MORE evidence found, hair has been found in the boot. There's so much evidence saying they did it and hardly any saying they didn't. And it's about bloody time the media has 'turnt against them'. :lol:

 

Sorry Josh, but you are getting ridiculous. You seem to believe anything the media feeds you that makes the McCanns look guilty, which is in itself quite odd, as you seem it want it to be true that they killed her just so you can be right. As I said before, if I was, like you, to believe what is said in the Sun, Mirror's etc, then of course, I would too think they definatly killed her, but seriously, put things into perspective here and think about it. Does that fact that pretty much all of what is said in the papers about this is pure speculation and not in any way factual not tell you anything? I mean it is the papers job to make a story as appealing as possible, to sell more copies of the paper. The Sun claimed the blood was 100% Maddie's, which it CLEARLY was'nt, I don't even think blood was found, it was bodily fluids or something as I recall, but not blood. The Sun also, claimed the police asked the judge to give them permission to dig up around the church, as they believed she was burried there, which was yet again, typical Sun bull$h!t, as it was confirmed what the police wanted was Kate's diary (quite why I do not know, Kate hardly bloody admitted in it to killing her ffs). A hair was found in their car? Big bloody deal ffs, hardly anything in any way shocking, as it could've easily got there. You keep saying all the evidence proves they did it, then why the fuk were they not charged/arrested, instead of being allowed to swan back to the UK? Sorry, but the police clearly did not have credible enough evidence to charge them, and pretty much most of what the media have been saying since then has been nothing but speculation with each claim being proven false and I am sick of it tbh.

 

If they did do it, it will in time be proven hopefully, however at this present moment, to claim that there is so much evidence saying they did do it with so little saying they did'nt is a ridiculous thing so say, as it is so obvious that if any of these claims in the tabloids were actually true, then they would've been arrested by now, but seeing as most of these claims are not true, and the police are now looking for a diary, leads me to believe, that most the evidence clearly does not say they did it.

 

And I'd hardly say the media are turning against them, The Sun etc, are just doing what they are known for doing, exadurating and making up bull$h!t to sell more papers. If you read their opinions on it though, in the editorial parts, I am sure they are doing their usual "have'nt the parents suffered enough" c**p. Hypacritical bast*rds <_<

At last a balanced article that sums things up perfectly.............

 

Madeleine: a grimly compelling story that will end badly for us all

We're divided and now confused by the McCann investigation - and in real danger of losing our common decency

 

Jonathan Freedland

Wednesday September 12, 2007

The Guardian

 

Visit the Sky News website and you'll see in the menu of topics the single word Madeleine, sandwiched between UK News and World News. The story is now so big that it commands its own category, on a par with Politics or Business. There is, of course, no need to supply a last name or any other details: Madeleine refers to what is surely becoming the biggest human interest story of the decade. It's not just the hour-by-hour updates on television news or the you-the-jury phone-ins on the radio. A more reliable indicator is the chatter heard in offices, at bus stops or in queues at the shops. Thanks to the astonishing twist of recent days, the British collective conversation is not focused on the war in Iraq or the efficiency of the NHS, even if it should be. Instead, its great preoccupation is the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, a story that gets ever more strange.

 

Even before last week, the case had gripped. The apparently random abduction and murder of children always does, whether it's Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman, Sarah Payne or the victims of Ian Brady and Myra Hindley. We fear these crimes like no other; they touch fears with deep roots in the cultural soil. The child snatcher is a creature from myth, whether the oldest Gaelic folktales or Little Red Riding Hood and Hansel and Gretel. Modern storytelling is hardly immune: my own generation once cowered in terror from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang's Child Catcher. So when the news first broke in May that a sleeping child had vanished from her bed in a Portuguese holiday resort, all the familiar fears were stirred.

But last week brought a dizzying twist, one that has left the watching public badly confused. The notion of a predatory stranger seizing Madeleine McCann was terrifying but uncomplicated: we knew how we were supposed to feel. The naming by Portuguese police of the little girl's parents as formal suspects has obliged us to contemplate not an ancient fear but a grave taboo: infanticide.

 

Of course, the grim reality is that cases of parents slaying their young are all too common. The boyfriend battering his lover's child to death has become a grisly staple of the news bulletin, usually consigned to halfway down the running order. The middle-class temptation in such cases is to comfort themselves with the thought that these families are dysfunctional, that they are nothing like them. The branding of the McCanns as suspects allows for no such lazy response. Their campaign enjoyed such widespread press backing in part because they are the very model of a middle-class, professional couple: both are doctors, still society's most trusted group. Indeed, since May, the sight of a distraught Kate McCann clutching Madeleine's toy Cuddle Cat had become the very image of parental love. Even to conceive of them as the suspected killers of the daughter whose loss they have been grieving is to experience cognitive dissonance.

 

Which is why people don't know how to react. Suddenly we have to hold two entirely contradictory thoughts in our head at the same time. For the McCanns have now either suffered the cruellest fate imaginable - not only to have innocently lost their beloved daughter but also to have been publicly accused of a wicked crime - or they are guilty of the most elaborate and heinous confidence trick in history, deceitfully winning the trust and sympathy of the world's media, a British prime minister, the wife of the American president and even the Pope, to say nothing of international public opinion. One of those statements, both of them extraordinary, describes the truth. As a senior tabloid journalist put it to me yesterday: "They're either the victims of a horrible smear which they will never fully escape or they are cold, psychotic killers" responsible for the death of their own child.

 

His own newspaper now covers this story with both possibilities in mind. Note the headlines in the Sun and the Mirror, carefully surrounded by caveats and qualifiers, just in case the other scenario proves to be true.

 

This is not how stories like this usually play out. Ordinarily, the popular papers, in particular, have a hunch about the culprit (and very often their hunches are right). Not this time, however. The press pack following the McCann case is apparently split into two camps, for and against the couple, with some reporters refusing to speak to those on the other side. One tabloid editor is changing his mind on where guilt lies "on an hourly basis".

 

It's easy to see why. Yesterday it was reported that the Portuguese police had found not just the odd DNA trace in the boot of the McCanns' hire car - rented weeks after Madeleine's disappearance - but substantial amounts of the child's hair and even bodily fluids. Suddenly, an entire narrative assembles itself, built from leaked nuggets and speculative fragments, which runs as follows. The McCanns had sedated their children so that they could have an undisturbed dinner with friends (hence the failure of the two younger McCann children to awake even during the loud chaos of the night of May 3). They returned to find Madeleine dead. Fearing their twins would be taken from them if they confessed the truth, they hid Madeleine's body, then hid it again in the spare wheel compartment of their rented car until finally burying it somewhere else. (Where? The anti-McCann view even has an answer to this question. Portuguese police are reported to be planning to search the Our Lady of the Light church in Praia da Luz, where the McCanns prayed regularly and to which they were given the keys, so they might visit day or night. Detectives are said to be set on digging up an area around the church - including one cobbled street where roadworks were under way when Madeleine disappeared.)

 

It hangs together well enough until you start asking questions. How could two people under constant media scrutiny possibly have carried out and hidden their daughter's body without being seen? (Especially when it's well known within these circles they were followed by one set of paparazzi 24/7 on a rota basis). If they really had concealed a corpse in their car, wouldn't the smell have been obvious? How could two people unfamiliar with the local landscape have found an eventual hiding place that would still, months later, remain undiscovered? Is it plausible to imagine that, in the moments after suffering the trauma of a dead child, two people could have constructed such an elaborate cover-up plan, executed it coolly and remained steady ever since? Could anybody maintain this front, a global lie, for so long without cracking?

 

Arguments like that are going on everywhere, in pubs or the train to work, as well as in newsrooms around the world. The McCanns must hate it but they cannot be surprised by it. For wholly understandable reasons, they chose to make the loss of their daughter public property, to recruit the media to their cause. So now we are like folk gathered in the village square, offering our two-pennyworth on the mysterious events that have befallen one benighted family.

 

How will this story end? That's what makes it so grimly compelling: none of us knows. Until we do, basic justice demands that we presume the McCanns are wholly innocent. Common decency demands the same. For if they are eventually found guilty, there will be plenty of time for condemnation. But if they are innocent, to presume otherwise is to commit a second crime against people who have already suffered enough.

 

A great read for once about this case. The Sun, take note (as if) :lol:

says it all t.i.p. thanks for shareing.

It's an excellent article, but he's nowhere near critical enough of the McCann's parenting "skills", or lack of... And I dispute that they are "wholly" innocent, they took a seriously stupid gamble when they left the children on their own, they lost; and they should face the consequences of that in the same way that the guy who gambled that he was safe to drive and then ended up inadvertantly causing the Selby rail crash faced the consequences of his stupidity.....

 

Innocent of murder or manslaughter - perhaps

Innocent of neglect and child abuse (ie, feeding sedatives to under fives for no good medical reason) - no way....

 

And the writer is spot on when he says "they chose to make the loss of their daughter public property". Live by the sword, die by it, IMO....

 

I also like this passage - "Of course, the grim reality is that cases of parents slaying their young are all too common. The boyfriend battering his lover's child to death has become a grisly staple of the news bulletin, usually consigned to halfway down the running order. The middle-class temptation in such cases is to comfort themselves with the thought that these families are dysfunctional, that they are nothing like them." The facts are, when it's "lower class" people, the Meeedjaaaaahhhhhhh don't give a fukk, there are well over a thousand kids going missing every year in this country, yet it barely even merits a passage in the local rag, and we all know the reason why - the vast majority of these kids are from estates, usually boys, more often than not black or asian, and quite often from single parent families or families on benefits or low incomes... Where's the "fighting fund" for THOSE kids, who speaks on behalf of THOSE kids?? Certainly NOT the Middle Class British Press that's for fukkin' sure....

I think she will be found (let's just hope that it's not to late) but I also think that her parents know more than they told. It's so sad, I really don't know what comment to add to all that :(

It's becoming quite evident now that the Portugese police are so short on leads that they'll do anything, such as claiming to have found non-existant evidence or bribing Kate, to get someone behind bars. If the evidence that the McCann parents really are involved is strong enough, then by all means charge them, but until then I think the police need a total re-focus of where this investigation is going, especially if rumours that they offered Kate money and a shorter jail term if she'd confess are true.

The Judge has 4,000 Pages of Evidence about this Case from the

Prosecutor, who got it from the Police. As I understand it, the Judge

decides if Gerry & Kate should be charged, or if he thinks there is

'No Case To Answer', & removes their 'Suspects' status.

 

In the meantime more Evidence is being gathered in - and that

will be added to what the Judge already has.

 

No one is trying to 'Frame' Gerry & Kate - they would be just as

much under suspicion had it happened in the UK or USA - the FBI would

see them as Suspects in the USA, & the UK Police would see them as

Suspects in the UK - 100% true.

 

The UK Tabloid hysteria, & anger, that broke out, when the McCanns were

made Suspects is ridiculous! In the UK & USA they would have been Suspects

from Day 1 - I suspect that they were in Portugal too.

 

Our Tabloids are NOT Anti McCann. Sure they print the gossip & rumours

from the European Press, but if you look at the Editorials in the UK Press,

they actually are 100% in SUPPORT of Gerry & Kate. As do many UK Columnists.

 

Last Sunday's 'Sunday Mirror' & 'News Of The World', even had Editorials

proclaiming the McCann's 'Innocent' - stupid, when the UK Press does not know

what Evidence there is! (For either Guilty or Innocent claims to be made, on behalf

of Gerry & Kate).

 

Female Columnist after Female Columnist insists the the McCann's cannot

possibly be guilty. Because they are nice, decent, & dignified etc. It means Zero!

It is what you DO that decides if you are a good person - not your Job, your looks,

& whether you go to Church etc!

 

Fiona Philips etc. see themselves in the McCann's - Middle Class 'Decent'

people - they do not want to believe that such people could have committed

this Crime, so they defend & defend & defend the McCann's - and anyone who

criticises the McCann's is made out to be, 'Pond Life', basically.

 

Their Defenders say that the McCann's had no time to hide Madeleine's body,

as they arrived at the Tapas Bar at 8.30/8.40pm, & Kate found Madeleine gone

at 10pm, & raised the alarm.

 

However, who said that Madeleine was alive at 8.30/8.40pm? Gerry & Kate said

she was left in the Apartment with the Twins at that time, but there is a perfectly

reasonable alternative theory - she was dead BEFORE the McCann's even went out

that Night. AND she was NOT in the Apartment when they went out - they had already

moved her body.

 

The Police need to look at when the McCann's were LAST SEEN with Madeleine

that Day - by other people - as it is from THEN, until they reached the Tapas Bar

that the McCann's DID have time to move her Body. Now some sources say that

the Child was last seen with Gerry & Kate at 2.30pm that Day - other sources say

it was 7.40pm. There is quite a difference, but both give a longer time frame

- for her body to be moved - than the one that the Press has strapped themselves

into - 8.30/8.40 - the McCann's arrive at the Tapas Bar - leaving Madeleine in bed.

10pm - Kate finds her gone. I am 100% SURE that the Portuguese Police have long

since decided that Madeline was dead - and hidden - well before the McCann's reached

the Bar - IF they did it.

 

She was then moved again 25 Days later - via the Hire Car..... Maybe dumped at Sea.

 

Still, I am sure that the UK Police have worked that scenario out, too. Just because

Gerry & Kate claim this or that - it does not mean that they are telling the truth.....

 

I do hope that IF Gerry & Kate end up in Court, they are made to see Psychiatrists,

as more than one Psychiatrist & Psychologist can already see very, very odd & disturbing

patterns in how they behave & what they say - believe me!

 

Hopefully UK Psychiatrists are analysing them too - studying their behaviour - on behalf

of UK Police.

 

For it is in Gerry & Kate's minds - their Syndromes - that the answers to this will lie.

The answer to - 'Why would they do such a thing?'

 

I do NOT know if Gerry & Kate have done this Crime. I do know that those who insist they

are '100% Innocent', do NOT know that either. They are allowed to be called Innocent until

proven Guilty - if ever. However, that does not mean that we cannot speculate about

what MAY have happened in this Case - IF they DID do the Crime.

 

GMTV does virtually a Party Political Broadcast, in favour of Kate & Gerry, every Day.

It has made it quite clear that it thinks they are innocent. So it runs Pro McCann

Propaganda every Day.....It may as well be called Gerry McCann TV....(GMTV!).

 

We will see how this ends. It may be that there is simply not enough retrievable Evidence

to put the McCann's in Court, or to find them Guilty - IF they do go to Court. I mean that

it depends if the Portuguese Police can find the Child's body - highly unlikely - IF it is

dumped at Sea - in a weighted bag.....It is a pity that the entire EU does not have the 3rd

Verdict that Scottish Courts have - 'Not Proven'.....(It means the Court thinks you did it,

but there is not enough evidence to prove it. It is less than both Innocent & Guilty).

Edited September 14, 200717 yr by zeus555

The Judge has 4,000 Pages of Evidence about this Case from the

Prosecutor, who got it from the Police. As I understand it, the Judge

decides if Gerry & Kate should be charged, or if he thinks there is

'No Case To Answer', & removes their 'Suspects' status.

 

In the meantime more Evidence is being gathered in - and that

will be added to what the Judge already has.

 

No one is trying to 'Frame' Gerry & Kate - they would be just as

much under suspicion had it happened in the UK or USA - the FBI would

see them as Suspects in the USA, & the UK Police would see them as

Suspects in the UK - 100% true.

 

The UK Tabloid hysteria, & anger, that broke out, when the McCanns were

made Suspects is ridiculous! In the UK & USA they would have been Suspects

from Day 1 - I suspect that they were in Portugal too.

 

Our Tabloids are NOT Anti McCann. Sure they print the gossip & rumours

from the European Press, but if you look at the Editorials in the UK Press,

they actually are 100% in SUPPORT of Gerry & Kate. As do many UK Columnists.

 

Last Sunday's 'Sunday Mirror' & 'News Of The World', even had Editorials

proclaiming the McCann's 'Innocent' - stupid, when the UK Press does not know

what Evidence there is! (For either Guilty or Innocent claims to be made, on behalf

of Gerry & Kate).

 

Female Columnist after Female Columnist insists the the McCann's cannot

possibly be guilty. Because they are nice, decent, & dignified etc. It means Zero!

It is what you DO that decides if you are a good person - not your Job, your looks,

& whether you go to Church etc!

 

Fiona Philips etc. see themselves in the McCann's - Middle Class 'Decent'

people - they do not want to believe that such people could have committed

this Crime, so they defend & defend & defend the McCann's - and anyone who

criticises the McCann's is made out to be, 'Pond Life', basically.

 

Their Defenders say that the McCann's had no time to hide Madeleine's body,

as they arrived at the Tapas Bar at 8.30/8.40pm, & Kate found Madeleine gone

at 10pm, & raised the alarm.

 

However, who said that Madeleine was alive at 8.30/8.40pm? Gerry & Kate said

she was left in the Apartment with the Twins at that time, but there is a perfectly

reasonable alternative theory - she was dead BEFORE the McCann's even went out

that Night. AND she was NOT in the Apartment when they went out - they had already

moved her body.

 

The Police need to look at when the McCann's were LAST SEEN with Madeleine

that Day - by other people - as it is from THEN, until they reached the Tapas Bar

that the McCann's DID have time to move her Body. Now some sources say that

the Child was last seen with Gerry & Kate at 2.30pm that Day - other sources say

it was 7.40pm. There is quite a difference, but both give a longer time frame

- for her body to be moved - than the one that the Press has strapped themselves

into - 8.30/8.40 - the McCann's arrive at the Tapas Bar - leaving Madeleine in bed.

10pm - Kate finds her gone. I am 100% SURE that the Portuguese Police have long

since decided that Madeline was dead - and hidden - well before the McCann's reached

the Bar - IF they did it.

 

She was then moved again 25 Days later - via the Hire Car..... Maybe dumped at Sea.

 

Still, I am sure that the UK Police have worked that scenario out, too. Just because

Gerry & Kate claim this or that - it does not mean that they are telling the truth.....

 

I do hope that IF Gerry & Kate end up in Court, they are made to see Psychiatrists,

as more than one Psychiatrist & Psychologist can already see very, very odd & disturbing

patterns in how they behave & what they say - believe me!

 

Hopefully UK Psychiatrists are analysing them too - studying their behaviour - on behalf

of UK Police.

 

For it is in Gerry & Kate's minds - their Syndromes - that the answers to this will lie.

The answer to - 'Why would they do such a thing?'

 

I do NOT know if Gerry & Kate have done this Crime. I do know that those who insist they

are '100% Innocent', do NOT know that either. They are allowed to be called Innocent until

proven Guilty - if ever. However, that does not mean that we cannot speculate about

what MAY have happened in this Case - IF they DID do the Crime.

 

GMTV does virtually a Party Political Broadcast, in favour of Kate & Gerry, every Day.

It has made it quite clear that it thinks they are innocent. So it runs Pro McCann

Propaganda every Day.....It may as well be called Gerry McCann TV....(GMTV!).

 

We will see how this ends. It may be that there is simply not enough retrievable Evidence

to put the McCann's in Court, or to find them Guilty - IF they do go to Court. I mean that

it depends if the Portuguese Police can find the Child's body - highly unlikely - IF it is

dumped at Sea - in a weighted bag.....It is a pity that the entire EU does not have the 3rd

Verdict that Scottish Courts have - 'Not Proven'.....(It means the Court thinks you did it,

but there is not enough evidence to prove it. It is less than both Innocent & Guilty).

 

Excellent posting as always from Zeus.. Here's hoping some of the Pro-McCann cheerleaders out there are actually listening to your well thought out, well explained theories.. BECAUSE THEY ACTUALLY MAKE SOME SENSE, unlike about 99% of the drivel the press spouts..... The facts are that until a body is actually found, we will have no idea of an ACTUAL time of death.

 

As far as I'm concerned this whole thing hinges on social class - because they're "respectable, middle class people" no one even wants to consider the possibilty that they might be guilty of any wrongdoing (which they damn well are in any case through drugging their kids and leaving them on their own for hours on end, regardless of whether they committed the actual act of homicide/manslaughter or not..), oh, but of course it is FAR easier to believe a "lower class" couple or a single mother might do something like this, because they're just scum, right...?? <_<

lets face it, this story was a gift for the gutter press who only too quickly took the bait... "what perv stole this beautiful little white girl from a respectable family' line.. all too quick to 'big up' the p**** angle (poor robert murat who must have been SICK with worry at being wrongly suspected of such a heinus crime) whilst holding up the mccanns as the victims.

 

i noticed (at a petrol station, not bought) the daily mail claiming she was killed by an overdose of sleeping tablets. its all begining to make sense, but ill not be getting out the rope until anything is proven.

lets face it, this story was a gift for the gutter press who only too quickly took the bait... "what perv stole this beautiful little white girl from a respectable family' line.. all too quick to 'big up' the p**** angle (poor robert murat who must have been SICK with worry at being wrongly suspected of such a heinus crime) whilst holding up the mccanns as the victims.

 

Amen to that Brother Rob... Whatever else comes out of this, as far as I'm concerned, as parents and as people, they're lower than crocodile pish regardless of whether they committed the act - they drugged their kids with sedatives for no good medical reasons, merely so they could go out for a jolly night out, they left their kids on their own in a hotel room in a foreign land when anything could have happened (and, unfortunately for Maddie, did..). To me, they're a pair of utter c/unts whatever way you cut it.... <_<

Grimly, the point of all of this is not to find out whether the McCanns killed Madelaine, and if not, who did - not whether the case would get the same treatment if the McCanns were lower class, a point which you've argued tens of times already now.

they drugged their kids with sedatives for no good medical reasons, merely so they could go out for a jolly night out,

 

Hold on - when was it announced they drugged them, apart from in the craploids? Have I missed something? :wacko:

Grimly, the point of all of this is not to find out whether the McCanns killed Madelaine, and if not, who did - not whether the case would get the same treatment if the McCanns were lower class, a point which you've argued tens of times already now.

 

as in any discussion, it evolves, it evolves to look at the bigger picture and seeing as the press have been our main scource of information their take on this subject makes scotts points vallied. the question is... would there be such coverage if she was a little black kid from a council estate?... if not why not?...

Grimly, the point of all of this is not to find out whether the McCanns killed Madelaine, and if not, who did - not whether the case would get the same treatment if the McCanns were lower class, a point which you've argued tens of times already now.

 

It's about everything mate. This whole shebang has become about a lot more than just one missing-presumed-dead kid, and if you dont see that, then frankly you're totally missing the point...

 

Just for the record, my own opinion is, I'm not sure, but I am definitely gravitating towards the "guilty" camp, and frankly it really wouldn't surprise me if they did do away with the kid, even if it was an accidental overdose...

 

as in any discussion, it evolves, it evolves to look at the bigger picture and seeing as the press have been our main scource of information their take on this subject makes scotts points vallied. the question is... would there be such coverage if she was a little black kid from a council estate?... if not why not?...

 

Exactly Rob.. And the facts are, living in London about the only time you hear about any kids going missing is when their pictures appear on bus shelters, train stations, etc.. Maybe an article the local rag, IF they're lucky, and it IS a fact that most of these kids are boys, from council estates, usually (but not always I hasten to add) black or Asian, and they vary in age from about 6 to 15... They get nothing even remotely like the coverage this white, middle class little girl is getting.... And it is about bloody high time we as a society started asking "why IS that...??".

 

Just for the record, my own opinion is, I'm not sure, but I am definitely gravitating towards the "guilty" camp, and frankly it really wouldn't surprise me if they did do away with the kid, even if it was an accidental overdose...

 

It's not the killing her part I find hard to believe, as it could've been by accident, it's the getting rid of the body that I just don't buy. I've been in Praia da Luz, and the place is just so small, with such an increadible amount of tourists there, so getting rid of her body to begin with would've been extremly hard without being seen, and if they did, then surely it would've been found by now? Besides, them then apperently, then 25 days later, taking her body in their car and moving it somewhere else is also where the problem is for me, I just do not see that at all possible considering they were followed everywhere for well over the first month.

It's not the killing her part I find hard to believe, as it could've been by accident, it's the getting rid of the body that I just don't buy. I've been in Praia da Luz, and the place is just so small, with such an increadible amount of tourists there, so getting rid of her body to begin with would've been extremly hard without being seen, and if they did, then surely it would've been found by now? Besides, them then apperently, then 25 days later, taking her body in their car and moving it somewhere else is also where the problem is for me, I just do not see that at all possible considering they were followed everywhere for well over the first month.

 

accident or stupidity?... i think stupidity.

 

well true, getting rid of the body would be hard to do, unless it was done BEFORE they raised the alarm. when was the last time she was seen alive by anyone else? theres one big sea there, and a little light body weighed down would be impossible to find. the dna in the car is inconclusive and proves nothing.

Well the one fact is certain is so far no body has been found.

 

But let's look at a couple of famous cases and what the outcome was in lieu of a missing body:

 

1. The case of Natascha Kampusch (born 1988 in Vienna, Austria) who was abducted at the age of 10 on 2 March 1998, and remained in custody of her kidnapper, Wolfgang Priklopil, for more than eight years, until she escaped on 23 August 2006.

 

The 10-year old Kampusch left her family's residence in Vienna's Donaustadt district on 2 March 1998 for school, but failed to arrive at school or come home. A 12-year old witness reported having seen her entering a white minibus with dark rear and side windows, and two other witnesses reported the letters G or GF (for Gänserndorf) on the license plate. The 12 year old witness claimed also she had seen Kampusch being dragged into the white minibus, with another person at the wheel. Kampusch, however, does not report that a second man was present. The police doubted the 12 year old witness' story as teachers told them she was prone to fantasizing, but still maintained her story 8 years later. A massive search followed, yielding no success. Seven hundred minivans were examined, including that of Priklopil, who lived in Strasshof an der Nordbahn in Lower Austria, near Gänserndorf, about half an hour from Vienna by car, as part of a massive effort to interview owners of white minibuses. Although he stated that on the morning of 2 March 1998 he was alone at home, no further investigation was undertaken. The police were satisfied with his explanation of why he owned the minibus: to transport construction site rubble, since Priklopil was doing construction work in his house. Furthermore, he had no criminal record at that time and the police had no further reason to suspect him.

 

The white van was not the only lead the police followed. It turned out afterwards that the white van was the only viable lead, so the media concentrated on it, often creating the impression that this was the only lead. The police searched the area where the girl disappeared with dogs and search teams, divers searched ponds and many men with criminal records as sex offenders were checked. Many speculations about child pornography rings or organ theft were offered. The girl had carried her passport with her when she left (she had been on a family trip to Hungary a few days before) and the police extended the search abroad.

 

What the media & authorities did:

Accusations against Kampusch's family from the press after a couple of months complicated the issue even more; on May 25, 1999, her mother was officially charged and ordered to stand trial for aiding in the abduction to cover up sexual abuse. She was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in prison where she committed suicide maintaining her innocence in 2003.

 

 

2. The case of nine-week-old Australian baby Azaria Chamberlain disappeared who on the night of 17 August 1980 on a camping trip with her family. Her parents, Lindy and Michael Chamberlain, reported that she had been taken from their tent by a dingo.

 

An initial inquest, highly critical of the police investigation, supported this assertion. The findings of the inquest were broadcast live on television — a first in Australia.

 

What the media & authorities did:

Subsequently, after a further investigation and second inquest, Azaria's mother, Lindy Chamberlain, was tried and convicted of her murder, on 29 October 1982 and sentenced to life imprisonment. Azaria's father, Michael Chamberlain, was convicted as an accessory after the fact and given a suspended sentence.

 

The media focus for the trial was extraordinarily intense and sensational. The Chamberlains made several unsuccessful appeals, including the final High Court appeal. After all legal options had been exhausted, the chance discovery of a piece of Azaria's clothing in an area full of dingo lairs led to Lindy Chamberlain's release from prison, on "compassionate grounds." She was later exonerated of all charges. While the case is officially unsolved, the report of a dingo attack is generally accepted. Recent deadly dingo attacks in other areas of Australia have strengthened the case for the dingo theory.

 

The story has been made a feature film "Cry In The Dark" starring Meryl Streep.

 

The similarities between this case & the McCann's case:

 

Disappearance of Azaria

Pastor Michael Chamberlain, his wife Lindy, their two boys, Aidan and Reagan, and their new little daughter, Azaria, left their home in Mount Isa for a camping and sightseeing trip to various Northern Territory landmarks, including Ayers Rock. They arrived on the evening of Saturday, August 16, 1980.

 

On the night of August 17, Lindy Chamberlain raised the alarm that a dingo had just been seen leaving the family tent and that Azaria, who had been sleeping in her bassinette, was missing. Three hundred people formed a human chain during the night and searched the sand dunes near the campsite, but Azaria was never found.

 

One week later, a tourist from the state of Victoria, Wally Goodwin, discovered Azaria's heavily blood-stained, jumpsuit, singlet, booties and nappy near a dingo lair. Goodwin was later to state that when he found the clothing, he did not touch it, but called a police officer. The officer immediately handled the jumpsuit, pulling out the singlet and booties which were still inside it. When Goodwin expressed concern that the evidence should not be handled, the officer put the booties and singlet back into the jumpsuit and contacted a senior.

 

 

Coroners' inquests

The initial Coroner's inquest into the disappearance was opened on December 15, 1980 before Denis Barritt, SM. On February 20, 1981, in the first live telecast of Australian court proceedings, Justice Barritt reported that the likely cause was a dingo attack. In addition to this finding, Mr. Barritt also concluded that subsequent to the attack, "the body of Azaria was taken from the possession of the dingo, and disposed of by an unknown method, by a person or persons, name unknown."

 

The Northern Territory Police and prosecutors were unsatisfied with this finding fuelled by the Chamberlain's unpopularity amongst the Australian media for coming across as a cold & clinical. Investigations continued, leading to a second inquest. Whilst between the first & second inquest the media were drip fed various "incriminating evidence" in a variety of different allegations made against the Chamberlain's.

 

The second inquest was held in September 1981. Based on ultraviolet photographs of Azaria's jumpsuit, Dr James Cameron of the London Hospital Medical College alleged that "there was an incised wound around the neck - in other words a cut throat," and that there was an imprint of the hand of a small adult on the jumpsuit, visible in the photographs.

 

Following this and other findings, the Chamberlains were charged with Azaria's murder and taken into custody.

 

The trial:

 

The Crown alleged that Lindy Chamberlain had cut Azaria's throat in the front seat of the family car, hiding the baby's body in a large camera case. She then, according to the proposed reconstruction of the crime, rejoined the group of campers around a campfire and fed one of her sons on a can of baked beans, before going to the tent and raising the cry that a dingo had taken the baby. At a later time, while other people from the campsite were searching, it was alleged, she disposed of the body.

 

The key evidence supporting this allegation was the jumpsuit and the finding of the second inquest, as well as a highly contentious forensic report claiming to have found evidence of fetal haemoglobin in stains found on the front seat of the Chamberlains' 1977 Torana hatchback. Fetal hemoglobin is present in infants six months or younger, and Azaria Chamberlain was nine weeks old at the time of her disappearance.

 

Lindy was questioned about the garments that the baby was wearing. She claimed that the baby was wearing a jacket over the jumpsuit, but the jacket was not present when the garments were found. She was questioned about the fact that the baby's singlet, which was inside the jumpsuit, was inside out. She insisted that she never put a singlet on her babies inside out and that she was most particular about this. This statement conflicted with the state of the garments when they were collected as evidence. The garments had been arranged by the investigating officer for a photograph.

 

In defence, eyewitness evidence was presented of dingos having been seen in the area on the evening of 17 August 1980. All witnesses claimed to believe the Chamberlains' story. One witness, a nurse, also reported having heard a baby's cry after the time when the prosecution alleged Azaria had been murdered. Evidence was also presented that adult blood also passed the test used for foetal haemoglobin, and that other organic compounds can produce a similar results to the particular test, including mucous from the nose, and chocolate milkshake, both of which had been present in the vehicle where the baby was allegedly murdered.

 

Evidence was rejected by engineer Les Harris, who had conducted dingo research over a decade, that, contrary to Cameron's findings, a dingo's carnassial teeth can shear through material as tough as motor vehicle seat belts. The researcher also cited the example of a captive female dingo removing a bundle of meat from its wrapping paper and leaving the paper intact.

 

Evidence to the effect that a dingo was strong enough to carry a kangaroo was also ignored. Also ignored was the removal of a three year old girl by a dingo from the back seat of a tourist's motor vehicle at the camping area just weeks before, and witnessed by the parents.

 

An aboriginal man gave evidence that his wife had tracked the dingo and found places where it had put the baby down, leaving the imprint of the baby's clothing in the soil. This evidence was discounted, because the man spoke on behalf of his wife, in the first person, according to custom.

 

The defence's case was rejected by the jury. Lindy Chamberlain was convicted of murder on 29 October 1982 and sentenced to life imprisonment with hard labour. Michael Chamberlain was found guilty as an accessory to the murder, and was given an 18-month suspended sentence.

accident or stupidity?... i think stupidity.

 

well true, getting rid of the body would be hard to do, unless it was done BEFORE they raised the alarm. when was the last time she was seen alive by anyone else?

 

According to various media reports it was definitely 6PM. Which leaves a 4 hour window until the alarm was raised.

 

I'll say what I said on Sunday. If the McCann's were credible suspects for the (accidental) killing of Madeleine & hiding the body then why the f*** did the Portuguese authorities allow them to leave the country with no bail restrictions what so ever because if there is serious credible evidence against the McCann's then that is sheer incompetence on a huge scale?