A new member's perception - but are these points true or false?

[Benita]

I guess you mean Madeleine's blood.

nope it wasn't madeleine's blood!!

[Aiofe]

The reference was to the shutter being forced, jemmied etc...

Words and their meaning are so important.

[ferryman]

Jesus H Christ.

The more I read these forums the more I despair about some off these arguments.

Evidence does not equal proof and conjecture does not equal evidence.

Proof is better than evidence and evidence is better than conjecture. If some of you understood that then these discussions would be a lot more productive and interesting.

So, on topic;

There is evidence that the McCanns said the window had been forced open. The statements from their friends and family are evidence that they said it. It doesn't prove they did but it is certainly evidence.

There is evidence that Madeline came to harm in the appartment. Again, its not proof, its evidence and that evidence comes from the sniffer dogs and other forensics.

However, nether of these are particularly good evidence. They certainly wouldn't stand on their own in court.

As for Madeline being abducted. Well, this is pure conjecture. I'm not saying she wasn't abducted but there is no evidence or proof. No one saw her being taken, no  forensics exist for her being taken. Nothing. The only thing there is Kate saying she knows Madeline was taken (conjecture) and others saying they saw a girl being carried through the streets (proof only that people carry their kids through the streets in a holiday resort)

Its also worth pointing out, as I did on another thread, that forensics can be both evidence and it can be proof. depending upon the quality of the forensics. Finding human blood is evidence that Madeline was hurt. Finding her DNA would be proof that she was hurt.

So in this case there's bucket loads of conjecture, a hand full of evidence and zero proof.

So can people please try and post with this in mind because I'm really finding this bickering is putting me off reading half of the things posted.

There is evidence that Madeline came to harm in the apartment

A useful starting-point might be to educate yourself on what is evidence,

An even better follow-up might be to rid yourself of the misnomer "open-minded".

[Benita]

And here we go!!!!

We don't know whos blood it was. It might have been hers, it might have been someones elses. Thats why its evidence and not proof!!!!


ETA:

Evidence - the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
Proof - evidence or argument establishing a fact or the truth of a statement.
Conjecture - an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information.

chill man!! ok so it was inconclusive ..not evidence nor proof same thing really ..

[j.rob]

The Portugese police were baffled by some of the behaviours of the McCanns. For instance, when they arrived Kate and Gerry made strange gestures, as though praying. They also reported that Kate became irritated when they contacted her about a sighting at a nearby petrol station and they wanted her to go to the police station. She behaved in a way that suggested she had no hope of finding Madeleine.

The Portugese police were there. They saw the couple. They did not believe in the abduction theory. They found no evidence for it. They thought the McCanns acted strangely.

And they did. It's nuts to immediately assume your child has been abducted (by a paedophile, no less). There were many other possibilities for Madeleine not being in her bed - like wandering off. Mark Warner even had a 'lost child' procedure which they immediately put into place. So this had happened before.

It's strange to run out of an apartment where an abductor might be hiding, leaving two other children in there. That makes no sense. It's strange to make an immediate assumption about what had happened without considering other possibilities. It's strange to conclude that the one thing that you thought would not happen (abduction by a stranger) was the only thing that did happen. I mean, that is more than strange. It makes no sense at all. I'm sure it made no sense to the police either.

On the few occasions when I have found one of my children missing, the last thing I would do would be to start wailing and behaving hysterically. I became very focused on an outcome - the outcome of finding my child. No doubt the Portugese police found it quite extraordinary that the McCanns appeared to have developed telepathic insight into exactly what had happened to Madeleine.

She could have wandered off to find her parents. She could have gone to the creche or to another person's apartment. Or should could have been found by someone either in or out of the resort. Someone could have heard commotion in the apartment and gone inside to check everything was ok and maybe taken Madeleine out if she had hurt herself, for instance.

The McCanns were very quick to criticize the Portugese police......but perhaps this was more to do with the fact that they had been unable to pull the wool over their eyes with the abduction theory and Jane Tanner's sighting of a man carrying a sleeping child. They simply didn't find it credible.

[Benita]

And another FFS.

Read this

Evidence - the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.
Proof - evidence or argument establishing a fact or the truth of a statement.
Conjecture - an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information.

There are indications she came to harm. There is no proof she came to harm. Its really not hard to understand. Well, obviously some of you do find it hard to understand.Proof > Evidence > Conjecture. Basic logic.

are you posting this as fact!

[j.rob]

I think they likened the police to Tweedledum and Tweedledee or something - I think that was Kate's description of the early police response. A lot of people went off searching for Madeleine that night but Kate and Gerry had other things on their mind that night and the ones that followed, what with lining up the world's media, hiring extradition lawyers and a reputation manager.

The Portugese police found that the massive media response hampered the enquiry as well it might. Things turned into a media circus very early on and it must have been a nightmare for them.

It must have been more than annoying for the McCanns and their friends to have their version of events not believed by the Portugese police. But why would they - it had more holes in it than a colander.

[j.rob]

And, as I have repeatedly posted, I also think it is beyond strange that the twins were not woken up. Firstly, to check they were okay (an abductor had been in the apartment, remember?) and had not been molested and secondly to ascertain whether they had been disturbed and had seen anything. An intruder might have disturbed them enough to wake them up. And in actual fact I am pretty sure it is reported that the twins did not wake up at all which is amazing when you consider the amount of commotion in that apartment once the alarm had been raised.

Why did they not wake up? Were they exceptionally heavy sleepers? If, as Kate later suggested, the abductor could have drugged Madeleine to facilitate an abduction, then presumably the abductor could also have drugged the twins, so why not get toxicology tests done? You would also most definitely want to rule out any molestation possibility for the twins but this does not seem to have occurred to Kate which again is incredibly odd.

So it is possible that the twins had been drugged but if not by an abductor then by whom?

[Benita]

And, as I have repeatedly posted, I also think it is beyond strange that the twins were not woken up. Firstly, to check they were okay (an abductor had been in the apartment, remember?) and had not been molested and secondly to ascertain whether they had been disturbed and had seen anything. An intruder might have disturbed them enough to wake them up. And in actual fact I am pretty sure it is reported that the twins did not wake up at all which is amazing when you consider the amount of commotion in that apartment once the alarm had been raised.

Why did they not wake up? Were they exceptionally heavy sleepers? If, as Kate later suggested, the abductor could have drugged Madeleine to facilitate an abduction, then presumably the abductor could also have drugged the twins, so why not get toxicology tests done? You would also most definitely want to rule out any molestation possibility for the twins but this does not seem to have occurred to Kate which again is incredibly odd.

So it is possible that the twins had been drugged but if not by an abductor then by whom?

answer to the latter part of your post ..this has been done to death ...the twins were tested and no they were not drugged ...

[sadie]

And, as I have repeatedly posted, I also think it is beyond strange that the twins were not woken up. Firstly, to check they were okay (an abductor had been in the apartment, remember?) and had not been molested and secondly to ascertain whether they had been disturbed and had seen anything. An intruder might have disturbed them enough to wake them up. And in actual fact I am pretty sure it is reported that the twins did not wake up at all which is amazing when you consider the amount of commotion in that apartment once the alarm had been raised.

Why did they not wake up? Were they exceptionally heavy sleepers? If, as Kate later suggested, the abductor could have drugged Madeleine to facilitate an abduction, then presumably the abductor could also have drugged the twins, so why not get toxicology tests done? You would also most definitely want to rule out any molestation possibility for the twins but this does not seem to have occurred to Kate which again is incredibly odd.

So it is possible that the twins had been drugged but if not by an abductor then by whom?

Simples j.rob.

Quite possible that they slept thru naturally.  Some kids do.

But if they were drugged to a lesser extent than Madeleine, then it could have happened via a cup of hot chocolate or in a sarnie or in a sweetie at their teatime.

Madeleine was so tired that she had to be carried back to 5A.   Now that seems to me to point to a drug.  What do you think

[Wonderfulspam]

Simples j.rob.

Quite possible that they slept thru naturally.  Some kids do.

But if they were drugged to a lesser extent than Madeleine, then it could have happened via a cup of hot chocolate or in a sarnie or in a sweetie at their teatime.

Madeleine was so tired that she had to be carried back to 5A.   Now that seems to me to point to a drug.  What do you think

So are you saying the 'abductor' entered the apartment before they had tea, drugged the food & drinks (which the abductor somehow knew the children were going to consume) and then left the apartment to return later & abduct Madeleine?

[sadie]

So are you saying the 'abductor' entered the apartment before they had tea, drugged the food & drinks (which the abductor somehow knew the children were going to consume) and then left the apartment to return later & abduct Madeleine?

NO i am NOT saying that at all.

Haven't you botherede to read any of the PJ or Rog Statements?

It ios quite clear from them that the kids had their tea at the outside tapas restaurant and that Madeleine dropped so tired that they had to carry her the 70 odd metres back to 5A.

It is also quite clear from the statements that after bathing, the children usually went in the evening, in their jimjams, for a last play together at the play area near the tapas.  That night they were too tired to go.



I think it quite probable that someone at the tapas restaurant slipped some drugs in somehow.  Into the hot chocolate?

[Mr Gray]

Simples j.rob.

Quite possible that they slept thru naturally.  Some kids do.

But if they were drugged to a lesser extent than Madeleine, then it could have happened via a cup of hot chocolate or in a sarnie or in a sweetie at their teatime.

Madeleine was so tired that she had to be carried back to 5A.   Now that seems to me to point to a drug.  What do you think

 children this age will often fall into a very deep sleep from which it is difficult to wake them. Particularly when on holiday and have played all day and are shattered. absolutely not in the slightest suspicious to me

[Mr Gray]

I think the forum risks being spoilt by new posters who post long posts of what is in my opinion absolute tripe. in the past it has always been the practice that posters should be able to back up what they say with evidence but this now seems not to be the case.

[Lyall]

children this age will often fall into a very deep sleep from which it is difficult to wake them. Particularly when on holiday and have played all day and are shattered. absolutely not in the slightest suspicious to me

It's possible people only mention it because the children's own father did so too.