what do you think the odds are of abduction in this case?

[Holly Goodhead]

Re the title is this abduction from the apartment or 'woke and wandered' and was then abducted or both?

Remember Prof Roy Meadow's ill-fated statistical evidence at the trial of Sally Clark who had two sons both of whom died as a result of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) aka Cot Death.  Meadows, a pediatrician by profession, calculated the odds of 2 children dying as a result of SIDS in an affluent non-smoking family at 1 in 73,000,000.  Meadow's evidence played a part in Sally Clarke's conviction for murder which was subsequently overturned.

Much controversy existed about the statistics and some mathematicians have calculated that the true odds may have been greater than 2:1 in favour of death not being murder.
 

[barrier]

I don't know how anyone can rule out abduction from the apartment or 'woke and wandered' and was abducted from outside the apartment.  What evidence exists supporting any hypothesis?  It seems to me zilch.   

Cause some awfully nice person when setting up grange said it was to investigate  an abduction  as if it happened  in the uk .

[barrier]

So daCarmo definitely does not rule out abduction and you don't know if he believes or not it's the most probable scenario...

Nor is his flag nailed to the abduction mast,unlike the blinkered SY.

[Mr Gray]

Nor is his flag nailed to the abduction mast,unlike the blinkered SY.

I think SY are, spot on and in no way blinkered

[slartibartfast]

Re the title is this abduction from the apartment or 'woke and wandered' and was then abducted or both?

Remember Prof Roy Meadow's ill-fated statistical evidence at the trial of Sally Clark who had two sons both of whom died as a result of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) aka Cot Death.  Meadows, a pediatrician by profession, calculated the odds of 2 children dying as a result of SIDS in an affluent non-smoking family at 1 in 73,000,000.  Meadow's evidence played a part in Sally Clarke's conviction for murder which was subsequently overturned.

Much controversy existed about the statistics and some mathematicians have calculated that the true odds may have been greater than 2:1 in favour of death not being murder.
 

Very bad stats that. Although the causes of SIDS are not fully known an assumption should have been made that they do not occur randomly:

[Holly Goodhead]

Came to some harm in 5a by persons known or unknown and body removed.

Abducted from 5a by persons known or unknown

Woke and wondered and had some accident alone eg entered Ocean and drowned

Woke and wondered and had some accident at the hands of persons known or unknown eg knocked over by car

Woke and wondered and was abducted by persons known or unknown

Can anyone think of any other possibilities?

[Robittybob1]

Came to some harm in 5a by persons known or unknown and body removed.

Abducted from 5a by persons known or unknown

Woke and wondered and had some accident alone eg entered Ocean and drowned

Woke and wondered and had some accident at the hands of persons known or unknown eg knocked over by car

Woke and wondered and was abducted by persons known or unknown

Can anyone think of any other possibilities?

You've covered the field pretty well IMO.

The one scenario I have been developing over the years  is a "Woke and wondered and had some accident at the hands of persons known or unknown eg knocked over by car" variation.

My version is:
Woke up by burglars who attempt an entry to 5A.
Madeleine was hiding in 5A when Matt did his check.
Madeleine fled out via the front door when another person entered via through the patio door.
This other person closes the front door and leaves via the patio door and goes to look for Madeleine.
Madeleine goes to the secondary reception and finds it closed, crosses over to the car park and gets hit by a car. She is picked up and taken away for "medical attention".

[jassi]

Very convoluted scenario that -IMO
I'm sure the solution is much simpler.

[niklasericson]

If I take two scenarios where strangers could've been involved.
The odds for the-abducted-by-a-stranger-from-5A-scenario is sky high.
The odds for the scenario where she was abducted in panic by a stranger after an accident outside 5A is pretty low.

[Robittybob1]

If I take two scenarios where strangers could've been involved.
The odds for the-abducted-by-a-stranger-from-5A-scenario is sky high.
The odds for the scenario where she was abducted in panic by a stranger after an accident outside 5A is pretty low.

Do you realise that as the numbers in an odds calculation goes up the probability of that event goes down.

Can you put some numbers onto those odds so I'm sure you are on the right track for I thought you might have it around the wrong way around. 

It is a lot easier to pick a child off a street than it would be to get into a home and take her IMO.

[niklasericson]

Do you realise that as the numbers in an odds calculation goes up the probability of that event goes down.

Can you put some numbers onto those odds so I'm sure you are on the right track for I thought you might have it around the wrong way around. 

It is a lot easier to pick a child off a street than it would be to get into a home and take her IMO.

You are using the British odds system in the UK we do not.
We are using the European odds system so the odds for the scenario where she was abducted by a stranger in 5A would be equal to Watford winning the Prem leauge this season, around 1000x the money.
The odds for the scenario that she was abducted by a stranger after an accident outside 5A is equal to Liverpool winning the Prem leauge, around 4x the money.
And the explanation for this is quite simple.
No evidence, witnesses or forensics are able to show that any stranger took her from 5A.
On the other hand there's a chain of circumstances where the pieces fit in the puzzle.
According to the witness Fiona Payne was Kate worried that she would wake up so she thought it would be better to left the door unlocked so she could go out to find them.
If we believe the given timeline there was no one around 5A for about 25 minutes between ~20:40-21:05 and exactly during this time of period there was a man who travelled by car along these roads and withheld important information and lied about the time.
He said he travelled home by car at ~20:45 but he did not.
He travelled home by car after 21:00, after he had picked up a service vehicle (van/pick up) and he withheld this information and why did he need a service vehicle AFTER his job was done?
And one more thing,
there was no lock at all on the lower "security" gate that  lead directly out onto the dark street.

[Mr Gray]

Re the title is this abduction from the apartment or 'woke and wandered' and was then abducted or both?

Remember Prof Roy Meadow's ill-fated statistical evidence at the trial of Sally Clark who had two sons both of whom died as a result of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) aka Cot Death.  Meadows, a pediatrician by profession, calculated the odds of 2 children dying as a result of SIDS in an affluent non-smoking family at 1 in 73,000,000.  Meadow's evidence played a part in Sally Clarke's conviction for murder which was subsequently overturned.

Much controversy existed about the statistics and some mathematicians have calculated that the true odds may have been greater than 2:1 in favour of death not being murder.
 

Deleted

[Mr Gray]

You are using the British odds system in the UK we do not.
We are using the European odds system so the odds for the scenario where she was abducted by a stranger in 5A would be equal to Watford winning the Prem leauge this season, around 1000x the money.
The odds for the scenario that she was abducted by a stranger after an accident outside 5A is equal to Liverpool winning the Prem leauge, around 4x the money.
And the explanation for this is quite simple.
No evidence, witnesses or forensics are able to show that any stranger took her from 5A.
On the other hand there's a chain of circumstances where the pieces fit in the puzzle.
According to the witness Fiona Payne was Kate worried that she would wake up so she thought it would be better to left the door unlocked so she could go out to find them.
If we believe the given timeline there was no one around 5A for about 25 minutes between ~20:40-21:05 and exactly during this time of period there was a man who travelled by car along these roads and withheld important information and lied about the time.
He said he travelled home by car at ~20:45 but he did not.
He travelled home by car after 21:00, after he had picked up a service vehicle (van/pick up) and he withheld this information and why did he need a service vehicle AFTER his job was done?
And one more thing,
there was no lock at all on the lower "security" gate that  lead directly out onto the dark street.

That leaves parental involvement... So what are your odds for parental involvement

[Robittybob1]

You are using the British odds system in the UK we do not.
We are using the European odds system so the odds for the scenario where she was abducted by a stranger in 5A would be equal to Watford winning the Prem leauge this season, around 1000x the money.
The odds for the scenario that she was abducted by a stranger after an accident outside 5A is equal to Liverpool winning the Prem leauge, around 4x the money.
And the explanation for this is quite simple.
No evidence, witnesses or forensics are able to show that any stranger took her from 5A.
On the other hand there's a chain of circumstances where the pieces fit in the puzzle.
According to the witness Fiona Payne was Kate worried that she would wake up so she thought it would be better to left the door unlocked so she could go out to find them.
If we believe the given timeline there was no one around 5A for about 25 minutes between ~20:40-21:05 and exactly during this time of period there was a man who travelled by car along these roads and withheld important information and lied about the time.
He said he travelled home by car at ~20:45 but he did not.
He travelled home by car after 21:00, after he had picked up a service vehicle (van/pick up) and he withheld this information and why did he need a service vehicle AFTER his job was done?
And one more thing,
there was no lock at all on the lower "security" gate that  lead directly out onto the dark street.

I have read about that person using the service vehicle etc and I found it rather suspicious as well.  In theory it doesn't even have to be the ones who knocked the child over to be the ones who take her away from that terrible situation they are observing.

Thanks for your explanation.  Just to confirm what you are saying: are you saying that abduction from the street is about 250 times more likely?  e.g. 1000:1 compared to 4:1  1000/4 = 250.

[Mr Gray]

I have read about that person using the service vehicle etc and I found it rather suspicious as well.  In theory it doesn't even have to be the ones who knocked the child over to be the ones who take her away from that terrible situation they are observing.

Thanks for your explanation.  Just to confirm what you are saying: are you saying that abduction from the street is about 250 times more likely?  e.g. 1000:1 compared to 4:1  1000/4 = 250.

The problem is that those odds only account for 25% of the possibilities. .si are the parents the other 75 % which if course is, absurd