Madeleine McCann 3 year old missing in Portugal - Part 8 [Archive]

mrsmousemat

07-27-2007, 06:42 AM

Thanks again MrsMouseMat...very insightful information.

Those Yanks among us really need to know these things, it expands our point of view.

So, thanks for your contributions. What did you think about our responses to your last post? Please help us understand, I am desperate for understanding.

What I think of the responses? Mixed.

I’m not going to agree with everything that has been written. But I support free speech, as long as it's not libellous, which I think is the case on other websites, and I believe that readers of this site can sort out a sensible argument from conjecture.

.....This case is so scary that it’s natural that everyone wants a quick result. So there is a tendency to want to find someone responsible as well as find Madelaine.In the absence of finding the culprit, then many correspondents are turning on the parents.

But we don’t know all the facts of the case… you have to remember this is a small police station that investigated the case initially and the Portuguese would not want their reputation of a safe holiday country for children challenged. It would be a satisfactory outcome for the local population if the 'culprits' were all British - if there is no evidence against the British suspect maybe the parents are to blame....

And do we know whether all the local paedophiles have been interviewed for instance - or is it just Robert Murat that is in the news?

If you imagine that a group of Japanese – for instance – holidayed in Florida and one of their children went missing how do you suppose that the local papers would handle the information about the case? That the Japanese were responsible, particularly if there is a Japanese suspect at hand, or that the American police were slow to move and Florida was a dangerous place to be?

Portugal is a country that is quite dependent on tourism for its income. So it is likely that local pride would not want Portugal to be found to be negligent. (See the film Jaws 1– not an exact parallel but you get the picture of vested interests.)

I am not saying that the Portuguese have fitted up Robert Murat as a suspect - but that we don't hear of wider investigations in the absence of any clear evidence against him.

I holidayed in Portugal last year with my family, and was surprised to learn this year that it was something of a paedophile hot-spot. So I won’t be going back in a hurry. Neither, would I imagine, would many British people with young families.

As to the McCann group ‘clamming up’ - If you imagine that you are being questioned in a foreign police station under these circumstances, then maybe you would be circumspect. And how is it known that the group ‘clammed up’? Even if the group were very helpful – do you really think it would be reported?

As to the behaviour of Mrs Mcann – I believe there is a tendency to want see a display of grief of some sort in the USA but that is another cultural difference as the British like to keep their feelings more to themselves (and after seeing Tom Cruise on Oprah Winfrey expressing his emotions, maybe the tide is turning a bit in the USA?)….

So if Mrs Mc Cann was carried off on a stretcher wailing miserably – would this be OK? Or would she be accused of giving in to her emotions, rather than putting her children first?

The reports that she couldn’t ‘handle her children’. Own up anyone who has handled three children at this age supremely well all day. And where are these reports from – the Portuguese or the British?

She is clearly trying to keep the children in their routine. After all their sister has just disappeared. So if they went to daycare before, it would be natural for her to take them there again. She is in their own home - so would be difficult to keep them amused.

And she goes jogging? Tut– yes, doctors do have to have an inordinate belief in tedious exercise. Perhaps it helps her from going under.

As to a private eye? From my limited knowledge, I think they usually work under cover, so it is likely the employment of one may not be announced to the press, who would follow any investigation.It may be a tad difficult to do much detecting with 40 photographers following you.

The McCanns, who must feel a tremendous weight of guilt – as even the most eagle-eyed parent would do – and are trying hard to find any way possible to find Madelaine. This means travelling to speak to anyone who might help and not letting people forget that she is still missing.

I gather that you have Megan’s law in the USA because of the loss of a child and parental campaigning.

Maybe improved co-operation between international police to detecting lost children – and the finance to support this - will come in the wake of the publicity of this case. Because if the McCanns can’t find their own child, maybe they just want to help to find others that have gone missing, as a small consolation.

Shazza

07-27-2007, 07:54 AM

Hi mrsmousemat, you have posted great information and your insight into this case is appreciated. All the points you have listed have made me rethink, but for the life of me I still stand with the negligence of the McCanns, gut feeling, intuition, call it what you like. But from the information that has been published and of what we know via interviews, media, the words from their own mouths,internet etc, I still cannot bring myself to think nice thoughts for the parents of Madelaine. There is something terribly wrong going on, and I really feel the parents are the key to solving this horrific case.

ceeaura

07-27-2007, 11:51 AM

Hiya mrsmousemat,Thank you for posting your thoughts here.Just wanted to make a comment about the Tom Cruise stunt on Oprah that you posted and about british keeping emotions bundled up.

Tom Cruise is a strange fellow.IMO.Most hollywood types are.Perfectly normal people for awhile when they are starting out and then they start getting strange.Examples is Tom Cruise and Roseanne Barr just to name a couple.Me and my husband call it "The Hollywood Syndrome"

I don't know if its that we want to see a display of grief of some sort,its more of how can we not see the grief?When it comes to a child ,your child,who is just gone missing how could you keep the grief and pain hidden?A father who comes to my mind is Mark Lunsford.Ever time he was being interviewed you could see and hear his pain.I would just cry everytime I saw and heard him.He is a southern man,blue collar kinda a guy and as most of those kinda guys wouldn't be the type to show public display of emotion.Then the tradgedy of his daughter being kidnapped was to much to bundle up.

Hope this doesn't sound as me being mean or hateful.I just wanted to give you my thoughts.I enjoyed reading yours mrsmousemat.So wanted to give my opinion on a couple of points you brought up :) I haven't finished my first cup of coffee yet so I hope I made sense :D

CaliKid

07-27-2007, 01:44 PM

mrsmousemat, thank you for posting because it definitely gives us a cultural reference point. Your point on the parents' reserve is well understood, but I still think the McCanns seem cold and unfeeling. It's almost as if they were following a posted grief schedule.

Day 1 thru 4: minimal make-up, hair a mess, wear same clothes as yesterday, blotchy face and red eyes from crying, clutch CuddleCat, hang on Gerry to keep from falling down, voice whispery and almost inaudible ...
Day 20: normal make-up, hair clean and in place, clothes green/yellow and well maintained, look composed, leave CuddleCat in apartment, etc.

I wish I didn't feel as if the McCanns were putting up a big front about Madeleine, but I can't help it. There is simply something about them that doesn't feel genuine.

CaliKid

07-27-2007, 01:56 PM

The reports that she couldn’t ‘handle her children’. Own up anyone who has handled three children at this age supremely well all day. And where are these reports from – the Portuguese or the British?

The reports came from Kate McCann's mother, I think. She said her daughter worked part-time as a doctor, and when she was home with the children she needed help on a regular basis because they (Madeleine and the twins) were too much for her alone.

I know many parents in the same situation who did it all by themselves. Once upon a time my best friend's oldest three children were 4 (barely), 2 and 1, and the only time she needed help was when she wanted to go shopping. Since several of my kids were the same age, I was only too happy to accompany her and we'd help each other keep an eye on the hatchlings.

I was a foster parent for many years and remember caring for 2-3 foster children at a time plus my own. My youngest two were 14 months apart, and often I'd have a smaller one in tow. Did it supremely well? Maybe not. But I did it on my own.

CaliKid

07-27-2007, 02:06 PM

http://ionglobaltrends.blogspot.com/2007/07/mccanns-useful-links.html

There's a lot of comments that go with Aussie Mike's but if you go to the middle of them, an anonymous poster (Can I go back to Labrador's post involving Francis Wicks on the Leicester Mercury comments?) claims that some of the pro-McCann posters have been PAID to leave comments. So who is paying them? Is the money coming from the Madeleine fund? Lots of interesting questions.

CarpeDiem

07-27-2007, 02:20 PM

colomom

07-27-2007, 05:42 PM

Oh my goodness.....OUCH!!!

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=18636398&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6

:eek:

CaliKid

07-27-2007, 06:33 PM

Oh my goodness.....OUCH!!!

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=18636398&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6

:eek:

Very nice article that says exactly what most of us here think. Everyone should read it and write letters to the editor.

englishleigh

07-27-2007, 07:00 PM

Oh my goodness.....OUCH!!!

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=18636398&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6

:eek:

:clap::clap::clap::clap:

RoughlyCollie

07-27-2007, 07:40 PM

I think Team McCann turned Mrs. McCann into a Barbie.

mrsmousemat, thank you for posting because it definitely gives us a cultural reference point. Your point on the parents' reserve is well understood, but I still think the McCanns seem cold and unfeeling. It's almost as if they were following a posted grief schedule.

Day 1 thru 4: minimal make-up, hair a mess, wear same clothes as yesterday, blotchy face and red eyes from crying, clutch CuddleCat, hang on Gerry to keep from falling down, voice whispery and almost inaudible ...
Day 20: normal make-up, hair clean and in place, clothes green/yellow and well maintained, look composed, leave CuddleCat in apartment, etc.

I wish I didn't feel as if the McCanns were putting up a big front about Madeleine, but I can't help it. There is simply something about them that doesn't feel genuine.

CarpeDiem

07-27-2007, 07:42 PM

Oh my goodness.....OUCH!!!

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=18636398&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6

:eek:

Oh thank goodness. I hope that can easily be found and read.

mrsmousemat

07-27-2007, 08:03 PM

The reports came from Kate McCann's mother, I think. She said her daughter worked part-time as a doctor, and when she was home with the children she needed help on a regular basis because they (Madeleine and the twins) were too much for her alone.

I know many parents in the same situation who did it all by themselves. Once upon a time my best friend's oldest three children were 4 (barely), 2 and 1, and the only time she needed help was when she wanted to go shopping. Since several of my kids were the same age, I was only too happy to accompany her and we'd help each other keep an eye on the hatchlings.

I was a foster parent for many years and remember caring for 2-3 foster children at a time plus my own. My youngest two were 14 months apart, and often I'd have a smaller one in tow. Did it supremely well? Maybe not. But I did it on my own.

What you see isn't always what you get it to be....

If your uncle dies - you may be sad for days, crying etc.

But, at the funeral - you briefly smile at your aged aunt, to comfort her ... the press take that picture , crop you aunt out of it - and you will have been smiling away at your own uncle's funeral for all the world to see.

Happy as a lark as your loved uncle is lowered below.

It's easy to fake a picture - anyone who displeased one newspaper that I knew of was put on the end of the line which was being pictured and cropped off later. Thus - they were not even at the event.

A photograph doesn't give the the whole picture. Neither does a film. In the USA you may not have seen the story about the Queen apparently storming out ofa photo session with an American photographer - Annie Liebowitz(??). Untrue - as the chronological order of the film was reversed and the pictures shown showed her entering the room, rather than leaving it. Apologies all round.

So if newspaper articles are sometimes hype, photographs can be cropped and films reversed - it's wise to be cautious, when thinking you know all about personalities that you see in the media. In fact, some are exactly like they are portrayed on screen, others are quite unlike their media selves. Your gut reaction can be manipulated.

Even if you - Calikid - were almost exemplary with your young children, I bet a good photographer could come up with a shot that would show you distracted or cross by being pictured at the wrong moment from the wrong angle. You know that the paparrazzi will shout abuse at personalities just to get that sellable reaction on film.

Personally, I really don't know what to think about the McCann's leaving their children. I've never left mine. But I'm not willing to make the parents into the people I hate simply because I know that I don't know all the facts.

If there was an employed nanny, I find it hard to belive that the press haven't yet tracked her down, as, if she exists, her story would be worth reading.

As for those fun-loving globe-trotting parents, what's the alternative for the couple? Pack up, go home and forget all about their daughter?

I can write the story for you now.....

The McCanns, parents of the lost Madelaine, today refused to meet Mr Important saying it was more necessary for them to return from Portugal to their luxury *£450,000 home in Leicester.

Despite the fact that their four-year-old daughter has been missing since May 3, the pair have turned their backs on the investigation, dismissing the idea that their daughter could be alive, in their eagerness to get on with their lives. etc etc

(* No I don't know how much their home is worth but you get the picture).

Just refuse to be manipulated by what you read and think you see and keep an open mind.

Jdee

07-27-2007, 08:03 PM

Oh thank goodness. I hope that can easily be found and read.

The tides are turning.. I predict before long we will be seeing a lot more articles like that. I think in part it is BECAUSE of Gerry's recent visit to the USA. They have come under scrutiny now by the US press which frowns on parents who neglect their children and does not brush it under the rug.

Shazza

07-27-2007, 08:21 PM

Oh my goodness.....OUCH!!!

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=18636398&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6

:eek:
My sentiments exactly.

petra

07-27-2007, 08:32 PM

My sentiments exactly.

same here-thanks for the link colomom

petra

07-27-2007, 08:33 PM

Latest Update - Gerry's Blog/Diary

Day 85 - 27/07/2007

Quite a lot of e-mails and telephone calls today planning future events, which might be helpful to keep Madeleine in peoples minds. I am sure there will be a lot of interest in Saturday August 11th if Madeline because that will mark 100 days if Madeleine is still missing. This date coincides with the world pipe band championships being held in Glasgow. A former world pipe band champion, Alasdair Gillies who is aq friend of one of my sisters, has composed a ‘Marvellous March for Madeleine’ that will be played by 100 pipers from all over the world. It should be quite a spectacle and hopefully it will be a celebration, and not a another marker that Madeleine is still missing.

Shazza

07-27-2007, 08:56 PM

Schmerty_Jones

07-27-2007, 09:07 PM

Oh my goodness.....OUCH!!!

http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.cfm?newsid=18636398&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=6

:eek:

Well thought out ! Well expressed!! I hope this will be published world wide. In the USA Mrs. Bush refused his request to meet with her.:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

englishleigh

07-27-2007, 09:49 PM

colomom

07-27-2007, 10:12 PM

A celebration? :furious: Of WHAT??????????????????? The piper championships? Who gives a &^*$!!!

Now, now English...come er' 'ave a hug (((((EnglishLeigh)))))

I think what he was trying to convey, in his inept way, was that he is hoping that Maddy is found by then and the pipers playing the song will be in celebration of her return.

Still, it would have sounded much better if he wrote it like this:

This is the date when the world pipe band championships will be held in Glasgow. A participant friend wrote ‘Marvellous March for Madeleine’ that will be played by 100 pipers from all over the world. I hope and pray that it will be a celebration of her return to us, and not a another marker that Madeleine is still missing.

He desperately needs someone to edit his blog entries. He is amazingly disconnected about how his words effect people. Especially people who are in pain about Madeleine (spelled her name wrong again, I see). Tell you what, I am glad he is not my doctor! Can you imagine his bedside manner? :loser:

colomom

07-27-2007, 10:48 PM

What you see isn't always what you get it to be....

~snip~

Just refuse to be manipulated by what you read and think you see and keep an open mind.

Please MrsMouseMat, give us a little credit. We are not stupid.

Especially those of us in America, we know how manipulative the media can be, shoot, we are heaven for the paparazzi. We are the home of the "spin doctor" in this country.

I don't think that most of us here hate the McCanns, that is a really strong word. I think we are frustrated, dumbfounded and aggravated by them. Most of those emotions do not have anything to do with pictures. It is words, it is inconsistencies, it is their refusal to take responsibility for the part that they played in her dissapearance. The way that they continue to blame us for their huge error in judgement (by saying things like "the comments are hurtful and not helpful"). They tell us that we are the bad guys!!! If they would just stop that self-righteous, sanctimonious, holier-than-thou C R A P, and admit that what they did was dangerous and selfish, we would be a much different beast on this board.

It may be too late now. My gut tells me that they will never admit their cupability. And BTW, if they decided that they wanted to return to their home, for the sake of the twins, and they expressed that feeling, and I believed what they were telling me, I would be the first to tell them that it was OK to move their family home and continue the fight from there.

AND, if it turns out that we were completely wrong about our gut instinct in this case (somehow I do not think so) I think we have already expressed how happy we would be to eat crow!

I just need to know what really happened to Madeleine......

englishleigh

07-27-2007, 11:06 PM

Now, now English...come er' 'ave a hug (((((EnglishLeigh)))))

I think what he was trying to convey, in his inept way, was that he is hoping that Maddy is found by then and the pipers playing the song will be in celebration of her return.

Still, it would have sounded much better if he wrote it like this:

This is the date when the world pipe band championships will be held in Glasgow. A participant friend wrote ‘Marvellous March for Madeleine’ that will be played by 100 pipers from all over the world. I hope and pray that it will be a celebration of her return to us, and not a another marker that Madeleine is still missing.

He desperately needs someone to edit his blog entries. He is amazingly disconnected about how his words effect people. Especially people who are in pain about Madeleine (spelled her name wrong again, I see). Tell you what, I am glad he is not my doctor! Can you imagine his bedside manner? :loser:

LOL, Heather, can you tell how badly he freaks me out?? :bang: Thanks for the hugs!! Agreed on the bedside manner, it must be nonexistent.

colomom

07-27-2007, 11:29 PM

LOL, Heather, can you tell how badly he freaks me out??

Me too EL, me too....:blowkiss:

CaliKid

07-27-2007, 11:53 PM

Please MrsMouseMat, give us a little credit. We are not stupid.

Especially those of us in America, we know how manipulative the media can be, shoot, we are heaven for the paparazzi. We are the home of the "spin doctor" in this country.

I don't think that most of us here hate the McCanns, that is a really strong word. I think we are frustrated, dumbfounded and aggravated by them. Most of those emotions do not have anything to do with pictures. It is words, it is inconsistencies, it is their refusal to take responsibility for the part that they played in her dissapearance. The way that they continue to blame us for their huge error in judgement (by saying things like "the comments are hurtful and not helpful"). They tell us that we are the bad guys!!! If they would just stop that self-righteous, sanctimonious, holier-than-thou C R A P, and admit that what they did was dangerous and selfish, we would be a much different beast on this board.

It may be too late now. My gut tells me that they will never admit their cupability. And BTW, if they decided that they wanted to return to their home, for the sake of the twins, and they expressed that feeling, and I believed what they were telling me, I would be the first to tell them that it was OK to move their family home and continue the fight from there.

AND, if it turns out that we were completely wrong about our gut instinct in this case (somehow I do not think so) I think we have already expressed how happy we would be to eat crow!

I just need to know what really happened to Madeleine......

I'd like to second this. I do NOT hate the McCanns. Their refusal to be accountable for their actions and the danger they put Madeleine in angers me. I dislike the self-centered way they're acting and the focus on money-making over (IMO) their daughter's welfare. And I'm puzzled about why GM puts so much faith in the FindMadeleine posters, as if they alone are going to bring her home, especially when he seems to go out of his way to criticize efforts to help locate her.

philamena

07-28-2007, 12:57 AM

Shazza

07-28-2007, 02:06 AM

I gotta admit I do dislike the Mccann's. I dislike them because they left their 3 little children-unsupervised-for nights on end while they drank a toddy or two and had dinner. That was enough to cause my dislike.
Im with you philamena, I too dislike the McCanns for their negligent actions.
There are no perfect parents out there but the McCanns admitted it themselves that their children were left alone at night on more than one occasion at night whilst they were out dining and wining, Im sorry but I cannot forgive them for that.....plus the inconsistencies and the lies in their recollection of the night that Madelaine disappeared.

I know that the media can paint a different picture, so as to the comments made by mrsmouse, we are definitely aware of that as Colomom said.

Elphaba

07-28-2007, 02:19 AM

I don't know them, therefore I can't hate them... I just hate that an innocent child is now missing due to, in part, their negligence and that they aren't being held responsible for leaving their little babies alone like they did. I hate that there are predators out there that look for opportunities to harm children... be it a pervert abducting children or a parent harming their child and covering it up. With the McCanns, their actions and their demeanor after Maddie's mysterious disappearance has caused many a question to arise, which includes questions of just how much they are involved in her disappearance. How people are negatively reacting to the McCanns isn't some kind of made up witch hunt... they have seriously put theirselves so far out there that their own actions have caused a lot of us to feel suspicious. Their plight so far seems to be more about raising money and rubbing elbows with big names... not actually about finding Maddie, but using Maddie's disappearance as a step on the ladder of notoriaty. I don't think I have ever seen parents act like that before, in a missing child case... and yes, I know that everyone processes things differently, but their actions are so far out of the box that you can't help but question them.

For a lot of us, we know all too well about child predators... we know parents can hurt their children... we know perverts exist around a lot of corners, seeking out opportunities to harm a child... and we know it knows no limits: child predators come in every size, shape and national origin. Don't hold it against us that we, as people wishing to make a positive difference in such crimes, are holding a magnifying glass up to the McCanns. It doesn't mean we care less about Maddie being found... if anything, the reason we question the parents actions is because we DO want Maddie found... it's just that we believe in leaving no stone unturned, when the stone warrants a good turning over...

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 02:29 AM

For a lot of us, we know all too well about child predators... we know parents can hurt their children... we know perverts exist around a lot of corners, seeking out opportunities to harm a child... and we know it knows no limits: child predators come in every size, shape and national origin. Don't hold it against us that we, as people wishing to make a positive difference in such crimes, are holding a magnifying glass up to the McCanns. It doesn't mean we care less about Maddie being found... if anything, the reason we question the parents actions is because we DO want Maddie found... it's just that we believe in leaving no stone unturned, when the stone warrants a good turning over...
This is something I don't understand about the McCanns. You would think that two doctors would know about child abuse. Especially a GP like Kate McCann who probably sees small children in her practice. So how could they say they were naive and act like this is the first they've ever heard of molest, exploitation and kidnapping?

Shazza

07-28-2007, 02:53 AM

This is something I don't understand about the McCanns. You would think that two doctors would know about child abuse. Especially a GP like Kate McCann who probably sees small children in her practice. So how could they say they were naive and act like this is the first they've ever heard of molest, exploitation and kidnapping?
Hi Calikid.....Its a cover up imo, they are hoping that the public will have sympathy for them, again taking the spotlight off Madelaine. Off course they are aware of the dangers that can befell small children, they are just acting dumb to try and get away from taking responsibility for their actions......GUESS WHAT......it didnt work. The McCanns I think, are starting to realise that a lot of people are wisening up to their stupidity, and they are not liking what is being said about them. Their secret pact is not a secret anymore, as in that the public are aware of a secret pact. I hope the truth comes out, the McCanns are the key.

docwho3

07-28-2007, 03:19 AM

What you see isn't always what you get it to be. . .

I have read two of your more lengthy posts and I must say that I admire your good sense, especially as it relates to being careful to not rush to judgement about the parents in this case.

I would like to know if the parents stories checked out and were confirmed but I almost always ask that when a child is missing because, unless I have evidence to contraindicate it, I generally start looking at a case as it relates to those closest to the missing person and then slowly widen the circle of suspects outwards from there. I think that judgement of the wisdom or lack thereof shown by the parents in leaving the child behind should at least be left until after she is recovered. Until evidence surfaces to point to the parents having taken part in some wrong doing towards the child they are victims as much as she is.

So far in this case I have no real reason to doubt the various L.E. involved in the investigation.

Shazza

07-28-2007, 03:35 AM

I have read two of your more lengthy posts and I must say that I admire your good sense, especially as it relates to being careful to not rush to judgement about the parents in this case.

I would like to know if the parents stories checked out and were confirmed but I almost always ask that when a child is missing because, unless I have evidence to contraindicate it, I generally start looking at a case as it relates to those closest to the missing person and then slowly widen the circle of suspects outwards from there. I think that judgement of the wisdom or lack thereof shown by the parents in leaving the child behind should at least be left until after she is recovered. Until evidence surfaces to point to the parents having taken part in some wrong doing towards the child they are victims as much as she is.

So far in this case I have no real reason to doubt the various L.E. involved in the investigation.
Victims dont leave their children alone, the victim here is Madelaine.

docwho3

07-28-2007, 03:57 AM

Victims dont leave their children alone, the victim here is Madelaine.
Ummm, yes, they do sometimes. There have been other cases where parents left a child in a car alone and went into by a pack of smokes and the car was stolen with the baby inside. It happens. Not all victims of crimes are perfect people or perfect parents but that does not make them any less victims when their child is stolen and/or harmed. This vitriol against the parents with little or no evidence of them perpetrating a crime against their child (as in murder or kidnap) is nothing more than than that,vitriol, and in the face of having no evidence to back it up it seems like a crime to me in itself. If anyone wants to lynch the parents at least show me how that finds the little missing girl.

If such judgments were part of a solid theory that had any supporting evidence that could indicate the parents killed this child I might look upon it . . . . .but when done without any evidence at all it sounds like family bashing to me but that's just my opinion.

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 04:08 AM

docwho3, in the case you mentioned, the victim wouldn't be the parents, it would be the baby left in the car. Tragic as it may be to have your child kidnapped, either on purpose or accidentally, it's the abducted child who is victimized.

Something very similar to your example happened in my area last year. A mom popped into a convenience store and left her baby in the car with the engine running. She came out, and the vehicle was gone. Luckily for her, the thief didn't want the baby, he was after the car. He abandoned both car and child several hours later, but I don't remember if he was ever caught. This stupid mom was very, very fortunate to escape with only a few hours worth of stress. And oh yes, she was charged with neglect.

Shazza

07-28-2007, 04:14 AM

Ummm, yes, they do sometimes. There have been other cases where parents left a child in a car alone and went into by a pack of smokes and the car was stolen with the baby inside. It happens. Not all victims of crimes are perfect people or perfect parents but that does not make them any less victims when their child is stolen and/or harmed. This vitriol against the parents with little or no evidence of them perpetrating a crime against their child (as in murder or kidnap) is nothing more than than that,vitriol, and in the face of having no evidence to back it up it seems like a crime to me in itself. If anyone wants to lynch the parents at least show me how that finds the little missing girl.

If such judgments were part of a solid theory that had any supporting evidence that could indicate the parents killed this child I might look upon it . . . . .but when done without any evidence at all it sounds like family bashing to me but that's just my opinion.
This is such a sad story, there has been no evidence of anything that might help us find Madelaine, we dont know that she was kidnapped, there is no concrete evidence, we dont know if she just wandered away and then taken, no concrete evidence, we dont know if she was drugged by her parents and then died, there is no concrete evidence, we really have no evidence whatsoever as to what happened to Madelaine.

We do know that Madelaine and her siblings were left alone on more than one occasion, the last time resulting in the disappearance of Madelaine.
So in my opinion we do have concrete evidence of child neglect by the parents.
I do not think me or other posters who think that the parents are neglectful, or that they havent told the truth are parent bashing, you lay blame where the blame is, and the parents are to blame for the disappearance of Madelaine.

BethInAK

07-28-2007, 04:34 AM

Ms MouseMat,
I do not feel we should judge people by their personal greiving process. If the McCanns aren't crying enough for my satisfaction, thats my problem.

My issue with the McCanns is their neglect of the children, which led to the disappearance and probably death of one of their children and their inability to take any responsibility for it.

docwho3

07-28-2007, 05:06 AM

docwho3, in the case you mentioned, the victim wouldn't be the parents, it would be the baby left in the car. Tragic as it may be to have your child kidnapped, either on purpose or accidentally, it's the abducted child who is victimized.. . . Sure the child is a victim but if the parents did not harm the child then they are victims as well and no ones anger at their perceived lack of parenting skills changes that fact. The child is gone. What more can any of us do in anger towards that will hurt them more than that? I say find the child and let the family begin to heal and then look at what factors contributed to her being stolen and take whatever actions are appropriate at that time. The thief who stole this child did the crime and the poor child and her poor parents are victims and we should not shift a bullseye onto the parents backs just becasue we have not yet found the true thief who took the child.

Victim: "a person who suffers from a destructive or injurious action or agency: . ."

When someone steals your child that does you harm and is a grievous injury to your whole household. Parents who have lost a child can probably tell you that it is a great injury that hurts.

Shazza

07-28-2007, 05:34 AM

Sure the child is a victim but if the parents did not harm the child then they are victims as well and no ones anger at their perceived lack of parenting skills changes that fact. The child is gone. What more can any of us do in anger towards that will hurt them more than that? I say find the child and let the family begin to heal and then look at what factors contributed to her being stolen and take whatever actions are appropriate at that time. The thief who stole this child did the crime and the poor child and her poor parents are victims and we should not shift a bullseye onto the parents backs just becasue we have not yet found the true thief who took the child.

Victim: "a person who suffers from a destructive or injurious action or agency: . ."

When someone steals your child that does you harm and is a grievous injury to your whole household. Parents who have lost a child can probably tell you that it is a great injury that hurts.

Was this child taken, we dont know that the child was taken, there is no concrete evidence that that is what happened, the parents could have been involved so your saying if the parents were involved in Madelaines disappearance that they are still victims, I dont think so. I am not saying that the parents did do anything else with Madelaine except leave her alone which put her in harms way, but no one knows yet what has happened to her. It is all speculation at this point as to what has happened to Madelaine. But the parents are not the victims, they could be the perpetrators, we dont know that they are not involved.

But there is evidence the parents put their children in harms way, and they have lied about what happened that night.... how can they be called victims. This all started because of them.

docwho3

07-28-2007, 05:46 AM

But there is evidence the parents put their children in harms way, and they have lied about what happened that night.... how can they be called victims. This all started because of them.If you cannot see they are victims after all this then you never will see it and that is your choice. Until I see evidence of more than a possible error in parenting I choose differently.

Shazza

07-28-2007, 06:08 AM

If you cannot see they are victims after all this then you never will see it and that is your choice. Until I see evidence of more than a possible error in parenting I choose differently.
There has been more evidence against the parents than anyone else, their parenting skills are in question, not only do they leave their children alone at night, but they are put into daycare most for most of their holiday in Portugal, why would a parent put their children in a daycare everyday on a family holiday, this is the time that you would spend quality time with your kids, as I assume they work long hours being in the medical profession, and they are sent to daycare whilst they work, so the parenting skill come into question imo.
I do not see these parents as victims, but at fault. If we ever find out the truth and the parents are not anymore involved than they already are I will eat humble pie, but in saying that if they are not involved other than leaving their kids alone they should be charged with child endangerment, and I have never heard of a victim being charged for a crime they made possible.

april4sky

07-28-2007, 08:40 AM

Trino

07-28-2007, 08:46 AM

[QUOTE=docwho3;1602032]Sure the child is a victim but if the parents did not harm the child then they are victims as well and no ones anger at their perceived lack of parenting skills changes that fact. The child is gone. What more can any of us do in anger towards that will hurt them more than that? I say find the child and let the family begin to heal and then look at what factors contributed to her being stolen and take whatever actions are appropriate at that time. The thief who stole this child did the crime and the poor child and her poor parents are victims and we should not shift a bullseye onto the parents backs just becasue we have not yet found the true thief who took the child.

I agree the parents are victims, but their behavior enabled their child to disappear.

You mention "appropriate time." When is the appropriate time to take action, especially if Madeline is never found?

jacobean

07-28-2007, 08:57 AM

Quote: As to the behaviour of Mrs Mcann – I believe there is a tendency to want see a display of grief of some sort in the USA but that is another cultural difference as the British like to keep their feelings more to themselves Unquote

been lurking in here for a while, would like to say that although i agree and am pleased that the cultural differences have been brought up (im also a brit btw), i think theres a bit of a difference between our famed "stiff upper lippiness" and the behaviour shown by the McCanns which makes me frankly extremely uncomfortable . And while i dont hate them (dont really think anyone else does either) or necessarily agree on their involvement, i do 100% agree with many of the posters here that they need to own their mistakes and quit trying to justify or excuse leaving three kids on their own, at night, in a ground floor appt, with the bloody door unlocked! They need to face up to the fact that they are responsible for a situation that allowed someone to abduct their 4 yr old daughter. That alone, imo, is evidence of a definate error in parenting.

april4sky

07-28-2007, 09:59 AM

This article may be of interest, but keep in mind it's a tabloid so may not be true. Tabloids are not as bad as blogs though. They are just sh#t stirrers, in my opinion.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2007/07/28/murat-altered-tale-in-quiz-by-madeleine-cops-89520-19534073/

april4sky

07-28-2007, 10:09 AM

The Sun......Another tabloid is also carrying the same story as the Mirror.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2005320001-2007340855,00.html

colomom

07-28-2007, 10:46 AM

~snip~
This vitriol against the parents with little or no evidence of them perpetrating a crime against their child (as in murder or kidnap) is nothing more than than that,vitriol, and in the face of having no evidence to back it up it seems like a crime to me in itself. If anyone wants to lynch the parents at least show me how that finds the little missing girl.

Hello docwho3,

Thank you for posting your feelings about this case. We need to have more than one point of view expressed.

I want to touch on the part of your post outlined above. The word "vitriol" means "cruel and bitter criticism" and honestly, I do not think most of us have gone there. Criticism, yes...cruel and bitter, no. I have never seen anyone call for anybody to be "lynched" or even arrested. We have been insistent that the McCanns need to tell the truth. I believe that there has been alot of evidence that they haven't. In my opinion, in order for the LE to conduct a proper investigation they need to know the truth. I am not sure why but it appears that the McCanns (and others) have not been truthful with those responsible for investigating Maddy's dissapearance. While I would expect deceit from a kidnapper I would expect complete and total honesty from Madeleine's parents. We have been clamoring for the truth. The truth may indeed help find this little girl. I don't care if it's ugly, personally damaging or embarassing to the McCanns, her life may depend on it.

We want the truth! The speculation and conjecture beyond that is human nature and I think we have been very civil. If you want to see vitirol than visit some of the forums in her home country.

colomom

07-28-2007, 10:50 AM

been lurking in here for a while, would like to say that although i agree and am pleased that the cultural differences have been brought up (im also a brit btw), i think theres a bit of a difference between our famed "stiff upper lippiness" and the behaviour shown by the McCanns which makes me frankly extremely uncomfortable. ~snip~

Hello jacobean!

Welcome to the forum! I love it when our conversations bring lurkers out to contribute. Please stick around....you input is appreciated.

:blowkiss:

docwho3

07-28-2007, 11:21 AM

. . .You mention "appropriate time." When is the appropriate time to take action, especially if Madeline is never found? If the child is never found or is found dead (but not dead by the parents hands) I think that is punishment enough for any poor parenting error. How can one do more to a grieving parent who has lost a child than the loss itself has already done to them?

If she is found alive then I think after a certain amount of time is allowed for the family to reunite charges could be brought if L.E. thinks charges should be brought for poor parenting that day that she disappeared. One should not try to bring charges in a case that is incomplete.

mrsmousemat

07-28-2007, 11:24 AM

Please MrsMouseMat, give us a little credit. We are not stupid.

Especially those of us in America, we know how manipulative the media can be, shoot, we are heaven for the paparazzi. We are the home of the "spin doctor" in this country.

I don't think that most of us here hate the McCanns, that is a really strong word. I think we are frustrated, dumbfounded and aggravated by them. Most of those emotions do not have anything to do with pictures. It is words, it is inconsistencies, it is their refusal to take responsibility for the part that they played in her dissapearance. The way that they continue to blame us for their huge error in judgement (by saying things like "the comments are hurtful and not helpful"). They tell us that we are the bad guys!!! If they would just stop that self-righteous, sanctimonious, holier-than-thou C R A P, and admit that what they did was dangerous and selfish, we would be a much different beast on this board.

It may be too late now. My gut tells me that they will never admit their cupability. And BTW, if they decided that they wanted to return to their home, for the sake of the twins, and they expressed that feeling, and I believed what they were telling me, I would be the first to tell them that it was OK to move their family home and continue the fight from there.

AND, if it turns out that we were completely wrong about our gut instinct in this case (somehow I do not think so) I think we have already expressed how happy we would be to eat crow!

I just need to know what really happened to Madeleine......

Your'e IQ doesn't really matter - it's just that many people do not know how the media operates. Whether you read the broadsheets or tabloids you can get information that is biased and you can believe it without questioning the source and the context.

Most of the much-quoted infromation about the McCann's seems to come from a Portuguese paper.

I would guess that they are not prostrating themselves asking for forgiveness on leaving the children on legal advice - because of the Portuguese law about unattended children.

Great for anyone who thinks they should face charges in a Portuguese court immediately - but perhaps the needs of the younger children might outway their need to make a public statement at the moment.

If they make a public statment, the Portuguese police may be forced to act, which would not be in anyone's interests at the moment.

colomom

07-28-2007, 11:36 AM

The Sun......Another tabloid is also carrying the same story as the Mirror.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2005320001-2007340855,00.html

No matter how many stories I read about RM, I have never felt that he is responsible, but I could be wrong, it would not be the first time. My "gut" tells me that he is a opportunist and like those kids in school that always wanted attention and voluntered to help the teacher. He gives me the creeps but not in a "kidnapper/predator" way.

The article quoted his mother:
"She insisted he did not leave the villa between finishing his evening meal and going to bed.
A Portuguese newspaper reported that phone records between 8pm and midnight back her claim. But police say it does not prove he was there all night."

"The McCanns' friends Fiona Payne and Rachael Oldfield say they saw him outside Madeleine's apartment at 11.45pm, soon after she went missing. Another pal, Russell O'Brien, says he saw Murat at 1am."

Seems to me that he heard/saw all the police activity at the Ocean Club and walked over to check it out. His shifty alibi is probably due to his fear that the police were going to pin it on him. Rather than saying he was with his girlfriend he changed it to being with his mom. And the phone records (?) confirm that??? Another puzzle....

Rather than trying to figure out why RM was seen after Maddy's dissapearance, I want to know what Gerry McCann was doing on the back side of the apartment, near the children's bedroom window, when Jeremy Wilkins came upon him. This happened just before Jane Tanner reported seeing a man carrying a child. That meeting is referenced in the SOL article (here is one link: http://www.geocities.com/hallsofmirrors/SOL.html). If he was checking on the children then why not climb the stairs at the front and enter through the french doors which they said they left open? Why go around to the back? And the time is wierd. GM supposedly left to check the kids at 9:05PM and Jane Tanner saw the "man with the child" at about 9:15PM but the encounter between Jeremy Wilkins and GM would have been about 9:10PM? Jeremy said he never saw "the man".
And then Matthew Oldfield shows up to check the kids just a few minutes later? Why? And he saw the kids sleeping?

This is the one part of the whole story that just bugs me to no end.

WHY HAVEN'T LIE DETECTOR TESTS BEEN ADMINISTERED?? ON EVERYBODY??

:waitasec: :waitasec:

Trino

07-28-2007, 11:39 AM

If the child is never found or is found dead (but not dead by the parents hands) I think that is punishment enough for any poor parenting error. How can one do more to a grieving parent who has lost a child than the loss itself has already done to them?

I, for one, would feel better about your statement if I truly felt the parents were grieving rather than jet-setting and meeting with the Pope.

Madeline's parents have broken a Portuguese law. Is it okay to break a law and not be charged?

colomom

07-28-2007, 11:58 AM

I would guess that they are not prostrating themselves asking for forgiveness on leaving the children on legal advice - because of the Portuguese law about unattended children.
~snip~

Back to my post on the need for them to be completely honest about what happened that night. If they are trying to cover their butts by twisting times and actions because they are worried about being prosecuted....whaaaaahttp://smileydatabase.com/s/346.giftoo bad for them. They are not doing Madeleine any favors or LE who is trying to solve this case. Do they want to avoid jail or get their daughter back????
:mad:

docwho3

07-28-2007, 12:08 PM

Hello docwho3,

Thank you for posting your feelings about this case. We need to have more than one point of view expressed. . . Thank you for the kind words.

. . .We have been insistent that the McCanns need to tell the truth. I believe that there has been alot of evidence that they haven't. . . I have no problem with people saying someone involved in the case lied if they can post links to show it is so. I do have a problem with the credibility of posts by people posting that the parents are to blame for whatever happened just because they did not see the abduction take place (bearing in mind those posting such things do not yet know what happened) and I do have a problem with credibility of those who accuse the parents of murder solely on the basis of a perceived lack of emotion. I have also seen many posts about the funds that have been raised as if that somehow is evidence of murder and I have seen lots of posts about a lack of emotion shown being a horrible thing whether or not they actually committed any crime. I looked up the meaning of vitriol before posting to be certain I had the proper meaning for what I was seeing and in some cases that is what I was seeing. However I don't mean to paint all withthe same brush, there have been some extraordinarily sensible people posting as well and I pay attention when they speak as they usually post based on facts and not based on any kneejerk emotional response.

Evidence is a good thing to base a theory on.

For those who think the parents were the perps of the girls disappearance: Has anyone figured what they did with the body and in what time frame they disposed of it? (That's an honest question and not a challenge thing.)

For those who think someone other than the parents were involved why, and how was it done and where is the missing girl?

mrsmousemat

07-28-2007, 12:15 PM

april4sky

07-28-2007, 01:15 PM

No matter how many stories I read about RM, I have never felt that he is responsible, but I could be wrong, it would not be the first time. My "gut" tells me that he is a opportunist and like those kids in school that always wanted attention and voluntered to help the teacher. He gives me the creeps but not in a "kidnapper/predator" way.

The article quoted his mother:
"She insisted he did not leave the villa between finishing his evening meal and going to bed.
A Portuguese newspaper reported that phone records between 8pm and midnight back her claim. But police say it does not prove he was there all night."

"The McCanns' friends Fiona Payne and Rachael Oldfield say they saw him outside Madeleine's apartment at 11.45pm, soon after she went missing. Another pal, Russell O'Brien, says he saw Murat at 1am."

Seems to me that he heard/saw all the police activity at the Ocean Club and walked over to check it out. His shifty alibi is probably due to his fear that the police were going to pin it on him. Rather than saying he was with his girlfriend he changed it to being with his mom. And the phone records (?) confirm that??? Another puzzle....

Rather than trying to figure out why RM was seen after Maddy's dissapearance, I want to know what Gerry McCann was doing on the back side of the apartment, near the children's bedroom window, when Jeremy Wilkins came upon him. This happened just before Jane Tanner reported seeing a man carrying a child. That meeting is referenced in the SOL article (here is one link: http://www.geocities.com/hallsofmirrors/SOL.html). If he was checking on the children then why not climb the stairs at the front and enter through the french doors which they said they left open? Why go around to the back? And the time is wierd. GM supposedly left to check the kids at 9:05PM and Jane Tanner saw the "man with the child" at about 9:15PM but the encounter between Jeremy Wilkins and GM would have been about 9:10PM? Jeremy said he never saw "the man".
And then Matthew Oldfield shows up to check the kids just a few minutes later? Why? And he saw the kids sleeping?

This is the one part of the whole story that just bugs me to no end.

WHY HAVEN'T LIE DETECTOR TESTS BEEN ADMINISTERED?? ON EVERYBODY??

:waitasec: :waitasec:The Sol link has been removed as it apparently violated community guidlines...I wonder why?

The mirror article also states there are Portugese witnesses who saw Murratt near the McCann apartment the evening Madeleine was kidnapped. I have no idea if he was involved or not and hope the police will be able to prove it, or clear him soon.

And the Portugese police have also said the McCanns are not suspects. And as they know details that we are not privy to that's good enough for me.

It's strange how we see the Mccanns differently. I see a couple still in shock who desperatly want to find their child. They are trying to be positive for Madeleine's sake by channeling all their efforts and taking as much expert advice on the best ways of searching for Madeleine. Madeleine's case would already have been forgotten without those efforts. Other than the UK and Portugal I doubt many other country's would have ever heard of Madeleine, but they are never given any credit for that. They should not have left their children alone and i'm sure they wish they hadn't, but that is the only thing they are guilty of IMO. Having said that I do believe they love their children.
Right now, the last thing they need is to be constantly castigated.....for Madeleine's sake they need everybody's help and support.

colomom

07-28-2007, 04:02 PM

The Sol link has been removed as it apparently violated community guidlines...I wonder why?

...try removing the ) (parenthesis) at the end of the url...

"violated community guidlines":waitasec:
Where did that come from?

Elphaba

07-28-2007, 04:20 PM

Has anyone heard of what GM plans to do with the "facts" he picked up on his "fact finding" mission to here in the US? I know he kept talking about how the US has this legislation and that legislation and what the centers do for missing kids... but he never applied it to the personal level of his world and how it will be reflected on finding Maddie. Or am I missing something?

mrsmousemat

07-28-2007, 08:18 PM

Thank you for the kind words.

I have no problem with people saying someone involved in the case lied if they can post links to show it is so. I do have a problem with the credibility of posts by people posting that the parents are to blame for whatever happened just because they did not see the abduction take place (bearing in mind those posting such things do not yet know what happened) and I do have a problem with credibility of those who accuse the parents of murder solely on the basis of a perceived lack of emotion. I have also seen many posts about the funds that have been raised as if that somehow is evidence of murder and I have seen lots of posts about a lack of emotion shown being a horrible thing whether or not they actually committed any crime. I looked up the meaning of vitriol before posting to be certain I had the proper meaning for what I was seeing and in some cases that is what I was seeing. However I don't mean to paint all withthe same brush, there have been some extraordinarily sensible people posting as well and I pay attention when they speak as they usually post based on facts and not based on any kneejerk emotional response.

Evidence is a good thing to base a theory on.

For those who think the parents were the perps of the girls disappearance: Has anyone figured what they did with the body and in what time frame they disposed of it? (That's an honest question and not a challenge thing.)

For those who think someone other than the parents were involved why, and how was it done and where is the missing girl?

************

I agree with your views on factual evidence, as I expect you've realised if you've read the previous posts. The discussion about the rights and wrongs of leaving the children is interesting but similar opinions are being repeated over and over.

However, the Sky website says:

'Three of the McCann's party were able to identify Robert Murat as he had been confronted with allegations he had been seen "peeking into" the family's holiday apartment in Portugal on the night Madeleine was abducted'......

.....One of the three friends allegedly shouted at him: "I know you were there. I would recognise you anywhere."

It is reported all three had, in separate interviews, referred to Murat's 'lazy' right eye.'

If this is true, and he was peeping and spotted by all three witnesses - who all must have been near enough to see his eye - why didn't someone go to sit with the children?'

Edit: It appears, from another website, that they claimed they saw him AFTER the loss had been reported. But why would anyone, who has just snatched a child, return to the scene of the crime so soon after the event? It would seem a very reckless thing to do.

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 08:34 PM

[/I]

Your'e IQ doesn't really matter - it's just that many people do not know how the media operates. Whether you read the broadsheets or tabloids you can get information that is biased and you can believe it without questioning the source and the context.

Most of the much-quoted infromation about the McCann's seems to come from a Portuguese paper.

I would guess that they are not prostrating themselves asking for forgiveness on leaving the children on legal advice - because of the Portuguese law about unattended children.

Great for anyone who thinks they should face charges in a Portuguese court immediately - but perhaps the needs of the younger children might outway their need to make a public statement at the moment.

If they make a public statment, the Portuguese police may be forced to act, which would not be in anyone's interests at the moment.

Okay, I will agree with you that bias motivates some writers in the media. I am even willing to agree that the Portuguese press may be writing articles with an unflattering point of view about the McCanns because they're tired of their country being portrayed negatively by them and their friends. Very few people like their region or country criticized and pointed at as some place lax in arresting and prosecuting criminals.

For instance, we know the McCanns claimed early on, even though they deny it now, that the PJ was inept and handling Madeleine's disappearance wrong. They demanded that information from the PJ's investigation be released to the public because they felt certain clues were important to apprehend the person responsible, and the PJ capitulated to them.

So there may be some bias in the Portuguese media against the McCanns that is flavoring their reporting. But if we're going to accuse them of manufacturing news, they're no worse than the British newspapers.

Shazza

07-28-2007, 08:36 PM

There is probably a lot of information that the public are not privvy to yet, so as not to hinder the investigation, but if you have been posting about this case from the beginning, there has been evidence that some of the latest posters have not seen, I suggest to those posters you read all the threads on Madelaines disappearance before you keep saying that evidence is needed to prove what other posters are saying.

A lot of what we say is our opinion or our gut feeling which we are allowed to share here, but we say that after reading evidence, seeing the actions of the McCanns, not knowing all the facts because people who were there cant get their stories straight.

There are so many inconsistencies in this case, of course we are going to speculate with the evidence throughout all the threads in this case.
Sometimes posters just give their theory of what could have happened, but that doesnt mean it did, it is just their opinion. The one thing we all have in common is the SAFETY OF MADELAINE.

So all the posters who want evidence please read the whole threads, there are photos, maps, reports from the LE, the media and the McCanns.
See if you dont come up with some of the conclusions a lot of posters here have, that the McCanns were maybe somehow involved beside leaving their children alone.

Shazza

07-28-2007, 08:40 PM

Okay, I will agree with you that bias motivates some writers in the media. I am even willing to agree that the Portuguese press may be writing articles with an unflattering point of view about the McCanns because they're tired of their country being portrayed negatively by them and their friends. Very few people like their region or country criticized and pointed at as some place lax in arresting and prosecuting criminals.

For instance, we know the McCanns claimed early on, even though they deny it now, that the PJ was inept and handling Madeleine's disappearance wrong. They demanded that information from the PJ's investigation be released to the public because they felt certain clues were important to apprehend the person responsible, and the PJ capitulated to them.

So there may be some bias in the Portuguese media against the McCanns that is flavoring their reporting. But if we're going to accuse them of manufacturing news, they're no worse than the British newspapers.

Good Post Calikid....one other thing why would the P LE put the friends of the McCanns in the same room as Murat to find out who was telling the truth. That doesnt sound like the right policing protocol to me.

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 09:15 PM

Sure the child is a victim but if the parents did not harm the child then they are victims as well and no ones anger at their perceived lack of parenting skills changes that fact. The child is gone. What more can any of us do in anger towards that will hurt them more than that? I say find the child and let the family begin to heal and then look at what factors contributed to her being stolen and take whatever actions are appropriate at that time. The thief who stole this child did the crime and the poor child and her poor parents are victims and we should not shift a bullseye onto the parents backs just becasue we have not yet found the true thief who took the child.

Victim: "a person who suffers from a destructive or injurious action or agency: . ."

When someone steals your child that does you harm and is a grievous injury to your whole household. Parents who have lost a child can probably tell you that it is a great injury that hurts.

Maybe I'm more cynical than most, but I have a difficult time finding sympathy for a parent who puts their child into harms' way. IMO, it's much easier to feel badly for parents whose child was abducted through no fault of their own. The mothers and fathers of the Groene children, Jessica Lunsford, Reachelle Smith, Sophia Tennis- these are the parents who have my empathy.

colomom

07-28-2007, 09:18 PM

Shazza

07-28-2007, 09:19 PM

Maybe I'm more cynical than most, but I have a difficult time finding sympathy for a parent who puts their child into harms' way. IMO, it's much easier to feel badly for parents whose child was abducted through no fault of their own. The mothers and fathers of the Groene children, Jessica Lunsford, Reachelle Smith, Sophia Tennis- these are the parents who have my empathy.

Bravo CaliKid...:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 09:25 PM

Unfortunately, Trino, I believe that to let the McCanns get off without official investigation is to condone their behavior. Maybe now is not the time, but I'd say some time in the not-to-distant future it should be looked into.

An "error in parenting" is neglecting to send a coat with your child to school on a chilly day or forgetting to give him vitamins. What the McCanns did was premeditated neglect.

Welcome, jacobean

Shazza

07-28-2007, 09:26 PM

I will never, ever, in a million years...understand the McCanns.

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0eLp9AydH6di6/610x.jpg

Don't ask me where it came from or when it was taken because I have no idea.

Why are they smiling? This is another example as to why I do not like the McCanns. Why would you smile holding up a T Shirt with a picture of your missing daughter on it. If it were me I wouldnt even have my photo taken with the shirt, they dont need to see the parents, this is all staged, OMG, they could have just put a photo of the T Shirt and where they can get them from, but oh no, just another way to get their mug shots in the media. LOOK AT ME, LOOK AT ME. GM and KM go and crawl back under the rock from where you came.:furious:

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 09:34 PM

Was this child taken, we dont know that the child was taken, there is no concrete evidence that that is what happened, the parents could have been involved so your saying if the parents were involved in Madelaines disappearance that they are still victims, I dont think so. I am not saying that the parents did do anything else with Madelaine except leave her alone which put her in harms way, but no one knows yet what has happened to her. It is all speculation at this point as to what has happened to Madelaine. But the parents are not the victims, they could be the perpetrators, we dont know that they are not involved.

But there is evidence the parents put their children in harms way, and they have lied about what happened that night.... how can they be called victims. This all started because of them.

The neglect and changing testimony is what makes it hard for me to feel sorry for the McCanns. The forced door and window turned into an unlocked door. A few yards away with an unobstructed line of sight became more than 100 yards- across 2 parking lots and a pool and behind a wall. And now they've reverted to a solid "50 yards" fib. They can't even get their stories straight about how often the children were checked on and by whom.

There has been more evidence against the parents than anyone else, their parenting skills are in question, not only do they leave their children alone at night, but they are put into daycare most for most of their holiday in Portugal, why would a parent put their children in a daycare everyday on a family holiday, this is the time that you would spend quality time with your kids, as I assume they work long hours being in the medical profession, and they are sent to daycare whilst they work, so the parenting skill come into question imo.
I do not see these parents as victims, but at fault. If we ever find out the truth and the parents are not anymore involved than they already are I will eat humble pie, but in saying that if they are not involved other than leaving their kids alone they should be charged with child endangerment, and I have never heard of a victim being charged for a crime they made possible.

For Madeleine's sake mostly, but also for her parents', I wish with all my heart that the McCanns had left their children at home in Leicester and gotten away by themselves if they wanted a vacation. Seeing as how they don't appear to have spent much time together as a family, I don't know why they didn't.

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 09:37 PM

If the child is never found or is found dead (but not dead by the parents hands) I think that is punishment enough for any poor parenting error. How can one do more to a grieving parent who has lost a child than the loss itself has already done to them?

If she is found alive then I think after a certain amount of time is allowed for the family to reunite charges could be brought if L.E. thinks charges should be brought for poor parenting that day that she disappeared. One should not try to bring charges in a case that is incomplete.

I would guess that they are not prostrating themselves asking for forgiveness on leaving the children on legal advice - because of the Portuguese law about unattended children.

Great for anyone who thinks they should face charges in a Portuguese court immediately - but perhaps the needs of the younger children might outway their need to make a public statement at the moment.

If they make a public statment, the Portuguese police may be forced to act, which would not be in anyone's interests at the moment.

It is my understanding (which is possibly wrong), that to charge the parents with neglect now would force them to testify about what happened on May 3. But testifying is out because they're not allowed to talk about the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance. So whatever the UK or Portugal does about the neglect charges will have to wait.

Shazza

07-28-2007, 09:39 PM

Hi CaliKid and Colomom, I need a break, will be back later. Keep up the great sleuthing.

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 09:44 PM

No matter how many stories I read about RM, I have never felt that he is responsible, but I could be wrong, it would not be the first time. My "gut" tells me that he is a opportunist and like those kids in school that always wanted attention and voluntered to help the teacher. He gives me the creeps but not in a "kidnapper/predator" way.

The article quoted his mother:
"She insisted he did not leave the villa between finishing his evening meal and going to bed.
A Portuguese newspaper reported that phone records between 8pm and midnight back her claim. But police say it does not prove he was there all night."

"The McCanns' friends Fiona Payne and Rachael Oldfield say they saw him outside Madeleine's apartment at 11.45pm, soon after she went missing. Another pal, Russell O'Brien, says he saw Murat at 1am."

Seems to me that he heard/saw all the police activity at the Ocean Club and walked over to check it out. His shifty alibi is probably due to his fear that the police were going to pin it on him. Rather than saying he was with his girlfriend he changed it to being with his mom. And the phone records (?) confirm that??? Another puzzle....

Rather than trying to figure out why RM was seen after Maddy's dissapearance, I want to know what Gerry McCann was doing on the back side of the apartment, near the children's bedroom window, when Jeremy Wilkins came upon him. This happened just before Jane Tanner reported seeing a man carrying a child. That meeting is referenced in the SOL article (here is one link: http://www.geocities.com/hallsofmirrors/SOL.html). If he was checking on the children then why not climb the stairs at the front and enter through the french doors which they said they left open? Why go around to the back? And the time is wierd. GM supposedly left to check the kids at 9:05PM and Jane Tanner saw the "man with the child" at about 9:15PM but the encounter between Jeremy Wilkins and GM would have been about 9:10PM? Jeremy said he never saw "the man".
And then Matthew Oldfield shows up to check the kids just a few minutes later? Why? And he saw the kids sleeping?

This is the one part of the whole story that just bugs me to no end.

WHY HAVEN'T LIE DETECTOR TESTS BEEN ADMINISTERED?? ON EVERYBODY??

:waitasec: :waitasec:

Unfortunately, Portugal doesn't use polygraphs. And the link above doesn't work, btw.

Jane Tanner's reports of seeing a strange man carrying Madeleine doesn't ring true for another reason. Mathew Oldfield claims to have checked on the children at 9:30 after JT did and says he saw them asleep.

docwho3

07-28-2007, 10:15 PM

. . .However, the Sky website says:

'Three of the McCann's party were able to identify Robert Murat as he had been confronted with allegations he had been seen "peeking into" the family's holiday apartment in Portugal. . .For several reasons it would appear that mr murat is a main focal point for the L.E. looking into the case. I think the wikipedia website lists some interesting info in that regard and seemingly does a fair job of doing timelines and such, although I recommend checking news sources and other sources of info for consistency and accuracy as much as one is able.

. . .Edit: It appears, from another website, that they claimed they saw him AFTER the loss had been reported. But why would anyone, who has just snatched a child, return to the scene of the crime so soon after the event? It would seem a very reckless thing to do.
(Please forgive me if I tell you stuff you already know.)
Reading cases at websleuths has allowed me to learn many of the actions taken by the perps in those cases. One thing I have learned is that some perps will engage in very risky behavior such as snatching a young woman out of a parking lot full of people (in broad daylight) right after a track and field practice or, as in the current case here, where someone evidently took a child from a fairly busy sort of area.

It is also not unheard of for perps to try in some way to either insert themselves into the investigation in some way or to stay near to the family left behind and keep tabs on what is going on, in some places they are present when L.E. arrives on the scene to investigate and sometimes they even attend funerals for the victim after a body has been found. I have known where L.E. had to go back over news coverage and amateur video tapes of such events to look for the face of a suspect in both arson and murder cases. To me mr murat's actions after the event are consistent with those of the perps in some cases and so do nothing to rule him out as a suspect. That being said, I have no favorite theory yet as to who or what happened to this child.

General comment for readers: I will try to post some coments about the case in general for those interested. I do not yet have a favorite theory and so far I am working on several possible scenarios and trying to see which has the most puzzle pieces fit.

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 10:22 PM

Back to my post on the need for them to be completely honest about what happened that night. If they are trying to cover their butts by twisting times and actions because they are worried about being prosecuted....whaaaaahttp://smileydatabase.com/s/346.giftoo bad for them. They are not doing Madeleine any favors or LE who is trying to solve this case. Do they want to avoid jail or get their daughter back????
:mad:

:) Admit you screwed up and use it as an example to other parents.

I have no problem with people saying someone involved in the case lied if they can post links to show it is so.

docwho3, if you go back to earlier threads about Madeleine, you'll find all sorts of sources, especially in the early days of her disappearance. Many of the news articles that pointed out the parents' inconsistencies are so old you may not be able to access them.

Evidence is a good thing to base a theory on.

For those who think the parents were the perps of the girls disappearance: Has anyone figured what they did with the body and in what time frame they disposed of it? (That's an honest question and not a challenge thing.)

For those who think someone other than the parents were involved why, and how was it done and where is the missing girl?

IMO, there are a few reasons why the parents seem suspicious, the greatest being that they insist it was a kidnapping. Like a child of almost four, who has awakened at least once that week, is incapable of going through an unlocked door and getting lost?

But let's assume that Madeleine was abducted. You're Kate McCann, and at 10:00 you walk into your apartment to check on your three children. Oh my gosh! Your oldest daughter is gone! What is happening internally? Your "fight or flight" instinct sends adrenaline pumping through your system, your parental gut intuition to protect your children kicks in, and you need help. Thinking one of your kids has been taken by a stranger, would you leave the other two alone in the apartment? No, even in a panicky situation a responsible parent would either get on the phone, call out to people in the apartments nearby or take the twins with you.

One question that has been asked over and over is, when was Madeleine last seen by somebody other than her parents or their friends? We're assuming it would at least be late afternoon when she was picked up from the creche. The parents went out to dinner around 8:30.

IF the McCanns are involved, I think the death was accidental. It's been suggested that, because people around the apartment were allegedly complaining about the children crying for their parents on the other nights they went out and left them alone, maybe one of them sedated Madeleine and overdosed her. This is an idea, not based on any evidence.

IF there was some sort of accident that resulted in Madeleine's death, her parents may have panicked, figuring they would be blamed somehow. If Madeleine overdosed on a sedative the parents would probably stand to lose their medical licenses.

The sticky part of this scenario is the amount of time they'd have to dispose of Madeleine's body and where to put it. It also calls into play a possible conspiracy theory where all the friends were in on it, but that sounds weird, though not totally unbelievable. There have been unconfirmed reports that GM was seen dumping a large black bag in a trash bin behind a restaurant.

If the parents are involved it could be as logical as checking the landfill or using specialized equipment to look for her body in the hills above town. Even if the McCanns didn't hurt Madeleine and she was killed by a pedophile/kidnapper, that's where I think she is.

docwho3

07-28-2007, 10:30 PM

. . . IMO, it's much easier to feel badly for parents whose child was abducted through no fault of their own. . .
If we only love those who are easy to love what good are we? Any parent who has had a child stolen deserves to have us work towards finding that child without "dissing" them all along the way, (if they did not do the crime against the child.)

docwho3

07-28-2007, 10:39 PM

. . .docwho3, if you go back to earlier threads about Madeleine, you'll find all sorts of sources, especially in the early days of her disappearance. Many of the news articles that pointed out the parents' inconsistencies are so old you may not be able to access them.
. . . I just found this post I am replying to and need to read it more thoroughly before responding in detail. For the moment I will say you raise some interesting points which I hope to better comment on after reading the post more thoroughly.

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 11:07 PM

...try removing the ) (parenthesis) at the end of the url...

"violated community guidlines":waitasec:
Where did that come from?

It works for me.

Has anyone heard of what GM plans to do with the "facts" he picked up on his "fact finding" mission to here in the US? I know he kept talking about how the US has this legislation and that legislation and what the centers do for missing kids... but he never applied it to the personal level of his world and how it will be reflected on finding Maddie. Or am I missing something?

I don't know what he found out or how he used the information. The one good thing that might come out of Madeleine's disappearance is if it spurs the countries of the EU to get together and adopt specific guidelines on how to search for missing and abducted children and prosecute kidnappers and pedophiles. There was a huge consortium of first ladies, including Laura Bush from the US, last week in Paris for this purpose.

If this is true, and he was peeping and spotted by all three witnesses - who all must have been near enough to see his eye - why didn't someone go to sit with the children?'

Edit: It appears, from another website, that they claimed they saw him AFTER the loss had been reported. But why would anyone, who has just snatched a child, return to the scene of the crime so soon after the event? It would seem a very reckless thing to do.

If Murat was at the resort and the friends saw him acting suspicious, it begs the same question people have asked of Jane Tanner- why did she not report her suspicions (of the stranger carrying a child in pajamas) to the rest of the McCann party before he was accused.

If Murat took Madeleine, the smartest thing for him to do would've been to say he heard the commotion at the resort when everyone was looking for her and go over to help. That puts him on the spot for an "innocent" reason, and nobody would be questioning why he was there. So either Murat is very, very stupid to try to fake-alibi himself away from the apartment, or he had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance.

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 11:16 PM

I will never, ever, in a million years...understand the McCanns.

http://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0eLp9AydH6di6/610x.jpg

Don't ask me where it came from or when it was taken because I have no idea.

I think the man on the right is GM's uncle, Brian. I heard that there was a soccer team that put images of Madeleine on their shirts, but these don't look like soccer jerseys.

Why would you smile holding up a T Shirt with a picture of your missing daughter on it. If it were me I wouldnt even have my photo taken with the shirt.:furious:

Agree 100%.

CaliKid

07-28-2007, 11:24 PM

Good Post Calikid....one other thing why would the P LE put the friends of the McCanns in the same room as Murat to find out who was telling the truth. That doesnt sound like the right policing protocol to me.

Thanks, Shazza. I read that it's just the way they do things in Portugal.

Pinkhammer

07-28-2007, 11:37 PM

I saw the father being interviewed by Greta Von S. He is an insufferable name-dropper. All he talks about is himself and the famous people he has met. He barely ever mentions Madeleine's name, except as an afterthought.

Greta seemed very cool towards him...she has good instincts. I bet Greta doesn't even leave her cats alone while she's out at work or on the town. I could sense that she didn't cozy up to McCann at all, as she usually does to her guests who are true victims.

McCann's speech is very low-class. I wonder where he spent his childhood, and in what circumstances. He appears to be from the lower echelons, and his words are barely comprehensible. Definitely did not have a private boarding school education.

He rather relishes his newly-found celebrity status, eve though it is at the expense of the safety, and possibly the life, of his little girl.

An altogether unlikable chap.

april4sky

07-29-2007, 12:01 AM

"violated community guidlines":waitasec:
Where did that come from?
From the link yesterday!!! Tried again today...Now it says page not found.

Elphaba

07-29-2007, 12:08 AM

He has a Scottish accent... not sure of what dialect it is, though...

april4sky

07-29-2007, 12:26 AM

If we only love those who are easy to love what good are we? Any parent who has had a child stolen deserves to have us work towards finding that child without "dissing" them all along the way, (if they did not do the crime against the child.)I so agree docwho3 :clap: :clap: :clap:

CaliKid

07-29-2007, 12:28 AM

From the link yesterday!!! Tried again today...Now it says page not found.

I tried it again, and it works fine for me.

http://www.geocities.com/hallsofmirrors/SOL.html

CaliKid

07-29-2007, 12:47 AM

april4sky

07-29-2007, 12:57 AM

I tried it again, and it works fine for me.

http://www.geocities.com/hallsofmirrors/SOL.html

Thanks this one works, Previous one has a bracket at the end which must have caused the problem.

Shazza

07-29-2007, 02:14 AM

But we come right back to who is at fault for leaving Madeleine in the first place.
I agree CaliKid, as I suggested in an earlier post, all the evidence that new posters want to see is in the closed threads of this case, please read all the previous 7 threads to get a better understanding of this case, some of the posters who have been posting right from the beginning cant remember where some of the posts that answer the questions the recent posters are asking.
So go back and read it all, I for one am sick of going over and over the same information everytime a new poster comes onto this thread.

docwho3

07-29-2007, 02:35 AM

But we come right back to who is at fault for leaving Madeleine in the first place.No, you only "come right back" to that because you choose to do so, not because that is in any way the logical path to take. Of course anyone may choose to be as single minded as they wish when stating an opinion. Once a certain amount of emotional momentum is built up it is very difficult to change even if someone was the type to attempt it. I disagree with much of the castigation of the parents I have seen but I defend your (the generic "your"- the general public) right to have your own thoughts and to stick to your own opinions just as I have my own thoughts and opinions. If this case is ever solved we may someday know the truth in its entirety which for the moment eludes us.

docwho3

07-29-2007, 03:18 AM

I will try to respond to some intersting point you made:

. . .docwho3, if you go back to earlier threads about Madeleine, you'll find all sorts of sources, especially in the early days of her disappearance. Many of the news articles that pointed out the parents' inconsistencies are so old you may not be able to access them. . . I have followed this case from the beginning and am aware of the news articles available but thank you for mentioning them so others may learn of them and go read for themselves.

. . . IMO, there are a few reasons why the parents seem suspicious, the greatest being that they insist it was a kidnapping. Like a child of almost four, who has awakened at least once that week, is incapable of going through an unlocked door and getting lost? . . .
Ok but it has been quite awhile and this is not a wilderness we speak of so if she has not been found by now is it really unreasonable for the parents to think she was kidnapped? I don't mean to be neeedlessly argumentative but I just don't yet understand how their believing their child was kidapped indicates guilt on their part in their daughters disappearance.

. . . But let's assume that Madeleine was abducted. You're Kate McCann, and at 10:00 you walk into your apartment to check on your three children. Oh my gosh! Your oldest daughter is gone! What is happening internally? Your "fight or flight" instinct sends adrenaline pumping through your system, your parental gut intuition to protect your children kicks in, and you need help. Thinking one of your kids has been taken by a stranger, would you leave the other two alone in the apartment? . . . One of the things about panic is that it can be unpredictable. A lady recently told me that she was at her home in the countryside and some hunters were evidently shooting at anything that moved and shots started landing very close to her and she panicked and instead of hitting the dirt and staying down out of sight she went blindly running accross the field trying to get "away". She said to me that she knew better than to do that when she is calm but in the moment she reacted stupidly. I am not sure that we can draw any conclusions about the parents guilt based on what they did in a possible panic situation.

. . .One question that has been asked over and over is, when was Madeleine last seen by somebody other than her parents or their friends? We're assuming it would at least be late afternoon when she was picked up from the creche. The parents went out to dinner around 8:30. . . Note: I added the bolding to "assuming".

So if one is theorizing the parents did this crime then we now have an "assumed" time to begin their window of opportunity to commit whatever crime took place. I wish we knew for certain when the last time the child was seen by non family. And by the way, I do not at all mind looking at theories about the parents committing the crime unless or until evidence rules them out and thats the same attitude I use for all potential suspects in a case.

. . .IF the McCanns are involved, I think the death was accidental. It's been suggested that, because people around the apartment were allegedly complaining about the children crying for their parents on the other nights they went out and left them alone, maybe one of them sedated Madeleine and overdosed her. This is an idea, not based on any evidence. . . An interesting possibility. Now we need to also figure how they got rid of the body with so many witness around if the child is indeed dead by their hand. (I am not making fun of the theory. It might require some convoluted planning on the parents spart but it could have happened. In past cases I have seen parents use kidnapping stories to cover up the death of their own child at the parents hands and sometimes the actual facts turned out to be pretty complicated.)

. . .IF there was some sort of accident that resulted in Madeleine's death, her parents may have panicked, figuring they would be blamed somehow. If Madeleine overdosed on a sedative the parents would probably stand to lose their medical licenses. . . Hmm doctors not knowing how to handle sedatives with a child. Somehow that does not sound quite right when it is said like that but I suppose a child might have an unforseen reaction to a med.

. . .The sticky part of this scenario is the amount of time they'd have to dispose of Madeleine's body and where to put it. It also calls into play a possible conspiracy theory where all the friends were in on it, but that sounds weird, though not totally unbelievable.
There have been unconfirmed reports that GM was seen dumping a large black bag in a trash bin behind a restaurant. . .
I repeat: (I am not making fun of the theory. It might require some convoluted planning on the parent spart but it could have happened. In past cases I have seen parent use kidnapping stories to cover up the death of their own child at the parents hands and sometimes the actual facts turned out to be pretty complicated.)

. . .If the parents are involved it could be as logical as checking the landfill or using specialized equipment to look for her body in the hills above town. Even if the McCanns didn't hurt Madeleine and she was killed by a pedophile/kidnapper, that's where I think she is.
You posed another interesting thought. L.E. aren't usually stupid so I wonder what made them consider other alternatives. Maybe the dumpster story was checked out and we just don't know but its one of tha many things in this case I wish we knew more about.

I still have no reason to assume the parents did the crime but it is interesting to look at the possibilities of all potential suspects, including mr murat and others.

CaliKid

07-29-2007, 03:49 AM

Thank you for your questions. :) We can always use another sleuth.

Ok but it has been quite awhile and this is not a wilderness we speak of so if she has not been found by now is it really unreasonable for the parents to think she was kidnapped? I don't mean to be neeedlessly argumentative but I just don't yet understand how their believing their child was kidapped indicates guilt on their part in their daughters disappearance.

From the very first contact with LE, the McCanns insisted that Madeleine had been kidnapped.

Note: I added the bolding to "assuming".

The McCanns took the children to the creche every morning after breakfast and picked them up at lunchtime. The children spent two hours with the parents, eating lunch, and returned to the creche at 2 pm. Normally the parents picked them up between 4 and 5. The reason I said "assuming" is that, while we have no reason to believe their schedule that day was any different, it has never been established exactly what time the parents picked the kids up. Madeleine and the twins ate dinner and were usually in bed by 7:30 to 8:00.

So if one is theorizing the parents did this crime then we now have an "assumed" time to begin their window of opportunity to commit whatever crime took place. I wish we knew for certain when the last time the child was seen by non family. And by the way, I do not at all mind looking at theories about the parents committing the crime unless or until evidence rules them out and thats the same attitude I use for all potential suspects in a case.

I think this would depend on whether the McCanns prepared the children dinner or took them somewhere for it. If they ate in, that's a lot of time unaccounted for.

Hmm doctors not knowing how to handle sedatives with a child. Somehow that does not sound quite right when it is said like that but I suppose a child might have an unforseen reaction to a med.

Or they could've tried sedating Madeleine earlier in the week and it didn't work very well so they gave her more, ending up with too much. The only reason I say this is because sedation is based on weight, and on ICMEC page her weight is left blank. Maybe they didn't even know it.

Salem

07-29-2007, 04:13 AM

I will try to respond to some intersting point you made:

Ok but it has been quite awhile and this is not a wilderness we speak of so if she has not been found by now is it really unreasonable for the parents to think she was kidnapped?

One of the things about panic is that it can be unpredictable. A lady recently told me that she was at her home in the countryside and some hunters were evidently shooting at anything that moved and shots started landing very close to her and she panicked and instead of hitting the dirt and staying down out of sight she went blindly running accross the field trying to get "away".

I wish we knew for certain when the last time the child was seen by non family.

In past cases I have seen parents use kidnapping stories to cover up the death of their own child at the parents hands and sometimes the actual facts turned out to be pretty complicated.

Maybe the dumpster story was checked out and we just don't know but its one of tha many things in this case I wish we knew more about.

I still have no reason to assume the parents did the crime but it is interesting to look at the possibilities of all potential suspects, including mr murat and others.

Docwho3 - I'm not Calikid - but I did want to post some thoughts. I have edited your return post to Calikid for the sake of space.

First - the search of the area. I would agree that it is not really a wilderness so something would have turned up by now. Also, recently, I read an old media link (sorry I'm not sure which one) that indicated that an extensive ground search and an extensive door to door search were conducted. However, it was very frustrating to read the media reports of the P-LE handling of the search in the area identified by the Dutch pyschic. P-LE did not want to search, after much pressure by the media, finally approximately a dozen of them searched a very large area for approximately 1.5 hours.

Then the reports of the towel..... whatever happened with that?

Does it make it reasonable to think she was abducted because she has not turned up somewhere? Not in my mind. Unless there is a reason why it is not possible that she walked out of the apartment by herself - then this should be the first line of inquiry. She could very well have gone to play in the ocean.....

Second - while I agree with your assessment of what might happen when you are in a panic, generally speaking, when a person finds themselves in such a position, it is not uncommon to: 1) check self for injury, potential harm and react accordingly; 2) once self is covered, do a mental check of where those of importance might be - run through your mind wife/husband/children/parents; 3) at this point - if you are safe, almost always you will check to be sure your "immediate" others are safe. As a parent, this is your first priority, it is second nature; 4) you do what is necessary to protect your "immediate" others.

I do not believe a parent, who just discovered her child missing, would abandon her 2 other children, even for a moment. There were so many options here.... picking up the phone, standing outside the door and screaming, taking the children with her. Having given this quite a bit of thought - picking up the phone might have seemed like a "nonoption" knowing the person on the other end would speak Portugese, not English - discard this immediately because you have no time not to be understood. Standing outside the door and screaming - definite option, after all the Tapas Bar was within sight of the apartment, but maybe being of a more reserved culture, this type of behavior would be unacceptable to a panic'ed mind. Picking up the remaining 2 children and running for cover - totally acceptable on all accounts, except one... leaving the apartment without knowing where the 3rd child was. To my mind - it would be extremely difficult to walk/run out of that apartment not knowing where the 3rd child was.... Having gone through the safety issues related to my "immediate" others - GM waiting for me, twin 1 in bed, twin 2 in bed, Madeleine missing....., double check, still missing, twins still there, okay... I need help.... she's not in the bathroom, she's not under the bed, I need help.... where is she, need GM, what do I do? what do I do? phone - they won't understand, call GM - he doesn't have his cell phone (I don't have my cell phone), call him from the door (then I'll make quite the scene), go get him.... go get him.... the twins, what about the twins????? what do I do??? I need GM, Madeleine is missing, I need help.... go get him.

Okay - that was quite interesting. I have just talked my self out of the argument I wanted to make. In her shoes, if I was panic'ed, my thought is I would go get my husband. No way around it. He takes care of us, he always knows what to do. I would go get my husband. Now being the very vocal person that I am, I woud have stood at the top of the stairs and screamed for him, but I can understand NOW why she might not have.

As for your other comments - I agree. I wish we had more information. Even though I have just worked my way to understanding how she might have gone back to the Bar, leaving the other two children in harm's way, this story still does not ring true.

The last thing I would like to point out is that Jane's description of the egghead was very detailed. There were several media reports that pointed out that as described by Jane, the man with the child had "longish" hair in the back, reaching the collar. Media also reported that Mr. Murat has never had such a haircut, always keeping his hair well above the collar.

Salem

Shazza

07-29-2007, 04:13 AM

Originally Posted by docwho3 http://websleuths.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1603184#post1603184)
Hmm doctors not knowing how to handle sedatives with a child. Somehow that does not sound quite right when it is said like that but I suppose a child might have an unforseen reaction to a med.

The bolded section is what I have a problem with, you saying being doctors not knowing how to handle sedatives with a child, doesnt sit right with me either, but being doctors surely they understand the danger that they put their children in by leaving them alone at night in a strange country in a room with an unlocked door, and saying their children were checked every half hour. The staff at the restaurant said that none of those parents left the table whilst their for dinner. So who do we believe.

docwho3

07-29-2007, 05:55 AM

Docwho3 - I'm not Calikid - but I did want to post some thoughts. I have edited your return post to Calikid for the sake of space. . . I am glad you posted. We are here to do what little bit of good we can.

. . .First - the search of the area. I would agree that it is not really a wilderness so something would have turned up by now. Also, recently, I read an old media link (sorry I'm not sure which one) that indicated that an extensive ground search and an extensive door to door search were conducted. However, it was very frustrating to read the media reports of the P-LE handling of the search in the area identified by the Dutch pyschic. P-LE did not want to search, after much pressure by the media, finally approximately a dozen of them searched a very large area for approximately 1.5 hours. . . I can well understand L.E. not wanting to take the word of a psychic. It may be frustrating for the public to think that L.E. does not jump up and spend money to send in searchers over every unsubstantiated thing that comes along but that is the way it is so I suppose we will have to live with the situation.

. . .Then the reports of the towel..... whatever happened with that? . . . I will have to read up on that detail as it escapes my memory for now. Perhaps someone else can post a comment to recap and update us on the outcome of that, if the outcome is known. I will also try to find time to read up on it again myself.

. . .Does it make it reasonable to think she was abducted because she has not turned up somewhere? Not in my mind. . . .
Ok, for the sake of discussion I can go along with that thought to a point. So I guess I am wondering how the parents are guilty of murder because they assumed it was an abduction? If they had went along with the thought she just wandered away it might have made them look more innocent to some of the public and these are educated people who could well have tailored their comments to fit public expectations. The fact that they did not do so makes them seem less like a perp to me but it is not a reason in and of itself to declare them innocent or guilty of anything. We also do not know where the idea of a kidnapping came from. It may have issued from their lips but was the belief planted by L.E. or by murat or others nearby?

. . .Unless there is a reason why it is not possible that she walked out of the apartment by herself - then this should be the first line of inquiry. She could very well have gone to play in the ocean.....
And the body is where? It was searched for but missed and then eaten by fish? I suppose thats a possibility (with th