Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Madeleine McCann

Options
1…174175177179180…264

Comments

  • Options
    #5282
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    OwlsZat wrote:
    That's for you disagreement while providing no counter argument or debate on any of the points made.


    You stated statements should have been taking immediately, road blocks, close borders. When did these individuals go to the police about the bogus collector's before or after Madeline disappeared. If it was after what difference would it have made? When did Murat become a suspect, your timeline is all over the place tbh.


  • Options
    #5283
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    OwlsZat wrote:
    It's your choice to decide however you feel. I've outlined clearly why I conclude what I do. Please to do the same.


    Already did, you claimed several pages back that the sighting in Amsterdam was the most significant. I showed you why it wasn't. You even expressed disbelief when it was pointed out that Kate said Madeline always corrected people who called her Maddie.


  • Options
    #5284
    OwlsZat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,510 ✭✭✭OwlsZat


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    You stated statements should have been taking immediately, road blocks, close borders. When did these individuals go to the police about the bogus collector's before or after Madeline disappeared. If it was after what difference would it have made? When did Murat become a suspect, your timeline is all over the place tbh.

    I didn't present a timeline. I stated the police investigation was a shambles. Considering they sacked their own lead I'd say that's obvious. They also made two people official suspects. The first who definitely did not do it. They wasted their time and resources trying to frame people I believe who didn't do it. It clearly shows they were compromised in trying to get someone quickly.


  • Options
    #5285
    OwlsZat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,510 ✭✭✭OwlsZat


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    Already did, you claimed several pages back that the sighting in Amsterdam was the most significant. I showed you why it wasn't. You even expressed disbelief when it was pointed out that Kate said Madeline always corrected people who called her Maddie.

    I said it was one of the few sightings that wasn't discredited, making it significant. Without getting a statement from Anna herself or going through what she did and didn't see. I wouldn't be able in good faith to determine the accuracy of her statement. I presented to you the theory on what I think happened based on all the evidence. If you don't like it go ahead and do you own.


  • Options
    #5286
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    OwlsZat wrote:
    I didn't present a timeline. I stated the police investigation was a shambles. Considering they sacked their own lead I'd say that's obvious. They also made two people official suspects. The first who definitely did not do it. They wasted their time and resources. Trying to frame people I believe who didn't do it.


    But you mentioned the independent witnesses, when did they go to the police? When did Murat become a suspect? Police forces do not operate on the basis of abduction in the first few hours of a disappearance just because that's what the parents claim happened.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5287
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    OwlsZat wrote:
    I said it was one of the few sightings that wasn't discredited, making it significant. Without getting a statement from Anna herself or going through what she did and didn't see. I wouldn't be able in good faith to determine the accuracy of her statement. I presented to you the theory on what I think happened based on all the evidence. If you don't like it go ahead and do you own.


    But they did get a statement. You linked an article that contained it. The Mirror newspaper flew her to the UK to talk to a police artist. She mentioned Madeline's eye colour but no mention of the eye defect. She did claim to have a photographic memory surprised she missed the eye . She claimed Madeline referred to herself as Maddie , not true according to Madeline's mother.
    I already did my own, she wasn't abducted that's my position.


  • Options
    #5288
    OwlsZat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,510 ✭✭✭OwlsZat


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    But they did get a statement. You linked an article that contained it. The Mirror newspaper flew her to the UK to talk to a police artist. She mentioned Madeline's eye colour but no mention of the eye defect. She did claim to have a photographic memory surprised she missed the eye . She claimed Madeline referred to herself as Maddie , not true according to Madeline's mother. I already did my own, she wasn't abducted that's my position.

    The eye defect is unusual but I know that if I met someone who I thought I recognized I'd fine it hard to recall even the color or their eyes. Let alone if there were any defect present. Maybe quote your own so I don't have to go through 350pages and have a look.

    Have you an explanation for the charity collectors, the man with dreds and military jacket, the near miss of the abduction of the other girl or the main with the glasses on the McCann balcony, or the ford transit parked opposite their apartment which was gone in the morning?


  • Options
    #5289
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    The witness statements count for next to nothing.

    It’s interesting how selective you are in what witness statements you choose to dismiss, since you seem to put a lot of faith Mrs Martin’s apparent recollection of David Payne despite her insistence she has no idea where she remembers him from. Interesting. And I know you will reply to this post with some kind of hodgepodge counter-argument but let it be known I have absolutely zero interest in responding to you. Your clear selective bias in what you choose to believe and ignore as well as a selective bias in what theories you choose to debunk have informed me that your posts are not worthy of engaging with from here on in.


  • Options
    #5290
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    OwlsZat wrote:
    The eye defect is unusual but I know that if I met someone who I thought I recognized I'd fine it hard to recall even the color or their eyes. Let alone if there were any defect present. Maybe quote your own so I don't have to go through 350pages and have a look.

    But we are not talking about your memory so what you would or wouldn't remember from an encounter is irrelevant. I'm referring to the article you linked from the Mirror surely you remember because you said how significant it was. Anna claimed to have a photographic memory she said Madeline stood in front of her and referred to herself as Madeline. Not only I but one or two other posters told you that she according to Kate always corrected anyone who called her Maddie so makes zero sense as to why she would refer to herself as Maddie.
    OwlsZat wrote:
    Have you an explanation for the charity collectors, the man with dreds and military jacket, the near miss of the abduction of the other girl or the main with the glasses on the McCann balcony, or the ford transit parked opposite their apartment which was gone in the morning?

    None whatsoever and since the police both the PJ and Met have said little to nothing about them I think are but a footnote. You still though didn't say when the witnesses went it the police about them, was it before or after Madeline's disappearance. It is actually important to the rest of your claim about wasting time/ resources etc.


  • Options
    #5291
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Something Else
    OwlsZat wrote: »
    Having followed the case at the time, the documentary more recently and most recently read everything there is to read I want to explain what I think happened.

    1. Kate McCann suffered from General Anxiety Disorder. Her relationship with Gerry as a result was chaotic and dysfunctional. They were rowing and the kids suffered. They were neglected. It's this that makes them look guilty. They are guilty of negligence but nothing more.

    2. I believe the anonymous tip off which was given stating the child was ordered by a Pedophile gang in Belgium. Because shortly before the abduction the McCann residence in OH was teeming with "shady characters". People in the alley looking in from the balcony, parked van watching, odd strangers on the property of the hotel, and most importantly a number milling around the vicinity posing as charity collectors (also known as spotters). I believe it was a team effort to lift the child. They knew where she was and that she was left unattended.

    3. The white transit van is involved in the abduction. It's directly outside the property. Then it appears through 3 or 4 different statements and sightings. It's the obviously getaway vehicle.

    4. A blonde (french speaking) female is involved with the abduction. The one reported to have her with the older individual in Monforte-Ermesinde. I believe she is the same woman reported from Amsterdam by Anna. The woman is important as the whole thing will look far more believable if Madiline is with a woman.

    5. No idea after that. Alive, dead, likely owned by a group of wealthy pedos. Likely long forgotten who she is. Does she get out or did the dispose of her years ago, who knows.

    It's frightening that the "investigation" didn't do better but it didn't. There is tones of leads and repeated commonalities they should have picked up. They were slow to react and quick to pin it on anyone they could as the Robert Murat stuff demonstrates. They acted out the same plot as the Rui Pedro case and really the police are probably the main reason that the case will likely never be solved.

    Saying that I'm still hopeful that either she is recognized as an adult God knows where or when or that someone involved gives up information with authorities in exchange for leniency for another crime. I mean surely at least one of the "charity collectors" could be identified and picked up.

    What a shambolic police effort that that was never the case.

    The PJ themselves would tell you that the case was a shambles. The crime scene was destroyed by people looking for the girl before police were even called. The statements made no sense and raised more questions than answers. Interference from the UK police was frustrating. UK police withheld much information from the PJ for months if they provided it at all.
    The McCanns ran to the media and started a media circus.

    All of those were not ideal.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5292
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    retro:electro wrote:
    It’s interesting how selective you are in what witness statements you chose to dismiss, since you seem to put a lot of faith Mrs Martin’s apparent recollection of David Payne despite her insistence she has no idea where she remembers him from. Interesting. And I know you will reply to this post with some kind of hodgepodge counter-argument but let it be known I have absolutely zero interest in responding to you. Your clear selective bias in what you chose to believe and ignore as well as a selective bias in what theories you chose to debunk have informed me that your posts are not worthy of engaging with from here on in.


    Can't say that I care what you think or why you feel it's necessary to be so personal, it is a discussion forum after all. Maybe you are a little too invested in it prehaps?but I'm sure your rant will garner a few thanks from the usual suspects.


  • Options
    #5293
    OwlsZat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,510 ✭✭✭OwlsZat


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    None whatsoever and since the police both the PJ and Met have said little to nothing about them I think are but a footnote. You still though didn't say when the witnesses went it the police about them, was it before or after Madeline's disappearance. It is actually important to the rest of your claim about wasting time/ resources etc.

    They arent a footnote. They are the biggest giveaway that this was organised crime. What could they say when they don't know anything of them. Just look at the crowd up north digging out ATM machines. How have they not been caught yet you'd really wonder. Clearly they are well organised.

    Ignoring them is as daft as focusing in on the name a woman in Amsterdam recalled the child called herself. Leave Anna out of it or indeed the French speaking blonde woman if you must. It make no difference to the theory.


  • Options
    #5294
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Something Else
    cnocbui wrote: »
    You must have mentioned this ten times by now.

    Scotland yard ruled out investigating the McCanns because they had reviewed the PJ investigation and had concluded they had covered that angle comprehensively to the point where they considered any further effort to likely be a waste of time. To pursue an investigation targeting the McCanns you would need hard forensic evidence - which the UK police simply can't do as any such evidence would be in Portugal and they have no legal authority to operate there, just as the PJ can't come to Ireland and do crime scene investigations where they collect forensic evidence and interview witnesses etc - only the Guards have the legal mandate to act in that way. If the Met wanted to do anything concrete in PDL, they would have ask the PJ to do it for them.

    Were they to attempt such a thing, the PJ and Portugal would be incensed at the blatant arrogance and the suggestion that they hadn't done an adequate and thorough job of it themselves. The Met and the UK would have been told not to bother - though not that politely.

    You seem to be implying that Sutton as an individual is somehow superior to the Met as a whole, who would know far more about the case than Sutton, since he was never in the loop and never had access to the material the Met have nor spent as much time analysing it.

    I'd no idea there is a wordometer in operation ;)

    Just a quick one - do you have a source for that from the official files. Thanks


  • Options
    #5295
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    OwlsZat wrote:
    They arent a footnote. They are the biggest giveaway that this was organised crime. What could they say when they don't know anything of them. Just look at the crowd up north digging out ATM machines. How have they not been caught yet you'd really wonder. Clearly they are well organised.


    But they are, amazing how you know there was an organised crime gang but neither the Met or PJ know about them. I can only suggest you go to the authorities and offer your services.


  • Options
    #5296
    Boom_Bap
    Moderators, Music Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,730 Mod ✭✭✭✭Boom_Bap


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    But they are, amazing how you know there was an organised crime gang but neither the Met or PJ know about them. I can only suggest you go to the authorities and offer your services.


    Right, I for one have had enough of these snarky comments.

    Please don't post in the thread again


  • Options
    #5297
    OwlsZat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,510 ✭✭✭OwlsZat


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    But they are, amazing how you know there was an organised crime gang but neither the Met or PJ know about them. I can only suggest you go to the authorities and offer your services.

    The PJ know about them because they have three independent witness statement about them in their files. You can be well sure they spent resources trying to understand them better.

    To the best of my knowledge their is no Met reports available online so the point is redundant.


  • Options
    #5298
    Abba987
    Registered Users Posts: 312 ✭✭Abba987


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    You'd be ok with another man talking abiut your 4 year old daughter in a sexualised manner?

    Did i miss something ? I havnt heard of some one talking about her like that. Payne?


  • Options
    #5299
    yourdeadwright
    Registered Users Posts: 20,631 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    Accident happened, parents hid body
    Abba987 wrote: »
    Did i miss something ? I havnt heard of some one talking about her like that. Payne?

    Look into
    The Gaspar Family Statements


  • Options
    #5300
    Abba987
    Registered Users Posts: 312 ✭✭Abba987


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    yourdeadwright wrote: »
    Look into
    The Gaspar Family Statements

    Will do thanks


  • Options
    #5301
    Lady Poepoe
    Registered Users Posts: 15 ✭Lady Poepoe


    chicorytip wrote: »
    If you watch the Richard Hall analysis, which is extremely detailed and thorough, he more or less glosses over this incident and attatches no real significance to it.

    I think Richard D Hall asked a statment analyst about it.
    https://youtu.be/uS6ucYudNAo time stamp is 1:57:34


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5302
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,913 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    No one knows, or ever will know now what happened. The speculation is interesting though, and I hold my hand up for being guilty of that too.

    Anyway, something came into my head the other day.... I often wonder why Madeleine was the target, when it seems all the children in the group were left alone at night, and that includes Madeleine's sibling twins.

    I am sure someone will tell me something along the lines of... well their apartment was nearest the road and they knew the doors were unlocked etc. But from the checking system it seems that all kids in all apartments were in the same situation.

    IF the checks happened as they all said. I really doubt that. But anyway, it is all very odd to me.

    And there is zero evidence of abduction. If anyone has any I would be happy to acknowledge that.


  • Options
    #5303
    Creol1
    Registered Users Posts: 554 ✭✭✭Creol1


    Something Else
    OwlsZat wrote: »
    3. The white transit van is involved in the abduction. It's directly outside the property. Then it appears through 3 or 4 different statements and sightings. It's the obviously getaway vehicle.

    An abduction theory just wouldn't be complete without a white transit van.


  • Options
    #5304
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,913 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Creol1 wrote: »
    An abduction theory just wouldn't be complete without a white transit van.

    Sorry, but I did lol at that.

    Surely black or a darker colour would be less noticeable. But there was no Transit Van, there was no abduction, there is no evidence of anything other than the child is gone really. Bless her.


  • Options
    #5305
    oceanman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,749 ✭✭✭oceanman


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    No one knows, or ever will know now what happened. The speculation is interesting though, and I hold my hand up for being guilty of that too.

    Anyway, something came into my head the other day.... I often wonder why Madeleine was the target, when it seems all the children in the group were left alone at night, and that includes Madeleine's sibling twins.

    I am sure someone will tell me something along the lines of... well their apartment was nearest the road and they knew the doors were unlocked etc. But from the checking system it seems that all kids in all apartments were in the same situation.

    IF the checks happened as they all said. I really doubt that. But anyway, it is all very odd to me.

    And there is zero evidence of abduction. If anyone has any I would be happy to acknowledge that.
    how much evidence would someone abducting a child leave though?


  • Options
    #5306
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,913 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    oceanman wrote: »
    how much evidence would someone abducting a child leave though?

    Something, that's for sure, even a footprint, a disturbance, a handle or window opened even with gloves, they do leave a residue. I dunno, but I doubt that an abduction happened and no one saw or heard anything at all. Just my opinion, I have no answers.

    What do you think of the abductor leaving evidence or not?


  • Options
    #5307
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    There is evidence of an abduction, the missing child being the most prominent piece, as well as a distinct lack of evidence of other foul play.
    There is no evidence of an abductor because the circumstances in which she was left meant whoever took her didn’t even need to break a sweat never mind a window or a door in order to take her.
    Any potential evidence was also heavily compromised in the aftermath when all and sundry were allowed to traipse through in and out as it wasn’t secured. But all of this has been said before x1 million so I don’t know who I’m trying to convince here. Clearly many people believe an abduction is a very viable and sincere scenario which is why it is winning by a country mile in the poll.


  • Options
    #5308
    Spanish Eyes
    Registered Users Posts: 15,913 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    retro:electro wrote: »
    There is evidence of an abduction, the missing child being the most prominent piece, as well as a distinct lack of evidence of other foul play.
    There is no evidence of an abductor because the circumstances in which she was left meant whoever took her didn’t even need to break a sweat never mind a window or a door in order to take her.
    Any potential evidence was also heavily compromised in the aftermath when all and sundry were allowed to traipse through in and out as it wasn’t secured. But all of this has been said before x1 million so I don’t know who I’m trying to convince here. Clearly many people believe an abduction is a very viable and sincere scenario which is why it is winning by a country mile in the poll.

    It is important not to follow the herd, but use one's own intuition and not be led by the popular vote.

    There is no evidence of abduction. Can you point me ONE piece of evidence?

    The doors were left open, so the little girl could have woken and wandered and fell or was knocked down or whatever. That's my theory anyway, poor child crying for her mother night after night, no wonder she may have tried to find her.


  • Options
    #5309
    retro:electro
    Registered Users Posts: 21,039 ✭✭✭✭retro:electro


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    It is important not to follow the herd, but use one's own intuition and not be led by the popular vote.

    There is no evidence of abduction. Can you point me ONE piece of evidence?

    The doors were left open, so the little girl could have woken and wandered and fell or was knocked down or whatever. That's my theory anyway, poor child crying for her mother night after night, no wonder she may have tried to find her.

    I’m sure people are following their own intuition, the fact it happens to be the majority does not mean those choosing abduction do not have a mind of their own and are incapable of surmising their own opinions.

    I’ve aleady answered the second bit.

    That’s a genuine theory alright but not one I’m convinced happened for reasons I’ve previously outlined. Again there was no evidence of an accident outside as far as I’m aware nor did anyone see a little child wandering around unassisted. But, in the absence of literally anything we’re all entitled to our views. Some like to make baseless accusations against certain people in order to assist their views, others don’t.


  • Options
    #5310
    OwlsZat
    Registered Users Posts: 1,510 ✭✭✭OwlsZat


    She wandered out herself, something happened (car accident/paedo)
    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    Something, that's for sure, even a footprint, a disturbance, a handle or window opened even with gloves, they do leave a residue. I dunno, but I doubt that an abduction happened and no one saw or heard anything at all. Just my opinion, I have no answers.

    What do you think of the abductor leaving evidence or not?


    They left it unlocked the and doors open. How much evidence ya gona leave.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5311
    gozunda
    Registered Users Posts: 18,996 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    Something Else
    Spanish Eyes wrote: »
    Something, that's for sure, even a footprint, a disturbance, a handle or window opened even with gloves, they do leave a residue. I dunno, but I doubt that an abduction happened and no one saw or heard anything at all. Just my opinion, I have no answers.

    What do you think of the abductor leaving evidence or not?


    And there is the nub of this thread. Where is the evidence?

    The disappearance of the child from the apartment can be said to constitute 'evidence" for each one of the the main scenarios listed. However this evidence is predicated on the just one fact- ie that the child is missing. However it remains there is little absolute evidence to support any of the actual scenarios tbh.

    In the case of an abduction it would be reasonable to assume that some of the following would have resulted in at least some form of evidence being left behind or observed.

    An individual (or individuals) who enters a strange apartment, in the dark, who has to open doors (and/or windows). Move curtains, lift a sleeping child in the presence of other children, close doors and exit same carrying a possibly screaming or crying child in a building swarming with residents and guests. As unpleasant as it to imagine such a thought - It is just as feasible that the child suffocated and or banged her head without significant external trauma, was found and the body quickly moved outside and hidden.

    Imo the poll may indicate the popularity of each of the relevant scenarios- unfortunately this boils down to individual speculation based on our own observational bias in the absence of any real definitive evidence.

    Despite the lack of progress of this case in the real world - I reckon its unlikely that solving crimes by means of a poll is going to catch on anytime soon ;)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement