Wednesday

Scotland Yard's Asst. Commissioner Mark Rowley should be ashamed of himself for bringing the Police Service into disrepute and perverting the course of justice by talking bollocks on national TV re: the betrayal of three-year-old Madeleine McCann

Scotland Yard's Asst. Commissioner Mark Rowley talking bollocks about the £11million Madeleine McCann cover-up which, don't forget, was only ever to "investigation the abduction as though it happened in the UK".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/25/madeleine-mccann-ten-years-police-still-pursuing-critical-leads/

Ruling by Portuguese Supreme Court - Parents NOT cleared of the involvement of the disappearance of Maddie: http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Supreme_Court_31_01_2017.htm
---------------

And this from retired Police Superintendent who doesn't have such a corrupt remit:

This is a precis for a new chapter of PeterMac's FREE e-book, currently being written:
http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

Recent hysterical Press reports are still concentrating on who could have done it, and are refusing to concentrate on whether it was done at all.

I could believe in an Abduction if I was presented with evidence of the MO - The Modus Operandi  - the evidential signs which detectives look for when investigating a report of crime, and which when placed in sequence can tell the story of what happened.

Many criminals stick to a particular MO which can be revealing for future detection

The list of points is long, but includes

Point of entry - window, door, front, back, side, locked or unlocked

Method of entry -  was it forced, using instrument or bodily pressure,  duplicate key, by fraud, by intimidation, silent,  . . .

Tools used - blunt instrument, sharp instrument, brick, concrete, wood, ladder, climbing . . .

Times between - 

Day of week -

Point of exit - as entry, or using door, climbing on furniture

Method of exit

Search - was this orderly professional, or amateur, 

Items taken - money, antiques, etc

Marks and items left at scene - fingerprints, foot prints, DNA, hair, clothing fibres, bodily fluids and solids, cigarette ends, artefacts from elsewhere

Victim - age, gender, characteristics

Trademark - eating food from fridge, drinking from bottles or glasses, using facilities, wanton damage to specific items, use of fire to hide evidence, cleaning, attempt removal of forensics

Witnesses

And so on.

Here we have - NOTHING.

No point of entry, 

No method of entry, (even Mitchell conceded both these)

No time window

No search

No items taken

No marks of any sort, inside or outside

No trademark

No witnesses

What then do we have ?

We have two people insisting that “For us, there is only the abduction theory possible", without providing or being able to point to a single piece of evidence.

And we have the top police and detectives of two Countries after a 10 year investigation unable to find a single piece of credible evidence

And by that we do not mean unable to find 'sufficient evidence to prosecute' - but unable to find a single piece of evidence.

Until we have that, there is no point in speculating about who might have done 'it'.

Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann forum for in-depth research and analysis: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/