Missing McCann daughter
I have been following this case and have, from the start, found it odd that the parents were not looked at from the very beginning. I saw an interview on the news this morning with a former Criminal Attorney and Prosecutor here in the U.S. She indicated a lot of discrepancies now coming to light such as the children (3- twins ages 2 years and Madeleine 4 years) being left alone in the hotel room while the parents went to dinner with friends. There was in-room childcare offered at no additional cost by the hotel and they chose instead to have one of their dinner companions check on the kids, but all she did was listen at the door, never even opened it. The parents had also given the children something to make them sleep and it was said this is "common practice" among the Europeans. There was a lot more said regarding DNA found in the trunk of the McCann's vehicle, their "crocodile tears" during interviews, odd behaviour all the way around. I just CAN'T imagine leaving my children unattended anywhere, let alone in a foreign country, so I could have an enjoyable, quiet dinner with friends. Sandy

There was a thread on this when Maddie first disappeared, but it got to the point where it was breaking both the site rules and libel laws, so it was pulled, quite understandably.

The reporting over here has raised the possibility that the children had been given sedatives, but at the moment I don't think it's been proved.

I don't think I'd leave three young children alone in an apartment - however, the McCann's weren't the only ones. They were with a group of friends who were all doing the same thing.

Apparently, the police are now saying that the DNA found in the car is not definitive, only that it could be Madeline's. The McCann's only hired the car 25 days after Madeline's disappearance.

I gather that the holiday apartment didn't undergo a proper forensic search until several weeks after she disappeared either.

There's been criticism of the way the parents have behaved since the disappearance, but until someone writes a handbook on the socially acceptable way to behave when one's child goes missing, I really don't think that any credence can be given to that.

There has been a drip feed of information from the Portugese police over the weeks that is pointing to the McCanns. I find this odd because when they named their first suspect they said that they were legally prevented from saying why they suspected him.

Of course, we don't know exactly what is in the dossier that has been handed to the judge, and it's probably not wise to speculate at this point.

Leau, I have never heard of this at all. Doctor or not doctor, tranquilising or sedating your child is wrong isn't it?

There is a well-known brand of liquid cold remedy that is used by some to get a child off to sleep, whether they are ill or not, especially if the child is fractious, or playing up. Have a look at some of the parenting web sites, readers comments, for more details - not recommended, but it does go on. My children are in their 30's and I can remember some mothers advocating its use all those years ago. It's maybe not that different to putting a drop of brandy in the bottle, which I gather, my grandmother used from time to time.

It's not something I ever resorted to, even in desperation, but I can remember one mother using it when she wanted some peace time in the evening.

I haven't read anywhere about the McCann children being sedated - I think there's too much speculation going on, things taken out of context and exaggerated. Maybe when more official information is forthcoming, these stories will be more factual.

Edited: to qualify not recommended by parenting websites.

I used to think that the parents definitley werent involved but after watching the today show this morning im not so sure...

I notice in the media that this story seems to be turning into a "Portugal vs. the U.K." conflict, with the Portuguese largely convinced of the McCanns' guilt and many British holding the opposite opinion. I think we have to give the Portuguese police the benefit of the doubt, especially since the DNA tests were carried out in a British lab.

A number of the police claims do not seem to add up, particularly those regarding the rental car and the fact that they have suggested both that Kate McCann accidentally overdosed the child with a sedative and accidentally killed her with a physical blow. However, since we don't know exactly what forensic evidence they have (and they seem to be backpedaling today on some of it), we should probably just wait for more information.

As for sedating children, people in the U.S. have been known to use antihistamine medications to keep children quiet on planes. A U.S. flight attendant recently caused something of a controversy by rather nastily suggesting that one mother should give such a drug to her noisy toddler.

jordandog, some of the posts here previously were incredibly vicious, and at the time there was no official suggestion whatsoever that the parents were involved. As I remember, at least one of the posters seemed to have joined FT with the specific reason of making unpleasant comments about the case.

I'm not aware of any trend towards sedating children. I remember a relative was given a sedative to give to her toddler, but that was nearly 30 years ago, and I don't think it was exactly common practice. Didn't work anyway, she ended up swigging it down herself!

Something that troubles me with the DNA business is how are they matching it up? If they say they have a DNA sample from the car that matches up with Madeline's DNA, where did they get her DNA from in the first place, given that she is still missing? I know they can find DNA on say a toothbrush or a hairbrush, but it's hardly as reliable as taking a sample directly from a person.

I read some travel articles and apparently, there are a great many people who still give their kids Benedryl to make them behave on airplane trips...

I remember there used to(i assume there still is)be some kind of "knockout" drops for children when i was young.

The main problem with this case however is the public do not know what evidence there is(only what is supposedly leaked).How can anyone make any sort of judgement,without evidence?

The one thing that concerned me from the start,was that they refused childcare,they said they didn't feel safe leaving their children with a stranger,so they left them alone.
They also said they could see the apartment from the restaurant the whole time,this clearly cannot be so,if we are to believe their version of events.

That point does worry me,but what people say or remember during this sort of event,is not always accurate,stress and shock can cause confused recollections.

I think it is best to let the evidence come out before making any judgement.

I would think leaving such small children alone borders on child neglect. Just my personal opinion.

Without getting into mud slinging I would just like to add that when I hear the first news report on a crime, I have a built in 'alarm bell' which just makes me feel that there is 'something fishy' about this story or something is just not right. When I heard about Madeleines dissapearance - my alarm bell rang.

Waiting the final verdict on this case.

I thought they were in an apartment, not a hotel.

On one occasion I can remember 'doping' my children and mentioned it to someone, the next day the child protection officers were at my door to have a word with me wanting to know what I had done! They appreciated that the person who reported me had completely over reacted to something fairly innocuous.

As for leaving them alone, I have done that too. One time we were on a campsite in France when the children were five and four, some people in neighbouring tent listened for our children whilst we went 100 yards or so to have dinner in a restaurant and we did the same for them. It has been my understanding that the McCann's were doing much the same.

Yes, we pulled the other thread and I would ask you to be very careful in what you say in the forums. Anything in the slightest bit libellous will be pulled by us, the site has no wish to be sued for libel.

I don't see it as unnatural,if i had a child go missing,i would also want it front page until there was some sort of closure.
The flip side of it is, some will think it is an elaborate cover-up.

The problem now is that under Portugese law,nothing can be made public until a trial.The media however have a huge long running story,but nothing much to report,so they dig for dirt.

It's kinda sad the way that this story is progressing, or not, as the case may be.

I was under the impression that whenever someone died or disappeared, their immediates where automatically under suspicion. Parents in the case of children, husbands and wives in the case of spouses. Crime statistics show that you are more likely to be killed by someone you know than someone who is a complete stranger.

The story never seems to stay the same - were they in an apartment, hotel, or at a resort, as I heard on an Australian news program yesterday? I don't know. The only thing that bothered me was that the children were left unattended, however, I'm not in their shoes, so I'd rather not try to walk in them. What bothers me is perfectly normal to some people, and what I'm quite blase about would terrify some people I'm sure. To each his own.

Did the McCann's give their child/ren something to help them sleep? Who knows? It's way too late to test the other tots, and we won't know unless Maddie is found, and the worst possible thing happened to her soon after this alleged 'doping' took place. I know people who feel that this is appropriate, and one of them is a doctor. I can certainly understand the temptation, despite never having done this myself, I've gone so far as to consider it. Does this make me a bad person, or is it okay because my son is tucked up in bed behind me as I type?

It certainly bears a resemblance to the Azaria Chamberlain case in Australia many years ago now. Nobody thought a dingo would take a baby, but the law later found that this doesn't automatically make the child's mother guilty of murder.

I'd suggest that the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth will never be known in this case - the same as the fate of young Azaria Chamberlain, or that of JonBenet Ramsay.

"I was under the impression that whenever someone died or disappeared, their immediates where automatically under suspicion. Parents in the case of children, husbands and wives in the case of spouses. Crime statistics show that you are more likely to be killed by someone you know than someone who is a complete stranger."

That is most certainly true, but what has clouded the case is this "Trial by the media".
As has already been said - it was indeed the Mccanns themselves who turned to the media for publicity in this case, but who can deny that the media has made a LOT of money from this, and will no doubt continue to "dig the dirt" relying on the fact that it's a very emotive issue and EVERYONE has an opinion on it.
Therefore, each and every one of us who voices an opinion, is guilty of perpetuating the media circus!

There are indeed, some very, very shocking threads , one in particular is that on the Sun newspaper website, where a lot of name-calling and surely libellous remarks are being posted.
I do not presume to know anything and would not presume to make any assumptions at all about this dreadful situation. But I wish that the press would stop their circus antics in the village where the McCanns live. It must be terrible for the residents of that place.

I don't wish to speculate at all about the guilt/innocence of Maddie's parents but I do think that there is something not quite right about the way they have reacted since the beginning.
The point I'd like to make here however is, I hope the Portugese police are investing as much time and effort into finding Maddie as they are into investigating her parents. It seems as though everyone is overlooking the fact that there is still a missing little girl out there somewhere and she needs to be found.

Unfortunately anyone who is made a 'suspect' is automatically tainted. Too many people (the police, anyone who feels vulnerable, those who like happy endings) actively want a suspect to be found guilty. It reassures people that the police are competent and can protect them, and, in this case, that there isn't a child abductor on the loose. However an enormous percentage of suspects aren't guilty. Until a suspect is charged and found guilty, everyone should always remember that they may well be innocent. No-one who is suspected of a crime should automatically be condemned - don't forget it may be you next who is accused of something you didn't do, and you will need the support of those around you. It can happen to anyone.

Quote:

---

"I was under the impression that whenever someone died or disappeared, their immediates where automatically under suspicion ..."

---

Usually this applies only briefly at an early stage, and is generally little more than a formality (?). They are usually suspects in a formal sense, not for statistical reasons (NOT because in general they are 'more likely ...') but because they were often (among) the last people who saw the deceased alive or were perhaps actually present when the person died. Possible suspects among the "nearest and dearest" are usually eliminated as soon as possible unless there is firm evidence against them.

In Britain the popular press has a long-standing tradition of regarding foreign police forces as incompetent and bad. When it comes to Southern Europe the contempt shown by the popular press knows no bounds.

This raises the question for me about "Innocent until Priven Guilty"? What has happened to this premise in this case?

I know that under law in some countries the onus is on the accused to prove their innocence, but come on, that doesn't happen in England. Or Australia.

I agree with TempusFugitDi - don't forget, any of us, at any time, can have a finger of suspicion pointed at us for absolutely no reason whatsoever. I'm fortunate to live in a country whereby one is innocent until proven guilty, but that doesn't stop innocent lives being ruined by being under suspicion, and then having the trial by media begin in earnest. The media is able to portray images and events in whatever light they choose (and it is a choice) - it's called slant. Innocent statements are twisted into gruesome lies that barely resemble their former selves.

The focus should be on finding Maddie. Once this little girl is found (one way or the other), then the finger pointing should start. It seems counter-productive to do it now, when clearly the parents don't have her (alive) and stashed in the attic.

I am going to have to admit that I heard about this practice of giving kids some kind of syrup or 'sirop' in France when they were young to get them to sleep. I was appalled of course, but, as my first child never slept through a night and in the mountains where I heard this story about it being common practice, I actually considered trying it just once, to sleep a whole night through. The reason I considered it? Doctors whom we knew personally told us. So I confirm this story.

This was twenty years ago though.