Madeleine McCann

Banana Republic. wrote: »

No no to get a bigger search net and attention into their missing child that very very few can acquire if their child went missing, for example a poorer family without the standing in life like Doctors and all their professional friends. The question begs why they got bigger attention then almost any case in history in relation to the amount of children that go missing every year. I would love to know how, doesn’t have to be sinister just a wondering if how they acquired this attention so quick.

The McCanns got the amount of attention that they got because of a number of reasons:
The media in particular the rolling news tv stations were contacted very quickly with a view to accelerating the spread of the story and of Madeleines photos in an effort to raise awareness of her abduction in the hope that she would be spotted and saved.
The McCanns made themselves available to the media and were followed by and watched over by them 24 hours a day 7 days a week until they went home. Their very visible deep distress and shock and grief was the news story that kept giving and giving and giving. They made no attempt to hide or go home. The perfect English family mum and dad and 3 little kids living out every parents nightmare in real time. Money couldn’t buy this kind of stuff for the press.
Another angle for the media to play on was the distinct undercurrent of disapproval from the judgemental mob back at home, the perfect parents of the internet all hissing and pointing with no mercy.
The perfect news story. Attractive professionals on holiday with cherubic children act worse then Sharon and Nigel from Billericay and actually lose one of their sprogs. “Think they’re so high and mighty when they’re really no better then the rest of us” People couldn’t get enough of it.
Some people got addicted to the daily outrage the McCanns allowed them to display.
So addicted that long after it became apparent to everyone else that the McCanns had no act hand or part in their child’s disappearance they continue to try desperately to keep it going, ( you can see lots of examples here in this thread)even as the attention falls further and further away from the unfortunate family.

splinter65 wrote: »

The McCanns got the amount of attention that they got because of a number of reasons:
The media in particular the rolling news tv stations were contacted very quickly with a view to accelerating the spread of the story and of Madeleines photos in an effort to raise awareness of her abduction in the hope that she would be spotted and saved.
The McCanns made themselves available to the media and were followed by and watched over by them 24 hours a day 7 days a week until they went home. Their very visible deep distress and shock and grief was the news story that kept giving and giving and giving. They made no attempt to hide or go home. The perfect English family mum and dad and 3 little kids living out every parents nightmare in real time. Money couldn’t buy this kind of stuff for the press.
Another angle for the media to play on was the distinct undercurrent of disapproval from the judgemental mob back at home, the perfect parents of the internet all hissing and pointing with no mercy.
The perfect news story. Attractive professionals on holiday with cherubic children act worse then Sharon and Nigel from Billericay and actually lose one of their sprogs. “Think they’re so high and mighty when they’re really no better then the rest of us” People couldn’t get enough of it.
Some people got addicted to the daily outrage the McCanns allowed them to display.
So addicted that long after it became apparent to everyone else that the McCanns had no act hand or part in their child’s disappearance they continue to try desperately to keep it going, ( you can see lots of examples here in this thread)even as the attention falls further and further away from the unfortunate family.

Very true plus I think the Internet was only really exploding back then which gave them unprecedented access to the world and media at large. They were very very shrewd that’s for sure. You would wonder how someone got away if they were on their own or more so whoever it was I would say panicked and god knows what really that resulted in.

Banana Republic. wrote: »

Very true plus I think the Internet was only really exploding back then which gave them unprecedented access to the world and media at large. They were very very shrewd that’s for sure. You would wonder how someone got away if they were on their own or more so whoever it was I would say panicked and god knows what really that resulted in.

There was no shrewdness. Just absolute desperation. Whoever took Madeleine was well gone with her by 10pm on the Friday night.

Redordeadqwwer wrote: »

https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/1284601345345978381?s=21

https://twitter.com/mwilliamsthomas/status/1284600463669825536?s=21

It seems Mark Williams Thomas linked the CB phone call that night to another paedophile.

This could be a major breakthrough if true.

One would have to wonder why he was talking to a paedophile in the immediate area an hour or so before Madeleine was taken. That would be approximately the same time that Gerry was talking to Jeremy Wilkins outside the apartment at 9pm.

What are the chances he was watching the apartment right at that moment??

Deleted User wrote: »

Two well paid doctors versus a single mother on welfare.

Not exactly similar circumstances.

There was huge media coverage regarding the disappearance of Shannon Matthews at the time, both in the print and broadcast media. The only reason it didn't go on as long as it has for the McCanns is that poor Shannon was thankfully found alive.

There were books written about the crime and a TV mini series made about it.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not sure the point of your question? Or what you're alluding to?

Time and time again, the reaction of the GNR has been shown to be slow and unprofessional.

E.g. possible forensics evidence damaged by dozens of people traipsing around the apartment and the room, an uncoordinated search effort etc, not to mention the obvious language barrier.

Vs

A child goes missing in a housing estate in Newcastle, no language barrier, city cops on the scene in under an hour.

My point was, one case, the orchestrator had something to gain. She's now in jail. The other case.. ?

Shannon Matthews mother WAS quite deservedly in jail as the orchestrator of her child’s disappearance.
We don’t know who is the orchestrator of the disappearance of MMcCann. It’s looking increasingly likely that it could be a German man.
If it was him then he’ll deserve to be in jail for that.
I don’t know what relevance you think Madeleines parents have in this point.
They didn’t orchestrate anything.

splinter65 wrote: »

How long do you think he needed? He was a veteran of breaking and entering.

Veteran of breaking and entering is one thing, to kidnap a child with another two sleeping and regular checks, that takes some guile to get her and get out of PDL without being noticed one bit. If it was him he had to be the sighting of carrying the child away.

MonsterCookie wrote: »

i wonder will this programme on ITV1 next Thursday offer anything new? I doubt it but will watch nonetheless.

might throw some light on what Mark WT has shared with the German police.

https://www.itv.com/presscentre/ep1week30/madeleine-mccann-hunt-prime-suspect

Yes I'd say it's just a synopsis of everything to date that we already know. I really hope they find something soon if it was this creep.

Somebody mentioned a missing child case on here a few days ago that was similar (not Shannon Matthews) but I can't find it. Anyone remember?

splinter65 wrote: »

I think that they could deduct from this that the parents had nothing to answer to. I think you may as well investigate the possibility that the Easter Bunny took Madeleine. And I think that they were investigated, with great vigour, and are now considered to be innocent. But I respect your opinion and we can agree to disagree.

They aren't considered to be innocent. That is a fact

The McCanns have spent millions of pounds trying to ban goncal amarals book on at least three different occasions

The most recent judgement in the supreme Court regarding their "innocence" was thus

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."

dark crystal wrote: »

Everyone is presumed innocent until proven otherwise. It's a basic tenet of the law. Even in Portugal.

https://cjad.nottingham.ac.uk/en/legislation/157/keyword/311/#:~:text=Constitution%20of%20the%20Portuguese%20Republic&text=2.,the%20safeguards%20of%20the%20defence.




There's no proof of innocence because there was no trial.

There’s proof that they weren’t cleared as some would have ppl think. Doesn’t make them innocent or guilty either way.

splinter65 wrote: »

You’re not innocent of the murder of Trevor Deely either but you haven’t been the victim of a 20 year online hate campaign as a result.

Yea like they are the same thing, wow.

owlbethere wrote: »

There's still so much about the madeleine maccann case that I don't get. None of it makes sense.

How on earth did an abductor establish that the apartment was adult free and had unsupervised children sleeping in their beds? And within such a short time frame too.

Also what madeleines parents did was neglect. They put their wants of a child free dinner night ahead of the needs of their young children. The parents being doctors were nearly untouchable by their status. If that was any other couple with any other jobs, social services would have swooped in upon the other two children.

Quite easily, really.
There was a note on their booking in the reservations diary of the restaurant that the Tapas group needed that specific table at that specific time every single night because it gave the easiest access to the apartments and they needed it because they had left their sleeping children in the apartments.
A wide range of staff had access to this book, from bartenders, waiters, managers, reception staff and cleaners.
Anyone could have seen this and passed this info on. It was common knowledge among hotel staff that a group of Brits were leaving their kids alone while they dined every night, and all it would have taken would have been for this info to be passed innocently or intentionally onto the wrong sort of person.

Their apartment was unlocked and had roadside access, someone watching for a few hours would be able to establish how often the checks were happening and make their move in between them.

Social services investigated the McCanns upon their return to the UK and found them to be competent parents and saw no need to remove the twins from their custody.
The McCanns have paid the ultimate price for what they did and all indications show the twins to be well adjusted, well looked after teenagers with a close loving relationship with their parents, who spend every weekend taking them to their athletics completions as a family.
I can only assume anyone arguing for their removal from their parents custody are doing so not out of concern for their welfare, but as yet another method of punishing Kate & Gerry.