What evidence would one expect to find in an ABDUCTION?

[Carana]

I suspect they only saw what they wanted to see.  And who knew which dog was which in those days?

Erm, the PJ were with the dogs while Grime was there. He is recorded on video as saying that he did not intend to put Eddie in the boot, but in the translation the "not" got missed out.

Shouldn't Amaral and Tavares de Almeida and whoever else have NOTICED that Eddie wasn't in the boot, despite the error in translation, from reviewing the footage even if they were not all physically present?

The two dogs don't have spots in the same places and the amount of white between the ears is different. Eddie actually had more white between his ears...

[John]

There are more indicators than you've mentioned, John.

The McCanns didn't "thwart" the investigation: the McCanns never refused to go back, in fact they were legally obliged to do so if requested. The friends decided not to go back in the end - and Jez didn't want to go back, either.

We already have a long thread on here on the issue of whether a reenactment would have proven their innocence or not. I don't see how it could have done.

For example, if the precise angle of the door, the wind direction and extent of gust at that moment, curtains whooshing and the door slamming couldn't be reproduced, or was difficult to reproduce, then the assumption would have been that Kate was lying. If the door did slam, then it would have been "Ok, maybe" - but it still wouldn't have proven that that is what happened on the night.

It is known that Jez, Gerry and Jane don't agree on exactly where everyone was standing. Getting Jane to flipflop past two men in a fake and tense situation to see if they could hear / see her or not is silly as they'd know what to expect and would unconsciously be concentrating. In any case, it's irrelevant now as someone believed to be Tannerman and child have been identified. If the PJ had checked the creche records, they might have found that out themselves.

Even in the best case scenario of "Ok, maybe", the PJ would not have then gone back to the drawing board to look for new suspects - there was no time left. Rebelo was tying up loose ends to see whether there were grounds for charging them or not. The clock was ticking very fast as the investigation had to be wound up one way or another due to legal time limits. And the time limit had already been exceptionally extended in order to process the results of the rogatory interviews.

Rebelo didn't answer Kate's letter begging for news, so what would staying on in Portugal have achieved? At that point, they weren't aware of the child sexual assaults, and it's not clear that the PJ did either back then as the GNR had apparently handled them (or rather hadn't).

The fact is they didn't go back to take part in the requested police reconstitution even after agreeing to do so.  We might never know what went on between them and the rest of the tapas group because it is all cloaked in secrecy.  All we are told according to the files is that several of the tapas group refused to take part.  In my opinion the Portuguese should have dragged every one of them back kicking and screaming if need be.

Only police officers know how useful a reconstruction or a reconstitution can be.  There is much which can be found out when participants are confronted by others who were there on the night and dispute their version of events.  Remember the very simple confrontation between Gerry and Jane?  Now imaging bringing Wilkins into the equation and you have the classic result.  Now imagine the same scenario but encompassing several hours and you have a massive opportunity for finding fault with certain witnesses evidence. Liars are nearly always exposed in such an exercise.

[Carana]

The fact is they didn't go back to take part in the requested police reconstitution even after agreeing to do so.  We might never know what went on between them and the rest of the tapas group because it is all cloaked in secrecy.  All we are told according to the files is that several of the tapas group refused to take part.  In my opinion the Portuguese should have dragged every one of them back kicking and screaming if need be.

And even if that had happened, what would the results have been, in your opinion? Would a door slamming or not slamming on an arbitrary evening prove that someone was being truthful or was lying ?

Would a disagreement about who was standing where in the JT/Gerry/Jez episode and attempting to recreate two men deep in conversation with JT passing by prove anything?

What about all the OC workers who saw them at dinner that night and witnessed the ensuing chaos? Shouldn't they have been there as well?

[Wonderfulspam]

Erm, the PJ were with the dogs while Grime was there. He is recorded on video as saying that he did not intend to put Eddie in the boot, but in the translation the "not" got missed out.

Shouldn't Amaral and Tavares de Almeida and whoever else have NOTICED that Eddie wasn't in the boot, despite the error in translation, from reviewing the footage even if they were not all physically present?

The two dogs don't have spots in the same places and the amount of white between the ears is different. Eddie actually had more white between his ears...

It wasn't Crufts, ffs.

[Mr Gray]

So why did they stop cooperating?  Were the cops getting too close to the truth maybe?

No the cops were getting too close to arresting the McCanns and then could have held them for up to 12 months waiting trial. The McCanns had been told that if they were Portuguese they would be in jail..no mistake. The McCanns did absolutely the right thing to get out.

[Wonderfulspam]

And even if that had happened, what would the results have been, in your opinion? Would a door slamming or not slamming on an arbitrary evening prove that someone was being truthful or was lying ?

Would a disagreement about who was standing where in the JT/Gerry/Jez episode and attempting to recreate two men deep in conversation with JT passing by prove anything?

What about all the OC workers who saw them at dinner that night and witnessed the ensuing chaos? Shouldn't they have been there as well?

Alfred was just saying that it would provide evidence against them.

Maybe he can tell you.

[Alfred R Jones]

And even if that had happened, what would the results have been, in your opinion? Would a door slamming or not slamming on an arbitrary evening prove that someone was being truthful or was lying ?

Would a disagreement about who was standing where in the JT/Gerry/Jez episode and attempting to recreate two men deep in conversation with JT passing by prove anything?

What about all the OC workers who saw them at dinner that night and witnessed the ensuing chaos? Shouldn't they have been there as well?

Someone on this board (can't remember who) is of the view that everyone who was in PdL that night should be brought back to do a reconstruction.  Cheaper and easier to use a time machine I reckon.

[John]

We now know that these professionals had misunderstood the evidence of the dogs and actually thought the mccanns were guilty...I fully support the decision to leave Portugal...staying would not have helped to find maddie

Absolutely incorrect, nobody yet knows what non blood scent Eddie alerted to and alert he did.  That said though, the dog handler seems pretty well convinced as to what it represented.

[Carana]

John, it would have made sense shortly after the events.  OC staff were still there, as were some of the tourists. It could have jogged people's memories of what exactly happened when. Amaral's excuse for not organising it at the time is lamentable.

[Carana]

It wasn't Crufts, ffs.

No. Quite right. It was a police investigation. And aren't the police supposed to take correct notice of alleged evidence?

[Mr Gray]

Absolutely incorrect, nobody yet knows what non blood scent Eddie alerted to and alert he did.

Grime has not confirmed the reason for the alert...the PJ thought it proved something..it didn't

[Mr Gray]

Absolutely incorrect, nobody yet knows what non blood scent Eddie alerted to and alert he did.  That said though, the dog handler seems pretty well convinced as to what it represented.

The dog handlers statement is anything but convincing....suggestive is not convincing

[John]

Grime has not confirmed the reason for the alert...the PJ thought it proved something..it didn't

Knowing something and proving it are two different things. 

By the way, what makes you think that SY believe the most probable explanation for Madeleine's disappearance is stranger abduction when they have spent a week digging up PdL looking for her grave?

Looks like nobody can provide any evidence solely related to abduction?

[Alfred R Jones]

Knowing something and proving it are two different things. 

By the way, what makes you think that SY believe the most probable explanation for Madeleine's disappearance is stranger abduction when they have spent a week digging up PdL looking for her grave?

Looks like nobody can provide any evidence solely related to abduction?

I have never understood why people think SY digging up PdL is an indication that they are not treating the case as one of stranger abduction, can you please explain?

[Carana]

Knowing something and proving it are two different things. 

By the way, what makes you think that SY believe the most probable explanation for Madeleine's disappearance is stranger abduction when they have spent a week digging up PdL looking for her grave?

Looks like nobody can provide any evidence solely related to abduction?

Erm, the title of this thread is "What evidence would one expect to find in an ABDUCTION?"...

Often, there simply isn't any.

What's your explanation for the fact that there are numerous hairs which don't correspond to anyone known to have been there for legitimate reasons?