To think that today's news offers a glimmer of hope

[boringnickname]

here that Madeleine could still be alive. I have always thought the worse but this being bought up again now seems to be quite out of the blue and i can't help but hope.

I know its bad form, but i just wanted to share the glimmer

Kitty a lot of people don't know about this stuff. McCann files has it all down.

I'm not saying I have any idea whatsoever what really happened but yes the embargo on open discussion about the case is extremely counterproductive, and yes, a lot of the fund went on suing various parties, not looking for the child.

You have to remember that people whose kids go missing under unexplained circumstances can be anyone, and if they are, say, very pleasant, amenable and believeable people in the wake of the tragedy, they probably were beforehand. The same can be said of narcissistic or ungracious types, they were probably always that way, it doesn't mean they did anything wrong...look at the Sharon Matthews case, or that of Jo Yeates or anyone you care to compare it to.
The people affected have all got different attitudes, appearances, ways of speaking and being and it doesn't necessarily link them in any way to the crime.

But saying that it doesn't mean you have to feel any sort of affection towards them. Or believe them.

I wouldn't believe a word some people say and that's based on their manner.
Others come across as entirely plausible.

It doesn't make me right. I don't know them; I don't know what they are really like.

exacly wannabe and flighty...

when you think that presidents have been assassisnated, dictators being deposed, crimes like jeffrey dahmer and the gory details et al

we can discuss the issues, circumstances, opinions surrounding these events, either heated or not but at least we can discuss them

yet when it comes to talk of a little girl who disappeared one night in portugal..we have to be ambiguous, cryptic and not make much sense iykwim..through fear of litigation...

I never make much sense

But you're spot on. It's disproportionate. And quite mad.

It's the way we are only allowed to hear one side of the story which raises a red flag for me. I don't know what happened, I wasn't there, but I do know that I smell a rat.

Why on earth should the McCanns tolerate being smeared as murderers on no evidence? Or at least, no evidence that would support a murder or manslaughter charge? Just because a bunch of frankly ill-informed people on the internet have pretensions of investigative competence?

The arrogance of all these amateurs and armchair detectives, let alone their lack of humanity, never ceases to astound me. I love the way when these cases come up (this one, Amanda Knox, Joanna Yates) a bunch of muppets who've never investigated anything pile in to declare they've seen the truth that seems mysteriously to elude seasoned police investigative teams. I hate the way the internet has enabled any fucking no-mark with a keyboard to wreak havoc on reputations right, left and centre and style themselves as better than the experts.

And don't forget too, that the newspapers which ran the wink wink campaign some posters are so keen to espouse are the same ones behind phone hacking (including of Milly Dowler's phone) and all the other misdeeds that have shocked the nation.

But portugal have said they won't re open the case as the UK will only allow them to pursue the abduction theory and nothing else.

It is not open to the UK to ban Portugal from doing anything. If the Portuguese want to reopen the investigation in their own country using their own resources there is nothing any other country can do to stop them. Arrant bullshit.

The portuguese have always said they will open it with any new evidence. If there is any surely they would as this must have an effect on tourism Although teh portuguese economy is so shaky they probably can't afford a big enquiry Who knows I think we never will. It s like many missing people they either turn up years later or it is a mystery forever

I think it´s human nature to speculate.

It´s the 21st Century & a little girl vanishes seemingly without a trace.

It beggars belief!

I´m not sure if it was busy in terms of other holiday makers, but the "group" were up & about every few minutes checking their children, yet no one saw anything.

It´s a horrible situation for all concerned.

Why is it deliberate cover-up rather than incompetence? Journo being given not very long to doquick cuttings-job update on a story teh Guardian has never been very interested in?

Eldritch Well, in this case - the ban was overturned in, I believe, October 2010. Ample time to get a story out about the ban being overturned, I would have thought?

Guardian not very interested? Yesterday they had a page 3 spread about the new information i.e. Madeleine might be alive or she might be dead, and the age progressed photo. If they think that was worth a page of newsprint, why couldn't they stretch to a paragraph about the ban being rescinded?

I personally incline more to the 'cock-up' view rather than a conspiracy view, but in this case there just seem to be so many aspects of the case which seem fishy.

I just think its strange how you cannot be of any other opinion than that of that she was abducted.
If everyone is as innocent as most people make out then why isnt any one allowed to voice their opinion?- why are the mcanns worried about other peoples opinions if they are truely innocent?
I just hope the police get to the bottom of what actually happened either way so this little girl can either be found or rest in peace and justice can be done.

well, tbh I think the whole "abducted to order by an internation paedophile ring," idea just as much as a bollocks conspiracy theory as some of the theories on the other side of the scale. Possibility of abduction? absolutely. Abducted to order? bollocks. And there has never been any evidence to back that kind of theory up - it's just a conspiracy, probably one that was invented to keep the idea of her being alive in the spotlight.

The idea of her being taken for adoption was ruled out early on as she was too old and there were younger children in the apartment. So this is the only theory they can use to try to claim she is still alive. But in truth this idea is completely unheard of.

why are the mcanns worried about other peoples opinions if they are truely innocent?

The idea that if you know you are innocent you shouldn't care if lots of people accuse you and treat you as though you are guilty is one I have never, never, understood.

How far should this 'not caring' extend? Being called a murderer at the school gate when picking up your other children? Beng refused a job because the prospective employer thinks you probably did it? Having abuse thrown at you in the supermarket?

What do people think the effect might be on the other McCann children and on family life generally of possibly increasing numbers of people regarding and treating their parents as the killers of their sibling?

If they had not sued, plenty of people would be on here saying 'Well, if they are innocent, how come they never sued?' and feeling free to ramp up the accusations accordingly. The McCanns really cannot win.

I agree with wannabe there's so many theories on both sides that just don't seem plausible. I read that site of the open files, and to be honest, some of the tone smacks of seeing monsters where there are none. The whole "Tapas Seven" thing...surely the most elaborate theory is the least plausible? It's not some Agatha Christie murder mystery!

So much can be read into so much retrospectively. I had a quick read up because I really couldn't remember much but one thing that I remember that has always struck me as odd is Kate saying - immediately upon discovering Madelaine was missing - "they've taken her, they've taken her!".

My thoughts were: Who is they? Why the immediate assumption she has been taken and not just by a singular person, but a group? Why didn't she say "She's not here!" or "She's missing!"

But you know - I am not Kate, I don't speak exactly like everyone else on the planet and no one else does either. You could read a million things into that one frenzied, panicking knee-jerk reaction from Kate and see guilt of a crime...Without any kind of proof, all this retrospective finger-pointing really is seeing shadows where there are none. And I have no idea - I can't imagine the scenarios presented by either side are very plausible but the one I can see the most realistic is an opportunistic act by someone who had observed the very lax and irresponsible parenting of that group. That is basically the best opinion I have!

Oh, for God's sake LaVolcan, I'm not suggesting any of this has happened, those were hypotheticals to illustrate the point I was making, which is that I don't understand why people, if innocent, should not care that others treat them as guilty. The examples are things that would surely devastate and harm anyone, however much they knew in their hearts they were blameless.

to be fair, I think eldritch is just using those as examples.

No I don't think there should just be an acceptance, but there is a difference between protesting your innocence and actively suing or threatening to sue anyone who voices any opinion other than the "she was abducted" one, including comments made about how the children shouldn't have been left (these are also routinely deleted by mn hq).

If you are going to be that public about something then I'm afraid that there needs to be a certain amount of acceptance that not everyone is going to be supportive, and that there will even be people who believe that you deserved what happened due to the circumstances. I don't personally believe that, but there are some who do.

Make your private life public and there are people who are going to judge, especially five years on when, realistically, there is nothing to be gained by doing so.