do you think maddie is alive or dead

[AlwaysShocked]

Oh, wow. I voted "Dead, parents not innocent" and then looked at the poll results. I was kind of surprised because I thought I might be in the minority.

I did not follow the case at the time. I was aware of it, but did not follow it. Yesterday I read all of the pertinent documents from both the Portugese and British investigators.

Those cadaver dog hits bother me a lot. And the friend who says she saw the guy carrying a child does not ring true for some reason. Could be because she says she walked past the father and another guy to whom he was talking (when he went back to the apartment to check on the kids that last night) and neither of them ever saw her. Ever. At all. Something going on there but I don't know what. Jane was her name and she was adamant and even began to cry during her interrogation by a British investigator.
Because she says she is frustrated and she knows what she saw.

Hey, how about the Irish FAMILY who saw a guy carrying a child down in the town when they all came out of a restaurant? They reported it to police. Police had a drawing made. Drawing kind of matched Jane's description. Later in the case, the father in the Irish family - MartinSmith, I think - saw a news report of the McCanns getting off the plane when they returned to Great Britian. Gerald McCann was carrying one of the twins. The Irish guy immediately called the British police and said "It was him! That's the guy I saw in town carrying a child!"

So many stories in this one. But I agree, the dogs don't lie.

 

[jordynsmommy529]

Oh, wow. I voted "Dead, parents not innocent" and then looked at the poll results. I was kind of surprised because I thought I might be in the minority.

I did not follow the case at the time. I was aware of it, but did not follow it. Yesterday I read all of the pertinent documents from both the Portugese and British investigators.

Those cadaver dog hits bother me a lot. And the friend who says she saw the guy carrying a child does not ring true for some reason. Could be because she says she walked past the father and another guy to whom he was talking (when he went back to the apartment to check on the kids that last night) and neither of them ever saw her. Ever. At all. Something going on there but I don't know what. Jane was her name and she was adamant and even began to cry during her interrogation by a British investigator.
Because she says she is frustrated and she knows what she saw.

Hey, how about the Irish FAMILY who saw a guy carrying a child down in the town when they all came out of a restaurant? They reported it to police. Police had a drawing made. Drawing kind of matched Jane's description. Later in the case, the father in the Irish family - MartinSmith, I think - saw a news report of the McCanns getting off the plane when they returned to Great Britian. Gerald McCann was carrying one of the twins. The Irish guy immediately called the British police and said "It was him! That's the guy I saw in town carrying a child!"

So many stories in this one. But I agree, the dogs don't lie.

BBM

That's false he says he's about 60% sure that it could be GM!

 

[kaRN]

It woudl be highly illegal apart from anything else to track people without going through the police.

There is no evidence the parents were involved, no possible way for them to have hidden a body in the time available etc (they either had up to an hour in broad daylight or five minutes in the dark to find madeleine dead, walk through the village they did not know well, hide her body in a public accesible area so well that it was never found, and wlak back again, change for dinner and behave normally - just not possible)
But it is possible an abductor walked in through the unlocked patio doors, picked her up and walked out again in under five minutes. ten people saw a man carrying a child who could have fitted madeleine's description, and as of yet has not come forward. The abductor could have been local, or been based anywhere in the EU and targeted a holiday resort where it was known there were a lot of children).
The police can do door to door searches, but only with eprmission or a search warrant. It does not appear the PJ attempted this. In the UK when a child goes missing, the police are out in force straight away, helicopters are deployed straight away, drones can be used etc. None of this happened for madeleine, it was not the parents fault.

Had the parents been parenting and not partying, Madelaine wouldn't have been alone to be possibly abducted so yes it is the parents fault. Everyones to blame it seems except the people responsible for putting their children in harms way. MO
That alone would bring charges of Child endangerment against the parents in Canada and the USA.

 

[brit1981]

Dead and not innocent. I believe her mother killed her in a fit of rage. I do not believe Kate's story her use of the word THEY took my child.....I believe the dogs hit on the boot of that rental car as much as I Believe Cindy knew caylee was dead. At one point we even saw Gerry w a suitcase walking along the rocks. All the footage shoots, jogging and tanning and they returned to the site of those rocks several times. On film.i believe Gerry is complicit in illegal disposal of her body.

Jmo, my most humble and true opinion I can give.

There are no reports of Kate initially used the word they when she raised the alarm. A nanny said later in the flat she heard Kate say they, but context never given I.e was she screaming about paedophiles. The nanny said in the same interview she saw Robert Murat there that night, yet he has an alibi.

The dog never alerted in the boot, and also alerts to all bodily fluids, and has made false alerts.

Gerry is never seen with as suitcase near rocks, and not one photographer, journalist reported noticing a decomposing body or the parents hiding anything.

 

[brit1981]

Had the parents been parenting and not partying, Madelaine wouldn't have been alone to be possibly abducted so yes it is the parents fault. Everyones to blame it seems except the people responsible for putting their children in harms way. MO
That alone would bring charges of Child endangerment against the parents in Canada and the USA.

Having dinner fifty metres away is not partying. And I thought in the us it was considered acceptable to leave children in the care of thirteen year olds with no parental checks all evening.

And the only person to blame is the abductor.

 

[brit1981]

Oh, wow. I voted "Dead, parents not innocent" and then looked at the poll results. I was kind of surprised because I thought I might be in the minority.

I did not follow the case at the time. I was aware of it, but did not follow it. Yesterday I read all of the pertinent documents from both the Portugese and British investigators.

Those cadaver dog hits bother me a lot. And the friend who says she saw the guy carrying a child does not ring true for some reason. Could be because she says she walked past the father and another guy to whom he was talking (when he went back to the apartment to check on the kids that last night) and neither of them ever saw her. Ever. At all. Something going on there but I don't know what. Jane was her name and she was adamant and even began to cry during her interrogation by a British investigator.
Because she says she is frustrated and she knows what she saw.

Hey, how about the Irish FAMILY who saw a guy carrying a child down in the town when they all came out of a restaurant? They reported it to police. Police had a drawing made. Drawing kind of matched Jane's description. Later in the case, the father in the Irish family - MartinSmith, I think - saw a news report of the McCanns getting off the plane when they returned to Great Britian. Gerald McCann was carrying one of the twins. The Irish guy immediately called the British police and said "It was him! That's the guy I saw in town carrying a child!"

So many stories in this one. But I agree, the dogs don't lie.

Smith originally said it was a local person in his opinion, later he claimed that although he did not see his face he was sixty percent sure it was Gerry as he thought the carrying style was unique.

 

[scandi]

Smith originally said it was a local person in his opinion, later he claimed that although he did not see his face he was sixty percent sure it was Gerry as he thought the carrying style was unique.

I think 60% is pretty high - almost 2/3rds. After all the labor of love that I spent on Madeleine's case, I think it would take a decree from the Queen to even give a thought for me that her parents had nothing to do with her going missing.

MOO

 

[UKgirl]

Having dinner fifty metres away is not partying. And I thought in the us it was considered acceptable to leave children in the care of thirteen year olds with no parental checks all evening.

And the only person to blame is the abductor.

Disagree. If the madeline was safe in her parents care, she would still be here today. Abductor yes is to blame, but the parents have the biggest blame not insuring the childrens welfare in this situation

 

[UKgirl]

I think 60% is pretty high - almost 2/3rds. After all the labor of love that I spent on Madeleine's case, I think it would take a decree from the Queen to even give a thought for me that her parents had nothing to do with her going missing.

MOO

My thoughts exactly a low percentage and I am willing to agree that there could be a discrepancy. But 60% :twocents:

 

[Donjeta]

Having dinner fifty metres away is not partying. And I thought in the us it was considered acceptable to leave children in the care of thirteen year olds with no parental checks all evening.

And the only person to blame is the abductor.

These children were not in the care of a babysitter, they were alone.

If you don't take care of your children it makes no difference to the children if you were partying or at church while you were busy not taking care of them.

The only people to blame for abductions are the abductors. The only people to blame for neglecting the welfare of their children and leaving them without supervision in dangerous situations are usually the parents.

 

[jordynsmommy529]

These children were not in the care of a babysitter, they were alone.

If you don't take care of your children it makes no difference to the children if you were partying or at church while you were busy not taking care of them.

The only people to blame for abductions are the abductors. The only people to blame for neglecting the welfare of their children and leaving them without supervision in dangerous situations are usually the parents.

Completely agree. What ever happened to Madeleine happened because her parents neglected her and her siblings.

 

[AlwaysShocked]

I have now read the official translations plus the British LE interviews of all of the vacationers. Plus the statements of many others.

And I must say, I've changed my mind. I no longer think the parents were involved.

BUT I will say that I feel they were guilty of neglect of their children. ALL of them, except perhaps the couple who did come equipped with a "more expensive" room monitor.

It is very difficult for me, as a parent and a grandparent, to understand how these very educated, intelligent adults could have thought that a "listening plan" - whether offered by a resort or instituted on their own - was an okay thing.

In reading their statements, it appears these folks were all expressing what "concerned parents" they were, how they were interested in the psychological welfare of their children, etc. Yet on that same evening, one of the dad's came to check on his child, heard her "murmuring" inside and went in to discover she had vomited.

Now this father was a doctor. Would THAT incident not give anyone pause about these small children being left locked alone in an apartment? Apparently not.

And I also noticed that not one of them verbally expressed regret that they had done this. If anything, they continued to justify their decision, almost a year after the incident.

I sincerely hope this tragic incident has led to the discontinue the practice of "listening service" as a means of childcare in Europe. There are just too many things wrong with it to list!

eta: Forgot to add that the real reason I changed my mind was a reading of the reports about the dog hits and the DNA evidence. The initial DNA "match" was negated by further, more specific testing. And it seems the dog in question wasn't licensed, was not specifically cadaver trained. Seems it hits on any and all bodily fluids.

 

[brit1981]

I don't think 60% is high when it involves carrying style alone. He first said it was dark, he had no glasses, never saw the man's face but thought it was a local not a tourist. He later then said when he saw Gerry McCann he was sixty percent sure it was him not a local based on the way he was carrying his child down the plane steps, not on his face etc, but carrying style alone. Gerry was carrying his child against the chest like most parents do, I cannot see for the life of me how it was unique. No court in the us would allow that as evidence, in fact even facial recognition would not be allowed in those circumstance in all probability given witness is alleged to be a friend of the third aguido and changed his story only after he saw Gerry McCann had also been made an aguido.

 

[brit1981]

Yes they were wrong to leave the children,monitor or not, but why rub their faces in it. Imagine making a stupid decision that led to god only knows what happening to your child. I also think an abductor would have tried to get in at night anyway, there had been cases of someone in the area breaking in and abusing tourist children whilst parents slept.

 

[Donjeta]

Yes they were wrong to leave the children,monitor or not, but why rub their faces in it. Imagine making a stupid decision that led to god only knows what happening to your child. I also think an abductor would have tried to get in at night anyway, there had been cases of someone in the area breaking in and abusing tourist children whilst parents slept.

Yes, let's all leave our two-year olds alone because someone might break in even if we were there so it makes no difference, our children won't be any better off with their parents there than alone.

Is that the absolute worst excuse for leaving two-year olds to their own devices that we can come up with or could we improve on that if we strive harder?

If there is a pervert entering apartments molesting children most people would think that more supervision is required, not less.

 

[21merc7]

I've held onto hope for too long. Logic just kicked in, after reading about the new "sting operation" of 38 suspects. No way, no how, would that be made public knowledge if she is alive.

She either died at the Flat 5A or was intentionally killed soon after the eye "fleck" was made known across the world.

 

[brit1981]

Yes, let's all leave our two-year olds alone because someone might break in even if we were there so it makes no difference, our children won't be any better off with their parents there than alone.

Is that the absolute worst excuse for leaving two-year olds to their own devices that we can come up with or could we improve on that if we strive harder?

If there is a pervert entering apartments molesting children most people would think that more supervision is required, not less.

Not saying its an excuse, just that IMO it might not have made a difference. I think the apartment location was the issue.

And the other attacks had been kept quiet, no tourists knew of them at the time.

 

[brit1981]

I've held onto hope for too long. Logic just kicked in, after reading about the new "sting operation" of 38 suspects. No way, no how, would that be made public knowledge if she is alive.

She either died at the Flat 5A or was intentionally killed soon after the eye "fleck" was made known across the world.

Don't think the eye fleck made a difference. Amaral claimed it would harm her because it was recognisable, but the PJ themselves released details of it straight away. Her face was recognisable, fleck or not.

 

[Clutchbag]

Don't think the eye fleck made a difference. Amaral claimed it would harm her because it was recognisable, but the PJ themselves released details of it straight away. Her face was recognisable, fleck or not.

Brown mark in the eye was put by the authorities on the LE website/Interpol, for LE information, the vast majority of the population do not read these sites, they watch the news and read the papers. Gerry Mccann was warned by LE not to publicise it, his response was to say, though it was possible the abductor might do something to her eye, it was still a good marketing ploy!!

The whole "LOOK" campaign was based on the coloboma in the eye for months, via appeals, posters, media campaigning and so forth, even though Kate Mccann went on to say years later when interviewed by CNNs Pierce Morgan, that they never made much of her eye!
:floorlaugh:
http://www.zimbio.com/Gerry+McCann'...eXW/Kate+McCann+haven+t+put+much+emphasis+eye

 

[Clutchbag]

Yes, let's all leave our two-year olds alone because someone might break in even if we were there so it makes no difference, our children won't be any better off with their parents there than alone.

Is that the absolute worst excuse for leaving two-year olds to their own devices that we can come up with or could we improve on that if we strive harder?

If there is a pervert entering apartments molesting children most people would think that more supervision is required, not less.

They didnt even do physical checks. If there was no noise they would just walk away without looking in. What parents goes to chexk on their kid but doesnt actually check? I find it bizarre that they worried about stranger female nannies babysitting them at night, as if these young women working for the holiday resort were obviously child abusers, these were the same people who looked after them during the day, but then go on to leave them unattended for hours in an open apartment, and not worry about any strangers coming off the street into it which was so easy, as it was dark and they couldnt really see the apartment back, even if they had their eyes glues to it all night whilst eating and drinking, and also all the things that can befall unattended babies and toddlers, and if they worried about nannies abusing them they would certainly be worries that a stranger could just waltz in and abuse them, despite them saying it would never cross their mind. Whoever agrees that this is acceptable responsible behaviour with two and three year olds needs to get their head checked. They took risks.