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

[Brietta]

The word 'botched' could apply to SY.

Now what did gamble say about the UK Police forces competing against each other.

Madeleine was searched for extensively over a period of time by the Police and volunteers.

If you say anything to the contrary, that's your problem then, dealing with reality.

As to misconduct, then look no further than the mccanns and what they failed to do, i.e. keep their children safe.

That is absurd reasoning which yet again excuses the role played by the perpetrators of crime by heaping the blame en masse onto the parents of every child who ... to paraphrase you ... 'failed to keep their children safe'.

[G-Unit]

Just like Operation Grange, the original investigation worked on more than one possibility. Just like Operation Grange one was that the child was alive, another that she was dead. They conducted a huge search of the surrounding area, did hundreds of interviews and followed up hundreds of sightings. The evidence that they did all that is in the files.

They didn't properly examine those closest to the child thoroughly enough and we have no evidence that Operation Grange have done that either.

[Carana]

The hairs were tested using mitochondrial DNA. They were then attributed to different people, Kate, for example;

Mitochondrial DNA profiles of the vestiges;

                    13 lounge
                    15 entrance hall
C          53    13 entrance to bedroom            Kate Healy (Mother)
                     4 floor; bed next to window
                     1 bed of the child
                     7 floor; next to child's bed

However, when hair was found in the apartment in Burgau which matched Jane Tanner's mitochondrial DNA profile, it wasn't seen as proof that she was there;

In response to your letter I advise that a mitochondrial DNA profile is not an exclusive or objective identification of a single [determined] person. Because of this result the inquiry could not say with absolute certainty that the hair found in Burgau actually came from JT because it could have come from any person born of a mother belonging to any of the eight profiles in the database - one profile, of course, had to be of JT's maternal line, so it could have been some distant (or close) relative.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PORTUGUESE-FORENSIC.htm

So we can conclude that any unidentified mitochondrial DNA profiles found couldn't be said, beyond reasonable doubt, to have been left by one particular person, even if a match was found. In other words, if SY said 'we've got the abductor' and his hair had the same mitochondrial DNA profile as one of more of the unidentified hairs, it wouldn't prove he was in G5A.

Correct. However, a fuller mtDNA test could presumably be done than the standard forensic one at the time. It may now be possible to extract nuclear DNA from some of them (there are contradictory papers about this).

[Mr Gray]

The facebook response on the sun's pages will hardly be good reading for the mccanns or their supporters.

and kate mccann believes Madeleine is alive and well in Portugal.

Mmm.

what the facebook page shows me is the mentality of the people posting there...lots of mentioning of the dog alerts and lie detectors from poeple who clearly do not understand the evidence

[Benice]

Just like Operation Grange, the original investigation worked on more than one possibility. Just like Operation Grange one was that the child was alive, another that she was dead. They conducted a huge search of the surrounding area, did hundreds of interviews and followed up hundreds of sightings. The evidence that they did all that is in the files.

They didn't properly examine those closest to the child thoroughly enough and we have no evidence that Operation Grange have done that either.

If there was evidence in existence which implicates the parents- then SY would have found it during their investigations - which involved meticulous examination of all of the files  - and all the other info which we don't have.       

So there are two possible scenarios IMO

1.  SY have found no evidence  to implicate the parents - because none exists.

or

2.  SY have found evidence to implicate the parents - but on instruction - have ignored/hidden/destroyed it.

Anyone who believes No. 2 needs to come up with credible reasons why an ordinary normal family from Leicester living an ordinary normal life could possibly merit a cover-up of such gigantic proportions - which if exposed would result in the ignominious ruination of the careers and lives of those who sanctioned it. 

Too daft for words IMO.

[Mr Gray]

Just like Operation Grange, the original investigation worked on more than one possibility. Just like Operation Grange one was that the child was alive, another that she was dead. They conducted a huge search of the surrounding area, did hundreds of interviews and followed up hundreds of sightings. The evidence that they did all that is in the files.

They didn't properly examine those closest to the child thoroughly enough and we have no evidence that Operation Grange have done that either.

you have no evidence that either the PJ nor SY have not investigated the mccanns

[Eleanor]

This is silly.  Short of a massive conspiracy involving hundreds of complete strangers, of course The McCanns have been investigated and ruled out.

[G-Unit]

what the facebook page shows me is the mentality of the people posting there...lots of mentioning of the dog alerts and lie detectors from poeple who clearly do not understand the evidence

Maybe it's not necessary to have a towering intellect to understand when people are trying to fool you? Many supposedly intelligent people have been fooled before and will be again.

[ferryman]

If there was evidence in existence which implicates the parents- then SY would have found it during their investigations - which involved meticulous examination of all of the files  - and all the other info which we don't have.       

So there are two possible scenarios IMO

1.  SY have found no evidence  to implicate the parents - because none exists.

or

2.  SY have found evidence to implicate the parents - but on instruction - have ignored/hidden/destroyed it.

Anyone who believes No. 2 needs to come up with credible reasons why an ordinary normal family from Leicester living an ordinary normal life could possibly merit a cover-up of such gigantic proportions - which if exposed would result in the ignominious ruination of the careers and lives of those who sanctioned it. 

Too daft for words IMO.

Exemplary post.

Apart from the last 3 letters.

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggh!

[Alice Purjorick]

If there was evidence in existence which implicates the parents- then SY would have found it during their investigations - which involved meticulous examination of all of the files  - and all the other info which we don't have.       

So there are two possible scenarios IMO

1.  SY have found no evidence  to implicate the parents - because none exists.

or

2.  SY have found evidence to implicate the parents - but on instruction - have ignored/hidden/destroyed it.

Anyone who believes No. 2 needs to come up with credible reasons why an ordinary normal family from Leicester living an ordinary normal life could possibly merit a cover-up of such gigantic proportions - which if exposed would result in the ignominious ruination of the careers and lives of those who sanctioned it. 

Too daft for words IMO.

Number 2 is as you say too daft for words but you have omitted a third possibility. There may well be other possiblities of course.
The third being being there is evidence pointing in a particular direction but lacking the sufficiency required to bring a successful prosecution against anyone.

[ferryman]

Number 2 is as you say too daft for words but you have omitted a third possibility. There may well be other possiblities of course.
The third being being there is evidence pointing in a particular direction but lacking the sufficiency required to bring a successful prosecution against anyone.

No there isn't.

[Mr Gray]

Maybe it's not necessary to have a towering intellect to understand when people are trying to fool you? Many supposedly intelligent people have been fooled before and will be again.

These people believe the dogs alerted to cadaver...false

and a lie detector would prove something...false again

that's the point I am making...the majority of people who do not believe teh mccanns do not understand the evidence and taht is easily proved by reading their posts

[Benice]

If you think the McCanns will be bothers by comments on the sun you are living in cloud cuckoo land
After all these years comments like those are like water off a ducks back

Amazing how the McCanns allow this to happen - what with them being in control of the UK press with editors unable to print a word without their permission.  (apparently).

[stephen25000]

Sadie has given her account to the people who matter ... it is for them to decide if they are a piece of the jigsaw.

Since you doubt Dr Kate McCann's words what chance has Sadie got with you?  But I don't think your opinion will weigh too much; as I have said the people who matter have been given all the information she possesses ... so why don't you leave them to it.

Well I know you believe Sadie's 'stories', and I can't help you on that.

As to the people who matter, they have found...............................................

As to ms. mccann and mr. mccann , why should anyone believe them, especially their shortcomings.

The 'locked' apartment, became 'unlocked'.

[stephen25000]

That is absurd reasoning which yet again excuses the role played by the perpetrators of crime by heaping the blame en masse onto the parents of every child who ... to paraphrase you ... 'failed to keep their children safe'.

Here it is in capitals.............

'FAILED TO KEEP THEIR CHILDREN SAFE'.

5 nights in a row, whilst they wined and dined.

Excellent parenting. &%&£(+ &%&£(+ &%&£(+