Ugly man is Maddie suspect

Dudess

If the McCanns' on-camera appearance was enough of a good lead, it would have been used by now. There are professionals trained to spot facial expressions and twitches that would be unnoticable to the layperson. Apparently that's a crucial factor in how Ian Huntley became top suspect.

Although while I'm not one to leap to conclusions in these matters, I do remember being hugely struck by Joe O'Reilly's... not calmness, but casualness when he appeared on The Late Late Show immediately after his wife's murder.

Ann22

Dudess wrote: »

If the McCanns' on-camera appearance was enough of a good lead, it would have been used by now. There are professionals trained to spot facial expressions and twitches that would be unnoticable to the layperson. Apparently that's a crucial factor in how Ian Huntley became top suspect.

Although while I'm not one to leap to conclusions in these matters, I do remember being hugely struck by Joe O'Reilly's... not calmness, but casualness when he appeared on The Late Late Show immediately after his wife's murder.

A lead's no good if there's not enough evidence. Their behaviour did arouse the Pj's suspicions then the cadavour dog's reactions really put them in the limelight however it wasn't enough to build a case against them especially with the might of the British empire against them.

walshb

As I said, it was not simply their demeanor and appearance, but this, coupled with
their actions on the night, just will not allow me to see much with them. They just strike me
as a little cold, that's all. Hey, not that this indicates any wrong doing whatsoever.
The wrong doing in this case was when they chose to leave Maddie alone and
unsupervised!

Venom

Dudess wrote: »

If the McCanns' on-camera appearance was enough of a good lead, it would have been used by now. There are professionals trained to spot facial expressions and twitches that would be unnoticable to the layperson. Apparently that's a crucial factor in how Ian Huntley became top suspect.

When they were named as suspects tho their PR people pretty much went on a smear campaign against the police officers involved If I recall correctly. Personaly Iv always thought there was something off about the Mccain's when they gave interviews after the child went missing

fr larry duff

I agree with a lot of things, such as they should never have left her in the first place. However, I don't believe for a second they had any DIRECT involvement with her disappearance. Trying to analyse their facial expressions or tone of voice afterwards and concluding they were cold and therefore responsible, is absolutely ludicrous. Nobody has any idea how they would react in that situation. I'm sure they've had many a sleepless night of hysterical crying in the privacy of their own home, but them not doing it on camera does not equate to their guilt, for a number of reasons, the most important of which is all expert advice saying showing emotion is detrimental to the case, i.e giving the abductor ammunition, a perverse pleasure etc. Kate McCann was very VERY clearly told by experts to be as emotionless as possible in press conferences.

I don't deny that had they have been of a lower class, people would be even more vitriolic towards them, considering they left the kids alone, which is absolutely inexcusable, I agree. I also believe people of a different class and less pull would have been prosecuted. While I don't believe for one second that such double standards are right, that doesn't change the way this story has panned out, nor the fact that as long as there is a possibility that girl is out there somewhere, I couldn't give two hoots if the McCanns got their own TV channel in an effort to drum up more publicity for the case. The fact is, as likely as it is that she is dead, there is still possibility. As long as that is there, you can only think of the child. Regardless of what you think of the parents, there could be a child still out there in God knows what situation. This is why the publicity doesn't p1ss me off, even if my opinion on the matter has swung from annoyance to blaming the parents to feeling sorry for them or whatever.

Plainly and simply, as long as there's the possibility she is alive (which until a body is found, there is), it is important to keep up the publicity. Yes, sh1t happens to other people every day, plenty of kids go missing, and while I agree it is a sad reflection on our society which cases get most importance, the fact is that there is an innocent child to consider, and any parents who had the same pull and money to do everything in their power to get them found would do the exact same.

Acacia

fr larry duff wrote: »

I agree with a lot of things, such as they should never have left her in the first place. However, I don't believe for a second they had any DIRECT involvement with her disappearance. Trying to analyse their facial expressions or tone of voice afterwards and concluding they were cold and therefore responsible, is absolutely ludicrous. Nobody has any idea how they would react in that situation. I'm sure they've had many a sleepless night of hysterical crying in the privacy of their own home, but them not doing it on camera does not equate to their guilt, for a number of reasons, the most important of which is all expert advice saying showing emotion is detrimental to the case, i.e giving the abductor ammunition, a perverse pleasure etc. Kate McCann was very VERY clearly told by experts to be as emotionless as possible in press conferences.
.

I agree. I think there was a case in America where a woman who's children went missing was crying on TV, pleading for the abducter to bring them back...iirc, it turned out that these were merely crocodile tears and she had abducted the children herself.

In any case, many people go into shock or run autopilot trying to deal with that sort of stress. Who knows how they were feeling on the inside?

Ann22

That was Susan Smith, yeah she drove the kids into a river or something..mad bitch.
Regardless of whatever happened that night, they did lose a child. Can't imagine how I'd live with the guilt for leaving them alone, in the dark, in a strange room. Maddie was heard by the woman in the room upstairs crying for an hour and a half two nights before she went missing. She stopped when the parents arrived back. I'd be sick with shame and remorse if that was me.

walshb

Ann22 wrote: »

That was Susan Smith, yeah she drove the kids into a river or something..mad bitch.
Regardless of whatever happened that night, they did lose a child. Can't imagine how I'd live with the guilt for leaving them alone, in the dark, in a strange room. Maddie was heard by the woman in the room upstairs crying for an hour and a half two nights before she went missing. She stopped when the parents arrived back. I'd be sick with shame and remorse if that was me.

That's news to me. So, they had been leaving her alone on night(s)?
I thought it was a once off and they got caught out.

An hour an a half is a hell of a long time to do something
so horrible. Sorry, I didn't like them one bit when I first heard
that Maddie was left alone, and I dislike them more now that
I have heard this.

The child crying and alone and in
a distressed state while her "well to do" parents are
out on the tear. Despicable people if you ask me!

maebee

walshb wrote: »

That's news to me. So, they had been leaving her alone on night(s)?
I thought it was a once off and they got caught out.

An hour an a half is a hell of a long time to do something
so horrible. Sorry, I didn't like them one bit when I first heard
that Maddie was left alone, and I dislike them more now that
I have heard this.

The child crying and alone and in
a distressed state while her "well to do" parents are
out on the tear. Despicable people if you ask me!

Hi walshb,

Have a look here.

http://www.the3arguidos.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=35

This site has around five thousand members who are dedicated to finding out the truth about what happened to Madeleine.

cjbh

i'm extremely suspicious of the McCanns, and have been from the start.
i don't know how so many people have been suckered by them

there is so much circumstantial evidence against them, i know it wouldn't hold in court, but it's enough to make you think

e.g.
-Irish man saw Gerry carrying blonde girl towards the beach
-dogs smelled death on Kate
-Kate washed Maddie's toys
-DNA of Maddie in the boot of the car
-Kate's bible bookmarked on suspicious page
-their general behaviour
-lying about a window being forced open
etc. etc.

the simplest explanation is usually the right one. Maddie woke up, had an accident, parents freaked, disposed the body, got friends to help...IMO simpler than opportunistic paedophile in quiet resort town just happened across the apartment while the parents just happened to be out

maebee

You can add to that:

Kate refusing to answer the PJ's 48 questions.

The lot of them refusing to return to Portugal for a police re-construction.

The world-renowned British sniffer dogs, Eddie and Keela, detected the scent of a corpse in 10 places which strongly suggested Madeleine died in the McCanns’ holiday apartment.

Initially, the McCanns claimed that an abductor forced entry to the apartment by ‘jemmying open the shutters’. The police and Mark Warners’ staff examined the shutters, proving this was untrue. The McCanns quickly changed their story to say the abductor must have come in via the open patio door and exited through a small bedroom window

The description of an abductor by McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner changed several times

Until very recently, the McCanns’ website described a moustachioed man, over 6ft tall, as ‘the probable abductor’, when there was no evidence connecting this man, seen by a tourist days before Madeleine was reported missing, to the events the night Madeleine went missing. Further, he looks nothing like the 5’ 7” man described by Jane Tanner.

The McCanns’ rush to appoint lawyers and PR experts.

Making long-term plans to mark Madeleine’s alleged abduction - whilst claiming she was alive and could still be found.

Nice to hear Snr.Amaral's statement today that he intends to sue the McCanns.

Karl Hungus

Anyone else think that the picture looks supisciously like this guy?

Snake Plisken

ah another Madeline's parent's thread thought we did this last year or the year before? Anyway they didn't do it as any parent can see that the mother looks like she blames herself and it's slowly but surely killing her, they're only guilt is leaving the kids alone, I suppose they thought they were in a safe little resort in Portugal. At the end of the day the child is still missing and the parent's won't ever be able to move on until either she turns up safe or they find her body. I would personally say it was someone local who took her. But deffo not the parents.

Kess73

Karl Hungus wrote: »

Anyone else think that the picture looks supisciously like this guy?

Damn you Rorschach, damn you.

shqipshume

Ann22 wrote: »

They lack the look of desperation you see normally in the parents of missing kids...even soon after it happened. They have sometimes however looked like bereaved parents....there's a difference. I lost my child in Pennys once and nearly lost my life.

You cant judge them by how they appear on tv.I am sure family and friends would have mentioned their lack of caring.There is such thing as numbness and disbelief.No one knows how they are reacting behind the scenes.They looked to be honest to me like pale and very drained.
And also the media and police screwing up the investigation in the beginning did not help.Took focus off the possible real abductor.Lets face it it,it was done by professional abductors not two parents who just murdered her and buried her somewhere or they would have found the evidence.

asdasd

The description of an abductor by McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner changed several times

did she not finger murat at one stage?

Ann22

An earlier poster said 'they were very clearly told not to show any emotion'. According to the police, they were never told any such thing. Seems odd that, I've read books on missing children and the parents were never told that. I can't imagine being able to contain my despair and tears if it was me. This is the opinion of one profiler in particular.

'' I have never heard of an expert telling parents to be unemotional in a plea to a kidnapper so as not to amuse them. Personally, I have to say most pleas are a waste of time and will have no effect on a psychopathic kidnapper. But, if one wanted to make a plea because one really believed the abducted child was not already dead or being tortured in a dungeon, that the child was with some nutty woman who just had to have the pretty little thing, then an emotional plea would be just the thing to try to jog the woman's conscience to return the child''.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

For those who depend on the uk tabloids for their knowledge on the case should read through Mccannfiles.com. The translated Portuguese documentary 'The Truth of the lie is available to watch on youtube. The McCanns have threatened to sue if it's shown on any uk tv channel. It's in 6 short parts here....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yB__7F-Ghpo

Jesus Wept

asdasd wrote: »

did she not finger murat at one stage?

tmi

hottstuff

All i can say is, someone, somewhere knows what happened to the poor little girl and i hope they pay for it, whether that be the lies or the act itself.

On the parents, i always thought if it was my daughter i would be hysterical, and i'm not the hysterical type.

cjbh

nobody is accusing them of murder
i believe they disposed of Maddie and concocted a huge cover-up story that snowballed out of all proportion and now they have to go along with it
yes i can see in their interviews they are drained and often upset...they are drained and upset because they KNOW their daughter is dead (IMO) and of course feel guilty about it but they sure as hell aren't going to admit to it.
what they are not, and never have been, is panicky, or desperate - Kate just seems sad and withdrawn and Gerry is defensive and passive aggressive

btw, they were on This Morning on ITV today...
Fern asked Gerry why the search wasn't being focused in the Algarve (statistics show that when a child is abducted they are usually kept in that area)
Gerry immediately became uncomfortable and tried to justify the 'worldwide search' (i.e. trying to deflect the search away from Portugal).

it seems to me like they've got something to hide in Portugal, and they want to keep up the pretence by 'searching' somewhere where they know she will never be found (i.e. the rest of the world)

Dudess

hottstuff wrote: »

All On the parents, i always thought if it was my daughter i would be hysterical, and i'm not the hysterical type.

How on earth could you know? You could be absolutely frozen with shock. Or drugged to the eyeballs.

And really, it just seems like people are desperate for the cover-up thing to be true because it's exciting...

Yeah, that poor guy Murat - another victim of the "We desperately want someone to blame" brigade... :mad:

gimme5minutes

cjbh wrote: »

nobody is accusing them of murder
i believe they disposed of Maddie and concocted a huge cover-up story that snowballed out of all proportion and now they have to go along with it
yes i can see in their interviews they are drained and often upset...they are drained and upset because they KNOW their daughter is dead (IMO) and of course feel guilty about it but they sure as hell aren't going to admit to it.
what they are not, and never have been, is panicky, or desperate - Kate just seems sad and withdrawn and Gerry is defensive and passive aggressive

btw, they were on This Morning on ITV today...
Fern asked Gerry why the search wasn't being focused in the Algarve (statistics show that when a child is abducted they are usually kept in that area)
Gerry immediately became uncomfortable and tried to justify the 'worldwide search' (i.e. trying to deflect the search away from Portugal).

it seems to me like they've got something to hide in Portugal, and they want to keep up the pretence by 'searching' somewhere where they know she will never be found (i.e. the rest of the world)

Would you ever come off it, 'keep up the pretence'.... the easiest thing in the world for them to do would be to just drop it altogether. They've been cleared ages ago, they have nothing to gain at this stage by continuing this search, apart from finding madeline. Starting a worldwide manhunt that turns all the cameras of the world on you as way to avoid being done for killing your daughter makes zero sense, its pure conspiracy theory nonsense. Lots of kids go missing and nobody hears about it, if they had've actually killed her they could've just gone back to England, said she was abducted and that would've basically been the end of it.

WillieCocker

Dudess wrote: »

How on earth could you know? You could be absolutely frozen with shock. Or drugged to the eyeballs.

Frozen with shock
It's a missing child, not a mutilated body.

And really, it just seems like people are desperate for the cover-up thing to be true because it's exciting...

Oh, nothing to do with the fact that the parents are creepy and answered a lot of questions in an odd way.?
Or hey maybe even the fact that they are selfish assholes who care more about appearances than their missing child!!!!
They are guilty of ONE THING at least.
Selfish STUPIDITY.

Ann22

gimme5minutes wrote: »

Would you ever come off it, 'keep up the pretence'.... the easiest thing in the world for them to do would be to just drop it altogether. They've been cleared ages ago, they have nothing to gain at this stage by continuing this search, apart from finding madeline. Starting a worldwide manhunt that turns all the cameras of the world on you as way to avoid being done for killing your daughter makes zero sense, its pure conspiracy theory nonsense. Lots of kids go missing and nobody hears about it, if they had've actually killed her they could've just gone back to England, said she was abducted and that would've basically been the end of it.

The man who was broadcast all over the tabloids-this 'ugly' bloke, was checked out and cleared by the Pj. The search has been refreshed to look for an individual for no reason except to raise the profile of the case again as the fund is drying up. None of these caricature type stereotypical baddies will ever turn up.
Some narcissistic personalities thrive on media attention. Why else would you leave your two babies behind in a resort where there was a potential abductor and go gallavanting around the world for meetings with the Pope etc? I'd never let them out of my sight again...Why suggest meeting Kerry Needham (mother of missing toddler Ben in Kos in '91) only to back out when she (Kerry) said she didn't want the cameras or reporters to be there??

shqipshume

Well you sure as hell wouldnt want to be on a jury, if they cry and scream they are not guilty lol And i thank god you're not police


Have you ever seen people who laugh in bad situations or don't cry at funerals everyone reacts and does things different in all situations.Some don't cry because they are afraid if they do they wont be able to stop,some think if they lose control they wont be able to regain it.There is many different reasons and not to mention possibly medicated.I personally when in trouble in school laughed when given out to i have no idea why not i thought was funny but i would laugh anyway.When in a accident situation i can stand blood and so what i got to do but i could watch a programme on tv and not be able to stomach it.
The only action anyone need think about with these parents is yes a disgrace they left their children in a room while they went to a bar.Lots and lots of parents do it,i have seen them do it.
But they are still searching and haven't stopped,as someone else said above.They could have walked away now wrote a book made millions and there you go home free.They are not criminal masterminds there is no way they could have got rid of all the evidence linking them to her disappearance.She was abducted probably targeted previously,arrangements made before her abduction and swiped and gone from the country within minutes of her disappearance.

Dudess

WillieCocker wrote: »

Frozen with shock
It's a missing child, not a mutilated body.

And you don't think it's feasible for a person to be in shock if their child disappears?

Oh, nothing to do with the fact that the parents are creepy and answered a lot of questions in an odd way.?

I don't think either applies to them - it seems more like people want to ascribe such attributes to them.

Or hey maybe even the fact that they are selfish assholes who care more about appearances than their missing child!!!!

You've lost me. How do they care more about appearances than their missing child?

They are guilty of ONE THING at least.
Selfish STUPIDITY.

Yeah, we know.

This itching for them to be guilty of accidentally killing Madeleine reminds me of those poor men recently in the news for being wrongly accused of sexual abuse. Some people would do anything for a bit of scandal and sensationalism...

King of Kings

Dudess wrote: »

Yeah, that poor guy Murat - another victim of the "We desperately want someone to blame" brigade... :mad:

[/QUOTE]

murat? didn't you read your informed tabloid - he was an oddball who lived with his mother and had 1 eye.... Did you hear me - 1 EYE....
he was soo guilty.

Ann22

They've had quite a lot of support publicly really, whether they had anything to do with it or not..I suppose a lot boiled down to the fact that there were arrangements made in the early days with the paparazzi, they walked every morning hand in hand to church and sat for photos. Who could forget Cuddle Cat hanging obviously out of Kate's bag for the cameras to catch. Good saleable snapshots were worth supportive reporting.
I think it was unfair the way the Portuguese people were discredited and sneered at in all the British tabloids. It really was a disgrace...calling them 'fat', 'sweaty' and 'sardine munchers'. It's clear by the published reports the efforts that were made by the Portuguese authorities, no easy task with the pressure they were under...and Gordon Brown sticking his oar in too...where would you see it? Why did Kerry Needham not get the prime minister ringing her personally (on a few occasions too)?
The Pj got very little cooperation from the uk side government wise but I also hasten to add according to Amarel it was the point of view of the English police that something happened to the child in the apartment. They've never denied it.

cjbh

shqipshume wrote: »

Well you sure as hell wouldnt want to be on a jury, if they cry and scream they are not guilty lol And i thank god you're not police


They are not criminal masterminds there is no way they could have got rid of all the evidence linking them to her disappearance.She was abducted probably targeted previously,arrangements made before her abduction and swiped and gone from the country within minutes of her disappearance.

they are not criminal masterminds, but they are rich and can afford good lawyers and good PR. they are also attractive people and studies have shown that people are more likely to attribute good qualities (such as honesty) to attractive people than to unattractive people (e.g. Karen Matthews)

people like me are not desperate to see them found guilty, I am just calling it as i see it. We have been duped before by 'victims' keeling to our hearts. It's time to stop being naive.

shqipshume

cjbh wrote: »

they are not criminal masterminds, but they are rich and can afford good lawyers and good PR. they are also attractive people and studies have shown that people are more likely to attribute good qualities (such as honesty) to attractive people than to unattractive people (e.g. Karen Matthews)

people like me are not desperate to see them found guilty, I am just calling it as i see it. We have been duped before by 'victims' keeling to our hearts. It's time to stop being naive.

I don't find them attractive at all
The majority of cases that i know parents are involved in murder or disappearance of their kids or partners are caught in sort time after.Hence you been able to use that name as example.
They would not imo been able to get rid of the evidence that fast and cover their tracks.Because the police fouled up the case from minute one that's why that child hasn't been found.IMO
But in the small likely hood that they did do it they will be caught eventually.

asdasd

I don't find them attractive at all

Well thats becuase you probably hang only with the beautiful people.


Amongst normal people they are definitely attractive, even when looking sad ( which is genuine)

shqipshume

asdasd wrote: »

Well thats becuase you probably hang only with the beautiful people.


Amongst normal people they are definitely attractive, even when looking sad ( which is genuine)

No i just find them normal looking people as i do everyone.I don't think anyone is more beautiful then the next person.
I have a thing when i like someone and think they are good people they are beautiful people inside and out,but if they are mean people i find them unattractive to look at as well.
In the case of the mccanns i think they are normal looking as i don't know them.
But i think that finding is not accurate with looks and honesty.

WillieCocker

asdasd wrote: »

Amongst normal people they are definitely attractive, even when looking sad ( which is genuine)

:eek:
The only part of this weird post i agree with is the bold bit.
They certainly are not normal.

asdasd

The only part of this weird post i agree with is the bold bit.
They certainly are not normal.

? my post was simple. I accused the guy who believed that they were not attractive of hanging with the beautiful people, but amongst us normal people they are attractive.

I dont understand any of your post on the other hand. You boldified the part of my post you didnt agree with, and said that was the only part you agreed with.

This thread is getting remedial.

WillieCocker

Sorry, let me simplify it for you.

I disagree, they are not attractive & i agree, they certainly are NOT normal.

shqipshume

Police interviewing known paedophile who stayed near the resort when Maddie was abducted! I hope they find out what happened to her.
He is dying of cancer.

Ann22

shqipshume wrote: »

Police interviewing known paedophile who stayed near the resort when Maddie was abducted! I hope they find out what happened to her.
He is dying of cancer.

It's the McCann's private investigators that want to question him I think not the official police. Scarily he really looks like Gail Cooper's photofit (the original ugly man). I pray to God he didn't have anything to do with it. I've always leaned towards the belief that something befell her accidentally in the room, it seems more likely when you read all the evidence....I suppose deep down i'd rather think that than something unimaginable like some abomination of humanity getting their filthy paws on her.

shqipshume

Ann22 wrote: »

It's the McCann's private investigators that want to question him I think not the official police. Scarily he really looks like Gail Cooper's photofit (the original ugly man). I pray to God he didn't have anything to do with it. I've always leaned towards the belief that something befell her accidentally in the room, it seems more likely when you read all the evidence....I suppose deep down i'd rather think that than something unimaginable like some abomination of humanity getting their filthy paws on her.

No i heard it on news today police are questioning him tonight.
I know what you mean it very heart breaking to think of something so horrific happening to a child.Makes me sick to my stomach sad:(

Dudess

WillieCocker wrote: »

Sorry, let me simplify it for you.

I disagree, they are not attractive & i agree, they certainly are NOT normal.

What's not normal about them?

Dudess

cjbh wrote: »

i'm extremely suspicious of the McCanns, and have been from the start.
i don't know how so many people have been suckered by them

there is so much circumstantial evidence against them, i know it wouldn't hold in court, but it's enough to make you think

e.g.
-Irish man saw Gerry carrying blonde girl towards the beach
-dogs smelled death on Kate
-Kate washed Maddie's toys
-DNA of Maddie in the boot of the car
-Kate's bible bookmarked on suspicious page
-their general behaviour
-lying about a window being forced open
etc. etc.

the simplest explanation is usually the right one. Maddie woke up, had an accident, parents freaked, disposed the body, got friends to help...IMO simpler than opportunistic paedophile in quiet resort town just happened across the apartment while the parents just happened to be out

Well one would hope so - the parents thing is far more exciting and scandalous than the boring paedophile thing... :pac:

shqipshume

Dudess wrote: »

Well one would hope so - the parents thing is far more exciting and scandalous than the boring paedophile thing... :pac:

Paedophiles don't go to these places in organised groups and watch kids and target them for specific reasons at all sure they dont.
They kidnap children to a buyers actual request or for them selves or groups.Why are people so laid back about that,and think these guys are just opportunistic? They are opportunistic in beginning but after that they become very organised.

WillieCocker

Dudess wrote: »

What's not normal about them?

Are you being silly?:rolleyes:

BraziliaNZ

does anyone else thing he looks like Lee Van Cleef?
http://arcona.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/lee-van-cleef.jpg
not sure if this has been noted in this thread already...

Kess73

Ann22 wrote: »

It's the McCann's private investigators that want to question him I think not the official police. Scarily he really looks like Gail Cooper's photofit (the original ugly man). I pray to God he didn't have anything to do with it. I've always leaned towards the belief that something befell her accidentally in the room, it seems more likely when you read all the evidence....I suppose deep down i'd rather think that than something unimaginable like some abomination of humanity getting their filthy paws on her.

The picture of him from 12 years ago looks like Gail Cooper's photofit. I think it is more a case of trying to make the pieces fit. The photo they showed of the guy they are now suspecting is from 1997. They showed more recent pictures of him from the last three years and he did not have the tache or long hair in pics taken a month or so before the kid was taken.



Although it would be better for all involved if he was the guilty one as at least then there would be some closure to this thing. But I have my doubts that it was him, despite his past history.

asdasd

Does anybody know if Jane Tanner pointed the finger at Murat, or not?

Some reports say she did, but the reporting on this case - specially regarding Murat - was atrocious.

Ann22

Kess73 wrote: »

The picture of him from 12 years ago looks like Gail Cooper's photofit. I think it is more a case of trying to make the pieces fit. The photo they showed of the guy they are now suspecting is from 1997. They showed more recent pictures of him from the last three years and he did not have the tache or long hair in pics taken a month or so before the kid was taken.



Although it would be better for all involved if he was the guilty one as at least then there would be some closure to this thing. But I have my doubts that it was him, despite his past history.

I read that Police sources said he had been eliminated because his bank card was used in Lisbon – three hours from Praia da Luz – at the time Madeleine was abducted.
In all honesty, I'd say there were a fair few paedos about the place at the time. The investigators are meant to be checking another one out at the moment.

asdasd

There's just too much fingerpointing.

Ann22

asdasd wrote: »

Does anybody know if Jane Tanner pointed the finger at Murat, or not?

Some reports say she did, but the reporting on this case - specially regarding Murat - was atrocious.

Yes she did. She was taken in a police surveillence vehicle where she observed people passing by. She formally identified Murat as being the man she saw 'by the way he walked'.. this was after the original eggman sketch where the face was vague. Later on she helped in the original ugly long haired man sketch-totally different from Murat. (as a matter of interest, David Payne is a dead ringer for Murat).

asdasd

Extraordinary.

The only thing I can say in her favour is maybe she did see someone, and she *wanted* to believe it was Murat, or was under pressure to say so.

Thats the best scenario. The worst scenario is she didnt see someone and was pointing at Murat to deliberately frame an innocent man.

Dudess

shqipshume wrote: »

Paedophiles don't go to these places in organised groups and watch kids and target them for specific reasons at all sure they dont.
They kidnap children to a buyers actual request or for them selves or groups.Why are people so laid back about that,and think these guys are just opportunistic? They are opportunistic in beginning but after that they become very organised.

I'm not laidback about it at all - I was just taking the piss out of a particular post.

WillieCocker wrote: »

Are you being silly?:rolleyes:

What they did - leaving their children unsupervised - was not normal, but that's not what was being discussed in this instance. People were referring to how they appear - and yes, they appear normal. It's just bizarre to say they don't. They look and act like any youngish couple whom you wouldn't bat an eyelid at if you saw interacting on the street.

cjbh wrote: »

they are not criminal masterminds, but they are rich and can afford good lawyers and good PR. they are also attractive people and studies have shown that people are more likely to attribute good qualities (such as honesty) to attractive people than to unattractive people (e.g. Karen Matthews)

people like me are not desperate to see them found guilty, I am just calling it as i see it. We have been duped before by 'victims' keeling to our hearts. It's time to stop being naive.

How is it "naive" to give them the benefit of the doubt? What's naive is to treat this sorry affair as if it's an episode of Eastenders.

WillieCocker wrote: »

:eek:
The only part of this weird post i agree with is the bold bit.
They certainly are not normal.

What was said was "they are attractive to normal people" so that response doesn't make sense at all.
And yes, in a general sense, they're reasonably attractive. They're hardly unattractive just because they don't look like Brad and Angelina. They're fairly young, fit, healthy, slim, well presented. These tick the attractive box - one doesn't have to fancy them to make them attractive. We're not talking about personal preference anyway.

LOL at how people are determined to depict them as akin to Fred and Rosemary West. Innocent until proven guilty perhaps?