Gerry and Kate Mcann promoting Book on Late Late next week

Kess73

dark crystal wrote: »

So Kate McCann just took the chance that one of the others checking on the child might discover the dead body then? Or if you believe she or Gerry moved the body before that, you think they would then just turn up for dinner acting like nothing had happened, allowing the others to check on Madeline, only to find her missing instead?



We will never know for sure. Maybe the idea was for one of the others to check on the room and for them to be the one who raised the alarm?


This baffles me the most - what ordinarily loving parent, would discover their dead child and then instead of raise the alarm or scream in grief, but instead decide to coldly just dispose of the body, whilst a short while later just put the twins to bed and saunter off down to dinner, acting perfectly normally, allowing others to check the room? Doesn't make any sense.


Well the ringing of the English media almost straight away rather than going out and checking the immediate grounds struk me as a very odd thing for a parent who has just discovered their child is missing to have done.




The cadaver dogs - now, who's to say Madeline wasn't smothered in the room to stifle her screams or cries and was indeed dead in the room at some stage before being taken? Why presume it was the McCanns? Indeed, who's to say the cadaver dogs are reliable evidence at all? As far as I know, they are not used as evidence in court, because they are simply not reliable enough.


The scent of a corpse was found in the McCann's car, a car they rented after they reported the child missing, and at the church Kate McCann went to, I never mentioned the dogs in the apartment. As for the dogs. They were brought in from the UK and had been used in high profile cases before. Plus the same dogs had a track record of 200 correct identifications from 200 cases. So they were very well trained and reliable in what they did. Funny how the only case they got wrong is this one.


There is no evidence whatsoever to assume that any person seen carrying a child was the abductor. More likely another holidaymaker, or a local carrying their own child. There were other families there. Perhaps they were clutching at straws and hoping this person they recall seeing was the abductor. Refer to my earlier post where I mention how different people can give differing accounts of the same incident called 'the Roshomon effect'.


I agree it could have been anyone carrying their own child, but that did not spot the witnesses from claiming the child had the same PJs as Madeline and for the likes of Murat and others to be painted as suspects based on that. Also the witness who says she saw the person carrying a child changed the skin colour, sex, and nationality of the person she saw a number of times.



Claims or suggestions? The McCanns admit the patio door was open and offered the suggestion that perhaps the abductor left through the shutters, as the windows were open. They can't claim that's what happened as they weren't there. Perhaps you could assume the grieving parents weren't in the most logical state of mind. It might be the first thing you'd assume if the window was open too.

When the police checked the shutter it was found to be locked, and not tampered with. The claim was made that the shutter had been forced and that it showed signs of it. That claim was soon dropped once the shutter was proven to be intact and locked, making the window story an impossible excuse.


In an unsolved missing persons case (of which there are many around the world), stories may change as people remember previously forgotton scraps of memory. Can you remember every tiny detail of what you do, or say or see on any given day? Imagine yourself in a state of immense shock and grief and then try remembering every detail....

Not one scrap of any of the largely circumstantial evidence presented would lead me to believe that Kate and Gerry are anything other than grieving parents and that little madeline was the victim of tragic circimstance, taken or killed by an oppurtunist, who was probably watching the apartment that night. Sadly, it happens every day, all over the world.


There is also the small matter of Gerry McCann saying that when he visited the apartment, that he had the feeling that there was someone there as a door was open, but that he did not bother to check it. What father would not check if he thought a stranger was in the same room as his young children?

Even things like how they claimed they could see the apartment from where they were drinking was proven to be wrong.
There are enough inconsistencies in the McCann's story and certainly enough turnarounds in their claims to cast some doubt over their versions of what happened that night.

Sorry about the way I replied but I don't know how to break up what you said into seperate quotes. I just feel that there is enough about the case to cast reasonable doubt as to what happened. As I said earlier the only thing that seems certain is that a little girl is not longer alive.

dark crystal

Colmo52 wrote: »

Buried her at sea

Without any witnesses and without ever washing up on shore in the four years since?

Yep, sounds plausible to me alright.

Tipsy McSwagger

Colmo52 wrote: »

Buried her at sea

Very much doubt that. They would have to hire a boat to put her in the deep waters and if they threw her off a cliff her body would more than likely have washed up ashore.

Kess73

dark crystal wrote: »

Without any witnesses and without ever washing up on shore in the four years since?

Yep, sounds plausible to me alright.

Very easy to weigh an adult body down so that it does not come up, let alone the body of a small child.


The body of a Limerick man retrieved from a small Clare lake a few years back is proof of that. The body was missing for year and when found just one concrete block was what had weighed him down in something like ten feet of water for those years.

Tipsy McSwagger

As for burying her body where would they go? How would they do it? If they used a shovel it would take ages to did a hole in the hard clay and a beach would be out of the question. They would need a JCB to dig a hole in the short space of time that they had.

K-9

dark crystal wrote: »

She was seen several times on the day of her disappearance. There is no way she could have been killed before 7 PM

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/apr/11/madeleinemccann

This gives the McCanns 3 hours in which to kill, dispose of Madeleine and concoct a plan as well as put the twins to bed, get ready and go to dinner with their friends, all whilst acting perfectly normally.

3 hours yeah, very possible.

dark crystal

Kess73 wrote: »

Sorry about the way I replied but I don't know how to break up what you said into seperate quotes. I just feel that there is enough about the case to cast reasonable doubt as to what happened. As I said earlier the only thing that seems certain is that a little girl is not longer alive.

It does puzzle me how people are more willing to believe that two ordinarily loving parents would kill their child, dispose of her body, concoct a master plan to evade detection, then casually have dinner with friends, pretend to discover their daughter missing, call the police, mount a huge international campaign for four years and keep up the sustained pretence to both their families and the public of mourning their child, rather than believe that she was kidnapped whilst in bed alone.

None of it makes any sense to me at all.

Still, I do agree it is most likely she is now dead. If not, I would hate to think what her life has been like this past four years....

Kess73

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

You would have to be one very cold hearted individual to find your little daughter dead inside your apartment and then just casually dump her body in the sea or bury her and then go on like nothing happened while joining friends for a meal.
And you did it because 'we didn't want people to know we left our kids on their own'. If this was what happened then either one of them would have cracked by now or they would be at least be separated which happens a lot in child kidnappings/deaths.

There were suggestions, based on the DNA tests on the child's hair that was found on her brush that her body contained high levels of some sleeping tablet.

If a parent accidently caused the death of their own child in such circumstances, they could panic and do something totally illogical.


Saying they would have seperated by now if they had done something wrong is no proof of anything. As you rightly pointed out, many couples whose child get kidnapped do end up seperating, so by that logic the fact they are together could be used to say that their child was not kidnapped.

Personally I think that they fact that they are still together means nothing to be honest in relation to the case. As genuine folk in their position may stay together or seperate just the same as folk who are not genuine could do likewise.


I do think that if they, or rather one of them, were involved in what happened to their child, that it had to be the result of some kind of terrible accident that resulted in panic causing them to try to cover up and the story just getting so big so fast that they could not come clean.

gosuckonalemon

Maybe she evaporated in the apartment?

dark crystal

K-9 wrote: »

3 hours yeah, very possible.

Very possible? even taking into account the time during that three hours they were at dinner with friends?

I would say it was almost entirely impossible and improbable.

You are talking about two very slick and very sick operators if you truly believed they could do that and then act perfectly normally afterwards.

Kess73

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

As for burying her body where would they go? How would they do it? If they used a shovel it would take ages to did a hole in the hard clay and a beach would be out of the question. They would need a JCB to dig a hole in the short space of time that they had.

If you had something the size of a small child wrapt up in a blanket or something. How hard would it be for you to find a river/lake/sea within ten miles of wherever you live and weigh whatever you have down in that water?

I'm not talking about how hard it would be mentally, just how hard would it be to find a river/lake etc in which to do such a thing.


It is something that could be done very quickly by a person who was desperate. No JCB, shovel or anything like that needed.

dark crystal

Kess73 wrote: »

Very easy to weigh an adult body down so that it does not come up, let alone the body of a small child.


The body of a Limerick man retrieved from a small Clare lake a few years back is proof of that. The body was missing for year and when found just one concrete block was what had weighed him down in something like ten feet of water for those years.

Given the timeline involved, you believe they would have time to do that?

Four years later, no one has still discovered the body? Not a swimmer, or a fisherman, or a diver? After all, there is no evidence they took out a boat that evening, so they would had to have buried her in relatively shallow water.

Kess73

dark crystal wrote: »

It does puzzle me how people are more willing to believe that two ordinarily loving parents would kill their child, dispose of her body, concoct a master plan to evade detection, then casually have dinner with friends, pretend to discover their daughter missing, call the police, mount a huge international campaign for four years and keep up the sustained pretence to both their families and the public of mourning their child, rather than believe that she was kidnapped whilst in bed alone.

None of it makes any sense to me at all.

Still, I do agree it is most likely she is now dead. If not, I would hate to think what her life has been like this past four years....

There are plenty of cases where a person or persons, ordinary folk, lept up a normal front for the world after being involved in crime, murder etc.


Personally I hope that if the truth, the absolute truth, ever comes out on this event, that my scepticism is proven to be totally wrong. Otherwise the remaining children would end up losing their parents along with their sister.

Dudess

gambiaman wrote: »

And still more people come on to post that leaving three babies alone and out of sight and hearing for any reason is acceptable behaviour.

I'm gobsmacked.

Who said it was acceptable behaviour? Please enlight. Or are you talking about those who say it was a grave mistake but they're paying for it now? Because that is not the same as saying it is acceptable behaviour.

bad2dabone

dark crystal wrote: »

This gives the McCanns 3 hours in which to kill, dispose of Madeleine and concoct a plan as well as put the twins to bed, get ready and go to dinner with their friends, all whilst acting perfectly normally.

agreed, while the abduction story doesn't sit with me100% either, I can't see how in this short period of time they'd have time to do all this.

mconigol

K-9 wrote: »

I did suggest what to do? Why are you saying I've no suggestions?

The second point is ludicrous. Nobody is suggesting that.

Why do you have to be so dismissive on the third point? A paedophile is far more likely to be a family member or close family friend. The dogs suggested something and the detective pointed out other stuff.

Why so dismissive?

You said:

By not writing their memoirs and seeking funds like any charity.

Where is the suggestion of what to do there exactly? You say what not to do but then don't actually suggest any alternatives.

Why are you so dismissive of the fact that they were never charged with anything? Why so dismissive of a campaign to try raise awareness and generate finances to do so?

ISDW wrote: »

I actually find it very disturbing that the madeleinefoundation thing exists. Why on earth are these people spending their time on this? If they are so concerned for child protection/safety etc, why aren't they working with children who need their help right now? How are they helping Madeleine at all? Handing out leaflets on the streets of Bristol (just one thing that I saw at a quick glance a that website). What is that going to do? How about going and working with disadvantaged, or at risk children in Bristol instead? Or are they too middle class to actually get their hands dirty?:rolleyes:

Allegations about the money being misspent etc, how on earth does it help when the McCanns and the fund then have to pay for law suits against these allegations?

People are very, very weird.

em....because their daughter is missing? I think that would be a good enough reason. I would safely say they are getting their "middle class" hands dirtier than you and many others when it comes to trying to make a difference.

After reading your post and many others on here I've also come to the conclusion that people are indeed very, very weird.

Dudess

Einhard wrote: »

This is exactly the kind of sentiment I was talking about earlier, when I said that people were rounding on the McCann's because they didn't conform to the expected norms of how grieving parents should react. Very few of us know what it is to lose a child, especially in such awful circumstances, and yet we come on here and condemn ithers because they don't act as we expect. The hsuband didn't break down in tears or wail in anguish, there fore he's "cold" and "in control", and therefore he must have somethign to hide. Did it never occur to people that he's utterly destroyed on the inside, but trying to hold it together on the surface. For his wife's sake? For the kid's sake? Did it never occur to people that, perhaps he's a naturally reserved man?

I know people who have been obviously devestated by the loss of loved ones. People who have found it hard to go on afterwarads, and on whom the pain is clearly etched. I know others though, who were back at work soon afterwards, and who could share a smile and a laugh at the funeral. Are we to believe that the latter is "cold", emotionless, or not as atatched to their deceased as the former? Or should accept the evidence that surrounds us everyday, that people react to grief in different ways? Of course not...the McCann's didn't react as expected, and therefore they must be guilty.

I have to say that the level of hatred displayed towards the two, the rationale behind it, and especially the ludicrous claims that they exploited the tragedy for gross financial gain is pretty shocking.

Were they negligent in their actiosn that night? Of course. Does it make them bad parents? Perhaps? Do they share in the responsibility for their daughter's disappearance. Yes, some of it. But do they deserve the level of vituperation levelled at them, and the horrendous allegations that they are motivated by mercenary motives, and fame? Definitely not, and the fact that they are subject to such hateful, and entirely unfounded abuse, is really quite disturbing.

Great post. One of the "grounds" for suspicion towards Lindy Chamberlain was her perceived "coldness" too. Funny that, seeing as she DIDN'T DO IT.

Tipsy McSwagger

Kess73 wrote: »

If you had something the size of a small child wrapt up in a blanket or something. How hard would it be for you to find a river/lake/sea within ten miles of wherever you live and weigh whatever you have down in that water?

I'm not talking about how hard it would be mentally, just how hard would it be to find a river/lake etc in which to do such a thing.


It is something that could be done very quickly by a person who was desperate. No JCB, shovel or anything like that needed.

Not saying it couldn't be done but the time frame, thousands of holiday makers around and little knowledge of the area would make it very difficult.

maebee

Goncalo Amaral's book online:


http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.com/

TheZohanS

Some interesting questions:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRvgK6M2_7Q

Kess73

dark crystal wrote: »

Given the timeline involved, you believe they would have time to do that?

Four years later, no one has still discovered the body? Not a swimmer, or a fisherman, or a diver? After all, there is no evidence they took out a boat that evening, so they would had to have buried her in relatively shallow water.

There is a hell of a lot of water near where they stayed. Both saltwater and freshwater.

No boat would be needed and why would someone have found the body? Bodies in heavily used stretches of water in this country can go years without being found and often never get found. Drop a weighed down body into ten or more feet of water and best of luck finding that if you don't know what body of water to search.

The idea that disposing of such a small body in an area with so much water sithin such a short distance would require a boat or a JCB just does not stack up.

I am not saying it is what happened, but I am saying that given the time constraints that some here are using, that it is possible.

Kess73

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

Not saying it couldn't be done but the time frame, thousands of holiday makers around and little knowledge of the area would make it very difficult.

Was it not an area that they and family members had been to a number of times on holiday in the past?


If it was, then they would have decent knowledge of the area.

bad2dabone

Kess it's pysically possible to dump a childs body in water but not combined with all the other stuff. Sure getting 3 kids ready for bed take 3 hours

Tipsy McSwagger

Kess73 wrote: »

Was it not an area that they and family members had been to a number of times on holiday in the past?


If it was, then they would have decent knowledge of the area.

Holiday makers generally stay in the vicinity of the resort that they are staying in no matter how many times they have been to the same place. If they were to bury the body they would have to go to an area with nobody around and isolated from the usual tourist trails.

mconigol

Kess73 wrote: »

If you had something the size of a small child wrapt up in a blanket or something. How hard would it be for you to find a river/lake/sea within ten miles of wherever you live and weigh whatever you have down in that water?

I'm not talking about how hard it would be mentally, just how hard would it be to find a river/lake etc in which to do such a thing.


It is something that could be done very quickly by a person who was desperate. No JCB, shovel or anything like that needed.

Wayne O'Donoghue couldn't manage it in the middle of the countryside down in cork...it's not that easy to dispose of a body quickly. If that was the case there would be very few murders ever solved.

Kess73 wrote: »

There were suggestions, based on the DNA tests on the child's hair that was found on her brush that her body contained high levels of some sleeping tablet.

If a parent accidently caused the death of their own child in such circumstances, they could panic and do something totally illogical.

I do think that if they, or rather one of them, were involved in what happened to their child, that it had to be the result of some kind of terrible accident that resulted in panic causing them to try to cover up and the story just getting so big so fast that they could not come clean.

I could agree with someone panicking in the event of an accidental death. But the very fact of it being accidental would make the suggestion that they had some well thought out plan even less likely. People who are panicking generally don't tend to make very good decisions.

Kess73 wrote: »

Sorry about the way I replied but I don't know how to break up what you said into seperate quotes. I just feel that there is enough about the case to cast reasonable doubt as to what happened. As I said earlier the only thing that seems certain is that a little girl is not longer alive.

I think you're reasonable doubt is not anywhere close to reasonable at all. Sounds more like stretching some "facts" to fit a preconceived idea. If you were to present the "facts" you mentioned there to somebody who had absolutely no prior knowledge of the case do you really think that they could justifiably come to the same conclusion as you?

Daroxtar

maebee wrote: »

Goncalo Amaral's book online:


http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.com/

Now speaking of people profiteering........ This inept scumbag was involved in beating a woman into signing a confession that she killed her own child and hid the body only a few years before Madeline disapeared. Then he writes a book detailing his own ridiculous ideas. Now even though a judge in his own country rules that he cannot publish it due to it being factually incorrect, he goes ahead and has it published outside the jurisdiction so plenty of like minded idiots can back up their own twisted claims with the ramblings of a drunken moron.

He's a fúckwit of the lowest order and IMO its quite possible he has some involvement with covering up for paedophiles abducting children....just as plausible as the theories blaming the McCanns.

Dudess

And remember that poor guy Robert Murat who was nearly convicted by the red-tops? Fucking lowlives... Even after he was proven innocent, no doubt some twats were proclaiming "Well, no smoke without fire"...

mconigol

maebee wrote: »

Goncalo Amaral's book online:


http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.com/

It's funny how he didn't write any books about any of his other cases, solved or unsolved.

But he chose to write one about a case that has worldwide media attention and an international audience. Odd.

He's made €1million out of his book.

ISDW

mconigol wrote: »

em....because their daughter is missing? I think that would be a good enough reason. I would safely say they are getting their "middle class" hands dirtier than you and many others when it comes to trying to make a difference.

After reading your post and many others on here I've also come to the conclusion that people are indeed very, very weird.

Really? The people that run that have their daughters missing as well - wow, what a huge coincidence.

Maybe you should actually read posts and links before you start making smart remarks.

You know nothing about me, but I have made a huge difference to a lot of children's lives and do indeed get my hands dirty. But again, maybe if you bothered reading people's posts, you'd know that.

Kess73

mconigol wrote: »

Wayne O'Donoghue couldn't manage it in the middle of the countryside down in cork...it's not that easy to dispose of a body quickly. If that was the case there would be very few murders ever solved.



I could agree with someone panicking in the event of an accidental death. But the very fact of it being accidental would make the suggestion that they had some well thought out plan even less likely. People who are panicking generally don't tend to make very good decisions.



I think you're reasonable doubt is not anywhere close to reasonable at all. Sounds more like stretching some "facts" to fit a preconceived idea. If you were to present the "facts" you mentioned there to somebody who had absolutely no prior knowledge of the case so you really think that they could justifiably come to the same conclusion as you?

For every Wayne O' Dongohue there is someone who does hide the body well. Hence why there are so many missing person cases and unsolved cases where murder is suspected but no body can be found, even years later.


Another odd thing is how the facts presented by the McCanns and their legal teams seemed to become more detailed the more time went by, and little items seemed to become easier to recall with the passing of months. Generally what people can recall becomes a bit blurry the more time that goes by, but in this case their witnesses were able to remember more really detailed bits of "evidence" as months passed, and lots of it only seemed to be remembered once they were back in the UK.



And as for whether a person could come to the same conclusion as me at this point after reading what the police published, the changing stories that the McCanns published, well I think that they could.

When the story first broke I thought the child was kidnapped. But as stories changed and other bits of information were made public I began to think that there was a chance that the parents knew more than they were saying.

You can put the word facts into inverted commas if you like, but I think that official statements by the police forces involved, by two or more sets of senior police involved, by the dog team count as actual facts to be mulled over.

Unless of course we are to assume that both the Portuguese and UK police involved are all idiots and have no idea at all as to what they are doing, and that everything the McCanns said is totally true even the bits that were changed and dropped into the story.


Any unsolved case has doubt attached to it, otherwise it would not be an unsolved case.