That's probably the most worrying scenario in all this. If they have been saving face with stories of "regular checks" which in turn has squiffed the timeline of events then that would be very serious. It would add a whole new time frame with a much larger window for something to have happened.
Madeleine McCann
- Thread starter Fergies Gum
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
That's probably the most worrying scenario in all this. If they have been saving face with stories of "regular checks" which in turn has squiffed the timeline of events then that would be very serious. It would add a whole new time frame with a much larger window for something to have happened.
Has the guy who the Smith family saw still not come forward? If so then that's interesting, as you would expect everyone (Not the suspect) who was in the area to come forward straight away to help the police and so the police can remove them from their investigation.
You would like to have thought that the idea of saving face (if they had not been checking) would have been shelved fairly quickly once the seriousness of the situation dawned on them all. And if not fairly quickly then certainly in the intervening years.
Better to say "actually we didnt really check" than sit back and let a bad situation get worse all for saving face.
Better to say "actually we didnt really check" than sit back and let a bad situation get worse all for saving face.
Surely independent witnesses have backed up their story they they saw Gerry/Kate and the others get up turn by turn during the evening and then return back.
Its worrying that the frequency with which they were making checks seems to have changed, it's been said to have been every 15 minutes, or every hour and finally settled on every half hour. Although I've seen this refuted on t'internet, so who knows?
I suppose this is what attending the Bingo would be like.
Must have done. Staff members at the restaurant, other diners, & guests. It would be a very easy thing to disprove.
Easy to disprove? I'm not sure it would, to be fair. I don't often pay attention to whether other people in a bar/restaraunt leave their table.
To me, the biggest questions are raised by the evidence of the dogs. Even if they had come into contact with dead bodies, how could Kate and Gerry be leaving strong secondary contamination in an apartment and rental house weeks later? After how many changes of clothes and showers? And in such strange places. Not in their bedrooms, but behind a couch. What were Gerry and Kate doing behind a couch? A dead body, on the other hand.....?
And why would Kate take a child's toy to work with her? A toy which was found dumped at the bottom of an empty closet later.
There might be reasonable explanations for all of it, but we haven't heard them.
And why would Kate take a child's toy to work with her? A toy which was found dumped at the bottom of an empty closet later.
There might be reasonable explanations for all of it, but we haven't heard them.
Like what? "In the 5 minutes you were away did you kidnap my child and sell her to a kiddy fiddler?" or "Did you accidentally kill my kid and hide the body in the 5 minutes that you were away?"
You might ask if he saw something that might help the investigation but you two are saying it is obvious that he had something to do with it. Which is a very odd assumption.
A toy that she washed after her daughter's disappearance. That I cannot understand at all. As a mother myself, why would anyone wash away the remaining scent of your missing child.
No I'm not. If you'd bothered your arse to read what I'd said instead of coming out with your stupid "kinell" bollocks, you'd have seen I specifically said I didn't think he was involved, and suggested more that the holes in the story with people doing checks who'd never done them before, who barely knew the McCanns or their kids, was, in my opinion made up or embellished to sugar coat the fact that they hadn't been checking or paying attention to the safety of their kids, who were lying in unlocked hotel apartments out of their parents sight.
If someone I didn't know well offered to check on my kids on one night on my holiday, which was my second meeting with them, having never offered before, and came back saying everything is fine, then half an hour later my kid is missing and this person is now saying "well, I didn't check that well. I don't know if she was there when I looked in". Then yeah, I'd ask fecking questions. But then, I don't think the McCanns had to, because I don't think they were checking the kids as much as they say they were, if at all. And Oldfield probably wasn't in the room when he says he was.
Very interesting case and one that I sadly don't think will be solved due to the questionable initial investigation and the large amount of time that has passed from then to the present day.
Some of the main points of interest to me are:
1. The reports of Madeline crying for 75 minutes the night before the incident. This suggests to me that the Tapas 9 did not check their children as regularly as they made out. If this was the case then the time window on the night of the incident totally changes.
2. The point of entry and exit to the apartment mixed with the feasibility of carrying, without causing a disturbance, a 3 year old child away from the premises.
3. The scents detected inside the apartment, car and on cuddle cat.
My brief opinion is sadly Madeline died that very night. I am not convinced by a stranger abduction one bit.
Some of the main points of interest to me are:
1. The reports of Madeline crying for 75 minutes the night before the incident. This suggests to me that the Tapas 9 did not check their children as regularly as they made out. If this was the case then the time window on the night of the incident totally changes.
2. The point of entry and exit to the apartment mixed with the feasibility of carrying, without causing a disturbance, a 3 year old child away from the premises.
3. The scents detected inside the apartment, car and on cuddle cat.
My brief opinion is sadly Madeline died that very night. I am not convinced by a stranger abduction one bit.
'Kinell, full retard etc.
I got your back, Wibs.
I got your back, Wibs.
Cadaver dogs only give false positives about 10% of the time in lab conditions where things are very controlled and there are no distractions. In the field they are far less reliable. When there is something to find they are pretty good at finding dead bodies but are very unreliable when there is nothing to find - very frequently giving false positives - 30-80% of the time apparently. This is why such evidence isn't admissible in court. And in this case there was no body and no forensic evidence therefore this is a meaningless bit of "evidence".
I think you are inventing stuff to justify your intuitive lurches as to what happened. If you back up Cider who very much seemed to think that this guy should be questioned as if he was a suspect you can't then try to suggest you didn't meant this as well.
I don't see why all of you want to believe that the parents are being dishonest when it seems obvious that they have been and had feck all to do with her disappearance.
Back up Cider? So yeah, you didn't read it then? That's fine, we don't all like to read what it is we're referring to when we make a stupid point.
I brought up the Matthew Oldfield stuff, and suggested if it happened as they say it did I'd be asking him questions, and then suggested, rather than that I think Matthew Oldfield was involved, I think they embellished the truth with regards the checks to perhaps make it look like they were less neglectful than they really were. That's all I've accused anyone of.
What am I inventing, by the way? Everything I've said about how much they knew each other comes from the statement Matthew Oldfield made to the police. HE said they first met at a wedding (the Payne couple also part of the Tapas 9), HE said they hadn't seen each other since, HE said they weren't particularly close and rather knew each other through mutual friends, HE said the night she went missing was the first night anyone other than their parents had checked on their kids, HE offered to check on the kids even though he hadn't done before. And all this, even though the reason the McCanns gave for not getting a baby sitter was she didn't want the kids waking up to a stranger. The kids knew the baby sitters better than Oldfield, they'd been with them all week in the creche/kids club. They barely knew Oldfield.
So yes, if it happened that way I'd find this guy suspicious. But as I've said, I don't think it happened that way. I think they sugarcoated things by embellishing their checking stories, how often they were checked, who did the checking etc, because it makes them all look less neglectful.
Not sure I've seen this question asked but does anyone know if there were sightings of Maddy out and about with her parents on the day of the kidnapping?
Apparently they had the kids in a creche all day. You know, before putting them in bed and fecking off out. (Sorry Popper if I mentioned that again, but you know what? It was the cause of all this and I still don't see it as a 'footnote', I see it as the most major part and fact we know).
And I've said it quite a lot before now, and surely will again, but I'm not convinced the parents actually had anything to do with it but thank feck the police aren't stupid enough to rule them out like some have. The sad fact is until a body is recovered we simply won't know what happened. So nothing can be ruled out.
I've asked this before, but do we actually know who contacted the press that early? Because there's been some reports saying the parents did. Now unless the original police were that incompetent (and it seems they probably were), I thought that was a no-no? Because if she was still alive by that point, she sure as hell would have been killed the second her face was plastered all over the news
Re: the above ~
One of the supposedly unanswered questions was: 'Have you spoken to Sky News?'.
One of the supposedly unanswered questions was: 'Have you spoken to Sky News?'.
I know nothing about the performance of sniffer dogs, and I haven't researched it, but both the bloodhound and the specialist cadaverine dog gave positive indications in the same places, which enhances their credibility. Also, they were both taken to other apartments in the same building and gave no positive responses.
Lots of good evidence isn't admissible in court - results of lie detector tests, whereas a lot of bad evidence is regarded highly - eye witness identification of strangers, for instance. The Law is still stuck somewhere in the nineteenth century.
Apparently they had the kids in a creche all day. You know, before putting them in bed and fecking off out. (Sorry Popper if I mentioned that again, but you know what? It was the cause of all this and I still don't see it as a 'footnote', I see it as the most major part and fact we know).
And I've said it quite a lot before now, and surely will again, but I'm not convinced the parents actually had anything to do with it but thank feck the police aren't stupid enough to rule them out like some have. The sad fact is until a body is recovered we simply won't know what happened. So nothing can be ruled out.
I've asked this before, but do we actually know who contacted the press that early? Because there's been some reports saying the parents did. Now unless the original police were that incompetent (and it seems they probably were), I thought that was a no-no? Because if she was still alive by that point, she sure as hell would have been killed the second her face was plastered all over the news
I'm not sure how reliable the reports are, but there are people who have said the McCanns repeatedly went against advice in regards to publicising certain things about Maddie for the exact reason that it would increase the chances of a kidnapper killing her. It was apparently heavily advised by both British and Portuguese police that they didn't draw attention to her eye-defect, yet they even went ahead and trademarked it.
Really?
Because yes, I believe it's entirely the wrong thing to do to publicise precise details that early on. Because beyond the 3hr mark, if the child is still alive it greatly enhances the chance of one day finding them alive doesn't it? The worst thing to do is draw attention that specific and risk the kidnappers panicking. Don't get me wrong, I don't know the ins and outs, but surely one pretty little blonde girl isn't worth the sort of monetary risk that all that heat would have drawn to them? So by running to the press, that's a death sentence.
I still don't think they are the ones who did it, nor do I really believe a cover up, but it can't be denied that throughout this whole thing the parents haven't exactly come across as entirely truthful.
I'm not sure how soon they went about doing it but there seems to be quite a lot to support the idea that they were responsible for the press knowing so early on, either by contacting them directly or telling somebody else to.
The one thing that really doesn't make sense in all of the theories that they're involved is motive. I can't really think of any possible reason for them to either have her kidnapped or to kill her. There are loads of things about the case that are extremely strange to say the least, but in all honesty I just think it's going to be one of those things that we'll never actually find out what happened. A lot of their odd behaviour can probably be chalked up to covering their own arses regarding neglecting the kids.
Well, I suppose the one motive that fits is accidental death and panic.
I mean, if the mother really refused to answer questions that might help the case in the fear she was being stitched up or something like that, it would fit in with the obvious failings as a parent. I mean, I can't believe anyone cold enough to leave their kids alone all day in a creche, then by themselves at night, would place the well-being of those kids above their own in those circumstances.
Doesn't mean they're neglectful though. Selfish cnuts maybe, but that's not the same as neglectful.
That's the only thing I can think of, but I don't know how they'd get 9 friends to all be in on the act, especially considering some of them weren't actually that friendly with them. I also don't understand how they'd have acted so quickly if it was accidental death. Presumably if it was accidental it would have either been Madeline doing something while they were out, or her being given too much sedative, which has been suggested as a possible cause of her potential death.
I think regardless of whether she was kidnapped or died accidentally, the priority of her parents has definitely been to ensure that they are resolved of any wrongdoing, and that will always come before any attempts to find her. I don't think they've ever expressed any regret for leaving her on her own, and have never said anything remotely resembling a warning to other parents about that sort of parenting. Instead they've focused a lot of time, effort and money trying to discredit the work of the Portuguese police and funding projects to improve the police response times of child-kidnap cases.
I think it can be seen as neglectful in the sense that they actually neglected to spend any time with their children, day or night. Surely neglect can be defined as not providing suitably for your child both in terms of food, water, clothing etc. and in love, attention and time. The fact that they tried to say they left the children behind in the evenings to get a break from them when they'd actually been leaving them in the creche all day shows that they put themselves first at least on that holiday.
I know, I was aiming at others who have defended them. Sorry.
When my kids were pre-school age I was desperate to spend as much of the holidays with them as I could. Their mother looked after them full-time, but she wanted to share everything with them as well. We didn't have much money but we had care and love, and that's conspicuously missing with the McCanns.
Kate refused to answer any of the questions put forward to her by the Portuguese police, one of which was something like "Had you discussed or made plans to have another relative take over as primary carer of Madeline prior to this holiday?"
Since when are lie detectors good evidence? They produce far too many false positives and you'll find little real justification for their use.
Whilst I agree that lie detectors are quite shit, the point about eye witness accounts is extremely valid.
We've been through this in the thread, look up the definition of neglect yourself.
It is nothing short of neglect what they did, and continued to do. The outcome might have been worse case scenario, but that doesn't change the fact that you do not feck off out and leave your three year old daughter and younger twin children alone.
In a foreign country and in a strange room. When my kids were babies they'd wake up and cry even in their own rooms. Can you imagine Madeline waking up in a strange room and her parents are not even there to comfort her. Also the way the room was situated makes it so easy for someone to grab her and disappear, providing she was kidnapped.
Lie detectors are garbage evidence. Worse than useless because it is often misleading. And 2 different dogs having the same reaction means nothing. It just means they are reacting to the same thing but if there was nothing to find then they are still utterly unreliable. Cadaver dogs are good to locate buried bodies in a known area and for nothing else.
I didn't realise you were such an expert.
They left them alone, sleeping, in an unlocked holiday apartment in a foreign country. If that isn't neglectful I'm not sure what is.
That was one of the reasons the Portuguese think the parents are involved somehow with the girl missing.
Really. That's a very specific question.
Expert? No?
Scientist with access to and ability to read and interpret the primary literature? Yes.