The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Welcome to 'The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' forum 🌹

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann.

Please note that when you register your username must be different from your email address!

Probability Theory

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Probability Theory

Post by Mikey on 15.11.13 8:17

The disappearance of Madeleine McCann, a hypothesis by probability:

Having only today finished reading ‘What really happened to Madeleine McCann’, it raises interesting thoughts for me.  First amongst those would be/is “why are the British Police seemingly ignoring so many such controversial aspects to this case?”, or better still, are they?  Is there an real agenda to actually get to the truth of the matter, and the public, British and those globally interested should allow them the time to complete their enquiries?  I would also like to make clear, that I believe that it would be in the public interest to free Mr Bennett from what ever restrictions he was previously placed under, and let the truth of the matter be understood.  Start to finish.
One thing that is almost certain, beyond much doubt, given what is available today, is that unless the infamous group are questioned, and they have no ‘honest’ reason to refuse, the British Police will not get a great deal closer.
Ok, given that I am a relative newbie, please excuse what you may view as repetition and also read all that follows as a theory alone.  Although I have taken some interest over the years, it is only in more recent months that it has started to pique somewhat.  There is much that I still have not read.  Most of you are probably already aware that the above mentioned booklet can easily be accessed.
Anyhow, let’s get to my thinking, and the manner in which it is developed:
Is she alive?  Although possible, unlikely I believe.  If she were taken alive, the McCanns’ themselves, by appearances, did their utmost to ensure that any potential abductor would need to get rid of her, most of this completely against professional advice.  Nothing was dealt with in the manner of a ‘normal’ abduction/kidnapping case.  It was the McCanns’ themselves that saw to this by the extraordinary high level of publicity, methods and manners in which they and they alone sought to progress this case in the public eye.  This is further supported by the fact that they, as far as I am aware, did not take part in any searches either immediately or in the days that followed.  This and other aspects, actions, etc, point to the possibility that they already knew that they would never see their daughter again.  Probability, very low.
Abduction by unknown party/parties?  No.  I am not led to believe this.  There is yet to be produced a single shred to suggest this may have occurred, that is other than the declarations of the McCanns and their friends.  The World already knows that their story or more probable fabrication leaks worse than a sieve.  That said, it will remain a possibility albeit remote.  I find it incredibly difficult to believe that an abductor, by chance, in a brief window of opportunity, without a vehicle, or assistance, could or would have achieved this without any trace.  Also begs the question of why a potential abductor would have harmed her and left trace evidence of such (cadaverine and blood) when this yet further reduces the likelihood of an abduction.  Without evidence or ‘believable’ witness statement to substantiate this claim, probability remains low.
Taking the above into account and presuming the higher probability of her being deceased, where did she die?  The highest likelihood seems to be in the apartment or close by.  This would substantiate, explain and be supported by the existence of both blood and cadaverine.  Add into this the inadmissible yet unbelievably high probability of accuracy given by the dogs, and limited loss of accuracy by DNA markers, etc, and the overall likelihood points to only this conclusion, no matter how you try to wrap it in a different guise.  Therefore the probability that she either died in the apartment or her body was moved there after an accident whilst wandering is very high.
Premeditated?  No.  I do not believe so.  The McCanns’ would have had an alibi prepared with much more thoroughness.  This doesn’t exist and there are too many holes/inconsistencies in and at every step they take to consider this as a high probability.
Murder?  No.  Murder would tend to lean more towards premeditation.  It equally doesn’t fit.
Manslaughter?  This is a higher possibility.  Again I would like to think not, but in this case there are aspects that do lend some support and credence to this suggestion.  Given those reported/suggested admissions to doping, manslaughter will remain a possibility, though accidental I would expect.  The hole in this; if she had died as a result of a reaction to some medication, this would not explain the existence of the blood and cadaverine, so I believe this also falls into unlikely.
Robbery gone wrong?  No.  There was no evidence to suggest anyone else had entered the apartment for robbery let alone abduction.  That said, of course it remains as another possibility... plenty of robberies do occur in and around holiday locations... they may be seen as relatively easy pickings.  Furthermore, there was nothing disturbed, nothing taken, and not only it is doubtful that any potential robber would have taken let alone harmed or killed the little girl had she awoken, why take the body, and why would it have not been reported by the McCanns?  All evidence (if that is what it can be called) or lack of it suggests that this is a very remote possibility.  No.  The McCanns had their ‘story’ and they were going to stick to it at all costs.  They were not willing to entertain any other possibilities.
Constructive homicide/Involuntary manslaughter/Accident?  I cannot seem to separate these.  Reasoning; If an accident occurred in the apartment, or outside (wandering/falling, etc) and the body was brought back in, this would explain the existence of the blood and cadaverine.  Under any normal circumstances, do I believe she would have wandered out of the apartment in the dark, had she awoken?  No, more likely she would have cried and called for her parents as she did on a previous evening.  An accident could however have occurred whilst under the influence of some form of doping, hence these possibilities remain tied.  This also may explain why she could have been unsteady, more inclined to be disoriented, confused, exit the apartment, have an accident, etc.  The two remain tied mostly because if it was a simple accident, why not report such immediately?
It is easily possible to understand the reaction of one or more of the McCanns acting in a panic, only if there were some form of doping or other potential bodily evidence to suggest something untoward that occurred recently or in the past, otherwise the higher probability is that they would have reported such accident.  What is not understood is how or why all the friends in the group would support the potentially fabricated stories.  This leads me to believe that someone outside of the McCanns aided in some manner, such as to draw them into the potential fabrication.  The trouble is of course, that once this path of potential fabrication is taken, it is extremely difficult to turn back from.  I do believe there is a good chance that one or more of the party may be unaware of all the circumstances, but now have also been drawn in.
I do not believe that any harm to cause death was intentional, however I do believe that harm was perpetrated inadvertently leading to her death.  Therefore very much the highest probability is that the case (based upon current information) falls into the last category ‘Constructive homicide/Involuntary manslaughter/Accident’ one way or another.
This is my hypothesis/theory.
Footnotes:
Unfortunately without a body, person or persons coming forward with additional statement(s) or further evidence, much will remain open to debate.
Whether today there is sufficient to prove beyond any doubt, only a professional could piece together enough circumstantial evidence in conjunction with the discounting of the entire set of presumably fabricated alibi/stories, to be able to bring a case to court, this remains to be seen, but is probably unlikely.
What I also cannot determine, is when the last corroborated and irrefutable evidence of her being alive and well is.  Perhaps someone can throw light on this?  If the crying on the evening prior was definitely her, then this provides a possible starting point.  A nanny confirming seeing her on the day in question, etc?
This above also sheds light on the mentality of the McCanns in making deliberate and conscious decisions to abandon their very young children in the pursuit of their own pleasures, having supposedly even refused a babysitter who would have already been known and friendly with the children.  This is not news of course, but is quite possibly at the very heart of the entire case.
The first and probably most pointed question I would ask myself, and anyone else, including the McCanns and their small group of friends; “Why are you not assisting the police in any manner possible to help in the search for your missing daughter?”
When all is said and done, the above of course is all hypothesis and conjecture.  I live in the hope that one day soon we will learn the truth.  Further, I also hope that unlikely as it seems to me, that there remains that small chance that she is alive and well somewhere.

Mikey

Posts : 32
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by canada12 on 15.11.13 9:49

I like your hypothesis. I might add to it that I believe Madeleine died in the apartment a little earlier than the time we're led to believe she was discovered missing (I'd guess perhaps up to an hour earlier). I remember reading that it was reported that Madeleine had sleepwalking issues, and that she was fond of getting up in the night and going to her parents' bedroom. If we consider the possibility that a) she was medicated and sleepy and b) she's a three year old in an apartment that isn't laid out the same way as her familiar home, then c) it's entirely possible she woke up, and in a very sleepy state wandered to what she thought was her parents' bedroom, in the dark, and climbed onto what she thought was their bed, but it turned out to be the sofa. From which she fell, hitting her head on the hard floor.

I'd also like to add that, being medical doctors, surely Kate and Gerry and all of their friends would have been acutely aware of the necessity of keeping the "scene of the crime" clear so that any clues left by their "abductor" would be preserved. This wasn't done.

Furthermore, their insistence that there was no DNA of Madeleine available for the police to recover tells me that the sources of her DNA might contain information they were anxious not be discovered. For instance, traces of medication identifiable in saliva and hair follicles.

canada12

Posts : 1461
Reputation : 200
Join date : 2013-10-28

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by suzyjohnson on 15.11.13 10:00

Mikey, well done. Your assessment just about sums up what I was thinking.

Amaral puts the last reported sighting of MM, by anyone outside the Tapas group, at around 5.30 pm on 3 rd May when she was signed out from the creche register (apparently the nannies take this register round to the Tapas restaurant area while the children are having their tea, so children can be collected from there) 

Between 6.30 pm - 7 pm David Payne says he saw MM at the apartment along with Kate and the other two children. Payne is a long standing friend of McCann and so may have been someone he could ask for assistance in staging a cover up.

____________________


suzyjohnson

Posts : 1192
Reputation : 261
Join date : 2013-03-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Confirmation of time

Post by Mikey on 15.11.13 10:20

Thanks Canada and Suzy.  Good to note that time.  As I said, there is much that I have not fully read as yet.  Amaral's book being one of those, not fully read yet.  So 17:30 is the only independant time that I would accept, and this certainly allows for a great deal more to have occured, been cleaned-up, etc, prior to embarking on the fabrications and play acting that followed.

Still fits that not all the group may be fully aware of what occured, either then or since, but are now inevitably tied into it.  One suggestion of giving freedom from prosecution from the Portuguese, British and wider European courts is good... It's possible this could help bring a witness statement/changed statement forward, even if it were to extend to both parties of a family, i.e. husband and wife.  I fully believe that one or more of those involved must be having an awful time with their conciences.

Mikey

Posts : 32
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by Guest on 15.11.13 10:45

@Mikey wrote:The disappearance of Madeleine McCann, a hypothesis by probability:

Having only today (13th November 2013) gained a copy and finished reading Mr Bennetts ‘What really happened to Madeleine McCann’, it raises interesting thoughts for me.  First amongst those would be/is “why are the British Police seemingly ignoring so many such controversial aspects to this case?”, or better still, are they?  Is there an real agenda to actually get to the truth of the matter, and the public, British and those globally interested should allow them the time to complete their enquiries?  I would also like to make clear, that I believe that it would be in the public interest to free Mr Bennett from what ever restrictions he was previously placed under, and let the truth of the matter be understood.  Start to finish.
One thing that is almost certain, beyond much doubt, given what is available today, is that unless the infamous group are questioned, and they have no ‘honest’ reason to refuse, the British Police will not get a great deal closer.
Ok, given that I am a relative newbie, please excuse what you may view as repetition and also read all that follows as a theory alone.  Although I have taken some interest over the years, it is only in more recent months that it has started to pique somewhat.  There is much that I still have not read.  Most of you are probably already aware that the above mentioned booklet can easily be accessed.
Anyhow, let’s get to my thinking, and the manner in which it is developed:
Is she alive?  Although possible, unlikely I believe.  If she were taken alive, the McCanns’ themselves, by appearances, did their utmost to ensure that any potential abductor would need to get rid of her, most of this completely against professional advice.  Nothing was dealt with in the manner of a ‘normal’ abduction/kidnapping case.  It was the McCanns’ themselves that saw to this by the extraordinary high level of publicity, methods and manners in which they and they alone sought to progress this case in the public eye.  This is further supported by the fact that they, as far as I am aware, did not take part in any searches either immediately or in the days that followed.  This and other aspects, actions, etc, point to the possibility that they already knew that they would never see their daughter again.  Probability, very low.
Abduction by unknown party/parties?  No.  I am not led to believe this.  There is yet to be produced a single shred to suggest this may have occurred, that is other than the declarations of the McCanns and their friends.  The World already knows that their story or more probable fabrication leaks worse than a sieve.  That said, it will remain a possibility albeit remote.  I find it incredibly difficult to believe that an abductor, by chance, in a brief window of opportunity, without a vehicle, or assistance, could or would have achieved this without any trace.  Also begs the question of why a potential abductor would have harmed her and left trace evidence of such (cadaverine and blood) when this yet further reduces the likelihood of an abduction.  Without evidence or ‘believable’ witness statement to substantiate this claim, probability remains low.
Taking the above into account and presuming the higher probability of her being deceased, where did she die?  The highest likelihood seems to be in the apartment or close by.  This would substantiate, explain and be supported by the existence of both blood and cadaverine.  Add into this the inadmissible yet unbelievably high probability of accuracy given by the dogs, and limited loss of accuracy by DNA markers, etc, and the overall likelihood points to only this conclusion, no matter how you try to wrap it in a different guise.  Therefore the probability that she either died in the apartment or her body was moved there after an accident whilst wandering is very high.
Premeditated?  No.  I do not believe so.  The McCanns’ would have had an alibi prepared with much more thoroughness.  This doesn’t exist and there are too many holes/inconsistencies in and at every step they take to consider this as a high probability.
Murder?  No.  Murder would tend to lean more towards premeditation.  It equally doesn’t fit.
Manslaughter?  This is a higher possibility.  Again I would like to think not, but in this case there are aspects that do lend some support and credence to this suggestion.  Given those reported/suggested admissions to doping, manslaughter will remain a possibility, though accidental I would expect.  The hole in this; if she had died as a result of a reaction to some medication, this would not explain the existence of the blood and cadaverine, so I believe this also falls into unlikely.
Robbery gone wrong?  No.  There was no evidence to suggest anyone else had entered the apartment for robbery let alone abduction.  That said, of course it remains as another possibility... plenty of robberies do occur in and around holiday locations... they may be seen as relatively easy pickings.  Furthermore, there was nothing disturbed, nothing taken, and not only it is doubtful that any potential robber would have taken let alone harmed or killed the little girl had she awoken, why take the body, and why would it have not been reported by the McCanns?  All evidence (if that is what it can be called) or lack of it suggests that this is a very remote possibility.  No.  The McCanns had their ‘story’ and they were going to stick to it at all costs.  They were not willing to entertain any other possibilities.
Constructive homicide/Involuntary manslaughter/Accident?  I cannot seem to separate these.  Reasoning; If an accident occurred in the apartment, or outside (wandering/falling, etc) and the body was brought back in, this would explain the existence of the blood and cadaverine.  Under any normal circumstances, do I believe she would have wandered out of the apartment in the dark, had she awoken?  No, more likely she would have cried and called for her parents as she did on a previous evening.  An accident could however have occurred whilst under the influence of some form of doping, hence these possibilities remain tied.  This also may explain why she could have been unsteady, more inclined to be disoriented, confused, exit the apartment, have an accident, etc.  The two remain tied mostly because if it was a simple accident, why not report such immediately?
It is easily possible to understand the reaction of one or more of the McCanns acting in a panic, only if there were some form of doping or other potential bodily evidence to suggest something untoward that occurred recently or in the past, otherwise the higher probability is that they would have reported such accident.  What is not understood is how or why all the friends in the group would support the potentially fabricated stories.  This leads me to believe that someone outside of the McCanns aided in some manner, such as to draw them into the potential fabrication.  The trouble is of course, that once this path of potential fabrication is taken, it is extremely difficult to turn back from.  I do believe there is a good chance that one or more of the party may be unaware of all the circumstances, but now have also been drawn in.
I do not believe that any harm to cause death was intentional, however I do believe that harm was perpetrated inadvertently leading to her death.  Therefore very much the highest probability is that the case (based upon current information) falls into the last category ‘Constructive homicide/Involuntary manslaughter/Accident’ one way or another.
This is my hypothesis/theory.
Footnotes:
Unfortunately without a body, person or persons coming forward with additional statement(s) or further evidence, much will remain open to debate.
Whether today there is sufficient to prove beyond any doubt, only a professional could piece together enough circumstantial evidence in conjunction with the discounting of the entire set of presumably fabricated alibi/stories, to be able to bring a case to court, this remains to be seen, but is probably unlikely.
What I also cannot determine, is when the last corroborated and irrefutable evidence of her being alive and well is.  Perhaps someone can throw light on this?  If the crying on the evening prior was definitely her, then this provides a possible starting point.  A nanny confirming seeing her on the day in question, etc?
This above also sheds light on the mentality of the McCanns in making deliberate and conscious decisions to abandon their very young children in the pursuit of their own pleasures, having supposedly even refused a babysitter who would have already been known and friendly with the children.  This is not news of course, but is quite possibly at the very heart of the entire case.
The first and probably most pointed question I would ask myself, and anyone else, including the McCanns and their small group of friends; “Why are you not assisting the police in any manner possible to help in the search for your missing daughter?”
When all is said and done, the above of course is all hypothesis and conjecture.  I live in the hope that one day soon we will learn the truth.  Further, I also hope that unlikely as it seems to me, that there remains that small chance that she is alive and well somewhere.
Hi Mikey / all...

Have you read this theory about the Maddies death on the 2nd??

http://unterdenteppichgekehrt.blogspot.co.uk/p/theory-english.html

Not sure what other peoples thoughts opinions are but does seem very plausible to me.

Apologies if this has been discussed / posted before.

I'm a newbie and finding my feet!!!!
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by Guest on 15.11.13 10:47

Welcome Andrew77R, yes it has been discussed on here, 88 pages of it........

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2588-theory?highlight=theory
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by Guest on 15.11.13 10:56

candyfloss wrote:Welcome Andrew77R, yes it has been discussed on here, 88 pages of it........

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2588-theory?highlight=theory
Apologies Candyfloss.

Thanks for that. Will keep me busy for a while then as do find that theory fascinating and very believable.

Regards,
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by Guest on 15.11.13 11:23

candyfloss wrote:Welcome Andrew77R, yes it has been discussed on here, 88 pages of it........

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t2588-theory?highlight=theory
I got a few posts into that and realised that it used to be a lot more... fractious here, didn't it? Although I did have to laugh when one of the posters was defending the MCs using Tannerman as evidence; highly ironic, with hindsight
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by Guest on 15.11.13 11:26

For what it's worth, I'm increasingly coming to the belief that Charlotte Pennington's presence in PdL that week suggests premeditation. Was she even employed by MW?
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Fractious

Post by Mikey on 15.11.13 11:33

Golly Clay... you are not wrong.  I hadn't seen this.  Who ever that 'Garth' person was, was certainly not trying to be pleasant or even come close to debating anything really.  Made for awful reading and frankly speaking made, him presumably, come across as a narrow minded bully.  Nothing more.  Perhaps this matches a hidden trait that could exist elsewhere and fall within someone else's potential theory?

Mikey

Posts : 32
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2013-11-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by Guest on 15.11.13 11:39

Yes, it was an interesting time (if not for all the right reasons) when Garth graced us with his presence!

He seems to have disappeared now from the Internet - don't anyone bother sending out the dogs to find him.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by Guest on 15.11.13 11:53

No Fate Worse Than De'Ath wrote:Yes, it was an interesting time (if not for all the right reasons) when Garth graced us with his presence!

He seems to have disappeared now from the Internet - don't anyone bother sending out the dogs to find him.
***
Was that Garth of Anorak [in]fame? Gosh, he was a pain in the something ...
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by ultimaThule on 15.11.13 12:07

Andrew77R wrote:Hi Mikey / all...

Have you read this theory about the Maddies death on the 2nd??

http://unterdenteppichgekehrt.blogspot.co.uk/p/theory-english.html

Not sure what other peoples thoughts opinions are but does seem very plausible to me.

Apologies if this has been discussed / posted before.

I'm a newbie and finding my feet!!!!
welcome Andrew... the problem with finding your feet in the murky waters of the McCanns' ocean of lies is the lack of a depth gauge and, having settled on one theory, a tidal of wave of more cause for doubt can knock you sideways yes

Disregarding the numerus curious coincidences which run through this case like letters in a stick of rock, and to the assorted conspiracy theories relating to paedophile rings, MI5, IRA, witness protection etc, which are variously presented to explain why the McCanns continue to avoid justice, it seems to me Johanna's carefully formulated theory is more probable than most and I believe that, had he continued to head the investigation, Dr Amaral would have come to the conclusion Madeleine 'disappeared' considerably earlier than the evening of 3 May 2007.

Johanna has made reference to 'the malice and ruthlessness' apparent from her study of the files while Mikey's hypothesis claims it is easily possible to understand the reaction of one or more of the McCanns acting in a panic.

IMO any panic experienced by one or more of the Tapas 9 would be in the nature of being momentarily overwhelmed by fear of the possible aftermath of what occurred before attention was turned to the most effective manner of disguising what took place.  In short, I cannot buy into any theory which has a body being disposed of in haste as it does not accord with what is known of the McCanns and their friends and, in addition, there was no cause for any of them to fear immediate discovery.

avatar
ultimaThule

Posts : 3355
Reputation : 4
Join date : 2013-09-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by Ayniia on 15.11.13 13:12

@Mikey wrote:Golly Clay... you are not wrong.  I hadn't seen this.  Who ever that 'Garth' person was, was certainly not trying to be pleasant or even come close to debating anything really.  Made for awful reading and frankly speaking made, him presumably, come across as a narrow minded bully.  Nothing more.  Perhaps this matches a hidden trait that could exist elsewhere and fall within someone else's potential theory?
In my short stay on this forum one thing I noticed is, the more plausible a theory is, the more "Mccann defense knights " come in... that speaks for itself.

____________________
"My advice to any British tourist ,please come to Portugal,please come to the Algarve but if you're coming as a family holiday treat it as a family holiday and do things together, don't leave the kids"
Words from an ExPat Algarve resident
avatar
Ayniia

Posts : 546
Reputation : 7
Join date : 2013-03-21
Location : Portugal

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Probability Theory

Post by Guest on 15.11.13 13:22

Is it true the MCs were offered a babysitter for free for the night of the 3rd by MW because of the complaints about crying on previous nights?
And they refused the offer.
avatar
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum