More recent events related to Madeleine McCann's case

[Vertigo Swirl]

I agree - but have the sense to understand that works two ways|!!

If you read my post again you will see that I “have the sense” to see it both ways by referencing the Smiths testimony as evidence so please don’t be so rude.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

You know for a fact that the abductor didn't go in through the unlocked patio door, do you?

That's a loaded question!!! We don't even know for a fact there was an abductor!! We need to be open minded remember!! We need to look at evidence... and something more concrete than hearsay.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I don't assume they are lying. I just don't know which of their accounts is anywhere near accurate.

I’m sorry but if you don’t accept Kate’s account of the open window is evidence of an abduction then that can only be brcause you think she is lying, please don’t deny it and pretend you think she might have been mistaken - that’s codswallop.

[Vertigo Swirl]

That's a loaded question!!! We don't even know for a fact there was an abductor!! We need to be open minded remember!! We need to look at evidence... and something more concrete than hearsay.

Do you accept Kate may be telling the truth?  Do you accept the window may have been open?  If so do you accept that this would be evidence of an abduction?

[Wonderfulspam]

Do you accept Kate may be telling the truth?  Do you accept the window may have been open?  If so do you accept that this would be evidence of an abduction?

No.

A burglar could have opened the window, seen the children & then decided not to rob the place.

[Vertigo Swirl]

No.

A burglar could have opened the window, seen the children & then decided not to rob the place.

So an open window definitely can be ruled out as evidence of abduction because….?

[Wonderfulspam]

So an open window definitely can be ruled out as evidence of abduction because….?

because it isn't evidence of abduction.

[Vertigo Swirl]

because it isn't evidence of abduction.

Explain why an open window (that was left closed)  in a missing child’s bedroom is not evidence of abduction.  What rules it out as evidence?

[Wonderfulspam]

Explain why an open window (that was left closed)  in a missing child’s bedroom is not evidence of abduction.  What rules it out as evidence?

I don't have to explain anything.

Statements as fact without supporting evidence are permissible under new forum rules, apparently.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I don't have to explain anything.

Statements as fact without supporting evidence are permissible under new forum rules, apparently.

In this case an open window was evidence if abduction.  Why in this case but not in the McCann case?

https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/isabel-celis-6-year-old-girl-vanishes-from-tucson-arizona-home
I don’t think you know how to answer this question.

[Wonderfulspam]

In this case an open window was evidence if abduction.  Why in this case but not in the McCann case?

https://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/04/isabel-celis-6-year-old-girl-vanishes-from-tucson-arizona-home
I don’t think you know how to answer this question.

Because Maddie wasn't abducted.

[Billy Whizz Fan Club]

If you read my post again you will see that I “have the sense” to see it both ways by referencing the Smiths testimony as evidence so please don’t be so rude.

Well obviously you can't ignore the Smith sighting as it's important evidence, but you didn't really present it in an open minded way did you. Talk of it being evidence of GM "parading" a corpse around the streets of PDL was an exaggeration of the events in an attempt to keep the reader's mind focussed away from certain conclusions. The use of that intransitive implies deliberately being exhibitive, flaunting something even, deliberately doing something to make people look at what you're doing. I didn't get that impression of Smithman from the family statements. Let's be open minded and lets examine the concrete evidence (not hearsay) which suggests there was a break in (or walk in) and an abduction. I'm still waiting to see this evidence but when I do I'll be quite happy to examine it with an open mind because like everyone else here I do not know what happened to Madeleine McCann.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Because Maddie wasn't abducted.

I knew you wouldn’t be able to explain and I was right.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Well obviously you can't ignore the Smith sighting as it's important evidence, but you didn't really present it in an open minded way did you. Talk of it being evidence of GM "parading" a corpse around the streets of PDL was an exaggeration of the events in an attempt to keep the reader's mind focussed away from certain conclusions. The use of that intransitive implies deliberately being exhibitive, flaunting something even, deliberately doing something to make people look at what you're doing. I didn't get that impression of Smithman from the family statements. Let's be open minded and lets examine the concrete evidence (not hearsay) which suggests there was a break in (or walk in) and an abduction. I'm still waiting to see this evidence but when I do I'll be quite happy to examine it with an open mind because like everyone else here I do not know what happened to Madeleine McCann.

So you don’t accept Kate’s statement is evidence but you do accept Smith’s satement is evidence, that’s what I discern from the above.

[sadie]

Normal as in open or normal as in closed?!!

Oh, Billy, please don't act like a simpleton.  We know that you are not.



For any simpletons around:

We all know that with very cheap flimsy curtains such as these, when a sturdy gust of wind blows them, they fly inwards and open.

Hadn't you noticed that Billy?