Madeleine Mccann

I can't quite put my finger on it, but there's been something odd about the way the parents have behaved since Madeleine's disappearance/death.

A few questions continue to puzzle me:

When the mother said "they've taken her", who are "they"?

Why was the window and shutter opened from the inside of the room?

How/why did Madeleine's teddy bear come to be placed on a ledge out of reach of the children?
 
What she said is disputed. In the first case one assumes a fair number of the people who heard her, wouldn't necessarily be able to speak English, and those who did, (including the mother) were well stuck into the vino by then, so wouldn't constitute reliable witnesses?

That windows and shutters had been opened to aid sleep in a Southern Mediterranean country isn't unusual?

The teddy bear might have been taken away from her as punishment?

There's 'reasonable doubt' at every turn. If the parents had done the deed, I can't see how they'd keep a body in those temperatures without the aid of a deep freezer for 25 days before someone detected it with half Europes media on top of them?

Initially I was being flippant when I suggested that the decision to sue the paper might have been a contributory factor. All of a sudden I'm less than sure. The paper so far as I can establish is indeed the local rag called Tal & Qual. It's a weekly production with a circulation of just 27,000, and has a reputation for excitable sensationalism, without necessarily being well regarded for its proximity to police sources previously.

The McCanns had already wreaked havoc on the tourist season, and now a local employer, who might not be able to withstand a heavy damages suit, was under their direct threat, although the legal papers served named the Editor and Journalist. Some slightly damaging relationships between the local police and media might have come to light as a result of any hearing? but then again the media consensus seemed to be that Tal & Qual weren't particularly well connected. I know from my own experience that an informal relationship exists between a local authority and the local media (but that's no guarantee the same thing applies in Portugal of course). I don't see why at face value though the same mutual self interests shouldn't apply? One side wants to secure sympathetic coverage, the other side knows that the other is a good carousel of stories and thus makes one's job a lot easier, as such a slightly uneasy sense of co-operation where mutual interests are observed can develop.

The libel case now appears dead in the water. It strikes me as slightly odd that a week after filing a 6 page libel action against the local newspaper, they've been charged and effectively driven out of the resort by proxy. It would be equally odd though, to think that such a small newspaper, with the glare of the worlds media on them could precipitate such a police action, (unless there were close friendships or low level corruption involved?). Critically when the stories were first emerging and being published the police strenuously denied the McCanns were suspects. It's only when they filed the libel action though, that this position seems to have changed.

We'll know soon enough. The police might just go quiet now? If the objective was to rid the resort of the McCanns, then it will have worked. It's impossible to think they could return now unilaterally, as it will become increasingly apparent to them how resented they'd become, and the longer they stay in Rothley the less likely they'll be to want to return. Why would they? and to what end? the obvious thing to do would be to consolidate and come to terms with what's happened away from the Goldfish bowl they'd sucked themselves into. If I'd lost someone under these circumstances I think it would be only a little matter of time before I couldn't face the prospect of even contemplating getting back on a plane knowing I was flying back to the same resort, to see all those painfully places, whilst being acutely aware that not one person there wants to me to be around.

By imposing the arguido status on them, (sounds like a gunpowder plotter) they've also gone a long way towards gagging them, and preventing them from launching a campaign from the UK against the police. I'd be less than confident that the Portugese authorities really want to conduct a show trial that has all the possibilities of going badly wrong and becoming something of a national embarrassment if it ends up putting the police handling of the investigation in the dock. They'll have needed to engage in an old fashioned fit up to achieve a conviction, and with all the meaningful forensic analysis having been evaluated and logged in the UK it's going to be difficult to achieve.
 
Originally posted by Gearoid+Sep 8 2007, 10:23 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Gearoid @ Sep 8 2007, 10:23 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Headstrong@Sep 8 2007, 10:10 PM
so it's head was hanging out, face showing - and clearly visible to all the paparazzi. That makes me uncomfortable.
Talk about reading too much into nothing. [/b][/quote]
Sorry, but I think that kind of artfulness in this situation is a bit creepy. And there's no way Kate McC's 'use' if you will of that cuddelcat toy has been anything but artful. I've had I suppose a certain amount of training in visual interpretation, and maybe that makes me sensitive to such things - it doesn't mean I'm reading something into things which aren't there. I've been noticing things like that in all the media coverage.

On the other hand, it certainly doesn't follow that she is guilty of anything. As Gal put it: "I personally think they are innocent of any wrong doing...could be wrong but its just a gut instinct." I'll say amen to that until anything resmbling proof to the contrary turns up.
 
Warbler, the significance about the window and shutters being opened from the inside is that the parents said they must have been forced open from the outside, which has been shown to be untrue.
 
One aspect I find slightly strange is that Kate McCann washed the cuddle toy because she said it was getting dirty; instinctively, I would think that if you were keeping a childs toy to remind you of that child, washing it (and therefore diluting or destroying the link with the child) would be the very last thing you would want to do. What do others think?
 
Totally agree, Rory & Venusian. As I have said for a while there are quite a few things about this case that just don't add up. Clearly, not enough for them to be charged for any wrongdoing but just things that continue to vex me. shrug::
 
Oh come on, people are only voicing their opinions as to what they think may possibly have gone on - after all every daily paper from here to Portugal also does so on a daily basis. I didn't think the thought police had been unleashed in this country quite yet.

The McCanns must realistically have expected that there was a large possibility of them being made suspects, after all those relatives closest to the victim are always scrutinised more closely. My own personal opinion is that the public outrage coming from them over being looked into seems slightly bizarre to say the least - surely you'd be willing and happy to be eliminated from any enquiries whilst hoping the police are being as thorough as they possibly can be?
 
True, except that the time for the police to interrogate them would have been as part of a through and painstaking enquiry into what happened right at the start. I think they would have accepted that more readily then, and so would the public - but coming so long after DNA has degraded, it's pretty hard to accept. The strong inference that the police are using a kind of blackmail and giving negative briefings to the local press is also pretty horrible. From everything the family has said in the last few days, it's clear they feel they are being 'fitted up' to save the face of the Portuguese.

One [tabloid] paper yesterday carried a story that the main policeman in charge of the case is under investigation for battering a woman from a village only a few miles from Praia de Luz, accused and found guilty of killing her daughter - no body has ever been found. The woman claims she was set up by the police, whom she is suing for battery. She's still in jail, and has received little sympathy.

One other point which struck me reading press reports yesterday: local women have it seems turned against Kate McC because 'she hasn't wept for her daughter'. Well, I'm sure she has, but not in front of the media. They should remember she is a DOCTOR - she's trained not to show her emotions or react overtly to bad news.

There are two matters of general interest arising out of all this, for me, aside form the personal tragedy:

1] As Princess Di discovered, the press is a tiger you cannot ride with impunity - it will always turn on you in the end
2] Signing this new EU 'treaty' will enmesh us even closer into a shared European legal system.
As someone who has lived in Spain, France and Italy, that fills me with foreboding. This case - even more than relatively trivial ones like the "Greek plane spotters" a few years ago, demonstrates how very different standards of policing are in most of the EU, and how far the continental legal system differs from our own.
 
Originally posted by Venusian@Sep 10 2007, 06:21 PM
Warbler, the significance about the window and shutters being opened from the inside is that the parents said they must have been forced open from the outside, which has been shown to be untrue.
Accepted,

I didn't realise the significance.

Apologies
 
2] Signing this new EU 'treaty' will enmesh us even closer into a shared European legal system.
As someone who has lived in Spain, France and Italy, that fills me with foreboding. This case - even more than relatively trivial ones like the "Greek plane spotters" a few years ago, demonstrates how very different standards of policing are in most of the EU, and how far the continental legal system differs from our own.

If the British legal system is so superior then it is to everyone's benefit that the rest of Europe is 'enmeshed even closer' to it.
 
I wouldnt know whether the british legal system is superior but its pretty well respected throughout the world, tahts not a secret

Talking about this in my office you find that so many are simply judging the facts on the profile of the parents. The best one ive heard is that the Renault (which seems to be the key to the whole case now ..and if the matched dna is confirmed as coming from a certain type of sample, will certainly lead to a charge) must have been used by the murderer before the Mccanns hired it

Talk about denial

because they are nice doctors then they must be inoocent (dare we mention shipman)

Thank god they werent cockney estate agents

I have an open mind about all of this, but i get the feeling that the british public could be in for a bit of a shock quite soon
 
The news of the 100% DNA match splashed across the papers this morning has been denied by Portuguese police.
 
Portuguese police have played down reports that DNA evidence with a 100% match to Madeleine was found in her parents' hire car.

As per the BBC. Not quite denied

Also Sky News and the Times today report the match pretty confidently
 
From the Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...1/wmaddy111.xml

However, Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa, spokesman for the police investigation, denied the DNA reports to Portuguese journalists last night.

Alipio Ribeiro, national director of the investigative Policia Judiciaria (PJ), also suggested that the forensic tests had not been conclusive. He told Portuguese state broadcaster RTP: "We can't say with certainty whether it was the blood of person 'A' or person 'B'.

From the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/story/0,,-6912308,00.html

But Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa, spokesman for the police investigation, denied the report to Portuguese journalists.

Alipio Ribeiro, head of the investigative Policia Judiciaria, also suggested that the forensic tests had not been conclusive.

shrug::
 
Originally posted by Venusian@Sep 10 2007, 06:21 PM
Warbler, the significance about the window and shutters being opened from the inside is that the parents said they must have been forced open from the outside, which has been shown to be untrue.
It's also irrelevant, because by all accounts they didn't lock the doors! - which in a corner flat, on the ground floor, of which the kids' bedroom window was facing ontot he street on the OTHER side of the block away from the pool/restaurant area, is pretty irresponsible, esp as the kid was known to have walked in her sleep...

Which make sit all the more bizarre that Kate's immediate reaction was that the kid had been snatched - 'taken' was the word she used in all eyewitness accounts - when most people's reaction would have been the same as that of the Portuguese police, ie that Maddie had woken disoriented, and wandered off in search of her parents. It seems Kate was adamant this couldn't have and hadn't happened - why?

As I've said here or elsewhere, parents do tend to behave with a lot less nous when on holiday than at home - I know mine were much less careful and controlling, to an amazing extent.

Rory's point about the toy being washed is also good - I even kept my dog's blanket out of her basket for almost a year before washing it, after she died - until it hadn't a trace of smell left on it. But then, Kate is a doctor, and/so maybe she's a hygiene freak.

It's all these little niggles which make us keep to some extent an open mind in this dreadful and horribly riveting case
 
Originally posted by Headstrong@Sep 11 2007, 04:28 PM
I even kept my dog's blanket out of her basket for almost a year before washing it, after she died - until it hadn't a trace of smell left on it.
Glad I am not the only one who has done that, I have a drawer in my welshdresser full of collars/blankets/coat of the two cats & one dog we lost last autumn & I would not even think about washing them at the moment cry
 
Headstrong, the significance (to me) about the open window and shutters are:

1. The parents both said they must have been forced open from the outside, but this has been shown to be untrue. They had been opened from the inside.

2. If an intruder had walked in through the unlocked patio door, then why would he/she open the window and shutters before leaving?
 
Back
Top