Gerry and Kate Mcann promoting Book on Late Late next week

Tadaa!

Been following this for a long time and I think I've come to a conclusion of what happened that night.

The twins ate Madeleine. Its all about survival of the fittest and 3 is a crowd etc. They look innocent I know but you can see the guilt dripping from them..

Mystery solved.

Mistyeyes321

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Absolutely not , I am a parent and under no circumstances would I condone what that group of people did .
I stayed in an apartment that looked straight down on the number 5a and the Mark Warner complex . What the Mc Canns failed to mention is that you cant walk in a straight line from the Tapas bar to 5a, you have to go out by the reception entrance on to the road and up the steps into the apartment .You cannot see the doors from the bar unless you eat standing on a chair .
The apartment 5a is particulary vulnerable as its the corner one and the steps lead on to the road outside .Its the main road leading from many apartments down to the sea front and restaurants , so people are passing all the time .The front entrace ( facing away from the complex is hidden from view by trees and bushes .
I would not have left cash or credit cards openly exposed in that apartment , never mind three precious little children
I dont know the full story , I know the evidence is flawed , stories changed , mobile phones wiped clear before handing over and many many more little niggles .
What I do know is that that group and most of all the Mc Canns put their own enjoyment and entertainment before the safety of thier children .
For that alone in my eyes they were hugely neglectful and sellfish .
In fact watching that apartment and how it could be open to break in and is vulnerable I am very surprised that not all three kids were taken .

I think the Mc Canns are on a mission to blame anyone they can so they dont have to look inward and see they it was they who facilitated and they who were the childrens keepers and they who should have kept them safe .

Here Here, I take my Hat off to you of course all these Parent's put their Children in Danger! What all these Parent's did is unforgivable, The Mccann's was lucky only to lose one child it could quite easily have been all three...Their so called Friends are also very Lucky indeed to still have their children. Not just from the "Supposed Abduction" :rolleyes: But also if this Had happened in the UK these people would have been Charged with Neglect at the very Least!!

Does anyone else not believe the time frame's that have been given?!

mrsbyrne

K-9 wrote: »

Actually there is no simple explanation in this case.

There is evidence of paedophile tendencies with David Payne and with the discrepancies in statements it would be rather easy to put that forward as the answer, together with other stuff in the holiday.

It's possible and a simple answer. There are too many simple answers to this case!

K9 please show us what you refer to as "evidence"?!? of paedophile tendencies on behalf of David Payne. Also tell us why you think the Gaspar statements (for this is the evidence you speak off) remain after 4 years the only "evidence" youve managed to "uncover". Do you think david Payne is a paedophile?

mrsbyrne

geetar wrote: »

FYI. pm'ing insults is far more productive. it doesnt distract or derail threads from whatever personal vendetta you have, and keeps topic on topic. your being quite ignorant and its bound to bite you in the ass. go back under your bridge and quite trolling this thread. your answers have been answered.

the reference someone made to the use of acid was entirely hypothetical, and IMO farfetched, but im not going to go insane like you and be rude about it. there is every possibility that two parents, who are doctors, over sedated a 4 year old child resulting in her death. what happened her body remains a mystery, but thats why we still dont know what happened to her. the answers you are looking for dont exist, if they did people would be in jail. we can only answer your "questions" with hypothetical scenarios which you seem hellbent on rejecting.

thanks geetar for filling me in on the Pming of insults. now go and check your inbox. Does eatmychocolate appreciate your defending him/her? i hope so. my questions are not answered. or as you so quaintly put it my "answers" have not been answered.
if you think there is every possibility that two parents over-sedated their 3 year-old (not 4 lots of mistakes in this post) you should at least be able to give us a rough outline of how you think this panned out. no?

tfitzgerald

Whatever happened it's very sad

carolmon

interview with mark cagney tv3 coming on now

ppink

so supposing she had an accident and they disposed of her, which given no one else actually saw her since 530pm could have happened.
this does not explain the cadaver in their hire car 23 days after the event? that would mean they had to transport her in that car with the police and press all over the place??

I think they have blurred the whole investigation by all of them trying to cover the fact that they all left their kids unattended. Even down to the timelines written out in her little book as to who checked when. then wiping theri phones and not answering questions......whats that about. they themselves have hindered the process.
I dont think under Portugese law that the could be charged with neglect and the English courts cannot charge them with negelct in another country can they??

ISDW

Does it really matter that they deleted the call/message records on their phones, could the police not have got all that information anyway, from their service providers? Does anyone know if they did that, and if not, has there been any explanation given as to why not?

Micky Dolenz

Any more sniping will result in thread closure and bans.

Fair warning.

Lando Griffin

I wonder will they put those of us who dont read books out of our misery and make a film out of it.

Savage Tyrant

ISDW wrote: »

Does it really matter that they deleted the call/message records on their phones, could the police not have got all that information anyway, from their service providers? Does anyone know if they did that, and if not, has there been any explanation given as to why not?

Very strange one that... Apparently not only did they delete their own phone records, but their service providers also "lost" the records of the time they were in Portugal.
It looks suspicious all right, but I've no idea how one would go about convincing their network to "misplace" their records, and I doubt they would be able to.

ISDW

Savage Tyrant wrote: »

Very strange one that... Apparently not only did they delete their own phone records, but their service providers also "lost" the records of the time they were in Portugal.
It looks suspicious all right, but I've no idea how one would go about convincing their network to "misplace" their records, and I doubt they would be able to.

Theres so much odd stuff like that. I don't read tabloids, so until this thread, I actually didn't know that much about the case, just what has been on the TV or radio news. But when things like that come out, it just confuses things even more. As you say, how would they convince a service provider to lose those records? I don't know how these things work, but would it not actually be easier to find records if they were abroad, as it would have to go through a Portugese network first, so would there not be two sets of records?

Deleting the call records on their phones is odd, unless they had done it much earlier in the day, just to clear up some space on their phones, which I do every now and then. Huge coincidence obviously that they do it on that particular day. But as intelligent, educated people, they would know that the records would still be with the service provider. So, to cover anything up, that would be a waste of time. Surely the way to do that would be to buy some throw away pay as you go phones.

gent9662

I felt sorry for them both. I'm sure that they have blamed each other and feel responsible for Maddie's disappearance.

I think they did the right thing by going onto the show. The best thing to do is keep the publicity going. Hopefully their book will get around the world and maybe in some way stop this type of thing happening again.

iamwhoiam

ISDW wrote: »

Theres so much odd stuff like that. I don't read tabloids, so until this thread, I actually didn't know that much about the case, just what has been on the TV or radio news. But when things like that come out, it just confuses things even more. As you say, how would they convince a service provider to lose those records? I don't know how these things work, but would it not actually be easier to find records if they were abroad, as it would have to go through a Portugese network first, so would there not be two sets of records?

Deleting the call records on their phones is odd, unless they had done it much earlier in the day, just to clear up some space on their phones, which I do every now and then. Huge coincidence obviously that they do it on that particular day. But as intelligent, educated people, they would know that the records would still be with the service provider. So, to cover anything up, that would be a waste of time. Surely the way to do that would be to buy some throw away pay as you go phones.

If I remember correctly it wasnt just one or two phones but the whole groups phones that were wiped .
I think the little niggles that all add up into a bigger niggle is why people are very sceptical about the Mc Canns .For example Gerry on the Late Late said the window could be opened from the outside despite this being totally ruled out by the police and the Mc Canns had to change the story about the window very early on .
Coupled with their lack of awareness how wrong it was to leave the children where they did makes it difficult to fully understand them . Gerry insists its like being in your garden while having a drink and the kids are in bed asleep
It so is not , I dont know anyone with a huge pool in the garden , a path that lead to the road and back in to the apartment , access to my house via a public road with an unlocked patio door available to all and sundry
Silly nonsense like that and making silly statements is not helping their cause in my opinion .

AnneFrank

i don't want my tv licence fee going on these people,
scumbags leaving their kids alone in a hotel room in a foreign land with the front door unlocked,
decent parents just wouldnt do that.oh and everyone google the 48 questions kate mccann refused to answer
to the portugese police, why wouldnt she help them to find her child ??
but hey at least they got their mortgage paid off,
oh and they havent worked a day since,
handy that

K-9

mrsbyrne wrote: »

K9 please show us what you refer to as "evidence"?!? of paedophile tendencies on behalf of David Payne. Also tell us why you think the Gaspar statements (for this is the evidence you speak off) remain after 4 years the only "evidence" youve managed to "uncover". Do you think david Payne is a paedophile?

Well there is no convictions if that's what you mean, evidence was a bit strong, sorry. It's an internet discussion so it probably was too strong a word.

iamwhoiam

AnneFrank wrote: »

i don't want my tv licence fee going on these people,
scumbags leaving their kids alone in a hotel room in a foreign land with the front door unlocked,
decent parents just wouldnt do that.oh and everyone google the 48 questions kate mccann refused to answer
to the portugese police, why wouldnt she help them to find her child ??
but hey at least they got their mortgage paid off,
oh and they havent worked a day since,
handy that

Actually I will defend them on that point . Gerry is a cardiologist and works full time

PinkFly

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Actually I will defend them on that point . Gerry is a cardiologist and works full time

If it were me id be workin full time turning every sod in portugal lookin for my child...that always amazes me...we never seen the mccanns actually searching??? In a field with hundreds of othrs...actually physically lookin....strange that??

iamwhoiam

PinkFly wrote: »

If it were me id be workin full time turning every sod in portugal lookin for my child...that always amazes me...we never seen the mccanns actually searching??? In a field with hundreds of othrs...actually physically lookin....strange that??

Actually a very odd thing , I was in Praia da Luz the following year ,16 months after Madeleine went missing and I found myself always looking around me to see if I could find her .I couldnt help myself and though maybe we would come across her .I know that seems odd but I think its just an instict .
I too found it very odd that the Mc Canns were not out digging up the beach , tearing bushes apart and moving rocks ,.I think I would be out with a shovel still if she were mine ,

ISDW

PinkFly wrote: »

If it were me id be workin full time turning every sod in portugal lookin for my child...that always amazes me...we never seen the mccanns actually searching??? In a field with hundreds of othrs...actually physically lookin....strange that??

But then you could turn that the other way. If they did hide her body, they could go and join in a search in a completely different area to where they 'know' she is, so it would look as though they were doing the 'right' thing.

AnneFrank

anyone who is defending these muppets do me a favour and google the 48 questions,
it will change your opinion

ISDW

AnneFrank wrote: »

anyone who is defending these muppets do me a favour and google the 48 questions,
it will change your opinion

Already done it, no it didn't.

AnneFrank

ISDW wrote: »

Already done it, no it didn't.

so why didn't she answer the simple questions ?
they were trying to find her missing daughter ??
or where you just attempting to be witty ?
you failed by the way

thebullkf

mrsbyrne wrote: »

metrovelvet im interested in how you think the mccanns murdered their daughter, why, and how they disposed of her body, taking into account they were being monitored day and night by the worlds press. also, why have they pursued the search for their, in your opinion, murdered daughter, keeping themselves in the limelight and badgering politicians when the obvious thing for people who have committed the perfect crime, according to you, would be to fade away, breathe a sigh of relief, and breathe. thanks.

mrsbyrne i'm interested in how you think they're not involved given the discrepencies in this case, thanks

PinkFly

ISDW wrote: »

But then you could turn that the other way. If they did hide her body, they could go and join in a search in a completely different area to where they 'know' she is, so it would look as though they were doing the 'right' thing.

Who said they killed her??? If she was abducted or wandered surely they should be constantly searching,like the other poster said they did even tho it wasnt their child..... I know if i wer in that situation i wooda sold the family house,moved to portugal, spent everyday in different areas with a team of people combing the area for her..esp in the begining when there was some hope of finding her alive..because if i didnt the guilt of leaving her alone that night,would surely eat away at me...

up for anything

Mistyeyes321 wrote: »

But also if this Had happened in the UK these people would have been Charged with Neglect at the very Least!!

I don't know why people keep saying this. It's not true.

How many children have died in the UK from parental abuse and neglect. Children that were on the at risk register, children that had social workers, files inches thick, numerous visits to casualty and GPs. Their parents weren't charged in most cases until they had actually caused the child's death.

Vudgie

I always hoped that they had nothing to do with this and I still will until there is some proof. It is always amazing when someone vanishes without a trace but it does happen.

Has Kate ever been asked why she didn't answer the 48 questions, was it because she felt that the investigation thought they had their man/woman and were constructing the case around them?

Can someone clear something up for me.....what is the explanation surrounding the blood in the boot of the car, particualrly since it was only rented after the child disappeared, am I missing something?

iamwhoiam

Mark Cagney did a recorded interview with the Mc Canns , shown on Ireland AM today .Its on the Catch up in two parts if anyone is interested ., I found it a bit strange as Cagney seems to know the truth and be very dissmissive of anyone who questions it . .

ISDW

AnneFrank wrote: »

so why didn't she answer the simple questions ?
they were trying to find her missing daughter ??
or where you just attempting to be witty ?
you failed by the way

Nope, not trying to be witty. It has been discussed a lot already on this thread about why the McCanns do or don't answer questions. Answers can be twisted, you can incriminate yourself even if you aren't guilty of anything. Simple legal standpoint.

Really don't understand your aggression towards me, is that how you always are with people who don't agree with you?

PinkFly wrote: »

Who said they killed her??? If she was abducted or wandered surely they should be constantly searching,like the other poster said they did even tho it wasnt their child..... I know if i wer in that situation i wooda sold the family house,moved to portugal, spent everyday in different areas with a team of people combing the area for her..esp in the begining when there was some hope of finding her alive..because if i didnt the guilt of leaving her alone that night,would surely eat away at me...

Searching where? If she was abducted, she would surely be in a building somewhere, and obviously the McCanns couldn't go searching people's property. I understand what you're saying about moving to Portugal etc, but they do have two other children who's lives have already been blighted by this. Is it fair for their whole lives to be about their missing sister? I think they have a right to as normal a life as is possible under these circumstances.

mrsbyrne

ISDW wrote: »

Already done it, no it didn't.

me neither

hondasam

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Mark Cagney did a recorded interview with the Mc Canns , shown on Ireland AM today .Its on the Catch up in two parts if anyone is interested ., I found it a bit strange as Cagney seems to know the truth and be very dissmissive of anyone who questions it . .

The late late show interview was recorded as well.

iamwhoiam

hondasam wrote: »

The late late show interview was recorded as well.

, I didnt cop that and wondered why they had left them so late to interview .

Savage Tyrant

up for anything wrote: »

I don't know why people keep saying this. It's not true.

How many children have died in the UK from parental abuse and neglect. Children that were on the at risk register, children that had social workers, files inches thick, numerous visits to casualty and GPs. Their parents weren't charged in most cases until they had actually caused the child's death.

Correct. It's not true. It should be, but it's not.

PinkFly

ISDW wrote: »

Nope, not trying to be witty. It has been discussed a lot already on this thread about why the McCanns do or don't answer questions. Answers can be twisted, you can incriminate yourself even if you aren't guilty of anything. Simple legal standpoint.

Really don't understand your aggression towards me, is that how you always are with people who don't agree with you?



Searching where? If she was abducted, she would surely be in a building somewhere, and obviously the McCanns couldn't go searching people's property. I understand what you're saying about moving to Portugal etc, but they do have two other children who's lives have already been blighted by this. Is it fair for their whole lives to be about their missing sister? I think they have a right to as normal a life as is possible under these circumstances.

Fields?? Beaches?? Anywhere a young girl cudda wandered to if that was the case?? Surely uprootin the children for the sake of looking for ur eldest is a good enough reason....the twins will never have a 'normal' life they have become 'famous' worldwide for all d wrong reasons

ppink

ISDW wrote: »

Nope, not trying to be witty. It has been discussed a lot already on this thread about why the McCanns do or don't answer questions. Answers can be twisted, you can incriminate yourself even if you aren't guilty of anything. Simple legal standpoint.

.

so presumably the book will answer these questions?

who did the forensics I wonder. Was it all Portugese or was their Brit involvement in the collection.
I know the blood was sent to UK for analysis.

ppink

up for anything wrote: »

I don't know why people keep saying this. It's not true.

How many children have died in the UK from parental abuse and neglect. Children that were on the at risk register, children that had social workers, files inches thick, numerous visits to casualty and GPs. Their parents weren't charged in most cases until they had actually caused the child's death.

that is interesting. the impression I got was that the facility is there under Uk law but not under Portugese......not sure if that is true but I thought that one of the documentaries I watched, a UK investigator said that.

ISDW

PinkFly wrote: »

Fields?? Beaches?? Anywhere a young girl cudda wandered to if that was the case?? Surely uprootin the children for the sake of looking for ur eldest is a good enough reason....the twins will never have a 'normal' life they have become 'famous' worldwide for all d wrong reasons

Did the police not organise searches?

We'll have to disagree on the other children. I think they will have more of a normal life in the UK, with extended family and friends around them, than living in a foreign country. I think that the security that is provided by being in their own environment is probably very important to those two children. I don't just mean the physical security, I mean emotional security, as they are growing up and becoming more aware of what happened, I wonder if they will have 'survivors guilt' and other emotional difficulties?

That is one thing I would be critical of the McCanns about, personally I think that they shouldn't allow filming or photography of the twins, let them grow up without strangers knowing what they look like.

ISDW

ppink wrote: »

so presumably the book will answer these questions?

who did the forensics I wonder. Was it all Portugese or was their Brit involvement in the collection.
I know the blood was sent to UK for analysis.

I have no idea if the questions are answered in the book, but if they have been advised not to answer them for legal reasons, I doubt it.

up for anything

ppink wrote: »

that is interesting. the impression I got was that the facility is there under Uk law but not under Portugese......not sure if that is true but I thought that one of the documentaries I watched, a UK investigator said that.

Just because there is a facility there for it under UK law (and I'm not sure if there is), it doesn't mean to say it would be utilised in their case or indeed in many cases. If it was in their case then they would have to have had prosecuted all the members of the Tapas 9 that had included their own children in 'babysitting' scheme. I really could not see that happening.

ISDW

There is no age in UK law at which children are not allowed to be left alone.

hondasam

iamwhoiam wrote: »

, I didnt cop that and wondered why they had left them so late to interview .

I believe They Don't do live interviews. Turbidy made the mistake of saying afternoon but changed mid sentence to night.

ppink

I was jsut wondering about the detective Amaral. So he is now doing 18 months for colluding with the perputrators on another case and lying.

it make me wonder if the forensics were actually right in this case or if there was ever a second set taken by the UK police. Forensics is the big issue here after all.
if it was "organised" that nothing be found except the mccanns prints??

ISDW

ppink wrote: »

I was jsut wondering about the detective Amaral. So he is now doing 18 months for colluding with the perputrators on another case and lying.

it make me wonder if the forensics were actually right in this case or if there was ever a second set taken by the UK police. Forensics is the big issue here after all.
if it was "organised" that nothing be found except the mccanns prints??

I think thats why this case is so difficult, personally I don't know who to believe, there are so many things that the police should have done but appear not to have. Or to have maybe done wrongly, such as not taking the cuddly toy for examination immediately.

A cynical person could view the whole thing as a nightmare for the Portugese tourist industry, and by extension their whole economy. A little girl disappears from a holiday complex, tourists would probably stay away. However, try and prove it was the foreign parents that did it, there would be no reason for tourists not to go there.

There is so much confusing information from both 'sides'.

homeOwner

I watched the McCanns on TLLS on friday night and I didnt take away from it what most of the posters here did.

Gerry saying "read the book" was in response to a question from Ryan that really there was no short answer to. it was the start of his answer. I took Gerry's response as being, read the book for the full version but here is the short version.....

Kate looks like a broken woman.

I started reading this thread believing that the McCanns were not involved in their daughter's dissapearance (apart from being negligent and leaving the children on their own).
From reading some of the posts here I began to change my mind and think there was something more to it.
But as I read more and more I see that alot of the points being raised here are simply not the facts.

Here are some:
1. Gerry admitted to sedating his kids.
It was reported by an unnamed person in the PJ and does not appear on any interviews or transcripts. The fact that Maddy asked Kate why she didnt come when they cried the night before lends credibility to their statement that they did not sedate their kids.

2. The police were not called until 23:50
According to the McCanns and the portugeuse detective who wrote the book, the local police were called at 22:40 and arrived just after 23:00. Gerry asked one of the tapas 9 to tell the management to call the police just after 10pm when the alarm was raised and they didnt. They called MW management instead and then called the police after Gerry asked a second time to go call the police.

3. The window shutter couldn't be opened from the outside.
The window shutter could be opened from the outside. The PJ said an intruder couldnt leave from that window without leaving evidence and disturbing the lichen that was growing on it. They didnt find any evidence of it being disturbed. This does not mean that it didnt happen. Just that they didnt find any evidence of it happening. Kate said she closed the window and shutters when she found Madeline missing.

4. Kate washed the cuddle cat destroying evidence.
Kate said she washed it 70 days later as it was filthy. The police never asked for it nor bagged it for testing.

5. They didnt look for Madeline.
Gerry went looking for her with some of the tapas 9 just after Kate reported her missing. They searched the streets around the apartment calling her name and went downt to the beach. They came back to the apartment and Gerry then enquired where the police were because he had asked for someone (Matthew?) to call them but they hadnt arrived.

6. The sniffer dogs detected the smell of a dead body and DNA matching Madeline's was found in the apartment.
From what I have read sniffer dog results are only used in conjection with other evidence as it is only 33% effective (I read that recently somewhere). When shown the video of the dogs at the car, Kate apparently came away with the conclusion that they were leading the dog to their car away from other cars that the dog had initially been heading to and that no sane person could think that is conclusive proof. When interviewed as a suspect Gerry asked to see the DNA report and the police then blustered about it and didnt produce it. The evidence was reported to be inconclusive for her DNA.

7. The tapas 9 change their stories and timelines.
I would think this is normal and shows it was unrehearsed. If you asked me to relate the events of an evening out with my friends at the weekend just passed I would be hard pushed to recall who left the table at what time to go to the bathroom. If I had time then later to think about it and relate events to other events I might be more accurate. Jane Tanner is the only exception to this. Her change of description of the man she said she saw some months later is not credible. She is the only one of the group that I find hard to believe.

8. They have refused to answer some questions that the police want to ask them.
They were being treated as suspects and I dont blame them for not answering anything. At that point the police had decided they were guilty and had stopped looking for Madeline. They left the country as soon as they could. I would do the same thing.

9. They could ask for the case to be re-opened but they havent.
Would you really want the same police who accused you of killing your daughter to re-open the investigation? There is no new evidence in the case. It is now being investigated by Scotland Yard after annocement last week by David Cameron.

Anyway thats my 2 cents. I have gone back to my original belief that they were not invloved.

I can only imagine how guilty they feel and that they would do anything to go back and change the decisions they made that night. They certainly let Madeline down. And as someone else posted, they were very lucky all 3 kids were not taken.

Rubberlegs

Was in Portugal, close enough to where Madeline went missing, the week after it happened. Can remember lots of posters up everywhere, but was surprised at the lack of police presence around. It certainly made me grip my daughter's hand that bit tighter the whole time we were there. I am not as well up on all the facts as some posters are, and can only say I'm really not sure what to believe. Think it goes without saying that it was completely negligent to leave three young kids alone, no matter how close by they were. If it's true Madeline was abducted through their selfish actions, then this is something they have to deal with for the rest of their lives. If you don't want to bring your kids to dinner with you on holidays, get them a babysitter, its that simple. Or why didn't they take it in turns, as in one set of parents mind all the kids, while the others went out? There were enough adults there to do this. I really want to believe Kate and Gerry had nothing to do with this and she's alive somewhere being looked after. But on the other hand, I think its far more likely that the child is dead. They did come across as very strange and detached and mechanical on the Late show, but maybe its years of answering the same questions. What really put me off was Kate insisting very matter of factly that they don't row. WTF:eek:. With all thats gone on, they haven't rowed ? Definitely the smell of BS there! Thought Gerry seemed very domineering when it came to answering the questions, Kate often didn't get a word in edgeways. I have a feeling that this is a case there will sadly never be an outcome to. One sure thing is obviously there is someone out there who knows exactly what happened, be it the McCann's themselves or some abductor.

up for anything

homeOwner wrote: »

4. Kate washed the cuddle cat destroying evidence.
Kate said she washed it 7 days later as it was filthy. The police never asked for it nor bagged it for testing.

After sitting on the fence and then standing on both sides of it I'm not sure any more what I think.

The above is one of the things though that I find strange. If a cuddly toy was the last thing 'my missing child' may have touched I would never ever wash it, no matter how manky it got - symbolically to me it would be like washing the child out of my life.

homeOwner

up for anything wrote: »

After sitting on the fence and then standing on both sides of it I'm not sure any more what I think.

The above is one of the things though that I find strange. If a cuddly toy was the last thing 'my missing child' may have touched I would never ever wash it, no matter how manky it got - symbolically to me it would be like washing the child out of my life.

Perhaps, but she would have had so many other things belonging to her with her smell on it like the clothes she wore the previous day, her bed clothes at home, her blankets, her pillow case. I might not have done the same thing but then again I might have if I was carrying it all the time. Maybe it didnt smell of Madeline anymore but smelt of the beach or of old food or anything and she wanted it to smell clean. Who knows. It certainly isnt as ominous as other posters have made out, like she was trying to hide something.

hondasam

homeOwner wrote: »

4. Kate washed the cuddle cat destroying evidence.
Kate said she washed it 7 days later as it was filthy. The police never asked for it nor bagged it for testing.

I thought she said seventy days.

metrovelvet

The washing of the cuddle toy is distracting and has nothing to do with the investigation. There are a million different reasons why she washed it. No bearing on culpability imo.

ppink

hondasam wrote: »

I thought she said seventy days.

so did I actually!