Abductor types - who are we expected to believe could be responsible?

Who are we meant to believe could have abducted Madeleine?
1.       Childless woman – I don’t know what the statistics are but I would imagine these are desperate women suffering from mental illness and surely a younger child would be the first choice (twins). Also how would this desperate woman steal a toddler without the child screaming and making a fuss – surely she would also not want to harm the child.
2.       Lone Paedophile – two types spring to mind
(a)    Ian Huntley type driven by uncontrollable urge unable to realise the stupidity of their heinous crime and implications for investigation DNA etc. Unfortunately the child is usually killed and left with hurried attempt at concealment – the police are usually able to solve these crimes when evidence is uncovered. Many use vehicles (Roger Black's van etc.) - they are never seen running through towns with their victims!
(b)   Frittzel type imprisonment – these seem to involve older children/young adults and a degree of planning, building room/cellar adaption etc. and how would that person be aware that at that specific week in the calendar that a family with young children would be there and left unattended?
 
(3)    Group of paedophiles – High risk more people more chance of leaving evidence, risk to many rather than the few less likely to take extreme risk – entering premises during small window of opportunity and chance to escape. Even less likely to remove and escape across border(s). Not an expert but the cases of groups that I have read about seem to concern vulnerable children (Council care homes etc.).
Surely anyone who had left a child unattended with the door open, having found that child missing would automatically assume that they had left the apartment on their own? One of my children when he was 4 years old was left to play outside our new house on a newly built estate with instructions to ‘just stay there for five minutes’ and then went missing. In panic I ran down the road calling his name out and neighbours came out immediately. I of course ran off to search around the estate and then returned to leave one neighbour waiting outside our house with my mobile number to call me if he returned(the mobile incidentally is never switched off and messages have never been cleared!). Again I returned and no sightings so I got in my car and drove around all the local parks and ponds desperately looking and enlisting help from any person. Eventually he returned with his friend having walked nearly a mile crossing three major roads to get some sweets. I spent the rest of the evening holding him tightly and still remember the panic – BUT at no time did I ever consider he had been taken/abducted!

Always remember that most ABDUCTIONS (so called) in the PACT and missing persons sense of the words are simply

4 One Parent taking the child out of the control of the other parent.

All the ones on the Spanish part of the missing children site are this category. The whereabouts of several are well known, but the law of the particular - often Muslim - country in which they are residing chooses not to hand them back. Lady What's-her-face's children are in this category, so she takes a salary of 85,000 a year from the Charity to attend 'functions' at No 10.

It seems to me that only a relatively naive public believe that a child abduction out of a holiday apartment is a reasonable possibility. Surely any policeman (who I assume would be more familiar with the reality of abductions) would instinctively raise an eyebrow if they were met with parents telling them this?

Research_Reader wrote:It seems to me that only a relatively naive public believe that a child abduction out of a holiday apartment is a reasonable possibility. Surely any policeman (who I assume would be more familiar with the reality of abductions) would instinctively raise an eyebrow if they were met with parents telling them this?

From the Swedish interview: summer 2012 with thanks to McCannfiles.com

Gerry McCann: You can understand that when people are fed information that parents are in suspicious involve people will want to believe that because they'll want to think that this will not happen to them and they'll want to think that there actually... there isn't actually an abductor out there and their children are not at risk but what happens on the ground is very different. We know now that people in Portugal, and elsewhere, people keep their children much closer to them, and...

Annika Widebeck: Closer than... than in the UK?

Gerry McCann: I think certainly there's been remakably few child abductions since Madeleine was taken and I think people are more aware, and one of the things we've tried to do throughout the last 5 years is not look back because you can't change what's happened. We're more interested in what can still be done and... and at this minute, and following Kate's book launched last year, the Metropolitan Police are now reviewing the case and working with a... a new team in Portugal and that's much much more important about discredited former officers.

Unquote

I don't doubt that there are abductions, perhaps lots of them, but my understanding was (as has been mentioned earlier) they are either one of the parents, or of children in vulnerable living situations (care-homes etc).

Research_Reader wrote:I don't doubt that there are abductions, perhaps lots of them, but my understanding was (as has been mentioned earlier) they are either one of the parents, or of children in vulnerable living situations (care-homes etc).

I think there are very few abductors, The quote from the interview was to highlight Gerry 's attempt to create them by saying there are fewer abductions. I think the first post was spot on. Abductions by strangers are very rare and almost certainly end in the death of the child.

Perhaps another consequence of this ridiculous charade of a case is that its stoked up unreasonable fear amongst parents of child abductors.

Research_Reader wrote:Perhaps another consequence of this ridiculous charade of a case is that its stoked up unreasonable fear amongst parents of child abductors.

My parents had kittens about us taking our daughter to Portugal. That's the main reason I'm interested in this case - the Portuguese people are, in my experience, without exception wonderful, especially to children, and the slurs upon them and their nation that have resulted from this case are a grievous injustice.

I suspect that abductions of children by complete strangers are vanishingly rare, statistically. Especially so where the parents are complicit (and I do regard the McCanns as complicit in the "abduction", either intentionally or otherwise).

I've also had nothing but positive experiences with the Portuguese. When I think back to some of the things the British tabloids were saying in the early days about the Portuguese police I really cringe.

Research_Reader wrote:Perhaps another consequence of this ridiculous charade of a case is that its stoked up unreasonable fear amongst parents of child abductors.

You might wish to rephrase that sentence to read 'unreasonable fear of child abductors amongst parents' RR   

Child abduction by strangers is rare and it's even rarer to encounter cases where children are abducted from their homes by a stranger, or strangers, who've unlawfully gained entry for the purpose. 

Fwiw, I can't think of any cases which fall within the latter category although it's entirely possible there have been cases of kidnap for ransom which have escaped my attention.   

There was a case some time back of a young child being taken from her home by an unrelated male, but I'm under the impression he was known to the mother who raised the alarm immediately.  As I recall there was a police chase or surveillance on the M4 or other motorway and the child was recovered unharmed, but the name of the perpetrator eludes me.

As far as I'm aware, there's no reason to suppose that Portugal's statistics in regard to stranger abduction are materially different from those of the UK.

ultimaThule wrote:

Research_Reader wrote:Perhaps another consequence of this ridiculous charade of a case is that its stoked up unreasonable fear amongst parents of child abductors.

You might wish to rephrase that sentence to read 'unreasonable fear of child abductors amongst parents' RR   

Yes, I was just thinking that!

Something I can never get past if I ever try to entertain the idea that MM was abducted by a stranger - if she was, it's because the apartment door was left unlocked.

What are the chances of intelligent people leaving three children under the age of four alone, in a fairly exposed, unlocked apartment in a foreign country? Simply, none. I just don't believe it.

Any 'abductor' would not have kept her alive either as she would've been too easy to identify with the Coloboma and would definitely have been found by now.

Research_Reader wrote:Perhaps another consequence of this ridiculous charade of a case is that its stoked up unreasonable fear amongst parents of child abductors.

Fear of abductors :)

Indeed. I seem to remember parents complaining when Missing Madeleine adverts were played in cinemas showing childrens' films - (Shrek III I believe). It was of course in very bad taste and frightened the life out of the kids. Another one of their 'spread the fear' tactics was to ask JK Rowling to put some sort of Maddie bookmark into her latest release.(presumably with details of their website and paypal button) - fortunately she had the sense to turn them down.

This is one aspect of this case that I find particularly wicked. Kids have, no doubt, had what little freedom they had left, further curtailed because of these bogus abductors, they will never have childhoods like those of us of a certain age, and that is sad. I also find it unbelievable that they have told their twins a man stole their older sister from an early age.

Just about everybody else looks after their kids, they certainly don't need any advice from Kate and Gerry and its galling listening to them tell the world over and over it was the abductor's fault, not theirs. They waived their responsibility to care for their children and they continue to waive responsibility for whats happened to Madeleine. .

Fleffer wrote :
On 1 Jan 2008, the McCann Team was preparing for two big New Year stories, four months after Gerry and Kate had been made suspects. First, Gail Cooper and Paul Gordon had been interviewed by Brian Kennedy and forensic artist Melissa Little. With the help of Det Supt Stuart ‘call-me-Stu’ Prior of Leicestershire Police, the McCann Team was gearing up for the publication of a sketch of the terrifying, mustachioed, ‘Monsterman’ to the British public. Second, one of the McCanns’ Portuguese lawyers, Marcos Aragao Correia, had met on 10 December with Metodo 3 investigators Francisco Marco and Antonio Jiminez Raso at the Arade Dam in Portugal. Just 7 weeks later, a search for Madeleine’s bones in the very same dam was conducted in the bright lights of world-wide publicity.
Unquote

This is copied from the 7  New Year's days topic as I've always wanted to do a list of the type of abductor according to TM. I think it would be very useful and give an insight on how the changing descriptions were backed up by witnesses. Such as the estimable Ms. Cooper...  

tigger wrote:Fleffer wrote :
On 1 Jan 2008, the McCann Team was preparing for two big New Year stories, four months after Gerry and Kate had been made suspects. First, Gail Cooper and Paul Gordon had been interviewed by Brian Kennedy and forensic artist Melissa Little. With the help of Det Supt Stuart ‘call-me-Stu’ Prior of Leicestershire Police, the McCann Team was gearing up for the publication of a sketch of the terrifying, mustachioed, ‘Monsterman’ to the British public. Second, one of the McCanns’ Portuguese lawyers, Marcos Aragao Correia, had met on 10 December with Metodo 3 investigators Francisco Marco and Antonio Jiminez Raso at the Arade Dam in Portugal. Just 7 weeks later, a search for Madeleine’s bones in the very same dam was conducted in the bright lights of world-wide publicity.
Unquote

This is copied from the 7  New Year's days topic as I've always wanted to do a list of the type of abductor according to TM. I think it would be very useful and give an insight on how the changing descriptions were backed up by witnesses. Such as the estimable Ms. Cooper...    

How about persons that have been rejected from dining in tapas because of the Tapas group, Booking against the rules, Every remaining night of holiday ?

An lets be honest u only have to look at statements from the lot of them to realize they couldn't collaborate on anything an i dont think they would have the ball's to try such a thing. In my opinion it was a guest who has stayed in a private apartment in mark warner who has had the nose disjointed at the fact a group of people against the rules have booked restaurant for "lets say 4 days an thought will teach them a lesson but due to publicity have shat them selves and Madeleine is probably holed up against her will in one of the apartments off the road the smiths last seen her. Why ? if u go google maps an go to seated area at end of entry / road  were smiths seen man carrying child, look at guys t-shirt an tell me what u see

SallyScouser, are you seriously suggesting that a disgruntled would-be Tapas diner stole Madeleine as revenge for not being able to eat Tapas and hid her in an apartment 6 1/2 years ago and no-one has been into said apartment and found her? Gosh. Thanks for that. We can all go home now   

The point I was trying to make was regarding the possible profile type that could be put forward as a suspect, besides the Tapas group. The statistical percentage is extremely high that the perperator of harm to the child is known to the victim - outside that group who else could have a motive? I have tried to suggest other types/generalities that may have motives and explore their possibilty and personally I do not believe that it is likely in any scenario that there was an abduction. The explanation has always been affirmed that there was an abduction and many possible abductor descriptions have been put forward but their possible motive for abduction has never been discussed beyond peadophilia - my contention is that even this would be almost impossible to perform in the timelines that have been put forward especially considering that even the local population would have difficulty in knowing who was in in each apartment each week and even less likely that they would know the intinery of the family. It would seem that any other explanation could only involve a very small group of people who could possibly know that an unattended child was in the apartment at that time so the suspect list must be minimal to say the least and the likelyhood of preparation for an abduction before the week when they arrived must be even smaller. A lone deviant acting on their horrible urge would be unlikely to know that the child would be left alone and if such a 'fluke' occured would have an extremely short time to execute their crime and leave no evidence? They also would surely have no time to clean up afterwards if we are to accept that the blood found under the tiles was eveidence that a clean up occured. Thoughts about a group being involved again just leads to the belief that the risk involved in such an enterprise were so great that an agreement to abduct a child in this way would be unlikely when more simpler methods could be used - there can not have been enough time before the arrival of the family for a group of people to identify that this was to be their victim.
Basically I discount the adbuction theory completely and have tried to articulate why - therefore this leaves posibly only one or two other explanations - both very dark and sinister!

@nightfly - i agree withyour findings. My main problem was the evident cooperation of friends and family which seemed impossible - both on moral and practical grounds.

However If neither of these groups were aware of the whole story, each being fed whatwas necessary, the supportfrom these two groups can be understood.

The failure of TM to comeup with a consistent narrative betraysa certain contempt for the common man, possibly they based this on tabloid headline readers and the low-level TV shows.

However, like a magician trying unsuccessfully to come up with a credible trick, TM has fielded an amazing number and variety of abductors, some as quoted above in fleffer's post, the creepy or Cooperman.
This was a completely orchestrated ID. See also the topic on the powerpoint presentation.

I'd love to drawup a timeline of abductors and did start atopic on that once. Essentially, the TM campaign is a reactive one- since the SY review theyseem to have stuck with Tannerman for reasons best known to themselves.

Nightfly wrote:The point I was trying to make was regarding the possible profile type that could be put forward as a suspect, besides the Tapas group. The statistical percentage is extremely high that the perperator of harm to the child is known to the victim - outside that group who else could have a motive? I have tried to suggest other types/generalities that may have motives and explore their possibilty and personally I do not believe that it is likely in any scenario that there was an abduction. The explanation has always been affirmed that there was an abduction and many possible abductor descriptions have been put forward but their possible motive for abduction has never been discussed beyond peadophilia - my contention is that even this would be almost impossible to perform in the timelines that have been put forward especially considering that even the local population would have difficulty in knowing who was in in each apartment each week and even less likely that they would know the intinery of the family. It would seem that any other explanation could only involve a very small group of people who could possibly know that an unattended child was in the apartment at that time so the suspect list must be minimal to say the least and the likelyhood of preparation for an abduction before the week when they arrived must be even smaller. A lone deviant acting on their horrible urge would be unlikely to know that the child would be left alone and if such a 'fluke' occured would have an extremely short time to execute their crime and leave no evidence? They also would surely have no time to clean up afterwards if we are to accept that the blood found under the tiles was eveidence that a clean up occured. Thoughts about a group being involved again just leads to the belief that the risk involved in such an enterprise were so great that an agreement to abduct a child in this way would be unlikely when more simpler methods could be used - there can not have been enough time before the arrival of the family for a group of people to identify that this was to be their victim.
Basically I discount the adbuction theory completely and have tried to articulate why - therefore this leaves posibly only one or two other explanations - both very dark and sinister!

When Kate went through the files she found a note had been left at the Tapas Bar, stating that the group had left their small children alone and were checking them. Kate is saying that the note was left in public view and may have been seen by the abductor. This is of course another of those over complicated stories from Kate to backfit the abduction story, a bit like the abductor having a trial run the night before.

Gerry also told Jez Wilkins that they were leaving the children alone. Very strange parents indeed.

Cristobell wrote:

Nightfly wrote:The point I was trying to make was regarding the possible profile type that could be put forward as a suspect, besides the Tapas group. The statistical percentage is extremely high that the perperator of harm to the child is known to the victim - outside that group who else could have a motive? I have tried to suggest other types/generalities that may have motives and explore their possibilty and personally I do not believe that it is likely in any scenario that there was an abduction. The explanation has always been affirmed that there was an abduction and many possible abductor descriptions have been put forward but their possible motive for abduction has never been discussed beyond peadophilia - my contention is that even this would be almost impossible to perform in the timelines that have been put forward especially considering that even the local population would have difficulty in knowing who was in in each apartment each week and even less likely that they would know the intinery of the family. It would seem that any other explanation could only involve a very small group of people who could possibly know that an unattended child was in the apartment at that time so the suspect list must be minimal to say the least and the likelyhood of preparation for an abduction before the week when they arrived must be even smaller. A lone deviant acting on their horrible urge would be unlikely to know that the child would be left alone and if such a 'fluke' occured would have an extremely short time to execute their crime and leave no evidence? They also would surely have no time to clean up afterwards if we are to accept that the blood found under the tiles was eveidence that a clean up occured. Thoughts about a group being involved again just leads to the belief that the risk involved in such an enterprise were so great that an agreement to abduct a child in this way would be unlikely when more simpler methods could be used - there can not have been enough time before the arrival of the family for a group of people to identify that this was to be their victim.
Basically I discount the adbuction theory completely and have tried to articulate why - therefore this leaves posibly only one or two other explanations - both very dark and sinister!

When Kate went through the files she found a note had been left at the Tapas Bar, stating that the group had left their small children alone and were checking them.  Kate is saying that the note was left in public view and may have been seen by the abductor. This is of course another of those over complicated stories from Kate to backfit the abduction story, a bit like the abductor having a trial run the night before.

Gerry also told Jez Wilkins that they were leaving the children alone.  Very strange parents indeed.

Yes, isn't it strange that Gerry said that when he was talking to JW he told him that the children were alone in the apartment. Now, if my child had "disappeared" in the way that GM has said his child had, my first thoughts would be that JW would be a suspect, but this has never been the case. How strange!

sallypelt wrote:
Yes, isn't it strange that Gerry said that when he was talking to JW he told him that the children were alone in the apartment. Now, if my child had "disappeared" in the way that GM has said his child had, my first thoughts would be that JW would be a suspect, but this has never been the case. How strange!

Good point.  JW could have been hoovering up unattended children in the buggy.  How did GM know that the child was JW's ?
He was out for an awfully long time on a cold night - according to JT (or warm according to Fiona P, or HOT according to GM - take your pick)
Perhaps his apartment was full of abducted children, hence the incredibly high number reported in the area at the time . ..  Oh, hang on, I may have got that bit wrong !

PeterMac wrote:

sallypelt wrote:
Yes, isn't it strange that Gerry said that when he was talking to JW he told him that the children were alone in the apartment. Now, if my child had "disappeared" in the way that GM has said his child had, my first thoughts would be that JW would be a suspect, but this has never been the case. How strange!

Good point.  JW could have been hoovering up unattended children in the buggy.  How did GM know that the child was JW's ?
He was out for an awfully long time on a cold night - according to JT (or warm according to Fiona P, or HOT according to GM - take your pick)
Perhaps his apartment was full of abducted children, hence the incredibly high number reported in the area at the time . ..  Oh, hang on, I may have got that bit wrong !

"full of abducted children" made me laugh, Peter. But on a serious note, I have been puzzled about JW going to the toilet at the Tapas Bar? when he was out with his child. Again, I find this strange. Where would he leave the child when he was "otherwise engaged", or if he was that desperate, why didn't he go back to his apartment? So many questions, so few answers.

Yes, JW spotted the "rasta style" man while at the Tapas bar.

A good thread really makes you think.

This is information from a parental guide website from experts:

• Stranger kidnapping victimizes more females than males, occurs primarily at outdoor locations, victimizes both teenagers and school-age children, is associated with sexual assaults in the case of girl victims and robberies in the case of boy victims (although not exclusively so), and is the type of kidnapping most likely to involve the use of a firearm.
  
• Only about one child out of each 10,000 missing children reported to the local police is not found alive. However, about 20 percent of the children reported to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children in nonfamily abductions are not found alive.
  
• In 80 percent of abductions by strangers, the first contact between the child and the abductor occurs within a quarter mile of the child's home.
  
• Most potential abductors grab their victims on the street or try to lure them into their vehicles.
  
• About 74 percent of the victims of nonfamily child abduction are girls.
  
• Acting quickly is critical. Seventy-four percent of abducted children who are ultimately murdered are dead within three hours of the abduction.
  

Sadly when you read the stats IF the child was taken by a stranger she probably would have died very quickly.

The thing is too looking at the profile of the abductor. Why would anyone put themselves in a position of being caught is the first thing.

PDL at the beginning of May is quiet not so busy, so probably the worse time to take a child, as a stranger would be more likely noted. PDL is very popular with ex pats and they tend to all know everyone....

Why would the abductor be there in that exact location when 3 children or more were on holiday and being left every night in unsecure apartments?

Did the person live there or were they visiting or working there. What person for example could be visiting with work. Perhaps a contractor cleaning apartments, or decorating them for hiring out in the season? Where all these people checked by the police?

Who would know there were children being left on their own?

Did someone decide to take one of the children because they were being neglected? Seems a bit far fetched.

How come the abductor was so clever not to have been caught, or leave traces, or even lift a child that made no noise. Could the child have known the abductor. IF so who would she have known and not been scared of?

For a pedophile to cross the line and take a child, it usually means they have done it before so will be known or on a register. I believe ALL known abductors in the area were checked and dismissed.

OK so perhaps a pedophle who had not crossed the line, decided to do just that and take a child, why risk going into an apartment. Quite often the pedophile will make friends with a child in the area and get their confidence BEFORE they act. OR they will take a child away from outside and the child is usually sadly found dead within hours.

What bothers me too is the huge reward 2.5 million and yet no one claimed it....

No its very difficult to image who could of done such a thing, and why....

The only thing that makes sense is a false abduction perhaps to cover up something, but even then I find it all so convulated.

Its almost as though the child never really existed....

ultimaThule wrote:
Child abduction by strangers is rare and it's even rarer to encounter cases where children are abducted from their homes by a stranger, or strangers, who've unlawfully gained entry for the purpose. 

Fwiw, I can't think of any cases which fall within the latter category although it's entirely possible there have been cases of kidnap for ransom which have escaped my attention.   

I agree it's extremely rare but not unknown. This is a case of a child being taken from a downstairs bathroom whilst the parents were in the house. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
The child was able to give police a description of the route the car took and fortunately she wasn't murdered as well as being abused.
A six-year-old girl was snatched from her bath, kidnapped and raped before being dumped in an alley, a court has heard.
Peter Voisey, 35, of Blyth, Northumberland, denies raping, sexually assaulting and abducting the girl from her North Tyneside home in December.

Newcastle Crown Court heard how the youngster, now seven, was repeatedly abused in Mr Voisey's car.

She was found later, blood-stained and shivering in the freezing back alley.

Prosecutor James Goss QC told the jury of six men and six women that Mr Voisey entered the bathroom of the family's home in Willington Quay, on the evening of 27 December last year.

He said: "He told her to be quiet or he would hurt her, lifted her out of the bath, put his hand over her mouth, carried her to a car outside and drove off.