Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!

SJP

New Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
1
Likes
0
#1
When nobody knows if
a) there is an abductor and
b) who the abductor is
weird . . . .
sorry I was talking about the Madeline McCann case, It was a continuation from another question, I should have made that clearer but I still have my morning head on!
Bobby L, if that is the case why are they describing this accomplice as a new person? Is that just more media spin?
Honest to god, I need a holiday to get away from all this crap!
 

Bobby L

New Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
2
Likes
0
#2
It seems Murat was being regarded as an accomplice to an abductor - someone who had passed information to an abductor - not as being the abductor himself. And Murat did tell this to Sky's Martin Brunt some weeks ago.
Obviously, it was thought that Murat's known movements would have made it impossible for him to conceal the child himself - therefore, there must have been someone else. (Though everyone assumed Murat was being questioned as the lone kidnapper.)
If Murat is starting to move out of the frame, the police still need to identify an accomplice, because they reckon - if there was an abduction - it was impossible for it to have been carried out single-handedly. A witness (NOT Jane Tanner) did report seeing a man on the evening of 3 May. The police are now assuming that man is the accomplice and are trying to identify him.
The other lines of inquiry - sniffer dogs and the presence of a corpse in the McCann apartment - are very alarming indeed. Apparently, a body would have to be lying for at least two hours before it gives off the scent which a specially-trained sniffer dog can detect as a corpse.
How could a body have been lying for more than two hours in the McCann apartment??
The fact that the British press is reporting these pieces of information from Portugal at all - rather than just ignoring them, which is what they've done in the past - would seem very significant.

EDIT: Barbie, the 'new person' bit could refer to the possibility that Murat may soon be released from his arguido status. So there would have to be some other person in the frame to fill his presumed role as accomplice.
But if there is someone else already identified who's been 'under surveillance' for some time, then that you would expect that to be someone living in Praia da Luz or perhaps at the Club. You would expect that person to lead the cops to the actual abductor - or the killer, if the child was actually slain in the apartment. (That's two people to find.) Grim stuff.
 

Bobby L

New Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
2
Likes
0
#3
It seems Murat was being regarded as an accomplice to an abductor - someone who had passed information to an abductor - not as being the abductor himself. And Murat did tell this to Sky's Martin Brunt some weeks ago.
Obviously, it was thought that Murat's known movements would have made it impossible for him to conceal the child himself - therefore, there must have been someone else. (Though everyone assumed Murat was being questioned as the lone kidnapper.)
If Murat is starting to move out of the frame, the police still need to identify an accomplice, because they reckon - if there was an abduction - it was impossible for it to have been carried out single-handedly. A witness (NOT Jane Tanner) did report seeing a man on the evening of 3 May. The police are now assuming that man is the accomplice and are trying to identify him.
The other lines of inquiry - sniffer dogs and the presence of a corpse in the McCann apartment - are very alarming indeed. Apparently, a body would have to be lying for at least two hours before it gives off the scent which a specially-trained sniffer dog can detect as a corpse.
How could a body have been lying for more than two hours in the McCann apartment??
The fact that the British press is reporting these pieces of information from Portugal at all - rather than just ignoring them, which is what they've done in the past - would seem very significant.

EDIT: Barbie, the 'new person' bit could refer to the possibility that Murat may soon be released from his arguido status. So there would have to be some other person in the frame to fill his presumed role as accomplice.
But if there is someone else already identified who's been 'under surveillance' for some time, then that you would expect that to be someone living in Praia da Luz or perhaps at the Club. You would expect that person to lead the cops to the actual abductor - or the killer, if the child was actually slain in the apartment. (That's two people to find.) Grim stuff.
 

Ysanne

New Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2007
Messages
1
Likes
0
#4
I agree, not much of this case makes any sense. Didn't the police say that they are treating this as an disappearance as there was no evidence to suggest an abduction?
Yet, Kate mentions in her interview yesterday that she could tell Madeleine had been taken by the state of the apartment!
Oh, and the Tapas bar has now moved to only being 20 yrds away.
It's gets weirder and weirder.
 
Top Bottom