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

[Mr Gray]

Unfortunately for Kate there is no independent corroboration that the window was found open.  It might have been open, it might not. Even if it was found open that in itself does not support the abduction theory.

as you know John the whole thing depends on whether the investigating police force regard Kate as truthful...amaral didn't...SY do. If Kate is telling the truth...the window was opened and someone opened it. SY have to decide if Kate is a credible witness. it seems like they have decided she is

[pegasus]

(snip) Even if it was found open that in itself does not support the abduction theory.

Agreed 100% John.
The window being opened from outside before 10pm is completely consistent with non-abduction.

[pathfinder73]

Pathfinder unless you can give an exact step-by-step description of how you would open that window from inside, leaving 5 prints all on the glass, then you are not qualified to accuse KM of doing what you can't.

Evidence Peggy. Don't criminals wear gloves in Portugal?

[pegasus]

I don't see that any prints on the inside of the window need be contemporary with it being opened. They might have been made days earlier.

A good general point, however this was almost certainly the first time this witness touched the window, therefore her prints on the glass were made when she leaned to look out of the already open window at about 10pm on the 3rd.

How people can possibly claim the 5 prints on glass indicate she opened the window is a mystery to me. If she'd opened the window she would have used the handle, not the glass - it's just common sense.

[pathfinder73]

A good general point, however this was almost certainly the first time this witness touched the window, therefore her prints on the glass were made when she leaned to look out of the already open window at about 10pm on the 3rd.

How people can possibly claim the 5 prints on glass indicate she opened the window is a mystery to me. If she'd opened the window she would have used the handle, not the glass - it's just common sense.

None of that is her police statements in 2007. Stop talking for another person. You are not Kate.

[jassi]

A good general point, however this was almost certainly the first time this witness touched the window, therefore her prints on the glass were made when she leaned to look out of the already open window at about 10pm on the 3rd.

How people can possibly claim the 5 prints on glass indicate she opened the window is a mystery to me. If she'd opened the window she would have used the handle, not the glass - it's just common sense.

What do you base that on - another uncorroborated statement?

[pegasus]

Evidence Peggy. Don't criminals wear gloves in Portugal?

Yes burglars do wear gloves.
And tourists use window handles Pathfinder.
Please explain exactly how you consider prints all on glass as evidence of her opening the window.
If she'd opened it she would have used the handle.

[stephen25000]

Look at a photo of the window handle and its two buttons.
Imagine you are inside the bedroom and want open the window - how would you do it?
Leaving 5 identifiable prints on the glass and none anywhere else.
If you can't do that, then it's unfair to claim that KM did.

I amfamiliar with tthat type of window.

Your assertion does not add up.

[stephen25000]

KM clearly stated that she found the window and shutter already open.
There is absolutely no evidence to indicate she is lying - if there is please post it.

If you're claiming there is a fingerprint indicating she opened the window, please post a photo or file reference of it.
Unless you can post some actual evidence that the witness is lying, the reasonable presumption must surely be that she is telling the truth.

The only place a witness is judged is in court.

Otherwise it is opinion.  many oeople do not believe kaye mccanns version of events.

[Mr Gray]

The only place a witness is judged is in court.

Otherwise it is opinion.

Try to comprehend Pegasus, many oeople do not believe kaye mccanns version of events.

it is still opinion in court as I have explained to you many times....most poeple ...including SY do believe the McCanns

[Eleanor]

Any further Comments containing insults will be deleted in full.

[pegasus]

What do you base that on - another uncorroborated statement?

It's based on KM statements Jassi.
If you start out assuming this witness is not truthful, and if you are wrong, you guarantee you will not solve the case, because by rejecting everything that the most important witness (apart from the missing child) states, you would lose a large part of the accurate information needed to solve the case.

[jassi]

It's based on KM statements Jassi.
If you start out assuming this witness is not truthful, and if you are wrong, you guarantee you will not solve the case, because by rejecting everything that the most important witness (apart from the missing child) states, you would lose a large part of the accurate information needed to solve the case.

I'm not trying to solve the case. What gave you that idea?
I know there are some who see themselves as a latter day Miss Marple, but not me.
I'll leave that to the professional detectives.

[Mr Gray]

It's based on KM statements Jassi.
If you start out assuming this witness is not truthful, and if you are wrong, you guarantee you will not solve the case, because by rejecting everything that the most important witness (apart from the missing child) states, you would lose a large part of the accurate information needed to solve the case.

#
you are absolutely right and i have said this many times. SY have to make a decision ..is Kate telling the truth...and if she is then abduction is odds on...as SY seem to believe

[pegasus]

The only evidence for a burglary attempt is the open shutter and window.

Think about it - if you claim that KM opened the window, you are really completely ruling out a burglary attempt.