The facts: Madeleine McCann is alive and well or a long time deceased.

[AnneGuedes]

Everybody has the right to think that Madeleine wasn't abducted, end of.
Everybody has the right to observe how Madeleine's parents misled their family, their friends and, through the media, the public, whether they were involved or not, this point being the competence of the police, end of.

[Redblossom]

Everybody has the right to think that Madeleine wasn't abducted, end of.
Everybody has the right to observe how Madeleine's parents misled their family, their friends and, through the media, the public, whether they were involved or not, this point being the competence of the police, end of.

Exactly, its  not a crime to believe, or think, and state those beliefs and thoughts and questions, god forbid

 

[Benice]

Everybody has the right to think that Madeleine wasn't abducted, end of.
Everybody has the right to observe how Madeleine's parents misled their family, their friends and, through the media, the public, whether they were involved or not, this point being the competence of the police, end of.

Well that's news to me and I'd bet my last penny it's news to their family and friends.

[AnneGuedes]

Well that's news to me and I'd bet my last penny it's news to their family and friends.

No news at all  and better keep you last penny under your mattress  ;)
Ms Renwick said : Poor Kate and Gerry don't know where to turn. She's obviously been taken as she couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters had been forced open."
"The shutters had been broken open and they've gone into the room and taken her.
Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone, said Mr Healy. She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open.
Trish Cameron, Mr McCann’s sister,  said it appeared that someone had been spying on Madeleine and had targeted her for abduction : The front door was open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open and Madeleine was missing. Nothing had been touched in the apartment, no valuables taken, no passports. They think someone must have come in the window and gone out the door with her.
All lying ?

[sadie]

No and err no.

So once again, I answer your questions but you chicken out of answering mine.

 >@@(*&)Hmmm

Simple question too
None of us know for sure whether she is alive, or not.  Cant think why you are pushing that Madeleine is dead, unless you dont want her searched for?

Everyone in authority accepts that there is nothing to point to her having been killed, or died .... so why do you keep on?
What's in it for you to keep pushing it? 

There has to be a reason for pushing it.    There is a reason for everything

Care to enlighten us?

So you cant give your reason.  Are you ashamed what people might think of you?

[John]

No news at all  and better keep you last penny under your mattress  ;)
Ms Renwick said : Poor Kate and Gerry don't know where to turn. She's obviously been taken as she couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters had been forced open."
"The shutters had been broken open and they've gone into the room and taken her.
Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone, said Mr Healy. She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open.
Trish Cameron, Mr McCann’s sister,  said it appeared that someone had been spying on Madeleine and had targeted her for abduction : The front door was open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open and Madeleine was missing. Nothing had been touched in the apartment, no valuables taken, no passports. They think someone must have come in the window and gone out the door with her.
All lying ?

To be honest Anne I don't believe they were lying or intentionally set out to mislead anyone but Gerry was most certainly confused and mistaken initially as to how external window shutters work in Portugal.  Unfortunately, that ignorance contributed to the ease in which Madeleine was abducted.

[Jazzy]

Both outcomes are rather bleak for all sorts of reasons.

If she is alive and well and being shielded within some obscure community then she will only be aware of that existence and of those people around her.  She will have for all intents and purposes integrated with that community.

Given her tender age at the time of her kidnap she will have few if any memories of her pre abduction existence.  She will have moulded a life for herself in a community which she considers to be home and a family which she considers to be her own.

One wonders then if she is eventually found what is crueller, to leave her where she is or to remove her to a life which she will consider alien to her entire existence?

She may also be a long time dead, either way the outcome for Maddie is not all that it is made out to be.

This is a good point, John. However, if this scenario turns out to be the correct one, it amounts to further damage inflicted on her by her abductor. She was snatched from her true, biological family to fulfill the agenda of a criminal. That is the true cruelty of the scenario. No kidnap victim can be left with their abductor.

[faithlilly]

To be honest Anne I don't believe they were lying or intentionally set out to mislead anyone but Gerry was most certainly confused and mistaken initially as to how external window shutters work in Portugal.  Unfortunately, that ignorance contributed to the ease in which Madeleine was abducted.

If the window was used, as seems likely, how did Gerry's ignorance contribute to the alleged abduction ?

[Benice]

No news at all  and better keep you last penny under your mattress  ;)

Ms Renwick said : Poor Kate and Gerry don't know where to turn. She's obviously been taken as she couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters had been forced open."
"The shutters had been broken open and they've gone into the room and taken her.
Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone, said Mr Healy. She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open.
Trish Cameron, Mr McCann’s sister,  said it appeared that someone had been spying on Madeleine and had targeted her for abduction : The front door was open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open and Madeleine was missing. Nothing had been touched in the apartment, no valuables taken, no passports. They think someone must have come in the window and gone out the door with her.

All lying ?

I don't know why you think anyone is lying Anne
 
I'm sure you already know that when people are re-telling something they have been told, they do not repeat parrot fashion the exact words which they heard - especially if it is something shocking or outrageous  -  they use their own words - and own interpretations and make assumptions based on what they have been told.     
 
The main gist being conveyed by Kate and Gerry was that they had found Madeleine gone from her bed and the shutters/ window in the bedroom, (which they knew to be closed when they went out)  - now both wide open.   Their immediate reaction to this horrific discovery was that someone had broken into that room through that window and abducted their child - which of course is the first thing any normal person would think at that point.   
 
We do not know the exact words K&G used, but we do know that they were both in a very distressed state, and the people they phoned would also be extremely shocked at the news.    The fact that different people have not all remembered - or precisely repeated word for word like tape recorders - what K&G told them, but may have also have added in their own impressions of what happened  is perfectly normal.       
 
It's obvious that K&G did not have identical conversations with each and every person they spoke to.   Different people would ask different questions -  and so what K&G talked about with one person, they may not have done with another.
 
None of those people were  there - and so they had to try to visualise what had happened:-

If Kate  said that someone had broken in through the window, then it's perfectly possible that one of the people she told this to assumed that in that case the shutters must have been jemmied - and so when they related what had happened to someone else - (say a reporter for instance)  - then 'jemmied' is the word they would use.  IOW they put their own take on it.
 
There is nothing odd or unusual about any of that. and no-one is lying or trying to mislead.   It's perfectly normal human behaviour. 
---------
 
A few years back I had a phone call from a neighbour excitedly telling me that our village PO had been raided in broad daylight and our postmaster had been attacked with a baseball bat and was in hospital.     The next time I went to the PO - I was surprised to see him standing there as fit as a fiddle.  He told me that there was a bat -   but the robbers had not touched him with it - only threatened him.     Did I think my neighbour was a liar?  No of course I didn't.   The story was probably 3rd/4th hand by the time it reached me - and as always happens in these cases - people had put their own take on it along the way  - and so inaccuracies had crept in.   
 

[faithlilly]

I don't know why you think anyone is lying Anne
 
I'm sure you already know that when people are re-telling something they have been told, they do not repeat parrot fashion the exact words which they heard - especially if it is something shocking or outrageous  -  they use their own words - and own interpretations and make assumptions based on what they have been told.     
 
The main gist being conveyed by Kate and Gerry was that they had found Madeleine gone from her bed and the shutters/ window in the bedroom, (which they knew to be closed when they went out)  - now both wide open.   Their immediate reaction to this horrific discovery was that someone had broken into that room through that window and abducted their child - which of course is the first thing any normal person would think at that point.   
 
We do not know the exact words K&G used, but we do know that they were both in a very distressed state, and the people they phoned would also be extremely shocked at the news.    The fact that different people have not all remembered - or precisely repeated word for word like tape recorders - what K&G told them, but may have also have added in their own impressions of what happened  is perfectly normal.       
 
It's obvious that K&G did not have identical conversations with each and every person they spoke to.   Different people would ask different questions -  and so what K&G talked about with one person, they may not have done with another.
 
None of those people were  there - and so they had to try to visualise what had happened:-

If Kate  said that someone had broken in through the window, then it's perfectly possible that one of the people she told this to assumed that in that case the shutters must have been jemmied - and so when they related what had happened to someone else - (say a reporter for instance)  - then 'jemmied' is the word they would use.  IOW they put their own take on it.
 
There is nothing odd or unusual about any of that. and no-one is lying or trying to mislead.   It's perfectly normal human behaviour. 
---------
 
A few years back I had a phone call from a neighbour excitedly telling me that our village PO had been raided in broad daylight and our postmaster had been attacked with a baseball bat and was in hospital.     The next time I went to the PO - I was surprised to see him standing there as fit as a fiddle.  He told me that there was a bat -   but the robbers had not touched him with it - only threatened him.     Did I think my neighbour was a liar?  No of course I didn't.   The story was probably 3rd/4th hand by the time it reached me - and as always happens in these cases - people had put their own take on it along the way  - and so inaccuracies had crept in.

But that's the point Benice, each person interviewed to a man said virtually the same thing,not their interpretation and those facts could only have come from the McCanns.

Can we put another myth to bed. By the time Gerry spoke to any of his family he had, we are told by Kate and Gerry themselves, tried the shutters and knew they didn't have to be jemmied or forced in any way to be opened. Strange  therefore how Gerry didn't mention the ease with which the shutters could be opened to any of his relatives by preferred to suggest force had been used.

[AnneGuedes]

I don't know why you think anyone is lying Anne
 
I'm sure you already know that when people are re-telling something they have been told, they do not repeat parrot fashion the exact words which they heard - especially if it is something shocking or outrageous  -  they use their own words - and own interpretations and make assumptions based on what they have been told.     
 
The main gist being conveyed by Kate and Gerry was that they had found Madeleine gone from her bed and the shutters/ window in the bedroom, (which they knew to be closed when they went out)  - now both wide open.   Their immediate reaction to this horrific discovery was that someone had broken into that room through that window and abducted their child - which of course is the first thing any normal person would think at that point.   
 
We do not know the exact words K&G used, but we do know that they were both in a very distressed state, and the people they phoned would also be extremely shocked at the news.    The fact that different people have not all remembered - or precisely repeated word for word like tape recorders - what K&G told them, but may have also have added in their own impressions of what happened  is perfectly normal.       
 
It's obvious that K&G did not have identical conversations with each and every person they spoke to.   Different people would ask different questions -  and so what K&G talked about with one person, they may not have done with another.
 
None of those people were  there - and so they had to try to visualise what had happened:-

If Kate  said that someone had broken in through the window, then it's perfectly possible that one of the people she told this to assumed that in that case the shutters must have been jemmied - and so when they related what had happened to someone else - (say a reporter for instance)  - then 'jemmied' is the word they would use.  IOW they put their own take on it.
 
There is nothing odd or unusual about any of that. and no-one is lying or trying to mislead.   It's perfectly normal human behaviour. 
---------
 
A few years back I had a phone call from a neighbour excitedly telling me that our village PO had been raided in broad daylight and our postmaster had been attacked with a baseball bat and was in hospital.     The next time I went to the PO - I was surprised to see him standing there as fit as a fiddle.  He told me that there was a bat -   but the robbers had not touched him with it - only threatened him.     Did I think my neighbour was a liar?  No of course I didn't.   The story was probably 3rd/4th hand by the time it reached me - and as always happens in these cases - people had put their own take on it along the way  - and so inaccuracies had crept in.

Benice, in this case it was first hand !
There's no reasonable explanation for the coincidence they all got it wrong about the doors locked, the broken shutters and the open window.  People awoken in the middle of the night by a phone call saying a little girl has gone don't start asking how, who etc., they're shocked.
They disguised the truth and they had a good reason for doing so : escape blame. The guilty one was a man without a face, then for ever without identity.
If their words exceeded their convictions, given the horrible situation of having lost the child they had so much longed for, how do you explain they were careful to tell the police only they had found the shutters open ?  And how do you justify they left the media repeat, innocently, the spectacular and false story of the broken shutters that miraculously turned them into victims ?
Had Madeleine had an accident when searching for them or even had she been abducted when searching for them, would people have thought the parents were victims ? Would you, Benice ? Or would you, if, by chance (the media wouldn't have reported it) you heard of the drama, simply feel compassion for parents who made a mistake with such cruel consequences ?

No doubt that readers of the UK newspapers, which all sang a song they didn't invent, thought the police was incompetent: doors locked, broken shutters and open window, what could it be unless a predator ? Why would the police lose precious time looking for a little girl who obviously hadn't wandered off ? Would they be trying to protect tourism, etc.

Though I find inappropriate to consider abduction as a fact, I'm not excluding the possibility Madeleine was abducted. Nevertheless, this hypothesis raises many questions, the first being why her parents didn't say the truth. The one and only reasonable explanation I can find is denying reality.

[Benice]

But that's the point Benice, each person interviewed to a man said virtually the same thing,not their interpretation and those facts could only have come from the McCanns.

Can we put another myth to bed. By the time Gerry spoke to any of his family he had, we are told by Kate and Gerry themselves, tried the shutters and knew they didn't have to be jemmied or forced in any way to be opened. Strange  therefore how Gerry didn't mention the ease with which the shutters could be opened to any of his relatives by preferred to suggest force had been used.

Faith,  we only know the gist of what Kate and Gerry said to their friends and family.   We do not know their exact words and to attribute other people's words and  interpretations of what they had been told -  to Kate and Gerry is unfair.  Once again you are not making any allowances for the emotional state everybody involved would be in during those conversations.    Everyone said what a dreadful state of fear and distress K&G were in and you are expecting Gerry to be having rational conversations???  You cannot be serious.

Once again I come back to the major sticking point in this case.     Why would Gerry and Kate decide to come up with such a complicated, convoluted cover story, involving disposing of the body early on when people were around, thinking up all kinds of stories, getting someone to give them an alibi - and involving loads of other people, who they would then have to rely on for the rest of their lives - when all they had to do was dispose of Madeleine's body in the dead of the night, get up in the morning, leave the front door ajar -  call the police and say that someone must have come in during the night and abducted their child.    No-one else involved, no stories to think up, and no alibis required.

The McCanns are intelligent well educated people and if they were so calculating and stoney-hearted that they could dispose of their own daughter in cold blood, they would have no difficulty at all in calmly sitting down and working out a cover story a million times simpler, easier and better than the one the sceptics claim they did.

How anyone can keep missing this massive elephant in the room I have no idea. 

 



 

[AnneGuedes]

Just a question, Benice. Do you admit Madeleine could have been abducted just before 10pm?

[sadie]

But that's the point Benice, each person interviewed to a man said virtually the same thing,not their interpretation and those facts could only have come from the McCanns.

Can we put another myth to bed. By the time Gerry spoke to any of his family he had, we are told by Kate and Gerry themselves, tried the shutters and knew they didn't have to be jemmied or forced in any way to be opened. Strange  therefore how Gerry didn't mention the ease with which the shutters could be opened to any of his relatives by preferred to suggest force had been used.

faith

Have you ever played the game where you all arrange yourself in a line, and the first person whispers a message into the ear of the next person?  That person whispers the same message into the ear of the next person and so on.... and so on all along the line?
By the end the message can be quite jumbled.

In this case, a message was given to one of a group of people by Gerry.  Then another similar but possibly slightly different message was given, by Gerry, to another person .... different because Gerry remembered different things as he went along ... and as people talked with him, his perception of what had happened adjusted accordingly.   He was also in shock with his mind either racing or blank.  Either thing can happen in a severe crisis

Additionally, because each person would ask different questions of Gerry, so the answers inevitably would include different facts.


What do you think would happen to these family members when Gerry stopped talking to them?

Each would immediately phone other family members and go over what Gerry had said.  A big family.  It would only take one member to suggest Jemmying .... and very rapidly as they cross conversed, they would all be using the word.


Nothing sinister there... just normal human conversations getting mixed up as in the party game.

Simples

[Benice]

Benice, in this case it was first hand !
There's no reasonable explanation for the coincidence they all got it wrong about the doors locked, the broken shutters and the open window.  People awoken in the middle of the night by a phone call saying a little girl has gone don't start asking how, who etc., they're shocked.
They disguised the truth and they had a good reason for doing so : escape blame. The guilty one was a man without a face, then for ever without identity.
If their words exceeded their convictions, given the horrible situation of having lost the child they had so much longed for, how do you explain they were careful to tell the police only they had found the shutters open ?  And how do you justify they left the media repeat, innocently, the spectacular and false story of the broken shutters that miraculously turned them into victims ?
Had Madeleine had an accident when searching for them or even had she been abducted when searching for them, would people have thought the parents were victims ? Would you, Benice ? Or would you, if, by chance (the media wouldn't have reported it) you heard of the drama, simply feel compassion for parents who made a mistake with such cruel consequences ?

No doubt that readers of the UK newspapers, which all sang a song they didn't invent, thought the police was incompetent: doors locked, broken shutters and open window, what could it be unless a predator ? Why would the police lose precious time looking for a little girl who obviously hadn't wandered off ? Would they be trying to protect tourism, etc.

Though I find inappropriate to consider abduction as a fact, I'm not excluding the possibility Madeleine was abducted. Nevertheless, this hypothesis raises many questions, the first being why her parents didn't say the truth. The one and only reasonable explanation I can find is denying reality.

They did not lie about the shutters.   When they left 5A  the shutters and window were closed as they had been all week and as far as they knew they couldn't be opened from the outside.     Madeleine was asleep in her bed.    When Kate returned the shutters and window were open and Madeleine was gone.   Any normal person on being confronted with that scene would immediately think that someone had broken in through that window and taken their child.   They would have been abnormal if they had NOT thought that is what happened.

Later they realised that the window was only ONE way the abductor could have got in.   But that doesn't mean they lied when they first told people what they thought had happened.   It was their opinion based on the evidence of their own eyes.  An opinion is not a lie.    The fact that Gerry discovered the shutters could be raised from the outside did not change their opinon at the time - and for all we know he may have thought the only reason they could now be raised from the outside was because they had been interfered with in some way by the abductors.     Who knows.