UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: John on April 02, 2013, 06:57:42 PM
-
Does the sequence of events support abduction or manslaughter?
I admit I haven't given too much thought to the ins and outs in the Madeleine case for a while but having read most of today's posts I got to thinking.
Madeleine was alive and well when she left the crèche on the day she disappeared. Her parents were seen on CCTV returning to the apartment with the children that afternoon and some hours before they reappeared at the tapas bar.
If something untoward had happened to Madeleine in that apartment and her parents had decided to conceal her remains for whatever reason and concoct a story about an abduction, I find it highly improbable that they would have alerted anyone that night. It just didn't give them enough time to get rid of the evidence.
They could have waited until everyone dispersed leaving them the entire night to plan their next move.
As far as Gerry being seen some distance away from the holiday complex walking with a child, how could he possibly have done that when his whereabouts were known to within minutes that entire evening?
-
A very sensible post, John.
-
A very sensible post, John.
Why thank you Eleanor, my time in the police hasn't been wasted after all! 8)-)))
-
Does the sequence of events support abduction or manslaughter?
I admit I haven't given too much thought to the ins and outs in the Madeleine case for a while but having read most of today's posts I got to thinking.
Madeleine was alive and well when she left the crèche on the day she disappeared. Her parents were seen on CCTV returning to the apartment with the children that afternoon and some hours before they reappeared at the tapas bar.
If something untoward had happened to Madeleine in that apartment and her parents had decided to conceal her remains for whatever reason and concoct a story about an abduction, I find it highly improbable that they would have alerted anyone that night. It just didn't give them enough time to get rid of the evidence.
They could have waited until everyone dispersed leaving them the entire night to plan their next move.
As far as Gerry being seen some distance away from the holiday complex walking with a child, how could he possibly have done that when his whereabouts were known to within minutes that entire evening?
If you want to understand the stranger [ censored word] you need to dispense with rationality and morals completely. Some aver she died 2 or three days ealier and they used a double to disguise this, carrying her body in the back of a pushchair in which were satthe twins. Others believe she did not travel to Portugal at all. Gerry carried her body back to the©©UK in hishand baggage. They also wrapped her body in a dead dog and cremated her in a pet cemetery. Bush, Brown and Blair protect them because of knowledge that Gerry has about nuclear
medicine. Madeleine was an experiment in cloning that went wrong and her body had to be disposed of. Madeleine. Was used by a British pado ring involving Labour politicians and died while being assaulted.
Take your choice.
-
Does the sequence of events support abduction or manslaughter?
I admit I haven't given too much thought to the ins and outs in the Madeleine case for a while but having read most of today's posts I got to thinking.
Madeleine was alive and well when she left the crèche on the day she disappeared. Her parents were seen on CCTV returning to the apartment with the children that afternoon and some hours before they reappeared at the tapas bar.
If something untoward had happened to Madeleine in that apartment and her parents had decided to conceal her remains for whatever reason and concoct a story about an abduction, I find it highly improbable that they would have alerted anyone that night. It just didn't give them enough time to get rid of the evidence.
They could have waited until everyone dispersed leaving them the entire night to plan their next move.
As far as Gerry being seen some distance away from the holiday complex walking with a child, how could he possibly have done that when his whereabouts were known to within minutes that entire evening?
You certainly have grasped it very quickly. I've been reading about the case since the beginning and still can't make my mind.
However I believe that manslaughter would be the adequate legal label. I don't know if the McCann were directly or indirectly involved in the demise of the child, my gut feeling is that they weren't, but I am sure that they know what happened and they, for some reason chose to hide it.
I've always found very disturbing the apparent contradiction between their (the parents) allusion to a possible paedophile abductor and at the same time the intensity used to make (or try to) people believe that the child was well and alive.
Another aspect that made me very suspicious about this case was that in the early days the police cautioned the parents to avoid divulge any identifying marks on the childs body, because there was a real danger that an abductor would "get rid" of her, and on that same day, under the Mr.McCanns "wider agenda" goals they revealed her eye and left leg marks - according to Mr. McCans interview to the Vanity magazine, those perils were known but "it was a good marketing ploy".
If the child was suspected or expected to be alive which parent would risk her life like that?!
-
When I was at the beach at Palma, Majorca, some years ago with my 3-year-old he disappeared from right in front of my eyes. One second he was there the next all I could see was this...
Rows and rows of tourists in every direction.
(http://i.imgur.com/eiA4Jmq.jpg)
Shock horror!! Which way to go?
It is so easy to lose a child with the best will in the world.
-
John:
They could have waited until everyone dispersed leaving them the entire night to plan their next move.
As far as Gerry being seen some distance away from the holiday complex walking with a child, how could he possibly have done that when his whereabouts were known to within minutes that entire evening?
We must remember that the holidays were ending, how could they explain the lack of one child on the return home? Besides I think that the whole group was fundamental to keep the "tale" up.
On what concerns the possible viewing of G. McC walking with a child, it has not been confirmed as the "reconstruction" was not possible. But even if it was him it does not collide with the facts because independent witnesses could not account for his whereabouts between 21:15 and 22:00h.
-
John: They could have waited until everyone dispersed leaving them the entire night to plan their next move.
As far as Gerry being seen some distance away from the holiday complex walking with a child, how could he possibly have done that when his whereabouts were known to within minutes that entire evening?
We must remember that the holidays were ending, how could they explain the lack of one child on the return home? Besides I think that the whole group was fundamental to keep the "tale" up.
On what concerns the possible viewing of G. McC walking with a child, it has not been confirmed as the "reconstruction" was not possible. But even if it was him it does not collide with the facts because independent witnesses could not account for his whereabouts between 21:15 and 22:00h.
Was that when he was checking the children?
-
Yes, it's too easy to "loose" a child in a crowded place, but not so easy in a closed home/house.
This is another aspect I don't believe, the supposed opened doors. If the back door was opened why did Mr. McCann walk 200 plus meters more when he wanted to use the loo, and entered through the front door with his key?!
-
John: They could have waited until everyone dispersed leaving them the entire night to plan their next move.
As far as Gerry being seen some distance away from the holiday complex walking with a child, how could he possibly have done that when his whereabouts were known to within minutes that entire evening?
We must remember that the holidays were ending, how could they explain the lack of one child on the return home? Besides I think that the whole group was fundamental to keep the "tale" up.
On what concerns the possible viewing of G. McC walking with a child, it has not been confirmed as the "reconstruction" was not possible. But even if it was him it does not collide with the facts because independent witnesses could not account for his whereabouts between 21:15 and 22:00h.
Was that when he was checking the children?
That statement by Luz is not true. Gerry was gone from the table between 9 pm and 9.20 pm. during which time he spoke to another independent witness who confirmed this.
-
Please provide evidence he was seen by independent witnesses from 9.15 to 10 pm.
-
John: They could have waited until everyone dispersed leaving them the entire night to plan their next move.
As far as Gerry being seen some distance away from the holiday complex walking with a child, how could he possibly have done that when his whereabouts were known to within minutes that entire evening?
We must remember that the holidays were ending, how could they explain the lack of one child on the return home? Besides I think that the whole group was fundamental to keep the "tale" up.
On what concerns the possible viewing of G. McC walking with a child, it has not been confirmed as the "reconstruction" was not possible. But even if it was him it does not collide with the facts because independent witnesses could not account for his whereabouts between 21:15 and 22:00h.
Was that when he was checking the children?
That statement by Luz is not true. Gerry was gone from the table between 9 pm and 9.20 pm. during which time he spoke to another independent witness who confirmed this.
Between 9 and 9:20 I believe you are referring to Jeremy Wilkins; where does that make make my observation "not true".
Yes John, his Jezz meeting was when he went to check the kids and also to make it to the loo...there are contradictory testimonies where at first (police depositions) he says he went through the front door and later (to the media, I think) he said he used the back door.
-
Though I think they could have been involved in Maddie's death I don't see how they could have had time to dispose of a body etc unless the real timeline was radically different to the official one. That's why I'm undecided (plus there is evidence of Portuguese police putting pressure on the parents of a missing child to admit to murder on at least one occasion in the past, and child abductions are disproportionally common in Portugal).
-
Let us just suppose that Kate and Gerry found Maddie, dead in the apartment. How on earth did they manage to conceal and then later, dispose of her body?
-
Let us just suppose that Kate and Gerry found Maddie, dead in the apartment. How on earth did they manage to conceal and then later, dispose of her body?
Yours is the reaction of a logical person.
-
Though I think they could have been involved in Maddie's death I don't see how they could have had time to dispose of a body etc unless the real timeline was radically different to the official one. That's why I'm undecided (plus there is evidence of Portuguese police putting pressure on the parents of a missing child to admit to murder on at least one occasion in the past, and child abductions are disproportionally common in Portugal).
This document whose translation is offered in joana morais blog (http://joana-morais.blogspot.com/2011/08/sos-crianca-has-signalled-41-missing.html), although is not referred to 2007 nor to 2013, can throw a little light on how
«child abductions are disproportionally common in Portugal»:
SOS-Criança has signalled 41 missing children [in Portugal] in 2010. Most of them ran away from home, but there were also parental abductions and flights from institutions. Some went missing for less than two days, others for over a year.
A report from SOS-Criança, an organization that was created in 1989 by the Child Support Institute (Instituto de Apoio à Criança) reveals that most of the children that disappeared last year had run away from home (25), but there were also 10 cases that were parental abductions and another six situations where the children fled from the institutions where they were staying.
Ten children were missing for less than two days and another seven for less than one week. The report further indicates that in five cases, the child managed to remain out of contact for one to two weeks, and three children disappeared for two to three weeks.
Three minors ran away for three to four weeks and another two remained unaccounted for a period over one month. In three cases, the minors disappeared for over half a year, and in four cases, for over nine months. The report further indicates that three minors remained missing for over one year.
Most of these children had someone “waiting for them”: 12 were with a parent, 16 with companions or friends and five with their siblings. Fifteen minors ended up returning “home” on their own, while in six situations it was the family or police (six times) that cleared the case. “Two children did not want to return home/to the institution, and nine have an open process”, the report mentions, indicating that 12 of the “missing” were repeat situations.
Concerning parental abductions, in 13 cases the parents were still married, eight were divorced, six were separated, and there were also two cases of people living together or single. The civil situation of the parents of nine missing children remains unknown until now.
Family conflicts are the most common motive for runaways
Family conflicts were the main motive for running away, followed by the internet and the influence of friends. "Domestic violence was responsible for four disappearances and abuse was responsible in three cases". The report further points out cases of psychiatric illness, neglect, behavioural problems, dating and even the story of a minor who ran away to attend a concert.
Last year, 31 girls and 10 boys disappeared, and most of the cases take place near the weekend: 11 on a Friday, seven on a Thursday and another five cases on a Monday.
As far as ages are concerned, there is no pattern: last year, two children aged two and six children aged three, five, six, seven, ten and eleven, but also five 16-year-olds and four 17-year-olds.
Most of them lived in Lisbon (11). In Évora and Bragança, four minor went missing in each of the regions. Setúbal, Braga, Coimbra, Faro, Leiria, Viseu, Santarém and Aveiro also registered cases.
In most of the situations, the alert was given by the family, but there were also eleven flights that were denounced by the community, and seven by professionals from institutions that are related to children. In two cases, the "fugitives" themselves contacted the SOS-Missing Child services.
Eight denunciations arrived at the SOS services by e-mail, while the other 33 arrived by phone, the report reveals, further indicating that the Missing Children Service has already signalled 318 cases over the years. Last year, there were 41 cases, half of what was registered in 2009, when the services signalled 88 missing children.
I'm sorry I couldn't find any document attesting that police have put pressure on parents to admitting the demise of children....By the way, Leonor, the convicted murder of her daughter was today sentenced to a plus 7 months in jail for having lied about being tortured by the police.
-
Thanks Stephen and Eleanor for the timings which seems to be in dispute. This is something I have learned from the Bamber case, you have to be accurate with your time-line or the argument just falls apart. An accuracy to about 5 mins is normal in some cases.
Do we have verified timings for when Gerry was out of anyones view?
-
Thanks Stephen and Eleanor for the timings which seems to be in dispute. This is something I have learned from the Bamber case, you have to be accurate with your time-line or the argument just falls apart. An accuracy to about 5 mins is normal in some cases.
Do we have verified timings for when Gerry was out of anyones view?
He went to the appartment approx 9 pm. Stayed approx 10 minutes as he used the lavatory. Stopped to talk to Gez Wilkins on the way back. Returned to the table approx 9.20
-
Let us just suppose that Kate and Gerry found Maddie, dead in the apartment. How on earth did they manage to conceal and then later, dispose of her body?
Why am I agreeing with you all the time today sika? @)(++(*
Anyway, one of the dogs detected in the cupboard beside the bed but so what? The police would have checked all those areas immediately they were alerted so I fail to see what that proves at the end of the day.
Gerry only was out of sight for minutes and was constantly watched after the police were involved so I find any suggestion that he or they hid the body and then moved it to be rather preposterous.
The evidence relating to the dog and the hire car hired weeks after the disappearance is strange but not altogether surprising. The dogs were out of their own territory working in a foreign environment with strange smells and odours because of the heat, I for on would not be surprised if they made a false indication.
-
Let us just suppose that Kate and Gerry found Maddie, dead in the apartment. How on earth did they manage to conceal and then later, dispose of her body?
Why am I agreeing with you all the time today sika? @)(++(*
Anyway, one of the dogs detected in the cupboard beside the bed but so what? The police would have checked all those areas immediately they were alerted so I fail to see what that proves at the end of the day.
Gerry only was out of sight for minutes and was constantly watched after the police were involved so I find any suggestion that he or they hid the body and then moved it to be rather preposterous.
The evidence relating to the dog and the hire car hired weeks after the disappearance is strange but not altogether surprising. The dogs were out of their own territory working in a foreign environment with strange smells and odours because of the heat, I for on would not be surprised if they made a false indication.
You don't know at what time they found (if they did) her dead. In fact there was an interest on making the reconstruction by the PJ because the period between 17:30 and 20:30 was considered extremely important.
Allegedely the child was seen by an independent wittness at 17:30 and the McCs arrived at the Tapas at about 20:30.
Dismissing the dogs is what the McCs also did, but then there has been convictions recently for murder in the absence of a body just because dogs signaled cadaver odour....
-
Let us just suppose that Kate and Gerry found Maddie, dead in the apartment. How on earth did they manage to conceal and then later, dispose of her body?
Why am I agreeing with you all the time today sika? @)(++(*
Anyway, one of the dogs detected in the cupboard beside the bed but so what? The police would have checked all those areas immediately they were alerted so I fail to see what that proves at the end of the day.
Gerry only was out of sight for minutes and was constantly watched after the police were involved so I find any suggestion that he or they hid the body and then moved it to be rather preposterous.
The evidence relating to the dog and the hire car hired weeks after the disappearance is strange but not altogether surprising. The dogs were out of their own territory working in a foreign environment with strange smells and odours because of the heat, I for on would not be surprised if they made a false indication.
You don't know at what time they found (if they did) her dead. In fact there was an interest on making the reconstruction by the PJ because the period between 17:30 and 20:30 was considered extremely important.
Allegedely the child was seen by an independent wittness at 17:30 and the McCs arrived at the Tapas at about 20:30.
You ASSume that she was found dead and not abducted.
-
No one has ever been convicted on dog evidence alone. Perish the thought.
-
No one has ever been convicted on dog evidence alone. Perish the thought.
I recall a famous UK case where two children were murdered and the police dog did locate them but because of the training the dog was not trained to give an audible warning so police handler did not investigate the location. When the children were located some weeks later a review of the dog training revealed this significant weakness in the handling and the training had to be revised.
Dogs however invaluable are only as good as their training and the ability of the handler to interpret their behaviour.