you know what i dont understand? even though theres a sh*t load of evidence proving that the parents of Madeline Mccann were responsible for her murder/disappearance, they're still off the hook?!
the main and obvios one is this.
The findings of the cadaver dog and the blood hound
Both dogs,highly trained, found the traces of blood and of death in the exact same places in the apartment, and also in the car they hired, plus on the Mothers clothing and on a cuddly toy of Maddie's. And their reasons to counter the findings are ridiculous, they say that the clothing which had the 'smell of death' came from the 6 dead bodies she encountered back in the UK as her job, also claiming that she brought the kids toy to work, when there's no way the smell of death would transfer to her clothing and that she was even wearing the same clothes she had during work.
Also, the Father claiming the smell of death in the car was of rotten meat he took to dump, when the smell of death the dog was trained to sniff was only of human corpses, and not of an animal.
Then there's the traces of actual blood found in the car and apartment, the Mccanns say Maddy grazed her knee on the plane, and that she had nose bleeds, which are silly excuses, since the blood was found in the small gaps of the tiles by the window, the blood form the grazed knee would have cleared by the time they got from the airport to the apartment, and nose bleeds usually only leave a small amount of blood on flooring, usually because a tissue would be used to cover it up, so it's highly unlikely that Madeline would have sat still while copious amounts of blood poured from her nose onto the tiled floor, right by the living room wall
Case thrown out?
Let's not forget these dogs have never once been wrong in their findings.
And also consider that the parents first reaction was on the reliability of the dogs! Surely the supposed 'abductor' could well have left behind traces of blood in the apartment, the parents could have even questioned who had the rental car before them, since this would be key evidence on what happened to their daughter, instead they question the reliability of two unquestionably highly trained police dogs with a 100% result in their findings.
You can also consider the other obvious things, like how they refused to answer any of the 41 police questions which would have helped in finding out what happened, and also the body language both parents display in all of their interviews, manly the live interviews, there's a video of Mr Mccann laughing carelessly away a few days after the girl went missing, one thing no Father would do knowing his 3 year daughter has been abducted and could either be dead or being abused at that very moment. Then there's the fact that they agreed to a lie detector to clear them, but then later refused?
People may argue on why the Mccanns in particular, have had so much support when other cases of missing children get thrown out the window shortly, is it because she's a pretty white blonde girl from a middle class family with well paid jobs? Why didn't they get arrested anyway for neglect, which would be for leaving their children unattended in the first place? This is asked a frequently, but my biggest question would be the first one.
Why are they still off the hook despite the DNA findings of her blood in the apartment and hire vehicle, with the parents' reasons for the findings being not valid?
Because DNA is 100% reliable and solid proof, so why these 2 people are still in the clear, and are still receiving support I don't know.
Am i the only one who things that the parents are the ones responsible, and they are hiding the fact that they did it?