Madeleine McCann

loveall · 07-11-2018 04:54PM

I am more afraid by those that are too blind to see. Love All. Bye x

Boom_Bap · 07-11-2018 04:55PM

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

retro:electro wrote: »

Hard to know if this will ever be resolved. Hopefully someone someday will gain a conscience and crack. Pity there wasn’t more CCTV in the area at the time too.

I don't think that this will ever be resolved unless Maddy is recognised and all grown up or that there are remains found.

There has been too much involvement from different parties, 'evidence' passed around too much, too many inner fights, too many outer fights, too much media involvement.......too much of everything outside of proper detective work.

Now, I'm sure there has been good detective work, but it sounds like it's been compromised from the beginning from outside influence.

iamwhoiam · 07-11-2018 04:57PM

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

retro:electro wrote: »

Hard to know if this will ever be resolved. Hopefully someone someday will gain a conscience and crack. Pity there wasn’t more CCTV in the area at the time too.

There must be nothing worse than not knowing . I can't even begin to think what does to a mind .
So many cases of this here in Ireland too . Philip Cairns , Trevor Deeley and Fiona Pender , so so sad

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 04:58PM

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

Yeah I don’t think it’ll ever be solved through any investigations into what may have happened. It’s just all too compromised now. The only resolution would be for someone directly involved to come out and say what happened, but the chances of that occurring are slim. It’s just crazy to know that someone out there knows something and is saying nothing.

Steve F · 07-11-2018 04:59PM

Boom_Bap wrote: »

I don't think that this will ever be resolved unless Maddy is recognised and all grown up or that there are remains found.

There has been too much involvement from different parties, 'evidence' passed around too much, too many inner fights, too many outer fights, too much media involvement.......too much of everything outside of proper detective work.

Now, I'm sure there has been good detective work, but it sounds like it's been compromised from the beginning from outside influence.

Yes,it does have that feeling alright of just going around and around in circles

Steve F · 07-11-2018 05:01PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Yeah I don’t think it’ll ever be solved through any investigations into what may have happened. It’s just all too compromised now. The only resolution would be for someone directly involved to come out and say what happened, but the chances of that occurring are slim. It’s just crazy to know that someone out there knows something and is saying nothing.

Yes crazy...you'd wonder how they sleep at nights?

the_pen_turner · 07-11-2018 05:05PM

Something Else

For what it's worth anyone could have a copy of Photoshop . Back around that time I was in college. Everyone I knew there had 20,000 euros worth of software that had been cracked or left unattended. Lots of it fully legal with codes and all.
If I could have it then a photographer would easily have it.

the_pen_turner · 07-11-2018 05:08PM

Something Else

Kingp35 wrote: »

I think some posters have lost the run of themselves now, particularly over the photo. There's no evidence the photo was manipulated in any way.

I've said it before but I find it odd that some people are completely closed to the fact that it could have been anything other than an abduction. The balance of possibilities clearly lean towards it being an abduction however the lack of evidence in the case lends itself to other theories at least being possible. Some of the stuff being posted lately though is off the wall!

The probability of an abduction is thousands of time less that a child falling and hurting themselves. People hurt themselves everyday.

gozunda · 07-11-2018 05:37PM

Something Else

retro:electro wrote: »

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

You are wrong.

It is a fact that McCanns have never been cleared. The tabloid misinformation on the McCanns status was formally
corrected in February 2017 when Portuguese Judges declared that the archiving of the criminal case did not in fact equate to the McCanns being cleared of criminal responsibility.

In Portugal Kate remains an arguido. Bizarrely in the UK - the hugely expensive and ongoing police investigation has never formally interviewed either Kate or Gerry McCann ...

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 05:43PM

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

gozunda wrote: »

You are wrong.

It is a fact that McCanns have never been cleared. The tabloid misinformation on the McCanns status was formally
corrected in February 2017 when Portuguese Judges declared that the archiving of the criminal case did not in fact equate to the McCanns being cleared of criminal responsibility.

In Portugal Kate remains an arguido. Bizarrely in the UK - the hugely expensive and ongoing police investigation has never formally interviewed either Kate or Gerry McCann ...

No you’re wrong. Their arguido status was lifted in June 2008. What the courts actually state (and what the Mc Cann’s refute) is that the lifting of said status and archiving of the case does not automatically declare them innocent, or guilty.

Kingp35 · 07-11-2018 05:45PM

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

the_pen_turner wrote: »

The probability of an abduction is thousands of time less that a child falling and hurting themselves. People hurt themselves everyday.

Except that it would not just be a child falling and hurting themselves, it would also include a cover up afterwards. You're being way too simplistic.

iamwhoiam · 07-11-2018 06:17PM

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

the_pen_turner wrote: »

The probability of an abduction is thousands of time less that a child falling and hurting themselves. People hurt themselves everyday.

Well yes they do but they don't dissappear into thin air then

Kidchameleon · 07-11-2018 07:07PM

bunderoon wrote: »

the fridge freezer and missing bag allows for the possibility for storage & removal.

I cannot find any proof of a fridge freezer missing. Can you provide any?

IngridM20 wrote: »

I am glad people are still talking about it, and by the looks of things, most are suspicious of these two monsters.

People are still talking about it thanks to the tireless work of those two "monsters"

limnam wrote: »

British police with holding statements from people who holiday'd with the McCanns - British Police the real heros.

Link please.

Mike9832 wrote: »

Gerry to this day still denies ever having that gear bag, photo evidence suggests he had

xalot wrote: »

There was a blue sports bag, now there isnt."

The fact that Gerry and Clarence Mitchell both deny this bag existed raises concerns for me.

No no no, Clarence Mitchell said that there is "no bag missing". The blue bag is there in the photo's for all to see, how can he deny it exists? Can you give us a link that proves Gerry and Mitchell said the bag does not exist?

limnam wrote: »

Was the device it was taken from ever provided to the police and verified?

I've never seen anything that it was

The very camera was available to the police. It can be seen on the table in the police photo's of the apartment.

limnam wrote: »

Ok so we've no evidence that the photograph/device/card was checked.

It was handed over to the Portuguese police. There is lots of information about that. There are lots of photos from that holiday that are not well known. I have seen them in Richard Hall's videos.

limnam wrote: »

why would she spend hundreds of thousands on con men?

Because they didn't know they were con men? Would they spend that money on them now?

gozunda wrote: »

In Portugal Kate remains an arguido.

She is not an arguido anymore. Arguido has not got an English translation but the closest phrase is "person of interest". Arguido does not mean suspect.

gozunda · 07-11-2018 09:39PM

Something Else

retro:electro wrote: »

No you’re wrong. Their arguido status was lifted in June 2008. What the courts actually state (and what the Mc Cann’s refute) is that the lifting of said status and archiving of the case does not automatically declare them innocent, or guilty.

Your bias is showing again I'm afraid ...

You made a statement in your comnent that they were cleared as follows

retro:electro wrote:

They were .... subsequently cleared because of a lack of evidence

That is completly incorrect ...

This is a translation of that ruling

It should not be said that the appellants were cleared via the ruling announcing the archiving of the criminal case.

That ruling was not made in virtue of Portugal’s Public Prosecution Service having acquired the conviction that the appellants hadn’t committed a crime.

The archiving of the case was determined by the fact that public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes by the appellants.

It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence."

https://www.her.ie/news/court-rules-kate-gerry-mccann-not-proved-innocent-maddies-disappearance-332373

No it's you are clearly wrong. Look up the rulling if you dont believe it yourself.

As for the 'status' - the fact is that technically that's what they remain (persons of interest) because of the ruling above and refusal to answer questions posted by the Portuguese police. Don't quite get why you are setting yourself up as the expert on the McCann case when lots of what you think you know is completly incorrect.

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 09:53PM

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

Eh your link shows me nothing I haven’t already said. Their arguido status was lifted in 2008, courts have stated this does not mean they’re innocent. You said Kate is still an arguido. Do you read your own links? :rolleyes:

Next.

gozunda · 07-11-2018 10:01PM

Something Else

retro:electro wrote: »

Eh your own link shows me nothing I haven’t already said. Their arguido status was lifted in 2008, courts have stated this does not mean they’re innocent. You said Kate is still an arguido. Do you read your own links? :rolleyes:
Next.

Read what I wrote again. Your talent for ignoring that which is relevant is evident in your comments.

And repeat this is what you said:

retro:electro wrote:

They were ... subsequently cleared because of a lack of evidence

This is the ruling

It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence."

Notice the difference?

Your opinion is evidently incorrect based on the ruling. As to the arguido / suspect / person of interest - thats what they technically remain because of said ruling whether they were previously formally declared or otherwise ...

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 10:02PM

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

And you said Kate is still an arguido. So you’re one to come at me for splitting hairs when you’re spouting misinformation.

Their arguido status was lifted in 2018

Your own link says that. Lol.

Charmeleon · 07-11-2018 10:06PM

I think the situation is that the investigation has been halted so everyone with arguido status has had that lifted. If the investigation were to be re-opened their arguido status would be almost certainly invoked again. So it’s very different from being declared innocent or no longer suspects.

In ireland we don’t have an official status for suspects so in many cold cases suspects remain suspects. The same applies in this case but the arguido designation is only used for active investigations.

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 10:06PM

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

“It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence."

Yeah this just confirms my earlier statement. Their arguido status was lifted due to lack of evidence, but this does not prove their innocence.

gozunda · 07-11-2018 10:07PM

Something Else

retro:electro wrote: »

And you said Kate is still an arguido. So you’re one to come at me for splitting hairs when you’re spouting misinformation.Their arguido status was lifted in 2018
Your own link says that. Lol.

so you're now ignoring that your opinion on them being cleared is wrong?
Again...

It doesn't therefore seem acceptable that the ruling, based on the insufficiency of evidence, should be equated to proof of innocence."

Thats is the complete opposite of what you said earlier

"retro:electro wrote:

They were ...subsequently cleared because of a lack of evidence

Let me spell it out simply

THEY WERE NOT CLEARED ...

My point about them still technically being suspects / persons of interest (not formally) as there is no active investigation in Portugal, is based on that very ruling from 2017 which you are IGNORING for some strange reason ...

retro:electro · 07-11-2018 10:13PM

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

Yeah go outside and get some air or something.

Kidchameleon · 08-11-2018 08:01AM

Ill say it again. Arguido does not mean suspect. They are not Arguido's anymore anyway.

Charmeleon · 08-11-2018 08:34AM

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Ill say it again. Arguido does not mean suspect. They are not Arguido's anymore anyway.

I think it is more of a language and procedural thing. The way I understand it, a ‘suspect’ in Portugal is someone who has been arrested or charged with a specific crime, but a person must be made an arguido before they can be charged. So in our system they would be considered a suspect because they are not being questioned as witnesses but are being actively investigated, ‘under suspicion’. In the Portuguese system they have been read their rights and allowed legal representation.

In this case only they and Murat were declared arguido, for all intents and purposes we would regard them as suspects.

Kingp35 · 08-11-2018 11:28AM

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

retro:electro wrote: »

Yeah go outside and get some air or something.

MOD NOTE: retro:electro thread banned for one week, please don't post again until a week has passed.

There have been a number of warnings issued in this thread. Further thread bans will be handed out if posters can't play nice

Babooshka · 08-11-2018 12:13PM

Charmeleon wrote: »

I think it is more of a language and procedural thing. The way I understand it, a ‘suspect’ in Portugal is someone who has been arrested or charged with a specific crime, but a person must be made an arguido before they can be charged. So in our system they would be considered a suspect because they are not being questioned as witnesses but are being actively investigated, ‘under suspicion’. In the Portuguese system they have been read their rights and allowed legal representation.

In this case only they and Murat were declared arguido, for all intents and purposes we would regard them as suspects.

It just means a person of interest.

Deusexmachina · 08-11-2018 05:43PM

Babooshka wrote: »

It just means a person of interest.

And everyone close to a crime is a 'person of interest' unless and until they are ruled out. That does not mean they are in any way involved - it just means that they have not been definitively ruled out.

It is almost impossible to rule anyone out of this investigation because there is no body and therefore no way to know for certain what happened to Madeline. That does not mean the parents are 'suspicious'. It is impossible to create any credible scenario where they have any involvement in their child's disappearance.

the_pen_turner · 08-11-2018 07:18PM

Something Else

Deusexmachina wrote: »

And everyone close to a crime is a 'person of interest' unless and until they are ruled out. That does not mean they are in any way involved - it just means that they have not been definitively ruled out.

It is almost impossible to rule anyone out of this investigation because there is no body and therefore no way to know for certain what happened to Madeline. That does not mean the parents are 'suspicious'. It is impossible to create any credible scenario where they have any involvement in their child's disappearance.

thats not true.

they have done lots of things that are suspicious .
washing the apartmant
washing the toy
lying about the window
lying about the bag
claiming an abdustion and not a missing child

all of these and others are very suspicious

combine that with a lot of wierd things and thye have to be the no 1 suspects

MonkieSocks · 09-11-2018 12:11AM

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

This Blue bag........Photographed by the Portugese police.
Checked by Martin Grimes Dogs...no signal given.
No Blood or bodily fluids found by forensic people

Have you got a link to where it says that " They Didn't have this bag " ?

Deusexmachina · 09-11-2018 12:32AM

the_pen_turner wrote: »

thats not true.

they have done lots of things that are suspicious .
washing the apartmant
washing the toy
lying about the window
lying about the bag
claiming an abdustion and not a missing child

all of these and others are very suspicious

combine that with a lot of wierd things and thye have to be the no 1 suspects

Such total crap. Tell us what actually happened if it wasn’t an abduction. You can’t because it’s nonsense.

the_pen_turner · 09-11-2018 12:38AM

Something Else

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Such total crap. Tell us what actually happened if it wasn’t an abduction. You can’t because it’s nonsense.

those are facts. not my opinion.

i dont know what happened . i can only theorise what happened just like you and everyone else.

there is zero evidence of an abduction. the only thing to point towards it is kate saying they have taken her. nothing else.

i would like to think that maddie was abducted but there is nothing to point in that way.

i dont know if the parents did anything or covered anything up . but they have done a lot of wierd and suspicious things that make them suspects.

Madeleine McCann

Comments