New Sketch of Maddie Abductor

[Claycat]

I believe the man in the sketch was paid by someone else to kidnap Madeleine.

 

[Texana]

The "creepy man" sketch really does look like George Harrison.

And we all know he was the least talented of the Beatles, although Ringo gave him a good run for the money.

How do we really know George is dead?

We know Paul is dead.

But what about George?

 

[colomom]

I believe the man in the sketch was paid by someone else to kidnap Madeleine.

Ermmm....why do you think that claycat?

 

[Salem]

The "creepy man" sketch really does look like George Harrison.

And we all know he was the least talented of the Beatles, although Ringo gave him a good run for the money.

How do we really know George is dead?

We know Paul is dead.

But what about George?

O/T Texana - Paul's not dead. John is dead. Paul is busy divorcing Heather. Its a big scandal. Renee from Bridget's Diaries went on a date with him, but actually I think he is seeing someone else right now.:crazy:

Salem

 

[ThoughtFox]

Not directed at me either but...

What if you left the pills within the reach of the children and had taken a couple for your pain and left the cap off....

In my opinion, leaving the cap "off" is the same thing as leaving a door "open."

They put child-proof caps on medicine bottles to prevent overdoses.
They put locks on doors to protect people - especially innocent children.

Yet for me, it isn't even that they didn't lock the children in the room. It's that they left them in the room alone.

It's just wrong to leave children that young alone, period. They are not pets and they deserve more supervision than that. The hotel knew that and provided Nannies, but the McCanns (and some of their friends) made a clear choice in what they did.

The basic fact of the case is - the kids had no one there to protect them, end of story. That stays the same no matter how Maddie died or how she disappeared. That's the one thing that is constant in all these various statements from the Tapas 9 - nobody was home, except three small kids.

 

[Salem]

I suppose the guy could have been interviewed before - there so little coming out from the PJ that who knows

The wheels of justice are indeed turning slowly - if indeed they are turning atall. Though I am struggiling to understand why the PJ are letting this case drift for so long ......... I just dont buy the argument that they are getting all their ducks in a row etc or they are still examining the DNA .

Hi Gord - I shortened your post a little just to save room. Hope you don't mind.

Today's DailyMail is saying the PJ said they interviewed the guy back in May. I'm not providing a link just because it is one of my least favorite sources.

The wheels are turning slowly. I wish I could find the link for you that explains the process the PJ have to go through to do the interviews in England. I believe it is from one of the Portugese papers. Also, I discussed it briefly with another poster on this forum (maybe Thoughtfox). It was not long after that article that there was news that the PJ would be going to England anyday. Which we now know was not true.:waitasec:

I don't think the PJ will make the new interviews before February. Apparently this is a very bureaucratic (sp?) process.

I do have faith in the PJ. Maybe they were not perfect, but everything they have done (or not done) has been verified or redone by the British LE. It was the British LE that found the blood in the apartment and in the rental car and it has been the British forensic teams that have done the major analysis of that evidence.

And I do put more stock in the Portugese papers. The reporters are there, they speak the language and they have more "contacts." Also, it was the SOL paper that gave us, in my mind, the first article that showed any investigative journalism. Until then, everything appeared to be written in the McCann's favor without hardly a word about leaving the children alone.

I'm hoping that this case is solved by May, before the anniversary date of Maddie's missing and I'm hoping she is recovered and returned to those who truely do love her.

Salem

 

[ThoughtFox]

From colomom's Portuguese news thread -

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53176&page=9

Almost all of the persons interviewed yesterday by 24 Horas said that if they had seen him they would remember. " I would never forget a face like this", was the most repeated sentence.

Who could?

Carla, 32 years old and client of the video club Eureka had already seen the photo in the newspapers. "It is strange it only appears now. So many months after people don't remember half of the faces that passed through here at the time. Nonetheless, I think that if I have seen him I would never forget", she said to 24 Horas. And she added that the photo reminded her of someone: " When I saw that photo in the newspapers it seemed to me like Charles Bronson".

That's awesome! :clap: I didn't think of Bronson! :woohoo:

We also spoke with some employees of the Ocean Club, the resort from where Madeleine disappeared. None recognised the man.

We heard the same answer in the Baptista's supermarket, the Tapas Bar and in the coffee shops near the beach where the British went during their holidays in Algarve.

Yep. Why am I not surprised?

 

[Texana]

O/T Texana - Paul's not dead. John is dead. Paul is busy divorcing Heather. Its a big scandal. Renee from Bridget's Diaries went on a date with him, but actually I think he is seeing someone else right now.:crazy:

Salem

Totally O/T, but when Abbey Road came out, it fueled all kinds of rumors that Paul was dead. Lots of clues, supposedly, on the cover, and if you play Revolution No. 9 you hear "Paul is dead." Mr. Texana spent many a wasted hour playing it backwards. And do we have his original Beatles albums to make ourselves rich on E-Bay? No, we do not, not that I'm bitter about that or anything.

Probably some true believers still out there sticking to this story.

See what a few drugs, a lot of free time, and no Internet used to do to us?

Google Abbey Road and see what you get.

Oh, I feel old now...

But the "Paul is dead" has about as much credibility as the new abductor sketches, IMO.

 

[Claycat]

Ermmm....why do you think that claycat?

Can you spell hunch? Aren't sleuths allowed to have hunches?

 

[colomom]

Can you spell hunch? Aren't sleuths allowed to have hunches?

Allright, I'll bite....ONCE.

You did not specify that this was speculation or a "hunch".

Like I said before, elaboration helps to define the response.

:furious:

 

[Claycat]

Allright, I'll bite....ONCE.

You did not specify that this was speculation or a "hunch".

Like I said before, elaboration helps to define the response.

:furious:

You can be assured that I will try my very best to define any future posts with clarification and elaboration!

 

[ThoughtFox]

You can be assured that I will try my very best to define any future posts with clarification and elaboration!

No need to get upset - here's why people wondered what you meant:

I believe the man in the sketch was paid by someone else to kidnap Madeleine.

That isn't just a hunch, but a vague hunch. Who is "someone else"? We can play 20 questions and guess what you mean, or you could just please be more specific.

Do you mean a pedophile group? Or do you mean the McCanns?

And I took your post to mean that you believe this drawing is of a real person, even though no one else ever saw anyone with these unusual features except this one tourist. Even the people there in the town don't remember this guy, so why do you believe it is true?

If you don't care to answer, I understand.

 

[Claycat]

Okay, ThoughtFox, I understand you are trying to pin me down. And that's okay. I said that because I got an intuitive image of someone paying a man with dark hair some cash. If you don't want to believe in intuition or psychic ability, that's okay. No skin off my back! I can't prove it, but neither can you disprove it. The image may be wrong. Sometimes they are, but often they are not.

If I am wrong, somewhere down the line you can say I told you so!

I do know that many detectives have hunches, and they are not always based on absolute fact. In fact, there are no absolutes!

 

[iNTERESTEDWOMAN]

I believe the man in the sketch was paid by someone else to kidnap Madeleine.

I believe the man in the sketch was a poor homeless man down on his luck. (If he even exist at all.)


Supposedly Ed Smart has befriended the McCanns. I think they stole the idea off of the scum that abducted Elizabeth. (similar appearance). He (David Brian) was also reported to be collecting money for the homeless....and VERY CREEPY

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/West/03/12/smart.kidnapping/

scroll down for his picture.

 

[colomom]

In my opinion, leaving the cap "off" is the same thing as leaving a door "open."

They put child-proof caps on medicine bottles to prevent overdoses.
They put locks on doors to protect people - especially innocent children.

Yet for me, it isn't even that they didn't lock the children in the room. It's that they left them in the room alone.

It's just wrong to leave children that young alone, period. They are not pets and they deserve more supervision than that. The hotel knew that and provided Nannies, but the McCanns (and some of their friends) made a clear choice in what they did.

The basic fact of the case is - the kids had no one there to protect them, end of story. That stays the same no matter how Maddie died or how she disappeared. That's the one thing that is constant in all these various statements from the Tapas 9 - nobody was home, except three small kids.

Thank you TF for "getting my meaning". :blowkiss:

 

[Claycat]

I believe the man in the sketch was a poor homeless man down on his luck.

I also believe (or think) this! That is why he might be open to the idea of snatching a child for a price. Just a thought! Just an idea! Not a fact!

 

[colomom]

I believe the man in the sketch was a poor homeless man down on his luck. (If he even exist at all.)


Supposedly Ed Smart has befriended the McCanns. I think they stole the idea off of the scum that abducted Elizabeth. (similar appearance). He was also reported to be collecting money for the homeless.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/West/03/12/smart.kidnapping/

scroll down for his picture.

You are good IW, very good. I did read that the Smarts and McCanns have kept in touch since GM's visit to the US.

Hmmmmm :waitasec:

 

[Texana]

I think that Ed Smart is a polar opposite of the McCanns, in personality and attitude in general.

And while I also believe Mr. Smart is one of the nicest people in the world, I also think he's one of the most naive and trusting people also. It would be like him to reach out to anyone he felt in need.

 

[Claycat]

Here is a new article about the sketch.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/20/nmaddy320.xml

 

[april4sky]

:boohoo:
That's the funniest thing I read for a week!

You agree it was wrong to leave the children alone yes? Madeleine is gone, and has never been found, yes? And there is no evidence they harmed her? If I left my toddlers in a car, I should not face any consequences if one child dies of heat stoke or is kidnapped? It's the suns fault?, it's the kidnappers fault?...is that what your saying?

Just so I understand better, I have a VERY SERIOUS question I hope you will answer.

I broke my foot, and the doctor prescribed prescription pain killers for me to take to relieve pain. Friends come over for drinks, and I get pre-occupied and I accidentally leave the pills in the reach of my three toddlers. My 3 year old child thinks it is candy and eats the pills. Who's fault would it be?

1. The doctors, for prescribing it.
2. The Pharmacists, for filling the prescription.
3. Mine, for leaving the medication out.
4. The Child's, for taking it.
5. You don't know me, so you can't answer.
6. No ones, it was a mistake.

The funniest thing? Really?
Well everything about this case just saddens me.
And it always comes back to them leaving the children alone :banghead: even though everyone is in agreement on this point.

Why do I get the feeling it's used as an excuse. .....Probably because its the only thing we know they did wrong.

It doesn't follow that they killed Madeleine.

If you really need an answer...3. Yours. I don't have a problem with that.
Many people have made terrible mistakes and paid the ultimate price. Many of them may even have been the perfect parent to this point.

In the last few days I heard about a mother, in the US, who left her three young children watching a movie while she showered. Sadly her two year old managed to get out of the house and drown in the family pool. I believe this family is being supported in their tragedy.
My heart goes out to her too as it doesn't follow that she's a bad mom. I really don't know to judge her. She may have done this many times before without a problem and thought her children were safe too.

We like to think we wouldn't make a mistake with our children. I was very careful with mine and would only use family to babysit. But I still think there but for the grace of god. Tragedy could strike any of us in many different ways no matter how careful. And we would be left broken and forever saying...If only.

Thats why unless I see real evidence, not just rumours and smears, I won't attack them.