The Sun claims Madeleine McCann was kidnapped during a botched burglary.

[Alice Purjorick]

The event could have taken place anywhere in the world where there were ...

(a)  locals prepared to assist
(b)  and to carry out the task
(c)  and to keep their mouths shut after the event

Perhaps Praia da Luz fitted that criteria.

The event can take place anywhere in the world period.

I am still waiting for someone to give me the first steps in this "theory".
The first one is a bit chicken and egg but I can see why no one who proposes the planned abduction is willing to take it on.
With the result that the proposition as ducked dived is akin to a Rutland Weekend Television sketch.

[G-Unit]

With respect G - your previous statement (below)  to which I replied - strongly contradicts what you say above as you made no exceptions IMO.   

Quote
' Yobs and petty burglars are not child abductors no matter how much people try to equate them. Even they have standards, believe it or not. ''
unquote

Are yobs and petty burglars also child abductors then? Maybe some do multi-task but that's not a valid reason for suggesting that specific ones in a certain geographical location fit that profile, which is what some people seem to be trying to do imo.

I get upset by assumptions because so much harm is done by relying on them. People have been convicted and hanged for crimes because police assumed the actual perpetrator was a respectable middle-class person.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Christie_(murderer)#Mistakes_in_the_investigation

[ShiningInLuz]

The event can take place anywhere in the world period.

I am still waiting for someone to give me the first steps in this "theory".
The first one is a bit chicken and egg but I can see why no one who proposes the planned abduction is willing to take it on.
With the result that the proposition as ducked dived is akin to a Rutland Weekend Television sketch.

The event did not take place anywhere in the world, though.  It took place in Luz.  So why Luz?  The options are that the event was totally random, therefore Luz was unlucky, and Madeleine was unlucky.  Or Luz was in some way special.  Whilst Madeleine was unlucky (random) or else fitted some criteria.

I have made it clear that there is insufficient evidence in the public domain to 'solve' the case.

That is blindingly obvious.  If it could be solved with information in the public domain, OG would hardly have been necessary, let alone racked £12 million.

I have also made it clear there is more in the files to support the line I have proposed, down to named individuals, but as I cannot prove this theorem, to name such individuals would be libel.

These are all simple concepts.  You appear to be unwilling to consult the files to get to the people who could make this happen.  That is your choice.

But to state no one has given you a start point is both a factual error and nonsense.

[Alice Purjorick]

The event did not take place anywhere in the world, though.  It took place in Luz.  So why Luz?  The options are that the event was totally random, therefore Luz was unlucky, and Madeleine was unlucky.  Or Luz was in some way special.  Whilst Madeleine was unlucky (random) or else fitted some criteria.

I have made it clear that there is insufficient evidence in the public domain to 'solve' the case.

That is blindingly obvious.  If it could be solved with information in the public domain, OG would hardly have been necessary, let alone racked £12 million.

I have also made it clear there is more in the files to support the line I have proposed, down to named individuals, but as I cannot prove this theorem, to name such individuals would be libel.

These are all simple concepts.  You appear to be unwilling to consult the files to get to the people who could make this happen.  That is your choice.

But to state no one has given you a start point is both a factual error and nonsense.

1. I have read the relevant bits in the files. I have told you that but you seem to unwilling to believe I have because I am questioning your theory which thus far you have failed dismally to support. I can read the files and weave a fairy story too.
2 No one has yet said what the primary event was despite my having asked several times. In the event I may have missed that post in all the excitement humour me and remind me what was the primary event.
You should be able to do it in a sentence and in generic terms so not being libellous.

If no one can come up with a straightforward response and identify the primary event then include me out.

[Brietta]

1. I have read the relevant bits in the files. I have told you that but you seem to unwilling to believe I have because I am questioning your theory which thus far you have failed dismally to support. I can read the files and weave a fairy story too.
2 No one has yet said what the primary event was despite my having asked several times. In the event I may have missed that post in all the excitement humour me and remind me what was the primary event.
You should be able to do it in a sentence and in generic terms so not being libellous.

If no one can come up with a straightforward response and identify the primary event then include me out.

How can anyone not immediately involved in Madeleine's abduction conjure up the primary event?  It is my opinion your negativity about Shining's posts is because she is hitting too close to the bone and has brought something to the equation that if not totally ignored has seldom been discussed in any depth.

Bit of a cop out to rule yourself out on the basis of an impossible diktat instead of entering into the discussion which at the least has the advantage of being a bit different.

[G-Unit]

How can anyone not immediately involved in Madeleine's abduction conjure up the primary event?  It is my opinion your negativity about Shining's posts is because she is hitting too close to the bone and has brought something to the equation that if not totally ignored has seldom been discussed in any depth.

Bit of a cop out to rule yourself out on the basis of an impossible diktat instead of entering into the discussion which at the least has the advantage of being a bit different.

It rests upon the specific booking system used by Mark Warner. I have been told the Thomas Cook system was different but no link to that system was provided so I don't know if that's fact or rumour.

This unique MW system apparently allowed certain people to be pinpointed before arrival and that info to be shared with other unnamed people. We need reasons to believe that people would share information. How were they approached and persuaded?

Keys are mentioned. The mechanics of who, why and how are ignored.

Lots of questions there to kick start a discussion, but no answers being offered.

[ShiningInLuz]

It rests upon the specific booking system used by Mark Warner. I have been told the Thomas Cook system was different but no link to that system was provided so I don't know if that's fact or rumour.

This unique MW system apparently allowed certain people to be pinpointed before arrival and that info to be shared with other unnamed people. We need reasons to believe that people would share information. How were they approached and persuaded?

Keys are mentioned. The mechanics of who, why and how are ignored.

Lots of questions there to kick start a discussion, but no answers being offered.

I may be mixing up Thomas Cook with Thompsons, and if that is the case, mea culpa.  Just compare and contrast the two major tour operators at the time, and make up your own mind about what level of information appears on the MW arrivals list that does not appear on the other.

The reason as to why the individual might have been involved at this level of activity is documented in the files.  Note I have stressed 'might', as I definitely cannot prove 'was'.

Said individual could determine where the T9 were to be accommodated, had access to the keys and is on file as saying the T9 would probably choose Tapas over Millennium, due to the distances involved.

Said individual had no control over 1) whether the T9 all had decent baby monitors 2) whether the T9 used the crèche or had a nanny sit in 3) whether the T9 took their children to the Tapas a la Stephen Carpenter 4) whether the T9 conducted checks every 5 minutes or not.

Point 4) is predictable and provides the major window of opportunity in both a botched burglary and a pre-planned abduction.  While the T9 stated the checks were time driven (i.e. look at watch, 30mins has gone by, must go and check) nothing supports this and various statements suggest otherwise.  The visits appear to be largely event driven.  I can find no evidence whatsoever of any of the checkers looking at their watches, during either starters or mains, deciding the time had come for a check, and getting up and leaving the meal half-eaten to conduct a check.

Everything supports that when starters began to be served, the checkers stayed at the table until they had eaten, then did any check between starters and mains.  Seeing starters come out would give a perpetrator a quite limited window of opportunity to act.  I can't remember off hand if Gerry's check was before or after starters, because it is not particularly significant.  At the time of Gerry's check, it was still too light to conduct a burglary/abduction/body disposal with any degree of safety.

That moves us to around 9.30, when it WAS dark enough to carry out the deed under the cover of darkness.  Two checkers go, one stays behind re a sick child (also an event a burglar/abductor could not possibly control) and Matthew pops into 5A to do his check, which does not involve actually checking Madeleine.

Matthew returns to the table.  We are now back into event-driven checking.  Mains start to be served.  As per usual, none of the checkers gets up with a meal half-eaten.  One checker eats her meal hurriedly, then goes to take over from her partner, but no-one leaves until his/her mains have been consumed.  This switch between one partner and another is out of pattern, but I don't see that as being important either.

A burglar or an abductor who had any inkling of the T9 routine should have been into 5A as soon as the mains started to be served.  It is the longest, most predictable window of opportunity for that night.  Neither burglary nor abduction requires more than one perpetrator.

That perpetrator does not have to be the person making the T9 arrangements.  I have no evidence to support it was, or was not.  It just has to be a perpetrator willing to take a risk.  With the knowledge I have detailed that risk gets minimised, but of course it might have been lightning-strike random instead.

I have already pointed, as clearly as I am going to, to the small group of people with access to the knowledge, with access to the keys, and with ability to control.  I can only make it clearer by naming names, and I'm not prepared to do that, even if everything is covered in the files.

[Alice Purjorick]

How can anyone not immediately involved in Madeleine's abduction conjure up the primary event?  It is my opinion your negativity about Shining's posts is because she is hitting too close to the bone and has brought something to the equation that if not totally ignored has seldom been discussed in any depth.

Bit of a cop out to rule yourself out on the basis of an impossible diktat instead of entering into the discussion which at the least has the advantage of being a bit different.

If you are making a postulation you must know the primary event in that postulation.
If you don't like the term primary event then think of it as a start point or trigger. Given the postulation is the operation was a planned abduction then you have two options for the start point or trigger. Were it planned the job certainly didn't start in the middle now did it?
Your semi goading remarks notwithstanding I am not discussing fairy stories where the story teller does not even know where it begins.

[stephen25000]

How can anyone not immediately involved in Madeleine's abduction conjure up the primary event?  It is my opinion your negativity about Shining's posts is because she is hitting too close to the bone and has brought something to the equation that if not totally ignored has seldom been discussed in any depth.

Bit of a cop out to rule yourself out on the basis of an impossible diktat instead of entering into the discussion which at the least has the advantage of being a bit different.

Do you think that by constantly repeating abduction as if it is a fact, people will believe you ?

Surely even you must realize beyond the mantra, nothing has been proved one way or the other, as regards Madeleine's fate.

[ShiningInLuz]

How can anyone not immediately involved in Madeleine's abduction conjure up the primary event?  It is my opinion your negativity about Shining's posts is because she is hitting too close to the bone and has brought something to the equation that if not totally ignored has seldom been discussed in any depth.

Bit of a cop out to rule yourself out on the basis of an impossible diktat instead of entering into the discussion which at the least has the advantage of being a bit different.

'Primary event' is moveable goalposts.  If primary event = when was it possible to start detailed planning on the T9, I have covered it.  If primary event = when did such capability first arrive in Luz, I have covered it.

If primary event = when did orderer and facilitator first get in touch to discuss the order and determine the compensation, then quite clearly it is an impossible challenge.

For all I know, orderer, facilitator and perpetrator could all be the same person, or they could be different people who had recently come into contact or alternatively went back donkey's years.  Without solving the crime, how am I able to get at this information?

[ShiningInLuz]

If you are making a postulation you must know the primary event in that postulation.
If you don't like the term primary event then think of it as a start point or trigger. Given the postulation is the operation was a planned abduction then you have two options for the start point or trigger. Were it planned the job certainly didn't start in the middle now did it?
Your semi goading remarks notwithstanding I am not discussing fairy stories where the story teller does not even know where it begins.

Feel free not to discuss this idea.

However, putting 'semi goading remarks' and 'fairy stories' in the same sentence is a bit rich, is it not?

For guests who may not know my position on the case, I have quite recently explained to members, in considerable detail, that a number of alternative solutions are possible, and pre-planned abduction is just one of these alternatives.

I have also made it clear that my understanding of the case is incomplete.  By that, I mean I can get all the alternatives to add up to about 40%, when if I understood everything well, they should add up to around 100%.

I've got to say I am a bit surprised any of the senior posters are unaware of this.

But to put it in plain and simple English, this is just one alternative out of several, and I cannot prove it happened this way.  I hope that is clear enough.

[Brietta]

Does anyone here remember if there is anything in PJ files about Malinka's car arson? I only have a Daily Mail article of March 21, 2008.

Many thanks.

My post on Praia da Luz yobs: http://espacioexterior.blogspot.com.es/2016/05/the-madeleine-mccann-abduction-role.html

I don't know if there is anything about it in the files but I came across this while browsing ... the link no longer exists.

21 Março 2008 - 12.17h

O carro de Sergey Malinka foi ontem destruído pelas chamas, na Praia da Luz Malinka alvo de ataque


No passeio, ao lado do carro destruído de Sergey Malinka, por cima do qual ainda foi deitado lixo depois de incendiado, foi deixado escrito, em letras bem visíveis, garrafais e de cor encarnada, uma única palavra: “FALA”.

"Fala": o ‘recado’ a Sergey Malinka foi deixado, em letras cor de sangue, no passeio da rua 25 de Abril, na Praia da Luz, ao lado do seu automóvel em chamas. A destruição do Audi A4 do informático russo, amigo de Robert Murat, que foi um dos primeiros suspeitos do desaparecimento de Maddie, ocorreu � s 04h00 de ontem.

'Já não sei o que hei-de fazer', desabafou Malinka ao CM, 'vou �  igreja todas as semanas, pago as minhas taxas, eu não mereço isto?'. O russo diz que não percebe a mensagem deixada no passeio e está 'farto' do caso Madeleine. 'Quero que me deixem em paz', reclama.
Malinka mora a escassos 30 metros do local, mas só soube do sucedido quando acordou. Outra viatura, um Opel Zaphira, foi também atingida pelas chamas sofrendo danos avultados.
'Estava a dormir e ouvi uma explosão, na rua', disse ao CM Baltazar Cristino, morador na zona, 'apanhei um susto enorme e fui ver o que se passava, o carro estava a arder e os bombeiros e a GNR já lá estavam'. Depois chegou a PJ que, juntamente com os bombeiros, limpou o ‘aviso’ do passeio.
Assustada ficou também Jennifer, que mora no local. 'Não sabia o que se estava a passar, pensei que alguém andasse a vandalizar carros a eito, mas as autoridades disseram-me para estar tranquila porque aquilo era um caso direccionado para uma só pessoa, mas não me indicaram quem', referiu.
Ao CM, já depois de feita a peritagem �  viatura, a PJ admitiu que se tratou de crime mas, para já, não há suspeitos.
PJ AFASTA SUSPEITAS DE LIGAÇÃO
'Não houve qualquer inflexão no inquérito', disse ao CM fonte próxima da investigação do caso Madeleine, perante a hipótese de Sergey Malinka voltar a estar sob suspeita. 'Foi ouvido apenas porque é queixoso num novo crime', diz a mesma fonte, afastando suspeitas de ligação do russo ao desaparecimento de Maddie. Inicialmente, Malinka foi ouvido apenas como testemunha e por ter feito a página on-line da Romigen – a empresa de Murat e Michaela Walczuch. Entretanto, ontem, fonte ligada �  investigação voltou a confirmar ao CM que ainda não há qualquer data definida para a partida dos inspectores para Inglaterra. E só lá se saberá se os McCann serão interrogados de novo. l
PORMENORES
TELEFONEMAS
Malinka só soube do sucedido de manhã, quando acordou. 'Tinha 32 chamadas não atendidas dos meus pais, quando falei com eles é que me disseram, a chorar', contou ao CM.
SEGURO
O carro de Sergey Malinka não tinha seguro contra este tipo de acidente. 'É perda total', admitiu, acrescentando que 'se calhar ainda tenho de pagar o arranjo do outro carro'.
CRIME
A Judiciária tomou conta do caso por se tratar de um crime que está sob a alçada da PJ. O russo explicou que se limitou a assinar 'uns papéis' e nada de particular lhe foi perguntado.

Ana Palma / João Mira Godinho

http://www.correiomanha.pt/Noticia.aspx ... DD100C3F14

March 21, 2008 - 12.17h


The car Sergey Malinka was yesterday destroyed by flames, in Praia da Luz Malinka attack target


On the ride side of the car destroyed to Sergey Malinka , above which was still lying waste after burned , it was left written in bold , bold and red color letters, one word: " SPEAK ."

"Speak": the 'message' to Sergey Malinka was left in blood-red letters, the walking street on April 25, in Praia da Luz, next to his car on fire. The destruction of the Audi A4 Russian computer, a friend of Robert Murat, who was one of the first suspects in the disappearance of Maddie, was 04.00 yesterday.

'I do not know what I will do,' unburdened Malinka to CM, 'I go to church every week, pay my taxes, I do not deserve this?'. The Russian says he does not realize the message left on the sidewalk and is 'fed up' Madeleine case.

'I want you to leave me alone', complains.

Malinka lives just 30 meters away, but only learned of what happened when he woke up. Another car, an Opel Zaphira, was also hit by the flames suffering substantial damage.

'I was asleep and I heard an explosion in the street, "said the CM Baltazar Cristino, a resident in the area,' I caught a huge fright and went to see what was happening, the car was on fire and firefighters and GNR were already there '. Then came the PJ that, along with the fire department cleared the 'warning' ride.

Startled was also Jennifer, who lives on site. 'I did not know what was going on, I thought someone had walked vandalizing cars in rows, but the authorities told me to be quiet because it was a targeted event for one person, but did not show me who' he said.

The CM, after already made expertise to the vehicle, the PJ admitted that it was a crime but for now, there are no suspects.

PJ PULL BACK CONNECTION SUSPICIOUS

'There was no inflection in the investigation, "said the CM source close to Madeleine case investigation before the hypothesis Sergey Malinka again be under suspicion.
'It was heard only because it is plaintiff in a new crime, "says the same source, away connecting suspected Russian disappearance of Maddie.

Initially, Malinka was heard only as a witness and to have made the online page Romigen - Murat and Michaela Walczuch company. However, yesterday, a source linked to the research reconfirmed the CM that there is still no date set for the departure of inspectors to England. And just there to know if the McCann will be questioned again. l

DETAILS
CALLING
Malinka only learned of what happened in the morning when he woke up. 'I had 32 missed calls from my parents, when I spoke with them is they told me, crying, "said the CM.

SAFE
The car Sergey Malinka had no insurance against this type of accident. 'It is a total loss, "he admitted, adding that' maybe I still have to pay the arrangement of the other car."

CRIME
The judiciary took over the case because it is a crime that falls under the jurisdiction of PJ. The Russian explained that merely sign "some papers" and nothing in particular he was asked.

[John]

Are yobs and petty burglars also child abductors then? Maybe some do multi-task but that's not a valid reason for suggesting that specific ones in a certain geographical location fit that profile, which is what some people seem to be trying to do imo.

I get upset by assumptions because so much harm is done by relying on them. People have been convicted and hanged for crimes because police assumed the actual perpetrator was a respectable middle-class person.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Christie_(murderer)#Mistakes_in_the_investigation

I agree G-Unit, I don't think anyone should be labelling youths in Praia da Luz as child abductors simply because they are capable of yobish behaviour and might have a conviction or two for petty theft.

I personally think Heriberto's blog above depicting the XRX team videos is extremely dangerous/judgemental and verges on the libellous.  There is no direct evidence that either of the two men he mentions have had anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance.

[Mr Gray]

Feel free not to discuss this idea.

However, putting 'semi goading remarks' and 'fairy stories' in the same sentence is a bit rich, is it not?

For guests who may not know my position on the case, I have quite recently explained to members, in considerable detail, that a number of alternative solutions are possible, and pre-planned abduction is just one of these alternatives.

I have also made it clear that my understanding of the case is incomplete.  By that, I mean I can get all the alternatives to add up to about 40%, when if I understood everything well, they should add up to around 100%.

I've got to say I am a bit surprised any of the senior posters are unaware of this.

But to put it in plain and simple English, this is just one alternative out of several, and I cannot prove it happened this way.  I hope that is clear enough.

You need to start with the alternatives...parental involvement....abduction from apartment... woke and wandered


those have to add up to 100 unless you can think of other alternatives

[John]

I tend to favour the woke and wandered, met with an accident and was lifted.