Madeleine McCann

sxt · 05-06-2020 10:42AM

splinter65 wrote: »

No it’s not. It’s a translation from Portuguese to English by an amateur with an agenda which has been dismantled almost point by point many times.

Here are the summary points(labelled A-I) from the official Portuguese report, and below is the translation.

Is there a hidden agenda behind this translation?

[img][/img]https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2601.jpg

.. Page continued

[img][/img]https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P10/10VOLUME_Xa_Page_2602.jpg

From everything that was exposed from the AUTOS, we conclude that:

A) The minor Madeleine McCann died in the apartment 5A of the Ocean Club resort, on the night of May 3rd of 2007;

It was performed a simulation of kidnapping;

C) In order to avoid the death [alarm] of the minor before 22H00, it was created a situation of the children's surveillance by the McCann while the children slept;

D) Kate McCann and Gerald McCann are involved in the occultation of the cadaver of their child Madeleine McCann;

E) At this moment, there seems that there aren't strong indicia that the death of the minor didn't happen due to a tragic accident;

F) From what was obtained until now, everything points out that the McCann, as self-defence, didn't want to deliver immediately and voluntarily the cadaver, existing a strong possibility that the same was transported from the initial place of deposition. This situation is susceptible to raise questions about the circumstances under which the death of the minor occurred.

So we suggest that the 'Autos' be sent to the EX.mo Sr. Procurador Geral da R'ublica [General Attorney], in order to:

G) New interrogation of the Arguidos Kate and Gerry McCann;
H) Evaluation of the measure of restraint to be applied in this case;

On the course of the house search to the residence of the McCann, a manuscript was found, a sort of diary, already photocopied, possibly authored by Kate McCann, and admitting that the same may contain elements that may help to reach the material truth of the facts, WE PROPOSE THAT:

I) The photocopies of such document to be presented to the M.Mo Judge regarding its apprehension, if legal, translation and eventual recovery of elements to bring into the 'Autos' for future investigation.

CONCLUSION

On the tenth of September, two thousand and seven
A
Chief Inspector

Tavares de Almeida

Hamsterchops · 05-06-2020 10:47AM

Sweet.Science wrote: »

It would be a massive help if her parents told the truth about the 24 hrs leading up to her disappearance

I don't doubt their innocence, but one thing that I'm not clear about is that on the night she was abducted, Gerry and his friend went back to the chalet (from the restaurant) to check on the kids, they checked the twins, but didn't look closely at Madeline?

Not sure if I remember that right.

Banana Republic. · 05-06-2020 10:57AM

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I don't doubt their innocence, but one thing that I'm not clear about is that on the night she was abducted, Gerry and his friend went back to the chalet (from the restaurant) to check on the kids, they checked the twins, but didn't look closely at Madeline?

Not sure if I remember that right.

The story is that they looked into the room and checked on the kids and felt there was someone in the room but still went back down to the dining area. The amount of BS from them two no wonder ppl are questioning their motives.

claregal1 · 05-06-2020 11:07AM

limnam wrote: »

The reason we're still talking about it this long and thousands of other children are forgotten is people are fascinated by the story.

Fascinated is the wrong word ..curious maybe a better word to use .
What about the other kids that went missing in Portugal in or around the same time , why not discuss these kids or their parents at great lengths?
Anyways , all I hope is that her parents get some closure and finally find out what happened to Madeline.

Pete_Cavan · 05-06-2020 11:23AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

The curent investigation is working on the theory that the crime was opportunistic, not pre-planned. Thus the perpetrator would have done no advance preparation. If the perpetrator planned anything in advance, it was a burglary, for which he would not have needed to use a phone, and so would have no occasion to equip himself with a single-use unregistered SIM card.

I don't see how this could have been opportunistic. Given how soon the alarm was raised after the abduction (20 mins?) and the enormous attention it received immediately, I don't think it would have been possible to move the child undetected and without leaving a trail or evidence without some form of plan and help. Even without help, the window of opportunity to do anything would have been very small with little margin for error. I cant see how someone who unexpectedly found themselves with a little girl could either kill her and dispose of the body so quickly without leaving any evidence, or contact someone who would take her and get her to that person alive without leaving any evidence, particularly if it is all happening in the spur of the moment with the alarm already having being raised.

Whatever about the abductor, any help which was solicited after the abduction without any prior knowledge would surely have been likely to slip up in some way given they were reacting to a situation and there would have been some degree of panic. I find it hard to believe that any accomplice would not have done something stupid, either in the heat of the moment or as the attention grew. Particularly someone not in on the initial abduction, they are far more likely to go to the police at some point and pin it on the other person, rather than risk getting caught and have themselves look more guilty.

I find it very hard to believe that someone acting on impulse could abduct her, get her to a location to kill her, then dispose of the body without leaving evidence. Passing her on would have been very difficult and I doubt any pedophile even wanted her after the initial few hours as the story was so hot. More likely is there was a plan in place to move her somewhere immediately and someone was already arranged to take her. The people involved all being in on it from the beginning makes them more likely to stick together all this time.

limnam · 05-06-2020 11:24AM

claregal1 wrote: »

Fascinated is the wrong word ..curious maybe a better word to use .
What about the other kids that went missing in Portugal in or around the same time , why not discuss these kids or their parents at great lengths?
Anyways , all I hope is that her parents get some closure and finally find out what happened to Madeline.

Because the parents of the other kids were not supported by government HR rep's

Nor where they able to spend millions on media and con artisits.

Sweet.Science · 05-06-2020 11:30AM

Hamsterchops wrote: »

I don't doubt their innocence, but one thing that I'm not clear about is that on the night she was abducted, Gerry and his friend went back to the chalet (from the restaurant) to check on the kids, they checked the twins, but didn't look closely at Madeline?

Not sure if I remember that right.

I have no proof they were involved etc . All we have proof of is that they are covering something up . Maybe their own negligence to avoid prosecution themselves i dont know. But they talked utter BS from the day she disappeared

walshb · 05-06-2020 11:49AM

Sweet.Science wrote: »

I have no proof they were involved etc . All we have proof of is that they are covering something up . Maybe their own negligence to avoid prosecution themselves i dont know. But they talked utter BS from the day she disappeared

I have no real feelings for the McCanns. I deeply sympathise with them losing their child.

They were not involved in any way with the abduction.

They simply made a very reckless decision that allowed someone else to abduct.

There is no way they’d be still so resolute and in the media and fighting this if they were the culprits. Someone would have cracked. Someone would know. Someone would come forward.

It appears that this man in Germany is a very strong candidate here.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 11:51AM

Sweet.Science wrote: »

I have no proof they were involved etc . All we have proof of is that they are covering something up . Maybe their own negligence to avoid prosecution themselves i dont know. But they talked utter BS from the day she disappeared

What is this proof of a cover up?

LiquidZeb · 05-06-2020 12:00PM

Babooshka wrote: »

Perfect example right here of how nasty things turn when the conspiracy theorists begin spewing their bile into a thread - and ALWAYS especially this particular case....things always get nasty, and it always begins to get personal from the "McCanns did it" side of the tracks. They're just not capable of not getting nasty towards others.

2U2Me, you asked me was I talking about this thread when I alluded to people's vitriol, well here you go now, here they come crawling out of their dingy little sewers.

First of all, I haven't spewed bile or made anything personal. If you're so precious that anyone disagreeing with you is immediately seen as vitriol or being a hater you should probably lay off the internet. All I did was question an odd statement made by a poster on the forum where anyone questioning the McCann's dubious parenting skills is immediately put down as being jealous of the beautiful and successful Kate and Gerry McCann as the poster alleged.

Babooshka · 05-06-2020 12:20PM

LiquidZeb wrote: »

First of all, I haven't spewed bile or made anything personal. If you're so precious that anyone disagreeing with you is immediately seen as vitriol or being a hater you should probably lay off the internet. All I did was question an odd statement made by a poster on the forum where anyone questioning the McCann's dubious parenting skills is immediately put down as being jealous of the beautiful and successful Kate and Gerry McCann as the poster alleged.

You got personal, you alluded to the poster "fancying" Kate McCann, and I don't see you telling mean spirited people who post deliberately unflattering photos of them or people labelling them as having done all sorts to lay off the internet, why should I just because I think there's a lot of malice going on. Not how it works.

Shefwedfan · 05-06-2020 12:25PM

Sweet.Science wrote: »

I have no proof they were involved etc . All we have proof of is that they are covering something up . Maybe their own negligence to avoid prosecution themselves i dont know. But they talked utter BS from the day she disappeared

What proof have you they are covering up something?

05-06-2020 12:29PM

Just supposing the Portuguese police were correct and that it was a tragic accident that was covered up, what I couldn’t get my head around is HOW the parents could manage the frat without breaking apart at the seams, and without having at least one or two of their travelling companions becoming suspicious enough and/or abhorred to the degree that they would feel compelled to relate the facts to authorities as they know/believe them to have been.

The practicalities of a cover up would be very complex and time consuming. Supposing they were back and forth to the apartment from the tapas bar and at one point a parents stumbled upon a horrible fatal accident, eh where child had hit head and was unconscious. Remembering the parents and group were mostly doctors, there would have been a fairly lengthy attempt at resuscitation, and realistically one of them would have phoned for an ambulance in the hope that however bad things looked there might be a little hope of saving her.

The only situation I could think of where a cover-up would be made is if the child had been found stone cold dead, dead for many hours with rigid Morris etc set in, after parents having left the child alone for many many hours. Maybe an accidental death from over-sedation, maybe Initial desperate attempts to resuscitate having resulted in injury to the body and leaking of blood etc.

That scenario would have played out over time, the parents would have appeared desperate, a desperate phone call would have been made by one to the other if it were one parent to discover theIt child’s body. Then there would have been the matter of bringing deceased child in a vehicle to a place of disposal after the inevitable discussion as to what might be the plan of action.

As for disposing of a body, Praia da Luz is a very short drive from the cliffs at Sagres, where parking is available very close to the cliffs. That part is “easy” and it is unlikely a small body thrown into the very wild Atlantic there would turn up, or if it did much evidence would be washed from it. The eventual disposal of the body to me is very obvious, and made more obvious when I visited Sagres on a tour some years ago. It would have been done under cover of dark, although I imagine it is a favourite spot for people having intimacy in cars, camping overnight etc. Speaking of the latter, it is highly likely the German suspect was very familiar with that spot.

Back to the theory of the parents covering up, then there was the not small matter of a clean up of apartment with bleach etc, another time consuming event. To cover up such an accident would have taken quite a Little number of hours after the initial agreement to do this in the first place. The parents would have appeared very edgy, shifty and distracted all the time at the Yapas bar if they were attempting to hide it from their friends.

And if their friends were “in on it” or even were part of what caused Madeleine’s accidental demise it is unlikely they would ALL have maintained their composure or silence all these years. Somebody would surely have said “there were actually two hours in the difference in the timings” etc. Loyalties change over years.

The theory of the McCanns being involved is maybe not impossible, but unlikely. However I think as a group they all collectively took measures to cover up their negligence over not taking due care of the safety of their children, and this has muddied up the course of the investigation.

LiquidZeb · 05-06-2020 12:32PM

Babooshka wrote: »

You got personal, you alluded to the poster "fancying" Kate McCann, and I don't see you telling mean spirited people who post deliberately unflattering photos of them or people labelling them as having done all sorts to lay off the internet, why should I just because I think there's a lot of malice going on. Not how it works.

I'm responding to you because right off the bat you started accusing me of spreading bile and vitriol and the like. I was merely questioning why the poster I mentioned believed that people are jealous of the McCann's.

Now I didn't see the pictures people put up and I don't give enough of a **** to see them but accusing people of being jealous of someone's looks or success is an odd path to go down and I called it out. I notice you're so quick to take issue with what other people say when you yourself have referred to people as sewer dwellers. Maybe a bit of introspection is needed.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 12:35PM

I think one of my favourite theories is that they found her dead and hid her body because they didn’t want to lose their jobs as Doctors, even though Kate hasn’t worked a day in her position since.

Babooshka · 05-06-2020 12:37PM

LiquidZeb wrote: »

I'm responding to you because right off the bat you started accusing me of spreading bile and vitriol and the like. I was merely questioning why the poster I mentioned believed that people are jealous of the McCann's.

Now I didn't see the pictures people put up and I don't give enough of a **** to see them but accusing people of being jealous of someone's looks or success is an odd path to go down and I called it out. I notice you're so quick to take issue with what other people say when you yourself have referred to people as sewer dwellers. Maybe a bit of introspection is needed.

Again with the unsolicited advice. Go away will ya.

LiquidZeb · 05-06-2020 12:40PM

Babooshka wrote: »

Again with the unsolicited advice. Go away will ya.

As mature and measured a response as ever.

Babooshka · 05-06-2020 12:43PM

LiquidZeb wrote: »

As mature and measured a response as ever.

Yes there's the added unfortunate side effect that you get dragged down to the level of what you're contending with on these threads, I always have a shower after spending some time on them.

LiquidZeb · 05-06-2020 12:45PM

Babooshka wrote: »

Yes there's the added unfortunate side effect that you get dragged down to the level of what you're contending with on these threads, I always have a shower after spending some time on them.

Considering I've done nothing to insult you or anyone else on this discussion I'd like to know what you're referring to. Considering how you insulted me out of nowhere I don't think much dragging had to be done. Enjoy your shower. Another weird detail to add but whatever.

Panrich · 05-06-2020 12:48PM

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I don't see how this could have been opportunistic. Given how soon the alarm was raised after the abduction (20 mins?) and the enormous attention it received immediately, I don't think it would have been possible to move the child undetected and without leaving a trail or evidence without some form of plan and help. Even without help, the window of opportunity to do anything would have been very small with little margin for error. I cant see how someone who unexpectedly found themselves with a little girl could either kill her and dispose of the body so quickly without leaving any evidence, or contact someone who would take her and get her to that person alive without leaving any evidence, particularly if it is all happening in the spur of the moment with the alarm already having being raised.

Whatever about the abductor, any help which was solicited after the abduction without any prior knowledge would surely have been likely to slip up in some way given they were reacting to a situation and there would have been some degree of panic. I find it hard to believe that any accomplice would not have done something stupid, either in the heat of the moment or as the attention grew. Particularly someone not in on the initial abduction, they are far more likely to go to the police at some point and pin it on the other person, rather than risk getting caught and have themselves look more guilty.

I find it very hard to believe that someone acting on impulse could abduct her, get her to a location to kill her, then dispose of the body without leaving evidence. Passing her on would have been very difficult and I doubt any pedophile even wanted her after the initial few hours as the story was so hot. More likely is there was a plan in place to move her somewhere immediately and someone was already arranged to take her. The people involved all being in on it from the beginning makes them more likely to stick together all this time.

If the child woke up during a burglary attempt, then it is conceivable that this was a spur of the moment decision.

It seems from what we know about the suspect that he was living in a camper van. That is an ideal scenario for an abduction. It is true that the alarm was raised within 20 minutes but he could have been nearly twenty miles away by then and counting. He had been living in Portugal for 12 years so would know the area very well and could therefore have brought her to a remote area where he was unlikely to be disturbed or arouse suspicion.

splinter65 · 05-06-2020 12:52PM

Sweet.Science wrote: »

It would be a massive help if her parents told the truth about the 24 hrs leading up to her disappearance

Who says they’re not telling the truth?

splinter65 · 05-06-2020 01:07PM

Sweet.Science wrote: »

I have no proof they were involved etc . All we have proof of is that they are covering something up . Maybe their own negligence to avoid prosecution themselves i dont know. But they talked utter BS from the day she disappeared

You really should provide the evidence you have of this cover up that the McCanns completed to at least one of the national police services that are investigating this disappearance for 12 years. I’m sure they’d be very glad to have it as they have found no evidence of cover up on behalf of the McCanns in all that time, or at least not enough to charge them.
I’m sure you’ll agree that you really have a duty to provide them with this evidence?

walshb · 05-06-2020 01:29PM

What are they covering up?

They did not abduct their own daughter, did not arrange-pay to have someone else abduct their own daughter, nor see of or know of someone was doing it and turning a blind eye to such knowledge

So, what are they covering up?

SlowBlowin · 05-06-2020 01:37PM

walshb wrote: »

What are they covering up?

They did not abduct their own daughter, did not arrange-pay to have someone else abduct their own daughter, nor see of or know of someone was doing it and turning a blind eye to such knowledge

So, what are they covering up?

This thread has degraded into utter rubbish.

Can we all agree, some people think they were involved in some way and others don't.

No one on boards has hard evidence either way. Plenty of people saying they did it, many others saying categorically they did not. Both are as bad as each other.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 01:52PM

SlowBlowin wrote: »

This thread has degraded into utter rubbish.

Can we all agree, some people think they were involved in some way and others don't.

No one on boards has hard evidence either way. Plenty of people saying they did it, many others saying categorically they did not. Both are as bad as each other.

Both as bad as each other? Absolutely not. How does saying I don’t think two parents killed their child as bad as saying they did? There is no evidence to suggest they had any involvement in her disappearance, which is why many people are reluctant to lay the blame on two grieving people.

In all my years on these threads I’ve never read one reasonable account of how they could have managed to do it, any kind of believable version of events or a credible timeline. I’ve read nothing only fantasy, exaggeration, filling in the blanks and waffle. If something credible was to come to light that indicated they were involved, then I would be all ears. But nothing has. So no, I don’t believe that people who fail to see how two parents could have killed their child or covered up her death and carried the charade for thirteen years without a shred of proof are “just as bad” as those who do badly want it to be true they have dreamt up a narrative and stick to it at all costs.

callmehal · 05-06-2020 01:56PM

retro:electro wrote: »

Both as bad as each other? Absolutely not. How does saying I don’t think two parents killed their child as bad as saying they did? There is no evidence to suggest they had any involvement in her disappearance, which is why many people are reluctant to lay the blame on two grieving people.

In all my years on these threads I’ve never read one reasonable account of how they could have managed to do it, any kind of believable version of events or a credible timeline. I’ve read nothing only fantasy, exaggeration, filling in the blanks and waffle. If something credible was to come to light that indicated they were involved, then I would be all ears. But nothing has. So no, I don’t believe that people who fail to see how two parents could have killed their child or covered up her death and carried the charade for thirteen years without a shred of proof are “just as bad” as those who do badly want it to be true they have dreamt up a narrative and stick to it at all costs.

Both as bad as eachother for sure. Let it go.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 02:00PM

callmehal wrote: »

Both as bad as eachother for sure. Let it go.

Great contribution there. Fair play.

splinter65 · 05-06-2020 02:04PM

callmehal wrote: »

Both as bad as eachother for sure. Let it go.

Let it go? One side wants to be allowed to present opinions and feelings as facts and lies and myths and rumours as evidence of a crime. The other side wants to challenge that for the cruel and damaging nonsense that it Is.
Also, I’d say that if you don’t like a thread or don’t like the direction it’s going in you can simply Unfollow it. Telling people to “let it go” is the preserve of the mods. If you you think a post is outside the forum charter then report it.

SusieBlue · 05-06-2020 02:09PM

retro:electro wrote: »

I think one of my favourite theories is that they found her dead and hid her body because they didn’t want to lose their jobs as Doctors, even though Kate hasn’t worked a day in her position since.

My personal favourite was that Kate & Gerry found the terrible twos/threes to be very difficult with Madeleine, she needed a lot of attention and they were sick of it, they loved the twins more than her and they wanted her gone.
So they had arranged to sell her for quite a sum of money to a gang of pedophiles before they ever arrived to Portugal and pretended she was kidnapped to cover it up. And their friends all helped with this so they wouldn’t get the blame.

It’s almost as bad as the one where Kate was secretly a devil worshipper and murdered and tortured Madeleine to death as sacrifice to the devil.

Someone actually offered these up as legitimate, reasonable theories as to how Madeleine came to be missing. It’s mind blowing.

retro:electro · 05-06-2020 02:20PM

splinter65 wrote: »

You really should provide the evidence you have of this cover up that the McCanns completed to at least one of the national police services that are investigating this disappearance for 12 years. I’m sure they’d be very glad to have it as they have found no evidence of cover up on behalf of the McCanns in all that time, or at least not enough to charge them.
I’m sure you’ll agree that you really have a duty to provide them with this evidence?

Interesting that they haven’t answered what this “proof of a cover up” is. I notice that post was thanked by 5 people, maybe one of them will fill us in?
More shlte that people come out with when they haven’t an iota what they’re on about. They draw a blank then when they’re asked to elaborate.

Madeleine McCann

Comments