Proof of abduction

[Mr Gray]

Maddie is missing and Kate has said the shutters were open. This is proof of third party involvement  and therefore abduction... what do posters think

[Robittybob1]

Maddie is missing and Kate has said the shutters were open. This is proof of third party involvement  and therefore abduction... what do posters think

I think it doesn't prove abduction as there are other options, like staged crime scene or even a prank played on Kate.

[stephen25000]

As has been stated by me and other people, especially,  there has never been independent verification of the window being open before Kate Mccann returned to the apartment.

Likewise, the only fingerprints identified are hers.

No scuff marks or anything else were found on the inside or outside of the window or walls.

[barrier]

Lets also not forget Kate who found Madeleine missing thinks/thought that the window being open could be a red herring,how an open window shows that an abduction happened is obviously way beyond officers from SY.
Here's a house,here's a door,windows...................

[Brietta]

Lets also not forget Kate who found Madeleine missing thinks/thought that the window being open could be a red herring,how an open window shows that an abduction happened is obviously way beyond officers from SY.
Here's a house,here's a door,windows...................

No-one legitimately associated with the apartment opened the window and raised the shutter ... so how do you suggest the shutter was raised and the window opened?

Please do not revisit Kate's fingerprints ... that is out of the same kennel as the green lichen with the only difference being one existed legitimately, the other did not except only in myth and fable.

[jassi]

No-one legitimately associated with the apartment opened the window and raised the shutter ... so how do you suggest the shutter was raised and the window opened?

Please do not revisit Kate's fingerprints ... that is out of the same kennel as the green lichen with the only difference being one existed legitimately, the other did not except only in myth and fable.

We don't know that - it's what we've been told.

[Brietta]

We don't know that - it's what we've been told.

If you prefer to call or infer the witness a liar that is your affair.   For myself, I accept Murat's statement he wasn't there ... as I accept Jane Tanner's statement that she saw a man carrying a barefoot child away from the direction of the apartment block to where she was heading.
Therefore I have no problem accepting that Madeleine's mother was alerted to her disappearance when she saw the window open and the shutter raised.

[jassi]

If you prefer to call or infer the witness a liar that is your affair.   For myself, I accept Murat's statement he wasn't there ... as I accept Jane Tanner's statement that she saw a man carrying a barefoot child away from the direction of the apartment block to where she was heading.
Therefore I have no problem accepting that Madeleine's mother was alerted to her disappearance when she saw the window open and the shutter raised.

It's exactly a matter of accepting a statement, or otherwise, none of us know if the statement is true or false.
We all accept only  what we want to.

[Brietta]

It's exactly a matter of accepting a statement, or otherwise, none of us know if the statement is true or false.
We all accept only  what we want to.

The only fact which is not in dispute, is that Madeleine is missing.

The weird and wonderful has been concocted in explanation for her disappearance although mainly in my belief, as diversion from at the very least an incompetent investigation.

Yesterday we discussed Riley Fox's abduction the events of which are documented.  It is as I said a master class in relation to Madeleine's case.

Nothing at all to do with what one wants to believe, more with what is logical v illogical, possible v impossible and mainly about one man's belief in the illogical and impossible and turning that to his advantage.

In the interim, Madeleine appears to be the last thought in the equation.  One of the impossibles is "Justice for Madeleine".   Without knowing exactly what that is, although the one thing I am certain it is not, is to take it upon oneself to declare her dead without substantive proof.

[Mr Gray]

It's exactly a matter of accepting a statement, or otherwise, none of us know if the statement is true or false.
We all accept only  what we want to.

again amaral thinks he knows...could someome tell him he doesnt

[jassi]

again amaral thinks he knows...could someome tell him he doesnt

I'll leave that to you , seeing as you'e raised the matter

[ChloeR]

Someone saying something does not equal proof unfortunately.

Madeleine is missing is a fact. The window being open is just hearsay really. Especially given the window was not open when the police arrived and so on.

[G-Unit]

Someone saying something does not equal proof unfortunately.

Madeleine is missing is a fact. The window being open is just hearsay really. Especially given the window was not open when the police arrived and so on.

Which means it's a matter of belief rather than of logic. 

[Brietta]

The first eye witness on the scene has made a sworn statement to the effect the window was open and the shutter raised.

Whether one wishes to believe her statement or not is a personal choice ... actually calling her statement or that of any other witness into disrepute is embarking on shaky ground.

[Robittybob1]

Someone saying something does not equal proof unfortunately.

Madeleine is missing is a fact. The window being open is just hearsay really. Especially given the window was not open when the police arrived and so on.

Wouldn't make any difference unless it was obvious that everyone was kept out of the crime scene.  They could just say that was staged after the event, even after the alert.