 9 people say ... onoe of them have any record of lies against their names.

You now know that Amaral based his case upon false premises,   He misunderstood what Keela and Eddies Alerts did or did not mean.  HE ATRIBUTED BLAME FROM nothing.  Why dont you sort your ideas out Stephen?

I don't ignore anything, but I do look at things logically and not with hysterical backing of the mccanns and an unproven story.

Open shutters and window. No proof of that.

Seeing people standing outside a building does not mean they were going to rob it or abduct children.

As to lying, well the mccanns have lied, hardly something unknown in human behaviour.


Just because children were molested in the area doesn't mean Madeleine was. You need proof that she was, and of course you can't for obvious reasons.

Merely because other children were abducted, doesn't  mean Madeleine was.

Burglary is not exactly uncommon in most countries, and remember gerry mccanns words...

NOTHING OF VALUE WAS TAKEN FROM THE 'APARTMENT'

[Miss Taken Identity]

1)  The place being watched
2)  Open shutter and window
3)  Other children in area sexually molested
4)  A run of abductions including two in the close area in the previous 3 years ... all 3 young fair haied and pretty little girls.
5)  At least two other apartments in OC being burgled via the front door in the preceeding weeks
One being Mrs Fenns, immediately above 5A.

No proof of place being watched
any evidence of sexually molested children- court cases,arrests? etc?
No proof of shutters and window being 'jemmied' ( if front door burglaries were taking place- why jemmy a window)? ( can't have it both ways).
Run of abductions?

There were also stories about parents going out for a meal and drink and leaving their little babies and a toddler alone...would that have something to do with the 'abduction'? I mean do you think they made it too easy?

[pegasus]

1)  The place being watched
2)  Open shutter and window
3)  Other children in area sexually molested
4)  A run of abductions including two in the close area in the previous 3 years ... all 3 young fair haied and pretty little girls.
5)  At least two other apartments in OC being burgled via the front door in the preceeding weeks
One being Mrs Fenns, immediately above 5A.

No proof of place being watched
any evidence of sexually molested children- court cases,arrests? etc?
No proof of shutters and window being 'jemmied' ( if front door burglaries were taking place- why jemmy a window)? ( can't have it both ways).
Run of abductions?

There were also stories about parents going out for a meal and drink and leaving their little babies and a toddler alone...would that have something to do with the 'abduction'? I mean do you think they made it too easy?

In the Fenn burglary there is no evidence at all of entry through front door - the open window is a rather obvious clue that entry was via the window.

[stephen25000]

Before the PJ decided it was the parents wot dunnit one of their theories was that it was a burglary gone wrong.  If they gave the idea some credence at the time why should it seem so far fetched now to the PJ Fan Club?

What burglary ?

'Nothing of value was taken from the apartment'.

[Benice]

What burglary ?

'Nothing of value was taken from the apartment'.

That is why the PJ were considering an intended burglary which may have 'gone wrong'.

[stephen25000]

That is why the PJ were considering an intended burglary which may have 'gone wrong'.

An intended burglary ???

Now this is getting more ridiculous by the day.

[Benice]

An intended burglary ???

Now this is getting more ridiculous by the day.

Tell it to the PJ - they were not excluding the theory that an intended burglary may have gone wrong.

[stephen25000]

Tell it to the PJ - they were not excluding the theory that an intended burglary may have gone wrong.

It still doesn't mean it was.

You do know that, don't you ?