Profiling

by mysterion 08.11.13 19:26

I`m a newbie on here and was wondering whether any independent profilers have taken the view that the McCanns are telling the truth.

by Guest 08.11.13 19:36

mysterion wrote:I`m a newbie on here and was wondering whether any independent profilers have taken the view that the McCanns are telling the truth.

***
Not that I am aware of ...

by Research_Reader 08.11.13 19:39

No profilers that I've read about. Although the psychologist/counsellor that was hired to help them stated that he found their reactions/behaviour consistent with parents who have lost a child as though in an abduction. Make of that what you will.

by Liz Eagles 08.11.13 19:42

Research_Reader wrote:No profilers that I've read about. Although the psychologist/counsellor that was hired to help them stated that he found their reactions/behaviour consistent with parents who have lost a child as though in an abduction. Make of that what you will.

What psychologist/counsellor would that be?

by Research_Reader 08.11.13 19:48

aquila wrote:
Research_Reader wrote:No profilers that I've read about. Although the psychologist/counsellor that was hired to help them stated that he found their reactions/behaviour consistent with parents who have lost a child as though in an abduction. Make of that what you will.
What psychologist/counsellor would that be?

Alan Robert Pike

"I would say that Kate e o Gerry were exhausted, anguished, confused, and angry for a few reasons, but namely with the lack of information. They were insecure as to how to help and with the lack of help and assistance. Their comportment did not surprise me. It was a comportment which I have witnessed a lot at times when a trauma is suffered. In my opinion, their reaction relative to the disappearance of Madeleine, as already stated above, was completely within the bounds of what one would expect of parents whose daughter was taken from them against their will."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Liz Eagles 08.11.13 19:52

Research_Reader wrote:
aquila wrote:
Research_Reader wrote:No profilers that I've read about. Although the psychologist/counsellor that was hired to help them stated that he found their reactions/behaviour consistent with parents who have lost a child as though in an abduction. Make of that what you will.
What psychologist/counsellor would that be?
Alan Robert Pike

"I would say that Kate e o Gerry were exhausted, anguished, confused, and angry for a few reasons, but namely with the lack of information. They were insecure as to how to help and with the lack of help and assistance. Their comportment did not surprise me. It was a comportment which I have witnessed a lot at times when a trauma is suffered. In my opinion, their reaction relative to the disappearance of Madeleine, as already stated above, was completely within the bounds of what one would expect of parents whose daughter was taken from them against their will."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Is this the man who went to the court in Portugal and has absolutely no qualifications as a psychologist?

do you mean Alan Pike who is a counsellor and who works for a company that works for Missing People and is linked to the travel industry?

by Research_Reader 08.11.13 20:01

I don't know any more about him, its just what I read in the link I provided from the investigation's evidence.

by Liz Eagles 08.11.13 20:04

Research_Reader wrote:I don't know any more about him, its just what I read in the link I provided from the investigation's evidence.

Perhaps you could search on the forum about the libel trial and the evidence given. If you put alan pike's name in the search facility it may well bring up some info.

by Research_Reader 08.11.13 20:12

I don't think its of much weight or consequence was this man thinks. Thats why I wrote "make of it what you will".

by sami 08.11.13 20:17

Research_Reader wrote:
aquila wrote:
Research_Reader wrote:No profilers that I've read about. Although the psychologist/counsellor that was hired to help them stated that he found their reactions/behaviour consistent with parents who have lost a child as though in an abduction. Make of that what you will.
What psychologist/counsellor would that be?
Alan Robert Pike

"I would say that Kate e o Gerry were exhausted, anguished, confused, and angry for a few reasons, but namely with the lack of information. They were insecure as to how to help and with the lack of help and assistance. Their comportment did not surprise me. It was a comportment which I have witnessed a lot at times when a trauma is suffered. In my opinion, their reaction relative to the disappearance of Madeleine, as already stated above, was completely within the bounds of what one would expect of parents whose daughter was taken from them against their will."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Sounds very much along the lines of "within the bounds of reasonable parenting" to me. Perhaps he is related to that person, who considered leaving the children alone "reasonable" according to Gerry. "completely within the bounds" used by two different people, not a very common phrase I would have thought.

by secrets and lies 08.11.13 20:20

Wasn't there also a link floating round recently to a piece written by a Swedish criminologist that was fairly damming of the McCanns and the whole sideshow?

by Guest 08.11.13 20:25

secrets and lies wrote:Wasn't there also a link floating round recently to a piece written by a Swedish criminologist that was fairly damming of the McCanns and the whole sideshow?

This one.........

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by mysterion 08.11.13 20:36

So it looks as if no qualified psychologist or criminlogist has stepped forward and said that he/she believes that the McCanns are telling the truth.

by Smokeandmirrors 08.11.13 20:51

mysterion wrote:So it looks as if no qualified psychologist or criminlogist has stepped forward and said that he/she believes that the McCanns are telling the truth.

Appears so. The "professionals" that have publicly supported them (including Ray Wyre now deceased, Mark Williams-Thomas, Jim Gambe), are not without large question marks above their names.

by Estelle 08.11.13 21:57

We can find more negative profiles on the McCanns than positive ones. Here is another negative one.

Madeleine McCann: It was British crime profiling expert who suggested parents could be suspects

Feb 11 2010 By Lynn Davidson

A BRITISH crime profiler made missing Madeleine McCann's parents suspects, it was claimed yesterday.

A court was told Lee Rainbow, the top profiler with the National Policing Improvement Agency, told Portuguese cops to consider the McCanns' possible involvement in their daughter's disappearance.

The advice came in a report Rainbow, who worked on the Ipswich Ripper and Shannon Matthews cases, wrote to senior Portuguese officers.

It was revealed at a trial involving detective Goncalo Amaral, who led the Madeleine inquiry in its early days before being removed from the case.

Amaral is trying to overturn a worldwide injunction banning the publication of his book Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie.

In it, he claims Glasgow-born heart consultant Gerry McCann and his GP wife were involved in Madeleine's death and staged her disappearance. The McCanns are suing him for libel.

His lawyer Antonio Cabrita told the court Rainbow wrote: "Madeleine's father was the last one to see her alive. The family is a lead that should be followed. Contradictions in Gerald McCann's statements might lead us to suspect a homicide."

Cabrita added: "This report has never been published before but is part of the investigation. It was British police who said they must consider not only abduction but homicide as well."

An NPIA spokesman said last night the advice given to probe family and close friends was "generic" in missing persons cases.
A ruling in Amaral's case is due to be made on February 18.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Estelle 08.11.13 22:04

Criminal Profiling Topic of the Day: Who Should be the Suspects in the McCann Case? [color:a74f=000000]The Daily Profiler

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown
Friday, October 26, 2007

MY PRESENT TAKE ON THE MCCANN CASE

One of the problems with trying to understand what has happened in a crime is being on the outside of the police investigation and not knowing the whole truth of what is going on. My speculation, as is true with all of us outside the investigation, professionals included, is based on limited information. Having said that, sometimes the police have the same problem. They may have limited information due to lack of evidence, lying witnesses, incorrect scientific conclusions, altered crime scenes (staged or accidentally altered), etc. So they actually are in the same boat, only a better constructed and less leaky one.

So, in a sense, it is a struggle to solve a crime, from the inside or outside. We theorize, search for evidence, theorize some more, search for evidence, and so on, until, hopefully, we have evidence conclusive enough to affect an arrest and conviction. Sometimes the evidence never reaches that state and, even if the police are pretty darn sure who is guilty, they still cannot arrest them or they know they cannot get a conviction.

As to the professionalism of the PJ's investigation, I cannot comment on that. They may have failed in some respects and done well in some respects. I don't have enough information. Generally speaking, most police departments will claim they do an excellent job following procedure, but in reality, sometimes it is less than perfect because police officers are human and vary in skill and competence. I have worked with some police departments that have done awesome work and others that make me cringe. Sometimes it is a lack of finances; sometimes it is departmental inefficiency; sometimes you just have a sad bunch of not too bright blokes. Every profession suffers these problems. Every profession tries to do their best with what they have and most police departments want to be a credit to their profession and work to be so.

To the McCann case; I don't have a clue as to the physical evidence or timeline because of police silence and all the rumors. Therefore it is really hard to actually analyze how the crime went down. But, I will go ahead with what I generally think on the matter.

POSSIBILITIES IN THE DISAPPEARANCE OF MADLEINE MCCANN

• Maddie is unlikely to have wandered off and drowned.
• Maddie was unlikely to have been kidnapped by a pedophile ring.
• Maddie is unlikely to have wandered off and been abducted though that COULD have happened (if there is no physical evidence of harm or death coming to Maddie in the apartment). If this is true, she is very likely dead.
• Maddie could have been abducted by a child predator that lived nearby. If this is true, she is likely dead.
• Maddie could have been medicated and died accidentally while her parents were at the restaurant. If this were true, the body of Maddie would have had to be moved from the flat and hidden or hidden within the flat prior to Kate's cry that Maddie was missing. If this is true, Maddie is dead.
• Maddie could have died accidentally prior to the McCann's going to dinner, giving them more time to move or hide Maddie's body. The time at the restaurant and the checks on the kids would establish an alibi and move the time of "disappearance" further from any possible witness sightings of earlier suspicious activities of the McCanns. If this is true, Maddie is dead.
• Kate killed Maddie, purposefully, or in a rage, and Gerry came back from tennis and found Maddie dead. He helped cover up the crime. If this is so, Kate would likely suffer from Munchausen's syndrome by Proxy (if she killed Maddie on purpose – MSP is the label for a female psychopath who harms or kills her children; husbands of MSP women tend to be detached and very oblivious or accepting of their wive's behaviors) or another serious psychiatric disorder (if she killed Maddie accidentally). They could have removed or hidden Maddie's body before going to dinner or the body could have been dealt with by Gerry during his checks on the children. If this is true, Maddie is dead.
• Gerry came back and killed Maddie in a rage. If this is so, Gerry would be likely rate high on a psychopathy checklist and be very controlling). Maddie's body would have been dealt with before or during the evening. If this is true, Maddie is dead.
• Kate killed Maddie, purposefully, or in a rage, and moved or hid her body without Gerry's knowledge. She would have had to manipulate Gerry into not noticing his daughter in bed ("Maddie's already asleep, let's go") before going to the restaurant. She would then possibly have hoped Gerry would do the checks and find Maddie missing, distancing herself from the crime. Maybe, if Gerry actually didn't do visual checks, Kate finally got fed up and went and did the check herself. If this is so, Kate would likely suffer from Munchausen's Syndrome by Proxy or another serious psychiatric disorder. If this is true, Maddie is dead.

These are all the possibilities I can think of based on very limited information,

I believe only two basic scenarios are worth spending much time on;

Maddie was taken by a child predator.
Maddie died in the apartment and the parents are covering up a crime.
In both cases, Maddie is likely dead.

THE SUSPECTS

Robert Murat is a good suspect. He should be kept on the suspect list (even if not officially) until there is evidence that contradicts his involvement in the disappearance of Maddie or until another person is arrested.

Police should continue investigating for the possibility of another child predator who could have been responsible for the disappearance of Maddie.

The McCanns are good suspects. They were the last people to have been known to see Maddie alive and their behaviors are very concerning. They should stay on the suspect list (even if not officially) until there is evidence that contradicts their involvement in the disappearance of Maddie or until another person is arrested.

Because of the following behaviors, I tend to lean toward the McCanns been involved with the disappearance, and therefore, death of their daughter, Maddie.

THE MCCANNS

They left three very young children unattended while they pursued pleasure for themselves. This is a sign of narcissism and a lack of attachment to one's children.

Both Kate and Gerry speak about Madeleine in a very impersonal and flat manner. Gerry writes nothing personal about Maddie on his blog. Maddie seems more like an abstraction than a real child. This is a sign of lack of normal attachment.

Kate states that the last words of Maddie before she went missing were "Today has been the best day of my life." Maddie's last words are unusual for a three-year-old girl. Kids that young don’t usually have a concept of their "life." "I am having the best time," and "I am having fun" are more normal statements for that age. Next, Kate says Maddie was "very pleased with her life," also an odd comment for an adult to say of her child. Both statements lead me to believe Kate knows Maddie is dead because of her emphasis on the inclusion of the word "life," as though there were a set of parentheses around the first day of her life and the last. Kate may want to convince herself that she gave Maddie a good life, right up until her last day, the best day of her life. Also, it is quite common for people involved in the death of a relative to exaggerate the perfection of their relationship or the last moments to insinuate that nothing negative was going on between the parties and, therefore, nothing untoward could have occurred.

The McCanns have never personally offered the reward on television or posted the reward at the web site. Almost all parents of missing children do this.

If Kate really believes Maddie is alive and being cared for in someone's home, she would make continual direct pleas to the captor for Maddie's return ("Please just drop her off any public location…"). Almost all parents of missing children who believe they are alive will do this.

Neither Kate or Gerry have taken or indicate they will take a polygraph. Parents of missing children do this to clear themselves so the police will not waste time focusing on them.

Kate and Gerry appearances show little fluctuation in emotion (except when they feel they are being accused of drugging Maddie). Neither breaks down and cries or blurts out anything with emotion ("Maddie! We love you, honey! Don't give up! We will find you!" Or "Please give us our Maddie back! Oh my God, please!") Usually in a set of parents, we will see emotions bounce around, one of them falling apart, one becoming angry; with the McCanns their answers are carefully constructed and evenly relayed. Their appearances feel more like performances than parents desperately trying to reach out to their child, the kidnapper or the public. Yes, they are British, but even a stiff-upper lip tends not to look like this under these circumstances.

There are muted flashes of anger, frustration, and annoyance directed from one of the McCanns to the other during their interviews which is very unusual for parents of a missing child. There is a strong feeling of control rather than support between the couple.

Gerry McCann commented in one interview: "In about the middle of June things, about five or six weeks, things were going really very, very quiet and I was actually quite glad of that and I thought we would start to get back to a more normal existence and a quieter form of campaigning, using the Internet and raising and broadening the political issues which have been highlighted to us and I saw that as a long term focus."

For a parent to have any interest in political issues so soon after his child has gone missing when the one and only concern should be finding their loved one, is extremely bizarre. That Gerry should see his long term focus at this point in time as a political one is also very concerning. This statement would be less concerning if a few years had passed and the McCanns, accepting they were likely never to find their daughter, wanted to do something to help others not suffer as they had and to do something in their daughter's name. But, to think this way so early on indicates Gerry believes or knows his daughter is dead and indicates more self-interest than interest in his daughter's welfare.

Gerry's blog focuses very little on Madeleine and more on his and Kate's activities. The cheery quality of the blog and self-centeredness of the content is a sign of disconnect between Gerry and Madeleine and a sign of having moved on as if Gerry knows Maddie is already dead.

Kate states she had trouble sleeping during the first five days after Maddie went missing but has been sleeping fine since. Very few parents of abducted children can sleep very well knowing their child might be in pain, crying, and scared. Kate's ability to sleep infers she is not worrying about Maddie because Maddie is dead already (or has an inability to feel empathy for others).

The quick return to normal activities is unusual for parents of abducted children; most obsess continually and can't think of anything else and have trouble going through the simplest routines of life.

Kate and Gerry left their twins in Portugal while they went to see the Pope. Most parents of abducted children would be paranoid to be away from their other children for fear something would happen to them. Furthermore, to leave your children in the exact location where your other child was taken, whether one had a relative with them or not, is odd for parents who believe the abductor of their missing child is in the very same vicinity.

The McCanns left Portugal as soon as they became Aguidos. If the only reason they were made suspects was a legal one so the police could ask them important questions to help them clear themselves, they should have stayed to continue to help the police put the matter straight and get the focus off of them.

Much of the PR campaign at this point appears to be responding to public opinion and trying to answer their suspicions about the innocence of the McCanns, not finding Madeleine. Even in the latest move, the television appearance of the McCanns did not make a plea to the abductor or send a message to Maddie. It appeared to be a show to prove Kate has emotions. Following the show, an artist's rendition of a supposed suspect was released many months after he was said to have been seen by one of their friends. The release of the picture will be counterproductive to actually finding Maddie, as not only is it based on a very questionable witness sighting, but may have nothing to do with Maddie. Such a picture will only elicit droves of worthless tips and waste police time. This is an unwise choice of strategy unless the purpose is to distract the police from focusing on the McCanns.

It is possible that the McCanns suffer from certain psychiatric designations that causes them behave in a manner which makes then look guilty of involvement in the disappearance of Maddie when in actuality, they had no part in it. For this reason, I can only say, they are good suspects; I cannot label them guilty.

SUMMARY

So, to recap, Madeleine McCann is 99% likely to be dead. My top suspects at this point, based on behavior and what information can be validated, are the McCanns. If I were a criminal profiler working with the police on the case, I would be focusing heavily on them as my investigative focus. However, I would not rule out the possibility of a child predator and, therefore, I would spend a portion of time pursuing leads and information that might prove this possibility to be true, and I would make sure I did not force fit any evidence to match my theories nor ignore any evidence that might point me away from those theories. As new evidence surfaced, I would take this into account, reanalyze the information, and adjust my conclusions accordingly.

I hope we will see progress soon in the investigation of Madeleine McCann's disappearance, so the whole matter can be put the rest and justice will be seen for this little girl and those who love her.

Criminal Profiler Pat Brown

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Guest 08.11.13 22:08

Chelsea Hoffman is another one.

by Estelle 08.11.13 22:36

From Dr Paulo Sargento, criminal psychologist, university professor and author
06 February 2009 - 01:19

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It was difficult to choose which one of the articles from Paulo Sargento to post here but I chose this one:

snipped....

"The educational practices that the McCanns demonstrated were predictors of one of the biggest acts of wickedness that I have witnessed against children: to give gifts to the twins, saying that those were sent by Maddie.

Mr and Mrs McCann:

Do not make of Maddie a Santa Claus who gives gifts to the children and that never, I repeat, NEVER, appears or will appear.

Let the twins do the mourning of their sister. You both know she will not appear.

Even if you believe that you had no intervention in the disappearance of your daughter (which I do not believe and I have that right as a citizen), you have been warned that the excessive media attention would increased the likelihood, in the hypothetical case of abduction, that the supposed kidnapper would kill the girl. If you do not want to face the grief of Maddie, you have that right and you have your reasons... But please, let the twins do it.

The girl, unfortunately, will not return. Do not give hope to the little ones because they will not remember their sister. They will not have a memory of Maddie, unless through pictures and what is told to them, and unfortunately, from what they will know and understand when they grow up. Do not build false memories through deceiving illusions. Tell the twins that Maddie is a little star [in the sky]. They will know what that means. Until then, do not let any pact to use the twins as a means.

These children live in a strange ambience. "Where is Maddie? Will she be back? And what if we are taken to that place?" Children do not think like us. They believe they are stolen by the boogeyman. And what if one has gone already?

Mr and Mrs McCann

I have never made any criticisms to your parental qualities.

However, given what you did with the twins I have to firmly say:

You are BAD PARENTS!

Get some counselling!

by Estelle 08.11.13 23:18

candyfloss wrote:Chelsea Hoffman is another one.

Thanks CandyFloss.

From Chelsea Hoffman, Criminal Profiler.

Still, there is the issue of who, what, why and how?
A 2012 study out of the UK reveals that 65% of child homicides are at the hands of the child's parent(s). Forty-seven percent of child homicides are at the hands of their mothers, while 53% at the hands of their fathers -- this is in England and Wales of course. On a worldwide scale, the statistics are a little different. I am, obviously, going by the UK stats in this example since the child and the parents were British visiting Portugal abroad.

As for the mode of homicide a United States governmental source indicates that homicides against young children are mostly perpetrated by family members. Suffocation and beatings are the top causes of homicidal death in both young boys and girls in this aspect. It should be mentioned, however, that the United States does surpass the leading countries where child homicide is prevalent by at least five times.

So where am I going with this? I think it's obvious, but more needs to be analyzed. I think the parents of Madeleine McCann have done a poor job of representing themselves to the public and the media with all of the evidence that has been claimed against them. What's more, their reactions to the forensic evidence confirmed to match the DNA of their missing daughter. See the video below:

The blatant avoidance of the topic perplexes me, and leads me to wonder just how deep this story is and just what may have happened to Maddie. One thing I am certain, however, is that this child never made it out apartment 5A alive. That's just my honest opinion.

Was she murdered or did she die as a result of an accident? Did something else entirely happen that still leaves the family completely unconnected? Possibly.

snipped...

"I'm sorry but the known evidence in this case simply points to the likelihood that they either killed their daughter or covered up a horrible accident that ended her life. Still, let's list off some of the reasons why I've come to my own idea that Kate McCann could be England's version of Casey Anthony.

Kate and Gerry McCann claimed they would take a polygraph test at any point. It's interesting that when a media source offered to pay for a polygraph test, the two backed out of their promise. Why would supposedly innocent parents of a truly missing childback-out after swearing they'd take one of these lie detector tests? As far as I've been able to find, they've still not taken one.

[color][font]
It's reported that Don Cargill, the chairman of the British And European Polygraph Association, had been in contact with the McCanns regarding the administration of a polygraph. However, Kate McCann submitted a list of "conditions" that would make giving the test impossible. In other words, it seemed like Kate would only take the test if the administrator only stuck to the questions she and Gerry would answer.
[/font][/color]

"Kate said she'd take it to prove her innocence but in reality, she wasn't willing. I was dumbfounded, to tell the truth." -- Don Cargill.

[color][font]

Let's be clear here: People who have nothing to hide; people who are completely innocent; people who are not connected to the potential crimes committed: do not refuse polygraph tests, nor do they try to weasel their ways out of answering the questions that matter. In the United States, where the homicide rates are certainly higher than the UK and Portugal, it's rather general practice for the parents of a missing or murdered child to take polygraph tests. Our experts recommend it regularly, such as John Walsh of America's Most Wanted, who often reminisces that when his son Adam was abducted, he and everyonein the family immediately volunteered polygraph tests because they wanted to be cleared immediately so the crime could be investigated properly and justice could be served.

The point is simple: Refusing a polygraph makes you look guilty as hell. Period.

Kate McCann refused to answer all but one of 48 questions during the an interrogation after Madeleine was allegedly abducted. She was asked if she was aware that her refusal to answer questions would hinder the investigation and she acknowledged it. You can see the list of 48 questions right here. Now ask yourself, if your child was missing would you answer these questions if you were innocent of wrongdoing?
[/font][/color]

The McCanns and their friends have never been able to get their stories to fully mesh. None of them have been able to agree on when the adults checked on the children the night Maddie "was taken." Furthermore, they all refused to do a re-enactment to help in determining the direction in which the investigation was to travel. Why? Probably because none of them can get their stories right. A re-enactment would only further reveal the inconsistencies in their stories, I think.
In regards to the evidence discovered by two famed British scent dogs, the behavior displayed by Kate and Gerry McCann was suspicious to say the least. From the very beginning the two began attempting to discredit the findings. They even quoted a U.S. case where a dog was thought to be in error -- however, the McCanns didn't find it in their best interests to admit that the dog's findings were later proven correct! Oh, they had tons of excuses and reasons for why the blood and cadaver dogs hit in their Algarve vacation rental and the "boot" of their car. It was from diapers, or a cut from one of the twins, etc etc etc., She also washed the toy called "cuddle cat" before police were able to test it -- claiming it smelled of suntan lotion. Like Cindy Anthony cleaning away the evidence from the car driven by Casey Anthony, the woman was apparently washing away some kind of evidence.

[color][font]
The blood evidence found by scent dogs was tested and found to have an 88% match to Madeleine McCann. It's reported that 12% of the DNA was too damaged to determine. Now, does this mean that the DNA didn't belong to Madeleine, or did it? Groupies of suspicious parents of "missing" children tend to grasp for any possibilities that their "team" scores the points they want, so in the eyes of some 88% might as well mean 0% -- However, the 16 points taken from this 88% match did indeed match Madeleine's DNA. Unfortunately, 88% DNA match is apparently inadmissible, but it certainly lent to the direction of the investigation. Also, it should be mentioned that one of the dogs who found this evidence was a dog trained to specifically sniff out human cadaver oil. That means the scent that the dog picked up came from someone who was dead -- the oils released post-mortem. So, if this DNA being only 88% match to the missing child, was part of the "post-mortem" oil finds, then that blows the McCann's excuses out of the water and shouldn't be overlooked by investigators.Obviously the human cadaver oil certainly would not belong to Kate McCann or the twins! In fact, that is why I believe the DNA evidence most certainly is Madeleine's. She's the one who was missing, and nobody else died in the rental apartment in the Algarve. Period.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Estelle 08.11.13 23:38

Dr Christian Ludke - Criminal Psychologist wrote:7 September 2007

"The forensic psychologist Dr. Christian Lüdke leads a company in Essen which supports the victims of robberies, kidnappings, accidents or disasters. He spoke with WELT ONLINE about the possible motives of the McCann couple in the tragic case of the abduction of Madeleine.

WELT ONLINE: You have warned, since early on, that the behaviour of Gerry and Kate McCann indicates their involvement in the crime. What has made you feel that way?

Christian Lüdke: I have, in recent years, cared for many parents who lost their children due to acts of violence. Most of them were under severe shock, feeling helpless, desperate and withdrawn. Many also quarralled. They blamed themselves hugely for not having looked after their child adequately.

WELT ONLINE: It was different with the McCanns?

Lüdke: They live very differently. In public, they are harmonious. Already, after only a few days they went jogging, as if that was a normal thing to do, always appearing together. These parents took matters into their own hands instead of leaving matters in the hands of the police. They distanced themselves from their two other children by going on a European tour, that to me is very strange.

WELT ONLINE: Maybe it was an accident?

Lüdke: No. In such a case, after the first shock, they would have trusted the police. Both parents are doctors, in case of an accident they would have tried to get help. It is even more unrealistic that of all people two doctors would leave 3 children alone in a strange environment, even more at night. I have many doctors as patients. As professionals they know all that can happen to children, and as parents they are overly protective.

WELT ONLINE: What could have been the motive to cause their own daughter's disappearance?

Lüdke: There are parents who have little or no emotional bond with a child. Often such a child is considered a burden that must be dealt with in a brutal or perverted way. The best known is Münchhausen Syndrome by Proxy: The mother tortures the child until it is almost dead and then calls for the police because she herself has a great desire to receive attention.

WELT ONLINE: Do you think it is possible that Madeleine's parents have killed Madeleine and together hidden her?

Lüdke: I believe both parents know what happened.

WELT ONLINE: It means, the McCanns planned the death of their daughter?

Lüdke: Yes, it is possible that they planned this a long time ago, they must at least have played it through in their minds many times and they must have spoken about it together. Otherwise they would now be contradicting each other.

WELT ONLINE: When parents are guilty of killing their child, do they block this fact out of their minds?

Lüdke: Unlikely. Both have clear consciousness, give interviews, travel. It is easier for them to lie than to speak the truth. One can probably exclude a psychosis. Many things point toward a mental disorder. The children of the McCanns were conceived artificially; that can lead to problems in parenthood. Maybe there were self esteem issues that were not openly addressed. Maybe the child had to die due to a problem that had lasted many years.

WELT ONLINE: But the McCanns seem perfect and loving parents.

Lüdke: That public image can be due to a guilt mechanism, like doing a media campaign, to distract attention away from the real problem.

WELT ONLINE: Why do they not go back to Great Britain?

Lüdke: That also speaks against them. When someone loses a child they want to be with their loved ones in a secure environment. By continuing to stay at that resort, where something terrible happened, the worse that can happen to a parent - that is, to lose a child - indicates a survival instinct. As in a mental cinema, these pictures would be constantly running over again. That the McCanns do not return home, where they would have memories of the beautiful times spent with their child, can be seen as an evasive action, in order to avoid having to deal with what they have done.

WELT ONLINE: The world thinks it is impossible that these parents can be guilty.

Lüdke: The media have possibly been taken in by the McCanns. They very quickly attended only after them, instead of around the child. The parents were accompanied like the Beckhams. In his Internet diary, the father writes almost daily about that and other irrelevant/banal things, the shirt he was wearing, what the weather is like. No father in despair could do this. Statistically 70 percent of all the violence against children is caused by the parents, family members or friends. That has unfortunately, to a large extent, not been looked into. The Portuguese police were attacked unfairly when they tried to refer in that direction.

WELT ONLINE: They have already expressed suspicions about the parents, when hardly anyone wanted to know about it. Have you been criticized for it?

Lüdke: Yes, very severely. There were open letters, a campaign on the Internet with professional associations. And I have done no more than look at the whole thing as an outsider.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by mysterion 09.11.13 11:33

Smokeandmirrors wrote:
mysterion wrote:So it looks as if no qualified psychologist or criminlogist has stepped forward and said that he/she believes that the McCanns are telling the truth.
Appears so. The "professionals" that have publicly supported them (including Ray Wyre now deceased, Mark Williams-Thomas, Jim Gambe), are not without large question marks above their names.

Does anyone have link to the statements made by any of the above?

In the absence of stronger claims by those people, it seems that any police force in any part of the world woyld come to the same concluions about the McCanns. I believe that most investigating police officers have a pretty good about when someone isnot telling the whole truth. After all, they are dealing with that behaviour all the time.