Author Topic: Not forgetting little Maddy  (Read 96091 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline GROWLER

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 17808
  • Reputation: 0
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #330 on: September 13, 2007, 10:39:32 PM »
Some of the comments of those clips on the YT site, make some of the comments in here look pretty damned tame. eeek:


Not a great deal has been made of the fact that these two bird brains alledgedly left their 3 babies/infants on their own while they went out scoffing and boozing.
Just how many of US would have done the same I wonder?
None I think. noooo:

Kids of that age need to be looked over ALL of the time, or at least present in the same vicinity/building.

IF Madeline was kidnapped, surely the parents would have heard something IF they'd been within earshot, and not guffawing with their high brow chummies. evil:

I don't believe they were checking on their nippers every half hour, as was alledgedly the case. Their 'mates' by agreeing with this are mearley covering up for them, but EVERY half hour isn't / wasn't acceptable in the first place imo. They should have been with them, or have had a bloody pizza delivery at the villa.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2007, 10:50:44 PM by GROWLER »

Offline Snoopy

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 54191
  • Reputation: 0
  • In the Prime of Senility
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #331 on: September 14, 2007, 07:36:40 AM »
Pretty much what we all agreed 22 pages ago.
As a positive step, not that it will help recover the child/body or solve the mystery, I have stopped reading all newspapers. At least it stops me getting angry at the piss poor reporting and desperate, almost frantic, scrabblings of the journos for something to print.
I used to have a handle on life but it broke.

Offline TG

  • Fool Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4677
  • Reputation: 0
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #332 on: September 14, 2007, 08:01:44 AM »
OK. I'll go public.

I do not believe they did it. I cant really justify that statement beyond the fact that it makes no real sense to me.

Without re-hashing what is basically 4 months of unsubstantiated rumour and gossip I incline to the opinion that the simplest explanation is usually the right one.

What is easier to believe?

A/ Child killed accidentally/deliberatly by her own parents, body hid for 25 days, moved under nose of the worlds media and still not found. 4 months of scrutiny and no arrests.

B/ Child left unattended. Taken by predatory paedophile who spotted easy pickings or taken to order by organised peadophile gang who had been watching over the proceeding days.

Option B seems the more likely to me.

This is interesting : http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91210-1283987,00.html

At the very least it throws more mud at the Portugese police.  point:







I think my cat wants to kill me...

Offline Snoopy

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 54191
  • Reputation: 0
  • In the Prime of Senility
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #333 on: September 14, 2007, 08:03:46 AM »
Possibility c/ was that she was stolen to order ~ not for sexual purposes but to satisfy the "maternal" cravings of some rich person.
I used to have a handle on life but it broke.

Offline Uncle Mort

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 21652
  • Reputation: 2
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #334 on: September 14, 2007, 08:48:44 AM »


Also you're very selective on your use of quotations.



which is why I am considering a career in politics  whistle:



Yes, there has been a gap since Screaming Lord Sutch popped his clogs.

 ;)

Offline Darwins Selection

  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 39138
  • Reputation: 6
  • I mostly despair
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #335 on: September 14, 2007, 04:18:00 PM »


Also you're very selective on your use of quotations.



which is why I am considering a career in politics  whistle:



Yes, there has been a gap since Screaming Lord Sutch popped his clogs.

 ;)

eeek: eeek: eeek:

Is he dead?

Who have I been voting for then?
I mostly despair

Offline Snoopy

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 54191
  • Reputation: 0
  • In the Prime of Senility
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #336 on: September 15, 2007, 10:05:56 AM »
Worth  reading ~ unless you have already made up your mind or can't be arsed with posts longer than ten words.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2169867,00.html
I used to have a handle on life but it broke.

Berek

  • Guest
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #337 on: September 15, 2007, 10:49:12 AM »
the two cases can't be compared, the Lindbergh child was most likely a kidnapping for money.

One thing the McCanns COULD however have learned from it was to buy a baby monitor ( invented because of the Lindbergh case ) which would most likely have the range to be used between the bar and the apartment.. whistle:

Offline Snoopy

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 54191
  • Reputation: 0
  • In the Prime of Senility
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #338 on: September 15, 2007, 10:53:23 AM »
There is much that the Press could learn from the Lindberg case ~ which I think is the point the writer was making.
I used to have a handle on life but it broke.

Berek

  • Guest
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #339 on: September 15, 2007, 10:55:11 AM »
I read all the posts on that link you gave, heres the best :

"I have started to despise the McCanns. There is something truly irritating about them. I feel no pity for them. They have orchestrated this whole affair. I feel desperately sorry for their twins and for Maddy though. This truly mysterious case has "forced" me to buy newspapers I would never otherwise buy, and has intrigued me beyond belief for months. I loathe the way they have become media "darlings" (yes, they are being hounded by the media), but they are being courted by the glossies, and the TV stations, and just wait for the book, the novel, the film, the TV series. They will become multi-millionaires because of what has happened to them, and this is wholly unfair to the parents of the hundreds and hundreds of children that go missing in the world every year. I feel that a visit to the Pope is tantamount to a religious confession, and a request to be delivered from sin. I have two children, and I know the sacrifice involved as do other parents. It stinks that these parents have not held their twins close to them every minute of every day after their daughter went missing, and that every glimpse of them in the press was of them holding hands and walking along the beach, or her jogging, or him talking on his mobile. Their own courting of the media stinks. The money shoved their way on account of their missing daughter stinks too. How many other missing children's parents have received this kind of financial aid? How can they justify leaving Portugal for the sake of their twins? Two-year-old children are too young to have a notion of what is "normal life". For two-year-olds, being in a loving environment where their needs are fully met, with Mum and Dad is "normal". They wouldn't have any clue as to where they actually are, nor would they care. The whole business is highly suspicious, and I am sick to death of their poker faces dominating the news. God bless little Maddie, and the twins though. Joanna "


Offline Snoopy

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 54191
  • Reputation: 0
  • In the Prime of Senility
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #340 on: September 15, 2007, 11:00:53 AM »
Now that is good ~ because it avoids all the speculation and deals with things that are fact.

What is getting me down about the whole affair is the speculation. Throw enough ideas into the pot and eventually someone will be able to say "I told you so" whilst all the others will keep quiet or claim "to have know all along but not able to say because ....."

Do you think we will ever really get to the truth?
It seems unlikely to me
I used to have a handle on life but it broke.

Berek

  • Guest
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #341 on: September 15, 2007, 06:49:39 PM »
Mr Happy posted these somewhere else, i'll save him the time and nick them, this first one is interesting and i'm sure psychologists would say " liar " straight away because of him touching his ear.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMUdynuECbE&NR=1

you wouldnt like this cameraman as a mate, I can't tell if Gerry swears or not.. some reckon he does

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUcVncYr6xc&mode=related&search=

Offline Snoopy

  • Administrator
  • Power Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 54191
  • Reputation: 0
  • In the Prime of Senility
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #342 on: September 15, 2007, 06:53:54 PM »
 rubschin: This is an interesting take on matters from Sky.
Quote

Girl's Case 'May Solve McCann Mystery'

By Alex Watts
Sky News Online Reporter
Updated: 09:28, Friday September 14, 2007
Portuguese detectives have been urged to ditch their case against Gerry and Kate McCann and re-open the investigation into a girl who disappeared in similar circumstances to Madeleine.

Crime expert Mark Williams-Thomas believes there are far too many similarities between the two cases for it not to be a strong line of police inquiry.

Mr Williams-Thomas, a former detective who is now a child protection specialist, said: "I can't accept that Gerry and Kate as parents of the child could have been involved in her murder - even based on the fact that over 90% of murders are domestic-related.

"What I have difficulty in understanding is they would have killed her and stored her body for at least 25 days and left no evidence.

"At the very least the body would have started to decompose, especially in a hot country. And there was a huge risk of someone finding that body."

He believes the answer to the case may lie in the disappearance of an eight-year-old Portuguese girl in 2004.

Joana Cipriano vanished from a village just seven miles from Praia da Luz, where Madeleine disappeared.

Neither body has been found.

Joana's mother and uncle were jailed for her murder, but five police officers have now been accused of forcing false confessions out of them.

Mr Williams-Thomas believes that because of the huge doubts over the convictions, whoever abducted Joana is more than likely to be behind Madeleine's disappearance.
Joana vanished in Figueira


He said he could not understand why the police are pursuing their "ludicrous" investigation into the McCanns, when such a strong line of inquiry remains open.

He added: "There's not a single case in the UK where two children who are unknown to each other have been abducted or disappeared within a period of four years in a seven-mile radius.

"On that basis it has to be a serious line of inquiry to eliminate it as a huge coincidence.

"Portugal is a small country with very, very few abductions so two young girls vanishing out of thin air with their bodies never being recovered is something that needs to be investigated."

Joana vanished on September 12, 2004, after setting off from home in the village of Figueira to collect groceries. She never returned.

Like Madeleine McCann's case, the police investigation got off to a bad start. They failed to seal off the house where she was last seen.

Joana's mother Leonor and her brother Joao were jailed for 16 years for her murder.

But they claim they were set up and police have been named as suspects in their "torture".

Cipriano alleges police beat her to make her confess. A photograph of her heavily-bruised face was published in Portuguese newspapers.

She says the interrogation took place without her lawyer present and without the knowledge of the public prosecutor.

Police claimed Joana discovered Cipriano and her brother having sex when she returned with the groceries.

They said the pair were afraid Joana would tell what she saw and killed her.

Mr Williams-Thomas says because of the doubt over the safety of the convictions, the case should be re-opened.

But to compound the Madeleine investigation further, a senior detective in the hunt is one of the five officers alleged to have extracted the confessions.

Goncalo Amaral, who is number three in the Madeleine inquiry, and his officers have been accused of torture, omission of evidence and falsification of documents.

Portugal's Ministerio Publico has not revealed who has been accused of which offence.

Mr Williams-Thomas said: "This casts huge doubt in my mind about the integrity of the investigating officer.

"Even if we work on the basis that he is innocent, given this allegation against him, he shouldn't have anything to do with the Madeleine investigation."

He stressed: "There are so many similarities between the cases it has to be eliminated.

"Therefore to consider solely Kate and Gerry McCann as suspects rather than considering all the options is ludicrous."

The former detective also heavily criticised the Portuguese police inquiry into Madeleine's disappearance.

Commenting on their emergency application to seize Gerry McCann's laptop computer and reportedly even Madeleine's favourite toy Cuddle Cat, he said: "I think it's amazing that they haven't already seized them.

"This is the whole problem with the case. They are treating Kate and Gerry McCann as suspects but aren't dealing with them as suspects.

"Why didn't they do that when she went missing? They are back-tracking.

"They are trying to recover the situation, forensically and evidentally, they lost at the first opportunity."

Another crime expert believes even if the police do charge the McCanns they will struggle to convict them - because Madeleine's body is still missing and there is no evidence that has been made public to suggest she is even dead.

Desmond Thomas, a former deputy head of Hampshire CID who is now a forensic management consultant, says he does not believe anyone will be found guilty unless a body or weapon is discovered.

He said: "I think the Portuguese police are struggling. Of course, we cannot be sure about exactly what is in the dossier they have prepared.

"But from what we know this far, if I was bringing the charges, I would be nervous about it being successful.

"The only way I can see anyone being successfully charged is if the body is found and they can link it clearly to them."

This may be some solace to the McCanns, but then Portuguese courts may have a different conviction rate to UK courts.

After all, detectives managed to "solve" Joana's murder, and there was no body or weapon found.
I used to have a handle on life but it broke.

Misunderstood

  • Guest
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #343 on: September 15, 2007, 07:48:32 PM »
The presence of the same detective on both cases precludes any notion that the similarities in the cases have been overlooked.

It may be safely assumed then, that the police are sensitive to the accusations made of the first and keen to avoid parallel with the the second.

Everyone has skeletons in their cupboards if you look hard enough...   even the police.

Offline Barman

  • Administrator
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 153357
  • Reputation: -50
  • Since 1960...
    • Virtual Pub!
Re: Not forgetting little Maddy
« Reply #344 on: September 16, 2007, 08:28:29 AM »
I see they are planning a major advertising campaign to find her?

With a million pounds in the bank I think they?d garner more sympathy if they expanded it a little and did something worthwhile to trace all missing children, not just Maddy?  noooo:
Pro Skub  Thumbs: