I not only want them to find a solution, I want to see Madeleine get the justice she deserves.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Isn't it much better idea Madeleine being returned to her loving family who fought so much to get her back?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I not only want them to find a solution, I want to see Madeleine get the justice she deserves.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've never understood why the sofa against the wall was an issue. I think they moved it against the wall to keep the kids from running the circle around the furniture. My home has a layout that creates a circle through the kitchen, dining room, family room, living room and back into the kitchen. Every kid in my family found the circle fairly quickly and liked to tear through the track like it was laid out just for that reason. Two 2-year-olds and a three-year-old would love that! Squealing and laughing as they go.I just don't believe that was the reason the sofa was moved. Kids playing behind it...eyeroll.
IMO her little body was hidden back there for a bit.
I've never understood why the sofa against the wall was an issue. I think they moved it against the wall to keep the kids from running the circle around the furniture. My home has a layout that creates a circle through the kitchen, dining room, family room, living room and back into the kitchen. Every kid in my family found the circle fairly quickly and liked to tear through the track like it was laid out just for that reason. Two 2-year-olds and a three-year-old would love that! Squealing and laughing as they go.
Just my humble opinion
Isn't it much better idea Madeleine being returned to her loving family who fought so much to get her back?
I was very active on another case in which folks were divided into two camps. One group strongly believed the parent did it and the other group fiercely defended the parent in question. I thought the parent did it for sure. he case is still unsolved and I still believe the parent is the main suspect. But I have always said that if it turned out I was wrong and the was some kind of crazy freak intruder/abductor scenario after all, I wouldn't be surprised. I have seen so many cases with the most unexpected twists and turns.
It is strange now to be in the pro-parent camp. but again, if It came to pass that the parents did it, I wouldn't be surprised either. i am really curious about the consensus that the McCanns don't behave like grieving parents. I have said this about other parents. but I don't see this here. The interviews I have seen show two people who look exhausted, sick, burdened with grief and angry. I sense a lot of fury, which I would carry as well if my child was abducted and if there was no justice and if I had been dragged through hell. So does anyone have any particular interview or video I should watch, to get an idea of what people are talking about? Im genuinely curious and open minded.
In the interviews with previous tenants of 5A, PJ asked where the sofa was located and they said about 60cm from the wall (about 2 feet, for we Yanks.)I'm not sure if there was enough of room behind the couch to fit Maddie there. Look at the picture 12, the couch is moved so much towards the window, that it presses the curtains against the wall. And even if there was enough of place, McCanns, and later the PJ allegedly searched every cranny and nook and apartment. There would be no way they would not have found her if she was lying there. And McCanns would have no opportunity to take her body from 5A and hide.
Because that only makes it more complicated and I like to keep it simple. Note that opening the curtains (and then the window) would already give you extra light. Can't believe the room is still pitch black then. Much better and safer than f.i. using a flash light that always can be seen from the front and the back of the building. So, pretty much a pro we are dealing with here.
Isn't it much better idea Madeleine being returned to her loving family who fought so much to get her back?
I don't know if this has been discussed before. When I was reading the PJ files concerning the disappearance of Joana Capriano, I started to create a timeline of events that happened in that case and bouncing them off of Madeleine's case.
Interestingly enough, on May 4, 2007, the day after Madeleine was kidnapped, Gonçalo Amaral was officially made an Arguido in the case of the prison beating of Leonor Capriano, mother of little Joana. Same basic story as Madeleine's, child disappears never to be seen again. Except that Amaral, his buddy and three officers were charged with the beating, etc...I think you know that story as it lead to Amaral's falsification conviction.
It is written that Amaral was furious about being made an Arguido. He felt humiliated and embarrassed and surely felt like he had something to prove. So, he is very angry when he first arrives at the McCann apartment, and in my opinion, takes it out on the McCann's for what he considers his injustice in a very similar case.
This is the basis of why the McCann's DID express concern over his overseeing their case, and when he so obviously focused on them as the only possibility, they began to be concerned about their own safety. Would they decide to beat a confession out of Kate? or Gerry? History said it had been done before.
When one is an arguido in Portugal, the PJ can remand that person to jail for up to three years without formal charges. PJ needs a reason, of course and with Amaral not being shy about making stuff up, it wouldn't take much to lock the McCanns up.
The day after the McCanns were made arguido's, they left for the UK before any restrictions could be filed requiring them to stay in Portugal. They did, after all have to work, and raise the twins.
So, in the five months he was on this case, Amaral was quite involved with his own problems, and I think it severely skewed any rational judgment he might have had.
I was very active on another case in which folks were divided into two camps. One group strongly believed the parent did it and the other group fiercely defended the parent in question. I thought the parent did it for sure. he case is still unsolved and I still believe the parent is the main suspect. But I have always said that if it turned out I was wrong and the was some kind of crazy freak intruder/abductor scenario after all, I wouldn't be surprised. I have seen so many cases with the most unexpected twists and turns.
It is strange now to be in the pro-parent camp. but again, if It came to pass that the parents did it, I wouldn't be surprised either. i am really curious about the consensus that the McCanns don't behave like grieving parents. I have said this about other parents. but I don't see this here. The interviews I have seen show two people who look exhausted, sick, burdened with grief and angry. I sense a lot of fury, which I would carry as well if my child was abducted and if there was no justice and if I had been dragged through hell. So does anyone have any particular interview or video I should watch, to get an idea of what people are talking about? Im genuinely curious and open minded.
From PJ Files: Analysis Report of First 11 Volumes
"On the annex 90, there is a detailed analysis developed based on the hypothesis that the author of the kidnapping acted with the help of another individual, and that both activated on the same minute, only on the 3rd, one of the antennas at Praia da Luz. This means, they both would activate cells in Praia da Luz simultaneously. It was taken as reference the statements of Jane Tanner and Gerald McCann and it was admitted that this contact, short, had occurred between 21:00 and 21:20h."
:lol:
I've heard of sleuthers using their hubbies to experiment upon but this is the first time I've heard of a grandchild being lobbed about!
You're right of course, it is almost impossible for this scenario to have occurred.
Add in the fact that the only fingerprints found in the "open window" position were Kate's, and you have something which definitely needs explaining.
:cow:
Golden girl, I don't find your theory far fetched at all; I think it's plausible.
Upon finding (eventually) their dead child behind the sofa, why would any parent leap into action to cover up and dispose of the body? This, to me, means only one thing - something about the state of the child would mean certain jail time to the parents. I'm not talking physical mess of a dead body here, but there must have been something that the LE would find in an autopsy that would send the parents off to jail for sure - drugs/anaesthetics.
Imagine the scenario: all hell is going down in those first few moments, everyone frantic yelling the child's name, searching around outside in the streets nearby, and then lo and behold, the parent spots the child behind the sofa. A moment of realisation that they're totally going to rot in jail for the rest of their days for drugging and manslaughter, and quick into action. Get rid of the evidence, straight away to the garden area by the steps, then quickly to a place away from the apartment such as the rocky part of the beach, somewhere to go back to in the early hours with a holdall to move it further away (bringing the holdall back to the apartment since leaving it with the body would be too risky as it would link back to the parents and mean that the 'abductor' would have taken a child and a bag, making no sense at all).
Leaping on top of the Tanner sighting as this led the eye the other way. The dogs speak only the truth.
Jmo.
Eta: I don't think the deceased child spent time in the parents' closet where the dogs indicated, but the bag that HAD contained her did, AFTER it was bright back to the apartment.