Wandering Off Topic

[Wonderfulspam]

Why has chat GPT ignored the claim from the McCanns that the bedroom window was open, Vertigo?

Chat also failed to explain that in order to enter the patio door entrance, the abductor would have to open & close behind him the gate, child gate & patio doors, essentially shutting himself in the apartment before leaving with Maddie via the window it never mentioned. It seems to have also excluded the fact that Gerry noticed the bedroom door had moved at 9pm, which was his very reason for actually entering & visually checking on Madeleine. AI is unreliable. It makes things up. It tried telling me once that Martin Smith had retracted his claim to ID Gerry.

[Joe Blogs]

Chat also failed to explain that in order to enter the patio door entrance, the abductor would have to open & close behind him the gate, child gate & patio doors, essentially shutting himself in the apartment before leaving with Maddie via the window it never mentioned. It seems to have also excluded the fact that Gerry noticed the bedroom door had moved at 9pm, which was his very reason for actually entering & visually checking on Madeleine. AI is unreliable. It makes things up. It tried telling me once that Martin Smith had retracted his claim to ID Gerry.

The thing is, the window has to be included in any abduction theory because the McCanns claim they didn't open it themselves, Spam!
Although, Vertigo and others did point out that the abductor may have opened it as an emergency exit if anyone entered the flat!

[Wonderfulspam]

The thing is, the window has to be included in any abduction theory because the McCanns claim they didn't open it themselves, Spam!
Although, Vertigo and others did point out that the abductor may have opened it as an emergency exit if anyone entered the flat!

It often gets overlooked. As I explained before, making any theory of abduction fit the known evidence is difficult.
The bedroom door has to be moved, suspiciously, on Gerry's 9pm check. So the abductor has to be in the apartment before 9pm. Then the wind has to conveniently not be blowing through the open window during Matts check. Then, at 10pm, the bedroom door has to have suspiciously moved again, prompting Kate to do her visual check. So what was going on. Was the abductor in the apartment for the best part of 40 minutes? Or did the wind conveniently blow as & when required. Added to this, Kate never mentioned any blowing curtains in her first statement.

[Wonderfulspam]

The window wasn't open on Gerry's check, & when he entered the apartment he didn't report that the child gate etc were lying open. So how did the abductor get in the apartment? He must have entered through the patio doors, closed everything behind him & shut himself in the apartment before Gerry had entered. Then somehow he realised Gerry was coming. Don't know how? And he hid somewhere in the apartment during Gerry's extra long check.

[Wonderfulspam]

You see. When you press against it, the explanations become too complex to be realistic frankly. This is why no logical & plausible abduction theory involving Brueckner has been presented on this forum in the last six years.

[Wonderfulspam]

All we get is 'It would be easy to take a sleeping child from an unlocked ground floor apartment'. Perhaps it would, but when you need to account for all the known evidence in this case, the explanations become ever more ridiculous really.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Why has chat GPT ignored the claim from the McCanns that the bedroom window was open, Vertigo?

I suggest you ask Chat GPT yourself, I?m sure it will have some interesting things to say.  Interestingly Spam hasn?t actually challenged any of the points made by the Chat GPT answers I posted or explained why they are wrong -  pretty much everything they said I have said myself in more or less exactly the same way over the years.  Great (logical) minds think alike! Fixating on buttons and obsessing about the angle of the bedroom door is just a means of deflecting from the obvious, that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger.

[faithlilly]

You have no idea who might have provided the McCanns? detectives with the descriptions for the e-fits?  What no idea at all?  Amazing.  Good to know however that you set no store in them, me neither as they were done 16 months after the event.   If SY chose to feature them in Crimewatch I would suggest it?s because they existed and felt putting them up was better than nothing, use every scrap of information available but one can understand why the M Canns set no store in them either.
Tanner was 100% vindicated.  She described Julian Totman incredibly accurately, so how do you account for that then?
As for your ongoing fixation with the Madeleine website, apart from the odd message from the McCanns appearing on Birthdays and Christmas it obviously hasn?t been updated for many, many years.
There was nothing unusual or remarkable about the way Gerry was carrying his child so it is fair to say that any male of average build with short dark hair carrying a small child in the same way would have looked very similar.  I would suggest that Smith was heavily influenced by the fact that at the time Gerry was an arguido and the media was full of the most egregious nonsense about the McCanns, hence his sudden moment of semi-clarity (60-80% is still far from certain). Remember, this is one of the exact same reasons you cite for Luke Mitchell not getting a fair trial, because of media influence on so-called witnesses.

It?s interesting that you place the parent?s judgement above the police regarding the efits. That does explain rather a lot.

Tanner may have described Totman relatively accurately ie carrying a child, possibly in pyjamas but that doesn?t put the sighting when she claimed, that?s why she hasn?t been vindicated. Wilkins, who was allegedly having a chat with Gerry at the time of the sighting, didn?t see Tanner. TBF I think you need to hae visited the actual location of the sighting to know how impossible that would have been. Further it was the triangulation of information from statements that convinced the police that the man Tanner saw was Totman not his physical description. Tanner more than likely did see Totman and Gerry did have a chat with Wilkins however those events did not happen simultaneously.

Don?t you think that if your daughter was missing and you, as the parents seem to, believed that she may be alive you?d update your website every now and again? Daniel Morecombe?s parent?s did even during the police investigation and in fact set up a foundation in his name to keep his image at the forefront of people?s minds, a foundation that now teaches children about safety.

I would suggest that you are wrong and that it was Gerry?s posture and mannerisms that triggered Mr Smith?s memory and that could have only happened at that one point in time.

[Wonderfulspam]

I suggest you ask Chat GPT yourself, I?m sure it will have some interesting things to say.  Interestingly Spam hasn?t actually challenged any of the points made by the Chat GPT answers I posted or explained why they are wrong -  pretty much everything they said I have said myself in more or less exactly the same way over the years.  Great (logical) minds think alike! Fixating on buttons and obsessing about the angle of the bedroom door is just a means of deflecting from the obvious, that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger.

You can't explain the abduction theory & account for the known facts so now you're getting stroppy. Why not just explain, by yourself, exactly how Brueckner dunnit, accounting for the McCanns testimony? Can you do that?

[Joe Blogs]

Are there many youtube videos that take an indepth look at Smithman? Dont think i've come across any!

Seeing you have asked.

Maybe these will be of interest...haven't watched them but they are recently made.

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=smith+sighting+maddie+mccann

OK, watched the videos, Kizzy, and the follow up one featuring the Tapas 7 statements!

[Wonderfulspam]

I suggest you ask Chat GPT yourself, I?m sure it will have some interesting things to say.  Interestingly Spam hasn?t actually challenged any of the points made by the Chat GPT answers I posted or explained why they are wrong -  pretty much everything they said I have said myself in more or less exactly the same way over the years.  Great (logical) minds think alike! Fixating on buttons and obsessing about the angle of the bedroom door is just a means of deflecting from the obvious, that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger.

Vs says I ignore evidence that doesn't suit me when that's exactly what she's doing here.

[Joe Blogs]

I suggest you ask Chat GPT yourself, I?m sure it will have some interesting things to say.  Interestingly Spam hasn?t actually challenged any of the points made by the Chat GPT answers I posted or explained why they are wrong -  pretty much everything they said I have said myself in more or less exactly the same way over the years.  Great (logical) minds think alike! Fixating on buttons and obsessing about the angle of the bedroom door is just a means of deflecting from the obvious, that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger.

Ha ha! Problem for me is there doesn't seem to be anything very obvious about this case, Vertigo!

[Vertigo Swirl]

It?s interesting that you place the parent?s judgement above the police regarding the efits. That does explain rather a lot.

Tanner may have described Totman relatively accurately ie carrying a child, possibly in pyjamas but that doesn?t put the sighting when she claimed, that?s why she hasn?t been vindicated. Wilkins, who was allegedly having a chat with Gerry at the time of the sighting, didn?t see Tanner. TBF I think you need to hae visited the actual location of the sighting to know how impossible that would have been. Further it was the triangulation of information from statements that convinced the police that the man Tanner saw was Totman not his physical description. Tanner more than likely did see Totman and Gerry did have a chat with Wilkins however those events did not happen simultaneously.

Don?t you think that if your daughter was missing and you, as the parents seem to, believed that she may be alive you?d update your website every now and again? Daniel Morecombe?s parent?s did even during the police investigation and in fact set up a foundation in his name to keep his image at the forefront of people?s minds, a foundation that now teaches children about safety.

I would suggest that you are wrong and that it was Gerry?s posture and mannerisms that triggered Mr Smith?s memory and that could have only happened at that one point in time.

It?s interesting that you place the parent?s judgement above the police regarding the efits. That does explain rather a lot.
What does it explain?   The parents have every right to be sceptical about the e-fits.  I?m sceptical of them, you appear to set no store in them, they knew they were created by a couple who?d got it in their heads that the man they saw was Gerry, 16 months after the event.  However the police clearly didn?t think Smithman was Gerry so in that respect I put the police?s judgement on the same level as the McCanns.

[Wonderfulspam]

Ha ha! Problem for me is there doesn't seem to be anything very obvious about this case, Vertigo!

So you think the Fatherlike coincidental trousers pyjama changing abductor is feasible do you?

Or the Innocent Fatherlike coincidental trousers man with Maddie clone daughter?

Those seem like possible & likely explanations for the Smith family evidence to you do they, Joe?

Have a think about it & you'll discover that Brueckner dunnit, naturally.

[Vertigo Swirl]

It?s interesting that you place the parent?s judgement above the police regarding the efits. That does explain rather a lot.

Tanner may have described Totman relatively accurately ie carrying a child, possibly in pyjamas but that doesn?t put the sighting when she claimed, that?s why she hasn?t been vindicated. Wilkins, who was allegedly having a chat with Gerry at the time of the sighting, didn?t see Tanner. TBF I think you need to hae visited the actual location of the sighting to know how impossible that would have been. Further it was the triangulation of information from statements that convinced the police that the man Tanner saw was Totman not his physical description. Tanner more than likely did see Totman and Gerry did have a chat with Wilkins however those events did not happen simultaneously.

Don?t you think that if your daughter was missing and you, as the parents seem to, believed that she may be alive you?d update your website every now and again? Daniel Morecombe?s parent?s did even during the police investigation and in fact set up a foundation in his name to keep his image at the forefront of people?s minds, a foundation that now teaches children about safety.

I would suggest that you are wrong and that it was Gerry?s posture and mannerisms that triggered Mr Smith?s memory and that could have only happened at that one point in time.

?Tanner may have described Totman relatively accurately ie carrying a child, possibly in pyjamas but that doesn?t put the sighting when she claimed, that?s why she hasn?t been vindicated. Wilkins, who was allegedly having a chat with Gerry at the time of the sighting, didn?t see Tanner. TBF I think you need to hae visited the actual location of the sighting to know how impossible that would have been. Further it was the triangulation of information from statements that convinced the police that the man Tanner saw was Totman not his physical description. Tanner more than likely did see Totman and Gerry did have a chat with Wilkins however those events did not happen simultaneously.?

Well it?s a matter of opinion isn?t it.  The police are satisfied that the man JT saw has an explanation.  Of course you don?t accept it but that?s by the by, as far as I?m concerned she was thoroughly vindicated when Dr Totman said he passed the apartment at the time JT said she saw the man.