Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Madeleine McCann investigation

999 replies

lyndie · 06/05/2014 18:49

I saw today that possible excavations are to start in the resort where MM went missing.

Does anyone think the progress The Met have made is astonishing given the length of time that has elapsed? I can't help but wonder what progress could have been made if they had been involved at the start.

I really hope that somehow they can find out what happened and give her family some sort of closure. I know the ins and outs of what happened and her parents leaving her have been discussed at length on MN but from a crime point of view I would be very interested to see if the Portugese police had done enough or not.

OP posts:
ExcuseTypos · 10/05/2014 22:56

Can you quote where KM states they returned home the day after the disappearance Janey?

HavannaSlife · 10/05/2014 22:56

I have no idea when any of them were due to fly home, or what km wrote in her book but I presume if the police interviews are dated between 10-16th they are correct

ExcuseTypos · 10/05/2014 22:57

We weren't insinuating anything of the sort Just. We were asking why a reconstruction hadnt been ordered earlier. It's a perfectly reasonable question.

Viviennemary · 10/05/2014 22:59

It's hard to know what to believe. A couple of months ago I read that arrests were imminent. But nothing happened.

HavannaSlife · 10/05/2014 23:00

No just I was insinuating that it would be better to do it straight away, when it is still clear in their minds as the whole point is to see if anyone will come forward with new information

janey68 · 10/05/2014 23:01

In her book. She states that members of the group returned home on 5th May, less than 48 hours after the disappearance.
I said 'a day or two after', not 'the day after' if you care to read what's written.

ExcuseTypos · 10/05/2014 23:08

I've read the book too. I vaguely remember one or maybe two left a bit earlier than the rest of the group, as they had commitments.

However you insinuated that the friends all returned home a day or two after the event. That is what I'm objecting to. You can't get away with creating more rumours.

noddyholder · 10/05/2014 23:10

Reconstructions are often done a long time after sadly this is one thing i am 100% sure on sadly

Justanotherlurker · 10/05/2014 23:13

Ok I need to catch up, wine is in no way having an effect

Fideline987654321 · 10/05/2014 23:19

Does it matter when the friends left? Really?

The 'evidence' being held up as indicative that the McCanns had something to hide is their refusal to return to Portugan from Leics in 2008 for a reconstruction AFTER they had been declared arguidos.

To my mind, that is what guilty people would be likely to do, sure BUT it is also what falsely accused people would be likely to do. So where's the evidentiary value in dissecting that decision? It's not suggestive either way, is it?

janey68 · 10/05/2014 23:19

Creating more rumours FGS!!
Oh please!!

Look- just accept the fact that we aren't all McCann fans. It's entirely possible to feel compassion for MM, because one thing is for sure, as a 3 year old child she is the innocent victim here, and to feel that the whole situation is hugely sad, BUT simultaneously to feel very uneasy about the way the McCanns have worked the media, and indeed at the unprecedented hype, and the huge amount of money thrown at this case

Of course, it probably makes some people feel more saintly to say 'I don't care how much money it costs, whatever it takes...' But in the real world there is not a bottomless purse and tough decision have to be made. In seven years there is no clear evidence of what happened at all. There is no evidence of abduction or accident or intentional harm. It's very difficult to believe that answers will ever be found tbh

ExcuseTypos · 10/05/2014 23:23

I do accept that people aren't all "McCann fans", that's very obvious.

That doesn't mean I'll accept anyone making things up.

MrRedAndBlue · 10/05/2014 23:26

and yet... still no evidence of an abduction.

None whatsoever.

Fideline987654321 · 10/05/2014 23:28

No evidence of anything much MrRed

HavannaSlife · 10/05/2014 23:30

Theres a flight schedule in the pj files but I cant link on phone

Its difficult to read on the phone but looks like everyone is down as no shows on the 5th (when they were due to fly back) and that they started flying out on the 17th.

Except the Paynes, it doesn't say if they turned up or not

ExcuseTypos · 10/05/2014 23:34

I've just found the photo of the police dusting the shutter for fingerprints.

She has no protective clothes on, not even gloves ffs. Are those photos real?

Fideline987654321 · 10/05/2014 23:34

Ok clearly I am being thick.

Can someone please explain to me why the return dates matter so much?

PortofinoRevisited · 10/05/2014 23:37

I am sure there is record somewhere of who flew home when. It won't be a mystery to the PJ certainly.

PortofinoRevisited · 10/05/2014 23:38

MrRed, nor no evidence of any other type of criminal activity either.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 10/05/2014 23:40

the way the McCanns have worked the media

The McCanns have alerted the media to the disappearance of their daughter. That's it. They had media savvy friends - sure. They tried to use that to publicise their plight.

It's hardly worked in their favour though - yes it's in the public eye - but so many headlines have been against them - and actually libellous. They've successfully sued for lies - they've been continuously libelled in the press. What would you do - Let the world think you'd sedated your dc, when all you'd used is calpol? That clumps of hair were found in the boot of your hire car? Etc. Did you hear their evidence at at the Leveson enquiry?

Allowing these lies to stand is damaging to them personally, yes, but also damaging to the search for their daughter. Would you really be happy for newspaper to print lies about you - or would you challenge them?

janey68 · 10/05/2014 23:45

I don't think anyone has denied that some of the publicity has been negative against them have they? Hardly surprising given the circumstances . Not that libel is justified at all, but come on, be realistic, looking at the facts surrounding the case of course they were going to come in for criticism.

That doesn't detract from the fact that it was the mccanns who alerted the media and orchestrated a huge PR campaign

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 10/05/2014 23:48

I think that the Martin Smith sighting is being treated as evidence of a possible abduction.

The statements of the McCanns, their friends and the Tapas bar staff can also be viewed as evidence.

LaVolcan · 10/05/2014 23:51

Have the McCanns actually successfully sued anyone?

The Tapas friends had an out of court settlement against the Daily Express - cue carefully stage managed pictures outside the Royal Courts of Justice.

A solicitor called Tony Bennett was held in contempt of court for distributing leaflets about the McCanns, but that was because he was told to desist, not because it was libellous per se. At that court hearing the Judge didn't allow the lawyer representing Carter Ruck to claim that there had been an abduction, only that the McCanns had told her that.

There is an ongoing libel trial in Portugal which has been delayed.

nomorequotes · 10/05/2014 23:56

I also read on that Pamela whatshername website that she had a book removed from Amazon because the Mccanns Carter-Rucked them.

janey68 · 10/05/2014 23:57

There is no evidence of abduction Sabrina. Neither is there evidence of accident or intentional harm.

Swipe left for the next trending thread