Why now?

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

And yet some still insist that the dog alerts are conclusive evidence of parental involvement, why do you think that is?

I would hazard a guess that they believe cadaverine and/or blood plus a missing child leads them to conclude Madeleine died in the apartment and presume that the parents were involved. They neglect the fact that the DNA analysis was "inconclusive" so presently there is no conclusive evidence to prove parental involvement.

[G-Unit]

And yet some still insist that the dog alerts are conclusive evidence of parental involvement, why do you think that is?

Some still insist that an alleged open window and shutters is evidence of stranger abduction. People believe what they want to believe.

[Venturi Swirl]

Some still insist that an alleged open window and shutters is evidence of stranger abduction. People believe what they want to believe.

So you must surely agree the dog alerts tell us nothing wrt to what happened to Madeleine and are therefore an irrelevance as I have stated on many an occasion.  Hurrah!

[G-Unit]

So you must surely agree the dog alerts tell us nothing wrt to what happened to Madeleine and are therefore an irrelevance as I have stated on many an occasion.  Hurrah!

They aren't conclusive evidence or an irrelevance. Neither are the alleged open window and shutters.

[Venturi Swirl]

They aren't conclusive evidence or an irrelevance. Neither are the alleged open window and shutters.

The dog alerts have clearly been ruled an irrelevance by at least two police forces, imo.

[G-Unit]

The dog alerts have clearly been ruled an irrelevance by at least two police forces, imo.

Perhaps because they are investigating stranger abduction. It's not clear why they are doing that. Maybe one day they'll be required to explain.

[Venturi Swirl]

Perhaps because they are investigating stranger abduction. It's not clear why they are doing that. Maybe one day they'll be required to explain.

Perhaps because that is the way the evidence is pointing?  Either that or both police forces are a) completely stupid or b) conspiring in a pan-European cover up to protect the McCanns.  Which do you think is the most likely?

[G-Unit]

Perhaps because that is the way the evidence is pointing?  Either that or both police forces are a) completely stupid or b) conspiring in a pan-European cover up to protect the McCanns.  Which do you think is the most likely?

That's what they might have to explain one day.

[Venturi Swirl]

That's what they might have to explain one day.

Which do you think is the most likely?

[G-Unit]

Which do you think is the most likely?

It doesn't matter what I think, but I don't see strong evidence pointing to abduction. Consequently I don't understand why the remit for Operation Grange was to investigate an abduction.

[Venturi Swirl]

It doesn't matter what I think, but I don't see strong evidence pointing to abduction. Consequently I don't understand why the remit for Operation Grange was to investigate an abduction.

Of course it doesn’t matter what you think and as you know far less than the professionals  investigsting the case that’s hardly surprising , however I’m just interested to know why you think two police forces are treating the case as one of abduction by a stranger.  You must have some opinion on the matter, I simply don’t believe anyone who says they don’t.  So what’s your opinion?

[Mr Gray]

They aren't conclusive evidence or an irrelevance. Neither are the alleged open window and shutters.

I think the alleged dog alerts are less indicative than you think

[G-Unit]

Of course it doesn’t matter what you think and as you know far less than the professionals  investigsting the case that’s hardly surprising , however I’m just interested to know why you think two police forces are treating the case as one of abduction by a stranger.  You must have some opinion on the matter, I simply don’t believe anyone who says they don’t.  So what’s your opinion?

How can I know why, when no evidence has been shared?

[Venturi Swirl]

How can I know why, when no evidence has been shared?

You can certainly have an opinion on which is most likely -that both forces are 1) following the evidence, 2) completely stupid, or 3) colluding in a massive conspiracy.  IMO 1 is the most likely, what’s your opinion? 

[G-Unit]

You can certainly have an opinion on which is most likely -that both forces are 1) following the evidence, 2) completely stupid, or 3) colluding in a massive conspiracy.  IMO 1 is the most likely, what’s your opinion?

Are those the only possibilities you can think of? I don't subscribe to any of them.