very intresting old article must read McCann:Psychologist 2007 'parents know what happened'

McCann:Psychologist 2007 'parents know what happened'

Dr. Christian Lüdke
Dr. Christian Lüdke
Attrib.
By Uta Keseling
7 September 2007, 18:11
Translation by Nigel Moore
The forensic psychologist Dr. Christian Lüdke leads a company in Essen which supports the victims of robberies, kidnappings, accidents or disasters. Hespoke with WELT ONLINE about the possible motives of the McCann couple in the tragic case of the abduction of Madeleine.

WELT ONLINE: You have warned, since early on, that the behaviour of Gerry and Kate McCann indicates their involvement in the crime. What has made you feel that way?

Christian Lüdke: I have, in recent years, cared for many parents who lost their children due to acts of violence. Most of them were under severe shock, feeling helpless, desperate and withdrawn. Many also quarralled. They blamed themselves hugely for not having looked after their child adequately.

WELT ONLINE: It was different with the McCanns?

Lüdke: They live very differently. In public, they are harmonious. Already, after only a few days they went jogging, as if that was a normal thing to do, always appearing together. These parents took matters into their own hands instead of leaving matters in the hands of the police. They distanced themselves from their two other children by going on a European tour, that to me is very strange.

WELT ONLINE: Maybe it was an accident?

Lüdke: No. In such a case, after the first shock, they would have trusted the police. Both parents are doctors, in case of an accident they would have tried to get help. It is even more unrealistic that of all people two doctors would leave 3 children alone in a strange environment, even more at night. I have many doctors as patients. As professionals they know all that can happen to children, and as parents they are overly protective.

WELT ONLINE: What could have been the motive to cause their own daughter's disappearance?

Lüdke: There are parents who have little or no emotional bond with a child. Often such a child is considered a burden that must be dealt with in a brutal or perverted way. The best known is Münchhausen Syndrome by Proxy: The mother tortures the child until it is almost dead and then calls for the police because she herself has a great desire to receive attention.

WELT ONLINE: Do you think it is possible that Madeleine's parents have killed Madeleine and together hidden her?

Lüdke: I believe both parents know what happened.

WELT ONLINE: It means, the McCanns planned the death of their daughter?

Lüdke: Yes, it is possible that they planned this a long time ago, they must at least have played it through in their minds many times and they must have spoken about it together. Otherwise they would now be contradicting each other.

WELT ONLINE: When parents are guilty of killing their child, do they block this fact out of their minds?

Lüdke: Unlikely. Both have clear consciousness, give interviews, travel. It is easier for them to lie than to speak the truth. One can probably exclude a psychosis. Many things point toward a mental disorder. The children of the McCanns were conceived artificially; that can lead to problems in parenthood. Maybe there were self esteem issues that were not openly addressed. Maybe the child had to die due to a problem that had lasted many years.

WELT ONLINE: But the McCanns seem perfect and loving parents.

Lüdke: That public image can be due to a guilt mechanism, like doing a media campaign, to distract attention away from the real problem.

WELT ONLINE: Why do they not go back to Great Britain?

Lüdke: That also speaks against them. When someone loses a child they want to be with their loved ones in a secure environment. By continuing to stay at that resort, where something terrible happened, the worse that can happen to a parent - that is, to lose a child - indicates a survival instinct. As in a mental cinema, these pictures would be constantly running over again. That the McCanns do not return home, where they would have memories of the beautiful times spent with their child, can be seen as an evasive action, in order to avoid having to deal with what they have done.

WELT ONLINE: The world thinks it is impossible that these parents can be guilty.

Lüdke: The media have possibly been taken in by the McCanns. They very quickly attended only after them, instead of around the child. The parents were accompanied like the Beckhams. In his Internet diary, the father writes almost daily about that and other irrelevant/banal things, the shirt he was wearing, what the weather is like. No father in despair could do this. Statistically 70 percent of all the violence against children is caused by the parents, family members or friends. That has unfortunately, to a large extent, not been looked into. The Portuguese police were attacked unfairly when they tried to refer in that direction.

WELT ONLINE: They have already expressed suspicions about the parents, when hardly anyone wanted to know about it. Have you been criticized for it?

Lüdke: Yes, very severely. There were open letters, a campaign on the Internet with professional associations. And I have done no more than look at the whole thing as an outsider.
http://poppymeze.blogspot.com.au/2012/05/mccannpsychologist-2007-parents-know.html

wow eveything we have been saying for years!!!!!!!!!

Interesting - not sure I'd agree there was a definitive plan to do away with Madeleine - but it does seem that her almost certain demise does not seem to have had the effect it would have on caring Parents. A rather sinister form of serendipity?

The End Is Nigh wrote:Interesting - not sure I'd agree there was a definitive plan to do away with Madeleine - but it does seem that her almost certain demise does not seem to have had the effect it would have on caring Parents. A rather sinister form of serendipity?

exactly its articles like this that show we are not haters erc that we are logical free thinkers and if the mcanns Psychologist thought they may have done it why didnt they tell anyone????

The End Is Nigh wrote:Interesting - not sure I'd agree there was a definitive plan to do away with Madeleine - but it does seem that her almost certain demise does not seem to have had the effect it would have on caring Parents. A rather sinister form of serendipity?

There is such a thing as 'letting it happen on purpose' or 'letting it happen by accident' - i.e. not doing anything to prevent anything happening that you might have set up yourself, but could intervene at any moment. Does that make sense?

Yes, I understand what you're saying - and agree. I wish I'd said it!

The End Is Nigh wrote:Yes, I understand what you're saying - and agree. I wish I'd said it!

Thanks. Back to your cricket! Did you hear about the inspector for schools who said the PE he'd watched wasn't active enough? A lot of boys were just standing about he said in his report. They were fielding. It is truly

its being retweeted on twitter imo it isa old but good article

Justiceforallkids wrote:its being retweeted on twitter imo it isa old but good article

Hi Carly, I've RT yours and RT it on another tweet.

I think Dr. Christian Lüdke is 100% right,,,he has summed up the McCann's behaviour exactly....weird and unnatural.

Munchausen by Proxy would be a damn good reason why Maddie's medical records were not forthcoming.

Not sure I agree that if one's child went missing in a foreign country you'd want to return home. I think I'd want to stay near to where my child may be found. Returning home without her would seem like accepting defeat.

Interesting article which rather makes me shudder. Pat Brown listed MSbP as one of the possibilities for Maddie`s disappearance in her 2007 profile.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id191.html

See under heading `My Present Take on the McCann Case`.

She didn't want to return home because she wanted to stay near the body....thats my opinion and also returning home is returning to reality...she knew as soon as she set foot in that house reality would hit her.

I might not want to return home but I also wouldn't let the twins out of my sight. I definitely wouldn't put them back in the creche the day after it happened. At that point they didn't know if any of the MW staff were responsible. I would hold those 2 little ones close to me just in case.

Wintabells wrote:Not sure I agree that if one's child went missing in a foreign country you'd want to return home. I think I'd want to stay near to where my child may be found. Returning home without her would seem like accepting defeat.

I agree.

I also don't believe that they would have been planning it for a long time. Even if they do know what happened I don't think it would have been because they had planned it, it would be because of a horrible accident imo.

So you would cover up an accident, would you?

There could be two or three reasons they didn't want to return , after all, it wasn't costing them nothing to stay there, was it.


I bet Gerry McCann wanted to return but Kate McCann didn't.


They soon fled when they were made suspects ....they didn't think about Madeleine then, did they.

Velvet wrote:

I agree.

I also don't believe that they would have been planning it for a long time. Even if they do know what happened I don't think it would have been because they had planned it, it would be because of a horrible accident imo.

Most "accidents" are preventable - and most are caused by the inadequacies or inattention of people. Human factors. The issue in accidents is to determine whether those human factors were within "normal bounds" or whether there were aggravating features eg Negligence.

If you drug a child, that is no accident...you don't give it by accident....


When you go out and leave a child in a house on it's own you know ANYTHING could happen to that child when your not there....you don't accidentally go out and leave that child....



Whatever happens to that child AFTER you Leave him/her MAY be an accident ...but whatever led up to it happening.....was not an accident.



The mccanns KNEW what they were going to do BEFORE they got to pdl as payne stipulated .....'it worked in greece'....so it was premeditated what they were going to do.....

The Munchausen by Proxy idea is worth more consideration IMO. It is the parent that craves the attention via use of the child.

Some thoughts that may corroborate -

The time KM appeared on the balcony crying in view of all the press - a reporter has already noted how it could only have been to garner attention.

Going jogging in full view of press

Attention even from the Pope

Attention from Prime Ministers and many other important people

Informing the press when available for photoshoots

Continuing press appearances/interviews after 5 years feeds the need for attention

Still getting attention from press on campaign runs

Not returning back to work as a health professional (are her ex-employer`s aware?)

She/they have become `stars` like the Beckhams

Are RB/Murdoch feeding the Munchausens?

Subjects are often in the medical profession as interested in health – their patients have a higher incidence of dramatic life threatening events.

Subjects can come across as gentle care givers.

Victims are noticeably better when removed from the subject`s care – was it true there were plans to have Maddie adopted?

Are the twins safe as long as KM is getting media attention?

All in my humble opinion of course.

That all seems consistent.

Interesting debate - not a Subject I knew anything about previously.

kitti wrote:So you would cover up an accident, would you?

Is that at me Kitti?

The End Is Nigh wrote:

Velvet wrote:

I agree.

I also don't believe that they would have been planning it for a long time. Even if they do know what happened I don't think it would have been because they had planned it, it would be because of a horrible accident imo.

Most "accidents" are preventable - and most are caused by the inadequacies or inattention of people. Human factors. The issue in accidents is to determine whether those human factors were within "normal bounds" or whether there were aggravating features eg Negligence.

I am very aware that many accidents are preventable. My point is I doubt very much that the Mccanns would have been planning it for some time as the original post stated, I believe it would have been an accident, preventable or not. Which in this case yes it would have been. Do you think its likely that the Mccanns would have been planning their own daughters demise?

Velvet wrote:

Do you think its likely that the Mccanns would have been planning their own daughters demise?

Not overtly (Same answer regardless of what you actual mean by "demise" in this context).