Humans were involved in disappearance says lead Azaria detective

Lindy Chamberlain - "There is no textbook to say, 'this is how you handle it, this is what happens next, this is the way you can go through it'. It doesn't happen." http://www.crimeshots.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7096

Kate McCann - "You know, there isn't a text book that tells you what to do when your child has been abducted".

I saw Lindy Chamberlain speaking those words in an interview a couple of years ago and I'm sure I've seen Kate say her bit. Both women were using the same point to defend their behaviour and demeanour in light of the public's criticism. It was as if they were saying ... 'who are you to know how we should behave? is there a law against jogging, laughing, wearing earrings, sleeping, after your child has been taken? and if we break it, we're guilty? have you been in my shoes?'

Aside from the fact that the police must surely have guidelines on what to do when a child is abducted or missing and these days there's plenty of guidance for parents on the internet, the fact is, there doesn't need to be a 'text book' or a 'law' when it comes to the expected behaviour of parents when they lose a child. It's the law of human nature and we're all experts on that.

Law - A statement of fact, deduced from observation, to the effect that a particular natural or scientific phenomenon always occurs if certain conditions are present.

Surely if Lindy saw a dingo, shaking its head, the Dingo must already have had the baby in his jaws? Because if not, then she would have shouted at it and chased it off?
A dingo is about the size of a large fox? Alsatian? The baby was said to weigh about 10 pounds. I didn't follow the case at all, just heard snippets, so this quite new to me.

Yes Wintabells, lots of parallels here and although the initial agenda didn't include a Fund, since they were quite happy to declare the child dead - she did get 1.3 million compensation for wrongful imprisonment.

But why are newspaper articles being whooshed? Orwellian!

there was lots of blood found in the tent it was on a sleeping bag blankets etc on the little boy regan who was asleep in the tent so she bled alot

Have the detectives been "disgraced" yet?

Come on Sunday Express - here's your lead story!

Iris wrote:Have the detectives been "disgraced" yet?

Only over on the 'dark side.'

I believe about 6/7/8/9 years ago maybe more (as I didn't ever track this case) there was a proven incident where a dingo attempted to take a baby/toddler but was prevented? I vaguely remember seeing something in the media?

Whats the alternative hypothesis for this? (NB: I don't see anything wrong with parents taking children anywhere, I know nowadays kids are stuck to computers or televisions but back in the day people used to be more adventurous?

I can see how the mother would support the Mccann's if she was truely innocent because she would see it as another media persecution and feel emapthy no matter what the facts are. I also can't see what she would have to gain in bringing her case into the media's spotlight again if she was guilty as surely she would prefer a quiet life? (unless she has the narcissistic Mccann traits?)

As with anything I have an open mind, sell this to me.

*edit* I just read the part about how 'other substances can be similar to feotal hemoglobin' and it reminded me of the Mccann's seabass. Ironically; fishy.

I've never believed Lindy Chamberlain hurt her daughter, seems feasible to me a hungry dingo could take a defencless baby. As for the 'experts' involved in this case there was not much evidence about dingoes taking babies so therefore it *had* to be the mother, purlease?!

Imagine if Azarias jacket had never been found in the dingo lair, Lindy would still be languishing in jail based on assumptions!

If you think it was Lindy can you tell me how she killed and hid her daughter that night? How did she get the matinee jacket in the dingoes lair?

margaret wrote:I've never believed Lindy Chamberlain hurt her daughter, seems feasible to me a hungry dingo could take a defencless baby. As for the 'experts' involved in this case there was not much evidence about dingoes taking babies so therefore it *had* to be the mother, purlease?!

Imagine if Azarias jacket had never been found in the dingo lair, Lindy would still be languishing in jail based on assumptions!

If you think it was Lindy can you tell me how she killed and hid her daughter that night? How did she get the matinee jacket in the dingoes lair?

I don't think the jacket was actually found in a dingo's lair. It was found buried in the desert. Don't know where.
The matinee jacket was found years later, plenty of time to put it there and eventually have it found. In fact, I'd be interested in the circumstances of this find. Was it accidental or was a concerted effort made (why so many years later?) with large numbers of searchers.

tigger wrote:
I don't think the jacket was actually found in a dingo's lair. It was found buried in the desert. Don't know where.
The matinee jacket was found years later, plenty of time to put it there and eventually have it found. In fact, I'd be interested in the circumstances of this find. Was it accidental or was a concerted effort made (why so many years later?) with large numbers of searchers.

It must have been a chance in a million it was found...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azaria_Chamberlain_disappearance

The final resolution of the case was triggered by a chance discovery. In early 1986, English tourist David Brett fell to his death from Ayers Rock during an evening climb. Because of the vast size of the rock and the scrubby nature of the surrounding terrain, it was eight days before Brett's remains were discovered, lying below the bluff where he had lost his footing, in an area full of dingo lairs. As police searched the area, looking for missing bones that might have been carried off by dingoes, they discovered a small item of clothing. It was quickly identified as the crucial missing piece of evidence from the Chamberlain case—Azaria's missing matinée jacket.

The NT Chief Minister ordered Lindy's immediate release, and the case was reopened. On 15 September 1988, the NT Court of Criminal Appeals unanimously overturned all convictions against Lindy and Michael Chamberlain.[14] The exoneration was based on a rejection of the two key points of the prosecution's case—particularly the alleged fetal hemoglobin evidence—and of bias and invalid assumptions made during the initial trial.