Madeleine McCann

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote:

That would fall into number 2 but it doesn't make a difference because that theory also doesn't stack up.

Why not? There has been no evidence gathered to prove that either an accidental overdose or fatal assault did not take place in the apartment. Quite the contrary. There was clear evidence of the scene having been "arranged" in an attempt to make it appear as if an abduction had occurred. It is simply not credible that an abductor would not leave some trace of evidence behind them even allowing for the fact that the apartment had been contaminated before the evidence gathering process began. The removal of the body could have taken place quickly with the assistance of others - not members of the tapas 7 - who were already well known to the McCann's and would have had access to a nearby property with a deep freezing facility.

SusieBlue wrote: »

Yes there are, it was confirmed by creche staff and other parents. They had gone out on boats on an excursion for the afternoon. One man in the documentary talks about Madeleine playing with his daughter on that trip.
You can also view the signout sheet online that includes Kate's signature and a time stamp.

As well as that, the last recorded photo of Madeleine was taken by the pool that afternoon, at circa 2pm, which again was time stamped and verified. So she was most certainly alive, well and out and about until at least 6pm on the day she disappeared.

By whom?

Tristen Hissing Typhoon wrote: »

Line of inquiry the police are currently following is an abduction.

Which they have ZERO evidence off and have had no real leads in 12 years ,

Can people stop continually misusing the words proof and evidence.

proof - evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth
evidence - the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid

So proof is evidence which allow allows truth to be established and evidence is information or facts which allows us to establish the truth.

While there isn't much physical evidence there's tones of other evidence collected by the PJ. Every single piece of information collected related to the case is evidence. Which each individual can decide if they believe there is proof that any conclusions can be drawn.

gozunda wrote: »

What OwlsZat said. It's unfortunate that nothing adds up on this case and is why as a crime where a child inexplicably disappeared, it remains that practically everything about the case remains under discussion.

You'd have to imagine with the total lack of any information or the total lack of leads brought forward by anyone that it could not have been a gang or a ring of traffickers.

12 years on multiple arrests for this sort of things hundreds of people in gangs locked up for these sort of crimes and million of images and nothing on Maddie ever came up ,

Surely if it was gang someone arrested involved in trafficking would know something and could have used information as leverage for themselves , Even a person short on cash or had a falling out with people form that world could to use the information for the cash reward,

That would leave you to think it was one person (lone wolf ) or two people ( McCanns) anything beyond that some information would have surely come out of somewhere at this stage,

The evidence casefile has over 10,000 pages all available for your viewing pleasure at http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/

You should get familiar....

OwlsZat wrote: »

That did cross my mind. Particularly the way the photo of Rui Pedro post abduction is talked about in the Documentary. Have you done any digging in terms of how many of these type of rings have been bust in recent times.

There also was tip offs of various types, just nothing that could be found to be reliable. Could she still be captive. Now that's an impossible question.

https://www.her.ie/news/woman-freed-held-captive-abuser-10-years-377106

Unfortunately there id imagine there is zero chance she is alive ,
She is possibly the most famous abduction to ever happen on the planet with internet and Netflix and the likes, because of her of her distinct eye she would surely notice herself, or other people would notice her ,

FATHER_PACHECO

When questioned, he said he Never Heard their Confessions, perhaps because they only spoke English.

hawkelady wrote:

Everyone in this thread should really comprehend that the PDL priest has now come out and said that he feels the mccanns betrayed him !!! Why on Earth would he say this unless he has some fact that incriminates the mccanns but cause of canon law , he’ll take it to his grave

What sort of priest would make such a statement, in any event? Like many other claims made by those associated with this case you would have to doubt it's authenticity.

Jane Tanner and David Payne are they the last suspects. Does anyone think these slips are Freudian?

It would also explain why Gerry and Jes don't see Tanner when she susposibldy passed them just as Madeline is abducted, why Gerry is annoyed with Jane when she places him and Jes on the wrong side of the path during the reconstruction and the pitiful attempt she gives at creating an efit of the supposed abductor.

https://youtu.be/z9mcOMnx0Kc

OwlsZat wrote: »

Jane Tanner and David Payne are they the last suspects. Does anyone think these slips are Freudian?

It would also explain why Gerry and Jes don't see Tanner when she susposibldy passed them just as Madeline is abducted, why Gerry is annoyed with Jane when she places him and Jes on the wrong side of the path during the reconstruction and the pitiful attempt she gives at creating an efit of the supposed abductor.

https://youtu.be/z9mcOMnx0Kc

Wow. Might be flipping again. Makes a clear case that the anesthetists may have covered up accidentally killing Madeline. Maybe Gerry was angry with Jane for placing him on the same side of the path as the window.

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/2016/08/chapter-5-sedation.html?m=1

OwlsZat wrote: »

Jane Tanner and David Payne are they the last suspects. Does anyone think these slips are Freudian?

It would also explain why Gerry and Jes don't see Tanner when she susposibldy passed them just as Madeline is abducted, why Gerry is annoyed with Jane when she places him and Jes on the wrong side of the path during the reconstruction and the pitiful attempt she gives at creating an efit of the supposed abductor.

https://youtu.be/z9mcOMnx0Kc

There are always discrepancies between eye witness in lots of cases.

For example

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm

Martin Smith:-
— Concerning the facts under investigation, on the 3rd of May, he went with his family to the Dolphin restaurant in Praia da Luz where they dined.
Around 21H00 they left the restaurant and headed toward 'Kelly's Bar'; about a 50 metre distance from the restaurant, following the path, as it is very short.


Aoife Smith :-
— Regarding the 3rd of May, 2007, she went, with all her family, to eat at the Dolphin restaurant, which is close to Kelly's Bar.
When they left the restaurant, around 21H30, they headed toward Kelly's Bar. They stayed there for about 30 minutes.

— Around 22H00, they left Kelly's Bar. The group headed, on foot, for their apartment.



Peter Smith:-
— He would like to clarify that on the 3rd of May, he and his family went to the Dolphin restaurant, situated in Praia da Luz, where they dined.
Around 21H00 they left the restaurant and went to Kelly's Bar, about one minute away on foot.
In Kelly's Bar (he does not remember the name of the street it is on) they had a few drinks, having left from there around 21H50/22H00.


Aoife seems to be right



Time 21.27.40


____________________________________________

As for the Tanner description, I think she did pretty well

.

gozunda wrote: »

Interestingly Jane Tanner also identified Robert Murrat as definitely being the same man who she saw that night, even though she herself has said she got only a side view....

Please

Can you present a reliable official link for where Jane Tanner said that.

She never said that.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/

gozunda wrote: »

Seriously?.


Interestingly Jane Tanner also identified Robert Murrat as definitely being the same man who she saw that night, even though she herself has said she got only a side view....

I asked you for a link to the allegation you made regarding Jane Tanner - Robert Murat.
Harangued indeed

You didn't provide it, so I will not be responding to you any more.