Fencesitters & Not Guilty Post Here

[Kezlyn]

I don't think they did it.

I think they sedated Madeleine and her siblings. Doesn't mean they killed her. Sad as it is, millions of parents sedate their kids. And with the McCann's being doctors, I'd be very surprised if they accidentally overdosed Madeleine. I know that happens too, but why would there be blood evidence from an accidental overdose? Some people do bleed and froth when they overdose, but I wouldn't expect it to get all over the place as it would during a more violent death.

I'd also like to know just when the McCann's supposedly disposed of Madeleine's body. As far as I know, from the moment Kate ran from the room, their whereabouts have always been known.

 

[Shazza]

I don't think they did it.

I think they sedated Madeleine and her siblings. Doesn't mean they killed her. Sad as it is, millions of parents sedate their kids. And with the McCann's being doctors, I'd be very surprised if they accidentally overdosed Madeleine. I know that happens too, but why would there be blood evidence from an accidental overdose? Some people do bleed and froth when they overdose, but I wouldn't expect it to get all over the place as it would during a more violent death.

I'd also like to know just when the McCann's supposedly disposed of Madeleine's body. As far as I know, from the moment Kate ran from the room, their whereabouts have always been known.

There was plenty of time before Kate yelled that someone had taken her, if you read in the other threads on this forum, you will see that Madelaine was last seen at the pool at 2.29pm but that could be false, the last siting of Madelaine alive is still unknown.

 

[Kezlyn]

Ok, fine. She killed her in the afternoon and then sat down to a nice tapas meal with her friends.

 

[Shazza]

Ok, fine. She killed her in the afternoon and then sat down to a nice tapas meal with her friends.

That is how it is looking thus so far.

 

[poco]

That is how it is looking thus so far.

Why is it SHE killed her and not HE???? and didn't other people besides the McCann's go check on the children during dinner - unless she was already dead and they had her tucked in bed... I would think that would be highly unlikely. Someone like me, overly concerned, would probably go up and make sure each of the children were breathing....

 

[guineveer]

I am not convinced yet either. Too much of what we "know" has been heresay, conjecture and third-hand gossip.

I can't decide guilt on the McCann's actions alone. I've never lost a child or been anywhere near their position, so I can't surmise how I myself would react. If the evidence proves they did it, I'll be devastated not only at the travesty of little Madeleine's life but also at the sheer lack of humanity it would take to pull this kind of coverup over the world.

 

[Columbo]

Hi, I read websleuths a lot but don't post too much.
I was stunned at all this because I never for one minute thought they were guilty. The only thing that nagged at my mind was the "blog" kept by Gerry McCann. The things he talked about seemed lacking in feeling and mundane--I wondered why would he talk about this kind of stuff in a blog about his missing daughter? The other thing was that Kate seemed so cold; I couldn't understand how she could be out jogging when her daughter was missing but I guessed that , after awhile, people have to try to restore some semblance of normality to their lives, and do something to help get rid of the stress.
Where did the talk about "drugging their children so they could party" come from? Is there any basis in reality for this idea?

 

[Beyond Belief]

I still have to stay on the fence until evidence is strong enough to knock me off.

 

[packerdog]

This is a very strange case to me. I have always thought, and still do think that the Ramsey's killed their daughter. In this case I didn't think from the very beginning that they had anything to do with the fate of their daughter. After hearing all the news I am stumped! The deal with their rental car having DNA in the trunk after 23 days really makes no sense to me. It very well could be transfer, but what kind? The timeline is also a big deal to me,that is pretty tight. Did one of the group go into the rental and see Madeleine? If indeed smeone other than the parents saw her sleeping that would be a problem for LE.

 

[mrsmousemat]

The deal with their rental car having DNA in the trunk after 23 days really makes no sense to me. It very well could be transfer, but what kind? The timeline is also a big deal to me,that is pretty tight. Did one of the group go into the rental and see Madeleine? If indeed smeone other than the parents saw her sleeping that would be a problem for LE.[/quote]

Apparently the DNA would be similar to her mother's, so it's not 100percent solid evidence. Also we don't know whether it is a minute spot or a huge area that was found.

Also the McCanns are pictured with the car on Sky news, with the pushchairs of the twins in the back.

Maybe the pushchairs crossed the floor of the apartment and picked up DNA.


AS to the sedatives - Gerry McCann may have admitted to giving the children Calpol - as Kate McCann's father said they gave Calpol to the children on his TV interview. You can buy it in any chemists shop without a prescription in the UK. It's a mild painkiller and sometimes used to calm down overtired children, who can't get to sleep.

Not saying they are innocent - just innocent until the evidence proves them guilty

 

[packerdog]

The deal with their rental car having DNA in the trunk after 23 days really makes no sense to me. It very well could be transfer, but what kind? The timeline is also a big deal to me,that is pretty tight. Did one of the group go into the rental and see Madeleine? If indeed smeone other than the parents saw her sleeping that would be a problem for LE.

Apparently the DNA would be similar to her mother's, so it's not 100percent solid evidence. Also we don't know whether it is a minute spot or a huge area that was found.

Also the McCanns are pictured with the car on Sky news, with the pushchairs of the twins in the back.

Maybe the pushchairs crossed the floor of the apartment and picked up DNA.


AS to the sedatives - Gerry McCann may have admitted to giving the children Calpol - as Kate McCann's father said they gave Calpol to the children on his TV interview. You can buy it in any chemists shop without a prescription in the UK. It's a mild painkiller and sometimes used to calm down overtired children, who can't get to sleep.

Not saying they are innocent - just innocent until the evidence proves them guilty[/QUOTE]

Thanks mrsmousemat. The transfer could have very well happened this way.

 

[delilah]

I'm not ready to hold the parents responsible yet. I just don't see them killing their daughter and hiding her body that night. From what I've read, there wasn't enough time. That being said, I do find some of the McCann 's actions suspecious. So few tears during interviews make me a little nervous and the visit with the Pope is huge red flag for me. Many devout, dedicated, loving Catholics have had family members go missing and zero to nil get a visit with the Pope.

Still, I need hard evidence for this one.

Are you implying the Pope is an accessory to the murder then?

 

[KOOL LOOK]

Hi, I read websleuths a lot but don't post too much.
I was stunned at all this because I never for one minute thought they were guilty. The only thing that nagged at my mind was the "blog" kept by Gerry McCann. The things he talked about seemed lacking in feeling and mundane--I wondered why would he talk about this kind of stuff in a blog about his missing daughter? The other thing was that Kate seemed so cold; I couldn't understand how she could be out jogging when her daughter was missing but I guessed that , after awhile, people have to try to restore some semblance of normality to their lives, and do something to help get rid of the stress.
Where did the talk about "drugging their children so they could party" come from? Is there any basis in reality for this idea?

:blowkiss: Hi Colombo, welcome and I feel so special you have posted on my thread. I've noticed, anyone else? That we have lots of new posters on this forum? Especially on this thread? This really grows websleuths and I encourage new members to please post and give your insight.

Now, the reason I pulled this post out also is this insight speaks volumes, I almost wept when I read it. Colombo, I don't know if you realize how profound your words are.

Believing in their innocence, not getting taken into all the media hype, sensationalism even reading here, and just being so objective. But your opinion on what's only made you consider their guilt is their very own website where Gerry is Blogging. Gerry's own words has caused many, not just you to feel this same way.

Those that just can't wrap their minds around the parents being guilty until they read just what the Mccanns has put out there themselves. It's awesome and very telling that Gerry himself, nothing else is causing people to think their guilty. Great post!!

Welcome all new members here, I see hats I've never seen post, so nice to get some new perspective, writing styles, please go to the other areas of this forum, especially the private forums like the jury room. :woohoo:

I'm afraid it's going to be their very own words and actions that confirms and convicts thems.

 

[delilah]

The only thing that nagged at my mind was the "blog" kept by Gerry McCann. The things he talked about seemed lacking in feeling and mundane--I wondered why would he talk about this kind of stuff in a blog about his missing daughter?

I'm on the fence too. Although it doesn't mean he's guilty of anything, I think the blog is REALLY strange. What makes him think anyone wants to know when they went to church, when they went for a run, what children's party they attended, etc? I suppose it's partly the narcissistic culture of the internet, where loads of people think others are interested in the intimate details of their lives, anyone can have their 15 mins of fame etc, or it's some odd kind of therapy. I haven't read any before this week's but here are some extracts for those who haven't seen it. It's wierdly lighthearted and detached:

Thursday
Everyone will know that Kate attended for interview as a witness with the Portuguese police today. This is only the second time Kate has been interviewed and although it was a long day, going on past midnight, this was shorter than my second interview which lasted 13 hours! The suggestion that Kate is involved in Madeleines disappearance is ludicrous. Anyone who knows anything about the 3rd May knows that Kate is completely innocent. We will fight this all the way and we will not stop looking for Madeleine.

Wednesday
We were surprised to find increased media presence in Praia da Luz again today. We were followed down to church, then to the shops and back to our accommodation which is very unusual, apart from the build up to the 100 days. All the excitement seems to be over the results of the recent forensic tests that again have created a huge amount of speculation. There has been no official conformation that the report has been received, or what the tests suggest if anything!

Tuesday
Kate and I went for a run along the coast at lunchtime. It was pretty windy but still warm enough. Later in the afternoon we went to visit a friend of Kate’s who is on holiday in a nearby village with her family. They brought lots of cards from well-wishers at home and we talked a lot about the search for Madeleine. The twins had a great time splashing around in a little inflatable paddle pool, singing songs and being doted on by the older kids.

 

[KOOL LOOK]

I'm on the fence too. Although it doesn't mean he's guilty of anything, I think the blog is REALLY strange. What makes him think anyone wants to know when they went to church, when they went for a run, what children's party they attended, etc? I suppose it's partly the narcissistic culture of the internet, where loads of people think others are interested in the intimate details of their lives, anyone can have their 15 mins of fame etc, or it's some odd kind of therapy. I haven't read any before this week's but here are some extracts for those who haven't seen it. It's wierdly lighthearted and detached:

Thursday
Everyone will know that Kate attended for interview as a witness with the Portuguese police today. This is only the second time Kate has been interviewed and although it was a long day, going on past midnight, this was shorter than my second interview which lasted 13 hours! The suggestion that Kate is involved in Madeleines disappearance is ludicrous. Anyone who knows anything about the 3rd May knows that Kate is completely innocent. We will fight this all the way and we will not stop looking for Madeleine.

Wednesday
We were surprised to find increased media presence in Praia da Luz again today. We were followed down to church, then to the shops and back to our accommodation which is very unusual, apart from the build up to the 100 days. All the excitement seems to be over the results of the recent forensic tests that again have created a huge amount of speculation. There has been no official conformation that the report has been received, or what the tests suggest if anything!

Tuesday
Kate and I went for a run along the coast at lunchtime. It was pretty windy but still warm enough. Later in the afternoon we went to visit a friend of Kate’s who is on holiday in a nearby village with her family. They brought lots of cards from well-wishers at home and we talked a lot about the search for Madeleine. The twins had a great time splashing around in a little inflatable paddle pool, singing songs and being doted on by the older kids.

Delilah, welcome and thanks for posting these on this thread. I don't know how to bring over links, websites, etc... to do it for myself. I agree, it's their own doings that's going to do them in. It is weird. Strange.

I haven't seen them crying, just looking agitated, stressed and looking like they don't appreciate being bothered.

 

[delilah]

Delilah, welcome and thanks for posting these on this thread.

Nice to be here! And good to see a thread for those of us who haven't rushed to judgement or let the emotional aspects of the case overwhelm us. I want cold hard facts not subjective and fanciful rantings!

 

[Columbo]

:blowkiss: Hi Colombo, welcome and I feel so special you have posted on my thread. I've noticed, anyone else? That we have lots of new posters on this forum? Especially on this thread? This really grows websleuths and I encourage new members to please post and give your insight.

Now, the reason I pulled this post out also is this insight speaks volumes, I almost wept when I read it. Colombo, I don't know if you realize how profound your words are.

Believing in their innocence, not getting taken into all the media hype, sensationalism even reading here, and just being so objective. But your opinion on what's only made you consider their guilt is their very own website where Gerry is Blogging. Gerry's own words has caused many, not just you to feel this same way.

Those that just can't wrap their minds around the parents being guilty until they read just what the Mccanns has put out there themselves. It's awesome and very telling that Gerry himself, nothing else is causing people to think their guilty. Great post!!

Welcome all new members here, I see hats I've never seen post, so nice to get some new perspective, writing styles, please go to the other areas of this forum, especially the private forums like the jury room. :woohoo:

I'm afraid it's going to be their very own words and actions that confirms and convicts thems.

Thanks for your welcome, KOOL LOOK. I was hoping my post didn't sound off-the-wall and glad that you noticed the same things about Gerry's blog. I followed the case closely for a few weeks after it happened, and then off and on going to the website, but was/am devastated wondering what happened to the poor little girl.

If these people really are guilty, they sure are doing a bang-up job of trying to hide it by going all over Europe "trying to get Madeleine back", keeping the website, etc. I suppose that all this means is that they are smarter than Scott Peterson. : (

 

[KOOL LOOK]

I'm not ready to hold the parents responsible yet. I just don't see them killing their daughter and hiding her body that night. From what I've read, there wasn't enough time. That being said, I do find some of the McCann 's actions suspecious. So few tears during interviews make me a little nervous and the visit with the Pope is huge red flag for me. Many devout, dedicated, loving Catholics have had family members go missing and zero to nil get a visit with the Pope.

Still, I need hard evidence for this one.

Until I hear more information about what evidence there really is, I'll leave mind open but I have always been very suspicious of the McCann's.

I dont think they are guilty of anything more than bad judgement and that the Portuguese police are desperate to conclude.

As most know I have always been willing to consider the parents as suspects as long as the case was looked at on its merits and was not just more anger posts about their having left the children behind unsupervised.

I also wanted and expected that many people that were around the missing little girl should also be looked at carefully and that as long as there was only one official suspect, due consideration also be given in that direction. It is what is proper to do.

I posted that the parents should not be accused by us here without some evidence and without being considered suspects by L.E. but now they ARE officially considered suspects by L.E. so speculation concerning them as perps is more proper in sleuthing the case.

I am still on the fence but I am quickly leaning towards the parents being guilty of some sort of crime. I now see how it could have happened and if I can see a single possibility I bet others can name 10 more ways I have not thought of.

Before I go on to post my thoughts on how it might have been done I note that L.E. can lie to suspects to induce a confession, claiming they have evidence which they may not in fact have. L.E. told the mccanns they have DNA evidence from the rental car etc but we have then heard it from the mcanns and not yet from L.E. (so far as I last read in news reports.) L.E. can't say anything to the public about the case according to their laws, so we have not heard the DNA stuff directly from them as far as I know. (I was gone from home most of the day today.)

Maybe, probably the DNA evidence is as we have been told from the mccanns but maybe not. We may have to await L.E. telling us these things to know for sure.

As to how it could have happened IF the parents were involved as it now appears:

If sedatives were involved it may not have been an overdose perse. It might have been too much to safely walk though and Madeleine might have fallen and broken her neck or may have smothered in bed without being able to function properly to stay safe. If the parents found her dead would they have put her body in the fridge and then hollered "they've taken her!" so that people all do a quick cursory room search and then search outside looking for Madeleine to be wandering lost or to be a captive but always looking anywhere but in the fridge of the apartment?
If so then the reason for the blood in the second apartment would need to be explained and I might have a way. How to move a body of a 3 year old and not have it look like a body. Maybe in a suitcase or maybe as cut up freezer packages or maybe as a body in a wheelie portable ice chest.
But blood specs in the second apartment and in the car would seem to come from a thawing body or body parts which were moved to the car and then maybe to a beach somewhere to be disposed of.

There is no nonrefrigeration way to account for a body being kept unspoiled for 25 days and then transported by car. It is too much a coincidence to think kidnappers got Madeleine and killed her and used that car to dump the body and then the parents rented it.

But remember- we do not KNOW that the alleged DNA evidence actually shows what it has been alleged to show.

I am still a fence sitter with an open mind but I easily see that evidence seems to point right at the parents as having done some sort of crime.
There is no way to not see that.

I'm on the fence, but leaning slightly more towards they did it.

I am sickened by the thought (IF it is true) that they gave the children sedatives while they went out.

In any event, IF the children were given a sedative, it is possible that something happened because of that - an overdose, an allergic reaction - whatever, and when they got home she was already DEAD. The cover up begins - wouldn't look good for "drugs" to show up in a 3-year-old's system and the parents would probably no longer be able to afford long extended vacations to foreign countries. Obviously, any parent who would give their child a sedative while they went out, puts their own selfish pleasures above those of the welfare of their children's.

My other thought is -- their lack of emotion. Even IF this was truly an accident, you would think they would still be emotionally distraught over the incident (probably more for themselves though - "how could this happen to us"?). I always equate the lack of emotions (tears, etc) to intentional killings, not accidental ones.

I wonder if any questioning has been done of the other children - probably not.

I have wondered this about much of the media reports. I just watched a clip on the Today Show. The reporter/analyst just kept staying that the Tabloids were convicting these people.

The only thing I got out of the report was that there was transfer of Maddie's DNA to something in the trunk of that car. Was it blood ? The "family spokesperson" is the one stating the car was not rented until 25 days later. So, perhaps it was prior to this.

I suppose I feel like the devil's advocate here, but I am just not ready to believe that if they did something to her they could pull of this cover-up and have an audience with the Pope. I don't get a good feeling from the parent's, but that's not enough to convict them, in my opinion. Philamena, I am with you on this one. However, I will keep on open mind ... I just need more factual information and less circumstantial theories.

This is how I feel too. Even though it doesn't sound too good for the McCanns right now.
I will not judge them on rumor.
We need to hear what evidence the PLE actually have.

The police have been playing a double game for some time now. Saying one thing in their official statements, while deliberately leaking other damaging "rumors" about the McCanns to the press...against their own laws.
I don't have a problem with this tactic if it works...and so long as the McCanns are actually guilty.

I don't think they did it.

I think they sedated Madeleine and her siblings. Doesn't mean they killed her. Sad as it is, millions of parents sedate their kids. And with the McCann's being doctors, I'd be very surprised if they accidentally overdosed Madeleine. I know that happens too, but why would there be blood evidence from an accidental overdose? Some people do bleed and froth when they overdose, but I wouldn't expect it to get all over the place as it would during a more violent death.

I'd also like to know just when the McCann's supposedly disposed of Madeleine's body. As far as I know, from the moment Kate ran from the room, their whereabouts have always been known.

Welcome, this is why I felt we needed this thread, because they still at this point could be innocent. I'm leaning more to the guilty, because their being there own worse enemies to me. But I want facts to convict and judge, not rumor and conjecture. Certainly not the police either being pressured and forced into hasty actions because it's such a famous case. The tragedy would be that or a false confession due to pressure and being wore out tired.

The deal we know about being made to Kate, I don't want it if she submits just so she'll have peace again in her life. I can tell you, I can see now how these type of cases can be overwhelming and cause an innocent person to confess. We know it's happened in the past. Several famous cases could be named. We don't want that here. Just the real truth.

Maddy is missing. Fact. Someone took her. Fact. Length of time and no eyewitnesses, age, circumstances, statistics pertaining to missing young children, points to the parents. Fact.

Glad to see the new posters here. This is going to be a big case. Months if not years will be invested by many of us.

 

[MSM]

I have not been following this case closely, but came to read the forum after seeing that the parents were named as suspects. I have not read the many threads here (don't have time!) but am curious about what has caused suspicion on the parents. I think it's possible (based mostly on statistics) that they were involved, but I think it's also very possible that they were not.

If Madeleine's DNA got in the trunk of the rental car due to her parents' involvement in her disappearance, as many have pointed out, it must have been in the process of moving her (dead or alive) at least 25 days after she was reported missing. This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If they killed her, they decided when the police were notified. They could modify the timeline to suit their needs, ensuring that the body was removed before sounding the alarm. Why would they need to hide her in the apartment and move her later? Seems like an unnecessary risk.

I also don't think it is that strange that the parents gave their children over-the-counter medication to sedate them. It's not the best parenting in the world (neither is leaving 2 and 3 year olds alone with unlocked doors!!), but my father the doctor used to give me and my sister Benadryl at bedtime when we were little. I like to give him grief about this now, but there is nothing evil about it.

I would like to see if there is any other evidence, or any particularly suspicious statements or actions by the parents, before making up my mind. In contrast, with the JBR case, I thought someone in the family killed her as soon as I read about it.

Just my :twocents: !

 

[Columbo]

In the beginning I thought the parents were negligent in leaving their kids alone, but I never suspected that they were guilty - though I don't think they are necessarily "likeable" people. I just didn't get that guilty vibe like I have with other cases. Now, in light of recent developments, I am firmly on the fence.

However, I have always believed that Madeleine was either killed that night or shortly thereafter. I just wasn't sure by whom.

Like many here, I'm anxiously awaiting a full list of the evidence.

Thanks Olivia, that is the other thing that has been nibbling at my brain from the very beginning: how could these people, doctors yet, leave three little kids alone. Seemed really negligent to me, but then I started to believe their rationalization that the restaurant was not far away. I'm still not sure about the distance between hotel and restaurant--sorry, hope this doesn't sound dumb...I just haven't followed this case in detail.

I also did not get that strong "guilty" vibe like I have with other cases--with Scott Peterson, the INSTANT I saw him on t.v., a day or so after the murder (before he chose to stay silent & dodge the media), I knew he did it.