Madeleine McCann

Deusexmachina

redshoes15 wrote: »

“The children may or may not have been drugged to ensure they didn’t cause any issues or problems.”

I’m pretty sure that’s an exact quote from my post, I’m open to correction tho...

Well, they may or may not have been aliens too then.

Deusexmachina

redshoes15 wrote: »

And that’s a litany of personal insults you have spewed in my direction on a discussion board. Wowzers!!

Nope. At your post. Not at you. Your post was heartless.

Steve F

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Some vital witnesses the Portuguese Police didn't interview.

Paul and Susan Moyse

Paul Moyes, 58, who is on holiday with his wife, Susan, said:


“At 11.30pm there was a knock on the door. I went out in my dressing gown and there was a distressed gentleman there saying that a child had been abducted and could we help with the search..

This has always puzzled me.Right from the very beginning everyone in the "inner circle" was referring to Maddies disappearance as abduction.
Kate on returning to the Tapas Bar "They've taken her"

iamwhoiam

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

the_pen_turner wrote: »

its a crazy situation.
if a child was missing the parents would be screaming adn shouting out her name. if they could hear children crying then they would easily hear a very distressed parent calling for their child. .

Just to clarify one point .It was Pamela Fenn in the apartment directly above the Mc Canns that said she heard the kids crying the night before . The Moyes were one more floor above the Fenns .

iamwhoiam

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/YVONNE-WARREN-MARTIN.htm

This witness has always interested me .A busy body no doubt but credible and professional

---

On May 04, 2007, at around 07H00 she heard about the disappearance of an English girl from Praia da Luz, Lagos, from Sky News or BBC.
- Having worked for 25 years in the area of child protection, she felt obliged to offer help to her compatriots and went to Praia da Luz.

- At around 09H00, she met the McCann couple next to the apartment from where the child had disappeared, accompanied by a third person, a male, who seemed quite familiar to her.

- This third person of the group appeared to be an intimate (friend) of the family as he was the one who, when the media arrived, began to explain what was happening and answering questions, thereby saving the couple from this upset. Afterwards, she further confirmed his closeness to the family when she saw him taking care of the couple's twins, also small children.

- She identified herself and presented her credentials and immediately began talking to the mother of the missing child as she was visibly upset with the situation.

- During the conversation the mother told her that she did not understand why a couple had abducted her daughter.

Steve F

iamwhoiam wrote: »

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/YVONNE-WARREN-MARTIN.htm

This witness has always interested me .A busy body no doubt but credible and professional

---

On May 04, 2007, at around 07H00 she heard about the disappearance of an English girl from Praia da Luz, Lagos, from Sky News or BBC.
- Having worked for 25 years in the area of child protection, she felt obliged to offer help to her compatriots and went to Praia da Luz.

- At around 09H00, she met the McCann couple next to the apartment from where the child had disappeared, accompanied by a third person, a male, who seemed quite familiar to her.

- This third person of the group appeared to be an intimate (friend) of the family as he was the one who, when the media arrived, began to explain what was happening and answering questions, thereby saving the couple from this upset. Afterwards, she further confirmed his closeness to the family when she saw him taking care of the couple's twins, also small children.

- She identified herself and presented her credentials and immediately began talking to the mother of the missing child as she was visibly upset with the situation.

- During the conversation the mother told her that she did not understand why a couple had abducted her daughter.

Wait! What COUPLE??

Charmeleon

Deusexmachina wrote: »

And why did you say that from Day One? Looks suspicious, does she? What did she do?

There were a couple of things I remember were discussed openly in the media before the entire tone changed against the investigation.

First there was the fact that both parents selectively deleted the call records on their phones.

They never joined any search parties after the first night.

Kate left both twins alone in the apartment to go back to the tapas bar down the road after discovering one child missing.

Kate asked for a local priest that night and asked her mother to contact a priest at home.

The group wrote out two timelines of people’s movements before the police arrived. This seems pretty unusual since most people would know their own movements in their head and wouldn’t need to refer to a written account.

Some in the media suggested Kate seemed too calm and collected during the initial interviews, soon after Kate appeared alone on the balcony with Cuddle Cat crying inconsolably. Several reporters told s BBC presenter they felt this was staged for the cameras.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Its quite common in missing child investigations for the police force to not allow the parents go searching. Statistically, most children who are abducted end up dead and are found in close proximity to where they were taken from.
It makes sense that they wouldn't be allowed search for her for fear they would discover her body.

I refuse to analyse any notions of Kate/Gerry being too calm/too emotionless/too whatever, because people deal with panic and grief and trauma differently.
Just because she wasn't running around the place screaming her head off for a few weeks, doesn't make her guilty. And it doesn't mean she didn't care.

I'm sure we all remember the stellar performance Shannon Matthews mother put on, sobbing hysterically to the press every chance she got, frantically searching for her child, t-shirts with the childs face on etc. only for it to turn out she herself was behind the whole thing.
Over emotional does not equal innocent, and emotionally detached doesn't mean guilty.
Everyone handles things differently. There is no one size fits all approach to dealing with such a situation.

Dog Man Star

SusieBlue wrote: »

Its quite common in missing child investigations for the police force to not allow the parents go searching. Statistically, most children who are abducted end up dead and are found in close proximity to where they were taken from.
It makes sense that they wouldn't be allowed search for her for fear they would discover her body

What a ridiculous post, total nonsense.

Charmeleon

SusieBlue wrote: »

Its quite common in missing child investigations for the police force to not allow the parents go searching. Statistically, most children who are abducted end up dead and are found in close proximity to where they were taken from.
It makes sense that they wouldn't be allowed search for her for fear they would discover her body.

I’ve not heard of this practice, but regardless when Kate was asked in a TV interview did she not feel she wanted to join the search parties she said she did but they were initially ‘non-functioning’ and then ‘working really hard’ even though they were not physically searching. No mention of police or search coordinator advice against.

Did you as a mother Kate just sometimes think “I’ve got to go and be out there with them. I’ve got to go and just physically look as well?”

Kate McCann: I mean I did. I mean, we’d been working really hard really apart from the first 48 hours as Gerry says were incredibly difficult and we were almost non-functioning I’d say. But after that you get strength from somewhere. We’ve certainly had loads of support and that’s given us strength and it’s been able to make us focus really so we have actually in our own way, it might not be physically searching but we’ve been working really hard and doing absolutely everything we can really to get Madeleine back.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

What a ridiculous post, total nonsense.

Its not nonsense, its true.
Its very common for parents to not be allowed search for many reasons, for fear they'd find something distressing, in case a ransom call comes to the house, in case the child shows up at the home, or if they are suspects so they can't tamper with anything (which ironically would suit your own viewpoint on the matter).

The police want the parents to be easily accessible in case they are needed, be it for questioning, or observing their behaviour, and this isn't the case if they're off searching.

And you have some cheek calling my post ridiculous when you were spouting misinformation here a few days ago.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Charmeleon wrote: »

I’ve not heard of this practice, but regardless when Kate was asked in a TV interview did she not feel she wanted to join the search parties she said she did but they were initially ‘non-functioning’ and then ‘working really hard’ even though they were not physically searching. No mention of police or search coordinator advice against.

Did you as a mother Kate just sometimes think “I’ve got to go and be out there with them. I’ve got to go and just physically look as well?”

Kate McCann: I mean I did. I mean, we’d been working really hard really apart from the first 48 hours as Gerry says were incredibly difficult and we were almost non-functioning I’d say. But after that you get strength from somewhere. We’ve certainly had loads of support and that’s given us strength and it’s been able to make us focus really so we have actually in our own way, it might not be physically searching but we’ve been working really hard and doing absolutely everything we can really to get Madeleine back.

At that point the public were baying for blood, I wouldn't expect her to admit to being told not to search in an interview.
As I said, I'm not saying this is 100% definitely the case, I'm just saying its common in missing children cases so it wouldn't shock me to hear it was the case for Madeleine.

As for the bolded, I don't know how any could judge someone who has admitted to being so anguished, upset and grief stricken that they cannot even function enough search for their own child.
I know, I know - "if it was me I'd be out from dawn till dusk" etc, but unless you yourself have been in that exact situation you just don't know how you'd react.

Dog Man Star

SusieBlue wrote: »

Its not nonsense, its true.
Its very common for parents to not be allowed search for many reasons, for fear they'd find something distressing, in case a ransom call comes to the house, in case the child shows up at the home, or if they are suspects so they can't tamper with anything (which ironically would suit your own viewpoint on the matter).

The police want the parents to be easily accessible in case they are needed, be it for questioning, or observing their behaviour, and this isn't the case if they're off searching.

And you have some cheek calling my post ridiculous when you were spouting misinformation here a few days ago.

Total guff. The crap some people will come out with to defend the McCann's wacky behaviour is astonishing.

What's more, neither Kate nor Gerry McCann ever said they were blocked from searching, not once. Utter nonsense.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

Total guff. The crap some people will come out with to defend the McCann's wacky behaviour is astonishing.

What's more, neither Kate nor Gerry McCann ever said they were blocked from searching, not once. Utter nonsense.

Once again, you were the one posting misinformation the other day, yet fobbing people off to "read the files" when you clearly haven't even read the files yourself.

My opinion differing from yours doesn't make it wrong.
Its astonishing how you continue to refer to my posts as "guff", "crap", "nonsense" and "ridiculous", while adding nothing of particular substance to the discussion yourself, apart from blankly dismissing anyone who disagrees with you.

Steve F

SusieBlue wrote: »

Its quite common in missing child investigations for the police force to not allow the parents go searching.


I'd like to see them try and stop me from searching for my own child.
And not only that,who if ever faced with the situation would even for one second contemplate NOT searching?
This comment I find hard to swallow,sorry

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Steve F wrote: »

I'd like to see them try and stop me from searching for my own child.
And not only that,who if ever faced with the situation would even for one second contemplate NOT searching?
This comment I find hard to swallow,sorry

I imagine if they were in such a distressed state they might not be able to search, even if they wanted to. Not talking about the McCann's here, I'm on about "people" in general.

And again, just because it would be what "you" would do, it doesn't mean its automatically what everyone else would do too.

Steve F

SusieBlue wrote: »

I imagine if they were in such a distressed state they might not be able to search, even if they wanted to. Not talking about the McCann's here, I'm on about "people" in general.

And again, just because it would be what "you" would do, it doesn't mean its automatically what everyone else would do too.

Yes,obviously I can only speak for myself.
However,how can you be "unable to search?" It's such a basic function,no? Like walking??

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Steve F wrote: »

Yes,obviously I can only speak for myself.
However,how can you be "unable to search?" It's such a basic function,no? Like walking??

When my grandfather died, my grandmother vomited, fell into a weakness, and didn't get out of bed again until the funeral. She missed the rosary & the removal. She had to be brought to the funeral in a wheelchair.
She didn't even cry, she just sat there with a blank look on her face. She was absolutely numb.
I'm sure to anyone who didn't know her she probably looked like she didn't give a sh*t but she didn't even have the strength to stand up at her own husbands funeral.
She was a young woman of 26 when she lost him, so its not like she was frail and elderly.

Grief, stress & panic affect people in different ways. Even basic functions can seem like monumental tasks when you are that overcome with sadness.

Boom_Bap

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Just a reminder of this post yesterday from the mods

There is a clear divide in this thread between posters who think Madeleine was abducted and those who think the parents were involved. Both sets of posters are essentially using the exact same argument to back up their position - The total lack of evidence.

That's what it boils down to - there is no evidence that Madeleine was abducted but equally there is no evidence that the parents were involved. That's what makes this such a frustrating case. What's clear though is that nobody posting on this thread can be certain about the opinion they hold and the I find the staunch refusal to listen to the arguments of the other side to be a little odd, especially from posters who think it was a simple abduction case.

MODE NOTE: As an aside, posters stating that they don't think the parents have suffered enough are dangerously close to breaking the rules of this forum. You may hold the opinion that the parents were negligent without being so vitriolic

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108543315&postcount=431


Can we try to bear this in mind so that we can have a decent discussion on the topic.

xalot

Something Else

One thing that never seems to get mentioned is that Gerry reported a tennis bag missing from the apartment.

Personally, I think Madeline had an accident, and Gerry hid her body in the tennis bag when he found her. drinks were taken and he panicked. I just dont believe anything he says, he gives me the Heeby Jeebies the way Joe O'Reilly did on the Late Late Show.

Mad as it sounds I think he went back to dinner like nothing happened. I think he didn't say anything so that someone else would discover her missing. I think Kate's reaction was genuine on discovering her gone.

She seems like a completely broken woman. You just have to look at her to know that she's ruined.

How they disposed of the body is the real gap in this story. I cant believe any father would throw their child in a dumpster, though crucially the bins were collected prior to being checked so potential evidence lost.

I find it strange that they rented a car the next day and drove to a church however I'm not religious so maybe I dont relate to needing that comfort....though if the body in the tennis bag was in the car it would explain the dogs picking up the scent.

I dont think we'll ever find out what happened. It's certainly possible that someone knew their routine and took her but the contamination of the scene during the search means they'll never be found.

That missing bag just sticks in my head...

Steve F

xalot wrote: »

One thing that never seems to get mentioned is that Gerry reported a tennis bag missing from the apartment.

Personally, I think Madeline had an accident, and Gerry hid her body in the tennis bag when he found her. drinks were taken and he panicked. I just dont believe anything he says, he gives me the Heeby Jeebies the way Joe O'Reilly did on the Late Late Show.

Mad as it sounds I think he went back to dinner like nothing happened. I think he didn't say anything so that someone else would discover her missing. I think Kate's reaction was genuine on discovering her gone.

She seems like a completely broken woman. You just have to look at her to know that she's ruined.

How they disposed of the body is the real gap in this story. I cant believe any father would throw their child in a dumpster, though crucially the bins were collected prior to being checked so potential evidence lost.

I find it strange that they rented a car the next day and drove to a church however I'm not religious so maybe I dont relate to needing that comfort....though if the body in the tennis bag was in the car it would explain the dogs picking up the scent.

I dont think we'll ever find out what happened. It's certainly possible that someone knew their routine and took her but the contamination of the scene during the search means they'll never be found.

That missing bag just sticks in my head...

So in essence what you are saying is that initially Kate thought it was abduction until Gerry told her what "really" happened?
Wonder when he told her and why she didn't tell the police the "true" facts???

chicorytip

Something Else

ozzy jr wrote:

Yeah.

ozzy jr wrote:

People do it all the time, not necessarily after their child goes missing, but people lie all the time. Some are really good at it too, regardless of evidence against them. Lance Armstrong springs to mind, Jimmy Saville another. Every politician that's ever lived

Armstrong finally admitted his guilt after a prolonged period of intense scrutiny by investigative journalists whilst Savile's crimes only came to light after his death. He was never - to the best of my knowledge - charged with sexual assault or had allegations made against him in public during his lifetime. I accept your point that certain people have the ability to be convincing liars but most tend to be caught out by those lies in the end.

Dog Man Star

Boom_Bap wrote: »

Just a reminder of this post yesterday from the mods





https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=108543315&postcount=431


Can we try to bear this in mind so that we can have a decent discussion on the topic.

This is all well and good, but there is evidence that the McCanns are involved, it is how the lead Detective came to his conclusion. The sniffer dogs, the change of story, the deleted phone records, etc, etc, etc.

There is absolutely no evidence of an abductor, absolutely none.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

I obviously can't speak for everyone but if my child went missing & I discovered a few hours later that she had actually had an accident & my husband had disposed of her body in a tennis bag, there is no way on earth I would keep up the charade to protect my husband.
Let alone keep it to myself for 10 years.
I can only imagine the tension, pressure & resentment that would cause between a couple yet their marriage never really wavered, they seemed like a strong couple throughout the last decade.

Are we really suggesting that Gerry told Kate he had discovered the child was dead & had gotten rid of the body, and Kate was just like "ok cool" and went along with it?
Even though it meant she couldn't bury her precious child? Even though it meant she allowed her husband dispose of her beloved daughter like rubbish? Even though it meant she had to keep up the pretence of searching for her "missing" child for over a decade?

I'm obviously only speaking from my own point of view here, but it just seems highly unlikely. Unless they are the most clever, psychotic criminals on earth, which I don't believe they are, I'm not buying it.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

This is all well and good, but there is evidence that the McCanns are involved, it is how the lead Detective came to his conclusion. The sniffer dogs, the change of story, the deleted phone records, etc, etc, etc.

There is absolutely no evidence of an abductor, absolutely none.

In your opinion. You can't just try to shut down reasonable discussion just because you don't like it.

Thepoet85

Dog Man Star wrote:

What a ridiculous post, total nonsense.

Care to add a counter argument instead of an inflammatory remark?

Steve F

SusieBlue wrote: »

I obviously can't speak for everyone but if my child went missing & I discovered a few hours later that she had actually had an accident & my husband had disposed of her body in a tennis bag, there is no way on earth I would keep up the charade to protect my husband.
Let alone keep it to myself for 10 years.
I can only imagine the tension, pressure & resentment that would cause between a couple yet their marriage never really wavered, they seemed like a strong couple throughout the last decade.

Are we really suggesting that Gerry told Kate he had discovered the child was dead & had gotten rid of the body, and Kate was just like "ok cool" and went along with it?
Even though it meant she couldn't bury her precious child? Even though it meant she allowed her husband dispose of her beloved daughter like rubbish? Even though it meant she had to keep up the pretence of searching for her "missing" child for over a decade?

I'm obviously only speaking from my own point of view here, but it just seems highly unlikely. Unless they are the most clever, psychotic criminals on earth, which I don't believe they are, I'm not buying it.

I'm wondering if this is the scenario, then he somehow convinced her that she was just as much to blame as him and they would lose the twins??
Again Just putting this out there....

Babooshka

SusieBlue wrote: »

In your opinion. You can't just try to shut down reasonable discussion just because you don't like it.

I think the poster meant there was no physical evidence of an intruder. Given that the police didn't have any leads to follow and no one had anything to go on in the days after the disappearance I'd imagine that is true, I don't think that is really a matter for opinion.

Dog Man Star

SusieBlue wrote: »

In your opinion. You can't just try to shut down reasonable discussion just because you don't like it.

So tell me one tiny, tiny piece of evidence that there was an abductor? Because it would be news to me, and news to the world.

Heck, it would make headlines the world over!

splinter65

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

SusieBlue wrote: »

I obviously can't speak for everyone but if my child went missing & I discovered a few hours later that she had actually had an accident & my husband had disposed of her body in a tennis bag, there is no way on earth I would keep up the charade to protect my husband.
Let alone keep it to myself for 10 years.
I can only imagine the tension, pressure & resentment that would cause between a couple yet their marriage never really wavered, they seemed like a strong couple throughout the last decade.

Are we really suggesting that Gerry told Kate he had discovered the child was dead & had gotten rid of the body, and Kate was just like "ok cool" and went along with it?
Even though it meant she couldn't bury her precious child? Even though it meant she allowed her husband dispose of her beloved daughter like rubbish? Even though it meant she had to keep up the pretence of searching for her "missing" child for over a decade?

I'm obviously only speaking from my own point of view here, but it just seems highly unlikely. Unless they are the most clever, psychotic criminals on earth, which I don't believe they are, I'm not buying it.

Yes but Susie you are a person who lives in the real world where real people react in a real way to real situations.
As you can see from this thread the people who believe that the McCanns covered up their childs accidental death do not live anywhere else except the twilight zone. It’s like 9/11 conspirators.
None of the theories will allow for anything even remotely approaching a realistic scenario.
You’d have to wonder how some people even function in the real world, and come to the conclusion that they actually have little or no connection with it at all.

Franz Von Peppercorn

Dog Man Star wrote: »

So tell me one tiny, tiny piece of evidence that there was an abductor? Because it would be news to me, and news to the world.

Heck, it would make headlines the world over!

Pretty sure it’s the consensus opinion of most of the world.

Thepoet85

When was the last time she was seen alive? (By people outside of her immediate company)

Something I wondered about but can't find an answer.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

So tell me one tiny, tiny piece of evidence that there was an abductor? Because it would be news to me, and news to the world.

Heck, it would make headlines the world over!

I have absolutely no interest in justifying my position to you, I don't need to, and I don't want to, because you will undoubtedly just scoff at it, seeing as you believe yourself to have some sort of superior knowledge on the case that neither the Portuguese nor UK police have.

Its not a simple, straightforward case. Its not a closed case. Its still an open investigation.

Dog Man Star

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

Pretty sure it’s the consensus opinion of most of the world.

That is true, but that doesn't answer my question.

splinter65

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Steve F wrote: »

I'm wondering if this is the scenario, then he somehow convinced her that she was just as much to blame as him and they would lose the twins??
Again Just putting this out there....

Your spouse could convince you of this in a short span of time, and persuade you to go along with a horrific plan, and 12 years later, your still onboard?

ozzy jr

Something Else

Lance Armstrong had a tendency to sue anyone who questioned his version of events......

Anyway, if (please note the if) the parents were somehow responsible for the poor girls death, I would be sure they would have disposed of the body, before announcing she was gone.

There's no way they would have been able to dispose of the body after the media descended on the area.

What is the last confirmed credible sighting of Madeline? A sighting that was verified by the police or hotel staff (or someone outside their group).

What was the time between that sighting and the discovery she was gone?

splinter65

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

That is true, but that doesn't answer my question.

But everyone else is wrong then, 2 police forces from 2 different countries included, apart from you, a few other conspiracy theorists and Mr Amaral?

iamwhoiam

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

ozzy jr wrote: »

Lance Armstrong had a tendency to sue anyone who questioned his version of events......

Anyway, if (please note the if) the parents were somehow responsible for the poor girls death, I would be sure they would have disposed of the body, before announcing she was gone.

There's no way they would have been able to dispose of the body after the media descended on the area.

What is the last confirmed credible sighting of Madeline? A sighting that was verified by the police or hotel staff (or someone outside their group).

What was the time between that sighting and the discovery she was gone?

As far as I can see from the interviews on the PJ files it was a creche worker that saw Madeleine at about 12;30 pm .Almost sure I posted the interview somewhere on the thread .Will go hunt it down



here we go

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA_WILDING.htm

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

This is all well and good, but there is evidence that the McCanns are involved, it is how the lead Detective came to his conclusion. The sniffer dogs, the change of story, the deleted phone records, etc, etc, etc.

There is absolutely no evidence of an abductor, absolutely none.

Speaking of that brilliant lead detective. Try and find a single photo of him involved at the scene doing something in the immediate aftermath and days that followed. There are lots of photos of sniffer dogs all over the scene with their handlers in the apartments, combing wasteland and scrub - Guarda Nacional Republicana shipped in post-haste, but no top dog. I always have found that very curious. The lead detective came to the conclusion that involved the least effort on his part. I wonder who it was in the PJ who spent so much effort leaking PJ theories predicated on the McCanns being culpable and case details to the 24Horas newspaper? If that nonsense had gone on in any country I have lived in there would have been a major inquiry into that alone.

It is not possible to delete phone records. All telecommunications companies have all the records and keep them for some time.

There is no evidence - period - that is why the case confounds to this day.

the_pen_turner

Something Else

The reason there is so much suspicion aim at the parents is that every aspect of the case leads to them doing something weird or suspicious like lying to the police, washing toys,changing stories, saying she was taken, etc etc.
Every part of the case make you wonder why did they do that or that's a strange thing to do

You can explain away 2 to 3 weird thing but not 20 plus

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

So tell me one tiny, tiny piece of evidence that there was an abductor? Because it would be news to me, and news to the world.

Heck, it would make headlines the world over!

A lack of evidence of an occurrence does not mean something didn't occur. All you can logically conclude is that there is no evidence.

The old one about; 'if a tree falls in the woods and there is no one about to hear it fall, did it make a sound?' applies. The logical answer is; 'yes, probably,' but if someone demands proof - well that's just tough, there isn't any, but that doesn't mean it didn't make a sound when it fell.

iamwhoiam

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

SusieBlue wrote: »

I obviously can't speak for everyone but if my child went missing & I discovered a few hours later that she had actually had an accident & my husband had disposed of her body in a tennis bag, there is no way on earth I would keep up the charade to protect my husband.
Let alone keep it to myself for 10 years.
I can only imagine the tension, pressure & resentment that would cause between a couple yet their marriage never really wavered, they seemed like a strong couple throughout the last decade.

Are we really suggesting that Gerry told Kate he had discovered the child was dead & had gotten rid of the body, and Kate was just like "ok cool" and went along with it?
Even though it meant she couldn't bury her precious child? Even though it meant she allowed her husband dispose of her beloved daughter like rubbish? Even though it meant she had to keep up the pretence of searching for her "missing" child for over a decade?

I'm obviously only speaking from my own point of view here, but it just seems highly unlikely. Unless they are the most clever, psychotic criminals on earth, which I don't believe they are, I'm not buying it.

Unless he never told Kate .But again unlikely

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

So tell me one tiny, tiny piece of evidence that there was an abductor? Because it would be news to me, and news to the world.

Heck, it would make headlines the world over!

Well the child was there one minute and then gone the next, with no sign of foul play or death.
I think that’s all the evidence most people need.

Plumbthedepths

SusieBlue wrote:

And again, just because it would be what "you" would do, it doesn't mean its automatically what everyone else would do too.

You claimed they were not allowed participate in a search for her.

Dog Man Star

So at least we all agree there isn't a single tiny piece of evidence that there was an abduction.

That's a start.

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

So at least we all agree there isn't a single tiny piece of evidence that there was an abduction.

That's a start.

Apart from a disappearing child.

splinter65

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

So at least we all agree there isn't a single tiny piece of evidence that there was an abduction.

That's a start.

But that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Don’t you get that, at all?

splinter65

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

You claimed they were not allowed participate in a search for her.

Best practice in every single country in the developed world is that immediate family stay put while professionals search. Surely you know this.

cnocbui

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dog Man Star wrote: »

So at least we all agree there isn't a single tiny piece of evidence that there was an abduction.

That's a start.

There is evidence of someone around here being deliberately provocative to the point of trolling.

Boom_Bap

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

cnocbui wrote: »

There is evidence of someone around here being deliberately provocative to the point of trolling.

Please don't make accusations of trolling on thread, please report anything instead.