Author Topic: Wandering Off Topic  (Read 1465080 times)

0 Members and 12 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4935 on: January 17, 2019, 08:04:23 AM »
No-one with any sense ignores a mother who says she thinks her children have been sedated. As the supposed sedation was carried out by a criminal there's clearly a danger to their lives. It would have to be taken seriously and checked out.
I see you have avoided my question - your previous post mentioned “doctor mother” as if this was the reason why Kate should have been taken seriously, now you have dropped this to be any hysterical mother whose child most probably wandered off should be taken seriously.  Did Batista actually at any point  take seriously the possibility  that Madeleine had been kidnapped by a stranger?
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline slartibartfast

“Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired”.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4937 on: January 17, 2019, 09:25:24 AM »
I see you have avoided my question - your previous post mentioned “doctor mother” as if this was the reason why Kate should have been taken seriously, now you have dropped this to be any hysterical mother whose child most probably wandered off should be taken seriously.  Did Batista actually at any point  take seriously the possibility  that Madeleine had been kidnapped by a stranger?

If they knew that Kate and Gerry were doctors that would add weight to her 'fears', but even if they didn't know the children's welfare would have been a priority in my opinion.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4938 on: January 17, 2019, 09:45:44 AM »
If they knew that Kate and Gerry were doctors that would add weight to her 'fears', but even if they didn't know the children's welfare would have been a priority in my opinion.
I think you are looking at it from your point of view, but not from Ocean Club Management perspective.

It is on record that even John Hill did not accept that Madeleine had been abducted,  I would think Silvia felt the same way too.  In her opinion Madeleine had either wandered off or for reasons noted during the time she was with Kate she was wondering if the McCanns had something to do with it, especially when she noted Kate wanting a priest that night.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm
"She wanted to mention that around 3h00 Madeleine's parents asked for a priest to be present. They didn't explain why they wanted a priest but she (the witness) was amazed, because there were no indications that the little girl was dead and only in these circumstances is usually asked the presence of a priest."
« Last Edit: January 17, 2019, 09:54:29 AM by Robittybob1 »
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4939 on: January 17, 2019, 10:45:59 AM »
I think you are looking at it from your point of view, but not from Ocean Club Management perspective.

It is on record that even John Hill did not accept that Madeleine had been abducted,  I would think Silvia felt the same way too.  In her opinion Madeleine had either wandered off or for reasons noted during the time she was with Kate she was wondering if the McCanns had something to do with it, especially when she noted Kate wanting a priest that night.

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SILVIA_BATISTA.htm
"She wanted to mention that around 3h00 Madeleine's parents asked for a priest to be present. They didn't explain why they wanted a priest but she (the witness) was amazed, because there were no indications that the little girl was dead and only in these circumstances is usually asked the presence of a priest."

I'm a cynic too, but if I thought there was even the slightest posibility of a child being harmed I would err on the side of caution and act to safeguard that child. Even if I suspected the parents, the child still has to be considered first and foremost.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Brietta

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4940 on: January 17, 2019, 11:17:19 AM »
I'm a cynic too, but if I thought there was even the slightest posibility of a child being harmed I would err on the side of caution and act to safeguard that child. Even if I suspected the parents, the child still has to be considered first and foremost.

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that in the circumstances the first priority should have been the safeguarding of the children in the party.

The fact that it was considered appropriate to leave them secure in the unsupervised care of their parents is an indication that the police had no concerns whatsoever about their welfare.

If they had I am sure they would have taken appropriate measures; but quite obviously the assessment of the scene dictated that the best place for the children to be was in the care of their parents.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline G-Unit

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4941 on: January 17, 2019, 01:16:26 PM »
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that in the circumstances the first priority should have been the safeguarding of the children in the party.

The fact that it was considered appropriate to leave them secure in the unsupervised care of their parents is an indication that the police had no concerns whatsoever about their welfare.

If they had I am sure they would have taken appropriate measures; but quite obviously the assessment of the scene dictated that the best place for the children to be was in the care of their parents.

Which suggests that they had no reason to suspect that the children were not OK.



Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4942 on: January 17, 2019, 02:02:55 PM »
Which suggests that they had no reason to suspect that the children were not OK.
I was thinking are there cases where the crime is unproven against the parents but they take the kids away just in case.  In the Jonbenet Ramsey case even when the police thought the parents were involved the older son was not taken from the parents.  So I don't know if you are correct here.  Do you know of a case where children are removed from a family just in case the parents are later convicted?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4943 on: January 17, 2019, 02:06:52 PM »
I'm a cynic too, but if I thought there was even the slightest posibility of a child being harmed I would err on the side of caution and act to safeguard that child. Even if I suspected the parents, the child still has to be considered first and foremost.
So what should they have done to safeguard the children?  Were they being protected by having 5 or so family liaison officers on hand?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline G-Unit

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4944 on: January 17, 2019, 05:09:54 PM »
I was thinking are there cases where the crime is unproven against the parents but they take the kids away just in case.  In the Jonbenet Ramsey case even when the police thought the parents were involved the older son was not taken from the parents.  So I don't know if you are correct here.  Do you know of a case where children are removed from a family just in case the parents are later convicted?

If the mother of a missing child tells the police she fears her other children have been sedated the police are duty bound to call medical help, I would have thought.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4945 on: January 17, 2019, 06:44:50 PM »
If the mother of a missing child tells the police she fears her other children have been sedated the police are duty bound to call medical help, I would have thought.
They don't go and set up roadblocks just because Kate said Madeleine was abducted.  OK so which of the things said by a frantic mother are the GNR or PJ going to take notice of in the first day?
Next day the twins might have appeared 100% normal.  I can see why nothing is being done.

The other person there with Kate was Fiona also a doctor, had she backed up Kate on her request maybe things would have been different.  There is a second opinion there right on hand.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4946 on: January 17, 2019, 07:10:09 PM »
So no cite then.
What exactly are you wanting a cite for? 
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4947 on: January 17, 2019, 07:11:31 PM »
Just to remind us what Fiona thought 1 year after the event:
"Erm, tut, I looked, when I went into the room that Madeleine was sleeping in, the room was dark, Madeleine, erm, Madeleine's bed was sort of folded back, the sheets, quite kind of neatly really, erm, Sean and Amelie were fast asleep in their cots, they didn't stir, you know, I was opening the cupboards in the room and moving around the room, they didn't stir at all, which that was, that was odd. Erm, we were trying to ascertain whether Madeleine could have got out, and I've already said earlier the shutters were very heavy, and I was almost trying to convince Kate that she could have opened the shutter and climbed out, although knowing that wasn't a likely thing, but at that point we were just trying to pacify Kate in that Madeleine was going to be alright. Erm, and I, I think I touched the webbing in that room, but because Sean and Amelie were asleep, I didn't actually open the shutter in that room, we went, I went to the front of the house and I was trying to lift the shutter at the, at the back, just to prove whether, you know, whether it could have been opened and whether Madeleine could have opened it from the inside'.
 
 00.50.31
 1485
 'And''
 
 
 Reply
 'I mean, it was fairly obviously, I think, that that wasn't what had happened and what could have happened'."

So Fiona is trying to get Kate to accept that Madeleine opened the shutters and by implication the window herself.  One year later she is saying it was odd the twins remained asleep but did she say anything at the time?

Fiona goes on to describe what happened when the GNR arrive.  Strangely to me she is not mentioning and confirming Silvia's account of arriving along with the GNR and being the interpreter.

"Reply
 'Erm, well the next thing really was that the Police, two Policemen arriving, erm, at Kate and Gerry's apartment and they were Portuguese obviously, didn't really speak any English and that was, that was awful again really, because we were obviously desperate and frantic and at that point time, we were just conscious of every second that was passing by and by that time it was over an hour, I'm sure, before they arrived, but it felt like longer. Erm, and they wanted to come in the room, obviously, and, you know, see where Madeleine had been sleeping and they were checking the shutters and we were just trying to get over the urgency and it just didn't almost feel that they were recognising the urgency, although obviously with the language barrier, I can appreciate, you know, it's very, very hard. Erm, and Kate was getting hysterical at this point, erm, she, you know, screaming, erm, because she just wanted somebody who she felt was doing, doing something that was going to make a difference. Tut, erm, and then, they were the only two Police Officers we saw for, it seemed like quite, I don't know, this is where the time gets difficult, but another hour I'd say, erm, and then I was conscious of more sort of uniformed Police being around, sort of out the front. I mean, we were to'ing and fro'ing between the front of the apartment and the back of the apartment. And, erm, there were loads of MARK WARNER staff obviously running around the streets, they kept coming up the stairs at the back saying 'Have you checked the apartment' and we're like, you know, 'Yeah, she's not here'. Erm, tut, and there were some other locals who were all trying to be helpful, some helpful, some not. There was a woman who worked, I think she was work, had worked in the bar in Praia da Luz and she had actually almost invited herself up onto the balcony and was just quite drunk and not being, just not saying anything very helpful and I remember getting quite cross with her, saying 'Look', you know, 'Why are you here', you know, 'If you're going to be helpful get out and look for her' and, erm, and I remember Gerry actually asking her quite politely if she wouldn't mind just leaving them. Erm, I think she was the only one really that, that actually came anywhere near the apartment that wasn't one of us or a Policeman."

Does she mention Silvia at all?

No but he makes a point that some male person was doing translating on the night.

That is two major contradictions appearing in Fiona's statement.
1.  Where is Silvia and what is she doing?
2.  Who is this male person who the GNR don't see  yet according to Fiona they are talking to him?



Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4948 on: January 17, 2019, 07:12:10 PM »
If they knew that Kate and Gerry were doctors that would add weight to her 'fears', but even if they didn't know the children's welfare would have been a priority in my opinion.
A priority for Silvia Batista?  Why so?   Wouldn’t the missing child’s welfare be the main most urgent focus of attention?
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Wandering Off Topic
« Reply #4949 on: January 17, 2019, 07:14:17 PM »
I'm a cynic too, but if I thought there was even the slightest posibility of a child being harmed I would err on the side of caution and act to safeguard that child. Even if I suspected the parents, the child still has to be considered first and foremost.
So why didn’tshe then?  Maybe that’s why she was too embarrassed to admit that Kate had mentioned the sedation cos she did nothing about it.
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly