[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

On May 3 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?

First question. Any problem with that? No loaded, cant trip self up etc.

Many more like that too..still unanswered for some reason or another
List of the questions for those who dont know

But her lawyer probably told her that questions that rely on the presumption of guilt are not worth her answering, it's clear the intention of a lot of the questions is so that she will implicate herself, I'm not surprised she decided not to cooperate in an interrogation that she thinks should never have happened and is based on completely false premises

[Vicky.]

Of course the interrogation should have happened. In the huge majority of cases with an abduction, it turns out to be someone who knew the child rather than a stranger who took them. They/friends should have been the first suspects IMO. Then work from there :S

Edit. There is a chance I read your post wrong

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Of course the interrogation should have happened. In the huge majority of cases with an abduction, it turns out to be someone who knew the child rather than a stranger who took them. They/friends should have been the first suspects IMO. Then work from there :S

But I think there are better ways of doing that. Clarifying all of the details with them rather than phrasing questions to sound suspicious.

Asking her to go through exactly what happened from the moment she found Maddie missing until the police arrived is one thing, asking questions like "Why did you do this, instead of this?" is insinuating automatically that her actions were wrong and were wrong on purpose rather than due to shock or whatever.

Asking why she ran back to the restaurant is different to asking why not shout from the verandah instead.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

But I think there are better ways of doing that. Clarifying all of the details with them rather than phrasing questions to sound suspicious.

Asking her to go through exactly what happened from the moment she found Maddie missing until the police arrived is one thing, asking questions like "Why did you do this, instead of this?" is insinuating automatically that her actions were wrong and were wrong on purpose rather than due to shock or whatever.

The first question WAS that though. And it was still not answered.

I can sort of understand her refusing to answer ones that make her sound guilty.

Incidentally, I don't actually think Kate had anything to do with it. Its quite unfortunate that she acted in such a suspicious way.. :S

It's also really unfair to assume how someone should act when under such pressure, suffering, guilt, and grief. It's impossible to say "well I'd do this", because until anyone walks a mile in those shoes (and I hope no one ever does), you have absolutely no idea where their heads must have been.

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by Jesus.

It's also really unfair to assume how someone should act when under such pressure, suffering, guilt, and grief. It's impossible to say "well I'd do this", because until anyone walks a mile in those shoes (and I hope no one ever does), you have absolutely no idea where their heads must have been.

I agree. I can't even imagine how I'd react

[Ninastar]

Originally Posted by Lee.

I agree. I can't even imagine how I'd react

cant find the original quote but this is exactly how I feel.

who are we to judge? And the fact that the press pretty much openly pointed the finger at them numerous times throughout the case doesn't help. They probably thought that no matter what they said, would be twisted to sound awful. Which, wait a second... happened anyway!?

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Jesus.

It's also really unfair to assume how someone should act when under such pressure, suffering, guilt, and grief. It's impossible to say "well I'd do this", because until anyone walks a mile in those shoes (and I hope no one ever does), you have absolutely no idea where their heads must have been.

ha you make absurd assumptions all the time.....we are dealing with the FACT these 3 children were neglected abroad and one of them died because of this, you seem to ignore this tragedy, which comes across as incredibly cold blooded of you

[Ninastar]

Originally Posted by the truth

ha you make absurd assumptions all the time.....we are dealing with the FACT these 3 children were neglected abroad and one of them died because of this, you seem to ignore this tragedy, which comes across as incredibly cold blooded of you

thing is, he's not ignoring the tragedy... he's being completely rational? No one here is saying the parents weren't neglectful. I'm pretty sure everyone here would admit hands down that what they did was bloody awful and entirely their fault that she disappeared. But to call someone cold blooded because they don't think that people should point their fingers and accuse Maddie's parents of kidnap/murder etc... it's just as much of an absurd assumption as you're accusing him of.

btw, saying she is dead is also an assumption. No one knows what has happened to her, hence being world wide news.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Ninastar

thing is, he's not ignoring the tragedy... he's being completely rational? No one here is saying the parents weren't neglectful. I'm pretty sure everyone here would admit hands down that what they did was bloody awful and entirely their fault that she disappeared. But to call someone cold blooded because they don't think that people should point their fingers and accuse Maddie's parents of kidnap/murder etc... it's just as much of an absurd assumption as you're accusing him of.

btw, saying she is dead is also an assumption. No one knows what has happened to her, hence being world wide news.

We have actually had a few people throughout the thread talking about how it wasnt that bad, same as nipping to the shop, not their fault, could happen to anyone..etc. Along with the parents saying on CM that they did nothing wrong. This is why people comment on how it IS neglect, they are awful parents, and it was their fault.

[the truth]

Originally Posted by Ninastar

thing is, he's not ignoring the tragedy... he's being completely rational? No one here is saying the parents weren't neglectful. I'm pretty sure everyone here would admit hands down that what they did was bloody awful and entirely their fault that she disappeared. But to call someone cold blooded because they don't think that people should point their fingers and accuse Maddie's parents of kidnap/murder etc... it's just as much of an absurd assumption as you're accusing him of.

btw, saying she is dead is also an assumption. No one knows what has happened to her, hence being world wide news.

I don't think he is rational at all, he just gets off on being cold blooded and playing with peoples emotions, its horrible. This was beyond neglect, they should have been thoroughly investigated by social services for starters. Oh and by the way no one here is accusing them of murder are they, so why are you misquoting people here? People are saying for the 100th time, they should be investigated more thoroughly and that much of their story didn't add up. Also that these kids were neglected it seems for years leading up to this tragedy. Lets hope if anything comes from this avoidable tragedy, that parents never again behave with such gross negligence when taking small children abroad

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Of course the interrogation should have happened. In the huge majority of cases with an abduction, it turns out to be someone who knew the child rather than a stranger who took them. They/friends should have been the first suspects IMO. Then work from there :S

Edit. There is a chance I read your post wrong

To be a formal suspect you need to have some level of evidence or grounds for suspicion surely though? I'm not saying there wasn't cause for questioning her, but like Marsh said, from her point of view being treated as though you're guilty, which a lot of the questions seem to imply, would just be seen as seriously rubbing salt into the wounds

[Kizzy]

If a child of yours went missing would you get out and look for them?...

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

If a child of yours went missing would you get out and look for them?...

I'de be out until I dropped Kizzy,I couldn't function normally,I'de be mortified so much so I don't think I'de want to live,the pain would be unbearable,I hate to even think about it,I don't know how people cope,I really don't.

[Marsh.]

It's probably as MTVN said then, the lawyer advised to stay quiet because they were being interviewed as a suspect with no actual evidence to do it. But then, there is no substantial evidence for virtually any scenario.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by 08marsh

It's probably as MTVN said then, the lawyer advised to stay quiet because they were being interviewed as a suspect with no actual evidence to do it. But then, there is no substantial evidence for virtually any scenario.

Her lawyer did advise that. As did Gerry's. Funnily enough, he ignored his lawyer.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Her lawyer did advise that. As did Gerry's. Funnily enough, he ignored his lawyer.

Well they do come across as very different people in regards to their personalities. She seems more timid, likely to listen. Gerry would do as he decides probably.

But yeah, I meant she followed his advise because she wasn't comfortable being a formal suspect as opposed to just helping clarify details for the investigation.

[Vicky.]

http://www.theportugalnews.com/news/...portugal/29659

The Deputy Director of News at Sic Television was meanwhile reported to have exchanged e-mails with the BBC in the days running up to the Crimewatch programme in order to secure the rights to the full programme, but to no avail.
“The BBC said they are not selling the rights”, Martim Cabral told The Portugal News, “therefore we cannot show it.”
Another Portuguese news channel, TVI, told The Portugal News that it had contacted the British national broadcaster prior to the airing of the show, as it sought to “acquire the programme for Portugal, which was denied.”
“Should the BBC change its position and should TVI continue to show an interest, it is certain that we will look at transmitting the programme in question.
“TVI has also requested the BBC clarify this situation with British media to avoid more erroneous interpretations, such as those claiming Portuguese television channels are not interested in transmitting the programme.”

Quite strange. Surely the best thing for the investigation is to broadcast in the country that it happened in :S

Our papers say Portugal CHOSE not to broadcast it.

[Kizzy]

Hmm, the whole thing is just so odd... you can forgive some for suspecting foul play as this is not a very clear cut case is it?

[Kizzy]

The children being alone is by and large the only reason there is a case here initially, that has to be addressed.
There is just so much emphasis on court cases against detectives and book launches...
I wonder how much of this is for the right reason?
And as has been said it's not unheard of for those close to victims to be found to be instrumental in their disappearance.

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

The children being alone is by and large the only reason there is a case here initially, that has to be addressed.
There is just so much emphasis on court cases against detectives and book launches...
I wonder how much of this is for the right reason?
And as has been said it's not unheard of for those close to victims to be found to be instrumental in their disappearance.

No, the reason there is a case, is because some bastard wanted to steal a child for whatever reason. Ok, the McCanns made themselves an easy target, but I honestly believe that whoever took her would have taken a child at some time from somewhere in that area .. I think the McCanns were probably watched for nights before the abduction took place.

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Lee.

I was talking about those who just keep going on and on about the children being left alone in their apartment. I am fully aware of why they did the crime watch programme and it wasn't for the public and the media to have yet another pop at their parenting skills and lay the blame of their daughters abduction on them.

That is always going to be brought up in relation to it though Lee because if the kids weren't alone none of it would ever have happened.

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by Josy

That is always going to be brought up in relation to it though Lee because if the kids weren't alone none of it would ever have happened.

I think it would have. I don't know if somebody was paid to take her, if they wanted Madeleine specifically, or if it was a paedophile ring or gypsies.. But I do think that somebody was intent on snatching a child and unfortunately the McCanns made it easy for them.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Lee.

No, the reason there is a case, is because some bastard wanted to steal a child for whatever reason. Ok, the McCanns made themselves an easy target, but I honestly believe that whoever took her would have taken a child at some time from somewhere in that area .. I think the McCanns were probably watched for nights before the abduction took place.

The abduction senario is only one theory...

[Lee.]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

The abduction senario is only one theory...

It's the only theory I believe.. And the only one I find possible