Author Topic: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?  (Read 41379 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Robittybob1

  • Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 16055
  • Total likes: 2488
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
    • The Lord Jesus - search for Madeleine McCann
Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« on: January 18, 2017, 09:37:35 PM »
Who goes for an abduction as a possible solution?
I do, and I know Sadie does,
I know Stephen doesn't.
Alfie must think it is likely.

My theory was a two stage abduction.  There was the possible taking of Madeleine from her bed or walking and wandering part, and that is followed by the abduction.  So my initial thoughts were along the line that the "abductor" was never in the apartment.  It is really hard to build a workable scenario around these initial thoughts.

As I am exploring in another thread my findings so far are that none of the Tapas 9 (excluding Kate) initially thought Madeleine had been abducted.  Their initial thoughts were that she would be around the buildings or grounds somewhere, so they must have been thinking something like the woke and wandered scenario.
This is their thoughts even though they are generally aware that Kate and others had seen the window open and the shutters up.  (That in itself becomes quite contradictory.)

658
« Last Edit: January 30, 2017, 01:00:19 AM by John »
What are you doing to find Madeleine?

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2017, 10:58:25 PM »
Take the primary effect as being the child disappearing from her room.
St Thomas Aquinas teaches us that every effect has at least two causes, he also implies that causes may be condition or action. So the basic principles ain’t exactly some new kind of Voodoo man.
Any theory must accommodate the available known evidence*.
*“the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid”.
Note facts not speculation.
Method:
1 Define the primary effect.
2 Determine the known causal relationships including the actions and conditions of each subsidiary effect.
3 Show the causal relationships to including specific action and conditional causes.
4 Show evidence to support the existence of each cause.
5 Determine if each set of causes is sufficient and necessary to cause the effect.

For there to have been an abduction the paths of the child and abductor must cross so either the child vacated the apartment or the abductor gained access to the apartment. Using known evidence show how either was possible.





« Last Edit: January 19, 2017, 06:17:00 AM by Eleanor »
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Brietta

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2017, 11:03:13 PM »
Who goes for an abduction as a possible solution?
I do, and I know Sadie does,
I know Stephen doesn't.
Alfie must think it is likely.

My theory was a two stage abduction.  There was the possible taking of Madeleine from her bed or walking and wandering part, and that is followed by the abduction.  So my initial thoughts were along the line that the "abductor" was never in the apartment.  It is really hard to build a workable scenario around these initial thoughts.

As I am exploring in another thread my findings so far are that none of the Tapas 9 (excluding Kate) initially thought Madeleine had been abducted.  Their initial thoughts were that she would be around the buildings or grounds somewhere, so they must have been thinking something like the woke and wandered scenario.
This is their thoughts even though they are generally aware that Kate and others had seen the window open and the shutters up.  (That in itself becomes quite contradictory.)

I'm not sure exactly how close you sail along buffeted by the winds of libel but you certainly have a knack of introducing apparently innocuous thought processes informed by every slanderous allegation in the lexicon and then some.

In my opinion you are inventive in adding to the wealth of misinformation by putting your own interpretation on events in a way which no-one else has even thought about.

Your factoid regarding the thought processes of the McCann companions being the current one.

Boy oh boy ... I really do take my hat off to you.
The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ...  "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)"

Offline Robittybob1

  • Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 16055
  • Total likes: 2488
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
    • The Lord Jesus - search for Madeleine McCann
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2017, 11:12:13 PM »
I'm not sure exactly how close you sail along buffeted by the winds of libel but you certainly have a knack of introducing apparently innocuous thought processes informed by every slanderous allegation in the lexicon and then some.

In my opinion you are inventive in adding to the wealth of misinformation by putting your own interpretation on events in a way which no-one else has even thought about.

Your factoid regarding the thought processes of the McCann companions being the current one.

Boy oh boy ... I really do take my hat off to you.
I would hate to get a letter in the mail, so I sail as close to the wind as is safely possible.
I think exploring their thoughts and reactions could show something about what they know, but in the end no matter what we discover, there is still this other abductor out there.
I think Gerry said something like this in an interview, "there is still this abductor out there". 
« Last Edit: January 18, 2017, 11:15:37 PM by Robittybob1 »
What are you doing to find Madeleine?

Offline Robittybob1

  • Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 16055
  • Total likes: 2488
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
    • The Lord Jesus - search for Madeleine McCann
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2017, 11:33:51 PM »
Take the primary effect as being the child disappearing from her room.
St Thomas Aquinas teaches us that every effect has at least two causes, he also implies that causes may be condition or action. So the basic principles ain’t exactly some new kind of Voodoo man.
Any theory must accommodate the available known evidence*.
*“the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid”.
Note facts not speculation.
Method:
1 Define the primary effect.
2 Determine the known causal relationships including the actions and conditions of each subsidiary effect.
3 Show the causal relationships to including specific action and conditional causes.
4 Show evidence to support the existence of each cause.
5 Determine if each set of causes is sufficient and necessary to cause the effect.

For there to have been an abduction the paths of the child and abductor must cross so either the child vacated the apartment or the abductor gained access to the apartment. Using known evidence show how either was possible.


I wouldn't comprehend anything Thomas Aquinas said but I do follow your line "For there to have been an abduction the paths of the child and abductor must cross so either the child vacated the apartment or the abductor gained access to the apartment. Using known evidence show how either was possible."

Known evidence:
For the " the child vacated the apartment" abduction theory.
1. it is dark and there is space and cover so an abductor could observe the McCann apartment without being seen.
2. if the child came to him as in a woke and wander situation he doesn't need to enter the apartment (evidence -no sign of forced entry)
3.  The tapas 8 (9-1) thought she is closeby and search the immediate areas without success. (Evidence in the statements)
4. Man seen carrying child by the Smith family (all Tapas 9 are accounted for so not one of them)  Potential abductor.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2017, 06:22:26 AM by Eleanor »
What are you doing to find Madeleine?

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2017, 09:25:22 AM »
The door to the apartment was unlocked - known fact.
Therefore the apartment was not secure - known fact.
An abductor could gain access to the apartment without breaking and entering.
That's how it was possible.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy, and that's just using the known facts. 

Offline Robittybob1

  • Moderator
  • Veteran Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 16055
  • Total likes: 2488
  • Wisdom and understanding please.
    • The Lord Jesus - search for Madeleine McCann
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2017, 09:38:04 AM »
The door to the apartment was unlocked - known fact.
Therefore the apartment was not secure - known fact.
An abductor or anyone else interfering could gain access to the apartment without breaking and entering.

What are you doing to find Madeleine?

Offline Faithlilly

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2017, 10:20:07 AM »
The door to the apartment was unlocked - known fact.
Therefore the apartment was not secure - known fact.
An abductor could gain access to the apartment without breaking and entering.
That's how it was possible.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy, and that's just using the known facts.

And the constantly opening and closing door?

And the open window and shutters?
Moral Guilt
Detractors of the work of our British Police in bringing criminals to justice generally ignore the important distinction between moral proof and legal evidence of guilt. In not a few cases that are popularly classed with 'unsolved mysteries of crime,' the offender is known, but evidence is wanting. If, for example, in- a recent murder case of special notoriety and interest,* certain human remains had not been found in a cellar, a great crime would have been catalogued among `Police failures'; and yet, even without the evidence which sent the murderer to the gallows, the moral proof of his guilt would have been full and clear.
Robert Anderson

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #8 on: January 19, 2017, 11:27:13 AM »
And the constantly opening and closing door?

And the open window and shutters?
Window and shutters could have been open from the inside to communicate with others, keep a look out, hand out the child.
Door could have moved as a result of air movement when the patio door was opened during checks, or perhaps abductor moved it or perhaps it didn't move at all and it was faulty recollection  I don't know.  But a door moving a few inches does not rule out stranger abduction.

Offline Faithlilly

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #9 on: January 19, 2017, 11:59:12 AM »
Window and shutters could have been open from the inside to communicate with others, keep a look out, hand out the child.
Door could have moved as a result of air movement when the patio door was opened during checks, or perhaps abductor moved it or perhaps it didn't move at all and it was faulty recollection  I don't know.  But a door moving a few inches does not rule out stranger abduction.

So do you think there was more than one person involved in the abduction? Don't you think Madeleine was abducted for nefarious reasons ?
Moral Guilt
Detractors of the work of our British Police in bringing criminals to justice generally ignore the important distinction between moral proof and legal evidence of guilt. In not a few cases that are popularly classed with 'unsolved mysteries of crime,' the offender is known, but evidence is wanting. If, for example, in- a recent murder case of special notoriety and interest,* certain human remains had not been found in a cellar, a great crime would have been catalogued among `Police failures'; and yet, even without the evidence which sent the murderer to the gallows, the moral proof of his guilt would have been full and clear.
Robert Anderson

Online Davel

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #10 on: January 19, 2017, 12:08:47 PM »
A child was taken from her bath whilst her mother was in another room. Thats how easy an abduction can be. No need for complicated analyses....it is possible and very simple.
UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED ALL POSTS ARE MY OPINION

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #11 on: January 19, 2017, 12:16:51 PM »
So do you think there was more than one person involved in the abduction? Don't you think Madeleine was abducted for nefarious reasons ?
1) It's possible
2) almost certainly.

Offline Faithlilly

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #12 on: January 19, 2017, 12:17:40 PM »
1) It's possible
2) almost certainly.

So why so many people ?
Moral Guilt
Detractors of the work of our British Police in bringing criminals to justice generally ignore the important distinction between moral proof and legal evidence of guilt. In not a few cases that are popularly classed with 'unsolved mysteries of crime,' the offender is known, but evidence is wanting. If, for example, in- a recent murder case of special notoriety and interest,* certain human remains had not been found in a cellar, a great crime would have been catalogued among `Police failures'; and yet, even without the evidence which sent the murderer to the gallows, the moral proof of his guilt would have been full and clear.
Robert Anderson

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #13 on: January 19, 2017, 12:20:02 PM »
So why so many people ?
Hang on.  You asked if more than one person may have been involved.  I said it's possible, now you're asking me why so many people were involved.  Would you care to re-phrase your question?

Offline Faithlilly

Re: Is there a plausible, logical theory of abduction?
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2017, 12:27:19 PM »
Hang on.  You asked if more than one person may have been involved.  I said it's possible, now you're asking me why so many people were involved.  Would you care to re-phrase your question?

Fair enough. If you think that it's possible that more than one person is involved, in what way?
Moral Guilt
Detractors of the work of our British Police in bringing criminals to justice generally ignore the important distinction between moral proof and legal evidence of guilt. In not a few cases that are popularly classed with 'unsolved mysteries of crime,' the offender is known, but evidence is wanting. If, for example, in- a recent murder case of special notoriety and interest,* certain human remains had not been found in a cellar, a great crime would have been catalogued among `Police failures'; and yet, even without the evidence which sent the murderer to the gallows, the moral proof of his guilt would have been full and clear.
Robert Anderson