sadoldgit

The timeline is clearly an issue and not nailed on so I am not sure why you are so hung up on it. The original investigator clearly thought it was possible. Is it so far fetched? They clearly were not bothered that much about their children's wellbeing as they left them alone every night. They werent short of a few bob and child care was easy enough. Kate said she didnt want to leave them with "strangers" so preferred to leave them alone! These stangers would have been the same strangers who looked after the children in the creche when they were left during the day. Apparently traces of sedative were found in Madeleine's hair found in her brush. Is it not possible that they gave the children a sedative whilst they went out and something went wrong? The body could have been put anywhere short term and then moved later. A police investigtor has suggested that burial in a shallow grave in sand in a dry atmosphere helps the body to mummify. The fluids drain and the smell of the corpse reduces. They did have a car days later and the police dogs foun evidence of blood and cadaver smells that matched Maddie's DNA. Talking about probablities. What are the chances of a paedo walking up to an appartment, finding it unlocked, walking in and finding no one at home apart from three small children and walking out with the biggest? Given the Tapas 9 were out every night it is more possible that someone could have been aware that the children were left alone and planned it - but then they would have had to be around for a while whilst planning it all but at some point you would think that they would have aroused some suspicion and would ahve become a suspect early on. Even so there was no signed of a forced entry, no sign of anyone else being in the apartment. Kate was adamant that the window was used but on her print was found on the window. Have you seen the window? It is nt very big and the chances of an adult getting in or out with a small child is very small. The bedroom did not match Kate's account of what happened and looks very much like the furniture was rearranged. Curtains that were billowing in the breeze from the open window were now behind a bed and a chair etc. The McCann's didn't have time to look for their child but they found the time to delete many messages on their mobiles. They were heartbroken but found time to fly off to see the Pope, leaving the twins in the same place where their other child had been "abducted." Kate is quoted as saying if Maddy had of hurt herself when they were out, how was that their fault (WTF?). There is tons of this stuff and that is my problems with this case. There is so much that doesnt add up with what the McCanns would have us believe. You say that they have done a good job in covering it up but that is the point. If she was dead then all they have done that can be described as a good job is disposing of the body. Everything else is a bodge. They have convinced some people of their innocence and others believe that they have not told the whole truth. I wonder if this split has anything to do with those with young children and those without?

You are probably right and they could well not get charged with child neglect. IMHO they should have been, No one has to watch the four hours of film but I found it interesting and it helped fill a lot of gaps in what I had picked up so far. Considering that the dog evidence has been spot on in 200 cases I would say it was utterly irrelevant, There were of course attempts to discredit this evidence but if you look outside this case to see how this works you might be more respectful of police dogs. I really do not have time to get names of investigators and why should I. You believe they are all nutters and nothing I will say will prove otherwise. However this isnt rocket science and many people have picked up on the discrepencies in the McCanns stories. Why should the McCanns let the police investigation stop? As long as it goes on the money comes into their fund and some people believe they MUST be guiltless. As Geery says, she us the body. He knows as long as they dont find the body they are ok. They seem to have convinced you which makes me wonder if you have children of your own? Fours days after Madeleine went missing Gerry McCann was seen "laughing his head off." Apparently neither of her parents have ever, including the night she went missing, looked for Maddie themselves. There are many, many other recorded accounts of their behaviour which does not add up with the behaviour of parents how have lost a young child. How would you react?

I doubt if he will do the five years. Very poor. Reeva's family must be gutted. Still it could have been worse, he could have got community service! How he didnt get charged for murder I will never know but it appears that if you fire 4 dum dum bullets at someone at close range through a toilet door you cant be expected to know that they might die.

There are many people looking into the McCann case who are anything but "internet crackpots and fools." As for the let off the hook remark, they are,at the very least, guilty of child neglect surely?

She had a long and varied career and more recently was a regular on Loose Women. She decided to stop having treatment on her cancer recently and hoped to spend one last Christmas with her family. Sadly that didn't happen. She faced her illness with courage and dignity. Grew up with those Oxo ads.

Whatever you think of conspiracy theories and theorists, it is good that people don't automatically accept what they are fed and ask questions. There are issues over the McCann case that haven't been satisfactory addressed and those should be the issue rather than attacking fellow posters. Like many I guess, I have dipped in and out of the news items of this case over the years. From the early days I had my doubts about the validity of the McCanns accounts so yes, I have an agenda and will seek out items that reinforce my position. I found the Hall films helpful because I hadnt seen the "crime scene" before and wasnt aware of many of the conflicting statements made by the McCanns and the Tapas 7. Maybe they are kosher,maybe they are not. But it bothers me that they seem to be playing fast and loose with the truth (for whatever reason). It doesnt hurt to keep an open mind and I fully accept that my view of the McCanns could be wrong. But until there is a definite conclusion about what happened to Madeleine I do believe that there is still enough uncertainty around the McCanns not to let them off the hook.

Very brave lady. RIP.

Refs decision is final guys!

We have just won eight nil. A penalty wasn't awarded and Forster wasn't sent off. Why worry?

Maybe. Who knows? Shame that they haven't been charged for child neglect.

Bit harsh to not give it to Pelle methinks after watching it again this morning.

Tuned in to TalkSport for my sins the other day and there was time devoted to Saints under the question could we be a top 4 club this season. From what I hear radio seems to give more time to the so called unfashionable clubs. All of the callers that I heard (and they were Saints fans) didnt think we could sustain where we are due to injuries and suspensions. Good to hear a balanced piece on us though.

My apologies if I left anything out. I thought I had got it all. I had only seen a few quotes of this interview before so was interested to read the full piece and agree that Stalker was not attaching blame to the McCanns but what interested me was that he also clearly thinks that we havent been told the truth as yet. I was charged with an offence a few years ago and gave a number of statements. There was no deviation in my version of events. I answered all of the questions put to me because I was clear that I had nothing to hide. No no comments at all and I gave statements willingly. The person bringing the charges against me also gave a number of statements but in each case some details of their version of events changed significantly. The case was dropped on the morning before the trial because the person withdrew the allegations. Their barrister even stood up in court and berated the CPS (I wasn't working for them then) for even bringing the charges against me! My point is that if you stick to the truth you will not get tripped up and end up looking guilty even if you are not. I completely understand the points about not implicating themselves and remaining silent for good reason, but by refusing to answer questions and by changing their stories all they did was help to hamper the search for and investigation into the child's disappearance. I know that we are all different but if that was me (and I think many parents would act in the same way) I would have been out on the streets that night looking for her. I would have gladly taken a lie detector test. I would have gladly given up statements whenever requested and would have urged my friends to do likewise. I take the point about the Tapas 7 being worried about being seen as bad parents but we clearly know that anyway. The lady who lives about the McCanns apparently heard a child crying from their apartment for 75 minutes the night before and the claims that there were half hourly checks are probably bogus. We know at least that they were all very selfish people and only seemed concerned with having a good time themselves. What is more important, their reputations of the investigation in Maddy's disappearance? If I was the parent of a missing child I would be doing my utmost to ensure that anyway with information that would help the investigation co-operated fully. We can debate the effectiveness of sniffer dogs all day long. We can give up theories only why Maddy's blood samples were found in the boot of a car hired 25 days after she vanished. What continues to bother me is the way that some stories have changed or have been discredited - not least Kate's description of the bedroom as she found it that night and stories of how the shutters had been jemmied open when there no sign of them being interfered with. "They are extremely intelligent and articulate people." Why then do they have so much trouble getting the details of what they saw and did that night to tally?

Squeaky bum time or just a squeaky seat?

MCCANNS 'ARE HIDING A BIG SECRET' Sunday October 28 2007 By John Stalker I have watched the investigation into the Madeleine McCann case drag on for six months. One thing above all worries me: Why have the McCanns and the seven other members of their group - the Tapas Nine - remained so silent? My gut instinct is that some big secret is probably being covered up. Unlike other high-profile cases I have worked on, not one of them has been prepared to break ranks or really come out and support each other. After all this time and pressure, I cannot believe that nobody wants to speak. Their answer has always been no comment but there is surely some division between them. So what are they hiding? I have a real suspicion that we are not being told the whole truth. There is something else there, some issue that members of the party are embarrassed about. While they continue to refuse to talk it is unlikely that we will find out what it is for a very long time but one thing is certain - it will eventually come out. The sad fact is that we still have a missing girl and I believe the investigation will be focusing on the theory that she is dead. The likeliest scenario is that her abductor panicked when he realised the attention the case was creating and killed her days after snatching her. My fear now is that unless we find her body or her killer strikes again we will never know what really happened to that tiny child. My instinct, based on years of policing similar cases, is that we are looking at an abduction where the child was targeted in the days before her disappearance. On the night she vanished it is likely that her abductor simply spotted his opportunity and struck while he could. I have been horrified by the abject failure of the Portuguese detectives to adhere to basic principles of policing. The investigation does not seem to have taken a step forward from where it was in the first week after she went missing. I cannot believe that the Portuguese only sent selected DNA samples to the forensic science lab in Birmingham. There is absolutely no sense in that whatsoever. To fully evaluate poor-quality DNA traces, as we believe these were, forensic experts need to see the whole picture. In the past, when I have dealt with traces of bodily fluids, it is very difficult to establish how they got to be where they were. All DNA is highly transferable and that is the most likely explanation for the alleged traces found in the McCanns' hire car and on her mother's clothing. Robert Murat, the other suspect, was seen close to the apartment the day after Madeleine disappeared and freely admits having helped police as a translator. If he was in that apartment, or anywhere near it, ther is no doubt he would have transferred some of Madeleine's or the twins' DNA on to his clothing. I don't believe for one minute that Kate and Gerry McCann or their friends are capable or guilty of having murdered the four-year-old. All the criticism of Kate and Gerry and their friends has been completely out of order. They are extremely intelligent and articulate people and, just because they have never visibly cracked in public to the extent that they are beaten, does not mean that they are guilty of anything sinister. Yes, they have had more doors opened for them than other people would have in similar circumstances, but their main aim is to discover what happened to Madeleine. That should be the aim of all concerned. But my gut instinct still forces me to wonder: What is the secret that the Tapas Nine are so carefully hiding? This is what Stalker had to say a few months after the incident. You dont have to be a genius to work out that he thinks that there is something not quite right here. He is being careful in what he says. For example, how many child abductors would walk into an apartment thinking that there would be children alone there. Unless they have intel that the parents were not home it just is very unlikely to happen. Although he is supportive of the McCanns at that point, this was way before the stories started coming out and showed cracks. I have been looking for something more recent from him but no joy so far.

I think, without doubt, you are the most objectional poster on here (and you have some competition). I pity you. You seem to get some sort of pleasure out of slagging people off on an internet forum. Clearly you have no life. Further to your question, they have been suspects and there is nothing stopping them becoming suspects again. The very fact that they left three young children in an apartment alone tells you something about what kind of people they are, but you seem to have no problem with that do you? Still, child abductors walk into unlocked houses and take children all the time don't they so of course the McCanns are blameless. Dribblers. How old are you?

Just feel so good for everyone at the club after the summer doldrums. Happy days!

Unlike you not to know what to say Alps!

Erm, they were suspects and the guy who ran the investigation wrote a book on the subject. Seriously, fu ck off yourself.

So no meltdown then?

I agree that statements will often contain some inconsistencies. In this case there appear to be many. Kate's description of the bedroom when she returned for for one. The statements always seem to change in response to the police findings which seems odd. From what she says initially it would appear that the bedroom had been tampered with. As has been mention, the Payne evidence doesn't come across as the least bit convincing. They did have a car didn't they? The dogs found cadaver scent in the boot of it. There are issues about the timelines of the events of the day. I work for the CPS. We prepare cases for court. In general even if things are not 100% spot on, you get a general picture of what probably occurred in a crime. There are a number of things here that do not add up, both from the statements given by the McCanns and other members of the Tapas 7. The original investigator clearly thought there was time enough to dispose of the body (if that is what happened). He stands by his original position. Apart from CB Fry who obviously knows everything, there is plenty in the case that does not add up and throwing a "conspiracy theory" tag at it doesn't help. The well respected John Stalker has said that he believes that the McCanns havent told the whole truth and doesnt seem impressed about the Tapas 7. None of us were there. None of us know what happened (apart from CB Fry clearly . Maybe they are completely innocent. It is a shame they have refused a lie detector test but that is their right. All I know is that there is a lot that doesnt add up and, to me, the McCanns have never seemed credible. If my child went missing I would have been pounding the streets all night. They stayed in. Gerry is quite chilling when he talks about there being no proof against them because there is no body. He also has a habit of walking out of interviews when he doesnt like the questions. All too often parents of missing/murdered children appear on our TV screens. The McCanns have never appeared as broken as the others. Perhaps they are just good at hiding their feelings? Who knows. We can argue the toss about sniffer dogs etc. What is clear though is that there is no evidence of an abduction and the McCanns original statement about the window has been discredited.

You may well not be ignorant, but you infect this place like internet Ebola and clearly do not have a shred of empathy in your body. I should also add that Richard Hall isnt the only one who has pointed out the inconsistencies in the McCanns (and others) statements. One detractor includes one of our most respected policemen. But hey, they didnt do it because CB Fry says they didnt. So it is all settled then.

One dog found blood. One dog found the scent of a body. The fours hours of film were not just about the reactions of the sniffer dogs although when you add everything up it creates a bigger picture. The reactions of the dogs are interesting but what is more important is the difference in the statements made by the McCanns and others. Although of course if you are CB Fry that isn't important. What is important is making childish comments. We are not policemen. The person who led the investigation in Portugal was professional, just as the Met police are. By all means have a pop at me, but are you saying the guy doesn't know his job?

Why do you have to be so patronising?

Grow up