Disappearance of Madeleine McCann

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:44 am

tybfc wrote:The whole investigation has been a farce really and seems corrupt from top to bottom with Government ministers looking as though they may have become involved.

From a personal view it stinks.

A young family of three in a secluded set of apartments in Portugal.

One is 3 years old and has two younger twins in the room with her.

Their parents are both experienced professional doctors.

The kid's parent's go out for a night out. Forget what they say about going back to check on them blah de blah.

Me and my wife went away with my 13 year old son in February to India.

The hotel complex, which we have been going to for 18 years, is very safe.

Not once did we let him out of our sight. Perhaps we are over protective?

Each night we would go for a meal and as soon as he was tired we would go back to our room (with a couple of all inclusive drinks) and sit on our balcony watching the world go by whilst he slept in his bed.

The next morning he would be up early, a walk along the beach and the same for the extent of the holiday.

Not one single minute was he left in the apartment alone. And he is 13 years old.

I have always been of the view since I first saw Madeleine's mum's face the day after her "disappearance" that there was something not right and my view has not changed. She shows no emotion and never has. Her husband just milks the money.

I do not think that she will ever be found because they are too clever.

It’s not over protective, it’s normal behaviour as mentioned in another post link, having a glass of wine on the balcony or even inviting the friends back with the children & all playing cards & having a drink indoors & still continuing the merriment, as long as the children are there safe & attended.

claret59 · Post by **claret59** » Wed Mar 20, 2019 5:24 pm

I Have tried to keep pace with all this so may have missed it but has anyone mentioned the film, based on a real incident , called a' Cry in The Dark'?

In a brief summary it tells of the death of a nine week old daughter of Lindy Chamberlain and her husband. The baby went missing when left alone , for a short period of time, on a camping trip in Australia. The Mother was hounded and eventually convicted and imprisoned for the babe's murder. The evidence for it was flimsy at best but against the Mother was the fact that she refused to show the necessary 'emotion; in terms of tears and breakdown. She was also a member of the 7th Day Adventist Church, which went against her.

She always maintained her innocence ( as indeed she was ) and stated she had seen a dingo leave the tent with something in its mouth at the time of the baby's disappearance.
Some years later ( I cannot recall the exact length of time,) she was exonerated but not before her marriage had broken up and she had been separated from her family.

Just to point out that lack of emotion is not a crime. How many times have we seen relatives of a victim crying before the cameras only for them to be found responsible for the death /disappearance.

Much of this case is conjecture. I tend to think with those who feel that Madeleine woke up and went looking for her parents without any kind of clue as to what to do or where to go. She then came to an accidental death that was not even thought about until too late or possibly at that point came into contact with someone ,who perhaps offered to help her, but saw an opportunity to commit a crime. In that case one hopes for a fairly benign abduction rather than any other motive.

TheFamilyCat · Post by **TheFamilyCat** » Wed Mar 20, 2019 5:52 pm

dsr wrote:Forget accidental death. This is the scenario for accidental death.

1. The parents (both doctors) accidentally do something which will kill their daughter in such a way that they believe they will go to jail for it.
2. The girl dies.
3. One parent comes back to the room to check, and finds the girl dead.
4. That parent makes all possible attempts to revive her.
5. That parent goes back to the dining table and attracts the attention of the other parent, and tells them the news.
6. Parent two makes all possible attempts to revive her.
7. The parents decide to cover up the death by disposing of the body.
8. One or both of them goes and finds a place to do it - within walking distance. A place which subsequently proves to be untraceable.
9. They bury the body.
10. They return to the dining table, where their friends have not noticed anything wrong.

How long are you giving them to do all this? Bear in mind that the grieving process for the child, which both parents do separately, is often (they tell me) more than the five minutes or so that must be the most you can allow.

I suppose you can streamline the process slightly by getting the other four dinner guests to act as accomplices. But it's a long shot. If you ask four almost-strangers to assist in the burying of your child's body because you have accidentally killed her, you have to accept there is a decent chance at least one of them will tell the police. So I think we can exclude the accomplices.

No, I think if you want to pin the blame on the parents, you have to make it a Columbo-style complicated plan whereby they decided to do away with their child, and did it in foreign parts with no car present just to make it more challenging. Having her disappear from her bedroom at home would presumably lack the artistic merit.

There are theories that she had died prior to the evening. I’m not suggesting for one minute that they have any substance but that theory would discount most of your points above.

(One such theory used sedation and fear of finding high levels of drugs in her blood as the reason for them trying to cover it up)

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 20, 2019 10:26 pm

Without any degree of certainty nobody really knows what happened to the child, we are all reliant on stories stacking up which may be true or not, depending on the account of the testimony, i don't usually subscribe to conspiracy theories but I'm also open minded whilst the case remains open that it wasn't a abduction, I personally believe the child died as a result of neglect with choking or consuming a product left about unintentionally, that's as far as it goes with what I believe, & nobody will be able to prove or disprove this factually.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Wed Mar 20, 2019 11:14 pm

tybfc wrote:The whole investigation has been a farce really and seems corrupt from top to bottom with Government ministers looking as though they may have become involved.

From a personal view it stinks.

A young family of three in a secluded set of apartments in Portugal.

One is 3 years old and has two younger twins in the room with her.

Their parents are both experienced professional doctors.

The kid's parent's go out for a night out. Forget what they say about going back to check on them blah de blah.

Me and my wife went away with my 13 year old son in February to India.

The hotel complex, which we have been going to for 18 years, is very safe.

Not once did we let him out of our sight. Perhaps we are over protective?

Each night we would go for a meal and as soon as he was tired we would go back to our room (with a couple of all inclusive drinks) and sit on our balcony watching the world go by whilst he slept in his bed.

The next morning he would be up early, a walk along the beach and the same for the extent of the holiday.

Not one single minute was he left in the apartment alone. And he is 13 years old.

I have always been of the view since I first saw Madeleine's mum's face the day after her "disappearance" that there was something not right and my view has not changed. She shows no emotion and never has. Her husband just milks the money.

I do not think that she will ever be found because they are too clever.

About 60% of your post is reminiscing about your wonderful all-inclusive family holiday to India which has absolutely no relevance to whether the McCann’s were complicit in the death and cover-up of their child.

You then accuse the parents based solely on the mother’s face, lack of emotion and father’s greed. And yes, they would have to be more than clever to mastermind that cover-up.

Not very Christian of you ty. Imagine being accused of being complicit in your child’s death and the disposal of the body based on no tangible evidence other than your facial expression.

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Wed Mar 20, 2019 11:19 pm

There’s a lot more to it than facial expression but the whole way they react is strange. Lots of holes in their story and without the funded campaigning by the strange benefactor funding, the PR machine and media/people manipulation I think matters would be quite different.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 20, 2019 11:23 pm

Rileybobs wrote:About 60% of your post is reminiscing about your wonderful all-inclusive family holiday to India which has absolutely no relevance to whether the McCann’s were complicit in the death and cover-up of their child.

You then accuse the parents based solely on the mother’s face, lack of emotion and father’s greed. And yes, they would have to be more than clever to mastermind that cover-up.

Not very Christian of you ty. Imagine being accused of being complicit in your child’s death and the disposal of the body based on no tangible evidence other than your facial expression.

No it's not a nice thing to think about, but that's exactly where we are whilst the case remains open, & in the circumstances it's only natural to explore the possibility that the abduction is false & a more sinister turn of events could be factual & until things become clearer if they ever do, that the McCann's could be responsible & there's more to this than meets the eye.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Wed Mar 20, 2019 11:42 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:No it's not a nice thing to think about, but that's exactly where we are whilst the case remains open, & in the circumstances it's only natural to explore the possibility that the abduction is false & a more sinister turn of events could be factual & until things become clearer if they ever do, that the McCann's could be responsible & there's more to this than meets the eye.

Without a body, dead or alive, we’re unlikely to ever know exactly what happened. But there’s no hard evidence to suggest that the parents had any involvement and if you consider the scenario it is extremely unlikely that they did.

Did they display strange personalities whilst under intense stress and emotion that you and I can hopefully only try to imagine? Probably.

We’re they neglectful to leave their children unattended? Definitely.

But that doesn’t make them complicit in the death and/or disposal of their daughter’s body and I find it very distasteful that people can make those claims based on nothing but a hunch.

It seems like people want them to be guilty just because they’re shitty parents.

Jakubclaret · Post by **Jakubclaret** » Wed Mar 20, 2019 11:55 pm

Rileybobs wrote:Without a body, dead or alive, we’re unlikely to ever know exactly what happened. But there’s no hard evidence to suggest that the parents had any involvement and if you consider the scenario it is extremely unlikely that they did.

Did they display strange personalities whilst under intense stress and emotion that you and I can hopefully only try to imagine? Probably.

We’re they neglectful to leave their children unattended? Definitely.

But that doesn’t make them complicit in the death and/or disposal of their daughter’s body and I find it very distasteful that people can make those claims based on nothing but a hunch.

It seems like people want them to be guilty just because they’re shitty parents.

I haven't remarked upon the McCann's facial expressions to decide upon their guilt, & you are right about certain things which I can wholeheartedly agree with, it's my last post on this subject as I feel I've said enough, it's a big ugly question mark which will always be left hanging whether she was really abducted or a more sinister event happened, like I said earlier we will go to our graves not really knowing for certain.

Bfc34 · Post by **Bfc34** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:02 am

Why did Kate run back to the restaurant leaving her twins in bed when her daughter had just disappeared. Surely you'd stay with them incase of any more danger and shout or ring for help?

Why did she say she looked for maddie under the bed? The bed was a divan that goes down to the floor.

Why did she let over 20 people in the childs room after the event? It was a crime scene.

Why was the shutter and window closed? They told the police it was wide open when they found her gone. Also the only print on the window or shutter was Kate's.

If maddie was taken from somebody opening the shutter from the outside why was there no damage to the shutter or noise when it was forced open? The police said it could be only opened from the inside and it hadn't been forced.

The big one for me.. why did she shout 'they've taken maddaline'? Surly the 1st thing you'd shout would be 'maddie is missing' or 'maddie has disappeared'. Who's they?

To be fair I don't think they killed her but something doesn't seem right.

By the way she was advised not to show emotion in front of the cameras in case the abductor got gratification from her suffering.

Lord Beamish · Post by **Lord Beamish** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:26 am

Jakubclaret wrote: like I said earlier we will go to our graves not really knowing for certain.

I’ll go to my grave not really caring one way or the other.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:48 am

Bfc34 wrote:Why did she say she looked for maddie under the bed? The bed was a divan that goes down to the floor.

The documentary actually showed an image of the bed, and it was raised off the floor but maybe only by about 6 inches. If your child had gone missing from that room are you telling me that you wouldn't at least check under the bed just to rule it out?

Billy Balfour · Post by **Billy Balfour** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:49 am

Lord Beamish wrote:I’ll go to my grave not really caring one way or the other.

Yet you just had to comment.

Bfc34 · Post by **Bfc34** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:51 am

Rileybobs wrote:The documentary actually showed an image of the bed, and it was raised off the floor but maybe only by about 6 inches. If your child had gone missing from that room are you telling me that you wouldn't at least check under the bed just to rule it out?

I'd look absolutely everywhere.

Lord Beamish · Post by **Lord Beamish** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 11:51 am

Billy Balfour wrote:Yet you just had to comment.

Yes. This is an open forum, after all.

Billy Balfour · Post by **Billy Balfour** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 12:00 pm

Lord Beamish wrote:Yes. This is an open forum, after all.

Quite. I think it's highly commendable that you find the time to comment on things you don't care about. It shows commitment.

Lord Beamish · Post by **Lord Beamish** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 12:15 pm

Billy Balfour wrote:Quite. I think it's highly commendable that you find the time to comment on things you don't care about. It shows commitment.

It’s more a comment upon how people on this thread are over thinking it.

Quicknick · Post by **Quicknick** » Thu Mar 21, 2019 6:12 pm

Richard D. Hall: watch his YouTube videos.

SmudgetheClaret · Post by **SmudgetheClaret** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 1:49 pm

Disappearance of the money given to the Mc Canns more like..

FCBurnley · Post by **FCBurnley** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:52 pm

I just watched the whole series. The question I would like answering is `When was the last confirmed sighting of Maddie by someone other than a parent`. Surely you start your investigation from that point and work your way forward. Has this question been asked and if so does anyone know the answer ?

WestMidsClaret · Post by **WestMidsClaret** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:02 pm

FCBurnley wrote:I just watched the whole series. The question I would like answering is `When was the last confirmed sighting of Maddie by someone other than a parent`. Surely you start your investigation from that point and work your way forward. Has this question been asked and if so does anyone know the answer ?

Watch the series by Richard D Hall as someone has recommended above, it's an eye opener and though it doesn't give definitive answers I think you'll find it interesting.

Here's the link. There's a few documentaries on Madeleine, the "bloke" carrying a "child" and why the cover up.

https://youtu.be/_yYwFnglhtw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Goalposts · Post by **Goalposts** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:39 pm

i suspect they drugged there kids to sleep so they could go out.... got the dose wrong and covered it up

WestMidsClaret · Post by **WestMidsClaret** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 5:21 pm

Goalposts wrote:i suspect they drugged there kids to sleep so they could go out.... got the dose wrong and covered it up

I thought that but then I saw the amount of people, who they were and even the timings of when certain people arrived on the scene. It just seems a bit excessive for something like that. I think its bigger then that and some people needed to make sure that certain details didn't get out about something.

Goalposts · Post by **Goalposts** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 5:32 pm

i think it was common practise among the group to drug there kids....thats were the shared culpability comes in

WestMidsClaret · Post by **WestMidsClaret** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 7:00 pm

Goalposts wrote:i think it was common practise among the group to drug there kids....thats were the shared culpability comes in

Maybe but it doesn't explain why there was certain people and organisations there especially early doors. We'll probably never find out the real reason unless someone breaks their silence. Whatever happened more then likely a little girl probably lost her life that was no fault of her own and that is the biggest crime of all.

Steve1956 · Post by **Steve1956** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 7:05 pm

Shite parents....end of..

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:14 pm

The poor child deserved so much better that is for sure. I’m sure if they didn’t do it or didn’t have other children they wouldn’t be able to live with themselves for such negligence.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:25 pm

Blackrod wrote:The poor child deserved so much better that is for sure. I’m sure if they didn’t do it or didn’t have other children they wouldn’t be able to live with themselves for such negligence.

Imagine the guilt they must live with, on top of the totally unfounded accusations from millions of people that they had some part in her disappearance.

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:11 pm

They are not totally unfounded which is why millions believe this could be the case.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:47 pm

Blackrod wrote:They are not totally unfounded which is why millions believe this could be the case.

What credible evidence points towards the parents' involvement?

Quicknick · Post by **Quicknick** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:50 am

Rileybobs wrote:What credible evidence points towards the parents' involvement?

As I said earlier, watch the Richard D. Hall investigative journalism series. That will give you an idea.

fidelcastro · Post by **fidelcastro** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 8:08 am

Quicknick wrote:As I said earlier, watch the Richard D. Hall investigative journalism series. That will give you an idea.

Isn't he that American comedian who looks like Moe from 'The Simpsons'?

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 9:31 am

Quicknick wrote:As I said earlier, watch the Richard D. Hall investigative journalism series. That will give you an idea.

I’d rather somebody just point to some evidence that the parents were involved than sit through a documentary by a conspiracy theorist UFO hunter.

morpheus2 · Post by **morpheus2** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 9:57 am

Rileybobs wrote:I’d rather somebody just point to some evidence that the parents were involved than sit through a documentary by a conspiracy theorist UFO hunter.

I must confess, the content in the Richard Hall Youtube documentaries is extremely convincing and very damning towards the McCanns...But then when the next video in the Richard Hall playlist is some ridiculous 9:11 conspiracy involving remote control planes and all the rest of the conspiracy nut garbage that goes with it, it takes a little bit of the credence away from the credibility his other content.

Having said that, the main part of his McCann stuff still seems pretty legit and undebunkable.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 10:00 am

morpheus2 wrote:I must confess, the content in the Richard Hall Youtube documentaries is extremely convincing and very damning towards the McCanns...But then when the next video in the Richard Hall playlist is some ridiculous 9:11 conspiracy involving remote control planes and all the rest of the conspiracy nut garbage that goes with it, it takes a little bit of the credence away from the credibility his other content.

Having said that, the main part of his McCann stuff still seems pretty legit and undebunkable.

But is it real evidence or just clips of the McCanns laughing etc? Is there any credible evidence to suggest they played a part in their daughters disappearance?

WestMidsClaret · Post by **WestMidsClaret** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:28 am

To be fair there's no credible evidence an abductor took her either. Again all hearsay.

There was a "witness" to say she saw a bloke carrying a child but a gp said it was likely him as it matched his description and he said he was carrying his 2 year old that night. His wife confirmed that. They told the police but didn't hear anything for years. The bed madeleine was supposed to have slept in the night she went missing didn't look like anyone who had been in there (police pictures). Then there's the messing about with the holiday pictures. Instead of just handing over the camera they picked out their own pictures and put them on disks. There was also conflicting stories by both parents to how she was sleeping on/in the bed.

There's too many contradicting stories just to swallow what was written in the press and what the McCann's said.

WestMidsClaret · Post by **WestMidsClaret** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 11:38 am

And I'm not necessarily saying the parents killed her or covered anything up, I, like everyone else don't know either way but there are some serious questions and situations that came up and were never answered that makes people sit up and wonder.

Goalposts · Post by **Goalposts** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:04 pm

During eleven hours of interrogation, Kate McCann refused to answer 48 specific questions.

Madeleine's mother, who was legally represented in the interview, stayed silent as Portuguese police threw a series of questions at her that made clear they thought she was involved in her daughter's disappearance.

She answered only once - when accused of harming the hunt for Madeleine by her silence.

Kate McCann: She only answered one question during 11 hours of interrogation

These are the questions:

1. On May 3 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?

2. Did you search inside the bedroom wardrobe? (she replied that she wouldn’t answer)

3. (shown 2 photographs of her bedroom wardrobe) Can you describe its contents?

4. Why had the curtain behind the sofa in front of the side window (whose photo was shown to her) been tampered with? Did somebody go behind that sofa?

5. How long did your search of the apartment take after you detected your daughter Madeleine’s disappearance?

6. Why did you say from the start that Madeleine had been abducted?

7. Assuming Madeleine had been abducted, why did you leave the twins home alone to go to the ‘Tapas’ and raise the alarm? Because the supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.

8. Why didn’t you ask the twins, at that moment, what had happened to their sister or why didn’t you ask them later on?

9. When you raised the alarm at the ‘Tapas’ what exactly did you say and what were your exact words?

10. What happened after you raised the alarm in the ‘Tapas’?

11. Why did you go and warn your friends instead of shouting from the verandah?

12. Who contacted the authorities?

13. Who took place in the searches?

14. Did anyone outside of the group learn of Madeleine’s disappearance in those following minutes?

15. Did any neighbour offer you help after the disappearance?

16. What does 'we let her down' mean?

17. Did Jane tell you that night that she’d seen a man with a child?

18. How were the authorities contacted and which police force was alerted?

19. During the searches, with the police already there, where did you search for Maddie, how and in what way?

20. Why did the twins not wake up during that search or when they were taken upstairs?

21. Who did you phone after the occurrence?

22. Did you call Sky News?

23. Did you know the danger of calling the media, because it could influence the abductor?

24. Did you ask for a priest?

25. By what means did you divulge Madeleine’s features, by photographs or by any other means?

26. Is it true that during the searches you remained seated on Maddie’s bed without moving?

27. What was your behaviour that night?

28. Did you manage to sleep?

29. Before travelling to Portugal did you make any comment about a foreboding or a bad feeling?

30. What was Madeleine’s behaviour like?

31. Did Maddie suffer from any illness or take any medication?

32. What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister?

33. What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister, friends and school mates?

34. As for your professional life, in how many and which hospitals have you worked?

35. What is your medical specialty?

36. Have you ever done shift work in any emergency services or other services?

37. Did you work every day?

38. At a certain point you stopped working, why?

39. Are the twins difficult to get to sleep? Are they restless and does that cause you uneasiness?

40. Is it true that sometimes you despaired with your children’s behaviour and that left you feeling very uneasy?

41. Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?

42. In England, did you medicate your children? What type of medication?

43. In the case files you were SHOWN CANINE forensic testing films, where you can see them marking due to detection of the scent of human corpse and blood traces, also human, and only human, as well as all the comments of the technician in charge of them. After watching and after the marking of the scent of corpse in your bedroom beside the wardrobe and behind the sofa, pushed up against the sofa wall, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

44. When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

45. When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

46. When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

47. When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, whose analysis was carried out in a British laboratory, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

48. Did you have any responsibility or intervention in your daughter’s disappearance?

A QUESTION SHE DID ANSWER

Q. Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

A. 'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'

Goalposts · Post by **Goalposts** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:04 pm

whilst not eveidence is highly circumspect behaviour

WestMidsClaret · Post by **WestMidsClaret** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:12 pm

Goalposts wrote:whilst not eveidence is highly circumspect behaviour

To be fair they were probably advised not to say anything either by their solicitor or PR agent. They probably heard or something happened that meant they might incriminate themselves by answering certain questions. But most people would do whatever they could to help the police unless they found the police were looking at them.

FCBurnley · Post by **FCBurnley** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 2:14 pm

WestMidsClaret wrote:Watch the series by Richard D Hall as someone has recommended above, it's an eye opener and though it doesn't give definitive answers I think you'll find it interesting.

Here's the link. There's a few documentaries on Madeleine, the "bloke" carrying a "child" and why the cover up.

https://youtu.be/_yYwFnglhtw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for the link. Half way through watching and so far very interesting. Not doing the parents any favours at all

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:33 pm

Goalposts wrote:During eleven hours of interrogation, Kate McCann refused to answer 48 specific questions.

Madeleine's mother, who was legally represented in the interview, stayed silent as Portuguese police threw a series of questions at her that made clear they thought she was involved in her daughter's disappearance.

She answered only once - when accused of harming the hunt for Madeleine by her silence.

Kate McCann: She only answered one question during 11 hours of interrogation

These are the questions:

1. On May 3 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?

2. Did you search inside the bedroom wardrobe? (she replied that she wouldn’t answer)

3. (shown 2 photographs of her bedroom wardrobe) Can you describe its contents?

4. Why had the curtain behind the sofa in front of the side window (whose photo was shown to her) been tampered with? Did somebody go behind that sofa?

5. How long did your search of the apartment take after you detected your daughter Madeleine’s disappearance?

6. Why did you say from the start that Madeleine had been abducted?

7. Assuming Madeleine had been abducted, why did you leave the twins home alone to go to the ‘Tapas’ and raise the alarm? Because the supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.

8. Why didn’t you ask the twins, at that moment, what had happened to their sister or why didn’t you ask them later on?

9. When you raised the alarm at the ‘Tapas’ what exactly did you say and what were your exact words?

10. What happened after you raised the alarm in the ‘Tapas’?

11. Why did you go and warn your friends instead of shouting from the verandah?

12. Who contacted the authorities?

13. Who took place in the searches?

14. Did anyone outside of the group learn of Madeleine’s disappearance in those following minutes?

15. Did any neighbour offer you help after the disappearance?

16. What does 'we let her down' mean?

17. Did Jane tell you that night that she’d seen a man with a child?

18. How were the authorities contacted and which police force was alerted?

19. During the searches, with the police already there, where did you search for Maddie, how and in what way?

20. Why did the twins not wake up during that search or when they were taken upstairs?

21. Who did you phone after the occurrence?

22. Did you call Sky News?

23. Did you know the danger of calling the media, because it could influence the abductor?

24. Did you ask for a priest?

25. By what means did you divulge Madeleine’s features, by photographs or by any other means?

26. Is it true that during the searches you remained seated on Maddie’s bed without moving?

27. What was your behaviour that night?

28. Did you manage to sleep?

29. Before travelling to Portugal did you make any comment about a foreboding or a bad feeling?

30. What was Madeleine’s behaviour like?

31. Did Maddie suffer from any illness or take any medication?

32. What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister?

33. What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister, friends and school mates?

34. As for your professional life, in how many and which hospitals have you worked?

35. What is your medical specialty?

36. Have you ever done shift work in any emergency services or other services?

37. Did you work every day?

38. At a certain point you stopped working, why?

39. Are the twins difficult to get to sleep? Are they restless and does that cause you uneasiness?

40. Is it true that sometimes you despaired with your children’s behaviour and that left you feeling very uneasy?

41. Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?

42. In England, did you medicate your children? What type of medication?

43. In the case files you were SHOWN CANINE forensic testing films, where you can see them marking due to detection of the scent of human corpse and blood traces, also human, and only human, as well as all the comments of the technician in charge of them. After watching and after the marking of the scent of corpse in your bedroom beside the wardrobe and behind the sofa, pushed up against the sofa wall, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

44. When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

45. When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

46. When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

47. When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, whose analysis was carried out in a British laboratory, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?

48. Did you have any responsibility or intervention in your daughter’s disappearance?

A QUESTION SHE DID ANSWER

Q. Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

A. 'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'

Pretty sure that was about 90 days after her disappearance at which point Kate McCann was being interrogated as a suspect. If I were in her position and my lawyer advised me to not answer the questions I would do the same. She had given her accounts to the police in the 3 months beforehand and by this point they were not attempting to find Madeleine but to pin the blame on the parents.

Like everyone else, all people can point to is slightly unusual behaviour, which I'd say is to be expected from a couple who have just lost a child partly through their negligence.

FactualFrank · Post by **FactualFrank** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 4:31 pm

This is a link to the sniffer dogs checking out the apartment and car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lrrMoUr3OA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Eddie was trained to bark only when he detected the scent of human remains.
Keela was trained to signal when blood was detected.

Not sure why this evidence wasn't given more credit.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 5:23 pm

FactualFrank wrote:This is a link to the sniffer dogs checking out the apartment and car.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lrrMoUr3OA" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Eddie was trained to bark only when he detected the scent of human remains.
Keela was trained to signal when blood was detected.

Not sure why this evidence wasn't given more credit.

The sniffer dogs are a useful resource but their signals must be backed up by evidence. There was no blood found where the dog signalled that it had detected blood, and there was obviously no body found where the dog signalled that it had detected human remains.

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 6:25 pm

They sniff the scent of a dead body. Quite creepy when you watch it. When they bark only at the McCanns hire car and no others it is very strange.

mkmel · Post by **mkmel** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 6:26 pm

Rileybobs wrote:Pretty sure that was about 90 days after her disappearance at which point Kate McCann was being interrogated as a suspect. If I were in her position and my lawyer advised me to not answer the questions I would do the same. She had given her accounts to the police in the 3 months beforehand and by this point they were not attempting to find Madeleine but to pin the blame on the parents.

Like everyone else, all people can point to is slightly unusual behaviour, which I'd say is to be expected from a couple who have just lost a child partly through their negligence.

"partly through their negligence"

I would say completely through their negligence putting all of their kids at risk

If they had been decent parents they would have either have stayed in with their children or taken them with them
If they had done either of these things their child still be with them

So yes completely through their negligence

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 6:33 pm

And they're middle-class, too !
Result !

mkmel · Post by **mkmel** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 6:42 pm

And why wasn't all this time and money given also to the disappearance of a single mothers son Ben Needham

He went missing in Kos

evensteadiereddie · Post by **evensteadiereddie** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 7:03 pm

Have a guess.
But, to be fair, that lack of interest in the young lad's disappearance is not the McCanns' fault.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Sat Mar 23, 2019 7:22 pm

Blackrod wrote:They sniff the scent of a dead body. Quite creepy when you watch it. When they bark only at the McCanns hire car and no others it is very strange.

I saw the clips in the documentary and it is a little strange. But then again we haven’t seen how reliable those dogs are and how good their strike rate is. I’m sure they can pick up the scent of dead bodies and blood traces but that’s not to say every time they bark they have detected either. And why were there no traces of blood found where the dog barked?

It’s coming to something when the most damning ‘evidence’ against the parents is a couple of dogs barking.

And what is more strange is that the hire car was rented 25 days after she disappeared. So that makes the theory that her dead body was in the car utterly ridiculous.