Is this a reasonable objection?

[Robittybob1]

Stephen25000 posted http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7846.msg371029#msg371029

 "Again, for the last time. There is no independent verification the window was open before McCann got there.

More light than there should be ????

Meaningless drivel."

Is it reasonable to expect an independent verification of every claim?  What sort of independent person would be around the back of the McCann's apartment between 9:00 and 10:00 PM at night?

If Matt or Russell said when they saw it at 9:30 the shutters were down what difference would that make? 
Either it could be claimed that they are not independent or that the shutters must have been opened after their observation. 
There is no way to satisfy this objection unless there were two people doing the check together and even then would they be independent?  It is an impossible objection therefore totally unreasonable to expect anyone to deliver an answer.
I think we can all question as to whether Kate is telling us the truth but if there is no proof to the contrary and she has made a statement it would be up to the likes of Stephen to prove she is lying, otherwise we must remain sceptical but don't expect someone else to prove it is true.

[ShiningInLuz]

Stephen25000 posted http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7846.msg371029#msg371029

 "Again, for the last time. There is no independent verification the window was open before McCann got there.

More light than there should be ????

Meaningless drivel."

Is it reasonable to expect independent verification of every claim?  What sort of independent person would be around the back of the McCann's apartment between 9:00 and 10:00 PM at night?

If Matt or Russell said when they saw it at 9:30 the shutters were down what difference would that make? 
Either it would be claimed that they are not independent or that the shutters must have been open after their observation. 
There is not way to satisfy this objection unless there were two people doing the check together asnd even then would they be independent.  It is an impossible objection therefore totally unreasonable to expect anyone to deliver.
I think we can all question whether Kate is telling us the truth but if there is no proof to the contrary and she has made a statement it would be up to Stephen to prove she is lying otherwise  remain sceptical but don't expect someone else to prove it is true.

The state of the shutter and the window is critical.  When the shutter went up and when the window was opened is critical.  If we had certainty about those we would be much further forward in working out what happened to Madeleine.

But we aren't.

[Robittybob1]

The state of the shutter and the window is critical.  When the shutter went up and when the window was opened is critical.  If we had certainty about those we would be much further forward in working out what happened to Madeleine.

But we aren't.

That is correct, but it shows my point that no matter how many times you demand this evidence, it doesn't just materialise.  If the PJ ever spoke to the person who admits to raising the window shutters, or to a person who saw the shutters up or down just before Kate did, they are virtually confessing to the crime, so it is very unlikely at this stage.
This is where I find Matt's evidence rather unsatisfactory for he says he did a listening check at 9:00 PM but doesn't say whether this was at just one side of the building or both sides.
But whatever they say Stephen could then demolish it by simply saying "Matt or the others (the T7) are not independent". 
If by saying "they are not independent" is Stephen including the T7 as suspects?
Suspects in some sort of conspiracy.

[Mr Gray]

The state of the shutter and the window is critical.  When the shutter went up and when the window was opened is critical.  If we had certainty about those we would be much further forward in working out what happened to Madeleine.

But we aren't.

You might not be but others are
SY have said the McCanns are not suspects and therefore believe them
I have said many times if the McCann are telling the truth and theire is no reason to suggest they are not
Then Maddie was abducted
End of

[Robittybob1]

You might not be but others are
SY have said the McCanns are not suspects and therefore believe them
I have said many times if the McCann are telling the truth and theire is no reason to suggest they are not
Then Maddie was abducted
End of

But you wouldn't be certain when the shutters were raised are you?  But if I understand you correctly you are saying at the very least "they were up before Kate enters the kid's bedroom".
Can you accept this SIL?  I can, davel does, but can you?

[Mr Gray]

What independent evidence is there that Ben Needham was playing on his own out of sight when he disappeared
There isn't any
The police have to make a decision who they believe
That's it

[Mr Gray]

But you wouldn't be certain when the shutters were raised are you?  But if I understand you correctly you are saying at the very least "they were up before Kate enters the kid's bedroom".
Can you accept this SIL?  I can, davel does, but can you?

Everything I have read and seen over the past 9 years has convinced me that the McCanns are telling the truth
Which is confirmed by SY saying they are not suspects

[Robittybob1]

Everything I have read and seen over the past 9 years has convinced me that the McCanns are telling the truth
Which is confirmed by SY saying they are not suspects

Would you ever split the McCanns down the middle? 
"Could you ever accept "Everything I have read and seen over the past 9 months has convinced me that Kate McCann is telling the truth.
Which is confirmed by SY saying she is not a suspect."

Why did Gerry turn on the light when he checked Madeleine?

[Mr Gray]

Would you ever split the McCanns down the middle? 
"Could you ever accept "Everything I have read and seen over the past 9 months has convinced me that Kate McCann is telling the truth.
Which is confirmed by SY saying she is not a suspect."

Why did Gerry turn on the light when he checked Madeleine?

No I wouldn't
The whole idea that the McCanns have told a pack of lies over the past 9 years
 Committed a multi million pound fraud and begged SY to carry on investigating them is totally ridiculous

[G-Unit]

Kate's report of their interaction with the GNR in 'Madeleine';

I reported my fears that all three children could have been sedated

Did the GNR officers totally ignore this? Did Silvia, a mother herself, totally ignore it? Are we to believe that they all brushed off Kate's reported fears that her twins were under the influence of some unknown sedative? Are we to believe that a group of doctors then decided to risk leaving two children to sleep off the effects of some unknown substance rather than insisting on medical help being called?

That's a lot to be asked to believe.

Then there's this;

One of these questions was that they wanted the PJ to be aware of was Madeleine's revelation about Wednesday night, when she said that she was left alone during the night. She told Kate and Gerry that she remembered the twins crying and that she wanted to know why neither her mother nor her father had gone to the room to see what was happening.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/STEPHEN_MARKLEY.htm

The early version of the Wednesday night crying story. It suggests that Madeleine stayed in her bed so she didn't know the answer to her question. On Tuesday night, however, she didn't stay in her bed;

He cannot say exactly, but he thinks that on Monday or Tuesday MADELEINE had slept for some time in his bedroom with KATE as she [K] had told him that one or both twins had cried making much noise.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-10MAY.htm

Madeleine came through to our bedroom, complaining that Amelie was crying and had woken her up.
'Madeleine'

Why did she actively seek put her parents that night when a twin cried but not on Wednesday night? Had she done so she would have known that they didn't come because they weren't there;

Madeleine asked the witness the reason why they had not gone to her room when the twins were crying.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN.htm

Madeleine asked the interviewee why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN.htm

Later, Madeleine is included in the crying;

Madeleine had a question for us. ‘Why didn’t you come when Sean and I cried last night?’ .......
'Madeleine'

We were puzzled. Did she mean when they were having their bath? we asked her. No, Kate, you were there, remember?
Or just after they’d gone to bed? No. Kate, you were there, remember?

Children often get a bit fractious around bedtime, though I had no recollection of any tears from either Madeleine or Sean before they settled the previous evening. And it certainly hadn’t been in the early hours, because I’d been in the room with them, even closer than usual.......Could Madeleine and Sean have woken up while we were at dinner? If so, it was worrying, obviously, but it didn’t seem very probable. Well if you didn't hear it Kate, that makes it the most probable answer, surely?

[Robittybob1]

Kate's report of their interaction with the GNR in 'Madeleine';

I reported my fears that all three children could have been sedated

Did the GNR officers totally ignore this? Did Silvia, a mother herself, totally ignore it? Are we to believe that they all brushed off Kate's reported fears that her twins were under the influence of some unknown sedative? Are we to believe that a group of doctors then decided to risk leaving two children to sleep off the effects of some unknown substance rather than insisting on medical help being called?

That's a lot to be asked to believe.

......snipped

Look I said before Silvia had a conflict of interest (COI) in the disappearance of Madeleine.  She might have heard Kate but deliberately not suggest the idea to the GNR about this. This could have been part of the COI.

[G-Unit]

Look I said before Silvia had a conflict of interest (COI) in the disappearance of Madeleine.  She might have heard Kate but deliberately not suggest the idea to the GNR about this. This could have been part of the COI.

I know what you have said, but have seen no evidence that it's true. Suggesting that Silvia deliberately didn't translate what Kate said is quite unfounded.

Please explain why a group of doctors didn't insist on getting the twins checked out, if, as Kate suggests, they thought they may have been given an unknown substance to sedate them? I thought that was drummed into them during their training?

[jassi]

I know what you have said, but have seen no evidence that it's true. Suggesting that Silvia deliberately didn't translate what Kate said is quite unfounded.

Please explain why a group of doctors didn't insist on getting the twins checked out, if, as Kate suggests, they thought they may have been given an unknown substance to sedate them? I thought that was drummed into them during their training?

Being doctors, themselves, I'm sure they considered their own expertise  superior to anything Portugal would have to offer.

[Mr Gray]

I know what you have said, but have seen no evidence that it's true. Suggesting that Silvia deliberately didn't translate what Kate said is quite unfounded.

Please explain why a group of doctors didn't insist on getting the twins checked out, if, as Kate suggests, they thought they may have been given an unknown substance to sedate them? I thought that was drummed into them during their training?

I can explain exactly why
The fact that the twins vital signs were normal meant that they were not in danger and any sedative was wearing off

[ShiningInLuz]

But you wouldn't be certain when the shutters were raised are you?  But if I understand you correctly you are saying at the very least "they were up before Kate enters the kid's bedroom".
Can you accept this SIL?  I can, davel does, but can you?

I have limited information as to when the shutter was raised and the window opened.  That it was is not the question.  It is when?