Madeleine McCann

Thats probably how why they can only say 5 minutes away, where it briefly pinged another tower.

You could do a triangulation with only two towers but there would be a larger uncertainty in actual position

Yeah, people have that great ability to not admit when they're wrong. My pet theory is that when everyone got caught up in it, there was a kind of mass hysteria in that a lot of people thought they would play their part in finding her despite being in another country. After a while when that didn't happen, they turned their frustration towards the parents.

Then you have all sorts of ideas getting thrown around, I remember someone telling me that the McCanns were over there on a swinging trip. Ever since this everyone has become an expert on every single big news story, after all these days all you need to be an expert is a wi-fi connection and an opposable thumb.

It's not impossible that the McCann parents had something to do with it, as in the theory doesn't break the laws of physics, but if the point of taking the kids back out of Kids Club at 6.00 PM is correct, it leaves only a two-hour window for Madeleine to die, for her parents to process their grief, to get their stories straight, to hide the body, get dressed and then head down to dinner, putting on a brave face in front of their friends. That would be quite an evening's work. This isn't even to mention that Gerry goes for a tennis lesson around the same time as the kids return to the apartment, and he seems to be regarded as the one controlling matters when it comes to the 'McCanns did it' theory, so that's even less time for his involvement.

And then if the body of Madeleine were still in the apartment, it defies virtually all logic that the McCanns would raise the alarm, having police and various other people nosing about the place.

In order for it all to make sense, you have to make assumptions upon assumptions and this is where the theory runs afoul of occam's razor.

Meanwhile, Christian Bruckner is in the area, possessing both the means and the motive to carry out such an abduction. That's not to say he did it, but it is to say it's a more sound theory than the McCanns.

If in any doubt of Bruckners involvement, you only have to visit Praia da Luz in the off-season to see just how quiet it is.

Very little happens and those visiting at the beginning of Mayo are not in high numbers. For an opportunist, wouldn't be too difficult to narrow opportunities down. There are no moored boats in Praia da Luz, you'd have to go west to Burgau or east to Lagos for that so burying at sea would not have been an option.

Personally, I don't think it would be that hard to cover your tracks due to the landscape of the area, the incompetence of the Portuguese police and the local knowledge the perpretator would have.

I've no doubt Bruckner was responsible. Anyone still thinking the McCanns were actively involved would really need to lay off the tin-foil.

Not about whether Bruckner actually did it. As I understand, he denies any involvement, but the idea of him having taken Madeleine involves less leaps of logic and assumptions than the idea that Madeleine died in the apartment and her death was covered up by the parents, when you consider the timeline. It's a more probable theory.

The reason why some people are so invested in the 'McCanns did it' theory is because the tabloids led a campaign against them. They needed a compelling narrative to sell papers, which was first the whole thing of 'awful terrible parents leave little Maddie alone while they get their kicks across town', which then took a darker turn as traces of blood and cadaverine were found in the apartment, which tabloids seized on as evidence of Madeleine's body, though neither of these were found to be conclusive of anything, which is why the McCanns' arguido status was dropped. But, still, it's a juicier theory that falls down the list of probabilities when you look at the facts of the case.

From this I would assume they know he is guilty but they what to try and get the location of the remains out of him

If they know he's guilty, maybe charge him with murder?

If they have him bang to rights, it wouldn't make sense for him to withhold the location of the remains. That's the kind of information he could bargain with to get a more lenient sentence. Maybe not in terms of length, but maybe something better in terms of location/circumstance.

I wonder if they have evidence that he is guilty would they have shared with the parents? Seems like it would be the decent thing to do?

You can use circumstantial evidence to convict people - it's happened plenty of times. If you have enough circumstantial evidence to know somebody did something, but can't prove it in court, then I don't think you really have enough circumstance to know. If so, that 'know' needs to be revised down to 'strongly suspect'.

Is there any real evidence this guy is involved? Other than he may have been in the general area. Without being alarmist, think about the number of abuse cases that come before the courts annually. Any sizeable town anywhere in the western world is going to have a number of people among its population at any time.

The other thing is to consider what physical evidence exists. Any case has to fit with the evidence. If it doesnt, its wrong. A witness statement does not trump forensics. If they clash, the witness is normally mistaken.

"No way did they do all the checks they said they did".

I remember in the NetFlix doc, there was a journalist who commented on their story of checking on the kids every 15 minutes. She said something like "If that was true the dinner table would have been like an airport with people constantly coming and going to check on the kids".

I suspect the "checking every 15 minutes" was more like an intension to check every 30 minutes but it mostly was closer to every hour. Put it like this, charitably a 2 minute walk to the apartments, spend 3 minutes checking on the kids, 2 minute walk back. You'd only be back 8 minutes before someone else would have to go. It would be like the Mad Hatters tea party.

If no baby sitters were available, they could have taken it in turns for one parent to take a night off from the socialising. Im about their age now. I'm not sure I'd be able for 7 nights of socialising in a row any more.

Plus there was the night creche in the same resort. So I agree on the neglect opinion.

I wasn't referring to the night in question, I was making a comment on their approach for the entire week. I'm basing it off an interview I saw with Gerry.

That was their set routine apparently.

It wouldn't have been that big a hubbub even if others at the table were checking on their kids at the quarter hour rather than the half, which I understand to be the case. No more than a group of friends at a pub and various people regularly getting up to go to the smoking area.

Don't focus on the "at the quarter hour rather than the half". Don't focus on the time. Their official story is that they were checking every 15 minutes. I, and others, such as the journalist I mentioned from the NetFlix documentary are calling bs on that particular claim.

Across the pool? You mean across the pool then walk outside the resort and up the hill along the public road and into the apartment?

Getting back to the apartment was a bit more than just getting across the pool. I know it suits their story to say they were closer than they were but it's been well established that they were a good distance away from the apartment in reality.