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: Cariad on March 30, 2014, 10:38:02 AM
-
We have been discussing DCI Andy Redwood's recent comments of this case, namely that Madeline may not have been alive when she left the apartment.
I'm curious to hear of any other cases in which a stranger has entered a property, committed murder and then taken the corpse with them when they left.
I can't think of a single one and Google hasn't been much help either.
I would very much appreciate any examples people could provide.
-
I can't think of an example either, Cariad, and it will be interesting to see what we can come up with.
What would be the reason for someone doing such a thing?
It might help the 'abductor' in removing certain forensic evidence from the scene, but on the other hand, taking the body would surely present him with a lot more problems.
-
We have been discussing DCI Andy Redwood's recent comments of this case, namely that Madeline may not have been alive when she left the apartment.
I'm curious to hear of any other cases in which a stranger has entered a property, committed murder and then taken the corpse with them when they left.
I can't think of a single one and Google hasn't been much help either.
I would very much appreciate any examples people could provide.
Diametric contradiction in terms.
There cannot be an "abduction" of anyone who is dead, only an attempt to conceal the body.
Dr Cripin comes to mind ...
In fact, much more recent, Adrian Prout ...
-
Diametric contradiction in terms.
There cannot be an "abduction" of anyone who is dead, only an attempt to conceal the body.
Dr Cripin comes to mind ...
In fact, much more recent, Adrian Prout ...
Yes. I think this may have been mentioned a while ago on another thread - needless to say there was disagreement. ?{)(**
-
there was a case recently in the middle east where a british women was raped and murdered...the body was taken from the scene and burnt in the desert to try and destroy all forensic evidence...they didn't succeed and have been arrested
-
Diametric contradiction in terms.
There cannot be an "abduction" of anyone who is dead, only an attempt to conceal the body.
Dr Cripin comes to mind ...
In fact, much more recent, Adrian Prout ...
I've just Googled both Crippen and Prout, both were suspected/convicted of murdering someone they knew.
I'm sure there are many examples of people moving the body of a known victim. I'm interested in a case of a stranger doing the same.
Strangers who commit crimes outside will conceal a body too. It's an example of a stranger committing a murder/manslaughter inside someone else's property and then taking the body with them that would be helpful.
This has been suggested in this case. It would also allow the EVRD alerts to be ignored as the time scale could be within the 50 minutes that the Mccanns did not see their daughter, before discovering her missing.
If you find the word 'abduction' a problem, please ignore it.
If it's a problem, maybe a mod could change the thread title? Possibly 'removed' would be better?
-
I've just Googled both Crippen and Prout, both were suspected/convicted of murdering someone they knew.
I'm sure there are many examples of people moving the body of a known victim. I'm interested in a case of a stranger doing the same.
Strangers who commit crimes outside will conceal a body too. It's an example of a stranger committing a murder/manslaughter inside someone else's property and then taking the body with them that would be helpful.
This has been suggested in this case. It would also allow the EVRD alerts to be ignored as the time scale could be within the 50 minutes that the Mccanns did not see their daughter, before discovering her missing.
If you find the word 'abduction' a problem, please ignore it.
If it's a problem, maybe a mod could change the thread title? Possibly 'removed' would be better?
[/quote
Undoubtedly. As for Crippen there are those who believe that Ethel Le Neve was the real instigator such as Agatha Christie who used the Crippen case as the background for her novel ' Ms. McGinty's Dead'
Having now had a Google of Ethel Le Neve too, she was still someone known to the victim, we're looking for a stranger who removes a body from the victims property.
This is something that many here have suggested happened since Any Redwoods "may not have been live when she left the apartment" yet no one has supplied another case in which this has happened?
What are people basing this belief on?
-
Cariad I've finally picked up on the story - it happened in Llandudno another seaside resort - and some others including abduction from the bath. No corpses luckily but all involved strangers.I'm getting a list together of the sites so you can check them out for yourself.
Another thing I picked up was that on average 500 children are abducted annually in the UK though many are parental.
The abduction from the bath was Peter Voisey's victim.
Thankfully she survived her ordeal.
-
Cariad I've finally picked up on the story - it happened in Llandudno another seaside resort - and some others including abduction from the bath. No corpses luckily but all involved strangers.I'm getting a list together of the sites so you can check them out for yourself.
Another thing I picked up was that on average 500 children are abducted annually in the UK though many are parental.
I know about the bath one, though I thought his name was Craig something....
I appreciate you looking Promotor, the thing is, what I'm really interested in is cases of a body being removed after a stranger has killed someone in there own property, as some have suggested may have happened in this case.
I've probably caused confusion by using the term 'abducted'...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/4579802.stm That's the bath one. I warn you, it's harrowing!
-
Cariad I've finally picked up on the story - it happened in Llandudno another seaside resort - and some others including abduction from the bath. No corpses luckily but all involved strangers.I'm getting a list together of the sites so you can check them out for yourself.
As you say, no corpses.
-
Cariad
I picked up more on the girl in the tent story form this website which would seem to be a forerunner of our own.
Howard Hughes - INNOCENT - Fighting miscarriages of justice
www.innocent.org.uk/cases/howardhughes/index.html Cached
... who went missing from a tent in her ... could be abducted from this position by a stranger without ... have left the tent herself before being abducted.
Might be a thought for a future thread
I remember that! She was having a sleepover in her garden! It was horrendous! It's bed time for me, I read the details in the morning.
Night all.
-
I know about the bath one, though I thought his name was Craig something....
I appreciate you looking Promotor, the thing is, what I'm really interested in is cases of a body being removed after a stranger has killed someone in there own property, as some have suggested may have happened in this case.
I've probably caused confusion by using the term 'abducted'...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/4579802.stm That's the bath one. I warn you, it's harrowing!
I don't follow your logic here. Are you saying that if something hasn't happened thus far - then it never can happen? There must have been a time in the case of the person who assaulted children in their beds in Portugal that he had never assaulted a 7 year old. But then he did.
There has to be a first time for everything.
-
From another thread
European Commission – Directorate-General for Justice
Missing children in the European Union Mapping, data collection and statistics
(2013)
http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se/sites/default/files/documents/1709_missing_children_study_2013_en_original_1.pdf
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=3542.255
An issue, IMO, is that even what the police record can be scanty and the media only pick up on a few cases. Unless the circumstances of a missing child are known, the child is simply missing. The cases we tend to hear about are those that the media find particularly newsworthy (or rather likely to sell extra copies), or if there is a particular campaign launched. And even then, it depends on the languages that we understand and can google.
-
Previous Article Published 8/27/12 →
Isabella Tennant, 5, was allegedly murdered by a 16-year-old family friend, John Freeman, in her grandmothers home.
An upstate teen killed a 5-year-old girl he was babysitting “with his bare hands” and, with the help of a friend, bagged her body and dumped it in an alleyway garbage can, police said.
Little Isabella Tennant’s slain body was found in at the bottom of a trash can near downtown Niagara Falls at around 9 a.m. on Monday, a few hours after her family reported her missing, authorities said.
A five-year-old girl who disappeared from her grandmother‘s house was found dead in a garbage can down a NY alley yesterday. (Aug. 27th, 2012) A 16-year-old boy, described as a ‘trusted family friend’, was named as a person of interest in the death of Isabella Sarah Tennant, according to police. The girl was last seen at midnight at her grandmother’s home on 6th Street in the City of Niagara Falls, New York on Sunday night. Her body was found, around 12 hours later, stuffed into a garbage bag and dumped two streets away between 3rd and 4th. The girl’s grandmother was known for helping troubled children and the 16-year-old regularly came to the house, according to Wgrz.com.
Police were tipped off to the location of the child’s body by another 16-year-old.
No weapon was found at the scene but there were indications of trauma. The 16-year-old was expected to be charged with second-degree murder, according to sources.
Police were releasing no further information at present.
A neighbor who was also at the grandmother’s house and was one of the last people to see five-year-old Isabella had also been spoken to by police as a person of interest.
The girl who had blue eyes and blonde hair was last seen wearing pink pyjamas with black stars.
Neighbors had combed the area late into the night and police brought in search dogs.
The girl was being cared for by her grandmother while her mother, of Cheektowaga, worked at Player’s nightclub in Niagara Falls.
SOURCE: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2194378/Missing-year-old-girl-dead-alley-teenage-boy-arrested-Niagara-Falls-New-York.html
-
David McGreavy. He killed the children he was babysitting and then took them and impaled them on the neighbours railings. I guess though this doesn't count as he was the lodger of the childrens parents and therefore not a stranger. Horrific case!
-
I don't follow your logic here. Are you saying that if something hasn't happened thus far - then it never can happen? There must have been a time in the case of the person who assaulted children in their beds in Portugal that he had never assaulted a 7 year old. But then he did.
There has to be a first time for everything.
No, absolutely not. Despite the saying that there's nothing new under the sun, I am not claiming that something can not happen just because it hasn't either before or since (to our combined knowledge anyway).
I do wonder why people think that it's a possibility. A few people have proposed it as an alternative to Andy Redwood basing his recent comments on the dog alerts.
At first it I thought I was just unaware of these other cases. I asked on other threads a couple of time, but got no reply so I went to Google. I couldn't find anything there either. It was quite difficult to know what to Google though, so again, I thought I might've been missing something.
To me it seems like one of the most unlikely scenarios. As far as I am aware, someone unknown to the victim has never entered the victims property, caused a death, then taken the body with them.
Bear in mind that in this case there was only a 50 (ish) minute window, broken up by a check at 9:30 which was about 20 minutes in to that window, during which everything was quiet and there was no signs of either a murder or a break in.
There are many reasons why one would conceal the body of a known victim. That happens all the time. There are also cases of children being removed from their homes alive by strangers then coming to harm, as has been mentioned further up the thread, though thankfully that is rare.
But why would someone remove the body of an unknown victim from their own property?
-
Previous Article Published 8/27/12 →
Isabella Tennant, 5, was allegedly murdered by a 16-year-old family friend, John Freeman, in her grandmothers home.
An upstate teen killed a 5-year-old girl he was babysitting “with his bare hands” and, with the help of a friend, bagged her body and dumped it in an alleyway garbage can, police said.
Little Isabella Tennant’s slain body was found in at the bottom of a trash can near downtown Niagara Falls at around 9 a.m. on Monday, a few hours after her family reported her missing, authorities said.
A five-year-old girl who disappeared from her grandmother‘s house was found dead in a garbage can down a NY alley yesterday. (Aug. 27th, 2012) A 16-year-old boy, described as a ‘trusted family friend’, was named as a person of interest in the death of Isabella Sarah Tennant, according to police. The girl was last seen at midnight at her grandmother’s home on 6th Street in the City of Niagara Falls, New York on Sunday night. Her body was found, around 12 hours later, stuffed into a garbage bag and dumped two streets away between 3rd and 4th. The girl’s grandmother was known for helping troubled children and the 16-year-old regularly came to the house, according to Wgrz.com.
Police were tipped off to the location of the child’s body by another 16-year-old.
No weapon was found at the scene but there were indications of trauma. The 16-year-old was expected to be charged with second-degree murder, according to sources.
Police were releasing no further information at present.
A neighbor who was also at the grandmother’s house and was one of the last people to see five-year-old Isabella had also been spoken to by police as a person of interest.
The girl who had blue eyes and blonde hair was last seen wearing pink pyjamas with black stars.
Neighbors had combed the area late into the night and police brought in search dogs.
The girl was being cared for by her grandmother while her mother, of Cheektowaga, worked at Player’s nightclub in Niagara Falls.
SOURCE: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2194378/Missing-year-old-girl-dead-alley-teenage-boy-arrested-Niagara-Falls-New-York.html
Again, the victim was known to the perpetrator. He was know to have been in the property with the child at the time of the crime so had every reason to remove and hide the body. He needed to distance himself from the crime. But what if a stranger had broken in and caused the death of the child, either as an accident or murder? Why would they take the body with them?
-
Again, the victim was known to the perpetrator. He was know to have been in the property with the child at the time of the crime so had every reason to remove and hide the body. He needed to distance himself from the crime. But what if a stranger had broken in and caused the death of the child, either as an accident or murder? Why would they take the body with them?
There's avery simple answer but you won't want to accept it as you believe the parents are involved...the body is removed to remove any forensic evidence
-
There's avery simple answer but you won't want to accept it as you believe the parents are involved...the body is removed to remove any forensic evidence
That is the simple answer. However, it actually causes more questions to be asked. Not least of which is, how was there time to clean up the scene of the crime, but not to clean up the victim? If you consider the risks involved in removing the body, surely it would've been safer to leave her?
As you are well aware davel, I have never claimed to know what happened to Madeline Mccann. I have never claimed that it was her parents 'what dunnit'. The most I have ever expressed about the parents is that they are 'iffy' and there childcare arrangements were shockingly below par.
Anyway, I don't want this thread derailed with questions of guilt or innocence of Madeleine's parents. There are hundreds of other threads for that.
-
I'm not blaming you, you have every right to answer a question directed at you.
It's probable that my own bias is affecting how I see this. To me it would seem like a much greater risk to remove a body that to leave it in situ if there's nothing to connect you to it.
I dunno. If it was for forensic reasons, why isn't it common practice? Why no sign of a struggle? Why no forensics in the property? Even in a state of panic, surely the first response would be to run? Not pause to grab a body that you then have to dispose of?
Good questions Cariad.
I await to see logical answers.
-
That is the simple answer. However, it actually causes more questions to be asked. Not least of which is, how was there time to clean up the scene of the crime, but not to clean up the victim? If you consider the risks involved in removing the body, surely it would've been safer to leave her?
As you are well aware davel, I have never claimed to know what happened to Madeline Mccann. I have never claimed that it was her parents 'what dunnit'. The most I have ever expressed about the parents is that they are 'iffy' and there childcare arrangements were shockingly below par.
Anyway, I don't want this thread derailed with questions of guilt or innocence of Madeleine's parents. There are hundreds of other threads for that.
I don't see why it would have been safer to leave her. Someone who'd committed other crimes, or possibly one who lived or worked nearby would have risked being in the spotlight.
A quick Google hasn't thrown up any cases yet. Some of the cases of murdered children don't specify where the child was taken from, nor who was responsible, so it's hard to tell. On the other hand, offhand, I can't think of any cases of children murdered at home by a stranger and the body left behind either (except JonBenet if she was indeed killed by a stranger).
The fact that it may well be rare and the lack of any concrete evidence that she did come to any serious harm in the apartment leaves a small hope that she could still be alive somewhere (a caveat being that the forensics were far from thorough). Or if she did come to grief, that it happened elsewhere.
-
I don't see why it would have been safer to leave her. Someone who'd committed other crimes, or possibly one who lived or worked nearby would have risked being in the spotlight.
A quick Google hasn't thrown up any cases yet. Some of the cases of murdered children don't specify where the child was taken from, nor who was responsible, so it's hard to tell. On the other hand, offhand, I can't think of any cases of children murdered at home by a stranger and the body left behind either (except JonBenet if she was indeed killed by a stranger).
The fact that it may well be rare and the lack of any concrete evidence that she did come to any serious harm in the apartment leaves a small hope that she could still be alive somewhere (a caveat being that the forensics were far from thorough). Or if she did come to grief, that it happened elsewhere.
That is assuming a third party removed Madeleine from the apartment.
-
I don't see why it would have been safer to leave her. Someone who'd committed other crimes, or possibly one who lived or worked nearby would have risked being in the spotlight.
A quick Google hasn't thrown up any cases yet. Some of the cases of murdered children don't specify where the child was taken from, nor who was responsible, so it's hard to tell. On the other hand, offhand, I can't think of any cases of children murdered at home by a stranger and the body left behind either (except JonBenet if she was indeed killed by a stranger).
The fact that it may well be rare and the lack of any concrete evidence that she did come to any serious harm in the apartment leaves a small hope that she could still be alive somewhere (a caveat being that the forensics were far from thorough). Or if she did come to grief, that it happened elsewhere.
That's an excellent point. I can't either. Maybe we can add that in to the question?
Can anyone think of a case in which a stranger has entered a property, killed a child and left them?
Just to be clear though, the original question was not just about children. Any case in which a stranger killed/caused the death of another person in their own property, regardless of age or gender, then removed the body would do.
-
I'm not blaming you, you have every right to answer a question directed at you.
It's probable that my own bias is affecting how I see this. To me it would seem like a much greater risk to remove a body that to leave it in situ if there's nothing to connect you to it.
I dunno. If it was for forensic reasons, why isn't it common practice? Why no sign of a struggle? Why no forensics in the property? Even in a state of panic, surely the first response would be to run? Not pause to grab a body that you then have to dispose of?
I commented before seeing this post.
You're thinking of it from the angle that she did die there at the hands of a stranger? I still think she could have been taken out alive, but I'll try to set that aside.
Common practice: I haven't found much information to figure out what common practice might be in such cases.
No signs of a struggle:
- she might not have been in bed at the time.
- a big hand on a little face or even a big paw around her throat could have killed her, even accidentally.
No connection: as I'd said before, perhaps someone already known to the police or someone in the vicinity with no alibi would be more likely (in theory) to be considered a suspect.
Panic and run:
- the guy intercepted in children's bedrooms seemed calm. I'd have thought that that guy would have panicked and run, but seemingly not.
- Taking a body: forensic reasons? It would be easier to grab a child's body and pretend it was asleep than an adult's one.
-
Not directly relevant as it turns out that the killer knew the child and it's not clear if he thought he'd killed her before taking her from her bedroom or not. He'd strangled her, but she actually died of drowning after being dumped in a storm drain, poor child. The killer seemingly didn't remember much of what had happened, even less why he did it.
Trinity's killer gets life
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/trinitys-killer-gets-life-20120802-23hg3.html
-
I commented before seeing this post.
You're thinking of it from the angle that she did die there at the hands of a stranger? I still think she could have been taken out alive, but I'll try to set that aside.
Common practice: I haven't found much information to figure out what common practice might be in such cases.
No signs of a struggle:
- she might not have been in bed at the time.
- a big hand on a little face or even a big paw around her throat could have killed her, even accidentally.
No connection: as I'd said before, perhaps someone already known to the police or someone in the vicinity with no alibi would be more likely (in theory) to be considered a suspect.
Panic and run:
- the guy intercepted in children's bedrooms seemed calm. I'd have thought that that guy would have panicked and run, but seemingly not.
- Taking a body: forensic reasons? It would be easier to grab a child's body and pretend it was asleep than an adult's one.
This is in line with my own thinking Carana. Also a serial abuser who had successfully 'got away' completely with numerous similar crimes against children in the past may be feeling quite 'confident' that this would continue.
Who knows what goes through the mind of such a vile monster, but it would appear that if he did decide to take the risk of removing her (maybe even thinking she was only unconscious) then it worked - as 7 years later he is still on the loose.
Whether this man is the perpetrator or not - he needs to be found.
-
If the child being carried was dead, I keep coming back to the question of ' Why carry her thru the streets of PdL openly ' ?
There were bags in the apartment. If dead why not bundle her in one of them ? Or even wrap her in his jacket out of sight?
The whole scenario of carrying a dead child openly thru the streets, just doesn't make sense
I believe that both Tannermans child and Smithmans child was alive. Maybe the same child, maybe not.
-
I'm not blaming you, you have every right to answer a question directed at you.
It's probable that my own bias is affecting how I see this. To me it would seem like a much greater risk to remove a body that to leave it in situ if there's nothing to connect you to it.
I dunno. If it was for forensic reasons, why isn't it common practice? Why no sign of a struggle? Why no forensics in the property? Even in a state of panic, surely the first response would be to run? Not pause to grab a body that you then have to dispose of?
Yes why would a STRANGER abduct a corpse. Long time ago I did google and google this and found no instances with STRANGER from home.
Why would someone do this.
DNA is probably the only reason.
However, if there was no DNA or fingerprints found in the apartment (because even though there were 3 young children living in there, and friends visiting the place was pristine) then the assumption is the stranger who had for some reason killed the child would have been wearing gloves and protective clothing.
Also friends fingerprints would be expected in the apartment and more than likely dismissed.
That leads to sexual DNA being the only other reason for taking the child away. IF the child was found dead and sexually abused DNA would be taken, and strangers OR someone known to the family would be checked for DNA....so yes a stranger or not would then need to take the childs body away.....
-
Yes why would a STRANGER abduct a corpse. Long time ago I did google and google this and found no instances with STRANGER from home.
Why would someone do this.
DNA is probably the only reason.
However, if there was no DNA or fingerprints found in the apartment (because even though there were 3 young children living in there, and friends visiting the place was pristine) then the assumption is the stranger who had for some reason killed the child would have been wearing gloves and protective clothing.
Also friends fingerprints would be expected in the apartment and more than likely dismissed.
That leads to sexual DNA being the only other reason for taking the child away. IF the child was found dead and sexually abused DNA would be taken, and strangers OR someone known to the family would be checked for DNA....so yes a stranger or not would then need to take the childs body away.....
So, the burglar entered 5a with a key, sexually assualts and murders Maddie, opens the window to remove his tell tale body odour, changes Maddies jammies from short sleeved eeyores to a long sleeved white pair before leaving the front door, closing it behind him & making his getaway on foot past the smith family.
It all makes perfect sense to me.
-
So, the burglar entered 5a with a key, sexually assualts and murders Maddie, opens the window to remove his tell tale body odour, changes Maddies jammies from short sleeved eeyores to a long sleeved white pair before leaving the front door, closing it behind him & making his getaway on foot past the smith family.
It all makes perfect sense to me.
Thats not what we are talking about we are asking ANY OTHER CASES IN WHICH A STRANGER HAS ABDUCTED A CORPSE?
I am merely pointing out one of the reasons why one might want to do this, NOT that it happened.
-
NOBODY would parade a dead child thru the streets in full view. A living child has to breath so could not be put in a bag.
Both Tannerman and Smithman were carrying a living child
-
NOBODY would parade a dead child thru the streets in full view. A living child has to breath so could not be put in a bag.
Both Tannerman and Smithman were carrying a living child
Andy Redwood has stated that Madeleine may not have been alive when she left the apartment. One of the suggestions is that someone broke in and caused her death, either intentionally or accidentally.
We're just exploring the likelihood of that and whether it has happened before to our knowledge.
-
Andy Redwood has stated that Madeleine may not have been alive when she left the apartment. One of the suggestions is that someone broke in and caused her death, either intentionally or accidentally.
We're just exploring the likelihood of that and whether it has happened before to our knowledge.
Apart from leaving incriminating DNA or evidence of sedation which could lead back to the perpetrator, the only reason for removing a corpse I can think of would be that it was not realised that death had occurred.
But what normal person could determine what goes through the mind of an individual who would enter a home to harm a child?
Should an abduction victim’s body be later recovered I would imagine it would be impossible to determine where death had occurred unless there was some indicator present ruling out death in the home, for example if water were found in the lungs.
Also, if no trace of the victim is found it is impossible to state with any degree of certainty that a death has taken place either in the home or elsewhere, and it should be presumed the victim may still be alive.
-
Apart from leaving incriminating DNA or evidence of sedation which could lead back to the perpetrator, the only reason for removing a corpse I can think of would be that it was not realised that death had occurred.
But what normal person could determine what goes through the mind of an individual who would enter a home to harm a child?
Should an abduction victim’s body be later recovered I would imagine it would be impossible to determine where death had occurred unless there was some indicator present ruling out death in the home, for example if water were found in the lungs.
Also, if no trace of the victim is found it is impossible to state with any degree of certainty that a death has taken place either in the home or elsewhere, and it should be presumed the victim may still be alive.
You might think so, but I believe there have been a number of cases where someone has bee convicted of murder without a body ever being found,
-
You might think so, but I believe there have been a number of cases where someone has bee convicted of murder without a body ever being found,
Perhaps I should have qualified by saying, unless there is enough evidence to lead to a prosecution, for example, David Gilroy was convicted of murdering Suzanne Pilley despite no body being found, incidentally indicators to Suzanne’s death were made by VRDs, but this was backed up by sufficient evidence to warrant prosecution and to convince a jury.
www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-20153898 Cached
-
Staging is a main reason for removing or moving a dead body. Witnesses say the child was in a deep sleep with her arms not wrapped around the man but dangling down so that means she could have been dead. Have you seen the man and child that matched Madeleine's description come forward in 7 years to clear themselves? No me neither.
-
For the record, I find the idea of a stranger removing the body unlikely in the extreme. I'd go as far as to stay that stranger abduction is more probable than body removal in this case.
If we are to take the statements of the T9 at face value, Madeleine was seen alive at roughly 9:10, then Matt entered the apartment again at 9:30.
The bed was not disturbed (and sexual assault is surely the most likely cause of DNA contamination?) There were no signs of a struggle, though how much of a struggle an almost 4 year old sleepy child could put up might not leave any signs anyway, but also no other DNA located in the the apartment or fingerprints, or signs of forced entry.
The only logical explanation is that an intruder caused her death, cleaned up the apartment then took the body. That in itself is just not logical.
As for the time constraint, you either have a 20 minute window, a thirty minute window, or an intruder hanging around and hiding during Mattt's check. All in the dark. Not knowing when someone will return.
On top of this highly unlikely scenario, you need to add in 11 separate ERVD alerts which were all either wrong or coincidental.
All of the above proves nothing of course. It is all possible. It just involves suspending your disbelief to such an extent that if it were a film plot, you'd be asking for your money back.
-
If the child being carried was dead, I keep coming back to the question of ' Why carry her thru the streets of PdL openly ' ?
There were bags in the apartment. If dead why not bundle her in one of them ? Or even wrap her in his jacket out of sight?
The whole scenario of carrying a dead child openly thru the streets, just doesn't make sense
I believe that both Tannermans child and Smithmans child was alive. Maybe the same child, maybe not.
I often asked this question, Sadie, as you will remember, because to me, walking around the streets with a (living) child - rather than putting her into a car - would indicate a very unprofessional type of abduction.
However in parctise, carrying a living child through the streets would be just as problematic for an abductor (or whatever we are calling him) than carrying a dead one - maybe even more so. A living child could cry, scream, struggle, or otherwise draw attention to herself.
A dead child would simply lie in a sleeping position.
Who's to say whether or not the child the Smiths saw was alive or dead? Is there anything in their descriptions of the child that would indicate, positively, that she was alive? I don't think so. She was simply assumed to be asleep - an assumption that a snatcher could quite reasonably rely on with regard to his movements being witnessed.
-
Yes, I imagine that in the dark a dead child could very well pass for a slumbering one.
-
Yes, I imagine that in the dark a dead child could very well pass for a slumbering one.
Ummm... Really unpleasant question alert......
Would a dead persons eyes stay shut, or would they fall open?
-
I often asked this question, Sadie, as you will remember, because to me, walking around the streets with a (living) child - rather than putting her into a car - would indicate a very unprofessional type of abduction.
However in parctise, carrying a living child through the streets would be just as problematic for an abductor (or whatever we are calling him) than carrying a dead one - maybe even more so. A living child could cry, scream, struggle, or otherwise draw attention to herself.
A dead child would simply lie in a sleeping position.
Who's to say whether or not the child the Smiths saw was alive or dead? Is there anything in their descriptions of the child that would indicate, positively, that she was alive? I don't think so. She was simply assumed to be asleep - an assumption that a snatcher could quite reasonably rely on with regard to his movements being witnessed.
Sherlock, I think you read Sadies theory? If so you will know that I believe a car was coming to pick Tannermann and Madeleine up,
...but that it was frustrated because of two things
1. Gerry and Jez chatting on the edge of the pavement at the corner of the alleyway. Where the car had to pass and also within sight, all-be-it at a distance from Gerry, of Tannerman/ bundleman
2. Jane Tanner actually witnessing the abduction. No way would the driver go up there and risk a pick up. If fact I think he wet his pants and buzzed off leaving Tannerman in the lurch.
I dont think it was a choice to carry Madeleine thru the streets; I think it became a necessity
-
There used to be a thread on here that I found really interesting until it disintegrated into abusive comments. It was an invitation to examine what forensic evidence one would expect in various scenarios and what was actually found. A problem is that the leader of this thread wasn't aware that the forensic analysis actually conducted was not a full analyisis of the entire apartment, that the apartment hadn't been locked down permanently until the arrival of the dogs and that even then the new forensic attempt concentrated on where Keela had alerted.
That said...
- If she had died or had even been murdered in the apartment and the body removed, what forensic evidence could be expected?
- If she was taken out alive, what would one expect in terms of forensic evidence?
In both, what evidence was found and what evidence was not found?
A caveat will still be where the forensic team actually searched.
-
There was a very sad case in Bristol England which IMO meets the criteria of a person who is not a relative or associate of the victim kills victim in victim's residence then "abducts" body.
You could argue about the definition of "stranger" for in that case the perp and the victim were previously aware of each others existence but IIRC that was only in the sense that they were neighbours, not associates.
-
There used to be a thread on here that I found really interesting until it disintegrated into abusive comments. It was an invitation to examine what forensic evidence one would expect in various scenarios and what was actually found. A problem is that the leader of this thread wasn't aware that the forensic analysis actually conducted was not a full analyisis of the entire apartment, that the apartment hadn't been locked down permanently until the arrival of the dogs and that even then the new forensic attempt concentrated on where Keela had alerted.
That said...
- If she had died or had even been murdered in the apartment and the body removed, what forensic evidence could be expected?
- If she was taken out alive, what would one expect in terms of forensic evidence?
In both, what evidence was found and what evidence was not found?
A caveat will still be where the forensic team actually searched.
That's a very difficult question to answer, Carana. I can speculate, but that's all it would be? I'd be happy to participate in a thread, if you want to start one.
-
There was a very sad case in Bristol England which IMO meets the criteria of a person who is not a relative or associate of the victim kills victim in victim's residence then "abducts" body.
You could argue about the definition of "stranger" for in that case the perp and the victim were previously aware of each others existence but IIRC that was only in the sense that they were neighbours, not associates.
Do you mean Joanna Yates? I don't even remember the name of the guy who murdered who, but I do remember Chris Jefferies, her other neighbour, who was wrongly accused.
I believe they lived in the same house, which was converted into flats. They were not strangers.
Here's an example of a stranger murder at home.
http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/west-london-news/burglar-guilty-murder-after-stabbing-6745400
I must say that I had to look quite hard for that. It doesn't seem like a common crime.
-
http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/nostalgia/crimelibrary/annenoblett/
Murder, removal of corpse, deep freeze unsolved to this day.
-
Do you mean Joanna Yates? I don't even remember the name of the guy who murdered who, but I do remember Chris Jefferies, her other neighbour, who was wrongly accused.
I believe they lived in the same house, which was converted into flats. They were not strangers.
Here's an example of a stranger murder at home.
http://www.getwestlondon.co.uk/news/west-london-news/burglar-guilty-murder-after-stabbing-6745400
I must say that I had to look quite hard for that. It doesn't seem like a common crime.
What definition of "stranger" are we talking about?
Different countries seem to have varying definitions...
Kidnapping
(...)
Non-family abduction was subdivided into "stereotypical kidnappings" which fit the public stereotype of the crime, and legal definition abductions, which are generally short-term forced movement or detention of children to facilitate another crime such as robbery or sexual assault..
In 1999, there were an estimated 115 "stereotypical kidnappings," defined as abductions perpetrated by a stranger or slight acquaintance and involving a child who was transported more than 50 miles and detained overnight, held for ransom or with the intent to keep the child permanently, or killed.
In 1999, there were an estimated 58,200 child victims of non-family abductions, defined more broadly to include all non-family perpetrators (including friends and acquaintances as well as strangers) and crimes involving lesser amounts of forced movement or detention in addition to the more serious crimes entailed in stereotypical kidnapping.
http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/kidnapping/
CEOP:
Stranger abduction
Child abduction is an offence under Section 2 of the Child Abduction Act 1984. Although such cases
are relatively rare, children face the risk of abduction by strangers who approach them in public.
Such strangers may be motivated to commit sexual offences. Alternatively, children may be
abducted as a result of family feuds.
Children and young people may also be targeted and groomed by adults for sexual abuse,
exploitation, criminality and other under illicit activities. In the present information and
communication technology age, children are increasingly targeted and groomed online and through
other media devices. The term ‘stranger abduction’ may not be relevant in
these situations as the child or young person may feel that the abductor is known to them and will often refer to them as a ‘friend’.
http://ceop.police.uk/Documents/ceopdocs/Missing_scopingreport_2011.pdf
Just thinking out loud...
Ylenia was abducted (albeit not at home) and murdered by a stranger - someone who presumably would never have encountered her before. I guess that's the strictest sense of "stranger".
MariLuz was abducted and murdered by someone living locally, but seemingly would have been in the "slight acquaintance" category by virtue of living nearby.
Jo Yates was killed at home and her body removed by a neighbour (Vincent Tabak), but he also seems to have been in the "slight acquaintance" category.
In an adult scenario, if you're in a bus queue and someone strikes up a conversation, is that person still a stranger or does he/she then become a "slight acquaintance"?
In a child scenario, would simply having said "thank you" to someone then constitute a "slight acquaintance"?
In Madeleine's case, her sphere of social contact was restricted, both because of her age and because she wasn't in her normal place of residence. In this case, I would consider a "stranger" to be either a total stranger (had never seen the person before) or someone she may have met for a minute or two, but whose presence in the apartment at night would be considered as alarming.
A slightly different thought... people assume that it was necessarily a male, but what if it was a female? Although I was two years older, some total stranger (female) came creeping into my bedroom late in the evening to check on me (halfway between a child-listening and child-minding service) and because it was a female, I just went straight back into a deep sleep. If it had been a strange man, I'd have screamed the place down.
-
I meant someone with no connection to the victim.
-
I meant someone with no connection to the victim.
I know... but I was wondering whether we were all thinking of "stranger" from the same perspective.
-
I know... but I was wondering whether we were all thinking of "stranger" from the same perspective.
Off topic, but I've just done a search for the forensic thread you were talking about and I can't find it anyway. either it's been deleted or I'm being incompetent. Both are possible ?{)(**
-
Off topic, but I've just done a search for the forensic thread you were talking about and I can't find it anyway. either it's been deleted or I'm being incompetent. Both are possible ?{)(**
Deleted. I believe I kept a few examples of the kinds of questions asked which seemed perfectly sensible to me.
-
Ever heard of hitmen or so called contract-killers? Not that uncommon.
Are you proposing that someone took a hit out on Madeleine? Another child in her nursery class possibly? Did she use up all the blue crayon, or get the role of Mary in the nativity once too often?
Well, it's possible I guess....
-
Anything's possible including abduction.
I beg to differ. Almost certain
-
You need to download the picture to your PC then add it as an attachment to your post.
Thank you for finding that, but again, they were killed away from the home, not killed in the home, then their bodies removed.
Thanks for the advice, Cariad, I'll try that next time I want to include pictures. 8((()*/
You are correct that this pervert in Australia kidnapped living children.
But is a very difficult assignment you have given us.
Unless irrefutable evidence of death is left at the scene for example, so much blood life could not be sustained, or a witness to killing, it is likely only the perpetrator would know whether the victim was alive or dead when removed from the crime scene.
-
Thanks for the advice, Cariad, I'll try that next time I want to include pictures. 8((()*/
You are correct that this pervert in Australia kidnapped living children.
But is a very difficult assignment you have given us.
Unless irrefutable evidence of death is left at the scene for example, so much blood life could not be sustained, or a witness to killing, it is likely only the perpetrator would know whether the victim was alive or dead when removed from the crime scene.
It is a difficult assignment! I tried to find something myself before starting the thread and came up with nothing. Google wasn't even any help. There's such a wide pool of knowledge here that I was kind of hoping someone would know of a similar situation.
Time and place of death are fairly easy to ascertain. It's usually possible to tell if a body has been moved.
The only cases I have found of a victim being removed from their own property is when the perpetrator is known to them.
As someone pointed out, this doesn't mean that it can't have happened in this case, but it does point to it being highly unlikely, especially if you then need to either dismiss the dog alerts or find coincidental reasons for them.
It was postulated as a reason for DCI Redwood saying Madeleine may not have been alive when she left the apartment. I just wanted to look at it a bit deeper and see what we could jointly come up with.
The short answer is nothing 8)-)))
-
Actually Estaurine, I think that is rather clever. I liked it.
Try not to be too precious Estaurine; that was fun.
I wasn't being precious I was being f*****g sarcastic. You should try to learn the difference.
If you thought it was clever you should read Julie Burchill on Stephen Fry.
-
IMO the murder by Tabak in Bristol does meet the description of murder in victim's residence by stranger who then removes body. AFAIK perp and victim had never spoken to each other until the evil crime, so although the perp was a neighbour he was a stranger.
-
IMO the murder by Tabak in Bristol does meet the description of murder in victim's residence by stranger who then removes body. AFAIK perp and victim had never spoken to each other until the evil crime, so although the perp was a neighbour he was a stranger.
They lived in the same building. That's pretty connected.
-
With a wall in between?
Yes, it was the flat next door, not in the same building. Still, not exactly strangers.
-
Oh I don't know. How well do you know your neighbours?
Very well. you?
-
The two flats were next door to each other within same building. I will try to find another case. But it's difficult. If you insist on a total stranger perp, absolutely not connectable in any way to the victim, probably the only logical reason for removal would be if perp is aware of being on DNA database?
-
I will try to find another case. But it's difficult. If you insist on a total stranger perp, absolutely not connectable in any way to the victim, probably the only logical reason for removal would be if perp is aware of being on DNA database?
Yep. I'd say it's probably impossible. I really did try and find something myself before starting the thread.
DNA is the only reason I can come up with, but probably not applicable to the Mccann case as there wasn't any found, so either an intruder cleaned up or wore gloves. Given the time constraint, gloves were more likely.
Or there was no intruder.
-
Found a case in 1827 or 1828 where a person named joseph was killed in own residence a lodging house and the perps then removed him. However the perps lived in same building so probably you will disqualify it.
-
... Or there was no intruder.
The evidence indicates an intruder who did not enter.
-
Yep. I'd say it's probably impossible. I really did try and find something myself before starting the thread.
DNA is the only reason I can come up with, but probably not applicable to the Mccann case as there wasn't any found, so either an intruder cleaned up or wore gloves. Given the time constraint, gloves were more likely.
Or there was no intruder.
Sy seem convinced that an intruder was possible
-
Sy seem convinced that an intruder was possible
Well the majority of intruders are burglars.
-
The evidence indicates an intruder who did not enter.
There is no evidence of an intruder who did not enter. He went to the trouble to open everything - window, shutters then left without attempting to enter @)(++(* The only finger prints found and no glove marks indicate staging.
-
.. He went to the trouble to open everything - window, shutters then left without attempting to enter @)(++(* ...
You may laugh, but yes that is likely IMO.
-
Searched high and low......
Dennis Radar and the murder of Delores Davis. This guy is one seriously nasty piece of filth! She was his tenth victim and also wasn't his usual MO to remove the body.
http://www.karisable.com/skazbtkdd.htm (http://www.karisable.com/skazbtkdd.htm)
Ten internet points to you sir!
We have an example of a stranger committing a murder in someone's home and removing the body!
I'm going to doing some Googling to see if BTK says why he did it!
I'll be back.....
-
Yep. I'd say it's probably impossible. I really did try and find something myself before starting the thread.
DNA is the only reason I can come up with, but probably not applicable to the Mccann case as there wasn't any found, so either an intruder cleaned up or wore gloves. Given the time constraint, gloves were more likely.
Or there was no intruder.
Apparently, this was the original forensic search area within the apartment. That seems logical in the immediate panic, but I'm not aware that a more thorough investigation ever took place later prior to the dog inspection, but that only checked where Keela had alerted and that was many occupants later.
(http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P9/09_VOLUME_IXa_Page_2322.jpg)
-
Two indisputably correct answers by buzz.
-
Re the plan posted by Carana above showing seven areas examined forensically for hairs etc.
Those areas do not include behind the sofa under the window nor even near it.
Those areas do not include inside the left wardrobe in the south bedroom nor near it nor anywhere in that room.
Basically the examination is only of three routes from child bedroom to outdoors.
Does anyone know if the forensic examination of these seven areas was all done on the 4th May?
-
I've just spent a rather harrowing hour looking in to the Dennis Rader killings. I watched this you tube video of his confession of killing Dolores E Davis, thanks to Buzz for finding Mrs Davis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaDE1GEVm8w
During which he references a Mrs Hedge. So I found this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NPCzLuB14c
On these two occasions he removed the victims bodies from their homes. Although he doesn't say why, Mrs Hedge actually lived on the same street as him, so body removal makes sense.
He didn't seem to have any connection to Dolores Davis though.
The only other thing I found was this snippet:
"Lately he also started to change the disposal site of one body in order to throw police out of his identification."
http://www.criminal-psychology.net/site/tag/dennis-rader/
Whether they mean Mrs Hedge or Mrs Davis, isn't clear.
Watching the video, I kept waiting for the judge to ask him why he moved the bodies. He didn't.
As an aside, Dennis Rader is absolutely terrifying.
-
So the murders, of Davis by Rader, and of David Ferriera by Chase, were both murder by stranger at the victims property with subsequent body removal. But it seems in both cases the reason for removal was not to remove evidence.
-
Does anyone know of any cases where an attempted burglary is interrupted at its beginning by an awoken resident so the burglar flees but the event triggers indirectly the accidental death of the resident?
-
Does anyone know of any cases where an attempted burglary is interrupted at its beginning by an awoken resident so the burglar flees but the event triggers indirectly the accidental death of the resident?
Who removed her body in your burglar instigated accidental death theory Peggy?
-
Who removed her body in your burglar instigated accidental death theory Peggy?
I prefer to concentrate on the details of the beginning first.
But certainly the burglar removed no body IMO.
The furthest he got inside IMO was just his right arm to operate the strap.