I was having an interesting conversation the other day and found myself quoting from Kate Healy/McCann about their claim that there was no evidence Maddie has come to any harm with regards her disappearance.
I still struggle to comprehend this answer to the question...
A deaf, dumb, blind person would have laughed this off and found a way to commuicate: "Yeah she has been harmed! DUH"
What reason would K & G have, to make this bloody silly claim 'no evidence'? Well, it is a play on words. there is no evidence Maddie was harmed, but that is not the same as: she must have been harmed even if only psychological- concluded much the same way it is claimed she must have been abducted. ( as their is no evidence of that either)
The play on words goes on, as it is claimed she was not harmed in her disapearance. It is claimed by the parents she was harmed by what was written in a book, by a person close to the investigation, a claim for money was the order of the day- however, this time there was NO evidence their daughter was harmed as it was strange to even think a child could read such a book if she was given a copy or understand its meaning.
Having explained this I won over everyone at the table!
There are two issues which concern me about the parents.
Dissassociation from their daughters dissapearnce - to the new found enterprise/business which they found VERY early on in the 'dissappearance'saga.
It never ceases to amaze me the comments the parents made to remove themselves from Maddies disappearance.
1. They were not anywhere near her when she dissappeared
2. They constanly said there is a 'little girl missing' ( not their daughter) (I found that creepy).
3. would it be their fault, if they were in the apartment when she dissapeared
4. blaming others( took to name calling) for not finding 'the little missing girl'
5. refusing point blank to concede, that anything other than stranger abduction from the bed was the only scenario to explain 'little missing girl'
The business
1. The smiles displayed at puplic gatherings, receiving money and support based on the 'story' they told.
2. the speed at which the business was set up, and it was for the long term ( how did they know Maddie as not going to JUST turn up?)
3. The sheer pleasrue on their faces and mentioned in blog entries about phone calls with Prime minsters and other'influential' people. IT BECAME ALL ABOUT THEM. THEY, and not their daughter, became famous celebrities and they used their daughter to keep this stautus.
Hence why they had to say there is no evidence she was harmed because, if the truth was outed from the start, no money would have poured in and zero support for the pair and their Tapas friends woud have been wholly negative, and besides, this is their reputation we are talking about- not money.
There is overwhelming evidence that Maddie was harmed,Either she has been isolated from her family and kept somewhere against her will or has been murdered= HARMED.
There is absolutely no evidence that Maddie was harmed by a book written by someone close to the investigation.
In my opinion this claim was done out of malicious intent to blame someone for their short commings, and THEIR greed for money.
A clincal psychologist of 25 years experience said he was intruiged to hear that Maddie would be reunited with her 'loving' family and that she would be hapPy about this, he seemed to think that would not be the case. He also claimed that if she was found alive, she would indeed have been harmed in some way.
So, to keep the money flowing, and to keep the parents 'innocent' ,absolved of any assumed guilt of any part they played, even for facilitating their daughterds disappearance, We need a Maddie alive,happy and unharmed.
So what are the chances...?
