Discussion of points raised in Danny Collins' book Vanished ...

[G-Unit]

I have, as I explained near the start of this thread.

I picked up nothing of interest on the Madeleine McCann case, merely chunks of misinformation.  Collins did cover the Michael Cook case (exchange in Parliament) in an appendix, which was as accurate as Hansard is.

I got the distinct impression that Mr Collins had cobbled his book together, at long range from Luz, using published media articles.  If so, it would be as accurate or inaccurate as those early reports were.

I agree. Cobbled together to cash in.

[Robittybob1]

I'm not sure when it was published. He quotes from Matthew Oldfield's 4th May statement at one point. It doesn't matter anyway, my point about investigative journalism stands. They are supposed to find and reveal hidden facts, not make facts up themselves.

In fact what he says about Matthew seems to show he had some access to information beyond what we do. Maybe he did a bit of investigative journalism.  I nearly threw the book away to begin with.   

[Mr Gray]

I'm not sure when it was published. He quotes from Matthew Oldfield's 4th May statement at one point. It doesn't matter anyway, my point about investigative journalism stands. They are supposed to find and reveal hidden facts, not make facts up themselves.

This case has been so intensely investigated perhaps there are no hidden facts
He has no access to interview important witnesses so it was pretty obvious he would come up with nothing new
It was a book for the general public to give them an overview of the case from his point of view
Every such book will contain inaccuracies
We would expect a book from someone in Amarals position to be accurate.... unfortunately it is full of errors

[Brietta]

In fact what he says about Matthew seems to show he had some access to information beyond what we do. Maybe he did a bit of investigative journalism.  I nearly threw the book away to begin with.

It would seem that his contribution consists of the wandered hypothesis and she was picked up from the street and abducted.

At his time of cashing in on Madeleine's disappearance I think there were two hypotheses on the table ...

• death and concealment
• stranger abduction

In my opinion the death and concealment hypothesis is dead in the water for the simple reason none of its suggested components have proved viable ... as affirmed in the Policia Judiciaria final report presented to the prosecutors who archived Madeleine's case.

Which leaves that which was determined to be the only other hypothesis by the PJ of stranger abduction well and truly on the table.

[ShiningInLuz]

no...i specifically asked gunit if she had read the book....I wasnt interested in the fact that you had read the book...

so if you are going to reply to the post you need to tell me if gunit has read the book.....thats the question.....perhaps you simply misunderstood

Then try the PM system or @G-Unit.

It's an open forum, as I'm sure you understand.

[Mr Gray]

Then try the PM system or @G-Unit.

It's an open forum, as I'm sure you understand.

Yes it's an open forum and you are welcome to answer the question I asked....you didn't

[stephen25000]

It would seem that his contribution consists of the wandered hypothesis and she was picked up from the street and abducted.

At his time of cashing in on Madeleine's disappearance I think there were two hypotheses on the table ...

• death and concealment
• stranger abduction

In my opinion the death and concealment hypothesis is dead in the water for the simple reason none of its suggested components have proved viable ... as affirmed in the Policia Judiciaria final report presented to the prosecutors who archived Madeleine's case.

Which leaves that which was determined to be the only other hypothesis by the PJ of stranger abduction well and truly on the table.

The archived report clearly showed there was no evidence to prosecute anyone with anything.#

They did not know what happened.

[G-Unit]

This case has been so intensely investigated perhaps there are no hidden facts
He has no access to interview important witnesses so it was pretty obvious he would come up with nothing new
It was a book for the general public to give them an overview of the case from his point of view
Every such book will contain inaccuracies
We would expect a book from someone in Amarals position to be accurate.... unfortunately it is full of errors

He saw an opportunity to make a few bob and took it, I think.

It was interesting to discover that he suspected that the McCann's abduction thesis was suggested because they feared prosecution for abandonment. His theory is that she wandered off.

[G-Unit]

In fact what he says about Matthew seems to show he had some access to information beyond what we do. Maybe he did a bit of investigative journalism.  I nearly threw the book away to begin with.

What are you referring to?

[Robittybob1]

What are you referring to?

What he says about Matt Oldfield on page 4 chapter called "First report".  Does Matt change his statement as Danny implies?

[faithlilly]

It would seem that his contribution consists of the wandered hypothesis and she was picked up from the street and abducted.

At his time of cashing in on Madeleine's disappearance I think there were two hypotheses on the table ...

• death and concealment
• stranger abduction

In my opinion the death and concealment hypothesis is dead in the water for the simple reason none of its suggested components have proved viable ... as affirmed in the Policia Judiciaria final report presented to the prosecutors who archived Madeleine's case.

Which leaves that which was determined to be the only other hypothesis by the PJ of stranger abduction well and truly on the table.

I believe Danny Collins gave a chunk of the money earned from the book to the Find Madeleine Fund.

[Robittybob1]

I believe Danny Collins gave a chunk of the money earned from the book to the Find Madeleine Fund.

I find it amazing that he made money out of it.

[G-Unit]

Although he updated his book for the ten year anniversary Collins made no effort to correct his earlier mistakes, I notice.

[G-Unit]

I believe Danny Collins gave a chunk of the money earned from the book to the Find Madeleine Fund.

A cite supporting your belief would be helpful.

[G-Unit]

What he says about Matt Oldfield on page 4 chapter called "First report".  Does Matt change his statement as Danny implies?

Not that I know of, but feel free to check for yourself.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-10MAY.htm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm