So what are the various scenarios available to us?

[stephen25000]

Having read through the replies to my post after I logged off last night, I see no evidence of abduction has been supplied.

Sadie, you can present all the photos you want, but what you should do is show some under the same lighting conditions as when tanner made her alleged sighting. Showing daylight photos has no credence whatsoever.

Likewise, saying tanner was looking like a hawk at the faceless Mr. Bundleman, do you realize you have no proof tanner say anything at all. ?

[Benice]

Question is...how did an abductor know which bedroom the children were in?

If he/they were watching the apartment, they would quickly notice that the lights in the back bedroom went on when the McCanns returned home each night.  And even if they didn't know for sure, then once they got in there it was hardly a problem to find out -  in a two bedroom apartment.

[Benice]

Having read through the replies to my post after I logged off last night, I see no evidence of abduction has been supplied.Sadie, you can present all the photos you want, but what you should do is show some under the same lighting conditions as when tanner made her alleged sighting. Showing daylight photos has no credence whatsoever.

Likewise, saying tanner was looking like a hawk at the faceless Mr. Bundleman, do you realize you have no proof tanner say anything at all. ?

To believe that you must think KM lied about finding the shutters and window open.  Why would she do that?

[stephen25000]

To believe that you must think KM lied about finding the shutters and window open.  Why would she do that?

Are you kidding me ?

As it stands, and you I'm sure you know this, the only identifiable fingerprints obtained were hers.

[Eleanor]

"Finger Print on the inside."  Don't exaggerate.  This is how Myths are born.

[Benice]

Are you kidding me ?

As it stands, and you I'm sure you know this, the only identifiable fingerprints obtained were hers.

No I'm not kidding you Stephen.  Why do you think Kate would lie about the shutters and window? What did she have to gain from doing that?

There were other fingerprints found but they were incomplete.  That didn't stop them from being fingerprints.   IMo You are implying no other fingerprints whatsoever were found which is not true.   

[stephen25000]

No I'm not kidding you Stephen.  Why do you think Kate would lie about the shutters and window? What did she have to gain from doing that?

There were other fingerprints found but they were incomplete.  That didn't stop them from being fingerprints.   IMo You are implying no other fingerprints whatsoever were found which is not true.

If the abduction is made up as I believe, then she had everything to gain.

I am aware other fingerprints were found but not identifiable, but hers were.

[Eleanor]

If the abduction is made up as I believe, then she had everything to gain.

I am aware other fingerprints were found but not identifiable, but hers were.

"Hers was."  I despair, I really do.

[Benice]

"Hers was."  I despair, I really do.

Me too.    Apparently any fingerprints found that were incomplete and so could not be identified are to be dismissed as evidence.    What they should be classed as -  according to Stephen, I have no idea.    Partial or not they are still fingerprints found at the scene and left there by someone.
 

[stephen25000]

Me too.    Apparently any fingerprints found that were incomplete and so could not be identified are to be dismissed as evidence.    What they should be classed as -  according to Stephen, I have no idea.    Partial or not they are still fingerprints found at the scene and left there by someone.

However, it does not mean any other prints were made by an 'abductor'.

[stephen25000]

"Hers was."  I despair, I really do.

I despair of people like you who believe every word spouted by the Mccanns.

You are aware of course of the statistics for missing children, in two respects, the likelihood of finding a child after this length of time, and also how many 'disappearances' are linked to the family itself.

They have stuck to an abduction thesis for which there exists no evidence.

P.S.  In simple language, a person(s) seeing someone holding a child does not mean proof of abduction. Likewise, the tanner and Smith accounts contradict each other,

and for the umpteenth time, after 6+ years and not one sign of Madeleine's whereabouts and worldwide publicity for the case, what next ?

[Benice]

However, it does not mean any other prints were made by an 'abductor'.

Quite right Stephen, and by the same token it doesn't mean they were NOT made by an abductor either.  We have no way of knowing. Surely you can see that?

Kate had lived in the apartment for 6 days, so it's hardly sinister that her prints were found on the inside of the window of her children's bedroom. 



 

[Eleanor]

After six years of no arrests, no charges and no trial, what next?

[Benice]

I despair of people like you who believe every word spouted by the Mccanns.

You are aware of course of the statistics for missing children, in two respects, the likelihood of finding a child after this length of time, and also how many 'disappearances' are linked to the family itself.

They have stuck to an abduction thesis for which there exists no evidence.

P.S.  In simple language, a person(s) seeing someone holding a child does not mean proof of abduction. Likewise, the tanner and Smith accounts contradict each other,

and for the umpteenth time, after 6+ years and not one sign of Madeleine's whereabouts and worldwide publicity for the case, what next ?

The statistics show that stranger abduction does happen.   And that is all we need to know.

My belief that the McCanns are innocent is not based purely on what they say.  In the main it is common sense which tells me that they did not have anything to do with their beloved daughter's abduction.

I too despair of people who claim the parents 'did it' but refuse to say how or why they managed to change from loving parents into raving psychopaths in a matter of minutes, or how their friends suddenly lost all semblance of intelligence, and in a flash turned into brainless thickos who happily agreed to become accessories to the death/disposal of a child - as if a child's death was of no more important to them than a family goldfish which had been found dead.      It simply makes no sense.

[stephen25000]

The statistics show that stranger abduction does happen.   And that is all we need to know.

My belief that the McCanns are innocent is not based purely on what they say.  In the main it is common sense which tells me that they did not have anything to do with their beloved daughter's abduction.

I too despair of people who claim the parents 'did it' but refuse to say how or why they managed to change from loving parents into raving psychopaths in a matter of minutes, or how their friends suddenly lost all semblance of intelligence, and in a flash turned into brainless thickos who happily agreed to become accessories to the death/disposal of a child - as if a child's death was of no more important to them than a family goldfish which had been found dead.      It simply makes no sense.

You are implying by that statement that people who don't believe the Mccanns think they killed her.

I do not.

I believe she had an accident from which she didn't recover and subsequent event were to cover up what happened, and please don't say cover ups don't happen, they do.

I have given reasons many times here and elsewhere why I think the Mccanns behaviour is not in accord with an abduction, and nothing I have seen so far has convinced me otherwise.

You are welcome to show me I am wrong, with concrete evidence I am wrong.