Madeleine McCann

the_pen_turner

Something Else

Trekker09 wrote: »

........also, when my kids were that age and we were away, we never had any problem getting them to sleep. Sea air, loads of activity etc, they were out as soon as their head hit the pillow

no sea air or activities. or at least very little. they spent most of the time at a creche

Trekker09

the_pen_turner wrote: »

no sea air or activities. or at least very little. they spent most of the time at a creche

That day they had been out sailing with the kids club.

splinter65

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

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

She had a sister a year or so younger in the same room.

Look, I know what I am saying is verging on the awfulness of it all, but realistically, if someone wanted to do this, they could have taken all three in the space of a couple of minutes.

I do not believe there was any abduction.

The abductor stepped into the room put his hand over sleeping Maddie’s mouth and nose and stepped back out and down the steps. It took seconds. You are insisting that that couldn’t possibly have happened on the grounds that it was even easier for him to take all three children what with him having 6 arms and all.
You have to discount the abductor theory because you have to in order to make your “the parents did it” theory seem plausible even though you can’t give a timeline to the parents doing it without introducing the most ludicrous laughable scenarios.

Mike9832

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

The three kids were administered sleepy anti histamines. Like Piriton. Not illegal at all.

1.Madeleine woke up groggy and looked for her parents. The twins were in cots, she was in a bed. She staggered out one of the many unlocked doors to find them and was knocked down by a car. Local driver disposed of the evidence. She was 3.5 years old FGS.

2. She woke up groggy etc. and went into the living room where she fell off the couch and had a fatal head injury. Cover up.

3. She woke and wandered and fell in to the sea or roadworks or whatever.

What do YOU think happened? Abduction is the least possible outcome IMV.

How come they never asked the twins what happened or were they knocked out?

They were 2 years old then and even my own son who wasn't the quickest to talk, could communicate at 24 months old, he'd let you know if he wanted something etc

My niece could nearly have conversations before her 2nd birthday, really advanced in speech

Mantis Toboggan

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

Enjoying it so far but they could have condensed it to 4 episodes.

Plumbthedepths

Mike9832 wrote:

How come they never asked the twins what happened or were they knocked out?

The twins never woke the night in question despite all the commotion in the apartment. Which lead to the suggestion they were sedated .

Spanish Eyes

Ah look, in fairness this mystery has been going on for years. It is inevitable that people with theorise since there are so many holes in the abduction theory anyway, IMV of course before y'all descend on me!

Spanish Eyes

splinter65 wrote: »

If you don’t think there was an abduction then you must have a theory as to what happened and how and where and when and why. What is it?

See post 2746 above.

Spanish Eyes

splinter65 wrote: »

The abductor stepped into the room put his hand over sleeping Maddie’s mouth and nose and stepped back out and down the steps. It took seconds. You are insisting that that couldn’t possibly have happened on the grounds that it was even easier for him to take all three children what with him having 6 arms and all.
You have to discount the abductor theory because you have to in order to make your “the parents did it” theory seem plausible even though you can’t give a timeline to the parents doing it without introducing the most ludicrous laughable scenarios.

Could have taken the sister, no need for hand over mouth to keep her quiet, she and her brother were zonked anyway, and slept through the resulting mayhem.

If an abductor was the reason, and they had researched the situation, an accomplice or two would achieve the abduction of three kids in two minutes.

Sorry I am very annoyed at those saying the three kids could never have been taken by one person. There could have been more than one. But anyway, IMV it is all bobblycocks anyway.

Trekker09

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Ah look, in fairness this mystery has been going on for years. It is inevitable that people with theorise since there are so many holes in the abduction theory anyway, IMV of course before y'all descend on me!

Though I don't agree with your scenarios they are valid and you believe them, which should be respected.

Snake Plisken

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

Trekker09 wrote: »

While all of the above are possible, I can't really see them being probable.

I firmly believe that she was abducted.

That was a good series, clarified in my mind that Madeline was abducted. Only crime that Kate and Gerry did was leave their children alone and they have paid for this mistake every day since. Just hope Madeline was taken by some childless couple and not some Pedo network.

iamwhoiam

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

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Could have taken the sister, no need for hand over mouth to keep her quiet, she and her brother were zonked anyway, and slept through the resulting mayhem.

If an abductor was the reason, and they had researched the situation, an accomplice or two would achieve the abduction of three kids in two minutes.

Sorry I am very annoyed at those saying the three kids could never have been taken by one person. There could have been more than one. But anyway, IMV it is all bobblycocks anyway.

No one said they " couldn't " but that is would be a lot easier to take one
Taking just one doesn't rule out an abduction in my opinion
But sure none of us know we are all only guessing really

scamalert

problem is that theres not a shred of evidence to support abduction either. the only thing there is, what family claims to happen on the last day which amounts to nothing as well. Like a claim about open blinds wich been proven to work only from inside and why risk that when you can walk out in a second via main exit as you entered, since wind claim aside it would prob bought another hour or two for kidnapper. its little lies and inconsistencies that really dont make much sense as a claim of facts. why tell you had walked trough resort access when you actually left open gates to main street and used it as main route which again prompts reason why ?

Trekker09

scamalert wrote: »

problem is that theres not a shred of evidence to support abduction either. the only thing there is, what family claims to happen on the last day which amounts to nothing as well. Like a claim about open blinds wich been proven to work only from inside and why risk that when you can walk out in a second via main exit as you entered, since wind claim aside it would prob bought another hour or two for kidnapper. its little lies and inconsistencies that really dont make much sense as a claim of facts. why tell you had walked trough resort access when you actually left open gates to main street and used it as main route which again prompts reason why ?

So what do you think happened?

Spanish Eyes

Trekker09 wrote: »

Though I don't agree with your scenarios they are valid and you believe them, which should be respected.

Sad and all that the mystery of the child's disappearance is, there is no getting away from the fact that everyone and his/her mother will have a theory.

I have mine, others have theirs. No proof of abduction gets me I have to say. So shoot me now.

scamalert

Trekker09 wrote: »

So what do you think happened?

its not about speculating its about asking why did it happen, as i said what was the reason to leave main gate open and apartment as well, would you act the same if you went on holidays and left all your cash knowing main gate is open to street and anyone could basically walk in and go out, while you drink and be like oh it will be fine if ill check every half an hour.


I bet if you did something like that and told someone the minute you did youd be called all names, now replace that with 3 children under 3 and rationalize that.

Plumbthedepths

"F**king b**tards took her". According to witnesses this is what Kate screamed the night Madeline disappeared. I wonder what made her so sure and not entertainthe thought her unsupervised child may have wandered off after waking up and not knowing where her parents were.

Spanish Eyes

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

"F**king b**tards took her". According to witnesses this is what Kate screamed the night Madeline disappeared. I wonder what made her so sure and not entertainthe thought her unsupervised child may have wandered off after waking up and not knowing where her parents were.

Drink could have been a factor here too. Anyway I thought she said "they've taken her"

WTAF? How did KMC know this. But look, I am as interested in this mystery as everyone else posting is TBH, probably not good for my brain, must get a life ha ha.

Mike9832

scamalert wrote: »

would you act the same if you went on holidays and left all your cash knowing main gate is open to street and anyone could basically walk in and go out, while you drink and be like oh it will be fine if ill check every half an hour.

That's a good point

Would they have left 20k in cash in that situation

**** no they would

Mike9832

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

The twins never woke the night in question despite all the commotion in the apartment. Which lead to the suggestion they were sedated .

Crazy

2 year olds are alert, i don't believe for a second the twins would have not woke up

A few day old newborn might sleep in such a situation from my experience anyway

Portuguese would have broke them if they stayed

They know a lot more than they are letting on that's for sure

Mike9832

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

"F**king b**tards took her". According to witnesses this is what Kate screamed the night Madeline disappeared. I wonder what made her so sure and not entertainthe thought her unsupervised child may have wandered off after waking up and not knowing where her parents were.

She was probably langered

Calltocall

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

Trekker09 wrote: »

While all of the above are possible, I can't really see them being probable.

I firmly believe that she was abducted.

I’ve always felt she was abducted, putting aside the rights and wrongs of the parents for a moment and focusing on what could have happened based on information/leads I’ve gone back over information online after watching the documentary as there was a segment about this charity collector that just didn’t sit right with me, from reading one website it was reported by a number of different people that a man was hanging around the general area collecting money for an orphanage, there were at least three separate incidents reported of this.

1. Paul Gordon - who stayed in the same apartment as the mcanns the week previous, reported that he was approached by a man outside his apartment who said he was raising money for an orphanage, he gave him a tenner, he reported this to police after the madeleine story broke.

2. Unidentified British woman in early 2007 in praia da luz - reported a man raising money for an orphanage knocked on her door, and reported he was affixed on her three year old daughter, she refused to give him money. That morning when walking her child to school the same man was hanging around the school, close to the ocean club apartments. The next day the woman said she found an intruder in her house speaking to her three year old daughter, he fled when he heard her coming down the stairs.

3. Gail Cooper reported she was asked by an unknown male for money for an orphanage, she said he made her uneasy, she said she saw the man three times, once in proximity to a childrens group playing on the beach, she gave a photofit description which apparently jane tanner said was 80% like the individual she saw walking away from the apartments with a child in his arms.

Now, apparently the agency responsible for orphanages in Portugal were asked and they said they have no orphanages near the area and they knew nothing of collectors looking for Money. Does anyone know how well those leads were investigated? Could well of been a scam but the woman who reported a man that intruded into her property and was speaking to her little girl in the same area as Madeliene mcanns hotel in the same year she went missing does raise eyebrows to say the least, that’s not an everyday occurrence and with all the messing with the investigation I hope this was given serious consideration.

Spanish Eyes

So the only child in the resort was abducted. Pfff.

I am guessing that the daycare kiddies club was full of blond three year olds.

Why Madeleine, and not the children of the so called Tapas friends or others in the resort at that time?

Does not add up for me anyway.

iamwhoiam

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

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

So the only child in the resort was abducted. Pfff.

I am guessing that the daycare kiddies club was full of blond three year olds.

Why Madeleine, and not the children of the so called Tapas friends or others in the resort at that time?

Does not add up for me anyway.

Because maybe the other three year old blonde girls parents stayed with them and locked the door .
And The Mc Canns apartment was the most vulnerable and close to the road

In the absence of any evidence as to what did actually happen, people are blaming her parents for leaving her alone. It's natural to want someone to blame but the person to blame is actually whoever is responsible for her disappearance.

I'm not going to keep stating the same thing, unlike many on here! This is the case, as I see it;

A child is missing, last seen in bed in the apartment. Possible scenarios are

1. Child wakes, walks out of apartment, gets lost, is never found.

2. Child wakes, walks out & is taken by someone.

3. Child is taken from apartment by someone unknown.

4. Child is taken from apartment by someone known

5. Child dies / is killed & body is hidden, never to be found.

Now, while there is no evidence of any one particular theory, some are naturally more likely or less likely than others.
In Ireland, the chances of a child abduction by a stranger are practically zero, on the continent however things are different. So, her being abducted either from the street or from the apartment could be likely.
Her being abducted by someone known to her is a possibility, maybe someone in the group had an accomplice.
Her wandering out alone, & never being seen again is highly unlikely.
Her being killed or dieing in the apartment & her body being hidden somewhere never to be found is unlikely. Reasons being, timeline of events, behavior of parents, local knowledge of area by parents, chances to move a dead body & hide it somewhere never to be found all while being in the centre of a huge Investigation, highly unlikely.

So I would suggest that the most obvious scenario is she either wandered outside & got taken or someone went into the apartment & took her.

Spanish Eyes

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Why Madeleine, and not the children of the so called Tapas friends or others in the resort at that time?

Does not add up for me anyway.

& if it was one of the other children you would be saying the same about that child.
I don't understand what you're trying to say here?

Spanish Eyes

There was so much support from British establishment. So if anything dodgy happened it would never be revealed really.

I was amazed at the time at the amount of publicity, PR gurus, lawyers, lawsuits, Murat, and Malinka, and everything else that I just said to myself WTAF is going on here. Do they want to find their daughter, or shut dissenting voices.

I reckon there are D notices here.

Sorry for the little child.

scamalert

Calltocall wrote: »

I’ve always felt she was abducted, putting aside the rights and wrongs of the parents for a moment and focusing on what could have happened based on information/leads I’ve gone back over information online after watching the documentary as there was a segment about this charity collector that just didn’t sit right with me, from reading one website it was reported by a number of different people that a man was hanging around the general area collecting money for an orphanage, there were at least three separate incidents reported of this.

1. Paul Gordon - who stayed in the same apartment as the mcanns the week previous, reported that he was approached by a man outside his apartment who said he was raising money for an orphanage, he gave him a tenner, he reported this to police after the madeleine story broke.

2. Unidentified British woman in early 2007 in praia da luz - reported a man raising money for an orphanage knocked on her door, and reported he was affixed on her three year old daughter, she refused to give him money. That morning when walking her child to school the same man was hanging around the school, close to the ocean club apartments. The next day the woman said she found an intruder in her house speaking to her three year old daughter, he fled when he heard her coming down the stairs.


.

yeah sounds totally legit, stranger in house with your kid, sure report it next time when theres kid missing about it being suspicious.

Spanish Eyes

scamalert wrote: »

yeah sounds totally legit, stranger in house with your kid, sure report it next time when theres kid missing about it being suspicious.

Does no one lock their doors anymore FGS.

Perfect foil for the mcs anyway. Ah sure it's Portugal, we don't need to lock up at all, but there are paedophiles out there abducting 3 year olds to order.

No bother at all.

Calltocall

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

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Because maybe the other three year old blonde girls parents stayed with them and locked the door .
And The Mc Canns apartment was the most vulnerable and close to the road

Exactly, you could say that about any abduction case, why that child and not another, it comes down to opportunity and timing, they gave the opportunity by leaving the room unlocked.

I strongly suspect he was watching the group and made his move after the last parent checked on the kids, you have to remember also one piece of key information is that hotel staff put a note in a book which stated the mcanns block booked a table for themselves and their friends from 8.30 for four nights and it mentioned in the note that their kids were sleeping in their rooms, this book was left at a reception area visible for anyone to see. For someone with ill intent they gave him the opportunity by unlocking the door and the note gave him the times when they were away from their room.

Spanish Eyes

Sorry now, but firstly how could any parent go on the lash and leave three kids under the age of four alone? That is just unthinkable to me, but I may be alone in thinking that.

Secondly how could they think that leaving the doors unlocked was sensible. Well in fairness if you deem leaving your little kids alone, possibly leaving the doors unlocked was not on the radar.

The whole thing stinks to me.

But D notices abound, and we will never know.

But there is no evidence of an abductor either is there?

scamalert

yeah ok so we got that their aptm was closest to main street and, and as dumb as it sounds they had a note with times they will visits their kids at reception for some reason.


Now why would someone risk opening blinds if they had targeted that house why would someone open blinds, or even use them to jump out given its resorts all over place and pretty much lit up street so more chance to draw unwanted attention ?



as if it was such a timed kidnap why not put a towel under kids blanket or smth and buy yourself a days start, as given all records on checks it seems not a single parent went actually inside just a peek trough doors, as besides wind gust story it seems they prob wouldn't noticed it until next day.

Spanish Eyes

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Sorry now, but firstly how could any parent go on the lash and leave three kids under the age of four alone? That is just unthinkable to me, but I may be alone in thinking that.

Secondly how could they think that leaving the doors unlocked was sensible. Well in fairness if you deem leaving your little kids alone, possibly leaving the doors unlocked was not on the radar.

The whole thing stinks to me.

But D notices abound, and we will never know.

But there is no evidence of an abductor either is there?

Same thing over & over.....
You don't like the McCanns, obviously, we get it. Leaving kids alone does not make someone responsible for their disappearance, whoever caused them to disappear, or dissapeared them, I know you love that word! Is responsible.
There's no evidence of anything, so like I said its a case of which is most likely to have happened.

Spanish Eyes

bubblypop wrote: »

Same thing over & over.....
You don't like the McCanns, obviously, we get it. Leaving kids alone does not make someone responsible for their disappearance, whoever caused them to disappear, or dissapeared them, I know you love that word! Is responsible.
There's no evidence of anything, so like I said its a case of which is most likely to have happened.

There is no need to get personal at all. Where did I say I didn't like the McCanns anyway? You might have a link for that.

I said what a lot of people also say.

It is a discussion forum. As long as we are civil with each other and not libellous it's all good.

Calltocall

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

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Sorry now, but firstly how could any parent go on the lash and leave three kids under the age of four alone? That is just unthinkable to me, but I may be alone in thinking that.

Secondly how could they think that leaving the doors unlocked was sensible. Well in fairness if you deem leaving your little kids alone, possibly leaving the doors unlocked was not on the radar.

The whole thing stinks to me.

But D notices abound, and we will never know.

But there is no evidence of an abductor either is there?

I agree it was not sensible or right to leave their children alone in an unlocked room they will have to live with that mistake and will be haunted by that forever, that being said an awful lot of this case has been focused on the moral actions of the parents etc which imo has taken the focus off the actual ****ing scumbag who abducted the child and all this back and forth arguing between police forces etc took the focus off him and allowed him to slip through the net, there’s a lot of eye raising plausible theories mentioned in the doc such as the charity collector to warrant throwing everything behind finding that individual however it didn’t happen and a lot of this stuff came to light years later through private investigators when it was really too late, the whole thing is a tragedy.

dark crystal

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

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Sorry now, but firstly how could any parent go on the lash and leave three kids under the age of four alone? That is just unthinkable to me, but I may be alone in thinking that.

Secondly how could they think that leaving the doors unlocked was sensible. Well in fairness if you deem leaving your little kids alone, possibly leaving the doors unlocked was not on the radar.

The whole thing stinks to me.

But D notices abound, and we will never know.

But there is no evidence of an abductor either is there?

You are literally repeating the same paragraphs over and over again. We got it the first dozen times...the McCanns were wrong for leaving the children, D notices something and no evidence of abduction etc..


Anything new to add to the discussion?

Creol1

Something Else

There's no smoking gun but my view is that the parents must have been responsible in some way for their daughter's disappearance/death, because, even though there is no conclusive evidence, it is too much of a stretch of credulity to believe anything else.

If we believe she was abducted by a stranger, then we have to believe that he managed to steal the child not only without being caught in a busy holiday resort, but that, critically, he did not even leave the merest trace of his own DNA evidence in the apartment; we have to believe that it was a coincidence that world-class cadaver dogs went through several different apartments and alighted on a cadaver odour in the cupboard of the apartment Madeleine had been in; that it was a coincidence that an independent witness testified that he had seen someone matching Gerry McCann's features with a child or the body of a child around the time of the disappearance; and that the professional instincts and judgement of the competent police authority were entirely misplaced and/or motivated by bad faith.

I just can't swallow all of that, and the denigration of the Portuguese police is something that is particularly jarring and seems to have been a feature of the case from the very beginning in coverage in the English-language media. There seems to be a touch of xenophobia in the way the British tabloids treated the Portuguese police as a mere detail in the case at best and at worst a hostile force engaging in some kind of conspiracy to frame these decent English professionals. The police force are the professionals, are linked internationally to INTERPOL and EUROPOL, and whatever thesis they come to should automatically be the preferred theory, unless there is some clear and solid evidence of corruption or bias on their part. While the McCanns were never charged, it is clear that the police in Portugal formed the view, and have never disavowed the view, that they were the most likely culprits.

Some of the alternative theories are simply risible. Apparently one idea that was actually seriously pursued by the British police was that Madeleine wandered out of the apartment and fell into a manhole somewhere, thus disappearing without trace. As for the child-trafficking theory, that this young white girl was kidnapped by a dastardly gang of North African child traffickers, this might represent the type of fears that might seem plausible in the minds of a certain segment of the English population, but to anyone else it is fanciful to the point of comical.

Involvement of her parents in her death seems to me the most likely explanation, but that's not the same as proof and if I were a member of a jury I wouldn't necessarily vote to convict her parents as probability isn't a high enough burden of proof. Even if they were responsible, Kate and Gerry McCann have built their lives around "searching" for their daughter and have probably reached they stage where they half-believe it; after this time lapse, I doubt they will ever confess, so I don't think we will ever know for sure what happened in that apartment.

Spanish Eyes

Calltocall wrote: »

I agree it was not sensible or right to leave their children alone in an unlocked room they will have to live with that mistake and will be haunted by that forever, that being said an awful lot of this case has been focused on the moral actions of the parents etc which imo has taken the focus off the actual ****ing scumbag who abducted the child and all this back and forth arguing between police forces etc took the focus off him and allowed him to slip through the net, there’s a lot of eye raising plausible theories mentioned in the doc such as the charity collector to warrant throwing everything behind finding that individual however it didn’t happen and a lot of this stuff came to light years later through private investigators when it was really too late, the whole thing is a tragedy.

The fund had millions behind it, but in the end could find nothing. I do not know if that was deliberate or because there was no evidence of anything, but nothing was found. I often wonder. But anyway.

There is still no evidence of an abductor. If you think there is, why has the Fund not found this out do you think?

Spanish Eyes

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

There is still no evidence of an abductor. If you think there is, why has the Fund not found this out do you think?

There is no evidence of anything, why do you think there was no abduction?

Spanish Eyes

dark crystal wrote: »

You are literally repeating the same paragraphs over and over again. We got it the first dozen times...the McCanns were wrong for leaving the children, D notices something and no evidence of abduction etc..


Anything new to add to the discussion?

Why do you care about what I say? It is a discussion, but I just wondered why you are seemingly so personal and kind of stalkerish about it.

Everyone has their theories. All are valid really given the lack of evidence for any theory.

There is really no need to personally target my posts. IMO.

Spanish Eyes

bubblypop wrote: »

There is no evidence of anything, why do you think there was no abduction?

Why do you think there was an abduction? All views are valid here.

dark crystal

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

Creol1 wrote: »

There's no smoking gun but my view is that the parents must have been responsible in some way for their daughter's disappearance/death, because, even though there is no conclusive evidence, it is too much of a stretch of credulity to believe anything else.

I completely disagree that it's a stretch of incredulity to believe anything else, I actually believe the theory of the parents doing it is the incredulous theory!

If we believe she was abducted by a stranger, then we have to believe that he managed to steal the child not only without being caught in a busy holiday resort, but that, critically, he did not even leave the merest trace of his own DNA evidence in the apartment; we have to believe that it was a coincidence that world-class cadaver dogs went through several different apartments and alighted on a cadaver odour in the cupboard of the apartment Madeleine had been in; that it was a coincidence that an independent witness testified that he had seen someone matching Gerry McCann's features with a child or the body of a child around the time of the disappearance; and that the professional instincts and judgement of the competent police authority were entirely misplaced and/or motivated by bad faith.

The crime scene was vastly contaminated. There were loads of people in and out of the apartment throughout that evening before it was sealed off for examination.

The independent witness's statement was discounted because Gerry was seen by many people at the Ocean Club; i.e, 10pm - when the alarm was initially raised. How could he be in two places at once?

I just can't swallow all of that, and the denigration of the Portuguese police is something that is particularly jarring and seems to have been a feature of the case from the very beginning in coverage in the English-language media. There seems to be a touch of xenophobia in the way the British tabloids treated the Portuguese police as a mere detail in the case at best and at worst a hostile force engaging in some kind of conspiracy to frame these decent English professionals. The police force are the professionals, are linked internationally to INTERPOL and EUROPOL, and whatever thesis they come to should automatically be the preferred theory, unless there is some clear and solid evidence of corruption or bias on their part. While the McCanns were never charged, it is clear that the police in Portugal formed the view, and have never disavowed the view, that they were the most likely culprits.

Competent Police Force, ok. Read up on the Joana Cipriano case and the subsequent trial of the Police officers involved, including Goncalo Amaral's involvement.

Some of the alternative theories are simply risible. Apparently one idea that was actually seriously pursued by the British police was that Madeleine wandered out of the apartment and fell into a manhole somewhere, thus disappearing without trace. As for the child-trafficking theory, that this young white girl was kidnapped by a dastardly gang of North African child traffickers, this might represent the type of fears that might seem plausible in the minds of a certain segment of the English population, but to anyone else it is fanciful to the point of comical.

It may be fanciful and comical to you, but did you see the section of the documentary that detailed the disappearance of the 11 year old Portuguese boy, Rui Pedro, who was found to have been abducted and trafficked by a paedophile ring? You only have to look at the website for the National Centre for Missing and Exploited children and then call it fanciful.

Involvement of her parents in her death seems to me the most likely explanation, but that's not the same as proof and if I were a member of a jury I wouldn't necessarily vote to convict her parents as probability isn't a high enough burden of proof. Even if they were responsible, Kate and Gerry McCann have built their lives around "searching" for their daughter and have probably reached they stage where they half-believe it; after this time lapse, I doubt they will ever confess, so I don't think we will ever know for sure what happened in that apartment.

If your explaination is so likely, explain how they did it in the timeline involved and how they've managed to get away with it so long?

dark crystal

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

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Why do you care about what I say? It is a discussion, but I just wondered why you are seemingly so personal and kind of stalkerish about it.

Everyone has their theories. All are valid really given the lack of evidence for any theory.

There is really no need to personally target my posts. IMO.

Stalkerish? I'm on the same thread as you, how am I stalking you? Please!


I'm quoting your post, as you have quoted others - if you feel that is somehow targetting you personally, report it.

Spanish Eyes

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Why do you think there was an abduction? All views are valid here.

I have already posted what I think based on most likely scenarios, you can go back & read my posts if you like

Spanish Eyes

dark crystal wrote: »

Stalkerish? I'm on the same thread as you, how am I stalking you? Please!


I'm quoting your post, as you have quoted others - if you feel that is somehow targetting you personally, report it.

Ah come on, there is no need to get too invested and personal. But in fairness, you did mention many other posts of mine!

Why not just discuss and post with facts (but there are none are there?). So on we go.

We are allowed to discuss things here, and I think the mods will decide who should be infracted.

Please do not get personal, it doesn't help anyone.

scamalert

Calltocall wrote: »

I agree it was not sensible or right to leave their children alone in an unlocked room they will have to live with that mistake and will be haunted by that forever, that being said an awful lot of this case has been focused on the moral actions of the parents etc which imo has taken the focus off the actual ****ing scumbag who abducted the child and all this back and forth arguing between police forces etc took the focus off him and allowed him to slip through the net.

How about getting story right from beginning before jumping to some bogey man that no one seen and there isn't any evidence off.


As seems your inclined their innocent but yet we have no clue why they made any of the most stupidest decisions leading to disappearing of their child, to which they contributed the most. Since past that its only fairy tales and made up stories that we can continue to speculate on someone taking child, yet events leading up to that is no interest to you as you deem its fault that shouldn't raise any questions, when its actually only solid proof that could been followed on.

Calltocall

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

scamalert wrote: »

How about getting story right from beginning before jumping to some bogey man that no one seen and there isn't any evidence off.


As seems your inclined their innocent but yet we have no clue why they made any of the most stupidest decisions leading to disappearing of their child, to which they contributed the most. Since past that its only fairy tales and made up stories that we can continue to speculate on someone taking child, yet events leading up to that is no interest to you as you deem its fault that shouldn't raise any questions, when its actually only solid proof that could been followed on.

What? I don’t follow you, I’ve said they gave the opportunity to someone with bad intent by leaving their room unlocked, that was their critical mistake, and do you know why they made those decisions?? Imo it was Because they were negligent, because they didn’t think there was someone waiting to abduct their child. They shouldn’t have done that but it doesn’t make them murderers. Also a note was left in the reception area which stated the time they would be away from their kids and also the nights they were away from their room, doesn’t take a genius to figure out someone who wanted to take a child had all the info he needed. And they’re not fairytales btw the charity collector was reported by witnesses, also do you know there were at least 6 sexual assaults against british children that occured in the algarve area in holiday villas by a lone intruder at night, 3 in praia da luz, one in 2005 in praia da luz that involved a man that snuck into a ten year old girls room, no one was ever apprehended. Not fairytales.

Blanco100

Somebody might correct me on this but it didnt seem to be properly explained in relation to exact relationship between the McCanns and the tapas 7. Were they friends who met over the course of the holiday? were they close friend who were acquainted back in Uk?

The Oldfield guy who check on their kids, was he a close friend from home? Very odd to let a bloke you met on holiday check on your kids.

However, being a negligent parent doesnt make them complicit. There would be a whole different spin put on this case if the McCann were an unemployed couple in same circumstances whose kid went missing in Benidorm.

I think they were closed off to certain lines of questioning/closed ranks to a certain extent as they knew they were going to be vilified for leaving their kids alone.

So many theories in fairness, but my own guess would be that the family were under surveillance by a sophisticated trafficking operation who saw a window of oportunity to get in and get out having witnessed the families regular evening habits.

Chances are shes living with a family now and is completely non the wiser.

Trekker09

Blanco100 wrote: »

Somebody might correct me on this but it didnt seem to be properly explained in relation to exact relationship between the McCanns and the tapas 7. Were they friends who met over the course of the holiday? were they close friend who were acquainted back in Uk?

The Oldfield guy who check on their kids, was he a close friend from home? Very odd to let a bloke you met on holiday check on your kids.

However, being a negligent parent doesnt make them complicit. There would be a whole different spin put on this case if the McCann were an unemployed couple in same circumstances whose kid went missing in Benidorm.

I think they were closed off to certain lines of questioning/closed ranks to a certain extent as they knew they were going to be vilified for leaving their kids alone.

So many theories in fairness, but my own guess would be that the family were under surveillance by a sophisticated trafficking operation who saw a window of oportunity to get in and get out having witnessed the families regular evening habits.

Chances are shes living with a family now and is completely non the wiser.

AFAIK they worked together and were long term friends. For the McCanns to have been responsible in the death of Maddie, it would have meant that all the group would have to have been involved to some degree. No way would they all have been able to keep it to themselves this long if that had been the case.

I agree with you and would like to believe that she's alive and relatively well.

Mike9832

Trekker09 wrote: »

AFAIK they worked together and were long term friends. For the McCanns to have been responsible in the death of Maddie, it would have meant that all the group would have to have been involved to some degree. No way would they all have been able to keep it to themselves this long if that had been the case.

I agree with you and would like to believe that she's alive and relatively well.

Not really

Only the parents saw Maddie between 17:30 - 22:00?

That's a lot of time

What I don't understand is why can't the parent's admit they were wrong to leave the babies alone

Kate's mother wanted to shake her for leaving Maddie and toddlers alone, at least she had sense