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

[Lace]

Amber Alert only applies when a certain set of criteria are met.

Three year old missing cannot be found,   does that apply to a certain set of criteria?    It should.

[Lace]

the issue  was  too the mcanns and the tapas allowed the crime  scene  whatever that   crime was be  destroyed ie the mcanns and their friends  trampling in and out   wiping out possible  dna evidence etc the pj should have secured the apartment   right  away  im not  knocking the pj  but the same  thing happned   in the jon benet  ramsey case

Of course people trampled in and out,  they were searching for Madeleine,  how were they to know she wouldn't be found hiding in there somewhere?    You only mention the McCann's and friends I see,  what about the Police smoking and the dogs?

[barrier]

Rowley  said the first investigation dealt with it
They had looked at and agreed
That reads to me that they had considered the parental involvement and ruled it out
Its a matter of opinion

Yet the remit to investigate as if an abduction took place in the uk,was clearly drawn up with out the files being first  translated  so that circle doesn't square.

[Benice]

the issue  was  too the mcanns and the tapas allowed the crime  scene  whatever that   crime was be  destroyed ie the mcanns and their friends  trampling in and out   wiping out possible  dna evidence etc the pj should have secured the apartment   right  away  im not  knocking the pj  but the same  thing happned   in the jon benet  ramsey case

It wasn't a crime scene until it had been established that Madeleine was not in 5a or in the immediate vicinity.   They could not do that without  first walking around the apartment.     It is a human reaction for anyone arriving on the scene to check for themselves, even though they know others have checked.   The first thing the GNR officers did when they arrived was to search the apartment.

The idea that the McCanns or their friends should have behaved like policemen on finding Madeleine missing is totally unrealistic.     The police on the other hand were not suffering from massive shock and panic when they arrived and so have no excuse for failing to cordon off 5a far more quickly than they did.

IIRC it was spilt red fingerprint powder, cigarette ash and a multitude of dog hairs which caused problems when it came to collecting evidence.

AIMHO 
 

[ferryman]

Yet the remit to investigate as if an abduction took place in the uk,was clearly drawn up with out the files being first  translated  so that circle doesn't square.

The shape (circle or square) fits perfectly.

The shelved enquiry thoroughly investigated the McCanns and their friends and found they had no case to answer.

The logical next step (and the smooth progression) from there is to investigate the crime as if afresh, but starting with the premise that no one close to Madeleine has any case to answer.

[stephen25000]

SY did not investigate the McCann's.

They relied on the shelving report.

Which is what the Supreme Court referred to.

Why are some unwilling to accept the truth ?

[barrier]

The shape (circle or square) fits perfectly.

The shelved enquiry thoroughly investigated the McCanns and their friends and found they had no case to answer.

The logical next step (and the smooth progression) from there is to investigate the crime as if afresh, but starting with the premise that no one close to Madeleine has any case to answer.

So you agree that OG have not investigated the parents then.

[Lace]

Probably well covered by the "I think" at the start of her sentence.

This is what carly posted -    i think john rightly  wants  an open minded forum  and he thinks abduction shouldnt be mentioned just  what  i think because  there is no evidence of  abduction

The 'I think' at the start of her post refers to why John has started this thread,   she clearly says she thinks that John wants an open minded forum, because there is no evidence of abduction.

[Eleanor]

i  read it means injunction??   are supporters lawyers now?  lol

No, it does not mean Injunction.  Mayhap you should look it up.  This might help.

[jassi]

The shape (circle or square) fits perfectly.

The shelved enquiry thoroughly investigated the McCanns and their friends and found they had no case to answer.

The logical next step (and the smooth progression) from there is to investigate the crime as if afresh, but starting with the premise that no one close to Madeleine has any case to answer.

Would you accept that the PJ conducted a thorough investigation throughout or do you only accept selected excerpts?

If their investigation was rubbish, how is it that their conclusion regarding the McCanns is OK?

[Eleanor]

Amber Alert only applies when a certain set of criteria are met.

This is not entirely true.

[Mr Gray]

Yet the remit to investigate as if an abduction took place in the uk,was clearly drawn up with out the files being first  translated  so that circle doesn't square.

It is more likely the remit was drawn up having spoken to the McCann and interviewing them as witnesses imo

[ferryman]

Would you accept that the PJ conducted a thorough investigation throughout or do you only accept selected excerpts?

If their investigation was rubbish, how is it that their conclusion regarding the McCanns is OK?

That is a strawman.

While there may have been a tendency, more widely, to condemn the whole (shelved) enquiry, I, personally have never been among those critics.  On the contrary, I have always been careful to give credit where (I believe) it's due to those aspects of the shelved enquiry (including, and especially, on the Portuguese side) to the shelved enquiry.

The enquiry was manifestly flawed in many respects.  But there was also some (genuinely) excellent work put in, particularly on the Portuguese side.

[barrier]

It is more likely the remit was drawn up having spoken to the McCann and interviewing them as witnesses imo

But yet no one can produce anything of substance to back it up.

[Erngath]

SY did not investigate the McCann's.

They relied on the shelving report.

Which is what the Supreme Court referred to.

Why are some unwilling to accept the truth ?

All in your opinion.