Why did Madeleine 'go missing'?

[Donjeta]

TBH, I think it's unlikely that anything we can focus on here is going to find Madeleine.

If any of us knew anything we'd have reported it a long time ago already.

 

[brit1981]

TBH, I think it's unlikely that anything we can focus on here is going to find Madeleine.

If any of us knew anything we'd have reported it a long time ago already.

True, but on the other hand the gossip focusing on the parents could make it less likely someone woudl report something they knew. If you think about it an innocent person who knows something may well be a close friend or relative that just has suspicions about a loved one. Now they know if they report it the media will get wind of it, and it could ruin the persons life if they are innocent. If people keep focusing on the parents, or saying madeleine is dead it could just make the person tell themselves they are wrong to be suspiciois and just keep it to themselves.

 

[Donjeta]

It works in both directions though. There might be a few missing children out there in which the parent had something to do with it but everybody focuses on a presumed stranger pervert and then someone might not report what they know about the parents because they are assumed to be poor victims of a stranger.

At least people still remember Madeleine.

it could be worse, she could be one of those kids who went missing a few years ago and nobody talks about the case any more at all, pretty much ensuring that no tips will come in unless the perp finds religion and confesses.

 

[gord]

It works in both directions though. There might be a few missing children out there in which the parent had something to do with it but everybody focuses on a presumed stranger pervert and then someone might not report what they know about the parents because they are assumed to be poor victims of a stranger.

At least people still remember Madeleine.

it could be worse, she could be one of those kids who went missing a few years ago and nobody talks about the case any more at all, pretty much ensuring that no tips will come in unless the perp finds religion and confesses.

True - The parents have been crucified in certain quarters for creating the fund , the web site , being on te TV etc etc - but 5 years on her name is still on the news . - Regardless of what your view is or what you think of the parents - there is still an outside chance that someone might come forward - I mean someone knows what happened - stranger have happened

 

[SapphireSteel]

True - The parents have been crucified in certain quarters for creating the fund , the web site , being on te TV etc etc - but 5 years on her name is still on the news . - Regardless of what your view is or what you think of the parents - there is still an outside chance that someone might come forward - I mean someone knows what happened - stranger have happened

I personally believe we all know about Madeleine because this case is the UK version of JonBenet...a clear, blatant miscarriage of justice.

I have never seen or read a word, to my knowledge, from the Leave No Stone Unturned Foundation.

Despite millions of dollars of donations, not one single shred of credible evidence has been developed. We are still back at 3 May 2007.

It would have been far more helpful to make the Fund a charity, and use part of the funds to search for/publicise ALL missing children not just Madeleine...that way they would be far, far more visible and perhaps more effective.

In my opinion.

 

[brit1981]

Obviously as Madeleine has not been found it is a miscarriage of justice, but like you say not one bit of evidence has been released to the public (we have no idea what evidence the police have as they have not released it all) to point the finger at anyone or point to where madeleine is. There is a big missing people's charity in the UK which Kate works with publicising missing people especially children. People gave money to the mccanns before the fund was set up so it was up to the donors such as Richard branson if they wanted their money to be used specifically for Madeleine. Everyone hs the option of donating to missing people.
Since madeleine disappeared there has been a lot more awareness of other disappearences such as Katrice lee major, and Ben needham. Katrice's family even went on TV with kate to talk about missing people and their case.

 

[BritsKate]

I wouldn't say Katrice or Ben have gotten nearly the coverage they deserve. Even Tia, so fresh in our memory, was lost in the coverage of the Olympics. Then you have kids you never see a flyer or poster for - never hear of an appeal for. Girls like Elizabeth Ogungbayibi who has been missing from Manchester since she was 5. Or Ashia Jabbi or Ying Lee.

Most are family abductions but with no media coverage or public awareness I believe few children will be returned to their rightful custodians.

Personally I believe as I did when it came to light that Casey Anthony was paid for pictures of the daughter many still believe she murdered: No parent should ever profit from the disappearance or death of a child. I believe there should be a national fund in place to benefit all missing children with no press coverage being given to just a child or two while dozens of others are never even mentioned in a blurb. This is the money that should be allocated to leaflets, posters, billboards, etc.

Lisa Irwin's disappearance shot to US national news within days of her being reported missing but very few know about the sad fate of little Lauryn Dickens. JMO and FWIW

 

[LinasK]

I believe whatever happened to Maddie, was all accidental, just like the Caylee Anthony and Ramsey cases.

An accidental death, then a coverup.

All JMO.

I believe Maddy's death was accidental and a cover-up, and I also believe that's what happened to JonBenet, but I strongly believe Caylee's death was premeditated. Casey didn't "let her drown", she actively killed her by suffocating her with Chloroform and Duct Tape!

 

[SapphireSteel]

Obviously as Madeleine has not been found it is a miscarriage of justice, but like you say not one bit of evidence has been released to the public (we have no idea what evidence the police have as they have not released it all) to point the finger at anyone or point to where madeleine is. There is a big missing people's charity in the UK which Kate works with publicising missing people especially children. People gave money to the mccanns before the fund was set up so it was up to the donors such as Richard branson if they wanted their money to be used specifically for Madeleine. Everyone hs the option of donating to missing people.
Since madeleine disappeared there has been a lot more awareness of other disappearences such as Katrice lee major, and Ben needham. Katrice's family even went on TV with kate to talk about missing people and their case.

An easy and effective way for the McCanns to deal with all of the money they have made would be to set up a missing childrens charity such as the one you refer to.

Instead, they chose to ignore all other missing children and set up a private company to administer the money.

They could have used Madeleine's exposure for good, to help less "popular" or wealthy families of missing children, too...but inexplicably they chose not to.

This would seem to be foolish, as the McCann theory is Madeleine was abducted by an organised pedophile ring, which presumably is responsible for other missing children as well as Madeleine. Attempts to help find ANY missing child could well result in finding their daughter, under this theory.

I find it ironic Kate has consented to associate herself at this point with any missing child's charity at all, considering her only experience in the area is successfully losing one.

:cow:

 

[brit1981]

I wouldn't say Katrice or Ben have gotten nearly the coverage they deserve. Even Tia, so fresh in our memory, was lost in the coverage of the Olympics. Then you have kids you never see a flyer or poster for - never hear of an appeal for. Girls like Elizabeth Ogungbayibi who has been missing from Manchester since she was 5. Or Ashia Jabbi or Ying Lee.

Most are family abductions but with no media coverage or public awareness I believe few children will be returned to their rightful custodians.

Personally I believe as I did when it came to light that Casey Anthony was paid for pictures of the daughter many still believe she murdered: No parent should ever profit from the disappearance or death of a child. I believe there should be a national fund in place to benefit all missing children with no press coverage being given to just a child or two while dozens of others are never even mentioned in a blurb. This is the money that should be allocated to leaflets, posters, billboards, etc.

Lisa Irwin's disappearance shot to US national news within days of her being reported missing but very few know about the sad fate of little Lauryn Dickens. JMO and FWIW

I agree about Katrice and ben, but that has been one shred of a silver lining in that madeleine's disappearence has led to more publicity for these cases. I remember katrice's family saying they were not allowed to publicize katrice's case by the army, and they just refused to look into the idea of an abduction instead they insisted she must have wondered off.

I also agree in theory that it is wrong that the media focus on some cases and not others. they always do this, I remember Soham. But on the other hand if my loved one, especially my child, was missing I do not think I culd say no please do not focus on just my loved one, give the air time to someone else instead. I would want the focus to be on my child. In the same way if they were suffering from an illness and the NHS could not help, but private care would I would use the private system even though I think it is wrong and unfair. Its like when you see these appeals to help a sick child, we do not go "it is wrong to help this child, the parents are being selfish and should make sure that money is shared around all ill children". Its not fair to expect the families to step back and not focus on their loved ones. It is up to us as members of the public to look at the missing people charity and make ourselves aware, to actually stop and look at missing people's posters instead of just walking past, to donate or volunteer for missing people's charities.
I think there is a lot more that can be done for missing people, for instance I think in cases of missing children they should be able to put announcments on the tube, or make announcments like they do with sudden traffic problems on car radios, or text alerts. And if people suddenly think there are too many, then that highlights to them how many missing people there are.

 

[SapphireSteel]

I agree about Katrice and ben, but that has been one shred of a silver lining in that madeleine's disappearence has led to more publicity for these cases. I remember katrice's family saying they were not allowed to publicize katrice's case by the army, and they just refused to look into the idea of an abduction instead they insisted she must have wondered off.

I also agree in theory that it is wrong that the media focus on some cases and not others. they always do this, I remember Soham. But on the other hand if my loved one, especially my child, was missing I do not think I culd say no please do not focus on just my loved one, give the air time to someone else instead. I would want the focus to be on my child. In the same way if they were suffering from an illness and the NHS could not help, but private care would I would use the private system even though I think it is wrong and unfair. Its like when you see these appeals to help a sick child, we do not go "it is wrong to help this child, the parents are being selfish and should make sure that money is shared around all ill children". Its not fair to expect the families to step back and not focus on their loved ones. It is up to us as members of the public to look at the missing people charity and make ourselves aware, to actually stop and look at missing people's posters instead of just walking past, to donate or volunteer for missing people's charities.
I think there is a lot more that can be done for missing people, for instance I think in cases of missing children they should be able to put announcments on the tube, or make announcments like they do with sudden traffic problems on car radios, or text alerts. And if people suddenly think there are too many, then that highlights to them how many missing people there are.

If the McCanns had've wanted the "focus" to be on their child, I dare say she wouldn't be missing.

From the very first moment the McCanns wanted the "focus" to be the abductor, not Madeleine.

 

[BritsKate]

I agree about Katrice and ben, but that has been one shred of a silver lining in that madeleine's disappearence has led to more publicity for these cases. I remember katrice's family saying they were not allowed to publicize katrice's case by the army, and they just refused to look into the idea of an abduction instead they insisted she must have wondered off.

I also agree in theory that it is wrong that the media focus on some cases and not others. they always do this, I remember Soham. But on the other hand if my loved one, especially my child, was missing I do not think I culd say no please do not focus on just my loved one, give the air time to someone else instead. I would want the focus to be on my child. In the same way if they were suffering from an illness and the NHS could not help, but private care would I would use the private system even though I think it is wrong and unfair. Its like when you see these appeals to help a sick child, we do not go "it is wrong to help this child, the parents are being selfish and should make sure that money is shared around all ill children". Its not fair to expect the families to step back and not focus on their loved ones. It is up to us as members of the public to look at the missing people charity and make ourselves aware, to actually stop and look at missing people's posters instead of just walking past, to donate or volunteer for missing people's charities.
I think there is a lot more that can be done for missing people, for instance I think in cases of missing children they should be able to put announcments on the tube, or make announcments like they do with sudden traffic problems on car radios, or text alerts. And if people suddenly think there are too many, then that highlights to them how many missing people there are.

With estimations of parents being the perpetrator responsible in anywhere from 65-80% (depending on which study you believe) of child homicide cases I don't feel parents should be involved in decisions regarding funding or media AT ALL. Ever.

One national organisation. One national amber alert system. No families involved and hopefully fewer kids getting lost in who 'looks the part' to the media if they're forced to cover every case. JMO

 

[BritsKate]

I believe Maddy's death was accidental and a cover-up, and I also believe that's what happened to JonBenet, but I strongly believe Caylee's death was premeditated. Casey didn't "let her drown", she actively killed her by suffocating her with Chloroform and Duct Tape!

I've been studying filicide cases for a very long time - for me it's a crime that is so wretched and such a betrayal of a sacred bond that I keep seeking to understand it. An exercise in futility.

I do not know of a single case in which a child has died by accidental means that has been arranged to look like a murder. Typically I believe when parents are in collusion to hide the true fate of their child it is because the fate is far worse than the illusion.

I also feel most cover ups come about without the benefit of premeditation. It is horrifying just how many parents "snap".

JMO and FWIW

 

[rashomon]

I've been studying filicide cases for a very long time - for me it's a crime that is so wretched and such a betrayal of a sacred bond that I keep seeking to understand it. An exercise in futility.

I do not know of a single case in which a child has died by accidental means that has been arranged to look like a murder. Typically I believe when parents are in collusion to hide the true fate of their child it is because the fate is far worse than the illusion.

I also feel most cover ups come about without the benefit of premeditation. It is horrifying just how many parents "snap".

JMO and FWIW

The very term "filicide" implies a parental agent whose directed action toward the child (whether premeditated or in a fit of rage) results in the death of the child.

But what if in the McCann case, the child had an accident as a result of parental neglect, and the parents who were in a panic to be held responsible and charged in a country whose laws they were not familiar with, sponaneously concocted an abduction story, and somehow managed, admittedly against all odds, to dispose of the body?

Typically I believe when parents are in collusion to hide the true fate of their child it is because the fate is far worse than the illusion.

"The fate is far worse than the illlusion" - could this train of thought lead to the truth in the McCann case?
Maybe "The fate is far worse than the illlusion" would explain an illusionary 'abduction scenario' which the McCanns created for the public, but also for themselves?

 

[BritsKate]

You're right, of course, Rashomon. There are anomalies to every statistic and anything is possible especially since we don't have very many other cases to draw upon in comparison. Just stating what my experiences were in researching child homicides.

(Typically I believe when a parent fakes an abduction it's usually to beat a charge for murder but strange country, foreign laws, who knows? When I moved my kids abroad it definitely made me more hyper-vigilant for the same reasons. MOO)

 

[Donjeta]

I think it might be perceived as a thin line sometimes, whether a child's death is the result of an accident, negligence or murder. The person covering it up (if any) might not be too sure which one it's going to be blamed on. But I don't think that people usually cover up honest-to-God accidents if they don't think there is some criminal culpability in there somewhere. For a cover-up to make sense it should mean less legal trouble than the truth.

 

[fabgod]

So does it seem that the general consensus would be Madeleine didnt go missing due to an Abductor (or two)?

Would I be correct in stating that it would be wiser as a result of all other considerations, to look closer to home?

 

[brit1981]

Well the police have said it was a stranger abduction, so i do not think it is a general consensus that it was not a stranger abduction. But obviosuly all investigations like this should start by looking at the home.

 

[BritsKate]

Until the police can tell me which stranger abducted Madeleine I believe it dismissive to preclude other possibilities but that's just me.

 

[fabgod]

Until the police can tell me which stranger abducted Madeleine I believe it dismissive to preclude other possibilities but that's just me.

We don't really know where the police review is up to do we?
Of course that is the correct way to go about their work and hopefully in time, they will find some key evidence to proceed.

I looked on the Met website and other sites, they have stated that they believe it was possible that Madelene was taken and it is also possible that she is alive.
They also say she could sadly be dead. If the review is as comprehensive as promised, they will be looking at all avenues, just as they should.

As you say BritsKate, when they find whatever happened to Madeleine and bring someone to justice, that will be the time to believe!