How can the Mccanns be 100% innocent - when they haven't been 100% been cleared.

[Mr Gray]

In my opinion that is because assumptions have been made about the nature of the crime and the reasons for archiving the first investigation. Those assumptions may be correct, but they are not, imo, based on firm evidence.

You don't know what evidence they are based on

[Wonderfulspam]

You don't know what evidence they are based on

The police have released zero abduction evidence in the past 14 years.

With no evidence of evidence being present, it's quite reasonable to assume no evidence exists.

[G-Unit]

The police have released zero abduction evidence in the past 14 years.

With no evidence of evidence being present, it's quite reasonable to assume no evidence exists.

A C Rowley demonstrated what Op Grange think;

However she left that apartment, she has been abducted. It is not a 20-year-old who has gone
missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the
heart of this has been an abduction.
http://findmadeleine.com/pdf/ac-rowley-transcript.pdf

It seems they deduced that as Madeleine wasn't old enough to decide to start a new life she must therefore have been abducted. Is that type of evidence upon which the Metropolitan Police habitually rely, I wonder?

[Mr Gray]

A C Rowley demonstrated what Op Grange think;

However she left that apartment, she has been abducted. It is not a 20-year-old who has gone
missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the
heart of this has been an abduction.
http://findmadeleine.com/pdf/ac-rowley-transcript.pdf

It seems they deduced that as Madeleine wasn't old enough to decide to start a new life she must therefore have been abducted. Is that type of evidence upon which the Metropolitan Police habitually rely, I wonder?

That might be how it seems to you.. But not to Mr.
Rowley said more than that

[Lace]

Do you mean the front door kmc didn't look out of that led to the car park... during her 10 min search of the apartment

Why an abductor would bother to open that window in the first place ...does not make any sense at all.

No Kate looked out of the window.   The window could have been opened for a few reasons.   Abductor could have come in through the window,   abductor could have opened the window for a means of escape if caught in the apartment,  abductor could have opened the window to pass Madeleine through to an accomplice. 

IMO the abductor was disturbed by Gerry coming back to the apartment,  one of the friends listened outside the children's window and went back to report all was well.   IMO the abductor was watching the friend do his check and decided there wouldn't be another one for thirty minutes,  so he went into the apartment and was disturbed by Gerry coming back.   When Gerry left the apartment he opened the window incase there was another disturbance and he could make an hasty retreat.

[Eleanor]

No Kate looked out of the window.   The window could have been opened for a few reasons.   Abductor could have come in through the window,   abductor could have opened the window for a means of escape if caught in the apartment,  abductor could have opened the window to pass Madeleine through to an accomplice. 

IMO the abductor was disturbed by Gerry coming back to the apartment,  one of the friends listened outside the children's window and went back to report all was well.   IMO the abductor was watching the friend do his check and decided there wouldn't be another one for thirty minutes,  so he went into the apartment and was disturbed by Gerry coming back.   When Gerry left the apartment he opened the window incase there was another disturbance and he could make an hasty retreat.

Way too logical.  That won't wash.

[Wonderfulspam]

No Kate looked out of the window.   The window could have been opened for a few reasons.   Abductor could have come in through the window,   abductor could have opened the window for a means of escape if caught in the apartment,  abductor could have opened the window to pass Madeleine through to an accomplice. 

IMO the abductor was disturbed by Gerry coming back to the apartment,  one of the friends listened outside the children's window and went back to report all was well.   IMO the abductor was watching the friend do his check and decided there wouldn't be another one for thirty minutes,  so he went into the apartment and was disturbed by Gerry coming back.   When Gerry left the apartment he opened the window incase there was another disturbance and he could make an hasty retreat.

Too many assumptions here imo.

You're assuming Kate looked out of the window, when only she really knows.

You're assuming there was not only an abductor, but also an abductors accomplice.

Worst still, you're assuming the gender of this imaginary abductor.

But other than that, I agree completely.

[Wonderfulspam]

Way too logical.  That won't wash.

Yes very logical, if your idea of logic involves making multiple assumptions based on nothing.

[Eleanor]

Yes very logical, if your idea of logic involves making multiple assumptions based on nothing.

You do it all of the time so you would know.

[Wonderfulspam]

You do it all of the time so you would know.

Hilarious.

'It takes one to know one' are you sure you're not 12?

[Vertigo Swirl]

I give the answers which, imo, are applicable. I have no evidence of what the Portuguese police are thinking.

So when the Portuguese police say "The McCanns are not suspects - period" you don't consider that to be evidence of what they are thinking?  What exactly do you understand by the word "evidence"?

[Vertigo Swirl]

A C Rowley demonstrated what Op Grange think;

However she left that apartment, she has been abducted. It is not a 20-year-old who has gone
missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the
heart of this has been an abduction.
http://findmadeleine.com/pdf/ac-rowley-transcript.pdf

It seems they deduced that as Madeleine wasn't old enough to decide to start a new life she must therefore have been abducted. Is that type of evidence upon which the Metropolitan Police habitually rely, I wonder?

It seems you are determined to be facetious.

[Wonderfulspam]

A C Rowley demonstrated what Op Grange think;

However she left that apartment, she has been abducted. It is not a 20-year-old who has gone
missing and who has made a decision to start a new life, this is a young girl who is missing and at the
heart of this has been an abduction.
http://findmadeleine.com/pdf/ac-rowley-transcript.pdf

It seems they deduced that as Madeleine wasn't old enough to decide to start a new life she must therefore have been abducted. Is that type of evidence upon which the Metropolitan Police habitually rely, I wonder?

I seem to remember Andy Redwood talking some nonsense riddle about clear opportunity for an abduction & his belief on the evidence that is a criminal act by a stranger, before retiring in defeat.

Last time I looked that Rowley bloke looked a bit old so it's quite safe to assume he'll retire before abduction evidence ever rears it's head, & whatever ever happened to that Nicola Wall woman?  To her credit, at least she kept her mouth shut.

ETA:  I've just found Nicola Wall's only public comment on Grange:

“It was a great privilege to be Head of Operation Grange during the last  three and a half years and I guarantee I will be leaving the operation in the hands of a very experienced colleague”.

[jassi]

I seem to remember Andy Redwood talking some nonsense riddle about clear opportunity for an abduction & his belief on the evidence that is a criminal act by a stranger, before retiring in defeat.

Last time I looked that Rowley bloke looked a bit old so it's quite safe to assume he'll retire before abduction evidence ever rears it's head, & whatever ever happened to that Nicola Wall woman?  To her credit, at least she kept her mouth shut.

ETA:  I've just found Nicola Wall's only public comment on Grange:

“It was a great privilege to be Head of Operation Grange during the last  three and a half years and I guarantee I will be leaving the operation in the hands of a very experienced colleague”.

I think he's already long gone. Don't think he had any hands-on involvement anyway.

Seems to me that OG is either the 'short straw' or gentle wind-down for DCI's approaching retirement.

[G-Unit]

I seem to remember Andy Redwood talking some nonsense riddle about clear opportunity for an abduction & his belief on the evidence that is a criminal act by a stranger, before retiring in defeat.

Last time I looked that Rowley bloke looked a bit old so it's quite safe to assume he'll retire before abduction evidence ever rears it's head, & whatever ever happened to that Nicola Wall woman?  To her credit, at least she kept her mouth shut.

ETA:  I've just found Nicola Wall's only public comment on Grange:

“It was a great privilege to be Head of Operation Grange during the last  three and a half years and I guarantee I will be leaving the operation in the hands of a very experienced colleague”.

Rowley retired a while back. DCI Mark Cranwell replaced Nicola Wall, but he supervises Op Grange on a part-time basis and is not funded by the Home Office.
https://www.met.police.uk/foi-ai/metropolitan-police/disclosure-2019/november/status-update-operation-grange/

Cranwell reports to Commander Stuart Cundy.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10177250/madeleine-mccann-police-knife-crime/