Ed Madeleine McCann Mystery

IamFreeCanIGo said:
One of the questions was regarding the timelines and Jane Tanners witness statement. Basically, the mccanns wrote down their timeline, and the the rest of the tapas 9 wrote down their timeline, both included the 9:15 sighting of jane tanner in the timeline.

However later Jane Tanner said she did not inform the mccanns about the abduction until 24 hours later because she was embarrassed. So it brings up the question of how did the mccanns know to write it in their timeline.
Click to expand...

When did the McCanns write down their timeline?
 
Matthew Best said:
When did the McCanns write down their timeline?
Click to expand...

And if you had happened to find your child missing and call the police would you not expect to make a statement of when the children were checked to aid with the search for the missing child, even if she walked off alone?

Would you not ask your friends to help you remember?

Seems reasonable even as a form of coping with the situation.
 
IamFreeCanIGo said:
Moving along anyway. What evidence is their for an abduction? Instead of trying to dismiss evidence that may incriminate the McCanns, lets look at evidence for the other.

- What evidence or what is the best evidence that Maddie was abducted? (leaving aside the whole shes missing aspect)

- Why was no dna, or finger/glove print of an intruder found in the apartment? To jimmie open a shutter would suggest a bit of force was used.
Click to expand...

The best evidence that she was abducted is that a child that age who wonders off on their own accord rarely goes far. There was nothing nearby that she could have fallen into or been accidentally trapped whereby she would not have been found by now. For example tge swimming pool. The Ben Needham disappearence recently attracted publicity when a collapsed wall was excavated as it was pointed out he could have been there when it collapsed. There was no trace which further suggests he was taken.

Then the apartments location etc suggests abducted rather than murdered or wondered off.

Abduction is the most likely out of killed at the appartment or wondered off on their own and never found. So the bulk of the investigation is targetted at that.
 
Nessie said:
The best evidence that she was abducted is that a child that age who wonders off on their own accord rarely goes far. There was nothing nearby that she could have fallen into or been accidentally trapped whereby she would not have been found by now. For example tge swimming pool. The Ben Needham disappearence recently attracted publicity when a collapsed wall was excavated as it was pointed out he could have been there when it collapsed. There was no trace which further suggests he was taken.

Then the apartments location etc suggests abducted rather than murdered or wondered off.

Abduction is the most likely out of killed at the appartment or wondered off on their own and never found. So the bulk of the investigation is targetted at that.
Click to expand...

Fair points. But it worth noting that as others have pointed out in this thread, there is a lot of grey areas and it may well be a mistake to assume we are looking at either/or scenarios. Not everything you listed is mutually exclusive and though the lack of body or living child makes an abduction one of the higher probabilities, if it were from the apartment, if the child for some reason woke and left the apartment then happened to be abducted, or if something else happened.
 
Tomtomkent said:
And if you had happened to find your child missing and call the police would you not expect to make a statement of when the children were checked to aid with the search for the missing child, even if she walked off alone?

Would you not ask your friends to help you remember?

Seems reasonable even as a form of coping with the situation.
Click to expand...


No, you are missing the point. Nobody is saying its suspicious they wrote the timeline, it was done at the request of the pj. The issue is it was apparently done before jane tanner had told them about her seeing a man carrying a girl

from the released police interview with Jane Tanner

4078 “Did you ever have a reaction from Kate and Gerry about what you had seen and how you felt about what you had seen?”
Reply “Not a, I mean, we hardly saw, in those first few days we hardly saw them at all really, you know, because they were so, they were busy obviously with the Press and with everything else, so I can’t actually remember a specific time that, I think it was, it was actually a few days later that we actually sat down and sort of I actually told them directly what I’d seen. I think you, you know, you assume they know and I think at that stage I was still trying to convince myself that what I had seen hadn’t, didn’t have the significance which I think it did now, you know, and I think, I think that was sort of almost, I was hoping, you know, still hoping it didn’t have a significance”.
4078 “So you were kind of swept up in events after that I should imagine?”
Reply “Umm”.
4078 “You were taken for interviews and you mentioned this surveillance thing, how long after?”
Reply “Oh that was a long time”.
Click to expand...


I cant link on laptop, but looking at a timeline written and signed by Gerry McCann that has the tanner signting on it, according to other interviews, the timelines did seem to be written the night maddie disappeared
 
Abduction is the most likely out of killed at the appartment or wondered off on their own and never found. So the bulk of the investigation is targetted at that.
Click to expand...

So something with no evidence (abduction) is more likely than something that does have evidence to suggest (died in apartment), the cadaver odor.
 
IamFreeCanIGo said:
I'm not familiar with those cases, but i guess they know an intruder was present due to some other evidence pointing to that? Is their any evidence that supports the intruder scenario?

I have not verified this but just mentioning it because its interesting and its sort of related. There was a list of suggested questions sent to the McCanns book publisher, before it was released, for the McCanns to address in the book.

One of the questions was regarding the timelines and Jane Tanners witness statement. Basically, the mccanns wrote down their timeline, and the the rest of the tapas 9 wrote down their timeline, both included the 9:15 sighting of jane tanner in the timeline.

However later Jane Tanner said she did not inform the mccanns about the abduction until 24 hours later because she was embarrassed. So it brings up the question of how did the mccanns know to write it in their timeline.

I'll check later, to make sure the jane tanner statement is legit, i think i remember she did say that, but not sure.
Click to expand...
Because Gerry McCann was present when Jane Tanner told the police about her sighting.

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39077595/Rebuttal of "Fact" 8
 
Tomtomkent said:
Fair points. But it worth noting that as others have pointed out in this thread, there is a lot of grey areas and it may well be a mistake to assume we are looking at either/or scenarios. Not everything you listed is mutually exclusive and though the lack of body or living child makes an abduction one of the higher probabilities, if it were from the apartment, if the child for some reason woke and left the apartment then happened to be abducted, or if something else happened.
Click to expand...

Indeed and the investigators will know that. But they will also know to prioritise the more likely scenario.

It is highly unlikely Maddie wondered out the apartment and went somewhere were she was killed or trapped and died like falling into the pool such that her remains have not been found. It is unlikely her parents were involved in her death and later disposal of her remains. It is most likely she was abducted.

I just do not see how anyone can find such likelyhoods as wrong and be sure she was not abducted. It is wrong to claim believing such likelyhoods means you have ruled out all possibilities other than abduction.
 
Agatha said:
Because Gerry McCann was present when Jane Tanner told the police about her sighting.

http://madeleinemythsexposed.pbworks.com/w/page/39077595/Rebuttal of "Fact" 8
Click to expand...


If Jane mentioned it to someone, and the McCanns found out that night. Why didn't they go to Jane and ask her about it, if i found out my child had gone missing and someone told me that they had seen a man, id go ask them about it.

Either way, i agree its not a great indicator of anything, was just something i came across that was relevent to what was being talked about at the time
 
IamFreeCanIGo said:
So something with no evidence (abduction) is more likely than something that does have evidence to suggest (died in apartment), the cadaver odor.
Click to expand...

There is an investigatory check list called MAGICOP. Motive, ability, guilty intent, identifcation, conduct after the crime , opportunity, preparation.

For the McCanns killing Maddie the motive is not there, the ability is but children are easy relatively speaking to kill. The guilty intent is abscent as there is no reason for them to have killed her. The identification is nil for Kate and vague at best for Gerry with the Smith sighting. The conduct after the crime suggests no involvement in her death. There is scant opportunity for them to have killed her and disposed her body. There is no sign of preparation to kil her.

To get guilt you need ALL of the above to be present and evidenced. If you could put the DNA with the sniffer dog evidence and fit it into the above with other strong evidence then you can start to look seriously at them having killed their child and disposed of her body. But so much of MAGICOP is not there or very very week.

Then there is elimination. A search of the immediate area and no trace of Maddie makes her wondering off and dyinh very unlikely. So that is pretty much eliminated. The idea the McCanns were involved in her death and disposal of the remains has week and inconclusive evidence. So again abduction becomes the most likely by process of elimination.

The police are more methodical that speculative and hunches are for detective novels.
 
Nessie said:
Indeed and the investigators will know that. But they will also know to prioritise the more likely scenario.

It is highly unlikely Maddie wondered out the apartment and went somewhere were she was killed or trapped and died like falling into the pool such that her remains have not been found. It is unlikely her parents were involved in her death and later disposal of her remains. It is most likely she was abducted.

I just do not see how anyone can find such likelyhoods as wrong and be sure she was not abducted. It is wrong to claim believing such likelyhoods means you have ruled out all possibilities other than abduction.
Click to expand...


Actually in cases of missing children in these circumstances, its more likely the parents are involved.
 
Nessie said:
There is an investigatory check list called MAGICOP. Motive, ability, guilty intent, identifcation, conduct after the crime , opportunity, preparation.

For the McCanns killing Maddie the motive is not there, the ability is but children are easy relatively speaking to kill. The guilty intent is abscent as there is no reason for them to have killed her. The identification is nil for Kate and vague at best for Gerry with the Smith sighting. The conduct after the crime suggests no involvement in her death. There is scant opportunity for them to have killed her and disposed her body. There is no sign of preparation to kil her.

To get guilt you need ALL of the above to be present and evidenced. If you could put the DNA with the sniffer dog evidence and fit it into the above with other strong evidence then you can start to look seriously at them having killed their child and disposed of her body. But so much of MAGICOP is not there or very very week.

Then there is elimination. A search of the immediate area and no trace of Maddie makes her wondering off and dyinh very unlikely. So that is pretty much eliminated. The idea the McCanns were involved in her death and disposal of the remains has week and inconclusive evidence. So again abduction becomes the most likely by process of elimination.

The police are more methodical that speculative and hunches are for detective novels.
Click to expand...

In your opinion.
 
IamFreeCanIGo said:
Actually in cases of missing children in these circumstances, its more likely the parents are involved.
Click to expand...

I think you will find that in cases of missing children the most likely by far is they are found quickly and nearby.

Otherwise when I am not on my phone I will look to see what evidence there is as to wether or not parental infanticide is more common or not that abduction in the case of long term missing children.
 
Nessie said:
I think you will find that in cases of missing children the most likely by far is they are found quickly and nearby.



Otherwise when I am not on my phone I will look to see what evidence there is as to wether or not parental infanticide is more common or not that abduction in the case of long term missing children.
Click to expand...

-But she has not been found quickly and nearby, so its irrelevent

-Why would you do that? Thats not what anyone is saying.
 
IamFreeCanIGo said:
So something with no evidence (abduction) is more likely than something that does have evidence to suggest (died in apartment), the cadaver odor.
Click to expand...

Somthing with no evidence is a more reasonable supposition that something that has shown to be your misinterpretation and wishful thinking, yes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom