Kate McCann: I believe kidnapper drugged my twins night Madeleine was taken.

[jassi]

What is the truth?

Whatever you want it to be     Just don't expect everyone to agree with you.

[Alfie]

If that is what he actually said, of course, which he didn't. He actually said 'Yes, I mean, you know, we have conducted a forensic analysis of the timeline, and there is clearly opportunity there - for Madeleine McCann to have been removed from that apartment alive - and it is our belief, as experienced investigators - on the evidence, that, um that you know, that that, that is as a criminal act - and that has been, you know, undertaken by by a stranger,
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/60april12/ITV1_27_04_2012.htm

He says there was opportunity within the timeline for Madeleine McCann to have been taken from the apartment alive. He doesn't say it happened, he says it could have happened.

You've highlighted everything except this bit: it is our belief,  

Now, let's look at the sentence with all the stuttering repetition removed: it is our belief, as experienced investigators - on the evidence, that that is (as) a criminal act that has been undertaken by by a stranger.

He did not say "if".

[ferryman]

I think Redwood should have added "if she was taken" to that assertion.

Why?

Redwood would have made his assertion from a position of much fuller and more complete information than that available to anyone on-line.

[Mr Gray]

You've highlighted everything except this bit: it is our belief,  

Now, let's look at the sentence with all the stuttering repetition removed: it is our belief, as experienced investigators - on the evidence, that that is (as) a criminal act that has been undertaken by by a stranger.

He did not say "if".

Based on the evidence

[G-Unit]

You've highlighted everything except this bit: it is our belief,  

Now, let's look at the sentence with all the stuttering repetition removed: it is our belief, as experienced investigators - on the evidence, that that is (as) a criminal act that has been undertaken by by a stranger.

He did not say "if".

Saying there was an opportunity for something to have happened is not the same as saying it did happen. That's where the 'if' comes in.

[Alfie]

Saying there was an opportunity for something to have happened is not the same as saying it did happen. That's where the 'if' comes in.

Spin it any way you want it if it makes you happier.  The fact is Redwood stated clearly that after forensically studying the timeline that his team had identified a window of opportunity for a stranger abductor to strike, and based on the evidence that is what they believed happened.  That is precisely how his words were interpreted and reported by news media around the world, it's peculiar that they all got it so incredibly wrong and only a handful of "sceptics" got it "right", don't you think?

[Mr Gray]

Saying there was an opportunity for something to have happened is not the same as saying it did happen. That's where the 'if' comes in.

he says there is an opportunity and based on the evidence....
which many on here are in denial about.....
the fact that he mentions evidence shows he is referring to something that has happened

[stephen25000]

Clarence Mitchell..

“There was no evidence of a break-in''

Quite right.

No scuff marks on the window, no fingerprints identified other than Kate Mccann's.

The non-responsiveness of the children.

No drug/sedative tests, a failure of the Police and the Mccann's.

No trail of abduction/kidnapping.

Zero leads with relation to paedophiles in Portugal or elsewhere.

The dog's indications in several areas, but no indications of material/items not relating to the Mccann's.

So in reality, other than the dog's indications, NOTHING.

[Robittybob1]

Clarence Mitchell..

“There was no evidence of a break-in''

Quite right.

No scuff marks on the window, no fingerprints identified other than Kate Mccann's.

The non-responsiveness of the children.

No drug/sedative tests, a failure of the Police and the Mccann's.

No trail of abduction/kidnapping.

Zero leads with relation to paedophiles in Portugal or elsewhere.

The dog's indications in several areas, but no indications of material/items not relating to the Mccann's.

So in reality, other than the dog's indications, NOTHING.

The McCanns tried to get the twins drug tested.  Who stopped them?  You would have to look at the translator who clearly had a conflict of interest, who appeared very helpful but turned against them in the end.

[stephen25000]

The McCanns tried to get the twins drug tested.  Who stopped them?  You would have to look at the translator who clearly had a conflict of interest, who appeared very helpful but turned against them in the end.

No Rob, there is no indication or statement to support that.

Why would a translator have a conflict of interest ?

That makes no sense at all.

[Robittybob1]

No Rob, there is no indication or statement to support that.

Why would a translator have a conflict of interest ?

That makes no sense at all.

Kate says it in her book, and two Liaison officers admit the topic was brought up on the 5th. It was raised again later when Kate was made arguido according to the file.

There are many reasons the translator had a conflict of interest and I have covered them as much as I can in the thread on the topic. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7864.0

[Mr Gray]

Clarence Mitchell..

“There was no evidence of a break-in''

Quite right.

No scuff marks on the window, no fingerprints identified other than Kate Mccann's.

The non-responsiveness of the children.

No drug/sedative tests, a failure of the Police and the Mccann's.

No trail of abduction/kidnapping.

Zero leads with relation to paedophiles in Portugal or elsewhere.

The dog's indications in several areas, but no indications of material/items not relating to the Mccann's.

So in reality, other than the dog's indications, NOTHING.

No evidence of a break in so perhaps they had a key
You can keep your head in the sand but you are looking more and more isolated

[stephen25000]

The only people looking increasingly isolated are the McCann's and those who insist on 'abduction'.

Not a jot of evidence to show abduction, that can't be explained by the other scenarios.

Just the dog's indications.

That is why, there has been an attack on Martin Grimes, and the dog's deployment, since they were deployed and the indications were made known.

[Mr Gray]

The only people looking increasingly isolated are the McCann's and those who insist on 'abduction'.

Not a jot of evidence to show abduction, that can't be explained by the other scenarios.

Just the dog's indications.

That is why, there has been an attack on Martin Grimes, and the dog's deployment, since they were deployed and the indications were made known.

How many things can one person get wrong

[Robittybob1]

I quoted it about 2 weeks ago.  It is in the file itself somewhere.

I found it through Google http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CRECHE_ANOMALIES.htm

 "Sign-in/check-in Warner/Creche lists
The McCann case: anomalies in the case file
Since a small part of the case file - the DVD version was made accessible to the public, a great deal of ink has flowed. We note that it is necessary to be cautious as to its contents. In fact, it is only 17% of the complete case file and certain details are only of interest in relation to the complete file and not taken out of their context.