Quote:
Originally posted by spacebandit
I suspect that there are a lot of people, especially parents, who found the McCanns story "iffy" - but would never say so for fear of being attacked, as those who did raise such suspicions initially were.
Personally I found something "wrong" about them leaving their other children with babysitters, in a foreign country, near to where their sibling was "abducted" while they jetted off to rome and madrid are anywhere a foregin "leader" would be willing to meet them.
but for me the real eye-opener was the alleged sighting of the kid in Belgium - where the police even DNA tested a glass held by the child - came back negative but the police are not sure they tested the right glass -but what struck me was that whilst all the newspapers here in Britain and elsewhere in Europe, inluding Portugal, focussed on that as a real possibility while the results of the test were being waited for - the McCanns didn't exactly rush there did they ?,
rush off to see the police investigation for themselves, in fact they didn't go at all.
the only sighting of any voracity - and despite them jetting off to every other city that would have them just to shake a few hands - they show no interest at all in that sighting.
and I'm sorry but you have to ask - why ??
Would it be too cynical to suggest that - why bother going to Belgium, perhaps Rome and Madrid are much more exciting [they went there, not for a sighting - just to shake some hands] , and if you know already the sighting is false....why bother ?
I'd like to know why a proper crime scene investigation team didn't go over that room from top to bottom and collect and scrape everything that may be needed at the time.
IMO I think that the reason the room was trace checked now was after the Belgium episode, I cannot be the only one who noticed that they showed no interest in that "sighting".
I hope my suspicions turn out to be unfounded - as that is the most sad and disturbing end to a childs life imaginable, at the hands of its own parents.
I'd like to know why the finger of suspicion was pointed elsewhere without any questions- after all if your wife is murdered or goes "missing" the husband is ALWAYS considered as suspect no.1 until there is cast iron certainty of his innocence, and vice versa on the case of a murdered/"missing" husband.
Why when it comes to murdered children, or as in this case, probably murdered, do the police get a politically correct hamstringing if they dare even suggest the parents "may" be responsible ?
The police should have gone in there and collected everything if only to rule out the parents for certain instead of letting speculation fester.
In a survey of murder cases carried out in 1998 16% of murder victims were members of the murderers family and 64% where friends and acquaintances - strangers accounted for the remaining 20%.
Why were family members ruled out so conclusively in this case ?, except to appease the newspapers who did not want to run with that story.
|
That's kind of what I thought about the whole thing, I think you just worded it better than I would have. Maybe it's because everyone reacts to shock in different ways but if my child was abducted, god forbid, I'd be so distraught, I'd be on the police force's case 24/7. It seems awful to make this speculation but from what I have seen of them on TV and what-not, something seems weird.