Why did Madeleine 'go missing'?

[april4sky]

Respectfully snipped...

They chose to leave three very young children alone

And this is the crux of the matter!!

But it's nonsense IMO to jump from disliking the decision they made to then believing it must mean they are capable of killing their child.
There is not and never has been any evidence to support such a cruel claim.

So I honestly think--What "smears" can anyone say about the McCanns that is worse than the actual truth of what they did? What can you, or I, say that is more damning than this fact.

Geeez!!
Try accidently killing, murdering, carrying the rotting body of their own child:crazy:....etc, etc, etc!!

It is argued here, that just because they left their children alone, does not mean that they could not then cover up the accidental death of one of the children.
That is not logical.

No Texana not could not - did not!! Big difference!!
And thats because there is not and never has been any evidence that they killed Madeleine.

In fact there is no evidence that Madeleine is not alive.

 

[PattyCake]

It is very interesting to see that almost 70% of people that voted on this poll believe her parents to be culpable in some form.

I cannot believe that they left these 3 little children alone period. The AGE they all were, anything could happen to kids that young and it takes mere seconds. As doctors they must have seen countless scenarios of accidental deaths & injury when children were unsupervised. They had the money for a sitter but felt this was an okay thing to do instead?

I think an accidental overdose happened and they got rid of Madeline. If they didn't get rid of her body, they could have been found guilty of murder, lose their entire life / lifestyle & children. Then linger in a foreign prison for the rest of their lives under unknown conditions. I think they panicked and did what they could to save their butts.
They had no other option than to stage an abduction. Because in their minds, dosing children to sleep is common practice and they probably felt they did no wrong so why get punished for an 'accident'??!!

An overdose would show up in an autopsy making them culpable for murder, not an accident. Therefore it was vital they got rid of Maddie / evidence.

my2cents as always

 

[Barnaby]

Texana, I'm sure such a book could exist, but the idea that one might have been in the McCann's possession is laughable. IMO

Actually Claycat it's more disturbing than laughable....


During the searches of the Villa, video recorded very interesting reading material on the bedside table.


This is the CEOP Manual that is normally for Law Enforcement only. It is strange that the McCanns have a copy of it.

This is a book written by a physic (http://www.thepsychicbarber.co.uk/about.html) about communications with the DEAD!!!

This is Interpretation of a Murder (http://www.interpretationofmurder.com/) which people have said details crimes and investigations and it is about MURDER!!!

These screen shots are from the video of the dogs searching the Villa the McCanns stayed in after the Ocean Club. The full video is found here:http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html (2nd video down, titled: Search of [SIZE=+0]Vista Mar Villa[/SIZE], 02 August 2007)




IMHO, The CEOP Manual and the Interpretation of Murder book could very well give someone ideas about how to conceal a crime (hide a body so LE can't find it).

 

[Claycat]

Gordon Smith happens to be a renowned psychic medium from Scotland. I have talked to him twice on Hay House radio. I'm not surprised they had one of his books. I have read Spirit Messenger myself. It is an excellent book. I have also had messages from spirits. I have seen images of Madeleine, but I always see her in surroundings, as if she is still alive.

We don't know if Madeleine is alive or dead. I hope someday we do. I pray that she is alive.

The McCanns having those books is not proof of anything.

 

[Texana]

Actually Claycat it's more disturbing than laughable....


During the searches of the Villa, video recorded very interesting reading material on the bedside table.


This is the CEOP Manual that is normally for Law Enforcement only. It is strange that the McCanns have a copy of it.

This is a book written by a physic (http://www.thepsychicbarber.co.uk/about.html) about communications with the DEAD!!!

This is Interpretation of a Murder (http://www.interpretationofmurder.com/) which people have said details crimes and investigations and it is about MURDER!!!

These screen shots are from the video of the dogs searching the Villa the McCanns stayed in after the Ocean Club. The full video is found here:http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html (2nd video down, titled: Search of [SIZE=+0]Vista Mar Villa[/SIZE], 02 August 2007)




IMHO, The CEOP Manual and the Interpretation of Murder book could very well give someone ideas about how to conceal a crime (hide a body so LE can't find it).

Thanks, Barnaby, finally an answer to my question.

 

[scandi]

Here's the thing about the McCanns, smears, and all else:

They chose to leave three very young children alone (and not crib babies, who, it can be argued, at least lack the ability to get out on their own) repeatedly, by their own admission.

That they thought it was reasonable, or safe, doesn't really matter. They chose to do that, they were more than educated on what can happen to children left alone, and they did it anyway. You can figure out for yourself what needs or motives drove them to do that--but the fact remains, they did that. They left the children alone--more than once.

So I honestly think--What "smears" can anyone say about the McCanns that is worse than the actual truth of what they did? What can you, or I, say that is more damning than this fact--that two educated, upper middle class parents who could easily afford to have their children watched, chose to leave them alone with an admitted unlocked door? Near a swimming pool, a street, and in a foreign country to boot?

It is argued here, that just because they left their children alone, does not mean that they could not then cover up the accidental death of one of the children.

That is not logical.

People who are capable of leaving their children alone and admitting that one child said, "Mummy, why didn't you come for us when we cried" are people who are capable of then acting in their own interests to salvage what is left of their family and their children.

These are not self-sacrificing parents.

Would you leave your young children alone like that? If the answer is no, then you probably will not believe that the McCanns could then cover up an accidental death if they believed that they would lose their jobs and their remaining children.

Remember: They would have had very little time to make a decision.

PLUS, they left their children alone EVERY evening, not just the night she disappeared. Chronic child abusers IMO. xox

 

[scandi]

Actually Claycat it's more disturbing than laughable....


During the searches of the Villa, video recorded very interesting reading material on the bedside table.


This is the CEOP Manual that is normally for Law Enforcement only. It is strange that the McCanns have a copy of it.

This is a book written by a physic (http://www.thepsychicbarber.co.uk/about.html) about communications with the DEAD!!!

This is Interpretation of a Murder (http://www.interpretationofmurder.com/) which people have said details crimes and investigations and it is about MURDER!!!

These screen shots are from the video of the dogs searching the Villa the McCanns stayed in after the Ocean Club. The full video is found here:http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html (2nd video down, titled: Search of [SIZE=+0]Vista Mar Villa[/SIZE], 02 August 2007)




IMHO, The CEOP Manual and the Interpretation of Murder book could very well give someone ideas about how to conceal a crime (hide a body so LE can't find it).

Thanks Barnaby for pulling all of that out of your hat :blowkiss: Posters can choose to ignor all the reasons that give weight to the possibility the McCanns were involved in spiriting her body away.

When I saw Kate on TV today in her little red jacket all I could think of was ALERT, ALERT, ALERT!

I've seen her too much off camera and in photos when she didn't know she was live!

 

[docwho3]

So let me get this straight about the alleged book (Havent seen links to news footage showing this book in their possession- Did I miss something?): Is it supposed that they committed the crime and then immediately ran out and bought this book on L.E. evidence procedures so they would not make any mistakes during the short time they had to grieve,panic, calm down, decide to hide the body and possibly confer and conspire with others to have matching cover stories.(Can you hear the doubt in my voice?) Or was this book supposed to have been acquired after all that other stuff allegedly happened & if it was so long after the fact then what purpose in having the book since the crime and most of the cover up would already have been a done deal?

If the book was acquired before the alleged death of the child then I suppose one could then (if the child was proven to be dead) argue that the book showed premeditation of some sort. (Although that premeditation would likely put some holes in many theories because a plan before the act is hard to make fit the known facts. - Did they come to this vacation as a way and a place to kill their daughter where L.E. might not be up to the task of catching on and that was the best plan they could come up with? They have other children so it is not as if getting rid of one was going to allow them to run and have fun unfettered by a child. Yet again we come to the title of this thread, "Why did Madeleine 'go missing'?")

If the book was purchased the night of the disappearance one might argue that it might have been a desperate attempt to avoid mistakes in hiding evidence of the death. I just really have doubts that they had time that night to hunt down such an unusual book. I doubt they sell that one in the hotel lobbby.

If the book was acquired any time after that first night when the child went missing then it might be harder to argue there was any devious motive. Perhaps they just wanted to know that L.E. in this possibly less than sophisticated vacation place were doing the best things to preserve whatever evidence might be found to ensure their daughter is found as soon as possible. Also I do not know if a doctor that handles bodies would need or wish to know the things in that book in relation to their work or not. Even pediatric doctors must handle abuse cases and/or rape cases and gather evidence and at some point that evidence must be turned over to L.E. so I do not know if the info in that book might aid in preserving that chain of evidence or not.

Ok, so if I was going to plan a crime and use such a book to help me avoid mistakes I would certainly plan to NOT have it with me when the crime actually took place and would likely have burned it long before the event.
That isn't rocket science, just basic precaution.

Now if you find a book on how to poison someone in a family members room and one of that family turns up dead by poison then you have something worth considering but in this missing girl case the whole alleged book thing rings hollow to me. Until I learn more about it color me doubtful.

 

[Maryam]

So let me get this straight about the alleged book (Havent seen links to news footage showing this book in their possession- Did I miss something?): Is it supposed that they committed the crime and then immediately ran out and bought this book on L.E. evidence procedures so they would not make any mistakes during the short time they had to grieve,panic, calm down, decide to hide the body and possibly confer and conspire with others to have matching cover stories.(Can you hear the doubt in my voice?) Or was this book supposed to have been acquired after all that other stuff allegedly happened & if it was so long after the fact then what purpose in having the book since the crime and most of the cover up would already have been a done deal?

If the book was acquired before the alleged death of the child then I suppose one could then (if the child was proven to be dead) argue that the book showed premeditation of some sort. (Although that premeditation would likely put some holes in many theories because a plan before the act is hard to make fit the known facts. - Did they come to this vacation as a way and a place to kill their daughter where L.E. might not be up to the task of catching on and that was the best plan they could come up with? They have other children so it is not as if getting rid of one was going to allow them to run and have fun unfettered by a child. Yet again we come to the title of this thread, "Why did Madeleine 'go missing'?")

If the book was purchased the night of the disappearance one might argue that it might have been a desperate attempt to avoid mistakes in hiding evidence of the death. I just really have doubts that they had time that night to hunt down such an unusual book. I doubt they sell that one in the hotel lobbby.

If the book was acquired any time after that first night when the child went missing then it might be harder to argue there was any devious motive. Perhaps they just wanted to know that L.E. in this possibly less than sophisticated vacation place were doing the best things to preserve whatever evidence might be found to ensure their daughter is found as soon as possible. Also I do not know if a doctor that handles bodies would need or wish to know the things in that book in relation to their work or not. Even pediatric doctors must handle abuse cases and/or rape cases and gather evidence and at some point that evidence must be turned over to L.E. so I do not know if the info in that book might aid in preserving that chain of evidence or not.

Ok, so if I was going to plan a crime and use such a book to help me avoid mistakes I would certainly plan to NOT have it with me when the crime actually took place and would likely have burned it long before the event.
That isn't rocket science, just basic precaution.

Now if you find a book on how to poison someone in a family members room and one of that family turns up dead by poison then you have something worth considering but in this missing girl case the whole alleged book thing rings hollow to me. Until I learn more about it color me doubtful.

What an excellent post, docwho3! :clap: I agree with everything you've written and have been asking myself the same questions.

 

[Jayelles]

Texana you can postulate all you like if you choose but it doesn't change the fact that there's a big difference between opinions and outright nasty smears posted as fact - because that helps nobody to learn the truth.

That being said it's very clear why some people don't mind when irrational and completely ridiculous theories are posted as fact.

And also why they choose not to provide links to prove their irrational and completely ridiculous theories - because thats all they are.

An English radio show host devoted an hour to the McCann case today. He invited those who hate the McCanns to come on and say why they hate them. I listened with interest but alas, not one of the numerous people who called in managed to come up with more than an hysterical "They left their kids...." Two actually admitted they couldn't say why - just "had feelings". Several others sounded hysterical. James O'Brien - that was his name. I think the programme may have been recorded and may be on his website for anyone interested.

 

[Texana]

An English radio show host devoted an hour to the McCann case today. He invited those who hate the McCanns to come on and say why they hate them. I listened with interest but alas, not one of the numerous people who called in managed to come up with more than an hysterical "They left their kids...." Two actually admitted they couldn't say why - just "had feelings". Several others sounded hysterical. James O'Brien - that was his name. I think the programme may have been recorded and may be on his website for anyone interested.

With all due respect, I could care less what any callers to a British talk show had to say--for or against the McCanns.

Why do you keep bringing in "they saids" from other venues, particularly "they saids" that are against the McCanns?

That doesn't address any of the issues or points of discussion here.

So people hate the McCanns for leaving three young children alone in an apartment in a foreign country. That's hardly an unexpected response. It's rather Captain Obvious, isn't it?

So, once again: The significant thing about the McCanns leaving their children alone is that it showed poor judgment by two educated, intelligent people--who still defend that decision and say they'd do it again. So given that, what other kinds of poor judgment or poorly rationalized decisions could they have made?

Or another point of discussion--Why did the McCanns feel so safe leaving three small children with an unlocked door? Did they give the children some kind of sleeping "help?" Why did they refuse to have the twins tested for sedatives until months later? Why did the twins sleep so soundly through all that commotion that night that night that the police remarked upon it? Why did the McCanns refuse to have the twins awakened and asked anything at all about Madeleine?

Is it really news that people calling in to a talk radio show made it clear they aren't voting the McCanns parents of the year? Although as a side note of great importance, it does seem to reflect rather poorly upon poor Clarence Mitchell.

 

[Isabella]

With all due respect, I could care less what any callers to a British talk show had to say--for or against the McCanns.

Why do you keep bringing in "they saids" from other venues, particularly "they saids" that are against the McCanns?

The thing about that is...they say it says this or that but when you ask for links your told to go and look yourself..and yet we are continually asked for links.

That doesn't address any of the issues or points of discussion here.

So people hate the McCanns for leaving three young children alone in an apartment in a foreign country. That's hardly an unexpected response. It's rather Captain Obvious, isn't it?

So, once again: The significant thing about the McCanns leaving their children alone is that it showed poor judgment by two educated, intelligent people--who still defend that decision and say they'd do it again. So given that, what other kinds of poor judgment or poorly rationalized decisions could they have made?

Or another point of discussion--Why did the McCanns feel so safe leaving three small children with an unlocked door? Did they give the children some kind of sleeping "help?" Why did they refuse to have the twins tested for sedatives until months later? Why did the twins sleep so soundly through all that commotion that night that night that the police remarked upon it? Why did the McCanns refuse to have the twins awakened and asked anything at all about Madeleine?

Today a meeting was held between Mr and Mrs Amaral and some bloggers. I believe they could all ask 3 questions each. One question was did Amaral really believe the children were drugged. He said yes 100% basically and that there was no doubt. He went on to say that in August following the events in PDL..Kate phoned a colleague of his in the PJ and she was upset..and she asked if the PJS could go there and test the twins hair. However later on that day..Gerry McCann phoned the said pj and cancelled it :furious:

Is it really news that people calling in to a talk radio show made it clear they aren't voting the McCanns parents of the year? Although as a side note of great importance, it does seem to reflect rather poorly upon poor Clarence Mitchell.

Poor Clarence really earns his money i think lol

 

[Barnaby]

Poor Clarence really earns his money i think lol

Sure does but how long will he be earning it for now that Brian Kennedy has pulled the plug? Who will lie for the McCanns then without all the gulping, gasping, face/ear/nose touching, etc that identifies people who have something to hide!

 

[Isabella]

Sure does but how long will he be earning it for now that Brian Kennedy has pulled the plug? Who will lie for the McCanns then without all the gulping, gasping, face/ear/nose touching, etc that identifies people who have something to hide!

Well the fund is paying his money atm..but ofc the fund was almost empty..well until the appearance on Oprah and the documentary tonight which coud net more money for them.

Incidentally Mitchell has aged 10 years the past couple of years.

 

[claudicici]

...did anyone see jane valez or whatever it's called tonight...totally victimizing the 'poor mccanns'...even if it was a stranger abduction ,imo,it's still their fault and they should be arressted,at least for child neglect..

 

[Isabella]

...did anyone see jane valez or whatever it's called tonight...totally victimizing the 'poor mccanns'...even if it was a stranger abduction ,imo,it's still their fault and they should be arressted,at least for child neglect..

The problem is these anchors dont read the statements or the pjs files..just go on whats in the national press...and nothing negative can be put because for some reason this case is classified as one of "national security" so..maybe these people shouldnt comment on things they know nothing about.

 

[Salem]

~Respectfully snipped and bolded by me ~

Here's the thing about the McCanns, smears, and all else:

They chose to leave three very young children alone (and not crib babies, who, it can be argued, at least lack the ability to get out on their own) repeatedly, by their own admission.

They chose to do that, they were more than educated on what can happen to children left alone, and they did it anyway.

...and admitting that one child said, "Mummy, why didn't you come for us when we cried" are people who are capable of then acting in their own interests to salvage what is left of their family and their children.

Actually, the bolded statements are the crux of the matter! I agree 100% with Texana that these are not self-sacrificing parents, but parents out to take care of themselves.

Very sad for Maddie and her siblings.

Salem

 

[Texana]

~Respectfully snipped and bolded by me ~

Actually, the bolded statements are the crux of the matter! I agree 100% with Texana that these are not self-sacrificing parents, but parents out to take care of themselves.

Very sad for Maddie and her siblings.

Salem

Thanks, Salem. I think it always comes back to this.

 

[OneLove]

Is this thread open again? Because it keeps popping up in my list of most recently commented yet the last comment was posted years ago.

 

[OneLove]

Question: In the USA, leaving children this age alone in these circumstances would be considered neglectful. Is there a different "standard of care" that makes this acceptable in the UK?