Why the abduction theory is both improbable and implausible...

[sadie]

No alibi for point 6 and it was nearly the perfect one until the Smiths arrived.

alibi - something that proves that someone was not where a crime happened and therefore could not have done it.

You know the night of the Hatton Garden Jewellery Heist?

I was nearby ... and I dont have an alibi. 








Actually I wasn't there, honestly Gov

But do you get the picture?

[pathfinder73]

You know the night of the Hatton Garden Jewellery Heist?

I was nearby ... and I dont have an alibi. 








Actually I wasn't there, honestly Gov

But do you get the picture?

No that case is not relevant to this one. Anyone who plans something and wants to get away with it knowing they will be prime suspects get a good alibi. Getting an alibi is at the top of the list for a cocky smart ass when committing a crime.

[Brietta]

No that case is not relevant to this one. Anyone who plans something and wants to get away with it knowing they will be prime suspects get a good alibi. Getting an alibi is at the top of the list for a cocky smart ass when committing a crime.

It seems that good sleuthing can crack a case whatever alibi may be in place ... we await with interest the result of the impending trial of the eight charged with the Hatton Garden Jewellery Heist.

No doubt the PJ and SY have given the alibis and phone history of the arguidos in Madeleine McCann's case ~ remember them ~ a thorough going over. 
It is worthwhile bearing in mind that none of the McCann party figure in that line of questioning.

So I think it would be a safe bet to consider that neither the PJ or SY subscribe to Mr Amaral's theory of parental involvement, and are doing what should have been done in 2007 when no evidence was found to support the theory and have cast the net a bit wider.
They are working the case step by step ... and are doing so because the evidence they have points to stranger abduction.

[Carew]

Evidence pointing to "stranger abduction" during which Madeleine may not have been alive when she left the apartment.

How plausible and probable is that and why was it considered necessary for SY to point it out?

[faithlilly]

Evidence pointing to "stranger abduction" during which Madeleine may not have been alive when she left the apartment.

How plausible and probable is that and why was it considered necessary for SY to point it out?

So a 'stranger abduction' where Madeleine may have been dead when she left the apartment but coincidentally the dogs alerted but not to that dead body because, of course, that body would have to have been dead for at least 90 minutes putting the McCanns firmly in the frame.

[Carew]

Perhaps the comment made about the possibility that Madeleine may not have been alive when she left the apartment should be factored in when the improbability/implausibility of "the abduction theory" is considered?

[G-Unit]

Perhaps the comment made about the possibility that Madeleine may not have been alive when she left the apartment should be factored in when the improbability/implausibility of "the abduction theory" is considered?

If the child was not alive when taken from the apartment she is unlikely to have been on the bed unless she was moved very quickly. The dogs didn't detect anything unusual in the children's bedroom.

[ShiningInLuz]

Perhaps a "sceptic" would like to tell us why this explanation is both improbable and implausible?


I certainly don't agree with that assessment Alfred.  The known facts which you refer to (albethey few and far between) can support several other possibilities so why do you insist on the abduction claim?

My own preference is the woke and wandered theory with the possibility that a burglar opened the bedroom shutter and window intending to rob the apartment.

The Amaral theory is still a very valid contender since none of it has ever been disproved.

To answer the opening post however, my view is that the abduction theory is neither improbable nor implausible just as any of the other scenarios aren't.



Reasons why the abduction was improbable are:

1. Risk.  Why take the chance in a busy holiday resort when there are thousands of children in rural communities much easier to abduct and abscond with?

2. Publicity.  Why abduct a child on holiday with all the media attention it would attract when abducting some little pleasant girl from the back of beyond would in all probability go unreported?

3. Appearance.  Why abduct a child whose appearance was going to cause problems?

4. Age.  Why abduct a nearly four-year-old when a younger child would have been both easier to hide and easier to control?

5. Locus.  Why abduct in a situation where the abduction would be discovered any minute creating greater risk?  Better some quiet backwater where a child might not be missed so soon.

6. Time.  Why abduct in the evening with so many people moving about?  Better the middle of the night.

I am slowly working through one particular planned abduction scenario at ShiningInLuz and this checklist of objections is going to come in very handy, so my thanks for this.

Point 4 bothered me quite a bit.

In the variant I am working on, the perpetrator had access to the OC records.  These showed ages and genders once a child hit 2.  Before that is was merely how many months old, and gender could not be determined.

The OC records (actually the MW records accessed by the OC) show Madeleine as being 3 when she was to return home.

So if it was an OC perp, they knew 3 years, but they did not know nearly 4 years.

Madeleine appears to have been small for her age.  Therefore, my OC perp could have thought early 3.  A perp without access to the OC records, judging purely by height and build, might well have gone for younger than this.

I have but two memories remaining from when I was 3.  Neither relates to my parents, my siblings, or where I was living at age 3.  A nearly completely blank sheet.

[G-Unit]

I think memories depend upon circumstances. I can remember things when I was 2 years old, because they were big things. Significant memories are retained imo. My husband remembers little before about 4 years of age, but nothing much happened to him.

[Miss Taken Identity]

I think memories depend upon circumstances. I can remember things when I was 2 years old, because they were big things. Significant memories are retained imo. My husband remembers little before about 4 years of age, but nothing much happened to him.

I don't believe the lack of memory is the reason for the dodgy timelines, who was where, when. I think it is deliberate. That is why so many including the police are suspicious of them. It is also interesting that there was NO physical checks, just listening, so we are unsure when Maddie was last seen by an independant witness that evening.

[Brietta]

I don't believe the lack of memory is the reason for the dodgy timelines, who was where, when. I think it is deliberate. That is why so many including the police are suspicious of them. It is also interesting that there was NO physical checks, just listening, so we are unsure when Maddie was last seen by an independant witness that evening.

I think it entirely possible that having conducted a review of the case of Madeleine McCann's disappearance ... the experts of Scotland Yard will be aware of timelines, memory and arrangements for checking the children and will have accounted for any so called discrepancies.

It is worth remembering that not only do they have proper translations of the files ... they have all the files.

Moving on to the present day ... neither SY or the PJ are showing any interest at all in the shibboleths of the past ... they are actually making investigations which do not feature Madeleine's parents or their friends ... we still have arguidos in Portugal and no doubt many further avenues will be pursued.

Surprised you hadn't noticed the fresh developments.  I look forward to the possibility the identity of the abductor/s will soon be discovered, I'm sure you do too.

[Lace]

Why would an abductor carry a heavier child when a younger one was available and lighter to carry ?

An older child is much easier to manage.   An older child can be given information such as 'Mummy asked me to collect you'    'Mummy and Daddy are waiting for you'.     Later 'Mummy and Daddy don't want you back'   'Mummy and Daddy asked me to look after you'.     Younger children would not understand any of that they would just scream the place down.

[stephen25000]

An older child is much easier to manage.   An older child can be given information such as 'Mummy asked me to collect you'    'Mummy and Daddy are waiting for you'.     Later 'Mummy and Daddy don't want you back'   'Mummy and Daddy asked me to look after you'.     Younger children would not understand any of that they would just scream the place down.

Nope.

Try again.

[Mr Gray]

I think memories depend upon circumstances. I can remember things when I was 2 years old, because they were big things. Significant memories are retained imo. My husband remembers little before about 4 years of age, but nothing much happened to him.

I remember having a photograph taken at 2...still have the photograph...it was no big occasion

[sadie]

An older child is much easier to manage.   An older child can be given information such as 'Mummy asked me to collect you'    'Mummy and Daddy are waiting for you'.     Later 'Mummy and Daddy don't want you back'   'Mummy and Daddy asked me to look after you'.     Younger children would not understand any of that they would just scream the place down.

Exactly

Especially is she knew the abductor, an older child would listen to what was said and if it sounded reasonable with someone she  mistakenly trusted, then she would co-operate.


Several years ago I read that abductors say things like "Mummy and Daddy have asked me to fetch you.  Hush, dont tell the twins"


And later when the little one got restless and was starting to demand Mummy and Daddy, the abductor made up stories like "Mummy and daddy dont want you; they dont love you.  They hate you.  They were going to hurt you and I have rescued you". 


Anything to attract the child initially and later to placate the child by turning her against her Mum and Dad.


Wicked.