Madeleine McCann

Spanish Eyes

No one knows, or ever will know now what happened. The speculation is interesting though, and I hold my hand up for being guilty of that too.

Anyway, something came into my head the other day.... I often wonder why Madeleine was the target, when it seems all the children in the group were left alone at night, and that includes Madeleine's sibling twins.

I am sure someone will tell me something along the lines of... well their apartment was nearest the road and they knew the doors were unlocked etc. But from the checking system it seems that all kids in all apartments were in the same situation.

IF the checks happened as they all said. I really doubt that. But anyway, it is all very odd to me.

And there is zero evidence of abduction. If anyone has any I would be happy to acknowledge that.

Creol1

Something Else

OwlsZat wrote: »

3. The white transit van is involved in the abduction. It's directly outside the property. Then it appears through 3 or 4 different statements and sightings. It's the obviously getaway vehicle.

An abduction theory just wouldn't be complete without a white transit van.

Spanish Eyes

Creol1 wrote: »

An abduction theory just wouldn't be complete without a white transit van.

Sorry, but I did lol at that.

Surely black or a darker colour would be less noticeable. But there was no Transit Van, there was no abduction, there is no evidence of anything other than the child is gone really. Bless her.

oceanman

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

No one knows, or ever will know now what happened. The speculation is interesting though, and I hold my hand up for being guilty of that too.

Anyway, something came into my head the other day.... I often wonder why Madeleine was the target, when it seems all the children in the group were left alone at night, and that includes Madeleine's sibling twins.

I am sure someone will tell me something along the lines of... well their apartment was nearest the road and they knew the doors were unlocked etc. But from the checking system it seems that all kids in all apartments were in the same situation.

IF the checks happened as they all said. I really doubt that. But anyway, it is all very odd to me.

And there is zero evidence of abduction. If anyone has any I would be happy to acknowledge that.

how much evidence would someone abducting a child leave though?

Spanish Eyes

oceanman wrote: »

how much evidence would someone abducting a child leave though?

Something, that's for sure, even a footprint, a disturbance, a handle or window opened even with gloves, they do leave a residue. I dunno, but I doubt that an abduction happened and no one saw or heard anything at all. Just my opinion, I have no answers.

What do you think of the abductor leaving evidence or not?

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

There is evidence of an abduction, the missing child being the most prominent piece, as well as a distinct lack of evidence of other foul play.
There is no evidence of an abductor because the circumstances in which she was left meant whoever took her didn’t even need to break a sweat never mind a window or a door in order to take her.
Any potential evidence was also heavily compromised in the aftermath when all and sundry were allowed to traipse through in and out as it wasn’t secured. But all of this has been said before x1 million so I don’t know who I’m trying to convince here. Clearly many people believe an abduction is a very viable and sincere scenario which is why it is winning by a country mile in the poll.

Spanish Eyes

retro:electro wrote: »

There is evidence of an abduction, the missing child being the most prominent piece, as well as a distinct lack of evidence of other foul play.
There is no evidence of an abductor because the circumstances in which she was left meant whoever took her didn’t even need to break a sweat never mind a window or a door in order to take her.
Any potential evidence was also heavily compromised in the aftermath when all and sundry were allowed to traipse through in and out as it wasn’t secured. But all of this has been said before x1 million so I don’t know who I’m trying to convince here. Clearly many people believe an abduction is a very viable and sincere scenario which is why it is winning by a country mile in the poll.

It is important not to follow the herd, but use one's own intuition and not be led by the popular vote.

There is no evidence of abduction. Can you point me ONE piece of evidence?

The doors were left open, so the little girl could have woken and wandered and fell or was knocked down or whatever. That's my theory anyway, poor child crying for her mother night after night, no wonder she may have tried to find her.

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

It is important not to follow the herd, but use one's own intuition and not be led by the popular vote.

There is no evidence of abduction. Can you point me ONE piece of evidence?

The doors were left open, so the little girl could have woken and wandered and fell or was knocked down or whatever. That's my theory anyway, poor child crying for her mother night after night, no wonder she may have tried to find her.

I’m sure people are following their own intuition, the fact it happens to be the majority does not mean those choosing abduction do not have a mind of their own and are incapable of surmising their own opinions.

I’ve aleady answered the second bit.

That’s a genuine theory alright but not one I’m convinced happened for reasons I’ve previously outlined. Again there was no evidence of an accident outside as far as I’m aware nor did anyone see a little child wandering around unassisted. But, in the absence of literally anything we’re all entitled to our views. Some like to make baseless accusations against certain people in order to assist their views, others don’t.

OwlsZat

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Something, that's for sure, even a footprint, a disturbance, a handle or window opened even with gloves, they do leave a residue. I dunno, but I doubt that an abduction happened and no one saw or heard anything at all. Just my opinion, I have no answers.

What do you think of the abductor leaving evidence or not?

They left it unlocked the and doors open. How much evidence ya gona leave.

gozunda

Something Else

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Something, that's for sure, even a footprint, a disturbance, a handle or window opened even with gloves, they do leave a residue. I dunno, but I doubt that an abduction happened and no one saw or heard anything at all. Just my opinion, I have no answers.

What do you think of the abductor leaving evidence or not?

And there is the nub of this thread. Where is the evidence?

The disappearance of the child from the apartment can be said to constitute 'evidence" for each one of the the main scenarios listed. However this evidence is predicated on the just one fact- ie that the child is missing. However it remains there is little absolute evidence to support any of the actual scenarios tbh.

In the case of an abduction it would be reasonable to assume that some of the following would have resulted in at least some form of evidence being left behind or observed.

An individual (or individuals) who enters a strange apartment, in the dark, who has to open doors (and/or windows). Move curtains, lift a sleeping child in the presence of other children, close doors and exit same carrying a possibly screaming or crying child in a building swarming with residents and guests. As unpleasant as it to imagine such a thought - It is just as feasible that the child suffocated and or banged her head without significant external trauma, was found and the body quickly moved outside and hidden.

Imo the poll may indicate the popularity of each of the relevant scenarios- unfortunately this boils down to individual speculation based on our own observational bias in the absence of any real definitive evidence.

Despite the lack of progress of this case in the real world - I reckon its unlikely that solving crimes by means of a poll is going to catch on anytime soon

Spanish Eyes

OwlsZat wrote: »

They left it unlocked the and doors open. How much evidence ya gona leave.

AFAIK so did all other parents at the Tapas table. Otherwise each checker would have been fumbling around with seven keys after a few glasses of wine in the dark to do the So Called checks at precise intervals on the kids. Nah, all apts were unlocked.

So why the Mcs specifically. Sorry to be so blunt, but there were more girls than boys in the group of children, each just as vulnerable to abduction IMV.

But there was no abduction of Madeleine. No evidence.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

But there was no abduction of Madeleine. No evidence.

No evidence of her parents being responsible for her disappearance either.

gozunda

Something Else

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Afaik so did all other parents at the Tapas table. Otherwise each checker would have been fumbling around with seven keys after a few glasses of wine in the dark to do the So Called checks at precise intervals on the kids. Nah, all apts were unlocked.

So why the Mcs specifically. Sorry to be so blunt, but there were more girls than boys in the group of children, each just as vulnerable to abduction IMV.

But there was no abduction of Madeleine. No evidence.

^^ This. One witness interviewed stated that in total there was 10 blonde pretty girls in one of the resorts childcare group. And two boys. That there were other young girls in the Tapas group of similar age or a bit younger is also relevant.

As to reports of crazed orphanage collectors and deadlocked individuals and dodgy characters with limps is that in the event of a crime like this - nearly everyone can point to something they saw as being suspicious. Whether it was the guy up the ladder or hanging around in a white van- people will genuinely try to be helpful and report what they saw in case it might help. However most of these observations imo are found to be the usual cast of characters in any urban area on any other day.

As to why the McCanns child? That's presuming a) there was a crime ie child didn't just wander away and fall down a hole etc or alternatively b) that the McCanns had no part to play in the disappearance and that it was an external agent at play with regard to the disappearance and etc.

It could have been any other child. In this case we only know it was Madeleine McCann and that lack of supervision of this child was at least a contributory factor to the disappearance.

Calltocall

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

AFAIK so did all other parents at the Tapas table. Otherwise each checker would have been fumbling around with seven keys after a few glasses of wine in the dark to do the So Called checks at precise intervals on the kids. Nah, all apts were unlocked.

So why the Mcs specifically. Sorry to be so blunt, but there were more girls than boys in the group of children, each just as vulnerable to abduction IMV.

But there was no abduction of Madeleine. No evidence.

The proximity of the Mccann apartment to the public road made it more vulnerable, an easier target, you could just walk in off the street and out again, one didn’t have to walk through the complex therefore easier to avoid detection.

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

So why the Mcs specifically. Sorry to be so blunt, but there were more girls than boys in the group of children, each just as vulnerable to abduction IMV.
.

And if one of the other children that was taken you’d be saying why him/her and not all the others.
Why do robbers leave the kitchen sink after them and not gut the place while they have the chance? If a house was broken into and only a few things taken would you dismiss a break in because all of the belongings weren’t taken?
A baffling conclusion you’ve reached on completely nonsensical grounds, but how and ever.

Spanish Eyes

Calltocall wrote: »

The proximity of the Mccann apartment to the public road made it more vulnerable, an easier target, you could just walk in off the street and out again, one didn’t have to walk through the complex therefore easier to avoid detection.

There is an open path into the complex right by where Mcs apartment was.

I'd guess that if I contemplated abducting anyone, anywhere other than close proximity to a public road would be less noticeable. But all views are valid I suppose including my own. Sure the "abductor" could have been mistaken for one of the parents doing their military timed checks, so who would know?

No one has a clue do they really? Still no evidence of abduction IMV.

Spanish Eyes

retro:electro wrote: »

And if one of the other children that was taken you’d be saying why him/her and not all the others.
Why do robbers leave the kitchen sink after them and not gut the place while they have the chance? If a house was broken into and only a few things taken would you dismiss a break in because all of the belongings weren’t taken?
A baffling conclusion you’ve reached on completely nonsensical grounds, but how and ever.

It is not baffling, it is reasonable. But if you are over invested in all this, there is nothing I can do about that.

There is no EVIDENCE of abduction, all doors were unlocked, the checks were sporadic, if they happened at all, so I draw my own conclusions, which are just as valid as anyone else's really.

Abduction may have happened, so might the child falling and hitting her head, or waking and wandering and meeting harm. Those are equal theories to abduction.

Calltocall

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

gozunda wrote: »

^^ This. One witness interviewed stated that in total there was 10 blonde pretty girls in the resorts childcare group. And two boys. That there were other young girls in the Tapas group of similar age or a bit younger is also relevant.

As to reports of crazed orphanage collectors and deadlocked individuals and dodgy characters with limps is that in the event of a crime like this - nearly everyone can point to something they saw as being suspicious. Whether it was the guy up the ladder or hanging around in a white van- people will genuinely try to be helpful and report what they saw in case it might help. However most of these observations imo are found to be the usual cast of characters in any urban area on any other day.

Yeah but that’s like saying when a child is abducted off a street why that child why not other kids on the street, these individuals don’t go around abducting 10 kids at a time, they zone in on one particular kid and crucially then they act when they have opportunity to, the mccanns gave that opportunity by leaving their kids alone in an unlocked roadside apartment, all they had to do was wait for the right moment and just lift her out of her bed.

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

It is not baffling, it is reasonable. But if you are over invested in all this, there is nothing I can do about that.

There is no EVIDENCE of abduction, all doors were unlocked, the checks were sporadic, if they happened at all, so I draw my own conclusions, which are just as valid as anyone else's really.

Abduction may have happened, so might the child falling and hitting her head, or waking and wandering and meeting harm. Those are equal theories to abduction.

I’m not sure why you feel you have to reduce your argument to such a degree you feel you need to make passive aggressive remarks like the one in bold and the one in a previous post. It just takes away from whatever point you are trying to make and I lose interest and respect as a result.

gozunda

Something Else

Calltocall wrote: »

Yeah but that’s like saying when a child is abducted off a street why that child why not other kids on the street, these individuals don’t go around abducting 10 kids at a time, they zone in on one particular kid and crucially then they act when they have opportunity to, the mccanns gave that opportunity by leaving their kids alone in an unlocked roadside apartment, all they had to do was wait for the right moment and just lift her out of her bed.

That's not the point I was making but
I presume you missed this bit ..

As to why the McCanns child? That's presuming a) there was a crime ie child didn't just wander away and fall down a hole etc or alternatively b) that the McCanns had no part to play in the disappearance and that it was an external agent at play with regard to the disappearance and etc.

There were 10 pretty blonde girls. Anyone of them were a likley target. Were they all being watched? What if Madeleine did wander off and the fact that the child happened to be in an unsupervised apartment with easy access to the street made this possible.

Or is it that many of these circumstances also help support other listed scenarios? I'm not presenting an answer to the question as to what happened rather pointing out that there is little about this case which can be ascribed to one outcome.

Spanish Eyes

retro:electro wrote: »

I’m not sure why you feel you have to reduce your argument to such a degree you feel you need to make passive aggressive remarks like the one in bold and the one in a previous post. It just takes away from whatever point you are trying to make and I lose interest and respect as a result.

I have my views, you have yours, great!

To be fair, if we don't challenge other people's views with our own theories, we may as well log out!

brookers

Im really interested in the Martin Smith family and their account of meeting a man mid 30s early 40s carrying a child, he has not come forward. Why did the Smiths wait so long to give their story to the police....?

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

I have my views, you have yours, great!

To be fair, if we don't challenge other people's views with our own theories, we may as well log out!

You’re not challenging views though. You’re actually shutting down viable views because there is “NO EVIDENCE”, despite this being the case for every single theory.

But, having been around the block and back with you on this topic for years now I’m aware that answering your posts is an exercise in futility as no sooner are they answered and you’re asking the same question again.

So, as The Dragons say, I’m out

micks_address

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

OwlsZat wrote:

I think you've chosen the wrong word as the witness statements are all the strongest evidence possible. I hope your criticising the police effort rather than questioning three independent statements.

The witness statements count for next to nothing, do you think Scotland Yard made no attempt to follow up on these accounts as they were tasked to investigate an abduction nothing else according to Colin Sutton.

You keep bringing up Colin Sutton, if he'd taken the case what would your view be?

Calltocall

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

gozunda wrote: »

That's not the point I was making. There were 10 pretty blonde girls. Anyone of them were a likley target. Were they all being watched? What if Madeleine did wander off and the fact that child happened to be in an unsupervised with easy access to the street made this possible.

Or is it that many of these circumstances also help support other listed scenarios? I'm not presenting an answer to the question as to what happened rather pointing out that there is little about this case which can be ascribed to one outcome.

Fair point you make, I’m not discounting an accident, you’re right it could have happened, I just think that if she would have wandered out in a distressed state more than likely crying for her parents it’s more likely someone would have heard or seen that, I lean towards abduction as an individual with that intent would have gotten out of the area with her very quickly and less likely to be noticed.

Also I think it’s plausible that if an individual was capable of abducting a child they would survey the area first and observe many kids as scary as that sounds, I don’t think they just wandered down and decided I’ll take Madeleine, it’s likely they would watch the area over a period and notice a vulnerability with a certain child, such as the parents leaving their kids alone while they went off to dinner, they might watch again and again and see the pattern emerge and given the ease of access as it was next to a public walkway they had all the opportunity they needed.

gozunda

Something Else

brookers wrote: »

Im really interested in the Martin Smith family and their account of meeting a man mid 30s early 40s carrying a child, he has not come forward. Why did the Smiths wait so long to give their story to the police....?

Martin Smith has given several accounts of his and his families encounter on that night. The official interviews are available to read in the PJ files.

There is a very good article by an Irish Jounalist who interviewed Martin Smith here.

https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2018/02/maddie-did-the-bbc-bend-the-truth/

Please dont mind the ongoing rabble - its nearly always like this at this time of night

zoe 3619

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

No one knows, or ever will know now what happened. The speculation is interesting though, and I hold my hand up for being guilty of that too.

Anyway, something came into my head the other day.... I often wonder why Madeleine was the target, when it seems all the children in the group were left alone at night, and that
I am sure someone will tell me something along the lines of... well their apartment was nearest the road and they knew the doors were unlocked etc. But from the checking system it seems that all kids in all apartments were in the same situation.

IF the checks happened as they all said. I really doubt that. But anyway, it is all very odd to me.

And there is zero evidence of abduction. If anyone has any I would be happy to acknowledge that.

If Madeleine hadn't been the target we'd probably be speculating about a different child.
Maybe all the kids were in the same situation and it was going to be one of them.
As someone said earlier,it could have been the perfect storm.Easily accsesed appartment,door unlocked,think some of the group were using baby moniters but the mc.canns didn't.

Spanish Eyes

retro:electro wrote: »

You’re not challenging views though. You’re actually shutting down viable views because there is “NO EVIDENCE”, despite this being the case for every single theory.

But, having been around the block and back with you on this topic for years now I’m aware that answering your posts is an exercise in futility as no sooner are they answered and you’re asking the same question again.

So, as The Dragons say, I’m out

I don't remember the user name of anyone from beyond yesterday. I cannot believe you remember me on this topic for years! Wow.

Look it is nothing personal, it is just a discussion. Everyone's theory is valid since there really is no evidence of anything.

You can put me on ignore and continue the discussion without me. Don't leave because of me though. All views are valid.

OwlsZat

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Sorry, but I did lol at that.

Surely black or a darker colour would be less noticeable. But there was no Transit Van, there was no abduction, there is no evidence of anything other than the child is gone really. Bless her.

Just Google Madeline McCann white van. There are loads of independant reports of a white van. If your not willing to search the details...


http://www.anorak.co.uk/213897/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-and-raymond-hewletts-white-van.html

iamwhoiam

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

I have walked past 5a on numerous occasions . It was without doubt the most vulnerable apartment . From the back easiest to nip in and out of . From the front shaded by trees and difficult to see the hall door .
A car could park right outside the front door in the shade of a tree .
As far as I know some of the families were on the upper floors ( not 100% sure and can't find any link to verify that )

MonkieSocks

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

gozunda wrote: »

Please dont mind the ongoing rabble - its nearly always like this at this time of night

:rolleyes:

gozunda

Something Else

Calltocall wrote: »

Fair point you make, I’m not discounting an accident, you’re right it could have happened, I just think that if she would have wandered out in a distressed state more than likely crying for her parents it’s more likely someone would have heard or seen that, I lean towards abduction as an individual with that intent would have gotten out of the area with her very quickly and less likely to be noticed.

Also I think it’s plausible that if an individual was capable of abducting a child they would survey the area first and observe many kids as scary as that sounds, I don’t think they just wandered down and decided I’ll take Madeleine, it’s likely they would watch the area over a period and notice a vulnerability with a certain child, such as the parents leaving their kids alone while they went off to dinner, they might watch again and again and see the pattern emerge and given the ease of access as it was next to a public walkway they had all the opportunity they needed.

I see what you are saying. Regarding let's say wandering away - the thing that springs to my mind though is that she may not have been distressed - was there a chance she had been sedated - woke up and wandered out. Or not sedated and just went to look for her parents because one of the twins was crying. The unfortunate thing is that it looks like we may never know what the basic circumstances that night were. We can only speculate.

I posted this earlier with regard to the ability of a child Madeleines age to do the unexpected.Btw I'm not saying that she definitly did walk out - for me there are just too many other troubling issues with this case unfortunately.

In my experience three to four years old can manage a well used sliding patio door with little problem.

In the official police files there is a photo of David Paynes child who I believe was a bit younger as Madeleine at the patio door in her parents apartment with her hand on the lever of the door and she was not stretching to do so.

I have also known a three year old to let themselves out of a hotel room where his grandmother was asleep in the same bedroom. The child got up managed to unlock and open the door (round handle) go down the stairs and announce to all and sundry in the dining room that he needed to go wee wee!

Young children of that age have alot more motor skills than they are often given credit for.

I dont believe I ever saw a proper reconstruction with a child opening the door in the apartment. The McCanns and a number of media channels did various reconstructions including that of Tannerman sighting etc. It's a real pity this one wasn't ruled out tbh.

MonkieSocks

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

brookers wrote: »

Im really interested in the Martin Smith family and their account of meeting a man mid 30s early 40s carrying a child, he has not come forward. Why did the Smiths wait so long to give their story to the police....?

here offical police statements

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_SMITH.htm#p6p1611

gozunda

Something Else

MonkieSocks wrote: »

:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:+1

See what I mean

gozunda

Something Else

OwlsZat wrote: »

Just Google Madeline McCann white van. There are loads of independant reports of a white van. If your not willing to search the details...


http://www.anorak.co.uk/213897/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-and-raymond-hewletts-white-van.html

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2009-05-16/man-in-white-van-an-urban-myth/1685570

Dont shoot me - I didn't write it ...

Dr Weatherburn says the media knows the vast majority of reports about men in white vans trying to snatch children are false.

"They've got no interest in telling people subsequently that it was a false report or that there was no evidence that an abduction took place," he said.

"They're certainly not interested in correcting anything they got wrong at the time, so people are left with this after taste, feeling that abduction is extremely prevalent."

Ms Morris wants the media to change the way it reports child abduction stories, especially during the school holidays.

"I'd like to see the truth," she said. "If it was untrue, print something just as big, just as bold, and say that due to further investigations it wasn't true."

Police say they take all claims of attempted child abduction seriously, but reports about men in white vans often peak during the school holidays.

The false reports also waste valuable police resources.

"It seems to be a common theme, whether each and every one is made up I can't confirm because I don't know what took place at the scene," said Detective Superintendent John Kerlatec.

"But I can say that there are several matters that are totally false that have involved white vans."

Forensic psychologist Dr Christopher Lennings says the urban myth about the man in the van probably began when the America's FBI created of a profile for a highly organised killer...

gozunda

Something Else

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Generalising other posters as rabble, well done.
Shrugs

Assuming it was a comment about posters and not the general melee of the discussion :rolleyes:

And then proving my point

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

You can put me on ignore and continue the discussion without me. Don't leave because of me though. All views are valid.

Erm yeah awkward, i meant I’m out of the discussion with you.

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I have walked past 5a on numerous occasions . It was without doubt the most vulnerable apartment . From the back easiest to nip in and out of . From the front shaded by trees and difficult to see the hall door .
A car could park right outside the front door in the shade of a tree .
As far as I know some of the families were on the upper floors ( not 100% sure and can't find any link to verify that )

It’s somewhere I’d love to visit at some stage in my life, just to get a realistic grasp of the logistics of how it all could have happened. Can I ask did seeing the apartment in real life change your views in any way or were you always of the opinion it was an opportunistic abduction?

OwlsZat

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

gozunda wrote: »

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2009-05-16/man-in-white-van-an-urban-myth/1685570

Dont shoot me - I didn't write it ...

I don't mind you in the slightest posting whatever you want. I don't understand though how statistics allows you to bypass the actual evidence. The statistics are interesting only up until the evidence is presented. Then you forget them and you evaluate all the evidence independently. You don't prejudice yourself before evaluating it. Else your ignoring the evidence itself. Just defeats the entire point entirely. It's totally nonsensical.

gozunda

Something Else

OwlsZat wrote: »

I don't mind you in the slightest posting whatever you want. I don't understand though how statistics allows you to bypass the actual evidence. The statistics are interesting only up until the evidence is presented. Then you forget them and you evaluate all the evidence independently. You don't prejudice yourself before evaluating it. Else your ignoring the evidence itself. Just defeats the entire point entirely. It's totally nonsensical.

Eh? Whose bypassing what evidence? I believe I was referring to the media article about white vans and Madeleine McCann. That many of these reports are as a result of a) there being lots and lots of white vans and b) it's a known phenomenon for media to support stories about child abductors in white vans. Take a read of the full article I posted.

As I said dont shoot me! :eek:

OwlsZat

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

gozunda wrote: »

Eh? What actual evidence? I believe I was referring to the media article about white vans and Madeleine McCann. That many of these reports are as a result of a) there being lots and lots of white vans and b) it's a known phenomenon for media to support stories about child abductors in white vans. Take a read of the full article I posted.

As I said dont shoot me! :eek:

Work off the evidence. Talk about who reported seeing the white van and white they were wrong. We have 4 or 5 report of the white at differnt times including directly outside. Two of them aren't even for the abduction there are afterwards in the following days which Madeline is linked too. 1 report granted maybe false. 3,4,5 different kettle of fish. To the facts justice by evaluating them and debating them. Not posting some generalised opinion piece as if it blanket applies to all reports of a white vans involed in crimes.

gozunda

Something Else

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Didn't realise you were talking about yourself
rabble1. a disorderly crowd; a mob.
Indeed...shrugs again..

Now now. Do you know more than our own knowledgable and gracious Mod? :eek:

</mod snip>rabble rabble rabble about [redacted]</mod snip>

Do try and keep up with the comments

And that's enough. Thanks

iamwhoiam

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

retro:electro wrote: »

It’s somewhere I’d love to visit at some stage in my life, just to get a realistic grasp of the logistics of how it all could have happened. Can I ask did seeing the apartment in real life change your views in any way or were you always of the opinion it was an opportunistic abduction?

Yes , i did change my mind a little when I saw it . I was unsure and a bit suspicion of the Mc Canns but seeing the geography of 5a it was extraordinarily vulnerable . I would not have left my credit card or phone in that apartment .

We stayed in the apartment block directly behind 5a . We could look right down on the front door and yet could not see it or anyone at it as the trees shaded it . ( it was Sept not May to be exact )
I very much doubt Madeleine wandered out as instinctively she would go towards the way to the pool and bar as thats the familiar root and she would have been spotted on that road .
P da L is not dotted with holes where a child could fall in , its a busy , tidy resort . She would not have made it to the sea without being seen it is too busy at that time

We didn't by the way visit P da L to check it out ! We got a great offer of am apartment there and delighted to take it
Its a beautiful area and a lovely town

Spanish Eyes

It is really the mystery of the century isn't it?

No wonder there are so many theories, and tensions run high sometimes too. That's inevitable.

MonkieSocks

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

gozunda wrote: »

Do you know more than our own knowledgable and gracious Moderator? :eek:



Do try and keep up with the comments

I have, you made a show of yourself with the rabble comment.;)

Nothing to do with a moderator deleting rubbish and calling it what it was


Indeed

gozunda

Something Else

OwlsZat wrote: »

Work off the evidence. Talk about who reported seeing the white van and white they were wrong. We have 4 or 5 report of the white at differnt times including directly outside. Two of them aren't even for the abduction there are afterwards in the following days which Madeline is linked too. 1 report granted maybe false. 3,4,5 different kettle of fish. To the facts justice by evaluating them and debating them. Not posting some generalised opinion piece as if it blanket applies to all reports of a white vans invoked in crimes.

Not arguing anything btw. The article simply details why white van sightings are so common and problems with this phenomenon. It's a fact as detailed - but there you go.

gozunda

Something Else

MonkieSocks wrote: »

I have, you made a show of yourself with the rabble comment.;Nothing to do with a moderator deleting rubbish and calling it what it was
Indeed

Lol I really dont believe someone tried to start a rabble about another poster pointing out there being loads of rabble rabble rabble ongoing in this thread. :rolleyes: sorry doesn't wash. Rubbish indeed

gozunda

Something Else

iamwhoiam wrote: »

I have walked past 5a on numerous occasions . It was without doubt the most vulnerable apartment . From the back easiest to nip in and out of . From the front shaded by trees and difficult to see the hall door .
A car could park right outside the front door in the shade of a tree .
As far as I know some of the families were on the upper floors ( not 100% sure and can't find any link to verify that )

Would you say it was the easiest one to access the street directly?

gozunda

Something Else

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Hasperen :rolleyes Goeie Nag

QED ....

gozunda

Something Else

MonkieSocks wrote: »

QUE INDEED [/img]

QUE? Lol

gozunda

Something Else

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Fixed
QUD INDEED

QUD???? Lol

I think its well past your bedtime tbh ...