The case of Madeleine McCann

[mike tesko]

German authorities were hoping to discover grave of 2nd pet dog suspect had in 2007, with the likelihood that digital evidence linking him to Madeliene McCann disappearence, or some other form of corroborating evidence, that he kept victims, tortured them, and killed them in a cellar located in the area of the allotments...

[mike tesko]

Digital evidence was recovered from the grave of the suspects 1st pet dog, which included disks and memory sticks. The animal and the evidence were buried beneath large rocks /stones...

In the last search, police took away a large amount of rocks and stone , suggesting that the suspect may have concealed additional digital evidence, or bodies beneath the 2nd pet dogs grave...

And...

The possibility that DNA evidence may be present on breeze blocks which linked the cellar now being linked to the Madeliene McCann case..

[mike tesko]

German police took away breeze blocks which formed the shell of the concealed/hidden cellar - purpose, to try and locate victims DNA on the surfaces of any internal surfaces (of the same) of/on these breeze blocks, in view of known DNA profiles, including Madeliene McCann, as well of other possible victims...

[mike tesko]

But...

[guest29835]

I hope not to post too much about this case, and I admit I'm not well up on it, but one thing intrigues me.

Is there any evidence that would tell me that the abduction scenario is either impossible or implausible?  I did watch a video once in which the Portuguese lead detective from the Polícia Judiciária stated that abduction was "materially impossible", but when I listened to his reasons, I have to say I wasn't overly impressed.  He left me with the distinct impression that he is the type - quite typical of police officers all over - who arrives at a conclusion and then looks for the evidence to support it, and I came away with a better appreciation of why the British authorities had decided to involve themselves and give oversight.

I am inclined towards believing the parents.  Could one of you who doesn't believe them kindly tell me, in very brief terms, what it is I am not seeing?  What makes abduction "materially impossible"?  A bullet point précis is fine.

[mike tesko]

I am inclined towards believing the parents.  Could one of you who doesn't believe them kindly tell me, in very brief terms, what it is I am not seeing?  What makes abduction "materially impossible"?  A bullet point précis is fine.

Please, pause for a moment and reflect - why have the parents, and their friends who are members of the 7/9 tapas group, given conflicting accounts regarding when Madeliene McCanns  disappearance was first alerted to, or mentioned?

Clear evidence exists, to suggest that the parents, a parent, and other persons of interest, have all deliberately lied about the very first occasion that anybody/ everybody knew that Madeliene  was missing from apartment 5A....

9pm..
9.15pm...
9.20pm...
9.30pm..
9.45pm...
10.00pm?

[mike tesko]

In my opinion, based on my knowledge and experience in crime, criminality, police, the prosecuting authorities, and judiciary, I know with 100% certainty, that the McCann parents are not telling the truth about the date Madeliene  went missing!

She actually was removed from the McCann apartment (5A), at the end of 1st May 2007, not at 10pm, on evening of 3rd May 2007..

[guest29835]

Mike,

Obviously I respect your view and don't wish to disrupt this thread, but the question I am asking is specific:

What piece of evidence tells me that the abduction theory is "materially impossible"?

If nobody can answer, that's fine, but if so, I really think you should admit it.  If I was a lawyer prosecuting the McCanns, I would make a point of admitting to the jury that abduction is not materially impossible and the jury must weigh the theory in and consider it with regard to the evidence.

That's the honest thing to do.

[mike tesko]

AT THE MOMENT (July 2020), the Portuguese, UK and the German authorities, are investigating the case, from different perspectives (yet all co-operating with one another). The point in issue, no matter which stance any of them choose to pursue, is that the McCann parents, and or the other 7 tapas group members can't agree when it was first alerted to  or known about, when (on evening of 3rd May 2007), that Madeliene  had gone missing?

[guest29835]

AT THE MOMENT (July 2020), the Portuguese, UK and the German authorities, are investigating the case, from different perspectives (yet all co-operating with one another). The point in issue, no matter which stance any of them choose to pursue, is that the McCann parents, and or the other 7 tapas group members can't agree when when it was first alerted to  or known about, when (on evening of 3rd May 2007), that Madeliene  had gone missing?

Interesting.  It seems to me that the various parents probably did lie or twist the truth about the safeguarding arrangements that evening, but only because it caused them embarrassment, not because they're guilty.

Lying about things doesn't make them guilty.

Moreover, inconsistencies in statements, etc. don't amount to proof of guilt.  There is bound to be disagreement.  Indeed, ironically an innocent person is more likely to be inconsistent and unsure about the facts than a guilty person.

But my issue here is that the Portuguese detective dismisses abduction as "materially impossible" but his reasons left me rather underwhelmed.

[mike tesko]

What piece of evidence tells me that the abduction theory is "materially impossible"?

If nobody can answer, that's fine, but if so, I really think you should admit it.  If I was a lawyer prosecuting the McCanns, I would make a point of admitting to the jury that abduction is not materially impossible and the jury must weigh the theory in and consider it with regard to the evidence.

That's the honest thing to do.

Parents, and other members of 'the group', have all given conflicting views regarding when each of them, or others did checks of, or at apartment 5A on the evening of 3rd May 2007, rather than checks made on evening of 1st May 2007 (and/or later), when they went from the evening meal script, at the tapas bar restuarant (by 10.00pm) to Chaplins bar (midnight  or later). It seems quite clear to me, that other members of the so called 'tapas 9'  group, are in cahoots with eachother, to try to not comment, or talk about what had, did, could, have taken place two days (1st / 2nd May 2007) or so previously...

[mike tesko]

The parents and the others,  have shot themselves in the foot, simply by displacing the known date and time they were aware that Madeliene  was 'gone', or had been taken...

Such a deception would 'from my perspective', cause a jury to believe  that the parents / friends, did have 'something to do' with the circumstances relating to the actual disappearence of Madeliene McCann which for whatever reason, they were, or are reluctant to discuss, or admit to, through a genuine fear of guilt, that they might possibly have been more involved than they are prepared to admit to...

[mike tesko]

If, the McCann parents actually (off record) told the truth to personnel at the British Embassy in Portugal (at the time) and they were told, or advised not to speak a word of it to anybody or anyone, including the GNR, PJ, Media, etc

Then I could understand the path they all took.

[mike tesko]

As each of us go through life,we often learn valuable lessons...

YOU either (1) tell the truth as you know, recollect or remember it, or 'you say nothing'!

Often, telling the truth does not make you guilty as charged. Similarly,' saying 'nothing at all' does not prove or establish beyond doubt  that you might be a liar, and therefore you must be guilty!

[mike tesko]

To my mindset, the McCann parents do not come across as those telling the truth, not the whole truth, and nothing but the truth..

I BELIEVE that I would know if and when the parents were/are telling the ultimate truth..