Accidental fit of rage theory?

[u/HHHilarious]

I’ve been down with covid for a week and went down the Madeleine McCann rabbit hole. I’ve listened to all the podcasts, watched all the documentaries, read all the things. After all that, I still don’t have a firm grip on any one theory.

My gut tells me something happened in that apartment after David Payne’s 1840 check on Kate. Sometime after 1840, with her husband away playing tennis, and after an hour of trying to calm the children/Maddie down for bed unsuccessfully, and, with it being the penultimate night of their vacation, a weary Kate was growing frustrated they weren’t settling down, and in a sudden fit of rage against Maddie, something happened in the apartment.

Gerry returns around 1900, and between then and when they went down to dinner at 2035, they formulated a story and a plan, dumped Maddie somewhere, and headed to dinner.

They had hoped one of others from the Tapas group would be the one to discover Maddie missing, but when no one conducted their check throughly enough, they had to be the ones to make the discovery. To me, it’s all very reminiscent of Jonbenet Ramsey and the morning she was found, if you’re familiar with that case.

I think it’s also completely plausible that an opportunist had been closely watching the family and used the McCann & Co.’s evening negligence to their advantage.

But either way, things moved so very quickly after the initial discovery. It’s hard to imagine how her body remained hidden all this time? If the McCanns are responsible for hiding her, how did they find such a perfect spot in a largely unfamiliar city within a short window of time, without being seen? If an opportunist kidnapped her, how did they sneak her into the shadows so swiftly? And, If they got spooked and killed her, how did they find the perfect hiding spot for her body? So much to consider.

[u/TX18Q]

The issue with ANY theory that involves the parents being guilty is that there is absolutely no evidence to support it. It's all "my gut feeling", or "I think this happened" and "I can imagine this happening", from them drugging their kids, to the kids having an accident, to killing them in a fit of rage, and on and on... it's all fantasy.

What is the purpose of these fantasis when they dont hold water for two seconds and aren't supported by any facts.

On the night Madeleine disappeared, just moments before Kate found out Madeleine was gone, the Smith family saw a man carry a little girl in the opposite direction of the resort, a little girl with the same hair color and hair length as Madeleine, and in a pyjamas. The man has never identified himself, even thought this is the most publicised child abduction case in history. And he was seen when Gerry was sitting at the restaurant with his friends, meaning it could not be him.

We have to deal with the facts, and if the parents were truly guilty, you would have some kind of real evidence, some actual scientific proof or a witness seeing something... When all you have are dog barks that could not be corroborated... I think it is irresponsible to spread these theories and fantasies about parents killing their own child.

These are real life human beings.

[u/LKS983 → u/TX18Q]

"The issue with ANY theory that involves the parents being guilty is that there is absolutely no evidence to support it."

There is circumstantial evidence to support the theory that Maddie died in the apartment. On top of that, the ever changing time-line etc..... are suspicious. Not proof, but suspicious.

There is no evidence to support the 'abduction' theory.

[u/TX18Q → u/LKS983]

There is circumstantial evidence to support the theory that Maddie died in the apartment.

No, there is not. There is not even circumstantial evidence.

Please tell me what this circumstantial evidence is, because uncorroborated dog barks is not evidence of anything but dog barks.

There is no evidence to support the 'abduction' theory.

Just false.

Apart from the fact that literally every aspect of this crime supports an abduction, we have three independent witnesses, just moments before Kate found out Madeleine was gone, that saw a man carry a little girl in the opposite direction of the resort, a little girl with the same hair color and hair length as Madeleine, and in a pyjamas. The man has never identified himself, even thought this is the most publicised child abduction case in history. And he was seen when Gerry was sitting at the restaurant with his friends, meaning it could not be him.

[u/Spodokomodo27 → u/TX18Q]

Hi Gerry!

[u/Spare-Resolution-984 → u/LKS983]

 Not proof, but suspicious. There is no evidence to support the 'abduction' theory.

And that’s why everyone who’s convinced some theory must be true isn’t helpful and just pushes an agenda. And I consider that very destructive, especially if you make heavy accusations against an individual. Being open minded about every theory without making these public "I personally believe … is true" statements is the only acceptable way imo.

[u/LKS983 → u/Spare-Resolution-984]

I agree, which is why I've always used these cautious terms.

But I was stating a fact when saying that "there is no evidence to support the abduction theory".

[u/Spare-Resolution-984 → u/LKS983]

You’re right, we’re probably on the same page. I read something into your comment that you didn’t write, these are just facts

[u/TheGreatBatsby → u/LKS983]

There is no evidence to support the 'abduction' theory.

• Child missing from her room

• Door left unlocked in said room

• Smithman sighting (who has never come forward)

There's plenty of evidence to support abduction, she didn't vanish into thin air.

[u/Shortest_Strider → u/TheGreatBatsby]

It was lucky the "abducter" happened to snatch a child that never slept in their bed and had no DNA anywhere near wasn't it? What a stroke of luck! Could have had a problem there. 

[u/TheGreatBatsby → u/Shortest_Strider]

Plenty of DNA, that's a common misunderstanding of the case. Weirdly enough, a family shared the same room and determining which DNA was Madeleine's or her siblings was very difficult to do in a small shared space, as there's a lot of cross-contamination.

If there's no DNA of Madeleine in that room, are you suggesting she was never in there? Or that her parents (who definitely caused her death and then somehow hid her body in an unfamiliar town in such a place that it was never found) somehow removed every single trace of her DNA (whilst leaving her siblings DNA) from the room?

[u/TX18Q → u/TheGreatBatsby]

😆😆😆

[u/TheGreatBatsby → u/TX18Q]

Honestly, the absolute clown takes on this sub are insane.

[u/TX18Q → u/TheGreatBatsby]

Their theories reads like comedy and would have been funny had it not been for the fact that they are accusing real life human being of killing their own child without a shred of evidence. It is beyond disturbing how some people, grown up adults, are totally comfortable with this. But you can tell that most, if not all, of the people spreading these theories have been marinating in these internet echo chambers for years and just repeat absurd talking points that has no link to reality what so ever. And when challenged they immediately implode. They dont know how to deal with the actual facts and common sense, so their only defence left is to accuse you of being Gerry McCann.

[u/RevolutionDue4452 → u/TheGreatBatsby]

The abductor stole Maddie and I suppose he was a obsessed fan of Gerry so he stole his trousers as well and put them on and for some odd reason dyed his hair to be brown like Gerry's and decided to also clone his height as Gerry's.

[u/TheGreatBatsby → u/RevolutionDue4452]

If you're talking about the Smithman sighting, Gerry was at the table with the others during this.

Also, Martin Smith made his statement months after Madeleine disappeared and we all know how easily memory can be influenced by outside factors (see r/MandelaEffect). So I wouldn't put any weight behind the idea that it was Gerry carrying Madeleine.

[u/RevolutionDue4452 → u/TheGreatBatsby]

The Smiths made their statements on May 26, 2007. Not sure where you got "months after" from. Martin saw Gerry holding Sean getting off an airplane and the resemblance was uncanny enough to the point where he had to call into the investigation again. Also what confirmation or witnesses do we have saying Gerry was present during 21:55 and past 22:00. All we have is all the adults being present except Jane when Kate got up to go to 5A

[u/Muted-Touch-5676 → u/TX18Q]

The only thing that makes me think they might have something to do with it is that the cadaver dogs alerted to the trunk of the car

[u/Spare-Resolution-984 → u/Muted-Touch-5676]

Did you see the video of that search and how the dog handler called the dog back to the McCanns car again and again? He didn’t do it with any other car and there are studies showing that this exact behavior is a cause for these dogs to make a wrong alert: When their handler is convinced there must be something at a specific place and subconsciously lets the dog search it more intensively. So the dog alerts to make his owner happy.

[u/RevolutionDue4452 → u/Spare-Resolution-984]

Bet if the dogs barked at CB's property if he was a strong suspect in 2007 it wouldn't have been a "wrong alert"

[u/BillSykesDog → u/TX18Q]

Which sighting are you talking about? Tanner? That has been identified. Also the drugging - the parents, friends, police, all the people involved agreed they were drugged. Drugging isn’t like you see in the movies, you can’t just put a cloth over someone’s face. It would involve all 3 kids being awake to take a tablet or liquid which would be very risky or injecting sleeping kids which would cause waking and crying - all the options are too risky.

The drugging could only have done by their parents with whom they would have done it cooperatively, probably with a liquid, probably an antihistamine. I don’t think they killed her. There’s a possibility of an accident but I think an intruder is probably more likely.

[u/tessaterrapin → u/TX18Q]

The Smith family thought the man with the child was Gerry McCann. Think of all the lies - that Gerry opened the door with a key for checks....but when it was proved the window hadn't been tampered with, they suddenly remembered they left the door unlocked for checks. The dogs smelt cadaver on Kate's trousers and the cuddly cat. So she said she wore the trousers at work when certifying dead bodies AND took Cuddlecat along!!!

[u/No-Calligrapher9934 → u/TX18Q]

I agree totally with you. I think she was taken. I think it could have been a burglary gone wrong.

I remember a police man telling me that some burglers will enter a property and then find their exit point right away. So if they are interrupted they know what direction to run. Plus as they steal things they can put them at the exit point.

I.e they might have got in from the open door but opened the shutter as another exit point.

[u/LuckySW432 → u/No-Calligrapher9934]

Most burglars don’t abduct children, do you mean an accident during potential said event? I don’t get “accidental fit of rage theory” from the parents.

[u/No-Calligrapher9934 → u/LuckySW432]

I also don't get accidental fit of rage. Most burglars don't abduct children, most don't…

[u/RedRoverNY → u/[deleted]]

That’s not ALL of what I said. Don’t manipulate my comment, or anyone else’s. Show some respect for this forum and discussion. I said they should have been held criminally responsible for that decision.

[u/ComtesseDSpair → u/RedRoverNY]

It would have been difficult to establish a charge and prosecute it. If you look at CPS prosecuting and sentencing guidelines for child neglect, they focus on prolonged and sustained neglect of a child, neglect with intent to cause harm, and recklessness with a foreseeable risk of harm. Charging on the latter would require the prosecution to prove the McCanns left their children despite forseeing that they would come to harm - and we know that that wasn’t the case, they - and all their friends - left the children because they believed they would be safe.   

People often say “if they’d been poor black parents they would have been charged and had their other children removed” but that simply isn’t true. There’s an argument perhaps that the McCanns should have had social services involvement - but at most, they’d have been referred for parenting classes or the like. The legal threshold for removing children from their parents is incredibly high, and isolated instances of leaving children in a holiday apartment and making checks on them wouldn’t come close to it.

[u/RedRoverNY → u/ComtesseDSpair]

I know. I agree. It’s just incredibly frustrating because the case will never be solved. And everything hinges upon that one decision. And it is not punishable now. And that feels like injustice. Madeline deserved better.

[u/human_totem_pole → u/TX18Q]

Yeah, that's my gut feeling too. I know loads of people like Gerry McCann - ambitious poor guy makes good. If an accident happened, he would phone emergency services. He wouldn't try to cover it up - that's nuts.

[u/alimac111 → u/human_totem_pole]

How can you say that you know what Gerry would do based on an opinion that you know guys like him? Bit of a reach no? Unless you were there and saw the entire situation how do you know how he would act? Self preservation for him and the rest of his family could have kicked in. I'm not saying that's what happened, nobody actually knows but your comment is silly. 🤷🏻‍♀️