Anyone watching Madeleine McCann ten years on?

[spottysuperted]

They're framing it slightly differently now.. 😧 interesting from the bbc...

I think if Mark Warner and the Portuguese authorities had been upfront about the series of break-ins they wouldn't have left their kids in the first place. They thought they were staying in a family-friendly resort in a Mark Warner complex - they felt a degree of reassurance they had no right to feel. If it had been known there were suspicions of a paedophile ring operating in the area they certainly wouldn't have left their kids. So easy for people to say they would never do that, but ask yourself - would you let your kids sleep in a room on their own? On another floor to you? In the house if you were outside in the garden? What if you have a big garden? You can see the house from the end of your garden - do you feel safe to do that? I think that's probably how the Mcanns and the other families rationalised it when they decided to do what they did - they could see the apartment, they were taking turns to check - everyone else thought it would be OK. No one would dream of doing it now, but then - can you honestly say that you might not have been tempted?

Lilian

I agree

My dd is the same age as Madeleine and my mum lives in the same area in Portugal where she went missing. Just after we went there and loads of people were staring at my daughter and someone asked if I was her real mum.

Kate reported her daughter missing, the police arrived at the apartment and found the shutters pushed up and the window open - exactly the same modus operandi as in three other recent burglaries in the area. Did they point this out? No - they said there was no possible way the shutters could have been forced from the outside, even though there was evidence of this happening in the same block on three previous occasions. They ruled it out as a possibility. Why? How much better might it have been to have followed that line of investigation at the time? I thought this was one of the most interesting points raised by the documentary. How can that line of inquiry possibly be followed up now, so long after the event? Why were they so quick to blame the parents while apparently brushing aside as irrelevant a fourth case of shutters being forced in a Mark Warner holiday apartment? She may not have been taken by burglars, but she could have been frightened to see someone climbing in the apartment and run out through the unlocked door. I imagine Kate Mcann was thinking why are you questioning me - get out there and find my daughter.

It was certainly presented in a way to evoke suspicion - footage of coves and him in a boat etc. The question mark beside his name on that list, losing his job ? Why?

Having said that he may be entirely innocent and it doesn't look like there was any evidence other than circumstantial evidence. You can't really believe the way things are presented on a programme like this

lillian I agree completely re shutters. Why would they say it was impossible to open from outside when they knew it was. That's hugely suspicious of a cover up and makes you wonder how high up any paedophile ring might have gone

You wonder if more information will emerge as it has with MP paedophile scandals here

The Mark Warner employee may have been entirely innocent, but there was a question mark by his name and he appeared to have left under a cloud. If anyone knew residents were leaving their kids alone, Mark Warner employees might have. They were on site, knew their way round, presumably knew about the burglaries so might have tried to make it look like a burglary when it was something more sinister. Would Mark Warner Holidays really have wanted to consider that possibility? Would they have wanted suspicion to fall on their staff? What would it do to their business if one of their staff was responsible - or even suspected of being responsible. I think that is a far more likely scenario than the Mcanns accidently killing her, hiding her body for a month and then disposing of it in the full glare of publicity. That man is in all likelihood innocent, but it's a bit late to start investigating ten years after the event. It should have been investigated in the immediate aftermath of her disappearance.

He behaved exactly like somebody who was trying to hide something, did not get a good feeling about him at all

He was under no obligation to speak to a BBC reporter and tbh, if I had been that man, I would have told the reporter to fuck off.

The hounding of apparent 'suspects' in this programme was outrageous. They'd been questioned by the police and no charges had been brought against them. To then be shown in this programme as potential suspects was just not on.

We were on a Mark Warner style holiday a couple of years after Madeleine disappeared. I was gobsmacked that so many British parents ( it was a UK company) allowed their children wander around the complex while they, the parents, sat in the bar drinking. The complex's bar overlooked a public beach where the children played/ wandered in the dark. Granted the children were older, aged 8 plus.
They were in pairs, groups but it would be quite easy to lure a child away.
I truly was gobsmacked.

However more and more people think she died in the apartment,

Evidence, please?

Where's the evidence that the child died in the apartment?

The hounding of apparent 'suspects' in this programme was outrageous Why is it Ok to talk about the Mcanns as potential suspects, but rule everyone else out? Isn't that exactly what the Portuguese police did in the beginning? What is outrageous is that these potential suspects have never been flagged up before. I remember Robert Murat, but not the others. That surely was the whole point of revisiting the case after ten years.

No evidence either way that's all.

Why is it Ok to talk about the Mcanns as potential suspects, but rule everyone else out

Show me in my post where I said that that was alright, please?

Re Kate's 48 questions. It's true that she had been questioned three times before this, but in the files you can see that she was asked totally different questions. Because of the particular nature of those 48 questions, the PJ gave her the status of arguido before asking them, as you can only refuse to answer (the "no comment" WITHOUT inference drawn) if you ARE arguido. She then took advantage of this right. It's not true to say that this was the fourth time she had been asked. She never answered them, probably on good legal advice.

Sorry Hiphop you neither said it nor implied it, but quite a few people on here have been implying just that.

"However more and more people think she died in the apartment,"

The chief of the PJ said there is no evidence. The Met do not believe this. .....who are these informed and knowledgable people who think this?

Where's the evidence that the child died in the apartment?

There's plenty.

I give this thread 30 mins at best before deletion given recent posts.....

What evidence?

No DNA evidence. That has been debunked by both the PJ and the Met.

There isn't actually any evidence to that effect and it would also seem to be the least likely scenario and yet bafflingly that is the scenario the police pursued most vigorously at the beginning of their investigation.

No evidence of an abduction either.

Mainly because the PJ weren't looking for evidence of it - considering they brushed over the forced shutters in spite of having evidence of exactly that happening a least three times before.