Is there any hard evidence whatsoever in the Madeleine McCann case?

[G-Unit]

Please do not insult my intelligence.  Signed Statements are never absolute fact, especially as they tend to contradict.
Unless you can show me a statement that is proven fact.

Eleanor doesn't see statements as facts. Therefore the open window is not a proven fact.

[Mr Gray]

Eleanor doesn't see statements as facts. Therefore the open window is not a proven fact.

you seem to want to continually move the goal posts...kate's statement is evidence that the window was open..when you were shown to be wrong you changed to hard evidence ,,,then proven fact

[G-Unit]

you seem to want to continually move the goal posts...kate's statement is evidence that the window was open..when you were shown to be wrong you changed to hard evidence ,,,then proven fact

You misunderstand me. I agree that statements are evidence. However, Kate's statement is evidence that Kate said the window was open.

[stephen25000]

you seem to want to continually move the goal posts...kate's statement is evidence that the window was open..when you were shown to be wrong you changed to hard evidence ,,,then proven fact

The window being open isn't a fact.

Hers were the only identifiable fingerprints is.

and of course, no corroboration the window was open at any time prior to her return to the apartment.

[Mr Gray]

You misunderstand me. I agree that statements are evidence. However, Kate's statement is evidence that Kate said the window was open.

you misunderstand yourself...kate's statement is evidence that the window was open...it is actually proof that Kate stated that the window was open

[Mr Gray]

The window being open isn't a fact.

Hers were the only identifiable fingerprints is.

and of course, no corroboration the window was open at any time prior to her return to the apartment.

no one said it was a fact..try and keep up

[G-Unit]

you misunderstand yourself...kate's statement is evidence that the window was open...it is actually proof that Kate stated that the window was open

What? so the only 'proof' that the window was open is that she said so? Isn't that what I said?

[Mr Gray]

What? so the only 'proof' that the window was open is that she said so? Isn't that what I said?

NO

[Brietta]

I agree with Brietta!

Logical isn't it ... and we are both sometime logical thinkers.   


Borne out by the fact that neither Dr McCann was charged with any offence in relation to their daughter's disappearance ~ there is not a shred of evidence linking either them or their friends to what happened to Madeleine.

That leaves wandering off ... or abduction.

There is no evidence that Madeleine wandered off.

Whether members like it or not there is evidence that there had been an intrusion to the apartment.  Dr McCann's statement to how she found the apartment window on her return is evidence.

Ever wondered why Sylvia Baptista's assessment of the situation has carried such weight in the doubters' lexicon ... her suspicions when Dr McCann requested pastoral support have become legendary ... but no-one mentions that she also claims to have seen Robert Murat ...

**snip
She doesn't remember who was with him, whether he came walking or in some vehicle. That same individual, she was told later, is the son of Morat, his first name is ROBERT.
Robert speaks fluently English and Portuguese. He helped the GNR of Lagos and later the PJ, translating the testimony of some British persons.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

So it is very much a pick and mix of which evidence internet detectives will choose to illustrate their point or their prejudice ... fortunately, with the eyes of the world on Madeleine McCann's case the rule of evidence and therefore the rule of law had to be seen to be being applied.

[stephen25000]

Logical isn't it ... and we are both sometime logical thinkers.   


Borne out by the fact that neither Dr McCann was charged with any offence in relation to their daughter's disappearance ~ there is not a shred of evidence linking either them or their friends to what happened to Madeleine.

That leaves wandering off ... or abduction.

There is no evidence that Madeleine wandered off.

Whether members like it or not there is evidence that there had been an intrusion to the apartment.  Dr McCann's statement to how she found the apartment window on her return is evidence.

Ever wondered why Sylvia Baptista's assessment of the situation has carried such weight in the doubters' lexicon ... her suspicions when Dr McCann requested pastoral support have become legendary ... but no-one mentions that she also claims to have seen Robert Murat ...

**snip
She doesn't remember who was with him, whether he came walking or in some vehicle. That same individual, she was told later, is the son of Morat, his first name is ROBERT.
Robert speaks fluently English and Portuguese. He helped the GNR of Lagos and later the PJ, translating the testimony of some British persons.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

So it is very much a pick and mix of which evidence internet detectives will choose to illustrate their point or their prejudice ... fortunately, with the eyes of the world on Madeleine McCann's case the rule of evidence and therefore the rule of law had to be seen to be being applied.

A brief reminder.

A lack of forensic corroboration does  not mean there wasn't a dead body in the apartment.

There is absolutely no quantifiable proof abduction took place.

Not one witness.

A child being carried is not evidence of abduction.

Madeleine's walking out of the apartment as some believe and then 'disappearing' is a possibility.

No trace of Madeleine after 8 years, not even one iota  of a trail to follow, moere than casts doubt on abduction, it makes it look ridiculous.

[G-Unit]

you misunderstand yourself...kate's statement is evidence that the window was open...it is actually proof that Kate stated that the window was open

Let's unpick this. There are two things being said above, in bold.

Kate's statement is evidence. In it she says the window was open. Therefore her statement is evidence that the window was open.

Kate's statement is proof. Proof of what? That she stated that the window was open.

If I'm misreading, please correct me.

[G-Unit]

Logical isn't it ... and we are both sometime logical thinkers.   


Borne out by the fact that neither Dr McCann was charged with any offence in relation to their daughter's disappearance ~ there is not a shred of evidence linking either them or their friends to what happened to Madeleine.

That leaves wandering off ... or abduction.

There is no evidence that Madeleine wandered off.

Whether members like it or not there is evidence that there had been an intrusion to the apartment.  Dr McCann's statement to how she found the apartment window on her return is evidence.

Ever wondered why Sylvia Baptista's assessment of the situation has carried such weight in the doubters' lexicon ... her suspicions when Dr McCann requested pastoral support have become legendary ... but no-one mentions that she also claims to have seen Robert Murat ...

**snip
She doesn't remember who was with him, whether he came walking or in some vehicle. That same individual, she was told later, is the son of Morat, his first name is ROBERT.
Robert speaks fluently English and Portuguese. He helped the GNR of Lagos and later the PJ, translating the testimony of some British persons.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm

So it is very much a pick and mix of which evidence internet detectives will choose to illustrate their point or their prejudice ... fortunately, with the eyes of the world on Madeleine McCann's case the rule of evidence and therefore the rule of law had to be seen to be being applied.

So the open window is evidence which supports the abduction theory? (It doesn't follow, but never mind) What evidence is there that the window was open? Kate McCann's statement. Is that statement true? We don't know, because, as you said, people lie in statements.

[Mr Gray]

Let's unpick this. There are two things being said above, in bold.

Kate's statement is evidence. In it she says the window was open. Therefore her statement is evidence that the window was open.

Kate's statement is proof. Proof of what? That she stated that the window was open.

If I'm misreading, please correct me.

That's right

[Brietta]

A brief reminder.

A lack of forensic corroboration does  not mean there wasn't a dead body in the apartment.

There is absolutely no quantifiable proof abduction took place.

Not one witness.

A child being carried is not evidence of abduction.

Madeleine's walking out of the apartment as some believe and then 'disappearing' is a possibility.

No trace of Madeleine after 8 years, not even one iota  of a trail to follow, moere than casts doubt on abduction, it makes it look ridiculous.

Oh, I see, the alert man who noticed serial killer Robert Black abducting a little girl should just have ignored it on the grounds it wasn't evidence.
Only problem with that is that the fact he saw her then he didn't combined with a van driving off was evidence of an abduction ... furthermore it was the only evidence the child had been abducted ... and without prompt action by the witness in contacting the police and the prompt police response ... undoubtedly that little girl would have been killed as others were and Robert Black would have continued murdering other little girls.

**snip

He prowled the country hunting for little girls to bundle into the back of his van

When he saw a little girl being bundled into a van, a sharp-eyed retired sub-postmaster took down its registration number.
It was a sunny July day in 1990, and the chance sighting by pensioner David Herkes in Stow, in the Scottish Borders, sparked a massive search.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2054133/Robert-Black-convicted-murder-fourth-schoolgirl-Jennifer-Cardy.html#ixzz3YJ7nkFbJ

[stephen25000]

That's right

fingerprints, fingerprints, wherefore  art thou fingerprints.