Was Mark Rowley wrong to claim that Madeleine McCann was abducted?

[Mr Gray]

saying there is no evidence of abduction is just an opinion ...we dont know...SY may well have evidence of abduction


can post now be adjusted accordingly

[John]

Rowley states that Maddie was abducted..you have to accept that...you might not agree ...but hes the expert

Actually he's isnt, he's a senior manager in the Metropolitan Police, his brief is too wide to be classed as an expert.

[John]

saying there is no evidence of abduction is just an opinion ...we dont know...SY may well have evidence of abduction


can post now be adjusted accordingly

They may well have evidence of many things but SY have been unable to follow through on any of it which can only lead to one conclusion.  If abduction did ocur it was more likely to have been from the street and not from the bedroom.

[Robittybob1]

They may well have evidence of many things but SY have been unable to follow through on any of it which can only lead to one conclusion.  If abduction did ocur it was more likely to have been from the street and not from the bedroom.

Is an abduction from the street called any different to abduction from the bedroom, it would still be called an abduction would it not?

[John]

Being allowed to post that there is no evidence of abduction appears to be permitted yet that is also an unproven fact. Very biased.

As none of us actually know what evidence there is or isn't & discussion about abduction must now be accompanied by a million disclaimers, or the red pen will be produced, what the heck is the point of a discussion forum????

Good point misty, posters should make clear that it is an opinion based on the KNOWN facts.

[John]

maddie gone..an open widow

evidence of abduction#...theres more

Maddie gone is what we call neutral evidence, it has no significance as to how she came to be missing.  It certainly does not indicate she was abducted.

The claimed open window was never proven to have been open and in any event the only identifiable fingerprints found on it belonged to the missing child's mother Kate McCann.

[John]

Thanx to barrier for the Rowley quote.

In terms of Andy using the word abduction, she was not old enough to set off and start her own life.
However she left that apartment, she has been abducted

Robby touched on this earlier and having read this quote again I can see the significance. 

What I hear him say is "however she left that apartment she's been abducted".   However she left the apartment - that is the full range of ways of getting out of the apartment, walked out back door or front door, dragged out or carried out.

Rowley isn't saying that she was definitely abducted from the apartment.  What he is in fact inferring is that she could have been abducted from either inside or outside the apartment which puts an entirely different slant on it.

[Brietta]

Also worth noting no where as any one stated that this alleged incident is limited to wholly and solely stranger involvement.

“Neither her parents or any of the members of the group that were with her are either persons of interest or suspects”
~DCI Andy Redwood

[John]

Is an abduction from the street called any different to abduction from the bedroom, it would still be called an abduction would it not?

It depends on whether the victim is alive or dead as in a fatal car accident.

[Robittybob1]

It depends on whether the victim is alive or dead as in a fatal car accident.

Are you thinking it could be as bad as that?

[Robittybob1]

There is nothing (in the files available publicly) to gainsay abduction, and evidently nothing in the information available to Mark Rowley (who knows more than we do) to gainsay ABDUCTION.

gainsay

verb formal
deny or contradict (a fact or statement).
"the impact of the railways cannot be gainsaid"
synonyms:   deny, dispute, disagree with, argue with, dissent from, contradict, repudiate, declare untrue, challenge, oppose, contest, counter, fly in the face of; More
speak against or oppose (someone).
"none could gainsay her"

Well what happens if we put the definition into your sentences:
 There is nothing (in the files available publicly) to deny or contradict abduction, and evidently nothing in the information available to Mark Rowley (who knows more than we do) to deny or contradict ABDUCTION.

There is nothing (in the files available publicly) to speak against or oppose abduction, and evidently nothing in the information available to Mark Rowley (who knows more than we do) to speak against or oppose ABDUCTION.

So are you saying it can't be denied and it can't be argued against?

[G-Unit]

I know people passionately believe in the abduction scenario but I really don't understand why it's so important to them to be allowed to post about it as a fact. To me it's a great big fuss about nothing but a slight adjustment to posts.

I have no idea, either, why the Metropolitan Police should be seen as the oracle. They are not even the best police force in England and Wales, never mind in the world as some claim. The best police force in 2016 was Durham, according to HMIC.

It has long been suspected that Operation Grange were investigating only an abduction and no other possibility because of the wording of their remit. Colin Sutton confirmed this.

The Supreme Court of Portugal's recent ruling about the situation at the time of the archiving suggests that Operation Grange may have misunderstood the findings of the first investigation.

Rowley's claim that parental involvement was 'dealt with' by the PJ is therefore questionable. His dismissal of 'woke and wandered' by asserting that the child wasn't old enough to go off and start a new life was, in my opinion, an insult to people's intelligence. Most people can come up with other reasons to explain why Madeleine might have left the apartment.

Operation Grange may have evidence of abduction but equally they may not. Perhaps one day we will find out, but until we do there's no reason to believe they are on the right track in my opinion.


 

[Mr Gray]

I know people passionately believe in the abduction scenario but I really don't understand why it's so important to them to be allowed to post about it as a fact. To me it's a great big fuss about nothing but a slight adjustment to posts.

I have no idea, either, why the Metropolitan Police should be seen as the oracle. They are not even the best police force in England and Wales, never mind in the world as some claim. The best police force in 2016 was Durham, according to HMIC.

It has long been suspected that Operation Grange were investigating only an abduction and no other possibility because of the wording of their remit. Colin Sutton confirmed this.

The Supreme Court of Portugal's recent ruling about the situation at the time of the archiving suggests that Operation Grange may have misunderstood the findings of the first investigation.

Rowley's claim that parental involvement was 'dealt with' by the PJ is therefore questionable. His dismissal of 'woke and wandered' by asserting that the child wasn't old enough to go off and start a new life was, in my opinion, an insult to people's intelligence. Most people can come up with other reasons to explain why Madeleine might have left the apartment.

Operation Grange may have evidence of abduction but equally they may not. Perhaps one day we will find out, but until we do there's no reason to believe they are on the right track in my opinion.

I believe Maddie was abducted... I don't know for sure but based on the evidence I think its way ahead the most likely scenario....
We had a situation yesterday when it was forbidden to repeat Rowleys claim that Maddie was abducted. Why do some people have such a problem with that....I find that very strange and it seems that the abduction scenario needed to be suppressed.

[G-Unit]

I believe Maddie was abducted... I don't know for sure but based on the evidence I think its way ahead the most likely scenario....
We had a situation yesterday when it was forbidden to repeat Rowleys claim that Maddie was abducted. Why do some people have such a problem with that....I find that very strange and it seems that the abduction scenario needed to be suppressed.

You're perfectly at liberty to believe Madeleine was abducted but not to say it's definitely what happened.

Are you sure about being forbidden to repeat  Rowley's claim? Can you point me to that discussion because as I understand it we can repeat it as long as we don't insist his claim is correct.

You seem to be confusing suggesting that an abduction occurred and insisting that it did. The crime against Madeleine (if any) is unknown, so claiming one of the possible scenarios as a fact is incorrect.

[Innominate]

His dismissal of 'woke and wandered' by asserting that the child wasn't old enough to go off and start a new life was, in my opinion, an insult to people's intelligence. Most people can come up with other reasons to explain why Madeleine might have left the apartment.

I do not read the interview that way.

If you read the response and the question, as a whole, my interpretation of his response has always been that he did not dismiss woke and wandered.

The question refers to 'woke and wandered'.

His response is roughly however she left the apartment she did not leave to start a new life.

I.E. If she left the apartment voluntarily she did not leave to start a new life because she was only 4 years old, therefore there was third-party involvement.

He states abduction as third party involvement, but third party involvement also includes removal of a body after an accident IMO.