The nature of the crime has not been proven...

[Mr Gray]

On da money as dey say.   Looks like the diminishing boys in blue from de olde bill have spent £7.3 mil on the McCanns say so that the window and shutter were were open once upon a time. 

That's because you do not understand the meaning of the word evidence

[Angelo222]

That's because you do not understand the meaning of the word evidence

Still waiting on all this evidence from you after your earlier claim that abduction was the "most probable cause of the disappearance".  In reality there are two possibilities and neither have good endings but all in my opinions of course.

[Carana]

I am sory Mr M but the sightings are not irrelevant.

Kate and Gerry thought that both the little girl in the Rif mountains and the little girl walking around the bank in Molenbeek could well be Madeleine.  They saw no pictures in Leh to judge.


It is normal for people to take on board evidence from official statements, is it not?  Why are kate, Gerry and the Tapas group statements treated differently?
Kate found the window open and the shutter raised.  Why are you unable to acknowledge thta ?

Hmmm Sadie. IIRC, the McCanns were shown pics and video stills of the first two, and the DNA of the Leh girl didn't match.

[Alfred R Jones]

I have to agree.  It's absurd to say there have been confirmed sightings of Madeleine.  There have not, sadly, but this is not evidence that she has not been abducted nor that she may not still be alive.  Too many "nots" in that sentence but hopefully you get my drift...

[Mr Gray]

Still waiting on all this evidence from you after your earlier claim that abduction was the "most probable cause of the disappearance".  In reality there are two possibilities and neither have good endings but all in my opinions of course.

Two basic possibilities I agree..one probable and one improbable..IMO

[stephen25000]

If Redwood believes in an abduction that is good enough for me

Can we have your theory on the abduction please Stephen?   Time you gave it.

Do you seriously believe all members of the police force believe in abduction ?

If you do, you are sadly mistaken.

A brief reminder, a belief in something is not tangible. You need evidence to stand up in court.

[Mr Moderator]

Please restrict posts to the subject of the discussion.

The opening post suggests the most logical scenario is stranger abduction and points to Scotland Yard's sympathetic utterances in that direction yet fails as they do to provide any evidence for such an assertion.

What evidence was there of a crime, assuming there ever was one in the first place?

[Alice Purjorick]

Please restrict posts to the subject of the discussion.

The opening post suggests the most logical scenario is stranger abduction and points to Scotland Yard's sympathetic utterances in that direction yet fails as they do to provide any evidence for such an assertion.

What evidence was there of a crime, assuming there ever was one in the first place?

The only possibility where a crime was not committed is one where the child gains egress of her own volition and has an unfortunate as yet undetected accident.
Any other possibilities with respect to her disappearance involve a crime of some sort which remains unidentified and undetected.
IMHO in the nicest possible way of course.

[Mr Gray]

if Maddie didn't wander out....which seems highly unlikely.....then there are only two options...stranger or parent

[sadie]

if Maddie didn't wander out....which seems highly unlikely.....then there are only two options...stranger or parent

No parent that was responsible for a crime against their child would have repeatedly put themselves at risk by searching, searching and pushing, pushing,  as the Mccanns have.

The Mccanns are not dumbwits, they are highly intelligent people.

They would know that if they were responsible, they necessarily MUST keep reputedly the Worlds best Detectives (NSY) away from the case.  They would know that NSY, with a big team, has considerably more intellect collectively than they do.  They would be found out.

They pressed for SY to be involved. 


Proof on its own that they were not involved

[Mr Gray]

If the parents were not involved then that pretty well proves Maddie was the victim of a crime by a stranger

[Alice Purjorick]

if Maddie didn't wander out....which seems highly unlikely.....then there are only two options...stranger or parent

Three actually! Parent, person known to the victim or stranger.
Tempered with the comment by Leicestershire's Assistant Chief Constable with which most will be familiar.

[slartibartfast]

No parent that was responsible for a crime against their child would have repeatedly put themselves at risk by searching, searching and pushing, pushing,  as the Mccanns have.

The Mccanns are not dumbwits, they are highly Gintelligent people.

They would know that if they were responsible, they necessarily MUST keep reputedly the Worlds best Detectives (NSY) away from the case.  They would know that NSY, with a big team, has considerably more intellect collectively than they do.  They would be found out.

They pressed for SY to be involved. 


Proof on its own that they were not involved

That's what they want you to think...

P.S. That isn't an accusation but suggesting that any perpetrator who thinks they are in the clear may press for investigation to divert attention. So no proof of innocence.

[Benice]

That's what they want you to think...

P.S. That isn't an accusation but suggesting that any perpetrator who thinks they are in the clear may press for investigation to divert attention. So no proof of innocence.

Just another example IMO of sceptics convincing themselves that black is actually white.  In seven years the McCanns behaviour has been the complete opposite of that of guilty people  - therefore that is proof that they ARE guilty?     Bizarre logic.

IMO life wouldn't be worth living if every second of every day you had to make sure you never slipped up and had to learn by heart everything you were going to say in public - and then remember everything you had said year in year out.      The strain would be intolerable.    And why do that anyway when you could just as easily have kept your head down and slipped quietly into obscurity - which is surely what guilty people would want to do.

I don't know of any guilty person who ever tried to get a case re-opened, let alone devote as much time and effort to doing that as the McCanns did.

Why would their friends sit back and watch them do that if they knew the McCanns were guilty and that they themselves were implicated in a heinous crime - which apparently they had been lucky enough to get away with?       

The whole idea is too daft for words IMO.

[Mr Gray]

That's what they want you to think...

P.S. That isn't an accusation but suggesting that any perpetrator who thinks they are in the clear may press for investigation to divert attention. So no proof of innocence.

a bizarre suggestion...there was no attention...the case was closed...if the mccanns were guilty they were home and dry