For Albertini ...

[Albertini]

A trial of an abductor would not "show the McCanns were innocent."  Such a trial would simply determine whether that abductor was guilty or not gulity of the abduction of Madeleine.

The trial and conviction of an abductor would by definition prove the McCann's innocence.

[Chinagirl]

The trial and conviction of an abductor would by definition prove the McCann's innocence.

Not necessarily at all.  It could, for example, show collusion between the abductor and McCanns.  Hypothetical, of course, for those who don't understand the word "could."

[stephen25000]

Not necessarily at all.  It could, for example, show collusion between the abductor and McCanns.  Hypothetical, of course, for those who don't understand the word "could."

Then of course you have to consider the hypothetical abductor.

[Jean-Pierre]

A question for Stephen.  You views concerning an abductor are well known, and really do not need rehearsing further.

Can you think of any circumstances under which an abuction did not occur but the McCanns are innocent of any crime under Portuguese law?

[sadie]

A question for Stephen.  You views concerning an abductor are well known, and really do not need rehearsing further.

Can you think of any circumstances under which an abuction did not occur but the McCanns are innocent of any crime under Portuguese law?

Interesting question J-P

Await your response, Stephen

[stephen25000]

A question for Stephen.  You views concerning an abductor are well known, and really do not need rehearsing further.

Can you think of any circumstances under which an abuction did not occur but the McCanns are innocent of any crime under Portuguese law?

I am not an expert in Portuguese law, and I don't speak the language and would not rely on google translate. However, I'm sure someone on here is bilingual and could offer their services.

Now if Madeleine had a fatal accident in the apartment when left unsupervised, I would be very surprised if her parents wouldn't be charged.

[stephen25000]

.... moderated off topic .....

Also, have you contacted SY  with your theories  (as I notice you haven't answered that question again) ?

[Mr Moderator]

Please stay on topic guys.

[sadie]

.... moderated off topic .....

Also, have you contacted SY  with your theories  (as I notice you haven't answered that question again) ?

Is this on topic Mr Moderator?

[Jean-Pierre]

I am not an expert in Portuguese law, and I don't speak the language and would not rely on google translate. However, I'm sure someone on here is bilingual and could offer their services.

Now if Madeleine had a fatal accident in the apartment when left unsupervised, I would be very surprised if her parents wouldn't be charged.

Your "cop out" is noted.

So - would it be fair to say that if there was no abductor, then the McCanns would, in your opinion, be guilty of something?

[stephen25000]

Your "cop out" is noted.

So - would it be fair to say that if there was no abductor, then the McCanns would, in your opinion, be guilty of something?

No cop out, I've already stated several times NEGLECT.

[Jean-Pierre]

Well, neglect has been ruled out by the AG already.  So a charge of neglect is unlikely to get off the ground.

Can you think of anything else?

[stephen25000]

Well, neglect has been ruled out by the AG already.  So a charge of neglect is unlikely to get off the ground.

Can you think of anything else?

Ruled out so far, on the available 'evidence'.


What happens if new evidence comes to light that Madeleine did have an accident and died in the apartment ?


Then of course if the McCann's new that ,what next ?

Now your turn to answer JP.

[Jean-Pierre]

If new evidence comes to light, then I assume that will influence the direction of the investigation and any prosecutions that follow. 

However, as things stand, there is no credible evidence to suggest that the McCanns are guilty of anything.  And I think we all know that you dont believe there is any evidence of an abduction etc etc...

But - a little girl is missing, a witness saw a child being carried in the viciniti at ablut the right time, and the supercop who co-ordinated the investigation ruled out entry or exit by the front door because "nobody was authorised to have a key" (ref:  TV1 Documentary), and the crime scene was so badly handled by the Portuguese police that it is hardly surprising that there is no evidence of an intruder. 

By insisting that there was no abduction, you are saying that the McCanns were involved in her disappearance.

So I suggest we all take it as read that Stephen2500 does not think there was an abduction, and then you can stop trying to derail any threads which discuss such things as the "A" word.

[stephen25000]

If new evidence comes to light, then I assume that will influence the direction of the investigation and any prosecutions that follow. 

However, as things stand, there is no credible evidence to suggest that the McCanns are guilty of anything.  And I think we all know that you dont believe there is any evidence of an abduction etc etc...

But - a little girl is missing, a witness saw a child being carried in the viciniti at ablut the right time, and the supercop who co-ordinated the investigation ruled out entry or exit by the front door because "nobody was authorised to have a key" (ref:  TV1 Documentary), and the crime scene was so badly handled by the Portuguese police that it is hardly surprising that there is no evidence of an intruder. 

By insisting that there was no abduction, you are saying that the McCanns were involved in her disappearance.

So I suggest we all take it as read that Stephen2500 does not think there was an abduction, and then you can stop trying to derail any threads which discuss such things as the "A" word.

So credible evidence..............

The Mccanns left their children, with infrequent visits, unprotected, in an unlocked apartment, whilst they wined and dined.

Evidence of abduction.......................

Not a jot.

So a child being allegedly seen being carried in a man's arms, who Mr. Smith was pretty sure was Gerty Mccann is evidence  of abduction ?

No, because by that logic (mantra time again ) a child being carried in someone's arms could be abduction.

Pull the other one JP.

Of course, if there was no abduction JP, who should be held responsible for Madeleine's disappearance ?

Tough choice isn't it.