Texana
Overreaching
Exactly, although they now say they didn't drink that much. They apparently just paid for it.
:slap:
Theories
- Thread starter colomom
- Start date
New Posts
-
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #187- Latest: girlhasnoname
- Status
Exactly, although they now say they didn't drink that much. They apparently just paid for it.
:slap:
Calikid,
I'm with you on every one of your points, except the last. I don't think they premeditated a murder. But I think they may have reached some point where they were careless and negligent and maybe overly forceful with this little girl who was an annoyance to them.
Terribly sad to think of, but it has happened before. I haven't seen statistics, but I'm willing to bet a lot that parents kill children FAR more often than random strangers do.
Also, parents with a lot of guilt (whether they actually killed her or just didn't love her enough) sometimes react more than parents who can lay the child to rest knowing in their hearts that they gave the child all they could. That uncaring aspect of the McCanns might actually explain their going overboard on the search thing. They have to purge themselves of guilt.
For the theory I HOPE is true, see below -- a new posting.
Calikid wrote:
"I have often wondered if Gerry McCann merely tolerated his oldest daughter.
Kate admitted she had colic as an infant, and I can testify that for some parents this can lead to a lot of resentment towards the child and the spouse.
Maybe Madeleine was truly only loved and wanted until the birth of the twins- both healthy, one of each sex, better than Madeleine because they weren't flawed.
As horrible as this sounds, was the whole idea of this vacation a setting for Madeleine's murder?"
I'm with you on every one of your points, except the last. I don't think they premeditated a murder. But I think they may have reached some point where they were careless and negligent and maybe overly forceful with this little girl who was an annoyance to them.
Terribly sad to think of, but it has happened before. I haven't seen statistics, but I'm willing to bet a lot that parents kill children FAR more often than random strangers do.
Also, parents with a lot of guilt (whether they actually killed her or just didn't love her enough) sometimes react more than parents who can lay the child to rest knowing in their hearts that they gave the child all they could. That uncaring aspect of the McCanns might actually explain their going overboard on the search thing. They have to purge themselves of guilt.
For the theory I HOPE is true, see below -- a new posting.
Calikid wrote:
"I have often wondered if Gerry McCann merely tolerated his oldest daughter.
Kate admitted she had colic as an infant, and I can testify that for some parents this can lead to a lot of resentment towards the child and the spouse.
Maybe Madeleine was truly only loved and wanted until the birth of the twins- both healthy, one of each sex, better than Madeleine because they weren't flawed.
As horrible as this sounds, was the whole idea of this vacation a setting for Madeleine's murder?"
Here's a new one:
What if all the publicity around the McCanns being named suspects is actually a ploy to bring the TRUE suspect out of the woodwork? Get the person to relax their guard, do something stupid?
It just strikes me as strange that the family spokesman was saying such incriminating things about the McCanns (she was the first to report that Kate had been offered a plea deal) and the media being full of information that someone is obviously leaking to them.
Yet at the same time there's a supposedly a silence order on both the police and the McCanns.
Would anyone here give this theory a ghost of a chance? I sure wish it could be true.
What if all the publicity around the McCanns being named suspects is actually a ploy to bring the TRUE suspect out of the woodwork? Get the person to relax their guard, do something stupid?
It just strikes me as strange that the family spokesman was saying such incriminating things about the McCanns (she was the first to report that Kate had been offered a plea deal) and the media being full of information that someone is obviously leaking to them.
Yet at the same time there's a supposedly a silence order on both the police and the McCanns.
Would anyone here give this theory a ghost of a chance? I sure wish it could be true.
What does everyone mean when they say, 'not murder but an accident' - how does everyone think Maddy died by accident. Just curious -- my kids have tumbled down stairs and hit pavement and I can go on & on -- they get up and walk away everytime!! Not a scratch. Just wondering what sort of accident could kill a 3 year old from a first floor apartment.
What does everyone mean when they say, 'not murder but an accident' - how does everyone think Maddy died by accident. Just curious -- my kids have tumbled down stairs and hit pavement and I can go on & on -- they get up and walk away everytime!! Not a scratch. Just wondering what sort of accident could kill a 3 year old from a first floor apartment.
It depends on what you call an accident.
If you're talking about her wandering away from the apartment, there are some credible possibilities. But the only explanation would be if Madeleine's accidental death was caused by someone who didn't want to be blamed (such as hitting her with a car, etc.) and they hid her body somewhere.
As far as the parents go, an accidental death would be from giving her a sedative. Either they gave her too much, she vomited in her sleep and choked to death, or she tried to get out of bed and fell, etc.
christine2448
Retired WS Staff
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2005
- Messages
- 10,392
- Reaction score
- 341
I just read your post Cali on the Where is Maddie, thread, where is she????
This is what I have been thinking (whatever happened, happened way before the missing report was made and everyone has been focused on that time and after) but w/o the info you all have, I can hardly keep up w/you guys...I couldn't make sense of what I was thinking...here you explain. I didn't even know about the frequent trips around by dad, the suitcase, the friggie...all very interesting. I am not sure this is exactly how it happened, but I am still saying whatever happened, happened BEFORE dinner the night they reported her missing.
I refer to your post # 6 on the following thread :clap:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53160
MeddleGuru
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2007
- Messages
- 7
- Reaction score
- 0
Hi everyone - new poster here.
Sudden flash on an old topic: Kate running back to the tapas bar and shouting to her friends "They've taken her!"
Might she have meant -- or, more cynically, meant to imply to the friends that she believed -- that "they" were some of the staff of the resort, who, having already spoken to the McCanns about leaving their children alone, had taken it upon themselves to go snooping about the McCanns' villa and upon seeing that the kids were once again alone then had the gall to walk in and remove Maddie themselves? Perhaps she and Gerry had told the friends that they'd been warned earlier by the staff not to leave the children. So "They've taken her" would have been said in sort of gossipy exasperation, not in panic. "Oh good grief, check this out, can you believe the nerve" kind of thing. And would explain running back to the tapas bar instead of calling the police, or even going down to the front desk. AND would give her an absolute air of innocence.
I haven't read anywhere the details of that scene, and obviously everyone immediately determined Maddie had been kidnapped, not simply removed to safety by some uppity disapproving workers. But... interesting, anyway, IMO.
Sudden flash on an old topic: Kate running back to the tapas bar and shouting to her friends "They've taken her!"
Might she have meant -- or, more cynically, meant to imply to the friends that she believed -- that "they" were some of the staff of the resort, who, having already spoken to the McCanns about leaving their children alone, had taken it upon themselves to go snooping about the McCanns' villa and upon seeing that the kids were once again alone then had the gall to walk in and remove Maddie themselves? Perhaps she and Gerry had told the friends that they'd been warned earlier by the staff not to leave the children. So "They've taken her" would have been said in sort of gossipy exasperation, not in panic. "Oh good grief, check this out, can you believe the nerve" kind of thing. And would explain running back to the tapas bar instead of calling the police, or even going down to the front desk. AND would give her an absolute air of innocence.
I haven't read anywhere the details of that scene, and obviously everyone immediately determined Maddie had been kidnapped, not simply removed to safety by some uppity disapproving workers. But... interesting, anyway, IMO.
superunknown
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2007
- Messages
- 369
- Reaction score
- 299
I've been thinking about this case and forgive me if starting another thread isn't the right thing to do... but I have a theory and I'm not sure if anyone else has thought about this...? (Mods, feel free to move this if need be)
I don't know much about the town or area where this little girl disappeared, so bear with me. But what I do know is that if the reports are true about the kids crying on previous nights when they were left alone, could it be plausible that Madeleine got out of bed and wandered out of the apartment on her own, looking for Mom and Dad?
In small European towns, there are narrow streets and alleyways around buildings that can be very dark at night. Also Europeans tend to drive a lot faster than us Yanks and also do not have the "yield the right of way to pedestrians" thing ingrained in their psyche. (If you've been to Europe and tried to cross a street then you know what I mean.)
I am wondering if this child got out of the apartment somehow and then met with either foul play or an accident? If a person hit her they could have panicked and tried to dump the body somewhere. Also is it possible this could have happened and then the parents found her after, panicked and disposed of the body?
Three year olds can be very mischevious and it is not beyond the realm of possibility to me that this little girl could have wandered out of the apartment since there was no supervision.
Thoughts?
I don't know much about the town or area where this little girl disappeared, so bear with me. But what I do know is that if the reports are true about the kids crying on previous nights when they were left alone, could it be plausible that Madeleine got out of bed and wandered out of the apartment on her own, looking for Mom and Dad?
In small European towns, there are narrow streets and alleyways around buildings that can be very dark at night. Also Europeans tend to drive a lot faster than us Yanks and also do not have the "yield the right of way to pedestrians" thing ingrained in their psyche. (If you've been to Europe and tried to cross a street then you know what I mean.)
I am wondering if this child got out of the apartment somehow and then met with either foul play or an accident? If a person hit her they could have panicked and tried to dump the body somewhere. Also is it possible this could have happened and then the parents found her after, panicked and disposed of the body?
Three year olds can be very mischevious and it is not beyond the realm of possibility to me that this little girl could have wandered out of the apartment since there was no supervision.
Thoughts?
Jeana (DP)
Former Member
I think its a possibility.
englishleigh
Authentic Southern Belle
- Joined
- May 31, 2004
- Messages
- 7,116
- Reaction score
- 166
I think it is, too. I think it's a very good theory.
KOOL LOOK
~~~Sin is the Cause of all Sorrow~~~For this Gal,
I felt truth and a sense of reasonableness to this theory. Actually, quiet good. That would explain it being an accident. Which I think 98% of us do agree that it was an accident.
We have been leaning to accidental drug overdose, or out of control accidental anger outburst.
This theory does work for me. That's motive right there. Being they left the children again alone in the room, even after warnings, found her harmed or dead, that would be a reason to cover up and hide the body.
We have been leaning to accidental drug overdose, or out of control accidental anger outburst.
This theory does work for me. That's motive right there. Being they left the children again alone in the room, even after warnings, found her harmed or dead, that would be a reason to cover up and hide the body.
Schmerty_Jones
________________ Even if you're on the right
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 2,793
- Reaction score
- 7
It is as possible as some of the other theories put forward. However the negligence of leaving 3 babies unattended & the cover-up don't make this tradegy much more palatable than sedation , & cover-up! or violence & cover-up!
Texana
Overreaching
I think it's more plausible she wandered off, then she was taken by an abductor within the narrow window of time available.
wicket
Member
Could one parent be covering for another? Just suppose one parent has been known to have a quick temper and the other parent has been continuously covering for him/her. In this case, if this was found out, the twins would be taken away during investigation and also their reputations adversely affected. It has happened time and again where a parent professes the innocence of the other parent even when a child is covered with bruises, sexually molested or dead.
OTOH, the mother went through many procedures to have children - what if the father was less interested in fathering than has been depicted?
And around and around I go.......
OTOH, the mother went through many procedures to have children - what if the father was less interested in fathering than has been depicted?
And around and around I go.......
She may have wandered off and been hit by a car, but why would the parents hide that fact? Why would the mother say "They took her"? And why the DNA in the trunk of the rental car?
If the parents were completely innocent, I'd have thought their first assumption would have been that she had wandered off to look for them, especially since they had left the door unlocked.
If the parents were completely innocent, I'd have thought their first assumption would have been that she had wandered off to look for them, especially since they had left the door unlocked.
MeddleGuru
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2007
- Messages
- 7
- Reaction score
- 0
My heart just breaks for that child. Even if she's alive. Horrible world.
My theory is that it was Russell O'Brien who accidentally killed Maddie. Here's how I think it happened: On the day of May 3, the Tapas group was planning their evening outing, and the McCanns said they might not be able to go out because Maddie had cried so the night before that a neighbor had complained. O'Brien, an anesthesiologist, offered to give the child a sedative to put her to sleep.The McCanns accepted his offer.
When either Gerry or Oldfield went to check on her, Maddie was found either in some sort of distress or perhaps already dead, so O'Brien was called for help. O'Brien found her dead, and panicked. He took her body and hid it, perhaps in the trunk of his rental car. (Is this possibly the same car the McCann's rented 5 weeks later?) That would explain why he was gone so long. He made up the story about his own daughter vomiting to account for it. (I mean, really, what parent would leave a vomiting child unattended?) This would also make it possible to wash Maddie's sheets without raising suspicion.
Meanwhile, his partner, Jane Tanner, concocted the story of seeing a man carrying a child under a blanket to make it seem like Maddie had been abducted. Ironically, she may have actually seen this -- except it was not a stranger but instead O'Brien carrying Maddie out under a blanket. Perhaps they were also covering their tracks in case any one else witnessed O'Brien carrying her out. Part of the cover-up plan was to implicate Robert Murat, whom O'Brien and Tanner had reportedly met days before Maddie's disappearance.
After O'Brien returned to the bar, the entire group panicked and discussed a cover-up plan. That would explain why they are now observing a code of silence. Once the plan was in place, Kate returned to the room and made the scene about Maddie missing. Her odd claim that "They took her" may have referred to a part of the plan that was never put into play. Perhaps, for example, one of the Tapa group had was supposed to report seeing two strangers sniffing around the kids earlier that day. (Or perhaps they were going to claim that she was abducted by the same group of individuals that represented a small foreign faction who kidnapped Jon Benet.
)
The McCanns launched into a media blitz not only to cover things up but to keep O'Brien out of the spotlight. And they can both honestly say that neither of them killed Maddie.
When either Gerry or Oldfield went to check on her, Maddie was found either in some sort of distress or perhaps already dead, so O'Brien was called for help. O'Brien found her dead, and panicked. He took her body and hid it, perhaps in the trunk of his rental car. (Is this possibly the same car the McCann's rented 5 weeks later?) That would explain why he was gone so long. He made up the story about his own daughter vomiting to account for it. (I mean, really, what parent would leave a vomiting child unattended?) This would also make it possible to wash Maddie's sheets without raising suspicion.
Meanwhile, his partner, Jane Tanner, concocted the story of seeing a man carrying a child under a blanket to make it seem like Maddie had been abducted. Ironically, she may have actually seen this -- except it was not a stranger but instead O'Brien carrying Maddie out under a blanket. Perhaps they were also covering their tracks in case any one else witnessed O'Brien carrying her out. Part of the cover-up plan was to implicate Robert Murat, whom O'Brien and Tanner had reportedly met days before Maddie's disappearance.
After O'Brien returned to the bar, the entire group panicked and discussed a cover-up plan. That would explain why they are now observing a code of silence. Once the plan was in place, Kate returned to the room and made the scene about Maddie missing. Her odd claim that "They took her" may have referred to a part of the plan that was never put into play. Perhaps, for example, one of the Tapa group had was supposed to report seeing two strangers sniffing around the kids earlier that day. (Or perhaps they were going to claim that she was abducted by the same group of individuals that represented a small foreign faction who kidnapped Jon Benet.
)The McCanns launched into a media blitz not only to cover things up but to keep O'Brien out of the spotlight. And they can both honestly say that neither of them killed Maddie.
- Status