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: Albertini on May 08, 2014, 09:41:05 PM
-
The point is that if Madeleine is buried in one of the sites which are allegedly to be dug up it would be physically impossible for an abductor to have done that.
If we believe or don't believe that Oldfield saw Madeleine at 9:30 we have a window for an abductor to have taken Madeleine between, at the very longest, Gerry leaving the apartment at 9:10-9:15 and Kate discovering Maddie missing at 10:00.
Now leaving to one side for a minute SY's assertion that the "abduction" happened nearer to 10:00pm then we have a scenario where if there is to be an abductor, he has taken the child then found and dug a burial site near to where she was taken all before Maddie was discovered missing? In what 30 minutes?
Do you know how long it takes to dig a grave? and why so near to where her parents would be looking for as soon as they discovered her missing?
Does that sound plausible to anyone with a modicum of intelligence?
Because one thing is certain. After the alarm was raised and after the world's media were alerted and arrived en masse it would have been an impossibility for an abductor to rock back up to PDL and dispose of a child so near to 5A without being seen or noticed.
-
The point is that if Madeleine is buried in one of the sites which are allegedly to be dug up it would be physically impossible for an abductor to have done that.
If we believe or don't believe that Oldfield saw Madeleine at 9:30 we have a window for an abductor to have taken Madeleine between, at the very longest, Gerry leaving the apartment at 9:10-9:15 and Kate discovering Maddie missing at 10:00.
Now leaving to one side for a minute SY's assertion that the "abduction" happened nearer to 10:00pm then we have a scenario where if there is to be an abductor, he has taken the child then found and dug a burial site near to where she was taken all before Maddie was discovered missing? In what 30 minutes?
Do you know how long it takes to dig a grave? and why so near to where her parents would be looking for as soon as they discovered her missing?
Does that sound plausible to anyone with a modicum of intelligence?
Because one thing is certain. After the alarm was raised and after the world's media were alerted and arrived en masse it would have been an impossibility for an abductor to rock back up to PDL and dispose of a child so near to 5A without being seen or noticed.
One of our theories was that the person was in the apartment all the time and that he accidentally killed Madeleine at the Oldfield's visit point, by trying to make her quiet and then he took her body out to hide his steps.
IMO if she was buried she would have been found long ago..
-
One of our theories was that the person was in the apartment all the time and that he accidentally killed Madeleine at the Oldfield's visit point, by trying to make her quiet and then he took her body out to hide his steps.
IMO if she was buried she would have been found long ago..
Again why dispose of the body so near to the scene, when the parents could have been alerted and started looking for the child within minutes?
Anyone in that scenario would have got the hell out of PDL as quickly as possible and disposed of the body as far away from the scene of the crime and not hung around waiting to be caught shovel in hand!
Searching for a body in a PDL grave is proof positive that the real investigation is not looking for an abductor because there is no viable scenario where an abductor would have buried the child so near to the scene.
-
One of our theories was that the person was in the apartment all the time and that he accidentally killed Madeleine at the Oldfield's visit point, by trying to make her quiet and then he took her body out to hide his steps.
IMO if she was buried she would have been found long ago..
The problem with this theory is - cadaver scent.
It takes a while to develop, hours not minutes.
The dogs detected cadaver in 5a, which now appears to be CORRECT as they're digging for a body, therefore Madeleine MUST have been dead already when Gerry performed his 9.15 check.
-
Good grief, talk about missing the point.
The point is that if Madeleine is buried in one of the sites which are allegedly to be dug up it would be physically impossible for an abductor to have done that.
If we believe or don't believe that Oldfield saw Madeleine at 9:30 we have a window for an abductor to have taken Madeleine between, at the very longest, Gerry leaving the apartment at 9:10-9:15 and Kate discovering Maddie missing at 10:00.
Now leaving to one side for a minute SY's assertion that the "abduction" happened nearer to 10:00pm then we have a scenario where if there is to be an abductor, he has taken the child then found and dug a burial site near to where she was taken all before Maddie was discovered missing? In what 30 minutes?
Do you know how long it takes to dig a grave? and why so near to where her parents would be looking for as soon as they discovered her missing?
Does that sound plausible to anyone with a modicum of intelligence?
Because one thing is certain. After the alarm was raised and after the world's media were alerted and arrived en masse it would have been an impossibility for an abductor to rock back up to PDL and dispose of a child so near to 5A without being seen or noticed.
Why impossible for an abductor, but not impossible for Gerry McCann?
-
The problem with this theory is - cadaver scent.
It takes a while to develop, hours not minutes.
The dogs detected cadaver in 5a, which now appears to be CORRECT as they're digging for a body, therefore Madeleine MUST have been dead already when Gerry performed his 9.15 check.
I don't believe cadaver scent was found in 5A.
IMO they are searching for nothing. She is still alive.
-
I don't believe cadaver scent was found in 5A.
IMO they are searching for nothing. She is still alive.
This is the ONLY case I can remember apart from Jonbenet, where the work of several police forces has been summarily dismissed because it doesn't "fit" with the innocence of the parents.
-
Why impossible for an abductor, but not impossible for Gerry McCann?
Maybe because [name removed] to use your example could have done it at any time before the alarm was raised at 10:00 on the 3rd May.
An abductor only had the few minutes between oldfields check and Kate raising the alarm to do so.
Can you present the forum with a coherent and sensible scenario how and why an abductor could do it in a maximum of 30 minutes and why he would take such a risk?
I'm all ears.
-
Maybe because [name removed] to use your example could have done it at any time before the alarm was raised at 10:00 on the 3rd May.
An abductor only had the few minutes between oldfields check and Kate raising the alarm to do so.
Can you present the forum with a coherent and sensible scenario how and why an abductor could do it in a maximum of 30 minutes and why he would take such a risk?
I'm all ears.
It takes less than 3 minutes to take her out.
-
It takes less than 3 minutes to take her out.
And to find a site dig a hole and then refill it?
All within the same small resort you've just taken her from?
-
Maybe because [name removed] to use your example could have done it at any time before the alarm was raised at 10:00 on the 3rd May.
An abductor only had the few minutes between oldfields check and Kate raising the alarm to do so.
Can you present the forum with a coherent and sensible scenario how and why an abductor could do it in a maximum of 30 minutes and why he would take such a risk?
I'm all ears.
Perhaps you could explain how anyone could have dug a grave ( something which takes a fair amount of time and usually requires a shovel)? And when?
Why also do you assume an abductor would immediately abuse and kill and dispose of the body all within a few minutes?
-
And to find a site dig a hole and then refill it?
All within the same small resort you've just taken her from?
I don't believe she has been buried.
-
Maybe because [name removed] to use your example could have done it at any time before the alarm was raised at 10:00 on the 3rd May.
An abductor only had the few minutes between oldfields check and Kate raising the alarm to do so.
Can you present the forum with a coherent and sensible scenario how and why an abductor could do it in a maximum of 30 minutes and why he would take such a risk?
I'm all ears.
I take it from your comment you don't believe Smithman was Gerry then btw...?
-
I don't believe she has been buried.
Do you realise how your "beliefs" sound?
Like brainwashing.
Like it or not, SY apparently "believes" she died in the resort, which is why they are looking for burial sites.
Which in turn tends to support the work of Eddie and Grime.
Which in turn means that Madeleine HAD TO BE ALREADY DECEASED.
Which in turn means that the person carrying the child thought to be Madeleine alongside that vacant land, takes on a whole new importance.
Which you don't "believe".
BTW.....photos of a Portuguese helicopter doing some low flying stunts across PDL are just that - staged photo op for the media.
They have ALREADY gone across with radar, which is why they know where to dig.
Post edited in terms of forum rules. MM
-
Perhaps you could explain how anyone could have dug a grave ( something which takes a fair amount of time and usually requires a shovel)? And when?
Why also do you assume an abductor would immediately abuse and kill and dispose of the body all within a few minutes?
You're still not getting it. The abductor could only have done it after he'd taken Madeleine (after 9:30 according to Redwood) and before the alarm were raised by Kate at 10:00 pm. That's 20-30 minutes to get the child out do whatever find a burial site, dig a hole at least a metre long and 3 foot deep and then refill that hole. Anytime after that and there were people out looking for Maddie and the police were on their way
Then after the police and worlds media were swarming over the place it would have been impossible not to mention none sensual to believe that an abductor would then drive back to PDL avoiding the cameras and police and then start digging a hole and burying a child.
-
I don't believe she has been buried.
So what do you think SY are digging for?
-
You're still not getting it. The abductor could only have done it after he'd taken Madeleine (after 9:30 according to Redwood) and before the alarm were raised by Kate at 10:00 pm. That's 20-30 minutes to get the child out do whatever find a burial site, dig a hole at least a metre long and 3 foot deep and then refill that hole. Anytime after that and there were people out looking for Maddie and the police were on their way
Then after the police and worlds media were swarming over the place it would have been impossible not to mention none sensual to believe that an abductor would then drive back to PDL avoiding the cameras and police and then start digging a hole and burying a child.
And yet in your view easy-peasy for someone finding themself suddenly with a dead child on their hands to slip off in the dusk or even before dark, find a shovel and a suitable location to dig a hole, bury a child and get back to dinner and some amiable banter - yes clearly your scenario is fully plausible. So who was the guy the Smiths saw then?
Edited according to forum rules.
-
And yet in your view easy-peasy for someone finding themself suddenly with a dead child on their hands to slip off in the dusk or even before dark, find a shovel and a suitable location to dig a hole, bury a child and get back to dinner and some amiable banter - yes clearly your scenario is fully plausible. So who was the guy the Smiths saw then?
Edited according to forum rules.
On his way to his *possibly pre-dug* burial spot.
You know if Madeleine died earlier than they all say, that he could have easily dug up a grave unseen BEFORE raising the alarm.
Edited
-
On his way to his *possibly pre-dug* burial spot.
You know if Madeleine died earlier than they all say, that he could have easily dug up a grave unseen BEFORE raising the alarm.
You think someone buried her before 10pm as Albertini has said, then changed his mind, dug her up and took her to another hole he'd prepared earlier?
Edited.
-
So what do you think SY are digging for?
IMO this is to make certain people nervous.
Plus, if I am wrong and she is buried, who is to say she was buried there the same night. It could have been a month later! ;)
-
You think someone buried her before 10pm as Albertini has said, then changed his mind, dug her up and took her to another hole he'd prepared earlier?
Edited.
But yet those are the only two scenarios aren't they for digging looking for a body. And I've just explained why it's impossible for an abductor to have done it, so that leaves only one option doesn't it?
I don't really want to quote the famous Sherlock Holmes quote but it does apply here.
Now you tell me how an abductor could have done it in 20-30 minutes and when he didn't know whether he'd be found out in 20 or 5 minutes.
Present a theory which fits in with an abduction against the known fact that the Yard want to dig for a body.
-
IMO this is to make certain people nervous.
Plus, if I am wrong and she is buried, who is to say she was buried there the same night. It could have been a month later! ;)
Which people? And do you think that the Pj would agree to to their down being dug up as a bluff when they wouldn't allow the yard to question the burglars?
Nope not possible a month later he Pj and the worlds press were all still there. Why would an abductor go back and take that risk?
-
Which people? And do you think that the Pj would agree to to their down being dug up as a bluff when they wouldn't allow the yard to question the burglars?
Nope not possible a month later he Pj and the worlds press were all still there. Why would an abductor go back and take that risk?
Because it is easier to dig in the middle of night a month later than this particular night?
-
Again why dispose of the body so near to the scene, when the parents could have been alerted and started looking for the child within minutes?
Anyone in that scenario would have got the hell out of PDL as quickly as possible and disposed of the body as far away from the scene of the crime and not hung around waiting to be caught shovel in hand!
Searching for a body in a PDL grave is proof positive that the real investigation is not looking for an abductor because there is no viable scenario where an abductor would have buried the child so near to the scene.
I disagree. I think anyone in that scenario would've left the body. Taking the body makes no sense at all if you're not known to the victim.
No one kidnaps a corpse.
-
Because it is easier to dig in the middle of night a month later than this particular night?
What in PDL?? Where the PJ were still running the biggest investigation they have ever run? When an abductor could have dumped the body unseen anywhere in the whole of Portugal??
Does that make any sense to you.
Unless you're going to try and argue an abductor would take such a risk to pin it on the McCanns?
-
But yet those are the only two scenarios aren't they for digging looking for a body. And I've just explained why it's impossible for an abductor to have done it, so that leaves only one option doesn't it?
I don't really want to quote the famous Sherlock Holmes quote but it does apply here.
Now you tell me how an abductor could have done it in 20-30 minutes and when he didn't know whether he'd be found out in 20 or 5 minutes.
Present a theory which fits in with an abduction against the known fact that the Yard want to dig for a body.
I have no idea what SY think they are going to find in that wasteland area but my view is that it's unlikely she will be found there. Elsewhere in PdL possibly. But consider this: just as doubters have no problem whatsoever imagining someone digging up a child's rotten corpse weeks later and putting it in the boot of a car and taking it for a spin, likewise I think its perfectly credible that an abductor living in or near PdL could keep a child in captivity for days, weeks or months, or retain her body within the environs of their home and then re-bury it an an opportune moment.
Edited
-
I disagree. I think anyone in that scenario would've left the body. Taking the body makes no sense at all if you're not known to the victim.
No one kidnaps a corpse.
Guess it depends on whether you think leaving a corpse leads the police to you with the evidence you've left for the coppers to find on the body.
-
I disagree. I think anyone in that scenario would've left the body. Taking the body makes no sense at all if you're not known to the victim.
No one kidnaps a corpse.
Precisely.
To me, it is 1 + 1 =2.
If the child was buried so close, it means she did not leave PDL alive. Which in turn means the cadaver alerts in 5a and MOST IMPORTANTLY the Renault, are now officially assumed to be accurate.
The fact that SY have now come to the exact same conclusions after an in depth investigation running nearly 4 years, tells me that THIS is what happened.
They have the who, they probably have the why. Now they are piecing together the HOW.
Truth will out.
Edited
-
How did anyone "pre-dig" the grave and when in your view?
Posted edited in terms of forum rules. MM
-
What in PDL?? Where the PJ were still running the biggest investigation they have ever run? When an abductor could have dumped the body unseen anywhere in the whole of Portugal??
Does that make any sense to you.
Unless you're going to try and argue an abductor would take such a risk to pin it on the McCanns?
You are contradicting your own theory,do you not realise what you are saying @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
How would it be easy for a man to dig a grave at short notice whilst he's on holiday in a foreign country, and without anyone noticing?
Edited
-
How would it be easy for a man to dig a grave at short notice whilst he's on holiday in a foreign country, and without anyone noticing?
And without a shovel too.
-
So you're seriously suggesting someone took her but kept her alive for weeks or months around PDL (is that in Edgar's 'lawless hinterland') in the epicentre of Portugal's and arguably the world's most famous missing persons case then at some point in the future killed the child and then, inexplicably, returned to the scene of the crime, and buried her almost next to where she was taken from?
All righty then!
-
You are contradicting your own theory,do you not realise what you are saying @)(++(* @)(++(*
No, I'm really not.
-
And without a shovel too.
Only gardeners and local home owners would own a shovel.
And if it was a tourist then how would they and where from get the digging equipment?
-
No, I'm really not.
oh but you really are @)(++(*
-
Would it be easy for a man to dig a grave at short notice whilst he's on holiday in a foreign country, and without anyone noticing?
It wasn't peak season, was it?
You tell me. Could someone find a little place on a rocky beach to hide a tiny body at night?
I'd say it would be quite easy, myself.
Edited
-
Only gardeners and local home owners would own a shovel.
And if it was a tourist then how would they and where from get the digging equipment?
Ah we go back to the modus operandi of the McCann supporters when in a tight spot.
The yard have requested digs in PDL. The PJ must be satisfied the evidence is sufficient to allow the request.
There are only two options if the yard are looking for a body in PDL. One is that [name removed] buried it or an abductor buried it.
Until such time as you or any of your fellow supporters can come up with a coherent and physically possible theory why and how an abductor could have done this, then that option is by the process of elimination off the table which then only leaves one option.
-
It wasn't peak season, was it?
You tell me. Could someone find a little place on a rocky beach to hide a tiny body at night?
I'd say it would be quite easy, myself.
Edited
Blimey. It's difficult to follow this argument as one doubter has it that somebody must've got rid of the body in the wasteland before 10pm and one has it that he dumped her in an easy-to-dig hole on the beach after 10pm. I think I'll have to leave you to your fantasies for the time-being.
-
So you're seriously suggesting someone took her but kept her alive for weeks or months around PDL (is that in Edgar's 'lawless hinterland') in the epicentre of Portugal's and arguably the world's most famous missing persons case then at some point in the future killed the child and then, inexplicably, returned to the scene of the crime, and buried her almost next to where she was taken from?
All righty then!
I thought I made it clear that I doubted she was buried in that patch of wasteland, did you miss that bit?
-
Ah we go back to the modus operandi of the McCann supporters when in a tight spot.
The yard have requested digs in PDL. The PJ must be satisfied the evidence is sufficient to allow the request.
There are only two options if the yard are looking for a body in PDL. One is that [name removed] buried it or an abductor buried it.
Until such time as you or any of your fellow supporters can come up with a coherent and physically possible theory why and how an abductor could have done this, then that option is by the process of elimination off the table which then only leaves one option.
please stop contradicting yourself you are looking very silly 8-)(--)
-
oh but you really are @)(++(*
Well you think that my dear if it helps you sleep tonight but it doesn't make you right.
I'd love to hear your take on who buried it there and how they did it given the parameters I have outlined about an abductor and the time constraints between the child being taken and the alert that Maddie was missing.
-
So you're seriously suggesting someone took her but kept her alive for weeks or months around PDL (is that in Edgar's 'lawless hinterland') in the epicentre of Portugal's and arguably the world's most famous missing persons case then at some point in the future killed the child and then, inexplicably, returned to the scene of the crime, and buried her almost next to where she was taken from?
All righty then!
These sorts of posts ( and you make them relentlessly ) are without substance
You persist with the insupportable suggestion that unless a precise and detailed explanation for the McCanns possible involvement in their daughter's disappearance is forthcoming then we are, somehow, obliged to accept their version of events without question
That is non sequitur ... the logic does not follow
It is perfectly reasonable to question that which is questionable without having an 'alternative' explanation to offer
Speaking for myself, I have no idea what happened to that little girl ... but I certainly don't feel that because I don't know what happened to her I must, necessarily, believe what her parents say happened to her
-
I thought I made it clear that I doubted she was buried in that patch of wasteland, did you miss that bit?
Oh so you know more than the Yard & the PJ?
Have you informed them that they are wrong to be searching there?
What evidence have you got that they are digging in the wrong place?
-
Well you think that my dear if it helps you sleep tonight but it doesn't make you right.
I'd love to hear your take on who buried it there and how they did it given the parameters I have outlined about an abductor and the time constraints between the child being taken and the alert that Maddie was missing.
do you have a shovel handy if so keep digging your hole @)(++(* @)(++(*
-
Well you think that my dear if it helps you sleep tonight but it doesn't make you right.
I'd love to hear your take on who buried it there and how they did it given the parameters I have outlined about an abductor and the time constraints between the child being taken and the alert that Maddie was missing.
You seem very certain that Madeleine is buried in that patch of waste ground. Aren't you jumping the gun a bit?
-
Oh so you know more than the Yard & the PJ?
Have you informed them that they are wrong to be searching there?
What evidence have you got that they are digging in the wrong place?
None whatsoever - it's my personal opinion which I doubt that SY would be interested in. I don't think they are wrong to be searching there anyway. That area should have been searched thoroughly right at the start. I can't believe it wasn't!
-
do you have a shovel handy if so keep digging your hole @)(++(* @)(++(*
My what tremendous substance you have added to a discussion forum thread.
You're dying to spit it out. Go ahead full your boots!
-
These sorts of posts ( and you make them relentlessly ) are without substance
You persist with the insupportable suggestion that unless a precise and detailed explanation for the McCanns possible involvement in their daughter's disappearance is forthcoming then we are, somehow, obliged to accept their version of events without question
That is non sequitur ... the logic does not follow
It is perfectly reasonable to question that which is questionable without having an 'alternative' explanation to offer
Speaking for myself, I have no idea what happened to that little girl ... but I certainly don't feel that because I don't know what happened to her I must, necessarily, believe what her parents say happened to her
I look at it from the point of view of common sense. Did [name removed] have the physical means and opportunity to dispose of a child's body between 7.00pm and 10.00pm? Why do you dislike me raising these discussions so much? Why do you refuse to think things through logically, preferring instead to nurture your vague doubts?
-
I look at it from the point of view of common sense. Did [name removed] have the physical means and opportunity to dispose of a child's body between 7.00pm and 10.00pm? Why do you dislike me raising these discussions so much? Why do you refuse to think things through logically, preferring instead to nurture your vague doubts?
You are not 'raising' discussion ... you are shutting it down
Members post reasonable questions and instead of addressing them you post 'counter questions' as a diversion
It' is a common propaganda ploy
-
I thought I made it clear that I doubted she was buried in that patch of wasteland, did you miss that bit?
The bit we saw, the ground was baked too hard.
-
I think Amarals whole story was just that .... a story, with very little supporting evidence, if any at all. At best, I think he misunderstood the dogs alerts.
Well Scotland Yard are bringing in the earth diggers to look for a body now ... so I guess they've 'misunderstood' the cadaver dog's alerts too
-
Well Scotland Yard are bringing in the earth diggers to look for a body now ... so I guess they've 'misunderstood' the cadaver dog's alerts too
IMO they don't find it important at all..
-
This is a new thread.
Members should take care when posting since there are three live threads which potentially deal with the proposed digs in Praia da Luz.
* Latest news on the search for Madeleine McCann.
* Scotland Yard about to commence digs in and around Praia da Luz.
* Could a child really be buried so quick and never be found?
It is important that you post on the correct thread. Your cooperation in this would be greatly appreciated.
-
This is a new thread.
Members should take care when posting since there are three live threads which potentially deal with the proposed digs in Praia da Luz.
Latest news on the search for Madeleine McCann.
Scotland Yard about to commence digs in and around Praia da Luz.
Could a child really be buried so quick and never be found?
Have the areas been searched before....are all the areas regularly walked by the public
-
Have the areas been searched before....are all the areas regularly walked by the public
I doubt anyone regularly walks across overgrown, bumpy, fenced off vacant land.
It's called "trespass".
-
The opinion of the Portuguese police suggests that the scenario of the body of an abducted child being buried close to the scene of the crime fits the profile of perpetrators of this sort of crime. I would assume such a person would not linger while carrying out such a task.
37. In the hypothesis that the girl had been taken by someone and taking into account the time that had passed before the Guarda was alerted, it would be possible that she had been transported to a distance quite far away, further than any of the search perimeters, however the lack of any information about what really could have happened, makes it necessary that the decision about how to direct the searches, should be based only on the typology of the crime eventually in question and on the profile of the aggressor of this kind of crime, who would normally leave the victim in a place not very far from where she had been taken and who would in most cases bury the child. Within the theory, searches were made using an all terrain vehicle of the area composed of the Mata Nacional do Barao de S. Joao.
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
-
Hmmm.....an individual seen on a beach with a child's bucket and spade, digging a hole....perhaps preparing a surprise fort for his children to play in....
No one would look twice.
After 7pm at night? On his own? Carrying a bucket and spade?
Apparently asking questions like these is a propaganda technique I use frequently - I apologise in advance to Icabod for annoying her.
-
You seem very certain that Madeleine is buried in that patch of waste ground. Aren't you jumping the gun a bit?
I have no inside information as to what SY want out of the digs, other than to note that given the way this request has been approved it must be on the basis of some foundation based evidence.
If the PJ aren't going to let the Yard look at the bank accounts of suspects then they aren't going to let the Yard dig up PDL easily or on a whim are they?
I am still waiting to hear coherent and persuasive how, whys whens and wherefores of an abductor taking the child and dumping the body in the self same resort.
I've explained why i do not believe it would be possible for as third party abductor to do this.
Have you or indeed any of the McCann supporters pieced together something, anything, remotely cognitive to explain the digs?
All i've heard is an awful lot of misdirection and squirming from supporters.
-
Hmmm.....an individual seen on a beach with a child's bucket and spade, digging a hole....perhaps preparing a surprise fort for his children to play in....
No one would look twice.
That may be so ~ but the GNR dog teams did look at least once and found nada ~ which suggests to me there was no body there to be found.
3. During this nocturnal period, the searches took place along the entire perimeter of the OC, in the urban area, plots of land and the nearest buildings, the officers searching all the place where there was a possibility the child might be, this area being extended later to include all of the beach zone.
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
-
After 7pm at night? On his own? Carrying a bucket and spade?
Apparently asking questions like these is a propaganda technique I use frequently - I apologise in advance to Icabod for annoying her.
Look, really can you stop all this misdirection gibberish and nail your colours to the mast and tell us how why where and when an abductor took the child and then buried the body in the same resort the child was taken from either in the maximum 30 minute window of the 3rd May or at any point afterwards.
I have told you why i believe an abductor could not do this.
You now need to tell the forum how an abductor could do this.
-
I have no inside information as to what SY want out of the digs, other than to note that given the way this request has been approved it must be on the basis of some foundation based evidence.
If the PJ aren't going to let the Yard look at the bank accounts of suspects then they aren't going to let the Yard dig up PDL easily or on a whim are they?
I am still waiting to hear coherent and persuasive how, whys whens and wherefores of an abductor taking the child and dumping the body in the self same resort.
I've explained why i do not believe it would be possible for as third party abductor to do this.
Have you or indeed any of the McCann supporters pieced together something, anything, remotely cognitive to explain the digs?
All i've heard is an awful lot of misdirection and squirming from supporters.
I have given my opinion in other posts that this is all that NSY have been allowed to do because their other requests have been refused.
Half a loaf is better than none.
-
Look, really can you stop all this misdirection gibberish and nail your colours to the mast and tell us how why where and when an abductor took the child and then buried the body in the same resort the child was taken from either in the maximum 30 minute window of the 3rd May or at any point afterwards.
I have told you why i believe an abductor could not do this.
You now need to tell the forum how an abductor could do this.
You have a very short memory. I answered this question yesterday.
-
Look, really can you stop all this misdirection gibberish and nail your colours to the mast and tell us how why where and when an abductor took the child and then buried the body in the same resort the child was taken from either in the maximum 30 minute window of the 3rd May or at any point afterwards.
I have told you why i believe an abductor could not do this.
You now need to tell the forum how an abductor could do this.
Perhaps you missed my post, or perhaps you disagree with the GNR assessment of the profile of the perpetrator of such a crime.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4070.msg150815#msg150815
-
After 7pm at night? On his own? Carrying a bucket and spade?
Apparently asking questions like these is a propaganda technique I use frequently - I apologise in advance to Icabod for annoying her.
Why does it have to be "after 7 at night"?
Why couldn't he have done it earlier?
No reliable sightings of Madeleine since 5.30, apart from all the shenanigans with old mate Dave in and out of 5a offering to "help" Kate care for her own children.....
-
Why does it have to be "after 7 at night"?
Why couldn't he have done it earlier?
No reliable sightings of Madeleine since 5.30, apart from all the shenanigans with old mate Dave in and out of 5a offering to "help" Kate care for her own children.....
So Gerry wasn't playing tennis until seven?
-
So Gerry wasn't playing tennis until seven?
I don't know.
No one knows the accurate timeline of that night, just the McCann timeline, which changes depending on circumstance.
-
You're still not getting it. The abductor could only have done it after he'd taken Madeleine (after 9:30 according to Redwood) and before the alarm were raised by Kate at 10:00 pm. That's 20-30 minutes to get the child out do whatever find a burial site, dig a hole at least a metre long and 3 foot deep and then refill that hole. Anytime after that and there were people out looking for Maddie and the police were on their way
Then after the police and worlds media were swarming over the place it would have been impossible not to mention none sensual to believe that an abductor would then drive back to PDL avoiding the cameras and police and then start digging a hole and burying a child.
How many people carry shovels with them? And how could they carry a child and a shovel at the same time? If they had a car, that person would certainly drive away as far as possible to get rid of any body. It would be much too risky to do this so close to the resort. It simply doesn't make sense. JMO.
-
The opinion of the Portuguese police suggests that the scenario of the body of an abducted child being buried close to the scene of the crime fits the profile of perpetrators of this sort of crime. I would assume such a person would not linger while carrying out such a task.
37. In the hypothesis that the girl had been taken by someone and taking into account the time that had passed before the Guarda was alerted, it would be possible that she had been transported to a distance quite far away, further than any of the search perimeters, however the lack of any information about what really could have happened, makes it necessary that the decision about how to direct the searches, should be based only on the typology of the crime eventually in question and on the profile of the aggressor of this kind of crime, who would normally leave the victim in a place not very far from where she had been taken and who would in most cases bury the child. Within the theory, searches were made using an all terrain vehicle of the area composed of the Mata Nacional do Barao de S. Joao.
http://mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GNR_SNIFFER.htm
Barao de San Joao is 7.9km away from apartment.
The upcoming ground searches will be looking, whether for extant shallow burial or some other evidence, as close as 120 metres from the apartment.
-
Barao de San Joao is 7.9km away from apartment.
The upcoming ground searches will be looking, whether for extant shallow burial or some other evidence, as close as 120 metres from the apartment.
And there it is
For seven years the McCanns have been demanding that every corner of the globe be searched ... it needed to be an 'international search' they proclaimed
Now the police are back from this 'world wide' search and are focussing on a very little part of the world ... the only part of the world that ever really mattered as far as the missinig child was concerned ... and that little part of the world is just 120 metres from the apartment she was last seen alive in
The relentless 'awareness campaign' that generated thousands of sightings thousands of miles away, have brought the police ... finally, following years of distraction ... back to within 120 metres of apartment 5A
-
And there it is
For seven years the McCanns have been demanding that every corner of the globe be searched ... it needed to be an 'international search' they proclaimed
Now the police are back from this 'world wide' search and are focussing on a very little part of the world ... the only part of the world that ever really mattered as far as the missinig child was concerned ... and that little part of the world is just 120 metres from the apartment she was last seen alive in
The relentless 'awareness campaign' that generated thousands of sightings thousands of miles away, have brought the police ... finally, following years of distraction ... back to within 120 metres of apartment 5A
Yes - the closest ANYONE has come to actually finding something in 7 long years...and her parents are nowhere to be seen.
-
The search and rescue teams were looking for signs of a live child, not necessarily evidence of soil disturbance. If earth had recently been dug up somewhere for whatever purpose, would one more small area nearby have attracted any attention?
-
If someone had wanted to dispose of a small body quickly, stuffing it in a rubbish bag and dumping it in one of the big rubbish containers would seem easier than digging a hole.
How thoroughly could 188 large containers in PdL and surrounding areas have been inspected by 5 people in a single day?
This inspection apparently took place on 7 May. Would they have been emptied prior to that or not?
12-Processos Vol XII Page 3183
TRANSLATION BY INES
12_VOLUME_XIIa_Page_3183
Service Information
2007/05/07
To: The Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation
From: J. C. Franco, Inspector
Subject: Verification of Rubbish Containers
I hereby bring to your notice, that on this date, I the undersigned, together with Inspector Luis Piedade as well as three employees from the Lagos Municipal Chamber, responsible for rubbish collection from Praia da Luz, went to P da L and carried out a detailed check of all the rubbish containers in the area, including the underground containers, as well as in surrounding areas, a total of 188 containers were checked, nothing was found of interest to the NUIPC 201.07 OGALGS investigation.
Signed
Inspector J.C. Franco
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUBBISH.htm
-
I have given my opinion in other posts that this is all that NSY have been allowed to do because their other requests have been refused.
Half a loaf is better than none.
So you think the PJ would agree to dig up a resort just because they have refused to let the Yard check some burglars houses and bank accounts?
Haha! That's funny, it's nonsense of course but funny nonesense.
-
You have a very short memory. I answered this question yesterday.
Is that the answer where an abductor kept the child near to PDL for days/weeks/months then returned to the scene of the crime at some point in the future to bury the child out of choice right at the epicentre of the investigation?
Is that the answer you're clinging to?
-
If someone had wanted to dispose of a small body quickly, stuffing it in a rubbish bag and dumping it in one of the big rubbish containers would seem easier than digging a hole.
How thoroughly could 188 large containers in PdL and surrounding areas have been inspected by 5 people in a single day?
This inspection apparently took place on 7 May. Would they have been emptied prior to that or not?
12-Processos Vol XII Page 3183
TRANSLATION BY INES
12_VOLUME_XIIa_Page_3183
Service Information
2007/05/07
To: The Coordinator of the Criminal Investigation
From: J. C. Franco, Inspector
Subject: Verification of Rubbish Containers
I hereby bring to your notice, that on this date, I the undersigned, together with Inspector Luis Piedade as well as three employees from the Lagos Municipal Chamber, responsible for rubbish collection from Praia da Luz, went to P da L and carried out a detailed check of all the rubbish containers in the area, including the underground containers, as well as in surrounding areas, a total of 188 containers were checked, nothing was found of interest to the NUIPC 201.07 OGALGS investigation.
Signed
Inspector J.C. Franco
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/RUBBISH.htm
Smithman would've used an already made hole or trench near to the church re pipe laying, building site behind etc. That's what they'll be thinking happened not that he started digging at 10:05. Cadaver dogs should check the landfill.
-
So you think the PJ would agree to dig up a resort just because they have refused to let the Yard check some burglars houses and bank accounts?
Haha! That's funny, it's nonsense of course but funny nonesense.
I believe it came as a surprise to the Portuguese authorities that NSY accepted their permission to dig in the environs of PdaL.
I believe they were expected to refuse as it is obvious there are many other lines of inquiry they wish to follow and probably wished to pursue before reaching this point.
I believe digging was probably the last item on their agenda and possibly would not have been required if other leads had proved fruitful.
However as far as I can make out, without exception ~ all the areas under discussion are areas of interest indicated by the original investigators.
So carrying out the work now ~ which it would have been more relevant to carry out in 2007 ~ IMO serves to highlight the failings of the original investigation. I think it is an own goal.
Anyway, I'm glad to have cheered up your morning and given you a laugh. 8)--))
-
Smithman would've used an already made hole or trench near to the church re pipe laying, building site behind etc. That's what they'll be thinking happened not that he started digging at 10:05. Cadaver dogs should check the landfill.
Seven years later???
I don't find that realistic.
-
I believe it came as a surprise to the Portuguese authorities that NSY accepted their permission to dig in the environs of PdaL.
What makes you think they were surprised? Why would the PJ be surprised that the Yard accepted their approval of the Yard's request?? That makes no sense.
I believe they were expected to refuse as it is obvious there are many other lines of inquiry they wish to follow and probably wished to pursue before reaching this point.
I believe digging was probably the last item on their agenda and possibly would not have been required if other leads had proved fruitful.
So you think the Yard asked on the basis that they thought it would be turned down?
Don't you think it is far more likely the PT authorities believed this request had more foundation to it than the others?
However as far as I can make out, without exception ~ all the areas under discussion are areas of interest indicated by the original investigators.
So carrying out the work now ~ which it would have been more relevant to carry out in 2007 ~ IMO serves to highlight the failings of the original investigation. I think it is an own goal.
Anyway, I'm glad to have cheered up your morning and given you a laugh. 8)--))
The original investigation was criticised for concentrating too much on what happened around PDL by supporters of the family and the family themselves.
Indeed as Gerry says:
"As you know, the Spanish border is only about 90 minutes away and we felt, if Madeleine had been moved quickly, our chances of finding her with a local investigation only would be quite slim. Therefore we wanted an international campaign as much as possible and for people to be aware of her being missing."
But now you are trying to argue the original investigation "failed" because it didn't find this evidence in PDL back in 2007 BUT you the family and your fellow McCann supporters said before last week that the investigation failed because it didn't go international and because it wanted to concentrate solely on events in or around PDL.
That's utter revisionism and hypocrisy.
Seems we've been seeing a fair bit of that on this forum over the last few days.
-
Smithman would've used an already made hole or trench near to the church re pipe laying, building site behind etc. That's what they'll be thinking happened not that he started digging at 10:05. Cadaver dogs should check the landfill.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1866.0
-
What makes you think they were surprised? Why would the PJ be surprised that the Yard accepted their approval of the Yard's request?? That makes no sense.
So you think the Yard asked on the basis that they thought it would be turned down?
Don't you think it is far more likely the PT authorities believed this request had more foundation to it than the others?
The original investigation was criticised for concentrating too much on what happened around PDL by supporters of the family and the family themselves.
Indeed as Gerry says:
"As you know, the Spanish border is only about 90 minutes away and we felt, if Madeleine had been moved quickly, our chances of finding her with a local investigation only would be quite slim. Therefore we wanted an international campaign as much as possible and for people to be aware of her being missing."
But now you are trying to argue the original investigation "failed" because it didn't find this evidence in PDL back in 2007 BUT you the family and your fellow McCann supporters said before last week that the investigation failed because it didn't go international and because it wanted to concentrate solely on events in or around PDL.
That's utter revisionism and hypocrisy.
Seems we've been seeing a fair bit of that on this forum over the last few days.
What makes you think they were surprised? Why would the PJ be surprised that the Yard accepted their approval of the Yard's request?? That makes no sense.
Do you think it was the intention to have digs of this nature going on during the tourist season?
So you think the Yard asked on the basis that they thought it would be turned down?
Don't you think it is far more likely the PT authorities believed this request had more foundation to it than the others?
I don’t know if you deliberately misinterpret what I am saying or if I am not making myself clear enough.
NSY made this request along with many others in the expectation that the Portuguese authorities would accede to all the requests or the majority.
It seems that has not happened and access has been denied for most if not all and as far as we can know except for this one. There can be no doubt NSY has been obstructed from carrying out elementary investigation to rule evidence in or out.
The original investigation was criticised for concentrating too much on what happened around PDL by supporters of the family and the family themselves. etc
I won’t go through the recognised protocols usual when a child goes missing, merely to say that it must be highly unusual not to alert borders and check vehicles when the initial search must be for a living child.
That's utter revisionism and hypocrisy.
I have absolutely no idea why you think that comment is relevant to anything, I find it applicable to nothing posted by me.
Let's get this straight and I hope I make myself understood this time
NSY submitted letters of request to enable them to carry out their investigation on Portuguese soil under the lead of the PJ
Within that list was a request to dig should that prove necessary
IMO the request to dig is the only request that has been approved
IMO it was not expected by the Portuguese that NSY would agree to dig because the psyche of the Brits wasn't taken into consideration, I think it was expected they would refuse.
I don't think you have come up with anything to refute my opinion.
-
As we don't know what was in the ILOR's there is no way it can be said that the majority of requests in them have been turned down.
For all we know they may have all contained the same requests but with additional information each time in order to get the requests approved.
Apart from the three burglars the digging may have been the only other request.
-
What makes you think they were surprised? Why would the PJ be surprised that the Yard accepted their approval of the Yard's request?? That makes no sense.
Do you think it was the intention to have digs of this nature going on during the tourist season?
I think we have not been told in advance about the digs in the same way we were about the burglars. That should give some indication as to the nature of the evidence and information underpinning these particular requests. I also think the request was agreed to because it had significant enough foundation with which to help resolve this case, irrespective of whether it was tourist season or not.
I do not accept at all that SY threw in this request as some sort of carpet bombing strategy to see which ones they could get the PT to agree to.
That is a nonsense.
So you think the Yard asked on the basis that they thought it would be turned down?
Don't you think it is far more likely the PT authorities believed this request had more foundation to it than the others?
I don’t know if you deliberately misinterpret what I am saying or if I am not making myself clear enough.
NSY made this request along with many others in the expectation that the Portuguese authorities would accede to all the requests or the majority.
It seems that has not happened and access has been denied for most if not all and as far as we can know except for this one. There can be no doubt NSY has been obstructed from carrying out elementary investigation to rule evidence in or out.
No i am not misinterpreting anything i am replying directly to your written words. You did say after all:
I believe it came as a surprise to the Portuguese authorities that NSY accepted their permission to dig in the environs of PdaL.
We do not know if this request was made at the same time as the others at all. I would argue given the helicopter business and the SY team being there last week that this request was made some time, given it needed approval.
So we cannot say it was one of many requests made at the same time.
We also have no evidence of obstruction. What we have is the Portuguese authorities requiring sufficient evidence to cede to SY's requests. One can only presume that the evidence presented to the Portuguese for the other requests was not sufficient to satisfy the requirements under Portuguese law.
That is not obstruction, it is about the Police of one country having to respect the law and due process of another country it wants to try and operate in.
The original investigation was criticised for concentrating too much on what happened around PDL by supporters of the family and the family themselves. etc
I won’t go through the recognised protocols usual when a child goes missing, merely to say that it must be highly unusual not to alert borders and check vehicles when the initial search must be for a living child.
Well let's be clear Gerry McCann wanted and stated the border closing, can you show me a protocol where a country any country does that when a child goes missing.
The point is for 7 years supporters of the family castigated the investigation for concentrating on the events and inhabitants in and around PDL too much, and that they should have widened the investigation scope to include boats, cars, Morocco and Victoria Beckham look alikes around the world.
Now that digs are planned in PDL the supporters of the family are now blaming the PJ for not investigating enough around PDL!
That's hypocriosy and revisionism.
That's utter revisionism and hypocrisy.
I have absolutely no idea why you think that comment is relevant to anything, I find it applicable to nothing posted by me.
Let's get this straight and I hope I make myself understood this time
NSY submitted letters of request to enable them to carry out their investigation on Portuguese soil under the lead of the PJ
Within that list was a request to dig should that prove necessary
IMO the request to dig is the only request that has been approved
IMO it was not expected by the Portuguese that NSY would agree to dig because the psyche of the Brits wasn't taken into consideration, I think it was expected they would refuse.
I don't think you have come up with anything to refute my opinion.
There is no evidence one large shopping list of requests was sent in one lump.
We do not have any evidence to know if any other requests were approved. We have no evidence that states ALL other requests were turned down.
I am sorry but your opinion about Portugal not expecting SY to accept the permission that the Portuguese gave to the request that SY made to dig is just, frankly, preposterous.
I am saying it is my opinion and indeed common sense that SY provided a request to dig, provided the evidence they had, and perhaps in conjunction with the information already gathered by the PJ, they agreed to dig.
I can't see the logic in SY asking for a request and then being surprised it was accepted nor that Portugal was then surprised that the Yard took them up on it.
It just makes no sense.
-
snip////
I am sorry but your opinion about Portugal not expecting SY to accept the permission that the Portuguese gave to the request that SY made to dig is just, frankly, preposterous.
I am saying it is my opinion and indeed common sense that SY provided a request to dig, provided the evidence they had, and perhaps in conjunction with the information already gathered by the PJ, they agreed to dig.
I can't see the logic in SY asking for a request and then being surprised it was accepted nor that Portugal was then surprised that the Yard took them up on it.
It just makes no sense.
I completely agree with this. I doubt very much that Andy Redwood is playing some sort of game that involves asking for things he doesn't want!
If you want to ignore professionalism, competency, reputation and everything SY has on the line by making requests that they don't really want, just think of the expense! Goodness knows how much that helicopter cost, but they don't come cheap.
-
Is that the answer where an abductor kept the child near to PDL for days/weeks/months then returned to the scene of the crime at some point in the future to bury the child out of choice right at the epicentre of the investigation?
Is that the answer you're clinging to?
that's where you've decided Madeleine is buried is it? Just to remind you, I said that I doubted her remains would be found in that area you keep on about, but I do think they will be found in the PdL environs, more likely within the grounds of the home of whoever took her.
-
Smithman would've used an already made hole or trench near to the church re pipe laying, building site behind etc. That's what they'll be thinking happened not that he started digging at 10:05. Cadaver dogs should check the landfill.
Topic : After the Smiths sighting - Where could this mystery man have gone? Land or Sea?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1764.15
-
If the SY wants to dig in PDL this could mean they suspect someone specific and that person
1. Does not have a car
2. or cannot leave PDL due to work or health or other reasons.
The question actually should be why SY wants to dig in PDL and who would place a corpse in these areas.
-
So back to the original question -
could a child be buried that quickly?
Answer is a resounding YES.
She may not even have been buried straight away, at 10pm.
If I wanted to hide a dead little girl, I might throw her in a vacant lot.
People will be looking for a live child, one who can answer calls. If the grass was long, it could just be pulled over her, temporarily.
Folks forget that the McCanns were 100% alone from 3am.
They went for a walk alone at 6am. No one saw them, everyone else in PDL was asleep. [...moderated ...]
The cadaver dogs hadn't yet been in, just the search dogs. Looking for a live child, not a dead one. They found her scent but it stopped and could have been left any time over the holiday anyway.
I would like to know if Eddie was walked over any of these areas, and if he was, what did he indicate?
Does anyone know?
-
Smithman would've used an already made hole or trench near to the church re pipe laying, building site behind etc. That's what they'll be thinking happened not that he started digging at 10:05. Cadaver dogs should check the landfill.
I don't believe for a moment that the abductor, if there was one, had a premeditated plan to lift a kid, murder her and then bury her. None of that makes any sense. SY won't find anything of significance in public areas in Praia da Luz because it would have been far too risky to bury her where he might be seen. If she is buried within the town boundary she is most likely to have been buried on private property hidden away from public gaze. Remember too that the GNR and their dogs conducted a very wide search for her the next day but found nothing.
My own view however is that she was sedated and taken away in a vehicle of some sort. To answer the op therefore, I don't believe that a child could be buried so quickly and never found. Seems the Portuguese police feel the same.
-
So back to the original question -
could a child be buried that quickly?
Answer is a resounding YES.
She may not even have been buried straight away, at 10pm.
If I wanted to hide a dead little girl, I might throw her in a vacant lot.
People will be looking for a live child, one who can answer calls. If the grass was long, it could just be pulled over her, temporarily.
Folks forget that the McCanns were 100% alone from 3am.
They went for a walk alone at 6am. No one saw them, everyone else in PDL was asleep. [... moderated ...]
The cadaver dogs hadn't yet been in, just the search dogs. Looking for a live child, not a dead one. They found her scent but it stopped and could have been left any time over the holiday anyway.
She could have been in someone's house for days.
To bury her quickly people would need equipment and also it would be visible on them that they did the digging... on their shoes, clothes etc, possibly even their cars.
Person might had had a car but he could not leave PDL to not to cause suspicion.
There are no many people in PDL who could have had the equipment, time and who could had made a hole in the ground in these spots.
It would be noticed, by their friends, partners, relatives, work colleagues, fellow tourists.
-
I don't believe for a moment that the abductor, if there was one, had a premeditated plan to lift a kid, murder her and then bury her. None of that makes any sense. SY won't find anything of significance in public areas in Praia da Luz because it would have been far too risky to bury her where he might be seen. If she is buried within the town boundary she is most likely to have been buried on private property hidden away from public gaze.
My own view however is that she was sedated and taken away in a vehicle of some sort. To answer the op therefore, I don't believe that a child could be buried so quickly and never found. Seems the Portuguese police feel the same.
They are checking around the church because they think she was hidden there at 10:05. They are checking the road works close to the church again for the same reason - that she was placed in a trench/hole and covered. They realise Smithman only had a small window of opportunity to conceal the body so the bin theory is also an obvious choice (but there were bins available just before he passed the Smiths >@@(*&)). Maybe the body was moved again later or better concealed or if he got a car the body later left PDL >@@(*&)
-
She could have been in someone's house for days.
To bury her quickly people would need equipment and also it would be visible on them that they did the digging... on their shoes, clothes etc, possibly even their cars.
Person might had had a car but he could not leave PDL to not to cause suspicion.
There are no many people in PDL who could have had the equipment, time and who could had made a hole in the ground in these spots.
It would be noticed, by their friends, partners, relatives, work colleagues, fellow tourists.
If she had been kept in a house in PDL, she would have been found.
-
If she had been kept in a house in PDL, she would have been found.
By who?
-
If she had been kept in a house in PDL, she would have been found.
She might still be waiting to be found. You must surely be aware of the numerous cases of girls and women who have been incarcerated in their abductors' homes for many years only to be freed by chance discovery or because they managed to escape. How many more were never that fortunate..?