Theories

[colomom]

I'll start us off:

(Originally posted June 24 on Websleuths)

I really believe that prior to their dinner date that fateful evening GM and KM were preparing the kids for another evening alone. I think Maddie was not too pleased with the prospect. I think she had been traumatized a couple of nights previously, remember the reports of neighbors hearing her crying for her so-called father? She was not being cooperative and might even have thrown a fit. I think GM was angry at being kept from his "fun" that evening. I think he lost his temper when trying to get her to take her sedative and either scared her so badly that her little heart gave out or he manhandled her and fatally injured her. My reference to her heart has to do with the possibility of her having a heart defect related to a mild form of CHARGE that she might have had (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHARGE_syndrome). I believe that GM panicked and convinced KM that they had to cover it up because if they didn't they would lose their medical licenses and the twins as well. I think he had time to take Maddie's body to a remote location and hide her and then return to the resort in time for dinner. I would love to know how their dinner mates felt about their behavior that night. I think KM felt no choice but to go along with her husband. Some of her body language shows some anger towards GM. Watch her in this video (http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91210-1264418,00.html) when she reads the script asking for the return of their daughter and GM nuzzles her at the end. Watch her eyes and the movement of her head and see if you don't pick up on a flash of anger towards GM. I see it right at the end when he starts rubbing on her. I thought the nuzzle looked like GM's way of saying "thanks for going along with protecting my sorry a$$". Once the deed was done they were trapped. No going back. I am not sure that they have involved anyone else in this deception (maybe the friend that said she saw a stranger carring a child?) but he could insure their silence by threating to expose their own neglect of their children. He could convince them that if they talked they would all end up investigated by the authorities.

[Olivia77]

A fatal and violent reaction to a sedative is the theory I am going with...

ETA: I think that this reaction could have caused her to vomit, become very sick, etc, which to me would explain finding blood spatters or bodily fluids.

[KOOL LOOK]

Since we know there is blood involved, in the car, on the wall, forensics in the cupboard, and death smell on the cat toy and Kate's clothing, we know it wasn't a soft kill. Too much bodily fluids.

I believe it was out of control anger. I think sometime within 24 hours prior to her being reported she was killed. Not neccessarily the couple of hours during dinner and the missing report. Timeline is broader in my eyes.

They wanted to swing, eat, party and Maddy interfered with those plans and wouldn't cooperate in going to sleep at night and possibly during the day for nap times like the twins so Gerry could have sex with his wife.

Being they were new parents, especially just beginning to experience a child that knew what was going on in the environment and not sleeping alot, full of energy, that was new to them. Babies sleep alot, can lay in the bed with you, while mom and dad do other things and never know. Three and four year olds makes that not likely as their more aware.

I beleive after several days of putting up with this, much to their new surprise and not being accustomed to this interuption and interference, for they did work and having a needy demanding child around 24/7 is different.

This was their first vacation with an active know it all child where they couldn't easily get to nap and do whatever grown ups do with their young in the same room.

Now I have my foundation laid down so it can be visualized as to what could have happened during the days leading up to maddy's disappearance.

The credible neighbor witness hearing maddy cry and scream is critical to the truth of the matter of how they handled things as parents with their children. I raised three babies and mine never cried and screamed, "mommy, daddy unless something was really wrong. Being in the same room with the children, what possibly could be sooooooooo wrong. Unless possibly they could be doing trial runs of seeing how maddy would react to finding herself without her parents nearby and in the room.

My theory is maddy was killed prior to them arriving at their dinner table at the bar to meet their friends. I believe they ahd already placed her body temporarily in a safe place.

The screams and crying has me leaning towards drama going on in the family dynamics. Something the parents weren't accustomed to and didn't know how to react to. Which led to her death.

I don't believe it was premeditated. Just parents being exposed to new childlike behaviors they hadn't planned on that would interfer with their daily and nightly plans.

I believe one of the parents hit Maddy causing blunt force trauma, somewhere in her torso or head, hence causing the loss of bodily fluids.

I don't see Kate accepting the plea deal. They appear to think they have all rights to carry on and mis-lead the public and police. I don't see any remorse in either one of them. Just a major protecting of themselves. Anything not to loose their positions and lifestyle.

[colomom]

Rev. Hubbard's Theory

http://www.ukskeptics.com/commentary/2007/07/22/madeleine-mccann-psychic-predictions-and-insights/

[Salem]

I think it was a tussle between Kate and Maddie, possibly over cuddlecat. I agree it was not a soft kill. I know Gerry has confessed to the sedation, but I would ask: did he sedate all 3 kids that night or did he find Maddie did not need to be sedated. Did he sedate the twins to ensure they would not wake while they figured out what to do with the Maddie and twins wouldn't see what was happening?

I don't think it was premediated. I think at least 1 of the Tapas 9 other than the McCanns know what happened but I do not believe all 7 of them know.

Salem

[CaliKid]

This is an apended version of my theory I originally posted on June 25 here at WS. And I'm sorry, but it's rather long.

Something happened in the McCann's apartment on May 3 before they went out to dinner. Her doctor parents gave the children something to sedate them at night because Mrs. Fenn had heard Madeleine crying for Mommy and Daddy on at least one other occasion. I feel the McCanns didn't want to deal with a scared child or the resort asking questions while they were supposed to be drinking with friends. Sedating the kids took care of the problem. But Madeleine overdosed or had an allergic reaction. Or under sedation, she suffered some kind of accidental death.

Nobody has said when Madeleine was last seen by anybody other than her parents or what their movements were prior to leaving for dinner. To me it's obvious that one of the McCanns did something and accidentally caused her death, and the claims of the kidnapping was a cover-up. My opinion is based on the weird behavior of the McCanns since Madeleine disappeared and their quickly-changing stories:

a. The McCanns first said that someone broke in through a jimmied door and/or window which was eventually discounted by the police and resort staff, at which time it turned into we left the patio door unlocked. Of interest, it appears as if the McCanns had to change their story once they realized the break-in theory wasn't being believed. They also stood to get in a lot of trouble for leaving their children in a locked apartment because of the fire danger.

b. The McCanns claimed they were checking on the children every 30 minutes. Soon after this turned into "one of us walked up to the apartment and listened at the door..." Only after restaurant employees said that nobody in the party left their table for two hours did we find out they weren't eyeballing them regularly. And then all of a sudden a couple weeks later Jane Tanner "remembered" that she saw a suspicious someone carrying a child wearing pajamas and wrapped in a blanket when she was rushing to join the other adults (or returned to the apartment to check on her own child- take your pick).

c. Kate McCann's screams to GM at 10:00 that "They took her", as she raced back to the restaurant without the twins. Who is "they"? Which one of her daughters is "her"? Like if she suspected that someone had kidnapped one of the children, why would she leave the twins alone?

d. Even the fact that all of the McCanns' friends trouped through the apartment before the police arrived is suspect. These are supposed to be a bunch of doctors whom we can reasonably assume are intelligent people, and surely one of them should've thought about contaminating a potential crime scene.

e. Add to the fact that absolutely nothing has been said by any of the couples who went to Portugal with the McCanns in their defense, and it makes me really suspicious of a conspiracy. The Tapas 9 employed a Pact of Silence.

f. Forgive me for thinking this, but the McCanns didn't act like grieving parents. At first they were sort of upset (although if you looked carefully, there were no tears), but even if they are personally responsible for Madeleine's death, they still loved her and miss her. They could've been reacting to guilt too. But within about two weeks they started acting normal, and I don't think it was just to put on a brave face for Sean and Amelie. Smiling and waving for cameras, smirking during interviews- they looked like anything but parents with a missing child.

g. The McCanns spent the summer flitting all over Europe. I don't fault them for making dignitaries aware of Madeleine, but they were not searching for her. Who goes to visit the Pope and tries to get an audience with Laura Bush? GM's trip to America was about other missing kids, not Madeleine. His blogs about their day were an embarrassment of jogging times, hair appointments, rushing back and forth to airports and photo opportunities, but he rarely said anything about their daughter. If Maddie had really been kidnapped, why were they poo-pooing sightings of her in Malta, Belgium and elsewhere? Is it because they knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that she wasn't there?

i. When Robert Murat became an arguido, the McCanns' friends were very quick to jump on the bandwagon and start pointing fingers, but there was absolutely no evidence against him other than their testimony. It was very suspicious how the man in the tan pants carrying something in his arms quickly turned into Murat carrying Madeleine. It just sounded like they wanted someone- anyone- to be a suspect and take the spotlight off themselves. And in the meantime, the McCanns and their supporters keep throwing accusations of incompetency about the P-LE around.

j. The whole FindMadeleine fund was a huge red flag to me. What kind of people who have had a child kidnapped go out and start a fighting fund two weeks after her disappearance? Who puts up a store to sell wristbands and posters of your child- which in other missing children's cases are always free- on a website? It appeared to me as if the McCanns are turning Madeleine's disappearance into a huge money-making machine with no accountability on how the money was spent or whether they'd have to give the remainder back if she was found. GM spent a lot of time talking to funding officers about various events that really didn't seem to have much to do with finding her. And while there were restrictions about using private investigators in Portugal, if they really wanted a private team to come in and look for her, it probably would've been allowed. So why didn't the McCanns hire detectives to track Madeleine? And why didn't they go to places where child trafficking is a severe problem, like Eastern Europe?

k. Instead of returning to England and giving their twins a sense of normalcy and spending time with them, they stayed in Portugal indefinitely while Kate worked on her suntan. At the risk of appearing heartless, the McCanns looked like they were on an endless vacation. Their families took turns sending relatives out to visit, and they put their children in the resort creche almost every day. Like what kind of parents who have had one child stolen would be willing to part with the other two on a daily basis? And I really think that the McCanns were not as free to travel as they made out, because I can only think of one occasion in which both parents and the kids were allowed to leave Portugal at the same time.

l. The high-level government meddling also was a red flag. How were two seemingly insignificant doctors able to get two British prime ministers to lend their support as well as staff? And the UK media, whom I understand are usually bulldogs in digging through someone's life looking for scandal, were surprisingly muzzled about the McCanns. Instead of reporting on the neglect angle and checking with people who knew the family in Leicester, they wrote puff pieces on "tragic" Kate and Gerry. All we heard about from the UK were how the foreign news stories contained lies, vicious slurs and "hurtful, unhelpful" speculations about the McCanns. Anyone raising any negative opinions about the parents were labeled scum, or (my favorite from Phil McCann) members of a witch's coven. There was a complete black-out of all questions about the McCanns' behavior at all levels.

[BloodshotEye]

Tipping my hat to Colomom. Indeed.

And I would add one small adjustment to my theory:
It's kind of an "If/then" theory.

1. If we can speculate/presume that the child exhibits one (possibly more that we cannot directly observe) clinical symptoms of CHARGE syndrome (the coloboma in the eye is quite noticable), then (as some technical papers suggest), this child is very much at risk for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), (as well as heart related complications as Colomom stated).

2. Anethesia of a child at risk for OSA (including children with CHARGE syndrome) is a discussed in a number of clinical papers. If there is such a risk, then quite possibly, there are very real risks associated with the administration of sedatives to such a child.

3. Some individuals with CHARGE have abnormal gastro-esophageal reflux. If such a child was sedated, and vomited - the results could be deadly. Accidental, but deadly.

4. Upon discovery of Maddie by Kate, the child was quickly put into a suit case. And K McC, rushed out to begin shouting that "they took her".

For now, until we have additional information, I speculate that the death was accidental, and not an abduction. This tragic accident, caused these two parents to hide, and then bury their child. And make the requisite claims that might save their remaining family from further grief and preserve their careers/reputation within the medical community.

Hole in my theory:
Not sure, but I think this theory pretty much excludes the possibility that Maddie was already known to be dead, and was hidden or "buried", before the McC's went to party. Why? Because I am assuming that the objective of sedating Maddie, was to make her sleep through the Tappas Bar party.

Unless...Maddie was sedated sometime that day, to "test" it's effect. And that was when the accident happened. And the rest of the evening, was simply an act to create their alibi.

Technicalities:
Technical references list the following syndromes that mimic some of the attributes of CHARGE syndrome include:
22q deletion syndrome, VATER/VACTERL association (the ears, face and hands do not look like CHARGE syndrome); Chromosome abnormalities; Retinoic embryopathy; PAX2 mutations (can cause colobomas, hearing loss and rare kidney problems).

[Columbo]

This is an apended version of my theory I originally posted on June 25 here at WS. And I'm sorry, but it's rather long.

Something happened in the McCann's apartment on May 3 before they went out to dinner. Her doctor parents gave the children something to sedate them at night because Mrs. Fenn had heard Madeleine crying for Mommy and Daddy on at least one other occasion. I feel the McCanns didn't want to deal with a scared child or the resort asking questions while they were supposed to be drinking with friends. Sedating the kids took care of the problem. But Madeleine overdosed or had an allergic reaction. Or under sedation, she suffered some kind of accidental death.

Nobody has said when Madeleine was last seen by anybody other than her parents or what their movements were prior to leaving for dinner. To me it's obvious that one of the McCanns did something and accidentally caused her death, and the claims of the kidnapping was a cover-up. My opinion is based on the weird behavior of the McCanns since Madeleine disappeared and their quickly-changing stories:

a. Someone broke in through a jimmied door and/or window which was eventually discounted by the police and resort staff, at which time it turned into we left the patio door unlocked. Of interest, it appears as if the McCanns had to change their story once they realized the break-in theory wasn't being believed. They also stood to get in a lot of trouble for leaving their children in a locked apartment because of the fire danger.

b. We were checking on the children every 30 minutes became one of us walked up to the apartment and listened at the door became ... (only after restaurant employees claimed nobody in the party left their table for two hours did we find out they weren't eyeballing them regularly). And then all of a sudden a couple weeks later Jane Tanner "remembered" that she saw a suspicious someone carrying a child wearing pajamas and wrapped in a blanket when she was rushing to join the other adults (or returned to the apartment to check on her own child- take your pick).

c. Kate McCann's screams to GM at 10:00 that "They took her", as she raced back to the restaurant without the twins. Who is "they"? Which one of her daughters is "her"? Like if she suspected that someone had kidnapped one of the children, why would she leave the twins alone?

d. Even the fact that all of the McCanns' friends trouped through the apartment before the police arrived is suspect. These are supposed to be a bunch of doctors whom we can reasonably assume are intelligent people, and surely one of them should've thought about contaminating a potential crime scene.

e. Add to the fact that absolutely nothing has been said by any of the couples who went to Portugal with the McCanns in their defense, and it makes me really suspicious of a conspiracy. The Tapas 9 employed a Pact of Silence.

f. Forgive me for thinking this, but the McCanns didn't act like grieving parents. At first they were sort of upset (although if you looked carefully, there were no tears), but even if they are personally responsible for Madeleine's death, they still loved her and miss her. They could've been reacting to guilt too. But within about two weeks they started acting normal, and I don't think it was just to put on a brave face for Sean and Amelie. Smiling and waving for cameras, smirking during interviews- they looked like anything but parents with a missing child.

g. The McCanns spent the summer flitting all over Europe. I don't fault them for making dignitaries aware of Madeleine, but they were not searching for her. Who goes to visit the Pope and tries to get an audience with Laura Bush? GM's trip to America was about other missing kids, not Madeleine. His blogs about their day were an embarrassment of jogging times, hair appointments, rushing back and forth to airports and photo opportunities, but he rarely said anything about their daughter. If Maddie had really been kidnapped, why were they poo-pooing sightings of her in Malta, Belgium and elsewhere? Is it because they knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that she wasn't there?

i. When Robert Murat became an arguido, the McCanns' friends were very quick to jump on the bandwagon and start pointing fingers, but there was absolutely no evidence against him other than their testimony. It was very suspicious how the man in the tan pants carrying something in his arms quickly turned into Murat carrying Madeleine. It just sounded like they wanted someone- anyone- to be a suspect and take the spotlight off themselves. And in the meantime, the McCanns and their supporters keep throwing accusations of incompetency about the P-LE around.

j. The whole FindMadeleine fund was a huge red flag to me. What kind of people who have had a child kidnapped go out and start a fighting fund two weeks after her disappearance? Who puts up a store to sell wristbands and posters of your child- which in other missing children's cases are always free- on a website? It appeared to me as if the McCanns are turning Madeleine's disappearance into a huge money-making machine with no accountability on how the money was spent or whether they'd have to give the remainder back if she was found. GM spent a lot of time talking to funding officers about various events that really didn't seem to have much to do with finding her. And while there were restrictions about using private investigators in Portugal, if they really wanted a private team to come in and look for her, it probably would've been allowed. So why didn't the McCanns hire detectives to track Madeleine? And why didn't they go to places where child trafficking is a severe problem, like Eastern Europe?

k. Instead of returning to England and giving their twins a sense of normalcy and spending time with them, they stayed in Portugal indefinitely while Kate worked on her suntan. At the risk of appearing heartless, the McCanns looked like they were on an endless vacation. Their families took turns sending relatives out to visit, and they put their children in the resort creche almost every day. Like what kind of parents who have had one child stolen would be willing to part with the other two on a daily basis? And I really think that the McCanns were not as free to travel as they made out, because I can only think of one occasion in which both parents and the kids were allowed to leave Portugal at the same time.

l. The high-level government meddling also was a red flag. How were two seemingly insignificant doctors able to get two British prime ministers to lend their support as well as staff? And the UK media, whom I understand are usually bulldogs in digging through someone's life looking for scandal, were surprisingly muzzled about the McCanns. Instead of reporting on the neglect angle and checking with people who knew the family in Leicester, they wrote puff pieces on "tragic" Kate and Gerry. All we heard about from the UK were how the foreign news stories contained lies, vicious slurs and "hurtful, unhelpful" speculations about the McCanns. Anyone raising any negative opinions about the parents were labeled scum, or (my favorite from Phil McCann) members of a witch's coven. There was a complete black-out of all questions about the McCanns' behavior at all levels.

Wow--great post, CaliKid. Thanks. I was on the fence but after reading your excellent summary here, I think they must have had something to do with their daughter's death. So many red flags! Apparently the Portuguese LE officers are NOT a bunch of Keystone Cops, either.

[Barnaby]

Hi, new to this Forum.

I originally thought that the adbuction had been a set up for money & that Madeleine would reappear. I was immediately suspect at the statement "They've taken her, They've taken her" I also thought that was the reason for their lack of emotion because they knew she was safe & well. However, with all the emerging information it would appear that the child is unfortunately dead & therefore I have to subscribe to the school of thought that they were indeed involved.

[twinkiesmom]

I'm with Callikid's theory but believe that they discovered her dead only after they returned from the restaurant and she was handed off to another member of the party prior to the authorities being notified. That would account for "We've let her down" being heard as well as the body being present for 2 hrs in the apartment necessary for the cadaver dogs to pick up on the scent.

There were media reports that the family that rented the apartment subsequent to the McCann's were responsible for the blood on the wall. It may be very much like the Laci case in which their were numerous leaks about blood in the home that never materialized...the reports of blood galvanized the public relations campaign against the defendant....and you can feel the tide turning against the McCann's.

[Betsy]

This may seem fat-fetched, but I'm going to say it anyway.

In reading the daily blog, my first thought was "This blog is an effort to communicate information--but in a code-like fashion."

I'm assuming that the McCann's phones and e-mail accounts were being tapped, and they most likely could not sit around and chat with the Tapas bar friends. What if one or more of these friends WAS involved in the cover-up? How could the McCann's communicate with them and let them know what was going on?

These stupid references to breakfast and jogging and whatnot--could they mean something else?

Or do I just watch too much TV?

[poco]

c. Kate McCann's screams to GM at 10:00 that "They took her", as she raced back to the restaurant without the twins. Who is "they"? Which one of her daughters is "her"? Like if she suspected that someone had kidnapped one of the children, why would she leave the twins alone?


WOW, this sets my hinky meter off - good call Cali -

WHY would she leave the two twins alone when she just found her one daughter missing..........

WHY did she say "THEY took HER"; if that is in fact exactly what she said. Can anyone verify this? This sounds like a staged comment. THEY - who is they?? why did she say they? and HER - her who? There was another little girl in that room.

Wouldn't you think she would have said something more along the lines of "Maddie is not in the apartment" or "Maddie isn't in her bed" -
NOT - THEY TOOK HER!!!!!

In a way it sounds to me like a rehearsed script -

[philamena]

....

In a way it sounds to me like a rehearsed script -

Hummm reminds me of a 3 page ransom note.

[MoonGoddess]

Copy/pasted under instruction from colomom:blowkiss:

I have believed from the very beginning (colomom can verify) that Madeleine died as a result of an accident in the apartment, I feel this was bought on by Gerrys temper as she was playing up because she knew they were going out to party, I do believe she had been sedated but I dont believe this is what killed her, I feel Gerry grabbed her in a rage and she smacked her head and even possibly broke her neck, they knew as Dr's that they couldn't deny the way she died (and sedatives in the system) and they went into a blind panic. I believe he took control, Kate cleaned the apartment and he went and hid her, I feel it happened at bathtime @6.37 and he had her hidden by 8pm in a remote spot within a few miles of the apartment, I do feel he must have had use of a car at that time because I feel he took her out of the apartment in a suitcase and put it in the back of a car (NOT the one he later hired) I haven't been able to verify his having the use of a car, but I feel he could already have hold of some car keys (from the 'swinging' time they were having) or he could have asked one of the other group to borrow it as he had to run an errand?

I think Madeleine is laying in barren/scrubland or parkland, I really dont believe (and having been there cant see how or where he could have thrown her into the sea) I dont think that would fit the profile of a father who had accidently killed his child, he was her father at the end of the day and didn't intend for this to happen, I cant see that he could dispose of her in a bin, as I mentioned I could not see anywhere near the church where she could be....

I think she must be wrapped in a sheet/blanket or large towel as he couldn't bare to look at what he had done, she could even still be in the suitcase or one of those 'clothes protectors' - you know the ones you use to protect suits/dresses when travelling... there are rocks everywhere in these remote spots and he could have placed rocks/large cement blocks on top of her...

I think they will find her and am incredibly anxious to know where...

This is getting a bit long but just quickly to say, I think Kate will confess, I think the PJ could know its Gerry but is seeing if Kate will crack if they imply it is her, or if Gerry will stand by and let her take the wrap for it... once she has confessed he will have no choice but to lead the PJ to her little body - I think they should be the ones responsible for at last giving their child the proper burial she deserves...

All unbelievable I know, to think these two could have gone to dinner after their child had just been laid out somewhere... I dont think they have fully come to terms with it themselves, they are in utter denial...

ALL IMHO of course...

Diane
http://websleuths.com/forums/images/misc/progress.gif

[christine2448]

Don't know if this theory has been mentioned....I can hardly keep up!!!!!

Everyone is so focused on the night she was reported missing, thinking things through, this may have been mentioned, but I'm wondering if something happened BEFORE the dinner party, she was already dead and moved...then dinner (alibi maybe) and return, she's gone!

This is my theory at THIS moment, subject to change at any moment after THIS one!

[aussie_mum]

christine I am about to agree with you. Of course this is all suppasition as we really don't have much real information about the days lead up....

So this is my sort of theory..... it may change.... but the idea will prob always be similar...... that is her parents are to blame for her death.

Unless it can be verified that Maddie was seen 1st at the pool swimming where the picture was taken and 2nd that evening for supper with her parents, but not her brother and sister this is what I guess to have happened, but it could have happened after the swim.

An ordinary household accident or perhaps a little bit of brute strength while trying to control Maddie. Perhaps while she was in the bath she wasn't attended to or maybe a backhand that went astray. I have heard alot in cases of child abuse that they felt like they just couldn't stop when they started. Perhaps Kate did something similar and the bruises on her arms were from Gerry pulling her off Maddie. Once they realised she was dead they did a clean up job because in this situation there would have been blood.... but not too much perhaps a smear or a few drops. Upon realising what they have done Gerry decides the best thing to do is to cover for his dear wife because Maddie knew they loved her and her brother and sister have already lost their sister and don't need to lose their mum.
Kate holds her little body and says good bye knowing that it is not maddy anymore just a shell while Gerry cleans up. They then place Maddy into a small suitcase that wouldn't attract attention being carried around by a tourist (or even perhaps a stroller with a cover). Gerry takes the body and hides it some where possibly in a cave under some rocks or on a ledge at the back, or under a shrub.
He then went to the upstairs appartment to ask a friend to dinner that night at the tappas bar while still holding the suitcase.... then he went to the store and perhaps dumped any sheets etc. Or even just to buy a drink.
He then returns home and they concoct the story about the kidnapping with the plan beeing that one of the other parents find Maddy missing. The twins are dopped up so they don't wake when someone enters the room and are asked wheres maddie? and perhaps say something like "She isn't here." Basically saying they knew she wasn't there which they wouldn't have known if they had slept thru it all.
So unfortunately because no one actually went into the room, Kate got antsy and decided she would have to be the discoverer before they all got to drunk or they called it a night early.
When Gerry took the suitcase to the beach with the sand toys for the twins I think that was so if someone had seen him with it previously it could be said he carried it on a regular basis.
The same suitcase, I think sat in the car because even tho they couldn't throw it, they couldn't bear to look at it. Which is why the dogs picked the smell up. Also why they may have picked it up in a cupboard if I recall correctly.
Perhaps Cuddle cat was in the suitcase with Maddie but while going to bury her Gerry decides that he can't leave cuddle cat to and brings it home where it is placed on the shelf with the intention of putting it in Maddies bed after the twins are asleep so they don't get it and play with it, which wouldn't have happened if Maddie was there and sleeping with it. however they forget, so it remains on the shelf.

They get all this media attention, first by accident and then they start to act on. Start to believe what is said about them. That they did their best etc etc. They couldn't look for Maddie or write about her on the website.... they already knew she was gone so they write about themselves and what they are doing. Totally missing the point that people are looking for Maddie.

[Barnaby]

Has anyone looked at the possibility that this was a planned killing? It sounds preposterous & unthinkable I know but it would explain the composure of the parents. Even if you killed your daughter accidentally & decided to cover it up surely you would be too totally distraught at the loss to go to dinner & act normal?
Could she have been ill/had a syndrome, maybe was going to die anyway & they all planned this easy way out in advance? Would explain kate McCann taking the cat to the scene of a cadaver in advance of the holiday as they would know about forensics.

[twinkiesmom]

Copy/pasted under instruction from colomom:blowkiss:

I have believed from the very beginning (colomom can verify) that Madeleine died as a result of an accident in the apartment, I feel this was bought on by Gerrys temper as she was playing up because she knew they were going out to party, I do believe she had been sedated but I dont believe this is what killed her, I feel Gerry grabbed her in a rage and she smacked her head and even possibly broke her neck, they knew as Dr's that they couldn't deny the way she died (and sedatives in the system) and they went into a blind panic. Diane
http://websleuths.com/forums/images/misc/progress.gif

I agree with most of your hypotheses, but I believe either it was parental rage or oversedation...the combination seems contraintuitive. If she was acting up and he sedated her, all he'd have to do is wait for the drug to kick in.

[CaliKid]

Has anyone looked at the possibility that this was a planned killing? It sounds preposterous & unthinkable I know but it would explain the composure of the parents. Even if you killed your daughter accidentally & decided to cover it up surely you would be too totally distraught at the loss to go to dinner & act normal?
Could she have been ill/had a syndrome, maybe was going to die anyway & they all planned this easy way out in advance? Would explain kate McCann taking the cat to the scene of a cadaver in advance of the holiday as they would know about forensics.

We have speculated about the CHARGE syndrome because of Maddie's coloboma in her eye, and from what we found out, it can cause a variety of both physical and behavioral symptoms.

I have often wondered if Gerry McCann merely tolerated his oldest daughter. If he was truly as narcissistic as I think he is, he wouldn't have had the capacity to love her the way most parents do love their children.

Kate admitted she had colic as an infant, and I can testify that for some parents this can lead to a lot of resentment towards the child and the spouse. Mom is anxious because she can't get the baby to stop crying and becomes angry with the father who can just walk away, while he resent the time Mom has to put into caring and comforting the baby.

Maybe Madeleine was truly only loved and wanted until the birth of the twins- both healthy, one of each sex, better than Madeleine because they weren't flawed. Is it possible that one of the parents had jealousy issues with her? Or as she grew up, apparently stubborn, defiant and acting out, was she beginning to embarrass her parents with her behavior? As Gerry snidely put it, "What Madeleine wants, Madeleine gets."

As horrible as this sounds, was the whole idea of this vacation a setting for Madeleine's murder? Was Portugal chosen as a holiday site so they'd be in one of the poorest countries in the EU where there wouldn't be the standard resources to investigate properly? Remember how quickly the media campaign and FindMadeleine fund came together- how would grieving parents be able to come up with it in two weeks, even with help?

I don't like thinking these things because, as a mom, it goes against everything I believe about loving your children no matter what. But the more I watch the McCanns, the more it makes me wonder.

[patti54]

Rev. Hubbard's Theory

http://www.ukskeptics.com/commentary/2007/07/22/madeleine-mccann-psychic-predictions-and-insights/

Complete with a psychic's help.

I was surprised there was not a thread here comparing the two cases.

You have Auntie, a mysterious open window, a mother accused of 'accidentally' killing her child, a mother whose first words upon finding her child missing are unusual, parents who are wealthy, a friend who was with the father but did not see the child, siblings who slept through the ordeal, the list goes on and on. So far the only thing missing is a Hi Tek shoe print.

I don't have a theory as to what happened but I do not understand why the parents have not been charged with child neglect. There is a credible witness reporting that Maddie cried for 75 minutes on the night prior to the night of the crime. There is no question that the 3 babies were left alone that night. Why are these people not charged with child abuse? Why are those twins not in protective custody?

The dinner party of 9 downed 14 bottles of wine on the night of the crime. Now there's some reliable witnesses.

[Texana]

The dinner party of 9 downed 14 bottles of wine on the night of the crime. Now there's some reliable witnesses.

Exactly, although they now say they didn't drink that much. They apparently just paid for it.

:slap:

[hcc2007]

Calikid,

I'm with you on every one of your points, except the last. I don't think they premeditated a murder. But I think they may have reached some point where they were careless and negligent and maybe overly forceful with this little girl who was an annoyance to them.

Terribly sad to think of, but it has happened before. I haven't seen statistics, but I'm willing to bet a lot that parents kill children FAR more often than random strangers do.

Also, parents with a lot of guilt (whether they actually killed her or just didn't love her enough) sometimes react more than parents who can lay the child to rest knowing in their hearts that they gave the child all they could. That uncaring aspect of the McCanns might actually explain their going overboard on the search thing. They have to purge themselves of guilt.

For the theory I HOPE is true, see below -- a new posting.

Calikid wrote:
"I have often wondered if Gerry McCann merely tolerated his oldest daughter.

Kate admitted she had colic as an infant, and I can testify that for some parents this can lead to a lot of resentment towards the child and the spouse.

Maybe Madeleine was truly only loved and wanted until the birth of the twins- both healthy, one of each sex, better than Madeleine because they weren't flawed.

As horrible as this sounds, was the whole idea of this vacation a setting for Madeleine's murder?"

[hcc2007]

Here's a new one:

What if all the publicity around the McCanns being named suspects is actually a ploy to bring the TRUE suspect out of the woodwork? Get the person to relax their guard, do something stupid?

It just strikes me as strange that the family spokesman was saying such incriminating things about the McCanns (she was the first to report that Kate had been offered a plea deal) and the media being full of information that someone is obviously leaking to them.

Yet at the same time there's a supposedly a silence order on both the police and the McCanns.

Would anyone here give this theory a ghost of a chance? I sure wish it could be true.

[wtsn5]

Here's a new one:

What if all the publicity around the McCanns being named suspects is actually a ploy to bring the TRUE suspect out of the woodwork? Get the person to relax their guard, do something stupid?

It just strikes me as strange that the family spokesman was saying such incriminating things about the McCanns (she was the first to report that Kate had been offered a plea deal) and the media being full of information that someone is obviously leaking to them.

Yet at the same time there's a supposedly a silence order on both the police and the McCanns.

Would anyone here give this theory a ghost of a chance? I sure wish it could be true.


Wow I was thinking the exact same thing. I just don't think it is true.

[BethyC]

What does everyone mean when they say, 'not murder but an accident' - how does everyone think Maddy died by accident. Just curious -- my kids have tumbled down stairs and hit pavement and I can go on & on -- they get up and walk away everytime!! Not a scratch. Just wondering what sort of accident could kill a 3 year old from a first floor apartment.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/misc/progress.gif

[CaliKid]

What does everyone mean when they say, 'not murder but an accident' - how does everyone think Maddy died by accident. Just curious -- my kids have tumbled down stairs and hit pavement and I can go on & on -- they get up and walk away everytime!! Not a scratch. Just wondering what sort of accident could kill a 3 year old from a first floor apartment.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/misc/progress.gif

It depends on what you call an accident.

If you're talking about her wandering away from the apartment, there are some credible possibilities. But the only explanation would be if Madeleine's accidental death was caused by someone who didn't want to be blamed (such as hitting her with a car, etc.) and they hid her body somewhere.

As far as the parents go, an accidental death would be from giving her a sedative. Either they gave her too much, she vomited in her sleep and choked to death, or she tried to get out of bed and fell, etc.

[christine2448]

It depends on what you call an accident.

If you're talking about her wandering away from the apartment, there are some credible possibilities. But the only explanation would be if Madeleine's accidental death was caused by someone who didn't want to be blamed (such as hitting her with a car, etc.) and they hid her body somewhere.

As far as the parents go, an accidental death would be from giving her a sedative. Either they gave her too much, she vomited in her sleep and choked to death, or she tried to get out of bed and fell, etc.

I just read your post Cali on the Where is Maddie, thread, where is she????

This is what I have been thinking (whatever happened, happened way before the missing report was made and everyone has been focused on that time and after) but w/o the info you all have, I can hardly keep up w/you guys...I couldn't make sense of what I was thinking...here you explain. I didn't even know about the frequent trips around by dad, the suitcase, the friggie...all very interesting. I am not sure this is exactly how it happened, but I am still saying whatever happened, happened BEFORE dinner the night they reported her missing.


I refer to your post # 6 on the following thread :clap:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53160

[MeddleGuru]

Hi everyone - new poster here.

Sudden flash on an old topic: Kate running back to the tapas bar and shouting to her friends "They've taken her!"

Might she have meant -- or, more cynically, meant to imply to the friends that she believed -- that "they" were some of the staff of the resort, who, having already spoken to the McCanns about leaving their children alone, had taken it upon themselves to go snooping about the McCanns' villa and upon seeing that the kids were once again alone then had the gall to walk in and remove Maddie themselves? Perhaps she and Gerry had told the friends that they'd been warned earlier by the staff not to leave the children. So "They've taken her" would have been said in sort of gossipy exasperation, not in panic. "Oh good grief, check this out, can you believe the nerve" kind of thing. And would explain running back to the tapas bar instead of calling the police, or even going down to the front desk. AND would give her an absolute air of innocence.

I haven't read anywhere the details of that scene, and obviously everyone immediately determined Maddie had been kidnapped, not simply removed to safety by some uppity disapproving workers. But... interesting, anyway, IMO.

[philamena]

Hi MeddleGuru,
That is a very good theory! Now you've got me wondering if little Maddie cried every night when her mom and dad went out and left her and the twins alone.

[patti54]

Wow, the bar is quite a bit further from the apartment than I realized:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2007/09/12/nmaddy112map.jpg

[rmf]

I've been thinking about this case and forgive me if starting another thread isn't the right thing to do... but I have a theory and I'm not sure if anyone else has thought about this...? (Mods, feel free to move this if need be)

I don't know much about the town or area where this little girl disappeared, so bear with me. But what I do know is that if the reports are true about the kids crying on previous nights when they were left alone, could it be plausible that Madeleine got out of bed and wandered out of the apartment on her own, looking for Mom and Dad?

In small European towns, there are narrow streets and alleyways around buildings that can be very dark at night. Also Europeans tend to drive a lot faster than us Yanks and also do not have the "yield the right of way to pedestrians" thing ingrained in their psyche. (If you've been to Europe and tried to cross a street then you know what I mean.)

I am wondering if this child got out of the apartment somehow and then met with either foul play or an accident? If a person hit her they could have panicked and tried to dump the body somewhere. Also is it possible this could have happened and then the parents found her after, panicked and disposed of the body?

Three year olds can be very mischevious and it is not beyond the realm of possibility to me that this little girl could have wandered out of the apartment since there was no supervision.

Thoughts?

[Jeana (DP)]

I think its a possibility.

[englishleigh]

I think it is, too. I think it's a very good theory.

[KOOL LOOK]

I felt truth and a sense of reasonableness to this theory. Actually, quiet good. That would explain it being an accident. Which I think 98% of us do agree that it was an accident.

We have been leaning to accidental drug overdose, or out of control accidental anger outburst.

This theory does work for me. That's motive right there. Being they left the children again alone in the room, even after warnings, found her harmed or dead, that would be a reason to cover up and hide the body.

[Schmerty_Jones]

It is as possible as some of the other theories put forward. However the negligence of leaving 3 babies unattended & the cover-up don't make this tradegy much more palatable than sedation , & cover-up! or violence & cover-up!

[Texana]

I think it's more plausible she wandered off, then she was taken by an abductor within the narrow window of time available.

[wicket]

Could one parent be covering for another? Just suppose one parent has been known to have a quick temper and the other parent has been continuously covering for him/her. In this case, if this was found out, the twins would be taken away during investigation and also their reputations adversely affected. It has happened time and again where a parent professes the innocence of the other parent even when a child is covered with bruises, sexually molested or dead.

OTOH, the mother went through many procedures to have children - what if the father was less interested in fathering than has been depicted?

And around and around I go.......

[kiltubrid]

She may have wandered off and been hit by a car, but why would the parents hide that fact? Why would the mother say "They took her"? And why the DNA in the trunk of the rental car?

If the parents were completely innocent, I'd have thought their first assumption would have been that she had wandered off to look for them, especially since they had left the door unlocked.

[MeddleGuru]

My heart just breaks for that child. Even if she's alive. Horrible world.

[kiltubrid]

My theory is that it was Russell O'Brien who accidentally killed Maddie. Here's how I think it happened: On the day of May 3, the Tapas group was planning their evening outing, and the McCanns said they might not be able to go out because Maddie had cried so the night before that a neighbor had complained. O'Brien, an anesthesiologist, offered to give the child a sedative to put her to sleep.The McCanns accepted his offer.

When either Gerry or Oldfield went to check on her, Maddie was found either in some sort of distress or perhaps already dead, so O'Brien was called for help. O'Brien found her dead, and panicked. He took her body and hid it, perhaps in the trunk of his rental car. (Is this possibly the same car the McCann's rented 5 weeks later?) That would explain why he was gone so long. He made up the story about his own daughter vomiting to account for it. (I mean, really, what parent would leave a vomiting child unattended?) This would also make it possible to wash Maddie's sheets without raising suspicion.

Meanwhile, his partner, Jane Tanner, concocted the story of seeing a man carrying a child under a blanket to make it seem like Maddie had been abducted. Ironically, she may have actually seen this -- except it was not a stranger but instead O'Brien carrying Maddie out under a blanket. Perhaps they were also covering their tracks in case any one else witnessed O'Brien carrying her out. Part of the cover-up plan was to implicate Robert Murat, whom O'Brien and Tanner had reportedly met days before Maddie's disappearance.

After O'Brien returned to the bar, the entire group panicked and discussed a cover-up plan. That would explain why they are now observing a code of silence. Once the plan was in place, Kate returned to the room and made the scene about Maddie missing. Her odd claim that "They took her" may have referred to a part of the plan that was never put into play. Perhaps, for example, one of the Tapa group had was supposed to report seeing two strangers sniffing around the kids earlier that day. (Or perhaps they were going to claim that she was abducted by the same group of individuals that represented a small foreign faction who kidnapped Jon Benet. :) )

The McCanns launched into a media blitz not only to cover things up but to keep O'Brien out of the spotlight. And they can both honestly say that neither of them killed Maddie.

[KR2tonenow]

I've been thinking about this case and forgive me if starting another thread isn't the right thing to do... but I have a theory and I'm not sure if anyone else has thought about this...? (Mods, feel free to move this if need be)

I don't know much about the town or area where this little girl disappeared, so bear with me. But what I do know is that if the reports are true about the kids crying on previous nights when they were left alone, could it be plausible that Madeleine got out of bed and wandered out of the apartment on her own, looking for Mom and Dad?

In small European towns, there are narrow streets and alleyways around buildings that can be very dark at night. Also Europeans tend to drive a lot faster than us Yanks and also do not have the "yield the right of way to pedestrians" thing ingrained in their psyche. (If you've been to Europe and tried to cross a street then you know what I mean.)

I am wondering if this child got out of the apartment somehow and then met with either foul play or an accident? If a person hit her they could have panicked and tried to dump the body somewhere. Also is it possible this could have happened and then the parents found her after, panicked and disposed of the body?

Three year olds can be very mischevious and it is not beyond the realm of possibility to me that this little girl could have wandered out of the apartment since there was no supervision.

Thoughts?

Absolutely! I wonder what the blood near the window was? The cadaver dogs caught the scent in the apartment and then down to the church.

I wish they'd search the church grounds already!!

[christine2448]

My theory is that it was Russell O'Brien who accidentally killed Maddie. Here's how I think it happened: On the day of May 3, the Tapas group was planning their evening outing, and the McCanns said they might not be able to go out because Maddie had cried so the night before that a neighbor had complained. O'Brien, an anesthesiologist, offered to give the child a sedative to put her to sleep.

When Gerry went to check on her, he found her either in some sort of distress or perhaps already dead, so he returned to the bar and asked O'Brien for help. When O'Brien went to check on her, he found her dead, and panicked. He took her body and hid it, perhaps in the trunk of his rental car. (Is this possibly the same car the McCann's rented 5 weeks later?) That would explain why he was gone so long. He made up the story about his own daughter vomiting to account for it. (I mean, really, what parent would leave a vomiting child unattended?) Meanwhile, his wife concocted the story of seeing a man carrying a child under a blanket to make it seem like Maddie had been abducted. Ironically, she may have actually seen this -- except it was not a stranger but instead O'Brien carrying Maddie out under a blanket. Perhaps they were also covering their tracks in case any one else witnessed O'Brien carrying her out.

After O'Brien returned to the bar, the entire group discussed a cover-up plan. That would explain why they are now observing a code of silence. Once the plan was in place, Kate returned to the room and made the scene about Maddie missing. Her odd claim that "They took her" may have referred to a part of the plan that was never put into play. Perhaps, for example, one of the Tapa group had was supposed to report seeing two strangers sniffing around the kids earlier that day. (Or perhaps they were going to claim that she was abducted by the same group of individuals that represented a small foreign faction who kidnapped Jon Benet. :) )

The McCanns launched into a media blitz not only to cover things up but to keep O'Brien out of the spotlight. And they can both honestly say that neither of them killed Maddie.


Hmmmmm..so many possibilities. This all sounds very possible.

[christine2448]

I think it's another very good theory! Thanks for posting. There are so many possibilites.

There is a thread for everyone to discuss their theories and reexamine, LOL, as we learn more...I have teeter tottered a couple of times already!

The thread can be found here (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53139)...why not copy and paste your initial post there, so people looking for 'theories' will see your idea, it's another good one!

[rmf]

Christine, can you merge this thread into the theories thread? I didn't see it until AFTER I started this one. I don't want to clutter up this subforum.

Thanks :)

[Schmerty_Jones]

My theory is that it was Russell O'Brien who accidentally killed Maddie. Here's how I think it happened: On the day of May 3, the Tapas group was planning their evening outing, and the McCanns said they might not be able to go out because Maddie had cried so the night before that a neighbor had complained. O'Brien, an anesthesiologist, offered to give the child a sedative to put her to sleep.The McCanns accepted his offer.

When either Gerry or Oldfield went to check on her, Maddie was found either in some sort of distress or perhaps already dead, so O'Brien was called for help. O'Brien found her dead, and panicked. He took her body and hid it, perhaps in the trunk of his rental car. (Is this possibly the same car the McCann's rented 5 weeks later?) That would explain why he was gone so long. He made up the story about his own daughter vomiting to account for it. (I mean, really, what parent would leave a vomiting child unattended?) This would also make it possible to wash Maddie's sheets without raising suspicion.

Meanwhile, his partner, Jane Tanner, concocted the story of seeing a man carrying a child under a blanket to make it seem like Maddie had been abducted. Ironically, she may have actually seen this -- except it was not a stranger but instead O'Brien carrying Maddie out under a blanket. Perhaps they were also covering their tracks in case any one else witnessed O'Brien carrying her out. Part of the cover-up plan was to implicate Robert Murat, whom O'Brien and Tanner had reportedly met days before Maddie's disappearance.

After O'Brien returned to the bar, the entire group panicked and discussed a cover-up plan. That would explain why they are now observing a code of silence. Once the plan was in place, Kate returned to the room and made the scene about Maddie missing. Her odd claim that "They took her" may have referred to a part of the plan that was never put into play. Perhaps, for example, one of the Tapa group had was supposed to report seeing two strangers sniffing around the kids earlier that day. (Or perhaps they were going to claim that she was abducted by the same group of individuals that represented a small foreign faction who kidnapped Jon Benet. :) )

The McCanns launched into a media blitz not only to cover things up but to keep O'Brien out of the spotlight. And they can both honestly say that neither of them killed Maddie.

I have been thinking this scenario for quite some time. Are you in my head:?silenced: Vomiting & aspirating came to my mind & it was such a coincidence that O'Brien said his___ child was vomiting & also had the same car that the McCanns later rented.IIRC O'Brien had some disciplinary problems at the hospital where he worked & was currently unemployed? or on leave? It seems to fit very well with some of the unexplanable actions! Yes the cover-up worse than the crime!

[Siren]

I agree!! The most logical assumption for someone to make if they checked on their child and they were not in their bed is that the child wandered off. Those sweet babes were left completely unsupervised. Why did Dr/Mrs McCann immediately assume that Madeleine has been "taken," AND then WHY did she leave the twins alone when she found Madeleine gone? I would have been screaming my head off from the apartment, NOTHING would have made my leave my other two babies if I thought someone had been in my apartment!!!

HINKY METER ALERT: Why DID Dr/Mrs McCann assume her daughter had been taken? I just doesn't make any sense unless she knew something she wasn't telling. (It's just like referring to the victim as was instead of is when you did the deed and the body hasn't been found.

[rmf]

Here's a personal story about a "missing" child:

When I was very young, about 5 years old or so, my younger brother, then about 3 years old, disappeared from the yard. We lived in a semi rural area at that time that was just beginning to become "suburban". This was in the 60s when all the neighborhood Moms were home with their kids and the Dads were at work.

Because of the rural setting and our familiarity with our neighbors, we were given a pretty wide berth in terms of "wandering space" and so were other kids on the block. My mother thought my brother was with me in the backyard, but he'd gone into the house about 30 mins beforehand and I didn't know where he was either. My Mom began frantically looking all over the house for him, this went on for about five or ten minutes, and then she started calling for him and checking with neighbors. No brother.

Finally she called the Fire Department and Sheriff. She was scared he'd wandered down to a creek that was behind our subdivision. Never ONCE did she say, "Someone took him!!" Her mind was more focused on the fact that he may be hurt or STUCK somewhere.

The fire department arrived first and then the police. They searched everywhere for him and I remember the police particularly looking VERY CONCERNED. (Being so young, I didn't get it then, but I get it now.)

Finally an officer came into the garage of our house and opened the lid of the clothes hamper sitting next to the washing machine. Inside it, was my brother, sound asleep. He had not heard us calling for him or any of the chaos with neighbors or the fire department. I keep thinking back to this when I think about the McCann case. Never once did it even cross into my Mom's possibility of thinking that he'd been taken. I think that as mothers, that is something too horrifying to grasp when you first think about this kind of thing. It must be some automatic form of psychological denial. In fact, my Mother and I just spoke about this incident (and laughed about it) recently and were discussing the McCann case. She said never once did it cross her mind that he'd been taken... she was more worried he'd gotten hurt or wandered off somewhere and gotten injured. Of course if he'd NOT been found where he was, my Mom said that the horrible realization of a kidnapping would have come into play. I think this is the same sentiment a lot of others are expressing with regard to Kate McCann and her statements about Maddy being "taken". Of course we live in different times now and people are much more afraid of abductions as a reality, so who knows.

My mother was in her early 20's at the time, with two small kids, so she says that was a valuable lesson for her to not let us out of her sight again.

[aussie_mum]

Hi everyone - new poster here.

Sudden flash on an old topic: Kate running back to the tapas bar and shouting to her friends "They've taken her!"

Might she have meant -- or, more cynically, meant to imply to the friends that she believed -- that "they" were some of the staff of the resort, who, having already spoken to the McCanns about leaving their children alone, had taken it upon themselves to go snooping about the McCanns' villa and upon seeing that the kids were once again alone then had the gall to walk in and remove Maddie themselves? Perhaps she and Gerry had told the friends that they'd been warned earlier by the staff not to leave the children. So "They've taken her" would have been said in sort of gossipy exasperation, not in panic. "Oh good grief, check this out, can you believe the nerve" kind of thing. And would explain running back to the tapas bar instead of calling the police, or even going down to the front desk. AND would give her an absolute air of innocence.

I haven't read anywhere the details of that scene, and obviously everyone immediately determined Maddie had been kidnapped, not simply removed to safety by some uppity disapproving workers. But... interesting, anyway, IMO.


Interesting.... but why would she think if the staff were so concerned about Maddie and took her that they woud leave 2 x 2 year olds by themselves.

And wow just for me then.... the realisation that she left the twins alone AGAIN! Even tho she 'knew' someone had taken he daughter.... she left those 2 babies alone again.

[poco]

My theory is that it was Russell O'Brien who accidentally killed Maddie. Here's how I think it happened: On the day of May 3, the Tapas group was planning their evening outing, and the McCanns said they might not be able to go out because Maddie had cried so the night before that a neighbor had complained. O'Brien, an anesthesiologist, offered to give the child a sedative to put her to sleep.The McCanns accepted his offer.

When either Gerry or Oldfield went to check on her, Maddie was found either in some sort of distress or perhaps already dead, so O'Brien was called for help. O'Brien found her dead, and panicked. He took her body and hid it, perhaps in the trunk of his rental car. (Is this possibly the same car the McCann's rented 5 weeks later?) That would explain why he was gone so long. He made up the story about his own daughter vomiting to account for it. (I mean, really, what parent would leave a vomiting child unattended?) This would also make it possible to wash Maddie's sheets without raising suspicion.

Meanwhile, his partner, Jane Tanner, concocted the story of seeing a man carrying a child under a blanket to make it seem like Maddie had been abducted. Ironically, she may have actually seen this -- except it was not a stranger but instead O'Brien carrying Maddie out under a blanket. Perhaps they were also covering their tracks in case any one else witnessed O'Brien carrying her out. Part of the cover-up plan was to implicate Robert Murat, whom O'Brien and Tanner had reportedly met days before Maddie's disappearance.

After O'Brien returned to the bar, the entire group panicked and discussed a cover-up plan. That would explain why they are now observing a code of silence. Once the plan was in place, Kate returned to the room and made the scene about Maddie missing. Her odd claim that "They took her" may have referred to a part of the plan that was never put into play. Perhaps, for example, one of the Tapa group had was supposed to report seeing two strangers sniffing around the kids earlier that day. (Or perhaps they were going to claim that she was abducted by the same group of individuals that represented a small foreign faction who kidnapped Jon Benet. :) )

The McCanns launched into a media blitz not only to cover things up but to keep O'Brien out of the spotlight. And they can both honestly say that neither of them killed Maddie.


Good theory up until the point where you get to the part about O'Brien returning to the bar............ What, did he sit down and say, hey, look but your kid is dead, blah blah blah, at which point they all conspired to do a cover up. If true, the McCann's must have thought more of their daughter as a pet than a true child - If I were Kate and Gerry I would have been friggin' flipping out, right there in the restaurant....

[Trino]

I think it's very possible that O'Brien could have done this. I cannot imagine that he would return to the dinner party, tell everyone that Madeline died, and that her parents and everyone else went along with the situation.

Surely, the McCanns would have screamed and called the police. THEY didn't administer anything.

[christine2448]

Christine, can you merge this thread into the theories thread? I didn't see it until AFTER I started this one. I don't want to clutter up this subforum.

Thanks :)


Done!

I somehow got a poll on there, it just appeared when I merged them! :doh:

Learning as I go!

[SleuthMom]

I am new here, but I have been reading this case for quite a while as well as this forum and it is so great to have people like you guys trying to figure out what happened to Madeleine. Here is what I think it may have happened. First of all, it is my impression that Maddie was a special needs child. I am a mom of a 7 year old with PDD-NOS (Pervasive Development Disorder Not Otherwise Specified, basically a very mild case of Austism). Unless you have a child with this condition, you have no idea the challenges you go through daily with a child like this. It is EXTREMELY stressful. BUT your LOVE for your own child conquers everything. :) And yes, it is hard. Let me tell you that my husband and I were NOT able to go out ANYWHERE because our son was uncontrollable, he would never settle down so we were at home ALL the time (my husband works from home) and we had to reject invitations to go out, etc because we knew our son could not handle it neither we had anyone willing to take care of him. We did NOT resent him because is OUR son and we love him more than anything in the world. Parents DO sacrifices for their children daily and unfortunately, not everyone is willing to take the HUGE task of raising a child with special needs. I think this was the case of the Mc Canns. Both doctors, both trying to live a lifestyle that because of their obligations was NOT meant to be (How can you want to have a family but at the same time try to live a life like if you are single?) You can't have it both ways, even more IF Maddie had some sort of special needs. Her age (3) was the MOST challenging age of my own son so I feel the Mc Canns just could NOT handle it. I just do not see how Maddie's death could be accidental. The night before she "disappeared". Mrs. Fenn said she hear Maddie crying for 75 minutes. Imagine that. Your own kid getting up in the middle of the night crying for YOU because she is afraid because you are NOT there. Do you leave her AGAIN the NEXT DAY to go and party with your friends? I don't think. I do not see "love" in that action AT ALL. Forgive me if I sound harsh but these people left their own children (3 and under) ALONE for the whole week! It seems to me that it is the typical case of people who just want to say I have cute kids but are NOT willing to do what it takes because let's be honest, even the most UNEDUCATED person KNOWS that leaving three kids of that age alone is NOT right neither SAFE but hey these two doctors think it was fine! Does not sound right to me. I do not believe she was drugged, I think she just did not want to settle down for the night (as it is SO common with these children) and the FATHER got upset at her and hit her to the point of death. For what other purpose they will go and hide the body, etc IF it was just an ACCIDENT? No, I think they perfectly knew the body would show signs of violence and that's why they did all this. BUT, by the other hand I have suspicious of Dr. Russell O' Brien. I do not buy for a minute that his daughter was so sick that he had to stay away from the table MOST of the night. He is obviously either INVOLVED in hiding Maddie's body OR he was part of the whole thing.

[Trino]

I agree that it was strange that O'Brien spent much of the evening caring for a sick child. Has it been verified the child was sick by anyone other than the infamous dinner party members?

[SleuthMom]

Trino, I don't think so. I think it was reported he changed sheets but staff does not recall giving clean sheets to him. For me, it does not make any sense that he will leave his sick daughter to go and have dinner IF she was THAT sick. I think we should investigate more about him since it is interesting to notice that wasn't his girlfriend the one that suddenly remembers seeing a guy carrying a child on her arms and that later on she says was Murrat? Also, wasn't reported that he rented the same car prior to the Mc Canns? Too many connections.

[hcc2007]

I agree with the posts about Kate yelling "they've taken her" ... utterly ludicrous, as the McCanns' unflinching supporters keep saying.

Me? I would've yelled "She's gone!" I might even have been a little annoyed, if she had run off on previous nights. Question: do we know FOR SURE that this is what Kate said? Who reported those statements? Man, how I'd love to see that dossier.

Also, new thought, on being named suspects: Does anyone besides me find it increasingly difficult to accept their calm and stoic manner, in the face of being named suspects?

I'm normally reserved and stoic myself, but if I were innocent and had been knocking myself out for months to find my child's abductor only to be named a suspect, I'd blow my top! I'd be yelling my head off about Portuguese incompetence and stupidity, and how dare they shift the blame to me just to clear themselves.

Think about it, wouldn't you be simply outraged, at that point? Yet they stay mum and sneak quietly away. To me that seems like guilty behavior.

[patti54]

According to the reports, Kate immediately thought Maddie was taken because the window was open. Also heard on Nancy Grace last night that the Cuddly Cat was found on a shelf that was too high for Maddie to reach.

I am not sure what the sleeping locations were of the children but I would assume the twins were in another room. Wouldn't that be the first place you looked to see if Maddie had woke up and went by her siblings? In no report does it say anything that Kate looked for Maddie around the apartment. Nor does it say she checked ont he twins. Rather she LEAVES the twins ALONE and goes back to the bar! Hell even Patsy Ramsey looked to see if JonBenet was in Burke's room and she had a ransom note in her hand!

I was just looking at various online newspapers and noticed that Gerry seems to have a little smile on his face way too many times. It was ironic that you commented on their demeanor just after I thought about that.

Another interesting note:
From the Mark Warner Resort website:
(it is on the very first page of their website)
http://www.markwarner.co.uk/sun/portugal... (http://www.markwarner.co.uk/sun/portugal/ocean-club)

Award-winning childcare

The Ocean Club offers a unique 'dine out' service. Simply get your little ones ready for bed and drop them off at our kids club. We'll watch over them whilst you go out and enjoy yourselves and you can pick them up on your way home.
^^^^
http://strivingforordinary.blogspot.com/... (http://strivingforordinary.blogspot.com/2007/09/missing-madeleine-mccann.html)
Here is a photo showing the distance between the apartment and the bar they were at. Looks like more than 50 yards to me! Not to mention it's NOT a clear view from point A to point B

[princessmer81]

For some reason when I first heard about this case I instantly thought of the movie "Man on Fire" (good movie, if you haven't seen it). In the movie a young girl is kidnapped and eventually it comes to light that her father (without the wife/mother's knowledge) arranged to have his daughter kidnapped in order to receive the kidnapping insurance money. This type of insurance is common in some countries. The insurance provides ransom money, money for costs associated with the search, ect.

In the movie the plan was that the little girl would be kidnapped, the kidnappers would ask for ransom money in exchange for the girl, the parents would get the insurance company to pay it and then the kidnappers would split the ransom money with the dad. Well, something went wrong, the kidnappers got greedy and the plan fell through and the little girl was in great danger.

This may be crazy but I can't help but wonder if Madeleine's parent(s) were in on some sort of deal like this and it went horribly wrong.

[patti54]

Hmmm...interesting theory. Good thinking. Especially in light of the controversery surrounding the Find Maddie fund.

Brings to mind the question of whether Kate may have accidentally tipped us off when she said "they" have taken her.

[Jeana (DP)]

Good post Princessmer. Way to think out of the box!!!!!

[patti54]

From the courttv website:
(this is from their message boards so I do not know the source or if this is totally accurate. I am trying to find a report saying that the staff did ask the McCanns to not leave their kids alone)
Pamela Fenn, 70, who lives in the apartment above where the McCanns were staying, and her niece, who is flying to Portugal from the UK, will be among those spoken to.

Mrs Fenn has said that in the weeks leading up to Madeleine's disappearance she scared off an intruder in her apartment.

There was no apparent sign of a break-in and it is thought the man may have had a key to let himself into the flat. She will be making a formal statement today at police headquarters in the city of Portimao. There was also another burglary in the complex a few weeks before in which police also suspected the intruder had a key.

[wicket]

I was pondering under what circumstances Mrs.McCann would say "They've taken her" and my imagination came up with a possible one: could they have been blackmailed or are being blackmailed?

Just suppose there's something in their backgrounds that they just don't want come out? Could they be involved in something having to do with the group they were traveling with - something that forced them to be at the tapas with no children. "They've taken her" certainly points to more than one which makes it possible that it took more than one person to carry out this crime. And if they are being blackmailed with threats also against the twins, it would make sense that there might be questions that Mrs. McMann would not answer more definitely. What if she/he feels they cannot trust the police with this information to safeguard Madeleine's return or the safety of the twins?

I guess I'm grasping at straws hoping against hope that these parents are not responsible - :banghead:

[patti54]

Sounds like a very logical explaination to me, Wicket.

[kelly london]

two comments:

the resort offered chilcare - why on earth did the parents not use that service for such small children.

2nd - since its been reported that the parents were taking turns checking on the kids - one man reported checking on the mccann's and couldn't recall if he saw her or not.

now, IF i killed my daughter, i am NOT sending my friend to check on her while i'm at dinner- i would not want anyone in my room that might discover her missing.

[SleuthMom]

wicket, good theory but what could be possible be (must be something HUGE) for them to go through being "arguidos", have the risk of the twins being taken away from them, etc.

[Smurf]

two comments:

the resort offered chilcare - why on earth did the parents not use that service for such small children.

2nd - since its been reported that the parents were taking turns checking on the kids - one man reported checking on the mccann's and couldn't recall if he saw her or not.

now, IF i killed my daughter, i am NOT sending my friend to check on her while i'm at dinner- i would not want anyone in my room that might discover her missing.


You know what-that is weird that she would want someone from the dinner party to go and check on her kids if she had accidently killed one unless she and her husband had already planned to try the ole' kidnapped front. Maybe she was hoping this guy would be the one to find her missing and he just half-a$$ checked on them.

[Squishified]

You know what-that is weird that she would want someone from the dinner party to go and check on her kids if she had accidently killed one unless she and her husband had already planned to try the ole' kidnapped front. Maybe she was hoping this guy would be the one to find her missing and he just half-a$$ checked on them.
That's a good thought, Smurf.
By the way I love the Smurfs!

[rmf]

I'd be very curious to know about the McCann's finances. Were they living beyond their means? Lots of debt? That would be interesting to know.

Also, about the open window, I still contend that the average parent would not have defaulted to "they've taken her!" when seeing that, but instead, "oh my god, she fell/climbed/jumped/crawled out the window! Look for her!!!"

I also find it rather disturbing that they left the other kids in daycare after this happened. If someone took my child, I'd be terrified that they'd try to come back and take the other two. I certainly would not be leaving them with strangers, right near the place where my other child went missing. That just defies logic.

[SleuthMom]

the resort offered chilcare - why on earth did the parents not use that service for such small children. I read that the Mc Canns said they did not want any strangers to take care of their kids, it does not make any sense to me because the kids spent most of the day in the care of strangers. 2nd - since its been reported that the parents were taking turns checking on the kids - one man reported checking on the mccann's and couldn't recall if he saw her or not. As a mom I found this sooo odd. How are you going to ask another person who is not related to you to check on your own kids? Don't you all find this odd?

[princessmer81]

I'd be very curious to know about the McCann's finances. Were they living beyond their means? Lots of debt? That would be interesting to know.

Also, about the open window, I still contend that the average parent would not have defaulted to "they've taken her!" when seeing that, but instead, "oh my god, she fell/climbed/jumped/crawled out the window! Look for her!!!"

I also find it rather disturbing that they left the other kids in daycare after this happened. If someone took my child, I'd be terrified that they'd try to come back and take the other two. I certainly would not be leaving them with strangers, right near the place where my other child went missing. That just defies logic.

I think that people do odd things during times of stress so I am trying to not read too much into how the parents acted when they discovered their daughter missing. What may immediately occur to one person could be the last thing to occur to another.
Had it been daylight I think it would have been more reasonable to suspect that Madeleine went for a walk on her own. It seems less likely to me that a child would do that at night - unless, of course, they went to search for mom and dad.
Another thought I had was that if the children were sedated then there would be no way that Madeleine went wandering off on her own - hence, mom would know that someone had to have taken her.

[patti54]

I read that the Mc Canns said they did not want any strangers to take care of their kids, it does not make any sense to me because the kids spent most of the day in the care of strangers. As a mom I found this sooo odd. How are you going to ask another person who is not related to you to check on your own kids? Don't you all find this odd?

Yeah it's always better to leave your babies home alone rather than get sitters provided by a reputable resort.

Geez. their parents skills leave a lot to be desired. I wonder how good their medical skills have been.

LE might just want to do a double check on those those 6 corpses Kate was around. Maybe it was easier to "put them to sleep" .........

[SleuthMom]

patti: Yeah it's always better to leave your babies home alone rather than get sitters provided by a reputable resort. I think I may have expressed myself wrongly. I would try to re-phrase. English is not my first language so bear with me. ;) What I find odd is the fact that they did not want to hire a babysitter YET they did not have a problem with a co-worker checking on the kids (a male, by the way). I find that odd.

[princessmer81]

None of their excuses or explanations for leaving their babies alone make sense to me.

When my siblings and I were young my parents would pay a babysitter to travel with us. This way my parents could go out at night and leave us with someone they trusted. I would think that two doctors could afford to do something similar.

[patti54]

You are right. 3 babies, good income, no excuse for not having a traveling nanny.

Does anyone know what their daycare arrangements were prior to their vacation? Oh hell, they probably just left Maddie to watch the twins.

I read on another forum that Maddie was sleeping between the twins. Anyone know if this is truth or speculation?
I try desperately to stick to reliable sources for my facts.

[SleuthMom]

When my siblings and I were young my parents would pay a babysitter to travel with us. This way my parents could go out at night and leave us with someone they trusted. I would think that two doctors could afford to do something similar. Of course! The big question is WHY they did not...EVEN in the case of them wanted to check their kids on their own, why rejected the idea of a baby monitor, why???

[BloodshotEye]

Pattie54: I had to laugh (in a twisted sort of way) at your comment that "LE might just want to do a double check on those those 6 corpses Kate was around. Maybe it was easier to "put them to sleep ....".

I completely agree. And maybe look to see if her buddy, O'Brien was the attending physician. Remember, she seems to be merely the one that hops from corpse to corpse, giving them one last visit with that damn stuffed cat, that she keeps in her pocket.

Here is one for the records. Perhaps you caught news of those cases quite sometime ago, where a nurse/doctor (can't recall which one), were taking money from family members, to "hasten" the demise of their critical care family members. wtf? Seriously. Documented case. Not that I am inferring that this is what went on with Kate's corpses. It's just that I would not be surprised by anything anymore.

Sorry to be so sarcastic. I seem to dissolve into these rants, when the "people of interest" give such sorry-@ss statements.

uh oh...should I not be commenting in the "Theory" thread? Mod, just toss my post out, if need be ;]

[Smurf]

Remember that nurse who injected all those patients (I beleive in a nursing home) so she could gain attention as the heroic nurse who was there and rushed to their bedside to adminster CPR; she would bring them back to life and then go back later to their room and start the whole process over again. Does anyone remember that. She killed a bunch of people and they called it Munchausen Syndrome. She was trying to impress a male co-worker

Sorry it's not exactly on topic.

The comment about checking on the corpses that Kate was in the presence of made me think of that evil nurse.

[wicket]

Lately everything seems to be drug-related; I hate to even mention this but could they have involved themselves in something along these lines? It bothers me to even suggest this because they do not appear to be the type, but I'm not saying they are users but could they have sold drugs sometime in the past? Could it be the basis for this whole situation? Could they have been threatened?

I feel they were allowed to return to Britain to assure the twins would be with family and not exposed to anymore publicity than necessary. It is about the parents not the twins.

[peace9274]

Could one parent be covering for another? Just suppose one parent has been known to have a quick temper and the other parent has been continuously covering for him/her. In this case, if this was found out, the twins would be taken away during investigation and also their reputations adversely affected. It has happened time and again where a parent professes the innocence of the other parent even when a child is covered with bruises, sexually molested or dead.

OTOH, the mother went through many procedures to have children - what if the father was less interested in fathering than has been depicted?

And around and around I go.......


I too have been going round and round... but I do agree with the above theory that one parent is covering for the other.

I mentioned on another thread that Maddie's emotionless expressions reminded me of Lisa Steinberg (Hedda Nussbaum's and Joel Steinberg's child that was abused and "accidently" killed).

My theory of the moment is that Kate's eggs were used for the pregnancy, but not Gerry's sperm. He may have resentments that Maddie isn't truly his and doesn't feel strong emotional love towards her...

(Someone mentioned Gerry being narcissistic/sociopathic, which = not having normal emotions towards others; being capable of killing, covering up, grotesque manuveuring, abuse to the body, etc. ALA Scott P.)

I think the "accident" happened before the dinner. Kate and Gerry used the get-together at the bar as an alibi. I think the many bottles of wine were ordered and consumed to hide their fear and guilt, and to hopefully get their companions intoxicated enough to not notice Kate's and Gerry's demeaner.

Re vomit of a child mentioned:
When the "accident" did happen (whether over-dose, shaking, hitting, throwing) and caused Maddie's death, I think K and G tried CPR to revive her.
When I worked on the medical floor at Children's Hospital (LA), there were many times that we preformed CPR on a child.

Many times with compressions, vomitus would shoot out and all over us and the bed and sometimes the wall, even. (Depending on the contents of the child's stomach and how hard the compressor pressed.)

K and/or G called O'Brian to "help" revive Maddie, and got involved in the cover-up when he found out what really happened.

Maddie was dead and in a separate bedroom from the twins when K and G left for the bar. They told the person doing the "children check" rounds to NOT enter the room, but to just listen to see it if it was quiet in there.

This is my theory for now... until I read someone else's... in a few minutes!

For now, I'm just :confused: :( :banghead: :mad: :furious: :confused:

[teacherbees]

peace9274 - your theory sounds VERY plausible. And thank you for your insights regarding children vomiting when CPR is being administered. That's something I'd wondered about.

[BethyC]

OK - lets say there is a fatal accident when they return from having dinner and ice cream with the kids. (6:00pm - Maddy was last seen in public eating area of the resort) If it was an accident as doctors -- first they would try resuscitation of the child (& I really & truely believe at this point they would have called for help if only for medical equipment to intubate or suction the airway) -- probably if it is your own child I would think that would go on for at least an hour....this gives them one hour to clean it up, mourn/freak out, gain composure, come up with a plan to cover up/hide the body -- then gain more composure and get cleaned up for dinner at the tapas bar. Does this seem realistic?
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/misc/progress.gif

[Betsy]

What if Kate is covering for Gerry?

What if something went terribly wrong, either Maddie was overdosed when they sedated the children (if indeed they did) or she got into some pills while her parents were at dinner, whatever. Maybe Gerry found her when he checked the kids earlier, saw that she was dead, realized that he and Kate would be blamed, and he somehow moved Maddie to another location to make it look as though she were kidnapped. I say somehow because I haven't figured that out yet. When Kate found Maddie missing, I believe that was genuine--she truly didn't know where her little girl was. Gerry would have had time to think about it and mull over what they needed to do, therefore he was more calm. At some point in the next few days, he confesses to Kate what happened. She immediately wants to come forward, but he convinces her not to. Nothing they can do will bring Maddie back, but they will end up losing everything else. Gerry tells her he will go to prison, and his trial will bring out all their dirty laundry; she may even go to jail as well for leaving the kids alone. If they say nothing, they won't be charged, because who is going to kick them when they're down? And if she dares to tell the truth, he'll implicate her as well somehow. She's terrified. She has no choice but to go along with it for a while, to save whatever is left of her family. By the time she realizes that this is not going to die down in "a while", it's too late. The story is international and bigger than either of them had thought. Too late to back pedal...

[HappyChic727]

I have only started to follow this case a little more closely in recent days. I belong to another forum called MysticBoard. Two of the posters (Spiritalk and Psychic Chef) who I believe are very good in their readings say that this was either an accident or done by design and someone close to the family is responsible.

See this link:
http://www.mysticboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=33190&highlight=mccann

These posters have also helped me with my question, which I put here as well of "Murder or Suicide" as to my friend who died in June.

[ny_]

I don't know about them planning it deliberately. They're doctors, they probably could figure out a way to make a death look more like an illness/accident. Plus, their colleagues at home would be more than likely to be involved in treating Madeline or pronouncing her dead. If anything, they would be less suspicious of the McCanns than the average parent coming into a hospital with a sick or injured child and give them leeway they wouldn't give another parent. Unless, of course, the colleagues already suspected abuse. But nothing the media have been reporting from where they live seems to indicate that.

An accident (from being left on her own), an overdose or unintended force from an out of control temper seem more likely, if the abduction theory isn't true. It would also go along with their public emotions. They seemed somewhat upset to begin with, then more of the smiles, etc. Until they were named as suspects. To me, that seems to indicate a combination of gulit/saddness over the death at first, along with a fear of being caught. Then they though they migh have gotten away with something. Then looking haggard again when it appears they might not have.

[ny_]

I've been thinking about this some more in the context of they "doth protest too much" over the leaving the kids alone. While you'd expect parents in this case to be somewhat defensive, their body language, etc. in the interviews such as this Sky News one (sorry, I forgot who had posted it originally or I'd note who did) seems to be really defensive:
http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/videoplayer/0,,31200-1267559,00.html

And here's a summary of quotes by Kate McCann on the topic (again, sorry for not remembering who posted it originally otherwise I'd note it):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2165021,00.html

Purely speculation, but I think what folks here have said about an accident & then attempted cover up is starting to make the most sense to me. A fall has been suggested previously here. That to me, seems to be a likely scenario. Unsupervised, there's a fall. One or both of them discovers it on their next check of the kids. Realizing they might be blamed for leaving the kids alone, they come up with the abduction. That would explain why they get so touchy when the supervision issue comes up because it comes the closest to what may have actually happened. Of course, that doesn't explain how they managed to transport/hide the body. Unless, as has been suggested, the man with the child in the blanket was one of the party carrying her out?

[ny_]

I didn't know that falls are a leading cause of accidents for children when I posted that theory. Came across some more info re: falls & children:

http://capt.org.uk/pdfs/factsheet%20falls.pdf (http://capt.org.uk/pdfs/factsheet%20falls.pdf)

Falls are the most common cause of accidental injury to children of all ages

Deaths and severe injuries are often associated with a fall from a high window or balcony or downstairs. Falls can also result in serious injury if the surface the child hits is hard -- such as concrete or paving stones

They were on the first floor, but how high was the window off the floor? How heavy was it to open? Were the shutters heavy/difficult to open? Although even if she were able to get to the window & open it, if she did fall out, wouldn't there be witnesses outside? What's the foot traffic in that area in the evening? From a Skynews link Colomom posted, here's a photo of the apt:

http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1586757.jpg

Though I don't know if that's the room where the children were sleeping. Also, given it wasn't their home, the usual childproof stuff wouldn't be in place.

Another photo of the apt from the same Sky News link:
http://static.sky.com/images/pictures/1586760.jpg

[Betsy]

First off, I am on the fence, somedays my legs are swinging toward one side, some days the other. But since we have no reliable facts with regard to physical evidence, I'm trying to "get into the minds" of the parents. My first reaction to all of is was "Of course they had nothing to do with this--no parent would be able to compose themselves so quickly and convincingly, and remain that way all these months..."

Then I started to really think. The McCanns are obviously professional people who, before all this started, were respected by the people they knew, and it seems they know some pretty important individuals. They wanted children, and so made it happen. They lived well, nice house, were able to go on vacation with several of their friends--not mind blowing things, but sometimes just these simple things are important.

For instance, perhaps earlier in the week, as they left their children alone in the room and checked on them periodically, perhaps one of their friends mentioned to them "Gee, I'm not sure leaving the kids alone is such a good idea--what if something happens?" And perhaps the McCanns replied, "Nah, they'll be fine, they're sleeping, we're checking on them, it's all good, please pass the wine..."

Then the unthinkable happens. Gerry goes to check on the kids and finds Maddie unconscious on the floor; perhaps she has fallen, trying to reach her cuddle cat which is on the shelf. Perhaps she got into a bottle of pills or other medicine. (Years ago, my mom's friend lost her toddler son when he ate her tube of preparation H....things happen...) Anyway, Gerry finds Maddie non-responsive, he tries to revive her, but she's gone. Panic!

Now, what does he do? Does he alert everyone, call an ambulance, knowing that there's nothing that can be done for Maddie, also knowing that, in doing so, the police will be called and he and Kate will be taken in for child endangerment, because they left her alone?? Openly admit that, even though they were warned something could happen, they chose to leave their children alone and will have to pay the consequences (even more than facing Maddie's death).

In shock, he says nothing. He carries her to the car, says a sweet prayer, asks for her forgiveness, and goes back to the table. He can't bear to tell Kate, he needs to think. What to do, what to do.

Before he gets a chance to figure it all out, Kate goes to check on the children and finds Maddie gone. She's in true panic mode! She runs back to the restaurant and says something. We don't know the exact words, so I won't get into that. But suddenly the friends and management and other guests--everyone is going out to find Maddie. The police are called, as well as others.

As Gerry and Kate are walking, searching for Maddie, Gerry confesses to Kate what happened. She breaks down. Others think she is grieving for her missing little girl; her grief is genuine, but not because Maddie is missing. Her first instinct is to tell the truth. Gerry stops her--how can they face everyone? They--who everyone likes and respects--will become outcasts, criminals, with no sympathy coming from anyone. They will have lost everything, their social status, their friends, their family will be so disappointed in their poor judgement, and potentially they will lose their careers, their other children, and quite possibly their freedom. Would Maddie want her parents to suffer so? No, she wouldn't. Gerry tells her we must shift the blame somewhere else, or else our worlds are at an end.

They pray to God, they pray to Maddie, they beg for His forgiveness and her forgiveness. They promise they will be better parents from now on. They promise to pledge their lives to finding lost children all over the world. They will start a campaign to do so, and raise money and awareness. Yes, they will use Maddie to do this, but in doing so, it makes her live on, for she will be helping others. It's what she would want them to do, they convince themselves.

As each day passes, they are torn with guilt, but they know that they can never--EVER--break their silence, or they will be hated throughout the world. And for these people, that may be worse than anything.


Just some thoughts.

[BloodshotEye]

very, very interesting theory, Betsy.
I will have to go back, and retrace Gerry's "back and forth" between the tappas party and the apartment. Of course, it will be Gerry's version of how he checked on Maddie that night. Yet, something about his "checking", or was it "standing around taking to Wilkins"... causes this particular scenario to give me the chills. It's as if, Gerry wanted Kate to be the one to discover the missing child. It would look more "authentic".

Still not sure if the news reports were accurate about the sedation of the children. Wonder if we will ever be privy to those details.

Good one, Betsy.

[ny_]

Betsy, that seems to fit pretty well with what we've seen of their behavior.

[haypaula]

I'm still on the fence and leaning towards the McCanns perhaps sedating the children to keep them asleep while they socialized that evening. If Mrs Fenn's account is true, Maddie had been crying for more than an hour the prior night, and didn't stop until the McCanns returned to their unit. So, it appears the children were repeatedly left alone, for extended periods of time, without anyone checking on them. Perhaps there were complaints about Maddie's crying and the McCanns, wanting to socialize the last night (IIRC) of their stay, decided to sedate them.

If a pedophile had been watching Maddie, that person would have known the McCanns' social schedule of leaving and returning. and the window of opportunity they had to snatch her. When Maddie disappeared, Mrs Fenn said she heard Kate say/cry repeatedly "we let her down" (might be paraphrased). I believe Kate said this out of guilt for rendering Maddie helpless, through sedation, which kept her daughter from awakening and screaming for help.

It would take two very cruel sociopaths to lie to the Pope, travel the world, meet with celebrities, attend church regularly, and accept donations from charitable caring strangers; all the while knowing they killed Maddie and disposed of her body. How could they perpetrate such a continued hoax, day after day? What did they do with her body for nearly a month? Can this couple be that evil and cruel?

This reminds so much of the Natalee Holloway case; same form of secret justice system, and same area dependency on tourism revenue, which had declined since Maddie's disappearance. I've seen the lengths Aruba has gone to in blaming the victim and her family, intentionally (IMO) bungling the case to save their perp inhabitants from being prosecuted and from projecting an unsafe environment for tourists, so I don't doubt the PJ, within that tourist area, would operate similarly. Sadly, tourism supersedes humanity.

Given the McCanns are physicians, they would be less likely to administer an accidental fatal overdose to Maddie, but nothing is impossible. However, it's difficult for me to wrap my mind around the hoax they perpetrated, following Maddie's disappearance, if they had accidentally killed her.

IMO

[teddiebear1955]

teddiebear1955
teddiebear hugs & kisses Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: texas
Posts: 68


hello all,
the more i read on this case the more i believe that Madeline was killed before dinner that night and her body moved totally away from the room.
there was enough time before the dinner ...and all else was staged ...they knew before they went to the bar that night that one of them had to make a dramatic announcement ..... before everyone left from the table to go home....which was kate cus i dont think gerry can get that dramatic...JMO... cuddle cat was put on the shelf,door was unlocked ,window was arranged so that it would look like a kidnapping.....
now where did they take her body ...hmmm i'm not sure yet ...but with all the jet setting going on ...anyone of those bags could have been Madeline ...and all the trips to take other ppl to the airport..geez..... the church is another place that i believe could have held her body for awhile...as all have read alot of things go on with the priest and the church and alot is hiden for along time....if they took her to the church the priest may have helped them hide her ...after all they did get the key to the church !!!!!!! i just really believe she was killed then removed and hiden close by till Gerryand Kate made the cry ...and then she was buried ....jmo...
Kate is strange almost like she is drugged to remain calm...she has to stay calm & cool ...she killed Madeline and Gerry covered it up so both are gulity ...if she breaks both will go to jail and lose the twins. Gerry is controlling and to me another Scott Peterson .....they have themselves believing that madeline was kidnapped cus they have to keep that lie going....but Kate is getting weaker as the months go along...you can see it happening while he is just fine ..its wearing on her more....
....sorry this was long....teddiebear
__________________-------------------------------moved by Teddiebear

[Tuba]

Yes, the reports in newspapers have concurred that Madeleine was sleeping in a bed between the twins. But I think that is SO important because O'Brien (purportedly) said that he could only see the twins, not Madeleine. If he did indeed say that, it does not make visual sense to me. Unless the twins' beds were far apart.

[Barnaby]

Yes, the reports in newspapers have concurred that Madeleine was sleeping in a bed between the twins. But I think that is SO important because O'Brien (purportedly) said that he could only see the twins, not Madeleine. If he did indeed say that, it does not make visual sense to me. Unless the twins' beds were far apart.
I think this is a very important factor! If he saw both the twins & madeleine was in between, he would have had to see her there or missing!

[hcc2007]

I think this is a very important factor! If he saw both the twins & madeleine was in between, he would have had to see her there or missing!

Yes I agree. Except ... if the twins were in cribs (which tend to be high) and she was in a lower bed between them, then he wouldn't have seen her.

[Tuba]

The Guardian described the twins' beds as cots.

[hcc2007]

Websleuths has done some marvelous sleuthing both in getting facts and in making logical inferences from the facts. But there is one assumption that most bloggers and sleuthers have made: Kate and Gerry are in this together.

But, what if they aren't? The more I think about this case, the more I see Gerry as the explanation for some things that haven't made sense.

* Why didn't they leave the kids in England or bring a nanny along? Maybe because Gerry likes keeping Kate 'in line' by loading her down with mothering duties. Or ...

* Why didn't they hire help the night of May 3? Maybe because Gerry is cheap. Or maybe because he had a plan in place for that night.

* How can Gerry have gone to the apartment and found things amiss, but not checked further? How can Gerry have been chatting with Jeremy Wilkins within earshot of his daughter's abduction, and not have noticed anything? Maybe because he knew about the abduction already.

* Why did Kate shout "THEY'VE taken her!"? Because Gerry spent the days leading up to this filling her mind with stories and worries about abduction. He could easily have prepared her, and the entire group, by simply dropping nuggets of information. "I've heard there's a pedo ring operating out of Algarve" or "Someone broke into the Ocean Club apartments last week" or "Look, that man seems to be staring at Madeleine. She's so beautiful, anyone would." That kind of thing. Easy.

* Who is the last person to have seen Madeleine alive? (a classic murder-solving question): Gerry.

* How can the McCanns have launched such an over-the-top campaign to find Maddy if they actually were responsible themselves? Maybe because Gerry is doing this for Kate's sake, to dampen her suspicions about him.

Your husband is the last person to have seen your daughter alive. He claims to have had suspicions but didn't act on them. Would you be livid? I would. I'd be thinking "I do all the work with these kids, I wanted to hire a babysitter, YOU said 'no it's too expensive [or whatever]', and YOU promised to check on them. Now look what's happened!" So he had to scramble and do some BIG stuff to make it up to her.

Maybe, being the callous sort Gerry seems to be, he was surprised at how hard Kate took it. Maybe because he himsel