Madeleine McCann

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

'Is it not obvious that they, like the McCann couple, had an erroneous view of what kind of environment they were in?'

I'm not sure what is meant by 'environment'- maybe a holiday resort where there were had been a number of break ins?

Is it certain that the McCanns or their friends knew about the break-ins or that they knew that any child had previously been abducted?


I would have thought that basic common sense would have prevented anyone from leaving such young children alone inside an apartment with an unlocked door. (If that was the case.)

I agree, but is lacking common sense a crime?


Speculation about the children of the Tapas group being sedated was there right from the beginning.

Speculation is not evidence.

The McCanns claimed that tests on hair belonging to their children showed no traces of sedatives.


The public could accept that one set of parents might have been reckless enough to leave young children alone, but all of them? All who happened to be doctors? An entire group of trained professionals who all made exactly the same massive miscalculation, as any common or garden parent could have explained to them in a matter of minutes? It didn't sit right then and it doesn't sit right now.

Acting in such a way as to make it easier for a criminal to victimise one does not make one an accessory to a crime.


Of course Kate McCann had the right to remain silent if she thought she was a suspect. But the PJ had every right to regard her as such and they also had the right to draw inferences from her refusal to answer any of the questions.

There was no evidence against her.

As in the Chamberlain case, no charges should ever have been contemplated because the McCanns, like the Chamberlains, could not conceivably have disposed of their child's body.

If a policeman presents a distraught parent with questions which assume she is guilty of disposing of her child's body, he has no right to draw any inference from her refusal to degrade herself by answering those questions.

[Sunny Delight]

That's the exact scenario that the police are investigating in reference to the German suspect, Christian Brueckner.

The most likely scenario to my mind.

[Sunny Delight]

'Is it not obvious that they, like the McCann couple, had an erroneous view of what kind of environment they were in?'

I'm not sure what is meant by 'environment'- maybe a holiday resort where there were had been a number of break ins? I would have thought that basic common sense would have prevented anyone from leaving such young children alone inside an apartment with an unlocked door. (If that was the case.)

Speculation about the children of the Tapas group being sedated was there right from the beginning. The public could accept that one set of parents might have been reckless enough to leave young children alone, but all of them? All who happened to be doctors? An entire group of trained professionals who all made exactly the same massive miscalculation, as any common or garden parent could have explained to them in a matter of minutes? It didn't sit right then and it doesn't sit right now.

Of course Kate McCann had the right to remain silent if she thought she was a suspect. But the PJ had every right to regard her as such and they also had the right to draw inferences from her refusal to answer any of the questions.

The break ins only became public knowledge in 2013 after the MET's investigation. At the time the McCanns stayed they couldn't have been aware of the break ins. It was kept quiet so as not to affect the tourist trade. You are looking at the case with hindsight. But yes an unlocked door would have been very risky and I would always have felt that way.

The PJ files make it clear that the Tapas group had been in Greece the previous year and the hotel had offered a 'listening service'. Essentially this service was an employee checking the hotel rooms of sleeping children by listening at the door and reporting back to the parents every 20 mins or so. The Tapas group decided that on the holiday to Algarve they would do a DIY listening service by taking turns to check their children and then listening for any cries in their friends apartments. 2007 was 16 years ago but surely baby monitors were freely available then. But that was the decision they made. Speculation of 'sedation' of their children by the group is simply that. Speculation. No evidence has ever been presented to even suggest it apart from those with feverish imaginations.

You still have not answered my question. If it was an accidental overdose what did the McCanns do with her body for 26 days before transporting it in the car. If the body was left outside or in a shallow grave the temperatures would have meant decomposition to such an extent that it would have been irretrievable. So do you subscribe to the view that the McCanns acquired a fridge to store the body before transporting it 26 days later in the hire car? Because that to Mr is an utterly preposterous theory.

[rjpalmer]

It’s possible that a thief struck lucky with an open door then turned his attentions to abduction instead

That's the exact scenario that the police are investigating in reference to the German suspect, Christian Brueckner.

[cobalt]

'Is it not obvious that they, like the McCann couple, had an erroneous view of what kind of environment they were in?'

I'm not sure what is meant by 'environment'- maybe a holiday resort where there were had been a number of break ins? I would have thought that basic common sense would have prevented anyone from leaving such young children alone inside an apartment with an unlocked door. (If that was the case.)

Speculation about the children of the Tapas group being sedated was there right from the beginning. The public could accept that one set of parents might have been reckless enough to leave young children alone, but all of them? All who happened to be doctors? An entire group of trained professionals who all made exactly the same massive miscalculation, as any common or garden parent could have explained to them in a matter of minutes? It didn't sit right then and it doesn't sit right now.

Of course Kate McCann had the right to remain silent if she thought she was a suspect. But the PJ had every right to regard her as such and they also had the right to draw inferences from her refusal to answer any of the questions.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

I defended them against the charge that they are not fit and proper parents.

[Darryl Kenyon]

I used to take my daughter away on my own for a few days to a week , three times a year at various holiday camps/parks in this country from the age of 3 to 11 [ when I started going with my partner and her daughter ]. Not once, not ever did I leave my daughter in a chalet or apartment on her own at night. I would not dream of it, even though child listening services were available etc
I find it completely distasteful that anyone would defend the Mcann's or any of the Tapas seven on this issue.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

It seems that five children of the so-called Tapas Seven, seven friends of the McCann couple, most of whom were also physicians, were also left unattended on the night that Madeleine vanished.

Are they too not fit and proper parents?

Is it not obvious that they, like the McCann couple, had an erroneous view of what kind of environment they were in?

They could not have realised how risky what they were doing was.

[ohrocky]

I think it extremely unlikely that the McCann's killed Maddie or had any involvement in her disappearance. What I am 100% certain of though is that the McCann's were guilty of child neglect. They are not fit and proper parents; they abandoned a young child in a strange apartment in a foreign country just so they could go and get p*ssed.

Had the McCann's been working class manual workers rather than middle-class "professionals", I am certain that social services would have been all over them. They should have had Maddie's siblings taken into care as they clearly prioritised going out drinking over caring for their child (who, as reported, was upset when her parents had done the same thing the previous night).

The parents are the people who will not be blamed for nothing.

[Sunny Delight]

There’s a lot of crackpots and bonkers people around if SD is to be believed. There isn’t much mileage in pointing out as a revelation something which was established in a previous post: that any response by a cadaver dogs is indicative, not probative. I’m sure most of us are aware that cadaver dogs can’t talk but unlike people, they can’t lie either.

The PJ established that no one had entered through the bedroom window of the McCanns’ apartment. The undisturbed lichen on the window sill was noted very quickly so if an intruder did enter the property it was certainly not through the window. It’s possible that a thief struck lucky with an open door then turned his attentions to abduction instead, but the Alesha McPhail murder is not much use in supporting this scenario. The murderer, Campbell, did enter through an unlocked front door and he took the child from her bedroom to an abandoned property where he assaulted and killed her. However he took Alesha from the house because her grandmother was sleeping in another room and any activity would likely have woken her. This would not have been the case with Madeleine McCann. Since this happened around 2am, not 10pm, it is unsurprising no one spotted him carrying the girl away. And little attempt was made to hide the body of Alesha after his murderous instincts were satisfied- she was found soon after being reported missing. This is clearly not the case with Madeleine McCann.

I would describe a number of actions by the McCanns as suspicious but the most egregious is the claim by Kate McCann that her daughter had asked where her parents were the previous night when she, Madeleine, woke up and called for them. This disturbing admission (if true) did not prevent the parents going out and leaving the children the following evening. So not only did the McCanns consider leaving children under five alone in an apartment well within the bounds of responsible parenting, they continued to do so even after their daughter had reported feeling anxious when she awoke to find them absent. And to add to the suspicion, the McCanns enjoyed the company of parents who just happened to hold exactly the same views on child safety as themselves.

I take PI’s point about the McCanns having no need to prove their innocence but not all of the 48 questions put to Kate McCann were assuming her being guilty of anything. It’s widely accepted that in any murder case the police have to eliminate immediate family which can be a very distressing experience for those involved: the PJ would have been rightly criticised had they not attempted to do so.

Your initial post queried why anyone would remove the child from the bedroom if they were intent on indulging their depraved fantasies. If this was a robbery which acted as an inadvertent opportunity for such a person then they would be aware that there was a possibility of someone returning and catching them in the act. What the Aleisha McPhail case shows is that this type of incident is very spur of the moment and therefore it is extremely difficult to pre-empt someones thought processes in that moment. As I say the likeliest solution is that the perpetrator feared someone returning.

By the time the 48 questions were put to Kate they were suspects. I don't blame her for stonewalling them. I would have as well. They were a disgrace. If you believe in the Cavidar dog evidence then answer the question how and when did the McCanns dispose of Madeleine's body. If the dogs are to be believed they waited at least 26 days before doing so. Where was the body stored in that time? You see it's easy to pick fairly superficial evidence and try to use it as something stronger but once you dig into it the whole thing falls apart.

The fact that Madeleine woke up and had asked her parents why they had not comforted the babies when crying the night before is not reflective of any guilt. Sure they went out the next night and and I think any right minded person would find that sickening. Indeed I find it disgraceful to treat your children like that even if you did have periodic checks on them. They were off drinking wine and enjoying themselves whilst their kids were alone in the apartment. Ridiculous behaviour. However it does not prove that they killed Madeleine nor does it even remotely suggest they had anything to do with her disappearance. I think we can all make our own judgements on their actions that night. But they paid the ultimate price. And so did their daughter.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Here are the last eight questions of the 48 put to Kate McCann:

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. After watching them, 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, carried out in a British lab, 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?


I recall a comment by a woman online somewhere that any mother in Kate McCann's position who wanted to find her daughter would have answered those questions.

The police line of questioning could not have made it clearer that they believed Kate McCann was involved in her daughter's disappearance and even that she had possibly killed her.

Why should she have cooperated with such an approach?

[cobalt]

There’s a lot of crackpots and bonkers people around if SD is to be believed. There isn’t much mileage in pointing out as a revelation something which was established in a previous post: that any response by a cadaver dogs is indicative, not probative. I’m sure most of us are aware that cadaver dogs can’t talk but unlike people, they can’t lie either.

The PJ established that no one had entered through the bedroom window of the McCanns’ apartment. The undisturbed lichen on the window sill was noted very quickly so if an intruder did enter the property it was certainly not through the window. It’s possible that a thief struck lucky with an open door then turned his attentions to abduction instead, but the Alesha McPhail murder is not much use in supporting this scenario. The murderer, Campbell, did enter through an unlocked front door and he took the child from her bedroom to an abandoned property where he assaulted and killed her. However he took Alesha from the house because her grandmother was sleeping in another room and any activity would likely have woken her. This would not have been the case with Madeleine McCann. Since this happened around 2am, not 10pm, it is unsurprising no one spotted him carrying the girl away. And little attempt was made to hide the body of Alesha after his murderous instincts were satisfied- she was found soon after being reported missing. This is clearly not the case with Madeleine McCann.

I would describe a number of actions by the McCanns as suspicious but the most egregious is the claim by Kate McCann that her daughter had asked where her parents were the previous night when she, Madeleine, woke up and called for them. This disturbing admission (if true) did not prevent the parents going out and leaving the children the following evening. So not only did the McCanns consider leaving children under five alone in an apartment well within the bounds of responsible parenting, they continued to do so even after their daughter had reported feeling anxious when she awoke to find them absent. And to add to the suspicion, the McCanns enjoyed the company of parents who just happened to hold exactly the same views on child safety as themselves.

I take PI’s point about the McCanns having no need to prove their innocence but not all of the 48 questions put to Kate McCann were assuming her being guilty of anything. It’s widely accepted that in any murder case the police have to eliminate immediate family which can be a very distressing experience for those involved: the PJ would have been rightly criticised had they not attempted to do so.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

However it’s more than a scintilla when taken in conjunction with the McCanns’ reported statements, and in the case of Kate McCann, non statement to the PJ.

Kate McCann refused to answer questions which assumed her guilt.

I have read them.

I would have refused to answer them had I been in her position.

I hope and think that you would have done likewise.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

The car was hired 26 days after Madeleine McCann disappeared. In order to preserve her body before transporting it they would have had to get access to a fridge and put their daughters body in there for an extended period of time before retrieving it, transporting it and dumping it. That is what is crackpot.

They were accused of storing Madeleine's body in the fridge in their apartment, transporting her in the boot of their car while a journalist was travelling in it, and then dumping the body in the sea - all without anyone noticing.

Possibly the strangest aspect of the case is that no-one saw the parents do anything wrong or act suspiciously, yet they expected them to prove their innocence.

The case is remarkably similar to the notorious Chamberlain case in Australia, in which the parents lacked the opportunity to commit murder, had no motive, were never seen acting suspiciously or doing anything wrong, yet were convicted of a murder which had not even been committed.

In both cases, the mothers were demonised by the press and public alike and even after the Chamberlains' convictions were quashed, there were people who insisted that they were guilty.

[jason_c]

Because the theory behind it is utterly ridiculous. It should not even be given the time of day its so bonkers. My post above I think covers it. There are some people convinced of their guilt, usually the same people who are anti-vax or believe Trump really won. Some people you just can't reach with sensible conclusions.

I'm not sure there is a unifying theory behind the idea of the McCann's being guilty. I certainly wouldn't like to state with any degree of certainty how they accomplished it IF true. I just know that those telling me there is no way the McCann's are guilty when we have no body and no perp are being unreasonably stubborn. Which is not to say the opposing side are any less unreasonable.

Edit: on second thoughts I'm perhaps being a bit harsh on those who think the McCann's innocent. On balance the McCann's are probably innocent. However, I still cannot say that with any great conviction until we get ourselves a perp.