Madeleine McCann General Discussion Thread No. 26

[orora]

Yes, all good answers. No problem. There are indicators of many things hidden within the words and actions of many. It is mainly all laid out in front of us and left to personal interpretation. Some defer to some other party, entity, or organization for an interpretauion, some make up their own. Interpretations will vary widely. Some points resonate more than others with different people dependant upon personal experience.

I have seen some funny stuff go on in the past that most would never believe, I have seen some of the same actions found here in some of those cases. I have seen people whom you would never suspect involved in the most attrocious of activities. I have seen organizations usually regarded as being above reproach involved in even worse. The cases which approach any level of conspiracy involving parties who could and would do this sort of thing are never solved.

The body finding device is a very rare distraction used seldom anywhere else and only dragged out in special circumstances. Its worthy of a notch in awareness. If you have never seen it before, you will not recognize it for what it is. It denotes something bigger at play behind the scenes. Fair enough, we all have our points that sway our opinion one way or another and everything is educational to an open mind. Should you come across this again, remember this point.

The following is an excellent conclusion and likely how it will end and likely how it was meant to end. imo... Look no further afield than the parents. Its just a lack of evidence and nothing more for the most informed of the general public. For others, there may have been an abductor. This is the end game, the closing ceremonies. Take your pick of the only two choices. SY will soon confirm.

This may well have been solved (in fact, I believe it is) but prosecuting is a whole different ball game.

 

[brit1981]

I am not saying the DNA proves the parents are innocent, how coudl not finding madeleine's DNA there prove their innocence. Finding it there in larger quantities thna would be possible via transfer would be a huge piece of evidence against them, but not finding it there does not prove their innocence. All anyone can say is that it is a sample from three to five people and that the components found could have come from all or one of them, ad that some are shared by madeleine as well as several other people who were witnessed to use the ar frequently.

SY have confirmed they belive it was an abductor. I do not think they will go into more detail than that because it could damage the chances of a prosecution and that will have to be done by the portuguese. I think all they can do is hand over any new evidence i.e a name to the PJ who will reopen the case and instigate proceedings and SY will probably be witnesses along with the PJ.

And we can know what are myths. the claim cadaver dogs were used and only alert to the "scent of death" is amyth, the claim that the DNA was identified as beign madeleine's is a myth, the claim that finding 15 out of madeleine's components is almost a positive identification is a myth, the claim of a blue sports bag going missing is a myth, the claim calpol is used as a sedative is a myth etc

 

[fabgod]

Orora,
Two things that I dont understand,
Why let the pawns be rewarded and advertise the fact over and over
and
Why play the scenes out in public as evidenced over the past 5 years, is that a case of brinkmanship and almost a challenge from one side of the court to another?

 

[SapphireSteel]

I am not saying the DNA proves the parents are innocent, how coudl not finding madeleine's DNA there prove their innocence. Finding it there in larger quantities thna would be possible via transfer would be a huge piece of evidence against them, but not finding it there does not prove their innocence. All anyone can say is that it is a sample from three to five people and that the components found could have come from all or one of them, ad that some are shared by madeleine as well as several other people who were witnessed to use the ar frequently.

SY have confirmed they belive it was an abductor. I do not think they will go into more detail than that because it could damage the chances of a prosecution and that will have to be done by the portuguese. I think all they can do is hand over any new evidence i.e a name to the PJ who will reopen the case and instigate proceedings and SY will probably be witnesses along with the PJ.

And we can know what are myths. the claim cadaver dogs were used and only alert to the "scent of death" is amyth, the claim that the DNA was identified as beign madeleine's is a myth, the claim that finding 15 out of madeleine's components is almost a positive identification is a myth, the claim of a blue sports bag going missing is a myth, the claim calpol is used as a sedative is a myth etc

It is Kates father who stated this.

 

[brit1981]

No it was not. If you watch the interview with kate's father he never once stated that calpol was used as a sedative. he actually said that when it came to medicines, the most the childen were ever given as far as he was aware was perhaps calpol like nearly all parents.

calpol is not a sedative, and what is more when her father was asked about sedative she said they never gave the children sedatives. It is a distortion when people have claimed the children were sedated with calpol, he never said this at all.

 

[orora]

Orora,
Two things that I dont understand,
Why let the pawns be rewarded and advertise the fact over and over
and
Why play the scenes out in public as evidenced over the past 5 years, is that a case of brinkmanship and almost a challenge from one side of the court to another?

Recognizing the anomalies of this investigation from the normal child abduction are the first step. The things that don't fit or make sense from either side. The degree of bungling and lack of cohesion. Pick them all out and note who would have to be involved no matter who or what organization it is. Be dispassionate its irrelevant who at this point.

The why part would likely take most people a lifetime of education or some personal background or involvement with things you likely would not come back from as the same person.

In some simple terms; if you look at chain of command structures and how they evolve over time, they grow, they compete, they amalgamate, they add resources and players as they go. If you look at organized crime structures you find much of the same only the criminal side is much more noticeable and expected. The line between the two is not as well defined as most would like to believe. The psychology of placing a psychopathic personality into a position of power within various differing arms of a power structure can create phenomenal results in the way of compliance largely unnoticed but by anyone high up and within. It becomes mandatory to defer decision making to a higher up and just follow orders.

That includes the courts. Things like this test, advertise, consolidates, initiates, mandates, dictates and cements all sorts of people within various organizations together in ways the general public isn't supposed to be aware of. Those who are in the know or who may be part of a competing power structure or who may potentially oppose the unseen hand are forced to see what they are up against each and everyday. The more advertising the longer the better, the more powerful the current players show themselves.

No one tackles that once it gets to that level. Hence for all intents and purposes, you will be left with the only two choices worthy of your consideration. You can discuss either til the cows come home. The biggest most well respected of all investigational bodies will drive the final nail. Its over.. All thats really left is what you get and take from it. In your lifetime you may even see another case like this as it unfolds live and you may see things differently as a result of having seen one before. You just might not have known what you were seeing until now.

 

[BritsKate]

I realise this question is not aimed at me but for what its worth,my reply would be,
certainly not unsolved because of the smartness of the perpetrators, if taken as the commonly acknowledged persons.
Partly due to an investigation that was purposely muddied and most likely without the experience to investigate what was faced quickly enough to be able to react at a time when there was a window in which to make such reactions.
I hope that made sense to you?

Just wanted to state I appreciate you not taking the botched investigation, Portugal Police have no clue what they're doing, line. I think it's far too easy to criticise another country's law enforcement and we see it often.

 

[badhorsie]

I fear some myths are being perpetuated on this very forum.
Eddie is not a cadaver dog and reacts to fluids from living people- Myth.
Thousands of Brits leave under 4s alone in apartment (NB Not hotel rooms) rooms while they drink and dine with friends 50 metres away -MYTH

If it is said often enough, people will believe it- BIG FAT MYTH

And something else, Eddie reacted to ONLY Kate's clothing, ONLY the McCann car, ONLY apartment 5A and the immediate environs. Explain this

 

[fabgod]

I fear some myths are being perpetuated on this very forum.
Eddie is not a cadaver dog and reacts to fluids from living people- Myth.
Thousands of Brits leave under 4s alone in apartment (NB Not hotel rooms) rooms while they drink and dine with friends 50 metres away -BIG FAT MYTH

If it is said often enough, people will believe it- BIG FAT MYTH

Agreed Badhorsie,
I must say its a pleasant change not to be told the same thing as fact over and over again recently.
Makes for a nicer atmosphere in my opinion

 

[Tink]

I wonder if it would be useful to start a new thread that would consider the timeline and what people think might have happened in particular periods of time IF it was the case that the parents were involved.

Tink

 

[fabgod]

I wonder if it would be useful to start a new thread that would consider the timeline and what people think might have happened in particular periods of time IF it was the case that the parents were involved.

Tink

Good idea Tink

 

[KariKae]

I am fairly new to the MM forum and have spent some time lurking and reading. IMO, a lot of evidence seems to implicate the parents.

What I don't understand is if the parents were involved, why do they continue to put themselves out there in the media? If it were my child, I wouldn't care about what people said about me, I would do that it takes to keep my child's face out there. Why wouldn't the parents do what Jon Benet's parents did and quietly slip from the public eye? This is the part that makes me hold out hope.

FTR - I would love it if they did an advertising campaign to educate other parents about the dangers of leaving children unattended while on vacation. Maybe with a age-progressed photo of MM at the end to remind people she is still missing.

 

[BritsKate]

I am fairly new to the MM forum and have spent some time lurking and reading. IMO, a lot of evidence seems to implicate the parents.

What I don't understand is if the parents were involved, why do they continue to put themselves out there in the media? If it were my child, I wouldn't care about what people said about me, I would do that it takes to keep my child's face out there. Why wouldn't the parents do what Jon Benet's parents did and quietly slip from the public eye? This is the part that makes me hold out hope.

FTR - I would love it if they did an advertising campaign to educate other parents about the dangers of leaving children unattended while on vacation. Maybe with a age-progressed photo of MM at the end to remind people she is still missing.

:seeya: Hi Kari! We agree on the campaign idea.

We see what you stated all the time in these cases. (And honestly parents are criticized and sometimes suspected no matter how they react.)

Susan Smith and Darlie Routier both made very public, teary eyed appeals to find the killers of their children. Yet the Bradley-Irwins and Aisenbergs rarely speak to the media now about their still missing children. D'Andre Lane (Bianca Jone's father) and Justin DiPietro (Ayla Reynold's dad) have also made public appeals for the return of their children. Lane is facing trial for murder though Bianca's body hasn't been found and DiPietro is still heavily suspected by the public. We've never heard from Julia Biryukova at all after little Sky Metalwala went missing from her unattended vehicle (other than an email to a local news channel bashing her ex-husband.)

There is no rhyme or reason for it that I can find. Sometimes innocent parents just can't or don't do media (more often media isn't interested) and other times parents guilty as sin make mass media appeals.

If the McCann's were to quietly slip away there would be fewer donations presumably to their fund in my opinion. They may not have access to the people and places Maddie's disappearance has opened to them. They certainly wouldn't get as much attention or sympathy. Whether those are factors or if they're truly innocent parents fighting for the return of their child remains to be seen. JMO

 

[Donjeta]

I see JonBenet and Madeleine different in that JonBenet was never missing so the parents had no incentive to keep on doing a campaign to get her back. An innocent family would naturally want her killer caught but keeping up a massive media campaign for a long time would not necessarily help to achieve that goal and might interfere with the grieving process.

Parents of missing children who still hold on to hope that the child may be found alive (or parents who know that the child is dead but want to convince people otherwise) are in a different place.

 

[fabgod]

Hi Britskate
I just read your post on the parents of missing children and their appeals.
It made me wonder, how many of the Parents of missing children like the ones mentioned by yourself, searched physically themselves?

I know of Kerry Needhams visits to Kos, Winnie Johnsons searches for Keith Bennett (God bless Winnie) as examples, but it would be interesting to know how many others took part in searches over time.
I am aware that this would not be a sign of guilt or innocence but it could be quite revealing.

 

[Donjeta]

I remember a few cases in which relatives searched tirelessly for their loved one's body long after there were no organized searches any more. I don't think they usually want relatives actively searching on organized searches because of the emotional and the legal difficulties if the family happens to find something (legal, eg. how do you prove they didn't put it there and pretend to "find it" later?). Then if the family believes their child is still alive and being held somewhere there isn't really much they can do legally in the way of searches other than put out flyers, do media appeals since you just can't go on private property and search.

 

[fabgod]

I remember a few cases in which relatives searched tirelessly for their loved one's body long after there were no organized searches any more. I don't think they usually want relatives actively searching on organized searches because of the emotional and the legal difficulties if the family happens to find something (legal, eg. how do you prove they didn't put it there and pretend to "find it" later?). Then if the family believes their child is still alive and being held somewhere there isn't really much they can do legally in the way of searches other than put out flyers, do media appeals since you just can't go on private property and search.

Good point Donjeta,
I just find it hard to imagine that if I lost a child, that every possible day, I would want to look myself, even if it was only to feel that I was still trying, you know?

 

[fabgod]

I'll tell you something else, If I was in that horrible position of having had my child taken, I don't think reason would stop me.
I would be fully prepared to go anywhere if there was a chance of finding the child, private property or not, I am pretty sure I would take the risk to be honest.
I read that Yeremi Vargas' grandad searches almost every day, driving around the area in Gran Canaria looking in old buildings and so on, I think it was the same with Eric larsfolks dad in the Larsfolk /McCormick disappearance.

 

[Donjeta]

It is understandable and I'm sure many families feel the same way you do.

I just don't think it's always possible to do that and keep your sanity if people have other responsibilities they must take care of. Jobs they can't afford to give up, other children they must take care of, aging parents etc.

 

[BritsKate]

Hi Britskate
I just read your post on the parents of missing children and their appeals.
It made me wonder, how many of the Parents of missing children like the ones mentioned by yourself, searched physically themselves?

I know of Kerry Needhams visits to Kos, Winnie Johnsons searches for Keith Bennett (God bless Winnie) as examples, but it would be interesting to know how many others took part in searches over time.
I am aware that this would not be a sign of guilt or innocence but it could be quite revealing.

I'm not caught up yet but few families physically search when an investigation is active. It's generally even requested by law enforcement that they do not. Contamination of evidence is always a risk but I believe part of the reason is simply the emotional trauma if remains are discovered.

That being said there are also parents who drive for hours on end, talk to everyone they can find showing their children's picture to anyone who will look...I've seen this more in missing teen cases than children though.

A lot of parents who I deem to be innocent (like Trista Reynolds and Desiree Young) bide their time with media appearances and arranging events to fund the search and enhance awareness for their missing children.

I believe truly innocent parents look for their children in every face they pass though for the rest of their lives. I just can't imagine the heartache of not knowing where your child is. FWIW and MOO