Anyone watching Madeleine McCann ten years on?

[spottysuperted]

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

This will presumably just be one of those cases which gets brought up from time to time as one of the biggest unsolved mysteries of our time. And as time goes on more and more speculation will be permitted because the family will lose their power in terms of being able to sue anyone who questions anything other than the story of abduction they have presented as fact.
This.
The 'no speculation' rule on it annoys me because really BOTH stories are speculation, but only one gets shut down. If you want to speculate "correctly" then you can say as much as you like.

I think you're right. It'll just keep being rehashed over and over.

I have got an open mind, i refuse to believe everything main stream media gives us though. We need to keep an open mind.

Imbroglio if you just lock your doors they won't be able to get in.

imbroglio and what if it's established that there isn't a child abductor out there, they haven't found one yet in 10 years. So then what?

but it sounds as if everything contained therein was pure speculation not really. It reexamined some of the evidence which was what I found interesting and why I joined this thread. I do have an open mind about this case and was interested to see evidence I was previously unaware of. I think this case will eventually be solved (if it ever is) by looking at the evidence - not on hunches and trying to second guess how someone should behave if their child goes missing.

Good point namey. Let's prosecute everyone who leaves a door unlocked. Child abductors can't be held responsible for their actions if you don't .

I was trying to be good and not come on here

Imbroglio if you just lock your doors they won't be able to get in.

But seriously!!

WannaBe: no, the programme did not speculate.

It looked at the 'evidence' connected to the PJ lines of enquiry and then the Met's line.

There are not 'two sides ' or 'two theories ' at present. The PJ lines of enquiry have stone-walled, with much of their potential evidence disproved or debunked. Similarly the Met's investigations failed to establish any evidence as to the identity of whoever opened the shutters, etc.

I am unclear why the parents were not prosecuted for neglect. Anything could have happened in that time even if their daughter hadn't gone missing - one could have choked on their own vomit or woken up terrified and upset or tried out the matches and set fire to something or felt hot and run a cold bath and drowned. Or tried to open the blinds and strangled themselves on the cord. Or fallen off the bed and smashed their head against the marble floor. Or anything.

Is it because Portuguese law allows for a different level of parental care perhaps?

If I hired a babysitter and she went for a meal nearby and checked on the kids every half hour I would be furious. If it was a nursery and the staff all walked out at lunchtime and went down the road for a nice meal with one popping back every half hour then there would be an utter utter outcry, even if absolutely nothing happened.

Except lots of hotels do offer just such a baby listening service where they keep,an eye on your kids by listening out rather than actually sitting in the room.

I have an open mind. There is no evidence either way (unless you count the dogs but that is not admissible). So for posters to argue their obvious innocence is just as silly as the opposite way. We don't know but we all have our theories I suppose. What I would say is that the Tapas 9 statements are a bit muddled and don't all match which is not helpful, and it is a shame that a reconstruction wasn't done straight away.

I know dogs aren't admissible, but why do they use them then, or wasn't someone once convicted on the evidence of dogs. I mean what are they for, sorry i'm getting a bit befuddled.

Cupid, the dogs are used to find where there may be evidence. They may point out where there has been a body but they can't say who it is, so they are used as a pointer if you like. Then forensics can check where the dogs have suggested there may be a dead body.

I do think the the initial investigation by the Portuguese is bafflingly awful tbh.

I feel desperately sorry for the McCanns but we visited Luz the year before this case and I remain shocked at anyone leaving children alone there. Luz is a village and the MW apartments and facilities are scattered around it on normal streets, not gated or security protected, and mixed in with other apartments and villas. The apartment block they stayed in was on one of the main roads into the resort. The restaurant looks close on an aerial view but it really isn't, there is a swimming pool, garden walls, etc between it and the apartment so the walk back is like three sides of a square (if that makes sense)

The view in Portugal is much less sympathetic than over here as children are usually taken out with their families and people there have had their lives and businesses destroyed (I thought the chap last night was a case in point, no evidence yet he lost his job and was clearly angry about that). One of the sports coaches who worked there as well as other places internationally has complained that if you Google him, even now, the first result is not his sporting achievements or coaching details but that he was interviewed in that investigation

They may point out where there has been a body but they can't say who it is, so they are used as a pointer if you like.
Well didn't the dogs make several alerts in the apartment, but Gerry Mccann said the dogs aren't reliable?

Cupid: did you watch the programme?

It actually showed the dogs being inconsistent during their work in the apartment. They 'alerted' cuddle cat once, and then twice ran past the toy without even acknowledging it.

The POlice said dogs are unreliable. Gerry was quoting them.

They use the dogs as an indicator, of places where they might start looking for actual evidence.

So as the dogs barked (inconsistently) in the apartment, they did DNA tests on the apartment and car.

The DNA tests showed no evidence that M had been in the car (which , remember, had not been hired until 7 weeks after M disappeared), but DNA traces which were consistent with other members of her family having been in the car. Given that M had / shared DNA with her parents and siblings.

Souls

Yes - the 'alert' to the cat looked more like a dog being excited to find a toy

One short snippet does not do justice to the skills of those dogs or their handler.

If dogs are so unreliable I wonder why the Met Police alone employ 6,000 of them.

If anyone is interested they can read all about the dogs here:www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MARTIN_GRIMES.htm

The cadaver dog indicated several times in the apartment. The best person to believe about the dogs is the dog handler. He's a professional who does this for a living. Yes, the dogs might have been wrong. But they haven't been wrong so far in the 200 times they were used previously. And they would have had to be both wrong together in the same place. There could've well been innocent traces of blood. But death scent too in the same place? That's weird and if I was a parent I would have been wanting to find out what that would mean rather than jumping to discredit them straight away. I personally don't go with the far fetched cover up theories but it annoys me when people discredit these dogs. They're bloody good. Also, there was evidence found where the dogs indicated. A 15/19 match to Madeleine. But in Portugal they need a full match to convict. That would not be the case in the U.K. Or USA.

What I would say is that the Tapas 9 statements are a bit muddled and don't all match which is not helpful

But it's inevitable. If you asked 9 people to make a statement about an event they witnessed very recently, there would be 9 inconsistent statements. It would be much more suspicious if they all tallied.

Namey, the Portuguese police said these dogs were unreliable - that's the police who were used to working with them.

And, yet again, unless you have been in these circumstances you cannot say what you would do.

We'll have to agree to disagree about their unreliability Ceto, but for the record the Portuguese weren't "used to working with them" - they were a British trained world famous dog team which the British police suggested that they borrow and use. The handler now works for the FBI. Dogs indications have helped in so many crimes around the world and haven't been discredited by anyone apart from the McCann team AFAIK

Maybe they just don't want to believe she is dead, I know I wouldn't. They might also fear if it's decided she is dead, it would be an added reason for the search for her to be scaled back?
You would expect evidence of Madeline to be in the apartment she had been staying there.