MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Reference Forum for all information regarding translations and PT Law etc and other useful information.

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby mr bluesky » Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:07 pm

diddy wrote:Dreyfus,
My understanding is that even the PJ aren't thinking K is a killer.

I think the others may not know anything, but all this trying to seem like good parents is getting in the way.

Whatever checking the Mccanns were doing patently wasn't enough as Madeleine was either abducted from the apartment, or wandered and was abducted.
If she had an accident whilst alone, and wasn't found until she had been dead a while, then they obviously weren't checking enough.

In all events, she disappeared whilst in their "care".
And if any of the above were true, I don't see how being with a group, when they should have been looking after the children is an alibi.

If there was an accident at K's hand, then the checking perhaps doesn't really come into it.


the question of child neglect doesnt really come into it either if you are in the camp of they killed/ disposed of the body etc

I mean if G & K had any hand in Maddelines dissapearance and then subsequent cover up - the whole left the kids alone debate becomes a bit non sensical especialy if you believe the Tapas friends were all part of the cover up .

I mean the PJ would hardly pursue a neglect case when there is a murder /man sluaghter case looming

no-one got a view on why the twins havent been taken into care ?
mr bluesky
Suspect
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:18 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby diddy » Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:16 pm

Bluesky, that's what I put.
If it was at the parents hands, the checking was irrelevant.
Although, how "lucky" to be with a group that all left children, thus making it easier to push the abduction theory.

Anyone else finding that the links to say there are new posts aren't working?
The charade must go on.
User avatar
diddy
On Parole
 
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby pear » Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:23 pm

Dreyfus wrote:
pear wrote:
Dreyfus wrote:De Abreu may be a whizz-kid on Portuguese law, but we know his English isn't so hot quote]

We do?
We've heard him speak Pear - when Gerry came out of Portimao cop shop. When Kate came out he preferred not to speak in English, he just spoke in Portuguese.

Anyway, it's a detail.

If the DNA report he was shown was genuine and he didn't make a mistake, why did the PJ allow the McCanns to leave the country? As soon as they saw the McCanns were booked on that Easyjet flight from Faro, why didn't they apply to the judge for pre-charge custody, if they had rock-solid evidence against the couple?


For the record, I do believe that a "report showing 100% match" is a lie. Neither the IML nor the FSS would write a ridiculous report like that. I think it is very likely that he was shown a report talking of a match of, for example, 15 markers over 20, which could be read as a probability of 1 over x zillions. I also think it is very likely that the report was in Portuguese, because there is no reason to think that it was done by the FSS only (I believe that most of the tests were done in both labs). The article doesn't say, of course, if that DNA came form tissues post mortem or ante mortem.

Going back to English, Pinto de Abreu spoke in Portugese, and rightly so. As a matter of courtesey torwards the foreigner media, he read a statement translated into English on the second day. If I was him, I would probably let the interpreter read it out.

I'm not going back to the discussion of preventive prison with you for the umpteenth time. It's getting boring.
pear
Hardened Criminal
 
Posts: 1536
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:24 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby twiglet1963 » Wed Mar 05, 2008 4:13 pm

Dreyfus wrote:
twiglet1963 wrote:
Dreyfus wrote:. ...I think Madeleine overheated in a stuffy bedroom, woke up because she was hot and went out while it was still light to look for her parents. ...



According to Tanner's account of Bundleman it was cold that evening.

According to the Astronomical Applications Department of the US Naval Observatory, the sun set in Portimao at 8.25pm (BST) on 3 May 2007. By the time the McCanns went out to dinner it was already getting dark.


Onda on the Mirror Forum said it was light till quarter to nine. We do not have a report from an independent witness who says what time the McCanns arrived at the Tapas Bar. Anyway, although I think it far more likely Madeleine would be brave enough to venture out alone in the light rather than the dark, other than Kate's "I know she wouldn't do that", we have no evidence she couldn't or wouldn't have done so. Alex Woolfall of Mark Warner's said the early assumption was that she had wandered off.


Let's see, I quote the Astronomical Applications Department of the US Naval Observatory and you tell me what Onda from the Mirror forum says. I'll stick with the scientists if you don't mind. All I'm saying is that both your assumptions are very shakey. It wasn't hot and it wasn't light. But let's say she woke up anyway, it doesn't matter why. And whatever the lighting outside, she went looking for her Mum and Dad and didn't find them in the apartment. What happens? Was she shouting and screaming in the apartment. We haven't heard. It didn't work the previous night so she goes to search, presumably.

I take it you are also discounting Gerry's check at 9pm and (can't remember who) checking at 9.30? But Gerry met Wilkins after his check. But what do children normally do? Do they go looking or do they shout? Mine shouts even from his bedroom. Doesn't head down the stairs. She may have been brave enough to go out. Those doors are heavy, are they not? She would have had to stretch for the handle and then pull a heavy glass door. Maybe her reach was good enough and her arms strong enough to open it enough to get out. Why not shout from the patio? And you're assuming that Madeleine had the presence of mind to close the door behind her when she left and also the gate at the bottom of the stairs. At least in all the twists and turns of the stories, no one has mentioned the door or gate being open. But they have mentioned open windows. Is that part of the McCanns' cover-up of the neglect and invention of an abduction to cover up the waking and wandering?

What about Tanner's sighting of whatever she saw? Is she lying? In fact all the checking must be lies since the odds of someone seeing her would be good if there was only half the checking going on. She must have been very quiet - not crying. Remember Oldfield and Tanner were right next door for large parts of the evening. Surely they would have heard her crying?

It's a man in a car. She wouldn't cross the road, surely. She must have headed up the road, away from the Ocean Club otherwise she would have headed into the narrow lane or down towards reception. Can cars go down that lane? No, it must have been up away from the reception area. Was she lost? Confused. Not drawn towards the loud, braying voices echoing across the pool from the Tapas bar? And the predator happens by and grabs her. Where was Wilkins? Wandering round the area with his pushchair. He had been in the area pushing his pram for maybe 20-30 minutes by the time he meets Gerry. He must have been coming down in the hill from the direction Madeleine would have headed if she wandered before his 9pm check. If it was after, she must have wandered between 9.25 and 10pm and we discount the 9.30 check. When could she have wandered off?

We need to discount all the forensics, especially the stuff told to their lawyer and all the subsequent reports of partially matching, inconclusive DNA. Those mutts, they must have got it wrong. No death smell. Those traces under the tile, on the floor and the wall. The washing of the curtains. All of that is nonsense, made up by the newspapers or discounted theories leaked by the PJ. Her toy. Her favourite toy. Why didn't she take it? Her blanket / comforter. Why did she leave it behind, especially if she was scared and heading out into the night? But she goes anyway.

And to cover their neglect, which they've not been slow to talk about, if not actually accept as neglect, the parents invent and sustain a particular type of abduction, insisting on a break in and pointing at a man walking away rather than entertaining the possibility of a car. Completely throwing everyone off track. Insisting on an abduction. No, it's really important that you believe she's been abducted. But not by a local, known paedophile - they've been checked and discounted. It must be someone unknown who happened to be in the neighbourhood of a quiet resort, out of season and a time when children would, should, be in their bed. Maybe it was. Hadn't planned it. He just got lucky. His Christmas walked up and quietly climbed into his car.

If you don't want to think the parents had any part in it, why not just an abductor who walked in through the open door and took her from her bed, disappearing into the night?
twiglet1963
 

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby diddy » Wed Mar 05, 2008 4:20 pm

Apartments can often get cool in the evening, even if it's been hot in the day.
They are usually designed to keep heat out, and out of season can feel cool inside even in the day.
The charade must go on.
User avatar
diddy
On Parole
 
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby Dreyfus » Wed Mar 05, 2008 4:44 pm

twiglet1963 wrote:
If you don't want to think the parents had any part in it, why not just an abductor who walked in through the open door and took her from her bed, disappearing into the night?


Because abductions are usually opportunist events - parks, empty streets, places outside. Chance snatchings when an adult isn't around to intervene. Cases of an abductor actually entering a home and taking a child are extremely rare. If the McCanns and friends were telling the truth about how frequently they checked, the abductor wouldn't have taken the risk of entering the apartment.

I think the McCanns and their friends were so ashamed about the fact Madeleine could have wandered off by herself (and concerned about negligence charges) that they embellished and exaggerated what happened to imply the abductor actually entered the apartment. The "jemmied shutters" and "open windows" were just a part of this We know Gerry saw Jeremy Wilkins at 9.05, but there is no evidence to confirm he actually went inside the children's bedroom and saw them. He may have just listened at the door. The waiters told the CBS PI the Tapas 9 hardly checked at all.

I think it's less bizarre to imagine the Tapas 9 are lying about how often they checked on their kids, rather than lying to cover up concealment of Madeleine's death.

The idea that the parents are involved in Madeleine's death only becomes a less fantastic version of events if you consider the forensic evidence. Back in September, this appeared irrefutable, but it seems to have become less and less certain as months have gone by. We will see shortly if there is anything in it, or it is just groundless speculation.

But if you believe the parents concealed the death Twiglet, and transported some of her remains in the hire car, you have to come up with a plausible story about how they got rid of the body. (If she was taken out in the blue sports bag, which it is alleged the police now have, WHY didn't they get rid of the sports bag at the same time?)
Dreyfus
First Time Offender
 
Posts: 745
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 3:46 pm
Location: Devil's Island

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby SallyGardens » Wed Mar 05, 2008 4:47 pm

Admirable post, Twiglet.
SallyGardens
Hardened Criminal
 
Posts: 1530
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2007 7:00 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby Dreyfus » Wed Mar 05, 2008 4:50 pm

Think how many people still believe Ben Needham was kidnapped by gypsies who then sold him. It doesn't have to be a paedophile.

No traces of Ben Needham's body have been found. He disappeared from the garden outside the cottage his grandparents were restoring. He was much younger than Madeleine. His grandparents actually waited much longer to inform the police. Do people think they were involved in his death? Not many. Of course there isn't the "scent of death" in that case, but otherwise the 2 cases are actually similar.
Dreyfus
First Time Offender
 
Posts: 745
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 3:46 pm
Location: Devil's Island

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby Whatever » Wed Mar 05, 2008 4:55 pm

Very interesting point you make Twiglet, about the stairgate (which was at the top of the patio stairs, incidentally, not the bottom). Not once have we had any details about its status during the evening and when Kate made her discovery. All I know about that stairgate is that it sits at the top of around a dozen tile covered stone steps leading down to the iron gate at the bottom. If Madeleine had woken, she would have first had to slide open the patio doors (no mean feat), close them again, then climb over the stairgate or open it and close it behind her (assuming it was closed), then do down the stairs and open the iron gate and close it again (once again assuming it was closed). All very weird. My daughter is 15 and I'm still yelling at her to close doors behind her.

For me, it would have to be that if she was abducted, it was by someone who just walked in and took her.

If she died accidentally, that stairgate may well have something to do with it. It's not there any more, says Panorama - maybe because the new owners don't need it, or maybe because it was removed for forensic testing.
'okay, we've tried really hard and we've come up with nothing' - K. McCann
User avatar
Whatever
Hardened Criminal
 
Posts: 1511
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:39 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby twiglet1963 » Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:35 pm

Whatever wrote:Very interesting point you make Twiglet, about the stairgate (which was at the top of the patio stairs, incidentally, not the bottom).


You're right. That's another gate. There's a gate at street level too. Stairgates are special, as we all know, but let's just remind ourselves anyway - they are designed to be difficult, preferably impossible, for small children to open. Maybe it was left open, maybe it was broken.

I'd forgotten about the stairgate.
twiglet1963
 

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby crosseyedlion » Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:43 pm

twiglet1963 wrote:
Whatever wrote:Very interesting point you make Twiglet, about the stairgate (which was at the top of the patio stairs, incidentally, not the bottom).


You're right. That's another gate. There's a gate at street level too. Stairgates are special, as we all know, but let's just remind ourselves anyway - they are designed to be difficult, preferably impossible, for small children to open. Maybe it was left open, maybe it was broken.


Left open for the convenience of the checkers?
http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/5871/yeaag9.jpg

"The investigation will bring its results, whoever they hurt."
User avatar
crosseyedlion
Been Cautioned
 
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:32 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby Whatever » Wed Mar 05, 2008 5:56 pm

crosseyedlion wrote:
twiglet1963 wrote:
Whatever wrote:Very interesting point you make Twiglet, about the stairgate (which was at the top of the patio stairs, incidentally, not the bottom).


You're right. That's another gate. There's a gate at street level too. Stairgates are special, as we all know, but let's just remind ourselves anyway - they are designed to be difficult, preferably impossible, for small children to open. Maybe it was left open, maybe it was broken.


Left open for the convenience of the checkers?


A child 'with a sense of danger' might assume a stairgate was locked and could attempt to climb over it. At some point during the climb, an open stairgate would swing open and cause major confusion.
'okay, we've tried really hard and we've come up with nothing' - K. McCann
User avatar
Whatever
Hardened Criminal
 
Posts: 1511
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:39 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby diddy » Wed Mar 05, 2008 6:08 pm

If the stair gate was open, do we assume(sorry!), that Madeleine couldn't get out of the apartment?
The charade must go on.
User avatar
diddy
On Parole
 
Posts: 1002
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:51 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby retribution » Wed Mar 05, 2008 6:32 pm

Dreyfus wrote:Think how many people still believe Ben Needham was kidnapped by gypsies who then sold him. It doesn't have to be a paedophile.

No traces of Ben Needham's body have been found. He disappeared from the garden outside the cottage his grandparents were restoring. He was much younger than Madeleine. His grandparents actually waited much longer to inform the police. Do people think they were involved in his death? Not many. Of course there isn't the "scent of death" in that case, but otherwise the 2 cases are actually similar.



I fail to see the similarities, other than both children are missing.

In Ben Needham's case, he disappeared from a garden (not from indoors, it was broad daylight (not night time), the delay in contacting the police was because the grandparents thought he was with another member of the family, who subsequently turned up, without Ben, and with no knowledge of where he might be.

Could you please explain the similarities?
retribution
First Time Offender
 
Posts: 573
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 3:01 pm

Re: MAIN MADELEINE THREAD MK II

Postby HarveyHumphries » Wed Mar 05, 2008 6:37 pm

Dreyfus wrote:No traces of Ben Needham's body have been found. He disappeared from the garden outside the cottage his grandparents were restoring. He was much younger than Madeleine. His grandparents actually waited much longer to inform the police. Do people think they were involved in his death? Not many. Of course there isn't the "scent of death" in that case, but otherwise the 2 cases are actually similar.

It's certainly worth taking a closer look at the Ben Needham case - cited by Gerry McCann, let's remember, as the ONLY precedent for what happened to Madeleine.

From the Express:
"Ben went missing on July 24 while in the care of his grandmother. She had taken him for lunch with his grandfather and uncles at the house they were renovating.

As the grown-ups ate, Ben entertained himself, running in and out of the house. Like the McCanns, the Needhams say they checked on him "every few minutes". When his uncle Stephen hopped on his scooter and set off for a swim at the nearby beach, Ben, just a baby, toddled after him and asked for a ride. Stephen said no and pointed Ben back to the house before driving away – but Ben didn't walk those few yards back to safety and was never seen again.

Even when the family realised he was missing they assumed he had gone to the beach with Stephen and didn't raise the alarm until five hours later. So, as with Madeleine, no one can pinpoint the exact time he disappeared and, if Ben was kidnapped, the perpetrators had a head-start on their getaway."

From the Times:
Stephen decided to go off for a swim and went outside to get on his scooter. Ben asked him for a ride – he'd been on the back of the scooter before. But Stephen said no.

Kerry's brother Stephen has also suffered. He was 17 when Ben disappeared, and he was the last person to see him. After Ben's disappearance, Greek police repeatedly suggested that Stephen had been involved in a motorcycle accident with Ben, causing the boy's death, and had buried him."

[Other reports state that Stephen had been riding Ben around on the back of the scooter earlier that same day.]

From the BFI synopsis of a 2001 documentary: REAL CRIME: BEN NEEDHAM: SOMEBODY KNOWS:
"Revisits the case of Ben Needham, who disappeared ten years ago whilst the family were staying on the Greek island of Kos. No trace of him has ever been found, although there have been several reported sightings and false trails. Ben's uncle Stephen Needham undergoes hypnosis to see if he can revive any memories of the day that may prove useful. He has disquieting images of killing Ben in a motorbike accident and burying him, but since police suggested this to him on several occasions during past interogations this may not signify anything."

From a review of this documentary, based on interviews with the participating forensic scientists:
"Dr. Berry's work occasionally entails inspecting scenes of alleged crimes and, as a preliminary, he paid a visit to Kos to study the location of Ben's disappearance. According to Dr. Berry, the farmhouse is in a very isolated spot up a dirt track that leads to a dead end. He asked a local to take him to the place and this person lost his way. Dr. Berry therefore believes that the theory that gypsies arrived on the scene at an opportune moment and abducted Ben is a non-starter.

The subject of the hypnosis was Stephen Needham. His account was that, following Ben's disappearance, the Greek police had interrogated him with great forcefulness, virtually accusing him of taking Ben, having an accident in which Ben died, and burying his body. The experience was so traumatising that he had since suffered from depression, panic attacks and disturbed sleep. He was also having nightmares of the very activities that the police had suggested to him. His memory for that day was unusually poor; he had a vague idea that on leaving the farmhouse he had glimpsed Ben playing on his bike, but he could not be sure of the timing of this memory.

Unfortunately Stephen was unable to retrieve any memories of seeing Ben as he left the farmhouse and rode off. It emerged that he felt guilty about not looking back, as he might have seen something important. The final session of hypnosis ended when Mrs. Alden asked Stephen to imagine viewing the scene of his departure from the farmhouse from a detached position. He declined and ended the session himself."
User avatar
HarveyHumphries
You're Nicked
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:33 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Maddy - Reference Forum and Investigations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests
cron