Little Moroccan girl Bushra Binhisa mistaken for Madeleine McCann revisited.

[Redblossom]

There are thousands of criminals out there who have never been caught and may never BE caught.   Why would you exclude this possibility from the McCann case?  That's illogical imo.

Maybe these thousands of criminals havent had

The whole world and its wife looking out for them and the child
Interpol
Three police forces investigating
Cold case reviews by several people
Seven sets of private investigators in addition to ones commissioned by various media
Untold number of ex coppers/other "experts" chipping in
Unprecedented constant worldwide media campaign for years
Millions of pounds spent
2.5 million pound reward
Unprecedented number of suspects
Etc etc etc

They must be living in the river Styx

Just a thought.....

[Lyall]

Does their expertise and the means they have at their disposal  to establish the veracity of the McCanns mean nothing?

Of course it does, until evidence is seen. That's how it works, at least that's how it used to work (before the age of news management).

[AnneGuedes]

And there is evidence that this criminal exists.  The open shutter and window are evidence that a stranger was involved in this crime.     Choosing not to believe that is not proof that it didn't happen.    SY believe it.

No.
I reckon that now you're introducing the myth of SY "believing" the open shutters/window, as if SY would take a hearsay as a fact.
Be careful, Benice, because "choosing not to believe that is not proof that it didn't happen" is a typical argument of conspiracy fans.

[Sherlock Holmes]

You mean connected the dots, commas, asterisks, dashes and colons.

Very funny, Slartibartfast!

[Sherlock Holmes]

But we are being told to fear a man who enters our homes and steals our children. That is what both you and Sadie have said in this thread!

Sadie "Do you want this gawd awful guy stealing more kids?  Surely not"

Sherlock "This is a point that is not made often enough.

Any abductor is likely to be roaming the streets at the moment - unless he has been incarcerated for another crime in the mean time - and is a potential threat to other families."

You're both using emotive language, conjuring up images of men hiding in wardrobes, waiting to pounce on our children.

I think that a point worth making is:

There has been no repeat crime with the same M.O.

There is no evidence that "this gawd awful guy"  has ever offended again. In fact there is no evidence that he ever existed at all!

I just want to clarify, Cariad, that I didn't mean to emphasise that an abductor would snatch a child, necessarily 'from bed'. There have been both successful and attempted snatchings of children from public places in that part of Europe, and in my opinion they are all part of the same statistic.

You are technically correct when you say that there is no evidence of an abductor in the first place, but given that this crime has not yet been solved, there remains the strong possibility that abduction is what has happened in this case. Until then, there therefore remains the risk that such a person would re-offend, and given the serious nature of the type of crime involved, we would surely want to do all we could to prevent it happening again if we could.

Whether such a person would or has re-offended is an important point, I believe, though the main point is simply that in the case of abduction, the perpetrator has not been apprehended and brought to justice.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Great post.

Actually has there actually been ANY child in area of PDL etc, where a child has been snatched from their bedroom and proven as such?

Remember, ccolumbo, that 'abduction from bed' is Anne's phrase. It is not mine; nor have I seen that specific wording anywhere else.

I personally would put almost all child stranger abductions - if that is what has happened in this case - in a similar category. I think it is splitting hairs to say this one from the back garden and this one from bed.

And yes, there have been several real and attempted snatchings of children from that part of Europe over the years. The cases are well known.

[pegasus]

The theory that the girl in that moroccan photo was the missing child is disproved because the child in the photo was traced.
The theory that KM opened the window is disproved IMO because it comes from accidental transposition of a photo of a GNR thumbprint from another room.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Maybe these thousands of criminals havent had

The whole world and its wife looking out for them and the child
Interpol
Three police forces investigating
Cold case reviews by several people
Seven sets of private investigators in addition to ones commissioned by various media
Untold number of ex coppers/other "experts" chipping in
Unprecedented constant worldwide media campaign for years
Millions of pounds spent
2.5 million pound reward
Unprecedented number of suspects
Etc etc etc

They must be living in the river Styx

Just a thought.....

And would that very long list of resources have been brought to the case if society as a whole did not consider it paramount to attempt to catch criminals and serve justice?

[Sherlock Holmes]

The theory that the girl in that moroccan photo was the missing child is disproved because the child in the photo was traced.
The theory that KM opened the window is disproved IMO because it comes from accidental transposition of a photo of a GNR thumbprint from another room.

These are far from the only points on which the question of abduction hinges.

[AnneGuedes]

The theory that KM opened the window is disproved

Is the claim that the window was opened proved to begin with ?

[Benice]

No.
I reckon that now you're introducing the myth of SY "believing" the open shutters/window, as if SY would take a hearsay as a fact.
Be careful, Benice, because "choosing not to believe that is not proof that it didn't happen" is a typical argument of conspiracy fans.

So do you think the SY team believe the McCanns are liars Anne?       It seems obvious to me that the very first thing SY would want to establish was whether they had any doubts about the credibility of the McCanns as truthful witnesses.    It seems they were able to satisfy themselves that they were telling the truth.     If they were not able to do that  - and had the slightest doubt -  then no way would they have publically ruled the McCanns out of the investigation.

Or do you think SY said ...''We don't believe they are truthful people, we think they are lying  - but let's rule them out of the investigation anyway''

Surely not.

[icabodcrane]

So do you think the SY team believe the McCanns are liars Anne?       It seems obvious to me that the very first thing SY would want to establish was whether they had any doubts about the credibility of the McCanns as truthful witnesses.    It seems they were able to satisfy themselves that they were telling the truth.     If they were not able to do that  - and had the slightest doubt -  then no way would they have publically ruled the McCanns out of the investigation.

Or do you think SY said ...''We don't believe they are truthful people, we think they are lying  - but let's rule them out of the investigation anyway''

Surely not.

You seem to be suggesting that the police had to make a decision whether or not  to  'believe'   everything the McCanns told them ...  based on nothing more than an unevidenced assessement of them  (  the McCanns )  as being  'truthful witnesses' 

I don't think it works like that

However credible a witness may be,  if what they are saying is  non  credible  then it would,  naturally,  be questionable to the police

The suggestion that the bedroom window was opened by an abductor  after  he had  already entered the apartment by some other means  ( and without intending to use it as an exit point  )   IS  questionable

Do you really think the police would  accept such an implausible suggestion at face value, ?    ...   that they would simply set aside their doubts because they had already  'decided'  that the McCanns were  'honest witnesses'  and everything they say must, therefore,  be  truthful whether it makes sense or not  ?

You,  and others,  might  unquestioningly accept the McCanns' every utterance as gospel truth,  but  why on earth would you think the police would  do  the same  ?

[Silkywhiskers]

The general inference is that EVERYONE is lying, including the dogs, the PJ, the Moroccan mum...

Everyone except Team McCann of course.

They've already told us they used different doors, locked.didnt lock them, searched/didnt search, prostrate on the bed/up writing a timeline, Murat was HIM, Hewlett was HIM, don't forget Posh Spice the Australian Child Dealer.

They've thrown every efit in the mix except the RIGHT ONE (unless of course Andy is lying) and still they emerge unscathed in the minds of the British Public.

Amazing...

[Redblossom]

And would that very long list of resources have been brought to the case if society as a whole did not consider it paramount to attempt to catch criminals and serve justice?

My point was that thousands of criminals dont get caught (as Benice stated) because such humungous resources are not brought in most cases. Even when they are,  unprecedently, as in this case, it has not found the "criminal"

[icabodcrane]

My point was that thousands of criminals dont get caught (as Benice stated) because such humungous resources are not brought in most cases. Even when they are,  unprecedently, as in this case, it has not found the "criminal"

...  or even determined what the crime  was

Astonishing really