Sue

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > All of which proves NOTHING. > > The McCanns reported Madeleine as missing as soon > as they realised she was missing for sure. How do you know that? > They were under the Police and media spotlight > within days if not hours of the reported > disappearance. Again nothing unusual in that. They were under the media spotlight because they courted the press right from the start. > > The chidren were checked on regularly by the > parents in turn and not left for hours. How do you know that? As they wouldn't return for a reconstruction, there is no way of knowing. And in any case, get your facts right, even the parents didn't claim they were checking them in turn. Those > parents genuinely believed their children were > safe. The intent is more important than you want > to admit How do you know what they believed or what their intent was? (having already decided they killed their > own child and covered it up). I have never said that, please read my posts and remove this statement. > > Not answering questions that can't be answered or > someone is unable to answer does not equate to non > co-operation. The list of questions asked is in the public domain, why not look them up. They were perfectly straightforward questions. Assumption by you based on biased > blogs and news reports that you have read, No, I have made no assumptions, the police files are in the public domain. One of the things this case has opened my eyes to is the total untrustworthiness of articles and comment in the press. as the > actual police interviews are not available for > public inspection in full, nor will be unless > there is a prosecution and court case. You are wrong. They are all available on the internet. The Portuguese system is different. Please get your facts right. > > Also I repeat that when people are bereaved or in > shock (even if it is laced with guilt) they > sometimes do NOT act normally. > > I could go on. In reference to the dogs...there is > NO conclusive DNA evidence (not even worth > mentioning anymore). Have you looked at the videos? Do you think both dogs were wrong? If there had been conclusive DNA evidence there would probably have been arrests by now. And if they DID detect the > death of someone in the apartment there is NO > evidence to link the McCanns to that death (or > indeed any conclusive evidence that it was > Madeleine's death). It is perfectly possible that > a third party WAS involved. I ask you again, please look at the facts. > > That is the problem with your argument. For > everything you list...all of which is just > speculation It is not speculation, please read my posts properly and none of which PROVES anything, No, and that is why there have been no arrests > there is an equally plausible and equally > speculative alternate argument. Which is what, and how is it equally plausible? > > On the leaving children unspuervised....millions > of parents do that every day. They do it to answer > the door, or to take a nap......even. Most people don't leave their children alone night after night to go out drinking. And most people don't "take a nap" when they are supposed to be looking after three children under four. Do you have any experience of children this age, DJKQ?. Some even > leave their children altogether for others to > raise and look after. You have children Sue (you > posted you have a grand-child) - did you have your > children before your eyes for every day of their > first say 13 years of life? I never left a child alone and would never ever do so. > > If the McCanns and their friends thought for one > moment that leaving their children sleeping in > apartments they could clearly see from their > dinner table They could not see inside the apartment where a child could be vomiting, choking or falling. And in any case, the apartments could not be "clearly seen" from their dinner table. for a couple of hours (whilst taking > turns to check on them regularly) It is you who is making assumptions, not me. How do you know they were checked on regularly? They have given inconsistent accounts to the police and refused to return for a reconstruction which would clarify these. would have led > to this they would never have done it. How do you know what the McCanns have done or might have done? They have > paid the ultimate price and I think it's very cold > hearted of you Sue to keep demonising them for > that mistake. I'm not demonising them. I'm interested in finding out what happened to a little girl. Both my brothers work in child protection - why shouldn't I be interested in trying to find out the truth?

mockney piers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- . Your self satisfied > gloating helps not one single person on this > planet. xxxxxxx Can you - seriously - point to anywhere where I've been "gloating"? Or "Self-satisfied"? I'm interested in the case. Full stop. ETA: DJKQ, instead of stating things as fact, please could you at least check them out first. There are plenty of resources on the internet, in fact I have given some links. And please remove your reference to my "saying that they killed their child", when if you read my posts properly you will find I have said nothing of the sort. I don't believe for a minute that they killed their child.

I've only seen The Pogues once, I think it must have been quite soon after they started out, and they were f***ing brilliant. What energy. Their version of Gentleman Soldier still makes me laugh every time I hear it :))

Well you probably wouldn't report someone missing if there was still a body about :-S And actually it's not true to say that their every move was watched afterwards, because they seemed to be constantly going jogging. Chick - you say that people posting on this thread should hang their heads in shame. I think it is the parents who should be hanging their heads in shame. Whatever happened to Madeleine, I believe that the following is not in dispute: The parents left her alone with her younger siblings even after they had been told on a previous night that she had been crying for her father for (I think) over an hour. They did not cooperate with the police investigation. Mrs McCann refused to answer 48 questions put to her by police. The only one she answered was along the lines of "Do you realise that by not answering these questions you are hindering the search for your daughter?", to which she answered "Yes". They went against police advise and publicised Madeleine's distinctive eye defect even when told that this would put her in danger because any abductor, on realising Madeleine would be immediately recognisable, would kill her. Their holiday companion/s attempted to pin Madeleine's disappearance on Robert Murat, a man living near the apartment, hence putting him through hell (I believe that he is currently suing them for their false claims). They refused to return for a reconstruction of the night Madeleine disappeared, which could have clarified the various inconsistencies in their statements. As a result, the police still do not have a clear idea of the apparent sequence of events. They dissed the police who were trying to find out what had happened to their daughter. They dissed the findings of two separate top British sniffer dogs (yes the DNA etc was too degraded for a conclusive match to be made, but the fact is that both dogs alerted in several places in an apartment from which a child had disappeared and in which nobody else had died, to Madeleine's cuddly toy, and to items of Mrs McCann's clothing) You can actually see a video of the dogs alerting - I will try to find the link to it. When the case was shelved, the McCanns could have requested that it be reopened. There was a window of opportunity in which legally they were able to do that. They didn't. You can read much of the police files online, such as witness statements, though I presume some evidence will have been withheld when the police published the rest. I will try to find the link. And for those who think I should not have started this thread - what is wrong with a society which criticises someone bringing to people's attention facts to counteract the spin of a paid "spokesman" (Clarence Mitchell), rather than criticising the parents who whatever way you look at it failed their little children? Here's one link to a site which has a lot of information: http://www.mccannfiles.com/ Here's a link to videos of the dogs alerting: http://www.mccannfiles.com/id167.html

HAL9000 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I know you're a fan of this remedy - breaking > news: Echinacea no help for colds: study. xxxxxxx That's weird, because since I stopped taking echinacia every day (last eighteen months, laziness more than deliberate) I've had more colds and bugs than I can ever remember :-S

F*** forgot they were on :-$

Bastards.

Where is the lead from, very old paint? Have you spoken to your GP?

Sadly I don't think it was still intact by Sunday afternoon :-S

SeanMacGabhann Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't think the Trip was even billed as a comedy > outright anyway - more of a pathos-filled drama xxxxxxxx It was certainly pathos-filled, but not in a good way :))

I think Miranda Hart's show is terrible, really weak material. But I also thought that latest Steve Coogan thing The Trip was unwatchable, and it got rave reviews. Humour is a funny thing (no pun intended), would be a dull old world if we all laughed at the same things, etc etc etc

Mine's been OK lately, admin. But LadyMuck, if it was something at your end, surely you would have had similar problems with other websites, rather than just this one?

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The two patio doors, to the McCanns apartment at > the back of the villa, in plain view of the Tapas > Bar, were left unlocked. All other doors were > locked. xxxxxxx I understand that the McCanns originally said that doors were locked and that the shutters to the apartment had been forced from the outside. When it was shown that in fact the shutters had been opened from the inside, they then said that entry was via an unlocked door and exit through the window (strange for someone to exit through a window rather than back the way they'd come!). Apart from the lack of any stranger's fingerprints (and yes they could have worn gloves), apparently lichen on the windowsill in question was undisturbed, plus the size and position of the window was such that it would have been almost impossible for somebody to climb through it whilst carrying a child. So far as the money raising is concerned, a large amount of money was apparently spent on private investigators who apparently had no expertise or even experience in searching for missing children.

louisiana Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- most middle class parents don't > kill their own children, on holiday or at any > other time. xxxxxxxx I never suggested anybody had killed anybody. I suggested there could have been an accident whilst a small child was left unattended. And DJKQ, the apartment was left unlocked.

Statistically, the vast majority of child disappearances are linked to the parents. A tiny percentage is due to abduction by a stranger.

R.I.P.

Great pics, Twirly! I nearly ran over a young fox a few days back - it ran across the road from Goose Green. Foxes have been making hideous noises in my back garden, but sadly unlike last year don't seem to be sleeping there :(

ImpetuousVrouw Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Was the door to the apartment unlocked? If so why > di the alleged abductor take the child out of the > window? xxxxxxx Just one of the many questions around this case. And why were the only fingerprints found on the window those of Kate McCann? And why did the parents claim that the shutters had been forced open, when in fact they hadn't been?

If anyone reading this needs help in the North Cross Road/Ulverscroft Road area, please PM me. I have a family get together tomorrow (assuming anyone can actually get to it ....) but will pick up your messages ASAP.

reggie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The scary thing about suspicion is that once that > thought is established then all manner of evidence > comes along to back up that suspicion. It was the > same with the 'dingo got my baby' case. Also the > Ozzie outback murder. Both cases had loads of > strange unanswered questions which will never be > properly explained. Both defendants were > unappealing, cold women. > Sue I think your anger at the parents is > increasing your suspicion. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx I've read quite a lot about the case, and my suspicion is based on what I've read which is based on the police files. ETA: If there was any evidence pointing towards an abduction, then that would alter things. I hope I'm open minded enough to take into account anything which contradicts my current view. Signing off now for the night .....

DJKillaQueen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To be fair it wasn't quite the mindless act you > describe. The villa was in clear sight of the > Tapas place Actually the relevant part of it wasn't and the parents collectively checked > on them periodically. There is only their word for when the checks were made, and they and their holiday pals "declined" to return to Portugal for a reconstruction of the night in question. Yes I agree leaving children > that young unsupervised is wreckless but all the > parents clearly thought their children were safe > (albiet wrongly so). Intent is a very important > consideration. Well clearly they thought there was no danger of a child choking, falling, wandering out of the unlocked apartment or anything else - and these are doctors. > > Certainly the evidence presented by the Inspector > you refer to seems compelling but there are very > good reasons why there has been no arrest or > prosecution of the McCanns. Yes, there are - there is insufficient evidence which would stand up in a Portuguese court The DNA evidence isn't > conclusive. This is a technical issue, but I understand that most of the markers matched Madeleine's and that in some countries this would have been sufficient in law. However I cannot follow all the scientific discussions about it, duh. Also given that both the McCanns are > Doctors, Cavadar is something they'll regularly > come into contact with. I understand that Gerry McCann's job does not involve contact with patients. Kate McCann was a part-time GP who I understand claimed to have come into direct contact with SIX!! (I think) bodies in the week (I think) before they went on holiday. When the cadaver dog alerted to Madeleine's cuddly toy (which incidentally I understand that Kate McCann washed when she found out the sniffer dogs were coming to Portugal) she apparently claimed that this was because she took it to work. She took her child's toy with her when she was going to see dead bodies??? I simply don't accept that > any parent finding their child injured, or dead, > would do anything but call an ambulance > (especially two parents who are doctors - even > though they'd have known full well if the child > was dead). Well it would depend on what they felt they needed to hide about the circumstances in which such a thing had happened. Even if Madeleine died in the apartment > after an accident, there is no evidence to say > that the McCanns were involved in any kind of > cover up. The Hire Car was after all a hire car > and explains why the DNA evidence taken from it > was so low and contained multiple markers. It > reminds me of the countless theories around the > death of JFK when all along it was one man who > pulled thrigger that day, and one man only. Lot's > of factors that can be put together in any number > of ways. I think it is necessary to look at all the indicative factors together. The dogs alerted to that hire car and to no other car, in the same way that they alerted only to the McCann's apartment. > > I think the McCanns are suffering enough for > having lost their child (esp if the truth is that > she died from an accident - and they have to live > with that forever). It will make no difference to > Madeleine if she is dead, whatever the truth is. > One thing is certain though. The McCanns didn't > leave their children in that apartment intending > to see one of them die that night. Pursuing some > vain hope of convicting them and putting yet two > more children at the mercy of the care system > seems pointless to me. If they had behaved differently then yes I would have agreed. Seeing them courting what seems to me to be dangerously close to celebrity status, seeing them smiling and laughing for the press on what would have been Madeleine's fourth birthday, seeing them planning events to mark, for example, the first anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance long beforehand, when they could not have known she would not be found, seeing them hiring lawyers as soon as she disappeared, many many other things - they do not cause me to have sympathy for them, I'm afraid. Sorry, maybe I'm just heartless, but my sympathies are all for the child.

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well yeah, but when I said "wrong", I was thinking > along more sinister lines. Of that, there is no > proof. xxxxx If there was proof, they'd have been prosecuted. There is indicative (but not conclusive) evidence, plus evidence which is not admissible in a Portuguese court. For example permission has to be sought to monitor a phone in advance of the calls/texts. Because obviously nobody knew that a child was going to disappear, evidence from mobile phone messages which could otherwise have been used, cannot be. There is no evidence at all of an abduction. Chick, you say this thread is sick. I think it is sicker that two parents left three little children under four in a dark, unlocked, unfamiliar apartment in a foreign country while they went out on the piss with their friends. And not just once - night after night. I'm interested in finding out what happened, and why a lovely little girl (who was the same age as my oldest granddaughter is now) has disappeared. I recognise that nobody may ever know - apart from those directly involved, of course. But I remain hopeful that the truth will out eventually.

There were Shelter chuggers in Lordship Lane today in that sort of area, was he one of them? If so, you could complain to Shelter. Perhaps he'd come in out of the rain .....

Keef Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Equally, you seem to have decided out of hand, > that it's a nonsense. xxxx I'm assuming you're responding to Curmudgeon and not to me :))

paragon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > Sue - do you think they killed her? xxxxxxx No. And Sr Amaral is not saying that either. He is repeating information which is already in the public domain from the police files, and repeating what was the conclusion of the official investigation. My personal opinion, and I stress it's only that, having looked at what information is publicly available and appears to be credible (as opposed to many of the press reports) is that she probably died whilst left alone, probably from a fall onto a hard floor in the dark, and that if that did in fact happen then for whatever reason the parents somehow covered it up. Curmudgeon, you are living up to your name, I see. If you were a parent, and two highly trained and highly respected British sniffer dogs both independently alerted, one to blood and one to cadaver odour, at identical places in an apartment from where your child had gone missing and where nobody else had died, what would be your reaction? Mine would be absolute despair. Theirs was to immediately discredit the dogs. I'm interested in this case for various reasons, but I can fully understand other people not being, or thinking it's all old news. But please make constructive comments if you want to post.