Criminal Profiling Topic
of the Day: The Madeleine McCann Letter – 13.06.2007
Someone has sent a letter
to the Dutch press claiming that he knows where little Madeleine
McCann is buried. Apparently this fellow had sent a similar letter
last year when the police were searching for the missing Belgian
sisters, Stacy and Nathalie, which arrived just on the day they were
found. Is this a hoax or could this be the abductor of all three
girls? Now, there was an arrest made in the case of the murdered
Belgian girls, but this letter writer is said to have known where
they were buried by the train tracks and so the police are taking the
Madeleine letter fairly seriously. Let’s profile this letter and
see what the possibilities are. First of all, the Belgian girls were
killed within hours of their abduction and if Madeleine’s body
really is where this writer says it is – seven miles from the
resort from which she was taken – I think we can eliminate the
pedophile ring scenario (a scenario I never really bought). The
Belgian girls were raped and killed quickly; there was no
transporting of them anywhere and certainly no time to do any selling
of them or videotaping of them being tortured and murdered. If
Madeleine is found right in the vicinity of the resort, we can
eliminate any fancy sex ring kidnapping little kids for profit.
Therefore, in both cases,
we would have a pedophile or a pedophile duo grabbing and amusing
themselves, not involving themselves in organized crime. The letter
writer could, in theory, be a traveling man and have gone to Belgium,
found a couple of victims, left the country and sent the letter when
he was back at home in Holland. He could have been on the road again,
come across another child left unattended (the Belgian girls were
left to play in the street at midnight while their parents were
drinking it up inside a bar), grabbed her, raped her and killed her,
and then gone back home to Holland where he once again writes a
letter at leisure to the newspaper he must read all the time. He
would be a publicity lover and get a kick out of having the girls
found and reading about the discovery over his morning coffee. Of
course, there was a man convicted of the sisters’ murder but it is
possible he isn’t guilty, just a dupe, and the real killer finds
this annoying and wants to set the record straight.
This is one possible
scenario. However, there is a problem with it. It is said that the
letter writer was right on the money as to where the sisters’
bodies would be found. I beg to differ. The letter writer marked a
location that turned out to be one mile away from where the girls
were found. This wouldn’t be such a big deal if he was one mile off
from where he claimed Madeleine would be found – six miles or seven
miles on a lonely road – well, maybe he just didn’t remember
exactly how far he drove, but being one mile off of the sisters’
dump site is a different story entirely.,The sisters’ bodies were
found within 300 meters of the bar, not over a mile from the bar. I
would think a killer well know the difference between “at the end
of the block” and “more than a mile down the road.”
Furthermore, a killer who leaves the kids at the end of the block
probably doesn’t have a car and the one who would leave them more
than a mile away would have to have a car to carry them that far.
At this point, unless
Madeleine is found exactly where the letter writer claims, the
letters were probably the work of an armchair detective who just
guessed where he thought they might be. If you add to this toss of
the dice to all the possible locations any other tipster gave and all
the psychics gave, someone is likely to get lucky and get close to
the right spot. The police, of course, would be remiss not to check
this out just to be sure they aren’t ignoring a serial killer’s
clues. But, chances are, there are two different pedophiles at work
in these crimes. Unattended children are easy targets for pedophiles
and just because the MO is similar, it doesn’t mean there is just
one guy committing the crimes. Yes, there is a serial killer of
children out there, but whether there is one serial killer or two
serial killers involved in these crimes remains to be seen.
Shirking Responsibility
for Criminal Behavior – 15.08.2007
In Virginia, another
drunk teenage driver has killed herself and her three friends who
were riding in the car with her. One of the fathers of the passengers
made this statement: "A drunk driver killed my kid." I beg
to differ, sir: a drunk driver and her drunk enabling passengers
colluded to kill themselves. You can't blame the driver without
blaming the passengers. There was an open gallon of vodka in the car,
half of it gone, when the car crashed. This isn't like a drunk pilot
killing his unsuspecting passengers. Every one of those kids knew the
driver was drinking and likely passed the bottle to her while she was
behind the wheel. In doing so, everyone shares the blame for the car
crashing and the resulting deaths. A while back, a Minnesota girl
survived such a crash that killed her friends. Because she was the
driver, she ended up getting charged. She admitted she was wrong but
she stated that all of her friends knew darned well what they were
getting into when they got into the vehicle with her and passed the
bottle around. She got a lot of angry feedback from that statement;
folks thought she was blaming the victims of her mistake. But, I
agree with the girl. She was wrong but her friends were just as
wrong.
In another horrifying
Virginia story, a man left a cache of weapons around his mentally
deranged son, took him to practice shooting at the gun range and gave
him drugs. The son ended up taking his daddy's guns and murdering two
police officers. The father ended up getting a few years for aiding
and abetting, a sentence I thought was far too low, although I was
happy to see him get nailed for something (unlike most of the parents
of school shooters who get off scott free after their children take
their father's or grandfather's guns and mow down their classmates).
Nancy Grace got sued by the family of Melinda Duckett for grilling
her over the disappearance of her son. After Melinda made herself
look really guilty with her poor answers, she went home and blew
herself away with Granddaddy's shotgun. Her grandfather, however,
instead of blaming himself for leaving his weapon around for his
mentally unstable granddaughter to do herself in with, attacks Nancy
for making his squirrelly grand kid feel bad about herself.
And let's not forget
Madeleine. Her parents left her and their two little babies alone in
a strange hotel room while they went off drinking. Now, they have
collected two million dollars from caring people to find her. While I
understand they are hurting, many parents have had their kids
kidnapped through no fault of their own. Madeleine's parents should
have been charged with child neglect. What do all these cases have in
common? Folks taking no responsibility for their behavior and blaming
someone else for the results of it. I would like to see people speak
out and say, well, you brought it on yourselves and you need to
either live with that fact or go to jail for your involvement with
the crime. Let's stop making excuses for these individuals and expect
and demand that they accept responsibility for their actions.
Is Maddie in
England? - 13.09.2007
IF the evidence we have heard recently
exists concerning Maddie's DNA and hire in the boot of the hire car
and the McCanns were involved with the disappearance and death of
their daughter, Madeleine, here is what I think could have happened.
I have been considering WHY anyone would move a body from one
location to another after twenty five days. If Maddie's DNA from
decomposition of her body is really in the hire car, what purpose
would there be in moving her body at that time? I can think of only
one: they would have to be afraid the Portuguese police were getting
closer and closer to discovering what happened to Maddie and they
took action. One possibility would be to move her to a location where
she could never be found: at the bottom of the ocean. The other would
be to move the body back to a location they controlled (the later
villa they had rented), they would not have to worry about the police
stumbling across their daughter’s remains. With all their traveling
about, leaving and entering the apartment with a suitcase is not
going to raise any eyebrows. Apparently, the police never brought the
sniffer dogs to the new villa and, therefore, Maddie’s body could
have remained in a suitcase in a storage area until the McCanns
decided to move on. If the decomposition stage was late enough, the
issue of odor would be less of a problem).
Kate McCann has stated she would never
leave Portugal without her daughter and maybe she was telling the
truth. Madeleine is but a small and very portable child. She weighs
little and, if she had been decomposing for so long, she would weigh
even less. The McCanns returned to England with four large black
suitcases. Was Maddie in one of them? It may unbelievable behavior
for a parent, but, many a body has been shipped in suitcases over the
course of history and parents have done strange things in desperation
or in grief, so this would not be an impossibility. If the McCanns
chose to do this and succeeded in not getting caught, they would have
outsmarted the Portuguese police, avoided a jail sentence and no one
would ever find out what really happened to their daughter. Because
the McCanns were familiar with air travel, airports, and entry and
departure points, they could determine whether their luggage was
likely to be searched upon arrival (and the answer from my experience
with travel to England is the chances of them having any problem with
scrutiny and searches is low).
If the evidence holds, the British
police might search for Maddie right there in Leicestershire,
England; who knows what they might find. Of course, this all depends
on whether any of the leaked information about the DNA and hair in
the boot of the hire car has any validity at all. If it doesn't, then
regardless of the negligence of Maddie's parents in leaving her
unattended out of eye and earshot (and I do not think this acceptable
parenting even if there are no kidnappers likely to take her), then
we are back to a pedophile snatching her. One way or the other, there
is little likelihood Madeleine is alive. At the heart of all crime
scene analysis is evidence, both forensic and behavioral. Theories
that then prompt investigative avenues are based on what evidence one
has in the case. If the evidence changes, then the theory will change
with it. This is why no one is guilty until proven so in a court of
law. Even the most suspicious of suspects is not guilty until the
jury says so.
Are the McCanns guilty or not? I have
no idea since I am not inside the homicide investigation. But if
there is really any evidence pointing toward the McCanns, then the
police should do what they suggest and "Leave No Stone
Unturned."
The
Moment Madeleine was Taken – 04.10.2007
One has to be careful
when analyzing from a distance if a particular person or persons is
exhibiting guilt concerning the commission of a crime. Until there is
hard physical evidence linking a perpetrator or perpetrators to a
crime, the case is tried in court and a conviction is handed down by
a jury or judge, all is still speculation. I am asked over and
over if I think the McCanns are guilty of the disappearance of their
daughter Madeleine. I always answer that I cannot say for sure
because at this point I haven’t a clue as to the veracity of any of
the information coming out of the European tabloid machines. I have
to say I have been rather appalled by any media spawning so many
“facts” that turn out to be just hearsay. It is not like
proposing a theory: speculation is not claiming knowledge and is
not lying, but stating something is a fact when it is not is
egregious and the media should not be doing this. Let’s look at the
supposed facts: if the DNA from Madeleine in the hire car exists, the
McCanns are guilty as hell. If there is blood from Madeleine on the
stairs, this only proves she was injured but not by who. If there are
sedatives in her hair, this is pretty damning. So much for the
“facts.” Let’s turn toward the McCanns and their behaviors.
Behavioral evidence is not conclusive evidence. It is useful
in determining investigative avenues to focus on and interview
methodology. It is circumstantial evidence and can lend weight
to a case in court but rarely can stand alone without physical
evidence to support guilt. As a criminal profiler, behavioral
evidence is extremely important in analyzing any case and advising
police investigators of its meaning within the context of the case.
The McCanns narcissistic
behavior is concerning, but they could be narcissistic people who
have had they child abducted. One thing I have learned about the
family of victims of horrible crimes; whatever you were like before
your loved one went missing is exactly what you are like afterward.
You don’t change. So, if you are a really aggressive person
before the crime, you are likely going to be aggressive afterwards
and fight to see the crime solved. If you were extremely passive
before the incident, you might simply allow the police to do the work
and hardly lift a finger. If you were a soft touch previously, you
may sob your way through a television appearance. If you were a tough
cookie, you may come off as a cold, uncaring, and possibly guilty of
wrongdoing. The McCanns appear pretty narcissistic in their behaviors
after Madeleine’s disappearance. They worry about their physiques,
their clothing, hair, and jewelry, and they like a lot of
attention. But, this is exactly how they were before Maddy went
missing, so I am not surprised they are acting this way. Their rather
off-putting behavior does not mean they are guilty of anything more
than child neglect.
But, I have been going
back over the actual interviews of Gerry and Kate McCann and one
statement sticks in my craw and bugs the devil out of me. It is the
one thing that makes me lean toward their guilt even without any
physical evidence. This is what Gerry said:
We felt our actions were responsible. We were essentially performing our own baby listening service although we have talked of the guilt we felt at not being there at the moment Madeleine was taken.
Maybe Gerry just
misspoke. Maybe it is similar to the ear pulling thing he did when he
denied that he and Kate gave Madeleine sedatives; maybe his ear just
itched at that moment and he wasn’t lying. Maybe it is like when
they left their twins to jet off to see the Pope claiming it was no
big deal because their children were in a safe location, the very
same town the abductor of their other child might still be loose in;
that statement doesn’t necessarily mean they know that no real
kidnapper is out there. Or when Gerry said that he and his wife Kate
were "100 per cent confident" of each other's innocence,”
maybe this strange wording for parents whose child is abducted while
they spent the evening in each other’s company, maybe I am reading
more into it than is necessary. So, maybe this particular statement
of Gerry’s is also just an odd choice of words. It doesn’t prove
guilt. But, it does continue to force me to look at them as suspects
in the real meaning of the word.,
Why?
It is not because he and
Kate still think that leaving their children alone is not wrong. We
know they have never felt leaving tiny toddlers to fend for
themselves constitutes neglect. They have said that over and
over. Clearly, they are never going to accept responsibility for
their horrendous actions that night. But, firstly, what Gerry
admits in that statement is they were only “listening” at the
door, not looking in to see if their children are all right. If
they are not actually observing their children, they would not know
if they were sick, injured, or missing from the room. Gerry has moved
away from saying they actually checked on their children to some
rather vague “listening” methodology, perhaps, one so distant,
that he meant they were close enough that they should be able to hear
one of the kids if they left the room screaming for them. Not only
that, Gerry basically admits the window for “kidnapping”
Madeleine is a whole lot larger than thirty minutes. She could have
been “taken” five minutes after they left the children in bed if
they never “saw” them again until Kate finally decides to not
just listen at the door but actually look in on her children. But,
more importantly, if Madeleine actually died during the time of the
“listening” checks or her body removed during the time of the
“listening” checks, it behooves the parents to carefully skirt
around having to lie about “seeing” Madeleine earlier during the
evening via visual checks on the children.
But, even this bit of
information is not the big problem. It is the very last part of the
sentence that rings warning bells to me:
“….although we have
talked of the guilt we felt at not being there at the moment
Madeleine was taken.”
First, let’s look at
what Gerry McCann did NOT say:
“We are horrified that
we left our little girl alone and made it easy for a predator to
kidnap her.”
Okay, that statement
would be normal for a nonnarcissit and one who accepts responsibility
for their actions, so maybe we shouldn’t think Gerry would say
that. But, one might think he should have at least said this:
”..although we have
talked of the guilt we felt at not realizing it was unsafe to leave
Madeleine alone and because we were naive, we feel guilt that
Madeleine was taken while we innocently left her unattended.”
This would be a pretty
good statement, but, wait, I have to say, again, they are too
narcissistic to admit to this large a mistake, so I would guess this
is why Gerry didn’t say that either. BUT, let’s see examine what
Gerry REALLY did say and why it is important and very concerning.
“…the guilt we felt
at not being there AT THE MOMENT MADELEINE WAS TAKEN.”
First of all, Gerry, IF
one of you had been there with Madeleine, there would be NO MOMENT
WHEN MADELEINE WAS TAKEN. It simply could not have occurred. If one
of you had been there, either the abductor would have simply turned
around and given up the idea or you would have fought with the
abductor to save Madeleine. She could NOT HAVE BEEN TAKEN if you were
there.
Let’s analyze further.
There are two very important words here: MOMENT and TAKEN.
First of all, Madeleine
couldn’t have been taken in a MOMENT by an abductor. It would have
taken quite a few moments to grab the child out of the bed, struggle
with her, climb out a window, and carry her off.
Secondly, she wouldn’t
have just been TAKEN. She would have been ABDUCTED, STOLEN, or
KIDNAPPED.
TAKEN is an interesting
passive word. Theoretically, it could just be Gerry and Kate trying
to feel less guilty about a child predator abducting a screaming and
terrified Madeleine. Maybe the word, TAKEN, just feels less awful.
But, then again, maybe TAKEN is what they really mean. Maddy may have
been taken from life and Gerry and Kate may feel guilt over the
MOMENT that occurred. Alternatively, if they really did have help
moving her body and Kate really did scream “THEY have taken
Madeleine,” maybe they feel guilt over not being there at the
MOMENT Madeleine was TAKEN from the room and hidden elsewhere.
Perhaps, this is exactly why no one was supposed to look in on the
children and why the doors were left unlocked. Maybe, the “feeling”
Gerry has that a man was in the room is accurate because he set the
whole thing up. But I digress.
If the MOMENT refers to a
time when Kate and Gerry were off partying and Madeleine suffered a
serious injury from falling down the steps or had overdosed on
sedatives, they might feel guilty they were not there at that MOMENT
because as doctors, had they been there at that MOMENT, they might
have been able to administer medical care and save Maddy’s life.
Gerry then would be admitting that MOMENTS do count and leaving your
child unattended for even a MOMENT can effectively contribute to the
child’s death.
Worse yet, if the McCanns
were there when Madeleine died and Gerry is referring to feeling bad
about not being there the MOMENT her body was moved, then one of them
killed her in a fit of rage or overdosed her with sedatives before
going out for the evening. This parent clearly would not be viewing
themselves at fault for the incident and the other parent is one heck
of a pushover and enabler. This can happen when one of the couple is
desperate enough to stay in the relationship, protect one’s
professional life, or keep a perfect social or personal image.
Considering the great deal of minimization the McCanns have done
since their daughter went missing, it is really not that big a
stretch to imagine one of them acting in such a fashion.
Regardless of which
scenario might be true, I think Gerry may have told the exact truth
with this statement: that he and Kate DO feel guilty for
“… not being there at
the MOMENT Madeleine was TAKEN.”
Does the fact, and this
is an actually fact, that Gerry says he and his wife feel guilt over
not being there at the MOMENT Madeleine was TAKEN– does this
statement of Gerry’s mean they are guilty of Madeleine’s
disappearance?
No, but it sure doesn’t
help me spend a lot of time looking harder at Robert Murat and if
there is much more damning information from the interviews with the
McCanns, their friends, the employee of the hotel, and the physical
evidence then we know of, one can’t blame the Portuguese police for
not spending much time looking at him either. They would only be
looking for Madeleine’s body or enough other physical evidence to
charge the McCanns in the death of their daughter and subsequent
obstruction of justice in hiding their daughter’s body and
misleading the police investigation. If the McCanns are innocent of
having anything to do with Maddy’s disappearance, I feel sorry that
they have had to suffer all the allegations on top of the anguish of
losing a daughter. However, I feel much sorrier for Madeleine, who
would have had to suffer through a horrible sexual assault and a
violent end to her life because of willful neglect of her parents.
The McCanns are reaping what they sowed and there are responsible for
the results of their actions. They only anger they should express is
towards themselves, not the police or public trying to find out what
happened to Maddy, and they only horror they should feel should be at
their own actions and the horrible hurt it brought to their innocent
little girl. But the McCanns apparently feel negative emotions toward
themselves over only one issue:
…not being there AT
THE MOMENT MADELEINE WAS TAKEN.
Another
“Ludicrous" Theory in the Disappearance of MMC – 08.10.2007
A short time ago, I made
a suggestion that the British police might investigate the McCann’s
residence (and the residences of friends and family of the McCanns)
for the possibility that the body of Madeleine McCann might have been
transported into England. Some folk immediately labeled the theory
ridiculous, or ludicrous, as the McCanns would say. How, they asked,
could the McCanns carry a putrefying and decaying body in a suitcase
and get it on and off of an airplane? I understand that this sounds
mighty foolish to many who don’t work in the field of criminal
investigation and profiling and they think Pat Brown is a nutcase par
excellence! Let me clear up a few misconceptions: first of all, it is
a theory, not a fact. Secondly, a theory is useful to stimulate
investigative avenues not yet thought of that might lead to evidence
that would otherwise have been overlooked. Third, offering one theory
does not mean it is the only theory or even the best theory. It is
far more likely that Madeleine’s body is somewhere underground in
Portugal or Spain or in the ocean. These are simpler places to bury a
body. It may be that the body has just not yet been discovered. This
is very often the case; while rumors and theories abound about white
slavery and porn rings and sightings are made of the victim all over
the world, the body of the poor thing has simply been lying in a
ravine for the past few months! Sometimes bodies fall into strange
and difficult places or are well-buried for years. Then, one day a
jogger trips over the body or a farmer turns over some soil to plant
his corn, and, voila! The victim has been found.
Maddy McCann will likely
be found in a similar way (unless someone did one heck of a job of
hiding her). Whether a child predator took Maddy or the parents did
her in, she will probably one day just be found. However, there is
nothing wrong with being proactive and trying to find her sooner than
later. Therefore, the police should follow all leads and theories. IF
they find her sooner, than not all the evidence with the body or
within the body will have been destroyed by time and nature. So,
search in Portugal and Spain and any other place one can think of.
And, yes, search in England: Maddy just might be there. Would it
really be possible for one of the McCanns to cart the body of their
daughter back to England? Yes, absolutely. Because of the climate in
Portugal, it is possible that should they have buried Maddy in a
shallow grave in a sandy substrate, her body would have mummified.
Mummification is a desiccation of the corpse where the fluids drain
into the ground and the rest of the body dries up. There is
relatively little odor associated with a mummified body. If this
occurred, the body would be easier to transport; it would be lighter
and drier and lacking the horrible smell of a corpse. Such a body
could easily be placed in a sealed bag and placed in a suitcase.
Screening of stowed luggage is not likely to uncover a body inside of
a suitcase and when the traveler reaches the other end and goes
through customs, they enter the “Have nothing to declare line,”
and just walk through (unless they exhibit concerning behavior that
raises a red flag and launches a search of the luggage). As to the
McCanns, I seriously doubt they were searched upon arrival, not with
all the press surrounding them and the mass of curious onlookers,
reporters, and VIPS lurking about.
IF the McCanns were
involved and IF Maddy’s body was brought home, when this would have
happened is another question. Unfortunately, only those inside the
organization would (we hope) know the truth about the McCann’s
movements. For example, Gerry McCann returned to England on June 19,
just four days after an exhaustive search for Madeleine was called
off. This search was in an arid, desolate area (the kind of climate
which might encourage the mummification of a body) near a town called
Odiaxere. A letter from an unknown sender had stated she could be
found there in a shallow grave. Four days later, Gerry is on a plane
home. I don’t know if he took any luggage with him, anything more
than a rucksack (which I don’t know the size of). He only stayed
for the day, purportedly to attend some meetings. He claims he had
his wallet stolen while getting money from an ATM and later that
evening, the wallet was mailed back to him. A rather peculiar story
that I wonder might not be a cover for the reason he was late to his
meetings; he ostensibly spent the time calling credit card companies
to cancel his credit cards.
If I were the police
investigator, I would follow up this lead. I would want to know what
luggage Gerry took with him to England. I would try to see if there
was any proof to the wallet theft story. I would find out if he had
any “alone” time on the trip. I would find out if he made those
phone calls to the credit card companies and if he really got money
from an ATM. I would find out exactly where he was that day through
any evidence of his movements (phone call tracking, receipts,
witnesses, etc.). I would want to know if anyone met him, especially
anyone who he could have transferred a package from one suitcase to
another. I would check all the McCann trips and look for possibly
ways for them to transport a body away from Portugal. And, again, I
would look for all possible places within Portugal or neighboring
countries as possible places to hide or bury a body. I would check
the possibility of a burial at sea.
If I were the Portuguese
police, I would be following all leads, even those that lead away
from the McCanns. It never hurts to be thorough. The point is to
recover Madeleine, dead or alive, and bring justice to those that
hurt her. In the end, it doesn’t matter which theory is correct
(except as an educational tool for future investigations). It only
matters that the case is solved.
Who Should be the
Suspects in the MC Case? - 26.10.2007
MY PRESENT TAKE ON THE
MCCANN CASE
One of the problems with
trying to understand what has happened in a crime is being on the
outside of the police investigation and not knowing the whole truth
of what is going on. My speculation, as is true with all of us
outside the investigation, professionals included, is based on
limited information. Having said that, sometimes the police have the
same problem. They may have limited information due to lack of
evidence, lying witnesses, incorrect scientific conclusions, altered
crime scenes (staged or accidentally altered), etc. So they actually
are in the same boat, only a better constructed and less leaky one.
So, in a sense, it is a struggle to solve a crime, from the inside or
outside. We theorize, search for evidence, theorize some more, search
for evidence, and so on, until, hopefully, we have evidence
conclusive enough to affect an arrest and conviction. Sometimes the
evidence never reaches that state and, even if the police are pretty
darn sure who is guilty, they still cannot arrest them or they know
they cannot get a conviction.
As to the professionalism
of the PJ’s investigation, I cannot comment on that. They may have
failed in some respects and done well in some respects. I don’t
have enough information. Generally speaking, most police departments
will claim they do an excellent job following procedure, but in
reality, sometimes it is less than perfect because police officers
are human and vary in skill and competence. I have worked with some
police departments that have done awesome work and others that make
me cringe. Sometimes it is a lack of finances; sometimes it is
departmental inefficiency; sometimes you just have a sad bunch of not
too bright blokes. Every profession suffers these problems. Every
profession tries to do their best with what they have and most police
departments want to be a credit to their profession and work to be
so. To the McCann case; I don’t have a clue as to the physical
evidence or timeline because of police silence and all the rumors.
Therefore it is really hard to actually analyze how the crime went
down. But, I will go ahead with what I generally think on the matter.
POSSIBILITIES IN THE
DISAPPEARANCE OF MADLEINE MCCANN
• Maddie is unlikely
to have wandered off and drowned.
• Maddie was unlikely
to have been kidnapped by a pedophile ring.
• Maddie is unlikely to
have wandered off and been abducted though that COULD have happened
(if there is no physical evidence of harm or death coming to Maddie
in the apartment). If this is true, she is very likely dead.
• Maddie could have
been abducted by a child predator that lived nearby. If this is true,
she is likely dead.
• Maddie could have
been medicated and died accidentally while her parents were at the
restaurant. If this were true, the body of Maddie would have had to
be moved from the flat and hidden or hidden within the flat prior to
Kate’s cry that Maddie was missing. If this is true, Maddie is
dead.
• Maddie could have
died accidentally prior to the McCann’s going to dinner, giving
them more time to move or hide Maddie’s body. The time at the
restaurant and the checks on the kids would establish an alibi and
move the time of “disappearance” further from any possible
witness sightings of earlier suspicious activities of the McCanns. If
this is true, Maddie is dead.
• Kate killed Maddie,
purposefully, or in a rage, and Gerry came back from tennis and found
Maddie dead. He helped cover up the crime. If this is so, Kate would
likely suffer from Munchausen’s syndrome by Proxy (if she killed
Maddie on purpose – MSP is the label for a female psychopath who
harms or kills her children; husbands of MSP women tend to be
detached and very oblivious or accepting of their wive’s behaviors)
or another serious psychiatric disorder (if she killed Maddie
accidentally). They could have removed or hidden Maddie’s body
before going to dinner or the body could have been dealt with by
Gerry during his checks on the children. If this is true, Maddie is
dead.
• Gerry came back and
killed Maddie in a rage. If this is so, Gerry would be likely rate
high on a psychopathy checklist and be very controlling). Maddie’s
body would have been dealt with before or during the evening. If this
is true, Maddie is dead.
• Kate killed Maddie,
purposefully, or in a rage, and moved or hid her body without Gerry’s
knowledge. She would have had to manipulate Gerry into not noticing
his daughter in bed (“Maddie’s already asleep, let’s go”)
before going to the restaurant. She would then possibly have hoped
Gerry would do the checks and find Maddie missing, distancing herself
from the crime. Maybe, if Gerry actually didn’t do visual checks,
Kate finally got fed up and went and did the check herself. If this
is so, Kate would likely suffer from Munchausen’s Syndrome by Proxy
or another serious psychiatric disorder. If this is true, Maddie is
dead.
These are all the
possibilities I can think of based on very limited information, I
believe only two basic scenarios are worth spending much time on;
Maddie was taken by a
child predator.
Maddie died in the
apartment and the parents are covering up a crime.
In both cases, Maddie is
likely dead.
THE SUSPECTS
Robert Murat is a good
suspect. He should be kept on the suspect list (even if not
officially) until there is evidence that contradicts his involvement
in the disappearance of Maddie or until another person is arrested.
Police should continue investigating for the possibility of another
child predator who could have been responsible for the disappearance
of Maddie.
The McCanns are good
suspects. They were the last people to have been known to see Maddie
alive and their behaviors are very concerning. They should stay on
the suspect list (even if not officially) until there is evidence
that contradicts their involvement in the disappearance of Maddie or
until another person is arrested.
Because of the following
behaviors, I tend to lean toward the McCanns been involved with the
disappearance, and therefore, death of their daughter, Maddie.
THE MCCANNS
They left three very
young children unattended while they pursued pleasure for themselves.
This is a sign of narcissism and a lack of attachment to one’s
children. Both Kate and Gerry speak about Madeleine in a very
impersonal and flat manner. Gerry writes nothing personal about
Maddie on his blog. Maddie seems more like an abstraction than a real
child. This is a sign of lack of normal attachment. Kate states that
the last words of Maddie before she went missing were “Today has
been the best day of my life.” Maddie’s last words are unusual
for a three-year-old girl. Kids that young don’t usually have a
concept of their “life.” “I am having the best time,” and “I
am having fun” are more normal statements for that age. Next, Kate
says Maddie was “very pleased with her life,” also an odd comment
for an adult to say of her child. Both statements lead me to believe
Kate knows Maddie is dead because of her emphasis on the inclusion of
the word “life,” as though there were a set of parentheses around
the first day of her life and the last. Kate may want to convince
herself that she gave Maddie a good life, right up until her last
day, the best day of her life. Also, it is quite common for people
involved in the death of a relative to exaggerate the perfection of
their relationship or the last moments to insinuate that nothing
negative was going on between the parties and, therefore, nothing
untoward could have occurred.
The McCanns have never
personally offered the reward on television or posted the reward at
the web site. Almost all parents of missing children do this. If Kate
really believes Maddie is alive and being cared for in someone’s
home, she would make continual direct pleas to the captor for
Maddie’s return (“Please just drop her off any public
location…”). Almost all parents of missing children who believe
they are alive will do this. Neither Kate or Gerry have taken or
indicate they will take a polygraph. Parents of missing children do
this to clear themselves so the police will not waste time focusing
on them. Kate and Gerry appearances show little fluctuation in
emotion (except when they feel they are being accused of drugging
Maddie). Neither breaks down and cries or blurts out anything with
emotion (“Maddie! We love you, honey! Don’t give up! We will find
you!” Or “Please give us our Maddie back! Oh my God, please!”)
Usually in a set of parents, we will see emotions bounce around, one
of them falling apart, one becoming angry; with the McCanns their
answers are carefully constructed and evenly relayed. Their
appearances feel more like performances than parents desperately
trying to reach out to their child, the kidnapper or the public. Yes,
they are British, but even a stiff-upper lip tends not to look like
this under these circumstances. There are muted flashes of anger,
frustration, and annoyance directed from one of the McCanns to the
other during their interviews which is very unusual for parents of a
missing child. There is a strong feeling of control rather than
support between the couple.
Gerry McCann commented in
one interview: “In about the middle of June things, about five or
six weeks, things were going really very, very quiet and I was
actually quite glad of that and I thought we would start to get back
to a more normal existence and a quieter form of campaigning, using
the Internet and raising and broadening the political issues which
have been highlighted to us and I saw that as a long term focus.”
For a parent to have any
interest in political issues so soon after his child has gone missing
when the one and only concern should be finding their loved one, is
extremely bizarre. That Gerry should see his long term focus at this
point in time as a political one is also very concerning. This
statement would be less concerning if a few years had passed and the
McCanns, accepting they were likely never to find their daughter,
wanted to do something to help others not suffer as they had and to
do something in their daughter’s name. But, to think this way so
early on indicates Gerry believes or knows his daughter is dead and
indicates more self-interest than interest in his daughter’s
welfare.
Gerry’s blog focuses
very little on Madeleine and more on his and Kate’s activities. The
cheery quality of the blog and self-centeredness of the content is a
sign of disconnect between Gerry and Madeleine and a sign of having
moved on as if Gerry knows Maddie is already dead. Kate states she
had trouble sleeping during the first five days after Maddie went
missing but has been sleeping fine since. Very few parents of
abducted children can sleep very well knowing their child might be in
pain, crying, and scared. Kate’s ability to sleep infers she is not
worrying about Maddie because Maddie is dead already (or has an
inability to feel empathy for others).
The quick return to
normal activities is unusual for parents of abducted children; most
obsess continually and can’t think of anything else and have
trouble going through the simplest routines of life. Kate and Gerry
left their twins in Portugal while they went to see the Pope. Most
parents of abducted children would be paranoid to be away from their
other children for fear something would happen to them. Furthermore,
to leave your children in the exact location where your other child
was taken, whether one had a relative with them or not, is odd for
parents who believe the abductor of their missing child is in the
very same vicinity. The McCanns left Portugal as soon as they became
Aguidos. If the only reason they were made suspects was a legal one
so the police could ask them important questions to help them clear
themselves, they should have stayed to continue to help the police
put the matter straight and get the focus off of them.
Much of the PR campaign
at this point appears to be responding to public opinion and trying
to answer their suspicions about the innocence of the McCanns, not
finding Madeleine. Even in the latest move, the television appearance
of the McCanns did not make a plea to the abductor or send a message
to Maddie. It appeared to be a show to prove Kate has emotions.
Following the show, an artist’s rendition of a supposed suspect was
released many months after he was said to have been seen by one of
their friends. The release of the picture will be counterproductive
to actually finding Maddie, as not only is it based on a very
questionable witness sighting, but may have nothing to do with
Maddie. Such a picture will only elicit droves of worthless tips and
waste police time. This is an unwise choice of strategy unless the
purpose is to distract the police from focusing on the McCanns. It is
possible that the McCanns suffer from certain psychiatric
designations that causes them behave in a manner which makes then
look guilty of involvement in the disappearance of Maddie when in
actuality, they had no part in it. For this reason, I can only say,
they are good suspects; I cannot label them guilty.
SUMMARY
So, to recap, Madeleine
McCann is 99% likely to be dead. My top suspects at this point, based
on behavior and what information can be validated, are the McCanns.
If I were a criminal profiler working with the police on the case, I
would be focusing heavily on them as my investigative focus. However,
I would not rule out the possibility of a child predator and,
therefore, I would spend a portion of time pursuing leads and
information that might prove this possibility to be true, and I would
make sure I did not force fit any evidence to match my theories nor
ignore any evidence that might point me away from those theories. As
new evidence surfaced, I would take this into account, reanalyze the
information, and adjust my conclusions accordingly. I hope we will
see progress soon in the investigation of Madeleine McCann’s
disappearance, so the whole matter can be put the rest and justice
will be seen for this little girl and those who love her.
What do Frozen Turkeys
have to Do with with Missing Persons? - 05.11.2007
I was reading through
some posts concerning the Madeleine McCann case and there was much
speculation on where little Maddie’s body could have been hidden,
kept from decomposing, transported, and disposed of, should the
parents be involved in her disappearance. Meanwhile, Stacy Peterson,
the fourth wife of a police officer, has gone missing in Illinois and
her friends and neighbors are combing the area for her body and
police are dredging local ponds. If her husband killed her, where
would he be likely to put her body? It is an unpleasant, if not
horrifying thought, to imagine someone handling a corpse, especially
one that might be a child, one’s own child. What kind of mind can
deal with disposing of a body, especially the body of a person who is
an intimate part of your life? What happens in the brain that would
allow someone to do some of the things we have seen before like
dismembering a body or carrying it about it in stages of
decomposition? The concept is so foreign to many people that they
dismiss certain scenarios as impossible because they cannot conceive
of doing such things themselves. They are unfamiliar with how another
who is perhaps narcissistic or psychopathic and also possibly
desperate can actually do pretty gruesome stuff with a person they
once supposedly loved or cared for. Yet, the reality is that some
people can indeed do such things.
For this very reason, an
investigator cannot rule out bizarre possibilities when trying to
locate a missing person. Many factors might play into what was done
with a body. First of all, how the person was killed may affect
choices. Is there a need to mask the cause of death or to destroy
particular evidence of the implement of death? Is there a need to
cover up prior physical or sexual abuse issues or drug issues? Any
evidence the killer feels might identify him as the offender might
cause the killer to destroy the body or parts of the body or work
harder to make sure the body is never found. If the killer is not
afraid of being linked to the crime by relationship, location, or
evidence, the body may easy to find, lying on the side of the road in
plain view or left at the scene of the crime, perhaps in the victim’s
apartment. So, when a missing person is suspected of being dead, the
detective must thoroughly investigate the victim’s life and those
people involved in it. The answer to where the body lies may be
within the details of the victim’s life and relationships. Stacy
Peterson’s body is likely going to be as hard to find as Lisa
Stebic’s. Stebic’s husband says he sympathizes with Stacy’s
husband because he knows how it feels to have a wife go missing and
everyone suspects the husband had something to do with it. My guess
is he can relate how nerve-racking it is to hope the searches never
come near where one put the body.
So someone wrote that
they wondered whether Madeleine’s body could be stored in a
freezer. Many bodies have been kept that way but it usually requires
a stand-alone freezer (one of those big storage types) and not a
side-by-side in the kitchen (unless one is dismembering the body as
well). If there was not one in any of the resort apartments (and it
does seem unlikely that type of freezer would be present), her body
would have had to be stored in a private home. The next question
might be how long it would take a body to unfreeze. I looked up
turkeys and some of the big one’s take four days! I find that
rather interesting in the sense of possible DNA in the McCann’s
hire vehicle meaning a frozen body transported to another location
shouldn’t unfreeze in that short a time to leave DNA and hair. I
don’t find myself particular convinced of the freezer theory
because of lack of freezer space available in the resort rental units
and the theoretical DNA in the hire car.
So, if the McCann’s
were involved and there was really DNA in the hire car, I would lean
more toward the possibility her body was in a shallow grave in a
drive sandy area and moved when it was feared the searches would
locate the body. The decomposition would likely, in that climate, to
cause mummification, a drying of the body, making it less difficult
to move, but not making it impossible for evidence of that move to be
left behind by stressed out and panicked participants. If it turns
out the McCanns had zero to do with the crime, the body is either on
private property of a pedophile (which would tend to eliminate Murat)
or, the body is in the ocean and will never be found. It will be
interesting to see if Maddie is ever found what methodology the
guilty party or parties used to prevent discovery of a body and any
evidence. BTW, for those of you who think Lisa Stebic, Stacy
Peterson, Natalee Holloway, and Madeleine McCann are really alive, I
applaud your sense of hope. I am a lot more cynical, and though there
is occasionally a miracle or surprise ending, chances of anyone of
these four missing persons showing up alive is near zero. The two
married women had children they loved and husbands they were afraid
of. This equation usually means the disappearance of the wife is the
result of a husband offing her. And Natalee and Madeleine were both
blonde, but sex rings can find lots of blondes without resorting to
high profile kidnappings that might expose them. Natalee and
Madeleine have almost zero chance of being found alive.
Let’s just hope, then,
that we can at least find out what happened to them and see that
justice is served.
McCann Detective 100
Percent Full of It – 20.11.2007
The McCanns either are
the most naïve people on the face of the earth or they are playing a
very expensive and wasteful publicity game with the donations from
kind folks who only want to help a little child be found. Those
Spanish investigators, The Metodo 3 agency, are crooks, plain and
simple. They are milking this case for the money it is bringing in.
They have a six month contract and stated that they would surely find
her within five months (not one month – as that would end the cash
flow all too quickly). Francisco Marco, who heads the team of Spanish
private detectives: “We’re 100 per cent sure she is alive. We are
very close to finding the kidnapper.” What a lying scumbag! First
of all, the only way, Mr. Marco, you can be 100 per cent sure
Madeleine is alive is if you have her locked up in the basement of
your house and you fed her this morning. This would mean you are a
kidnapper and a pedophile. Is this what you are claiming, Mr. Marco?
If not, you are a
despicable, money grubbing creep of another sort. If the McCanns came
to a decent private investigator for an investigation, he would tell
them right up front the chance of finding their daughter alive are
near zero. He would tell them that should a local pedophile have
snatched Maddie, she would have been killed within hours. If a
pedophile ring had snatched Maddie, she would have been dead as soon
as you started your campaign with her eye anomaly being broadcast to
the world. He would tell them that if he started searching for a
hidden Madeleine and broadcast his every move as to where he thought
she was, then Maddie would surely be dead by the time he reached the
location to retrieve her. He would tell the McCanns that the most he
could do is review the police investigation to make sure they hadn’t
missed anything and follow up on truly rational leads that had been
ignored and overlooked. He would tell them he might be able to find
out what happened to Madeleine and help bring the guilty party to
justice, but the chances of bringing Madeleine home alive were
extremely unlikely.
So, why have the McCanns
hired this fraud? Are they being conned by Mr. Marco or are they
using Mr. Marco to con us? Is it all for show and distraction or are
the McCanns really innocent of hurting their child and are so
desperate they will fall for the worst excuse for a private detective
agency I have run across in a long time? Gerry and Kate, fire them if
you want to be responsible adults. Stop using the public’s money
for your charades, either to impress us with your sincerity as to not
knowing what happened to Maddie, or to fool yourselves into believing
she is alive if you are being sincere. At least pay for this idiot
with your own money, if you want to play this silly game.
The Last Photo of
Madeleine McCann: Fact or Fake? - 22.11.2007
Some people think that
the final photo of Madeleine McCann at the pool with Gerry and her
sister, Amelie, is a forgery. The claim is that the photo really was
only of Gerry and Amelie and that Madeleine was added in through
photo enhancement, a ploy to cover up the fact she was already dead
by early afternoon on day she was said to have gone missing. I have
to admire the effort to consider this possibility and the effort put
out to analyze all the details of the photo and question some of the
elements. It is always good to be curious enough to delve into an
aspect of a case and see if there could be any clues there. In this
case, I would have to say the explanations of the photo being a fake
are not strong enough for me to believe that Maddie’s
death/disappearance occurred earlier than 6 PM in the evening.
My thoughts on the photo:
1) While it is true the
picture is not perfectly composed with a centering of the threesome
(and if Madeleine is not in the picture, then Gerry and Amelie are in
the middle), this is not all that uncommon. With the advent of
electronic photography, photos are snapped much more carelessly than
when one had to pay for developing the prints. Cameras now are used
more often as spontaneous recorders of events rather than composed
photos for display.
2) That Madeleine’s
outline is not overlapped by any person or object is likely just
coincidence. If one snaps enough photos, some of them will have
isolated objects.
3) The fact the brother
is not in the photo simply means he was running about. Again, this is
not a posed family portrait.
4) The fact Madeleine is
laughing at something out of sight and her father and sister are not
laughing is not particularly meaningful. Children tend to laugh
spontaneously at whatever they think is funny. Sometime this is just
something that strikes them amusing such as their big toe or an
expression on someone’s face.
5) The fact that
Madeleine is not in a swimsuit proves little. The outfits on the
girls look like play outfits and the trio just happened by the pool
area and sat down to relax and dangle their feet in the water.
6)The most telling clue
in this photo that tends to go against the possibility of any forgery
is in the clothing of Madeleine and Amelie. Take Maddie out of the
picture and what you have is a little girl dressed in a horribly
clashing outfit; an orange play suit and a fancy pink hat. Mothers do
not tend to put such an outfit on their children and let them out of
the house that way (especially a mother who is as fashion conscious
as Kate). Maddie’s white hat would look better with her clothing.
The sportier white hat on
Madeleine’s head does not clash with her girlier pink dress-like
outfit, but that pink hat on Amelie’s head would go with it better.
Put the two girls together on an outing and my guess is they started
off with the better matching hat, and through play, the girls ended
up with the other’s hat on their heads. It really makes little
sense that this photo would be manufactured. If Madeleine had been
missing for the majority of the day, there would be far too long a
period of time to account for and greater likelihood that Maddie’s
invisibility would have been noticed. Furthermore, if she was killed
in the morning, it would have been far easier for the McCanns to
simply claim that while they were out at the playground or popping in
and out of stores while they were shopping, they turned around and
Maddie was gone. It is a much simpler story.
But, if Maddie died in
the apartment while Gerry was at tennis, or after he came back, or
during the tapas bar rendezvous, then the children were already in
for the night and the chances of an abduction from the apartment
story being created makes far more sense.
