You need to think about this more clearly and look exactly at what I have said.
If...that is if....the McCanns are not involved we are left with two main possibilities.You must accept that these must add up to close to 100%. Abduction or woke and wandered...the archiving report dismissed w and w....so have the mcccanns...that makes abduction itself close to 100...perfect logic.
All this relies on the McCanns being ruled out. As I have said for a very long time if Kate is telling the truth then Maddie was probably abducted and the shutter was open. I would say that SY have spoken to the mccanns and decided they are telling the truth and that is why they are investigating abduction.
You have suggested a lie detector...do you not realise they are not reliable...your apparent belief reduces your credibility...as does your inference that Kate should take one....
would you share your model that adds up to 40
Still throwing in character evaluation? I thought this had been discussed elsewhere on the forum recently. And that is was generally regarded as a poor debating technique. Perhaps I am wrong.
What you say about your opinion of what SY would have done wrt to the McCanns remains just that i.e. what your opinion is on this point. If you have any evidence to support your opinion, this would be a very good time to bring such evidence to the forum.
The remit of OG requires that the McCanns are not to be investigated. DCI Redwood has made statements that are in support of this remit, and I have no intention of debating this, or whether such apposition may have changed since Redwood's pronouncements. In the absence of evidence, would, should, probably and might are fillers that get us nowhere.
The remit of OG requires that the McCanns are not investigated, whether by DCI Andy Redwood or DCI Nicola Wall.
Frankly, I have limited interest in how the archiving report went on certain topics, and I am not cherry picking here. One forum member has now been kind enough to initiate action relating to the woke and wandered theory. Now we have multiple ifs. If the information can be obtained. If the information is relevant. If the information confirms one possibility. THEN it will increase the possibility of W&W from a very small percentage, to something quite bigger. Just an awful lot of conditionals in there. It probably will not come to pass, but I am grateful to the forum member for trying to uncover fresh information.
I wish to split 'abduction' into unplanned abduction (i.e. burglary gone wrong) and planned abduction.
Unplanned abduction is something I currently rate as low probability. Roughly speaking, person tries the shutter, finds out to his delight the window is also open, then for some reason a burglary turns to unplanned abduction, complete with no evidence of such an act.
Planned abduction happens to be the one most likely. This is not based on an evaluation that the McCanns did not 'dun it' i.e. ruling them out. It is based on an evaluation of the evidence in the files, ruling in the possibility of a planned abduction.
Now here's the tricky bit folks, so please get your head wrapped around this.
The level of evidence I have would not pass muster in a criminal court of law. It would not pass muster in a civil court. Like I said, my model covers 40%, and that passes neither test.
So I can lay my assessment of all the options out for all to see. When I get to planned abduction, I run the risk of libel, not just on this forum, but in real life. Even if I turn out to be correct, I am running the risk of seriously damaging a live, on-going investigation. That investigation happens to be the best current chance for Madeleine. So I have no intent of bringing the forum into disrepute, of opening myself up to the possibility of libel, or of potentially derailing Madeleine's best chance.
What is so difficult about understanding that I said my model adds up to about 40%, which tells me my model is far from perfection?
The lie detector test is something I have clearly stated would have no standing in law. Curiously, one of the PI reports mentions lie detector information, but I am not going to spend my life trying to find out further information about this.
Kate taking a lie detector test has 2 benefits.
1) Any further PI team taking on the case would then start from a position of being reasonably confident that Kate described the incident scene correctly. Note I used the word 'reasonably', as I am aware that lie detector tests do not pass legal requirements. Before this is tucked into, I am aware that the McCanns would set a remit for the PIs, in much the same way that a remit was set for OG.
2) Amelie and Sean are about 11 now. I would guess they are still at primary school at this time. They are about to go to secondary school. I remember secondary school as a not particularly nice place to be, as my fellow schoolchildren established leaders, followers, camps, territory and much more c**p. And I went to one of the best secondary schools for many a mile.
Those twins are easy targets in a culture where kids can be cruel. They definitely will be associated with Madeleine, Kate and Gerry. What will that association be?
Please feel free to give me your take on the following. I'm interested, genuinely interested.
There will be a camp that states that Kate did not answer the 48 questions. That Kate and Gerry left the children in the crèche at every opportunity. That Kate and Gerry went out and left the 3 kids at risk while they wined, dined and socialised. That Kate and Gerry left the patio doors open. That Kate and Gerry lied about the checking arrangements. About the checking routine ... About, about, about.
Here's the one that crucifies me. They twins will have to explain, to their tormentors, why Kate concluded abduction, then left them in an open, unguarded, unsafe apartment while she put Madeleine top of the agenda.
So where does a lie detector test fit? Not into court evidence, certainly.
But the primary battle surely is for Madeleine?
Take your pick as to where the secondary battle lies. In my instance, it does not lie with the McCann parents. It lies with Amelie and Sean, totally innocent casualties of something over which they had zero control.
Don't they deserve to be able to say that Kate passed a lie detector test? Or should they simply be made to suffer outrageous allegations?
