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: Admin on March 30, 2013, 08:18:24 AM
-
The Kate McCann Book - Madeleine
-
What is the general consensus on here about Maddie's disappearance? The Portuguese police suspected the McCanns had drugged their children to make sure they didn't wake up while they were out at the restaurant and Maddie had died of an accidental overdose. Bearing in mind as GPs they would have had no trouble getting hold of the drugs they would have needed. Bear in mind as well to admit to having accidentally killed Maddie this would have meant without question that their medical careers would have been over. Does it not sound feasible that they could have been involved? I don't doubt that if this was the case then they didn't mean to do it hence their sadness about her disappearance is certainly not put on. I'm not 100% decided but I must admit I'm sceptical of the McCann's version of events surrounding the disappearance. I have a problem with the idea of an opportunistic child abduction. For anyone to successfully take Maddie means they must have staked out and observed the family for possibly days to establish the pattern of their usual movements and to be certain that if they went for the abduction there was no possibility of either of the McCanns returning to disturb them. Why go to so much effort just for one stranger's child?
And it does appear at times that they seem more interested in money making than in finding Maddie. However, we don't know for sure if this recent legal activity was instigated by them, the McCanns themselves may have had no involvement in it.
-
What is the general consensus on here about Maddie's disappearance? The Portuguese police suspected the McCanns had drugged their children to make sure they didn't wake up while they were out at the restaurant and Maddie had died of an accidental overdose. Bearing in mind as GPs they would have had no trouble getting hold of the drugs they would have needed. Bear in mind as well to admit to having accidentally killed Maddie this would have meant without question that their medical careers would have been over. Does it not sound feasible that they could have been involved? I don't doubt that if this was the case then they didn't mean to do it hence their sadness about her disappearance is certainly not put on. I'm not 100% decided but I must admit I'm sceptical of the McCann's version of events surrounding the disappearance. I have a problem with the idea of an opportunistic child abduction. For anyone to successfully take Maddie means they must have staked out and observed the family for possibly days to establish the pattern of their usual movements and to be certain that if they went for the abduction there was no possibility of either of the McCanns returning to disturb them. Why go to so much effort just for one stranger's child?
And it does appear at times that they seem more interested in money making than in finding Maddie. However, we don't know for sure if this recent legal activity was instigated by them, the McCanns themselves may have had no involvement in it.
Another point worth considering, why pick a child with an eye impairment which was so noticeable?
-
The abductor having arriving at the scene of the crime without transport, but carrying is Dyson for cleaning, or mop and bucket, wearing rubber gloves, hair net and protective suit, IV drip x 3\or inhalation anaesthetic forgot to bring his ophthalmic scope. There was no evidence it is alleged of either an abductor, or indeed Madeleine's hair or dna
-
The abductor having arriving at the scene of the crime without transport, but carrying is Dyson for cleaning, or mop and bucket, wearing rubber gloves, hair net and protective suit, IV drip x 3\or inhalation anaesthetic forgot to bring his ophthalmic scope. There was no evidence it is alleged of either an abductor, or indeed Madeleine's hair or dna
Wasn't there evidence of a chap seen walking near the apartment with a sleeping child in his arms. A chap who has never been traced?
-
tut tut ! We have a choice of two, the mysterious 'egg man' that morphed many characteristics as sighted by Jane Tanner a member of the same holiday group; which incidentally was in the road where Mr McC (M's father) stood chatting with JW someone he previously paid tennis with, but they heard or saw nothing, either of abduction or Mrs Tanner, this was around 9.20 Theory being either entrance via the unlocked patio door, thus in the apartment with Mr McC, or had gained entry via the ''jemmied'' shutter, unlocked window, exit could have been either via the front door or back out through the window. Strange as this side of the apartment was the car park & a more usual mode of abduction rather than on the hoof! But also blind to the side road where Mr McC stood and the Tapas bar where the ate.
About 9.30 Ms Tanner's partner, then checked their children again, with another holiday member MO who had said he would check the unlocked apartment of the McCanns, he noticed nothing untoward, despite two single beds being unoccupied, but can remember seeing both twins in their high sided travel cots, but M's bed not being in his line of sight was overlooked - other empty bed immediately ahead of him, under the alleged open window & shutter.
Next a sighting of a man carrying a child, was in the opposite direction as seen by the Smith family, this is about 10 pm. Later Mr Smith after much conscience searching thought he could identify the man, by his gait and method of carrying the child. That man was named.
I have no opinion to offer, since I had always thought that Madeleine had exited via the front door after waking and trying to find her parents. It can be noted in JT's rogatory interview, that she had DEADLOCKED the door of their apartment, thus preventing her daughter from exiting, the two girls being of the same age and not confined to a cot. I've never been able to establish whether apartment 5A's front door was deadlocked I've always assumed it wasn't.
The only [ censored word ] I can offer is to turn over the details to make some sense of them, merely inquisitive.
But with many years of interest of abductions, the statistics connected to them, I sadly don't give a slim chance the this child is still alive. But I suppose, there is always hope. But can we extend that hope to April Jones as well?
The McCanns and their family paid the ultimate price for leaving these children homealone, it wasn't a chance happening, but something they had done until disaster struck on the forth night and it is with profound sadness that they will have to also live with knowing these children, or a combination of them cried on the Tuesday for over an hour.
Some burden to carry until the end of your days
-
Shona, your opinionated and frankly very revealing (of you) post does not deserve a response other than to say, it really does not surprise me.
I appreciate your opinion, gilet. I'll spend as much time as I can today, reading Kate's book. Catch you later.
-
Shona, your opinionated and frankly very revealing (of you) post does not deserve a response other than to say, it really does not surprise me.
I appreciate your opinion, gilet. I'll spend as much time as I can today, reading Kate's book. Catch you later.
Ah the book.
Mills and Boon couldn't have done any better, in their fantasy section.
-
Shona, your opinionated and frankly very revealing (of you) post does not deserve a response other than to say, it really does not surprise me.
I appreciate your opinion, gilet. I'll spend as much time as I can today, reading Kate's book. Catch you later.
Ah the book.
Mills and Boon couldn't have done any better, in their fantasy section.
IN your obviously biased view.
BRoadbrush condemnation is all very well,but what is specifically wrong with it.
YOu will not answer specifics because that would take time and forensic skills.
HAve you even read the book?
-
Shona, your opinionated and frankly very revealing (of you) post does not deserve a response other than to say, it really does not surprise me.
I appreciate your opinion, gilet. I'll spend as much time as I can today, reading Kate's book. Catch you later.
Ah the book.
Mills and Boon couldn't have done any better, in their fantasy section.
IN your obviously biased view.
BRoadbrush condemnation is all very well,but what is specifically wrong with it.
YOu will not answer specifics because that would take time and forensic skills.
HAve you even read the book?
I had the unpleasant experience of reading the book some time ago.
A Mills and Boon special, in every sense.
The book is also biased, as it was 'written' and I use that word advisedly by K. Mccann, hardly neutral, was it ?
-
Shona, your opinionated and frankly very revealing (of you) post does not deserve a response other than to say, it really does not surprise me.
I appreciate your opinion, gilet. I'll spend as much time as I can today, reading Kate's book. Catch you later.
Ah the book.
Mills and Boon couldn't have done any better, in their fantasy section.
IN your obviously biased view.
BRoadbrush condemnation is all very well,but what is specifically wrong with it.
YOu will not answer specifics because that would take time and forensic skills.
HAve you even read the book?
I had the unpleasant experience of reading the book some time ago.
A Mills and Boon special, in every sense.
The book is also biased, as it was 'written' and I use that word advisedly by K. Mccann, hardly neutral, was it ?
OF course it is not neutral; it is her recollection of the events from her point of view.
IT was written to raise money rather than awareness.
AS was her right.
THe fact that you don't like it is immaterial. Enough people bought it to make it a major best seller at the time.
-
OF course it is not neutral; it is her recollection of the events from her point of view.
IT was written to raise money rather than awareness.
AS was her right.
THe fact that you don't like it is immaterial. Enough people bought it to make it a major best seller at the time.
It's also riddled with inaccuracies - or if you were less charitable - lies.
I know that all of these "discrepancies" are excused by McCann supporters as:
a) minor and irrelevant and
b) perfectly understandable after so much time
...but KM herself goes into great depth in her book explaining how much she spent (£100K or so) and how much time she spent going through the police files in microscopic detail. Therefore she should have been accurate to the files. Unless, of course, the initial statements to the police were inaccurate, of course.
She says she was always Kate Healy and only became Kate McCann on May 4th. Except she signed the creche (or someone did) as Kate McCann several times in the holiday (http://www.mccannfiles.com/id351.html (http://www.mccannfiles.com/id351.html)) as Kate McCann. Oopsie.
What about "As soon as it was light Gerry and I resumed our search." Where's that interview again where she admits to not physically searching but working hard or something...?
What about Kate claiming she took the photo of Madeleine and the tennis balls? Rachel Oldfield says that was taken by Jane Tanner. Discrepancies? What discrepancies, your honour?
Oh and whilst you're harping on about the naughty illegal amaral leaking information in contravention of the secrecy laws (you do, of course, have evidence it was Amaral, right?) what about the McCanns hiring Metodo 3 to work in Portugal on an active investigation? Illegal. Does that make them "unconvicted criminals"?
-
@ C.Edwards
And the biggest and most significant whopper of them all, cadaver scent only lasts 30 days !! This after her husband and an office of lawyers, can we ever forget their use of the Zapaa case, researched the subject day and night.
-
@ C.Edwards
And the biggest and most significant whopper of them all, cadaver scent only lasts 30 days !! This after her husband and an office of lawyers, can we ever forget their use of the Zapaa case, researched the subject day and night.
LOok at the literature. You will find that ceramics with a gloss finish lose cadaver scent quite quickly. Absorbent materials willretain the scent for very long periods.
-
I'm reading Kate McCann's book at the moment
Am I allowed to quote from it here, or is that also forbidden ?
-
I'm reading Kate McCann's book at the moment
Am I allowed to quote from it here, or is that also forbidden ?
That might depend on how much of it you wish to post, and whether you are Cherry Picking. On balance, probably best not.
But not my decision, of course.
-
I'm reading Kate McCann's book at the moment
Am I allowed to quote from it here, or is that also forbidden ?
That might depend on how much of it you wish to post, and whether you are Cherry Picking. On balance, probably best not.
But not my decision, of course.
You might be right
I recall the McCann's lawyers tried to shut down the ( excellent ) website that carries his own blogs
Thank goodness the McCann's objection to the release of the police files ( to every Tom, Dick and Harry, in Kate's words ) did not prevent us from having access and discussing, freely, the facts therin ... otherwise we'd be left with nothing but Clarence Mitchell's proclamations to debate !
-
I'm reading Kate McCann's book at the moment
Am I allowed to quote from it here, or is that also forbidden ?
That might depend on how much of it you wish to post, and whether you are Cherry Picking. On balance, probably best not.
But not my decision, of course.
You might be right
I recall the McCann's lawyers tried to shut down the ( excellent ) website that carries his own blogs
Thank goodness the McCann's objection to the release of the police files ( to every Tom, Dick and Harry, in Kate's words ) did not prevent us from having access and discussing, freely, the facts therin ... otherwise we'd be left with nothing but Clarence Mitchell's proclamations to debate !
In Britain you wouldn't even have got a look in, let alone Files to discuss.
Copyright remains sacrosanct for anyone's Book.
-
I'm reading Kate McCann's book at the moment
Am I allowed to quote from it here, or is that also forbidden ?
That might depend on how much of it you wish to post, and whether you are Cherry Picking. On balance, probably best not.
But not my decision, of course.
You might be right
I recall the McCann's lawyers tried to shut down the ( excellent ) website that carries his own blogs
Thank goodness the McCann's objection to the release of the police files ( to every Tom, Dick and Harry, in Kate's words ) did not prevent us from having access and discussing, freely, the facts therin ... otherwise we'd be left with nothing but Clarence Mitchell's proclamations to debate !
In Britain you wouldn't even have got a look in, let alone Files to discuss.
Copyright remains sacrosanct for anyone's Book.
You're right about not getting a look-in in in this country ... just look how many years it took the brave Hillsborough campaign group to finally get to the truth
As to 'copyright' ... I have a hard time seeing why that takes precedent over the welfare of a missing child
-
It is still available free online so I personally don't see any problem with quoting from it.
-
I'm reading Kate McCann's book at the moment
Am I allowed to quote from it here, or is that also forbidden ?
Feel free to refer to it but in your own words.
-
It is still available free online so I personally don't see any problem with quoting from it.
Is it Sandy ? I had no idea ( I spent a tenner on mine ... discount price at WH Smith )
Why havn't the McCann's 'big gun' lawyers put a stop to that then ? ... why intimidate a forum like this for simply placing a link, rather than address the source of copyright infringement ?
-
As with the Diana Unlawful Killing video I suspect there are websites on planet earth which even Carter Ruck cannot touch.
-
Another point worth considering, why pick a child with an eye impairment which was so noticeable?
From a distance, who would have noticed a slight defect in one eye?
-
The abductor having arriving at the scene of the crime without transport, but carrying is Dyson for cleaning, or mop and bucket, wearing rubber gloves, hair net and protective suit, IV drip x 3\or inhalation anaesthetic forgot to bring his ophthalmic scope. There was no evidence it is alleged of either an abductor, or indeed Madeleine's hair or dna
Wasn't there evidence of a chap seen walking near the apartment with a sleeping child in his arms. A chap who has never been traced?
evidence of a chap.........well you can hardly call it evidence ...if you mean J/T...
if so ...is g mcc not seeing J/T also evidence
-
I'm aware that some families try to cover up a death due to abuse as kidnapping.
I don't disagree with that.
However, it isn't always the case.
Some kids do simply disappear... and, thankfully, some do reappear.
How creepy is this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cK5XVeenp4