I agree. I think it's a potentially relevant fact in the investigation and is right to be at least checked out.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
On what basis is it relevant? What is the implication if the children aren’t biologically theirs?
That's not what you said though. Your post implied that if they were donated egg / sperm or adopted their parents were likely to abuse them which is ridiculous and as an adopted child (im now an adult obvs) offensive.
Obviously if you're talking about step parents that's different but please learn the difference.
Step parents are irrelevant in this case though?
Back to the thread...
Because potentially one of the parents struggled to bond with the child, knowing they were not biologically related.
Not saying that happens with all cases where egg or sperm is donated, just saying its a valid question for the cops to ask, knowing the parents had IVF.
Uncomfortable questions have to be asked as part of an investigation.
No that is not what my post implied at all. I’ve already clarified what I meant. Read my posts.
Jesus Christ. Have a look into the psychology behind child abuse where there is no biological connection between abuser and child. If a child is murdered/abducted/abused etc the biological paternity of that child will be looked into as part of the investigation. It’s standard practice in that type of investigation. No one is suggesting that all non biological children are at risk of abuse but in cases where children are abused/murdered etc the paternity DOES form part of the investigation. In the same way all aspects of the child’s upbringing are looked into.
I seem to recall that the McCanns threatened to sue, or did sue, a paper that published a story that a sperm donor was used. That was very early on, I think. It seemed like a very weird thing for two parents with a missing child to care about at the time. Looking back that was probably the first indication of how obsessed with PR and how litigious they would prove to be.
ETA: found this
www.standard.co.uk
ETA: found this
'I AM Madeleine's dad': Gerry McCann rejects claims sperm donor was
Gerry McCann has been forced to issue an extraordinary statement insisting that Madeleine is his natural daughter.
So it’s been done and nothing came of it if it’s standard practice
This wasn’t a case in which a child had been abused or murdered though. It was a case in which a child disappeared, according to her parents. There has been internet chat for years about possible abuse, but in terms of the actual evidence that is all speculation, and very different to the actual case that was being investigated.
Last edited:
Madeleine looked quite similar to her parents. I once saw a picture of Gerry‘s brother, and weirdly as genetics work, Madeleine looked extremely similar to her uncle. For me, there’s no doubt in them being related. The other possibility would be the brother being the sperm donor. (Not suggesting this is what happened.)I seem to recall that the McCanns threatened to sue, or did sue, a paper that published a story that a sperm donor was used. That was very early on, I think. It seemed like a very weird thing for two parents with a missing child to care about at the time. Looking back that was probably the first indication of how obsessed with PR and how litigious they would prove to be.
ETA: found this
'I AM Madeleine's dad': Gerry McCann rejects claims sperm donor was
Gerry McCann has been forced to issue an extraordinary statement insisting that Madeleine is his natural daughter.
But is this an abduction investigation?
It certainly wasn’t originally. Maybe the people at Op Grange are investigating an abduction - who knows what they’re investigating - but the fact that they’ve come up with absolutely nothing after 11 years rather speaks volumes. I guarantee they haven’t looked into the McCanns at all, including their biological relationship to Madeleine.
There is a lot of confusion out there of internet speculation, media coverage and the McCann’s insistence that Madeleine was abducted, with what the original case was and still is about: a child whose parents reported that she had “disappeared” from an apartment.
That is what the PJ and Amaral were originally investigating. You cannot investigate an abduction case, a murder case or an abuse case without a) evidence of an abduction, b) a dead body, or c) evidence of abuse which presumably would require the child to be there.
That’s not to say that none of those things happened. They all could have done, but that was not what was and is really under investigation, Madeleine’s reported disappearance.
Last edited:
From what people have said on here, which I know is theory and not fact, about Kate struggling it sounds like Kate was suffering from a form of PND or the like. 3 toddlers in a short space of time is alot and will test the most patient of people and if they struggled to conceive, used ivf etc I cam imagine the comedown of imagining what parenthood is like and actually living it would be quite big. It would tie in with the accidental death theory if Kate was struggling with motherhood and say, lashed out.
If that were the case though it still shows they were cold calculating people who not only carried on pretending and even accusing others, but milked a little girl's death for many years.
This also does not explain why so many important people helped them, and why no more evidence was found or why what was found was not acted upon but was dismissed.
It doesn't. It doesn't explain anything and like everything in her disappearance, raises more questions than answers.
The amount of time stories are rolled out about her in a "nothing to see here, look over there" fashion i could be persuaded that she never even existed.
Isn’t this even a conspiracy theory, she just never really existed.
Yeah cuz they couldn't find her dna anywhere ... like she was never there.Isn’t this even a conspiracy theory, she just never really existed.
I believe her blood / DNA was found behind the sofa and (I think) in the hire car. The dogs found cadaverine (smell of death) in the cupboard, in the hire car, on her brother’s T shirt and I believe on Kate’s T shirt.
All the evidence supports the theory of her death in the apartment, probably accidental. For me the biggest questions in this case is why the U.K. establishment supported the McCanns so extensively, and why the Tapas 7, Jane Tanner particularly, were willing to cover for them.
All the evidence supports the theory of her death in the apartment, probably accidental. For me the biggest questions in this case is why the U.K. establishment supported the McCanns so extensively, and why the Tapas 7, Jane Tanner particularly, were willing to cover for them.
What a sad old bag of snakes this case has ended up poor Maddie the innocent in all of it.
Am I right in thinking that the dogs alerted to blood and death in the apartment, Kates clothes and the hire car? But how do we know it was Maddies blood? Presumably it was just blood? Could have been anyone's considering it was a holiday let.
They tested the blood and the results showed it was a child of Kate and Gerry (squashing the rumours of donor sperm/egg) but wasn’t either of the twins blood. There wasn’t enough markers present in the blood to prosecute, but enough dna to confirm it to be a child of the mccanns. It was enough proof for Portugal, but not the U.K hence why they were considered suspects and fled home where they were safe from prison. The markers were destroyed by the use of bleach in the apartment in an attempt to wash away the blood. They had to go home and bring back madeleines pillow case for the initial dna sample as there wasn’t a trace of her existence being in that hotel room, other than the blood.
I always thought it strange that they said Madeleine didn’t have her own toothbrush on holiday, she shared with the twins, so they couldn’t provide DNA!
- Status