FIGHTING THEIR CORNER Maddie McCann’s parents vow to fight ‘tooth and nail’ if they are ever prosecuted over leaving their kids alone

princess_leia wrote:Does anyone know if Goncalo Amaral still believes she died on 3rd May?


=== ANSWER by Mod:

We do know from a person who is in direct touch with him that he has been made aware of the strong evidence for a significant and serious event having occurred much earlier in the week. What he is going to put into his new book is being kept carefully under wraps until publication! - Mod

jeanmonroe wrote:

plebgate wrote:I don't visit the site but has anyone seen the outpouring of love messages to the site?

This is my view.  Maddie is missing, it is coming up to the tenth anniversary of her disappearance and because there has been an outpouring of love the site re-opens.  What is that all about?

If I were ever in that position my site WOULD REMAIN OPEN AT ALL TIMES - whatever so-called trolls and wait for it   -  BULLIES chose to say.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Oh dear Tracy - apparently you are making everything up - has anyone complained to your boss or the newspaper watchdog?

suzyjohnson wrote:I am still of the opinion that most likely an accident occurred on the 3 rd May and was hastily covered up. The possible connection, as far as I am concerned, between neglect and fatal accident is that an accident could have occurred as a result of sedating the children so that the parents could continue to go out in the evening leaving them unsupervised. That is how I think neglect fits into the overall picture. Had Madeleine died as a result of having been sedated, the McCanns would be at risk of losing their other children, their careers, their reputation and income.   

There are different theories on this forum, yet common to them all is that in order for an abduction to have occurred at all, it is necessary that SOME neglect did occur on the holiday (had the parents been present then no abduction could have happened) so, to one extent or another (depending on your theory), the McCanns need to be seen as neglectful in order for the abduction scenario to be accepted.

I'm not saying that I know everything or that I'm necessarily right, it's just to me the Amaral / Pat Brown theory seems to me to be far the most likely explanation. I have great difficulty with the idea that the group spent an entire week dining out, playing tennis, pretending that nothing was wrong. I also think that anything other than a hasty decision to cover up, would have been a lot better organised.

sharonl wrote:First of all, they would need to prove that they actually did leave the kids alone.  After all, the PJ suggested that all the kids slept in one apartment, and we know that at least one adult member of the group was missing from the tapas party each night.
I believe that Madeleine died on April 29th.  If that is correct, then no way would the group risk any harm  coming to the remaining children.
The media, at every opportunity, report the line "Madeleine disappeared from her parents' apartment whilst they dined at the local tapas".  IMO, that is nothing more than an alibi, it puts across the idea that the McCanns were not present when Madeleine met her fate.  And of course, they could not claim the abduction without saying that they were out at the time.
IMO, They were far too quick to admit to leaving the kids alone, but they had to say that to cover for something much worse.

pennylane wrote:

suzyjohnson wrote:I am still of the opinion that most likely an accident occurred on the 3 rd May and was hastily covered up. The possible connection, as far as I am concerned, between neglect and fatal accident is that an accident could have occurred as a result of sedating the children so that the parents could continue to go out in the evening leaving them unsupervised. That is how I think neglect fits into the overall picture. Had Madeleine died as a result of having been sedated, the McCanns would be at risk of losing their other children, their careers, their reputation and income.   

There are different theories on this forum, yet common to them all is that in order for an abduction to have occurred at all, it is necessary that SOME neglect did occur on the holiday (had the parents been present then no abduction could have happened) so, to one extent or another (depending on your theory), the McCanns need to be seen as neglectful in order for the abduction scenario to be accepted.

I'm not saying that I know everything or that I'm necessarily right, it's just to me the Amaral / Pat Brown theory seems to me to be far the most likely explanation. I have great difficulty with the idea that the group spent an entire week dining out, playing tennis, pretending that nothing was wrong. I also think that anything other than a hasty decision to cover up, would have been a lot better organised.

I am in total agreement Suzy. 

worriedmum wrote:

pennylane wrote:

suzyjohnson wrote:I am still of the opinion that most likely an accident occurred on the 3 rd May and was hastily covered up. The possible connection, as far as I am concerned, between neglect and fatal accident is that an accident could have occurred as a result of sedating the children so that the parents could continue to go out in the evening leaving them unsupervised. That is how I think neglect fits into the overall picture. Had Madeleine died as a result of having been sedated, the McCanns would be at risk of losing their other children, their careers, their reputation and income.   

There are different theories on this forum, yet common to them all is that in order for an abduction to have occurred at all, it is necessary that SOME neglect did occur on the holiday (had the parents been present then no abduction could have happened) so, to one extent or another (depending on your theory), the McCanns need to be seen as neglectful in order for the abduction scenario to be accepted.

I'm not saying that I know everything or that I'm necessarily right, it's just to me the Amaral / Pat Brown theory seems to me to be far the most likely explanation. I have great difficulty with the idea that the group spent an entire week dining out, playing tennis, pretending that nothing was wrong. I also think that anything other than a hasty decision to cover up, would have been a lot better organised.

I am in total agreement Suzy. 

 Interesting points for me are the sticker book----suggests a rushed response
Kate mentioning to Fiona at the table about whether the doors should be left open
Gerry mentioning to Jez Wilkins about the children in the room , and making a point of speaking to him.

pennylane wrote:G

worriedmum wrote:

pennylane wrote:

suzyjohnson wrote:I am still of the opinion that most likely an accident occurred on the 3 rd May and was hastily covered up. The possible connection, as far as I am concerned, between neglect and fatal accident is that an accident could have occurred as a result of sedating the children so that the parents could continue to go out in the evening leaving them unsupervised. That is how I think neglect fits into the overall picture. Had Madeleine died as a result of having been sedated, the McCanns would be at risk of losing their other children, their careers, their reputation and income.   

There are different theories on this forum, yet common to them all is that in order for an abduction to have occurred at all, it is necessary that SOME neglect did occur on the holiday (had the parents been present then no abduction could have happened) so, to one extent or another (depending on your theory), the McCanns need to be seen as neglectful in order for the abduction scenario to be accepted.

I'm not saying that I know everything or that I'm necessarily right, it's just to me the Amaral / Pat Brown theory seems to me to be far the most likely explanation. I have great difficulty with the idea that the group spent an entire week dining out, playing tennis, pretending that nothing was wrong. I also think that anything other than a hasty decision to cover up, would have been a lot better organised.

I am in total agreement Suzy. 

 Interesting points for me are the sticker book----suggests a rushed response
Kate mentioning to Fiona at the table about whether the doors should be left open
Gerry mentioning to Jez Wilkins about the children in the room , and making a point of speaking to him.

All very interesting points worried mum.  The sticker book timelines certainly have last minute fiasco written all over it, as do many other facets of this case.

princess_leia wrote:I must be missing something here...so they never left them on their own during the holiday?  


I was wondering why I was seeing so many comments aboút this. 

I always believe that the general consensus was that they left the kids alone, M got out of bed, climbed up on the back of the sofa, fell and died, so has this changed now? 

What is the theory now then, how did she die?

MTSTAR wrote:Yes this has lost me too.  I was always under the impression that the children were left alone.  I'm new to this forum so apologies if I'm coming across as dense.  I'm fascinated by this case and have always thought the McCanns were involved.  So many lies have been told it's hard to get a straight story.  It seems to be changing, especially recently.

suzyjohnson wrote:

MTSTAR wrote:Yes this has lost me too.  I was always under the impression that the children were left alone.  I'm new to this forum so apologies if I'm coming across as dense.  I'm fascinated by this case and have always thought the McCanns were involved.  So many lies have been told it's hard to get a straight story.  It seems to be changing, especially recently.

 
In order to persuade people that an abduction had taken place, they would need to say that the children were left alone for long enough for an abduction to have happened. 

The possibilities would be that 1) The children were left alone and an abduction did take place or 2) that the children were left alone but that something else happened.

On the other hand, it's possible that the children were never left alone at all (that at least one adult was supervising each evening) and that something (other than abduction) happened. 

In this last case, the parents / group would wish to persuade the public that the children were neglected in order to cover up whatever else had happened, in addition to allowing time for abduction to have occurred.

Reggiregg wrote:The idea that one or other of the group babysat all the children goes back to the early days. It was so odd one or other was ill for a single night. I wonder if they were all sedated though as looking after all those babies and todders would hAve been a nightmare for one person if some were awake.

suzyjohnson wrote:

MTSTAR wrote:Yes this has lost me too.  I was always under the impression that the children were left alone.  I'm new to this forum so apologies if I'm coming across as dense.  I'm fascinated by this case and have always thought the McCanns were involved.  So many lies have been told it's hard to get a straight story.  It seems to be changing, especially recently.

 
In order to persuade people that an abduction had taken place, they would need to say that the children were left alone for long enough for an abduction to have happened. 

The possibilities would be that 1) The children were left alone and an abduction did take place or 2) that the children were left alone but that something else happened.

On the other hand, it's possible that the children were never left alone at all (that at least one adult was supervising each evening) and that something (other than abduction) happened. 

In this last case, the parents / group would wish to persuade the public that the children were neglected in order to cover up whatever else had happened, in addition to allowing time for abduction to have occurred.