Why did Madeleine 'go missing'?

[Isabella]

Great idea - why not ignore all the witnesses who saw Madeleine right up until 6.30pm on the day she went missing?

You can make any theory fit if you ignore the facts and factor in a conspiracy or ten.

Wasn't it Murder on the Orient Express where it turned out they'd ALL "done it"?

I even read a discussion yesterday which was suggesting that madeleine didn't even go on the holiday with her parents! Not sure whether they were suggesting another child played the part of Madeleine but they sure were suggesting that the McCanns had Photoshopped her into all their holiday snaps.

It wouldn't even make good fiction.

My personal opinion is...you put to much faith in the McCanns and their friends even when Gerry himself has put doubt one one of their statements. The McCanns and there friends are the ones that have the motive to lie..

MOO

 

[Texana]

The "tabloid" press in the United States has a much better record than the traditional media on breaking stories.

It was the National Enquirer that broke the news about OJ Simpson and his "ugly shoes" with a picture of OJ in the exact same Bruno Magli shoes. That distinctive shoe print--regardless of the DNA--was tremendously important in convicting OJ in the civil trial.

The National Enquirer was also the only publication to break the news about John Edwards, (recent presidential candidate) and his mistress and her new baby. Edwards had used his cancer-stricken wife's devotion to him as an integral part of his campaign, so it was very relevant to his character to see the truth.

Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn, as they say.

 

[docwho3]

. . .I even read a discussion yesterday which was suggesting that madeleine didn't even go on the holiday with her parents! Not sure whether they were suggesting another child played the part of Madeleine but they sure were suggesting that the McCanns had Photoshopped her into all their holiday snaps.

It wouldn't even make good fiction.

I confess that I actually considered that possibility early on in the case but soon discarded it because there was too much evidence that she was actually there. And, like you, I tend to dislike long complicated conspiracy theories especially if they require one to ignore established facts.

 

[rmmbr_Cara]

I wonder how true are the rumors that a book was found in their apartment about how to hide cadavers and that Gerry brought it from the US in the last days of July.

If is true AND he bought this book prior to May 3rd....then is premeditation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kg2UQbpDB5c

Was this question ever answered?

 

[Isabella]

Was this question ever answered?

As far as i know that was true. For sure the McCann have never denied it.

As for it being premeditated...certain aspects to me do seem premeditated...unless they had more time than they claimed.

 

[april4sky]

As far as i know that was true. For sure the McCann have never denied it.

As for it being premeditated...certain aspects to me do seem premeditated...unless they had more time than they claimed.

Would it make a difference if they denied it? :shakehead:

This was just one of the many smears Isabella that had no basis in fact.

 

[Isabella]

Would it make a difference if they denied it? :shakehead:

This was just one of the many smears Isabella that had no basis in fact.

In your opinion..but thats all it is..an opinion it certainly is not FACT

 

[april4sky]

In your opinion..but thats all it is..an opinion it certainly is not FACT

No it wasn't my opinion Isabella - it was yours.....

You posted....

"As far as i know that was true. For sure the McCann have never denied it.

As for it being premeditated...certain aspects to me do seem premeditated...unless they had more time than they claimed."
*****
You were the one posting an opinion Isabella - not a "fact."

 

[Texana]

No it wasn't my opinion Isabella - it was yours.....

You posted....

"As far as i know that was true. For sure the McCann have never denied it.

As for it being premeditated...certain aspects to me do seem premeditated...unless they had more time than they claimed."
*****
You were the one posting an opinion Isabella - not a "fact."

It's not an opinion because it can be proven.

Did the McCanns have the book (check yes or no.)

Did they get it during their vacation or was it given by someone else?

(Online bookstores have one-day express shipping, of course.)

For me, the primary thing is was indeed this book found?

And just because there are irrational and completely ridiculous theories does not mean, again., that the McCanns were not involved.

For example, you can postulate that John F. Kennedy was assasinated by space aliens because he was promoted the race to the moon, but that does not necessarily mean that a) Communist influences or b) the Mafia were not involved in his assassination.

(For the record, I think Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole shooter and sole person involved.)

Crazy theories A and B do not necessarily mean that what someone perceives as "Crazy" Theory C is not the truth.

 

[april4sky]

It's not an opinion because it can be proven.

Did the McCanns have the book (check yes or no.)

Did they get it during their vacation or was it given by someone else?

(Online bookstores have one-day express shipping, of course.)

For me, the primary thing is was indeed this book found?

And just because there are irrational and completely ridiculous theories does not mean, again., that the McCanns were not involved.

For example, you can postulate that John F. Kennedy was assasinated by space aliens because he was promoted the race to the moon, but that does not necessarily mean that a) Communist influences or b) the Mafia were not involved in his assassination.

(For the record, I think Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole shooter and sole person involved.)

Crazy theories A and B do not necessarily mean that what someone perceives as "Crazy" Theory C is not the truth.

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.

 

[Claycat]

I did a google search to find a book on how to hide cadavers and found no such item. If you know of such a book, please provide a link to the book.

(BTW, I believe JFK was killed by our own government, because he issued Executive Order 11110, which enabled the U.S. Treasury Department to print silver certificates, bypassing the Federal Reserve System.)

 

[claudicici]

...mmmmhhh april4sky,what exactly do u think is an irrational and ridiculous theory and why do u come to the conclusion...

 

[docwho3]

Let me see if I can explain some things that have bothered me about certain theories.

One parents-did-it-or at least-covered-it-up theory is essentially that somehow the death was unplanned, so that perhaps an accident occurred such as drug overdose or perhaps even some form of abuse had happened that went unexplainedly awry resulting in the unplanned death of the child. This would then require the parents to have been able to have gotten past their grief over the death of the child and the horror of the situation and still pull everything together well enough to have developed a plan in only a few minutes time that worked so well that they were able to hide the body, fool all those around them and then play out the charade of victim parents and while under a media spotlight of public attention and police involvement they would have still managed to hide and later move the body and dispose of it and all the while leaving behind no evidence that could not be at least theoretically explained away as innocent transference. All this would presumably have been planned and executed on the fly with no forethought.

Another theory is that the parents had help in foiling the efforts of L.E., that some or all of their covacationers aided in a horrific coverup of the death of the child. Now we have the same problems as mentioned above except now we have magnified the difficulty by several fold by bringing in more people to the mix who must all deal with their horror and fear of the situation and yet they must all then come to gether in this intricate plan help cover up for the death. All had to get the plan and all had to agree and all had to execute it in such a way that it has worked until this very day and it all happened on short notice.

For this crime to have been the parents doing would have required some extraordinary & unlikely events, a perfect storm of things working perfectly. . . . . would have needed some rather intricate maneuvers almost akin to those seen in one part of the 1999 movie The Thomas Crown Affair (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0KK0msnLhw )

and that complexity has always been one thing that has kept me looking at other possibilities just to make certain that I do not overlook a more ordinary explanation such as a real kidnapping not unlike what happened to E.Smart http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/West/03/12/smart.kidnapping/index.html

I am not declaring anyone innocent (or guilty) but I am just trying to keep an open mind to additional possibilities that, to me, do not require much extraordinary stuff to explain what happened.

This thread asks "Why did Madeleine 'go missing'? ", & I too wonder why. Perhaps someone wanted what appeared to be a very nice, very perfect, little girl. I just do not know why she went missing.

 

[Texana]

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.

And we are back at square one. Did the McCanns have such a book in their posession? It's a fact, yes or no.

I for one would like to know whether or not they did.

Claycat, I'm sure your Google searching abilities are excellent or even superior, but that doesn't mean that such a book does not exist. Surely you recognize that merely saying you couldn't find it on Google doesn't logically imply a book like that doesn't exist.

I am not sure why the pejorative term "nasty smears" seems to be applied to my posts. Perhaps I am misunderstanding that. If you want links for anything I have posted, go through the old threads. They are all there. It seems a little irrational to expect me to spend my time posting link after link from old threads when anyone who is truly interested could just spend their time going back through the threads.

Or perhaps we can just dispense with the term "nasty smears" and, as grown ups, realize that having differences of opinions regarding the McCanns' innocence or involvement does not make anyone a demon or an saint.

 

[Claycat]

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

 

[eddeva]

I wonder how true are the rumors that a book was found in their apartment about how to hide cadavers and that Gerry brought it from the US in the last days of July.

If is true AND he bought this book prior to May 3rd....then is premeditation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kg2UQbpDB5c

gerry had a book on police proceedures but i've never heard of a book about cadavers.
i'm sorry i don't have a link. all links and associated info were kept on the old mirror forum and we were given no notice in order to save them when the home secretary had it closed down.

 

[Texana]

It could be something relatively innocent, actually, such as a murder mystery that had a lot of realistic details. Or it could have been a forensics medical textbook.

I also think it's not realistic to think they would, if they ever did have such a book, leave it in their possession where it could be found by the PJ or anyone else.

If it was indeed a book on police procedures, it wouldn't necessarily point to their involvement.

On the other hand, if there was evidence the book had been heavily used, read, or marked in sections that talked about finding remains or corpses or where they could be hidden, that would be more significant because the McCanns have insisted from day one two things: Madeleine was abducted and she is still alive.

Having the book could be logically explained, but having certain sections marked or read would be more difficult to explain.

But this is all hypothetical.

 

[april4sky]

Respectfully snipped....

I am not sure why the pejorative term "nasty smears" seems to be applied to my posts. Perhaps I am misunderstanding that. If you want links for anything I have posted, go through the old threads. They are all there. It seems a little irrational to expect me to spend my time posting link after link from old threads when anyone who is truly interested could just spend their time going back through the threads.

Or perhaps we can just dispense with the term "nasty smears" and, as grown ups, realize that having differences of opinions regarding the McCanns' innocence or involvement does not make anyone a demon or an saint.

Texana you questioned one of my posts:waitasec: so must know I hadn't been refering to you.

And a difference of opinion is not the issue! We're all entitled to our opinion but nasty smears have been posted as fact when in fact they are only that persons opinion!
That was the issue.
And unfortunately that helps no one to learn the truth.

It would be nice to dispense with terms like smears but IMO nicer still if they didn't happen.

 

[flyonsweetangel]

This is an opinion NOT fact! But I find it very unusual that parents would leave 3 children unattended/unlocked in an apt/room at nite while they go out wining and dining with some friends. This isnt normal in my eyes, your just asking for trouble! Futhermore, why was just MM taken and her sblings werent? I remember watching the news on TV about this one and thought at the time, hmmmmm the parents arent even emotional about this. I would be losing it totally! Then the quick departure through me for a loop. No way no how would I of been leaving .... not even! But of course I am not MM's mother.....

 

[Texana]

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.