'Blood in car' - Maddie's mother is now a suspect

[boston bean]

THE mother of Madeleine McCann, the British four-year-old who vanished in Portugal, will be formally declared a suspect in her daughter's disappearance - a twist driven by stunning claims that the girl's blood was found in a car hired by her parents after her disappearance in May.

Mrs McCann was confronted with the claims during a gruelling 11-hour interrogation that ended early yesterday. She was also told she would be formally declared a suspect in the case, a family spokeswoman, Justine McGuiness, said.

"They believe they have evidence to show that in some way she's involved in the death of her daughter, which of course is completely ludicrous. They have suggested that blood has been found in a hire car that they hired 25 days after Madeleine was taken," she told the BBC.

Sky News in Britain quoted sources as saying Mrs McCann could be charged with the accidental death of her daughter. Mrs McCann's lawyer had warned her charges could be imminent, the network said, quoting a family friend.


more.....

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/blood-in-car--maddies-mother-is-now-a-suspect/2007/09/07/1188783496410.html

I don't believe it. Something screwy is going on. I just can't believe they could find the blood of that little girl in a car she was never in, that they rented 29 days after her disappearance.

[varkam]

1. ?

I just can't believe they could find the blood of that little girl in a car she was never in, that they rented 29 days after her disappearance.

How do you know she was never in the car? Apparently her blood was.

[boston bean]

2. I just dont' believe it. It was a rented car that they rented 29 days

after Madeliene was missing.

[varkam]

3. Doesn't mean that the girl wasn't in the car.

Apparently the police have evidence that's linking the girl to the car. I really doubt that the police are framing the parents. Moreover, in most cases involving the disappearance of children the parents are usually involved. It's a rare case that a stranger abducts a child.

[woodsprite]

5. A possible scenario is that she was being hidden someplace

and done away with at a later date. Not saying that's what I think, but saying it's one possibility.

[LisaL]

18. Why and how would the parents hide the child?

With so much attention on the case, how would they be able to pull it off?
And why?
Makes no sense.

[AnotherGreenWorld]

58. Doctors are good at covering things up.

[FARAFIELD]

10. The Parents did it

I mean who leaves 2 and 4 year olds in an hotel room and goes out to eat dinner. I think they have skated on this far too long, they should have been hung just for abondoning those kids, i cannot believe the free pass everyone has given them (almost everyone)

[DesertRat]

12. where did they hide Maddie for over 25 days

while everyone was looking for her? :shrug:

[Hoof Hearted]

25. I does bother me greatly that two parents of such obvious means

were so negligent as to leave their children unattended for any amount of time at all. Two doctors could certainly have brought the nanny for occasions like this.

It could have been an accident or an abduction.

Whether or not they are involved, they are certainly at fault. I feel sorry for the rest of the family and my heart rips at the seams for that little girl but the parents deserve whatever hell they're in and any to come.

[KiraBS]

53. If they have been a working class family ...

from a council estate, who left their child to go to the pub in Lanzarote, the British Press would have ripped them to shreds. I have always felt something wasn't right in this case.

[Bitwit1234]

4. Blood could have been found there. IF

the rental company only had a small amount of cars to rent, what are the chances that the parents rented a car that the real culprit used.

I don't know if they did or they didn't, but it could be just chance they got this car, OR someone at the rental agency is involved. All things are possible.

[spoony]

6. The whole thing stinks

I mean what's their theory, that the parents hid her for a month and transported her somewhere, bleeding, in a rental? It sounds like they're desperate to pin the tail on the nearest thing resembling a donkey.

[Beausoir]

13. Yes. There are huge holes in the police case. From the night Madeleine was reported missing...

Kate McCann was hounded with media. How in the world could she have evaded the photogs and police to dispose of the body?

How in the world could she have smuggled the dead child OUT on the first night...when her friends were just a few steps away?

This is bullshit. I don't buy it.

[LibDemAlways]

7. Why would the authorities check a car rented 25 days

after the girl's disappearance for her blood in the first place? I'm with you. Something screwy is going on.

[Reciprocity]

15. My theory

is they may think they moved the child’s body to another location from the original site. If it is the child’s blood in the car it also may have been transferred from something belonging to the parents onto the rental car. Either way something is not adding up. How did the missing child’s blood turn up in the car?

[Beausoir]

16. So...where was the body for the first 26 days? It doesn't add up.

[electron_blue]

57. I think the blood was on another object that was carried by the parents into the car

and then the blood particles fell off. Probabl the parents didn't think said item had blood on it.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

8. That's So Sad That The Mother May Have Killed Her.

Obviously we'll have to wait for more facts to come out to see if the charges have merit. But if they found blood in the car then that doesn't bode too well for her. I hope to hell she wasn't involved, but if she was then I can only hope they have enough evidence to convict her and send her ass away for good along with anyone else who was involved.

[bluedeminredstate]

9. Strange.

This would mean that they would have had to move the body almost 4 weeks after her disappearance, right? That would indeed be very strange and raises a whole slew of other questions, number one being: where did they keep the body up until then?
I don't know what happened in this case, but it's weird that these two intelligent doctors would leave their small children unattended while they went out to dinner. For that, they will be torturing themselves forever if they had nothing to do with her disappearance. And if this was some sort of accident... well, I don't think the public will be very forgiving. People don't like be played for fools.

[Horse with no Name]

22. Not only that

but the decompensation of the body would be a factor.

[SoCalDem]

11. Stressed parents..3 kids under 4..

Somehow taking those babies on a Portugal holiday, seemed odd to me..Mom & Dad alone, sure..but why drag all the accoutrements necessary for three babies on a "vacation" like that?

My Mom-sense tells me that a temper tantrum gone bat-shit crazy or some potty-training mishap led to this little girl's demise:cry:..and scared parents did the unthinkable.....twice.. in the doing and the covering it up..:cry:

[Beausoir]

14. I don't agree...I have 5 kids under 11 and I take them to Maui and St Thomas, etc. BUT...

what the police are claiming is that Kate McCann...a doctor....drugged the little girl to get her to go to sleep. And that she was accidentally overdosed. Hence..the coverup.

There are HUGE holes in this theory and I don't buy it.

[LisaL]

19. And how would the blood get into the car, 25 days after the child

went missing, if that was the case? There was a search going for the child.
If there was some sort of an accident, and the child was killed, and then hidden, how would the blood get into the car, that the parents didn't even have when the child went missing?
It is making no sense.
And why did police even test the car if these parents didn't have it at the time the child went missing?

[WinkyDink]

26. The police were watching the parents. And the blood isn't said to have been just spilled, aka, wet.

A speck of blood is plenty to test.

[LisaL]

30. If police were watching the parents, and the dead body

was placed into the car 25 days after the child was missing, why doesn't police know where that body is? If police was following the parents, and saw the parents do something suspicious with the rented car, then one would think police should know where that car went?

[Hoof Hearted]

27. blood pools on the underside of a body and decomposition would mean torn skin

I'm sure fluid would leak, I'm guessing any pooled blood too?

Anyone here with professional experience in this area with an opinion?

[abelenkpe]

35. Maddie was four

Do you really think she was still going through potty training? My son just turned three and I thought he was late getting the potty thing down. All the little girls we know seem to train up really fast. Although I have read horror stories of potty training leading to abuse and stuff, so I can see where one would think that.

I've read articles suggesting that the kids were drugged to help them sleep, but no statement saying that was in fact the case. There were suggestions there was blood in the apartment, but that turned out to belong to a man. Has anyone said that the blood in the rental car is a definative match for Madeleine? Cause I haven't seen that either. Did I miss something?

Personally, I've always thought Madeleine was kidnapped by a paedophile. But what the hell do I know? It has happened before. There was an article about a father in Baltimore finding a strange man (convicted sex offender) in his son's room just today. And the courts recently gave the death penalty to the man who kidnapped Jessica lunsford who again was taken from her home. If a child is targeted, it doesn't seem to matter if the parents were home or not. (Not that that makes what Madeleine's parents did OK) I will never understand why convicted sex offenders are returned to society if they have a history of preying on the most vunerable children.

Of course this is all speculation on my part. I really don't want to believe that the parents had anything to do with her disappearance....the whole thing breaks my heart! I still want Madeleine to be found and reunited with her family.

[SoCalDem]

46. Almost four.. they aid she died just before her birthday. ..and yes

kids do often regress when they are stressed..like the introduction to two new babies into the household..

I did not follow the story, but sadly, it's not a unique story..:cry:

[LeftishBrit]

47. No, that part is typical and not suspicious

At least for British people, the 'family holiday' abroad is a common part of life. Travelling to sunnier parts of Europe with your children is very usual.

This was a hotel that supposedly catered to children. It's not that uncommon in such hotels for more casual parents to leave children alone in their rooms for short periods, and to expect staff to notice and cope in an emergency. It's not WISE to do so; I would strongly recommend against it; but on its own, it's not something that would lead to a prosecution for neglect.

As far as the rest of the story is concerned - very bizarre. You'd think that a doctor would have more sense than to overdose a child in this way; but anything is possible. Or it could be some sort of frame-up. Or something else again. With all the sensational press about the story, it's really hard to tell.

[renate]

55. that explains a lot--thanks

I know that leaving babies in prams outside stores used to be absolutely commonplace in Europe (though I doubt that it's usual any more) but I had no idea that leaving kids alone in family-friendly hotels was done.

That might clear up why the parents have basically gotten a free pass for leaving three tiny children all alone. And I know I feel a little better about the parents, who'd I'd been thinking were the most horrendously irresponsible--or at least the dimmest--people ever.

[LisaL]

56. How would these parents expect the staff to notice and cope

in an emergency, when the children are left alone in the room? Living young children alone is obviously not a good idea. Those were three young children, under the age of four.

[LisaL]

17. This makes no sense to me. If the car was rented 25 days

after the child went missing, how would the blood of the child get into the car? Even if the child was killed, the body hidden somewhere for 25 days, and then transported, would a body bleed after 25 days?
This does not add up to me.

[Beausoir]

31. Yes. You are correct. There is no possible way that Kate McCann killed her child and then

covered it up.


The Portugese Police must be awfully stoopid to try and pin this on her.

[varkam]

37. Yes, it would.

The body would still be in a state of decomposition, so biological material could of transferred to the car.

[MoonRiver]

20. Could the Portuguese police be setting up Maddy's parents?

They're under enormous pressure to solve this case. I don't know how corrupt, if at all, the Portuguese legal system is, but I'm starting to wonder. How could blood turn up in a car rented so long after the child disappeared?

[LisaL]

24. Who knows what's going on.

Why would the police even think to test the car, if the parents did not have the car when the child was missing? If the parents had the car when the child went missing, testing it would be an obvious thing to do. But supposedly it got rented 25 days after the child went missing. Why test it at all? Do dead bodies bleed after 25 days?

[MoonRiver]

28. Exactly.

This smells.

[Hoof Hearted]

21. This is a very strange turn.

I don't think there's nearly enough information out there to form an opinion right now, for me personally anyway.

[WinkyDink]

23. Courttv.com has excellent and thorough threads on this case. Just an FYI.

[canetoad]

29. Two Words.

LINDY CHAMBERLAIN

[Hoof Hearted]

33. Mrs. Chamberlain

Did she not also leave her infant unattended?

It's simply bad parenting to leave babies and toddlers alone. Doesn't always add up to murder, true, but bad parenting, yes.

[Mandate My Ass]

39. she was convicted of killing her child-not leaving it unattended

which, even if it was a crime, her husband was equally as guilty as she.

[canetoad]

43. You don't have a clue. Do you?

[Swagman]

64. blood in the 'Dingo Lady's car turned out to be red paint

[alphafemale]

32. Remember though. Blood could have been "transferred" to the car

Without the girl (or her body) ever being in the car.

Something that was in contact with Maddy's blood being put in the car would be all it would take.

Even if it was something they had thought was thoroughly cleaned traces of blood can still be found.

I don't want to believe that they killed her, but this is damning evidence if true.

[Savannahmann]

34. Here is my problem with this.

First, the parents were at a dinner with old family friends, friends who would obviously notice if something was disturbing the McCann's. Now, for this to have worked, the Parents would have had to kill the little girl, get rid of the body, and then sit down and eat a dinner and have conversation with old friends without raising suspicions. Rather unlikely, but I suppose it could be possible, barely.

No parent who had previously doted on the little girl, as was reported by many family and friends, could do that. No one other than a sociopathic personality could possibly try that trick. I find it very difficult to believe that both parents are psychopaths.

Wait, there is more. Tourists who are probably not all that familiar with the city managed to hide the body so that hundreds of searchers who being far more familiar with the city and spent days looking couldn't find her. Who could come up with a sufficient hiding spot, withing a few hours of an "accidental death" as the police term it? It would be easier for the parents to tell the truth in that scenario and far more likely than they manage to pull off the crime of the century and hide the body where it's still not discovered?

Utterly impossible, I refuse to believe it. I don't know what happened to the little girl Madeline, but I know what didn't happen, and this scenario didn't happen. Absolutely asinine. If this is the best the Investigators in Portugal can come up with, perhaps we should help them with a book or something on common sense. Perhaps we can send a collection of Murder Mystery books so they can see what a believable scenario would look like.

[alphafemale]

36. Welcome to DU!

Savannah, GA by any chance?

:hi:

[Savannahmann]

45. Yes, in a manner of speaking

Outskirts of Savannah

[varkam]

38. You say that whoever would do this must by a psychopath.

But in most cases where children are harmed or disappear, it is the parents who are involved. Very few cases involve strangers.

[LisaL]

40. I can name a whole bunch of cases where

the child was kidnapped by strangers. Elizabeth Smart, Polly Klaas, Shasta Groene, to name a few. So, I am not sure what it is you mean by "very few."

[varkam]

49. Availability Heuristic

Just because you can call to mind many cases where a stranger was involved doesn't mean that those occur more frequently. If you look at the actual statistics, however, you'll see that the vast majority of such cases involve family members and not strangers.

[LisaL]

51. A majority of such cases involve parents? Are you saying

that in a case such as this, where a child goes missing, both parents say the child has been kidnapped, the parents are actually involved? Where do those statistics come from? And this would not be consistent with a case of parental abduction, where one parents kidnaps the child from the other parent, considering both parents say the child has been kidnapped.

[varkam]

52. NISMART

National Incidence Studies of Missing, Abducted, Runaway, and Throwaway Children, October 2002 (Adjunct of Department of Justice)

Stereotypical kidnappings are the particular type of nonfamily abduction that receives the most media attention and involves a stranger or slight acquaintance who detains the child overnight, transports the child at least 50 miles, holds the child for ransom, abducts the child with intent to keep the child permanently, or kills the child. They represent an extremely small portion of all missing children.

As far as the particulars, I'm not sure. All I'm saying is that more cases involve family abduction than non-family abduction. That's all I'm saying.

[LisaL]

54. What is involved in family abduction, is a non-custodial parent,

or some other relative,taking the child from the custodial parent. Which is clearly not the case here, since both parents say the child has been kidnapped. So, how do claims that most cases of abduction involve parents apply to this case, since this is not the case where one parent kidnapped the child from the other parent?

[Nevernose]

67. What about child abuse?

(sorry for thread-jumping)

From http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm05/summary.htm

In FFY 2005, more than three-quarters of perpetrators of child maltreatment (79.4%) were parents, and another 6.8 percent were other relatives of the victim. Unrelated caregivers (foster parents, residential facility staff, child daycare providers, and legal guardians) accounted for less than 10.1 percent of perpetrators. Women comprised a larger percentage of all perpetrators than men, 57.8 percent compared to 42.2 percent. More than three-fourths of all perpetrators were younger than age 40.

* Of the perpetrators who maltreated children, less than 8 percent (7.7%) committed sexual abuse, while 61.0 percent committed neglect.
* Of the perpetrators who were parents, more than 90 percent (90.6%) were the biological parents, 4.3 percent were the stepparents, and 0.7 percent were the adoptive parents of the victim. The parental relationship was unknown for 4.5 percent of the victims.

While the person you were originally responding to linked to abduction statistics, the fact remains that most children murdered are murdered by someone they know and presumably love. I can dig up statistics on that as well, if you'd like.

When a child is murdered on purpose and not in the commission of some other crime (like a robbery), it's more often than not a parent at fault, and often the other parent will try and cover it up. The parents in question in THIS case, though, are being judged unfairly; many of us arejuping to conclusions based on what the Portuguese press has revealed, and not what we know firsthand.

[LisaL]

70. Is there any evidence this child was abused?

While stranger abductions are rare, they certainly happen. I can name a bunch of cases where the child has been kidnapped by a stranger.
I am not sure how the fact that most abductions are over custodial disputes, or that some parents abuse their children and kill them apply to this case.

[Nevernose]

74. You've got a logical fallacy, and this is how it applies:

The fact that you can name a bunch of cases in which a child was kidnapped by a stranger in no way changes the fact that most kidnappings are committed by parents, for custody reasons or otherwise. But that's really just nitpicking, since kidnappings wasn't my point (I was thread jumping).

The fact that "some parents abuse their children and kill them" is the most relevant, salient detail to any case involving the presumed death of a child (presuming her death isn't, of course, the most positive way of thinking, but it is the most logical). Excluding disease and accident, the most likely cause of a child's violent death is, sadly, a parent or guardian. Standard SOP, basic Criminology 101, says that -- in the absence of other evidence -- the parents are usually to blame for a child's death.

Therefore, the Portuguese police would be FOOLS not to at least look into the most likely suspects -- one or both parents. Their job is not to be respectful to the parents' feelings or stature in the community, but to protect and serve the victim of a crime. There's only one victim here -- a four year old girl who's missing.

But people are rushing to their defense like they're some kind of martyrs or murderers when they A) haven't actually been accused by the authorities of doing anything illegal, B) have cooperated fully, and C) the public only has the information available to the average tabloid journalist.

[LisaL]

75. I've never said police shouldn't look at the parents.

I just don't understand the whole situation with the car, considering the car wasn't rented until 25 days after the child went missing.
And statistics might be well and good, but it's not like prosecutor can go into court and tell a jury that someone is guilty of something based on statistics.

[Savannahmann]

44. Actually, what I said was

I refused to believe that both the parents were psychopathic. I know the statistics of which you are talking about, and honestly I have issues with those statistics. First, they don't apply any where else in the world. It is estimated that there are roughly 1000 kidnapping for ransom cases in Mexico derived from the 532 reported cases http://www.claytonconsultants.com/links/SECURITY_ASSEMENT_OF_MEXICO.pdf in 2005. http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0917/p06s02-woam.html

That by the way is in direct contrast to the American which is zero every year.

Using the American standard for a foreign country is problematic for that very reason. While kidnapping is becoming more rare in the US, it's not yet a non existent crime, as kidnapping for ransom is essentially non existent. The reason is obvious, you get caught in America going for the ransom, you don't get caught in other nations. I didn't find numbers of kidnappings in Portugal, but I'm assuming that this isn't their first kidnapping ever.

We all know there are some seriously sick people, Just last July 125 were arrested in a Kiddie Porn Sting. Every year another of those stings makes the news, and yet there are always more that aren't caught. 2.1 Million kids are missing every year. http://www.missingchildrencenterinc.org/ Of those, one percent is a stranger abduction. That by the way is still some 21,000 kids, in the United States alone. The site Missing Children Center boasts of a 97% success rate. That leaves some sixty thousand kids in potential danger every year.

Only 14% of those missing kids are parental abductions. While I think we can safely rule out a runaway madeline. I would be hard pressed to declare the Parents as the only suspect, after all we are still left with some serious problems here, ones which I mentioned above are just off the top of my head.

Both parents were present at a dinner, and in order for them to have harmed Madeline, they would have had to co-operate in disposing of the body. They were able to dispose of the body in such a way in a town where they were tourists, not home where they might know some out of the way spot not frequented by people, but in a town where they were tourists, and the body hasn't been found? Did they slide on down to the beach and dump the kid in the ocean? If so did they expect not to be seen by the other tourists walking along the beach during the day/evening hours? It starts to really stretch the credulity when you consider a few of the minor problems that would prevent a successful attempt, and for what gain?

Let's say they were playing with Madeline, went to answer the phone, and she drown in the bathtub. Then why not call the hospital, ambulance, whatever, and make it what it was, a horrible accident. Did she slip and fall to her death? Again, am I expected to believe the parents planned the crime of the century in minutes?

I'm having trouble buying it, and I think anyone who considers the situation using both logic and common sense will have problems too. I don't know what the scientific folks will say, but the behavior I'm expected to buy is well outside the believable. If they charge the McCann's, I'll be interested in reading the information, but I believe that they would be charging and convicting the wrong person.

[varkam]

50. By refusing to believe that both parents are psychopathic

the implication is there that only a psychopath could do this sort of thing - so my assertion still stands. I'm not claiming that these parents did something horrible to their child, only to point out that it is not out of the realm of possiblities.

But being that none of us actually have access to the evidence nor are trained investigators (or at least I'm not) I think it's a bit foolish to start declaring guilt or innocence just yet. I think that they should be afforded the presumption of innocence, as should anyone who is charged with a crime. But again, my point is just to state that it is not even perhaps unreasonable, a priori, to think that the parents may be involved - not arguing that they actually were.

[Savannahmann]

71. No, the Psychopathic personality is how they deal with the friends

Again, the psychopathic personality would be needed to behave in a normal manner, with old family friends, while your four year old child lies dead somewhere you hid the body. I'm going to assume you are an average person, and in this scenario, you have just murdered your child, and in moments planned the crime of the century. You hide the body, and then sit down to dinner an behave normally through dinner and the conversation with old family friends, who would know you well enough to tell if you were distracted, or otherwise disturbed through the evening. You give no hint of anything wrong, and your guests don't pick anything up from your behavior, no sense of unease about you.

That would take a sociopathic/psychopathic personality, I refuse to believe that both the parents managed to pull this off as the police now claim. It's asinine.

It would be as if I was asked to honestly believe someone committed suicide by shooting themselves more than once with a .22 bolt action rifle. http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/101723/ http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,938367,00.html

[qdemn7]

41. These idiots in Portugal...

Must be taking tips from the Boulder, Colorado PD.:puke:

[JCMach1]

42. This set of forensics was completed in British labs (per SKYnews)

This is indeed damning evidence. The only question is was the blood direct contact with the body, or cross contamination with an object that had contact.

[itsrobert]

65. How did they match it to the girl without the body?

Did they have a blood sample of the girl from before? Maybe they matched it up with hair from the girl's brush?

[JCMach1]

66. I believe any of her DNA would do...

[Gravel2008]

48. Confess, you murdering murderers! Liars! CONFESS!!!

[SkyIsGrey]

59. Let's see if we can try to possibly..

make this a little bit clearer.

The police said that they found the girl's blood in the car hired by the parents. It did not specifically go into the amount of blood or where it was found and how the blood was transferred, it is possible it was either by the body or, as have some people have mentioned in responses to the OP, the blood could have possibly been transferred from an object that came in contact with the body unbeknownst to the parents. This evidence, although not conclusive proof of guilt, does place the body and/or something that came in contact with the body of the girl in the car that the parents rented.

Hope that helps.

[LisaL]

60. I am wondering if police have a clue as to what happened to this

child, or just trying to pin this on someone. As I recall, at first there was this other guy who was deemed suspicious, because he was interested in the investigation. As for the blood business, is this even for real? Was Madeline's blood actually found in the car, or it's another rumor, like about the blood found in the hotel room?

[SkyIsGrey]

61. Where did that rumor about the blood...

in the hotel room come from? I have not been following this case very closely so I'm rather curious where that came from. According to this paper, the blood trace on a car came from a police source. Let's just wait until it's verified before we jump to conclusions.

[LisaL]

62. I've seen the blood in the hotel room story reported many times.

Here is one article.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070807/Missing_British_Madeleine_070807/20070807?hub=CTVNewsAt11

I don't think it's clear whose blood it was.
Also, that Robert Murat guy was a suspect. Now, police apparently think the parents had something to do with it. I am just not sure police actually have a good idea as to who did it. Police obviously aren't always right when they suspect someone. In Elizabeth Smart's case Richard Ricci was suspected, and turns out he had nothing to do with it. Of course he died in jail before Elizabeth was found.

[SkyIsGrey]

63. But to did that report come from...

A police source? As that article stated, the police said that the couple are not suspects(at the time that that article was written) and they do not confirm newspaper reports, as in the report of the dogs finding blood in the hotel room.

Police aren't always right, that does not necessarily make them wrong in this case. Let's see where this goes and go from there.

[LisaL]

69. I have a feeling this might go nowhere, just like JonBenet

Ramsey's case.

[JCMach1]

68. not a rumor...

[LisaL]

72. How would you know? Now I've seen a report that maybe it

was not blood, but some bodily fluid.
Certainly if anything was found in the car rented 25 days after the child was missing, bodily fluid sounds more plausible to me than blood. That is assuming anything was found at all.

[Radio_Lady]

73. Do you remember Sabrina Aisenberg from Florida? Kidnapped at 4 months of age.

Parents were dragged into it immediately and kept on a string by the police for years, with questioning and wiretaps, etc. The Hillsborough County officials eventually had to admit there was no real evidence. They never found the child.

The parents received compensation of $1.3 million dollars for their wrongful arrest.

The story was repeated on MSNBC television today. So sad. I wonder how that couple is doing today.

[LisaL]

76. I've seen it today.

[AnotherGreenWorld]

77. There's a new theory

that the mother-doctor mistook her child for a patient. After doing so, it was merely second nature to cover it up, just as she would in her professional life.