Madeleine McCann

bladespin

Something Else

cgcsb wrote: »

The cultural gap certainly does play a role also. Portugal is a Catholic family orientated society. The McCanns themselves are Catholics yet they indulged in upper class English culture within which child abandonment is part of the scenery. No doubt the police and local media were flummoxed by this.

The Portuguese aren't as judgmental as you might think.

cgcsb

Something Else

bladespin wrote: »

The Portuguese aren't as judgmental as you might think.

Judgmental now there's an interesting word. I wouldn't use it to describe someone who criticises routine child abandonment / endangerment, especially in the McCann case where the only rationale for the abandonment of the todler and 2 babies was a wealthy couple saving £30 on a babysitter while they got juiced. They could have even had their friend's children stay over and split the fee between the parents if things were that tight.

How do you view people who condemn other forms of child abuse? Are people who condemn child genital mutilation judgmental for example? Or what about people who oppose forcing marriages on children? I don't see how you can castigate someone who would condemn flinging a toddler and 2 babies to the four sheets of the wind, and declaring 'come what may', as being 'judgmental'.

bladespin

Something Else

cgcsb wrote: »

Judgmental now there's an interesting word.

Hmm, I tend not to feed trolls but I make the odd exception.

It really is an interesting word if that's what you're into.

In the case of the McCanns, I doubt very much if the police and media were as flummoxed as you make out, by all accounts they rushed to the stricken parents aid without judgement and the relationship soured there after.

I've already voiced my opinion on what happened, if you read it I doubt you'd be asking.

Rock77

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

bladespin wrote: »

Hmm, I tend not to feed trolls but I make the odd exception.

It really is an interesting word if that's what you're into.

In the case of the McCanns, I doubt very much if the police and media were as flummoxed as you make out, by all accounts they rushed to the stricken parents aid without judgement and the relationship soured there after.

I've already voiced my opinion on what happened, if you read it I doubt you'd be asking.

Do you mind me asking what you think happened?

I haven’t studied up on the case facts but I don’t really believe or want to believe the parents did it.

dubstarr

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

I dont think the parents had anything to do with it.

But what makes it iffy is
They where further away than they claimed
They didnt check the kids as often as claimed
I dont think it was an opportunist either.

I think someone was keeping watch,knew the routines and went for it.

The thing that really upsets me,is Madeleine woke the previous night,was upset.And asked her parents why they didnt come when she called.Thats heartbreaking,

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

Kate said the shutter was open and She felt the draught. In the crime scene photos the shutter is closed, and it was only her fingerprints on it.
So did She close the shutter?

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

dubstarr wrote: »

I dont think the parents had anything to do with it.

But what makes it iffy is
They where further away than they claimed
They didnt check the kids as often as claimed
I dont think it was an opportunist either.

I think someone was keeping watch,knew the routines and went for it.

The thing that really upsets me,is Madeleine woke the previous night,was upset.And asked her parents why they didnt come when she called.Thats heartbreaking,

What did they give her the next night so she wouldn't wake as easily?

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

TheW1zard wrote: »

Kate said the shutter was open and She felt the draught. In the crime scene photos the shutter is closed, and it was only her fingerprints on it.
So did She close the shutter?

At best, it looks like they were lying about the times they were checking on the kids and somehow tried to cover up their neglect out of shame.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

Why didn't the kids wake up when She started screaming, or when the police came?

limnam

TheW1zard wrote: »

Why didn't the kids wake up when She started screaming, or when the police came?

There's no point probing the endless amount of wrong.


There's a perfectly simple explanation for anything you can find.

limnam

callmehal wrote: »

At best, it looks like they were lying about the times they were checking on the kids and somehow tried to cover up their neglect out of shame.

Would shame be on your mind with a brain full of thoughts of your only daughter been potentially raped by a peado gang?


Wouldn't enter mine.


But we don't know how we'd react blah blah blah


Oh look! my jogging shoes.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

limnam wrote: »

There's no point probing the endless amount of wrong.


There's a perfectly simple explanation for anything you can find.

Im alluding to the kids being drugged. Why do you think the kids didnt wake up?

limnam

TheW1zard wrote: »

Im alluding to the kids being drugged. Why do you think the kids didnt wake up?

I've no fcking clue.


But if you try to bring this up there be a barge of what people regard as perfectly good reasons.


There's no reason I know of, not with that level of noise and shenanigans.


each child is different


some kids are heavy sleepers


There's a never ending list of excuses for it.


Most people I know are afraid to whisper for the fear of them waking.

Rock77

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

To be fair none of us know how we would react if we thought our daughter was kidnapped by a paedo gang...

It would make sense that the parents were trying to cover up leaving the kids alone for long periods of time, I don’t think that’s too much of a stretch.

Rock77

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

limnam wrote: »

I've no fcking clue.


But if you try to bring this up there be a barge of what people regard as perfectly good reasons.


There's no reason I know of, not with that level of noise and shenanigans.


each child is different


some kids are heavy sleepers


There's a never ending list of excuses for it.


Most people I know are afraid to whisper for the fear of them waking.

Seriously, this thread is getting to you... you just argued with yourself for three posts in a row!

limnam

Rock77 wrote: »

Seriously, this thread is getting to you... you just argued with yourself for three posts in a row!

That's how well I know the answers

limnam

Rock77 wrote: »

To be fair none of us know how we would react if we thought our daughter was kidnapped by a paedo gang...

It would make sense that the parents were trying to cover up leaving the kids alone for long periods of time, I don’t think that’s too much of a stretch.

Covering up your shame at the cost of impacting an investigation into the abduction of your child?


That's pretty messed up for cool calm and collective Dr's

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

limnam wrote: »

That's how well I know the answers

You didnt answer, well you did, you said you dont know.
I reckon its because the kids were drugged.
What do other people think?

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

TheW1zard wrote: »

Kate said the shutter was open and She felt the draught. In the crime scene photos the shutter is closed, and it was only her fingerprints on it.
So did She close the shutter?

Can anyone explain this?

Theres a few things i cant get past, this being one of them.

limnam

TheW1zard wrote: »

Can anyone explain this?

Theres a few things i cant get past, this being one of them.

I think she was telling lies.


The wind speed that night was not enough to cause "swooshing" or door bangs as she claimed.


In the picture it's clearly behind the bed so the curtains couldn't blow as she described.


What others will tell you is the time between the photo been taken was so long anything could have happened between been open and closed.

limnam

The fact he said this a year ago is very bizzare


Mr Amaral, who has made outlandish claims including that MI5 was involved in a cover-up, said last year that a German paedophile currently in jail was “probably going to be the scapegoat” in the case.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

limnam wrote: »

I think she was telling lies.


The wind speed that night was not enough to cause "swooshing" or door bangs as she claimed.


In the picture it's clearly behind the bed so the curtains couldn't blow as she described.


What others will tell you is the time between the photo been taken was so long anything could have happened between been open and closed.

Ah i see, well i suppose they could of..
They would have left fingerprints though.

punchdrunk

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

limnam wrote: »

The fact he said this a year ago is very bizzare


Mr Amaral, who has made outlandish claims including that MI5 was involved in a cover-up, said last year that a German paedophile currently in jail was “probably going to be the scapegoat” in the case.

That’s a Different German abuser who is also in prison, he’s been ruled out

punchdrunk

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

German prosecutor said this in an interview

“We got things we cannot communicate that speak for the theory that Madeleine is dead, even if I have to admit that we don't have the body."

He also said: "We think our suspect has done more crimes possibly against British, Irish or American people. All these people are asked to call us so we can solve these cases."

“who has been in his houses and can tell us what they look like from the inside. And we hope that maybe we find victims that maybe also got in these houses, victims of sexual crimes."

The common thread being English speaking countries- I think they must have found more video

juno10353

Something Else

Neyite wrote: »

Out of the 8 children, Madeline was the oldest. The twins were 20 months, the Oldfields baby was 22 months, Tanner/O'Brien's kids were 3 and 1yr old. I don't know the age of the Paynes two children but they were younger than Madeline. That's a lot of unattended toddlers, all but two on the ground floor apartments, which are much easier to break into. Ironically the ones who had the safer apartment in that regard - the Payne's - as it was located on the first floor, were the ones who had a baby monitor.

Yes, one family with baby monitor and one family with grandmother babysitting

juno10353

Something Else

limnam wrote: »

I think she was telling lies.


The wind speed that night was not enough to cause "swooshing" or door bangs as she claimed.


In the picture it's clearly behind the bed so the curtains couldn't blow as she described.


What others will tell you is the time between the photo been taken was so long anything could have happened between been open and closed.

Her first claim was that the window shutter had been jammed. A story repeated at the time by family and friends and news.

No evidence of shutter being opened or jemmied.

Story of whooshing curtains came later

Rock77

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

limnam wrote: »

Covering up your shame at the cost of impacting an investigation into the abduction of your child?


That's pretty messed up for cool calm and collective Dr's

Leaving your kids alone while going drinking is pretty messed up to be fair.

Also nobody would be cool, calm and collective if their child was kidnapped regardless of their occupation.

I also don’t think it’s a stretch to say the parents or their friends were mistaken about a few details.

If you can open your mind for 2 seconds to the possibility that the child was taken and the parents were not involved can you imagine the panic at the discovery? The mother could have ran to the window, opened it and closed it twice and not remember doing it!

limnam

Rock77 wrote: »

I also don’t think it’s a stretch to say the parents or their friends were mistaken about a few details.

Slaughtering wine not that surprising



You might be right

Rock77

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

limnam wrote: »

Slaughtering wine not that surprising



You might be right

You have read up about this more than me so I presume with a comment like this that you know they were slaughtered drunk.

I have no idea If they were plastered or if they had 2 glasses with their dinner.

bladespin

Something Else

Rock77 wrote: »

Do you mind me asking what you think happened?

I haven’t studied up on the case facts but I don’t really believe or want to believe the parents did it.

On the face of all I've read, the simplest explanation seems the most likely: the child was probably snatched.

The part of me that likes twisting crime thrillers suspects otherwise but there's very little to support that, like the idea that the children were sedated and something went wrong and there was a cover up, though after all the coverage this case has had I would imagine the perpetrator must have been a forensic expert or it's just an overactive imagination.

Oh, and yes, I've already condemned the parents though I suspect they've done that themselves.

Garlinge

Something Else

Madeleine was awake and crying for over an hour on the Tuesday night as well. There was an elderly neighbour living overhead who reported same (Mrs Fenn).

I have followed this story for years and too many things that do not add up.

It was never mentioned that the Granny babysat. She was with them on the Thursday and was left at the table to mind the bags etc as they all rushed off when alarm raised by Kate who ran back to the group leaving her sleeping babies unattended ... again! They all had mobile phones!!! Kate shouted "they have taken her" not that Madeleine was gone, or someone broke in and took her.

They were due to travel back to UK on the Saturday so abduction was on second last night of trip.

Babooshka

Rock77 wrote: »

You have read up about this more than me so I presume with a comment like this that you know they were slaughtered drunk.

I have no idea If they were plastered or if they had 2 glasses with their dinner.

S/he doesn't know. Doesn't let it stop him/her though. Every third or fourth post. That's mainly the only contribution, that and to add they drank brandy with Clement Freud. Mostly every 3 or 4 pages, that one. It's just sad.

Rock77

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

Garlinge wrote: »

Madeleine was awake and crying for over an hour on the Tuesday night as well. There was an elderly neighbour living overhead who reported same (Mrs Fenn).

I have followed this story for years and too many things that do not add up.

It was never mentioned that the Granny babysat. She was with them on the Thursday and was left at the table to mind the bags etc as they all rushed off when alarm raised by Kate who ran back to the group leaving her sleeping babies unattended ... again! They all had mobile phones!!! Kate shouted "they have taken her" not that Madeleine was gone, or someone broke in and took her.

They were due to travel back to UK on the Saturday so abduction was on second last night of trip.

Over an hour the night before! That alone is heartbreaking.. never would I allow that to happen my child.

The wording she screamed on discovery and the fact she ran for help in a panic or even the fact it was the second last night do not raise my suspicions about the parents at all though.

Neyite

juno10353 wrote: »

Yes, one family with baby monitor and one family with grandmother babysitting

Diane Webster is Fiona Payne's mother and the Payne family were the ones with the baby monitor. They were also the only ones not on the ground floor, but on the first floor in apartment 5H. There's no mention that granny babysat but may have. She didn't that night though, as they had the monitor at the dinner table.



Tanner/O'Brien family were in 5D, their one year old was sick that night so the parents alternated shifts during dinner so one would always be in the room. Other nights though it's likely that they did the same as the Oldfields and McCanns given the mention that they did it due to the baby vomiting earlier.



The McCanns were in 5A, and Oldfields next door in 5B and neither of those used sitters/ monitors for the duration of their holiday.

cgcsb

Something Else

bladespin wrote: »

The part of me that likes twisting crime thrillers suspects otherwise but there's very little to support that, like the idea that the children were sedated and something went wrong and there was a cover up, though after all the coverage this case has had I would imagine the perpetrator must have been a forensic expert or it's just an overactive imagination.

I think it's fair to assume the children were being sedated in some way. Kate McCann had means (as a professional anesthetist), She had Motive (Maddie was crying last night, she didn't want the neighbours to hear, she'd be embarrassed if people knew she had abandoned the children again), and of course she had opportunity.

Then you have certain observable facts:
The twins out for the count while WW3 rages in the apartment.

Kate's words when she discovers Maddie missing: 'they've taken her'. I propose because she knows full well she couldn't have gotten up, left or hid somewhere so she jumps straight to the abduction scenario. No parent would do that because it's a much more frightening prospect than the child walking alone(thus cannot have gotten far).

In the abduction scenario, it's hard to imagine a toddler going silently and remaining asleep after being snatched from bed by a stranger, especially given we know this child was nervous and alone in a strange place, having been crying for an hour alone the night before. The Child would have certainly screamed bloody murder and woke the street up had she been unsedated.

In Kate McCann's subsequent television interviews she works overtime flogging the narrative of the children being 'very, extremely, so very much' tired. She plugs how long she had left them at the kids club for (you'd think they'd just leave the kids at home with granny if they didn't want to see them at all for 100% of the holiday's duration). This is something I've seen a million times before in a professional setting, people who know they've screwed up will blame the results of said screw up on some external factor beyond their control, build a narrative around it and push it at every opportunity. If she were honest, stating the children were tired wouldn't need to be drilled home so vigorously.

I don't know if the McCanns killed her or not but in the abduction scenario, or indeed any scenario, it's hard to imagine the children weren't given something to make them sleep. I just hope that Kate and Jerry come to their senses and tell the full start-to-finish truth of it instead of just trying to defend their actions, and play down the mistakes they made. As the Scotland Yard detective from Belfast said to Jerry 'it's never to late to do the right thing'.

bladespin

Something Else

cgcsb wrote: »

I think it's fair to assume the children were being sedated in some way. Kate McCann had means (as a professional anesthetist), She had Motive (Maddie was crying last night, she didn't want the neighbours to hear, she'd be embarrassed if people knew she had abandoned the children again), and of course she had opportunity.

It's not fair, so we can't, there's no way of proving one way or the other. Though definitely something to remember.

cgcsb wrote: »

Then you have certain observable facts:
The twins out for the count while WW3 rages in the apartment.

Kate's words when she discovers Maddie missing: 'they've taken her'. I propose because she knows full well she couldn't have gotten up, left or hid somewhere so she jumps straight to the abduction scenario. No parent would do that because it's a much more frightening prospect than the child walking alone(thus cannot have gotten far).

In the abduction scenario, it's hard to imagine a toddler going silently and remaining asleep after being snatched from bed by a stranger, especially given we know this child was nervous and alone in a strange place, having been crying for an hour alone the night before. The Child would have certainly screamed bloody murder and woke the street up had she been unsedated.

In Kate McCann's subsequent television interviews she works overtime flogging the narrative of the children being 'very, extremely, so very much' tired. She plugs how long she had left them at the kids club for (you'd think they'd just leave the kids at home with granny if they didn't want to see them at all for 100% of the holiday's duration). This is something I've seen a million times before in a professional setting, people who know they've screwed up will blame the results of said screw up on some external factor beyond their control, build a narrative around it and push it at every opportunity. If she were honest, stating the children were tired wouldn't need to be drilled home so vigorously.

I don't know if the McCanns killed her or not but in the abduction scenario, or indeed any scenario, it's hard to imagine the children weren't given something to make them sleep. I just hope that Kate and Jerry come to their senses and tell the full start-to-finish truth of it instead of just trying to defend their actions, and play down the mistakes they made. As the Scotland Yard detective from Belfast said to Jerry 'it's never to late to do the right thing'.

Plus a lot of other circumstantial pointers and strange behavior, seasoned investigators didn't begin to suspect without some incling, but there's nothing concrete.

Rock77

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

cgcsb wrote: »

I think it's fair to assume the children were being sedated in some way. Kate McCann had means (as a professional anesthetist), She had Motive (Maddie was crying last night, she didn't want the neighbours to hear, she'd be embarrassed if people knew she had abandoned the children again), and of course she had opportunity.

Then you have certain observable facts:
The twins out for the count while WW3 rages in the apartment.

Kate's words when she discovers Maddie missing: 'they've taken her'. I propose because she knows full well she couldn't have gotten up, left or hid somewhere so she jumps straight to the abduction scenario. No parent would do that because it's a much more frightening prospect than the child walking alone(thus cannot have gotten far).

In the abduction scenario, it's hard to imagine a toddler going silently and remaining asleep after being snatched from bed by a stranger, especially given we know this child was nervous and alone in a strange place, having been crying for an hour alone the night before. The Child would have certainly screamed bloody murder and woke the street up had she been unsedated.

In Kate McCann's subsequent television interviews she works overtime flogging the narrative of the children being 'very, extremely, so very much' tired. She plugs how long she had left them at the kids club for (you'd think they'd just leave the kids at home with granny if they didn't want to see them at all for 100% of the holiday's duration). This is something I've seen a million times before in a professional setting, people who know they've screwed up will blame the results of said screw up on some external factor beyond their control, build a narrative around it and push it at every opportunity. If she were honest, stating the children were tired wouldn't need to be drilled home so vigorously.

I don't know if the McCanns killed her or not but in the abduction scenario, or indeed any scenario, it's hard to imagine the children weren't given something to make them sleep. I just hope that Kate and Jerry come to their senses and tell the full start-to-finish truth of it instead of just trying to defend their actions, and play down the mistakes they made. As the Scotland Yard detective from Belfast said to Jerry 'it's never to late to do the right thing'.

Yeah makes sense and is fair to assume some sort of sedation... but it’s also fair to assume no sedation, maybe the 2 smaller ones are heavy sleepers, just because Kate could sedate her kids doesn’t mean she ever would.

Her driving home the fact they were tired may just be because she vividly remembers them being very tired.

Now I have to state, I am not saying this is what I think happened. I’m saying both scenarios are equally believable to me.

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

So Kate uses the back patio doors and Gerry uses the front, why the difference?

Rock77

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

TheW1zard wrote: »

So Kate uses the back patio doors and Gerry uses the front, why the difference?

Sorry, not really sure what you mean??

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

Rock77 wrote: »

Sorry, not really sure what you mean??

Kate discovered her gone by using the back patio door, Gerry used the front door.
Why the difference?

Rock77

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

TheW1zard wrote: »

Kate discovered her gone by using the back patio door, Gerry used the front door.
Why the difference?

So Kate went up to check and used the back door to get in, then ran down screaming. Gerry ran up and went in the front door? Correct ?

I’m not sure I see an issue? Maybe she always used the back door and him the front?

What am I missing?

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

Rock77 wrote: »

So Kate went up to check and used the back door to get in, then ran down screaming. Gerry ran up and went in the front door? Correct ?

I’m not sure I see an issue? Maybe she always used the back door and him the front?

What am I missing?

They were taking turns checking on them. Gerry used the front door, the longer route, and locked the door behind him.
She was just using the back patio door.
Using the front door, which was beside the kids room (more likely to wake them up) and taking the longer route (actually leaving the hotel) seems odd.
My wife and I would just do the same thing (whatever we would have decided).

That doesn't seem strange?

punchdrunk

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

Sedation? where are the pill bottles? Where are the tourniquets, alcohol wipes, syringes?

It’s a baseless accusation- no evidence!

Rock77

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

TheW1zard wrote: »

They were taking turns checking on them. Gerry used the front door, the longer route, and locked the door behind him.
She was just using the back patio door.
Using the front door, which was beside the kids room (more likely to wake them up) and taking the longer route (actually leaving the hotel) seems odd.
My wife and I would just do the same thing (whatever we would have decided).

That doesn't seem strange?

Sorry to sound smart but you and your wife have left your kids alone in an apt in a foreign country??

I’m doing my best not to sound like I’m defending the parents all the time but for me to be suspicious of them I’ll need more than the fact they used different doors to enter the apt...

TheW1zard

Accident happened, parents hid body

Rock77 wrote: »

Sorry to sound smart but you and your wife have left your kids alone in an apt in a foreign country??

I’m doing my best not to sound like I’m defending the parents all the time but for me to be suspicious of them I’ll need more than the fact they used different doors to enter the apt...

No i havent lol, i meant if i was in their shoes, and youre not sounding smart at all.



This is based on Gerry's third version of events, that he and his wife used different doors to check the kids. I'm asking does that not seem strange? If I was checking my kids while i was in a restaurant, I'm certain my wife and I would be doing it the same way.

So do you think its strange that they used different doors? If the answer is no fair enough!

bladespin

Something Else

punchdrunk wrote: »

Sedation? where are the pill bottles? Where are the tourniquets, alcohol wipes, syringes?

Could be something as simple as dozol or stronger, they didn't search the people at the time.

punchdrunk wrote: »

It’s a baseless accusation- no evidence!

Correct, pure speculation, like most of this thread.

Rock77

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

TheW1zard wrote: »

No i havent lol, i meant if i was in their shoes, and youre not sounding smart at all.



This is based on Gerry's third version of events, that he and his wife used different doors to check the kids. I'm asking does that not seem strange? If I was checking my kids while i was in a restaurant, I'm certain my wife and I would be doing it the same way.

So do you think its strange that they used different doors? If the answer is no fair enough!

Lol, gotcha.

No I don’t really think it’s strange.

Like my wife wouldn’t say to me ‘it’s your turn to check the kids, use the same door I did’ then again I suppose she might say ‘Rock77 darling, don’t use the front door cos it’s beside their room and you might wake them’

So we may or may not discuss which door to use but again I dont think it’s enough to raise any suspicion

SusieBlue

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

punchdrunk wrote: »

Sedation? where are the pill bottles? Where are the tourniquets, alcohol wipes, syringes?

It’s a baseless accusation- no evidence!

Are we really supposed to believe that two doctors, one of whom was a qualified anaesthetist, accidentally overdosed their kids?

Whether they used over the counter stuff or somehow managed to smuggle prescription stuff into the country without it being picked up at airport security, the odds of a doctor and an anaesthetist accidentally overdosing three small kids is less than zero.
If it was an average joe I might see some merit in the argument but they were both doctors!

bladespin

Something Else

SusieBlue wrote: »

Are we really supposed to believe that two doctors, one of whom was a qualified anaesthetist, accidentally overdosed their kids?

Overdose is just one theory, not the main one though, for me it would fit with the silent taking, but it's just a theory.

Something Else

I’ve followed this case for years now but the latest developments don’t do much for me.

Of course if you invest literally millions and keep investigating there will always be something of interest.

They’ve admitted they have no body and no hard evidence yet they believe he killed her and need information...