Madeleine McCann

Jequ0n

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120657609#Comment_120657609

But he’s right. What’s the point spending exorbitant amounts of money on what is now a cold case that has little chance of being solved. Enough money was pumped into this while other (more recent) cases are being sidelined.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120657435#Comment_120657435

But more evidence available for that than the abduction theory (where the mission impossible theme could also be played). The cadaver dog evidence didn't necessarily have to point the finger towards the McCann's, their reaction to it raised a lot of suspicions.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120657655#Comment_120657655

That would be one component. A larger one would be planning how to behave on the night in order to make things look convincing. And that would have been only one of the tasks necessary to cover up an accidental killing and pass it off as an abduction. Quite an evening's itinerary, given the timeline.

It was a possibility that was investigated by police at the time, but it lead to the conclusion that there was nothing to link the McCanns to Madeleine's disappearance, and it would appear that the only standing/credible/still being worked off of theory at this time is that Madeleine was taken by a 3rd party.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120657780#Comment_120657780

I refer you to my response to lbunnae in that the evidence against the McCanns was investigated but the police didn't appear to think that it had enough weight. This leaves the abduction one as the only really serious theory left standing (i.e. not just what people are saying, but what law enforcement are actually working off of).

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120657928#Comment_120657928

Not having enough weight to charge doesn't tell us anything really about their guilt or otherwise. There's not enough evidence of an abduction and you think that's true. The cadavar dog evidence is the strongest we have. The dogs didn't indicate anything in other searches, only in the McCann apartment, their rented car, Madeleine's toy and Kate's clothes. The McCann's panicked when they heard about the findings. Their lawyers instantly tried to discredit it. The McCann's got a flight out of Portugal soon after. It's a major shame that this evidence wasn't looked into more deeply. Follow up tests and searches etc. It might have given us a clearer idea if someone harmed Madeleine in the apartment, an intruder or possibly from dying accidentally.

Stevie2001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120655006#Comment_120655006

Being a GP doesn't mean your responsible.

What they did was insanity

2 year olds are well able to walk and they climb on everything, they could have easily got up and walked around the apartment that night and got badly hurt and a nearly 4 year old isn't a lot better.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658197#Comment_120658197

It does tell us something in the legal sense. It won't stop people from talking, but that's a hard thing to do at the best of times.

If the police investigate the body of evidence and find that it doesn't have enough weight to charge, never mind convict, then the McCanns are certainly not guilty, legally. The court of public opinion may have a different finding, but that 'court' isn't subject to the same standards and is prone to capriciousness. If the police didn't follow up on possible leads or possible evidence, they didn't follow up on them, and if it's no longer possible to follow up on it, then it'll leave a question mark, but because in the common law system a defendant is considered innocent until proven guilty, this question mark doesn't move the dial. It gives the public something to talk about, though.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658315#Comment_120658315

But didn't they drug them to stop that? Great parenting.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658320#Comment_120658320

You could make the exact same post about the German peado. There's not enough weight to arrest him either but some people are convinced it was an abduction. I suppose it was always directed that way from the moment Kate said they took her. Like the McCann's, you think the cadavar dog evidence is best ignored. Well it certainly can't be explained anyway.

Sweet.Science

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658454#Comment_120658454

'They took her' A cult of Pedos all on holiday to meet up with other Pedos.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658454#Comment_120658454

I don't recall saying that the cadaver dog thing is 'best ignored', but if the police don't follow up on it, there's nothing you can do with it.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658534#Comment_120658534

We're not in the police force or investigating this case. We're on an internet forum discussing it. But maybe you'd prefer not to comment on the cadaver dogs.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658645#Comment_120658645

This whole chain of discussion was started by me listing out arguments I think would be used to defeat a hypothetical negligence case brought against the McCanns, the accusation of criminal negligence once again asserted by another poster. One supporting point about the presence of an abductor was challenged and I cited this as the prevailing theory, i.e. the one authorities have been working off of since official suspicion of the McCanns was dropped. You posited that the theory of the McCanns' direct involvement has more evidence to back it up than the theory of an abductor. I say - not in a legal sense it doesn't as this avenue of investigation was dropped and not followed up on, either due to it being not actually having sufficient weight, or it could be fecklessness on the part of the police. Either way, the result is that the Portuguese police released a statement saying they have found no evidence to link the McCann parents to Madeleine's disappearance. Authorities presumably have the right to take this avenue of investigation up once again if possible and if they think there's something there, but until that point, it remains what you say which is talking about it on the Internet. Until the hypothetical point where that line of investigation is reopened and something more found, an abductor remains the prevailing theory of police investigation.

In the capacity of talking about it on the Internet, I do think it's an interesting point, but the handler, Martin Grimes, states that the dogs barking isn't evidence in and of itself, and is only an indication to study something further with forensics and so on. It's up to authorities to do just that.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658865#Comment_120658865

You didn't need to post all that, it's ok to say you don't really want to discuss the cadavar dog evidence. Just like the McCann's.

Their reaction to try to pour doubt on the findings rather than investigate how it came about really paints them in a bad light.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658909#Comment_120658909

You know as well as I do that I just gave my thoughts on the cadaver dogs in the second paragraph. You can engage with that as you wish.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658920#Comment_120658920

You're ignoring any discussion on the McCann's reaction to the findings, how alerts were only found in the McCann's apartment, rented car, Madeleine's toy and Kate's clothes, you're even ignoring the majority of the article you posted which shows a highly competent trainer with highly trained dogs performing their assigned task in a professional way. As has been said, the dogs don't lie. It's a pity that the McCann's decided to try to discredit them, a clearer picture could have been found.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120658977#Comment_120658977

They're all tantalising points - where the alerts were raised and the McCanns' reaction and the accuracy of the dogs, but the question remains that if it all combines to make a compelling case, then the Portuguese police don't come out with a subsequent statement that says there's no evidence to link the McCann parents to Madeleine's disappearance and an attempt by the McCanns to discredit would be easily rebuffed.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659056#Comment_120659056

Maybe Madeleine had an accident in the apartment to cause the scent. There's talk that the McCann's were giving their children sedatives, maybe something went wrong with that. It could have been an attempted robbery and the robber panicked because Madeleine was awake. It was strange though that a scent was found in the wardrobe and there's some dispute over a blue rucksack Gerry might have had.

Immortal Starlight

What I’ve always found odd is the washing of the cuddle cat. Surely that’s the last thing you would do. I can’t remember if I read that they washed the curtains in the apartment too but I could be mistaken about that as it seems very odd.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659216#Comment_120659216

I find it hard to believe that the parents could gain the composure needed to cover up an accidental death and play it cool until the point where they would 'discover' Madeleine had been taken, considering it would have been a matter of not more than six hours that they had to do it. If they were in any way normal, their heads would be completely gone upon that discovery, if it happened.

According to this article, tests were performed on the two remaining children's hair samples show no evidence of having been given sedatives, which would undermine the claim that they were given to Madeleine.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/tests-show-mccanns-did-not-sedate-madeleine-siblings-397407.html

It wouldn't make much sense for an opportunistic burglar to make off with Madeleine because she had discovered them in the apartment. They'd be as well to flee and be reasonably certain that the darkness of the room and Madeleine being little more than a toddler means that the police probably wouldn't be getting a whole lot of reliable testimony from her.

A huge problem with the dogs alerting is that it can be argued that what they were smelling came from previous users of the apartment or the rental car or that Kate had small amounts of cadaver smell on some of her clothes, picked up in her work as a medical professional, which she unwittingly transferred when handling Madeleine's personal items. I say 'problem' - what I mean by that is that trying to use this as evidence in isolation leaves it wide open to being discredited in the ways I outline. It has to be married with hard forensic evidence linking it specifically to Madeleine.

Deeec

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659455#Comment_120659455

But when were the other 2 children tested for sedatives - probably 2/3 days or more after Madeleine vanished therefore of course there was no evidence of sedatives in their system. This cannot be taken as proof that the McCanns did not give their children medication on that night.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659513#Comment_120659513

I can't find a specific date for when the other kids were tested, but the story about the tests comes up in October 2007. Given that the McCanns didn't become suspects until June, a month out from the disappearance, I think it unlikely that the other children would have been tested on the sedative theory before then. Any point from about one week on up to maybe a year is effective for hair testing, or so I've read.

juno10353

Can you post where the twins were tested for sedation? I was of the opinion that this was never done, and that they had haircuts later which would have made it too late, if ever suggested.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659608#Comment_120659608

Few posts above # 4671.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659455#Comment_120659455

A child vanishing is really not that common so anything to do with this case is hard to believe. Something extraordinary happened. We don't know all the timelines for sure because some stories changed and some of the tapas crew were definitely trying to cover up for their bad parenting. People do crazy things in stressful situations.

Like I said before, the cadaver evidence could have linked to an abductor, it didn't automatically mean it was the McCann's. That's why changing their flights to get out of Portugal as quick as possible and getting their lawyers on the case instantly was very suspicious behaviour. As well as washing the toy as pointed out above.

Deeec

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659597#Comment_120659597

Ok I looked it up there and providers are saying accurate if taken within 90 days ( 3 months basically)- this depends on hair growth though. Only old hair will show evidence of sedatives ( so the ends of the hair really). Newly grown hair wont show a trace. A clean test in October wouldnt be reliable as evidence.

Its possible the test was done at a much earlier date though ( within the 90 day period) and if the kids hair wasnt cut than could be accurate. The date of testing and if kids hair was cut is whats important.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659653#Comment_120659653

The washing of the cuddle cat was recorded in Kate's diary as happening 70 days or so on from the disappearance, because it had gotten quite dirty and 'no longer smelled like Madeleine'. There's no basis for the claim that it was washed five days after. That was another tabloid wonder. It did, however, lead to accusations that she was washing it before the sniffer dogs got there, but you can read all that below.

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39078068/Rebuttal%20of%20%22Fact%22%2034

People do crazy things in stressful situations, that can happen, yes. However, that statement by itself is nothing to predicate a serious accusation upon. You need hard evidence, primarily.

You talk about the suspiciousness of the McCanns getting out of Portugal, but the thing is that they weren't flying to a jurisdiction where investigation of them could not happen - British and Portuguese police were cooperating on the case - so the argument that it's fishy in that way doesn't hold much water.

briany

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659660#Comment_120659660

If the hair hadn't been cut since May, traces of a particular drug could be found, according to this archived Times article. I read a reddit post which claims the test happened in September, but they didn't provide a link to back that up.

Musicrules

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120659772#Comment_120659772

Again, it could have been used for evidence against an abductor. That the McCann's didn't even think about that is very strange. Washing it removed any chance of testing it further.

There's no real evidence for anything so that's kind of a pointless statement. Literally the cadaver dog findings is all they got. The German peado angle seems like a wild goose chase. It was fishy because they panicked. Changing flights, getting their lawyers involved, not even thinking that it could lead to catching an abductor. That's extremely fishy.

juno10353

I can find no links to Portuguese police ever testing the twins. Can not find in PJ files. Can someone here please post link.