The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.

[Mr Gray]

I suggest you stop bending the facts, I know exactly what has been established in this case.

then provide cites to support your claim...lets start with the false sightings

[Angelo222]

you are repeating questions I have aready answerred....as SY are investigating abduction it seems teh case for it is strong rather than weak

You don't know what SY are investigating...another myth.

[Mr Gray]

You don't know what SY are investigating...another myth.

we know exactly what they are investigating its in the remit and the latest stateemnt makes it crystal clear...abduction

[Angelo222]

we know exactly what they are investigating its in the remit and the latest stateemnt makes it crystal clear...abduction

No credible police department ever gives away the details of who they are investigating.  If you believe the garbage you heard on LBC I think you need a reality check.

[Mr Gray]

No credible police department ever gives away the details of who they are investigating.  If you believe the garbage you heard on LBC I think you need a reality check.

I think you need a reality check...it isnt just what SY are saying its putting everything together


so you are now referring tm the statement as garbage...more opinion as fact

[Angelo222]

I think you need a reality check...it isnt just what SY are saying its putting everything together


so you are now referring tm the statement as garbage...more opinion as fact

What...like your imaginary evidence of abduction?   

I'd like to play your little game some more but I'm off out to party. 

[Mr Gray]

What...like your imaginary evidence of abduction?   

there are thre options..if you eliminate two then the third is highly likely....abduction

[Angelo222]

there are thre options..if you eliminate two then the third is highly likely....abduction

Abduction is the least likely imo going by the real evidence.  Nobody should be fooled by the abduction mantra which has been pushed by the McCanns and their associated for the last ten years in an attempt to have their own involvement in their daughters disappearance mitigated.

[Mr Gray]

Abduction is the least likely imo going by the real evidence.

you are totally wrong...the archiving report discounted woke and wandered....SY have excluded the parents...they have not even been interviewed under caution...that makes abduction highly likely

[Angelo222]

you are totally wrong...the archiving report discounted woke and wandered....SY have excluded the parents...they have not even been interviewed under caution...that makes abduction highly likely

The Supreme Court of Portugal went out of their way just weeks ago to advise that the parents were never cleared by the archiving report.  Go figure that one!

[Mr Gray]

The Supreme Court of Portugal went out of their way to advise that the parents were not cleared.

cleared...how can they be cleared when there is no evidence to charge them
they are not being investigated full stop

[Alice Purjorick]

Sigh ....

The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.

Got that?

Non-involvement of Kate and Gerry in any penally relevant activity.

Whatever else the Prosecutors were uncertain of, they were certain Kate and Gerry had no case to answer.

And said so.

I wonder what definition of the word "seems" they rely on?

[Mr Gray]

They have presented nothing to indicate that an abductor is anything other than their opinion.

an opinion based on the evidence

[Alice Purjorick]

again if you do not understand what evidenve SY used to rule out the mccanns then you dont undestand what evidence is

So you keep saying.
Please post your definition of the word "evidence" just so's we is in the know.

[Mr Gray]

So you keep saying.
Please post your definition of the word "evidence" just so's we is in the know.

I already have done several times...try google ...its fairly straightforward


Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion.[1] This support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence.