Why don't people believe the Mccanns story of Abduction ?

[stephen25000]

People don't believe/quibble about the truth of Madeleine's abduction because

1  They are stupid

2. They understand the truth but are deceivers

3.  They haven't read the files carefully.

Can't think of any other reasons why people would quibble about the truth ....

1. They are not stupid.

2. They do understand the truth and can read through the tale spun by the mccanns and those who aid them.

3. They have read the files and have seen the inconsistent accounts of the mccanns and the PR behind it.

4. They see through people like you.

[sadie]

I think you'll find the only reference to 'detailed analysis' was in relation to the timeline.

Bwhahaha

Watch the Crimewatch program again.

The 'detailed analysis' when carrying the lavender coloured folder [I sent several Lavender coloured folders in] was about information sent in by the public and it seemed to refer to the folder [mine] being carried... but I may be wrong on that score.

Watch it and see

Am not sure now, but I think it was the second Crimewatch where that happened

But my Lavender coloured folders appeared to be being carried/ in evidence in both.



Posters/ readers who were in pfa2 will remember that i was always going on about Lavenders.


The big lavender coloured folder inn the middle of the top shelf also looks like mine, but I cannot be sure




Blonk, do you think that the black and white folder could be Bennetts?

[ferryman]

1. They are not stupid.

2. They do understand the truth and can read through the tale spun by the mccanns and those who aid them.

3. They have read the files and have seen the inconsistent accounts of the mccanns and the PR behind it.

4. They see through people like you.

And the Portuguese prosecutors (who said Madeleine was abducted).

And PJ Inspector Jaoa Carlos (who wrote the final PJ report and said Madeleine was abducted.

And Mark Harrison (who had no clue what happened to Madeleine but reached a tentative conclusion at variance with the conclusion of Amaral's book).

The only person who knows is Goncalo Amaral

Strange, that ...

[ferryman]

Amaral's wild guesswork remains just that.

Sometimes guesses get lucky.

I doubt it, here, though

The McCanns were unperturbed until all hell broke around 10.00pm on May 3rd, itself evidence of abduction, noted by the prosecutors in the archiving dispatch ....

[stephen25000]

Amaral's wild guesswork remains just that.

Sometimes guesses get lucky.

I doubt it, here, though

The McCanns were unperturbed until all hell broke around 10.00pm on May 3rd, itself evidence of abduction, noted by the prosecutors in the archiving dispatch ....

The mccanns were unperturbed ferryman ?

Yes we know.

They were drinking and eating.

After yet again they left 3 young children unprotected in a foreign country.

Yet not a jot of real evidence to show abduction.

[ShiningInLuz]

Bwhahaha

Watch the Crimewatch program again.

The 'detailed analysis' when carrying the lavender coloured folder [I sent several Lavender coloured folders in] was about information sent in by the public and it seemed to refer to the folder [mine] being carried... but I may be wrong on that score.

Watch it and see

Am not sure now, but I think it was the second Crimewatch where that happened

But my Lavender coloured folders appeared to be being carried/ in evidence in both.

Posters/ readers who were in pfa2 will remember that i was always going on about Lavenders.

The big lavender coloured folder inn the middle of the top shelf also looks like mine, but I cannot be sure

Blonk, do you think that the black and white folder could be Bennetts?

If second Crimewatch means the one from Oct 13, then there is a full transcript, in English and Portuguese, at shininginluz.wordpress.com.  This is linked to the programme on YouTube, and as of about 1 minute ago, the link works.  The transcript is cross-referenced to the time of the words appearing on the video.

To KISS, there is a searchable source making it easy for you to look up anything in that Crimewatch.

One cautionary note.  My aim was not to produce a 100% literal transcript.  The transcript underwent a degree of simplification designed to ensure that auto translation would work well.

[G-Unit]

And the Portuguese prosecutors (who said Madeleine was abducted).

And PJ Inspector Jaoa Carlos (who wrote the final PJ report and said Madeleine was abducted.

And Mark Harrison (who had no clue what happened to Madeleine but reached a tentative conclusion at variance with the conclusion of Amaral's book).

The only person who knows is Goncalo Amaral

Strange, that ...

I have quotes which do not say Madeleine was abducted. Please provide your quotes which say she was.

Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Within the factual context we could be facing an abduction situation, although all possibilities have always been open, as they continue to be.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm


Type of Crime – Unknown
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

[Eleanor]

Any further insulting posts and those attacking other posters will be removed in full from now on.

Oh, and Off Topic Posts as well.

[ferryman]

I have quotes which do not say Madeleine was abducted. Please provide your quotes which say she was.

Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

Within the factual context we could be facing an abduction situation, although all possibilities have always been open, as they continue to be.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm


Type of Crime – Unknown
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

From the archiving dispatch:

The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.

From Joao Carlos' final report:

Assuming that the minor's disappearance was due to the acts of third parties, the PJ explored various lines of investigation, not excluding any hypothesis considered plausible or hypothetically acceptable.

From the documentation, you will observe that during the investigation various possibilities were contemplated.

As such, consider:

1. abduction, for sexual exploration or other (e.g, later adoption, child trafficking, organ trafficking), without homicide;

2. abduction, followed by homicide with (or without) hiding of the corpse;

3. accidental death, with later hiding of the corpse;

pages 7 and 8

The Hypothesis 1 and 2 were considered in the double notion of the illicit of abduction (if that happened) that could have had occurred due to feelings of revenge by the
Kidnapper(s) towards the parents (intended abduction) or by taking merely the opportunity of the child being at a vulnerable situation (opportunity abduction).

As a remote hypothesis, the possibility of the minor leaving the apartment by her own means was explored – that would be highly unlikely physically – and after, because of an accident or by a third person intervention, she would have disappeared.

[stephen25000]

From the archiving dispatch:

From Joao Carlos' final report:

Again ferryman, the case was shelved because of the lack of evidence .

You can selectively copy and paste to your hearts content, but that won't change what happened.

None of the prevalent theories have been proved or disproved.

Remember that.

[ferryman]

There was not enough evidence to convict the abductor

[stephen25000]

There was not enough evidence to convict the abductor

There was no evidence to charge anyone with any crime.

Why do you omit, a crime may not have occurred in the apartment.

[G-Unit]

From the archiving dispatch:

From Joao Carlos' final report:

The conclusions are clear, and no-one concluded that abduction was the answer.



Legal summary;

 Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.



In conclusion, it results from everything that has been done, despite the efforts that were made and all investigation lines being explored, that it is not possible to obtain a solid and objective conclusion about what really happened that night, and about the present location of the missing minor.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

[ferryman]

There was no evidence to charge anyone with any crime.

Why do you omit, a crime may not have occurred in the apartment.

Woke and wandered, you mean?

Joao Carlos excludes that one ....

[ferryman]

The conclusions are clear, and no-one concluded that abduction was the answer.



Legal summary;

 Despite all of this, it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment (whether dead or alive, whether killed in a neglectful homicide or an intended homicide, whether the victim of a targeted abduction or an opportunistic abduction), nor even to produce a consistent prognosis about her destiny and inclusively - the most dramatic - to establish whether she is still alive or if she is dead, as seems more likely.



In conclusion, it results from everything that has been done, despite the efforts that were made and all investigation lines being explored, that it is not possible to obtain a solid and objective conclusion about what really happened that night, and about the present location of the missing minor.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/P_J_FINAL_REPORT.htm

Key words underlined: targeted abduction or opportunistic abduction.

But definitely abduction.