Why now?

[Brietta]

There's a difference between being suspected and actually being blamed. It's called evidence and if there was evidence attached to a body it wasn't available.

The disaster was less than it would have been if blame could have been demonstrated; that could have led to reputational, financial and professional ruin and the break up of family relationships.

Madeleine didn't receive the level of protection she was entitled to expect from her parents, remember, before the PJ had even heard of her.

The point is they were blamed - and they were blamed without evidence and since we are on the subject - the only serial divorcee and breaker up of families in this equation is Amaral.

[John]

Suggest Brueckner could have carried Maddie through the street, no problem, the streets were quiet so no one would notice.

Suggest Gerry could have carried Maddie through the streets, suddenly PDL becomes a heaving metropolis full of eagle eyed tourists & thus becomes impossible.

That seems to be the opinion here.

Someone certainly did as an Irish family met him.  As times goes by it appears more than likely that the young girl being carried was indeed Madeleine McCann.

[Wonderfulspam]

Someone certainly did as an Irish family met him.  As times goes by it appears more than likely that the young girl being carried was indeed Madeleine McCann.

It's always been the most likely sighting to me. They saw a child closely matching Maddie's description, whilst Jane Tanner saw some legs & feet, allegedly.

[G-Unit]

The point is they were blamed - and they were blamed without evidence and since we are on the subject - the only serial divorcee and breaker up of families in this equation is Amaral.

They were suspects based on circumstancial evidence.

[Venturi Swirl]

Not in the way it would have been if they were blamed for something. That would have adversely affected their jobs, their relationships with family members, their ability to work, pay a large mortgage and care for their other children and their public images.

You don't think they were blamed for something or that their lives were turned upside down in such a way that affected all aspects of their relationships and careers?  Wow, where were you?

[Venturi Swirl]

Someone certainly did as an Irish family met him.  As times goes by it appears more than likely that the young girl being carried was indeed Madeleine McCann.

I'm curious to know why you think the passage of time makes it more likely that it was Madeleine? 

[G-Unit]

You don't think they were blamed for something or that their lives were turned upside down in such a way that affected all aspects of their relationships and careers?  Wow, where were you?

They didn't lose their jobs, their remaining children, their house or their family support. All of them would have been endangered if guilt had been proved. It's a powerful motive.

[Brietta]

They were suspects based on circumstancial evidence.

Unless you can point it out - NO they were not!  They were blamed on NO evidence whatsoever.

[Brietta]

They didn't lose their jobs, their remaining children, their house or their family support. All of them would have been endangered if guilt had been proved. It's a powerful motive.

Their lives were irrevocably shattered as were the lives of family and friends yet you and other sceptics think nothing at all of attempting to increase their burden.
Pathetic that!  a bit like getting pleasure from pulling the wings off a butterfly.

She said: "I used to have thoughts like we'll get wiped out in the car on the motorway. So it would just happen, we'd all be gone, and the pain would be away."   Kate McCann

[Mr Gray]

They didn't lose their jobs, their remaining children, their house or their family support. All of them would have been endangered if guilt had been proved. It's a powerful motive.

You can dream up anything and say it's s powerful motive but you don't have any real evidence to support it..... And no one has claimed that any such evidence ecusts.
Yet when CB is, strongly suspected and Wolters, says he has the evidence to support it you cry foul.
It's totally hilarious.. Hypocritical

[jassi]

Please, no more, you'll have me sobbing into my handkerchief at this rate.

[G-Unit]

Their lives were irrevocably shattered as were the lives of family and friends yet you and other sceptics think nothing at all of attempting to increase their burden.
Pathetic that!  a bit like getting pleasure from pulling the wings off a butterfly.

She said: "I used to have thoughts like we'll get wiped out in the car on the motorway. So it would just happen, we'd all be gone, and the pain would be away."   Kate McCann

I wouldn't have likened either of the McCanns to fragile butterflies.

[Venturi Swirl]

They didn't lose their jobs, their remaining children, their house or their family support. All of them would have been endangered if guilt had been proved. It's a powerful motive.

Err, guilt proved of what crime exactly did you have in mind?

[Venturi Swirl]

I wouldn't have likened either of the McCanns to fragile butterflies.

And of course you know them both so well.

[John]

I'm curious to know why you think the passage of time makes it more likely that it was Madeleine?

By virtue of the simple fact that the man the Smiths saw has never come forward despite all the appeals to do so and the police enquiries.