Col1948 wrote:Firstly let me say 'Hello' to everyone on this thread/topic/discussion.
I came on the site by accident and spotted this topic and started to read the posts, something I've been interested in since the case began.
When it first came on the news I like everyone else was shocked and concerned as anyone would be and my heart went out for the safe return of Maddie.
But it wasn't long before I thought to myself that the parents seemed not to be acting right considering the situation, it seemed very strange, I thought it was just me not imagining it.
I was still working at the time and I remember saying in work that I thought they acted strange and learning more of the situation I also thought and not meaning to be clever that they could have gone overboard with a sedative and it turned out wrong.
Course my workmates said I was totally out of order to say such a thing, but I felt something wasn't right, any way after a time I saw a thread years ago on another forum about this case and I put my thoughts on there, again I was chastised by many of the members, I was beginning to think may be I am wrong in thinking these things.
Then funny enough on the very same forum years later the subject came up again and the mood was totally different they were all singing a different tune and saying there was something not right about the case etc.
I will admit I haven't taken stock of a lot a recent events on the case till I read the this thread and watched the Youtube links that have been posted, this again aroused my interest.
What also crossed my mind was just for a minute let us say that Maddie was abducted, if that is/was the case whoever abducted her is damn clever not to have left a trace of evidence or any kind or trail, they must have been professionals.
Then I saw the much talked about tests the dogs did, well years ago I worked at an airport and I witnessed many many times Customs used to test their drug sniffing dogs, the dog handlers would be outside playing with the dog and other officers would stick a back amongst an incoming flights baggage, then the dog came in and every single time it picked out the bag without fault.
What I'm saying is the dog was trained for that purpose just like these dogs were trained in this case for their purpose.
I was watching a documentary not long ago about a child abduction, nothing to do with this case by the way but one of the police investigators said something that made me think, he said, “When on a case like this if it is a baby or a young child, I don't what it is but you try harder to find the answer.”
Now he was just an investigator not a parent, if that this happened to nay of my children or grandchildren I would welcome any theory, test, anything if it brought a positive result, yet Gerry McCann said you can't trust those dogs, I would have said, go for it, bring in more dogs do anything if it finds Maddie.
I've gone on enough but I needed to express my thoughts, I'm sure I will think of more to say but I know a lot of text puts people off reading it and it gets skipped.
Col.
Welcome and thank you for your interesting post.
You're quite right of course that the absence of any evidence of an abduction is very relevant to the matter. It doesn't mean that the culprits were " professionals" however, since I know of no crime ever investigated where there was no evidence found that it had even occurred.
Even professionals leave evidence of the crime, they just try to avoid leaving evidence which connects them with it. However, it is clearly impossible to leave no forensic trace of your passing whilst entering or leaving the scene, and avoiding any witness, cctv camera etc noticing anything which they later find was some small part of the act.
Some may therefore conclude that the most likely explanation of this unique absence of a third party abducting the child , is that no third party was involved , and that no abduction in the way that we would normally define that took place.
soiled nappies, rotten food. Except the dogs do not alert to any of them.
