Madeleine McCann

I'm convinced McCann's know what happened

too many coincidences

- Dogs identifying blood in the rental car
- Timeline of night inconsistent
- Public interviews little empathy for Madeleine. Always trying to prove an abduction. Body language very suspiscious.
- Phone records cleared or altered
- Would not take Lie Detector test

SusieBlue wrote: »

I'm going to ignore your first two lines, as a Mod has already said to park that line of discussion.

But as for the rest of your post, its just pure projection.

I have never said that they were 100% not involved, in fact I can quote some posts for you where I say that I can see why others might think they are responsible.

I just think on the balance of probabilities, with the current evidence that's available, that they weren't involved as I don't see how its logistically possible.
Not because I think they are innocent at all costs.
If new evidence emerged that explicitly implicated them I'd be more than open to it.

That doesn't mean I excuse them leaving the children alone.
Making a stupid decision doesn't make them conspirators in the murder of their own child.

The whole case from either side is its" just pure projection"
Of course its doesn't mean they 100% murdered her but it is possible they did ,

"I don't see how its logistically possible."

Why do people think its has to be some huge elaborate plan ,

If they had times to take there bins out they had time to get rid of a body, As improbably as that may seems to you , it is literally that easy,

You just need to put a bag in the bins and wait for them to be collected ,

Risky yes very but possible yes very , as always its normally right in front of you , hidden in plain sight as they say ,

yourdeadwright wrote: »

The whole case from either side is its" just pure projection"
Of course its doesn't mean they 100% murdered her but it is possible they did ,

"I don't see how its logistically possible."

Why do people think its has to be some huge elaborate plan ,

If they had times to take there bins out they had time to get rid of a body, As improbably as that may seems to you , it is literally that easy,

You just need to put a bag in the bins and wait for them to be collected ,

Risky yes very but possible yes very , as always its normally right in front of you , hidden in plain sight as they say ,

No, you said that I and others like me think that they are 100% innocent and that isn't true. That was pure projection on your part.

I'm not talking about a huge elaborate plan. The bin theory has already been debunked and put to bed.
They searched the bins and she wasn't found.
They didn't and wouldn't discard their child in a bin like a piece of rubbish, that's absolutely preposterous and has no factual basis.

I have yet to see any convincing evidence in which they could kill their child (intentionally or unintentionally), come up with a plan, make a pact, destroy evidence & hide a body so well it hasn't been discovered over a decade later.
I don't see how they could have done this with no access to a car, smartphone or google maps in an unfamiliar resort in just under a 2.5 hr time frame before sitting down to dinner with their friends.

I really don't think this is an unreasonable stance to take given the serious logistics issues.

SusieBlue wrote: »

No, you said that I and others like me think that they are 100% innocent and that isn't true. That was pure projection on your part.

I'm not talking about a huge elaborate plan. The bin theory has already been debunked and put to bed.
They searched the bins and she wasn't found.
They didn't and wouldn't discard their child in a bin like a piece of rubbish, that's absolutely preposterous and has no factual basis.

I have yet to see any convincing evidence in which they could kill their child (intentionally or unintentionally), come up with a plan, make a pact, destroy evidence & hide a body so well it hasn't been discovered over a decade later.
I don't see how they could have done this with no access to a car, smartphone or google maps in an unfamiliar resort in just under a 2.5 hr time frame before sitting down to dinner with their friends.

I really don't think this is an unreasonable stance to take given the serious logistics issues.

"No, you said that I and others like me think that they are 100% innocent and that isn't true. That was pure projection on your part. "

Ok sorry about that ,

Bin theory was never debunked, they where never searched properly ,That night they where searching for a live child,

"They didn't and wouldn't discard their child in a bin like a piece of rubbish, that's absolutely preposterous and has no factual basis."

I gave you a way it was possible , you think not probably but it is POSSIBLE
But your statement above is preposterous and has no factual basis., how do you know , you don't know them , you have never meet them, you have no idea what they would or would not do,

Again showing you are not open minded,

If they did dispose of her in a bin, and the plan was to pretend she was abducted, why would they let their friends check on their kids, knowing one of them wasn't there?

And why would Kate raise the alarm at 10pm and not until after dinner, which would be much later, knowing that Madeleine was in a bin (I can't believe I've even had to type that).
Surely she'd want to leave it as late as possible to raise the alarm, knowing the bins might be checked, and thus leaving a smaller window to search them before they were collected at 4am?

Remember, in order for the bin theory to make sense, Kate & Gerry would have to have known they were due to be collected at that time. Otherwise it makes no sense at all.
Why would they put her in the bin if they thought they were only collected every few days? There'd be a huge chance of getting caught if so and it would be a stupid risk.

They would have had to have known there was an early morning collection, so it doesn't make sense that Kate would raise the alarm at 10pm, when she could have raised it much later.

In fact, they wouldn't have had to raise it at all, they could have gone back to the apartment, gone to bed, and woke up the next morning saying Madeleine had wandered out in the night and had no idea where she was.

By that point the bins would already have been collected, she would be in the landfill and thus no need for an elaborate faux abduction.

There you go. Debunked. It makes no sense.

I don't expect anyone to have answers to the above questions, btw. It just shows the utter lack of logic in the bin theory.

SusieBlue wrote: »

They didn't and wouldn't discard their child in a bin like a piece of rubbish, that's absolutely preposterous and has no factual basis.


Can I ask you what leads you to believe this , what about there character makes you think the above ?

I think its possible as hundreds of times we have seen people who seem normal do horrendous things time and time again ,

Also I wouldn't even call the McCann "normal parents " leaving Children alone for hours every night in a different country and with unlocked doors,

Allowing male friends to bath thee children's,

They show in life they have no problem putting there children in dangerous position's,

They show a lack of caring in life for there kids , So I would not put it past them to show a lack of love in death for them ,

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Can I ask you what leads you to believe this , what about there character makes you think the above ?

I think its possible as hundreds of times we have seen people who seem normal do horrendous things time and time again ,

Also I wouldn't even call the McCann "normal parents " leaving Children alone for hours every night in a different country and with unlocked doors,

Allowing male friends to bath thee children's,

They show in life they have no problem putting there children in dangerous position's,

They show a lack of caring in life for there kids , So I would not put it past them to show a lack of love in death for them ,

Nothing I have seen of them gives the impression that they don't love their children.
The only other scenario I can get on board with is accidental killing (which I still don't feel there is enough evidence for) but at that, it doesn't make sense to me that they'd just throw her away like rubbish if they did that.

SusieBlue wrote: »

If they did dispose of her in a bin, and the plan was to pretend she was abducted, why would they let their friends check on their kids, knowing one of them wasn't there?

And why would Kate raise the alarm at 10pm and not until after dinner, which would be much later, knowing that Madeleine was in a bin (I can't believe I've even had to type that).
Surely she'd want to leave it as late as possible to raise the alarm, knowing the bins might be checked, and thus leaving a smaller window to search them before they were collected at 4am?

Remember, in order for the bin theory to make sense, Kate & Gerry would have to have known they were due to be collected at that time. Otherwise it makes no sense at all.
Why would they put her in the bin if they thought they were only collected every few days? There'd be a huge chance of getting caught if so and it would be a stupid risk.

They would have had to have known there was an early morning collection, so it doesn't make sense that Kate would raise the alarm at 10pm, when she could have raised it much later.

In fact, they wouldn't have had to raise it at all, they could have gone back to the apartment, gone to bed, and woke up the next morning saying Madeleine had wandered out in the night and had no idea where she was.

By that point the bins would already have been collected, she would be in the landfill and thus no need for an elaborate faux abduction.

There you go. Debunked. It makes no sense.

I don't expect anyone to have answers to the above questions, btw. It just shows the utter lack of logic in the bin theory.

Just on bin collections, anytime ive been on holidays i do notice when they are collected.. its cause there's a pile of stuff there at a central point and they usually get to overflowing point before being collected...

re not raising alarm until after dinner.. id agree with you it would seem to make more sense if they were involved to wait longer.. i still think the timeline is very tight from maybe 7pm down to bed time for an accidental death to take place and then a plan of aciton to form and be executed so they were at dinner at 8.30.. if it was an overnight thing then it would be a much longer timeline to consider.. also i think its relevant that the kids we all sleepy or unusually tired coming back from the creche.. if they were being watched for a couple of days then it would make sense for someone to possible drug them at the kids camp through juice bottles or whatever so they were asleep for a potential abduction later that evening..

if it was an abduction i don't think it was random - it was planned out completely and they would have watched the dinner sequence each night and figured out timings. i think one of the apartments higher up and with a view of the dinner party was free and someone reported spotting a stranger coming out of the garden either earlier than day or a previus day.. they could have had someone up there as a lookout to signal to the people on the ground..

SusieBlue wrote: »

Nothing I have seen of them gives the impression that they don't love their children.
The only other scenario I can get on board with is accidental killing (which I still don't feel there is enough evidence for) but at that, it doesn't make sense to me that they'd just throw her away like rubbish if they did that.

But Susie, they touched their ears in an interview when they were being asked difficult questions.. they clearly did it :pac:

I must be looking at a different couple to the one who others describe as indifferent and apathetic to their circumstances. I see Kate as someone who has trauma written all over her face. There was a piece of footage in the documentary where she was appealing for Madeleine’s safe return and once the footage stopped rolling, she put her head in her hands and broke down crying. They kept all of that away from public view. I guess it’s a matter of opinion and perception on whether or not you believe they are deeply troubled and traumatised, as well as whether or not you have an ability to empathise.

On a side note, I remember reading before that abducters can sometimes take pleasure in the amount of trauma and upset they are causing, and so parents are often advised to maintain a cool and measured presence when appealing.

iamwhoiam wrote: »

Are you saying anyone who doesn't see it as you do or agree with your perception is less empathetic than you ?

Not at all. It wasn’t meant in absolute terms. I am saying that I don’t judge them for how they may have come across in interviews and appeals for her return and make ridiculous conclusions based on innocuous movements like ear touching. I am saying none of us have any idea how we would come across, and if you’re judging them based on how you believe you would react in that situation that is just unfair. None of us have any idea how we would come across in that situation never mind the fact that most of the world are judging your every eye movement, twitch and hand placement. I empathise with them on that regard, others don’t and find them suspicious as a result.

I found the bit where the dog finds the teddy in the press a bit odd.

It seemed to be the only item in there.

Why was it left there with nothing else? Looked like a bit of a staged find to me.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Debunked based on your opinion as to how the McCanns would have acted? . You seem be posting your opinion as fact, it's a guess nothing more just as everyone else's is.

Isn't that what everyone else is doing? Hence how the "they put her in the bin" conversation even started here?

If she was disposed of by bin, it calls into question why they'd have staged an abduction at all.
They could have went for dinner, pretended she was in bed, said they forgot to lock the front door and she wandered out during the night.
By the time the alarm was raised the next morning, Madeleine would be in the landfill.
No need for an elaborate abduction plot at all.

And I didn't mean it as fact, hence I said at the end of my post I didn't expect anyone to have answers to any of the questions.

I was just showing all the considerable plot holes that poke a substantial hole in the rationale.

SusieBlue wrote: »

Nothing I have seen of them gives the impression that they don't love their children.


Sorry but do you have children ?

If you love your children you do not leave them alone for hours every night of holidays ( she was at kids camp all day so they barley seen her) , You do not let make friends bath them

They come across as a couple who had children but the children where a burden , they where determined to have "There holiday " regardless of the fact they had children who "NEED" looking after,

Even after she went missing they left the twins in kid's camp in the same town there daughter was missing ,

Action speak louder than words they are not your average loving parents ,