do you think maddie is alive or dead

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

Do you think Maddie is Alive or Not?

  • alive

    Votes: 12 3.4%
  • Not

    Votes: 46 12.9%
  • Alive and parents innocent

    Votes: 33 9.2%
  • Dead and parents not innocent

    Votes: 166 46.5%
  • Don't know

    Votes: 37 10.4%
  • Dead and parents are innocent

    Votes: 63 17.6%

  • Total voters
    357
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sapphire for accuracy, it wasnt the tenth night, it was the fifth,the holiday was only for a week
but it is correct that they left their three toddlers all on their own night after night in an unlocked apartment and where they couldnt see or hear them, I find that really irresponsible, I mean, what mother, as we know mothers worry more than fathers could sit and enjoy a meal and a drink NOT KNOWING what was going on?? The kids could wake up, open the back door and fall over the balcony, for all she knew, let alone all the other dangers within the flat

To ME it is strange and not normal maternal behaviour for that age, 2 and 3, 9 10 or older perhaps

Thanks Clutch.

One night was too many...especially when they knew they'd been crying. :furious:

Loving parents cannot leave their babies alone in unlocked rooms, or locked ones for that matter. I know this for a fact, long story but I ended up staying inside instead of listening to an open air concert in my street one night, even though I had a baby monitor and was only out the front. I kept running in and driving my friends nuts running backwards and forwards checking the damn thing - "tell me if you can hear this" etc.

Physically impossible...I really really really wanted to be outside listening! But I just couldn't leave my little baby alone in the dark.

But then, I don't understand how they could smile and laugh at Madeleine's vigil either.

:sick:
 
What about the women in Europe who park their carriages with their babies outside while the have lunch inside so babies can sleep in the cold?

I think some of this is cultural. We all think we know best. We have all ranges of parents. Helicopter parents and really lax ones, like the woman who let her 9 yr old go on the subway alone in NYC. Them we have somewhere in the middle.

I would not go that far from my kids but I have say in a neighbors porch while my kids are asleep is that much different?

I don't know. I think they will regret it for the rest of their life but I don't think this off practice makes them guilty of murder. Especially since Madeline has never been found. I would think if she was killed there, they would have found her by now.
 
What about the women in Europe who park their carriages with their babies outside while the have lunch inside so babies can sleep in the cold?

I think some of this is cultural. We all think we know best. We have all ranges of parents. Helicopter parents and really lax ones, like the woman who let her 9 yr old go on the subway alone in NYC. Them we have somewhere in the middle.

I would not go that far from my kids but I have say in a neighbors porch while my kids are asleep is that much different?

I don't know. I think they will regret it for the rest of their life but I don't think this off practice makes them guilty of murder. Especially since Madeline has never been found. I would think if she was killed there, they would have found her by now.

Yes, it is far, far different. :moo:

Would you have left your babies if you'd known the evening before, they'd woken up scared and alone and cried for an hour and a half? :waitasec:

Would you trust your 3 year old to "look after" her 18 month old siblings? This wasn't a couple of street smart New York 9 year olds...they were babies. :furious:

Would you be happy if the room you left them in was not in your own home, rather a rented room in a foreign country, which had a balcony and stairs and a pool and 75m between you, them, and any number of non-child proofed hazards?

Would you go off and leave them alone in a strange, dark room with all the doors unlocked?

No one would do this. Not an expert in Childcare, nor a ghetto mom with 12 kids and a drug habit. Actually if a ghetto mom did swing off to partay and leave her kids at home and one went missing, you can be sure they'd throw the book at her, arrest her, take her kids and stick her in jail for child endangerment at best, murder or manslaughter at worst. :banghead:

These two have somehow managed to make everyone believe that gross child negligence is the most normal thing in the world...how on earth?

:sick:
 
The point is, Kate did not call for her daughter.

The "valuables" thing was just a footnote...the important thing is, Madeleine was never called for by her mother, or her father.

They didn't even look for her, both preferring to make midnight phonecalls to the UK instead.

Gerry searched for a few minutes, Kate not at all. She didn't budge from the apartment.


I agree with you Sapphire but your comment about Gerry searching for a few minutes brought back a memory from studying the case.

I almost lived and breathed Madeleine's case as a poster like so many of you here. We had a poster who worked at a little bar up by the church in PdL that had the little graveyard. She said this man came in who she later recognized as Gerry, sat down and ordered a drink and asked to speak to the manager. The word was he said his little girl was missing. Then he got up and left. There might have been another man with him but waiting outside.

Reading that it really helped form my opinion that Maddie was dead and I thought that church building or it's small grounds would give clues as to where she had been put. I don't even know if LE even searched the area. There was construction going on and a big ditch, I kept thinking of her being tucked in the graveyard temporarily.

Does anyone else have any feelings or info about that?
 
I agree with you Sapphire but your comment about Gerry searching for a few minutes brought back a memory from studying the case.

I almost lived and breathed Madeleine's case as a poster like so many of you here. We had a poster who worked at a little bar up by the church in PdL that had the little graveyard. She said this man came in who she later recognized as Gerry, sat down and ordered a drink and asked to speak to the manager. The word was he said his little girl was missing. Then he got up and left. There might have been another man with him but waiting outside.

Reading that it really helped form my opinion that Maddie was dead and I thought that church building or it's small grounds would give clues as to where she had been put. I don't even know if LE even searched the area. There was construction going on and a big ditch, I kept thinking of her being tucked in the graveyard temporarily.

Does anyone else have any feelings or info about that?

I seem to recall it, maybe from reading WS though.

I believe it was Gerry who was seen by the Smiths, carrying Madeleine.

I also believe that Tanner and Payne were accomplices and made sure the coast was clear - unfortunately for them, the Smiths popped up out of nowhere.

As to where she was hidden? I don't know. I do think the church is a possibility, remembering that the McCanns obtained the keys and free access.

:twocents:
 
What about the women in Europe who park their carriages with their babies outside while the have lunch inside so babies can sleep in the cold?

I think some of this is cultural. We all think we know best. We have all ranges of parents. Helicopter parents and really lax ones, like the woman who let her 9 yr old go on the subway alone in NYC. Them we have somewhere in the middle.

I would not go that far from my kids but I have say in a neighbors porch while my kids are asleep is that much different?

I don't know. I think they will regret it for the rest of their life but I don't think this off practice makes them guilty of murder. Especially since Madeline has never been found. I would think if she was killed there, they would have found her by now.


No one had said they murdered her! And your analogy about helicopter parents has nothing to do with this situation....2 and 3 yr old babies left alone for half hour stretches 100 metres away out of ear and eyeshot and also in a corner flat of the street with unlocked doors and all the dangers of leaving babies alone let alone the possibility of burglary is not in any way letting them have independence and freedom!!!! As if they were riding a bike down the street and the parents didnt hove over their every inch! Or letting an 12 yr old go to the mall with friends for the first time, lets get some perspective here.


Eta sapphire, no problem
 
What's most curious to me is some folks consistently refuse to even entertain the thought that the McCann may be involved.

An intelligent mind can entertain thoughts without believing them, yet too many seem to be resistant against even contemplating another scenario (aside from, organised pedophile blah blah).

:dunno:

We have acres and acres of evidence of Madeleine's death and her parent's involvement in hiding her, including but not limited to

Gerry being seen carrying her body
Kate not looking for her daughter
The general neglect of these children by their "carers"
The cadaver dog evidence.

Yet all of these are soundly dismissed by the McCann supporter as "rubbish" and "lies". Only the McCann are entitled to blind support regardless of facts, in these pages. Why?

Yes even on WS where we are supposed to be interested in the truth, not anyone elses agenda, still the McCann comes up smelling of roses.

They don't realise, these one eyed supporters, that they actually damage the McCann credibility.

Dismissing all the indicators we do have, in blind defence of these parents, renders the supporters totally biased and as such, operating against the WS credo which is "sleuthing".

That is, looking for the truth even though we may find it personally unpalatable.

The truth wins at WS (and in the court of common sense), not "spin".

:websleuther:
 
What's most curious to me is some folks consistently refuse to even entertain the thought that the McCann may be involved.

An intelligent mind can entertain thoughts without believing them, yet too many seem to be resistant against even contemplating another scenario (aside from, organised pedophile blah blah).

:dunno:

We have acres and acres of evidence of Madeleine's death and her parent's involvement in hiding her, including but not limited to

Gerry being seen carrying her body
Kate not looking for her daughter
The general neglect of these children by their "carers"
The cadaver dog evidence.

Yet all of these are soundly dismissed by the McCann supporter as "rubbish" and "lies". Only the McCann are entitled to blind support regardless of facts, in these pages. Why?

Yes even on WS where we are supposed to be interested in the truth, not anyone elses agenda, still the McCann comes up smelling of roses.

They don't realise, these one eyed supporters, that they actually damage the McCann credibility.

Dismissing all the indicators we do have, in blind defence of these parents, renders the supporters totally biased and as such, operating against the WS credo which is "sleuthing".

That is, looking for the truth even though we may find it personally unpalatable.

The truth wins at WS (and in the court of common sense), not "spin".

:websleuther:
the blind defence of the parents and excuses offered up for every little or major problem points to a cult, its scary, and kate mccann is the leader of it from what i have read
 
the blind defence of the parents and excuses offered up for every little or major problem points to a cult, its scary, and kate mccann is the leader of it from what i have read

Clutch - you're in the UK right?

Do you think these folks are intimidated still by the Establishment? A hangover from the old class society, where those "in charge" were viewed as nearly Godlike and infallible?

Is it just too scary for some to let themselves think such "nice" people could hurt their daughter?

:dunno:

The resistance (based only on opinion) is fervent and quite frightening, coming from a supposed Democracy that allegedly embraces Freedom of Speech.

Can a McCann supporter please cease critiquing the evidence we do have, such as the dogs and the DNA, and instead offer some positive evidence for an alternative scenario?

Strange fingerprints on the window frame, a sighting by an impartial witness of someone other than Gerry carrying Madeleine? A strange car, a scenario that explains what the Pedo actually did with Madeleine in a tiny resort?

Anything to show a reasonable basis for your belief an Intruder Did It?

Anything.....?
 
Sapphire the Mccanns were DEFINITELY over protected DEFINITELY

it stinks
 
They still are being protected Clutch.

More money is being spent on this mess, millions and millions of pounds, and LE come on to morning tv to say "she might be alive! Because we haven't found her dead!" like it's some sort of important discovery which justifies the expense.

Kind of funny when you think about it.

Since "Operation Grange" started - how long ago? We've had headline after headline - "Police wish to talk to anyone who was in Portugal in May 2007 for elimination purposes" - none of which has ever resulted in so much as a POI.

I'm glad my taxes aren't paying for this farce.

:cow:
 
For me as long as they don't find a body she could be alive and people should not stop searching. We have cases where people have been held for nearly decades and they pop up.
 
h:
For me as long as they don't find a body she could be alive and people should not stop searching. We have cases where people have been held for nearly decades and they pop up.

Whilst this is true how many of those missing persons had cadaver dogs alerting right left and centre from the last place they were seen alive?
:seeya:
 
They still are being protected Clutch.

More money is being spent on this mess, millions and millions of pounds, and LE come on to morning tv to say "she might be alive! Because we haven't found her dead!" like it's some sort of important discovery which justifies the expense.

Kind of funny when you think about it.

Since "Operation Grange" started - how long ago? We've had headline after headline - "Police wish to talk to anyone who was in Portugal in May 2007 for elimination purposes" - none of which has ever resulted in so much as a POI.

I'm glad my taxes aren't paying for this farce.

:cow:

Its either op grange are on a whitewash mission, which btw they have no chance inhell of succeeding at, or they are playing their cards close to their chest and doing what the brit police are very good at, catching culprits

they screwed up in the past big time, have fited people up, but by same token have found the perpetrators yrs down the line.....

Lets wait and see
Hey?
 
Its either op grange are on a whitewash mission, which btw they have no chance inhell of succeeding at, or they are playing their cards close to their chest and doing what the brit police are very good at, catching culprits

they screwed up in the past big time, have fited people up, but by same token have found the perpetrators yrs down the line.....

Lets wait and see
Hey?

No one will be more thrilled than I to see this investigated thoroughly and Madeleine found and/or an arrest made.

Literally. If there's one case I want to see solved, it's Madeleine's.

The trouble is, the British Police have already had involvement in this, and they walked away.

The British Police are the ones who developed "evidence" (which they never shared with the Portugese) that the McCanns had guilty knowledge, and they are the ones who brought in Eddie and Keela who seemed to confirm those suspicions.

Then the British police inexplicably packed up their toys and went home.

They also did nothing against the British parents who neglected a British child.

British Police have lost all credibility in my opinion, in fact I personally would like to see Interpol or an Anti Corruption Taskforce take it over. Maybe they won't **** it up.

:furious:
 
No one will be more thrilled than I to see this investigated thoroughly and Madeleine found and/or an arrest made.

Literally. If there's one case I want to see solved, it's Madeleine's.

The trouble is, the British Police have already had involvement in this, and they walked away.

The British Police are the ones who developed "evidence" (which they never shared with the Portugese) that the McCanns had guilty knowledge, and they are the ones who brought in Eddie and Keela who seemed to confirm those suspicions.

Then the British police inexplicably packed up their toys and went home.

They also did nothing against the British parents who neglected a British child.

British Police have lost all credibility in my opinion, in fact I personally would like to see Interpol or an Anti Corruption Taskforce take it over. Maybe they won't **** it up.

:furious:

Sapphire the british police at the time of the portuguese investigation were the local leicester police, all they did was assist...they were never in a position to direct or control anythng....this lot is the metropolitcan police, scotland yard, apparently reviewing and reinvestigating from a blank slate...let see

Btw the reference from wikileaks to the uk police developing the evidence was about them sending in the british cadaver dog and blood dog.....which was a strong reason after their alerts why the mccanns were made suspects....no one kept anythng back
 
OK the key factors to me are these:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id162.html

Just before 10:00pm on the night of 03 May 2007, the Smith family from Ireland pass a man carrying a child in his arms. The man averts his eyes from them to signal that he does not wish to speak.

Four months later, during which time the McCanns never sought to exploit this potentially crucial sighting, the Smith family are watching TV. They see the McCanns return to the UK and observe Gerry leave the plane and walk across the tarmac with Sean in his arms.

The father, Martin Smith, is shocked. He recognises the walking style and the way the child is being held against the shoulder. It is exactly like the man he saw on the streets of Praia da Luz, four months earlier.

Back in Ireland, the Smiths watch the news and learn of Jane's statement and the suspicions falling upon Murat.

- The father contacts the Irish police. He tells his story. The man he saw was NOT Murat. He knows Murat and it was not him.

- The father is almost certain that the girl he saw was Madeleine.

Sept 2007, McCanns return to UK

- Gerry exits the plane, carrying his son against his left shoulder, the child's arms down along his sides, down the stairs and across the tarmack Gerry walks

- The Smith family see this recording on the news at 22h00 and are hit hard: they know this person, this way of carrying a child and of walking. It is Gerry McCann, they believe with a high degree of certainty, that they saw on 3 May at about 22h00, carrying a 4 yr old girl who appeared to be deeply asleep

- The father contacts the police to communicate this new information. He says he has not slept since 9 Sept and is very upset. It's as if he re-lived the night he saw the man carrying the child. Seeing Gerry walk and carry the child, awoke something in his head...

- Still not completely convinced, he watches the news again on ITV and also on Sky.

- No, there are no doubts. Gerry McCann looks just like the same person he saw carrying the child on May 3.

- Smith, upset and worried about what he saw and has concluded, needs the investigators to contact him.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id70.html
The first eyewitness account of the frantic moments after Madeleine McCann disappeared can be revealed today.

Nanny Charlotte Pennington confirms that Kate McCann did scream: "They've taken her, they've taken her!"

The mother's precise words have become a pivotal issue in the case, with Portuguese police questioning why she would automatically assume Maddie had been abducted.

Mrs McCann's family have countered this by insisting they recall her shouting: "Madeleine's gone."

Miss Pennington, however, one of the first people to set foot in the couple's apartment after the disappearance, says she heard the mother use both phrases.

http://themccanngallery.blogspot.com/2009/12/jane-tanner-liar.html

Prior to the PJ arriving at 12:40/12:50 Russell O'Brien has written the timeline for them all, including, "Jane tanner sees stranger walking carrying child." He does this while Gerry McCann sits at the same table.

At three o' clock in the morning Jane Tanner informs Gerry McCann for the first time, about the existence of a possible abductor.

Gerry looks horrified upon hearing this.

ETA. But why did Tanner feel the need to lie to the PJ, to put the time at three o' clock in the morning for when both McCanns were "first made aware" of the possible abductor.

Other than, I can only assume, in their way of thinking they perhaps thought it best that the McCanns appeared outside the loop, separate somehow from the conspiracy that they all were so actively engaged in. I'm at a loss here, I really can't imagine.

And not only that, just think about what we are being asked to believe. Madeleine has been snatched, don't forget Kate knew this instantly, Madeleine has been snatched, Tanner has witnessed a man carrying a child in the vicinity of the apartment just prior to Madeleine being discovered gone, and tries to tell us, and the PJ of course, that she waited five hours before she informed the parents for fear of upsetting them.
 
OK the key factors to me are these:

At three o' clock in the morning Jane Tanner informs Gerry McCann for the first time, about the existence of a possible abductor.

Gerry looks horrified upon hearing this.

ETA. But why did Tanner feel the need to lie to the PJ, to put the time at three o' clock in the morning for when both McCanns were "first made aware" of the possible abductor.

As Mark Twain said, if you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.

Tanner doesn't strike me as the sharpest knife in the drawer, and she had a raft of lies to remember.

That is why her story has shifted, changed, and been embellished.

Truth is truth, it doesn't change from one telling to the other. Tanner's did.

:banghead:
 
If the PJ could have proved they were guilty with all this "evidence" you say exists, the McCann's would be in jail.
 
If the PJ could have proved they were guilty with all this "evidence" you say exists, the McCann's would be in jail.

At the very least, charged with negligence.

The fact that they weren't charged even for this relatively minor offence when they have freely admitted their guilt, illustrates that there are deeper issues at the heart of this case.

Like the Ramseys before them, we have expensive lawyers, PR, playing the media, attempting to steer the investigation, and friends in politically high places.

So far, it's worked. So far.

None of them has ever been in a witness box answering questions, which in itself is almost inexplicable...unless of course you're wealthy and influential.

The day they are questioned under oath in a courtroom, is the day the whole farce starts to unravel.

:banghead:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
112
Guests online
1,395
Total visitors
1,507

Forum statistics

Threads
599,292
Messages
18,094,003
Members
230,841
Latest member
FastRayne
Back
Top