Consider this scenario - Would a guilty person keep their case alive for many years?

[ShiningInLuz]

The most obvious answer is if you got away with it, but were now being subjected to a barrage of innuendo that you got away with it.  In a hypothetical situation, obviously.

[G-Unit]

You're being a bit silly now, perhaps because you have no other option but to try ridicule to deflect from the point being made.  What difference does it make to the scenario or *your* motive if a newspaper was assisting *you* in pushing for a review?

You're asking for a detailed explanation of the motives behind the actions of some people we don't know. Despite that, people have managed, based on a similar case, to suggest some things which may have made sense to the people involved. You have rejected all suggestions so there's not much point in people coming up with any more. It's all speculation anyway because only the people in your scenario know what their motives were.

[Alfie]

You're asking for a detailed explanation of the motives behind the actions of some people we don't know. Despite that, people have managed, based on a similar case, to suggest some things which may have made sense to the people involved. You have rejected all suggestions so there's not much point in people coming up with any more. It's all speculation anyway because only the people in your scenario know what their motives were.

Do you seriously think that any of the motives you and others have come up with on this thread to explain why *you* want a full and comprehensive review of *your own* crimes are in any way credible or rational? 

Hand on heart? 

Presumably you do, and presumably you believe that at least one of the aforementioned motives is applicable in a certain case we cannot mention on this thread. 

I find that quite baffling really. 

Did you ever for a moment consider that actually the real motive is all about finding out what happened to *your* child and who took her, and because actually *you* didn't have a hand in her disappearance after all? 

Or is that really way more unlikely than any of the other motives you've come up with...? &%+((£

[Alfie]

My observation is that certain people ie sceptics really don't want to give too much thought to this question because it can't be easily or rationally explained and still fit in with their beliefs.  Far easier to put it out of their minds and continue nit-picking over minor discrepancies in statements and tut-tutting at "strange" body language.

Interesting exercise, but ultimately pointless as beliefs are obviously far too ingrained to take on board the only obvious and rational explanation.   

[John]

Had events taken place as you suggest in your scenario Alf I don't see it thereafter playing out in such a way. Had the parent found the child missing though the need to understand what befell her and most importantly who was to blame would be overwhelming.  If a third party culprit can be identified then all the better, consciences can then be eased all round.

[G-Unit]

My observation is that certain people ie sceptics really don't want to give too much thought to this question because it can't be easily or rationally explained and still fit in with their beliefs.  Far easier to put it out of their minds and continue nit-picking over minor discrepancies in statements and tut-tutting at "strange" body language.

Interesting exercise, but ultimately pointless as beliefs are obviously far too ingrained to take on board the only obvious and rational explanation.

I would agree Alfie, but nothing in this hypothetical case has ever been easily or rationally explained. Every 'fact' seems, on closer examination, to be not so factual after all. Every explanation is convoluted and nothing has ever been rationally explained. Why anyone would expect a rational explanation for requesting a review escapes me.

[ShiningInLuz]

Do you seriously think that any of the motives you and others have come up with on this thread to explain why *you* want a full and comprehensive review of *your own* crimes are in any way credible or rational? 

Hand on heart? 

Presumably you do, and presumably you believe that at least one of the aforementioned motives is applicable in a certain case we cannot mention on this thread. 

I find that quite baffling really. 

Did you ever for a moment consider that actually the real motive is all about finding out what happened to *your* child and who took her, and because actually *you* didn't have a hand in her disappearance after all? 

Or is that really way more unlikely than any of the other motives you've come up with...? &%+((£

You are the one insisting this is an exercise in creative thinking.

The challenge was not to come up with the best explanation, it was to come up with any explanation that fitted the hypothetical constraints you put on it.

I see you are now admitting alternative explanations exist.  At least that's a start.

[Alice Purjorick]

You are the one insisting this is an exercise in creative thinking.

The challenge was not to come up with the best explanation, it was to come up with any explanation that fitted the hypothetical constraints you put on it.

I see you are now admitting alternative explanations exist.  At least that's a start.

Isn't that commonplace? as options become closer the constraints are increased to ensure only the desired target is hit. It is a bit like shooting down a funnel 

[Alfie]

I would agree Alfie, but nothing in this hypothetical case has ever been easily or rationally explained. Every 'fact' seems, on closer examination, to be not so factual after all. Every explanation is convoluted and nothing has ever been rationally explained. Why anyone would expect a rational explanation for requesting a review escapes me.

It is only so because you wish it to be so.  If you accept that the child was abducted then pretty much everything else makes perfect sense. 

[Alfie]

You are the one insisting this is an exercise in creative thinking.

The challenge was not to come up with the best explanation, it was to come up with any explanation that fitted the hypothetical constraints you put on it.

I see you are now admitting alternative explanations exist.  At least that's a start.

The challenge was to come up with a plausible logical motive.  My scenario, my thread, my challenge.  No one has yet provided one, though the ones that have been dreamt up so far have been quite entertaining, thanks to all.

[Alice Purjorick]

So long and thanks for all the fish.

[G-Unit]

It is only so because you wish it to be so.  If you accept that the child was abducted then pretty much everything else makes perfect sense.

If it made perfect sense I wouldn't be here. There is also the possibility that one of the people involved is completely innocent and that's the one who is driving the search and the review. Sometimes people really don't understand the nature of those they live with.

[ShiningInLuz]

The challenge was to come up with a plausible logical motive.  My scenario, my thread, my challenge.  No one has yet provided one, though the ones that have been dreamt up so far have been quite entertaining, thanks to all.

Make up your mind.  A few posts back you were admitting alternatives exist, now you are asserting they don't.

This strikes me as a thinly disguised attempt to put enough obstacles in the way that the end result must be that the parents in your scenario are innocent, but IMO it is backfiring, and actually quite damaging to your cause.

Basically, you are asserting that everything other than abduction must be incorrect, therefore abduction is correct.  And, IMO, you're not doing a good job of it.

[G-Unit]

The challenge was to come up with a plausible logical motive.  My scenario, my thread, my challenge.  No one has yet provided one, though the ones that have been dreamt up so far have been quite entertaining, thanks to all.

It's been entertaining watching you try to insist that the only plausible logical motive is the one you prefer. First you have to demonstrate that your hypothetical people have been plausible and logical from day one. If they haven't, why should their reasons for requesting a review be plausible and logical?

[ferryman]

Thank goodness detective work (that counts!) is left to real policemen ....