Liverpool FC Forum

by **Kharhaz** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:59 am

Or has this case become the latest conspiracy theory?

This may be my shortest thread opener but I was thinking about this earlier, the evidence that their is, could this be the most perfect cover up from the parents or the potential kidnapper/murderer.

The more I read into this, the more the parents seem more suspect than ever. If that kid was kidnapped, with the press around the world, somebody somewhere must have seen her. And somebody would have reported her.

Or have the McCanns got away with the perfect murder.

I raise this as a point, she will never be forgotten. Its simply a case that has to be resolved. What has happened to that little girl?

by **account deleted by request** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 8:59 am

I think they got away with manslaughter, but hardly the "perfect murder". I think she died that night and they covered it up.

by **SouthCoastShankly** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 9:48 am

s@int wrote:I think they got away with manslaughter, but hardly the "perfect murder". I think she died that night and they covered it up.

Well that is clearly pure guess work. There is no evidence whatsoever that they committed any crime, other that foolishly leaving their child alone in an apartment.

The conspiracy theory could be believable if only the Portuguese Police force investigated. But the UK services were also drafted in to provide assistance.

I is comical that a conspiracy theory suggesting her parents have hidden a murder is more credible than two Police forces clearing the McCanns of any wrongdoing and Maddie actually being abducted.

Scientific American - Why People Believe In Conspiracies
Why do people believe in highly improbable conspiracies? In previous columns I have provided partial answers, citing patternicity (the tendency to find meaningful patterns in random noise) and agenticity (the bent to believe the world is controlled by invisible intentional agents). Conspiracy theories connect the dots of random events into meaningful patterns and then infuse those patterns with intentional agency. Add to those propensities the confirmation bias (which seeks and finds confirmatory evidence for what we already believe) and the hindsight bias (which tailors after-the-fact explanations to what we already know happened), and we have the foundation for conspiratorial cognition.

by **fivecups** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:01 am

Kharhaz wrote:Or has this case become the latest conspiracy theory?

This may be my shortest thread opener but I was thinking about this earlier, the evidence that their is, could this be the most perfect cover up from the parents or the potential kidnapper/murderer.

The more I read into this, the more the parents seem more suspect than ever. If that kid was kidnapped, with the press around the world, somebody somewhere must have seen her. And somebody would have reported her.

Or have the McCanns got away with the perfect murder.

I raise this as a point, she will never be forgotten. Its simply a case that has to be resolved. What has happened to that little girl?

It would be helpful if you would link to or post some of the 'evidence' you mention Kharhaz.

by **lakes10** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:10 am

manslaughter

and the government know it................also strange that the medicine that they used that night "Medised" has had its age changed from 2 to 6 year olds.

if you ask anyone that knows body language they will also tell you that the McCanns are not telling the truth.

by **account deleted by request** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 10:39 am

SouthCoastShankly wrote:
s@int wrote:I think they got away with manslaughter, but hardly the "perfect murder". I think she died that night and they covered it up.

Well that is clearly pure guess work. There is no evidence whatsoever that they committed any crime, other that foolishly leaving their child alone in an apartment.

The conspiracy theory could be believable if only the Portuguese Police force investigated. But the UK services were also drafted in to provide assistance.

I is comical that a conspiracy theory suggesting her parents have hidden a murder is more credible than two Police forces clearing the McCanns of any wrongdoing and Maddie actually being abducted.

Scientific American - Why People Believe In Conspiracies
Why do people believe in highly improbable conspiracies? In previous columns I have provided partial answers, citing patternicity (the tendency to find meaningful patterns in random noise) and agenticity (the bent to believe the world is controlled by invisible intentional agents). Conspiracy theories connect the dots of random events into meaningful patterns and then infuse those patterns with intentional agency. Add to those propensities the confirmation bias (which seeks and finds confirmatory evidence for what we already believe) and the hindsight bias (which tailors after-the-fact explanations to what we already know happened), and we have the foundation for conspiratorial cognition.

Of course its guesswork mate, if I had any proof I would have passed it on.

I suppose it comes down to personal experience as to whether you think they are guilty of something or not. My own view leads me to believe that they are not telling "all" and if it had been my child I would have co-operated fully in order to expedite her recovery , something that the McCann's clearly failed to do.

by **tonyeh** » Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:06 pm

I'm not saying saying that the McCann case is a conspiracy or anythng, but to me it stinks of something wrong and personally, I just don't trust the McCann's.

However, we are some people so quick to dimiss the fact that groups conspire to achive their aims? Conspiracies happen ALL the time. They are par the course where governmental bodies are concerned, whether it's the Repubicans conspiring to bug the Democratic offices at Watergate, to bigger things like the National Socialists conspiring to contrive the Gleiwitz incident to push for a war in Poland...or the Bush administration conspiring to achieve their war in Iraq.

Conspiracies happen all the time folks.

Sure, there are some people who wil find a conspiracy in everything, simply because they will start from that point and work backwards "proving" they're correct. However, the same can be said for the "there are no conspiracies" crowd. They will start from a position of proof positive and work backwards too. Both people are equally wrong in their method.

by **Kharhaz** » Fri Jan 08, 2010 4:02 am

fivecups wrote:It would be helpful if you would link to or post some of the 'evidence' you mention Kharhaz.

Their is nothing concrete which is why I mention the conspiracy thing. The only "evidence" being the reactions by the parents. For one thing, the cuddle cat doll. When it could be used for forensics, why the bloody hell did the mother wash it? Why? If my kid went missing, and there was talk of blood or whatever I would insist the police took this teddy and try to find fingerprints. She didnt, she washed it instead. Why?

The dogs that were used. They helped solve many cases for the portugese police but yet when they were used in this one they were dismissed as their senses infringed the parents. They were classed as unreliable.

Then you have to consider why the british politicians got so much involved as they did and the british police. Where were they for Michael Shields?

My evidence would be in the reaction of the parents. The way they acted when questions were asked made them act above suspicion. Whatever state of mind you are in (and im guessing frantic would be one) your one concern would be in helping the police every which way to get your kid back. They didnt. And its that that makes me wonder.

by **lakes10** » Fri Jan 08, 2010 10:04 am

the police dog that were used had a 100% success rate detecting death untill this case, there rate is now 99.9%, since the cases there rate has again been 100%.

it seem strange that they did get the smell there but we are told they were wrong...........for the first time and only time since.

by **Owzat** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:06 pm

They contrived to leave a little girl UNATTENDED while having a meal, when it wouldn't have been too difficult to have babysat in say 30 min rotation. Any caring parent would not have taken any risk.

How did any abductor know there was noone in the apartment? Opportunistic passer-by snatching makes no sense, especially given the circumstance.

Of course there was always bound to be a plethora of maddy spots worldwide, anyone with blonde hair and in a dodgy country or their parent's weren't blonde would be an instant maddy. Aren't the guilty parties in most abductions/murders family or friends of family? (I would quote 90% of cases but I haven't heard that stat in a while so can't be sure) If you told the mcmanslaughter's fairy tale to the cops in UK they'd lock you straight up, there may not be much evidence the mcmann's did it, but there's very little to corroborate their own fairy tale bar "evidence" they could have created themselves to cover up their crime.

They did themselves no favours by abusing the donations given by people, paying off their mortgage or something with it. I was NEVER convinced by them, seen too many crims on TV covering up their crimes. World wide wild maddy chase, if you wanted to abduct a kid would you really break in to do it?!?! Especially organised crime syndicates of child traffickers, hardly going to go to all that effort for one kid. Didn't they leave other children, why break in and take one kid? All the "facts" I've heard about the case point more to something happening involving the parents, even them selling maddy cannot be ruled out, but I'm heavily unconvinced by the mccanns and their fairy tale.

I do accept the hair found in the hire car could have got there by means other than maddy being in the car. Much of the media and police coverage was unhelpful, but then so were the non-facts and speculation/defence the friends and relatives threw in the mix.

Type in madelaine mccann into google and get near 1m hits, type in jamie bulger and get 36k. I'm a tad surprised those two :censored:

weren't blamed by the mccanns for this one

Criticism of the parents
The parents have been criticised for leaving their children alone while they ate at a nearby restaurant despite the availability of a babysitting service and a creche.[159][160] There has also been criticism of the parents in the Portuguese media. Diário de Notícias insisted that the McCanns were suspects and claimed that on the night Madeleine disappeared they had not checked on the children, contrary to what they told police.[161] The Daily Telegraph has reported "Portugal has been stung by suggestions that the investigation has been handled ineptly, and while there is much sympathy locally for the McCanns they have also been criticised for leaving their children alone."[162]

Police questioned the couple on 10 May 2007 about why the three children were left alone in an apartment, with the patio doors unlocked, while they dined at the restaurant.[27] In an interview with the BBC on 25 May, the McCanns acknowledged the criticism, and spoke of the guilt they felt.[163] In reply to questions posed to them on 6 June at a press conference in Germany, when radio reporter Sabina Müller suggested that their behaviour was not normal for people whose child had been abducted, they denied involvement in any abduction of their daughter.[164]

On the 10 Downing Street website a petition to the Prime Minister was started on 12 June requesting that Leicestershire Social Services fulfil their statutory obligation to investigate the circumstances which led to Madeleine and her siblings being left unattended in an unlocked, ground floor hotel room. In response, Leicestershire County Council said it was "discharging [its] duties in... a full and professional manner" but the family has declined to comment on the petition.[159] The petition was rapidly rejected, with the reason given being the language it contained.[165]

Following criticism in the Portuguese media of the behaviour of the McCanns, on 21 July 2007, the Crown Prosecution Service lawyers held "informal discussions" to consider whether any offence may have been committed under the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, which deals with ill-treatment, cruelty, neglect and abandonment of children under 16.[166] The family said the calls to prosecute the McCanns were hurtful and unhelpful.[167]

The lawyer of Robert Murat, Francisco Pagarete, criticised the McCanns in late November. He said that they "deserve to be cursed" for leaving their children alone.[168] Gonçalo Amaral, who had originally headed the police investigation, criticised the parents in his book Maddie, a Verdade da Mentira (Maddie, the Truth of the Lie), published on 24 July 2008.[169] A Portuguese judge issued an injunction, on 9 September 2009, that stopped further publication or sales of the book and also banned Amaral from repeating his claims.[170] The McCanns travelled to Portugal for Amaral's libel trial, but on 11 December 2009 it was postponed for a month due to his lawyer falling ill. The trial had originally coincided with the publication of a second book by Amaral, A Mordaça Inglesa (The English Gag).[171]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Madeleine_McCann

by **bunglemark2** » Mon Jan 11, 2010 10:12 pm

Don't lost sight of the fact that there's a little girl missing, and that something horrendous has happened to her. I only hope - I don't pray, being a phillistine when it comes to all that mumbo jumbo - that the poor mite didn't suffer at all before....well, I don't even want to type what I think happened.
As a father who has just put his two kids down to bed tonight, I would lose my reason if anything happened to them.
Yes, the parents were neglectful, and downright idiotic to leave two small children unattended and/or out of sight. But I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.
I just hope I'm never made to eat my words....

by **Owzat** » Tue Jan 12, 2010 2:04 pm

At best the parents were neglectful, we might never know which crime they are guilty of but the very least they were "neglectful" and at worst murderous............................

by **Dundalk** » Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:06 am

people love a conspiracy and when this case wasn't solved then we had another one. personally i think the parents are not telling all they know but i fear we will never get the fulk truth

by **jacdaniel** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 12:10 pm

What does anyone think of the latest e-fits and stories?

I've always being intrigued by this case. But still looks like they're as far away as ever to finding out what happened.

I've always doubted the parents were involved. If they were, why have they fought to keep the investigation going when they could have gotten off. Still though, some of the things they've said seem to change etc.. like they often seem to be trying to save face. (possibly due to their guilt at neglecting their children)

Really hope they solve this one some day.

by **Stu the Red** » Tue Oct 22, 2013 4:59 pm

Without knowing the full facts my guess as to what happened is they've dosed the child up so she'll sleep. Came back to check on her and realised they've gave her an overdose.

They've then disposed of the body.

I think it was an accidental killing and they've moved the evidence so they don't get sent to jail.

Of course I could be completely wrong.... but something doesn't sit right for me.

Liverpool FC Forum

Maddy mccann, - Is it just me?

Who is online