What Happened To Madeleine McCann? - by Ian Horrocks.

[Brietta]

Well it appears Barry George was 'fitted up'.

The police ignored vital  evidence by other witnesses.

This has been dealt with before.

I suggest you read up on the case.

You are happy to criticise Amaral, so you know the old expression, what's sauce for the goose...

In other words the answer to my question is that there was no criminality involving "the seasoned officer" in this case.
Please desist from posting as if there was and concentrate instead on the OP and Ian Horrocks' informed opinion on Madeleine McCann's case which is after all the subject under discussion on this thread.

[stephen25000]

In other words the answer to my question is that there was no criminality involving "the seasoned officer" in this case.
Please desist from posting as if there was and concentrate instead on the OP and Ian Horrocks' informed opinion on Madeleine McCann's case which is after all the subject under discussion on this thread.

Horrocks is the subject matter.

As to an 'informed opinion', that is a matter of opinion.

Can you tell me what evidence he had at his disposal in writing his views on the case ?

[faithlilly]

Horrocks is the subject matter.

As to an 'informed opinion', that is a matter of opinion.

Can you tell me what evidence he had at his disposal in writing his views on the case ?

With the litigious behaviour of the McCanns and payment for his article involved I find it ridiculous that anyone would believe that any article Horrocks published could be other than supportive of the parents.

[Benice]

With the litigious behaviour of the McCanns and payment for his article involved I find it ridiculous that anyone would believe that any article Horrocks published could be other than supportive of the parents.

Faith -you make it  sound as if taking action against newspapers who libelled them is some kind of unacceptable behaviour by the McCanns.       As long as no libel was involved Horrocks could write whatever he liked.  Any idea that he would enter into a 'conspiracy' with the Sun because he was paid for his article is wishful thinking IMO.

AIMHO

[stephen25000]

With the litigious behaviour of the McCanns and payment for his article involved I find it ridiculous that anyone would believe that any article Horrocks published could be other than supportive of the parents.

Exactly Faithlilly.

If McCann supporters expect us to believe otherwise, they are sadly mistaken.

[Robittybob1]

Anyone observing their routine would have known that they had at least 20 minutes between each check. Horrocks

Matt leaves just before 9
When he returns Gerry leaves to check
Jane leaves at 9:10
Matt/Russ leave at 9:25
Jane leaves at 9:38
Russ returns at 9:45

Where is this 20 minute opportunity between each check according to Horrocks with all the comings and goings?

I think he was talking about any particular apartment, but i do see your point and it is valid if you think of the group doing combined checks.

[pathfinder73]

I think he was talking about any particular apartment, but i do see your point and it is valid if you think of the group doing combined checks.

Anyone watching would be crazy to attempt it with all the comings and goings that night. 20 minute opportunity between checks is clearly not true. Jez was walking around that area aswell.

[Alfie]

With the litigious behaviour of the McCanns and payment for his article involved I find it ridiculous that anyone would believe that any article Horrocks published could be other than supportive of the parents.

What nonsense.  Horrocks theory supports abduction, not the parents.  Now tell us why his theory is illogical and implausible, and why don't you point us in the direction of a better one?  I've looked up Peter Mac btw and he seems to believe Madeleine died on the 29th April - do you think that's more plausible then?  While you're at it perhaps you can explain why Peter Mac hasn't been sued by the McCanns...?

[The Singularity]

Well it appears Barry George was 'fitted up'.

The police ignored vital  evidence by other witnesses.

This has been dealt with before.

I suggest you read up on the case.

You are happy to criticise Amaral, so you know the old expression, what's sauce for the goose...

Stephen are you deliberately being obtuse? I have not criticised Snr Amaral at all. I disagree with this theory, I am debating the opinion not attacking him. There is a big difference.

Also despite Mr Horrocks' opinion on the Jill Dando case, I have already said that this was a mistake and again, I am not attacking Mr Horrocks for his findings or conclusions, I am questioning them. Not Mr Horrocks. Again, there is a big difference.

Attacking the individual is not an argument. Calling them names, questioning their integrity without due reason is not an argument.

You have also in a different post to another member dismissed Mr Horrock's theory simply by saying there is no evidence. The same goes for the investigating teams, then and now. The teams have changed but the amount and quality of the evidence hasn't.

Simply put, for you to dismiss someone you are clearly hostile to because of lack of evidence you are also dismissing Snr Amaral equally because he also had the same evidence. The difference between the two examples here is that you are personally invested in one over the other, not based on investigative knowledge, evidence, facts or reasonable conclusions; but because you have a fixed theory in your mind which doesn't allow you to consider other opinions, for example Mr Horrocks.

[Alfie]

Anyone watching would be crazy to attempt it with all the comings and goings that night. 20 minute opportunity between checks is clearly not true. Jez was walking around that area aswell.

"Anyone observing their routine would have known that they had at least 20 minutes between each check. They would have observed the group for a few minutes and then gone to the apartment. At the end of the alleyway they could see that the road was clear, it is then only literally a second for someone to go through the gate and into the garden area, where they would be virtually out of sight. It is then simple to enter the apartment through the patio doors, which although closed, had been left unlocked".

You don't need twenty minutes.  You don't even need 10 minutes. 

[The Singularity]

Colin Sutton and petermac ( not sure of his real name) are also highly seasoned and experienced police officers yet none of the two are convinced by the abduction theory. I suppose you pays your money.....!

Petermac, from JH's forum and staunch ally to AB  has been discredited many times over I'm afraid. However keeping an open mind should he bring something new to the theory then I would be interested to see it.

[pathfinder73]

"Anyone observing their routine would have known that they had at least 20 minutes between each check. They would have observed the group for a few minutes and then gone to the apartment. At the end of the alleyway they could see that the road was clear, it is then only literally a second for someone to go through the gate and into the garden area, where they would be virtually out of sight. It is then simple to enter the apartment through the patio doors, which although closed, had been left unlocked".

You don't need twenty minutes.  You don't even need 10 minutes.

You would be crazy to try it. Maybe he did it when Gerry and Jez were at the gate talking Hey? They didn't see Jane so maybe they missed the abductor too 

[Alfie]

Horrocks is the subject matter.

As to an 'informed opinion', that is a matter of opinion.

Can you tell me what evidence he had at his disposal in writing his views on the case ?

Horrocks is NOT the subject matter.  The OP would be just as interesting and valid if it had been written By A Nonymouse.  Let's discuss it.

[Alfie]

You would be crazy to try it. Maybe he did it when Gerry and Jez were at the gate talking Hey? They didn't see Jane so maybe they missed the abductor too 

You' be crazy to steal a child from her bed, abuse and murder her but people do.  Sick depraved people who take insane risks.

[Alfie]

You would be crazy to try it. Maybe he did it when Gerry and Jez were at the gate talking Hey? They didn't see Jane so maybe they missed the abductor too 

Pathfinder thinks that a child sex abuser would be "crazy" to take the risk of entering an apartment and removing a child when he knew that people were coming and going by the apartment.  However, interestingly Pathfinder doesn't seem to think it's crazy that the child's father would walk for several hundred metres with the dead weight corpse of his dead child, uncovered and himself undisguised through the streets of a holiday resort.

Let's reflect on this odd disconnect shall we?  &%+((£