Madeleine McCann

[SWP's back]

Have they been arrested yet?

Lack of evidence to arrest doesn't mean innocence.

 

[glen quagmire]

Have they been arrested yet?

Lack of evidence to arrest doesn't mean innocence.

Just my opinion, i think they are guilty.

 

[Ricster]

Just for you GSC. http://www.victimsofthestate.org/CC/WB.htm

It would depend on the Portuguese legal system though.

Any legal system which would allow a murder conviction with no body or witness should not be recognised by the UK, especially when it comes to our citizens.

You see this is where alot of people are getting mixed up. I for one believe that Gerry and Kate McCann had something to do with the disappearance of Maddie. But i am of the belief that it wasn't murder but manslaughter.<br /><br />-- Tue Aug 02, 2011 1:05 pm --<br /><br />

There is always another theory about the dogs of course; that the 'evidence' was planted. It took them three months to use the dogs, when their practices were already well under discussion and coming in for criticism. It took them 12 hours to even set up roadblocks and checks.
They knew they had loused up and went for the 'easy target', the parents. I'm not surprised the parents were reticent by this point, what with the hideously mangled translation on offer I don't think I would have been receptive to being questioned either!

Shh you must not criticise those nice Portuguese police.

They screwed up big time which made any outcome one way or another highly unlikely.

I agree they did screw up, yet they weren't helped much by the "victims"

 

[SWP's back]

Have they been arrested yet?

Lack of evidence to arrest doesn't mean innocence.

Just my opinion, i think they are guilty.

I think they know more than they let on

 

[Ricster]

And i still want to know what people think of this, seems to have got skimmed over or lost within the thread.

But Kate McCann let Sky News know about Maddie's "disappearance" before letting the police know. Why is this? My belief is that if a story like this is out in the public domain and the details are easily accessable, there is no way, at that time, that any jury would find them guilty. There would be compassion, and heart felt anguish shown for the parents and they would more than definately recieve a not guilt verdict.

Why did Kate do this?

Another very clever move by the McCann's, dont you think?

 

[metalblue]

.

-- Mon Aug 01, 2011 6:57 pm --

What makes me laugh is somehow they have managed to bring the focus to did they / didn't they where the simple fact is had they not been selfish fucktards and stayed in with their kids, who nobody forced them to have, instead of fucking off out, no matter it was only over the road, this kid would not be missing, for that alone they should be in prison.

Well I have to agree with you there.
Except no good would come from it.
No prison sentence would be harder than what they are going through.
It would hamper efforts to find her, and punish the remaining kids.(who have already lost a sister etc)

No i'd probably have to agree with you that a prison sentence would probably do more harm than good, don't make it sit right with me thou

 

[Ricster]

Interesting reading through this thread, especially all the different opinions and theories off people on this sad story!
I have stated numerous times (on the many threads that crop up on this story) that I do not believe for one minute that the parents killed her!
Maybe I'm naive and too trustworthy to believe they had something to do with her going missing , maybe I'm not aware of all the facts regarding this case??
I still keep coming back to the same point when someone suggests they killed her......where did they hide the body and how has it not been found if they did do it?
I mean if they did kill her and hide the body, I feel they would of panicked and made a hash of hiding it!
Pure speculation i agree...just as all the other stuff is!
I do think some people do go over the top with the sniffer dog theories etc....pure fantasy imo!

well im not 100% on the whole case but the fact that the sniffer dog has a 100% record and picked the scent of a dead body in the house and on the boot of the car doesn't suggest pure fantasy to me.

As neither the apartment nor the car belonged to the McCanns and were both rented, it really wouldn't be difficult to create reasonable doubt around the sniffer dog's evidence, even if it does have a 100% record. That's why it wouldn't be relied on as central to any prosecution case.

And what about the scent on Maddie's teddy?

 

[metalblue]

Do coroners sit in cupboards for 2 hours then hop in hire car boots for the rest of the afternoon?

Probably not, no.
Just Brits accidentally/purposely killing a much loved child, getting the world media involved ASAP, lobbing the said child's body into the ocean and/or burying it/hiding it somewhere for 3 weeks then loading it into a rental car.
Like you do.

I see your point, i'd agree to an extent that it would likely take a big combination of sheer good luck and police incompetence to pull this one without getting caught and add to that them disposing of a body in an area that probably isn't all that familar to them and that remains, to this day undetected.

 

[BlueHammer85]

And i still want to know what people think of this, seems to have got skimmed over or lost within the thread.

But Kate McCann let Sky News know about Maddie's "disappearance" before letting the police know. Why is this? My belief is that if a story like this is out in the public domain and the details are easily accessable, there is no way, at that time, that any jury would find them guilty. There would be compassion, and heart felt anguish shown for the parents and they would more than definately recieve a not guilt verdict.

Why did Kate do this?

Another very clever move by the McCann's, dont you think?

where is the evidence for this ?

 

[Ricster]

And i still want to know what people think of this, seems to have got skimmed over or lost within the thread.

But Kate McCann let Sky News know about Maddie's "disappearance" before letting the police know. Why is this? My belief is that if a story like this is out in the public domain and the details are easily accessable, there is no way, at that time, that any jury would find them guilty. There would be compassion, and heart felt anguish shown for the parents and they would more than definately recieve a not guilt verdict.

Why did Kate do this?

Another very clever move by the McCann's, dont you think?

where is the evidence for this ?

I believe its on the list of questions Kate refused to answer.

 

[Mr.Banks]

Do coroners sit in cupboards for 2 hours then hop in hire car boots for the rest of the afternoon?

Probably not, no.
Just Brits accidentally/purposely killing a much loved child, getting the world media involved ASAP, lobbing the said child's body into the ocean and/or burying it/hiding it somewhere for 3 weeks then loading it into a rental car.
Like you do.

I see your point, i'd agree to an extent that it would likely take a big combination of sheer good luck and police incompetence to pull this one without getting caught and add to that them disposing of a body in an area that probably isn't all that familar to them and that remains, to this day undetected.

I'm down on the Algarve and believe me the police incompetence could be a goer!! Seriously though you don't have to go far from the coastal towns to end up in deserted wildernesses and with the heat in Summer it wouldn't have taken long for Maddie to 'disappear' also there are plenty of uncapped boreholes and wells etc in the middle of nowhere.

 

[Kid A]

Probably not, no.
Just Brits accidentally/purposely killing a much loved child, getting the world media involved ASAP, lobbing the said child's body into the ocean and/or burying it/hiding it somewhere for 3 weeks then loading it into a rental car.
Like you do.

I see your point, i'd agree to an extent that it would likely take a big combination of sheer good luck and police incompetence to pull this one without getting caught and add to that them disposing of a body in an area that probably isn't all that familar to them and that remains, to this day undetected.

I'm down on the Algarve and believe me the police incompetence could be a goer!! Seriously though you don't have to go far from the coastal towns to end up in deserted wildernesses and with the heat in Summer it wouldn't have taken long for Maddie to 'disappear' also there are plenty of uncapped boreholes and wells etc in the middle of nowhere.

I used to work with someone who was staying in the resort the week before Maddy disappeared - she was interviewed by UK police. She was suspicious of the McCanns' story because the place is extremely remote, and the idea of an outsider just walking in and taking the girl seemed incredibly unlikely.

For my part, I think the parents are involved, which is pretty sickening, given their behaviour since it happened. Still, I guess we shouldn't be surprised that there are such twisted people in the world.

 

[Dubai Blue]

well im not 100% on the whole case but the fact that the sniffer dog has a 100% record and picked the scent of a dead body in the house and on the boot of the car doesn't suggest pure fantasy to me.

As neither the apartment nor the car belonged to the McCanns and were both rented, it really wouldn't be difficult to create reasonable doubt around the sniffer dog's evidence, even if it does have a 100% record. That's why it wouldn't be relied on as central to any prosecution case.

And what about the scent on Maddie's teddy?

Assuming a scent was present in the apartment, is it beyond the realms of possibility that the teddy became contaminated by it? Both parents work in hospitals. Could the scent have been transferred to the teddy through that? Did Madeleine ever visit their workplace with the teddy?

I'm not defending the McCanns or suggesting that it doesn't look dodgy, I'm just trying to show how easily reasonable doubt can be established around such evidence, which is why it would never be relied on as being central to a compelling prosecution case.

And i still want to know what people think of this, seems to have got skimmed over or lost within the thread.

But Kate McCann let Sky News know about Maddie's "disappearance" before letting the police know. Why is this? My belief is that if a story like this is out in the public domain and the details are easily accessable, there is no way, at that time, that any jury would find them guilty. There would be compassion, and heart felt anguish shown for the parents and they would more than definately recieve a not guilt verdict.

Why did Kate do this?

Another very clever move by the McCann's, dont you think?

I still can't find anything other than internet rumour that this actually happened. When the investigation was in full swing, different rumours were flying around on an hourly basis and I imagine most turned out to be bullshit. Was this ever proven?

The main hole I see in most of these theories is that we are expected to believe that two parents with no previous criminal history have been able to carry out the perfect crime in the hours immediately following the accidental death of their child, even to the extent that they dreamt up a cunning media PR strategy. Personally, I just can't see it.

 

[Lancet Fluke]

And i still want to know what people think of this, seems to have got skimmed over or lost within the thread.

But Kate McCann let Sky News know about Maddie's "disappearance" before letting the police know. Why is this? My belief is that if a story like this is out in the public domain and the details are easily accessable, there is no way, at that time, that any jury would find them guilty. There would be compassion, and heart felt anguish shown for the parents and they would more than definately recieve a not guilt verdict.

Why did Kate do this?

Another very clever move by the McCann's, dont you think?

I still can't find anything other than internet rumour that this actually happened. When the investigation was in full swing, different rumours were flying around on an hourly basis and I imagine most turned out to be bullshit. Was this ever proven?

The main hole I see in most of these theories is that we are expected to believe that two parents with no previous criminal history have been able to carry out the perfect crime in the hours immediately following the accidental death of their child, even to the extent that they dreamt up a cunning media PR strategy. Personally, I just can't see it.

As someone said earlier, she was asked about phoning Sky by the police. This may sound fairly simplistic (especially to those who say that the questions were leading and that they would not have answered the questions if in her position) but surely, if she didn't phone them, she could have said, "No, I didn't phone them." Or if she did phone them to get publicity for the search but phoned them after phoning the police, she could have said, "Yes I phoned them but not before I phoned the police." Not sure how that would have incriminated her and it would have cleared the issue up. Has she responded to this "rumour" in her book?

 

[Ricster]

I really want to read this book, but i am not going to line the pockets of a possible killer.

Anyone know where i can download it for free?

 

[metalblue]

And i still want to know what people think of this, seems to have got skimmed over or lost within the thread.

I still can't find anything other than internet rumour that this actually happened. When the investigation was in full swing, different rumours were flying around on an hourly basis and I imagine most turned out to be bullshit. Was this ever proven?

The main hole I see in most of these theories is that we are expected to believe that two parents with no previous criminal history have been able to carry out the perfect crime in the hours immediately following the accidental death of their child, even to the extent that they dreamt up a cunning media PR strategy. Personally, I just can't see it.

As someone said earlier, she was asked about phoning Sky by the police. This may sound fairly simplistic (especially to those who say that the questions were leading and that they would not have answered the questions if in her position) but surely, if she didn't phone them, she could have said, "No, I didn't phone them." Or if she did phone them to get publicity for the search but phoned them after phoning the police, she could have said, "Yes I phoned them but not before I phoned the police." Not sure how that would have incriminated her and it would have cleared the issue up. Has she responded to this "rumour" in her book?

From memory she had the staff at the restaurant call the police, which probably makes some sense, so perhaps she called the press while that was going on? I can't really remember I'll try have a flick through the book later tonight.<br /><br />-- Thu Aug 04, 2011 6:16 pm --<br /><br />

I really want to read this book, but i am not going to line the pockets of a possible killer.

Anyone know where i can download it for free?

Try the library?

 

[JoeMercer'sWay]

I still can't find anything other than internet rumour that this actually happened. When the investigation was in full swing, different rumours were flying around on an hourly basis and I imagine most turned out to be bullshit. Was this ever proven?

The main hole I see in most of these theories is that we are expected to believe that two parents with no previous criminal history have been able to carry out the perfect crime in the hours immediately following the accidental death of their child, even to the extent that they dreamt up a cunning media PR strategy. Personally, I just can't see it.

As someone said earlier, she was asked about phoning Sky by the police. This may sound fairly simplistic (especially to those who say that the questions were leading and that they would not have answered the questions if in her position) but surely, if she didn't phone them, she could have said, "No, I didn't phone them." Or if she did phone them to get publicity for the search but phoned them after phoning the police, she could have said, "Yes I phoned them but not before I phoned the police." Not sure how that would have incriminated her and it would have cleared the issue up. Has she responded to this "rumour" in her book?

From memory she had the staff at the restaurant call the police, which probably makes some sense, so perhaps she called the press while that was going on? I can't really remember I'll try have a flick through the book later tonight.

-- Thu Aug 04, 2011 6:16 pm --

I really want to read this book, but i am not going to line the pockets of a possible killer.

Anyone know where i can download it for free?

Try the library?

yeah it's in the fiction section.

 

[didactic]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/922...pen-case-saying-there-is-no-new-evidence.html

Madeleine McCann: Portuguese police refuse to reopen case saying there is no new evidence
Portuguese police have refused to reopen the inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann saying there is no new evidence

Yesterday the Met Police said the youngster could still be alive and released a new “age progression” image of the toddler, which they said showed what she would look like today at the age of nine.

They asked the Portugese Police to reopen the case saying they had identified nearly 200 new items for investigation within historic material and believed they had found new evidence.

But today police in Portugal regused the request.

"There are no new elements at the moment that would allow for the reopening of the inquiry," Pedro do Carmo, the deputy head of the criminal police department, told AFP.

It came just hours after her parents said they were ''hugely encouraged'' by the momentum in the case.

Kate McCann is said to be ''particularly pleased'' with the new age-progressed image of Madeleine, saying it has strong family resemblance.

Mrs McCann and her husband Gerry have also joined Scotland Yard in urging Portuguese authorities to reopen the search for Madeleine after detectives said there were 195 potential leads to finding her alive.

McCann family spokesman Clarence Mitchell told BBC Breakfast that as the five-year anniversary of her disappearance draws close, Mr and Mrs McCann are said to be ''coping as best they can''.

Mr Mitchell said: ''Kate and Gerry welcome this and they are hugely encouraged by what the police have been doing all of this last year since the launch of the investigative review.

''They (Scotland Yard) believe that it is quite possible that Madeleine could still be alive and that is what Kate and Gerry have said throughout the five years and they are hugely encouraged by all of this momentum in the case.''

 

[york away to this!]

...didn't realise she was in a case....did her father pack it?

 

[didactic]

...didn't realise she was in a case....did her father pack it?

As some rumours have it he did. One of the investigating officers made a documentary saying that he believes she died of an overdose given to her by her parents so she would sleep and the disposed of her body.

He even showed some rather compelling evidence.