In the late 1960’s, when my children were young, our family moved to a house on a small-build on the outskirts of a large town. We lived in a secluded cul-de-sac with half a dozen properties and quickly made friends with our neighbours who also had small children.
Once a month or so we would have a few drinks or a meal in one of our houses whilst we took it in turn to check the children who were asleep a few yards away, accessed through an adjacent garden and back door. Writing about it in the present climate it may sound a bit risky but we all felt so safe then, and viewed our homes as one extended house.
One evening, following the usual pattern, my neighbour took the one-minute-route from our back garden to hers and up the stairs to find her son was not in bed, or in the bathroom or his parent’s room or anywhere to be seen. The first we knew of it was when she opened her bedroom window and screamed, ‘David! David! A It’s mummy! Where are you?' Of course we came running out; our first verbal exchanges being that he must have woken up confused and somehow slept-walked out of the house, though the doors at the front of both houses were locked.
No-one’s first thought was of abduction.
We found David under the table in the conservatory, asleep!
I have read many theories on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and I am left with the overriding question. Why do so many people think that the McCann’s are not being honest?
Kate McCann had the opportunity to clarify some of these doubts when she was asked forty nine questions by investigators. On the advice of her lawyer, she only agreed to answer one. That is:-
Q ‘Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?
A. ‘Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.' A1
As a mother, I cannot understand why Kate McCann seemed to have been refusing to cooperate. Maybe she was angry and felt the investigation was being handled incompetently? Maybe that’s why both she and Gerald McCann left Portugal shortly after they were made arguidos?
Kate McCann was asked forty nine questions; I have asked myself twenty:
*Why didn’t the McCanns offer to take a polygraph test?
*Why didn’t they agree to an on-site re-enactment?
*Why, when a family (Smiths) reported seeing a man, carrying a child in his arms, walking towards the beach at around 10pm, did the McCanns state that he could not be the abductor, when according to Kate McCann it was around 10pm that she discovered Madeleine was missing?
*Why, when the McCanns locked the patio doors every night, did they not lock them that night?
*Why would the McCanns leave their children inside their apartment with an unlocked door opening onto the street?
*Why, when none of the McCann’s friends checked each other’s children all week, did they do it that night?
*Why did the McCanns and their friends draw up a rota of their checking times after the disappearance of Madeleine? Written on one of Madeleine’s books.
*Why did the McCanns say in their original statement that they both used the front door, then change it to state they both used back door?
*Why did Gerald McCann state that the shutters could be opened from the outside?
*Why did police and staff state that the shutters could not be opened from the outside?
*Why didn’t Jane Tanner tell Kate McCann straight away that she had seen a man carrying a child on the evening that Madeleine disappeared?
*Why does Jane Tanner say that, on one of her checks on the children she came across Gerald McCann and another male chatting in the street and that after she passed these two she noticed a man carrying a child in his arms – who later she thought could be Madeleine? If Jane Tanner passed so closely to Gerald McCann and the other man they should have seen her also but they say they did not.
*Why would an abductor choose to take a public route?
*Why did Kate McCann, believing her child to be abducted, run out of the apartment leaving her twins alone when the abductor could still be around?
*Why did Kate McCann say the windows were ‘jemmied’ open and police say that there was no evidence of a break-in and the only fingerprints on the window were hers?
*Why would an abductor choose to enter an apartment and abduct a child, who was sleeping it is believed, between her siblings, knowing that the parents could burst in at any moment?
*What happened to the evidence of the cadaver odour and bloods, found by the dogs, on the floor of Gerald and Kate McCann’s bedroom and in the lounge? Eddie and Keela two of the most famous dog detectives in Europe, used to work for South Yorkshire Police in the UK.
*What made Kate McCann say that all the children may have been drugged?
*Why did the twins sleep soundly throughout Kate McCann’s screaming and all the commotion?
*Why did a GNR Officer state that ‘after the search, he noticed a situation that seemed unusual to him, when at a determined moment, the girl's parents kneeled down on the floor of their bedroom and placed their heads on the bed, crying?’3
Although of no consequence to me or mine I have tweeted, blogged, waxed-and-wane over this case and the fate of this child.
The McCanns do not help their case or their image by constantly attempting to prevent others from exercising their human right which is to express an opinion. Maybe Madeleine McCann was abducted? Or maybe she fell and banged her head in the apartment or on the stairs, then just walked off, disorientated and drowsy? The night previously Madeleine had been heard crying out for her parents for over an hour; were steps taken this night, to ensure she and her siblings slept soundly?
A Coloboma1(fleck) in the eye may be associated with a heart abnormality, which I presume would make giving even a mild sedative, such as Calpol,2 to a child, a bit risky.
Maybe a predator had been watching for days and took the fleeting opportunity between the regular checks the friends say they carried out? Maybe it was the ‘creepy’ guy seen looking at the apartment? Maybe Murat is still a suspect? Though seemingly the dogs found no evidence in his home. For me the most powerful piece of evidence is the dogs.
A Coloboma1(fleck) in the eye may be associated with a heart abnormality, which I presume would make giving even a mild sedative, such as Calpol,2 to a child, a bit risky.
Maybe a predator had been watching for days and took the fleeting opportunity between the regular checks the friends say they carried out? Maybe it was the ‘creepy’ guy seen looking at the apartment? Maybe Murat is still a suspect? Though seemingly the dogs found no evidence in his home. For me the most powerful piece of evidence is the dogs.
Would eight people conspire to lie? Who knows? Maybe what started as a minor lie got complicated? ‘Oh what a tangled web......’
Why start a campaign and draw attention to yourself if you are guilty?
That is the question I constantly come back to and find so difficult to comprehend. Then again, others have. In the UK in 1997 when eight year old Jamie Lavis disappeared, Darren Vickers ingratiated himself with the family, even moved into the family home, set up a campaign and helped search for Jamie. Darren Vickers eventually became a suspect, was arrested and finally convicted of sexual abuse and murder of the little boy.
That is the question I constantly come back to and find so difficult to comprehend. Then again, others have. In the UK in 1997 when eight year old Jamie Lavis disappeared, Darren Vickers ingratiated himself with the family, even moved into the family home, set up a campaign and helped search for Jamie. Darren Vickers eventually became a suspect, was arrested and finally convicted of sexual abuse and murder of the little boy.
Why the suspicions? It is not down to one thing; I am given to understand that it is the totality of the evidence in any given crime that is taken into consideration. Yes, it can always be this-or-that but some things are more logical than others.
Why would anyone want to cover up a death that was a genuine accident? The only reason I can think of is the fear of a post mortem and what it would reveal; especially of you have a lot to lose.
Although over four years have passed since Madeleine disappeared maybe now that things are not so raw the McCann’s could return to Portugal and answer any police questions. Maybe volunteer to take a polygraph test, or complete an on-site re-enactment?
Painful as it is, even innocent parents of a cot-death baby have to accept that, initially, they are the prime suspects.
Surely it is worth it - for Madeleine?
Ref:
A) Name changed
A1) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1041635/The-48-questions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html
1) http://www.childrenfirst.nhs.uk/families/experts/c/colomba_eye-conditions.html
Disclaimer: the views expressed here and elsewhere by PoppyMeze represent its own passing opinions offered under protection of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the "Convention"), which has been incorporated into UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998. No allegations are made by PoppyMeze and/or therein implicit.
No comments:
Post a Comment