Fck knows appears to be your only working theory and it’s not terribly impressive. I think it’s unlikely that Madeleine died in the apartment on the evening of the 3rd May. I think it must have happened earlier because I don’t think heavily sedated children get out of bed within an hour of being tucked up in bed, I don’t think it’s plausible that she fell off the sofa spraying blood everywhere or down the stairs to be discovered by one of thr Tapas group who then immediately hatched a plot round the dinner table, I don’t think Gerry’s dumb enough to carry her uncovered corpse through town at the same time the alarm is being raised so yeah, it’s got to have all happened earlier in the holiday. Now, what do you think, or is it still fck knows? You seem convinced she died in the apartment and are willing to speculate about sedation and double doses so surely your speculation goes beyond that point? Come on, we need a really brilliant cast iron plausible, logical theory and so far there isn’t one but I feel with my brains and your beauty we can finally achieve this.
It's still fck knows. I'd at one point been inclined to believe HCW with his unequivocal fingering of CB, given his apparent certainty in his new evidence. But 4 years on, which is a record by the way, I've checked, he's actually further away from charging CB than ever. It's clear he has nothing, as his reliance on and his testing of his hobo testimony demonstrates. He needed those charges to stick so he could then use his hobos futher down the line.
So, to answer your question, there's even less evidence of an abduction now than ever, as HCW has blown part of his narrative / corroboration. It's a mortal blow.
Unless, of course, there's another strawman out there they can try to pin it on; what's the odds of another paedo-abductor waiting in the wings (I'm surprised they didn't bump into eachother outside 5a)
This leaves us with a fcking great vacuum, with the only remotely feasible explanation being the statistically most likely cause being parental involvement filling it.
As an aside, and I've discussed this at length with you misguided McCannerettes (did you swoon over Les McKeown and dress up in plaid too? Such an impressionale bunch), HCW has inadvertently introduced more reasonable doubt. Yes, the explicit language of 'reasonable doubt' may not actually be used, the principle is embedded in the inquisitorial system's safeguards to prevent wrongful convictions. Because HCW decided to turn the most recent trial in to a circus, resulting in the judge castigating him for broadcasting CB to the globe, any circumstantial evidence will be essentially soiled goods, the bar for burden of proof raised and FF may only need reach into his breast pocket and pull out the reasonable doubt card, perhaps even before it gets to trial, given the pre-screening legal system in Germany - they ain't gonna risk getting burned twice, not with the biggest trial the world has seen since Nuremberg.
