McCanns launch new appeal

[Moab]

Yes April claims that Madeleine was kidnapped ...after all....Tanner saw the kidnapper lol

Who needs more proof than that..right?

Can anyone "prove" she wasn't?

 

[Isabella]

Can anyone "prove" she wasn't?

More importantly..no one can prove she WAS. Gerry and Jez have both said she WAS NOT. When asked she did not know where EITHER was positioned. She said herself ...she saw a man carrying a bundle under a blanket that MAY have been a child but she wasnt sure. This then changed to a guy carrying a little girl wearing the same pyjamas as Madeleienes. Oh and now...the blanket had disappeared from her description...i guess this is convenient as it enabled her to see the pyjamas legs that Madeleine supposedly wore.


IMO...IF Jane was telling the truth there would be no need for her to keep changing her story. And when you bear in mind..the only witness to this supposed abduction is this woman..then its even more important to know what is and what isnt true about her story.

I truly would love to see Jane Tanner in court and answering questions about that night. She would get lynched. MOO

 

[Moab]

More importantly..no one can prove she WAS.

I think it is of equal importance as to whether it can be proven she was kidnapped or that she wasn't. From what I have read it cannot be proven either way.

 

[Isabella]

I think it is of equal importance as to whether it can be proven she was kidnapped or that she wasn't. From what I have read it cannot be proven either way.

I guess its a matter of opinion. The story the McCanns want to put across is "ludicrous" and when the only witness to this "kidnap" is a woman who cant even get her story straight and is a friend of the McCanns and is one of a group of people unwilling to cooperate with the Pjs to FIND the little girl..but will go back and do a construction for which the fund will get money..of which Gerry is a Director no less..and who was said NOT to be at the scene as she claimed by two people that were definetly there...then i think most people realise Tanner is a liar.

I think...if you look at all the evidence...there is enough to assume that Madeleine was not kidnapped. MOO Maybe it would been easier to prove it one way or another if the parents and there friends wanted to help the police find the little girl. Unfortunately they wasnt willing to do this. MOO

 

[Isabella]

Additionally regarding Jane Tanners supposed sighting she claims she saw a guy in beige trousers between the ages of 35 - 40 years old. Crucially this is the same description as given by Martin Smith the Irish guy who claims he saw a man down by the beach carrying a child. He claims the guy he saw was Gerry McCann. This guy has no reason to lie. Hes not connected to the McCanns unlike Tanner.

Does anyone know just how far from the beach the apartment was? And where was Gerry the WHOLE time between 9.50 and the PJS getting there? Because IMO..if we are going to say that Tanners description is right then i think we should say that Smiths is also based on description at least.

 

[Moab]

[FONT=&quot]I guess its a matter of opinion. [/FONT]

I think the finite may be made up of opinions, but before one can assume finite, one must look back at square one.

A little girl is missing, and it is not known whether she is dead or alive. This is fact and not opinion.

[FONT=&quot]I think...if you look at all the evidence...there is enough to assume that Madeleine was not kidnapped. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The evidence is what I just stated above. A little girl is missing, period. One can assume all they wish, but it doesn't change the simplest of facts... it is not known whether she is dead or alive. Until she is found, dead or alive, she is still just missing.

Until she is found dead or alive, she is not murdered/sold for a sex slave/killed by her parents/not killed by her parents/kidnapped/not kidnapped...she is a missing child and needs to be found and brought home. Then, and only then, the rest can the details of her going missing be sorted out and resolved.
[/FONT]

 

[Isabella]

I think the finite may be made up of opinions, but before one can assume finite, one must look back at square one.

A little girl is missing, and it is not known whether she is dead or alive. This is fact and not opinion.





[FONT=&quot]The evidence is what I just stated above. A little girl is missing, period. One can assume all they wish, but it doesn't change the simplest of facts... it is not known whether she is dead or alive. Until she is found, dead or alive, she is still just missing.

[FONT=&quot]Until she is found dead or alive, she is not murdered/sold for a sex slave/killed by her parents/not killed by her parents/kidnapped/not kidnapped...she is a missing child and needs to be found and brought home. Then, and only then, the rest can the details of her going missing be sorted out and resolved.[/FONT]
[/FONT]

Then to be honest...her parents..you know the ones who went out drinking and kept leaving the children on there own...maybe THEY should have cooperated with the authorities who was trying to bring her HOME instead of trying to do anything they could to stop the case being investigated correctly.

Incidentally...its been stated no one had died in that apartment before the McCanns visit. So just who do you think the dogs hit on and whose blood do you think was in the apartment?

Both Amaral and the PP have stated they believe that Madeleiene died the 3rd of May IN the apartment.

 

[Moab]

Then to be honest...her parents..you know the ones who went out drinking and kept leaving the children on there own...maybe THEY should have cooperated with the authorities who was trying to bring her HOME instead of trying to do anything they could to stop the case being investigated correctly.

That is an opinion.

Incidentally...its been stated no one had died in that apartment before the McCanns visit. So just who do you think the dogs hit on and whose blood do you think was in the apartment?

The fact is and the point is, no one knows for sure. Anything else is conjecture and opinion.

Both Amaral and the PP have stated they believe that Madeleiene died the 3rd of May IN the apartment.

Another opinion, until Madeline is either found dead or alive. If my opinion was that she didn't die in the apartment on the 3rd of May, then it holds no more or less weight than those who think she did. Both are opinion.

 

[Isabella]

That is an opinion.



The fact is and the point is, no one knows for sure. Anything else is conjecture and opinion.



Another opinion, until Madeline is either found dead or alive. If my opinion was that she didn't die in the apartment on the 3rd of May, then it holds no more or less weight than those who think she did. Both are opinion.

It is NOT a opinion that the McCanns didnt cooperate with the Pjs. Its a FACT. Did Kate answer all her questions? No! Did they refuse to do a reconstruction but then agree to do one when they got money from a tv show? Yes.

As for Amaral and the PP. Sorry but there opinions are far more knowledgeable than ours. If they believe she is dead...then i tend to believe them with the information at hand bearing in mind they know far more REAL information and have seen things WE have NOT.

 

[Moab]

It is NOT a opinion that the McCanns didnt cooperate with the Pjs. Its a FACT. Did Kate answer all her questions? No! Did they refuse to do a reconstruction but then agree to do one when they got money from a tv show? Yes.

You are letting your opinion of how you think they should act color your judgment and allow you to form a premature opinion, and to your defense, that may be your frame of reference, I don't know, but it may be germane to the conversation in as much as it is helping you to form your opinions. Perhaps you haven't been involved with missing person cases on a personal level, I don't know. I do know you would most likely have a different frame of reference if you had.

As for Amaral and the PP. Sorry but there opinions are far more knowledgeable than ours. If they believe she is dead...then i tend to believe them with the information at hand bearing in mind they know far more REAL information and have seen things WE have NOT.

How can you believe someone is dead, without a doubt, without a body? It is still nothing more than an opinion, of which you are certainly entitled, but it is not a fact from you or from them. They have more knowledge perhaps, about the case than you or I do, but they don't have a body either, do they?

 

[Isabella]

You are letting your opinion of how you think they should act color your judgment and allow you to form a premature opinion, and to your defense, that may be your frame of reference, I don't know, but it may be germane to the conversation in as much as it is helping you to form your opinions. Perhaps you haven't been involved with missing person cases on a personal level, I don't know. I do know you would most likely have a different frame of reference if you had.



How can you believe someone is dead, without a doubt, without a body? It is still nothing more than an opinion, of which you are certainly entitled, but it is not a fact from you or from them. They have more knowledge perhaps, about the case than you or I do, but they don't have a body either, do they?

With all respect...you can convict someone of murder without having a body. Sometimes..if you have enough evidence not having a body is irrelevance. So with the appropriate evidence i find it very easy to believe someone is dead without a body. And so must juries who convict without a body.

And yes..people react different i am sure in missing persons cases i am sure - yes i have been involved in a missing person case..very closely involved..and ..the parents did everything they could do try and find the child. EVERYTHING! unlike the mCCanns...who didnt even bother trying to find there daughter and then blamed others for not looking enough.

 

[Moab]

With all respect...you can convict someone of murder without having a body. Sometimes..if you have enough evidence not having a body is irrelevance. So with the appropriate evidence i find it very easy to believe someone is dead without a body. And so must juries who convict without a body.

And it seems you are convinced, and I am not, and that's okay.

And yes..people react different i am sure in missing persons cases i am sure - yes i have been involved in a missing person case..very closely involved..and ..the parents did everything they could do try and find the child. EVERYTHING! unlike the mCCanns...who didnt even bother trying to find there daughter and then blamed others for not looking enough.

I understand what you are saying and I appreciate your comments. From what I understand here however, is there isn't enough evidence to prove a crime has been committed whether it be an abduction or a homicide, there isn't a dead body, the parents are not under suspicion by any country at the present time - there is just opinion. I also have worked on many missing person cases, and our opinion is just different. Part of this is due to the fact of where we are both from and our different frames of reference.

 

[Isabella]

I also have worked on many missing person cases, and our opinion is just different. Part of this is due to the fact of where we are both from and our different frames of reference.

Erm I am English..like the McCanns are..and like a LOT of people dont believe the parents cooperated with the PJS so..i dont think where i am from or the McCanns has anything to do with it

The pjs didnt have enough evidence to prosecute. That does not mean they are not under suspicion. The fact is they are not looking for anyone else in connection with this matter.

And the fact is..although you arent convinced it can be proven someone is dead without a body..the fact is..the police force would disagree with you.

Btw are you watching Amarals documentary ? You should

 

[Moab]

Erm I am English..like the McCanns are..and like a LOT of people dont believe the parents cooperated with the PJS so..i dont think where i am from or the McCanns has anything to do with it

I think it does because you typically have less abductions in England, don't you? I am from the US and we have them all the time, and hence, our frame of reference is different. I wasn't saying right or wrong, I am saying "different".

The pjs didnt have enough evidence to prosecute. That does not mean they are not under suspicion. The fact is they are not looking for anyone else in connection with this matter.

The fact of the matter is they are not looking for Madeline either. That is a disservice to her and to the justice for her for the crime which has been committed, whatever that crime might be.

And the fact is..although you arent convinced it can be proven someone is dead without a body..the fact is..the police force would disagree with you.

I never said a crime cannot be proven without a body. It has in numerous cases. But it hasn't in this case, now has it?

Btw are you watching Amarals documentary ? You should

To the best of my knowledge it is not available for viewing here in the states.

 

[Isabella]

I think it does because you typically have less abductions in England, don't you? I am from the US and we have them all the time, and hence, our frame of reference is different. I wasn't saying right or wrong, I am saying "different".



The fact of the matter is they are not looking for Madeline either. That is a disservice to her and to the justice for her for the crime which has been committed, whatever that crime might be.



I never said a crime cannot be proven without a body. It has in numerous cases. But it hasn't in this case, now has it?



To the best of my knowledge it is not available for viewing here in the states.

Yes its available for viewing in the States..if you could get on to it as it was JAMMED with people watching the live feed on the internet..which is just AWESOME .. they can try and restrict what we read or watch in England..but with the Internet there on to a losing battle

Yes I would assume we have less abductions than you guys as after all we are far tinier. But isnt it true that most cases like this are in fact done by parents or people that know the child?

Regarding looking for her..if the Pjs have ruled out a abduction which they appear to have..then looking for a alive Madeleine is obviously out. They are a small country and spent a lot on this case. They are in a unusual position where the parents werent partiularly interested in helping and appeared via there agents to be interfering in the case.

 

[Isabella]

The possibility of SOMEONE'S blood or cadaver. Not proof that madeleine McCann's dead body was there. The same dog also alerted many times at the Jersey children's home and all that was found were animal bones.



.

Something I wanted to post here in Eddie and Keelas defence. I see them put down on here a lot from the McCann supporters and made out that they didnt find anything in Jersey. This isnt actually true

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/mar/14/haut-de-la-garenne

At Haut de la Garenne, the dogs made straight for the place where in 2003 the builder said he had found bones. A senior police officer recalled, "They did cartwheels on the spot. And Harper went through the roof." As in Portugal, the dogs had smelled something but could not differentiate between ancient remains and a contemporary murder. But at 2pm on 23 February, caution cast aside, Harper called a press conference, telling reporters police believed that the partial remains of a child were buried there.
Over the following months, £7.5m would be spent sifting 100 tonnes of earth. By the time DI Fossey returned, there were 65 milk teeth, 165 bone fragments and two lime-lined pits dominating the inquiry.

 

[Moab]

Yes its available for viewing in the States..if you could get on to it as it was JAMMED with people watching the live feed on the internet..which is just AWESOME .. they can try and restrict what we read or watch in England..but with the Internet there on to a losing battle

Would you have a link, or was it only a live feed and no longer available?

Yes I would assume we have less abductions than you guys as after all we are far tinier. But isnt it true that most cases like this are in fact done by parents or people that know the child?

Actually it is just the opposite. It may be people who have seen the child, but most are opportunistic abductions and killings. Some of the most widely publicized ones, they are mostly non-family.
Caylee Anthony - alleged family
Samantha Runnion - stranger
Adam Walsh - stranger
Elizabeth Smart - stranger - recovered alive 9 months later
Jessica Lunsford - stranger
Haleigh Cummings - alleged stranger
Ben Owenby - stranger - recovered alive
Shawn Hornbeck - stranger - recovered alive 4 years later
Shasta Groene & Dylan Groene - stranger- brother killed Shasta recovered alive
Destiny Norton - stranger
Rachel Runyon - stranger
Carlie Brusha - stranger

Regarding looking for her..if the Pjs have ruled out a abduction which they appear to have..then looking for a alive Madeleine is obviously out. They are a small country and spent a lot on this case. They are in a unusual position where the parents werent partiularly interested in helping and appeared via there agents to be interfering in the case.

How can they rule out an abduction when they don't "know" what happened? They are guessing. Sad no one is looking for her.
Didn't the family start something last month about renewing the effort to find her? How can you say they are doing nothing when they are looking and the police stopped looking?

 

[Isabella]

Would you have a link, or was it only a live feed and no longer available?


Actually it is just the opposite. It may be people who have seen the child, but most are opportunistic abductions and killings. Some of the most widely publicized ones, they are mostly non-family.
Caylee Anthony - alleged family
Samantha Runnion - stranger
Adam Walsh - stranger
Elizabeth Smart - stranger - recovered alive 9 months later
Jessica Lunsford - stranger
Haleigh Cummings - alleged stranger
Ben Owenby - stranger - recovered alive
Shawn Hornbeck - stranger - recovered alive 4 years later
Shasta Groene & Dylan Groene - stranger- brother killed Shasta recovered alive
Destiny Norton - stranger
Rachel Runyon - stranger
Carlie Brusha - stranger


How can they rule out an abduction when they don't "know" what happened? They are guessing. Sad no one is looking for her.
Didn't the family start something last month about renewing the effort to find her? How can you say they are doing nothing when they are looking and the police stopped looking?

I can get you a link yes..although its in Portugese. I believe its currently being translated into English right now. It was the highest programme for viewers so far this year in Portugal with over 41% of the Portugese audience watching the programme.

I guess we have to agree to disagree. The pjs and the PP know far moroe than we do about the case. Its been said by more than one person that shes dead who has been involved in the case one way or another. They dont need to know exactly how it happened to believe that she is dead.

As for the family..well..there was 2 mill in the fund and only a tiny amount of that was used on searching in a full year. Now Gerry is a director of the fund..and saying oh the money is all gone and will be empty by the end of the year..

Whenever the McCanns say there searching..its just to get more money for the fund. Do you know..one of the detectives who worked for Metado..actually said..he was being paid to try and get false sighings out. How crumby is that? There is no evidence that the McCanns have done anything to search for there daughter..only that they have used Metado in some dubious practises.

Btw when you said about last month..did you mean when they put the posters up in Praia de Luz saying..they went for a international audience before..when they should have appealed to the locals..and the locals tore down the posters..because almost everyone of them think the McCanns are guilty? Thats not searching for Madeleine..its just insulting the locals and makes it look like there doing something to get more money.

 

[Isabella]

Links to the documentary



http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2009/04/maddie-what-lies-beneath-truth-watch-it.html

 

[Refugee]

I just dont understand.

People continue to post here and elsewhere in blind support of the McCanns.

They claim abduction with no evidence.

They support parents who disgrace the description - people who even blamed their little just-under-four year old for crying and calling them out of the darkness of a lonely and apparently unsecured holiday apartment. They puzzled that she cried when she awoke alone - were they puzzled that she HAD awoken? Was it that they had sedated her so the puzzlement was that the sedative had failed? Did they apply more the following night? For sure even they admit they left her yet again!

I digress, so incredible was the behaviour of the cadaver juggling locum GP that it causes that digression without fail whenever I consider them!

Anyway, to return to my own puzzlement. Why do people continue to protect and defend these failed parents? Are they paid by Clarence, perhaps by the oddly protective Brian Kennedy?

The evidence is strong that these people did not find their child missing, yet all such evidence is cast aside as a theory with NO EVIDENCE WHATSOVER is pursued, that of the unheard of crime of abduction of a child by stranger from her bed.

Madeleine McCanns father Gerald contradicted the time that his own witness Jane Tanner claimed she saw Madeleine carried away - he said at the exact time she claimed she'd seen the mysterious abductor that he had looked down on her sleeping form. He wrote this on his 'blog' many weeks after she made the claim. This was no error, he must have known what he was doing in writing this time - this is incontravertable evidence - documented - undeniable. Even on its own this casts doubt over the words of Gerald McCann. Add to this his claim that he thought the twins might have been sedated- yet never had then tested - and I think doubts should form in even the most faithful to the McCann mind!

But does it stop the posters even trying to deny the evidence of the cadaver dog? It does not.l

So who are these people? Fools? friends of the McCanns? Naive faithfuls?

Should we pity or suspect them?

In my mind the McCanns are disreputable child neglectors at the very least. Their supporters are culpable, they prolong the idea that it is acceptable to neglect children. Perhaps their culpability is limited to this....perhaps it is not!