Would It Be Possible For Madeleine To Live A 'Normal' Life Elsewhere?

[faithlilly]

Well if MM was taken by a childless couple then she was abducted not adopted.  She was just short of her 4th birthday and given no one heard any crying or screaming and the bed was found neatly she may have slept thru it. The couple may then have come up with a plausible narrative which was just built on as the years went by to the point I guess her previous life would just fade from memory.  But she would be 16 yoa now and if she is living a 'normal' life with access to the internet you would think she might start wondering?

She is the most famous missing child in the world. Don’t you think if she was abducted for a childless couple her life would be anything but normal as the couple would have been terrified from the beginning that she may be identified? Do you really think that any couple knowing of the circumstances surrounding how the child was obtained and the worldwide publicity that ensued would be prepared to accept that child ?

[Holly Goodhead]

They could always claim that she was an orphan, say from a Romanian orphanage.   Falsify a date of birth and adoption papers, no way she would be able to trace her parents in those sort of circumstances.
Faced with a story like that, why should she think any different?

Well MM looks quite celtic with fair skin and blue eyes?  Perhaps not surprising since she hails from Irish stock.  Romanians tend to have a darker skin tone and eyes?  Is it really possible she could be with a couple leading a 'normal' life?  I guess it would depend on the couple's lifestyle pre any MM and how well they could incorporate her into their lives post abduction.   

[faithlilly]

Well MM looks quite celtic with fair skin and blue eyes?  Perhaps not surprising since she hails from Irish stock.  Romanians tend to have a darker skin tone and eyes?  Is it really possible she could be with a couple leading a 'normal' life?  I guess it would depend on the couple's lifestyle pre any MM and how well they could incorporate her into their lives post abduction.

So you don’t think that a couple suddenly obtaining a child who looked like the most famous missing child in the world or a couple just arriving in town who had a child in tow who looked like the most famous missing child in history would arouse suspicion ?

[Venturi Swirl]

Having watched Long Lost Family time doesn't seem to matter. Neither does whether the adoption was successful or not. The need to know is very strong. Adopted children gtow up isolated because they don't look, think or behave like anyone they know.

That may be your experience but I would say it was a gross generalisation.

[Mr Gray]

Having watched Long Lost Family time doesn't seem to matter. Neither does whether the adoption was successful or not. The need to know is very strong. Adopted children gtow up isolated because they don't look, think or behave like anyone they know.

Opinion as fact... I'm sure there's lots of variation in the way adopted children feel... Not just the depressing picture you paint

[G-Unit]

Well if MM was taken by a childless couple then she was abducted not adopted.  She was just short of her 4th birthday and given no one heard any crying or screaming and the bed was found neatly she may have slept thru it. The couple may then have come up with a plausible narrative which was just built on as the years went by to the point I guess her previous life would just fade from memory.  But she would be 16 yoa now and if she is living a 'normal' life with access to the internet you would think she might start wondering?

Young children will accept what they're told, but as they get older they will question more deeply. Madeleine has an inidentifiable distinguishing feature too.

[jassi]

Young children will accept what they're told, but as they get older they will question more deeply. Madeleine has an inidentifiable distinguishing feature too.

I think the eye defect was grossly exaggerated as a good marketing ploy.

[faithlilly]

I think the eye defect was grossly exaggerated as a good marketing ploy.

The childless couple theory is put forward simply to  make more palatable the totally reckless choices the parents made.

If Madeleine is alive and living a’normal’ life as the much wanted child of a childless couple then it somehow makes her parents neglect less catastrophic.

[Robittybob1]

They could always claim that she was an orphan, say from a Romanian orphanage.   Falsify a date of birth and adoption papers, no way she would be able to trace her parents in those sort of circumstances.
Faced with a story like that, why should she think any different?

What about memories and confusion?

[jassi]

What about memories and confusion?

She may not have any memories.

[Robittybob1]

So you don’t think that a couple suddenly obtaining a child who looked like the most famous missing child in the world or a couple just arriving in town who had a child in tow who looked like the most famous missing child in history would arouse suspicion ?

She wouldn't look so out of place if she was a true "replacement child".  Not a child in a childless family but replacing a child lost  in a family that had a daughter her age.  Could any family think that the McCanns owed them this much?

I know I sometimes buy tools with a lifetime guarantee.   Could parents think their lost daughter came with a lifetime replacement guarantee?

I'm a bit surprised to find in the archiving report that the PJ had considered such topics.  OK the translation isa bit wonky but I now think they are talking about this.  I'll have to dig it up.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

"Considering the participated facts, conjugated with the information that was offered. namely by the witnesses, and with the information that was made available through the development of the inquiry, the investigation equated the verification of several hypotheses: abduction, for the purpose of sexual exploration or others (i.e. posterior adoption, child traffic, organ traffic), without homicide; abduction, followed by homicide with (or without) concealment of a cadaver, hypotheses that were considered under the double sides of the abduction (if it existed) having occurred due to feelings of vengeance of the abductor(s) towards the parents (directed abduction) or simply taking advantage of the circumstance that the child was in a situation of actual vulnerability (opportunity abduction), accidental death, with posterior concealment of the cadaver and, underlying all of these possibilities, abandonment, substantiated as a crime under article 138 of the Penal Code."

Child replacement = posterior adoption.  Is that how it was to be translated?

hypotheses that were considered under the double sides of the abduction (if it existed) having occurred due to feelings of vengeance of the abductor(s) towards the parents (directed abduction) Was that the PJ considering someone insisting on the replacement coming from the McCanns?

[Robittybob1]

She may not have any memories.

Initially she would have memories.  Unless she did have an accident and suffered amnesia.
Like now at my age I may not have that many memories of being nearly 4, but when I was alive back then surely I had memories of my family at the time.

[faithlilly]

She wouldn't look so out of place if she was a true "replacement child".  Not a child in a childless family but replacing a child lost  in a family that had a daughter her age.  Could any family think that the McCanns owed them this much?

I know I sometimes buy tools with a lifetime guarantee.   Could parents think their lost daughter came with a lifetime replacement guarantee?

I'm a bit surprised to find in the archiving report that the PJ had considered such topics.  OK the translation isa bit wonky but I now think they are talking about this.  I'll have to dig it up.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm

"Considering the participated facts, conjugated with the information that was offered. namely by the witnesses, and with the information that was made available through the development of the inquiry, the investigation equated the verification of several hypotheses: abduction, for the purpose of sexual exploration or others (i.e. posterior adoption, child traffic, organ traffic), without homicide; abduction, followed by homicide with (or without) concealment of a cadaver, hypotheses that were considered under the double sides of the abduction (if it existed) having occurred due to feelings of vengeance of the abductor(s) towards the parents (directed abduction) or simply taking advantage of the circumstance that the child was in a situation of actual vulnerability (opportunity abduction), accidental death, with posterior concealment of the cadaver and, underlying all of these possibilities, abandonment, substantiated as a crime under article 138 of the Penal Code."

Child replacement = posterior adoption.  Is that how it was to be translated?

hypotheses that were considered under the double sides of the abduction (if it existed) having occurred due to feelings of vengeance of the abductor(s) towards the parents (directed abduction) Was that the PJ considering someone insisting on the replacement coming from the McCanns?

Have you been having discussions with Sadie ?

[Robittybob1]

Have you been having discussions with Sadie ?

Not recently.  That is straight out of the PJ legal summary.  They are considering if someone abducted Madeleine on the basis that the McCanns owed them something. That is a topic I've never seen being discussed before but there is evidence of this!

How do you understand the term "posterior adoption"?
Have you ever considered "Directed abduction"?

Up till now I have considered woke and wandered followed by an accident and an "opportunity abduction".
Yet my theory right from the start was a "directed abduction"  but have always struggled to see how this could be developed.  How could such a situation as "directed abduction" ever occur?

[G-Unit]

I think the eye defect was grossly exaggerated as a good marketing ploy.

I agree. It was a marketing ploy, wasn't it? All those doctors and nurses looking in children's eyes after reading about Madeleine's 'coloboma' in the Lancet! Wouldn't it be interesting if she was found and it had disappeared?