It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Madeline McCann's mother to be an official suspect

page: 8
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Appears like charges are just around the corner if this website is right: DA to arrest McCanns




posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 04:53 PM
link   
The website, www.findmadeline.com , has a blog by Gerry McCann and an affiliated sales channel selling Madeline items apparently to promote the 'safe return' of Maddy.

But the conspiracy is, the Domain name owner has chosen to remain anonymous by registering just within 7 days after her disappearance on 03-May-2007 through an anonymous domain registration service. Who could be the registrant of the domain ...?




Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (www.godaddy.com...)
Domain Name: FINDMADELINE.COM
Created on: 10-May-07
Expires on: 10-May-08
Last Updated on: 07-Jun-07

Administrative Contact:
Private, Registration FINDMADELINE.COM@domainsbyproxy.com
Domains by Proxy, Inc.
DomainsByProxy.com
15111 N. Hayden Rd., Ste 160, PMB 353
Scottsdale, Arizona 85260
United States
(480) 624-2599 Fax -- (480) 624-2599


[edit on 9-9-2007 by mhano]



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 05:57 PM
link   
There seem to be very few facts that are known about what happened. Talk of blood, syringes etc does not help.

What we do seem to have is a published timeline of key events. This has been in several newspapers and there doesn't seem to be any controversy about the truth of this timeline.

Kate runs screaming from the room, she is convinced that Madelaine has been taken. It is reported to the management of the complex. Fifty minutes later it is phoned through to the police.

Fifty minutes is a long, long time.

Going back to the issue of leaving children of this age alone. Everyone seems to say how ludicrous this is. What would tell me something more is whether there is anyone who says yes, they would do the same thing, that they are confident that their children would be ok. (incidentally, I don't have children and don't really know what they are like at these ages)

If there isn't anyone in teh world who would do this, then my conclusion is that either the McCanns did something pretty awful and unusual in doing so themselves or that in fact the whole evening was somehow set up and not everything was what it seemed.


Anyone out there would stand up and say they would leave their children under similar circumstances ?



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 06:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by wigit
No. Why? Was it compulsory?BTW, if they've caught them on a hidden recorder saying they did it, and they're covered in dead baby DNA, that sounds pretty much like a closed case so, why were they allowed to leave the country?

No, I was thinking the only reason you could manically defend them was because you got ripped off and wanted them to be innocent.

[edit on 9-9-2007 by Flyer]



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 06:19 PM
link   
no
never
not even for 5mins

this whole case has stunk from the start
the parents are not as innocent as they look

you do not go on holiday and then go out for the night with your kids in bed ALONE in the apartment

then start making a living out of the case
they became TV stars over night and they looked like they enjoyed the attention.
i would have been falling apart and i defiantly would not have looked as healthy and well. i would not have slept or eaten much and that would have showed in my face as it does on most people.

the police work has been a bit "iffy" as well

i STILL hope little madeline is ok tho



posted on Sep, 9 2007 @ 06:23 PM
link   
They are guilty as sin.

"Gerry McCann refused to answer 40 key questions about the disappearance of his daughter during a key interview by detectives after he was made an official suspect, it was reported today."

The only reason why he would answer them is because he is lying and doesnt want to drop himself in it.

also this.

"Kate and Gerry McCann told police that the window shutter in Madeleine’s bedroom, which could not been seen from the restaurant, had been forced open. Police tests showed the heavy metal shutter had not been forced up from the outside, so must have been pulled open from inside the room. Assuming that the abductor entered through the apartment’s unlocked patio windows, why would he or she not leave by the same way or the use the front door. Or was the window opened to make it appear as if an intruder had used it to enter the bedroom?"

[edit on 9-9-2007 by Flyer]



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 02:31 AM
link   
A spanish psychologist here studying the case made one or two good points on tv just now...Its a control situacion..The mother is cool, very cool and calculating and is controling the father, the weaker of the two, this is wh the mother rarely speaks in front of the cameras and the fathers always the spokesman.

And, as FLYER pointed out, now there milking it for what they can.

He pointed out aswell that he thinks they started the game of "OH MY GIRLS BEEN KIDNAPPED", to cover the accident and now they´ve lived the game so much and spent so much time infornt of the camera that they actually believe its the truth, and the story converts into realidad in their minds.

On the tv here now - THE MADDIE FUNDS HAVE AMASSED MORE THAN 1,000,000 EUROS...YES ONE MILLION EUROS..with aswell, people like j.k.rowling putting up rewards etc which have totalled up to now, wait for it, MORE THAN 4 MILLION EUROS !!

If they never find the girl....what´ll happen to the money ??



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer
No, I was thinking the only reason you could manically defend them was because you got ripped off and wanted them to be innocent.

Manically defending them? lol. You've accused them more times on this thread than I've defended them. I'm not manic. I don't like folk making things up and you've had them GUILTY from the start. I'm just wondering how you all come to your conclusions (barring the recent revelations) before we knew anything?

[edit on 10-9-2007 by wigit]



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by wigit
and you've had them GUILTY from the start.


I to have considered them guilty from the start, the total lack of emotion shown from day one surely isn't normal for any parent who's child has just vanished? even more so for a parent who has struggled to have the child in the first place ( they had to have ivf in holland iirc?) that along with them hireing lawyer's/spin doctor's in the very early stage's as well ( surely not the first thing on a parent's mind?) and turning this into a media circus and now we find out they refused to answer around 40 question's when interviewed by the police. One of these thing's may not be enough to point to them being guilty but when you add them all together along with the many other inconsistancies they point more and more to them being as guilty as sin.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 04:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by wigit

Originally posted by Flyer
No, I was thinking the only reason you could manically defend them was because you got ripped off and wanted them to be innocent.

Manically defending them? lol. You've accused them more times on this thread than I've defended them. I'm not manic. I don't like folk making things up and you've had them GUILTY from the start. I'm just wondering how you all come to your conclusions (barring the recent revelations) before we knew anything?

[edit on 10-9-2007 by wigit]

1 - Leaving 3 very young kids alone, its just not right
2 - Making loads of money off it
3 - going to see the pope
4 - trying to make money all over europe
5 - fleeing to the UK as soon as they are declared suspect
6 - buying a nice new house which would be the last thing on anyones mind at this time

Those are 6 things that make them seem guilty before even a shred of evidence was bought into the equation.

Now if you add the DNA evidence, the shutter broken from the inside, refusing to answer questions, her shouting "theyve taken her", them pointing out the shutters were broken even when you cannot see that was the case from outside plus the evidence we havent seen.

They are 100% guilty although they may get off because of the police incompetence of the main crime scene.

Dont have a go at me just because you cannot pick up on things like I and others can.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer
Dont have a go at me just because you cannot pick up on things like I and others can.
I'm not having a go at you, I thought it was the other way around. I won't post on this thread any more because you ARE starting to get my hackles up and I'll be barred before long if I keep talking but I'll leave you with this - I'm positive the McCanns are victims of a child snatch and not murderers. Remember what happened to Wee Burney before you make flimsy accusations.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 04:38 AM
link   
Everything I listed above is fact.

They are hardly flimsy accusations when the police officially think they are the prime suspects either.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 04:58 AM
link   
Well said and well listed points.

Unfortunately, the McCanns are still treated as respectable gods by the media in UK, what a shame on the publicly funded BBC!

Initially they announced they are going to fight their case, and then they flee portugal just within 6 hours when they finished questioning Gerry McCann.
They have sensed that the police is netting in, and once they are out of the country, they can plan their exit strategy at their liesure in UK.

I'm sure their lawyers both in UK and Portugal are working 24/7.


Originally posted by Flyer
Everything I listed above is fact.

They are hardly flimsy accusations when the police officially think they are the prime suspects either.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 08:07 AM
link   
The Strategy of McCanns is now becoming quite clear and the reason why they fled from Portugal within hours after the questioning can now be underlined.

The McCanns have now hired the best legal firm in London, well known with an excellent international track record in fighting battleship cases.

The law firm’s strategy to defend the McCanns will be guessable to anyone. Make up the case with an international profile by involving law firms in both countries to battle against the Portuguese police and drag them for long. In the end, court will decide to drop the case due to the lack of 'strong evidence'.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Perhaps this is why they set up that fund. The people who gave money to help find her could now quite possibly be funding the murders defence team.

Thats quite sickening.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 09:24 AM
link   
One of the things which I notice about the McCanns, as they present themselves to the media is their similarity to the Ramsays from the Jonbenet Ramsey case. You have the firm, calm, in charge, father spokesperson, accompanied by a wife who looks as if she is going to sprout six inch toenails and leathery wings and fly up to the ceiling to hang upside down.

Kate is not as aggressive as Patsy Ramsey, but like the Ramseys, her and Gerry present as a couple who are following a script that they've worked out. That, in itself, doesn't imply guilt, but when one looks at everything that has happened since Madeleine's disappearance, one could never accuse this couple of being slow on the rebound from trouble.

That fact alone might have been a very useful thing on May 3rd, when they had to move very quickly to pull the fat of their oh so lovely lives out of the fire. That is the key thing for me. To me, they, up until now, have looked, not like grieving destroyed parents, but more like people who have dodged a bullet.

Another thing to keep in mind. These people are doctors. Doctors deal with death frequently. Often they are cold and business like about it. Blood doesn't make them squeamish.

If their child died as a result of an unfortunate, unintended, right hook or an overdose of a sedative administered by an anaesthesiology wannabe, what is the rational course of action? Come clean and wreck your career, ruin your life and possibly lose your freedom in a Portugese jail, or cover up, make the best of it and go forward, trying to do your best with what you have left, a sadder and wiser person?



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flyer
Perhaps this is why they set up that fund. The people who gave money to help find her could now quite possibly be funding the murders defence team.

Thats quite sickening.


Well, at the moment they are being told that the fund cannot be used for their legal costs so if they set it up for that purpose they didn't make much of a job of it.

News of The World

...but you have to wonder how they will be affording those very expensive legal eagles.



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 09:55 AM
link   
The BBC is now saying that their local police and social services are meeting to discuss them being named as suspect's




Police and representatives from Leicestershire social services are meeting on Monday afternoon to discuss Madeleine's disappearance and the naming of her parents as suspects


source

what's the betting they do nothing



posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 10:29 AM
link   
They're going to use Maddies fund for the defense:
MADELEINE McCann’s parents are set to use £1million donated by the public to find their child to fund their criminal defence.

dailystar.co.uk...

Just sickening




posted on Sep, 10 2007 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by lecuitis
 


It's difficult to be sure about this without reading the full Articles of the company that administers the fund but I should think that there could very easily be a legal challenge to any attempt to pay their legal costs.

To provide support to the family, including financial assistance, is one of the stated objects of the fund but the first two objects are to find and return the child and to investigate and bring her abductors to justice, (I paraphrase for brevity).

These objects are a problem as supporting the legal defence costs of the family could well be considered to be in conflict to the first two objects and may, therefore, if these objects are set out in the Articles be illegal.

The independent Directors are also required to consider donor intentions as well as the fund's objects so they are going to need some pretty convincing legal opinion before they allow such a payment.

Find Madeleine



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join