Author Topic: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.  (Read 58312 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Benice

Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #180 on: May 13, 2017, 10:45:01 AM »
You would think by that comment that Rowley and the Met actually know something but then his comments were made for public consumption.  His comments added nothing to what we already know about this sham investigation, comments which any fool could see were contradictory throughout. On the one hand Rowley stated they did not know what became of Maddie but then went on to make wide sweeping claims about an abductor and the parents.

Surely your claim that the investigation is a 'sham' is libellous in the extreme?

The notion that innocence prevails over guilt – when there is no evidence to the contrary – is what separates civilization from barbarism.    Unfortunately, there are remains of barbarism among us.    Until very recently, it headed the PJ in Portimão. I hope he was the last one.
                                               Henrique Monteiro, chief editor, Expresso, Portugal

Offline Angelo222

Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #181 on: May 13, 2017, 10:45:27 AM »
Not only in the last 10 years, but there is nothing in their history to even hint that they were capable of doing what they have been accused of  - but plenty to suggest they could not possibly contemplate doing such a terrible thing to their own beloved little girl  - whom they had waited so long for.

It makes no sense at all, and if it doesn't make sense -  it didn't happen IMO.

AIMHO

You only need to look at what has taken place over the last ten years.  If by some miracle Maddie is eventually found alive I'm very sure she will have some very SEARCHING questions.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2017, 10:48:54 AM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #182 on: May 13, 2017, 10:46:40 AM »
You only need to look at what has taken place over the last ten years.

People (Sutton included) crawling out of the woodwork who haven't read the files, you mean?

Offline Angelo222

Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #183 on: May 13, 2017, 10:51:22 AM »
People (Sutton included) crawling out of the woodwork who haven't read the files, you mean?

Is that because his comments don't fit your agenda?

There is no evidence of any abduction and that's the bottom line unfortunately.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2017, 10:54:48 AM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #184 on: May 13, 2017, 10:53:17 AM »
Is that because his comments don't fit your agenda?

I don't have an 'agenda', just an objective analysis of what the files say.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #185 on: May 13, 2017, 10:53:38 AM »
Tut, tut ferryman.

We have been through all this many times.


They did not know what had happened.


We have indeed, and to your shame, you still don't seem to have got it.

The case was shelved for lack of evidence.

It was undetermined what happened to Madeleine.

Offline carlymichelle

Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #186 on: May 13, 2017, 10:55:06 AM »
You only need to look at what has taken place over the last ten years.  If by some miracle Maddie is eventually found alive I'm very sure she will have some very SEARCHING questions.

if by  some mircle maddie    is found alive i dont think she would leap into  gerry and kates arms  and play happy  familys  she wouldnt know them imo
« Last Edit: May 13, 2017, 12:13:55 PM by Brietta »

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #187 on: May 13, 2017, 10:55:30 AM »
Surely your claim that the investigation is a 'sham' is libellous in the extreme?

In fairness, Benice, aspects of it were a sham, although at the same time, acknowledging (genuinely) excellent work put in during the course of that investigation, including and especially on the Portuguese side.

Offline Angelo222

Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #188 on: May 13, 2017, 10:56:49 AM »
I don't have an 'agenda', just an objective analysis of what the files say.

Clearly inaccurate then.   You conveniently omit the bit in the AG report where he states that the parents lost the opportunity to demonstrate what they claimed by the refusal of their friends to partake in a reconstruction when requested to do so.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2017, 11:00:14 AM by Angelo222 »
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #189 on: May 13, 2017, 11:32:33 AM »
All my posts are on-topic.  The term 'abductor' does not need any qualification, and I have explained, precisely, in my (removed) posts why.

As far as I'm concerned, the only thing 'off-topic' is what this thread invites us to discuss.

The whole of the thread should be removed.

Offline Eleanor

Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #190 on: May 13, 2017, 11:44:18 AM »
This Thread is about Awareness.  This does not mean that I necessarily agree with the concept.  But it is not my place to do so.

Be aware of what is being asked of you all and we might actually get somewhere.  It's not difficult.  Use your words more carefully.  None of you appear to be illiterate.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #191 on: May 13, 2017, 12:03:19 PM »
This Thread is about Awareness.  This does not mean that I necessarily agree with the concept.  But it is not my place to do so.

Be aware of what is being asked of you all and we might actually get somewhere.  It's not difficult.  Use your words more carefully.  None of you appear to be illiterate.
Awareness?

The term 'abduction' should be used without caveat or qualification, unless or until someone both competent (ie having read the files, and formed an informed opinion) and qualified steps forward to do so.

Or unless Operation Grange brings into the public domain previously unknown information (at least publicly) to cast (genuine!) doubt on abduction.

All else (that questions abduction) is ill-informed conjecture.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #192 on: May 13, 2017, 12:12:05 PM »
Awareness?

The term 'abduction' should be used without caveat or qualification, unless or until someone both competent (ie having read the files, and formed an informed opinion) and qualified steps forward to do so.

Or unless Operation Grange brings into the public domain previously unknown information (at least publicly) to cast (genuine!) doubt on abduction.

All else (that questions abduction) is ill-informed conjecture.

It is a belief an abduction occurred.

Not a fact.

It is very clear yesterday what John stated.

The case was shelved in Portugal for lack of evidence.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2017, 03:11:42 PM by John »

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #193 on: May 13, 2017, 12:18:00 PM »
It is a belief an abduction occurred.

Not a fact.

It is very clear yesterday what John stated.

The case was shelved in Portugal for lack of evidence.


The case was shelved because no progress in tracking down Madeleine's abductor had been made.

Also, I think, Portuguese law (commendably in one respect) would not allow the unjust aspersion of 'arguido' to be hung around the necks of those accused (including Robert Murat) indefinitely.

The McCanns status of 'arguido' was rushed in just before a change in Portuguese law that would have forced the authorities to justify their reasons for imposing the status.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2017, 03:11:55 PM by John »

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: The use of the term 'abductor' should be qualified by caveat.
« Reply #194 on: May 13, 2017, 12:38:57 PM »
It is a belief an abduction occurred.

Not a fact.

It is very clear yesterday what John stated.

The case was shelved in Portugal for lack of evidence.

Why ferryman is allowed to keep posting this material, against forum rules is the question.

I can't be bothered (yet again!) to quote what the Portuguese prosecutors made very clear did NOT happen.

That Gerry was proved to be at the Tapas Restaurant at the moment of the Smith sighting (and also the moment of Kate's alert) scuppers all notion of parental involvement in anything to do with Madeleine's disappearance.
« Last Edit: May 13, 2017, 03:23:30 PM by John »