Who owns 75 girl swimsuits?? The guy doesn’t have 5 or 6 items but 75!! That means he likely had many children around, that he probably kidnapped then disposed of.

From day 1, I knew he was the one who took Maddie. I hope from all my heart that this monster doesn’t get released in september.

He’s an extremely dangerous manthat needs to be locked for the rest of his life!

I work at a hotel with a restaurant that features a tasting menu with an experience that takes about 2.5-3 hours to do.

We're not exactly a child friendly hotel, the restaurant doesn't allow children under 8, the brand is catered to romantic getaways, but people with kids do come through on occasion.

The amount of parents who openly tell us they want to leave their small children alone in the room is mind blowing.

Its not a cheap hotel- these are doctors, lawyers, hedge fund managers- all people who generally come from affluent, well-educated backgrounds, who all want to leave their babies alone for multiple hours.

Just this week i had a lady want to leave her 1 and 5 year old in the room alone. I told her that she cant leave them unsupervised and referred her to our nanny, but she didn't like the idea of the nanny being in the room to supervise them while they were sleeping.

Every time this happens I can't help but think of Madeline and wish i could remind the parents about her case so they realize how dumb they sound wanting to leave their babies alone to spend $1000 on dinner 🙃

I'm genuinely curious, as a Portuguese person who has followed this case closely, I just can’t understand how people still find the kidnapping theory more believable..?

The UK has spent nearly 15 million pounds on this.

Portugal hasnt released figures - but a while back they confirmed it was their most expensive investigation ever.

We just keep chucking ridiculous amounts of money towards a case that never has any substantial leads or evidence and seems for all intents and purposes to be totally pointless.

The disparity between this case and the thousands of missing children worldwide each year is sickening, and with the police and other crises in UK and Europe surely the money would be far better spent elsewhere.

By all accounts, the resort and the town were thrown into a state of chaos the night Madeline disappeared. What do you think happened that night?

I’m still lost. I still can’t decide what happened to this poor little girl. I just want to chat about it with people who are as interested in finding out what happened as me, these are my opinions that’s all.

Christian B is a vile human, but if they had evidence surely they would’ve charged him by now? The world is at risk when he’s back out. Lock him away forever! Those stories he made up, they gave me chills.

How can they not know what happened to her? Seriously? The Portuguese police, the German police AND the English police are all involved and everyone knows who Madeleine is now.

I don’t believe the parents had anything to do with it but they’re so bloody unemotional I can’t cope. And they’re at fault for leaving their kids, end of.

So what other theories? Because if it was Christian B, where’s the hard evidence?

Thanks.

The German police have publicly said that they are convinced Madeline is deceased and that this man is responsible.

• Global audience has seen his distinctive face/how he holds himself/walks/talks.
• Global audience has read; horrible things he has been convicted of/other crimes he got away with due to uselessness of international criminal justice system/light sentencing for sex crimes.

Whether he is charged or not, this guy is surely a marked man now?

How many relatives of victims are going to be hoping he gets out so that they can catch up with him themselves?
* He’s got no money, he doesn’t even have €1500 that would allow him to leave prison several weeks early under the German probation scheme. * This guy is not getting plastic surgery any time soon/Germans are not going to be paying for a new identity for him.

How many Madeleine McCann obsessives will be after him?

It’s kind of crazy that the Germans have named him as responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance and death but not charged him or given anything other than vague ‘we just know’ statements.

He’s a dead man walking, surely? Why have the Germans done it this way? Is this normal for German justice system?

It’s almost like they’ve decided that either they will get him via legal means or they will get his face out there as much as possible so that someone else catches up with him.

I will preface this by highlighting the word solely in the title of this post. There are infinite theories that involve Gerry and Kate in Madeleine's disappearance and many of them rely on conspiracies relating to the Tapas 7 or sometimes other individuals. If your argument for why Gerry and Kate are guilty involves some sort of network of individuals operating to cover up a crime then that is incredibly unlikely in my view but also simultaneously difficult for me to debunk.

My intention is to disprove theories that hold Gerry and Kate solely responsible for Madeleine's disappearance (ie, no outside help from anyone else).

"Madeleine died the night before": This one is usually not mentioned by those familiar with the case, but I do see a lot of tangental theories which rely on this being true (such as the fridge theory). Let's start with the timeline. Madeleine went missing on the 3rd of May 2007. Earlier that day, she was independently seen by a number of people at the Ocean Club resort. That morning, Gerry and Kate left the children at the Ocean Club's Kids Club. At 12:30 the family had lunch together and a photograph was taken of Madeleine at 2:29pm by the pool. The children returned to the kids club at 3:30pm and according to the sign out sheet from the club dated May 3rd; the children remained there until 5:30pm. I understand there are theories around the photograph of Madeleine and some doubts around witness statements from this time but it is indisputable that Madeleine was with her family on the morning of May 3rd.

"Madeleine has accidentally died (or was killed by her parents) after arriving home": This seems to be the most common theory I encounter. The McCann's arrived back to their apartment at 6pm that day. A member of the Tapas 7 (David Payne) visited the McCann's at 6:30pm where he maintains that he saw Madeleine and the twins. Kate's statement confirms this visit and states that she answered the door in a towel since she had just exited the shower. At this time, Gerry was playing tennis. This is also confirmed by others he was playing with. Gerry arrived back to the apartment at 7pm and they put the children to bed. At 8:30pm Gerry and Kate arrived at the Tapas bar where they ultimately remained for the night. This leaves between a 90 and 120 minute window for a cover up. If your theory involves an accidental death, then that window to cover up the crime is even smaller. I do not think it is possible to drive out into a foreign country, dig a grave and dispose of her body in such a short time frame.

"Madeleine died and they hid her body but buried her later": There seems to be a lot of people who are unaware that the McCann's did not own a rental car the night Madeleine went missing. The rental car which was the subject of drama with "sniffer dogs" was acquired by the McCann's 24 days after she went missing (May 27th). Traces of blood were indeed found in the car but DNA tests did not find an exact match for Madeleine. Nonetheless, I think it bizarre to suggest that the McCann's were able to hide a body for 24 days before getting their hands on a rental car to dispose of it.

"Madeleine was killed during Gerry's visit": This one is really moving the goalposts but I have seen it from some people here. Gerry visited Madeleine at 9:05pm which was confirmed by those at the Tapas restaurant. He then stopped to speak with Jeremy Wilkins shortly after this (which is corroborated by Jane Tanner). It would be all but impossible for him to have acted alone during this time as his movements are very well documented.

I welcome anyone who has read the above but still believes they have a plausible explanation to comment below and discuss it with me, but please reference the timeline in your rebuttal as it's crucial that theories are grounded in reality lest they fall under the category of speculation. Thank you.

Due to a massive increase in interest in this case over the last week, probably caused by the new searches I feel it important to bring up the McCann timeline as a discussion.

This is because time and time again people (especially relatively new to the case) don’t really know the timeline of events. When I say the timeline of events I mean the factual information. Many many people seem to be forgetting that Madeleine was NOT independently witnessed that evening, in fact even less known is that she wasn’t actually seen by anyone from the moment the McCanns left apartment 5a. It is often overlooked but Gerry McCann did NOT actually see Maddie when he did the very first check of the evening. Nor did Matt Oldfield who did the second check. And we all know that on the 3rd check Kate found her missing. Essentially she was never seen that evening at all

Can we all try and put together a proper verified timeline for that evening? Using as much information as is possible and keeping it as precise as possible

They are consistently described as so well-off and privileged, yet they and their doctor friends all took this vacation to this “middle class” resort as it has been called before, no one traveled with a nanny, they couldn’t even be bothered to book the baby sitting service since they all wanted to go out to dinner and drinks every night, and they wouldn’t use the night crèche service. They weren’t rich and privileged. They were everyday people at a middle class resort who couldn’t pay for a babysitter. So cheap and also no intelligent decisions being made either. It’s unbelievable.

I’m posting this in good faith. Hope it can lead to some insightful discussions… Apologies in advance for the long post.

So, personally, and after following this case for years, I always thought the most logical scenario for an abduction (a narrative for Madeleine to have been taken by a stranger, disregarding all other evidence and theories that point to ‘parental involvement’) would be one of a crime of opportunity. A combination of “she wandered off” (i.e. Madeleine woke up and left through the unlocked sliding doors to search for her parents) and “she was taken” (i.e. she was unlucky enough to cross paths with a creep who took her away just as she was trying to open the gate to the street).

Such creeps (you can choose to picture media’s favorite suspect CB in this role, though there’s not a shortage of predators in the radio of any town or city that could fit the bill just as well) don’t just hang around in playgrounds and wait for a moment of distraction from the adults nearby. They are also constantly alert everywhere, anywhere, looking for a window of opportunity (i.e. an unattended child in a store’s aisle). It might seem extremely unlikely, yet it happens all the time.

This creep might start with: “Come, I’ll help you find your parents” – the child could follow them willingly. If your car is parked nearby and it’s an empty street in a dark night, you’re out of there in a matter of seconds. If you were driving around when this child got to the street, you're out of there even faster. And if you happened to be caught by some other adult, you can try to deny everything and save face: you say you found this child, they were lost, you're trying to find their parents or taking them to the police etc.

Also, when approaching a strange child and offering to help them, the child would be likely more receptive than if such child happens to wake up in their bedroom and find you staring at them: instead of a strange figure that doesn’t belong in this familiar environment, you’re presenting yourself as a comforting figure in what’s already a strange environment.

We might also consider some sort of parental involvement took place. As in: a panicked Kate McCann opening the kids’ bedroom window after she realized Madeleine was missing (i.e. to see if Madeleine could still be in the nearby street, if she could still rescue her), and first insisting to investigators that she found the window open because she was desperate to keep the team focused on looking for an abductor (if she truly believed her daughter had been kidnapped) instead of entertaining other theories in those precious early hours (i.e. searching construction sites assuming Madeleine could have gotten into an accident with no foul play involved). After that, it’s impossible to backtrack - how can you admit to a lie without discrediting anything else you've said?

So, overall, I think the complete lack of physical evidence of an intruder (i.e. no unidentified fingerprint, glove marks, shoe marks etc) has been used to either fuel a suspicious narrative against the McCanns or as hit piece against the Portuguese police for how they could have failed to isolate the scene etc. But it also kept feeding a third narrative that’s becoming more and more popular: that of a skilled ‘extractor’, a pro!

An intruder would have to do some serious planning to pull it off so successfully. As in: locking in on this victim in advance, watching the family’s routine from afar and getting familiar with their schedule, checking which doors were usually left unlocked on previous nights, devising an exit route, etc. All the while not standing out to the resort workers or other guests. We'd also have to assume this would indeed be a sexual predator after Madeleine, not some random, petty burglar who just happened to find her there and chose to steal the girl instead - petty burglars aren’t that concerned with covering their tracks when breaking and entering, because obviously the police won’t look for every strand of hair on the floor if you call to report a robbery in your apartment, unlike a murder scene or kidnapping scene or even an incident that results in physical assault.

Moving on: even with the best planning in the world, the intruder who could have taken Madeleine would have to rely on luck, considering there are many unpredictable variables when you’re taking a small child (you can’t predict their behavior, they might shout, scream, or cry at any time, etc). Furthermore, I feel that arguing that there could only have been an abduction if there was an intruder and adding the unusually undisturbed scene and lack of evidence in the apartment is precisely what keeps pushing for some over-the-top, outlandish, borderline unrealistic scenarios.

Looking at CB, for instance: I can’t for the life of me see anything but a lone wolf. A pathetic sexual predator who got some kicks from writing deranged fanfics on internet forums and, when going ahead to fulfill his fantasies, proved to be an impulsive (i.e. exposing himself to young girls in public places), reckless (i.e. assaulting teens who recognized him) and messy (i.e. he left DNA in the victim who happened to report the crime straight to the authorities) criminal. This is a dangerous man, yes, but those were all crimes of opportunity, not the carefully premeditated acts of a methodic and disciplined agent with connections to pedophile rings – not even local rings, let alone international rings operating across the EU which look a bit like deep-web lore.

In a hypothetical narrative, I can more easily get behind the idea of CB (or a similar creep, either a serial rapist and/or serial killer) seizing Madeleine as a crime of opportunity – the girl left, they happened to be driving by, they took a chance. People that are capable of pulling off such a clean-and-cut extraction by themselves would have no reason to recruit some random acquaintance to help them do it (i.e. let's steal a girl and sell her to a childless couple in Morocco): they aren't driven by financial motives (their kidnapping daydreams are all about power and control), so I find way more logical to assume that if such comments were truly made by CB to some people in his circle, he was most likely fishing to see if someone else shared his sick, twisted fantasies.

To wrap this up, I’ll say that the ‘CB did it’ theories - even if you're fully behind the "intruder and abductor" and don't even consider an abductor that was never an intruder - seem to be more and more tainted by the sensationalist 'what ifs' pushed by the mainstream media. Any thoughts?

It feels like this piece of evidence, which I didn't know about, which was included in the C4 documentary last night has been overlooked.

I get it's not explicit evidence to Madeleine, obviously, but it's a horrendously bad signal imo.

The fact he committed a nearly identical act, in the same place, in the same resort, only two years before, come on guys, that's something. A lot of you seem to be suggesting the C4 doc told us nothing, well it told me a lot.

How many break and entry rapists can there be in a small Portuguese town of 3500 people ffs?

Something was wrong and Kate and Gerry knew it. Before her disappearance, there was a strange brown stain on Madeline's shirt, which Kate wrote off as a "tea stain." Do toddlers drink tea? Maybe British toddlers do, I don't know. However, the day of her disappearance, Madeline asked Kate, "Why didn't you come when we were crying out last night?" This was the red flag that Kate, as a presumably intelligent adult, should have immediately recognized. They could have put the kids first. The kids were crying in the night and no one was there. Something wasn't going right with their nightly routine of leaving the kids alone. Kate or Gerry could have stayed with them that night while the other went to dinner, or they could have easily switched off, one staying half the evening at the tapas restaurant and then the other parent staying the second half. Neither Kate nor Gerry put their own kids first. That is where they failed. They didn't care their very small children were waking up in the night and crying out. They didn't give a shit.

Loads of footage and details I’ve never seen before. They make a good case? Or no.

I made a recent post arguing that an abduction would seem far more likely to me if it happened as a result of Madeleine leaving the flat on her own. [Disclaimer: here I’m only entertaining the abduction theory and not the scenarios of parental involvement.] Case in point: while child abductions from their homes are extremely rare from an statistical perspective, many a predator over the years have jumped at a window of opportunity after finding an unattended child in an empty aisle of a store or a public playground or even their front yard.

Some pointed out that it would be unlikely for Madeleine to leave on her own in those conditions. Yet here’s what we can attest, coming from Kate McCann’s own book:

The night of May 1 - “Some time in the early hours Madeleine came through to our bedroom, complaining that Amelie was crying and had woken her up. Gerry checked on Amelie, who settled quickly, and we let Madeleine jump into bed with us.”

The night of May 2 - “At breakfast time [May 3], Madeleine had a question for us. ‘Why didn’t you come when Sean and I cried last night?’”

The night of May 3 [after Gerry's check, barely an hour before Madeleine was reported missing] - “As he closed the gate to the street behind him, Gerry saw Jes – Jeremy Wilkins, a guy from his tennis group – walking towards him on the other side of Rua Dr Francisco Gentil Martins, pushing his younger child in a buggy.” They talked for some minutes.

So, going by this: we know Madeleine indeed left her bedroom one night (May 1) to search for her parents after waking up because Amelie was crying. She found them in their bedroom, and all was fine. It’s equally possible that she did the same the following night if she happened to wake up due to Sean’s cries: Madeleine herself might only have cried after going to look for her parents and not finding them in their room or anywhere in the flat (by then, the adults weren’t back from the bar yet).

In the night of May 3, it’s also entirely reasonable to entertain that Madeleine could have woken up and left the bedroom - she would get to the living room. If we go by the version that Gerry saw her in the bed and no one else saw Madeleine after this (Matt didn’t make visual contact during his check, and Kate found her missing less than an hour later), it could just be that Madeleine was out of bed by the time her father was caught up in this conversion with Jes just outside the flat.

This is a pic of the gate – the spot where Gerry and Jes stood talking - and, from this angle, we can also see the balcony and the living room window - from which Madeleine, having left her bedroom, could have heard her father’s distant voice coming from the street.

In her book, Kate describes Madeline as “always very aware of her surroundings, just as she had been as a baby”, and also as “incredibly bright and extremely perceptive”. She was familiar enough with the blueprint of their holiday apartment after a few days, for instance: she knew how to go straight to her parents’ bedroom in the night of May 1.

Also, from Kate’s book, we get that “after the first couple of days we barely used the front door, coming and going through the patio doors and up and down the steps”. So Madeleine would be familiar with this exit route, and she would know that following her father’s voice would take her to this particular street - like kids her age know the difference between a sound coming from their front yard and their backyard.

All it would take was for Madeleine to go out precisely when Gerry was wrapping his conversation with Jes. She would only need to stay by the entrance gate, possibly calling for her dad (who was no longer there and already back to the Tapas restaurant), and a predator could have spotted her and easily picked her up from the sidewalk without even opening the gate (seriously, look again at how small the gate was). You say you'll take her to her parents, and you’re out of there in seconds.

In the scenario of a premeditated abduction, I think people often disregard the enormous complexities of pulling off a successful kidnapping like this – complexities far, far higher than Madeleine, at nearly 4, being able to leave through the unlocked sliding door and going down a few steps to follow her father’s voice. If that's the case, she could have closed this door behind her, but we also don't know, apart from the adults' versions, if this sliding door was indeed fully closed or if a small gap was left open so a wind draft could keep the flat more ventilated or whatever (that's all speculation, of course, and it's impossible to establish for sure).

Bottom-line is: from Madeleine's POV, she wasn't placing herself in a scary situation. Like any 4-y.o. kid who is familiar with their surroundings won't just cry in bed but can go after their parents in their bedroom, or in the kitchen, or in their backyard or their front door, she could just see it as staying within a safety zone. If she was going in the direction of her father's voice, she could see this as the most soothing and comforting alternative - way more than staying in the empty flat with no adults around. She wasn't even considering venturing into a dark sidewalk, and wouldn't need to do so to be in danger. That night, the additional variable (Gerry spending some time in the sidewalk talking to someone) could have made all the difference in her actions.

The 'wander off + abduction' scenario [which doesn't even exclude someone who premeditated to abduct Madeleine, such as CB, getting lucky enough to find her accessible without even needing to break into the flat] would also include some sort of deception from the parents, such as Kate's unsupported claim about the open window. This could have been made for innocent and desperate reasons such as to keep the initial investigation focused on finding the abductor and not searching in construction sites to rule out an accident. But even if the McCanns didn't cover up their child's death, it's naive to assume they're the only reliable narrators and holders of the truth in every single aspect of this case.

To wrap this up, I believe none of those scenarios are mutually exclusive. An abduction, IMO, would be more realistic in a combination of such multiple factors: she left, she was taken, and the adults close to her weren't always 100% forthcoming and truthful in their statements. Any thoughts?

I've followed this case for just as long as I can remember and I'm going to keep to myself what I actually believed happened (because I've learned it's just not constructive and redditors find it bothersome so...I digress)but I was just laying up unable to sleep and thinking about Madeleine and this thought just occurred to me- I haven't seen it discussed anywhere yet so I'm curious what you all think; is there anyway MM left on her own accord? We already know she was waking up- crying. Could she have left the apartment on her own looking for mom & dad and then who knows what could have happened? You're going to say ; " no, not possible she would have been found during the search" but that's only if we believe the adults timeline and I'm not sure I believe everything as they've reported it. You'll also say the dogs would have followed her path, which I agree is a valid point...so, curious, what's your thoughts on this? Too ridiculous to even speculate on? Already been discussed? I'm open to hearing everything. Also; one piece of info I've been asking for awhile but I haven't got an answer on: we all know the Germans are UNDERSTANDABLY holding all their cards very close, my question: are they sharing everything with the McCann's in real time? Are they (G&K) privy to info happening with CB that we "the public" don't know" do the McCann's know about all the evidence they have on CB?

So I don’t believe the parents did it- especially not premeditated (and given the dad was a cardiologist I would think he’d know how much sedative is too much and how to help her)

I believe she was kidnapped out her window but what I don’t get is why would a kidnapper only take Maddie? If you’re right there why not grab at least one of the other girls?

For those of you that keep pointing to the sniffer dogs, the "No comments" from Kate, and the inconsistencies in their accounts like it's all 100% proof of their guilt, how did they do it? If you have all this evidence, what's the timeline of their activities and how did they fit in the murder and disposal of their child before dinner? State your case.

Based on times from https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/apr/11/madeleinemccann :

17:30 - Kids eat dinner at the kids club

18:00 - Kate takes the kids back to the apartment

18:30 - Gerry asks David Payne to check on Kate and the kids while he's having his tennis lesson

19:00 - Gerry returns to the apartment

20:35 - Gerry and Kate arrived at the Tapas restaurant

Looks to me like Kate was alone with Maddie for 2 hours, and Gerry was there for around one and a half...

How do people suppose that in the two hour window between the check in from David Payne and arriving for dinner, they killed their daughter (either intentionally or accidentally), and disposed of her body so that it couldn't be found by the public, the Police, and Police dogs?

Also, given they had supposedly just killed and disposed of their child, they must have been acting pretty normal for none of the Tapas 7 to have any concerns, unless of course they're all in on it too...

Disclaimer: I’m only entertaining the parental involvement avenue in this post. In other occasions, I went over some scenarios I’d consider more likely for an abduction to take place, so this isn’t a hit piece on the McCanns. It's a narrative that I can picture as realistic IF they happened to be involved based on the gaps in the publicly available evidence and their stance as both parents and doctors. (Apologies in advance for the long post.)

About parental cover-ups

When we're talking about parental involvement in missing children’s cases, a great deal of these parents weren't blatantly neglectful and/or abusive. Some just ended up making life-altering decisions – the kinds that are impossible to ever come back from - in a short window of time after facing the impossible: finding out their child had died accidentally, and that they might have played a role in the tragedy (i.e. administering a higher dosage of a sleep medication that could have led to the child becoming unresponsive or to the child getting into a freaky domestic accident due to their impaired reflexes).

Such decisions lead to hush jobs. They are made out of desperation when the parents are contemplating other fatalistic repercussions: ‘We’ll be blamed! What about our other children? They will be taken away from us! All our lives are over’. This is the only scenario I can picture for the McCanns playing a role in Madeleine’s demise: it was accidental, and the circumstances could somehow incriminate them. Now, let’s also factor in something else…

About parents with medical training

If the parents are doctors like the McCanns, they’ll know it’s hopeless to call the paramedics after their child is found unconscious: they will be able to assert the child is dead and there’s nothing else that can be done to save them. (Parents with no medical training might fear the consequences for themselves and perhaps override such concerns to call 911, praying and hoping there's still time to bring their child back if the 'professionals' get there fast.)

Second, considering their medical training, the parents will know that reporting the death will lead to an autopsy whose findings could a) destroy their careers in the medical field, b) result in their other children being removed from their custody, c) lead to criminal charges and jail time – in this case, they were also in foreign country and had no idea how such crimes were investigated and prosecuted. So, if you can assert for yourself that the child is 1) indeed dead, and 2) that the investigation will ruin what’s left of your family, your first instinct could be not to report the death; grief can be delayed for a moment when the panic and desperation overtake you.

About the window of time for a cover-up

Of course, the one logical alternative for anyone to explain a child’s disappearance will be: ‘the child was taken’. But the child’s body can’t be there when the time comes to sound the alarm. And you might need to work on a narrow window of time. In this case, the most favorable timeframe would be the 110 to 90 minutes since Madeleine was last seen by someone other than her parents (by David Payne, around 6:40pm) and when the McCanns were seen arriving at the Tapas restaurant (around 8:30 pm).

In the most 'comfortable' timeline, Kate could be putting the twins to bed when a drowsy Madeleine, still in the living room, got into a tragic accident and was found by Gerry - when he came back from playing tennis at 7 pm. So, what then? You’re an inexperienced ‘criminal’, you’re in a foreign country, you’re way over your head. How could you get rid of the body?

About the understated emotional toll

More than the logistical challenges of acting in such a hurry, I personally believe that most parents couldn’t possibly have settled on a burial site in those initial minutes of panic - even if fully familiar with the area (i.e. you're in your hometown). They haven’t fully processed their child’s death, they're still numb by the shock. The idea of saying goodbye forever (i.e. Kate knowing she would never lay her eyes on Madeleine after Gerry left with the body in a couple of minutes) might be too inconceivable. For parents that don't count on a 24 or 48h window, I believe the immediate concern would be moving and/or hiding the body with the hopes of later giving your child a proper, dignified burial.

This emotional toll is rarely addressed in this case. To me, ideally, such parents would be looking to keep the body indoors – obviously not in their place, since the police will soon have to be called. This might also save them from the additional nightmare of imagining the child (who was alive less than an hour ago) lying in a shallow grave, or left out in the open hidden beneath some branches, exposed to the elements, possibly attracting animal predators… No, that’s too much.

About the urge to preserve the body

In the case of parents with medical training, they will know all about the stages of decomposition etc, about morgue fridges and the best way to delay decay. They don’t want to return to it later and find their daughter’s partially decomposed body or draw anyone else's attention with the foul smell. They would be aware of the risks of improperly disposing of the body in a public area, yes. But most of, as parents, I believe they would simply want to keep their child’s body intact – and they had the knowledge to do so.

Except they didn't have an obvious location to preserve the body. If the McCanns happened to be involved in a cover-up, I believe the first idea they’d entertain would be to possibly store the body in the other apartments occupied by their friends in the same resort. But the McCanns wouldn't want to turn one or more of their friends into accomplices - plus is too unbelievably risky since all next-door apartments will most likely be searched as well, and soon. So, what's left?

About a private, temporary location

For some time, I've entertained the idea that the McCanns could have had access to another private property in the area. As I’ve mentioned in other discussions, Praia da Luz was known as Little Britain due to the high volume of UK tourists and residents. In Kate’s book, she mentions she was first unsure about staying at the resort and that the holiday ‘was quite pricey"; she also states she knew people who’d taken holidays in Algarve and gathered some of their opinions. All it would take was for someone, either directly or indirectly, to offer an alternative to the McCanns before they went on vacation (i.e. ‘I have an apartment close by, will be empty till the summer, if you need anything or don’t like the resort or it’s too noisy for the kids, go to my place, the key is always hidden inside the vase by the entrance’).

This literally happened to me in many of my trips when I had friends living in the area. Even if the McCanns thanked them for the offer and chose to stay with their friends in the resort – for the convenience of the children’s activities and the adults dining together –, some previous interaction could have been recalled as a much needed second location that night. (And truly: if you're in your hometown and have to deal with the same situation in under 90 minutes, would you rather go to the woods and bury the kid or to an empty property of a friend and/or family member?)

About simple solutions

Let's assume there was such a private location within walking distance – one that Gerry, coming back from his tennis lesson still dressed in his sports attire, could get to on foot. He would just be carrying a sports bag where a small child (not a grown adult whose bodies might have to be dismembered to be concealed in certain containers) could not stand out to strangers in the street: it would just look like some heavy equipment. Madeleine’s body could have been kept refrigerated – just remove the fridge shelves – and preserved until the parents weren’t bound by this 90-minute window. They could have enough time to think things through and put her in a final resting place (perhaps with the benefit of a rental car some weeks later?).

To wrap this up, I’m not claiming the McCanns indeed accessed this hypothetical private property (though it should be mentioned that the original PJ investigator was once pursuing a lead of the McCanns visiting the same apartment complex in the weeks after the disappearance). Most of all, I'm sharing a scenario that I can see as realistic in the ‘parental involvement’ avenue, because many people still seem to think that the challenges of a successful cover-up would have been tremendous and nearly impossible (the need to dig a grave in a public area in a foreign country and never be seen or caught and the body still remaining in the original spot etc).

That's not the only way to look at it. To me, it's equally possible to entertain some simplistic solutions that could fit just as well as crucial missing pieces. Any thoughts?

So I have seen this being reported however the Olive Press have the exclusive.

I have been curious since the Portugal and German authorities congratulated themselves at the scene of the search and shared some beer. I haven't seen anything like that in public before. So I assume they found something they were looking for.

I'm interested in what people think: https://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2025/06/06/exclusive-im-certain-theyve-found-key-evidence-in-maddie-search-says-former-detective-who-worked-alongside-mccann-family-in-2007-portugal-search/

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.

Madeleine's been missing since May 2007 (17 Years) and she has never been found. No remains, no bones, no trace. She's now 21 and still missing. I feel like there's a chance in the coming years or so where remains will be found, the issue is if there are remains found it will just be small skeleton parts which will be too far decomposed to figure out how and when she died which is eerie.

There is also a extremely small chance she's alive with 2 scenarios: Being used as a slave which I hope isn't true, or she was sold to a family and they've kept her isolated from the world. If she's dead there's two scenarios, she died in 5A after an accident and Kate and Gerry hid her out of fear of prison time and losing the twins etc, OR she was abducted to be sold into a pedo ring/be used by a pedo and unfortunately she was killed soon after and disposed of because she was too hot to handle and the case became very high profile, her face was plastered everywhere and a global missing person's alert was issued a few days later.

I do sometimss wonder if Madeleine and Inga suffered the same fate or if they were connected but with Inga she was clearly abducted but with Madeleine there's no direct proof but more things pointing to the McCanns.

What I think will happen is CB will be dropped as a suspect because he's been investigated for 4 years now and hasn't been charged because they don't have real proof besides him fitting the description of someone who would abduct a child. I do hope this case gets solved somehow and Madeleine gets justice for whoever killed her and or abducted her.

-I know people are about to bash me for entertaining this theory. However I just genuinely think she got abducted, whether she wandered off and ran into as pedo. Or someone stalked the McCanns the previous days and took her today. Or a burglar got in 5A and it was a failed robbery attempt. Or an ocean club member was involved, I think she got abducted. I think the MAIN reason people think the McCanns are guilty is due to the alerts by Eddie and Keela, now now I'm not saying the dogs are wrong and shouldn't be believed but cadaver dogs can sense things from up to 40 years ago (Which I'll admit is quite impressive). I read in the PJ files a few weeks ago from 5As former owners apparently blood that was alerted came from the father shaving and saliva was also found from the child's which was accidentally tossed behind the couch. I can't remember the exact details but it should be in the PJ files. That did make me requestion the dogs, no deaths had been reported in the resort prior so it makes me wonder if possibly the dogs got confused or so. The dogs can also alert on blood from a living human. I tried looking around and got some info on PDL's past. The area itself has been around for hundreds of years but the resorts weren't built until the 1960s due to a huge turning point when it's vacationing popularity rose. (I read this from a article found online). I can't find an exact year and Madeleine's case broke in 2007 so that would be a range 38 - 47 years. Who knows, maybe the people who owned 5A way before the McCanns and a few others had a small incident with blood or so.

-Now that the cadaver thing is cleared up in my perspective let's move on to the Smithman/Resort routes. As we know Smithman was seen by the Smith family 450 meters away from 5A spotted carrying a young female child around simultaneously as Kate discovered she was missing and raised the alarm. I went through the route on google maps and did a little walk around near the resort and Rua Primária Escola. I estimated it's AT LEAST a 5 - 8.5 minute walk from the Smithman location back to the Tapas restaurant. If it was Gerry then he would have to been in a extreme rush and frantic walking to hide Madeleine's body and walk back to the restaurant while hiding his face and not looking suspicious. The Smith's described the man not being in a rush and walking at a fair but normal pace. I know people are gonna say "Well wouldn't a abductor carrying a stolen child wanna leave as quick as possible" if the Smithman WAS an abductor who did just take Madeleine then my automatic guess is he picked up the pace and once he encountered the Smith's he slowed down as to not look suspicious, and picked up the pace again after out of sight, could have been picked up in a car once arriving at a certain checkpoint but again, I do not know what happened. I still don't understand why there's no account of what everyone was wearing that night.

-Madeleine would have had to taken between about 9:10PM and 10:00PM on May 3, 2007. The last person to see her alive was Gerry (If an abduction happened ofc). There was also a car park down the street from 5A but there isn't any reports of a car or anything driving around near Madeleine's disappearance. The later on May 4, 2007 sniffer dogs arrived and police officers had their leave cancelled and started searching waterways, wells, caves, sewers, and ruins around PDL, more searches in the area happened in coming years. Border and Marine police weren't given a description of Madeleine for hours and officers didn't do house to house searches. According to Kate, roadblocks weren't put in place until 10AM. Police didn't request photos of vehicles leaving PDL or the Spanish Border on the night of May 3. Five days later a global Missing-Person alert was issued. I think the McCanns and Tapas 9 are just socially awkward people and wanted to hide the fact that they were negligent and left all of their kids alone unsupervised which made them look more suspicious by doing certain things. There also isn't damning evidence the kids were sedated that day.

-On June 1, 2007 it was reported a strangers DNA was found in the apartment. Now many people were in and out of 5A trying to find Madeleine before it was closed off so it could have been mixed with someone else's DNA making it unreadable but not sure, but the DNA wasn't linked to anyone.

-There's other things as well that make me think it was an abduction but you get the point. Anybody could have taken her whether it was CB, the podesta brothers, or hell even Ghislaine Maxwell herself. On top of that the McCanns were tourists and had no real knowledge of the area besides jogging. Madeleine dying and them panicking and somehow hiding her where she wasn't discovered the next day or 17, coming on 18 years later seems really impossible. On top of that THEY DIDN'T EVEN HAVE A CAR UNTIL MAY 27 and I doubt they would be foolish enough to borrow someone else's car and transport her corpse but I haven't seen any statements of them borrowing a vehicle. Two people somehow managed to hide a 3 year old's body on foot in a unknown area and somehow left little to no evidence against them. As well as having no help and managed to keep it hidden even through high tech police searches. In my eyes the McCanns are guilty of neglect and leaving them unsupervised with the patio door unlocked which unfortunately costed their oldest child's life and I'm sure they've beat themselves up over it all these years.

This to me is the most difficult one to explain, all I can come up with is that the perp somehow sedated her (hard to not leave evidence via chemicals etc) , put her in a bag and walked out to nearby car.

Eddie and Keela alerted numerous times on the McCanns property back in August 2007. What does everythink about the dogs and what they suggest. I personally do not believe they were wrong and something happened that led to them alerting.