Madeleine McCann

Thomyokk · 06-11-2018 11:56PM

It looked like the parents were already mourning the loss of their child when the story broke.

A tragedy, but it seemed like she had died already.

limnam · 06-11-2018 11:58PM

retro:electro wrote: »

I’m referring to people here who hypothesise and speculate about a drugging/murder/cover up without any actual proof or any kind of semblance of rationality in their posts. Finger pointing and accusations are a free for all, evidence be damned.

Most of this speculation and waffle tends to fall by the wayside when you try and get the conspiracy people to tell you what they think the timeline of events could have been, and particularly the complicated hijinks that would have had to have ensued if Madeleine's body was to be hidden from police searches, with everyone who could have been involved under almost constant scrutiny by the world’s media.

Ok so if they hypotheise about an abduction with the same lack of evidence that's ok

And think that the Portuguese police were out for entrapment etc

Balanced viewpoint.

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 12:00AM

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

Evidence of an abduction= missing kid

Evidence of a murder/foul play=

limnam · 07-11-2018 12:02AM

retro:electro wrote: »

Evidence of an abduction= missing kid

Evidence of a murder=

We have a "missing kid"

There's no evidence she was abducted.....

You appreciate the difference......right?

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 12:03AM

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

limnam wrote: »

We have a "missing kid"

There's no evidence she was abducted.....

You appreciate the difference......right?

Your posts are genuinely giving me a pain in my face at this stage.

shamrock55 · 07-11-2018 12:03AM

Something Else

What was the story about the police dogs getting a scent of a body from the boot of their rented car

Charmeleon · 07-11-2018 12:04AM

retro:electro wrote: »

Evidence of an abduction= missing kid

Evidence of a murder/foul play=

So, if you are serious, every child that has disappeared has been abducted unless proved otherwise? Not a very safe world for children if the default is to suspect unknown strangers and ignore people closer to the child.

limnam · 07-11-2018 12:05AM

retro:electro wrote: »

Your posts are genuinely giving me a pain in my face at this stage.

Thats understandable.

That goes back to my earlier points regarding the documentary

the_pen_turner · 07-11-2018 12:05AM

Something Else

is there any list of actual 100% proven facts.
all we know is that the mccanns were at the resturant at the time they claimed maddie was abducted
they reported maddie abducted at x time.

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 12:05AM

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

Timeline of events, anyone?

Disposable1 · 07-11-2018 12:08AM

fin12 wrote: »

It’s a common accurance with that poster.

Thanks for saying that buddy. I genuinely don’t think the poster is doing it out of badness though, I think they’re too passionate so aren’t taking the time to read properly and then think

MonkieSocks · 07-11-2018 12:08AM

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

Kate McCann was questioned as a witness for 8 hours on 6th September, 2007.

As a witness, she had no right to refuse to answer any questions.

Kate McCann was questioned as a Arguido on 7th September, 2007.

On the advice of her lawyer, Carlos Pinto de Abreu, Kate McCann refused to answer all questions once she was made arguido.

Spanish Eyes · 07-11-2018 12:11AM

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Kate McCann was questioned as a witness for 8 hours on 6th September, 2007.

As a witness, she had no right to refuse to answer any questions.

Kate McCann was questioned as a Arguido on 7th September, 2007.

On the advice of her lawyer, Carlos Pinto de Abreu, Kate McCann refused to answer all questions once she was made arguido.

And then the Mcs castigated the Portuguese Police for their incompetence. Right. And that played right into the hands of the tabloid readers back home.

limnam · 07-11-2018 12:11AM

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Kate McCann was questioned as a witness for 8 hours on 6th September, 2007.

As a witness, she had no right to refuse to answer any questions.

Kate McCann was questioned as a Arguido on 7th September, 2007.

On the advice of her lawyer, Carlos Pinto de Abreu, Kate McCann refused to answer all questions once she was made arguido.

Do you have a link to what questions were asked as a witness and the answers?

Was that released as part of the files?

dubrov · 07-11-2018 12:11AM

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Kate McCann was questioned as a witness for 8 hours on 6th September, 2007.

As a witness, she had no right to refuse to answer any questions.

Kate McCann was questioned as a Arguido on 7th September, 2007.

On the advice of her lawyer, Carlos Pinto de Abreu, Kate McCann refused to answer all questions once she was made arguido.

You are wasting your time.
People will pick and choose evidence to suit their narrative.

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 12:12AM

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

Charmeleon wrote: »

So, if you are serious, every child that has disappeared has been abducted unless proved otherwise? Not a very safe world for children if the default is to suspect unknown strangers and ignore people closer to the child.

But they weren’t ignored? They were made suspects and then subsequently cleared because of a lack of evidence

limnam · 07-11-2018 12:12AM

dubrov wrote: »

You are wasting your time.
People will pick and choose evidence to suit their narrative.

What does that "evidence" prove?

MonkieSocks · 07-11-2018 12:13AM

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

limnam wrote: »

Do you have a link to what questions were asked as a witness and the answers?

Was that released as part of the files?

Here is the link

Arguido

dubrov · 07-11-2018 12:14AM

limnam wrote: »

What does that "evidence" prove?

There isn't really evidence of anything.
The parents deserve the benefit of the doubt unless evidence proves otherwise

limnam · 07-11-2018 12:15AM

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Here is the link

Arguido

Thats the set she didn't answer?

I'm referring to what was asked as a witnessed that she was asked and answered or did i miss something on the link

limnam · 07-11-2018 12:17AM

dubrov wrote: »

There isn't really evidence of anything.
The parents deserve the benefit of the doubt unless evidence proves otherwise

So why did you say no point providing evidence?

No said she didn't answer questions as a witness....

The day after answering those questions she was made a suspect and then refused to answer any questions...

I'm not sure what is been proved here? apart from the fact after answering qestions they felt they would make her a suspect?

Cyrus T Buford · 07-11-2018 12:20AM

Something Else

retro:electro wrote: »

Evidence of an abduction= missing kid

Evidence of a murder/foul play=

Sorry but thats absolute nonsense.

The fact that there is a missing kid is not "proof" of an abduction...nor is it proof of foul play.
All it is, is a fact that the child is no longer eith her parents.

You say no-one has proof of a cover up, wheras you havnt yet given credible proof of an abduction..(the child being missing..is does not proove your theory.

There are two main theories being posted on this thread, BOTH of which are highly possible.
There is no suffiant amount of proof either way (which is why they are called theories by the way retro) if there was proof...then the case would be solved and closed would it not?! Yes.

I belive it wasnt an abduction, but who is to say im wrong?!....dedinatly not you (or are you able to give me a name and description of the abductor...or where he/she/they took maddie?)

However, if the case is ever solved and IF it was found to be an abduction, then ok. I do aknowledge it as a very very likely possibility (without proof) but i just dont think thats what happened.

You are veing extreamly biased in your posts and the statment i quoted by you is absolute nonsense in my opinion.
Do you belive what you have actually said here?

MonkieSocks · 07-11-2018 12:21AM

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

limnam wrote: »

Thats the set she didn't answer?

I'm referring to what was asked as a witnessed that she was asked and answered or did i miss something on the link

This one

limnam · 07-11-2018 12:23AM

MonkieSocks wrote: »

This one

ok,

is it just me or do those answers not match up with the questions that were not answered?

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 12:25AM

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

Cyrus T Buford wrote: »

You are veing extreamly biased in your posts and the statment i quoted by you is absolute nonsense in my opinion.
Do you belive what you have actually said here?

I am being no more bias than anyone else here accusing people of drugging, murder, disposing of a body and cover ups without even as much as a credible timeline. But yes, I’m the one spouting nonsense :rolleyes:

Hmm maybe “evidence” of an abduction was the wrong word. Indicator of an abduction would be more accurate.

limnam · 07-11-2018 12:26AM

retro:electro wrote: »

Hmm maybe “evidence” of an abduction was the wrong word. Indicator of an abduction would be more accurate.

Both wrong.

Cyrus T Buford · 07-11-2018 12:29AM

Something Else

retro:electro wrote: »

Hmm maybe “evidence” of an abduction was the wrong word. Indicator of an abduction would be more accurate.

The fact that the child is missing can indicate absolulutly anything.
There is more than one, even two possible scenarios of that night.

MonkieSocks · 07-11-2018 12:29AM

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

limnam wrote: »

ok,
is it just me or do those answers not match up with the questions that were not answered?

Never said they were the same questions.

She was cooperative on the 6th as a witness.

she refused to answer questions on 7th as a aguido on legal advice from her solictor Dr. Carlos Pinto de Abreu

limnam · 07-11-2018 12:31AM

MonkieSocks wrote: »

Never said they were the same questions.

She was cooperative on the 6th as a witness.

she refused to answer questions on 7th as a aguido on legal advice from her solictor Dr. Carlos Pinto de Abreu

Oh not saying you did.

There was others stating earlier that she answered all those questions already.

She didn't as she wasn't asked those on the 6th.

Thanks for clearing that one up for us.

Spanish Eyes · 07-11-2018 12:32AM

The child is dead imo.

The parents are still together, which I reckon is unusual. But there may be a pact or something, but I shudder to think of things like that.

So what do we do from here. On a discussion board I mean.

Nothing will change, the child is gone, parents ok, other kids ok, it is over until a body is found really.

Madeleine McCann

Comments