Why did Madeleine 'go missing'?

[Revolver]

Ah, we are again at the point zero. You assumed that the McCanns are non-psychopaths. How can you be so sure about it?




Psychopaths and egocentrist usually love attention, you know. And, to be honest if someone leaves their kid alone for the night again, after that kid asked "where you were when I cried last night?" well, the morals and mentality of such a person are highly questionable for me.



They drove to Fatima, they drove to Spain. Plenty of land to hide one little body.



Oh, but they could. They traveled around, completely alone. Nobody watched them. Not even media.



Smuggling little, blonde girls to the Eastern Europe is like carrying wood to the forest. Seriously.

Well, I can't think of many people who could concoct such a story and hide their child's body. They may have been able to do it. I don't think so.

I don't know the full details of the case re: Fatima and other excursions. How did they do it, then?

For me, an organised abduction seems very plausible.

 

[Cappuccino]

Why did they rent that car after madeline was missing. Usually if you were going to rent a car wouldnt it have been the first day of the holiday.

Maybe so they could drive around looking for her? To make it easier to go back and forth from the police station?

Just guessing, but they were in a holiday resort with all kinds of facilities within walking distance, they weren't taking a tour of Portugal. But their circumstances changed when Madeleine disappeared, which may have necessitated a car.

 

[Revolver]

Revolver;9903754sense.

Why cover it?

So they are not charged with criminal negligence, possibly Mansalughter or 2nd. degree murder if the drugging took place, or whatever Portugal's equivalent may be

So not to have their careers ruined.

So as not to be vilified even more than they currently are because, the negligence would be even more difficult to defend.

So as to appear to be "victims" thereby gathering sympathy from many, which has obviouosly worked as proven on any one of these threads. If they admitted their part in it, all this intruder nonsense would not be bantered about would it?



While I don't think that part was pre planned it has worked out far better than they ever could have imagined. They have become celebrities, tragic hero's, and made quite a tidy bundle on top of it, all funds being for the "search" (is there a wink icon? I couldn't tfind one)



I don't know. I also don't know where Caylee Anthony's body was originally hidden, or Kyron Horman's or Trenton Duckett or Lisa Irwin. I think that's why they call it



Gee, let me think. If I think parents drugged their child for their convenience or I believe that the child was abducted, which parent would I think looks better?
:seeya: I've got it now. The parents whose child was abducted definitely looks better,

Yes, but they are not in prison, have not lost their jobs, their money, their other children, they are celebrities with more money now than they had when Maddie disappeared.



Why on earth would innocent parents whose child had been abducted not be entirely truthful? Wouldn't innocent parents want to be sure that every single detail was conveyed so that LE had everything they needed to find their abducted child?

Just skimming through and will answer in depth later.

I don't believe that many people would do what many propose they did to maintain their careers (and even child custody). The concept would require grotesque and perverse humanity.

Again, my interest in the case has only been re-ignited by the recent Crimewatch doc. You and others will know about some elements better than I. The truthful comment is with regards to the '48 questions' and the timeline inconsistencies. I believe they tried to make themselves appear better parents than they actually were (with regards to the time they were left etc).

 

[chlban]

Revolver;9904016]

Just skimming through and will answer in depth later.

I don't believe that many people would do what many propose they did to maintain their careers (and even child custody). The concept would require grotesque and perverse humanity.

I think covering up the accidental death of a child requires a narcissistic personality.

I think that, like the Ramsey's before them, the McCann's fit that profile.
Appearances are everything. I don't doubt that they "love: their children, as much as Narcissist's are capable of loving someone other than themselves.
I don't think that in either case the death was pre-planned or even intentional.

I do, however, believe that once the damage was done, so to speak, the most important thing was protecting themselves and their image.

 

[natty01]

Perhaps they were hoping someone else could "discover" that she was missing ? jmo moo

This is exactly what I was thinking . Or discover that she had died, but when I check on my kids I open the door , peek in check they are still there ie theres a person sized lump in the bed and leave . The only time I do more than that is if either of them had shown any sign of illness , then I go in touch there heads to make sure they dont have a fever.

 

[Hexe]

This is exactly what I was thinking . Or discover that she had died, but when I check on my kids I open the door , peek in check they are still there ie theres a person sized lump in the bed and leave . The only time I do more than that is if either of them had shown any sign of illness , then I go in touch there heads to make sure they dont have a fever.

The McCanns admitted their kid were the light sleepers. I'm pretty sure their friends knew that and so they wouldn't try to go into the bedroom or touch the kids. Just, as you wrote, open the door and peek inside.

 

[Cappuccino]

This is exactly what I was thinking . Or discover that she had died, but when I check on my kids I open the door , peek in check they are still there ie theres a person sized lump in the bed and leave . The only time I do more than that is if either of them had shown any sign of illness , then I go in touch there heads to make sure they dont have a fever.

Wanting someone to discover she had died doesn't make sense because they were supposed to have staged the disappearance to cover up her death. If they wanted someone to discover her missing, that means they must have disposed of her between 5pm, when she was last seen, and 8.30 when they sat down to dinner.

How does that idea fit in with their known movements between 5 and 8.30?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Which pre-supposed that she was not only dead, but already disposed of before they sat down to dinner that night. Not sure how that fits in with their timeline?

Whose timeline?

Mine starts ticking immediately after the last independent person saw her alive. That would be 5pm ish....

Plenty of time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Donjeta]

I appreciate that they would have lost their careers and custody of the children had they overdosed Madeleine, but I don't believe any non-psychopaths would think to concoct an abduction, stuff their dead child into a bag and bury them.

I am not convinced that it is true, as I don't believe all the people who have concocted stories about what happened to their children can be diagnosed as psychopaths.Some could be just too cowardly to face the consequences of their actions. Some might have wanted to convince themselves that it is in the best interests of their remaining children not to have the parents thrown in prison for their violent impulses or extreme negligence in drugged haze or whatnot.

Any 'the McCanns did it' line of thought really does rely on them being mentally unstable and morally bankrupt. It's possible, but to do what they would have to have done really would make them extreme psychopaths.

No. One crime does not make you an extreme psychopath or even a regular one, there needs to be a long-standing pattern of antisocial behavior.

Would they have pushed for this latest appeal?

I don't believe the McCanns can be diagnosed as psychopaths but for the sake of argument, let's suppose a psychopath faked an abduction. They think primarily of their own self interest and what they have to gain. So a psychopath would push for an appeal if he thinks it's good for him. Perhaps he thinks he will get more donations for more publicity, he likes the attention, he thinks it will be good for his reputation and throw suspicion off of him, perhaps there is external pressure to have a campaign and he thinks that it's in his best interests not to cross those people who want it, and he's cocky enough to believe he committed the perfect crime and no appeal is going to turn up information that will incriminate himself.

 

[Cappuccino]

Whose timeline?

Mine starts ticking immediately after the last independent person saw her alive. That would be 5pm ish....

Plenty of time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

The McCanns timeline between 5pm and 8.30. Where were they? Who saw them, when, etc?

 

[UKgirl]

The McCanns timeline between 5pm and 8.30. Where were they? Who saw them, when, etc?

This is a good timeline

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id28.html

 

[liz b.]

So you think they actually disposed of the body earlier that day, before dinner?

IDK...I read an interesting post here, am still looking to find it again. It stated that there were other children in the apartment that night. I took it to mean that the other parents had left their kids with MM and the twins while they went to dinner. As in a sleepover. jmo moo

I would wonder : How old were the other kids ? How verbal were the other kids ? Where did the other kids actually sleep ? If they all slept in the same bedroom, I can't see how MM's absence would not have been noticed. On the other hand,if some of the kids slept in the living room, I can't see why someone looking to abduct a child would have walked past kids sleeping in the living room to get to MM. jmo moo

To answer your question : yes, IF MM was harmed by a parent, it would have happened earlier. In this scenario, it would have been better for the parents if someone else discovered she was missing. That way, the parents would not have been questioned as closely as to what exactly they saw when they went in her room,and found she wasn't there. jmo moo LE always focuses hard on that first person to realize someone is missing. jmo moo

Haven't followed this case as closely as most posters here, but i always thought that SY knew a great deal more than they let on, jmo moo.

 

[Cappuccino]

There's no evidence that any children other than the McCanns own children were in their apartment that night. Not that I've ever heard anyway - if anyone has any, please post it.

Thanks for timeline, UKGirl - so David Payne claims to have seen Madeleine at 6.30 approx. Gerry was playing tennis up to 7.20 approx. They all sat down to dinner at 8.30.

If we accept all the above as true, that leaves about an hour to hide a body. Not impossible at all, though tricky enough probably with no car and in a strange place.

But what happened? She wasn't on her own at that time, so the accidentally fell while unattended theory is out. No need for her to be drugged that early either, so the accidental overdose theory is out. Why would she be dead by 7.20 pm?

 

[haden]

People in here base their facts on newspaper articles which are often misleading, due to the journalists not knowing enough about the case and their editors not paying attention to this.
Back in 2007 journalists were sitting in a cafe in PDL and listening to 'hear says', basing their articles on this because there were no facts coming from the case investigators.

Very often cash strapped police and GNR would tell lies for couple of bucks..

 

[liz b.]

There's no evidence that any children other than the McCanns own children were in their apartment that night. Not that I've ever heard anyway - if anyone has any, please post it.

Thanks for timeline, UKGirl - so David Payne claims to have seen Madeleine at 6.30 approx. Gerry was playing tennis up to 7.20 approx. They all sat down to dinner at 8.30.

If we accept all the above as true, that leaves about an hour to hide a body. Not impossible at all, though tricky enough probably with no car and in a strange place.

But what happened? She wasn't on her own at that time, so the accidentally fell while unattended theory is out. No need for her to be drugged that early either, so the accidental overdose theory is out. Why would she be dead by 7.20 pm?

Again, IDK. perhaps she saw her parents getting ready to go out again ? And became vocally upset,as she is said to have been the night before. ( upstairs neighbor said she heard the children crying for a long time the night before).

In my experience, most parents do not usually set out to deliberately harm their children. They usually do so in a split second of anger. They will often say things like : " I wish i could turn back the clock " etc. They are often frustrated,and they momentarily loose control. IF this child was harmed by her parents, I would see it going down like that. moo imo. MM was at a difficult age to parent, moo jmo. Not fully old enough to be able to reason, possibly not fully verbal enough to express her emotions. 3 can be a hard age for parents and kids. jmo moo

And her parents are doctors.We hold them to a higher standard somehow. They would have been excoriated by the public,if it had been discovered to have been infanticide.

really don't know. no scenario fits exactly here. need much more info. jmo moo

 

[Revolver]

Still thing that the big issue, and the one that leads me to think she was genuinely abducted, is the 'removal' of Madeleine by Kate and Gerry. And as a human, I do lean towards the idea that they are good people. I hope so, anyway.

Enjoyed reading this place. Discussion seems very good and posters are well informed.

 

[aa9511]

One observation I have made in the last couple of days from watching many clips of the McCann's on youtube, is that in answers to questions concerning what did Madeleine do that day, what is your last memory of her, etc....she is consistent that IIRC she came back from a run and picked up the kids, they were all tired and she noticed Madeleine was very tired and had little color in her face from being so tired, then she took them to the room to do their bedtime routine, Gerry went to play tennis. They took bath, read 2 books, and then they went to sleep.

Sometimes I find it strange why she mentions every time that Madeleine was extremely tired and worn out and had a pale color on her face....just so tired. Seems to me that has nothing to do with being abducted. She adds those details, but doesn't add details you would think would be more relevant to her, like what was the last thing Madeleine said to her? What cute things was she saying during her bath and during reading of the book? Did she give her a hug before she went to sleep, what was the last thing she said to her before going to sleep? In one interview she named the 2 books they read, but didn't go into any detail about Madeleine herself after they got back to the room. To be fair, she doesn't talk about the twins, either, but the relevance being that those were the very last memories she has of Madeleine!

It's just very strange and you would think as a mom that she would hold on to and treasure those last memories of her daughter.

One reason she doesn't give details about the twins either COULD BE....something happened after they got to the room, she was so distracted with what happened to Madeleine that they didn't actually do the things that she said they did....bath, reading of books peacefully, etc.. Basically a chaos ensued. That would be explanation for no details regarding twins or Madeleine, she cannot talk about any details b/c no such details exist.

 

[LinasK]

Revolver;9903754sense.

Why cover it? Let's see.

So they are not charged with criminal negligence, possibly Mansalughter or 2nd. degree murder if the drugging took place, or whatever Portugal's equivalent may be?

So not to have their careers ruined?

So not to lose custody of their other children?

So as not to be vilified even more than they currently are because the negligence would be even more difficult to defend?

So as to appear to be "victims" thereby gathering sympathy from many, which has obviouosly worked as proven on any one of these threads. If they admitted their part in it, all this intruder nonsense would not be bantered about would it?



While I don't think that part was pre planned it has worked out far better than they ever could have imagined. They have become celebrities, tragic hero's, and made quite a tidy bundle on top of it, all funds being for the "search" :floorlaugh:



I don't know. I also don't know where Kyron Horman's body is or Trenton Duckett or Lisa Irwin. I think that's why they call it hiding



Gee, let me think. If I think parents drugged their child for their convenience or I believe that the child was abducted, which parent would I think looks better?
:seeya: I've got it now. The parents whose child was abducted definitely look better,

Yes, but they are not in prison, have not lost their jobs, their money, their other children, they are celebrities with more money now than they had when Maddie disappeared.



Why on earth would innocent parents whose child had been abducted not be entirely truthful? Wouldn't innocent parents want to be sure that every single detail was conveyed so that LE had everything they needed to find their abducted child?

Let's not forget the Ramsey's who have the most parallels to this case. Better to think there was an intruder with a ransom note than to seek help for your child's accidental death because of what society might think!!!

 

[LinasK]

There's no evidence that any children other than the McCanns own children were in their apartment that night. Not that I've ever heard anyway - if anyone has any, please post it.

Thanks for timeline, UKGirl - so David Payne claims to have seen Madeleine at 6.30 approx. Gerry was playing tennis up to 7.20 approx. They all sat down to dinner at 8.30.

If we accept all the above as true, that leaves about an hour to hide a body. Not impossible at all, though tricky enough probably with no car and in a strange place.

But what happened? She wasn't on her own at that time, so the accidentally fell while unattended theory is out. No need for her to be drugged that early either, so the accidental overdose theory is out. Why would she be dead by 7.20 pm?

I disagree, they wanted plenty of time to make sure the drugs took effect. Even when I have a migraine, I know that Excedrin and Advil both take 20 min. to kick in, so I have to go through at least 20 min. of pain, sometimes longer...

 

[Dushi]

This is a good timeline

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id28.html

When was it decided that the front door was left unlocked?


- 21:20
Gerry checks on Madeleine

According to Gerry himself, in his first police interview, he enters the apartment using his key, the door being locked, and goes to the children's room. He notes that the twins and Madeleine were OK.

He then spends several minutes going to the toilet.



From the above timeline