UK Justice Forum

Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: John on July 26, 2012, 10:37:36 PM

Title: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: John on July 26, 2012, 10:37:36 PM
Madeleine McCann disappeared on the evening of Thursday, 3 May 2007. She was on holiday with her parents and twin siblings in the Algarve region of Portugal. The British girl went missing from an apartment located in the central area of the resort of Praia da Luz, a few days before her fourth birthday, and has still not been found.

Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, have said that they left the children unsupervised in a ground floor bedroom (4) while they ate at a restaurant (1) about 50 metres away.

(http://i.imgur.com/Zvxh5Ex.gif)

The initial investigation by the Polícia Judiciária (PJ), the Portuguese criminal investigation police, was based on the assumption that the child had been abducted.  After further investigation, the PJ stated that there was a strong hypothesis that she might have died in her room.  During the investigation there were a number of unconfirmed sightings of Madeleine in Portugal and elsewhere, and additional scientific evidence was obtained. The investigation involved the co-operation of the British and Portuguese police and demonstrated the differing methodologies employed by each, with regard to such aspects as the amount of information released to the public and the legal status of those involved in the case.

(http://i.imgur.com/Dh6Yo.jpg)

Robert Murat, a local resident, was given arguido or suspect status on 15 May 2007.  Kate and Gerry McCann were also named as arguidos on 7 September but were allowed to fly back to the United Kingdom on 9 September.  As investigators failed to find evidence of any wrongdoing, all three suspects had their arguido status lifted on 21 July 2008. The Portuguese Attorney General archived the case, also on 21 July, adding that the case could be reopened if new evidence emerges.

The disappearance and its aftermath were notable for the breadth and longevity of the media coverage. This was initially due to the active involvement of the parents in publicising the case and to several awareness-raising campaigns by international celebrities and, latterly, to the interest that arose from the parents being named as suspects. The event generated international media attention with controversy surrounding the Portuguese-led police investigation and the actions of Madeleine's parents. There has also been criticism of the extent and nature of the publicity and of the reporting of the disappearance in both the Portuguese and British media.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: John on July 26, 2012, 10:50:42 PM
Portuguese detectives made the McCanns suspects in Maddie’s disappearance after taking advice from British police, it was claimed yesterday.

Cracker-style profiler Lee Rainbow – who worked on the Ipswich Ripper and Shannon Matthews cases – said officers should consider their possible involvement in the case, a court was told.

The National Policing Improvement Agency ( NPIA) expert wrote a report to Algarve police chiefs giving advice.

Details of the confidential report emerged during the final day of a libel trial involving former Portuguese detective Goncalo Amaral, who led the Maddie investigation.

Amaral is trying to overturn a worldwide injunction banning the publication of his book Maddie: The Truth of the Lie. In it he claims Kate and Gerry were involved in Maddie’s death and staged her disappearance. His lawyer, Antonio Cabrita, told the court Rainbow wrote: “It was Madeleine’s father who was the last one to see her alive.

“The family is a lead that should be followed. The contradictions in Gerald McCann’s statements might lead us to suspect a homicide.”

Cabrita added: “This report has never been published before but is part of the investigation.

On June 1st 2007 British police had the theory that Madeleine could be dead and the family could be involved.

“It was British police who said they must consider not only abduction but homicide as well.”

The NPIA provided a checklist of what should be done, advising the Portuguese police to include the McCanns in their inquiry and take new forensics at their holiday apartment in Praia da Luz.

Last night an NPIA spokesman said: “In disappearance cases it is common for the NPIA to advise investigating officers to consider the possibility of the involvement of family and close friends. The NPIA gave similar generic advice to the Portuguese police in the Madeleine McCann case.”

Meanwhile, Kate and Gerry launched criminal proceedings against Portuguese TV station TVI yesterday for repeating Amaral’s claims that Maddie is dead. A ruling in Amaral’s libel case is due to be made on February 18.

http://mccannexposure.wordpress.com/2010/02/11/brit-police-treat-the-mccanns-as-suspects/
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: sika on April 02, 2013, 06:45:40 PM
Two sets of witnesses claim to have seen a man carrying a child on that evening.
Given the level of publicity surrounding this case, would you not have expected the man/men carrying the child, to have come forward?
The dogs picked out a scent in the hire car.
Why would the McCanns have waited 20 odd days to move the body?

Looking at the evidence available, I would suggest that there is more that points to abduction, than any other scenario.
Common sense would also overwhelmingly point to abduction.
So why would anyone choose to believe that the McCanns are responsible?
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: debunker on April 02, 2013, 06:52:27 PM
Two sets of witnesses claim to have seen a man carrying a child on that evening.
Given the level of publicity surrounding this case, would you not have expected the man/men carrying the child, to have come forward?
The dogs picked out a scent in the hire car.
Why would the McCanns have waited 20 odd days to move the body?

Looking at the evidence available, I would suggest that there is more that points to abduction, than any other scenario.
Common sense would also overwhelmingly point to abduction.
So why would anyone choose to believe that the McCanns are responsible?

I have often wondered that. After much consideration I have come to believe that it is due to an obsession to show how bright they are and have a scapegoat to blame, despite the fact that they lack knowledge, rationality, discrimination and a moral compass; they wallow intheir own messy lives and seek to big themselves up by preying on innocent people thr just into the public eye.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: John on April 02, 2013, 07:02:47 PM
Two sets of witnesses claim to have seen a man carrying a child on that evening.
Given the level of publicity surrounding this case, would you not have expected the man/men carrying the child, to have come forward?
The dogs picked out a scent in the hire car.
Why would the McCanns have waited 20 odd days to move the body?

Looking at the evidence available, I would suggest that there is more that points to abduction, than any other scenario.
Common sense would also overwhelmingly point to abduction.
So why would anyone choose to believe that the McCanns are responsible?

I can empathise with that point of view sika unless someone can show me any different?
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: John on April 02, 2013, 07:13:30 PM
I think we can all agree that the McCann's actions were ill considered by not having an adult maintain a vigil with the children. 

That said however, with the best will in the world nobody expects their child to be abducted from a holiday apartment.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: sika on April 02, 2013, 08:11:50 PM
I think we can all agree that the McCann's actions were ill considered by not having an adult maintain a vigil with the children. 
That said however, with the best will in the world nobody expects their child to be abducted from a holiday apartment.

The abduction is merely a 'thesis', one without a shred of evidence.
What about the witnesses who saw the child being carried by the mystery man?
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: sika on April 02, 2013, 08:43:03 PM
Either. How do you explain the sighting by Mr Smith and his family?
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: debunker on April 03, 2013, 07:50:11 AM

There is no evidence of abduction according to the archiving of the case. Similarly there is no evidence of harm coming to Madeleine in the apartment.

There is a possibility of both.

Demanding 'proof' where a full investigation has  failed to provide it is a meaningless challenge made in desperation.

It is possible that either one happened.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Eleanor on April 03, 2013, 10:58:37 AM
Just because there is no physical evidence of an abductor doesn't mean there wasn't one.  He was hardly likely to have been scattering his DNA around.  He will have gone prepared for that possibility.  It isn't difficult you know.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Heriberto Janosch on April 09, 2013, 04:08:53 PM
There is a lot of plausible abduction theories, but no plausible theory which excludes "abduction by stranger to Tapas 9" ...

Only as an example the simplest (though maybe not the truest) abduction theory:

An unplanned abduction. The offender without a car was looking for a apartment to "break" (PdL is a very safe place but with a lot of "breakings" which means entering the apartment/house with or without damage to steal something). He found 5A window in a dark place. He opened the window form the outside (glass panes unlocked). Madeleine went to the window, somnolent and very tired, thinking he was one of her parents.  He (versatile offender) caught her at 21:45. Jane saw him. The Smiths saw him.

I always think is very difficult to keep a secret on such a famous case if more than one person knows what really happened ...

Heri.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: gavdalf on April 10, 2013, 11:22:04 AM
I always believed innocent until proven guilty, its not guilty until proven innocent.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: debunker on April 10, 2013, 11:30:03 AM
I always believed innocent until proven guilty, its not guilty until proven innocent.

I wish we had more people here who believe in that and in the rule of law.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: gavdalf on April 10, 2013, 11:42:08 AM
what I can see if that we have a great deal of information and theory that may eventually lead to facts, but not very much else at present that can be stated as such.

Oh actually I think we may be able to state as Fact that the couple's were dining at the tapas bar while the children were in the apartments? and had some form of checking routine, The timings of the checking regime and how it was being done I do not feel we can state as Fact - yes or no?

Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Carana on April 10, 2013, 02:44:28 PM
what I can see if that we have a great deal of information and theory that may eventually lead to facts, but not very much else at present that can be stated as such.

Oh actually I think we may be able to state as Fact that the couple's were dining at the tapas bar while the children were in the apartments? and had some form of checking routine, The timings of the checking regime and how it was being done I do not feel we can state as Fact - yes or no?

In the absence of CCTV dated images, timings would be somewhat approximate, I would have thought.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: ferryman on April 28, 2013, 09:00:22 PM
what I can see if that we have a great deal of information and theory that may eventually lead to facts, but not very much else at present that can be stated as such.

Oh actually I think we may be able to state as Fact that the couple's were dining at the tapas bar while the children were in the apartments? and had some form of checking routine, The timings of the checking regime and how it was being done I do not feel we can state as Fact - yes or no?

In the absence of CCTV dated images, timings would be somewhat approximate, I would have thought.

There is abundant evidence that regular checks were being run, including from waiters at the restaurant who comment on frequently having to return meals to the kitchen to re-heat them because guests would leave the table to check on their children.

There is also a conversation between Gerry and Jez Wilkins, related by JW, where Gerry talks about their checking regime.

Stephen Carpenter was in the restaurant on May 3rd and says that people would leave the table at very regular intervals.

It's all in the files ...
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: John on May 05, 2013, 08:52:59 AM
I wonder what the checks were like on any other evenings compared to the Thursday night?
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Redblossom on June 18, 2013, 08:58:44 PM
I wonder what the checks were like on any other evenings compared to the Thursday night?

The Mccanns are on record saying that after Madeleine said to them on the Thursday morning that she and her sibling had woken up the night before and she wondered why they didnt come when they were cryng, that they decided to make more frequent checks on the Thursday, suggesting the earlier checks were more apart than the reported 30 minutes on the Thursday
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Matthew Wyse on October 29, 2013, 08:07:37 PM
The Mccanns are on record saying that after Madeleine said to them on the Thursday morning that she and her sibling had woken up the night before and she wondered why they didnt come when they were cryng, that they decided to make more frequent checks on the Thursday, suggesting the earlier checks were more apart than the reported 30 minutes on the Thursday

didn't the dear old lady who lived permanently above the mccanns apartment tell the police that she had heard her crying for over an hour and possibly 90 minutes and that she was so concerned she telephoned a friend for advice as to what to do?
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Benice on October 29, 2013, 11:28:50 PM
The Mccanns are on record saying that after Madeleine said to them on the Thursday morning that she and her sibling had woken up the night before and she wondered why they didnt come when they were cryng, that they decided to make more frequent checks on the Thursday, suggesting the earlier checks were more apart than the reported 30 minutes on the Thursday

Wednesday 2nd May was the one night they stayed out longer than usual and went into the bar.    Kate says because of that it was probably 45 mins between their last check and the time they got home.  After what Madeleine said on the morning of the 3rd they decided to stick religiously to the 30 mins checks in future.



Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 29, 2013, 11:48:36 PM
Wednesday 2nd May was the one night they stayed out longer than usual and went into the bar.    Kate says because of that it was probably 45 mins between their last check and the time they got home.  After what Madeleine said on the morning of the 3rd they decided to stick religiously to the 30 mins checks in future.




http://www.mccannfiles.com/id136.html

Nevertheless, it can also be concluded from the files that this surveillance with the periodicity that was mentioned above was not the one that is alleged in the files, which leaves unexplained why, on that night, the procedures were altered in the sense of reducing the checking intervals.

In effect, this group of friends was enjoying a short holiday period, therefore perfectly relaxed and it would be normal that, having dinner, inclusively with an entertainment service available [25], they were not very concerned with anything that might happen to their children during that dinner period.

It is so much so that Kate herself mentions that on Thursday morning, the 3rd, Madeleine questioned her about the reason why they didn't come to her room, given the fact that the twins had cried [26], as was also mentioned by Gerald.

Pamela Fenn, who resides on the residential block's first floor, above the apartment that was occupied by the McCann family, clarified that on the 1st of May 2007, two days before her disappearance, at around 10.30 p.m., she heard a child crying, which from the sound would be MADELEINE and that she cried for an hour and fifteen minutes, until her parents arrived, at around 11.57 p.m.

This shows that the parents were not persistently worried about their children [and] that they didn't check on them like they afterwards declared they did, rather neglecting their duty to guard those same children, although not in a temerarious, or gross, manner.


They didn't check on them like they afterwards declared they did,"



 
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Benice on October 30, 2013, 12:41:15 AM
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id136.html

Nevertheless, it can also be concluded from the files that this surveillance with the periodicity that was mentioned above was not the one that is alleged in the files, which leaves unexplained why, on that night, the procedures were altered in the sense of reducing the checking intervals.

In effect, this group of friends was enjoying a short holiday period, therefore perfectly relaxed and it would be normal that, having dinner, inclusively with an entertainment service available [25], they were not very concerned with anything that might happen to their children during that dinner period.

It is so much so that Kate herself mentions that on Thursday morning, the 3rd, Madeleine questioned her about the reason why they didn't come to her room, given the fact that the twins had cried [26], as was also mentioned by Gerald.

Pamela Fenn, who resides on the residential block's first floor, above the apartment that was occupied by the McCann family, clarified that on the 1st of May 2007, two days before her disappearance, at around 10.30 p.m., she heard a child crying, which from the sound would be MADELEINE and that she cried for an hour and fifteen minutes, until her parents arrived, at around 11.57 p.m.

This shows that the parents were not persistently worried about their children [and] that they didn't check on them like they afterwards declared they did, rather neglecting their duty to guard those same children, although not in a temerarious, or gross, manner.


They didn't check on them like they afterwards declared they did,"

IIRC Mrs Fenn didn't name any child - just a child crying in the floor below.   On the 1st May Russell didn't go to dinner because his daughter wasn't well.    It might have been his daughter Mrs Fenn heard crying.  Children do cry when they're poorly.     Or if Madeleine was crying for that length of time on 1st May so loudly that she could be heard on the floor above - then wouldn't Russell also have heard her?    Would Sean and Amelie have stayed asleep with Madeleine crying so loudly just inches away from them for such a long time? 

Too many ifs and buts for me to come to any firm conclusions I'm afraid  - except to say that it's a pity that the PJ didn't interview Mrs Fenn and any other people occupying apartments on the floor above as a matter of urgency.  Were her phone records ever checked to confirm the date?  I don't know.

Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Wonderfulspam on October 30, 2013, 08:33:49 AM
IIRC Mrs Fenn didn't name any child - just a child crying in the floor below.   On the 1st May Russell didn't go to dinner because his daughter wasn't well.    It might have been his daughter Mrs Fenn heard crying.  Children do cry when they're poorly.     Or if Madeleine was crying for that length of time on 1st May so loudly that she could be heard on the floor above - then wouldn't Russell also have heard her?    Would Sean and Amelie have stayed asleep with Madeleine crying so loudly just inches away from them for such a long time? 

Too many ifs and buts for me to come to any firm conclusions I'm afraid  - except to say that it's a pity that the PJ didn't interview Mrs Fenn and any other people occupying apartments on the floor above as a matter of urgency.  Were her phone records ever checked to confirm the date?  I don't know.

Would Sean and Amelie have stayed asleep with Madeleine crying so loudly just inches away from them for such a long time? 

Sedation perhaps, the twins didn't wake when Kate raised the alarm either, but then.....

"I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances." (Source: Flash! magazine (Portugal)/The Daily Mail
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Benice on October 30, 2013, 09:28:59 AM
Would Sean and Amelie have stayed asleep with Madeleine crying so loudly just inches away from them for such a long time? 

Sedation perhaps, the twins didn't wake when Kate raised the alarm either, but then.....

 "I know that what happened is not due to the fact of us leaving the children asleep. I know it happened under other circumstances." (Source: Flash! magazine (Portugal)/The Daily Mail

But then that raises the question why would Madeleine have woken up if she had been sedated?

Yes there was a lot of noise in 5A after the alarm was raised - but once the door was closed, which I believe it was, that would become 'background' noise - not the same as prolonged loud crying and shouting right next to the the twins and in the same room.

There was traffic though the bedroom, but I think people would tend to keep the noise to a minimum in in there  - simply because the twins could be seen fast asleep.  IMO that is a normal reaction when going into a room where a child is sleeping.

The tests carried out much later on  - on the twins and Kate showed that no sedatives had been administered - but I don't think that test could be claimed to be 100% accurate.     So who knows?

Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 30, 2013, 02:11:34 PM
In spite of your "imo" and your "normal reaction" arguments, none of the people present agrees with you. All including police officers, doctors, OC staff and even their mother were amazed that both twins kept sleeping in such a noisy environment.
The tests were done one month too late (4 months after) to prove anything.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Redblossom on October 30, 2013, 02:50:56 PM
Nearly 5  months later, end of sept 07 according to the book Madeleine.....what kind of parent thinks her kids were sedated on the night and waits five months to get them tested?

Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: AnneGuedes on October 30, 2013, 03:04:41 PM
Benice goes on spreading disinformation, i.e beliefs without supporting evidence, following Carana's insidious comments about late Mrs Fenn.
The O'Brien flat is located about 15/20 m far from the 5A and Mrs Fenn occupied all the space (and actually more, she had a room above 5B) above 5A. She lived all year long in this building and she didn't hesitate in saying from which flat the crying came and how this stopped when the sliding door was opened.
The objective is this disinformation is dual :
negate the McCann kids could wake up and cry (though the McCanns reported two episodes of crying)
negate the McCann checks were more than half an hour (though they themselves admitted it could happen).
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Benice on October 30, 2013, 03:07:33 PM
Nearly 5  months later, end of sept 07 according to the book Madeleine.....what kind of parent thinks her kids were sedated on the night and waits five months to get them tested?

And what lead investigator ignores the parents queries via their FLO about the possibility of drugs being used and does nothing?

Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Redblossom on October 30, 2013, 03:12:29 PM
And what lead investigator ignores the parents queries via their FLO about the possibility of drugs being used and does nothing?

Gerry and Kate also questioned whether there was any suggestion that pointed to the use of drugs to facilitate Madeleine's abduction.


Specific to Madeleine, not the twins! the PJ did tests on her bed for gases that may have been used, negative results.......whereas Kate Mccann wondered but waited months to get her kids tested....highly odd
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Benice on October 30, 2013, 04:12:23 PM
Gerry and Kate also questioned whether there was any suggestion that pointed to the use of drugs to facilitate Madeleine's abduction.


Specific to Madeleine, not the twins! the PJ did tests on her bed for gases that may have been used, negative results.......whereas Kate Mccann wondered but waited months to get her kids tested....highly odd

Oh come on Red, be fair.    Of course the McCanns were thinking about the twins as well as Madeleine when it came to the question of sedation - and to keep trying to transfer the blame onto them for shoddy policework is not fair.      They made more than one enquiry to the PJ - but nothing was done.     


Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 01, 2013, 10:56:59 PM
It makes no sense whatsoever to sedate kids who were sleeping in order to snatch their sister. But, according to all, included doctors, their sleep wasn't natural. Why were they sedated then ? They might have been sedated to forget what they had seen.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Benice on November 02, 2013, 01:01:59 AM
It makes no sense whatsoever to sedate kids who were sleeping in order to snatch their sister. But, according to all, included doctors, their sleep wasn't natural. Why were they sedated then ? They might have been sedated to forget what they had seen.

We can't know for sure whether they were sedated or not because the PJ ignored the McCanns references to that possibility -  made to them via the FLO's -  and did not carry out any tests.     
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 02, 2013, 01:43:14 AM
We can't know for sure whether they were sedated or not because the PJ ignored the McCanns references to that possibility -  made to them via the FLO's -  and did not carry out any tests.     
I do believe the three doctors who said the kids' sleep wasn't natural.
The McCanns didn't suggest to take the twins to hospital, as any parent would have done. You can't expect the police to insist if doctor parents aren't worried.

The McCanns only asked if traces of sedation had been found concerning Madeleine. They never mentioned that again nor suggested with what and how she could have been sedated without waking up.
Why did they do useless tests ?
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Aiofe on November 03, 2013, 11:41:53 PM
I do believe the three doctors who said the kids' sleep wasn't natural.
The McCanns didn't suggest to take the twins to hospital, as any parent would have done. You can't expect the police to insist if doctor parents aren't worried.

The McCanns only asked if traces of sedation had been found concerning Madeleine. They never mentioned that again nor suggested with what and how she could have been sedated without waking up.
Why did they do useless tests ?

Which three doctors. When did they examine the twins. Where was their decision published.

Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 03, 2013, 11:49:29 PM
Which three doctors. When did they examine the twins. Where was their decision published.
I'm afraid you have to go back to the very beginning. 3 doctors, 2 of them even with a formation in anaesthetic.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Aiofe on November 04, 2013, 12:10:59 AM
I'm afraid you have to go back to the very beginning. 3 doctors, 2 of them even with a formation in anaesthetic.

So of course you will be providing a cite for when the doctors assessed the twins and how they decided that they were sedated.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: AnneGuedes on November 10, 2013, 09:07:46 PM
So of course you will be providing a cite for when the doctors assessed the twins and how they decided that they were sedated.
This is the best signature of all !
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Freya on June 24, 2014, 09:56:09 PM
I do believe the three doctors who said the kids' sleep wasn't natural.
The McCanns didn't suggest to take the twins to hospital, as any parent would have done. You can't expect the police to insist if doctor parents aren't worried.

The McCanns only asked if traces of sedation had been found concerning Madeleine. They never mentioned that again nor suggested with what and how she could have been sedated without waking up.
Why did they do useless tests ?
Kate McCann mentioned to the police liason officer that she wanted to know if the PJ had thought about drugging. Its in the files.

I found this as well
"was repeatedly told by Kate - three months after Madeleine's disappearance - that the police should do blood analysis on the twins." Insp Paiva also said he became irritated by Gerry who would email him every lead the family received in the hunt for Madeleine.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/secrets-of-the-madeleine-mccann-dossier-325724#ixzz35am1aSic

was repeatedly told by Kate - three months after Madeleine's disappearance - that the police should do blood analysis on the twins." Insp Paiva also said he became irritated by Gerry who would email him every lead the family received in the hunt for Madeleine.

Pavia himself had said he was getting irritated by Kate McCann telling him that PJ should do blood tests on the twins


I'm sorry but you stating that you cant expect the police to insist.....THATS THEIR JOB. It is not the parents job neither is it their area of expertise. Stop making excuses for poor policing
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Eleanor on July 30, 2014, 05:52:57 AM

This is all becoming quite ridiculous.

Everyone has something to say that will counteract anything that someone else has had to say.  And almost exclusively from Media Statements.  Which I wouldn't trust if you slapped me with a wet kipper.

Sadly, there isn't much else to go on.  And The Files are simply not to be trusted when it comes to pitting a one word translation against another.

I don't actually know anything much at all.  But I do understand Logistics.  Time.  Place.  And Opportunity.

Apart from that, and being a Pro Mod, I would like to say that Pegasus and Pathfinder have remained at all times polite and logical, in so far as this is possible.

Thank you to you both.
Title: Re: Madeleine McCann - Introduction to the case
Post by: Admin on October 30, 2015, 01:57:45 AM
Madeleine McCann disappeared on the evening of Thursday, 3 May 2007. She was on holiday with her parents and twin siblings in the Algarve region of Portugal. The British girl went missing from an apartment located in the central area of the resort of Praia da Luz, a few days before her fourth birthday, and has still not been found.

Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, have said that they left the children unsupervised in a ground floor bedroom (4) while they ate at a restaurant (1) about 50 metres away.

(http://i.imgur.com/Zvxh5Ex.gif)

The initial investigation by the Polícia Judiciária (PJ), the Portuguese criminal investigation police, was based on the assumption that the child had been abducted.  After further investigation, the PJ stated that there was a strong hypothesis that she might have died in her room.  During the investigation there were a number of unconfirmed sightings of Madeleine in Portugal and elsewhere, and additional scientific evidence was obtained. The investigation involved the co-operation of the British and Portuguese police and demonstrated the differing methodologies employed by each, with regard to such aspects as the amount of information released to the public and the legal status of those involved in the case.

(http://i.imgur.com/Dh6Yo.jpg)

Robert Murat, a local resident, was given arguido or suspect status on 15 May 2007.  Kate and Gerry McCann were also named as arguidos on 7 September but were allowed to fly back to the United Kingdom on 9 September.  As investigators failed to find evidence of any wrongdoing, all three suspects had their arguido status lifted on 21 July 2008. The Portuguese Attorney General archived the case, also on 21 July, adding that the case could be reopened if new evidence emerges.

The disappearance and its aftermath were notable for the breadth and longevity of the media coverage. This was initially due to the active involvement of the parents in publicising the case and to several awareness-raising campaigns by international celebrities and, latterly, to the interest that arose from the parents being named as suspects. The event generated international media attention with controversy surrounding the Portuguese-led police investigation and the actions of Madeleine's parents. There has also been criticism of the extent and nature of the publicity and of the reporting of the disappearance in both the Portuguese and British media.