[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

I honestly don't know, it's a very difficult one - you may be right that emotions can get in the way.

The public don't have a good track record on their reaction to cases like this and I find it very difficult to believe Maddie's parents would have either harmed their daughter or tried to cover up an accident or poor decision on their part i.e. Drugging her.

In this case I do prefer to give them the benefit of the doubt until concrete evidence proves me wrong.

I can only speak for myself but it was certainly the case for me.
I remember when it first made the news and before there was anything that suggested they might have been involved, my mum saying something like "hmm I bet the parents had something to do with it" because she's a 'think the worst of people' kind of person, so I think I've always felt a bit like suspicions of them had more to do with cynicism and wanting to think the worst than anything else, and I wanted to think they wouldn't have been involved. I'm not 100% either way on it though and I'm the same that I'd want concrete evidence to be convinced, so I still think the abduction theory could be true (although I think it's very unlikely), but mainly where I've changed my opinion on it is with thinking that people who are strongly convinced that the McCanns were involved in a cover up actually have a lot to reasonably back that up.

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

I can only speak for myself but it was certainly the case for me.
I remember when it first made the news and before there was anything that suggested they might have been involved, my mum saying something like "hmm I bet the parents had something to do with it" because she's a 'think the worst of people' kind of person, so I think I've always felt a bit like suspicions of them had more to do with cynicism and wanting to think the worst than anything else, and I wanted to think they wouldn't have been involved. I'm not 100% either way on it though and I'm the same that I'd want concrete evidence to be convinced, so I still think the abduction theory could be true (although I think it's very unlikely), but mainly where I've changed my opinion on it is with thinking that people who are strongly convinced that the McCanns were involved in a cover up actually have a lot to reasonably back that up.

I'm honestly not a "think the worst" kind of person at all eventhough statistically it's much more likely in a case like this to do with a child that family members or friends are involved than a complete opportunistic stranger. I never suspected them of having been involved until other people were going on about it and urging me to read up a bit more on it.

before I did that I believed they were certainly guilty of neglect but I did buy into the abduction theory

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

Look the police don't just take some ones word for what happened, if there was the evidence that was grounds to charge the mcanns they would of done.
Mistakes have been made, but until evidence is found I reserve my judgment.

There was evidence found though and they were made suspects in Portugal and when they went to sue the cop who was in charge of the original investigation for saying that he thought all the evidence pointed them being involved they lost and were told that they had not been cleared of anything or "proved innocent" as they like to pretend

[ebandit]

..............what sort of accident within the apartment could lead to death?

..............accident would more likely result in injury /need for urgent medical assistance

Mark L

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by ebandit

..............what sort of accident within the apartment could lead to death?

..............accident would more likely result in injury /need for urgent medical assistance

Mark L

She could have fallen off the back of the couch and hit her head off the tiled floor or broken her neck. Behind the couch is where blood splatter and cadaver odour was found by the dogs

[ebandit]

..............to myself that seems very unlikely....such a short fall

................you see kiddies fall further all the time...cry awhile then run on

Mark L

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by ebandit

..............to myself that seems very unlikely....such a short fall

................you see kiddies fall further all the time...cry awhile then run on

Mark L

Just because 9 times out of 10 a fall won't kill a child doesn't mean that it never happens, in fact I would say it's far more common than a stranger breaking into an apartment and kidnapping a child She could have landed awkwardly and the floor was tiled

[Vicky.]

Yup. Fall from sofa (while sedated, IMO..the reason for the coverup) is far more likely than the houdini abductor who also shuffled his way between the twins' cots to open a window for no reason at all...just to waste some time even though he came in through the open door...that had been left open incase madeleine awoke and wanted to find her parents, though it is claimed that NO WAY would she have been able to leave the place on her own

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yup. Fall from sofa (while sedated, IMO..the reason for the coverup) is far more likely than the houdini abductor who also shuffled his way between the twins' cots to open a window for no reason at all...just to waste some time even though he came in through the open door...that had been left open incase madeleine awoke and wanted to find her parents, though it is claimed that NO WAY would she have been able to leave the place on her own

a mass of contradictions

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yup. Fall from sofa (while sedated, IMO..the reason for the coverup) is far more likely than the houdini abductor who also shuffled his way between the twins' cots to open a window for no reason at all...just to waste some time even though he came in through the open door...that had been left open incase madeleine awoke and wanted to find her parents, though it is claimed that NO WAY would she have been able to leave the place on her own

exactly

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yup. Fall from sofa (while sedated, IMO..the reason for the coverup) is far more likely than the houdini abductor who also shuffled his way between the twins' cots to open a window for no reason at all...just to waste some time even though he came in through the open door...that had been left open incase madeleine awoke and wanted to find her parents, though it is claimed that NO WAY would she have been able to leave the place on her own

IMO Maddie was abused (Payne ,Gaspar statements )this is why her medical records have never been shown and explains the fear and embarrassment in her face in the Snow White video ,I think Kate lashed out at her in temper ,knocking her behind the sofa where blood splatter was found

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by chuff me dizzy

IMO Maddie was abused (Payne ,Gaspar statements )this is why her medical records have never been shown and explains the fear and embarrassment in her face in the Snow White video ,I think Kate lashed out at her in temper ,knocking her behind the sofa where blood splatter was found

That is a hell of an accusation and completely unfounded as far as I can see.

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

That is a hell of an accusation and completely unfounded as far as I can see.

Ive been in Maddie groups for over 9 years, my theory is not a whim plucked out of mid air

[ebandit]

................i too think the parents are more directly responsible............

imagine? the parents arriving home to find maddie injured/dead

.......they panic! unlikely they would panic! and think 'let's cover this up'

more likely...they panic! and rush maddie to nearest medical centre

even if there was no pulse a parent would hope for resuscitation even when hope

is gone................

Mark L

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by ebandit

................i too think the parents are more directly responsible............

imagine? the parents arriving home to find maddie injured/dead

.......they panic! unlikely they would panic! and think 'let's cover this up'

more likely...they panic! and rush maddie to nearest medical centre

even if there was no pulse a parent would hope for resuscitation even when hope

is gone................

Mark L

Most parents would yes but that doesnt mean all would

[ebandit]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Most parents would yes but that doesnt mean all would

you're right................most parents would have cracked under pressure sooner?

.............if the mc canns had sedated maddie with something a whole lot stronger that what has been suggested

then they might wish to cover up

Mark L

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by ebandit

you're right................most parents would have cracked under pressure sooner?

.............if the mc canns had sedated maddie with something a whole lot stronger that what has been suggested

then they might wish to cover up

Mark L

Kate is an anesthest as far as I'm aware

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Kate is an anesthest as far as I'm aware

GP who trained in anaesthetics

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by ebandit

................i too think the parents are more directly responsible............

imagine? the parents arriving home to find maddie injured/dead

.......they panic! unlikely they would panic! and think 'let's cover this up'

more likely...they panic! and rush maddie to nearest medical centre

even if there was no pulse a parent would hope for resuscitation even when hope

is gone................

Mark L

Really depends. IF they sedated the kids so they could go out on the piss this would show in an autopsy. Kate thought the kids had been drugged apparently yet did not take them to the hospital for tests. How likely is this? A parent thinks their babies have been given unknown drugs by a stranger but doesn't get them checked? If kids were proven sedated, thats both parents jobs over and twins possibly taken from them too.

Normal parents upon discovering an accident would call the ambulance. (IMO again) but these parents had something to hide. Something that could well ruin their lives and the lives of their remaining children.

As chuff said too, there is the chance of sexual abuse. Another reason to not want an autopsy. I haven't thought about the sexual abuse side much as its just a horrible thought but there is definitely something dodgy about their friend David Payne. The Gaspar statements pretty much pin him as a creepy ****er at the very least. then there was a social worker (Yvonne Martin I believe) who recognized Payne from her line of work...child protection.

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Really depends. IF they sedated the kids so they could go out on the piss this would show in an autopsy. Kate thought the kids had been drugged apparently yet did not take them to the hospital for tests. How likely is this? A parent thinks their babies have been given unknown drugs by a stranger but doesn't get them checked? If kids were proven sedated, thats both parents jobs over and twins possibly taken from them too.

Normal parents upon discovering an accident would call the ambulance. (IMO again) but these parents had something to hide. Something that could well ruin their lives and the lives of their remaining children.

As chuff said too, there is the chance of sexual abuse. Another reason to not want an autopsy. I haven't thought about the sexual abuse side much as its just a horrible thought but there is definitely something dodgy about their friend David Payne. The Gaspar statements pretty much pin him as a creepy ****er at the very least. then there was a social worker (Yvonne Martin I believe) who recognized Payne from her line of work...child protection.

Yes you're right on Yvonne Martin ,Payne took Mcs to one side and they came back and told her they didn't want her help
As for the drugging ,Kate refused to have the twins hair tested for 11 months ( the time it takes to get out of your system ) But i think twins were drugged as they woke up when Maddie died and being hid, so given something to knock them out
Watch the Snow White video, watch how Maddie looks up ,then lowers her eyes and chews her lip https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WaNMPZJ1jw Clearly scared of or embarrassed by the man with the camera, believed to be film maker Corner

[longstar]

the Mccanns are being protected by the government because they are in a high respected jobs of society, and they have friends that are rich and powerful, they where close friends of clement freud, and he had a flat near where maddie had disappeared, and he was cooking meals for the mccain family when they went on holiday at the time, its well clear that the mccains knew about the pre-planned abduction, why leave the patio door's unlocked and then tell a cock an bull story that who took her went threw the small window that would never fit even the smallest human adult, the drugging of maddie seems too have her stopped from screaming or crying, and the emails of clement freud and kate and gerry Mccann where deleted, and now the police are launching a probe into what he knew about it, its clear that alot of people knew what really happened to her, but the police can't arrest them for it, fred clement is dead but they only tell now about what he knew,

[ChristmasNeeve]

This from Pat Browns book, all this from statements made from Gerry McCann, Kate McCann and one the friends Jane Tanner :

Spoiler:

On subsequent analysis of the main statements, and taking into account the McCann’s very
early insistence that Jane Tanner’s sighting was of the abductor with Madeleine, that could
no longer be sustained. This fact had been recognised by Gerry McCann as early as 1:00am
on 4th May. [1]
The McCanns themselves clearly both accept that the “Window of Opportunity” for an
abduction was small. During one interview Kate McCann said - in a high pitched and
emotional voice - “Yyyeeah, yeah you’re right. It was a very small window of opportunity
but they saw it and then *click*!!!!!! Here Kate makes a clicking sound with her tongue
and a simultaneous downward chopping motion with her right hand. [2]
On 10th May 2007 Gerry McCann made a statement in which he confirmed this, although at
that time he seemed equivocal about the Jane Tanner sighting.
The passage bears repeating in full, for the avoidance of doubt.
“The deponent had had the wrong idea that MATHEW had seen the bedroom shutters closed
when he was there at 21H30, and therefore he thought the disappearance would have taken
place between 21h30 and 22h00, but presently he is fully convinced that the abduction took
place during the period of time between his check at 21h05 and MATHEW's visit at 21H30. It
was not until about 01h00 on 4 May 2007 that he learned through RUSSEL that his partner,
JANE, at around 21h10, saw a man crossing the top of the road with a child in his arms, that
may or may not have been his daughter MADELEINE. [3]
Quite how small was that window and the consequences that follow are examined here.
From their Police statements we learn the following :-
• The McCanns left the apartment to go for dinner around 8:30pm [4]
• Gerry McCann left the Tapas restaurant at 9:04 pm, walked back and re-entered the
apartment. He did a physical check on the children. He saw all three. [5]
Observation 1 : From the absence of any further comment in any of his statements it
must be assumed that the front door, the patio door, the garden gate and the security
gate, and the windows and shutters and curtains in the children’s bedroom, were all in
order.
Observation 2 : It takes one minute to walk at a normal speed from the Tapas bar to
the small gate at the bottom of the outside stairs. It would take around a further 20
seconds to open the gate, climb the stairs, open the patio doors quietly, enter the
apartment and reach the children’s bedroom. [6 ]
• He remained in the apartment for a little time, two or three minutes [7] recording that he
stood in the children’s room “and thought to himself, She’s so beautiful.” and took the
opportunity to use the bathroom. He then left the apartment through the patio doors, and went
down the outside stairs, through the gate and out onto the street. There he met Jeremy
(referred to throughout as Jez ) Wilkins. The two men spoke for a short time, estimated at
between 3 and 4, or 3 to 5 minutes. [8] [9 ] or “only a few minutes” [10]
• Jane Tanner left the Tapas bar at between 9:05 and 9:10 pm. Significantly she times her
own departure at five minutes after Gerry’s [11] She walked past the men whilst they were
talking. She reports seeing the two men [12] although the men state they did not see her.
[13]
• Immediately after passing the two men Jane Tanner states that she saw a man carrying a
child along the road across the top of the street, from left to right. The child was being carried
flat, across the forearms, and Jane Tanner saw its feet, which were towards her. She then
continued to her own apartment. [14]
• Gerry McCann then returned to the dining table in the Tapas bar. This time is given as
between 9:10 and 9:15 pm [15]
Working purely from the statements of Gerry McCann, Jeremy Wilkins, and Jane Tanner,
and adding the time as we proceed we can estimate the following -
Gerry McCann left the Tapas bar 9:05 pm
Arrived at gate at bottom of stairs 9:06
Climbed stairs, entered apartment and went to bedroom 9:06.30s
Looked at children and had “proud father” moment 9:07
Used toilet 9:08
Left apartment, closing doors, went down stairs, met Jez Wilkins 9:09
Talked to Jez Wilkins 9:09 - 9:13 pm
Jane Tanner left Tapas bar 9:10 pm
JT arrived bottom of stairs, saw and passed the two men 9:11
JT saw abductor carrying child across top of road 9:11.05s
There is therefore, on their own timings, just two minutes and five seconds for the intruder
to get in, seize Madeleine, get out again, and make his way round to the top of the road. To
walk from the front door or window of the apartment to the left behind the low wall, then
across the car park, then right to the corner of the street takes around 45 seconds. and a
further 5 seconds to cross the street. [16]
He has therefore around one minute and twenty seconds to enter, commit the crime, and
exit. This is an important point for the understanding of what happened.
Let it be stated once again.
If the man seen by Jane Tanner was the “abductor’ and was carrying Madeleine,
as the McCanns insist, he had available to him the time from Gerry McCann’s leaving the
apartment to the sighting by Jane Tanner. And no more.
In this time the intruder has to
• Enter the apartment
• Sedate all three children - in the dark
• Select Madeleine as the victim - in the dark
• Open the shutters and window - if he used the front door to enter
• Pick Madeleine out of her bed - in the dark
• Turn her round so that her head is now to his left, rather than to his right,
which is the way he would have approached her in the bed.
• Exit the apartment, either through the opened window and shutters, or
through the front door, which he must then close silently behind him.
• Walk to the left along the path in front of the apartment, walk straight ahead
across the car park, and then walk to the right along the road, and cross the
street in front of Jane Tanner, the father of the very child he had just abducted, and
another man who has his own child in a buggy.
Taking into account the travelling time, he has around one minute and twenty seconds in
which to achieve the first seven items on the list.
Clearly he could not enter through the patio door within this time frame, since Gerry was
standing either at the bottom of the steps, or on the other side of the road, depending whether
we follow the statement of Gerry McCann, Jez Wilson, [17] [18] or Jane Tanner. (During the
televised “documentary reconstruction” Gerry McCann’s version took precedence, and
viewers were treated to the sight of Jane Tanner being reduced to tears as her detailed
recollection was publicly destroyed.) [19]
For our purposes this important contradiction is, for the moment, irrelevant.
As Kate has observed, “What may be important is that all three of them were there.” [20]
It is indeed a very important point, as it fixes forever Jane Tanner’s sighting relative to Gerry
McCann’s leaving the apartment, in a way which cannot be altered by debate or legal
argument.
It could only be altered by admission of error, but Jane Tanner has several times then and
since publicly insisted that she was telling the truth. [21] [22]
Possible scenarios.
One scenario is therefore that immediately on Gerry McCann’s leaving the apartment, the
intruder entered though the front door by means unknown, or, having forced up the shutters,
propped or jammed them in a high position, forced open the window, and climbed in. This is
not supported by examination of the operation of the shutters, or the locking mechanism of
the windows. No implement to support the shutters was found, and no forensic traces were
seen on the window sill, or on the windows.
A second scenario has more recently been put forward to the effect that the intruder may have
already been in the apartment as Gerry McCann entered. This would allow him a few more
seconds or fractions of a minute in which to complete his crime. And in fact we find that this
was raised as a possibility by Dr Gerry McCann himself some time later. [23]
But the apartment is largely open-plan, there are only three doors, to the bedrooms and the
bathroom, and this theory leads to some vague stories being suggested about where the
intruder might have been secreted. None is persuasive. “Behind the door”, or “in the
cupboard,” have been offered. Examination of the photos of the bedroom, and indeed of the
entire apartment may lead a researcher to question this. [24]
Gerry McCann recounts seeing all the children, and having the “proud father” moment, and of
looking down at Madeleine. In none of his three statements does he report the smell of
anaesthetic gas or the presence of any other anaesthetic paraphernalia, and we conclude
that this procedure must therefore have been performed after he left.
Kate was initially sure that the children had been sedated.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

This from Pat Browns book, all this from statements made from Gerry McCann, Kate McCann and one the friends Jane Tanner :

.[/spoiler]

You certainly sparked my interest in this case Niamh. I've done a lot of reading since your last thread and have had a change of heart to the disappearance of Madeleine. Its all very suspicious.

I had a thought after reading your spoiler; could Madeleine of been already dead in her bed when Gerry stood looking over her and thinking how beautiful she was on his final visit to the house. Did Gerry let a man in who the Mccann's had paid off to get rid of her body. Was he talking to that other man to distract him from a man leaving the house with the body of a child? I wonder if that man was standing with his back to the house.

Another thing I was reading recently was the coffin that was laying in wake in a nearby church. The lid of that coffin remained closed by the relatives and it was a cremation. Could Madeleine's body of been cremated along with their relative?

[ChristmasNeeve]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

You certainly sparked my interest in this case Niamh. I've done a lot of reading since your last thread and have had a change of heart to the disappearance of Madeleine. Its all very suspicious.

I had a thought after reading your spoiler; could Madeleine of been already dead in her bed when Gerry stood looking over her and thinking how beautiful she was on his final visit to the house. Did Gerry let a man in who the Mccann's had paid off to get rid of her body. Was he talking to that other man to distract him from a man leaving the house with the body of a child? I wonder if that man was standing with his back to the house.

Another thing I was reading recently was the coffin that was laying in wake in a nearby church. The lid of that coffin remained closed by the relatives and it was a cremation. Could Madeleine's body of been cremated along with their relative?

It is very suspicious, just the fact that all the friends and the McCanns statements seemed to change all the time alone is suspicious. You could be right about paying the guy off but personally I think Jane Tanner made that up about seeing him

And yes I think the coffin is a very plausible theory

[chuff me dizzy]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

You certainly sparked my interest in this case Niamh. I've done a lot of reading since your last thread and have had a change of heart to the disappearance of Madeleine. Its all very suspicious.

I had a thought after reading your spoiler; could Madeleine of been already dead in her bed when Gerry stood looking over her and thinking how beautiful she was on his final visit to the house. Did Gerry let a man in who the Mccann's had paid off to get rid of her body. Was he talking to that other man to distract him from a man leaving the house with the body of a child? I wonder if that man was standing with his back to the house.

Another thing I was reading recently was the coffin that was laying in wake in a nearby church. The lid of that coffin remained closed by the relatives and it was a cremation. Could Madeleine's body of been cremated along with their relative?

IMO and lots of others opinion in Maddie groups, Maddie died a couple of days before the alarm was raised, giving Mcs time to clean 5a, and concoct alibis with the tapas group ,IMO Gerry was moving Maddies body on "Alarm night" when the man walking his baby came past, Tanner who was his look out failed to see the man, so Gerry laid Maddie in the flowerbed ( hence death scent found there )and went over talking to the man to stop him being suspicious and to see if he had seen anything ....Tanner knowing she had nearly got Gerry caught offered to come up with a "sighting" IMO Maddie was taken to Huelva 25 days after her demise (hence death scent in hire car ,and the unaccounted for milage and hours on the trip )Huelva has acid baths where Maddie body would never be found and promoted Gerrys "Find the body and prove we killed her" comment on their return ,neighbour reported hire car boot left open day and night after Huelva