According to some, there is certainly circumstantial evidence of abduction.

[jassi]

In my opinion Davel has proved Madeleine was abducted.

Perhaps you could furnish us with this proof as Davel seems a little shy on the subject.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Perhaps you could furnish us with this proof as Davel seems a little shy on the subject.

No need.  If I say it then it's a fact. 

ETA: to be clear: it's a fact that it's my opinion.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Does it matter? SY can't crack this particular enigma.

Only as a point to be debated on a forum, of course in my view what Amaral believes or says he's done is completely beside the point.  He is yesterday's man.

[Vertigo Swirl]

If it wasn't down to opinion there'd be no miscarriages of justice.

So if everything is opinion then perhaps we can dispense with the childish demands for stating "in my opinion" before every sentence we write.

[Mr Gray]

Yes the open window....body language... Them both being doctors...abduction proved imo

[Wonderfulspam]

Yes the open window....body language... Them both being doctors...abduction proved imo

Window closed, body language, Harold Shipman, death certain imo.

[Mr Gray]

My picture of Portugal is one of reality.

In the absence of DNA evidence, both investigations rely on goodwill.  I cannot say what the situation is in the UK,  because I don't track opinion aka goodwill there.  In Portugal, there is a lack of goodwill, which will help neither investigation.

There is no allegory of good v evil.

There was a McCann PR unit set up to protect the parents.

It focused on the UK and ignored Portugal.

It did next to nothing for Madeleine.

Team McCann chose to ignore Portugal.

So you are concerned about the lack of goodwill in Portugal which means you think that's, where the important  information  lies... Not in the uk.... So that's the parents ruled out.... Amaral thinks they're involved... I don't... So that makes my opinion more informed than his... Perfect

Edited spelling

[Vertigo Swirl]

The evidence does not prove that he is wrong, nor that he misunderstood the evidence.

Either prove that Madeleine did not die in 5A, or make it clear that it is simply your opinion.

Either prove that Amaral did not understand the evidence, or make it clear that it is simply your opinion.

Do you think Amaral should have been more careful with his words and instead should have said "I will prove that (in my opinion) Madeleine died in the apartment"   or should he have said "In my opinion, I will prove that Madeleine died in the apartment" because he really should have made it clear it was only his opinion, shouldn't he?

[jassi]

Do you think Amaral should have been more careful with his words and instead should have said "I will prove that (in my opinion) Madeleine died in the apartment"   or should he have said "In my opinion, I will prove that Madeleine died in the apartment" because he really should have made it clear it was only his opinion, shouldn't he?

I thought you said Amaral was yesterday's man. Why bring him up yet again ?

[Robittybob1]

I thought you said Amaral was yesterday's man. Why bring him up yet again ?

https://youtu.be/W6N3o4TDYsI

[Brietta]

My picture of Portugal is one of reality.

In the absence of DNA evidence, both investigations rely on goodwill.  I cannot say what the situation is in the UK,  because I don't track opinion aka goodwill there.  In Portugal, there is a lack of goodwill, which will help neither investigation.

There is no allegory of good v evil.

There was a McCann PR unit set up to protect the parents.

It focused on the UK and ignored Portugal.

It did next to nothing for Madeleine.

Team McCann chose to ignore Portugal.

It appears your opinion is at variance with that of Pedro do Carmo who replied when asked why ten years after the event Madeleine's disappearance is still so much in the public eye ...
"First, there was a deliberate and legitimate effort on the part of the child's parents to keep the topic on the agenda of the media."
When asked if it had been a mistake to make Madeleine's parents arguidos in 2007, his emphatic response was ...
"I will not naturally answer that question.
But what I can say, like I did in 2011 and 2013, is that Maddie's parents are not suspects.
This statement remains: the parents are not suspicious. Ponto.
http://expresso.sapo.pt/sociedade/2017-05-03-Pedro-do-Carmo-Os-pais-de-Maddie-nao-sao-suspeitos.-Ponto-1#gs.sEWw0fU

Pedro do Carmo who is the deputy director of the Judiciary Police seems to have a very positive outlook as far as Kate and Gerry McCann are concerned ... so perhaps there isn't as much doom and gloom amongst Portuguese opinion as you seem to think.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I thought you said Amaral was yesterday's man. Why bring him up yet again ?

Ancient History is a favourite subject of mine.

[ShiningInLuz]

It appears your opinion is at variance with that of Pedro do Carmo who replied when asked why ten years after the event Madeleine's disappearance is still so much in the public eye ...
"First, there was a deliberate and legitimate effort on the part of the child's parents to keep the topic on the agenda of the media."
When asked if it had been a mistake to make Madeleine's parents arguidos in 2007, his emphatic response was ...
"I will not naturally answer that question.
But what I can say, like I did in 2011 and 2013, is that Maddie's parents are not suspects.
This statement remains: the parents are not suspicious. Ponto.
http://expresso.sapo.pt/sociedade/2017-05-03-Pedro-do-Carmo-Os-pais-de-Maddie-nao-sao-suspeitos.-Ponto-1#gs.sEWw0fU

Pedro do Carmo who is the deputy director of the Judiciary Police seems to have a very positive outlook as far as Kate and Gerry McCann are concerned ... so perhaps there isn't as much doom and gloom amongst Portuguese opinion as you seem to think.

Haven't got a clue as to the point you are making.

Pedro do Carmo in no way makes up the 90% of the Portuguese respondents who were very unsatisfied that OG got yet more funding.  He could have been one of the many, or a McCann supporter, a neutral, or not voted.

Does one care?

[G-Unit]

It appears your opinion is at variance with that of Pedro do Carmo who replied when asked why ten years after the event Madeleine's disappearance is still so much in the public eye ...
"First, there was a deliberate and legitimate effort on the part of the child's parents to keep the topic on the agenda of the media."
When asked if it had been a mistake to make Madeleine's parents arguidos in 2007, his emphatic response was ...
"I will not naturally answer that question.
But what I can say, like I did in 2011 and 2013, is that Maddie's parents are not suspects.
This statement remains: the parents are not suspicious. Ponto.
http://expresso.sapo.pt/sociedade/2017-05-03-Pedro-do-Carmo-Os-pais-de-Maddie-nao-sao-suspeitos.-Ponto-1#gs.sEWw0fU

Pedro do Carmo who is the deputy director of the Judiciary Police seems to have a very positive outlook as far as Kate and Gerry McCann are concerned ... so perhaps there isn't as much doom and gloom amongst Portuguese opinion as you seem to think.

He will need to identify the crime before he starts suspecting people.

[Alice Purjorick]

I thought you said Amaral was yesterday's man. Why bring him up yet again ?

He is rather like a Kelly Doll is he not? in that he just keeps bobbing up on every thread usually in the company of Eddie and Keela.
A new trinity as it were.