Madeleine McCann

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

ronivek wrote: »

The most telling fact about the indication on the McCann's hired car is that it was only hired some 3+ weeks after Madeleine disappeared.

I don't see how anyone could believe the McCann's or anyone closely associated with them would have been able to conceal a body for that long and then transport it in that car without some physical trace left somewhere; when they weren't under direct Police surveillance they were being mobbed 24/7 by journalists.

Did it have to be a body?

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

nc6000 wrote: »

The handler also doesn't touch or tap the other cars.

The handler explains the dog sniffing the air was a reaction from the dog that he had found the scent in the air of what he was looking for. The trained handler then had to tie him down. If you look back at the dogs reactions, the dog changed when he got around the McCanns car.

cgcsb

Something Else

ronivek wrote: »

The most telling fact about the indication on the McCann's hired car is that it was only hired some 3+ weeks after Madeleine disappeared.

I don't see how anyone could believe the McCann's or anyone closely associated with them would have been able to conceal a body for that long and then transport it in that car without some physical trace left somewhere; when they weren't under direct Police surveillance they were being mobbed 24/7 by journalists.

The body didn't have to be in the car just an item in close contact with it. An item of clothing perhaps. The McCanns freezing the body then moving it was a tall tale by the Portuguese police. Years earlier they had convicted a local woman of killing her daughter not long before in another bizzar story involving a fridge that was also not true. The police liked fridge storeys.

Kidchameleon

There's no way the McCanns hid Maddies body & moved it later whilst under the watch of the worlds media & police, just no way. Its the most ridiculous tale put forward by the anti McCann crowd.

Regarding the shutters, these could have been opened by the intruder even if he/she had no intention of using them as an exit. Reason being, that window would act as an emergency getaway point should one of the parents come back to the apartment. Opening the shutters would have been a contingency tactic.

Regarding not leaving any physical evidence. If you are going to abduct a child, you wear baggies of your feet, gloves on your hands and perhaps a surgical mask* on your face - no physical evidence, simple.

Regarding Kate saying "they've taken her". She saw the covers folded back, Cuddle Cat placed to the side and the shutters open. Its was pretty obvious Maddie was taken from those facts alone. Now, she should not have left the twins there whilst she ran out to alert the others but she was in a highly stressful situation. None of us know what it is like to find your child has been abducted. None of us will ever know what state of mind Kate was in in those few moments. We cannot judge her on her actions because we will NEVER understand.

Regarding the sniffer dogs. The handler himself said the alerts must be analyzed along with physical evidence. There was no physical evidence in this case so the dogs alerts are irrelevant. Also, it was plainly obvious which car was the hire car in that video. All the other ones were civilian looking bangers, the McCann car stood out a mile. I'd be pretty sure there was some kind of hire car company type sticker on it somewhere too.

Lastly, to all the people arguing with the McCann haters here... Christian B could release a video of himself raping Maddie for hours and then cutting up her body into pieces and these same posters would find a way to blame the parents. Your wasting your time trying to change their minds. They don't believe what they are saying anyway, they are playing with you.

* Children raped in PDL in the past reported a man getting into their bed wearing a surgical mask. These incidents happened whilst the parents were in the apartment.

cgcsb

Something Else

Kidchameleon wrote: »

There's no way the McCanns hid Maddies body & moved it later whilst under the watch of the worlds media & police, just no way. Its the most ridiculous tale put forward by the anti McCann crowd.

I doubt that's the case, but the police came up with that scenario. If the McCanns are guilty there are other ways to explain it.

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Regarding the shutters, these could have been opened by the intruder even if he/she had no intention of using them as an exit. Reason being, that window would act as an emergency getaway point should one of the parents come back to the apartment. Opening the shutters would have been a contingency tactic.

The abductor could only open them from inside. If he was already inside why bother with the shutters, just grab the kid and leave from the door. The window was a fair drop down to street level, not the most practical escape.

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Regarding Kate saying "they've taken her". She saw the covers folded back, Cuddle Cat placed to the side and the shutters open. Its was pretty obvious Maddie was taken from those facts alone.

Not sure how that would conclude anything at all. Sounds like McCann fandom really.

Kidchameleon

cgcsb wrote: »

The abductor could only open them from inside. If he was already inside why bother with the shutters, just grab the kid and leave from the door. The window was a fair drop down to street level, not the most practical escape.

The shutters can be opened from the outside and they are far from a "fair drop" down. Here is irrefutable evidence of these facts which you will no doubt get yourself into a spaghetti twist of bs to try and deny:

punchdrunk

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Kidchameleon wrote: »

The shutters can be opened from the outside and they are far from a "fair drop" down. Here is irrefutable evidence of these facts which you will no doubt get yourself into a spaghetti twist of bs to try and deny:

the shutter won't stay up but anyone familiar with the apartments would know that and bring something handy like a short plank to hold them open,
or have an accomplice hold it up

Kidchameleon

punchdrunk wrote: »

the shutter won't stay up but anyone familiar with the apartments would know that and bring something handy like a short plank to hold them open,
or have an accomplice hold it up

These kinds of shutters can get blocked causing them not to open fully. Id imagine the shutters in your average holiday complex go though various states of repair/disrepair regularly. You will also find many brands will have a mechanism that allows them to be opened set at a certain height.

Creol1

Something Else

cnocbui wrote: »

I'm not aware of one, it's something I worked out from looking at the individual cases where they were employed. Haut de la Garenne, on Jersey, where false reporting by the dogs lead to the wasting of £20,000,000. The disappearance of Shannon Mathews, where the dogs reported on her gruesome death, only for her to found miraculously alive. The case in the US where the dogs indicated death in the garage, only for the body of the missing person to be discovered tens of miles away. And of course Madeline, where no trace of blood was ever found where indicated and no forensic evidence found whatsoever, in the several places where cadaverine was supposedly present.

At least they were consistent. I have never understood why people haven't been suspicious when a bloke starts bragging about how he threw away the normal Police mandated training procedures and came up with his own much more effective unapproved ones. In many other avenues of life where professional conduct is expected, such things would have triggered some serious prat alerts and questions and suspicions would have been raised.

In what sense exactly did the dogs "report" on Shannon Matthews' "gruesome death"?

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

Creol1 wrote: »

In what sense exactly did the dogs "report" on Shannon Matthews' "gruesome death"?

:pac: Imagine if the dogs got a scent from the German peados van? The McCann defenders would be all over it!

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Dogs can only be used to corroborate physical evidence, of which there is none against the McCanns.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

Dogs can only be used to corroborate physical evidence, of which there is none against the McCanns.

You mean of which there's none against anyone?

The video is definitely one that gives some support to those who think the McCanns may have played a part.

nc6000 wrote: »

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

:pac: Imagine if the dogs got a scent from the German peados van? The McCann defenders would be all over it!

A scent? A scent of what? As we know, an alert means nothing unless backed up with something substantial.
It would be strange however if Madeline’s DNA components were found in the back of his van alright, what with her never having been in it or met the guy before. Now that would be interesting.

Bet you thought you were really clever writing that though.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

You mean of which there's none against anyone?

The video is definitely one that gives some support to those who think the McCanns may have played a part.

Do you not see the handler calling the dog back 3/4 times after it runs away, until it gives a reaction? He does that to no other car in the car park.

The video supports nothing. The handler made it very that the positive reaction can only be used to support physical evidence. Of which there is none against the McCanns.

retro:electro

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

Very grainy video

:pac:

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

There was also the scent of corpse in the apartment and on Madeleine's toy. So it's not just the van. You can see why some believe the McCanns had some part to play in it.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

Do you not see the handler calling the dog back 3/4 times after it runs away, until it gives a reaction? He does that to no other car in the car park.

The video supports nothing. The handler made it very that the positive reaction can only be used to support physical evidence. Of which there is none against the McCanns.

Look at the video again and then listen to what the expert says about it.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

Then, of course, there was the lies from the McCanns. Why would they lie when their 3 year old daughter went missing? Were they ashamed of their behaviour going partying and leaving their kids on their own? Or was it more sinister?

With very little evidence to go on, you can see why the McCanns became suspects.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

There was also the scent of corpse in the apartment and on Madeleine's toy. So it's not just the van. You can see why some believe the McCanns had some part to play in it.

Those dogs were retired not long after that case because of poor performance. They gave indication that another child had died, who was later found to be safe and well. How do you explain that?
They rented the car 25 days after Madeleine disappeared, so in order for the scent of her corpse to be present, you’ll have to explain how and where they hid her body for over 3 weeks.

They can only be used to corroborate existing physical evidence. Of which there is absolutely zero. That’s the bottom line here.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Then, of course, there was the lies from the McCanns. Why would they lie when their 3 year old daughter went missing? Were they ashamed of their behaviour going partying and leaving their kids on their own? Or was it more sinister?

With very little evidence to go on, you can see why the McCanns became suspects.

Going out for tapas & wine is not going out partying, no matter how many times you try to insist it is. It’s very strange that you’ve chosen this as your hill to die on but the fact that you keep repeating it shows you have no genuine interest in discussing the case and you are only interested in muddying the waters with misleading statements.

Going out for tapas in wine in a quiet hotel restaurant is not ‘going partying’ to anyone except you.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

Those dogs were retired not long after that case because of poor performance. They gave indication that another child had died, who was later found to be safe and well. How do you explain that?
They rented the car 25 days after Madeleine disappeared, so in order for the scent of her corpse to be present, you’ll have to explain how and where they hid her body for over 3 weeks.

They can only be used to corroborate existing physical evidence. Of which there is absolutely zero. That’s the bottom line here.

Hey, I'm just going on the work of the experts. Who are we to argue with them? It raises suspicions for sure. Especially with no suspects and no other evidence.

Problem is now, we're unlikely to ever know. Unless someone comes out and confesses and directs police to where the body was left.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Hey, I'm just going on the work of the experts. Who are we to argue with them? It raises suspicions for sure. Especially with no suspects and no other evidence.

Problem is now, we're unlikely to ever know. Unless someone comes out and confesses and directs police to where the body was left.

Absolutely, I wholeheartedly trust the expert who has made it clear on many occasions that the dogs can only be used to support existing physical evidence.

Christian B is a pretty solid suspect if you are open to the idea that anyone besides the McCanns are responsible for Madeleine disappearing.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

Going out for tapas & wine is not going out partying, no matter how many times you try to insist it is. It’s very strange that you’ve chosen this as your hill to die on but the fact that you keep repeating it shows you have no genuine interest in discussing the case and you are only interested in muddying the waters with misleading statements.

Going out for tapas in wine in a quiet hotel restaurant is not ‘going partying’ to anyone except you.

What are you talking about hill to die on? We're discussing the disappearance of a 3 year old. Stop being so argumentative. They were at a dinner party. There's no point in denying facts.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

What are you talking about hill to die on? We're discussing the disappearance of a 3 year old. Stop being so argumentative. They were at a dinner party. There's no point in denying facts.

Yes, exactly, they were at a dinner party. Glad we’re sticking to the facts here.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

Absolutely, I wholeheartedly trust the expert who has made it clear on many occasions that the dogs can only be used to support existing physical evidence.

Christian B is a pretty solid suspect if you are open to the idea that anyone besides the McCanns are responsible for Madeleine disappearing.

Yes, we have to trust the experts. He really makes it clear what happens when the dog gets the scent near the McCanns car. Even from a casual eye, you can see completely different behaviour from the dog, obviously, the expert dog handler could tell more than what we observed.

What evidence is there that Christain B did it?

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

SusieBlue wrote: »

Yes, exactly, they were at a dinner party. Glad we’re sticking to the facts here.

You're the one that was denying they were out partying! You've accepted it now, let's move on.

Spanish Eyes

Everyone should have an open mind. But many do not.

The only thing that I know is totally true is the fact that three babies were left in an unlocked flat on their own.

Bet the money, credit cards etc. Were in the parents pockets on the night.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

Yes, we have to trust the experts. He really makes it clear what happens when the dog gets the scent near the McCanns car. Even from a casual eye, you can see completely different behaviour from the dog, obviously, the expert dog handler could tell more than what we observed.

What evidence is there that Christain B did it?

He also called the dogs back 3/4 times when they had moved on to other vehicles, until they gave a positive reaction. That grainy video is a joke.
How do you explain the positive reaction the dogs gave indicating a child who was alive and well was actually dead, on another case? Would it maybe be because the dogs aren’t infallible?

Plenty of evidence to arouse suspicion with Christian B. You are familiar with these threads so I won’t waste my time rehashing all the details for you. If you yourself can’t see any reason why he has come to their attention I won’t waste my time trying to convince you.
It’s dishonest to say there’s no other suspects when the police are presently questioning one, though.

callmehal

Accident happened, parents hid body

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Everyone should have an open mind. But many do not.

The only thing that I know is totally true is the fact that three babies were left in an unlocked flat on their own.

Bet the money, credit cards etc. Were in the parents pockets on the night.

That's the sad reality, isn't it? For a lot of people, they have kids and that's it. Their whole world will be about the kids forever. Every moment they'll want to spend with them.

For others, that's not the case. Not saying it's the worst thing in the world but the McCanns put a party above their kids. It's sad that it had such disastrous results.

SusieBlue

She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)

callmehal wrote: »

You're the one that was denying they were out partying! You've accepted it now, let's move on.

:pac: :pac: :pac: I agreed that they were at a dinner party, I do not agree that they were out partying. There is a difference. :pac: