SapphireSteel
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2012
- Messages
- 6,788
- Reaction score
- 105
It's just a bit too much of a leap for me to now imagine Madeleine being mentally tortured, by an abductor there was never any proof of in the first place.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Anyway, if an abductor wants to torment a child with the thought that people on the internet have given up hope an think s/he's dead he doesn't actually need to have any real people thinking so, he can just make stuff up, the child won't know the difference.
I'd probably agree if we were talking about an adult but this is a child who could have potentially been kept alive between the ages of 3-9+. She would have no idea how the media/internet etc works. That little ray of hope that someone might come rescue her would be totally dashed away with "look everyone thinks your parents killed you, no one's looking for you".
Steven Stayner's abductor told him all sorts of rubbish. In Madeleine's case the abductors would be able to back it up.
Don't underestimate the power of mental torture.
Just my opinion
True but it adds strengths to the claims.
True but it adds strengths to the claims.
How can anyone here know whether she is alive or dead. not one LE force has stated that they know for certain. PJ said they did not know, and scotland yard said whilst they did not know there were leads that meant there was a chance she was alive. It does happen, look at natascha Kampusch, she disappeared, and individuels campaigned against her mother claiming she was involved. But eight years later she turned up alive, and denied her mother had had any involvement with which the police concurred.
So the only people who can know at the moment are the ones who were there.
Also does anyone else think a bunch of grown adults taking votes on whether a tiny child is alive or dead is rather bad taste?
Well now i feel bad that i voted in this poll, because after reading your question brit1981 i do agree it is in bad taste after all. IMO i have never
believed the parents have had anything to do with their daughters abduction. Admittedly this case rarely makes headlines here anymore in Australia, but from what i know of the case, its been a witch hunt on the parents from day one. I think it was random opportunity, Maddie was a stunning child and it takes just one creep to think he/she can snatch what ever they like.
Why is it in "bad taste" to believe a child is likely deceased, yet being abducted and raped by a (or several) pedophile/s is somehow in good taste?
:waitasec:
of course gem was insinuating people on the internet are the cruel ones, i wonder if gem read the sun stories where the parents told maddies siblings that the presents they got at xmas were from madeleine, you know fromthe evil badman who hadherand you know gem the one of the twins wanted to kill the abductor but her parents let her post pressies, talk about screwing your kids heads up hey gem?
Well, it might.
Possibly.
If the abductor has taught the child to read and if he allows her to use the internet.
Both are doubtful imo.
The fact is, there is no abductor.
Never was.
If there had been an abductor, there would be evidence of one, in my opinion.
:cow:
This is not fact it is your opinion. We do not have all the information in this case.
Many children go missing without a trace every year. If this was organised crime, by an experienced perpetrator, then i'd think they'd be quite clever at not leaving any evidence behind. In any case the police made huge errors in the beginning and certainly compromised the investigation.
Yeah...I think Madeleine and her eye defect are probably too famous for an abductor to feel safe enough to send her to school but you never know, it's amazing what some people get away with. I guess if the abductor casually introduced the topic and said, "hey, my daughter has this eye defect, and she's been mistaken for Madeleine McCann so many times it's unbelievable..." people might take it in stride and not give it another thought.
Anyway, I think at this point a manipulating abductor might possibly show her the photo of any two random people and get her to believe they're her parents. Steven Sayner was seven when he was taken and was probably able to remember more than Madeleine who was several years younger. Many people have fuzzy or no memories from the time they were three or younger and if Madeleine had been living with someone who kept messing with her mind all this time there's no saying that she'd even know who Gerry and Kate are at this point.
That's what I would try to do if I ever found myself abducting a toddler. It seems it would be much easier to get away with it if the child was made to forget her real identity and believe whatever your cover story is instead of giving her reminders in the form of photos, internet stories about her disappearance, news articles about her real parents.
If the plan is to live with her and let her interact with people semi-normally and not keep her hidden and tortured in an underground cave anyway.
Well, if someone abducted Madeleine and kept her alive I don't think billions of dollars of search funds would do much of a difference. Searches work if you're looking for remains left in the fields or the woods or the beaches but if you've got a child locked up in someone's basement the searchers aren't going to be allowed there and there will be no sightings if the abductor doesn't allow any outings. Privately funded searchers aren't going to find any children in places where you need to be LE armed with a search warrant to go to.