Why did Madeleine 'go missing'?

[SleuthMom]

April, the guy is not a fool. He is an educated man. Having said that, okay lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say he got the distance wrong. Now he knows the distance is NOT the one he reported then why keep playing the same old record knowingly it is wrong? Even after a year his daughter has been missing!

I know...I know, guilt you said. I personally think he is just trying to cover up his behind.

 

[april4sky]

April:



Now I am lost (which is quite common) :crazy:

So you are speaking about the PJ then? If so, when did they smear them without evidence? It is obvious there was enough evidence to make them arguidos lets not forget that important fact.

SleuthMom the PJ didn't need "evidence" to make the McCanns arguedos. They would now though as the law has changed recently.
Arguedo is similar to calling somone a person of interest or suspect.
The same goes for Robert Murrat.

 

[april4sky]

April, the guy is not a fool. He is an educated man. Having said that, okay lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say he got the distance wrong. Now he knows the distance is NOT the one he reported then why keep playing the same old record knowingly it is wrong? Even after a year his daughter has been missing!

I know...I know, guilt you said. I personally think he is just trying to cover up his behind.

SleuthMom even an educated man would have done what I suggested in my
previous post IMO
As I have also said he really can't win as if he changed the distance now to the path estimate he would be accused all over again.

 

[Barnaby]

April, the guy is not a fool. He is an educated man. Having said that, okay lets give him the benefit of the doubt and say he got the distance wrong. Now he knows the distance is NOT the one he reported then why keep playing the same old record knowingly it is wrong? Even after a year his daughter has been missing!

I know...I know, guilt you said. I personally think he is just trying to cover up his behind.

Well as the whole world knows the truth of the distance, he is just compounding the fact that he is a blatant liar by continuing to repeat this.
If he had some strength of charachter & told the truth about underestimating the distance, he might have gained some respect, I say some! Anyone can make a mistake but this guy wants us to believe that everyone is wrong but him! Educated man? I would say seriously deluded man bordering on psycohtic!

 

[teacherbees]

Thanks Barnaby for putting into words exactly what I was feeling.
It's one thing to bear guilt (God knows both Gerry and Kate SHOULD feel guilty - if nothing else, for abandoning Maddy and putting her in a posititon where an abductor could find her to be such easy pickings).

Not having the decency to admit you made a huge error in stating the distance from the room to the Tapas bar is an integrity issue. IF Gerri truly misspoke in the initial days of confusion and upset, that might be understandable but to continue spouting off a known lie is just another demonstration of how much he plays with the truth.

And like you said so well, Barnaby - Gerry would rather act like the whole world is wrong for daring to challenge his continued lie about the distance.

Whew - it gets back to the statement I once made that I wouldn't allow Doctors Gerry or Kate to treat my dog, much less my children. If the McCanns are that stupid and arrogant, they have no business being in a life or death occupation.

Guilt as motivation to continually lie about the distance between Tapas and the McCann unit? Nah...sheer arrogance is more like it.

 

[Barnaby]

Thanks Barnaby for putting into words exactly what I was feeling.
It's one thing to bear guilt (God knows both Gerry and Kate SHOULD feel guilty - if nothing else, for abandoning Maddy and putting her in a posititon where an abductor could find her to be such easy pickings).

Not having the decency to admit you made a huge error in stating the distance from the room to the Tapas bar is an integrity issue. IF Gerri truly misspoke in the initial days of confusion and upset, that might be understandable but to continue spouting off a known lie is just another demonstration of how much he plays with the truth.

And like you said so well, Barnaby - Gerry would rather act like the whole world is wrong for daring to challenge his continued lie about the distance.

Whew - it gets back to the statement I once made that I wouldn't allow Doctors Gerry or Kate to treat my dog, much less my children. If the McCanns are that stupid and arrogant, they have no business being in a life or death occupation.

Guilt as motivation to continually lie about the distance between Tapas and the McCann unit? Nah...sheer arrogance is more like it.

Arrogance & being as my mother would say "a low type"

It was never an error, Teacherbees, it was a calculated lie like many others they have told!

 

[docwho3]

This discussion of possible lies versus accidental innaccuracies and so on does bring to mind a couple of possibilities, not really Earth shaking ones but something to consider along the way. Let me see if I can list what caught my attention about it, hopefully without hurting anyones feelings.

1. If Madeleine was kidnapped then all this fuss about distances is a waste of time unless the parents hired others to kidnap their own child. A lie to avoid embarrassment or accidental inaccuracy does not really matter in that instance since Madeleine is till missing and the kidnapper is still going free. (Please be patient as I list other possibilities as well.)

2. If Madeleine was indeed murdered by one or both parents who then have managed to cover up the fact so far then the lying might be indicative of a certain type of personality disorder where someone lies even about things that can easily be checked upon. That in itself might help build a profile which might then be used to serve as a base for coming up with a possible chain of events that might help lead to finding actual evidence somewhere eventually.

3. If not suffering from that personality disorder then: If the parents lied about the distance and if they are also guilty of covering up about her death (whether from murder or accident) then one has to ask why tell that particular lie? Why not tell the truth about the distance and then lie about something that really matters in keeping the real truth secret?

For that lie (assuming for the sake of discussion that it IS infact a lie) to be important enough to tell under the above guidelines it might be that the lie mattered in calculating the time the parents would have been gone, perhaps to make it seem they could not have been gone long enough to concoct a story & hide a body.

4. If not suffering from that personality disorder then: If the parents lied about the distance and if they are also guilty of covering up about her death (whether from murder or accident) another possibility could be the lie is designed to misdirect attention from something else that might otherwise attract our attention, sort of like drawing attention to your having eaten the freshly baked cookies so no one notices the missing antique vase that you sold to buy a ticket to your favorite groups concert. If the lie is meant to misdirect then we should look for what it is we were meant to not pay attention to. What other fact stands out that the ado about the distance lie has managed to mask? What fact have we NOT seen as it should be seen?

These are just possibilities that I happened to think of on the spur of the moment and none of the things listed are meant to insinuate either actual guilt or innocence on the part of the parents.

To me its sort of like having a blindfold on and trying to figure out if the source of warmth you feel nearby is also giving off light? Could it be the warmth of an old time room radiator heater? Or could it be the warm light of the sun coming through a window? Or could it be the warmth of a lightbulb? or a blow dryer or . . . . .It's all possibilities and where they lead you in seeking the light.

 

[Salem]

Hi Docwho! Good to see you posting

Also, good questions. I know Texana has spent a lot of time puzzling over why Gerry, to this day, refuses to admit the true distance from the bar to the apartment. Your post really puts some new fodder out there to mull over.

We have so few facts in this case and very little ability to get additional ones. We rely heavily on media reports that you have to process, compare and contrast to try to get a true "feel" for the truth.

Your comment about - they probably lie about other things that can be verified hits home: Kate said they did not take the children to dinner with them the night of May 3rd, because they did not have a buggy. However, there are several pictures showing them with a buggy. Two or three different buggies in fact. Then there is the constant lie about the distance to the bar, which has been verified. Those are two that I am sure of at this point.

Others that need to be verified again include who they called first - Police or Skynews? Last person other than G&K to see Maddie alive? Who left the table to check on the children? What Jane Tanner saw? and the list goes on and on.....

Okay guys - what do you think? Can we find a compulsive liar here and "prove" the lie either by what one of the McCanns has stated in their own words? or by pictures that have been posted?

Salem

 

[Barnaby]

Hi Docwho! Good to see you posting

Also, good questions. I know Texana has spent a lot of time puzzling over why Gerry, to this day, refuses to admit the true distance from the bar to the apartment. Your post really puts some new fodder out there to mull over.

We have so few facts in this case and very little ability to get additional ones. We rely heavily on media reports that you have to process, compare and contrast to try to get a true "feel" for the truth.

Your comment about - they probably lie about other things that can be verified hits home: Kate said they did not take the children to dinner with them the night of May 3rd, because they did not have a buggy. However, there are several pictures showing them with a buggy. Two or three different buggies in fact. Then there is the constant lie about the distance to the bar, which has been verified. Those are two that I am sure of at this point.

Others that need to be verified again include who they called first - Police or Skynews? Last person other than G&K to see Maddie alive? Who left the table to check on the children? What Jane Tanner saw? and the list goes on and on.....

Okay guys - what do you think? Can we find a compulsive liar here and "prove" the lie either by what one of the McCanns has stated in their own words? or by pictures that have been posted?

Salem

Well for starters a lady in Sagres saw them there with a buggy before Madeleine disappeared!

The Paynes & Diane Webster have reportedly told PJ that noone left the table, this was backed up by tapas staff!
Jane Tanner saw nothing & noone!

I think the fact that they are compulsive liars needs no proving!

Docwho, you could be right about the well calculated lies like when they released that Madeleine had asked why they didn't come when she & Sean were crying! That was released to deflect attention from other suspicions IMO! They cannot deny that they left the childeren so better have the focus on their neglect rather that the fact that they may have killed her or concealed her body after an accident!

 

[thentherewere4]

Wish you would have put an option for premeditated murder...I voted for the 2nd most obvious to me. Violent killing of an innocent child. (Not accidental crime of rage in my humble oppenion.)

BUMPARUMP

 

[Salem]

Well for starters a lady in Sagres saw them there with a buggy before Madeleine disappeared!

The Paynes & Diane Webster have reportedly told PJ that noone left the table, this was backed up by tapas staff!
Jane Tanner saw nothing & noone!

I think the fact that they are compulsive liars needs no proving!

Docwho, you could be right about the well calculated lies like when they released that Madeleine had asked why they didn't come when she & Sean were crying! That was released to deflect attention from other suspicions IMO! They cannot deny that they left the childeren so better have the focus on their neglect rather that the fact that they may have killed her or concealed her body after an accident!

Barnaby - see my bold in your post. I think there is a discrepancy between this idea and the Jeremy Wilkenson (sp?) conversation with Gerry McCann on the evening of May 3rd. Remember Jeremy said he saw Gerry and that Gerry crossed the street to talk to him supposedly at the same time that Tanner saw Bundleman.......

Salem

 

[Salem]

And.... if, according to the Payne's and Tapas staff, no one left the table how does the Jeremy guy fit in? He apparently was not associated with the Tapas 9 group and there did not seem to be any reason for doubting what he said.....

Hmmmmmm.......

Salem

 

[Texana]

Doc, those are all good points. The whole point about Gerry's constant and consistent misstatement of the distance is important because there has to be a reason--as you said.

The question is, does he repeat it consciously, for a planned specific purpose such as distraction, or does he repeat it unconsciously as part of psychological pathology?

I would include in that pathology a kind of arrogance/inflexible thinking that, once Madeleine was perhaps left alone and suffered a fatal accident of some kind, cannot give or admit even a tiny bit of responsibility or illogical thinking or neglect.

I lean towards this myself, as it seems best reinforced by Gerry's other comments. He said in one of the anniversary interviews something along the lines of "what's done is done and can't be undone" in terms of their decision to leave (again) the children alone. I think it's Gerry's coping mechanism to an extreme, again, pathological level. Given his upbringing in the notoriously tough city of Glasgow, it seems likely to me that Gerry is someone who can't take even a bit of introspection, regret, or "hindsight" analysis. What's done is done. Period. To survive, you have to move on.

On the other hand, I am open to the possibility that there's another reason he sticks to that "dining in the garden" lie. There is a reason, whether it's unconscious or conscious.

The "we didn't have a buggy" story is another deliberate falsehood, whether by omission or commission, we don't know. We didn't have a buggy because we left it at the front desk, we didn't have a buggy because they were rented daily, we loaned it out, we forgot, there is certainly a reason they didn't have one that day perhaps, that they conveniently leave out of the explanation.

People lie for a reason, whether unconscious or conscious. It could be as simple as wanting to justify a selfish decision, or it could be more complicated than that, wanting to cover up the consequences of a selfish decision.

 

[colomom]

Seems like a good time to remind you all of this:

http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

~in my best Jim Carrey~ "like a glove"!

IMHO, of course.

 

[Barnaby]

Seems like a good time to remind you all of this:

http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html

~in my best Jim Carrey~ "like a glove"!

IMHO, of course.

My ex husband to a T!

 

[Piglitsmum]

Ooh, I thought the malignant personality type was particularly reminiscent of Gerry's behaviour, in my opinion - Well worth a re-visit and comparison!

 

[CaliKid]

My ex husband to a T!

Mine too, but he also has a healthy dose of a martyr complex which makes him almost unliveable sometimes.

 

[Tony Bennett]

I think we can say from Amaral's book that if he voted on this poll (perhaps he already has!), he would probably choose: "She met with an accident; parents covered it up" - which only 15 out of 111 have voted for to date.

I suppose it's just possible he might go for the most popular option so far (43 votes out of 111): "She was overdosed on sedatives; parents covered it up"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[CaliKid]

I think we can say from Amaral's book that if he voted on this poll (perhaps he already has!), he would probably choose: "She met with an accident; parents covered it up" - which only 15 out of 111 have voted for to date.

I suppose it's just possible he might go for the most popular option so far (43 votes out of 111): "She was overdosed on sedatives; parents covered it up"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Either way and along with the 20 who think her parents murdered her, it still means 70% of us believe she died and her parents are responsible.

 

[scandi]

Hi, I'm a bit late coming in on this, but I voted that Madeleine died due to a drug overdose, and believe she died as a result of that overdose.

Today we read a link of an interview Amaral gave where he said he believes she died accidentally as the result of being given an overdose. I will go grab that link after I write this post.


The reason I have always felt this is since I read the original link I post here now, posted by Estelle at 3A's after the fiasco of all the great links disappearing when the McCann's won their first lawsuit against the media.


This is background, as I asked a poster friend to help me find the link

{Hey, I found this posted by Estelle, and don't know if we have this link here. It has the name of the Journo but she didn't give a proper link for it. I had forgotten some of this info.

Do you remember I always quoted Portuga's 'theory' as to what happened to Madeleine? It was she was given Benzodapizinesm first by one person and then by a second who didn't know she had already been dosed. And then when she started to fail she was given a Hypo shot to counteract the tranquilizer, and it didn't work {quoting it from memory}.

I always thought Portuga gleaned this as he knew the evidence of those Benzodapizineans pills were found in her fluids by FSS as well as the anecdote for them. Then reading this it makes one go WHOA"} My comment, and there was a good reason why Portuga would have knowledge of info coming from FSS.


"Maddie cried 18 hours a day
By Paul Harris

September 19, 2007 12:00am

KATE McCann has told of how Madeleine cried for 18 hours a day as a baby and demanded constant attention when her twin brother and sister were born.

In an interview with a Portuguese magazine, the 39-year-old GP is reported to have discussed her daughter suffering colic and how, at 20 months old, she reacted to the birth of twins Sean and Amelie.

Mrs McCann's intention seems to have been to illustrate how she and Madeleine bonded so closely during those early years, when mother and daughter were rarely separated.

But her interview was seized on by detectives as valuable evidence in the profile they are building of her.

Officers are seeking medical records to build up a case that she was incapable of controlling four-year-old Madeleine and the strain could have provoked her into violence while on holiday in Praia da Luz.

Mrs McCann's interview with Flash! magazine was held before she and husband Gerry were named as suspects in the case and before the diary details were published. In it, she spoke openly about her experiences in being a mother to Madeleine, candidly admitting that the first six months with her were "very difficult".

Her interview emerged as the case against the pair appeared to be crumbling because of doubts over the reliability of any forensic evidence. Sources told The Daily Mail officers may research information on Munchausen's syndrome by proxy as the condition can compel parents and other adults to harm children. It has become a routine line of inquiry in child murder investigations since the case of Beverley Allitt, the nurse who killed four children in 1991.

Allitt was convicted in 1993 on 13 charges of murder and causing grievous bodily harm. Those suffering from the condition often have a high knowledge of medical practice.
In the context of this case however, the suggestion was considered by some last night as another attempt to blacken the McCann name.

Police also said they want to reinterview the McCanns' friend Jane Tanner, who told police she saw a man carrying a child in a blanket the night Madeleine disappeared.

Miss Tanner, 37, is said to have arrived late at the table on the night of May 3, saying she was tending her sick child. Now police want to re-interrogate her to confirm her exact movements and analyse how it fits in with evidence from other members of the group dubbed the "tapas nine".

The interview probably conducted by police in England will be conducted as part of a general review of the witness evidence, which is being examined by a Portuguese judge.

Meanwhile lawyers acting for the McCanns are going back through Portuguese newspapers to look for evidence of "black propaganda" planted by police.

The trawl will be overseen by Clarence Mitchell, the former Foreign Office official who was yesterday announced as the family's spokesman.

He said: "They are an ordinary family caught up in extraordinary circumstances. I am utterly convinced they have nothing to do with the disappearance of their daughter."

'Sleep pills killed Maddie'

THE first hard evidence that Madeleine McCann died of an overdose of sleeping pills has been found by forensic experts, new media reports have said.

Body fluids found in the boot of a car hired by the parents of the missing four-year-old British girl 25 days after she went missing in Portugal showed she had been sedated, according to a French newspaper which said it had seen the evidence.

France Soir said DNA results of the fluids showed Maddie had swallowed enough sleeping pills to cause an overdose

Guilhem Buttut, an investigative reporter for the newspaper, said he had seen "hard evidence" about Madeleine's death in a report now in the hands of Portuguese prosecutors, the metro.co.uk news website reported.

Buttut said toxicological tests on the liquids "proved the little girl had ingested medicines, without doubt sleeping pills, in quantities large enough to cause an overdose"

Sources close to the investigation said earlier this week that police discovered an 88 per cent DNA match to Madeleine in the boot of the McCanns' rented Renault Scenic.

It was also reported that hair was found in the boot, allegedly showing that her body had been in it.

The McCanns are reportedly planning their own independent forensic tests on the hire car.

A family friend said the car was being kept in a "safe place", believed to be a pound at Faro airport in Portugal, The Independent newspaper reported today.

The latest revelations come as Portuguese media reported that police wanted to question Madeleine's mother Kate yet again.

Sources close to the McCanns said they were not aware of plans for a second interrogation.

Police may also quiz her about her diary, which police are seeking, along with her husband Gerry's laptop computer.

There are suggestions the diary has already been seen by detectives who took photocopies but police want to examine it in more detail.

Overnight, a warrant was passed from Portuguese authorities to British police to go to the McCanns' home in Rothley, Leicestershire, as early as today.

Portuguese newspapers said yesterday that they had seen the photocopies of extracts.

Correio da Manha said Mrs McCann wrote in the diary that her children were "hysterical" and exhausted her.

It also said her husband gave her little help with family chores.

"She complains frequently that her children are 'hysterical' and speaks of Madeleine as a child whose excess activity exhausts her," the paper said.

The daily Publico said Mrs McCann's worries about her children's behaviour and her difficulties disciplining them were contained in the diary.

Social workers have also visited the MCanns to discuss the welfare of the couple's two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie.

It is standard practice for a mother or father named as a suspect overseas to have their case considered by British authorities.

_________________
Justice for Maddie and the twins! By Estelle @ 3A's




I included the whole article instead of cutting it off as it is always helpful to read original articles. xox


And Hi to Colomom and all my wonderful friends here who are adamant about seeking Justice for Madeleine.