Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 26

[daffodil]

Why on earth should she be? Because she has a different opinion to others? Oh dear lol

 

[Texana]

The curious thing about the McCanns is that they never display anger or remorse, two very common parts of the complex emotion of grief. Have you ever seen a parent on television, even years after the crime, whose child was killed or abducted and never found? The sense of anger emanating from them is palpable. Even when they talk about forgiving the criminal, there is still a great sense of anger, frustration, and struggle.

I never sense that from the McCanns. They do not display anger to the abductor (they joke instead about Maddie giving her "tuppence worth" or say that they hope she is "well treated.") Watch the videos over and over and you will not see anything directed specifically at Madeleine's abductor--if anything, they sheer away from that. They mention that the important thing is that "a horrible crime has been committed" but they don't actually ever tie that to a person. It's as specific as global warning, in terms of personal involvement or direction.

And why don't they feel that sense of personal violation aimed at a specific person that committed a crime? Why do they direct that personal violation and outrage to the Portuguese police?

Because they are the ones who brought about the chain of events that resulted in Madeleine McCann going "missing." They can't fake an anger at themselves because they simply don't feel the deserve it.

 

[scandi]

Indeed.

And to label anyone as "McCann hater..." I don't think that finding the McCanns in some way culpable for what happened to their child (either accidental death or abduction) qualifies anyone as "hater." It is what it is.

The McCanns used singularly poor judgment for people who should have had better judgment, by their education, than anyone else. As doctors, they would have had training in accidental injuries to children. I am sure that the doctors in Great Britain go through a round of emergency room duty as part of their training same as any other first world country. I knew someone who had a master's in nursing and was the manager of a hospital emergency room and I will never forget that she told me she would never have a swimming pool, balloons, or a trampoline at her home--just based on the injuries she saw. I am sure the McCanns in their training as physicians saw more than one example of what can happen to a child left unsupervised.

It is not hating anyone to find it incredulous that the McCanns chose to leave their very young children unsupervised. Whatever scenario you believe, it ended badly for Madeleine McCann.

And yet, the McCanns defend their decision to this day.

If the McCanns aren't loved and respected, that is their own fault. Natural consequences.

scandi I have also studied this case from the beginning - and have always tried to separate fact from all of the malicious fiction.

I definately wouldn't accept as truth any of the books published so far about Madeleine. They have been published for one reason only - to make money out of Madeleine for their very questionable authors. Especially disgraced ex-cop Amaral.:crazy:

And yes I saw the video - I also saw there was a break in the recording before you see them laughing.
Who knows how long the break was, what they were responding too, what had been said, even said by whom!
Without all the information it's wrong to make assumptions and attack them.

As for your last paragraph scandi - I really hope your right. :blowkiss:

Thanks for your post April.

I would accept what you say about making assumptions based on one incident. Then I think of how it was not an unusual occurance to see them smiling right after a presser. It shows a lack of sincerity IMO. Having seen families in the same situation; the Smarts and Laci's family, little Samantha Runion's mom and Jessica Lunsford's dad - just a few examples of how having a missing child causes great trauma in the family. And like Texana says, they didn't show the normal signs of greiving and dealing with loss.

Kate. She was on the spot, yes. But if she really had nothing to do with Madeleine's plight, why did she lie about the cadavers she said she had contact with at her job and that CC had gone to work with her which is why Eddie alerted to him! Writing a book you would have to have a cup of spiked tea to make that one up IMO

A couple of weeks after it was let out she said that, mid to late September, there was an article in a small local paper in the town where her clinic was. The link was pulled right away, as you can imagine.

But Kate's boss and 2 fellow employees were all quoted saying it was not in Kate's job description to deal in any way with cadavers. What she said was an untruth and for me it set Kate in a window of light, telling me what she was really about. It wasn't about finding Madeleine. Why would one lie if they were desperately hoping for the return of their lost little girl.


Just a few thoughts. xox

 

[Isabella]

scandi I have also studied this case from the beginning - and have always tried to separate fact from all of the malicious fiction.

I definately wouldn't accept as truth any of the books published so far about Madeleine. They have been published for one reason only - to make money out of Madeleine for their very questionable authors. Especially disgraced ex-cop Amaral.:crazy:

And yes I saw the video - I also saw there was a break in the recording before you see them laughing.
Who knows how long the break was, what they were responding too, what had been said, even said by whom!
Without all the information it's wrong to make assumptions and attack them.

As for your last paragraph scandi - I really hope your right. :blowkiss:

I suppose two things i dont understand from your post

You say you have followed the case from the beginning and yet you didnt know something so big as the "only" witness to the crime having changed her story several times.

You say about seperating malicious fiction yet you seem to talk great delight in repeatedly calling Amaral a disgraced cop. To be honest i think its only the McCann supporters who even think that. Amaral was in one heck of a situation. A young girl went missing on his "patch" and the parents and there friends not only didnt seem to want to try and find her but they wouldnt answer all the questions asked of them. Not only that he had a situation where none of the stories were allegedly consistent with each other. They didnt even the proper time lines for when these checks supposedly happened or whether the door was locked or unlocked. He then had the situation where politicians from another country were getting involved and was threatened that he would be sued if he didnt release the photofit of the "eggman". In addition the guy had the childs parents spokesperson trashing them to the country where the little girl come from. It was never about Amaral and its sad if the McCann supporters dont see that. If the McCanns had been holidaying in America the FBI would be trashed to pieces - if it was in Australia the cops there would have got trashed. Anyone but the McCanns. MOO

Incidentally - would you buy a book by the McCanns or there friends? The last known people to see Madeleine and who have never been able to get there story straight?

 

[Isabella]

Thanks for your post April.

I would accept what you say about making assumptions based on one incident. Then I think of how it was not an unusual occurance to see them smiling right after a presser. It shows a lack of sincerity IMO. Having seen families in the same situation; the Smarts and Laci's family, little Samantha Runion's mom and Jessica Lunsford's dad - just a few examples of how having a missing child causes great trauma in the family. And like Texana says, they didn't show the normal signs of greiving and dealing with loss.

Kate. She was on the spot, yes. But if she really had nothing to do with Madeleine's plight, why did she lie about the cadavers she said she had contact with at her job and that CC had gone to work with her which is why Eddie alerted to him! Writing a book you would have to have a cup of spiked tea to make that one up IMO

A couple of weeks after it was let out she said that, mid to late September, there was an article in a small local paper in the town where her clinic was. The link was pulled right away, as you can imagine.

But Kate's boss and 2 fellow employees were all quoted saying it was not in Kate's job description to deal in any way with cadavers. What she said was an untruth and for me it set Kate in a window of light, telling me what she was really about. It wasn't about finding Madeleine. Why would one lie if they were desperately hoping for the return of their lost little girl.


Just a few thoughts. xox

Kate was a locum. All that means is she fills in for a DR for a few days or so if there ill or on holidays. She would be based at the surgery. Even IF someone died - no way would the body be in the surgery long enough for any items to be hit on by a cadavar dog. It just doesnt work that way.

As for emotion theres just two times ive really seen emotion from these people. Firstly when Gerry came out the police station that night. To me he looked totally shocked like he had been told something he didnt expect. Secondly was when he landed at East Midlands a few days later - IMO relief knowing he was unlikely to have to go back there.

 

[april4sky]

Why on earth should she be? Because she has a different opinion to others? Oh dear lol

Hi daffodil, :hand:

Your not surprised are you that I am now part of the conspiracy. :laugh:

I often wonder how much of a field day they would have if I said I had been to Leicester, Liverpool, Exeter, Ireland and OMG yes even Portugal.
Damn I haven't been to Scotland.

 

[scandi]

Kate was a locum. All that means is she fills in for a DR for a few days or so if there ill or on holidays. She would be based at the surgery. Even IF someone died - no way would the body be in the surgery long enough for any items to be hit on by a cadavar dog. It just doesnt work that way.

As for emotion theres just two times ive really seen emotion from these people. Firstly when Gerry came out the police station that night. To me he looked totally shocked like he had been told something he didnt expect. Secondly was when he landed at East Midlands a few days later - IMO relief knowing he was unlikely to have to go back there.

Hi Isabella, You are so right IMO. With the way a body is recycled back into Mother Earth, it takes at a minimum of 1 1/2 to 2 hours for the death scent to be sniffed by a human recovery dog. That is a fact, discussed by us to the hilt!

That means to have a death scent on her clothing or CC she would have to go trapesing thru the morgue. And I doubt her clinic even would store a body that long as the county coroner would be called for a pick up to do an autopsy. I think ;}

I just saw way more photos of them laughing then in distress.

Is there anything new in the case? Is Amaral still in trial? xox

 

[gogrannypop]

Some folks of higher learning and status think themselves invincible. MO

 

[Isabella]

Hi Isabella, You are so right IMO. With the way a body is recycled back into Mother Earth, it takes at a minimum of 1 1/2 to 2 hours for the death scent to be sniffed by a human recovery dog. That is a fact, discussed by us to the hilt!

That means to have a death scent on her clothing or CC she would have to go trapesing thru the morgue. And I doubt her clinic even would store a body that long as the county coroner would be called for a pick up to do an autopsy. I think ;}

I just saw way more photos of them laughing then in distress.

Is there anything new in the case? Is Amaral still in trial? xox

There wouldnt be a morgue at the surgery. Generally if someone dies a Dr is to certify the death and then generally the undertaker will fetch the body. A coroner will someones be called but in this situation ( at a surgery) i think its more likely that the Dr would sign the death certicate and then it would be sent to wherever.

As far as Amaral goes im not entirely sure. I will try and find out

 

[anne11]

I have never undertood how her clothes became contaminated by cadavrine (the death smell), for goodness sake she was a part-time GP. The morgue is at the hospital, GP's surgerys do not have morgues.

 

[Isabella]

Hey Scandi

Weird timing or what? Amaral is in fact court this morning regarding the charges against him.

The lawyer of Leonor Cipriano tried to get the magistrate hearing the case removed last month saying he was biased. The appeals comittee refused this complaint and so the judge will not be removed from the trial. This is not appealable.

Once he was told this he said he would not be going to the trial although he will represent Leonor in writing still.

There was one witness last m onth i believe it was who said that the marks on Leonors face was done on at least two different events. Today there was a an expert from the National Institute for Forensics Medicine who stated that the bruises were from 3 seperate periods - these being 3-4 days old, others that were 8-9 days old and some that were 3 weeks old.

I'll try and post more as the trial continues. One interesting thing I heard yesterday was that Gordon Brown phoned the Leicestershire police several HOURS before Amaral was removed from the case asking whether or not Amaral had actually been removed yet from the case. Really...how did he know before Amaral and why was he getting involved?

Although without a shadow of a doubt I believe Amaral to be innocent regarding Leonor it wouldnt entirely surprise me if hes found guilty just so he can be shut up once and for all.

Incidentally this is about the only country in Europe where you cant buy Amarals book - so go and figure.

 

[rashomon]

The dogs have a better reputation than the McCanns'.

Honestly, the evidence of the dogs' alerting is the most incriminating evidence against the McCanns'. Anyone who has not read that in detail, needs to do so immediately. The locations where the dogs alerted and the nature of each dog's training--a logical person cannot see that in any way other than very, very damaging for the McCanns and very sad for Madeleine.

You have to ask yourself; would you believe the actions of trained animals with superior abilities to detect odors, or human beings who left their children alone knowingly while they went out to drink and eat with friends; and who have good reason to lie? Which set of living beings has the reason to lie?

The dogs neither know nor care anything than they sense the odor of death.

One of the dogs simply went crazy when approaching the sofa.
What exactly was found behind the sofa? Blood?

 

[Salem]

I'm jumping in here, because this infuriates me. Not at you April, but in general. Respectfully snipped ~

Sorry Isabella but I don't believe she did. She couldn't discuss her evidence due to Portuguese secrecy laws. Which brings us back to the PJ and press!!
Perhaps you can provide links?

From the report....Prosecuter Mr Magalhaes explains his decision.......

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...irst-time.html

In their 58 page report, prosecutors Jose de Magalhaes and Joao Melchior Gomes said:

Mr Magalhaes defended the McCanns' decision to leave their children alone in the apartment on the night Madeleine vanished.

There was speculation that the couple may be charged with "abandonment", which can incur a prison sentence of up to 10 years.

But he said Mr and Mrs McCann had not thought their children were in any danger when they left Madeleine and her younger twin siblings.

"It is obvious that neither of the defendants, Gerald or Kate, acted with intent," he wrote.

"They could not predict that the resort where they had chosen to spend a few days holiday would leave the lives of any of their children in danger.
"It was located in a quiet place, where the majority of residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of crime.

"It seems obvious to us that the crimes of exposure or abandonment can be eliminated.
****************

First, Jane Tanner did change her description of the bundleman - she originally said she saw the back of his head and his expensive shoes. That went to a full on description, weeks/months later, of which someone produced a sketch. It is all BS.

As for the final report: It could have been predicted, regardless of what Mr Magalhaes says. AND it is my opinion the McCanns and the whole crew should have been charged with abandonment. The Tanners left their sick child alone????? WTH????

This was a group of Doctors - Doctors typically see many injured children during the course of their training, that were hurt because they were unsupervised. YOU NEVER, EVER leave 2 and 3 year olds alone. For Heaven's Sake. The McCanns and their friends knew this and they did it anyway out of some false sense of security or something. HOWEVER, after the night Maddie cried and cried - that these parents turned their backs on her AGAIN, after being told not to by the staff - is UNSPEAKABLE. How anyone can defend these monsters is beyond me. They don't deserve to have the twins and they didn't deserve Maddie.

There is no excuse for the McCanns behavior, not during the vacation nor after. It is all very sad that Maddie is the one to have suffered the greatest for their selfishness.

Salem

 

[wfgodot]

Hello, I'm a newbie here, particularly to this topic and, though I've read much about the case over the last couple of years, I'm sure to be a bit rusty, especially compared to the brilliance the rest of you show regarding the topic. Having made that caveat, I shall limit my maiden appearance on this thread to ten more words, viz., "I assume the parents to be responsible for the disappearance."

 

[Texana]

One of the dogs simply went crazy when approaching the sofa.
What exactly was found behind the sofa? Blood?

Eddie is the "cadaver dog" and is specially trained to detect the presence of cadaverine and only that of humans. Keela is specially trained to detect the presence of blood.

Eddie alerted to the scent of cadaverine (from a human, again, he does not alert to animal or other decomposed organic material) in the living room, behind the sofa.

Keela alerted to the scent of blood in the same spot, behind the sofa, in the living room, close to the outside window.

Blood was found when the tiles behind the sofa were removed and tested. However, the sample was degraded, probably due cleaning chemicals.

The FSS lab was able to check only five markers from that site but all five of those markers matched Madeleine's DNA. There were no markers that could not have come from Madeleine.

 

[Texana]

Hello, I'm a newbie here, particularly to this topic and, though I've read much about the case over the last couple of years, I'm sure to be a bit rusty, especially compared to the brilliance the rest of you show regarding the topic. Having made that caveat, I shall limit my maiden appearance on this thread to ten more words, viz., "I assume the parents to be responsible for the disappearance."

Welcome; I'm sure you will have much to add to the conversation!

 

[april4sky]

Respectfully snipped...

First, Jane Tanner did change her description of the bundleman - she originally said she saw the back of his head and his expensive shoes. That went to a full on description, weeks/months later, of which someone produced a sketch. It is all BS.

As for the final report: It could have been predicted, regardless of what Mr Magalhaes says. AND it is my opinion the McCanns and the whole crew should have been charged with abandonment.
Salem

Salem this is Jane Tanners statement from the files....

Brown male between 35 and 40, slim, around 1.70m. Very dark hair, thick, long at the neck. (Noticed when the person was seen from the back). He was wearing golden beige cloth trousers (linen type) with a "Duffy" type coat (but not very thick). He was wearing black shoes, of a conventional style and was walking quickly. He was carrying a sleeping child in his arms across his chest. By his manner, the man gave her the impression that he wasn't a tourist.
***********
And an article from the daily record
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/comment/newspaper-opinion/2008/08/06/maddie-police-stand-accused-86908-20685928/

Today, it is they who have become arguidos - formal suspects - after their files were opened for public scrutiny.
At the very least, they have behaved with staggering indifference. At worst, they stand accused of dereliction of duty.
There are few who will comprehend why they failed to publicise two highly detailed - and strikingly similar - efit pictures of possible suspects.
An English tourist remembers a man watching the McCann flat.
A second Briton provided data for a second efit after spotting a suspicious man in the area in the days before Madeleine disappeared.
Instead of using these efits to secure worldwide attention, the inquiry team issued a ridiculous drawing of the rear view of an egg-shaped head with hair. Why?
Because they didn't want to put out the images of the suspects the two Brits described because of secrecy laws and the fear of prejudicing further investigations.
It beggars belief that the police could even consider that the privacy of an unknown person, who might just be a dangerous child abductor, takes precedence over the life of a missing child.
First, detectives claimed to them that their daughter's DNA had been found in their hire car despite a British scientist's warning days earlier that tests were inconclusive.
Now the efit evidence has come to light.
The police have rightly been condemned by the prosecutors who concluded that their probe "achieved very little". They couldn't even find out whether Madeleine was alive or dead.
******
Salem Jane Tanners description did not change from her statement. The only reason people think she did is because the police released description changed.
No-one knows why the police did not share the description they were given by Jane or by Mr Smith or by any of the other people who came forward with descriptions of people seen around the area - they would have to explain that.
******
Salem I know your "opinions" regarding abandonment and conspiracy theories. But as you know I don't share them.
More importantly neither does the law.

Anything is possible with conspiracy theories! And when you count up the number of people pulled into this particular "conspiracy" it's just a nonesense IMO

 

[Salem]

April - we know we are of different opinions. That's okay, probably even a good thing. Normally, I really am not much of a conspiracist (sp?), but in this case, I'll admit I firmly believe that someone or something got to the FSS. I also have great concerns about all of the media contacts that the McCanns had/have, including that Gordon Brown dude.

I am puzzled by this case. I believe the McCanns are involved, based mostly on their actions, what they have said, their body language and their irresponsible actions in leaving the children alone. With that said, I will also admit I have questions. I personally, don't understand how all 7 of the members of the group, not including G&K, could keep quiet, unless they didn't know what really happened.

I did watch the video of the dogs and I understand they are the best dogs in the world at what they do. I firmly believe Maddie's body was in that apartment, on K's clothes and on cuddle cat. Nothing will change my mind about that. The problem with the dogs is that they can't talk and tell us exactly what is what, so the information they provide us with, is not enough in a court of law.

Given all the previous nonsense with the British press regarding this case, it would take more than one article to make me change my mind. I have looked at the final report. I have not read it word for word. BUT what I remember during this entire investigation, was how often the PJ reached out to the British LE and made use of their services. Most of the evidence found and published in the many articles was actually found by British LE. Everyone seems to forget that. So my biggest question is, if there was no evidence against the McCanns, why didn't the British LE say so? To date, it seems to me they have been really, really quiet about this. Early on there were rumors that the British LE felt the McCanns were quilty also, but were required to keep quiet by the British govt. Maybe that is more conspiracy theory, I don't know. What I do know is that I have never seen the British LE defend the McCanns. To me, that says a lot considering how involved they were in the investigation.

Salem

 

[Salem]

I'll have to go back an take another look at Tanner's statement. I remember many discussions regarding the map she drew and signed that is part of the final report.

That G&J did not see her is just illogical. I don't beleive that for a minute. It would have been impossible in my mind not to notice her.

Salem

 

[april4sky]

Respectfully snipped....

April - we know we are of different opinions. That's okay, probably even a good thing.

Normally, I really am not much of a conspiracist (sp?), but in this case, I'll admit I firmly believe that someone or something got to the FSS. I also have great concerns about all of the media contacts that the McCanns had/have, including that Gordon Brown dude.

I am puzzled by this case.
I will also admit I have questions. I personally, don't understand how all 7 of the members of the group, not including G&K, could keep quiet, unless they didn't know what really happened.

So my biggest question is, if there was no evidence against the McCanns, why didn't the British LE say so? To date, it seems to me they have been really, really quiet about this. Early on there were rumors that the British LE felt the McCanns were quilty also, but were required to keep quiet by the British govt. Maybe that is more conspiracy theory, I don't know. What I do know is that I have never seen the British LE defend the McCanns. To me, that says a lot considering how involved they were in the investigation.

Salem

Hi Salem,
It wasn't only the FSS who did the forensics. Some things were sent for testing to a Portuguese Lab and they came up with nothing.
IMO there is no way such a highly respected Lab as the FSS would be part of a conspiracy.

The British police could not take an active part in the investigation without the permission of the PJ. They did offer at the very beginning but this wasn't accepted for weeks! And much too late IMO
I’m sure this is on a thread here somewhere as we’ve posted about it before.
And if I remember right it was the McCanns themselves who requested the PJ to allow the British cadaver dogs to search.

Salem in the Natalee Holloway case “I have also posted proof of this here somewhere” there were similar problems with the Aruban police. The FBI could only investigate with the permission of the AP and then only investigate what the AP allowed.
And the FBI have never openly discussed Natalee’s case which seems to be normal policy concerning another countries investigation.
As professionals they must be seen to respect the rights of any country to do their own investigation – Even though they may not always agree with the them.
Besides they wouldn't have had access to all of the findings to be in the position to make a final determination.

And how often do you think a country would accept help if afterwards the one helping chose to put out their own findings - It would be considered interference and probably cause outrage. So IMO never!

In Natalee’s case too there was help from an important politician. Condaleeza Rice actually met Beth Holloway so this isn't unusual when in a crisis abroad, especially concerning children.
****
This is something I read recently which seems to have been forgotten…..

....Early on Portuguese sniffer dogs (not eddie & keela) traced a path from the front door, turned left and left again through between block 5 & 6 and then down the alley. They crossed the road to the car park opposite the tapas and stopped there.

There were two sniffer dogs. Both dogs were taken independently to sniff. They both followed the exact same route.

Interesting where they stopped was the same place someone had reported a white van with someone behaving suspiciously.