Why are some people so averse to parental involvement in this case

[jassi]

I think the simple answer is that the police don't have sufficient evidence to arrest anyone.

[stephen25000]

Didn't SY mention that Madeleine may have been killed by accident during a burglary?

The walking out of the apartment looks to have been ruled out,   Madeleine was almost four,  no child of that age would bother closing doors and gates behind them,  especially as one of the gates [child gate] was on top of a flight of steps,   she would have to have turned around in the dark to close it.

Take gerry mccanns advice.

Ask the dogs.

As to getting out of the apartment. Quite possible.

How do you know the child gate was closed ?

[G-Unit]

Well I've been told I'm a 'McCann worshipper'   'In fantasy land'   etc. etc.    All because I read the files and came to the conclusion the McCann's are innocent.

It's not that you heap criticism upon the heads of two innocent, heartbroken, caring people because you just don't like them.  End of quote.    It's because some arguments as to the McCann's being guilty are full of pettiness, eg.  they smiled,   they mixed up whose photo was used,   David P.  isn't good at time,   why didn't the McCann's watch Madeleine on the boat etc. etc.   all absolute rubbish and  nothing to do with what happened to Madeleine

I haven't called anybody anything, it's against the rules. Police pay very close attention to what witnesses say looking for inconsistencies as that is a red flag. They also pay close attention if stories change over time. You may think such things are nothing to do with the disappearance of Madeleine but in a lot of cases clues come from examining witnesse's statements and actions closely.

[Mr Gray]

I haven't called anybody anything, it's against the rules. Police pay very close attention to what witnesses say looking for inconsistencies as that is a red flag. They also pay close attention if stories change over time. You may think such things are nothing to do with the disappearance of Madeleine but in a lot of cases clues come from examining witnesse's statements and actions closely.

police also know that some inconsistencies are expected

[G-Unit]

Didn't SY mention that Madeleine may have been killed by accident during a burglary?

The walking out of the apartment looks to have been ruled out,   Madeleine was almost four,  no child of that age would bother closing doors and gates behind them,  especially as one of the gates [child gate] was on top of a flight of steps,   she would have to have turned around in the dark to close it.

I hate to say it, but to pursue the woke and wandered theory SY would have to completely discount the dog alerts. No matter what people want to believe, that's a sticking point. It's probably why Redwood mentioned the fact that she may not have left the apartment alive. Unless anyone can think of any other reason why he might think she died within the apartment. The burglar theory is a non starter really. Very few burglars kill, they run away if they can like Mrs Fenn's intruder.

[slartibartfast]

police also know that some inconsistencies are expected

I think inconsistencies between different witnesses is fairly common, between different statements from the same witness, less so.

[ferryman]

I think inconsistencies between different witnesses is fairly common, between different statements from the same witness, less so.

More common in statements translated and re-translated.  ...

[Brietta]

More common in statements translated and re-translated.  ...

As well as not being verbatim or recorded in audio or video format.

[Mr Gray]

I'm sure you will, because it seems to be all you have, judging by this thread. As to whether it means what you think (or hope) it means, everyone knows the Police can change their minds. They won't tell you, of course because it's for them to know what they're doing. The Portuguese finally managed to shut SY up, I believe.

IT isn't all there si...the statement by the police is just confirmation that having read the files and examined all the evidence they do not consider the mccanns suspects...that mean they do not think all the so called inconsistencies concern them. Of course things can change if new evidence comes along but it seems after 9 yrs there is none...which suggests there won't be

[Alice Purjorick]

IT isn't all there si...the statement by the police is just confirmation that having read the files and examined all the evidence they do not consider the mccanns suspects...that mean they do not think all the so called inconsistencies concern them. Of course things can change if new evidence comes along but it seems after 9 yrs there is none...which suggests there won't be

The case is then destined for the dusty shelves with no result again.

[G-Unit]

police also know that some inconsistencies are expected

Police use a variety of methods when investigating a crime. One of the things they have to decide is whether or not there are innocent explanations for any inconsistencies and story changing. In the DeOrr Kunz case the police seem to have decided that the reasons were not innocent. In the McCann case John Stalker felt something was being covered up. A policeman spends a lot of his time listening to lies and evasions and is probably very good at spotting them as a result.

[Alfred R Jones]

I'm sure you will, because it seems to be all you have, judging by this thread. As to whether it means what you think (or hope) it means, everyone knows the Police can change their minds. They won't tell you, of course because it's for them to know what they're doing. The Portuguese finally managed to shut SY up, I believe.

AS it stands the McCanns have been ruled out.  I know it's hard for you to come to terms with but there we are, no amount of semantic quibbling about the definition of the term "ruled out" changes that.  Of course I accept that things may change in the future but IMO the likelihood of the McCanns being ruled back in is very small indeed.  Maybe you hope and believe otherwise.  One day one of us will be proved right and I am supremely confident that it will be me.

[Alfred R Jones]

That's because we're all part of a hate filled 'gang' who have no minds of our own and are only here to heap criticism upon the heads of two innocent, heartbroken, caring, people because we just don't like them. How on earth could such an unintelligent rabble read the files, study the videos and news reports, and work out theories of their own? It's obvious we're unintelligent because if we weren't we'd be able to see how wrong we are.   

Finally the penny drops!

[G-Unit]

IT isn't all there si...the statement by the police is just confirmation that having read the files and examined all the evidence they do not consider the mccanns suspects...that mean they do not think all the so called inconsistencies concern them. Of course things can change if new evidence comes along but it seems after 9 yrs there is none...which suggests there won't be

On the other hand they may not have paid much attention to the statements except for the timeline if they were looking only at abduction. You are simply assuming that they examined and dismissed inconsistencies, it's not a fact because you can't verify it.

[Mr Gray]

On the other hand they may not have paid much attention to the statements except for the timeline if they were looking only at abduction. You are simply assuming that they examined and dismissed inconsistencies, it's not a fact because you can't verify it.

SO  you think they have spent 12 mill investigating in portugal and not even looked at the parents...I  would say that is ridiculous