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

[Mr Gray]

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.

 I am asking again... do you have any evidence of this or do you feel you can post any rubbish and claim its true

[Benice]

This is the MP's job, Benice. The team executes.

So why was it Amaral who was removed from the case?

[Aiofe]

one thing too OM  they call us  so called anti mcann  [ censored word ]s   but they hate GA and  dont care about maddie only gerry and kate

Please enlighten us how you know that other people do not care about Madeleine?

[pathfinder73]

Op probably thought the dogs were evidence but not proof..hes wrong. Our dog expert martin grime said that the dogs responses had no evidential value..the clue is in the word evidential OP...Ive been talking about the difference between evidence and proof for years

You don't know nothing. Let's finish that false statement shall we "No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence." Martin Grime

[Mr Gray]

You don't know nothing. Let's finish that false statement shall we "No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence." Martin Grime

 That's called a double negative and means I know something

 I know the whole quote... the alerts were not confirmed..fact.. therefore have no evidential value

[John]

Open minded has gone and so are the inappropriate posts.

[Cariad]

To be honest Im sick of posters making posts that are lies and then getting upset when I ask for evidence. this forum is going down the pan because posters are able to post absolute drivel which they cant back up. You cant use lies to get to the truth

Sometimes you can come off as a little abrupt davel. Maybe we should all make a special effort to not upset new posters?

Maybe if next time someone new posts 'rubbish' or drivel, you could say something like 'I respect your opinion, however I would like to point out that x y and z are not factually accurate, a b and c are, and here is a link for you to check for yourself'

What do you think?

[John]

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.

Were you never a newbie Dave?  Let and let live mate eh? 

After all, its up to mature members to set an example.

[Mr Gray]

Sometimes you can come off as a little abrupt davel. Maybe we should all make a special effort to not upset new posters?

Maybe if next time someone new posts 'rubbish' or drivel, you could say something like 'I respect your opinion, however I would like to point out that x y and z are not factually accurate, a b and c are, and here is a link for you to check for yourself'

What do you think?

 I didn't make either of those comments to OP in fact I was quite polite. I have made those comments to posters who have posted facts and when I have questioned them or asked for cites I have been ignored. Please see if you can get your facts right before criticising me. I was polite to Op and merely said there was no evidence that maddie came to harm in the apt . He responded by calling me stupid..and then we had the rest. as I said...best if you get your facts right before you criticise me

[Mr Gray]

Were you never a newbie Dave?  Let and let live mate eh? 

 Fine, only expressing an opinion

[Mr Gray]

Sometimes you can come off as a little abrupt davel. Maybe we should all make a special effort to not upset new posters?

Maybe if next time someone new posts 'rubbish' or drivel, you could say something like 'I respect your opinion, however I would like to point out that x y and z are not factually accurate, a b and c are, and here is a link for you to check for yourself'

What do you think?

Was that post after I was called a f..ing retard by a new poster who you are defending.. It is typical that you have no criticism for the poster , but do have for me..speaks volumes

[Cariad]

Was that post after I was called a f..ing retard by a new poster who you are defending.. It is typical that you have no criticism for the poster , but do have for me..speaks volumes

I don't support anyone using that kind of language on a open forum. I do understand his frustration though.

I wasn't meaning to be critical of you.

[Mr Gray]

I don't support anyone using that kind of language on a open forum. I do understand his frustration though.

I wasn't meaning to be critical of you.

  off to a bonfire with the kids

[jassi]

Was that post after I was called a f..ing retard by a new poster who you are defending.. It is typical that you have no criticism for the poster , but do have for me..speaks volumes

I'm afraid I missed that little spat, but I guess he only called it as he saw it. Obviously now an ex-member, so we shall hear no more from him.

[Cariad]

  off to a bonfire with the kids

Enjoy! Have a marshmallow on a stick for me!