DJKillaQueen

Never have two people on opposing sides of an argument spent so much energy and time, pounding out words to NO EFFECT WHATSOEVER I can think of many threads that out do this one in that respect Sean and neither Sue nor I have anything to do with them lol ;-) But in respect to this thread I totally agree the debates are circular, done to death and pointless...was kind of my point really (I think)....

How do you know that? It's in the timeline of the doc (which I have watched) you reference in the title of this thread (jesus)......if you can't even get that right then I suggest you go back and revisit your own sources of reference. I've read the sites you've linked to....and I have countered the points of your argument eloquently. You don't seem to want to acknowledge any theory beyond the ones you are peddling. I will conceed that you are arguing that abduction didn't happen (rather than murder/ manslaughter) but you are not presenting any theory so concrete that abduction can be dismissed. You have repeatedly criticised the McCanns for every aspect of their efforts to find their child. Can you not understand why a parent would want to continue to believe their child is alive and do what they can to find them? Or is it the case that you think they know their child is dead and so are somehow conning us all to cover that up (which is what you must believe from some of your criticism and cycnicism on their continued belief in abduction). You started this thread by showing support and credance to the argument presented by the Police Inspector (who incidently was fired) you refer to in your opening post...that's why you are sourcing the links and documentary and account's that you are...... I'm not removing any statements. I do think you are cold-hearted in your continued lack of sympathy at what the McCanns must have gone through in losing their child (you are more fixated in criticising and/or implicating them). Yes I do have LOTS of experience of children thank you very much. All parents make mistakes from time to time......luckily most of the time no harm is done. Or are you asking us to believe that you were the perfect mother?...somehow I think not. The theory you present is SPECULATIVE...there is NO hard evidence. A couple of dogs sniffing something that can't be seen or measured by humans...is NOT hard evidence. It needs hard DNA to have any worth and it has been explained to you why the DNA is useless and can prove nothing. I think it's a mystery that will never be solved until a body is found (either living or deceased) and there really is no point in pursuing a case beyond that.

All of which proves NOTHING. The McCanns reported Madeleine as missing as soon as they realised she was missing for sure. Nothing unusual in that. They were under the Police and media spotlight within days if not hours of the reported disappearance. Again nothing unusual in that. The chidren were checked on regularly by the parents in turn and not left for hours. Those parents genuinely believed their children were safe. The intent is more important than you want to admit (having already decided they killed their own child and covered it up). Not answering questions that can't be answered or someone is unable to answer does not equate to non co-operation. Assumption by you based on biased blogs and news reports that you have read, as the actual police interviews are not available for public inspection in full, nor will be unless there is a prosecution and court case. Also I repeat that when people are bereaved or in shock (even if it is laced with guilt) they sometimes do NOT act normally. I could go on. In reference to the dogs...there is NO conclusive DNA evidence (not even worth mentioning anymore). And if they DID detect the death of someone in the apartment there is NO evidence to link the McCanns to that death (or indeed any conclusive evidence that it was Madeleine's death). It is perfectly possible that a third party WAS involved. That is the problem with your argument. For everything you list...all of which is just speculation and none of which PROVES anything, there is an equally plausible and equally speculative alternate argument. On the leaving children unspuervised....millions of parents do that every day. They do it to answer the door, or to take a nap......even. Some even leave their children altogether for others to raise and look after. You have children Sue (you posted you have a grand-child) - did you have your children before your eyes for every day of their first say 13 years of life? If the McCanns and their friends thought for one moment that leaving their children sleeping in apartments they could clearly see from their dinner table for a couple of hours (whilst taking turns to check on them regularly) would have led to this they would never have done it. They have paid the ultimate price and I think it's very cold hearted of you Sue to keep demonising them for that mistake.

Don't want to be a downer on the thread but I do object strongly to the use of the word 'faggot'. It's not funny.

Seems odd...not only that he doesn't know where his sister lives (or have a tel number he can call her on to find out)but also that he'd be going to her party at 6pm on a Tuesday evening! Hopefully he was just genuinely lost.

Did you not see the snowman with a willy on it in the park LB? It was there sunday morning!

Echinacia won't stop you getting colds....staying away from people that already have colds will though (as that's how you catch them). Like anything...if you eat well and sleep well you have more chance of fending off or recovering quickly from colds than if you are run down or already ill. Fortunately I haven't caught any of the lurgys doing the rounds at the moment but I'm sure my time will come.....

They must drink at the Plough because there was one carved in the snow on a table outside.

I guess it might depend on the wine and how badly it's corked too lol.

LOL I LOVE booble hats! Going to order one right now!

There are lot's of chefs that will tell you that the bacteria that causes the wine to cork is killed and burnt off in the cooking process. In other words the taste and smell of the corked wine disappears once the wine boils.

You can cook with it as long as you are heating the food.....so in a bolognese or coq au vin it works absolutely fine. Pouring on a compost heap works equally well too......but I'd go for a nice coq au vin on boxing day personally.

I just checked the weather for the week as I too am dependent on it clearing to make it away for xmas. It looks as though there will be a slight thaw by Thursday, but whether that's enough to get everyone away in time I don't know.

I agree with chick.....this thread is pointless speculation, based on circumstantial at best, evidence. It is NOT unusual for bereaved people to be confused in the immediate grip of bereavement. There is no body and have been no arrests. You need overwhelming evidence for that and there is none. There is nothing to be gained by raking over it here with the sole intent of implicating the parents.

The two patio doors, to the McCanns apartment at the back of the villa, in plain view of the Tapas Bar, were left unlocked. All other doors were locked.

LOL cheeky ;-)

That may be so (in the majority of cases solved, it has to be added) just as the majority of murders of adults are by people known to them, and the majority of rapes are committed by perpetrators known to the victims. It's not a statistic remarkable to just the disappearance of children nor should it be used to present weight to theoretical scenarios when some crimes (albiet a minority) are at the hands of a stranger, and therefore present an equally possible scenario. Abduction is absolutely possible if the abductor has a key (it's a holiday villa where any number of people during the year would have access to a key, and not difficult to have a copy made). Add to that the ease with which a drowsy child can be lifted and removed, then you would not expect to see any disruption of furniture and so on. Discrepancies between witness statements are also not that unusual in cases, especially with regards to timescales. Cases where a group of witnesses are agreed on every point are often more likely to involve some kind of collusion. And of course if the abduction theory is nonsense then it is equally possible that a stranger is involved or even just one parent. It's not impossible that one parent knows nothing whilst the other knows exactly what happened. There are any number of ways to look at what happened that night.

Thank you Louisiana and HAL too for very informative posts.

I was going to Christmas shop today but sod that......lovely and warm indoors and doing housework!

This cold snap is set to stick around and the danger of frozen pipes is that they burst.

It's possible you have a frozen mains pipe if your neighbours are not affected.

Oh the irony.....

I've used a squire UBX D-lock for the last 15 years and never had my bicycle stolen. I think they are around ?100 these days.

I think for sure the case is complex, but only because there's no overwhelming evidence for any given scenario. And if Madeleine did not die from an accident in the apartment or at the hands of another and there is NO body then it is entirely plausible why two parents would want to pursue anything that gives any hope of their child being found alive - even if there is no evidence whatsoever for it (such as abduction). I disagree that anything in the Police files points beyond doubt or even with overwhelming evidence at a cover up by the parents. Yes it's possible (theories always are), but no European court of law would prosecute on such 'theoretical' evidence. The investigator cites a case in America where a prosecution is being made on equally weak DNA evidence. Anyone who knows anything about the US judicial system will tell you that American jails have a higher than average number of innocent people convicted of muder and manslaughter, because of such weak evidence being admissable. It's not something we should encourage to be replicated in European courts. People often do very odd things when grieving...any funeral director can tell you that....and I do think that, because the case involves a missing child, with no easy explanation, that the media reaction and conspiracy theories are typical. As someone pointed out above....we've seen it before. IMO...any continuing investigation should focus on finding Madeleine (whether deceased or living) because only then will there possibly be enough answers to know what really happened. Until then....laying blame achieves nothing but to add to the misery of two parents, who may well turn out to be guilty only of leaving their child unsupervised for an hour, on that trajic evening.

You forgot the white sheet quids ::o