do you think maddie is alive or dead

[Gem2626]

The McCanns were instructed NOT to release the detail about her eye as if she was still alive, it could trigger her murder.

They went ahead and did it anyway.

They were instructed (by SY) not to attend this libel hearing either, but they went ahead and did that too.

They know better, it seems. On all things.

Link to support your claims please

 

[Gem2626]

And how his hair wAs parted?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

Why is it not possible to see that hair is parted from a side view? She saw a side view of him but at no point has she said she saw exactly 50% of his head.

 

[Gem2626]

Gerry knew.

He was already planning the Anniversary Concert (oh wait it was going to be sooner than that) with all the big names, and marketing the resulting CD "Madeleine's songs", ONE MONTH after she vanished.

:sick:

Do you not think that this would have been his PR team advising this? Do you not remember the link I posted just yesterday stating that they were looking at holding events for if she's not found.
Planning in the long term is advise given to parents of missing children.

I've posted these links. Clearly you just ignore them.

 

[Gem2626]

Precisely...the standard of evidence required for an Intruder Theory is um....so low as to be non-existent.

The standard of evidence required for MDI is so high that it excludes every single piece of standard evidence including forensic, circumstantial, and of course the dogs.

Of course the intruder theory would mean that there would be less evidence or zero evidence. Because he wasn't hanging around long enough to leave any fingerprints etc. I've already linked to a man who abducted a girl and left no evidence of doing so.

Whereas if Madeleine's parents had done it there would be a lot more evidence which would vary depending on how she was killed and how she was disposed of. Opportunity, motive, any previous incidents, the McCann's characters.

None of the supposed 'evidence' would hold up in court. Their is no forensic evidence, dogs aren't considered reliable enough to make it into court and their findings were questioned in the official report. There is no evidence.

As for circumstantial evidence. Some people think that because 9 different people were able to remember some exact times that things happened that makes them guilty.

 

[Jmoose]

Of course the intruder theory would mean that there would be less evidence or zero evidence. Because he wasn't hanging around long enough to leave any fingerprints etc. I've already linked to a man who abducted a girl and left no evidence of doing so.

Whereas if Madeleine's parents had done it there would be a lot more evidence which would vary depending on how she was killed and how she was disposed of. Opportunity, motive, any previous incidents, the McCann's characters.

None of the supposed 'evidence' would hold up in court. Their is no forensic evidence, dogs aren't considered reliable enough to make it into court and their findings were questioned in the official report. There is no evidence.

As for circumstantial evidence. Some people think that because 9 different people were able to remember some exact times that things happened that makes them guilty.

So lack of evidence of an intruder means he was too clever to leave any, and lack of evidence that the McCanns did something to her means they didn't do it.

 

[Gem2626]

So lack of evidence of an intruder means he was too clever to leave any, and lack of evidence that the McCanns did something to her means they didn't do it.

The McCanns would be far more likely to leave evidence if they did it whereas it would be much easier for an abductor not to. That makes the chances of the McCanns having done it less likely.

 

[Jmoose]

The McCanns would be far more likely to leave evidence if they did it whereas it would be much easier for an abductor not to. That makes the chances of the McCanns having done it less likely.

Not necessarily...they stayed there for a week, so they would leave the typical type of evidence, like hair and bodily fluids (of 5 people). But just suppose (not saying this is what happened) that she was strangled-what would the incriminating evidence be once she was removed from the room? There were opportunities to move her to their car-after all, the McCanns checked on the children frequently (so it's said). I still think it's possible that Maddie could have left the room to look for her parents in the dark-she was described as "fearless" and while she may not have done so on the previous nights, maybe her parents said to her before they left "no need to cry tonight-we are right outside having dinner", so she went looking for them. Their view was obscured some, and they were drinking and having fun, so they wouldn't have seen her leave-they really weren't as vigilant as they say they were-since they also couldn't see an intruder, if there was one.

 

[Venom]

The McCanns would be far more likely to leave evidence if they did it whereas it would be much easier for an abductor not to. That makes the chances of the McCanns having done it less likely.

How so? The M's were living in the apartment for the week, of course their fingerprints, hairs, and all that are going to be in there. Now an unknown fingerprint (that doesn't belong to a resort worker, prior guest) that would be another thing. I don't get how it's easy for an abductor to not leave any evidence.

 

[Jmoose]

How so? The M's were living in the apartment for the week, of course their fingerprints, hairs, and all that are going to be in there. Now an unknown fingerprint (that doesn't belong to a resort worker, prior guest) that would be another thing. I don't get how it's easy for an abductor to not leave any evidence.

Add to that, the fact that tons of people went in and out of that villa and obscured all kinds of possible evidence, making it unlikely that LE could identify an intruder. None of this absolves the McCanns, who at best, were neglectful parents, at least on this vacation.

 

[SapphireSteel]

The dogs are wrong
The PJ was wrong
The British police were wrong
The forensics are wrong
The Smiths are wrong
The McCanns are absolutely perfect and beyond reproach.

Question everybody and everything else, but not the McCanns...

The IDI standard of proof = 0

The MDI standard of proof = well, what exactly is it? We've got circumstantial, forensic, eyewitness AND motive...yet it's still all "wrong".

:dunno:

 

[Inana]

The dogs are wrong
The PJ was wrong
The British police were wrong
The forensics are wrong
The Smiths are wrong
The McCanns are absolutely perfect and beyond reproach.

Question everybody and everything else, but not the McCanns...

The IDI standard of proof = 0

The MDI standard of proof = well, what exactly is it? We've got circumstantial, forensic, eyewitness AND motive...yet it's still all "wrong".

:dunno:

I know, right? it's crazy but true. I don't think the English police or FFS were wrong, but that's me. Glad you finally see the light!


:floorlaugh:


:great:

 

[SapphireSteel]

So what's your theory on the "significant changes to the timeline" that Andy is burbling about?

There is only one timeline...that created by the "distraught" McCanns while others were out searching for Madeleine on their behalf. Conveniently recorded for ever more on Madeleine's own colouring book cover, ripped off for the occasion.

Now, apparently, it's wrong. Officially.



Significant changes= it was wrong in the first place = lies. :seeya:

 

[Linda7NJ]

So what's your theory on the "significant changes to the timeline" that Andy is burbling about?

There is only one timeline...that created by the "distraught" McCanns while others were out searching for Madeleine on their behalf. Conveniently recorded for ever more on Madeleine's own colouring book cover, ripped off for the occasion.

Now, apparently, it's wrong. Officially.



Significant changes= it was wrong in the first place = lies. :seeya:

I think that's the nice way of saying...

The original was proven to be a lie.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[LinasK]

I know, right? it's crazy but true. I don't think the English police or FFS were wrong, but that's me. Glad you finally see the light!


:floorlaugh:


:great:

I think SS was being sarcastic if you didn't get it.

 

[SapphireSteel]

I think SS was being sarcastic if you didn't get it.

:ufo:

I wonder why the Alien Abduction theory isn't being seriously investigated...it makes about as much sense as IDI.

:scared:

 

[Inana]

I think SS was being sarcastic if you didn't get it.

So was I, if you didn't get it. eace:

 

[Inana]

:ufo:

I wonder why the Alien Abduction theory isn't being seriously investigated...it makes about as much sense as IDI.

:scared:

Crazier things have happened!

 

[Linda7NJ]

Crazier things have happened!

Really? Crazier?

Do you have a link?

Ha ha ha. Thud..,

I crack me up! lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Linda7NJ]

:ufo:

I wonder why the Alien Abduction theory isn't being seriously investigated...it makes about as much sense as IDI.

:scared:

Actually it makes more sense... More witnesses to some alien abduction stories than to IDI

And the sketches of the aliens all Look the same!!!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Inana]

So what's your theory on the "significant changes to the timeline" that Andy is burbling about?

There is only one timeline...that created by the "distraught" McCanns while others were out searching for Madeleine on their behalf. Conveniently recorded for ever more on Madeleine's own colouring book cover, ripped off for the occasion.

Now, apparently, it's wrong. Officially.



Significant changes= it was wrong in the first place = lies. :seeya:

I haven't heard about this. Is on the media thread? Could I have a link?