Justice 4 ALL Madeleine McCann Family
You need to be a member of this forum in order to view its entire contents.
We welcome applications to join the forum from genuine caring compassionate people that wish to support Mr Mrs McCann in their never ending resolve to finding their daughter Madeleine and bringing her back home where she truly belongs.

All applicants are checked out so people with no sense, no moral compass, no rationality and only half a brain cell and even less grip on reality and who are devoid of all logic - need NOT apply!
This also applies to ex-members, who no longer want to be members, yet spend their lives viewing this forum and telling people they no longer want to be members.
This is said without prejudice with no one in particular in mind.

Madeleine abduction 'opportunistic'

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Madeleine abduction 'opportunistic'

Post by vee8 on Fri May 01, 2009 4:48 pm

http://latestnews.virginmedia.com/news/uk/2009/05/01/madeleine_abduction_opportunistic?showCommentThanks=true#commentForm



Madeleine McCann was probably abducted after walking out of her holiday apartment in search of her parents, an expert on her disappearance has said.
Criminologist Mark Williams-Thomas said it was unlikely an abductor entered apartment 5a at the Ocean Club in Praia Da Luz, Portugal.
The former detective said Madeleine was probably snatched by an opportunistic paedophile as she looked for her parents as they ate with friends at a nearby tapas bar.
He said publicly-available evidence leads him to believe the three-year-old arranged her toys on her bed and left through the unlocked patio door.
Mr Williams-Thomas said the case bears striking similarities to the murder of Sarah Payne who was snatched from a West Sussex field nine years ago.
He said: "Is it unreasonable to presume that Madeleine woke up and then went in search of her parents at a restaurant within a holiday complex that she had grown familiar with over the course of her holiday?
"Neatly tucking up her toys - as her parents had done to her - she slipped out of the apartment through an insecure patio door. This seems all the more credible given what we know happened to eight-year-old Sarah Payne who was abducted in July 2000, even though she was only out of sight of her family for a matter of seconds."
Mr Williams-Thomas made his comments after reviewing more than 10,000 documents amassed by Portuguese police during their investigation.
He said an abductor would not have arranged the toys on the bed as he would have wanted to escape as quickly as possible. The expert said a paedophile may have also chosen to take one of the younger and more defenceless twins, Sean and Amelie, who were sleeping nearby. Mr Williams-Thomas said: "Based on the evidence provided from within the case files it is more likely that she was abducted after she had left the apartment. A number of factors suggest that this is the likely scenario."
Gerry and Kate McCann, of Rothley, Leicestershire, will mark the second anniversary of the disappearance of their daughter this weekend. They said the search for Madeleine continues with the "same strength and determination" and they are convinced someone knows where she is.
avatar
vee8
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3113
Location : suffolk
Registration date : 2008-06-24

http://www.madeleine-adestinybegun.co.uk

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine abduction 'opportunistic'

Post by dianeh on Fri May 01, 2009 5:01 pm

Actually as the mother of a little girl who is 4 1/2 and a little boy that is 3 1/2, it is the leaving of the toy behind that proves to me that she did not leave by herself.

My two children do not leave their beds under their own steam and leave their favourite toys behind. I have always maintained that if Madeleine wandered off, she would have taken Cuddle Cat with her.

I also have my doubts about a little girl who was apparently afraid of the dark, wandering out onto the street by herself. I also think she probably knew where her parents were, as she had been to the Tapas bar herself. It was just down the road, she would have known where it was, even at night.

The thing is Mark could be right, or I could be right. He has more experience in these things than I do, but not more experience with children.

If better forensics had been done immediately after Madeleine disappeared, then Mark would know for sure. But if he is using the toys as evidence she wandered off, then he has it back the front, they are actually proof of abduction.

There is only 2 ways I can imagine her leaving the toys.

1. She was asleep, and that means the abductor left CC behind. (Was CC actually tucked in, or just left behind under the covers).
2. She was awake, the person knew her and they both tucked the animal in bed.

ALso, quite frankly, my children do not tuck their toys into bed, they simply fling them around the room or the bed or carry them out with them.

I also thought that Kate knew Madeleine was taken because CC was still there, that she wouldnt have left CC behind. But I am not sure of that, it could just be one of those myths.

But all in all, Mark's theory makes a lot more sense than Amaral's. And there really is nothing to poo poo it, except the toys and that is only subjective, and probably only Kate would know whether Madeleine would have left CC behind.


Last edited by dianeh on Fri May 01, 2009 5:05 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : thought of more to say)
avatar
dianeh
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3465
Age : 53
Location : Outback, Australia
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine abduction 'opportunistic'

Post by clairesy on Fri May 01, 2009 7:57 pm

[quote="dianeh"]Actually as the mother of a little girl who is 4 1/2 and a little boy that is 3 1/2, it is the leaving of the toy behind that proves to me that she did not leave by herself.

My two children do not leave their beds under their own steam and leave their favourite toys behind. I have always maintained that if Madeleine wandered off, she would have taken Cuddle Cat with her.


The thing is Mark could be right, or I could be right. He has more experience in these things than I do, but not more experience with children.


But all in all, Mark's theory makes a lot more sense than Amaral's. And there really is nothing to poo poo it, except the toys and that is only subjective, and probably only Kate would know whether Madeleine would have left CC behind.[/quote]

HIi dianne,

reading marks report there does make sense, more sense than amarals.

Although like you i am very doubtful. I have a small child just a couple months older than madeleine and although she might wake up and get out of bed, she certainly wouldn't walk out of the house if she thought i wasn't there. It would probably scare her and reduce her to tears.Which is exactly what Madeleine was like just two nights before!!!!
My daughter usually goes to bed and stops there for the night although on the occasions where she as gotten out of bed she usually comes into my room bringing her teddy with her! She as always had a cuddly bear or doll in bed with her and i have sometimes woke to find myself smothered by her and a ted or two!!LOL

He might very well have more experience than you me and other parents statistic wise however i wonder if he actually as hands on experience with children himself in this sort of situation. Like you said children would more likely take their teddys or doll with them if they left the room.And even more so if they decided to walk out of the house or apartments!!!

If madeleine did walk out of the apartments that night to look for her parents then i would imagine cuddle cat would have gone looking with her. Also imo madeleine would have left walked to the tapas area and most probably have been seen by someone else before she was spotted by this opportunist peadophile that just happened to be walking by at that exact time.

If (as mark says) madeleine left to look for her parents because she knew her way to the tapas etc('''grown familiar over her holiday with the complex'') then i would also imagine she walked straight to the area and not wandered around aimlessly???

In that case any opportunist peadophile would have had to have been right there right then............imo that makes this case even more of a one in a million chance abduction than it would do if the abductor was watching them and staking them out over a period of a few days!

Although im not saying his theorie is completely impossible, im also thinking that its more unlikely that thats how it happened.

Its unlucky and rare enough that they were probably picked out and watched by an abductor in the first place but to imagine that one just happened to walk by on the off chance just as a small child made a short walk to her parents is even more bizarre.

I don't buy that theorie either,although ilke you im not a professional in the field of work,although i am a professional where my child is concerned,and i know she wouldn't walk out of my home and go searching for me of a night time. NO way! she would probably do just as madeleine done when she was supposedly heard crying for them.

I try to imagine that im in that road that night....and that i see no one around and then a child appears at the bottom of the steps of the apartment.........you wouldn't just walk up to her and take her for fear the parents are watching from the balcony....and the chances of an opportunist abductor just being there right at that specific moment in time are slim......

So i imagine i am in the road as i see her walking down further towards the entrance to the reception tapas bar etc...........I wouldn't want to go and take her because its all lit up at the reception and the chances are someone is going to be watching her and come to rescue her just as i go to grab her!!!

People arrive on holiday at all sorts of times of the day/night.....So i would imagine anyone watching her walking near the reception area that night would also imagine she was being watched by an adult who is also near by.After all it isn't everyday you find a very young child strolling along alone is it.

I believe they were being watched by someone, someone knew very well that Madeleine was alone that night.And although an abductor might not have arranged her teddys neatly on her bed before taking her to be neat etc...... i could also imagine that if she was to be removed slowly and carefully then gently moving her toys away and to the side would have been somethign an abductor would have done before carefully picking her up and walking away with her.

I have picked my daughter up many a times while she sleeps and i have very often had to pries a ted or two from near her and quietly move it to the side before being able to pick her up safely.................... and gently enough not to wake her.
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine abduction 'opportunistic'

Post by Tinkerbell43 on Sat May 02, 2009 9:57 am

I wonder if Madeleines prints were found to be on the patio doors, I wouldn't think sliding patio doors are particularly easy for a little one to open. Would she also think to close them ?

Hmmm food for thought. This would also indicate Kate is lying about the window and I cant see that myself.
avatar
Tinkerbell43
Admin
Admin

Number of posts : 1473
Age : 53
Registration date : 2008-04-18

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine abduction 'opportunistic'

Post by clairesy on Sat May 02, 2009 11:29 am

Hi tinks,

I would imagine Madeleine prints were on the patio doors, she probably touched them at some point during the holiday. Her prints and dna wold probably be in a lot of other places around luz to. Which is why i have sometimes wondered about the first sniffer dogs who traced her scent to the supermarket.......that's hardly surprising to me giving that she had probably been there numerous times
avatar
clairesy
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 2698
Age : 32
Location : uk
Registration date : 2008-06-04

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine abduction 'opportunistic'

Post by dianeh on Tue May 05, 2009 9:47 am

Tinks

Not sure if Madeleine would close the doors behind her. She may have done. We have doors going to the back deck, and the kids usually close these. But if they go out the front door of the house, they ALWAYS leave it open.

I tend to think that it unlikely though that Madeleine would have closed the doors. My reasoning is that it has taken us years to train our kids to shut the door to the deck, and it just doesnt seem to apply to any other door. Just to prove a point, we have been away for the weekend, and little boy kept leaving the door of the apartment open, never shut it unless I asked him to. And he will be 4 in Oct. Also, noticed that little girl, never once shut the door to the apartment either, and even let the little boy out once, and she will be 5 in Oct.

So I agree that Madeleine most likely never left via the patio doors under her own steam.
avatar
dianeh
Grand Member
Grand Member

Number of posts : 3465
Age : 53
Location : Outback, Australia
Registration date : 2008-04-27

Back to top Go down

Re: Madeleine abduction 'opportunistic'

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum