Where is Madeleine? Where is she? - THREAD No. 2

[NewMommy09]

Sorry guys, this is O/T, but would some of you check out the thread in my sig, and let me know if you think this child looks like missing child Acacia Bishop? Thanks.

 

[april4sky]

The difficulty I have in answering your rebuttal April is due to your requirement that I provide you with irrefutable, conclusive, incontestable, official documentation that proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Madeleine is dead. You know, as well as I do, that this is not possible. In this case it is essential that all information be considered. We cannot hold a hand up and say that we will not consider information unless it is definite. Wouldn't be proper sleuthing now, would it?

I have tried, repeatedly to outline the numerous inconsistencies and press reports that point toward a logical conclusion. I have made list after list of details that when considered, as a whole, show that it is very possible that the McCanns had something to do with Madeleine's disappearance on May 3rd 2007. Even if that "something" is the simple fact that they left her vulnerable and exposed in such a callous manner. My gut feelings about this case have been expressed but, I do not believe that I have ever stated that I am convinced that the McCanns killed their daughter.

I have asked many times that those who honestly believe that the McCanns had absolutely nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance to please provide press reports or even logical theory that points in a different direction. While some have offered explanations, they are very easy to discount, IMO. I want to see something, one thing, anything, that makes me think that an abduction is possible. When I mention that there is no evidence of an abduction this is what I am talking about. Just one thing, jimmied shutters, fingerprints, footprint, eye witness (don't even think of mentioning JT) would make a huge difference in how I "see" this case. I am still waiting. I would prefer a number of details that when considered together show that it is not logical to look toward the parents, since that is what I have attempted to do.

Rather than defend, defend, defend can you put together some documentation or theory that can really show how the McCanns must be innocent of any involvement?

Do you honestly believe that I would not acknowledge a bad judgement on my part if the McCanns are proved to be blameless? Like it or not, your question is insulting.

As far as your asking for "links" or your being "lost" on number 4, I have one word for you.....google.

Colomom as to question 4...I have googled.
As to my question...I honestly don't know, which was why I asked. Not to insult..Apologies if you felt insulted. But its not so surprising when anything that is favourable to the McCanns is never acknowleged as such. ie. DNA reported as inconclusive, to articles from experts refuting the success rates re-cadavers. To the 100 plus press articles which we now know beyond any doubt smeared the McCanns. You did say all information should be considered.

I think you went a bit over the top with the above list of requirements. Not true. Maybe an official from the PJ, not a source, confirming they have proof of the claims would do it...Sorry but I don't think its unreasonable to not accept rumours as fact.

It's not possible for us to provide proof that Madeleine was abducted. Just as its not possible to prove she wasn't. We know now the press don't know either way, and I seriously doubt the PJ do.

As for theory, I believe an abduction would have been easy. And much more believable than the theory that her parents carried her body around with them in the car, weeks after she went missing. Thats just to much of a stretch for me.
Abduction is much more likely IMO. Especially if someone had been watching the McCanns movements that week and watched them leave. It would have taken only moments for someone to enter the apartment and take Madeleine...and not leave fingerprints by wearing gloves...If they left by the door, as has been suggested before, the window would not have been damaged.

As I have said before I have seen no evidence to make me believe the McCanns killed Madeleine. And I am more convinced than ever since the press admission.



It's impossible to provide documentation as you put it, either way. I always thought it was up to the police to collect evidence. But confirmation of "evidence" from the PJ to seperate fact from rumour is very different, and essential if we want the truth. Especially when arguedos cannot defend themselves by confirming their statements due to those pesky secrecy laws.

 

[daffodil]

:clap: :clap: :clap:
Excellent post. I agree completely. Though I'm sure points 4 & 5 will have many rebuttals from some, (as usual ), Points 1,2 & 3 are totally enough to get my hinky meter going. Any disagreement on those points always come from those who think it was fine to leave the children alone to begin with, (and we know where their priorities are), and it's not for the welfare of children.

That post just makes me soooo angry.I think you need to be careful with lumping those who believe the McCanns innocent, as a group who think it ok to leave the children alone:furious: .I havent read ANY poster say it was right to leave them alone,not one, so please do not judge others OR their priorities.:slap:

 

[Salem]

More than one case has been built and prosecuted, successfully, on circumstantial evidence alone, and in this case there is no lack of circumstantial evidence.

Like teacherbee - I don't care about the jogging, the makeup, the blogging, but I do care about:

1. The initial lie regarding the shutters - why would you say they had been jimmied, when in fact, and yes I believe this is a FACT, they had not? So - why would you say this? To throw the police off the trail?

2. Why can not 9 people get the timeline right? If a child was really missing and no one was lying, between 9 people, you should be able to pull enough accurate information to come up with a fairly consistent timeline. Given that everyone had been drinking and they were probably in a high state of "emotion" some inconsistencies would be understandable. However, between the NINE of them, there should have been enough to compile a fairly accurate timeline.

3. Leaving the children alone AFTER being advised not too. I don't have links to all the old articles, but a woman who works for Mark Warner was QUOTED as having advised the McCanns not to leave the children.

4. Why would you leave the children AFTER your neighbor had complained about their crying? WHY? Is this also smear and rumor? I think not, the old woman was QUOTED. And when she said she "never said that" she was saying she never said the ADDITIONAL smears that were attributed to her. However, she never backed down from her story of the children crying. I take this a FACT, not opinion, rumor or smear, but just plain FACT.

5. I believe the dogs are ALWAYS right. The problem is that they can't talk and we humans don't always understand what they are trying to tell us. However, in this case, I see the dogs as particularly damning to the McCanns.

6. Why, if your child was missing, would you refuse to answer questions the police asked? Even if you had been doing something that might not have reflected well on your reputation, wouldn't you just ask the police for some discretion on what was leaked to the press so that you could tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth? After all, what good is your reputation, money, status if your child is lost???? This makes me think of the VanDams and the loss of their daughter, and yet they held their heads up and moved forward because the bottom line was that they wanted their daughter back. The McCanns don't have to be like the VanDams, but the McCanns lack of honesty and full disclosure is damning in my opinion.

7. Why would you leave your children alone if you thought someone was watching you? The McCanns are QUOTED as saying they believed they were being watched. If that is true, then they set their children up for what happened. How do you excuse that? The McCanns have ADMITTED this. How do you excuse that?

8. Why has it been so difficult for the PLE to re-interview the Tapas 9? If anyone of them was really concerned about what happened to Maddie, they would have found a way to make themselves available to the PLE without all this dancing around.

I am not trying to change anyone's mind here. I think it is prefectly fine that we have several trains of thought going on. This is a complex case, made more so by the lack of honesty on the parts of the family involved. Please also keep in mind that the evidence collected against the McCanns was collected with the help of British LE. It seems to me that the PLE were not so convinced of the McCanns complicity in this case until after the ENGLISH came to help them collect additional evidence from the apartment. In the beginning, I really believe the PLE wanted to believe this was a case of abduction.

So blaming all the "smears and rumors" on the PLE is inconsistent with the timeline of events as we watched them play out in the media. And, I'm going to wait to see how this plays out because I have a feeling the McCanns are going to have pay back that "defamation" award they recently won from the Daily Express.

So, that's my rant for the day

Salem

 

[colomom]

That post just makes me soooo angry.I think you need to be careful with lumping those who believe the McCanns innocent, as a group who think it ok to leave the children alone:furious: .I havent read ANY poster say it was right to leave them alone,not one, so please do not judge others OR their priorities.:slap:

I do not see where IW was referring specifically to posters here at WS.

I have seen many posts around the internet where people have defended what the McCanns did by saying they had done the exact same thing themselves. In other words, what they did was perfectly fine. They often are the same people who believe the McCanns are innocent of any involvement with Madeleine's disappearance. However, I did not see where IW said that "those who believe the McCanns innocent, as a group who think it ok to leave the children alone". While I agree that the word always should not apply, I can see how she might think that people who would defend leaving the twins with strangers, people who would lie and change their stories or people who would offer laughable explanations might indeed, be the same people who would defend the initial neglect of the McCann children. That is a logical conclusion.

At any rate I don't see it as being an attack, just an opinion. It is not a judgement, it is an opinion.

 

[april4sky]

april, I know you asked Colomom the question, but I'm going to also take a stab at answering you.

I will always have a suspicion that the McCanns were somehow involved in their daughter's death....at least, until VERY conclusive evidence otherwise turns up.

What would that be? A confession from some other person or person or finding the body with DNA and/or other evidence that points away from the McCanns.
Of course, Madeline being found alive would also be a wonderful turn of events, though i personally do not believe she's alive. (Even so, I do pray that if she is alive that she will be found.)

Why would I have such a hard time taking the McCanns out of possible suspect status? I'm a look at the whole picture type of person. In my mind, the McCanns have done too many things that make them look like possible suspsects.

I don't care what Kate dresses like or whether she runs every day and even whether Gerry is able to blog daily, with rather blithe references to everything but the horror of his baby girl being missing. None of that makes them suspects in my book.

However, I do look at human nature and find the McCanns behavior extremely strange in some regards. Here are some of my biggest hinky points -

1. If they truly went through the terrorizing experience of having a child snatched from them, I don't think they'd be IMMEDIATELY leaving their two other babies in the care of strangers in a strange country. We've gone over and over this point...but I think it rings true.
2. Their constantly conflicting statements (along with the other Tapas members) regarding the basic timeline and what happened that night. People who have nothing to hide don't lie and change their story.
3. Some of their ridiculous explanatory statements. The biggest example of this is Kate's trying to make us believe that she took Maddie's favorite Cuddle Cat to work with her, exposing it to dead bodies. Say what???? She'd let the toy come in contact with cadavers and not wash it before giving it back to her kid? And then, when that same little girl is missing and presumed dead, she'd think nothing of washing one of the last things her daughter touched and left her "essence" on. Sorry, I'm not buying it.
4. Refusal to cooperate with authorities. I don't even mind that they lawyered up (though i find it a bit odd), but making it so difficult to be re-interviewed and questioned is ridiculous. I think every mother and father here on this board would probably tell you they'd be knocking down the doors of the police station to get answers if their child went missing - assuming they were innocent.
5. Once again, until directly disputed, I believe the stories regarding the findings of the cadaver dogs. And, no I don't believe the scent they picked up on was from items of Maddie's when she was alive. The dogs are trained specifically to pick up CADAVER odor.

I could actually go on, but I have to get my son to school. I'm sure Colomom will come along and give you an excellent, well-thought out answer to your question.

You know, April, I don't want to believe that any parent could kill their child, even accidentally and then cover it up. But I also am not going to stick my head in the sand and refuse to see anything that might point a finger of suspicion at Kate and Gerry.

teacherbees thank you for your very honest answer. It's more or less what I thought quite a few posters would feel, even if the McCanns arguedo status is removed.

As to the highlight above. I think what you said shows you do care. From the word "but" shows what you feel, and possibly colours your view of them.

In answer to your points.
1. It's all to easy to judge but none of us know what we would do in such terror. I hope none of us are ever tested!!
2. Conflicting statements...We don't know their statements...They are not allowed to discuss them as they are still gagged due to secrecy laws!!
3. Who knows if any of it is true. We haven't heard Kate. We may have heard others via the press..Mmmm. I would like to hear Kate herself.
4. Again we only have the PJ's version. The Inspecter at that time is now on criminal charges himself due to his handling in a different missing child case. And why hasn't the new man in charge asked to re-interview the McCanns?
5. Believing is a choice we are all entitled to. Not evidence!! My choice is not to judge them through the filter of leaks rumours and smears. We need to hear them.

No one could take the amount of abuse let alone smears this couple have had to endure....and at a time when their child is missing....and come out smelling of roses.
It doesn't make them guilty of anything but making what turned out to be a tragic decision.

Not sure who you think has their head in the sand
I can assure you I haven't. I want to know the real truth....Even if it turns out to be the McCanns. It's not unreasonable to want to seperate the truth from the rumours. Rumours don't help anyone...Least of all Madeleine...who has sadly been forgotten because of them. IMO.

teacherbees thanks again for answering my question.

 

[Salem]

Oh where oh where, has little Maddie gone? With her shoes left home and her hair shiny blonde, oh where oh where has little Maddie gone?

May Maddie come home soon!

Salem

 

[Salem]

Maddie, honey - if you can at all, now would be a good time to reveal yourself. We would very much like to find you or have someone find you and bring you home, sweetie. So, if you can, please try to let us know where you are and someone will come for you.

Salem