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: AnneGuedes on April 10, 2013, 06:30:00 PM
-
Can brainwashing following kidnap at an early age leave any record of past existence?
No little girl just 4 could resist the paedophile gang her father first suspected or a predator.
Her twins brother or sister were a better choice for adoption.
Unfortunately the chances she survived are almost null. Resilience has limits.
-
Hello Anne
indeed spending money on PI's would be risky, as it will always be in essence as they maynot find anything so in essence you can pay for nothing I suppose, I haven't been able to see all the documents relating to these but haven't some been arrested.
I don't know but it always struck me as a very very fast procedure, I must correct my earlier post myself in which I stated 9 days, it was actually 12 days
so we can assume which is not evidence or fact, that someone somewhere between the night of the 3rd and 15th came up with the idea to set up a ltd company , and of course we all know what to assume can be
first off you would need to apply for it, setup company bank accts which would require a anti money laundering process, submission of documents etc.
The main aspect which sometimes appears to take a back seat to the debating, theorising and really just arguing is that unfortunately a child is missing, which upsets me
No little girl just 4 could resist the paedophile gang her father first suspected or a predator.
Her twins brother or sister were a better choice for adoption.
Unfortunately the chances she survived are almost null. Resilience has limits.
Personally, I would have thought that the Fritzl case was straight out of Stephen King's imagination... yet it happened and the victims were eventually found.
There is no proof that she is dead... however unlikely it may seem, she could still be alive somewhere. If, sadly, she's not, then finding her remains could take the case one step further.
-
Hello Anne
indeed spending money on PI's would be risky, as it will always be in essence as they maynot find anything so in essence you can pay for nothing I suppose, I haven't been able to see all the documents relating to these but haven't some been arrested.
I don't know but it always struck me as a very very fast procedure, I must correct my earlier post myself in which I stated 9 days, it was actually 12 days
so we can assume which is not evidence or fact, that someone somewhere between the night of the 3rd and 15th came up with the idea to set up a ltd company , and of course we all know what to assume can be
first off you would need to apply for it, setup company bank accts which would require a anti money laundering process, submission of documents etc.
The main aspect which sometimes appears to take a back seat to the debating, theorising and really just arguing is that unfortunately a child is missing, which upsets me
No little girl just 4 could resist the paedophile gang her father first suspected or a predator.
Her twins brother or sister were a better choice for adoption.
Unfortunately the chances she survived are almost null. Resilience has limits.
Personally, I would have thought that the Fritzl case was straight out of Stephen King's imagination... yet it happened and the victims were eventually found.
There is no proof that she is dead... however unlikely it may seem, she could still be alive somewhere. If, sadly, she's not, then finding her remains could take the case one step further.
Those cave prisoners are all much older. Being just 4, Madeleine was nonetheless too old to forget her loving family, unless she was submitted to some radical brainwashing I've never heard of.
-
Hello Anne
indeed spending money on PI's would be risky, as it will always be in essence as they maynot find anything so in essence you can pay for nothing I suppose, I haven't been able to see all the documents relating to these but haven't some been arrested.
I don't know but it always struck me as a very very fast procedure, I must correct my earlier post myself in which I stated 9 days, it was actually 12 days
so we can assume which is not evidence or fact, that someone somewhere between the night of the 3rd and 15th came up with the idea to set up a ltd company , and of course we all know what to assume can be
first off you would need to apply for it, setup company bank accts which would require a anti money laundering process, submission of documents etc.
The main aspect which sometimes appears to take a back seat to the debating, theorising and really just arguing is that unfortunately a child is missing, which upsets me
No little girl just 4 could resist the paedophile gang her father first suspected or a predator.
Her twins brother or sister were a better choice for adoption.
Unfortunately the chances she survived are almost null. Resilience has limits.
Personally, I would have thought that the Fritzl case was straight out of Stephen King's imagination... yet it happened and the victims were eventually found.
There is no proof that she is dead... however unlikely it may seem, she could still be alive somewhere. If, sadly, she's not, then finding her remains could take the case one step further.
Those cave prisoners are all much older. Being just 4, Madeleine was nonetheless too old to forget her loving family, unless she was submitted to some radical brainwashing I've never heard of.
What makes you convinced that a 4-year-old couldn't be subject to brainwashing?
-
If you had a link to articles concerning brainwashing on very young children, I'd appreciate very much, being totally ignorant on that topic. I'm sorry : I should have said it was just my intuition speaking !
-
If you had a link to articles concerning brainwashing on very young children, I'd appreciate very much, being totally ignorant on that topic. I'm sorry : I should have said it was just my intuition speaking !
I don't, which is why I am curious. I had perhaps mistakenly thought that you did have evidence that young children couldn't be brainwashed.
-
Without reinforcement from parents and others, very few people have real memories of their life before three years of age.
-
Yes but in this case there's at least a terrible emotional traumatism, difficult to imagine. At that age I was taken to my parents' friends because my mother was very sick. Nobody explained me what was happening. I still remember the feeling of despair, I kept crying, refusing to eat, to sleep, my father had to pick me up. Being at home, even without my mym, I recovered.
-
Yes but in this case there's at least a terrible emotional traumatism, difficult to imagine. At that age I was taken to my parents' friends because my mother was very sick. Nobody explained me what was happening. I still remember the feeling of despair, I kept crying, refusing to eat, to sleep, my father had to pick me up. Being at home, even without my mym, I recovered.
I can understand that that must have been traumatic for you. Sad indeed.
However, it doesn't explain how a young child could not be brainwashed by someone intent on doing so.
-
Before being possibly brainwashed the silent carried child had to be sedated : how ?
-
How and why has this got to brainwashing, this would be after the fact, and we don't even know the fact that this could or would be based on even if it was relevant
-
How and why has this got to brainwashing, this would be after the fact, and we don't even know the fact that this could or would be based on even if it was relevant
A just 4 one having the terrible shock of losing her family, home, friends and who knows mother language also, recovering happy ever after without some kind of amnesia process sounds implausible.
-
Hi Anne, you write very well
Ok I understand why the discussion then and if that is the case its very sad, but with a lot of this case we do not know, but it also huge leap from the point of that we cant even state as fact there was an abduction to what maybe happening now if indeed an abduction took place , hope that make sense
-
Brain washing. any age with MK Ultra, I believe, with Nazi and CIA origins, but aparantly used way back in history. Even by the Shamans, I think
This is VERY DISTURBING STUFF. Do not open unless you are of stout constution
http://vigilantcitizen.com/hidden-knowledge/origins-and-techniques-of-monarch-mind-control/
My understanding from reading several articles is that ...Basically it depends on destroying the subjects soul, by splitting it in multiple directions. Then the subject becomes a nonenity as a person. A new set of criteria/morales are installed making the subject into an uncomplaining sex slave, a murderer, a drug runner .... Full control of the subjects mind ...what ever is wished by the controller.
The mind is split by severe cruelty and deprivation allied with drugs, hypnotism, sounds and reward etc. The CIA have perfected it. The memory can be altered, or wiped out. It is used by Elites and the Illuminati and Secret Societies even today ...according to the above article.
It is mentioned in a gentle way in the Harry Potter books ... but you have to look for it.
-
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.
This is merely an hypothesis, where is your thesis?
I received Christmas presents religiously for 6 years until I decided I preferred the money because I din't like the presents, and I wrote that to Santa
When I lost my first tooth, mother told me to put it under the pillow and the Tooth Fairy would give me 500$00(2,5€ , old times, don't laugh), and the bank note was there.
Is there any proof that Santa Claus does not exist?
Is there any proof that the tooth Fairy does not exist?
For a child brain's, before those evidences, of course those proves were enough. But are they enough for a grown up?
Just because 2 persons come up with 2 accounts (one of them referring the father, not an abductor) that they saw a person with a child, that is not proof that a certain situation is what we think it is.
Many have asked why didn't the person that Jane Tanner saw never came out and related what he was doing, well, maybe because there was not such person.
Why didn't the Smith's testimony come out? Considering that Mr. Smith thought that "it" looked a lot like Mr. McCann it's difficult to consider Mr. McCann self appointing himself of being "it".
But are there facts that deny a non-abduction?! YES, there are, unfortunately facts that point(I don't say prove) to a fatal accident/death.
Perceptions are not facts and facts only make sense within a frame of meaning that must be construed after sufficient and solid co-current observations.
If there are enough observations to build an hypothesis that the child died, that thesis has yet to be proven beyond doubt.
P.S. I stopped believing in Santa Claus (in my case it was Baby Jesus) when I was 4, I just dribbled mother&father until I could negotiate with them
-
This is an interesting subject so we have given it a separate thread. ?>)()<
-
I don't think Madeleine would totally forget, as such, only that her memory would be over whelmed by current events, especially if people were being kind to her. Children are attracted to what is going on around them, and they need to interact.
I can remember very little that happened to me when I was three or four, other than major events like bombs falling and showing the dustbin men a doll's house that had been hidden as my christmas present. And believe me, there were a lot of major events going on at that time. I do remember being permanently hungry, and seeing a banana for the first time ever, but I was a bit older by the Banana Time.
The opposite scenario to people being kind to her is something that I have absolutely no desire to think of, and there is no reason why I or normal people would want to. There is nothing to be done about it. But I can well understand why Kate did.
-
So far I reckon there's no information about a possible brainwashing. We hardly remember events that occurred before we were 4. I personally remember one that I can situate in time (I was just 4). I think emotion has to be involved for us to remember and I intuitively think that involved emotion turns memories impossible to erase.
I'm aware Madeleine was a specially cherished child. I'm not suggesting she received more love than an average child, but she wasn't taken for granted. No, don't scream, please keep away the too famous issue !
-
I would imagine that Madeleine would remember the traumatic event of being abducted.
The abductor/abductors must have told her things to keep her quiet, such as 'we'll see mummy soon' or 'mummy and daddy have had to go somewhere, we are looking after you until they come back. They could even have said something on the lines of 'there was a fire your family are dead' who knows, a child of four would believe whatever was told to them.
When it was obvious to her that she wasn't going home again, then the story could have been. 'We are looking after you now, you are our daughter'.
After six years Madeleine would now look on them as her parents and if she questioned anything she remembered then it would be brushed aside.
-
I would imagine that Madeleine would remember the traumatic event of being abducted.
The abductor/abductors must have told her things to keep her quiet, such as 'we'll see mummy soon' or 'mummy and daddy have had to go somewhere, we are looking after you until they come back. They could even have said something on the lines of 'there was a fire your family are dead' who knows, a child of four would believe whatever was told to them.
When it was obvious to her that she wasn't going home again, then the story could have been. 'We are looking after you now, you are our daughter'.
After six years Madeleine would now look on them as her parents and if she questioned anything she remembered then it would be brushed aside.
A 4 years old believes only her parents, and that's fine it is so.
Your scenario, Lace, supposes a kind "new family". Could Madeleine have been stolen by nice people ? Was the carrier a lonesome soul who needed to worship a child of his own ?
-
I would imagine that Madeleine would remember the traumatic event of being abducted.
The abductor/abductors must have told her things to keep her quiet, such as 'we'll see mummy soon' or 'mummy and daddy have had to go somewhere, we are looking after you until they come back. They could even have said something on the lines of 'there was a fire your family are dead' who knows, a child of four would believe whatever was told to them.
When it was obvious to her that she wasn't going home again, then the story could have been. 'We are looking after you now, you are our daughter'.
After six years Madeleine would now look on them as her parents and if she questioned anything she remembered then it would be brushed aside.
A 4 years old believes only her parents, and that's fine it is so.
Your scenario, Lace, supposes a kind "new family". Could Madeleine have been stolen by nice people ? Was the carrier a lonesome soul who needed to worship a child of his own ?
We do not know. We have no evidenceto positively exclude that.
-
AnneGuedes
My post was an example of how Madeleine could have been hood winked [don't know if I can call it brain washed] into believing an abducter/abducters.
Of course there is the other side to it and the people might not have been caring and kind, but the same method could be used to quieten her and keep her controlled.
A lonesome person wanting to worship a child? No, I would say, perhaps a couple replacing a child or couple who cannot have a child of their own.
A gang wanting to sell her?
-
I would imagine that Madeleine would remember the traumatic event of being abducted.
The abductor/abductors must have told her things to keep her quiet, such as 'we'll see mummy soon' or 'mummy and daddy have had to go somewhere, we are looking after you until they come back. They could even have said something on the lines of 'there was a fire your family are dead' who knows, a child of four would believe whatever was told to them.
When it was obvious to her that she wasn't going home again, then the story could have been. 'We are looking after you now, you are our daughter'.
After six years Madeleine would now look on them as her parents and if she questioned anything she remembered then it would be brushed aside.
Seems plausible to me.
I'm not sure if studies are readibly available on that.
-
If Madeleine was sedated by the abductor, which she almost certainly was, then she will simply have woken up in a different place and with a different person. This won't necessarily have been very traumatic, more confusing, I would think. And a logical explanation would probably have kept her reasonably calm until she adjusted to the new circumstances.
That is what I hope.
-
If Madeleine was sedated by the abductor, which she almost certainly was, then she will simply have woken up in a different place and with a different person. This won't necessarily have been very traumatic, more confusing, I would think. And a logical explanation would probably have kept her reasonably calm until she adjusted to the new circumstances.
That is what I hope.
Good grief.
-
So why would a loving childless couple kidnap a four year old and not a two year old?
-
If Madeleine was sedated by the abductor, which she almost certainly was, then she will simply have woken up in a different place and with a different person. This won't necessarily have been very traumatic, more confusing, I would think. And a logical explanation would probably have kept her reasonably calm until she adjusted to the new circumstances.
That is what I hope.
Good grief.
I am much too well mannered to tell you what I think of your opinions.
-
If Madeleine was sedated by the abductor, which she almost certainly was, then she will simply have woken up in a different place and with a different person. This won't necessarily have been very traumatic, more confusing, I would think. And a logical explanation would probably have kept her reasonably calm until she adjusted to the new circumstances.
That is what I hope.
Good grief.
I am much too well mannered to tell you what I think of your opinions.
8@??)( 8@??)( 8@??)(
-
AnneGuedes
My post was an example of how Madeleine could have been hood winked [don't know if I can call it brain washed] into believing an abducter/abducters.
Of course there is the other side to it and the people might not have been caring and kind, but the same method could be used to quieten her and keep her controlled.
A lonesome person wanting to worship a child? No, I would say, perhaps a couple replacing a child or couple who cannot have a child of their own.
A gang wanting to sell her?
Except may be in the case of the carrier (after all the only person we "know") as caring (the way he was carrying her), certainly weird but not aggressive, I can't figure out people taking good care of her and loving her, whether they had her stolen for them or simply bought her. Ugly creatures !
-
So why would a loving childless couple kidnap a four year old and not a two year old?
Imagine they sent the carrier, a poor but delicate chap (he proved it the way he took her out of her bed), and he made a mistake. He took the one he found the most beautiful.
-
If Madeleine was sedated by the abductor, which she almost certainly was, then she will simply have woken up in a different place and with a different person. This won't necessarily have been very traumatic, more confusing, I would think. And a logical explanation would probably have kept her reasonably calm until she adjusted to the new circumstances.
That is what I hope.
I don't think she was sedated. Lasting sedation is complex and requires an equipment the carrier didn't carry and that hasn't been found.
Madeleine's brother and sister were described as deeply sleeping in spite of the noise around. But they were secure and not cold.
-
So why would a loving childless couple kidnap a four year old and not a two year old?
Imagine they sent the carrier, a poor but delicate chap (he proved it the way he took her out of her bed), and he made a mistake. He took the one he found the most beautiful.
The mccanns detectives were quoted in the news of the world newspaper within weeks of saying two different things
One, a childless loving couple got Madeleine taken to take care of as one od their own
Two, Madekeine was stolen and taken to a lawless area in an underground lair by nasty men within an x radius of pdl
These two clowns also invented, or were directed to, the victoria beckham lookalike extravaganza which proved to be a total sham
As was the Gail Cooper sham, a sham exposed by her own statements and by the papers stories on it and the Mccanns or their spokesmans lies about Jane Tanner saying Copperman was the man she saw
All these shams say to me no one took Madeleine JMO
-
Anyhow someone took her out of the flat. Where to ?
-
Anyhow someone took her out of the flat. Where to ?
a car right by or carried in something which wouldnt leave a scent trail
Both Jane Tanner and Smith man said no cover or blanket was used so her scent would have been found on both directions, it wasnt
-
Anyhow someone took her out of the flat. Where to ?
a car right by or carried in something which wouldn't leave a scent trail
Both Jane Tanner and Smith man said no cover or blanket was used so her scent would have been found on both directions, it wasn't
Redblossom, I dint think that is necessarily correct. Madeleine as a child wouldn't sweat, she might lose hair and skin cells, but it was mighty gusty that night. Gusts up to 20mph. The cells and hairs would not have stayed around.
And she was carried, so no contact with the ground ... no appreciable scent to follow. The GNR dogs almost certainly followed the scent of the abduction crew who had ground contact, either the scent as they left the little car park to take the round-about, but hidden walk to 5A front door ... or less likely the scent as the lifter left by that route. Bundleman took a completely different route as witnessed by Jane Tanner
-
Anyhow someone took her out of the flat. Where to ?
a car right by or carried in something which wouldn't leave a scent trail
Both Jane Tanner and Smith man said no cover or blanket was used so her scent would have been found on both directions, it wasn't
Redblossom, I dint think that is necessarily correct. Madeleine as a child wouldn't sweat, she might lose hair and skin cells, but it was mighty gusty that night. Gusts up to 20mph. The cells and hairs would not have stayed around.
And she was carried, so no contact with the ground ... no appreciable scent to follow. The GNR dogs almost certainly followed the scent of the abduction crew who had ground contact, either the scent as they left the little car park to take the round-about, but hidden walk to 5A front door ... or less likely the scent as the lifter left by that route. Bundleman took a completely different route as witnessed by Jane Tanner
What?
-
Anyhow someone took her out of the flat. Where to ?
a car right by or carried in something which wouldn't leave a scent trail
Both Jane Tanner and Smith man said no cover or blanket was used so her scent would have been found on both directions, it wasn't
Redblossom, I dint think that is necessarily correct. Madeleine as a child wouldn't sweat, she might lose hair and skin cells, but it was mighty gusty that night. Gusts up to 20mph. The cells and hairs would not have stayed around.
And she was carried, so no contact with the ground ... no appreciable scent to follow. The GNR dogs almost certainly followed the scent of the abduction crew who had ground contact, either the scent as they left the little car park to take the round-about, but hidden walk to 5A front door ... or less likely the scent as the lifter left by that route. Bundleman took a completely different route as witnessed by Jane Tanner
An "abduction crew" ? At least Bundleman had a witness and I believe JT saw the carrier. But exactly because I believe JT, I wonder why neither Numi nor Rex followed Bundleman's trail.
Neither the Smiths' carrier who, if Bundleman, would hardly have gone back to the 5A's main door, turned around the G5 building and used some kind of a vehicle he'd left just before crossing the Smith family.
So the tracker dogs most likely traced the route Madeleine took on Tuesday or Wednesday morning, as her father reported it.
-
This seems likely to me. But you can't expect the dogs to know exactly when it happened.
-
From the 5A's main door and following the corridor you arrive to a hall and have two options, whether take on the right an inclined plane leading to the private car park or go straight forward up to the end of the G5 building. The tracker dogs went straight forward, following a 2/3 days route, whereas Bundleman had, 3/4 hours before, taken the inclined plane with a little barefoot girl. Why ?