UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Holly Goodhead on November 19, 2019, 08:28:43 PM
-
Is it any wonder that initial investigators arrived at the conclusions they did?
- GM didn't make it clear up front the patio door was unsecured and that this was the door used for carrying out the checks whilst the children slept unsupervised over 5 consecutive nights whilst he and KM dined out at tapas for some 3 hours every evening.
- The emphasis was on KM's claims of the raised shutter and open window although no signs of forced entry at this window or elsewhere,
- JT claims she observed a man carrying a child away from 5A en route to her apartment. The route she claims to have taken meant she came within touching distance of GM chatting to JW although neither observed her.
- A Glasgow based friend of the MCCanns was telling the media, within hours of MM's disappearance, that the shutter had been jemmied despite the fact there was no evidence of forced entry.
-
It was the sister of GM who relayed to the press about the shutter.
Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters were jemmied open. Nothing had been touched and no valuables taken.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/maddy-3-goes-missing-472340
-
It was the sister of GM who relayed to the press about the shutter.
Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters were jemmied open. Nothing had been touched and no valuables taken.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/maddy-3-goes-missing-472340
Thanks. From the article you posted I can see the person I was referring to is Jill Renwick who went on air saying the shutters had been jemmied.
-
Jon Corner and Brian Healy were also told.
-
Jon Corner and Brian Healy were also told.
Thanks.
This is it imo...the way the story was told in the early hours/days simply doesn't fit the facts. I take the view when MM disappeared T9 were blown away and went into overdrive on a damage limitation exercise over the security of the apartments where the children were left unsupervised for hours at a time over 5 consecutive evenings along with who was checking who, when, where and how. But I can see how others, including PJ, could quite easily see all of this as evidence of something more sinister!
-
Thanks.
This is it imo...the way the story was told in the early hours/days simply doesn't fit the facts. I take the view when MM disappeared T9 were blown away and went into overdrive on a damage limitation exercise over the security of the apartments where the children were left unsupervised for hours at a time over 5 consecutive evenings along with who was checking who, when, where and how. But I can see how others, including PJ, could quite easily see all of this as evidence of something more sinister!
So you don’t believe any of the parents did any checks that night and are all lying do you?
-
So you don’t believe any of the parents did any checks that night and are all lying do you?
No that's not what I said. I believe GM downplayed the unsecured patio doors evidenced by:
- no mention of unsecured patio doors in GNR (first respondents) wit stats
- friends and family in early hours were beating the drum about jemmied shutters
- GM claims in his wit stat of 4th May he was using front door to check not unsecured patio doors. In his 10th May wit stat he came clean.
- I believe on 3rd May JT was checking her children via the unsecured patio door. This then accounts for the fact she observed GM/JW but they didn't observe her. JT and JW both say GM/JW stood chatting outside the gate to 5A.
- RO states in her wit stat that during the day her family would exit via the patio doors thereby leaving them unsecured. She also states she didn't like the car park at night as it was dark. On this basis I choose to believe the Oldfields were also checking via the unsecured patio doors and not the front door.
- RO is a trained lawyer and may well have alerted T8 to the possibility of charges of 'child neglect' and even if she didn't I think it would immediately hit T9 how all of this was going to look: a bunch of professionals wining and dining out every evening, leaving children 'home alone' for hours at a time completely unsupervised and worst still in all likelihood not even locking the doors!
-
No that's not what I said. I believe GM downplayed the unsecured patio doors evidenced by:
- no mention of unsecured patio doors in GNR (first respondents) wit stats
- friends and family in early hours were beating the drum about jemmied shutters
- GM claims in his wit stat of 4th May he was using front door to check not unsecured patio doors. In his 10th May wit stat he came clean.
- I believe on 3rd May JT was checking her children via the unsecured patio door. This then accounts for the fact she observed GM/JW but they didn't observe her. JT and JW both say GM/JW stood chatting outside the gate to 5A.
- RO states in her wit stat that during the day her family would exit via the patio doors thereby leaving them unsecured. She also states she didn't like the car park at night as it was dark. On this basis I choose to believe the Oldfields were also checking via the unsecured patio doors and not the front door.
- RO is a trained lawyer and may well have alerted T8 to the possibility of charges of 'child neglect' and even if she didn't I think it would immediately hit T9 how all of this was going to look: a bunch of professionals wining and dining out every evening, leaving children 'home alone' for hours at a time completely unsupervised and worst still in all likelihood not even locking the doors!
what did you mean then when you wrote in your previous post “the children were left unsupervised for hours at a time”?
-
It was the sister of GM who relayed to the press about the shutter.
Trish said: "When Kate checked, she came out screaming. Maddy had gone. The door was open and the window in the bedroom and shutters were jemmied open. Nothing had been touched and no valuables taken.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/maddy-3-goes-missing-472340
Too much emphasis is put on what Trish said. Trish recalled her brother was hysterical sobbing down the phone, she had a job to comprehend what he was saying as he was very distraught. The door IMO that he was referring to was the bedroom door which Kate said she found wide open, the shutters Gerry believed had been forced open as according to them they believed the shutters could only be opened from the inside. Trish was the one who said jemmied, or maybe Gerry might have said used something to force the shutters. Everything is simple to work out and IMO this conversation is twisted by many.
-
Too much emphasis is put on what Trish said. Trish recalled her brother was hysterical sobbing down the phone, she had a job to comprehend what he was saying as he was very distraught. The door IMO that he was referring to was the bedroom door which Kate said she found wide open, the shutters Gerry believed had been forced open as according to them they believed the shutters could only be opened from the inside. Trish was the one who said jemmied, or maybe Gerry might have said used something to force the shutters. Everything is simple to work out and IMO this conversation is twisted by many.
Pretty sure Trish had no concept of what a jemmy was at that time. Can't verify that because I'm in an OP covertly surveilling a Tango in a hedge. But I'm sure it's true.
-
Pretty sure Trish had no concept of what a jemmy was at that time. Can't verify that because I'm in an OP covertly surveilling a Tango in a hedge. But I'm sure it's true.
"Jemmied" is a long time Glaswegian expression. It generally means o break in somewhere with something, not necessarily a Jemmy.
-
"Jemmied" is a long time Glaswegian expression. It generally means o break in somewhere with something, not necessarily a Jemmy.
Nah, it's not just a Glaswegian term, a jemmy is common slang for a crowbar. But could also be a verb; Jimmy jemmied Johnny's Jewellers window, stealing jaw dropping gems for Jenny....
-
what did you mean then when you wrote in your previous post “the children were left unsupervised for hours at a time”?
T9 were leaving their children 'home alone' Sun - Thu from 8.30 pm up until very late into the evenings.
By GM's own admission on the reconstruction vid his check at circa 9 pm on 3rd May was the first time he had ever physically checked. I personally do not believe he physically checked at 9 pm on 3rd May. KM states in her PB that they were physically checking as well as listening and yet what was she physically checking when by her own admission at circa 10 pm on 3rd May she could not even determine whether or not MM was in her bed and did not want to put the light on for fear of waking the children.
-
T9 were leaving their children 'home alone' Sun - Thu from 8.30 pm up until very late into the evenings.
By GM's own admission on the reconstruction vid his check at circa 9 pm on 3rd May was the first time he had ever physically checked. I personally do not believe he physically checked at 9 pm on 3rd May. KM states in her PB that they were physically checking as well as listening and yet what was she physically checking when by her own admission at circa 10 pm on 3rd May she could not even determine whether or not MM was in her bed and did not want to put the light on for fear of waking the children.
They both gave a reason for entering the children's bedroom; the open door. Therefore it can be assumed that they wouldn't have entered if it had been as they left it.
-
T9 were leaving their children 'home alone' Sun - Thu from 8.30 pm up until very late into the evenings.
By GM's own admission on the reconstruction vid his check at circa 9 pm on 3rd May was the first time he had ever physically checked. I personally do not believe he physically checked at 9 pm on 3rd May. KM states in her PB that they were physically checking as well as listening and yet what was she physically checking when by her own admission at circa 10 pm on 3rd May she could not even determine whether or not MM was in her bed and did not want to put the light on for fear of waking the children.
So it’s your contention that despite the frequent visits of the parents and their friends back to their apartments the children were left unsupervised for hours at a time is it?
-
They both gave a reason for entering the children's bedroom; the open door. Therefore it can be assumed that they wouldn't have entered if it had been as they left it.
Erm....this seems to suggest you believe they found the door left not as they found it, surely not??
-
Too much emphasis is put on what Trish said. Trish recalled her brother was hysterical sobbing down the phone, she had a job to comprehend what he was saying as he was very distraught. The door IMO that he was referring to was the bedroom door which Kate said she found wide open, the shutters Gerry believed had been forced open as according to them they believed the shutters could only be opened from the inside. Trish was the one who said jemmied, or maybe Gerry might have said used something to force the shutters. Everything is simple to work out and IMO this conversation is twisted by many.
I didn't put the article in the papers,this story as never been retracted and there's no way it was lost in translation.
-
She was reading from a bleedin script ffs @)(++(*
Someone told her 'jemmied' imo
(https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/sitebuilderpictures/eileentrish.jpg)
-
Reporter: Well, the McCann family, Gerry and Kate, with their twins and three-year-old Madeleine went on holiday to Portugal last Saturday, from their home in Rothley, in Leicestershire. They'd gone to a popular resort on the coast of the Algarve with a group of other families; nine adults; eight children; all on holiday together. Now, last night Madeleine and the twins were left sleeping in their room, while her parents had a meal in a restaurant two hundred yards away - and they did regular checks on them - but at ten o'clock last night there was a huge shock for Kate. Madeleine's aunt who lives in Scotland, takes up the story.
Trish Cameron: They last checked at half past nine; they were all sound asleep, sleeping; windows shut; shutters shut. Kate went back at ten o'clock to check; the front door was lying open; the window had been tampered with; the shutters had been jammied open... or whatever you call it, and Madeleine was missing.
-
Jon Corner, founder of Liverpool-based River Media, is godfather to the McCann’s twins and his wife has known Mrs McCann since they were both three. The co-founder of city centre-based River Media, and a father-of-three himself, said: “Kate phoned me in the early hours totally devastated."
"She just told me that Maddy had been abducted, that the shutters of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her."
"Maddy was asleep in the room with Sean and Amelie and whoever has taken her has gone straight past the sleeping twins, left them completely alone and snatched Maddy."
"Kate is just so distressed. She doesn’t know what to do. It has knocked me and everyone else for six. It doesn’t actually seem real."
You & me both Jon @)(++(*
-
Your amusement at the family’s distress is really classy Spam, G-Unit finds it amusing too I see. Lovely people aintcha?
-
Your amusement at the family’s distress is really classy Spam, G-Unit finds it amusing too I see. Lovely people aintcha?
I find 'the abduction' of Madeleine McCann amusing....because it didn't happen imo.
-
Your amusement at the family’s distress is really classy Spam, G-Unit finds it amusing too I see. Lovely people aintcha?
Misread, misunderstand, misrepresent and attack. Boringly familiar reaction Swirly.
No 'family' was mentioned, just Kate McCann.
The story that was told was didn't seem real because it wasn't imo.
I wonder if Jon Corner was suitably chastised for calling Madeleine 'Maddy'?
-
Misread, misunderstand, misrepresent and attack. Boringly familiar reaction Swirly.
No 'family' was mentioned, just Kate McCann.
The story that was told was didn't seem real because it wasn't imo.
I wonder if Jon Corner was suitably chastised for calling Madeleine 'Maddy'?
Ooohh right, you’re just having a laugh at the expense of Kate McCann’s obvious distress, that’s perfectly fine then.
-
Ooohh right, you’re just having a laugh at the expense of Kate McCann’s obvious distress, that’s perfectly fine then.
Nope. At her story.
-
Nope. At her story.
she was expressing her distress and you found it funny, don’t try and wriggle out of it.
-
she was expressing her distress and you found it funny, don’t try and wriggle out of it.
To be fair, John Cormer was characterising / recounting Kate's account of her story, which formed an opinion of 'distress'. So the 'finding it funny', if it's the case, would be quite detached.
-
she was expressing her distress and you found it funny, don’t try and wriggle out of it.
Jon Corner said, about the abduction of MM...
"It doesn’t actually seem real."
To which I said....
You & me both Jon
That's funny because, to me & G-Unit, the abduction of MM, doesn't actually seem real.
Having to explain this kind of ruins the joke, but never mind.
-
Jon Corner said, about the abduction of MM...
"It doesn’t actually seem real."
To which I said....
You & me both Jon
That's funny because, to me & G-Unit, the abduction of MM, doesn't actually seem real.
Having to explain this kind of ruins the joke, but never mind.
I understood “the joke”. Dress it up how you want, the net result is you were both ridiculing Kate’s distress at the situation. Why even bother trying to deny it? It’s what you’re here for isn’t it?
-
I understood “the joke”. Dress it up how you want, the net result is you were both ridiculing Kate’s distress at the situation. Why even bother trying to deny it? It’s what you’re here for isn’t it?
OK. I find Kate's feigned distress amusing. Happy now?
-
Jon Corner said, about the abduction of MM...
"It doesn’t actually seem real."
To which I said....
You & me both Jon
That's funny because, to me & G-Unit, the abduction of MM, doesn't actually seem real.
Having to explain this kind of ruins the joke, but never mind.
I think Swirly understands exactly what you and I found amusing, but prefers to pretend otherwise. No-one can be capable of that level of misunderstanding imo.
Then again, those who support the McCanns to the nth degree seem capable of ignoring the many strange utterances of the McCanns and misrepresenting the posts of those who point them out as 'being nasty'.
-
I think that this is disgraceful.
-
I think Swirly understands exactly what you and I found amusing, but prefers to pretend otherwise. No-one can be capable of that level of misunderstanding imo.
Then again, those who support the McCanns to the nth degree seem capable of ignoring the many strange utterances of the McCanns and misrepresenting the posts of those who point them out as 'being nasty'.
i think those who criticise the mccanns simply refuse to look at the evidence objectively
-
Reporter: Well, the McCann family, Gerry and Kate, with their twins and three-year-old Madeleine went on holiday to Portugal last Saturday, from their home in Rothley, in Leicestershire. They'd gone to a popular resort on the coast of the Algarve with a group of other families; nine adults; eight children; all on holiday together. Now, last night Madeleine and the twins were left sleeping in their room, while her parents had a meal in a restaurant two hundred yards away - and they did regular checks on them - but at ten o'clock last night there was a huge shock for Kate. Madeleine's aunt who lives in Scotland, takes up the story.
Trish Cameron: They last checked at half past nine; they were all sound asleep, sleeping; windows shut; shutters shut. Kate went back at ten o'clock to check; the front door was lying open; the window had been tampered with; the shutters had been jammied open... or whatever you call it, and Madeleine was missing.
Trish was quoting what she made of the conversation with a very distraught Gerry, as she said she could hardly make out what he was saying he was crying so much. So this conversation was muddled and taken as fact, but only by those who decided the McCann's are guilty by the look of it.
-
I think Swirly understands exactly what you and I found amusing, but prefers to pretend otherwise. No-one can be capable of that level of misunderstanding imo.
Then again, those who support the McCanns to the nth degree seem capable of ignoring the many strange utterances of the McCanns and misrepresenting the posts of those who point them out as 'being nasty'.
I understood perfectly what Wonderfulspam found amusing.
What strange uttering of the McCann's are you referring to? Are you talking about the jemmied shutters? Are you trying to say that intelligent people would say they had been broken when there was no evidence that they were? Those blinds could be raised from the outside, the McCann's thought they were for extra safety and could only be raised from the inside, Gerry lifted them from the outside, to his way of thinking they were forced up, broken in other words. Why people have to keep on about the shutters is beyond me, but maybe it is the only thing they can go on about as there is nothing that points to the McCann's as being guilty.
-
I understood perfectly what Wonderfulspam found amusing.
What strange uttering of the McCann's are you referring to? Are you talking about the jemmied shutters? Are you trying to say that intelligent people would say they had been broken when there was no evidence that they were? Those blinds could be raised from the outside, the McCann's thought they were for extra safety and could only be raised from the inside, Gerry lifted them from the outside, to his way of thinking they were forced up, broken in other words. Why people have to keep on about the shutters is beyond me, but maybe it is the only thing they can go on about as there is nothing that points to the McCann's as being guilty.
IYO
-
i think those who criticise the mccanns simply refuse to look at the evidence objectively
According to some, those who said the McCanns told them that the shutters were jemmied, smashed or broken misunderstood what they were told. Just like the interpreters misunderstood what they were told, or they weren't up to the job, or they misinterpreted on purpose. Is that 'looking at the evidence objectively'? In my opinion that's making excuses.
-
According to some, those who said the McCanns told them that the shutters were jemmied, smashed or broken misunderstood what they were told. Just like the interpreters misunderstood what they were told, or they weren't up to the job, or they misinterpreted on purpose. Is that 'looking at the evidence objectively'? In my opinion that's making excuses.
still on the gennied shutters after 12 years...bizarre.....a simple chinese whisper is the expalnation.
i think its an established fact there will be errors in translation...
you on the other hand wont even accept the possibility that there are errors in translation...you beleive the stateements are 100% accurate....i think that is 100% unrealistic
-
Trish was quoting what she made of the conversation with a very distraught Gerry, as she said she could hardly make out what he was saying he was crying so much. So this conversation was muddled and taken as fact, but only by those who decided the McCann's are guilty by the look of it.
Graham McKenzie was able to understand Gerry McCann quite easily;
Mr McCann was absolutely distraught telling the person receiving the call that he feared 'she (Madeleine McCann) had been taken by paedophiles'.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GRAHAM-MCKENZIE.htm
He mentioned the possibility that that she could have been taken by a paedophile
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PATRICIA_CAMERON.htm
I think they were getting the gist, despite Gerry's distraughtness.
-
Graham McKenzie was able to understand Gerry McCann quite easily;
Mr McCann was absolutely distraught telling the person receiving the call that he feared 'she (Madeleine McCann) had been taken by paedophiles'.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GRAHAM-MCKENZIE.htm
He mentioned the possibility that that she could have been taken by a paedophile
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PATRICIA_CAMERON.htm
I think they were getting the gist, despite Gerry's distraughtness.
whats wrong with any of that...sounds quite genuine to me
-
Graham McKenzie was able to understand Gerry McCann quite easily;
Mr McCann was absolutely distraught telling the person receiving the call that he feared 'she (Madeleine McCann) had been taken by paedophiles'.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GRAHAM-MCKENZIE.htm
He mentioned the possibility that that she could have been taken by a paedophile
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PATRICIA_CAMERON.htm
I think they were getting the gist, despite Gerry's distraughtness.
How Gerry came by that information we will never know.....JK...it was all part of the staging imo
-
I think Swirly understands exactly what you and I found amusing, but prefers to pretend otherwise. No-one can be capable of that level of misunderstanding imo.
Then again, those who support the McCanns to the nth degree seem capable of ignoring the many strange utterances of the McCanns and misrepresenting the posts of those who point them out as 'being nasty'.
What’s with the “Swirly” reference? Yes, I know exactly what you find amusng - the idea that Kate McCann expressed her distress by saying the situation felt unreal as related to Jon Corner, because you believe she is a liar and not someone genuinely distressed by the events of her daughter’s disappearance. Now, consider for a moment that Madeleine WAS abducted (perfectly possible despite your assertions to the contrary) - is your amusement still justified? Is it ever appropriate to find a mother’s apparent distress amusing? And if it turns out she throttled Madeleine with her bare hands are her words still worthy of a snigger? You clearly think so.
-
OK. I find Kate's feigned distress amusing. Happy now?
Thanks for your honesty, though “feigned distress” is clearly just your opinion. Perhaps having murdered her child in cold blood she was genuinely distressed at her actions, eh?
-
What’s with the “Swirly” reference? Yes, I know exactly what you find amusng - the idea that Kate McCann expressed her distress by saying the situation felt unreal as related to Jon Corner, because you believe she is a liar and not someone genuinely distressed by the events of her daughter’s disappearance. Now, consider for a moment that Madeleine WAS abducted (perfectly possible despite your assertions to the contrary) - is your amusement still justified? Is it ever appropriate to find a mother’s apparent distress amusing? And if it turns out she throttled Madeleine with her bare hands are her words still worthy of a snigger? You clearly think so.
Karen Matthews.
-
Karen Matthews.
I didn’t find that amusing, I found it sad and despicable.
-
How Gerry came by that information we will never no.....JK...it was all part of the staging imo
Quite strange really, because they lost interest in the paedophile angle subsequently.
-
According to some, those who said the McCanns told them that the shutters were jemmied, smashed or broken misunderstood what they were told. Just like the interpreters misunderstood what they were told, or they weren't up to the job, or they misinterpreted on purpose. Is that 'looking at the evidence objectively'? In my opinion that's making excuses.
And yet you have decided it is strange or odd and seem to think there can be no other explanation apart from dishonesty. How is that objective, pray tell?
-
Thanks for your honesty, though “feigned distress” is clearly just your opinion. Perhaps having murdered her child in cold blood she was genuinely distressed at her actions, eh?
That's a bit of a moot point, considering, according to Grange it was definitely an abduction.
-
Quite strange really, because they lost interest in the paedophile angle subsequently.
Really ? Believing your daughter has been abducted by person or persons unknown rules out paedophilia from the equation in what way?
Perhaps providing a cite for your assumption might be in order. TY
-
What’s with the “Swirly” reference? Yes, I know exactly what you find amusng - the idea that Kate McCann expressed her distress by saying the situation felt unreal as related to Jon Corner, because you believe she is a liar and not someone genuinely distressed by the events of her daughter’s disappearance. Now, consider for a moment that Madeleine WAS abducted (perfectly possible despite your assertions to the contrary) - is your amusement still justified? Is it ever appropriate to find a mother’s apparent distress amusing? And if it turns out she throttled Madeleine with her bare hands are her words still worthy of a snigger? You clearly think so.
As I understood it Jon Corner found it 'unreal' not Kate McCann. That's how Wonderfulspam interpreted it too; hence his comment;
Jon Corner said, about the abduction of MM...
"It doesn’t actually seem real."
To which I said....
You & me both Jon
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11103.msg562190#msg562190
-
As I understood it Jon Corner found it 'unreal' not Kate McCann. That's how Wonderfulspam interpreted it too; hence his comment;
Jon Corner said, about the abduction of MM...
"It doesn’t actually seem real."
To which I said....
You & me both Jon
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11103.msg562190#msg562190
However you wish to spin it, the net result is amusement at Kate’s expense and at those completely innocent members of the McCanns family and friends at the highly distressing situation they all found themselves in. Spam has already admitted it anyway, at least he’s honest about it. It’s entirely up to you if you wish to express your amusement at their expense and it’s entirely up to me to shine a light on it if I so wish.
-
As I understood it Jon Corner found it 'unreal' not Kate McCann. That's how Wonderfulspam interpreted it too; hence his comment;
Jon Corner said, about the abduction of MM...
"It doesn’t actually seem real."
To which I said....
You & me both Jon
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11103.msg562190#msg562190
The wonders of the English language. The same sentence but entirely different meanings depending on the connotation one chooses to adopt.
Amaral understood exactly how to use Portuguese to do exactly the same, did he not.
-
Graham McKenzie was able to understand Gerry McCann quite easily;
Mr McCann was absolutely distraught telling the person receiving the call that he feared 'she (Madeleine McCann) had been taken by paedophiles'.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GRAHAM-MCKENZIE.htm
He mentioned the possibility that that she could have been taken by a paedophile
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PATRICIA_CAMERON.htm
I think they were getting the gist, despite Gerry's distraughtness.
What parent of an abducted child wouldn't think it was a possibility she was taken by a paedophile? What are you trying to say here?
-
What parent of an abducted child wouldn't think it was a possibility she was taken by a paedophile? What are you trying to say here?
I think what G-Unit is trying to say is that Gerry was desperately trying to persuade the police Madeleine had been taken by a paedophile when all along he knew her body was languishing under ten tonnes of Luz landfill. Or something like that.
-
Quite strange really, because they lost interest in the paedophile angle subsequently.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11103.msg562220#msg562220
Do you have anything which supports your statement; please post it as requested if you do. If not, please amend your post. TY
-
Quite strange really, because they lost interest in the paedophile angle subsequently.
Did they? Didn't know you had the ability to mind read.
-
I think what G-Unit is trying to say is that Gerry was desperately trying to persuade the police Madeleine had been taken by a paedophile when all along he knew her body was languishing under ten tonnes of Luz landfill. Or something like that.
Yes, but when did the McCann's dispose of Madeleine's body that is the question. No one could dispose of their child's body and then go off and eat dinner laughing and joking as if nothing had happened. Anyone finding their child dead would be grief stricken.
-
Quite strange really, because they lost interest in the paedophile angle subsequently.
I find that a ridiculous post... What evidence do you have thst they lost interest in the angle... I would think they still consider it a real possibility
-
Really ? Believing your daughter has been abducted by person or persons unknown rules out paedophilia from the equation in what way?
Perhaps providing a cite for your assumption might be in order. TY
March 2008
I was beginning to get past my early certainty that Madeleine must have been taken by a paedophile and murdered. I was coming to realize that didn’t have to be the answer. [Madeleine]
-
March 2008
I was beginning to get past my early certainty that Madeleine must have been taken by a paedophile and murdered. I was coming to realize that didn’t have to be the answer. [Madeleine]
She says it doesn't have to be the answer.... She is saying there could be other possibilities... That isn't what you claimed
-
March 2008
I was beginning to get past my early certainty that Madeleine must have been taken by a paedophile and murdered. I was coming to realize that didn’t have to be the answer. [Madeleine]
Are you able to understand and empathise with a mother who might look for other scenarios to concentrate on other than the daily rape of her young child by paedophiles?
-
Are you able to understand and empathise with a mother who might look for other scenarios to concentrate on other than the daily rape of her young child by paedophiles?
Yes. But in this case abduction isn't a proven fact, let alone anything else.
-
March 2008
I was beginning to get past my early certainty that Madeleine must have been taken by a paedophile and murdered. I was coming to realize that didn’t have to be the answer. [Madeleine]
The word in that paragraph is 'certainty' Kate got past her early 'certainty' doesn't mean that she didn't think there was a possibility that Madeleine was taken by a Paedophile.
-
Yes. But in this case abduction isn't a proven fact, let alone anything else.
What’s that got to do with what Kate wrote, something which you claim meant they had “lost interest in the paedophile angle”?
-
March 2008
I was beginning to get past my early certainty that Madeleine must have been taken by a paedophile and murdered. I was coming to realize that didn’t have to be the answer. [Madeleine]
Thank you.
It is interesting to witness your cognitive reasoning from your posts. I think the interpretation you have read into that sentence quite astounding particularly when the quotation is read and understood in context.
Kate was describing her research into missing and exploited children and the known horrible fates that had awaited some and which had shaped her determination to do something positive to help by becoming involved in promoting the Amber Alert system in Europe.
That did not distract her from Madeleine's unknown fate and I think it is in poor taste to minimise what it must have cost her to come to terms with her suffering.
Is it any wonder that such wilful distortion of the facts concerning Kate McCann has become - in my opinion - the hallmark of your posts about her.
-
Thank you.
It is interesting to witness your cognitive reasoning from your posts. I think the interpretation you have read into that sentence quite astounding particularly when the quotation is read and understood in context.
Kate was describing her research into missing and exploited children and the known horrible fates that had awaited some and which had shaped her determination to do something positive to help by becoming involved in promoting the Amber Alert system in Europe.
That did not distract her from Madeleine's unknown fate and I think it is in poor taste to minimise what it must have cost her to come to terms with her suffering.
Is it any wonder that such wilful distortion of the facts concerning Kate McCann has become - in my opinion - the hallmark of your posts about her.
Apparently the parents came to terms with their daughters fate-quite early on- still in Portugual ( in some interview).
It was a great drama, scary story- headliner-child snatched by paedo gang whilst sleeping- they jemmied windows and snatched her, while we were like in our garden like as like at home like you know like...
The parents behaviour has not convinced me they ever thought their daughter was snatched via a jemmied shutter/open window by a paedo gang. Not convinced me at all.
Are you able to understand and empathise with a mother who might look for other scenarios to concentrate on other than the daily rape of her young child by paedophiles?
There are two situations to discuss:
1. was the backlash from independent thinkers about the parents behaviour not increasing while Kate wastelling people their daughter was abducted and believed to being 'raped daily'.
They then had to look at a nice ending. a happy smiley family who were sad and childess took her and she is happy with them- this would bring back on board those vulnerable ,easily led 'nutters' who sent in letters offering solutions/assistance to find her - maybe along with some money for the fund.
2, Maybe her friendship with known paedo, CF who really cheered her up, (while her daughter was believed to be with paedo gang) told her it wasn't a paedo gang.
-
Apparently the parents came to terms with their daughters fate-quite early on- still in Portugual ( in some interview).
It was a great drama, scary story- headliner-child snatched by paedo gang whilst sleeping- they jemmied windows and snatched her, while we were like in our garden like as like at home like you know like...
The parents behaviour has not convinced me they ever thought their daughter was snatched via a jemmied shutter/open window by a paedo gang. Not convinced me at all.
There are two situations to discuss:
1. was the backlash from independent thinkers about the parents behaviour not increasing while Kate wastelling people their daughter was abducted and believed to being 'raped daily'.
They then had to look at a nice ending. a happy smiley family who were sad and childess took her and she is happy with them- this would bring back on board those vulnerable ,easily led 'nutters' who sent in letters offering solutions/assistance to find her - maybe along with some money for the fund.
2, Maybe her friendship with known paedo, CF who really cheered her up, (while her daughter was believed to be with paedo gang) told her it wasn't a paedo gang.
Ah yes, Clement Freud, the McCanns friend.
-
Apparently the parents came to terms with their daughters fate-quite early on- still in Portugual ( in some interview).
It was a great drama, scary story- headliner-child snatched by paedo gang whilst sleeping- they jemmied windows and snatched her, while we were like in our garden like as like at home like you know like...
The parents behaviour has not convinced me they ever thought their daughter was snatched via a jemmied shutter/open window by a paedo gang. Not convinced me at all.
There are two situations to discuss:
1. was the backlash from independent thinkers about the parents behaviour not increasing while Kate wastelling people their daughter was abducted and believed to being 'raped daily'.
They then had to look at a nice ending. a happy smiley family who were sad and childess took her and she is happy with them- this would bring back on board those vulnerable ,easily led 'nutters' who sent in letters offering solutions/assistance to find her - maybe along with some money for the fund.
2, Maybe her friendship with known paedo, CF who really cheered her up, (while her daughter was believed to be with paedo gang) told her it wasn't a paedo gang.
Is it any wonder that putting sentiments like that into practice while totally losing the golden hours (bet he didn't even know what that meant at the time) that Amaral totally screwed up the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance,
-
Is it any wonder that putting sentiments like that into practice while totally losing the golden hours (bet he didn't even know what that meant at the time) that Amaral totally screwed up the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance,
The parents screwed up Madeliene's life, and left a trail of distruction in the path.
I can find fault with the PJ and have been vocal about that.Unike you,and the supporters here, I Do it in a constructive way- without name calling and blaming them for Madelienes fate.
-
The parents screwed up Madeliene's life, and left a trail of distruction in the path.
I can find fault with the PJ and have been vocal about that.Unike you,and the supporters here, I Do it in a constructive way- without name calling and blaming them for Madelienes fate.
no one blames the pj for maddie's fate, have another think....they blame them for such a pathetic investigation into her disappearance.
-
The parents screwed up Madeliene's life, and left a trail of distruction in the path.
I can find fault with the PJ and have been vocal about that.Unike you,and the supporters here, I Do it in a constructive way- without name calling and blaming them for Madelienes fate.
Please note, I said ... "Amaral totally screwed up the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance". Is it any wonder that there is so much misinformation surrounding Madeleine's case when sceptics place such reliance on getting the simplest of statements totally wrong.
-
no one blames the pj for maddie's fate, have another think....they blame them for such a pathetic investigation into her disappearance.
I am pretty sure there are a lot of threads about Amaral. The hatred directed at him by, people who do not know him or what evidence the PJ actually have, is interesting.
She forgave the 'abductor' [suspected paedophile], but wanted Amaral to feel fear.
Yeah, strange one that.
-
I am pretty sure there are a lot of threads about Amaral. The hatred directed at him by, people who do not know him or what evidence the PJ actually have, is interesting.
Kate, that good catholic mother and daughter/wife, placed a curse on him. I am sure the pope would have spat out his cornflakes seeing that on TV.
She forgave the 'abductor' [suspected paedophile], but wanted Amaral to feel fear.
Yeah, strange one that.
none of its strange when seen in context
-
none of its strange when seen in context
Mistaken Identity has no context.
-
The parents screwed up Madeliene's life, and left a trail of distruction in the path.
I can find fault with the PJ and have been vocal about that.Unike you,and the supporters here, I Do it in a constructive way- without name calling and blaming them for Madelienes fate.
You do it in a constructive way, do you? (&^&
-
Is it any wonder that members get confused about the standard and tone of posts required when every other thread appears to me to be designed solely to castigate Madeleine's family and their friends. Including this one.
It is bound to cause confusion.
Please post on topic if you can determine what that is ... " Is it any wonder..." TY
-
Between castigating McCann & friends and criticising Amaral & colleagues, is it any wonder that there seems little left to discuss?
-
Is it any wonder that members get confused about the standard and tone of posts required when every other thread appears to me to be designed solely to castigate Madeleine's family and their friends. Including this one.
It is bound to cause confusion.
Please post on topic if you can determine what that is ... " Is it any wonder..." TY
Surely all threads need to be approved by a moderator?
-
Between castigating McCann & friends and criticising Amaral & colleagues, is it any wonder that there seems little left to discuss?
Is it any wonder discussion is so limited if you as a respected poster cannot take it beyond that, particularly on a loose topic as this one is.
-
Is it any wonder discussion is so limited if you as a respected poster cannot take it beyond that, particularly on a loose topic as this one is.
Respected poster ? Are you sure you've got the right person? @)(++(*
-
...initial investigators arrived at the conclusions they did?
- GM didn't make it clear up front the patio door was unsecured and that this was the door used for carrying out the checks whilst the children slept unsupervised over 5 consecutive nights whilst he and KM dined out at tapas for some 3 hours every evening.
- The emphasis was on KM's claims of the raised shutter and open window although no signs of forced entry at this window or elsewhere,
- JT claims she observed a man carrying a child away from 5A en route to her apartment. The route she claims to have taken meant she came within touching distance of GM chatting to JW although neither observed her.
- A Glasgow based friend of the MCCanns was telling the media, within hours of MM's disappearance, that the shutter had been jemmied despite the fact there was no evidence of forced entry.
The Washington Sniper hunt was sent down the totally wrong track for months, looking for a white box van, the most ubiquitous vehicle in the United States at the time, when it was actually a myth / hearsay / bias at play.
But they picked the ball up and ran with it on the back of flawed witness testimony. Did the State Police, FBI and DHS all get it so catastrophically wrong for so long due to incompetence?
(Incidentally, if you want contentious use of tracker dogs, this case is the benchmark. Clemente and Fitzgerald contend that the bloodhound was key in finding the evidence that helped them build the very accurate profile)
-
The Washington Sniper hunt was sent down the totally wrong track for months, looking for a white box van, the most ubiquitous vehicle in the United States at the time, when it was actually a myth / hearsay / bias at play.
But they picked the ball up and ran with it on the back of flawed witness testimony. Did the State Police, FBI and DHS all get it so catastrophically wrong for so long due to incompetence?
(Incidentally, if you want contentious use of tracker dogs, this case is the benchmark. Clemente and Fitzgerald contend that the bloodhound was key in finding the evidence that helped them build the very accurate profile)
I don't know anything about the above but I think trained investigators for whatever reason(s) do get fixated on pursuing false trails eg Asst Chief Constable George Oldfield and Wearside Jack is a classic example.
It happens with miscarriages of justice too where an investigator(s) forms a theory/identifies a suspect and then dismisses anything which contradicts and will even go as far as fabricating evidence to support the theory/suspect. I guess its part of the human condition in trying to make sense of puzzles! Confirmation bias.
-
Is it any wonder that members get confused about the standard and tone of posts required when every other thread appears to me to be designed solely to castigate Madeleine's family and their friends. Including this one.
It is bound to cause confusion.
Please post on topic if you can determine what that is ... " Is it any wonder..." TY
But I see similar in your own posts with GA.
Too much black and white and no shades of grey imo.
Imo key to the case are ingress and egress and much of what investigators were led to believe in this regard by T9 was clearly wrong.
-
But I see similar in your own posts with GA.
Too much black and white and no shades of grey imo.
Imo key to the case are ingress and egress and much of what investigators were led to believe in this regard by T9 was clearly wrong.
Plus the who.
-
But I see similar in your own posts with GA.
Too much black and white and no shades of grey imo.
Imo key to the case are ingress and egress and much of what investigators were led to believe in this regard by T9 was clearly wrong.
Again... Gerry in his statement of 4/5..explains the patio doors, we're unlocked... He confirms the apt was insecure
-
Again... Gerry in his statement of 4/5..explains the patio doors, we're unlocked... He confirms the apt was insecure
Hearsay,unreliable translation.
-
Again... Gerry in his statement of 4/5..explains the patio doors, we're unlocked... He confirms the apt was insecure
Were they unlocked to avoid disturbing the children, to allow access to their friends or to allow Madeleine to exit and wander around the village? Was it all of the above or, as is more likely, none of them?
-
Were they unlocked to avoid disturbing the children, to allow access to their friends or to allow Madeleine to exit and wander around the village? Was it all of the above or, as is more likely, none of them?
....or he couldn't be arsed walking round.
-
Were they unlocked to avoid disturbing the children, to allow access to their friends or to allow Madeleine to exit and wander around the village? Was it all of the above or, as is more likely, none of them?
holly seems to think gerry was trying to hide the fact the apt was insecure....im just proving her wrong
-
But I see similar in your own posts with GA.
Too much black and white and no shades of grey imo.
Imo key to the case are ingress and egress and much of what investigators were led to believe in this regard by T9 was clearly wrong.
Is it any wonder that just as you and others feel it necessary to remind yourselves of what you think are the McCann shortcomings that to maintain a balance it is necessary to be reminded that Amaral carries quite a bit of baggage along with him too.
-
I don't know anything about the above but I think trained investigators for whatever reason(s) do get fixated on pursuing false trails eg Asst Chief Constable George Oldfield and Wearside Jack is a classic example.
It happens with miscarriages of justice too where an investigator(s) forms a theory/identifies a suspect and then dismisses anything which contradicts and will even go as far as fabricating evidence to support the theory/suspect. I guess its part of the human condition in trying to make sense of puzzles! Confirmation bias.
Isn’t that precisely what the PJ did thanks to Amaral’s gut feel?
-
holly seems to think gerry was trying to hide the fact the apt was insecure....im just proving her wrong
I think he was reticent about the state of the patio door.
Davel answer me this please. On morning of 3rd May MM asked her parents why they hadn't come when she and SM were crying the previous night. The McCanns say they asked MM when she cried but she moved on and the McCanns let it drop. The McCanns say that they agreed they had to be extra vigilant with their checks as obviously they didn't want any of the children waking and crying without either of them there. When they left for tapas at circa 8.30 pm they are precise about how they left everything eg bedroom door 10cm ajar. Come GM's check at circa 9 pm he states the door had moved out of position and he initially thought this was evidence that MM had been up and about. He states upon checking and seeing MM he returned the door to its rightful position. Upon returning to the table he does not mention this to KM and it appears is so nonchalant that he is quite happy for MO to check at 9. 30 pm who had no idea about how he should find the door. Come circa 10 pm KM checks and she also finds the door out of position and MM disappeared.
Internal doors do not flap around without someone or something causing them to do so. GM does not say anything about letting in a draft or put forward any other explanation for the 'moving door' other than MM and yet despite MM's comment in the morning and despite the McCanns agreeing they needed to be extra vigilant GM does not mention to KM upon returning to the table or ask MO to check the position of the door to see if it had changed or decide to go back and check himself.
-
I think he was reticent about the state of the patio door.
Davel answer me this please. On morning of 3rd May MM asked her parents why they hadn't come when she and SM were crying the previous night. The McCanns say they asked MM when she cried but she moved on and the McCanns let it drop. The McCanns say that they agreed they had to be extra vigilant with their checks as obviously they didn't want any of the children waking and crying without either of them there. When they left for tapas at circa 8.30 pm they are precise about how they left everything eg bedroom door 10cm ajar. Come GM's check at circa 9 pm he states the door had moved out of position and he initially thought this was evidence that MM had been up and about. He states upon checking and seeing MM he returned the door to its rightful position. Upon returning to the table he does not mention this to KM and it appears is so nonchalant that he is quite happy for MO to check at 9. 30 pm who had no idea about how he should find the door. Come circa 10 pm KM checks and she also finds the door out of position and MM disappeared.
Internal doors do not flap around without someone or something causing them to do so. GM does not say anything about letting in a draft or put forward any other explanation for the 'moving door' other than MM and yet despite MM's comment in the morning and despite the McCanns agreeing they needed to be extra vigilant GM does not mention to KM upon returning to the table or ask MO to check the position of the door to see if it had changed or decide to go back and check himself.
wheres the cite i asked you for first
-
wheres the cite i asked you for first
Cite for what?
-
I think he was reticent about the state of the patio door.
Davel answer me this please. On morning of 3rd May MM asked her parents why they hadn't come when she and SM were crying the previous night. The McCanns say they asked MM when she cried but she moved on and the McCanns let it drop. The McCanns say that they agreed they had to be extra vigilant with their checks as obviously they didn't want any of the children waking and crying without either of them there. When they left for tapas at circa 8.30 pm they are precise about how they left everything eg bedroom door 10cm ajar. Come GM's check at circa 9 pm he states the door had moved out of position and he initially thought this was evidence that MM had been up and about. He states upon checking and seeing MM he returned the door to its rightful position. Upon returning to the table he does not mention this to KM and it appears is so nonchalant that he is quite happy for MO to check at 9. 30 pm who had no idea about how he should find the door. Come circa 10 pm KM checks and she also finds the door out of position and MM disappeared.
Internal doors do not flap around without someone or something causing them to do so. GM does not say anything about letting in a draft or put forward any other explanation for the 'moving door' other than MM and yet despite MM's comment in the morning and despite the McCanns agreeing they needed to be extra vigilant GM does not mention to KM upon returning to the table or ask MO to check the position of the door to see if it had changed or decide to go back and check himself.
So what? After his check he spent several minutes chatting with Jes, it was not uppermost in his mind and as he saw his children fast asleep in their beds what was to tell?
-
Isn’t that precisely what the PJ did thanks to Amaral’s gut feel?
The thread is about whether investigators were misled in the early hours/days. Of course if witnesses are reticent about coming forward with info and/or provide inconsistent and contradictory info then yes an investigation can go off in the wrong direction.
-
Is it any wonder that just as you and others feel it necessary to remind yourselves of what you think are the McCann shortcomings that to maintain a balance it is necessary to be reminded that Amaral carries quite a bit of baggage along with him too.
Don't you see any difference between those who were the last people to see a child before it disappeared off the face of the planet and one of the policemen who investigated that disappearance? A policeman, moreover, who wasn't in charge of the investigation, despite people trying to insist for 12 years that he was.
-
So what? After his check he spent several minutes chatting with Jes, it was not uppermost in his mind and as he saw his children fast asleep in their beds what was to tell?
So what? MM specifically asked her parents at breakfast why they hadn't come when she and Sean were crying the previous night. McCanns have a definite routine at night with the children which included leaving the door ajar 10 cm to allow a glimmer of light in. GM checks finds door half-open. His only explanation for this is MM up and about but finding her in her bed (or so he tells us) he returns the door to its rightful position but doesn't say to KM 'I don't want to alarm you but I think MM may have been up and about as the door was half open, she's in her bed asleep now. I'll go back and check all is ok again shortly'.
-
The thread is about whether investigators were misled in the early hours/days. Of course if witnesses are reticent about coming forward with info and/or provide inconsistent and contradictory info then yes an investigation can go off in the wrong direction.
Gerry said on the 4th the patio doors were unlocked
-
So what? MM specifically asked her parents at breakfast why they hadn't come when she and Sean were crying the previous night. McCanns have a definite routine at night with the children which included leaving the door ajar 10 cm to allow a glimmer of light in. GM checks finds door half-open. His only explanation for this is MM up and about but finding her in her bed (or so he tells us) he returns the door to its rightful position but doesn't say to KM 'I don't want to alarm you but I think MM may have been up and about as the door was half open, she's in her bed asleep now. I'll go back and check all is ok again shortly'.
I think you’re making something out of nothing to fit your prejudiced narrative, frankly. Gerry observed that his children were safe and asleep, what was the cause for alarm? Do you think he should have been on high alert for an abductor at that stage?
-
So what? MM specifically asked her parents at breakfast why they hadn't come when she and Sean were crying the previous night. McCanns have a definite routine at night with the children which included leaving the door ajar 10 cm to allow a glimmer of light in. GM checks finds door half-open. His only explanation for this is MM up and about but finding her in her bed (or so he tells us) he returns the door to its rightful position but doesn't say to KM 'I don't want to alarm you but I think MM may have been up and about as the door was half open, she's in her bed asleep now. I'll go back and check all is ok again shortly'.
Sometimes being pedant assists those who can't, don't understand plain speaking.
GM notices the door has moved- he may suspect MBM was awake at some point, and may have wandered to toilet,parents room.where ever, he check to see his daughter on top of the bed exactly like he left her as it was a warm evening. he moved the door back to its original position. no more to be said? well I think so.
1. when he saw his daughter as he left her- who moved the door?
2. If he thought his daughter was up and wandering around - she would have been faced with the same plight as the previous night- all three of them alone and no parents around.
3. would she just climb back into bed to the same position, as the temperature is an issue here, or go back under the covers (where her mother claims she left her all snuggled in because it was cold)
4. OR would she go out via the patio door to look for her parents and disappear?
The devil is in the detail.
-
I think you’re making something out of nothing to fit your prejudiced narrative, frankly. Gerry observed that his children were safe and asleep, what was the cause for alarm? Do you think he should have been on high alert for an abductor at that stage?
No I don't think he should have been on high alert for an abductor at that stage just one or more of his children who might have woken up and become upset that their parents were not around as MM claimed happened the previous evening. The fact GM claims the door had moved and he thought MM might have been up and about should have been enough for him to at least to discuss with KM when he returned to the table and certainly for either himself or KM to check at 9.30 pm not leave it to MO who had no idea about the door.
-
Sometimes being pedant assists those who can't, don't understand plain speaking.
GM notices the door has moved- he may suspect MBM was awake at some point, and may have wandered to toilet,parents room.where ever, he check to see his daughter on top of the bed exactly like he left her as it was a warm evening. he moved the door back to its original position. no more to be said? well I think so.
1. when he saw his daughter as he left her- who moved the door?
2. If he thought his daughter was up and wandering around - she would have been faced with the same plight as the previous night- all three of them alone and no parents around.
3. would she just climb back into bed to the same position, as the temperature is an issue here, or go back under the covers (where her mother claims she left her all snuggled in because it was cold)
4. OR would she go out via the patio door to look for her parents and disappear?
The devil is in the detail.
It certainly is.
I tend to think he did not notice the door had changed and/or physically checked the children. He said he did because it would look awful if he said 'I've no idea if any of the children were missing at 9.30 pm as I didn't actually look in on them and I've no idea whether or not the window was open/shutter raised'.
-
No I don't think he should have been on high alert for an abductor at that stage just one or more of his children who might have woken up and become upset that their parents were not around as MM claimed happened the previous evening. The fact GM claims the door had moved and he thought MM might have been up and about should have been enough for him to at least to discuss with KM when he returned to the table and certainly for either himself or KM to check at 9.30 pm not leave it to MO who had no idea about the door.
I think this is a totally unwarranted criticism IMO, as so many of them are.
-
Sometimes being pedant assists those who can't, don't understand plain speaking.
GM notices the door has moved- he may suspect MBM was awake at some point, and may have wandered to toilet,parents room.where ever, he check to see his daughter on top of the bed exactly like he left her as it was a warm evening. he moved the door back to its original position. no more to be said? well I think so.
1. when he saw his daughter as he left her- who moved the door?
2. If he thought his daughter was up and wandering around - she would have been faced with the same plight as the previous night- all three of them alone and no parents around.
3. would she just climb back into bed to the same position, as the temperature is an issue here, or go back under the covers (where her mother claims she left her all snuggled in because it was cold)
4. OR would she go out via the patio door to look for her parents and disappear?
The devil is in the detail.
She was asleep, why would Gerry need to consider all these possibilities?
-
It certainly is.
I tend to think he did not notice the door had changed and/or physically checked the children. He said he did because it would look awful if he said 'I've no idea if any of the children were missing at 9.30 pm as I didn't actually look in on them and I've no idea whether or not the window was open/shutter raised'.
Why do you think he had to invent a story about a moving door then?
-
Why do you think he had to invent a story about a moving door then?
To explain why he entered the bedroom.
-
This is nothing short of mind numbing stuff.
-
It certainly is.
I tend to think he did not notice the door had changed and/or physically checked the children. He said he did because it would look awful if he said 'I've no idea if any of the children were missing at 9.30 pm as I didn't actually look in on them and I've no idea whether or not the window was open/shutter raised'.
Yes I agree Holly, that is a distinct possibility. I am inclined to believe that.
I would also add that they would have to admit,with the bad time line, that no one had checked on the children at all, apart from listening at the door. And that would have been the last time Gerry said he saw her, was at bed time , when he left her on top of the bed as it was warm.
which conflics with Kate saying it was cold and MBM was snuggled in bed. Therefore, last physical check could have been around the bed time.
However, it leaves the question open as to why they had all these witness statements on this one evening. DP turning up to 'help' Kate. After claiming they never checked each others children before, we have two other males checking on the McCann children that particular evening.
-
To explain why he entered the bedroom.
Why did he have to give an excuse? Surely it would have been perfectly reasonable to say “I popped my head in the room and all was well”?
-
Why did he have to give an excuse? Surely it would have been perfectly reasonable to say “I popped my head in the room and all was well”?
Exactly!
-
Exactly!
So why did he have to “invent” the moving door then?
-
No I don't think he should have been on high alert for an abductor at that stage just one or more of his children who might have woken up and become upset that their parents were not around as MM claimed happened the previous evening. The fact GM claims the door had moved and he thought MM might have been up and about should have been enough for him to at least to discuss with KM when he returned to the table and certainly for either himself or KM to check at 9.30 pm not leave it to MO who had no idea about the door.
You haven’t clocked the illogicality in your argument have you? You claim Gerry had to invent an open door and a physical check to make him seem more caring and then you go on to berate him for not being caring enough to tell his wife about the moving door or to warn MO about it. So either way Gerry is in the wrong as far as you’re concerned. He didn’t have to invent the moving door he could simply have told police he popped his head in to check that all was well, and then he wouldn’t have had anything to report back to his wife either, and therefore would have been totally off the hook for failing to notice or report anything suspicious at the time.
-
You haven’t clocked the illogicality in your argument have you? You claim Gerry had to invent an open door and a physical check to make him seem more caring and then you go on to berate him for not being caring enough to tell his wife about the moving door or to warn MO about it. So either way Gerry is in the wrong as far as you’re concerned. He didn’t have to invent the moving door he could simply have told police he popped his head in to check that all was well, and then he wouldn’t have had anything to report back to his wife either, and therefore would have been totally off the hook for failing to notice or report anything suspicious at the time.
I think the point Holly is making is that Gerry's attempt to appear more caring failed because if he really was more caring he wouldn't have kept quiet about the door.
-
I think the point Holly is making is that Gerry's attempt to appear more caring failed because if he really was more caring he wouldn't have kept quiet about the door.
What ???
-
I think the point Holly is making is that Gerry's attempt to appear more caring failed because if he really was more caring he wouldn't have kept quiet about the door.
Gerry and Kate were on holiday, Madeleine said a sweeping remark that they didn't come when she cried then went off to play. Madeleine was sound asleep when Gerry did his check, so not awake and crying. He found the door open more than they had left it, so thought maybe Madeleine had got up and gone back to bed. Why would that be foremost on his mind when he went back to the Tapas bar? Madeleine was asleep in her bed, he wouldn't have been thinking 'an abductor had come into the bedroom' with hindsight it's easy to think he should have said something.
-
Please keep to the topic guys and cut the snide remarks otherwise I will impose sanctions.
And by the way, the mass deletion of post content by any member is seen as disruption and will result in permanent account deletion.
-
Gerry and Kate were on holiday, Madeleine said a sweeping remark that they didn't come when she cried then went off to play. Madeleine was sound asleep when Gerry did his check, so not awake and crying. He found the door open more than they had left it, so thought maybe Madeleine had got up and gone back to bed. Why would that be foremost on his mind when he went back to the Tapas bar? Madeleine was asleep in her bed, he wouldn't have been thinking 'an abductor had come into the bedroom' with hindsight it's easy to think he should have said something.
That's not a sweeping remark - that's a very pointed, specific remark from a 3 year old child. Chilling.
-
Gerry and Kate were on holiday, Madeleine said a sweeping remark that they didn't come when she cried then went off to play. Madeleine was sound asleep when Gerry did his check, so not awake and crying. He found the door open more than they had left it, so thought maybe Madeleine had got up and gone back to bed. Why would that be foremost on his mind when he went back to the Tapas bar? Madeleine was asleep in her bed, he wouldn't have been thinking 'an abductor had come into the bedroom' with hindsight it's easy to think he should have said something.
So you go out every evening leaving your children home alone. You decide that looking in on them every half hour is satisfactory. Then your daughter makes a comment which suggests that something happened during one of those half hours; your children cried and you missed it. Even worse, your child noticed you were absent.
So what is your response? According to your friends you left a door unlocked so your child could find you if there was more crying; even though you didn't really believe her;
"Could Madeleine and Sean have woken up while we were at dinner? If so, it was worrying, obviously, but it didn’t seem very probable." [madeleine]
According to their spokesman Clarence Mitchell;
He said Kate and Gerry discussed the matter and and decided it was safe to go out to the tapas bar on the evening of May 3 once the children were asleep - but they would be more "active and diligent" in their checks.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-and-gerry-mccanns-fury-over-302522
What did that mean? The same half hourly checks they had been making for the previous 5 evenings, apparently. During the first of those checks a door appeared to have been interfered with. Was it the child who moved it? Apparently not, she was sleeping soundly in exactly the same position she had been in 30 minutes earlier. Gerry therefore went off without solving the mystery, and without giving it another thought, apparently.
-
That's not a sweeping remark - that's a very pointed, specific remark from a 3 year old child. Chilling.
And even that one is in some doubt as to exactly who was crying. There are at least two definitions on which of the children that Madeleine mentioned.
-
So you go out every evening leaving your children home alone. You decide that looking in on them every half hour is satisfactory. Then your daughter makes a comment which suggests that something happened during one of those half hours; your children cried and you missed it. Even worse, your child noticed you were absent.
So what is your response? According to your friends you left a door unlocked so your child could find you if there was more crying; even though you didn't really believe her;
"Could Madeleine and Sean have woken up while we were at dinner? If so, it was worrying, obviously, but it didn’t seem very probable." [madeleine]
According to their spokesman Clarence Mitchell;
He said Kate and Gerry discussed the matter and and decided it was safe to go out to the tapas bar on the evening of May 3 once the children were asleep - but they would be more "active and diligent" in their checks.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-and-gerry-mccanns-fury-over-302522
What did that mean? The same half hourly checks they had been making for the previous 5 evenings, apparently. During the first of those checks a door appeared to have been interfered with. Was it the child who moved it? Apparently not, she was sleeping soundly in exactly the same position she had been in 30 minutes earlier. Gerry therefore went off without solving the mystery, and without giving it another thought, apparently.
Have you never come across a situation that you found momentarily odd, and then discarded it beyond the moment.
No, of course you haven't.
-
And even that one is in some doubt as to exactly who was crying. There are at least two definitions on which of the children that Madeleine mentioned.
Which means her parents were so concerned they couldn't actually remember what she'd said?
-
Have you never come across a situation that you found momentarily odd, and then discarded it beyond the moment.
No, of course you haven't.
I once came upon a similarly odd situation related to my children and I took steps to be on hand to protect them just in case.
-
Which means her parents were so concerned they couldn't actually remember what she'd said?
That is grossly unfair. It has all been used and abused by The Media.
Or are you suggesting that The McCanns came up with conflicting statements?
-
I once came upon a similarly odd situation related to my children and I took steps to be on hand to protect them just in case.
Jolly well done and bully for you. I was never that perfect.
-
That is grossly unfair. It has all been used and abused by The Media.
Or are you suggesting that The McCanns came up with conflicting statements?
Yes.
-
Yes.
So you think that The McCanns lied about which of the children were supposed to have been crying.
Why would they do that? This doesn't make sense. What bearing would this have on who stole what?
-
So you think that The McCanns lied about which of the children were supposed to have been crying.
Why would they do that? This doesn't make sense. What bearing would this have on who stole what?
On 4th May they both signed statements saying that the twins had cried. This was later changed to Sean and Madeleine had cried. I didn't say they lied, btw, those were your words. I mentioned forgetting what their daughter said to them.
-
So you go out every evening leaving your children home alone. You decide that looking in on them every half hour is satisfactory. Then your daughter makes a comment which suggests that something happened during one of those half hours; your children cried and you missed it. Even worse, your child noticed you were absent.
So what is your response? According to your friends you left a door unlocked so your child could find you if there was more crying; even though you didn't really believe her;
"Could Madeleine and Sean have woken up while we were at dinner? If so, it was worrying, obviously, but it didn’t seem very probable." [madeleine]
According to their spokesman Clarence Mitchell;
He said Kate and Gerry discussed the matter and and decided it was safe to go out to the tapas bar on the evening of May 3 once the children were asleep - but they would be more "active and diligent" in their checks.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-and-gerry-mccanns-fury-over-302522
What did that mean? The same half hourly checks they had been making for the previous 5 evenings, apparently. During the first of those checks a door appeared to have been interfered with. Was it the child who moved it? Apparently not, she was sleeping soundly in exactly the same position she had been in 30 minutes earlier. Gerry therefore went off without solving the mystery, and without giving it another thought, apparently.
Would you immediately think something had happened to Madeleine during on of those 'half hours'? Madeleine said why didn't you come when I cried, so they didn't know when she had cried. I honestly believe Madeleine was talking about the Tuesday night, when one of the twins woke her up and she called Daddy.
-
So you go out every evening leaving your children home alone. You decide that looking in on them every half hour is satisfactory. Then your daughter makes a comment which suggests that something happened during one of those half hours; your children cried and you missed it. Even worse, your child noticed you were absent.
So what is your response? According to your friends you left a door unlocked so your child could find you if there was more crying; even though you didn't really believe her;
"Could Madeleine and Sean have woken up while we were at dinner? If so, it was worrying, obviously, but it didn’t seem very probable." [madeleine]
According to their spokesman Clarence Mitchell;
He said Kate and Gerry discussed the matter and and decided it was safe to go out to the tapas bar on the evening of May 3 once the children were asleep - but they would be more "active and diligent" in their checks.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kate-and-gerry-mccanns-fury-over-302522
What did that mean? The same half hourly checks they had been making for the previous 5 evenings, apparently. During the first of those checks a door appeared to have been interfered with. Was it the child who moved it? Apparently not, she was sleeping soundly in exactly the same position she had been in 30 minutes earlier. Gerry therefore went off without solving the mystery, and without giving it another thought, apparently.
When Madeleine told the McCanns she woke up did the McCanns think “something must have happened to wake her up”?
-
This is nothing short of mind numbing stuff.
Goading. Again.
-
On 4th May they both signed statements saying that the twins had cried. This was later changed to Sean and Madeleine had cried. I didn't say they lied, btw, those were your words. I mentioned forgetting what their daughter said to them.
Kate and Gerry McCann volunteered that information. Why would they do that if there was anything at all dodgy about it ??? why would they forget what Madeleine said ??? and why would they get it wrong ???
Quote from the woman who was there and knows exactly what was said ...
At breakfast time, Madeleine had a question for us. ‘Why didn’t you come when Sean and I cried last night?’
madeleine Kate McCann
-
Kate and Gerry McCann volunteered that information. Why would they do that if there was anything at all dodgy about it ??? why would they forget what Madeleine said ??? and why would they get it wrong ???
Quote from the woman who was there and knows exactly what was said ...
At breakfast time, Madeleine had a question for us. ‘Why didn’t you come when Sean and I cried last night?’
madeleine Kate McCann
Did she offer Madeleine an explanation?
-
Kate and Gerry McCann volunteered that information. Why would they do that if there was anything at all dodgy about it ??? why would they forget what Madeleine said ??? and why would they get it wrong ???
Quote from the woman who was there and knows exactly what was said ...
At breakfast time, Madeleine had a question for us. ‘Why didn’t you come when Sean and I cried last night?’
madeleine Kate McCann
The same woman who was there, refused to answer and help the investigation,go figure.
-
The same woman who was there, refused to answer and help the investigation,go figure.
Did she really? Refuse to answer and help the investigation? So her statements to the police were fabricated by whom?
-
Yes really.
49 --- Asked if she is aware that her failure to respond to the questions put in the cause of the investigation, which seeks to know what happened to her daughter, she replied that
yes, if the investigation so thinks.
-
Yes really.
49 --- Asked if she is aware that her failure to respond to the questions put in the cause of the investigation, which seeks to know what happened to her daughter, she replied that
yes, if the investigation so thinks.
So she never answered any questions put to her the police, ever?
-
Yes really.
49 --- Asked if she is aware that her failure to respond to the questions put in the cause of the investigation, which seeks to know what happened to her daughter, she replied that
yes, if the investigation so thinks.
The facts are ... - the investigation was was not into Madeleine's case
- the investigation had given up on looking for Madeleine having decided she was dead and wasn't worth bothering about any longer
- the investigation was now a criminal investigation into Madeleine's mother
- to enable this to progress the PJ made her an arguida
- this entitled her to the right to be advised by a lawyer during interrogation
- this entitled her to the right of silence
- the legal advice given by her lawyer was to exercise her right to silence
- this she did
I should perhaps have mentioned that she was interrogated for many many hours immediately prior to being made an arguida (softening up ??)
Rather cynical to be asked about Madeleine by a man representing an organisation which ... in my opinion ... had already thrown the missing child to the wolves.
-
Yes really.
49 --- Asked if she is aware that her failure to respond to the questions put in the cause of the investigation, which seeks to know what happened to her daughter, she replied that
yes, if the investigation so thinks.
just because the inept incompetent pj say something doesnt make it true
-
just because the inept incompetent pj say something doesnt make it true
I feel the same way about the McCanns.
-
I feel the same way about the McCanns.
nothing wrong with that....every statement has to be judged on its merits
-
The facts are ... - the investigation was was not into Madeleine's case
- the investigation had given up on looking for Madeleine having decided she was dead and wasn't worth bothering about any longer
- the investigation was now a criminal investigation into Madeleine's mother
- to enable this to progress the PJ made her an arguida
- this entitled her to the right to be advised by a lawyer during interrogation
- this entitled her to the right of silence
- the legal advice given by her lawyer was to exercise her right to silence
- this she did
I should perhaps have mentioned that she was interrogated for many many hours immediately prior to being made an arguida (softening up ??)
Rather cynical to be asked about Madeleine by a man representing an organisation which ... in my opinion ... had already thrown the missing child to the wolves.
Kate was interviewed from 3pm-5pm; 5.15pm-8pm, and 10pm-11pm on 6th September.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
I make that five and three quarter hours. That isn't many many in my opinion.
-
You haven’t clocked the illogicality in your argument have you? You claim Gerry had to invent an open door and a physical check to make him seem more caring and then you go on to berate him for not being caring enough to tell his wife about the moving door or to warn MO about it. So either way Gerry is in the wrong as far as you’re concerned. He didn’t have to invent the moving door he could simply have told police he popped his head in to check that all was well, and then he wouldn’t have had anything to report back to his wife either, and therefore would have been totally off the hook for failing to notice or report anything suspicious at the time.
I dont even think anything is remotely suspicious about it
It's just a bit more Mccann bashing IMO
-
Kate was interviewed from 3pm-5pm; 5.15pm-8pm, and 10pm-11pm on 6th September.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
I make that five and three quarter hours. That isn't many many in my opinion.
From 3pm until 11pm makes for a very long and stressful day in my opinion.
-
From 3pm until 11pm makes for a very long and stressful day in my opinion.
Maybe so, but it's not many many hours of interrogation.
-
Maybe so, but it's not many many hours of interrogation.
That would be unbelievably long for someone in Kates mental state at that time. In my opinion. I bet she could hardly think straight.
But then Amaral is known for his, IMO, inhuman treatment of his suspects, isn't he ? Leonora Cipriano
-
Maybe so, but it's not many many hours of interrogation.
The Diane Abbot School of Mathematics then.
-
That would be unbelievably long for someone in Kates mental state at that time. In my opinion. I bet she could hardly think straight.
But then Amaral is known for his, IMO, inhuman treatment of his suspects, isn't he ? Leonora Cipriano
Chief prosecution witness in the trial of Jimmy abductor will test the mental reserve.
-
Maybe so, but it's not many many hours of interrogation.
Miniscule in relation to a time a suspect can be questioned in this country.
-
Kate was interviewed from 3pm-5pm; 5.15pm-8pm, and 10pm-11pm on 6th September.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm
I make that five and three quarter hours. That isn't many many in my opinion.
Great. So it is a lie to say she refused to co-operate with the police inquiry. At least we got that sorted. Nearly six hours of answering their questions is alot of chat.
-
Great. So it is a lie to say she refused to co-operate with the police inquiry. At least we got that sorted. Nearly six hours of answering their questions is alot of chat.
She was there for that length of time. Her degree of participation and cooperation is open to question - unless you have evidence to say otherwise.
-
She was there for that length of time. Her degree of participation and cooperation is open to question - unless you have evidence to say otherwise.
Erm...yes, in the link provided by G-Unit earlier, from the files, hope that’s a reliable enough source for you
-
That would be unbelievably long for someone in Kates mental state at that time. In my opinion. I bet she could hardly think straight.
But then Amaral is known for his, IMO, inhuman treatment of his suspects, isn't he ? Leonora Cipriano
A wee 'IMO' and the transparent rhetorical context doesn't stop the comment being defamatory. You'll need your facts straight if you're going down this line.
-
A wee 'IMO' and the transparent rhetorical context doesn't stop the comment being defamatory. You'll need your facts straight if you're going down this line.
You’re becoming a bore IMO.
-
Erm...yes, in the link provided by G-Unit earlier, from the files, hope that’s a reliable enough source for you
OK, thank you. How far back ? Post number, perhaps ?
-
You’re becoming a bore IMO.
Puzzled by the disparity in moderation.
Sadie's post should have been deleted on sight.
But I am a bore - I'm here. Not exactly mountain biking in Snowdonia, on a surveillance OP in the Med.
-
OK, thank you. How far back ? Post number, perhaps ?
Not very far dear, in fact I quoted it in my post to which you replied, so I’m sure you’ll manage to find it if you try hard.
-
Puzzled by the disparity in moderation.
Sadie's post should have been deleted on sight.
But I am a bore - I'm here. Not exactly mountain biking in Snowdonia, on a surveillance OP in the Med.
You gotta let it go, it’s the only way. Accept that there is uneven moderation, and accept that we are all victims of it (apart from SIL and the mods themselves of course). Now, go climb a mountain while you still can.
-
That would be unbelievably long for someone in Kates mental state at that time. In my opinion. I bet she could hardly think straight.
But then Amaral is known for his, IMO, inhuman treatment of his suspects, isn't he ? Leonora Cipriano
Strangely, I was feeling OK. I think by now I’d switched on to autopilot and an inner strength and
calmness I hadn’t expected to find had begun to take over
Kate McCann madeleine.
-
Not very far dear, in fact I quoted it in my post to which you replied, so I’m sure you’ll manage to find it if you try hard.
Indeed I have and she doesn't seem to have said an awful lot during the time period - IMO
-
Indeed I have and she doesn't seem to have said an awful lot during the time period - IMO
Yeah, there were long 20 minute silences where she just stared intently at the questioners, whilst refusing to answer, they just left those bits out of the transcript.
-
Indeed I have and she doesn't seem to have said an awful lot during the time period - IMO
That's either because she didn't... Or lots was left out... Which seems more likely to me
-
How many hours was Gerry questioned for and where’s his transcript?
-
Wouldn't it have been helpful if like the rogs... The witness statements had been audio recorded. Unfortunately the PJ were totally unprofessional imo. They were able to choose exactly what was and wasn't recorded and what was put in the, statements
-
Here we go, four hours and about the same number of pages. I expect he did lots of prolonged periods of silence too, whilst refusing to cooperate which the police decided not to mention
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GERRY-MCCANN-ARGUIDO.htm#p10p2567
-
Wouldn't it have been helpful if like the rogs... The witness statements had been audio recorded. Unfortunately the PJ were totally unprofessional imo. They were able to choose exactly what was and wasn't recorded and what was put in the, statements
Totally agree.
-
Wouldn't it have been helpful if like the rogs... The witness statements had been audio recorded. Unfortunately the PJ were totally unprofessional imo. They were able to choose exactly what was and wasn't recorded and what was put in the, statements
Helpful to whom? You would still have been reliant on a written transcript as with the rogatory interviews. No doubt, given your unfounded belief that the Portuguese police were biased against the McCanns you would still have criticised the transcripts.
-
Helpful to whom? You would still have been reliant on a written transcript as with the rogatory interviews. No doubt, given your unfounded belief that the Portuguese police were biased against the McCanns you would still have criticised the transcripts.
The Portuguese police WERE biased against the McCanns - one of them even wrote an extremely biased book about them, have you forgotten?
-
The Portuguese police WERE biased against the McCanns - one of them even wrote an extremely biased book about them, have you forgotten?
I think you are posting opinion as fact.
-
Helpful to whom? You would still have been reliant on a written transcript as with the rogatory interviews. No doubt, given your unfounded belief that the Portuguese police were biased against the McCanns you would still have criticised the transcripts.
What a totally untrue and biased opinion posted as fact
-
I think you are posting opinion as fact.
LOL... Your post, above to me is total opinion as fact
-
I think you are posting opinion as fact.
As are you claiming that it is an unfounded belief that the Portuguese were biased against the McCanns. My proof is Amaral's book (not to mention making them arguidos and therefore their prime suspects) - what's yours that they were not?
-
As are you claiming that it is an unfounded belief that the Portuguese were biased against the McCanns. My proof is Amaral's book (not to mention making them arguidos and therefore their prime suspects) - what's yours that they were not?
Hardly proof of bias *%87
The Portuguese were well within their right to do what they did given what had transpired. The changing stories taken with Kate McCann's refusal to answer the simplest of questions did them no favours. Add to this the information provided by Martin Smith when he said it was Gerry McCann who passed them carrying a young girl. Then there are the cadaver alerts to clothing laid out in the underground car park. It all adds up logically so little wonder the McCanns became persons of interest.
Far from being biased, I think the Portuguese police were extremely fair handed. Had the same thing happened in the UK the parents would have been hauled in for questioning much sooner imo.
-
As are you claiming that it is an unfounded belief that the Portuguese were biased against the McCanns. My proof is Amaral's book (not to mention making them arguidos and therefore their prime suspects) - what's yours that they were not?
Amaral's book describes the process of the investigation and it's conclusions up to 10th September. It may have been wrong, but that doesn't mean it was biased. You might as well say Operation Grange were biased when they made those four men arguidos.
-
Hardly proof of bias *%87
The Portuguese were well within their right to do what they did given what had transpired. The changing stories taken with Kate McCann's refusal to answer the simplest of questions did them no favours. Add to this the information provided by Martin Smith when he said it was Gerry McCann who passed them carrying a young girl. Then there are the cadaver alerts to clothing laid out in the underground car park. It all adds up logically so little wonder the McCanns became persons of interest.
Far from being biased, I think the Portuguese police were extremely fair handed. Had the same thing happened in the UK the parents would have been hauled in for questioning much sooner imo.
I think ant decent police force would have realised taht everytyhing you have psoted amounts to nothing......as the present PJ investigation seems to..
Smith is a good example of sceptic bias....his calim of 60 to 80 % is accepted as confirmation....the lady who saw maddie at a petrol station was 99% sure it was maddie...yet she is dismissed out of hand...thts plain proof of bias.
My take is that neither is positive confirmation
-
Amaral's book describes the process of the investigation and it's conclusions up to 10th September. It may have been wrong, but that doesn't mean it was biased. You might as well say Operation Grange were biased when they made those four men arguidos.
Amarals book goes much further than than the process of the investigation...can you really not see taht
-
Amarals book goes much further than than the process of the investigation...can you really not see taht
Please explain.
-
Please explain.
Where in the process does it say the dogs have helped solve two hundred cases
-
Amaral's book describes the process of the investigation and it's conclusions up to 10th September. It may have been wrong, but that doesn't mean it was biased. You might as well say Operation Grange were biased when they made those four men arguidos.
Amaral describes how he suspected the parents' involvement from day one, before he knew anything about anything apart from that they had left their kids unattended - nor did he appear to have changed his mind at any point during the investigation, or subsequently. I'd say that was pretty biased.
ETA: and yes, may be Op Grange was biased when it made 4 petty criminals arguidos. So...?
-
Hardly proof of bias *%87
The Portuguese were well within their right to do what they did given what had transpired. The changing stories taken with Kate McCann's refusal to answer the simplest of questions did them no favours. Add to this the information provided by Martin Smith when he said it was Gerry McCann who passed them carrying a young girl. Then there are the cadaver alerts to clothing laid out in the underground car park. It all adds up logically so little wonder the McCanns became persons of interest.
Far from being biased, I think the Portuguese police were extremely fair handed. Had the same thing happened in the UK the parents would have been hauled in for questioning much sooner imo.
The Portuguese police treated the McCanns not only with bias but with contempt IMO, abandoning the search for their child after one week, marking sightings (such as the one on the 4th May at Lagos Marina) as "no further investigation required", keeping them in the dark about the investigation, leaking juicy titbits to the paper that seemed to suggest they were guilty of something, etc etc etc. You may think that's fair and unbiased but I certainly do not!!
-
Strangely, I was feeling OK. I think by now I’d switched on to autopilot and an inner strength and
calmness I hadn’t expected to find had begun to take over
Kate McCann madeleine.
Why do you insist on taking quotes from Kate's book entirely out of context ??? It makes your posts untrustworthy when you twist and turn words to suit your own prejudices and not what actually transpired.
Sadie made reference to the marathon interrogation Kate had endured; your chosen response is nothing to do with that ... it is about coming to terms with an entirely different situation many hours after that and misrepresents the situation under discussion.
In my opinion that is misleading and dishonest. I do wish you would desist from employing this technique.
-
Where in the process does it say the dogs have helped solve two hundred cases
How does that demonstrate bias?
-
How does that demonstrate bias?
I never said it did... I responded to your claim that the book was based on the process... Have a read back
-
Why do you insist on taking quotes from Kate's book entirely out of context ??? It makes your posts untrustworthy when you twist and turn words to suit your own prejudices and not what actually transpired.
Sadie made reference to the marathon interrogation Kate had endured; your chosen response is nothing to do with that ... it is about coming to terms with an entirely different situation many hours after that and misrepresents the situation under discussion.
In my opinion that is misleading and dishonest. I do wish you would desist from employing this technique.
Sadie said;
"That would be unbelievably long for someone in Kates mental state at that time. In my opinion. I bet she could hardly think straight."
Sadie gave her opinion on what Kate McCann might have been thinking and feeling at the time. I responded by quoting, in Kate's own words, how she was actually feeling before the interview commenced.
My post did not refer to 'coming to terms with an entirely different situation many hours after that'
There was nothing misleading or dishonest in my post, it was factual.
Therefore your accusations are misleading and wrong imo.
-
I never said it did... I responded to your claim that the book was based on the process... Have a read back
The facts related to the criminal investigation of Madeleine McCann's disappearance that the defendant Goncalo Amaral refers in the book, in an interview with the newspaper Correio da Manha and in the documentary are mostly facts that occurred and are documented in this investigation (clauses 27 and 28 of the instruction basis) .
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0
-
The facts related to the criminal investigation of Madeleine McCann's disappearance that the defendant Goncalo Amaral refers in the book, in an interview with the newspaper Correio da Manha and in the documentary are mostly facts that occurred and are documented in this investigation (clauses 27 and 28 of the instruction basis) .
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0
Amaral claimed it was a fact that Madeleine died in the apartment, also that there was a simulation of an abduction, I guess you believe that’s a fact do you?
-
The facts related to the criminal investigation of Madeleine McCann's disappearance that the defendant Goncalo Amaral refers in the book, in an interview with the newspaper Correio da Manha and in the documentary are mostly facts that occurred and are documented in this investigation (clauses 27 and 28 of the instruction basis) .
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6307.0
I find that statement.. Based mostly on the process.... An odd thing to stay... As regards libel.. Mostly... Doesn't matter... It's no defence. If there is one libellous statement... That's it
-
Sadie said;
"That would be unbelievably long for someone in Kates mental state at that time. In my opinion. I bet she could hardly think straight."
Sadie gave her opinion on what Kate McCann might have been thinking and feeling at the time. I responded by quoting, in Kate's own words, how she was actually feeling before the interview commenced.
My post did not refer to 'coming to terms with an entirely different situation many hours after that'
There was nothing misleading or dishonest in my post, it was factual.
Therefore your accusations are misleading and wrong imo.
Oh Kate's comment was factual alright ... insofar as Kate wrote it. But it is not in context and is therefore misleading.
You have taken it upon yourself to pervert it from the situation under discussion here and the resulting trauma described at length in Kate's book into deliberate distortion using Kate's own words to do so.
____________________________________________________________________________
NB
6 September: Portuguese police interview Kate McCann for 11 hours as a witness in the presence of her lawyer.
7 September: During further questioning of Mr and Mrs McCann, detectives make them both "arguidos". Later, a family representative says officers believe they have found traces of Madeleine's blood in the McCanns' hire car.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13386785
____________________________________________________________________________
The interview under discussion and to which reference was made was that which took place on the 6th of September.
You have chosen to take Kate's description of an entirely different situation when she had progressed from one set of traumas engineered by the PJ to the process of entering fight mode for herself, Madeleine and the rest of her family particularly the twins, as she prepared herself for the forthcoming ordeal of being made an arguida which happened on the 7th of September.
The point is that Sadie was referring to the lengthy interrogation Kate had already suffered not the forthcoming one which required an entirely different mindset.
You are confusing one with t'other; the passive witness anxious to do all she could for her daughter transformed into the "lioness" who knew she had to fight tooth and nail for all three of her children and herself ... and good on her for having the strength of character which enabled her to do that !
You have ignored any reference Kate made to that and she wrote about it at length; specifically for example her fears for her children. You have chosen comment which was irrelevant to what was then past (and the subject of discussion here) but was entirely relevant to what she knew she was to face in the immediate future and her feelings about that. Two entirely different situations and by using the wrong one to describe the other you are confusing the issue in your posting.
-
Amaral claimed it was a fact that Madeleine died in the apartment, also that there was a simulation of an abduction, I guess you believe that’s a fact do you?
It could well be true, until her fate is revealed, anything is possible.
-
Oh Kate's comment was factual alright ... insofar as Kate wrote it. But it is not in context and is therefore misleading.
You have taken it upon yourself to pervert it from the situation under discussion here and the resulting trauma described at length in Kate's book into deliberate distortion using Kate's own words to do so.
____________________________________________________________________________
NB
6 September: Portuguese police interview Kate McCann for 11 hours as a witness in the presence of her lawyer.
7 September: During further questioning of Mr and Mrs McCann, detectives make them both "arguidos". Later, a family representative says officers believe they have found traces of Madeleine's blood in the McCanns' hire car.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13386785
____________________________________________________________________________
The interview under discussion and to which reference was made was that which took place on the 6th of September.
You have chosen to take Kate's description of an entirely different situation when she had progressed from one set of traumas engineered by the PJ to the process of entering fight mode for herself, Madeleine and the rest of her family particularly the twins, as she prepared herself for the forthcoming ordeal of being made an arguida which happened on the 7th of September.
The point is that Sadie was referring to the lengthy interrogation Kate had already suffered not the forthcoming one which required an entirely different mindset.
You are confusing one with t'other; the passive witness anxious to do all she could for her daughter transformed into the "lioness" who knew she had to fight tooth and nail for all three of her children and herself ... and good on her for having the strength of character which enabled her to do that !
You have ignored any reference Kate made to that and she wrote about it at length; specifically for example her fears for her children. You have chosen comment which was irrelevant to what was then past (and the subject of discussion here) but was entirely relevant to what she knew she was to face in the immediate future and her feelings about that. Two entirely different situations and by using the wrong one to describe the other you are confusing the issue in your posting.
On the basis of what actually occurred according to her lawyer, it would appear that even he had doubts thus why he advised her not to answer any questions for fear she might incriminate herself.
Question is, what criminal act did her lawyer fear she might incriminate herself?
-
Oh Kate's comment was factual alright ... insofar as Kate wrote it. But it is not in context and is therefore misleading.
You have taken it upon yourself to pervert it from the situation under discussion here and the resulting trauma described at length in Kate's book into deliberate distortion using Kate's own words to do so.
____________________________________________________________________________
NB
6 September: Portuguese police interview Kate McCann for 11 hours as a witness in the presence of her lawyer.
7 September: During further questioning of Mr and Mrs McCann, detectives make them both "arguidos". Later, a family representative says officers believe they have found traces of Madeleine's blood in the McCanns' hire car.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13386785
____________________________________________________________________________
The interview under discussion and to which reference was made was that which took place on the 6th of September.
You have chosen to take Kate's description of an entirely different situation when she had progressed from one set of traumas engineered by the PJ to the process of entering fight mode for herself, Madeleine and the rest of her family particularly the twins, as she prepared herself for the forthcoming ordeal of being made an arguida which happened on the 7th of September.
The point is that Sadie was referring to the lengthy interrogation Kate had already suffered not the forthcoming one which required an entirely different mindset.
You are confusing one with t'other; the passive witness anxious to do all she could for her daughter transformed into the "lioness" who knew she had to fight tooth and nail for all three of her children and herself ... and good on her for having the strength of character which enabled her to do that !
You have ignored any reference Kate made to that and she wrote about it at length; specifically for example her fears for her children. You have chosen comment which was irrelevant to what was then past (and the subject of discussion here) but was entirely relevant to what she knew she was to face in the immediate future and her feelings about that. Two entirely different situations and by using the wrong one to describe the other you are confusing the issue in your posting.
My quote described Kate McCanns feelings before her interview on 6th September. Sadie's post was also about that interview.
-
It could well be true, until her fate is revealed, anything is possible.
Is it a FACT that Madeleine died in the apartment and an abduction was staged, as Amaral asserts? YES or NO?
-
Is it a FACT that Madeleine died in the apartment and an abduction was staged, as Amaral asserts? YES or NO?
It is indeed a fact that he stated this but I don't agree that the claim is itself a fact.
-
On the basis of what actually occurred according to her lawyer, it would appear that even he had doubts thus why he advised her not to answer any questions for fear she might incriminate herself.
Question is, what criminal act did her lawyer fear she might incriminate herself?
He did what he was supposed to do and that was to give her the best legal advice that he could. She went along with that on the basis that he knew the system - through sheer mental exhaustion and through rage at the knowledge that they had written Madeleine off by declaring her death.
In my opinion his advice was sound and in my opinion she was absolutely correct to have taken it.
-
He did what he was supposed to do and that was to give her the best legal advice that he could. She went along with that on the basis that he knew the system - through sheer mental exhaustion and through rage at the knowledge that they had written Madeleine off by declaring her death.
In my opinion his advice was sound and in my opinion she was absolutely correct to have taken it.
I've always said that imo her refusal to answer the police questions made her look guilty. Parents with nothing to hide cooperate with the investigative authorities.
-
I've always said that imo her refusal to answer the police questions made her look guilty. Parents with nothing to hide cooperate with the investigative authorities.
Madeleine's parents did everything possible to cooperate with the investigating authorities up until they were made suspects in Madeleine's disappearance, which flagged up the fact the investigating authorities were investigating them having given up on Madeleine's investigation.
They would have been mad in my opinion to cooperate with an investigation the only aim of which was to secure their conviction based on 'evidence' dreamed up by incompetents who didn't understand forensics.
The release of the files proved that there was no evidence on which to base either parent being made an arguido: making any who harboured suspicion of guilt because Kate had exercised her legal right to silence look very foolish indeed.
-
A wee 'IMO' and the transparent rhetorical context doesn't stop the comment being defamatory. You'll need your facts straight if you're going down this line.
Are you picking on me ?
What is wrong with what i said?
Do you want me to list some of Amarals inhuman acts?
I assure you that I will win and it wont do Amaral any good at all.
-
It is indeed a fact that he stated this but I don't agree that the claim is itself a fact.
Thankyou.
-
I've always said that imo her refusal to answer the police questions made her look guilty. Parents with nothing to hide cooperate with the investigative authorities.
On that basis Gerry had nothing to hide.
-
Are you picking on me ?
What is wrong with what i said?
Do you want me to list some of Amarals inhuman acts?
I assure you that I will win and it wont do Amaral any good at all.
Please do, but stick to the facts if that's possible.
You will win? Win what? The internets?
-
I've always said that imo her refusal to answer the police questions made her look guilty. Parents with nothing to hide cooperate with the investigative authorities.
yesterday admin made a post re posting opinion as fact. you continually post opinion as fact...IMO this gives you little credibility
-
I've always said that imo her refusal to answer the police questions made her look guilty. Parents with nothing to hide cooperate with the investigative authorities.
I think you are factually incorrect. its been discussed many times and there are very good raesons imo...why kate refused to answer questions. IMO she actually helped move the investigation forward
-
I think you are factually incorrect. its been discussed many times and there are very good raesons imo...why kate refused to answer questions. IMO she actually helped move the investigation forward
I find your posts very frequently add substance to the debate by putting thoughts and what we know into words. I think this is one such post.
The arguments regarding "the questions" tend to circulate around the negativity from sceptic viewpoints and not on what the long term consequences of a Cipriano type capitulation represented for Madeleine's investigation when the terms of the 'deal' outlined to Kate's lawyer by the judicial police on the 6th of September are considered.
Without her ability to 'hang on in there' (given that the Portuguese courts didn't have to sit in judgement of her physical torture unlike Leonor Cipriano where the phrase 'beaten out of her' comes to mind) there would have been no continuing investigation into Madeleine's fate.
I think the proven resentment that Madeleine's case was reinvigorated in 2011 and continues today keeps the internet war against Kate and Gerry McCann going with 'the 49 questions' being just one tool in the box.
I think your observation that Kate ''helped move the investigation forward' is a precise one.
-
It moved it on? nigh on 13 yrs later its unsolved.
-
I find your posts very frequently add substance to the debate by putting thoughts and what we know into words. I think this is one such post.
The arguments regarding "the questions" tend to circulate around the negativity from sceptic viewpoints and not on what the long term consequences of a Cipriano type capitulation represented for Madeleine's investigation when the terms of the 'deal' outlined to Kate's lawyer by the judicial police on the 6th of September are considered.
Without her ability to 'hang on in there' (given that the Portuguese courts didn't have to sit in judgement of her physical torture unlike Leonor Cipriano where the phrase 'beaten out of her' comes to mind) there would have been no continuing investigation into Madeleine's fate.
I think the proven resentment that Madeleine's case was reinvigorated in 2011 and continues today keeps the internet war against Kate and Gerry McCann going with 'the 49 questions' being just one tool in the box.
I think your observation that Kate ''helped move the investigation forward' is a precise one.
Because that's how police interviews work. You refuse to answer questions, which inevitably progresses the investigation.
I'm pretty confident that the investigation would have been progressed exponentially if Kate would have simply answered the questions.
And given this novel explanation, I wonder if magnanimity was upper most in Kate's mind - or was this a serendipitous output of her being instructed to say f all! How wonderful!
-
Because that's how police interviews work. You refuse to answer questions, which inevitably progresses the investigation.
I'm pretty confident that the investigation would have been progressed exponentially if Kate would have simply answered the questions.
And given this novel explanation, I wonder if magnanimity was upper most in Kate's mind - or was this a serendipitous output of her being instructed to say f all! How wonderful!
Twas a double edged sword to be sure.
-
Because that's how police interviews work. You refuse to answer questions, which inevitably progresses the investigation.
I'm pretty confident that the investigation would have been progressed exponentially if Kate would have simply answered the questions.
And given this novel explanation, I wonder if magnanimity was upper most in Kate's mind - or was this a serendipitous output of her being instructed to say f all! How wonderful!
I bet the police are always pleased when they interview people who decline to answer their questions. "That'll progress our inquiries" they tell each other happily no doubt.
-
It moved it on? nigh on 13 yrs later its unsolved.
Do you recall the importance of the "Golden Hours" for a missing child investigation and the considered importance of early intervention.
Madeleine's investigation was seriously derailed when the PJ stopped looking for a live child and started seriosly investigating her parents instead.
From thereon in the police ceased looking for Madeleine until her case was reviewed in 2011.
As I said in my post there are those who resent with a vengeance the legitimate search for this missing girl whose "golden hours" were wantonly squandered. Are you one of them?
-
I bet the police are always pleased when they interview people who decline to answer their questions. "That'll progress our inquiries" they tell each other happily no doubt.
In what way did Kate's exercise of her legal rights impede the police inquiry into Madeleine's case? Bearing in mind the questions were not about Madeleine's case but about Kate's and the best way to lay criminal charges against her ... an entirely different case altogether don't you think.
-
I bet the police are always pleased when they interview people who decline to answer their questions. "That'll progress our inquiries" they tell each other happily no doubt.
They should stipulate it to save time, ' you have the right to remain silent, in fact, we strongly urge you to keep quiet so we can clear this thing up a bit quicker'.
-
In what way did Kate's exercise of her legal rights impede the police inquiry into Madeleine's case? Bearing in mind the questions were not about Madeleine's case but about Kate's and the best way to lay criminal charges against her ... an entirely different case altogether don't you think.
No, you're missing your own point - this isn't about 'impeding', you upped the ante here, you think she actively progressed the investigation by refusing to answer questions. Let's not muddy the waters. That's not squirming; that's doing Agadoo
-
Do you recall the importance of the "Golden Hours" for a missing child investigation and the considered importance of early intervention.
Madeleine's investigation was seriously derailed when the PJ stopped looking for a live child and started seriosly investigating her parents instead.
From thereon in the police ceased looking for Madeleine until her case was reviewed in 2011.
As I said in my post there are those who resent with a vengeance the legitimate search for this missing girl whose "golden hours" were wantonly squandered. Are you one of them?
What could have happened in them golden hours,the alleged crime scene was tampered with if you believe a tale about an open window what else was compromised before even a policeman entered 5a,golden minutes more like,lost for ever.There are those that resent with a vengence that the PJ up until 2017 at least, when they say that they have to consider other scenarios as well as abduction,are you one of them,seeing as you want to get personal,which frankly should be above a senior mod,or not as the case maybe.
-
What could have happened in them golden hours,the alleged crime scene was tampered with if you believe a tale about an open window what else was compromised before even a policeman entered 5a,golden minutes more like,lost for ever.There are those that resent with a vengence that the PJ up until 2017 at least, when they say that they have to consider other scenarios as well as abduction,are you one of them,seeing as you want to get personal,which frankly should be above a senior mod,or not as the case maybe.
I am a great believer in law and order and in the police taking criminal cases in hand with a view to solving them. In my opinion to equate criticism of official ineptitude with a personal attack is risible.
I believe there is still a thread in the member's area asking ... "What did Amaral & co get right?" ... perhaps you might like to add to its content and put your money where your mouth is.
While we are on the subject of what is available on the forum, allow me to recommend for your attention ...
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8404.0 A visit there could very well be worth your while too.
-
No, you're missing your own point - this isn't about 'impeding', you upped the ante here, you think she actively progressed the investigation by refusing to answer questions. Let's not muddy the waters. That's not squirming; that's doing Agadoo
Imo... The investigation was going in the wring direction and would have continued to do so if Kate had answered the question s. By not answering she forced the PJ to put up or shut up... They had to admit they had no real evidence against the McCann's... Could SY have got involved if the mccanns had still been arguidos. .or worse still arrested and charged by an inept police force
-
In what way did Kate's exercise of her legal rights impede the police inquiry into Madeleine's case? Bearing in mind the questions were not about Madeleine's case but about Kate's and the best way to lay criminal charges against her ... an entirely different case altogether don't you think.
I was responding to the suggestion that Kate McCann's refusal to answer questions moved the investigation on, not how it was impeded.
You seem to have separated 'Madeleine's case' and 'Kate's case', ignoring the fact that they are two sides of the same coin; the case of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
-
Imo... The investigation was going in the wring direction and would have continued to do so if Kate had answered the question s. By not answering she forced the PJ to put up or shut up... They had to admit they had no real evidence against the McCann's... Could SY have got involved if the mccanns had still been arguidos. .or worse still arrested and charged by an inept police force
There's a lot of assumptions there Davros. Maybe Kate would have provided useful information.
Are you then suggesting that it was better to leave it all be and not question them? And should we adopt this stance for every investigation that appears to be going awry?
It's certainly a novel approach.
-
There's a lot of assumptions there Davros. Maybe Kate would have provided useful information.
Are you then suggesting that it was better to leave it all be and not question them? And should we adopt this stance for every investigation that appears to be going awry?
It's certainly a novel approach.
For those who have followed the Cade it's clear that the PJ thought Kate was involved and wanted reason to arrest and or charge. If Kate was innocent... As I think she is that would have been disastrous for the investigation.
The idea that only the guilty refuse to answer questions is preposterous... That's not opinion... It's fact
-
I was responding to the suggestion that Kate McCann's refusal to answer questions moved the investigation on, not how it was impeded.
You seem to have separated 'Madeleine's case' and 'Kate's case', ignoring the fact that they are two sides of the same coin; the case of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
If there had been a shred of evidence which linked Kate McCann to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann your post might be worth some discussion.
As it is that one of the few proven conclusions reached by the Policia Judiciaria in either Kate or Madeleine's cases was Kate's innocence of any involvement in Madeleine's disappearance I think such discussion is an irrelevance.
-
For those who have followed the Cade it's clear that the PJ thought Kate was involved and wanted reason to arrest and or charge. If Kate was innocent... As I think she is that would have been disastrous for the investigation.
The idea that only the guilty refuse to answer questions is preposterous... That's not opinion... It's fact
I think the first step is to question. If the PJ thought she was guilty, then reinforced that perception of guilt by her refusing to answer questions, then they would have arrested her, with or without the answers.
-
I did note in DC's book that shortly after the McCanns were made arguidos Portuguese law changed and that this may have speeded up the process? DC explained that the new legislation would have made it difficult, if not impossible, to have made the McCanns and RM arguidos.
-
I think the first step is to question. If the PJ thought she was guilty, then reinforced that perception of guilt by her refusing to answer questions, then they would have arrested her, with or without the answers.
They need evidence to arrest... Police can't arrest people for not answering questions
-
They need evidence to arrest... Police can't arrest people for not answering questions
No, you seem to have difficulty understanding the basic concept (the old Davros mantra).
If you're so certain they 'wanted to arrest / charge' her, then they could have. They could have done so (while they were torturing her) in the presence of her lawyer. Because them being at least cognisant of the fact that arguido status allows silence as opposed to compliance, despite them being cast as total idiots, they would know that there was a high probability that she would be advised of that course of action.
Once the ground rules had been established, why do you think they were going through the motions of asking 40 more questions, knowing the response they would get? At that point they're not establishing any facts, they're establishing process and is evidence in itself.
Edit: Besides, plea bargain or no, I believe frank, informal discussions were held prior to the interview with all parties - I'm not saying 'plea bargain', but something went down that made Amaral so very, very sure of his case.
-
No, you seem to have difficulty understanding the basic concept (the old Davros mantra).
If you're so certain they 'wanted to arrest / charge' her, then they could have. They could have done so (while they were torturing her) in the presence of her lawyer. Because them being at least cognisant of the fact that arguido status allows silence as opposed to compliance, despite them being cast as total idiots, they would know that there was a high probability that she would be advised of that course of action.
Once the ground rules had been established, why do you think they were going through the motions of asking 40 more questions, knowing the response they would get? At that point they're not establishing any facts, they're establishing process and is evidence in itself.
Edit: Besides, plea bargain or no, I believe frank, informal discussions were held prior to the interview with all parties - I'm not saying 'plea bargain', but something went down that made Amaral so very, very sure of his case.
More opinion as fact... I think they were looking for evidence to arrest / charge
Sceptics seem to think only the guilty refuse to answer questions... That isn't true... Fact not opinion
-
More opinion as fact... I think they were looking for evidence to arrest / charge
Sceptics seem to think only the guilty refuse to answer questions... That isn't true... Fact not opinion
Now you're just on a wind up. You've just accused me of stating opinion as fact, by replying stating opinion as fact.
And your second sentence - that's also your opinion - a very flawed one.
-
Now you're just on a wind up. You've just accused me of stating opinion as fact, by replying stating opinion as fact.
And your second sentence - that's also your opinion - a very flawed one.
Innocent people may refuse to answer police questions... That is a fact
-
Innocent people may refuse to answer police questions... That is a fact
That is true. I didn't say it wasn't. You stated your opinion as fact that sceptics seem to think the opposite.
And it's also a fact that guilty people may refuse to answer police questions.
But what about my point? That the PJ will be fully aware of the likelihood that and Arguido would prefer to remain silent? Like it was all news to them and had never happened before? (only perhaps about 95% of the time).
Don't you think that FACT may have been driving the process? Go through the process, ask the questions, get it on record....that's also evidence.
-
That is true. I didn't say it wasn't. You stated your opinion as fact that sceptics seem to think the opposite.
And it's also a fact that guilty people may refuse to answer police questions.
But what about my point? That the PJ will be fully aware of the likelihood that and Arguido would prefer to remain silent? Like it was all news to them and had never happened before? (only perhaps about 95% of the time).
Don't you think that FACT may have been driving the process? Go through the process, ask the questions, get it on record....that's also evidence.
I doubt they thought Kate would remain silent... What evidence did Kate provide by staying silent...
I think Kate did absolutely the right thing and don't think for a second her silence was an indication of guily
-
I doubt they thought Kate would remain silent... What evidence did Kate provide by staying silent...
I think Kate did absolutely the right thing and don't think for a second her silence was an indication of guily
Neither do I. But once again, you've answered someone else's question.
I absolutely think they knew she would remain silent, either from experience, or from informal discussions held prior to the formal interview.
No sane person would persist after question 10, they'd pull it if they thought it was fruitless. They continued to provide due process to be used at a later date; for what purpose is open to conjecture.
-
Neither do I. But once again, you've answered someone else's question.
I absolutely think they knew she would remain silent, either from experience, or from informal discussions held prior to the formal interview.
No sane person would persist after question 10, they'd pull it if they thought it was fruitless. They continued to provide due process to be used at a later date; for what purpose is open to conjecture.
So you think no sane person would continue after question 10....yet I would say every sceptic here ...aoart from you..thinks she was wrong not to answer all the questions
-
So you think no sane person would continue after question 10....yet I would say every sceptic here ...aoart from you..thinks she was wrong not to answer all the questions
I meant the police would jack it in if they were getting nowhere. They persisted for a reason.
I doubt every other sceptic on here believes everyone who doesn't answer questions is guilty. I've always been advised to remain silent until your brief tells you to speak, which was also Kate's right at the time.
However, I'm sure that remaining silent is commonly used as a wee bit of leverage in trials - '......members of the jury, let us not forget, that the defendant point blank refused to answer any of the questions during the initial interview. Now why would he do that I wonder'.
'OBJECTION, your honour, that's purely speculation'.
'Shut up at the back there, or I'll close the public gallery'
[I slowly stand up and slink out, quickly return, stoop down to pick up my B&M carrier bag and shuffle back out]
-
Because that's how police interviews work. You refuse to answer questions, which inevitably progresses the investigation.
I'm pretty confident that the investigation would have been progressed exponentially if Kate would have simply answered the questions.
And given this novel explanation, I wonder if magnanimity was upper most in Kate's mind - or was this a serendipitous output of her being instructed to say f all! How wonderful!
Have you read the list of 48 questions? Say it was your kid who was missing and you had no idea who took her perhaps you’d like to pick out all the questions on that list that you think would have helped the police solve the mystery.
-
Have you read the list of 48 questions? Say it was your kid who was missing and you had no idea who took her perhaps you’d like to pick out all the questions on that list that you think would have helped the police solve the mystery.
That's brilliant, but how would she know what they were going to ask?
-
Have you read the list of 48 questions? Say it was your kid who was missing and you had no idea who took her perhaps you’d like to pick out all the questions on that list that you think would have helped the police solve the mystery.
The questions were all extremely innocuous so why was Kate McCann so terrified of them?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1041635/The-48-questions-Kate-McCann-wouldnt-answer--did.html
-
That's brilliant, but how would she know what they were going to ask?
What?? Just answer my question first, before askng a daft one of your own. Where did I even mention Kate or what she did or didn’t know?
-
I'm not in the least surprised she chose to answer question 49 though after refusing to answer the previous 48.
Q. Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?
A. 'Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.'
Why exactly would the mother of a missing 3-year-old actively jeopardise the investigation into her child's supposed disappearance? If her lawyer told her to do so then he must have had serious misgivings about her real involvement and was trying to prevent her incriminating herself which was her right.
-
What?? Just answer my question first, before askng a daft one of your own. Where did I even mention Kate or what she did or didn’t know?
You said 'have you read the 48 questions', suggesting Kate could somehow take exception to their content, without knowing what the next one would be. Nothing daft about that. Just insight that others perhaps don't possess. Difficult for laymen to process at first glance, I understand.
-
Have you read the list of 48 questions? Say it was your kid who was missing and you had no idea who took her perhaps you’d like to pick out all the questions on that list that you think would have helped the police solve the mystery.
It wasn't her place to second-guess the police interrogators, all she had to do was to answer honestly but she couldn't do that for some unfathomable reason.
-
It wasn't her place to second-guess the police interrogators, all she had to do was to answer honestly but she couldn't do that for some unfathomable reason.
I disagree....and it comes down to opinion. this has been discussed amny times before and I can see exactly why Kate refused to answer questions from what some think was acompletely inept investigation...you think one thing...I think another......
-
You said 'have you read the 48 questions', suggesting Kate could somehow take exception to their content, without knowing what the next one would be. Nothing daft about that. Just insight that others perhaps don't possess. Difficult for laymen to process at first glance, I understand.
I asked you a direct question with no mention of Kate at all. Perhaps you didn’t understand my question or perhaps you preferred not to answer it. That’s fine. The questions were completely and utterly pathetic IMO, and if I had been Kate I would have answered with a loud “f..king tossers” after each and every one.
-
It wasn't her place to second-guess the police interrogators, all she had to do was to answer honestly but she couldn't do that for some unfathomable reason.
its not unfathomable to mee....and others it seems
-
I asked you a direct question with no mention of Kate at all. Perhaps you didn’t understand my question or perhaps you preferred not to answer it. That’s fine. The questions were completely and utterly pathetic IMO, and if I had been Kate I would have answered with a loud “f....ing tossers” after each and every one.
Maybe she was in her head.
I'll answer your question - I'd answer the questions. Why? Because I'd want to show those f***ing tossers they were barking up the wrong tree and I'd prove it.
Then I'd flip a table, stab the first one in the neck with a pen, smash the second one's head against the door, handcuff them together, steal their radios, walk calmly out the fire exit, hot wire a panda car, beat a hasty retreat to Gib and be in Tangier by sunrise, disguised as a Bedouin Goat Herder.
-
Maybe she was in her head.
I'll answer your question - I'd answer the questions. Why? Because I'd want to show those f***ing tossers they were barking up the wrong tree and I'd prove it.
Then I'd flip a table, stab the first one in the neck with a pen, smash the second one's head against the door, handcuff them together, steal their radios, walk calmly out the fire exit, hot wire a panda car, beat a hasty retreat to Gib and be in Tangier by sunrise, disguised as a Bedouin Goat Herder.
That would be a silly thing to do IMO as you’d probably be arrested and done for GBH and theft before you’d herded your first goat.
Actually on second thoughts, it is the PJ we’re talking about so you’d probably get away with it.
-
I asked you a direct question with no mention of Kate at all. Perhaps you didn’t understand my question or perhaps you preferred not to answer it. That’s fine. The questions were completely and utterly pathetic IMO, and if I had been Kate I would have answered with a loud “f....ing tossers” after each and every one.
Really? ...and you think such disrespectful conduct would have helped Maddie?
-
Really? ...and you think such disrespectful conduct would have helped Maddie?
I dont think maddie was going to get ny help from the PJ..
-
its not unfathomable to mee....and others it seems
You must exist on a parallel universe then imo. There's only one reason a suspect refuses to cooperate with police when they are searching for their (suspects) missing child.
-
You must exist on a parallel universe then imo.
perhaps I do...mines called reality. as a matter of interest can you think of areason why kate never answerred the questions....I can
-
Really? ...and you think such disrespectful conduct would have helped Maddie?
Yep, really. Those stupid questions were never going to help Madeleine.
-
You must exist on a parallel universe then imo. There's only one reason a suspect refuses to cooperate with police when they are searching for their (suspects) missing child.
perhaps kate thought...quite rightly imo...that the pj werent searching for her daughter
-
Yep, really. Those stupid questions were never going to help Madeleine.
You obviously don't understand the psychology behind police questioning.
-
You obviously don't understand the psychology behind police questioning.
LOL. Why don’t you educate me then?
-
perhaps kate thought...quite rightly imo...that the pj werent searching for her daughter
Wasn't that why she was being questioned?
-
What a totally untrue and biased opinion posted as fact
Was it really? How?
-
LOL. Why don’t you educate me then?
You do realise that the police start with simple questions in order to put the suspect at ease?
-
I dont think maddie was going to get ny help from the PJ..
I agree with you on that one. IMO Maddie was beyond help by 10pm.
-
You obviously don't understand the psychology behind police questioning.
You see I do... And I've posted this before.
Had Kate answered the 48 there would have been another 48....then another... It's a simple process.
Kate did the right thing to stop the pj pulling this very old trick
-
You do realise that the police start with simple questions in order to put the suspect at ease?
NSS.
16. What does “we let her down” mean?
Explain how that question was supposed to put Kate McCann at ease?
-
You see I do... And I've posted this before.
Had Kate answered the 48 there would have been another 48....then another... It's a simple process.
Kate did the right thing to stop the pj pulling this very old trick
I disagree.
Had Kate told the PJ what she did with Maddie then there wouldn't have been anymore questions imo.
-
I agree with you on that one. IMO Maddie was beyond help by 10pm.
Why, when you believe fervently that Madeleine woke and wandered, do you also believe she was dead by 10pm?
-
Why, when you believe fervently that Madeleine woke and wandered, do you also believe she was dead by 10pm?
Because imo whatever happened to her happened before 10pm.
-
Because imo whatever happened to her happened before 10pm.
Of course..... When kate checked at ten the, window, was open and Maddie had been abducted..
-
Because imo whatever happened to her happened before 10pm.
Is there any logic to your belief that she was dead by 10pm?
-
Maybe she was in her head.
I'll answer your question - I'd answer the questions. Why? Because I'd want to show those f***ing tossers they were barking up the wrong tree and I'd prove it.
Then I'd flip a table, stab the first one in the neck with a pen, smash the second one's head against the door, handcuff them together, steal their radios, walk calmly out the fire exit, hot wire a panda car, beat a hasty retreat to Gib and be in Tangier by sunrise, disguised as a Bedouin Goat Herder.
What an imagination (&^&
-
What an imagination (&^&
Instant analysis of a situation such as this and the execution using commensurate skills comes with years of training.
Thankfully I've only had to deploy such tactics a handful of times.
-
Kate had been put through a gruelling interrogation for hours before she was asked the questions she declined to answer.
The Police told her she was lying, that someone had come forward saying they had seen Kate and Gerry with a large black bag. That maybe Kate had had a 'black out' and couldn't remember what she had done. That they had Madeleine's DNA that proved she had died in 5a.
This went on for hours, they wanted Kate to admit to hiding Madeleine's body.
Now if that had happened to you, do you honestly believe you wouldn't listen to your lawyer and remain silent? T
-
Instant analysis of a situation such as this and the execution using commensurate skills comes with years of training.
Thankfully I've only had to deploy such tactics a handful of times.
I would suggest you smash the second ones head against the door frame rather that the door
-
I would suggest you smash the second ones head against the door frame rather that the door
Go for the eyes, knees and ankles.
I'm sure some think that Kate was questioned, whilst reclining in an armchair, sipping tea and eating custard creams. It was horrific. Listen to what Robert Murat had to say about his interrogation. Afterwards he got home curled up in a ball and cried, terrified.
-
Kate had been put through a gruelling interrogation for hours before she was asked the questions she declined to answer.
The Police told her she was lying, that someone had come forward saying they had seen Kate and Gerry with a large black bag. That maybe Kate had had a 'black out' and couldn't remember what she had done. That they had Madeleine's DNA that proved she had died in 5a.
This went on for hours, they wanted Kate to admit to hiding Madeleine's body.
Now if that had happened to you, do you honestly believe you wouldn't listen to your lawyer and remain silent? T
What gruelling interrogation?
What black bag?
When was this charge of lying made?
*&^^&
-
This was from the may interviews..
. I sat in the waiting area for eight hours before I was told that it was now too late for me to be interviewed and I should go home and come back the next day. Gerry was there for thirteen hours.
-
Kate had been put through a gruelling interrogation for hours before she was asked the questions she declined to answer.
The Police told her she was lying, that someone had come forward saying they had seen Kate and Gerry with a large black bag. That maybe Kate had had a 'black out' and couldn't remember what she had done. That they had Madeleine's DNA that proved she had died in 5a.
This went on for hours, they wanted Kate to admit to hiding Madeleine's body.
Now if that had happened to you, do you honestly believe you wouldn't listen to your lawyer and remain silent? T
Kate was questioned for two hours then there was a fifteen minute break.
She was questioned for a further two and three quarter hours followed by a two hour break.
She was questioned for another hour and then sent home.
Twelve hours later questioning resumed after she was made arguida, but she refused to answer on the advice of her lawyer. Three and a half hours later it was finished.
Total hours being questioned; nine and a quarter over two days.
-
Kate was questioned for two hours then there was a fifteen minute break.
She was questioned for a further two and three quarter hours followed by a two hour break.
She was questioned for another hour and then sent home.
Twelve hours later questioning resumed after she was made arguida, but she refused to answer on the advice of her lawyer. Three and a half hours later it was finished.
Total hours being questioned; nine and a quarter over two days.
That was September... How many hours had she spent with the police... Helping them with their enquiries... Prior to this..
I doubt you have s figure
-
Kate was questioned for two hours then there was a fifteen minute break.
She was questioned for a further two and three quarter hours followed by a two hour break.
She was questioned for another hour and then sent home.
Twelve hours later questioning resumed after she was made arguida, but she refused to answer on the advice of her lawyer. Three and a half hours later it was finished.
Total hours being questioned; nine and a quarter over two days.
That's a grueller, to be sure. I've spent more time waiting in A&E.
Just think, she could've got out of there quicker if she'd have answered the questions.
-
That's a grueller, to be sure. I've spent more time waiting in A&E.
Just think, she could've got out of there quicker if she'd have answered the questions.
Me too. On the other hand she saved the PJ all that typing to get her answers down.
-
Me too. On the other hand she saved the PJ all that typing to get her answers down.
I still believe the PJ's pressing ahead through the whole question set, despite the obvious refusal to cooperate, was tactical.
Why didn't Kate's crack legal counsel tell her to refuse to take part in any form? As arguido are you bound legally to stay and listen to the questions?
-
I still believe the PJ's pressing ahead through the whole question set, despite the obvious refusal to cooperate, was tactical.
Why didn't Kate's crack legal counsel tell her to refuse to take part in any form? As arguido are you bound legally to stay and listen to the questions?
Prior to being taken to the police station Kate was a witness not an arguido and legally obliged to answer any questiond
-
Prior to being taken to the police station Kate was a witness not an arguido and legally obliged to answer any questiond
Or not, as in this case. So she was legally required to sit there? Gotchya
-
Or not, as in this case. So she was legally required to sit there? Gotchya
Until she was declared, arguido as a witness she was legally obliged to answer questions... And therefore attend the police station
-
Until she was declared, arguido as a witness she was legally obliged to answer questions... And therefore attend the police station
So it was a Mexican Stand Off that developed, as opposed to being pre-arranged. The PJ wouldn't have been aware of how Kate was going to answer, if at all, but would have had a strategy in place for dealing with o tratamento silencioso.
There must have been negotiations in the background up and down the chain. Once it became obvious that Kate was going full Marcel Marceau, someone would have been making decisions, talking to other parties regarding the next move. Hence the time it took.
-
I still believe the PJ's pressing ahead through the whole question set, despite the obvious refusal to cooperate, was tactical.
Why didn't Kate's crack legal counsel tell her to refuse to take part in any form? As arguido are you bound legally to stay and listen to the questions?
In the UK you are told; "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court."
I don't know if the same rule applies in Portugal, but if it does then Kate McCann would have been hampered by being unable to rely on the answers to any of the questions asked of her on 7th September.
-
In the UK you are told; "You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court."
I don't know if the same rule applies in Portugal, but if it does then Kate McCann would have been hampered by being unable to rely on the answers to any of the questions asked of her on 7th September.
Most of the questions were designed to give thr police ammunition that they could use against her in court, should that day ever have arisen. So, far better not to play their game. IMO.
-
Most of the questions were designed to give thr police ammunition that they could use against her in court, should that day ever have arisen. So, far better not to play their game. IMO.
Isn't that the purpose of every formal police interview for suspects?
-
Isn't that the purpose of every formal police interview for suspects?
Precisely... These questions were nothing to do with progressing the search
-
That's a grueller, to be sure. I've spent more time waiting in A&E.
Just think, she could've got out of there quicker if she'd have answered the questions.
You make be questioned for five hours sound like a walk in the park. Kate was advised not to answer the questions, it was obvious they were trying to frame her. The Officers told her that a witness had seen Kate and Gerry with a large black bag, they had Madeleine's DNA and they knew she was lying. After that I wouldn't have been told twice to say nothing. If they had arrested her, then no one would be looking for Madeleine, as it would have been Kate did it, case solved.
-
Precisely... These questions were nothing to do with progressing the search
I disagree; progressing (or indeed cessation of) the search would be a natural output. The facts would be established, or, conversely, a story spun and quickly investigated and debunked. Answering the questions will give you a definitive either way, either rule the 'suspect' out, or rule them in.
-
You make be questioned for five hours sound like a walk in the park. Kate was advised not to answer the questions, it was obvious they were trying to frame her. The Officers told her that a witness had seen Kate and Gerry with a large black bag, they had Madeleine's DNA and they knew she was lying. After that I wouldn't have been told twice to say nothing. If they had arrested her, then no one would be looking for Madeleine, as it would have been Kate did it, case solved.
How? How did the brief know what they were trying to frame her before the questions were asked?
-
I disagree; progressing (or indeed cessation of) the search would be a natural output. The facts would be established, or, conversely, a story spun and quickly investigated and debunked. Answering the questions will give you a definitive either way, either rule the 'suspect' out, or rule them in.
i disagree...an innoccuous answer that could be interpreted as not innoccuous could have led to arrest...imprisonment on remand and the end of the search
-
i disagree...an innoccuous answer that could be interpreted as not innoccuous could have led to arrest...imprisonment on remand and the end of the search
In the most high profile case in Portuguese history, with the eyes of the world's media on them, with the backing of the best legal team in existence and the unequivocal support from the British Government, an arrest with no evidence is not even on the table as a possible option.
I'd even suggest that, even if it was, there would be no chance she would spend a moment in the admin block of a remand centre.
-
How? How did the brief know what they were trying to frame her before the questions were asked?
He heard what the Police said to Kate when she was questioned before she was made arguido, that they had Madeleine's DNA, that Kate must have 'blacked out' that they knew she was lying, asking her 'what did you do' etc.
-
He heard what the Police said to Kate when she was questioned before she was made arguido, that they had Madeleine's DNA, that Kate must have 'blacked out' that they knew she was lying, asking her 'what did you do' etc.
Show me.
-
Isn't that the purpose of every formal police interview for suspects?
Yes so why provide them with any ammunition?
-
I disagree; progressing (or indeed cessation of) the search would be a natural output. The facts would be established, or, conversely, a story spun and quickly investigated and debunked. Answering the questions will give you a definitive either way, either rule the 'suspect' out, or rule them in.
How? Was Gerry ruled in or out by his answers?
-
In the most high profile case in Portuguese history, with the eyes of the world's media on them, with the backing of the best legal team in existence and the unequivocal support from the British Government, an arrest with no evidence is not even on the table as a possible option.
I'd even suggest that, even if it was, there would be no chance she would spend a moment in the admin block of a remand centre.
LOL at “eyes of the world’s media”. Most of the media were presenting the McCanns as guilty as sin by this point.
-
Yes so why provide them with any ammunition?
Or conversely, why not set them straight?
-
LOL at “eyes of the world’s media”. Most of the media were presenting the McCanns as guilty as sin by this point.
So the media were in on this 'witch hunt'?
And what about the government and phalanx of crack lawyers? No influence there then?
-
How? Was Gerry ruled in or out by his answers?
All the data wasn't in at that point, i.e interview all key witnesses. Gotta make sure the stories are straight. Again, pretty standard practice.
-
Or conversely, why not set them straight?
How so? Tell me one thing that a person in that situation could have said to set the record straight and get the police to reconsider their suspicions?
-
So the media were in on this 'witch hunt'?
And what about the government and phalanx of crack lawyers? No influence there then?
The media certainly was on a witch hunt yes, perhaps you weren’t paying attention at the time? What about the government and the lawyers? I seem to recall the latter failed the McCanns in court later on and what power does the UK government wield over Portugal exactly?
-
All the data wasn't in at that point, i.e interview all key witnesses. Gotta make sure the stories are straight. Again, pretty standard practice.
I think you’ll find that all the key witnesses were interviewed by that point.
-
The media certainly was on a witch hunt yes, perhaps you weren’t paying attention at the time? What about the government and the lawyers? I seem to recall the latter failed the McCanns in court later on and what power does the UK government wield over Portugal exactly?
The media certainly was on a witch hunt yes, perhaps you weren’t paying attention at the time? Chained to a radiator in Mogadishu, remember? What about the government and the lawyers? I seem to recall the latter failed the McCanns in court later on - more due to frivolous proceedings than legal ineptitude. And what power does the UK government wield over Portugal exactly? - Plenty, as was demonstrated by the McCann's hot-footing in back to Blighty. If you take your avocation of dear, old Leonor, she spent 10 years in prison for a crime she apparently didn't commit, prosecuted by a totally inept police force.
-
In the most high profile case in Portuguese history, with the eyes of the world's media on them, with the backing of the best legal team in existence and the unequivocal support from the British Government, an arrest with no evidence is not even on the table as a possible option.
I'd even suggest that, even if it was, there would be no chance she would spend a moment in the admin block of a remand centre.
That's your opinion again... Arrest was possible in mine.
Last week a leading barrister advised Prince Andrew not to travel to the US on the basis he could be arrested
-
The media certainly was on a witch hunt yes, perhaps you weren’t paying attention at the time? Chained to a radiator in Mogadishu, remember? What about the government and the lawyers? I seem to recall the latter failed the McCanns in court later on - more due to frivolous proceedings than legal ineptitude. And what power does the UK government wield over Portugal exactly? - Plenty, as was demonstrated by the McCann's hot-footing in back to Blighty. If you take your avocation of dear, old Leonor, she spent 10 years in prison for a crime she apparently didn't commit, prosecuted by a totally inept police force.
Are you claiming that the McCanns were only able to return to Britain because the UK government intervened?
-
Are you claiming that the McCanns were only able to return to Britain because the UK government intervened?
It goes without saying that events could have turned out very differently had the UK Government not intervened.
-
It goes without saying that events could have turned out very differently had the UK Government not intervened.
In what way... You mean the mccanns could have been a miscarriage of justice if the pj didn't realise they had to play it by the book
-
It goes without saying that events could have turned out very differently had the UK Government not intervened.
What specifically did the UK government do to change the outcome of this case?
-
You make be questioned for five hours sound like a walk in the park. Kate was advised not to answer the questions, it was obvious they were trying to frame her. The Officers told her that a witness had seen Kate and Gerry with a large black bag, they had Madeleine's DNA and they knew she was lying. After that I wouldn't have been told twice to say nothing. If they had arrested her, then no one would be looking for Madeleine, as it would have been Kate did it, case solved.
Kate was advised not to answer the questions but we don't know why her lawyer gave her that advice. According to Kate it was him who mentioned the bag and the DNA, not the police.
-
Kate was advised not to answer the questions but we don't know why her lawyer gave her that advice. According to Kate it was him who mentioned the bag and the DNA, not the police.
The lawyer told Kate what the pokuce had said to him Re the black bag
-
The lawyer told Kate what the pokuce had said to him Re the black bag
I really hope the pokuce catch Maggies abduktor.
-
I really hope the pokuce catch Maggies abduktor.
Strangely enough when "pokuce" is put into Google all the suggestions are to do with the police!
-
Strangely enough when "pokuce" is put into Google all the suggestions are to do with the police!
that’s because it’s a common typo.
-
Strangely enough when "pokuce" is put into Google all the suggestions are to do with the police!
Davros knew that, that's why he did it - always 3 steps ahead.
He even knew you were going to check and I was going to respond to your post about checking.
-
Of course..... When kate checked at ten the, window, was open and Maddie had been abducted..
We only have her sayso for that and only her fingerprints were identified on it. According to everyone else the window was never open.
-
Kate was advised not to answer the questions but we don't know why her lawyer gave her that advice. According to Kate it was him who mentioned the bag and the DNA, not the police.
He was concerned for her. Lawyers often act for the guilty.
-
We only have her sayso for that and only her fingerprints were identified on it. According to everyone else the window was never open.
According to whom was the window never open... Cited required
-
Davros knew that, that's why he did it - always 3 steps ahead.
He even knew you were going to check and I was going to respond to your post about checking.
He tells us he is a clever dude.
-
According to whom was the window never open... Cited required
Dianne Webster was in the apartment 5 minutes after the alarm was raised. The window was closed. David Payne didn't even see the open window when he entered after the alarm was raised. The only people in the apartment before them were Kate and Gerry and they both say it was open - surprise surprise!
Consequently she infers that at the time of her arrival at the apartment the window would have been closed.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANNE_WEBSTER_11-MAY07.htm
-
He was concerned for her. Lawyers often act for the guilty.
Well if she misunderstood what he was saying and the PJ didn't offer a deal then the advice he gave her suggests he thought the PJ were on the right track.
-
Dianne Webster was in the apartment 5 minutes after the alarm was raised. The window was closed. David Payne didn't even see the open window when he entered after the alarm was raised. The only people in the apartment before them were Kate and Gerry and they both say it was open - surprise surprise!
Consequently she infers that at the time of her arrival at the apartment the window would have been closed.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANNE_WEBSTER_11-MAY07.htm
So she said it was closed... Not that it was never open.... So no cite
-
We only have her sayso for that and only her fingerprints were identified on it. According to everyone else the window was never open.
That is not true
-
He was concerned for her. Lawyers often act for the guilty.
perhaps he believed all the rubbish teh PJ were spouting...if he did he would think Kate was guilty...of course we know it was rubbish. Thats why the investigationwent in teh wrong dirwction...the inept PJ.
-
We only have her sayso for that and only her fingerprints were identified on it. According to everyone else the window was never open.
Can we have cites from everyone else stating “the window was never open”? Of course not because a) you never provide cites and b) such cites don’t exist anyway.
-
Amy Tierney, independent witness
“She confirms that, on the night of the disappearance she was on duty and immediately went to the bedroom to see if the girl was hiding. She saw that the shutter was raised and that the window was partially open.”
-
Well if she misunderstood what he was saying and the PJ didn't offer a deal then the advice he gave her suggests he thought the PJ were on the right track.
If Carlos believed the rubbish the pj we're spouting he certainly would believe Kate was guilty... The problem was it was rubbish
-
Dianne Webster was in the apartment 5 minutes after the alarm was raised. The window was closed. David Payne didn't even see the open window when he entered after the alarm was raised. The only people in the apartment before them were Kate and Gerry and they both say it was open - surprise surprise!
Consequently she infers that at the time of her arrival at the apartment the window would have been closed.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/DIANNE_WEBSTER_11-MAY07.htm
If you are going to stage an abduction leave the window open for all to see!!! Do you think Kate is stupid? Wipe your finger prints off too!!
-
If Carlos believed the rubbish the pj we're spouting he certainly would believe Kate was guilty... The problem was it was rubbish
There has been a consistent campaign to convince people that the PJ were the devil's spawn. In my opinion they're no worse than any other police force. They assessed the evidence and listened to and observed the witnesses and reached a conclusion. Some people are convinced that the McCanns did no wrong, but they failed to convince others just as they failed to convince the PJ.
-
There has been a consistent campaign to convince people that the PJ were the devil's spawn. In my opinion they're no worse than any other police force. They assessed the evidence and listened to and observed the witnesses and reached a conclusion. Some people are convinced that the McCanns did no wrong, but they failed to convince others just as they failed to convince the PJ.
All police forces have equal merits and failings do they? How egalitarian of you. In my opinion there has been a campaign to convince people that the McCanns are the devil’s spawn. In my opinion they’re no worse than any other parents.
-
There has been a consistent campaign to convince people that the PJ were the devil's spawn. In my opinion they're no worse than any other police force. They assessed the evidence and listened to and observed the witnesses and reached a conclusion. Some people are convinced that the McCanns did no wrong, but they failed to convince others just as they failed to convince the PJ.
At the libel trial Almeida said the main evidence against the mccanns was the dog alerts... Yet they had been told the alerts had no evidential value or reliability.
They also thought the dogs had never been wrong in 200 cases... That was also untrue
-
There has been a consistent campaign to convince people that the PJ were the devil's spawn. In my opinion they're no worse than any other police force. They assessed the evidence and listened to and observed the witnesses and reached a conclusion. Some people are convinced that the McCanns did no wrong, but they failed to convince others just as they failed to convince the PJ.
It seems to me a number of people who comment online about this case haven't looked at other cases. If they did they might appreciate that the investigation was no better or worse than many other investigations in UK and elsewhere.
What I will say against PJ is that I'm really surprised an officer didn't take a wit stat from PF within 24/48 hours of MM's disappearance. This was a lady that resided permanently above 5A and in all probability was only meters away when MM disappeared. Why then is her wit stat dated 20th Aug 2007?
-
At the libel trial Almeida said the main evidence against the mccanns was the dog alerts... Yet they had been told the alerts had no evidential value or reliability.
They also thought the dogs had never been wrong in 200 cases... That was also untrue
The McCanns were not found guilty in a court of law. Many completely innocent people spend years behind bars based on unreliable evidence and witness testimony: Amanda Knox/Rafaelle Sollecito (Italy), David Bain (NZ), Lindy Chamberlain (Oz), Sally Clarke (UK).
-
It seems to me a number of people who comment online about this case haven't looked at other cases. If they did they might appreciate that the investigation was no better or worse than many other investigations in UK and elsewhere.
What I will say against PJ is that I'm really surprised an officer didn't take a wit stat from PF within 24/48 hours of MM's disappearance. This was a lady that resided permanently above 5A and in all probability was only meters away when MM disappeared. Why then is her wit stat dated 20th Aug 2007?
I've looked, at lots if other cases.. Mistakes are made but at least these mistakes usually are admitted.
The investigation in this case went in the wrong direction because the police thought they had proof Maddie died in the apartment.. They were wrong
-
Is it any wonder that initial investigators arrived at the conclusions they did?
I don't think it is in the least surprising the initial investigators made such a pig's ear of the investigation into Madeleine's investigation.
They were hardly 'Portugal's finest' were they?
Which of the senior officers who investigated Joana Cipriano's disappearance then followed by Madeleine McCann's disappearance a couple of years later both from villages in close proximity didn't end up with criminal convictions some of which were as serious as those possessed by the criminals they were paid to pursue.
None more so than the guy Amaral cosied up to on many's the chat show couch as they pursued their new careers as pundits making money out of the little girl they let down so very badly ... Paulo Cristovao. Cristivao went out of his way to associate himself with Madeleine by writing one of the first books about her disappearance which fingered her parents in her disappearance.
He left no stone unturned as he used his journalistic presence to vilify her parents in the pages of the Portuguese press and as already pointed out continued to play his TV part alongside Amaral to try to convince the Portuguese public of Madeleine's death.
Why would these convicted criminals do that? Whatever ... with such individuals in charge of and orchestrating an investigation into the case of a missing child for which they had neither experience or expertise in my opinion it was inevitable they followed entirely the wrong tack in reaching the conclusions they did.
After Amaral was sacked from the case his successor Rebelo conducted an entirely different process: he cleaned out much of the dross of Amaral's personnel by reducing their number and brought in as many experts in their field as was necessary for a missing child investigation. I don't know if a team like that had been there from the outset it would have made any difference to the final outcome as far as Madeleine was concerned, but I have absolutely no doubt that their professionalism would have made a difference to the way the investigation was conducted.
One of the first differences would have been that the media propaganda war waged against Madeleine's parents just would have been very unlikely to have happened and the lies which have become factoids for over twelve years wouldn't have been allowed to happen.
-
I've looked, at lots if other cases.. Mistakes are made but at least these mistakes usually are admitted.
The investigation in this case went in the wrong direction because the police thought they had proof Maddie died in the apartment.. They were wrong
That's your opinion, obviously and not the fact that the post implies. Unless you can thoroughly demonstrate otherwise.
-
I've looked, at lots if other cases.. Mistakes are made but at least these mistakes usually are admitted.
The investigation in this case went in the wrong direction because the police thought they had proof Maddie died in the apartment.. They were wrong
That's not much consolation to those who have spent years behind bars for crimes they did not commit and in some cases the perps free to commit other crimes.
And in many cases the police do not readily admit to their mistakes: Stephen Lawrence and Hillsborough are classic examples.
-
There has been a consistent campaign to convince people that the PJ were the devil's spawn. In my opinion they're no worse than any other police force. They assessed the evidence and listened to and observed the witnesses and reached a conclusion. Some people are convinced that the McCanns did no wrong, but they failed to convince others just as they failed to convince the PJ.
We are not discussing the Policia Juiciaria as an organisation. We are discussing the initial investigation under the leadership of Goncalo Amaral. It is important to stress that differential.
-
We are not discussing the Policia Juiciaria as an organisation. We are discussing the initial investigation under the leadership of Goncalo Amaral. It is important to stress that differential.
What was the chain of command?
-
That's not much consolation to those who have spent years behind bars for crimes they did not commit and in some cases the perps free to commit other crimes.
And in many cases the police do not readily admit to their mistakes: Stephen Lawrence and Hillsborough are classic examples.
I'm pointing out police incompetence within the initial investigation.. Perhaps posters here should make a, reasoned response instead of trying to excuse it... As you appear to be doing
-
What was the chain of command?
What was the chain of command when Rebelo took over as coordinator after Amaral was sacked ?
-
Is it any wonder that initial investigators arrived at the conclusions they did?
I don't think it is in the least surprising the initial investigators made such a pig's ear of the investigation into Madeleine's investigation.
They were hardly 'Portugal's finest' were they?
Which of the senior officers who investigated Joana Cipriano's disappearance then followed by Madeleine McCann's disappearance a couple of years later both from villages in close proximity didn't end up with criminal convictions some of which were as serious as those possessed by the criminals they were paid to pursue.
None more so than the guy Amaral cosied up to on many's the chat show couch as they pursued their new careers as pundits making money out of the little girl they let down so very badly ... Paulo Cristovao. Cristivao went out of his way to associate himself with Madeleine by writing one of the first books about her disappearance which fingered her parents in her disappearance.
He left no stone unturned as he used his journalistic presence to vilify her parents in the pages of the Portuguese press and as already pointed out continued to play his TV part alongside Amaral to try to convince the Portuguese public of Madeleine's death.
Why would these convicted criminals do that? Whatever ... with such individuals in charge of and orchestrating an investigation into the case of a missing child for which they had neither experience or expertise in my opinion it was inevitable they followed entirely the wrong tack in reaching the conclusions they did.
After Amaral was sacked from the case his successor Rebelo conducted an entirely different process: he cleaned out much of the dross of Amaral's personnel by reducing their number and brought in as many experts in their field as was necessary for a missing child investigation. I don't know if a team like that had been there from the outset it would have made any difference to the final outcome as far as Madeleine was concerned, but I have absolutely no doubt that their professionalism would have made a difference to the way the investigation was conducted.
One of the first differences would have been that the media propaganda war waged against Madeleine's parents just would have been very unlikely to have happened and the lies which have become factoids for over twelve years wouldn't have been allowed to happen.
I don't believe we have sufficient data to make a jusgement about how good, bad or indifferent PJ are compared with other police forces across the globe. Just focusing on this case and JC doesn't assist as the sample is too small.
The following might provide some idea and Portugal doesn't even feature:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases
-
What was the chain of command when Rebelo took over as coordinator after Amaral was sacked ?
At all stages of the investigation.
-
I'm pointing out police incompetence within the initial investigation.. Perhaps posters here should make a, reasoned response instead of trying to excuse it... As you appear to be doing
I would suggest miscarriages of justice, of which the UK has many, are the result of a poor initial police investigation.
-
I would suggest miscarriages of justice, of which the UK has many, are the result of a poor initial police investigation.
They most certainly are... But again you are deflecting by talking about the UK rather than the Portuguese case.
How often are there miscarriages of justice in Portugal.. We don't know
A Portuguese poster told us proudly there are no miscarriages if justice in Portugal.. They simply don't admit ti them
-
They most certainly are... But again you are deflecting by talking about the UK rather than the Portuguese case.
How often are there miscarriages of justice in Portugal.. We don't know
A Portuguese poster told us proudly there are no miscarriages if justice in Portugal.. They simply don't admit ti them
No I am not deflecting. I've given a few examples of MoJ's from across the globe: Italy, Oz, NZ and UK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases
I don't understand the constant PJ bashing.
UK schoolgirl Caroline Dickinson was raped and murdered in her bed during a school trip to France. The perp was eventually apprehended by US law enforcement some 5 years later.
-
I don't believe we have sufficient data to make a jusgement about how good, bad or indifferent PJ are compared with other police forces across the globe. Just focusing on this case and JC doesn't assist as the sample is too small.
The following might provide some idea and Portugal doesn't even feature:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases
The thread topic concerns the initial investigators and the way in which they conducted Madeleine's case; is there any valid reason why you wish to deflect from that.
-
No I am not deflecting. I've given a few examples of MoJ's from across the globe: Italy, Oz, NZ and UK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases
I don't understand the constant PJ bashing.
UK schoolgirl Caroline Dickinson was raped and murdered in her bed during a school trip to France. The perp was eventually apprehended by US law enforcement some 5 years later.
You might not understand it... That doesn't mean it isn't valid.
There was a meeting early on with the pj and grime where the pj were told the alerts themselves were not evidence.
Amaral and his team refused to accept this and took the investigation in the wrong direction
-
The thread topic concerns the initial investigators and the way in which they conducted Madeleine's case; is there any valid reason why you wish to deflect from that.
The thread topic concerns the initial investigation and whether or not witnesses assisted, hindered or had no impact on the investigation.
I don't see it as deflection. I'm simply putting the PJ investigation into the disappearance of MM into context with how other investigations have panned out.
-
You might not understand it... That doesn't mean it isn't valid.
There was a meeting early on with the pj and grime where the pj were told the alerts themselves were not evidence.
Amaral and his team refused to accept this and took the investigation in the wrong direction
But at least it didn't result in a wrongful conviction! Others have suffered far worse fates than the McCanns.
-
No I am not deflecting. I've given a few examples of MoJ's from across the globe: Italy, Oz, NZ and UK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases
I don't understand the constant PJ bashing.
UK schoolgirl Caroline Dickinson was raped and murdered in her bed during a school trip to France. The perp was eventually apprehended by US law enforcement some 5 years later.
The bashing began almost immediately, instigated by the McCanns, their friends and family. It was repeated by the media and those who supported the McCanns ad infinitum. In my opinion it was employed because some people think attacking is the best form of defence.
Using it, of course, leads some to see it as a defensive ploy, rather than a sincere criticism. When I recieve personal attacks on forums I see it as a sign that the people doing it are trying to discredit me in hopes of discrediting what I say. I assume that's because they have no sensible answers to what I said.
-
No I am not deflecting. I've given a few examples of MoJ's from across the globe: Italy, Oz, NZ and UK.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_miscarriage_of_justice_cases
I don't understand the constant PJ bashing.
UK schoolgirl Caroline Dickinson was raped and murdered in her bed during a school trip to France. The perp was eventually apprehended by US law enforcement some 5 years later.
An alert officer recognised him from a public appeal in a French newspaper and had him checked out ... albeit five years after the event.
What is the relevance to Madeleine's initial investigators ?
-
But at least it didn't result in a wrongful conviction! Others have suffered far worse fates than the McCanns.
No it didn't but again it's no reason to try and excuse it
-
The bashing began almost immediately, instigated by the McCanns, their friends and family. It was repeated by the media and those who supported the McCanns ad infinitum. In my opinion it was employed because some people think attacking is the best form of defence.
Using it, of course, leads some to see it as a defensive ploy, rather than a sincere criticism. When I recieve personal attacks on forums I see it as a sign that the people doing it are trying to discredit me in hopes of discrediting what I say. I assume that's because they have no sensible answers to what I said.
The criticism arise because it was justified. .
-
The bashing began almost immediately, instigated by the McCanns, their friends and family. It was repeated by the media and those who supported the McCanns ad infinitum. In my opinion it was employed because some people think attacking is the best form of defence.
Using it, of course, leads some to see it as a defensive ploy, rather than a sincere criticism. When I recieve personal attacks on forums I see it as a sign that the people doing it are trying to discredit me in hopes of discrediting what I say. I assume that's because they have no sensible answers to what I said.
JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA
Crime reporter, 'Diario de Noticias'
Information started circulating from sources connected to the Portuguese police that the story was full of holes from the side of the McCanns and their friends. Indeed within two days of Madeleine disappearing, this crime correspondent was filing this piece in the Portuguese Daily: Diario of the Noticias: "Headline: a badly told story." We started to receive information according to which the police suspected the theory they had apprehensions, didn't believe the theory that she had been kidnapped. To conclude, the police started to suspect the parents from the word go.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
It would have been good manners and perhaps even showed a little much needed professionalism on the part of the initial investigators by adhering to the secrecy laws, to have given themselves appropriate time to investigate before setting the tone of the investigation from the word go.
-
The criticism arise because it was justified. .
That's a matter of opinion.
-
That's a matter of opinion.
Thats a matter if opinion
-
An alert officer recognised him from a public appeal in a French newspaper and had him checked out ... albeit five years after the event.
What is the relevance to Madeleine's initial investigators ?
He was apprehended by US law enforcement not French.
-
JOSE MANUEL OLIVEIRA
Crime reporter, 'Diario de Noticias'
Information started circulating from sources connected to the Portuguese police that the story was full of holes from the side of the McCanns and their friends. Indeed within two days of Madeleine disappearing, this crime correspondent was filing this piece in the Portuguese Daily: Diario of the Noticias: "Headline: a badly told story." We started to receive information according to which the police suspected the theory they had apprehensions, didn't believe the theory that she had been kidnapped. To conclude, the police started to suspect the parents from the word go.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
CARLOS ANJOS
Association of Police Investigators
We have uncooperative witnesses who don't collaborate. The McCaans and the friends, the people who were there who clearly aren't collaborating with the investigation.
PEDRO TADEU
Editor, 24 Horas'
They are criticised for having displayed a cold and calculating attitude throughout this process. You can see already after the kidnapping Kate McCann appeared on a veranda in front of the journalists crying purposefully.
MAY 8th
[Veranda picture]
And we interpreted this as a performance for the media, and this made us feel some sort of discomfort.
August 9th
KATE: And as Gerry's just said, even last week when we met with the police they said: "We are looking for a living child" and they've said that a lot so...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
August 8th (the previous day when Neves and Encarnacao interviewed them)
Once again Gerry wanted to know if the case had now become a murder inquiry. The answer was indirect: ‘You can probably guess that from our lack of response. [madeleine]
[/quote]
It would have been good manners and perhaps even showed a little much needed professionalism on the part of the initial investigators by adhering to the secrecy laws, to have given themselves appropriate time to investigate before setting the tone of the investigation from the word go.
[/quote]
-
He tells us he is a clever dude.
He is a clever dde
Would make a hell of a good barrister imo
You are a clever dude too. Pity you two are unable to work together.
-
So she said it was closed... Not that it was never open.... So no cite
I gave you a cite. Dianne Webster's statement.
Dianne Webster got to the apartment 5 minutes after the alarm was raised. She did not see an open window and said it would have been closed (see her 11 May 2007 statement). When she tried to raise the shutter from the outside and got it stuck the window was closed (see crime scene photos). If the window was open it could only have been before Dianne arrived at the apartment 5 minutes after Kate raised the alarm but David Payne entered the apartment straight away with the McCanns and did not see the open window which is strange.
-
Amy Tierney, independent witness
“She confirms that, on the night of the disappearance she was on duty and immediately went to the bedroom to see if the girl was hiding. She saw that the shutter was raised and that the window was partially open.”
The shutter was partially open LOL as seen in crime scene photos. Amy got to the apartment before Dianne Webster. Sorry but she has to be mistaken. She couldn't be there before the tapas 9 or if she was one would have said so in their interviews/statements.
-
I gave you a cite. Dianne Webster's statement.
Dianne Webster got to the apartment 5 minutes after the alarm was raised. She did not see an open window and said it would have been closed (see her 11 May 2007 statement). When she tried to raise the shutter from the outside and got it stuck the window was closed (see crime scene photos). If the window was open it could only have been before Dianne arrived at the apartment 5 minutes after Kate raised the alarm but David Payne entered the apartment straight away with the McCanns and did not see the open window which is strange.
Your cite dies not confirm the window was never open... Think about it... It may have been open and later closed
-
Your cite dies not confirm the window was never open... Think about it... It may have been open and later closed
No one can confirm if it was open,what a conundrum for a prosecution lawyer.
-
Your cite dies not confirm the window was never open... Think about it... It may have been open and later closed
I didn't say the window was never open. I said Dianne did not see it open and she was on the scene only 5 minutes after the alarm was raised. And god knows how you can explain David Payne not seeing the open window when he entered the apartment straight after the alarm was raised. That does raise suspicions on whether it was ever open.
-
I didn't say the window was never open. I said Dianne did not see it open and she was on the scene only 5 minutes after the alarm was raised. And god knows how you can explain David Payne not seeing the open window when he entered the apartment straight after the alarm was raised.
Angelo said it... And I asked him for a cite... Read the posts
-
Angelo said it... And I asked him for a cite... Read the posts
David Payne not seeing the open window does raise suspicions on whether it was ever open.
-
David Payne not seeing the open window does raise suspicions on whether it was ever open.
No it doesn't
-
Yes it does because he entered the apartment with the McCanns straight after the alarm was raised so how didn't he see it?
-
Yes it does because he entered the apartment with the McCanns straight after the alarm was raised so how didn't he see it?
ask him
-
I gave you a cite. Dianne Webster's statement.
Dianne Webster got to the apartment 5 minutes after the alarm was raised. She did not see an open window and said it would have been closed (see her 11 May 2007 statement). When she tried to raise the shutter from the outside and got it stuck the window was closed (see crime scene photos). If the window was open it could only have been before Dianne arrived at the apartment 5 minutes after Kate raised the alarm but David Payne entered the apartment straight away with the McCanns and did not see the open window which is strange.
From Dianne Webster's statement of the 11th of May-
- Because she was asked, she says she does not know if the window, and the shutter, of the couple's bedroom were open or not, in that she did not enter that room.
So she didn't enter the bedroom where Madeleine had been sleeping. By the time she went to see if she could raise the shutter, someone had closed the window.
-
From Dianne Webster's statement of the 11th of May-
- Because she was asked, she says she does not know if the window, and the shutter, of the couple's bedroom were open or not, in that she did not enter that room.
So she didn't enter the bedroom where Madeleine had been sleeping. By the time she went to see if she could raise the shutter, someone had closed the window.
of the couple's bedroom
-
From Dianne Webster's statement of the 11th of May-
- Because she was asked, she says she does not know if the window, and the shutter, of the couple's bedroom were open or not, in that she did not enter that room.
So she didn't enter the bedroom where Madeleine had been sleeping. By the time she went to see if she could raise the shutter, someone had closed the window.
She found an already closed window which had allegedly been open some minutes before.
-
The shutter was partially open LOL as seen in crime scene photos. Amy got to the apartment before Dianne Webster. Sorry but she has to be mistaken. She couldn't be there before the tapas 9 or if she was one would have said so in their interviews/statements.
So Amy’s allowed to be mistaken, but not Diane? Is that Pathfinder’s Law?
-
Yes it does because he entered the apartment with the McCanns straight after the alarm was raised so how didn't he see it?
He’s got to be mistaken, just like Amy has got to be mistaken.
-
According to whom was the window never open... Cited required
Have a read of the witness statements, nobody saw that window open the night Maddie disappeared.
-
Have a read of the witness statements, nobody saw that window open the night Maddie disappeared.
Amy Tierney did.
-
Have a read of the witness statements, nobody saw that window open the night Maddie disappeared.
you posted...
According to everyone else the window was never open.
I dont see one witness staeemnt saying it was NEVER open.....amy tierney saw it open...so thats one.
can you provide one witness staement saying the window was NEVER open...you cant
-
All police forces have equal merits and failings do they? How egalitarian of you. In my opinion there has been a campaign to convince people that the McCanns are the devil’s spawn. In my opinion they’re no worse than any other parents.
You think leaving three toddlers alone in a strange apartment is something most people would do?
-
You think leaving three toddlers alone in a strange apartment is something most people would do?
you derail every thread with the same posts...
-
I'm pointing out police incompetence within the initial investigation.. Perhaps posters here should make a, reasoned response instead of trying to excuse it... As you appear to be doing
I have not identified any police incompetence in the initial investigation. I have however identified a concerted attempt by private investigators acting on behalf of Kennedy and the McCanns to derail the official investigation.
-
I have not identified any police incompetence in the initial investigation. I have however identified a concerted attempt by private investigators acting on behalf of Kennedy and the McCanns to derail the official investigation.
Ive identified plenty of incompetence in the initial investigation......getting pissed lunchtime being just one of them
-
You might not understand it... That doesn't mean it isn't valid.
There was a meeting early on with the pj and grime where the pj were told the alerts themselves were not evidence.
Amaral and his team refused to accept this and took the investigation in the wrong direction
That is merely your opinion, please state so when posting. You know the rules by now!
-
Ive identified plenty of incompetence in the initial investigation......getting pissed lunchtime being just one of them
Oh dear...is that the best you can come up with? @)(++(*
-
That is merely your opinion, please state so when posting. You know the rules by now!
its not just opinion...the alerts are not evidence...amaral thought they proved maddie died in the apartment
-
Oh dear...is that the best you can come up with? @)(++(*
ive already listed more ...not understanding the evidence is another
-
you derail every thread with the same posts...
You started it with your silly comment.
-
You started it with your silly comment.
remember amaral was so poor he was sacked from the investigation
-
The bashing began almost immediately, instigated by the McCanns, their friends and family. It was repeated by the media and those who supported the McCanns ad infinitum. In my opinion it was employed because some people think attacking is the best form of defence.
Using it, of course, leads some to see it as a defensive ploy, rather than a sincere criticism. When I recieve personal attacks on forums I see it as a sign that the people doing it are trying to discredit me in hopes of discrediting what I say. I assume that's because they have no sensible answers to what I said.
It was unprecedented imo. What they hoped to gain from it one can only guess?
Kate McCann's book took the biscuit though, the attacks on the Portuguese police were disgraceful.
-
It was unprecedented imo. What they hoped to gain from it one can only guess?
Kate McCann's book took the biscuit though, the attacks on the Portuguese police were disgraceful.
imo the attacks were thoroughly deserved
-
remember amaral was so poor he was sacked from the investigation
He spoke out publicly about what was happening in the case and he has been vindicated for doing so. We now know that SY have been operating with one hand tied behind their back.
-
He spoke out publicly about what was happening in the case and he has been vindicated for doing so. We now know that SY have been operating with one hand tied behind their back.
in your opinion..he had no right to criticise the uk police....this coming from a man later found guilty of false testimony..perjury...in court. Why should we believe a word he says. The only thing limiting SY is the pj limiting what they can and cannot look at..limited by the PJ
I think the idea that SY are somehow protecting the mccanns is totally balmy...there is just no real evidence against them
-
He spoke out publicly about what was happening in the case and he has been vindicated for doing so. We now know that SY have been operating with one hand tied behind their back.
You and amaral seem to forget that the PJ are not investigating the mccanns
-
You and amaral seem to forget that the PJ are not investigating the mccanns
Really? And you know this why??
-
in your opinion..he had no right to criticise the uk police....this coming from a man later found guilty of false testimony..perjury...in court. Why should we believe a word he says. The only thing limiting SY is the pj limiting what they can and cannot look at..limited by the PJ
I think the idea that SY are somehow protecting the mccanns is totally balmy...there is just no real evidence against them
What they can and can't look at - in Portugal and in accordance with Portuguese law.
-
in your opinion..he had no right to criticise the uk police....this coming from a man later found guilty of false testimony..perjury...in court. Why should we believe a word he says. The only thing limiting SY is the pj limiting what they can and cannot look at..limited by the PJ
I think the idea that SY are somehow protecting the mccanns is totally balmy...there is just no real evidence against them
Amaral is a hero for protecting his subordinates and he paid a heavy price for it.
-
Amaral is a hero for protecting his subordinates.
no he isnt...he is a convicted liar for trying to protect police guilty of torture...thats something to be ashamed of not proud of
-
Really? And you know this why??
its absolutely obvious....Pedro d C...not suspects and no evidence against them
-
its absolutely obvious....Pedro d C...not suspects and no evidence against them
But that doesn't mean they didn't do it.
-
But that doesn't mean they didn't do it.
i absolutely agree with you
-
He was apprehended by US law enforcement not French.
I know what happened. What do you see as its relevance to the initial investigators of Madeleine's disappearance taking her investigation off on the wrong tack ?
-
CARLOS ANJOS
Association of Police Investigators
We have uncooperative witnesses who don't collaborate. The McCaans and the friends, the people who were there who clearly aren't collaborating with the investigation.
PEDRO TADEU
Editor, 24 Horas'
They are criticised for having displayed a cold and calculating attitude throughout this process. You can see already after the kidnapping Kate McCann appeared on a veranda in front of the journalists crying purposefully.
MAY 8th
[Veranda picture]
And we interpreted this as a performance for the media, and this made us feel some sort of discomfort.
August 9th
KATE: And as Gerry's just said, even last week when we met with the police they said: "We are looking for a living child" and they've said that a lot so...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/7106086.stm
August 8th (the previous day when Neves and Encarnacao interviewed them)
Once again Gerry wanted to know if the case had now become a murder inquiry. The answer was indirect: ‘You can probably guess that from our lack of response. [madeleine]
It would have been good manners and perhaps even showed a little much needed professionalism on the part of the initial investigators by adhering to the secrecy laws, to have given themselves appropriate time to investigate before setting the tone of the investigation from the word go.
Sorry I haven't a clue what you are posting about here. Is it possible for you to elucidate ?
-
It was unprecedented imo. What they hoped to gain from it one can only guess?
Kate McCann's book took the biscuit though, the attacks on the Portuguese police were disgraceful.
Kate recorded in her book that the Portuguese police imparted very little information to their British colleagues and vetoed initiatives such as a reconstruction of events or the use of specialist dogs ...
Snip
Stubborn Portuguese police chiefs are refusing to let the world's best sniffer dogs join the hunt for Madeleine McCann.
Senior British cops last night urged officers leading the inquiry to accept help from UK dog teams before it is too late.
Two dogs attached to Britain's National Policing Improvement Agency have developed such powerful tracking skills they can follow a scent for miles, even one up to 28 days old.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm
Eddie an Keela were on standby to be used at the optimum time for finding Madeleine or what might have become of her but the offer was knocked back. Why?? I would say "suspicious minds" + "pig headedness" played a huge part. Any wonder ??? Indeed so.
-
Kate recorded in her book that the Portuguese police imparted very little information to their British colleagues and vetoed initiatives such as a reconstruction of events or the use of specialist dogs ...
Snip
Stubborn Portuguese police chiefs are refusing to let the world's best sniffer dogs join the hunt for Madeleine McCann.
Senior British cops last night urged officers leading the inquiry to accept help from UK dog teams before it is too late.
Two dogs attached to Britain's National Policing Improvement Agency have developed such powerful tracking skills they can follow a scent for miles, even one up to 28 days old.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm
Eddie an Keela were on standby to be used at the optimum time for finding Madeleine or what might have become of her but the offer was knocked back. Why?? I would say "suspicious minds" + "pig headedness" played a huge part. Any wonder ??? Indeed so.
Can we believe what we read in the newspapers? The answer is no;
Other British dog-handling teams did join the initial search for Maddie, and local cops later reported that dogs found a scent, but the trail was lost after 250 yards.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm
-
You think leaving three toddlers alone in a strange apartment is something most people would do?
Sigh. Try reading my post in the context of the discussion.
-
I have not identified any police incompetence in the initial investigation. I have however identified a concerted attempt by private investigators acting on behalf of Kennedy and the McCanns to derail the official investigation.
And how are you getting on with your campaign to persuade the PJ to go after them?
-
Can we believe what we read in the newspapers? The answer is no;
Other British dog-handling teams did join the initial search for Maddie, and local cops later reported that dogs found a scent, but the trail was lost after 250 yards.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm
Are you really attempting to rubbish the link I provided by using exactly the same one to make your point ???
I find that quite extraordinary. However, back to what passes for discussion ...
Kate McCann experienced first hand the intransigence of the Portuguese police during their first investigation. She recorded it in her book and if you care to read my post without the veils over your eyes you may perhaps note that she made reference to the refusal of the initial investigation to use "specialist" dogs ... by all accounts (not only hers) Eddie and Keela.
-
Are you really attempting to rubbish the link I provided by using exactly the same one to make your point ???
I find that quite extraordinary. However, back to what passes for discussion ...
Kate McCann experienced first hand the intransigence of the Portuguese police during their first investigation. She recorded it in her book and if you care to read my post without the veils over your eyes you may perhaps note that she made reference to the refusal of the initial investigation to use "specialist" dogs ... by all accounts (not only hers) Eddie and Keela.
You quoted a story from the Sun which seemed to be describing tracker dogs. The Portuguese had good tracker dogs of their own.
-
Are you really attempting to rubbish the link I provided by using exactly the same one to make your point ???
I find that quite extraordinary. However, back to what passes for discussion ...
Kate McCann experienced first hand the intransigence of the Portuguese police during their first investigation. She recorded it in her book and if you care to read my post without the veils over your eyes you may perhaps note that she made reference to the refusal of the initial investigation to use "specialist" dogs ... by all accounts (not only hers) Eddie and Keela.
Is there any further information re the British tracker dogs actually deployed early on? A date and the route they took would be most interesting.
And is there any further information on the 2 NPIA SuperTracker dogs not deployed? That's another angle that would be most interesting?
Why would the Brits send out UK ordinary trackers if they had UK SuperTrackers to hand? How curious!
-
You think leaving three toddlers alone in a strange apartment is something most people would do?
I also think an abductor would target a lone child and not target a room full of children with no space to move. Even reaching the window in the dark filled with beds and cots would be a struggle. What could possibly go wrong *%87
-
I also think an abductor would target a lone child and not target a room full of children with no space to move. Even reaching the window in the dark filled with beds and cots would be a struggle. What could possibly go wrong *%87
Well apparently nothing. Crime of the century. Couldn't have gone much better, save for abducting all 3.
-
Is there any further information re the British tracker dogs actually deployed early on? A date and the route they took would be most interesting.
And is there any further information on the 2 NPIA SuperTracker dogs not deployed? That's another angle that would be most interesting?
Why would the Brits send out UK ordinary trackers if they had UK SuperTrackers to hand? How curious!
The Sun is better at spreading confusion than it is at spreading information.
-
You quoted a story from the Sun which seemed to be describing tracker dogs. The Portuguese had good tracker dogs of their own.
You quoted from exactly the same source which identified the dogs which were on standby in May but only allowed to make an appearance three months after the event. Didn't you notice ... or have you extraordinarily never heard of them, particularly since you used a source dedicated to their exploits
Snip
"The dogs were put on standby to go to the Algarve within days of Madeleine’s disappearance.
"You would expect the Portuguese to make use of the best resources available to them, but they repeatedly ignore the offers of assistance."
The dogs include a spaniel whose sense of smell is so keen she can sniff traces of blood on a weapon even after it has been scrubbed clean.
But the source warned: "They work most effectively within a 28-day time frame. After that the scent becomes much weaker."
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm
Why do you think the offer of these "specialist" dogs was refused ... but ordinary run of the mill British trackers of which you opine "The Portuguese had good tracker dogs of their own." seem to have had the run of the place.
Did they ??
Why do you suppose the initial Portuguese investigators didn't wasn't to use the alleged two best tools in the box to find Madeleine?
-
Is there any further information re the British tracker dogs actually deployed early on? A date and the route they took would be most interesting.
And is there any further information on the 2 NPIA SuperTracker dogs not deployed? That's another angle that would be most interesting?
Why would the Brits send out UK ordinary trackers if they had UK SuperTrackers to hand? How curious!
Curioser and curiouser.
The point I made in my original post using a primary source was that the initial Portuguese investigators refused practical assistance from their British counterparts.
A senior officer of which ... Amaral says in his book he was so suspicious of that he had him followed: with that level of paranoia in evidence is it any wonder the initial investigators took the path they did which led them to entirely the wrong conclusions as they did.
-
Curioser and curiouser.
The point I made in my original post using a primary source was that the initial Portuguese investigators refused practical assistance from their British counterparts.
A senior officer of which Amaral says in his book he was so suspicious of that he had him followed: with that level of paranoia in evidence is it any wonder the initial investigators took the path they did which led them to entirely the wrong conclusions as they did.
IYO
-
IYO
Yep,nothing to suggest "The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ... "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)" is the right conclusion.
-
IYO
NO
Not on my opinion.
In the opinion of the Policia Judiciaria and the Portuguese Prosecutors: you want to quibble take it up with them, but that is the fact of the matter.
-
NO
Not on my opinion.
In the opinion of the Policia Judiciaria and the Portuguese Prosecutors: you want to quibble take it up with them, but that is the fact of the matter.
No, it is your opinion.
It hasn't been proven that the McCanns didn't do it.
-
Yep,nothing to suggest "The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ... "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)" is the right conclusion.
Precisely.
I'm yet to see any proof that Maddie was abducted.
Brietta has a habit of posting as if there is.
-
Yep,nothing to suggest "The remit of Operation Grange is to investigate ... "(as if the abduction occurred in the UK)" is the right conclusion.
You may not wish to acknowledge the official Portuguese decisions regarding the mistakes made by the initial investigators; that is entirely up to you but facts are chiels that winna ding and all the facts of the matter are contained in the PJ's FINAL REPORT and the ARCHIVING DISPATCH of 21.07.08.
-
Precisely.
I'm yet to see any proof that Maddie was abducted.
Brietta has a habit of posting as if there is.
8**8:/: Cite please 8**8:/:
-
8**8:/: Cite please 8**8:/:
Are you serious?
Your every post in this forum oozes with support for the McCanns.
-
Are you serious?
Your every post in this forum oozes with support for the McCanns.
I support the McCann's claim to innocence. There's no proof they arent
-
I support the McCann's claim to innocence. There's no proof they arent
Just as there's no proof Maddie was abducted.
It's quite possible the parents dunnit theory is correct (despite umpteen years & 12 million spent etc)
-
I support the McCann's claim to innocence. There's no proof they arent
Innocent of what exactly because I can think of a few things for which they are certainly culpable. Leaving their children unattended and unsupervised being one of them.
-
Innocent of what exactly because I can think of a few things for which they are certainly culpable. Leaving their children unattended and unsupervised being one of them.
Yes guilty of that.... But innocent of what amaral and his team accused them of
-
Just as there's no proof Maddie was abducted.
It's quite possible the parents dunnit theory is correct (despite umpteen years & 12 million spent etc)
There's no proof either way but plenty of evidence that indicates innocence
-
There's no proof either way but plenty of evidence that indicates innocence
Such as?
The parents claims.
Some (ridiculous) sightings.
"Not suspects".
I think that about covers it.
-
What is it about the Archiving Dispatch that is so difficult for some members to take on board and what is it that can't be understood from it that nothing the original investigators thought indicated Madeleine's parents of complicity in the crime against her was of the slightest significance when investigated by a competent team of investigators.
Snip
To this can be added that, in reality, none of the indications that led to their constitution as arguidos was later confirmed or consolidated.
If not, let us see:- the information concerning a previous alert of the media – before the police – was not confirmed
- the traces that were marked by the dogs were not ratified in laboratory
- and the initial indications from the above transcribed email, better clarified at a later date, ended up being revealed as innocuous
The Republic’s Prosecutor (José de Magalhães e Menezes)
The Joint General Prosecutor (João Melchior Gomes)
-
You quoted from exactly the same source which identified the dogs which were on standby in May but only allowed to make an appearance three months after the event. Didn't you notice ... or have you extraordinarily never heard of them, particularly since you used a source dedicated to their exploits
Snip
"The dogs were put on standby to go to the Algarve within days of Madeleine’s disappearance.
"You would expect the Portuguese to make use of the best resources available to them, but they repeatedly ignore the offers of assistance."
The dogs include a spaniel whose sense of smell is so keen she can sniff traces of blood on a weapon even after it has been scrubbed clean.
But the source warned: "They work most effectively within a 28-day time frame. After that the scent becomes much weaker."
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm
Why do you think the offer of these "specialist" dogs was refused ... but ordinary run of the mill British trackers of which you opine "The Portuguese had good tracker dogs of their own." seem to have had the run of the place.
Did they ??
Why do you suppose the initial Portuguese investigators didn't wasn't to use the alleged two best tools in the box to find Madeleine?
I think there's some selective quoting going on there. Here's what was said about these dogs;
Two dogs attached to Britain's National Policing Improvement Agency have developed such powerful tracking skills they can follow a scent for miles, even one up to 28 days old.
By sniffing an item of Maddie's clothing, they could trace a trail that might finally unlock the mystery of the four-year-old's disappearance.
"These dogs have immense capability. Their tracking skills are among the finest in the world.
"The dogs were put on standby to go to the Algarve within days of Madeleine’s disappearance.
"You would expect the Portuguese to make use of the best resources available to them, but they repeatedly ignore the offers of assistance."
Sounds like tracker dogs to me, although they also appear to mention Keela. Neither Eddie nor Keela were tracker dogs, so this article wasn't describing them.
-
I think there's some selective quoting going on there. Here's what was said about these dogs;
Two dogs attached to Britain's National Policing Improvement Agency have developed such powerful tracking skills they can follow a scent for miles, even one up to 28 days old.
By sniffing an item of Maddie's clothing, they could trace a trail that might finally unlock the mystery of the four-year-old's disappearance.
"These dogs have immense capability. Their tracking skills are among the finest in the world.
"The dogs were put on standby to go to the Algarve within days of Madeleine’s disappearance.
"You would expect the Portuguese to make use of the best resources available to them, but they repeatedly ignore the offers of assistance."
Sounds like tracker dogs to me, although they also appear to mention Keela. Neither Eddie nor Keela were tracker dogs, so this article wasn't describing them.
Please, please do have it your very own way I really don't "do" arguing black is white.
Your accusation of "selective posting" is risible. Anyone who is especially riven by this fascinating discourse can follow the link I have used https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm and/ or the link you have used https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm and everyone can make up their own mind.
My last word on the non-issue is that in my opinion the fact the page is headed Eddie and Keela * A brief introduction to the work of Eddie and Keela, as well as general information regarding the work of cadaver dogs rather gives the game away as to exactly which two dogs are under discussion; followed by the list below which outlines Eddie and Keela's eneavours to the exclusion of all others.- Keela's Nose Makes Her Top Dog, 30 December 2005
- UK's No1 Sherlock Bones, 30 December 2005
- On scent of success: sniffer dog Keela earns more than her Chief Constable, 30 December 2005
- Portuguese police turned down offer of dog help, 23 May 2007
- Top sniffer dog to join Maddy search, 08 August 2007
- Four-legged sniffers of the truth, 08 August 2007
- The English sniffer dogs that are helping in the hunt for Madeleine, 10 August 2007
- Specialized K-9 to Aid in Ga. Search, 14 September 2007
- Madeleine: McCanns consult American lawyers over 'cadaver dog' evidence, 16 September 2007
- Gerry McCann attacks handling of sniffer dogs, 17 December 2007
- How can a dog sniff through concrete?, 26 February 2008
- Report of PJ discards abduction theory, 05 July 2008
- 'Send In The Dogs' - ITV documentary, 22 July 2008
- English defended the use of the dogs, 20 July 2008
- The dogs' work as described by their own handler, 07 August 2008
Snip
If, or as seems increasingly likely, when, the full story of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is revealed, one question will demand an answer: why did detectives wait three months before bringing in sniffer dogs?
_________________________________________________________________________
The point made in my initial post using Kate McCann as my primary source is that the initial investigators blocked practical assistance offered by the British police at a time when all such assistance was of paramount importance as far as Madeleine McCann was concerned.
In my opinion the attitude and ineptitude of the Amaral led initial investigation resulted in the worst possible decisions throughout until Amaral's sacking from her case for Madeleine McCann.
Over twelve years down the line the results of that remain apparent.
-
Please, please do have it your very own way I really don't "do" arguing black is white.
Your accusation of "selective posting" is risible. Anyone who is especially riven by this fascinating discourse can follow the link I have used https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm and/ or the link you have used https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id157.htm and everyone can make up their own mind.
My last word on the non-issue is that in my opinion the fact the page is headed Eddie and Keela * A brief introduction to the work of Eddie and Keela, as well as general information regarding the work of cadaver dogs rather gives the game away as to exactly which two dogs are under discussion; followed by the list below which outlines Eddie and Keela's eneavours to the exclusion of all others.- Keela's Nose Makes Her Top Dog, 30 December 2005
- UK's No1 Sherlock Bones, 30 December 2005
- On scent of success: sniffer dog Keela earns more than her Chief Constable, 30 December 2005
- Portuguese police turned down offer of dog help, 23 May 2007
- Top sniffer dog to join Maddy search, 08 August 2007
- Four-legged sniffers of the truth, 08 August 2007
- The English sniffer dogs that are helping in the hunt for Madeleine, 10 August 2007
- Specialized K-9 to Aid in Ga. Search, 14 September 2007
- Madeleine: McCanns consult American lawyers over 'cadaver dog' evidence, 16 September 2007
- Gerry McCann attacks handling of sniffer dogs, 17 December 2007
- How can a dog sniff through concrete?, 26 February 2008
- Report of PJ discards abduction theory, 05 July 2008
- 'Send In The Dogs' - ITV documentary, 22 July 2008
- English defended the use of the dogs, 20 July 2008
- The dogs' work as described by their own handler, 07 August 2008
Snip
If, or as seems increasingly likely, when, the full story of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is revealed, one question will demand an answer: why did detectives wait three months before bringing in sniffer dogs?
_________________________________________________________________________
The point made in my initial post using Kate McCann as my primary source is that the initial investigators blocked practical assistance offered by the British police at a time when all such assistance was of paramount importance as far as Madeleine McCann was concerned.
In my opinion the attitude and ineptitude of the Amaral led initial investigation resulted in the worst possible decisions throughout until Amaral's sacking from her case for Madeleine McCann.
Over twelve years down the line the results of that remain apparent.
I wonder why the UK police wanted to bring in cadaver dogs on 7th May? The Portuguese were still searching for a live child.
-
I wonder why the UK police wanted to bring in cadaver dogs on 7th May? The Portuguese were still searching for a live child.
What a strange question IMO.
-
Are you serious?
Your every post in this forum oozes with support for the McCanns.
And yours do what, exactly?
-
No, it is your opinion.
It hasn't been proven that the McCanns didn't do it.
It hasn’t been proven that Robert Murat or Pamela Fenn’s niece didn’t do it either.
-
I wonder why the UK police wanted to bring in cadaver dogs on 7th May? The Portuguese were still searching for a live child.
I wonder why the British liaison officers were uncomfortable with the Portuguese decision to rule a couple out of the inquiry.
madeleine Kate McCann
-
I wonder why the British liaison officers were uncomfortable with the Portuguese decision to rule a couple out of the inquiry.
madeleine Kate McCann
Hmmm. Who were they Brie?
-
Hmmm. Who were they Brie?
Kate didn't say who they were, Sadie. So I've no idea but obviously Kate and Gerry knew who they were. Kate writes ...
"What was forthcoming, particularly in terms of the quality and depth of the investigation, would become
increasingly concerning to us.
Grounds for elimination, for instance, often seemed very flimsy.
I remember Gerry and me exchanging quizzical looks after the FLOs tried to explain how one couple had been ruled out of the inquiry."
A bit ironic considering the lengths the original investigators went to as far as Kate and Gerry were concerned.
-
Hi Brietta and Sadie,
Could this be the couple Kate referred to in her publication?
“ POLICE are investigating a childless couple who they suspect could have abducted missing Madeleine McCann.
The pair, who had told friends they would kidnap a child after becoming frustrated with adoption red tape, are among the list of 38 new suspects drawn up by British cops.
A review by London’s Metropolitan police led them to the couple and detectives are now investigating the theory that they smuggled the missing toddler out of Portugal aboard a boat.
The man had inherited a large amount of money around the time Maddie disappeared on May 3, 2007, from her family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, and it’s believed he could have used the money to set up a new life.
And it’s the childless couple theory that is fuelling the last remaining hope that Maddie could still be alive.
This week cops said there is still no proof she is dead.
Other theories centered around paedophile gangs and lone sex offenders, but the investigation is now focusing on one individual who, having struggled with adoption procedures in Portugal, threatened to kidnap a child.
The individual is believed to have told friends that he was so frustrated with adoption procedures in a number of countries that “he would take his own child” if necessary.
The Metropolitan Police have been aware of this line of inquiry for the past two years, but it’s only since British PM David Cameron ordered a fresh review that they had the resources to follow it up independently of the Portuguese authorities.
Sources close to the new investigation have told the Sunday World that they believe Madeleine was stalked and targeted for abduction in the days before she disappeared.
The English suspect, who has never been interviewed by UK or Portuguese Police officers, is understood to have been driving a four-wheel drive car at the time of the kidnapping.
The theory suggests that the planned abduction of Maddie involved at least two people and it is claimed that the suspect used a newly-purchased yacht, which was moored about an hour away from Praia da Luz, to leave the country.
Scotland Yard officers involved in the new probe also believe that it is likely the suspect had somehow accessed a key to apartment 5A, where the McCanns stayed with their three children.”
-
Hi Brietta and Sadie,
Could this be the couple Kate referred to in her publication?
“ POLICE are investigating a childless couple who they suspect could have abducted missing Madeleine McCann.
The pair, who had told friends they would kidnap a child after becoming frustrated with adoption red tape, are among the list of 38 new suspects drawn up by British cops.
A review by London’s Metropolitan police led them to the couple and detectives are now investigating the theory that they smuggled the missing toddler out of Portugal aboard a boat.
The man had inherited a large amount of money around the time Maddie disappeared on May 3, 2007, from her family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, and it’s believed he could have used the money to set up a new life.
And it’s the childless couple theory that is fuelling the last remaining hope that Maddie could still be alive.
This week cops said there is still no proof she is dead.
Other theories centered around paedophile gangs and lone sex offenders, but the investigation is now focusing on one individual who, having struggled with adoption procedures in Portugal, threatened to kidnap a child.
The individual is believed to have told friends that he was so frustrated with adoption procedures in a number of countries that “he would take his own child” if necessary.
The Metropolitan Police have been aware of this line of inquiry for the past two years, but it’s only since British PM David Cameron ordered a fresh review that they had the resources to follow it up independently of the Portuguese authorities.
Sources close to the new investigation have told the Sunday World that they believe Madeleine was stalked and targeted for abduction in the days before she disappeared.
The English suspect, who has never been interviewed by UK or Portuguese Police officers, is understood to have been driving a four-wheel drive car at the time of the kidnapping.
The theory suggests that the planned abduction of Maddie involved at least two people and it is claimed that the suspect used a newly-purchased yacht, which was moored about an hour away from Praia da Luz, to leave the country.
Scotland Yard officers involved in the new probe also believe that it is likely the suspect had somehow accessed a key to apartment 5A, where the McCanns stayed with their three children.”
This is a very good comment. It covers most of how I feel about this case. I believe that Madeleine was taken off by boat, probably to some other part of the World.
I believe that Madeleine is still alive and unaware of who she is.
-
Hi Brietta and Sadie,
Could this be the couple Kate referred to in her publication?
“ POLICE are investigating a childless couple who they suspect could have abducted missing Madeleine McCann.
The pair, who had told friends they would kidnap a child after becoming frustrated with adoption red tape, are among the list of 38 new suspects drawn up by British cops.
A review by London’s Metropolitan police led them to the couple and detectives are now investigating the theory that they smuggled the missing toddler out of Portugal aboard a boat.
The man had inherited a large amount of money around the time Maddie disappeared on May 3, 2007, from her family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, and it’s believed he could have used the money to set up a new life.
And it’s the childless couple theory that is fuelling the last remaining hope that Maddie could still be alive.
This week cops said there is still no proof she is dead.
Other theories centered around paedophile gangs and lone sex offenders, but the investigation is now focusing on one individual who, having struggled with adoption procedures in Portugal, threatened to kidnap a child.
The individual is believed to have told friends that he was so frustrated with adoption procedures in a number of countries that “he would take his own child” if necessary.
The Metropolitan Police have been aware of this line of inquiry for the past two years, but it’s only since British PM David Cameron ordered a fresh review that they had the resources to follow it up independently of the Portuguese authorities.
Sources close to the new investigation have told the Sunday World that they believe Madeleine was stalked and targeted for abduction in the days before she disappeared.
The English suspect, who has never been interviewed by UK or Portuguese Police officers, is understood to have been driving a four-wheel drive car at the time of the kidnapping.
The theory suggests that the planned abduction of Maddie involved at least two people and it is claimed that the suspect used a newly-purchased yacht, which was moored about an hour away from Praia da Luz, to leave the country.
Scotland Yard officers involved in the new probe also believe that it is likely the suspect had somehow accessed a key to apartment 5A, where the McCanns stayed with their three children.”
Hi,Anthro link to the tale please,way back in 2013 or there abouts if memory serves.
-
Hi Barrier, here’s the link:
http://www.sundayworld.com/top-stories/news/childless-couple-in-link-to-maddie-mystery#
-
Hi Barrier, here’s the link:
http://www.sundayworld.com/top-stories/news/childless-couple-in-link-to-maddie-mystery#
Doesn't link to the story,
-
Discussed previously way back in 2013 as I thought.Went no where fast,what with the events in 2014.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1933.msg61096#msg61096
-
Hi Brietta and Sadie,
Could this be the couple Kate referred to in her publication?
“ POLICE are investigating a childless couple who they suspect could have abducted missing Madeleine McCann.
The pair, who had told friends they would kidnap a child after becoming frustrated with adoption red tape, are among the list of 38 new suspects drawn up by British cops.
A review by London’s Metropolitan police led them to the couple and detectives are now investigating the theory that they smuggled the missing toddler out of Portugal aboard a boat.
The man had inherited a large amount of money around the time Maddie disappeared on May 3, 2007, from her family’s holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, and it’s believed he could have used the money to set up a new life.
And it’s the childless couple theory that is fuelling the last remaining hope that Maddie could still be alive.
This week cops said there is still no proof she is dead.
Other theories centered around paedophile gangs and lone sex offenders, but the investigation is now focusing on one individual who, having struggled with adoption procedures in Portugal, threatened to kidnap a child.
The individual is believed to have told friends that he was so frustrated with adoption procedures in a number of countries that “he would take his own child” if necessary.
The Metropolitan Police have been aware of this line of inquiry for the past two years, but it’s only since British PM David Cameron ordered a fresh review that they had the resources to follow it up independently of the Portuguese authorities.
Sources close to the new investigation have told the Sunday World that they believe Madeleine was stalked and targeted for abduction in the days before she disappeared.
The English suspect, who has never been interviewed by UK or Portuguese Police officers, is understood to have been driving a four-wheel drive car at the time of the kidnapping.
The theory suggests that the planned abduction of Maddie involved at least two people and it is claimed that the suspect used a newly-purchased yacht, which was moored about an hour away from Praia da Luz, to leave the country.
Scotland Yard officers involved in the new probe also believe that it is likely the suspect had somehow accessed a key to apartment 5A, where the McCanns stayed with their three children.”
Found this one too, Anthro ...
Processos Volume IV
Pages 854-855
External Inquiry Report
Date: 2007/05/09
Place: Praia da Luz - Lagos
Responsible Officers: Raquel Neves and Tony Almeida, Inspectors
Description and result of the inquiry:
In the sequence of information received by this Policia Judiciaria on this date, at around 11H40, we went to the Video Club “Eureka Services", located in Praia da Luz - Lagos, in order to contact Mr. S**** R******, the owner of the establishment.
…
Following an informal conversation, we were informed by that individual that he had remembered that on the previous Thursday, 3rd May, 2007, at the time he was closing up his shop, around 22h45, a small vehicle, whose make, model and number plate he does not remember, the only identifying element he captured was the colour of the vehicle—a dull red, almost as if the colour has been burnt off, sic, due to prolonged exposure to sunlight. Inside the vehicle, he could only make out the presence of one person, as well as a dog in the front passenger's seat.
…
At the moment that said vehicle passed him, he observed that the driver was looking towards the back seat . Mr R***** affirms that he did not have, at that time, the opportunity to determine what was in the back of the car.
…
When questioned, he further noted that he recognised the identity of the driver, indicating that it was a female, of Brazilian nationality, 1,70 cm in height, 25/26 years of age, slim with lightly coloured skin. He even added her name, S*** S***** because she and her partner had previously worked at his parents’ farm. …
Due to minor arguments caused by the misuse of tools, involving mainly the woman’s companion identified as E***** S*****, the latter, also of Brazilian nationality, and Mr. R*****, effectively came to blows, and the services of the couple were concluded.
…
He adds that some of the physical aggressions he suffered in Marina de Lagos, had required help from the local police;
…
After the couple were fired, he found out that they went to work in the Marina de Lagos, in the area of repairs/maintenance of boats, and more concretely, for a boat which was moored there and that they it as their residence. He furthers that it was a catamaran of high dimensions with the name "TROPICS";
…
Another individual called R***** also worked in that place with the couple. R*****’s telephone number is xxxxxxxxx, and he may help in determining other elements;
…
He only remembered the episode at this point, because in making some associations, given the disappearance of the child, it reminded of him of this couple who mentioned that they had an exceptional desire to have a child of their own;
…
After the facts occurred, he also stated that they had left Marina de Lagos, as the vessel was no longer found in that place.
When questioned about the physical characteristics of E**** S*****, he identified him as being bald, with a strong build, around 1,70 m in height, dark skin tone and around 42 years of age.
Signed.
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic116-10.html
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6532.msg268102#msg268102
Anna also supplied the following link ...
EXCLUSIVE: Brazilians in the frame in Madeleine hunt
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/546818/Brazilian-couple-who-wanted-a-child-re-examined-in-Madeleine-hunt
-
Kate didn't say who they were, Sadie. So I've no idea but obviously Kate and Gerry knew who they were. Kate writes ...
"What was forthcoming, particularly in terms of the quality and depth of the investigation, would become
increasingly concerning to us.
Grounds for elimination, for instance, often seemed very flimsy.
I remember Gerry and me exchanging quizzical looks after the FLOs tried to explain how one couple had been ruled out of the inquiry."
A bit ironic considering the lengths the original investigators went to as far as Kate and Gerry were concerned.
Kate may have been referring to the couple + child seen by Geroge Brooks at 6am on 4/5/07 near Lagos Marina. Kate & Gerry were aware of this sighting through Michael Wright & this happened during the time LP FLO's were in Luz.
See various media reports here.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id399.htm
However, PJ were reportedly not interested in the sighting for reasons unspecified & didn't interview the witness in early May 2007. There is no evidence the couple carrying the child were ever traced or investigated before being eliminated as per this service document:-
16-Processos Volume 16 Pages 4201 to 4202
SERVICE INFORMATION
To: Paulo Rebelo
From: Ricardo Paiva, Inspector
Date: 2008/04/24 (diligences at Pizza Real, Luz & telephone discussion with George Brooks)
*snipped*
Regarding the facts in question, he states that he had already contacted the OH in May of 2007 and at this time relayed to the police that at around 06H00 in the morning on the 4th May, 2007, he saw a couple passing the Marina de Lagos. The man was carrying the child. It was ascertained at that time that the aforementioned situation would not be of interest to the investigation.
Signed,
Ricardo Paiva
-
This is a very good comment. It covers most of how I feel about this case. I believe that Madeleine was taken off by boat, probably to some other part of the World.
I believe that Madeleine is still alive and unaware of who she is.
Interesting posts from Pegasus ...
The "Tropics" cat was being repaired.
The place where boats are repaired is the outer harbour.
https://goo.gl/maps/qDkH2
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2705.msg256408#msg256408
@pathfinder Your post is interesting, and contains two different things, unconnected with each other.
1. A report in May 2007 of a video shop owner's account about a Brazilian couple who lived on a boat at Lagos.
2. A report in May 2012 in the Evening Standard and This Is London newspapers about a British man who owned a boat at Lagos but didn't live on it. BTW if this report is true I think maybe an original completely non-suspicious word "adopt" got morphed (or "mitched") into "abduct" into "kidnap" if you see what I mean?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2705.msg256383#msg256383
-
Found this one too, Anthro ...
Processos Volume IV
Pages 854-855
External Inquiry Report
Date: 2007/05/09
Place: Praia da Luz - Lagos
Responsible Officers: Raquel Neves and Tony Almeida, Inspectors
Description and result of the inquiry:
In the sequence of information received by this Policia Judiciaria on this date, at around 11H40, we went to the Video Club “Eureka Services", located in Praia da Luz - Lagos, in order to contact Mr. S**** R******, the owner of the establishment.
…
Following an informal conversation, we were informed by that individual that he had remembered that on the previous Thursday, 3rd May, 2007, at the time he was closing up his shop, around 22h45, a small vehicle, whose make, model and number plate he does not remember, the only identifying element he captured was the colour of the vehicle—a dull red, almost as if the colour has been burnt off, sic, due to prolonged exposure to sunlight. Inside the vehicle, he could only make out the presence of one person, as well as a dog in the front passenger's seat.
…
At the moment that said vehicle passed him, he observed that the driver was looking towards the back seat . Mr R***** affirms that he did not have, at that time, the opportunity to determine what was in the back of the car.
…
When questioned, he further noted that he recognised the identity of the driver, indicating that it was a female, of Brazilian nationality, 1,70 cm in height, 25/26 years of age, slim with lightly coloured skin. He even added her name, S*** S***** because she and her partner had previously worked at his parents’ farm. …
Due to minor arguments caused by the misuse of tools, involving mainly the woman’s companion identified as E***** S*****, the latter, also of Brazilian nationality, and Mr. R*****, effectively came to blows, and the services of the couple were concluded.
…
He adds that some of the physical aggressions he suffered in Marina de Lagos, had required help from the local police;
…
After the couple were fired, he found out that they went to work in the Marina de Lagos, in the area of repairs/maintenance of boats, and more concretely, for a boat which was moored there and that they it as their residence. He furthers that it was a catamaran of high dimensions with the name "TROPICS";
…
Another individual called R***** also worked in that place with the couple. R*****’s telephone number is xxxxxxxxx, and he may help in determining other elements;
…
He only remembered the episode at this point, because in making some associations, given the disappearance of the child, it reminded of him of this couple who mentioned that they had an exceptional desire to have a child of their own;
…
After the facts occurred, he also stated that they had left Marina de Lagos, as the vessel was no longer found in that place.
When questioned about the physical characteristics of E**** S*****, he identified him as being bald, with a strong build, around 1,70 m in height, dark skin tone and around 42 years of age.
Signed.
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/topic116-10.html
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6532.msg268102#msg268102
Anna also supplied the following link ...
EXCLUSIVE: Brazilians in the frame in Madeleine hunt
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/546818/Brazilian-couple-who-wanted-a-child-re-examined-in-Madeleine-hunt
This is where my interests lie.
-
This is where my interests lie.
It seems they did exist and weren't a figment of someone's imagination.
They were in Luz at the appropriate time and if their catamaran was in the outer harbour as Pegasus says they had the means and the opportunity to make an unnoticed and clean getaway.
They had been working on the boat so it was most likely sea worthy and ready to go.
They didn't even have to box themselves in by heading into the Mediterranean they were in a location that could have seen them heading down the sea lanes towards the horn and thereafter the world was their oyster and for a long, long time the official investigators didn't look outside the box occupied by Kate and Gerry so no-one was looking for them.
-
It seems they did exist and weren't a figment of someone's imagination.
They were in Luz at the appropriate time and if their catamaran was in the outer harbour as Pegasus says they had the means and the opportunity to make an unnoticed and clean getaway.
They had been working on the boat so it was most likely sea worthy and ready to go.
They didn't even have to box themselves in by heading into the Mediterranean they were in a location that could have seen them heading down the sea lanes towards the horn and thereafter the world was their oyster and for a long, long time the official investigators didn't look outside the box occupied by Kate and Gerry so no-one was looking for them.
I was aware of them long time ago. And Yep, they could have sailed around for all of that Summer and then gone anywhere.
There could have been a need for Madeleine to learn a new language.
Personally I don't think that they abducted Madeleine themselves and might not even have known who she was.
-
I was aware of them long time ago. And Yep, they could have sailed around for all of that Summer and then gone anywhere.
There could have been a need for Madeleine to learn a new language.
Personally I don't think that they abducted Madeleine themselves and might not even have known who she was.
Sounds far more plausible than someone on nodding acquaintance with dear old Liz.
-
Sounds far more plausible than someone on nodding acquaintance with dear old Liz.
Thank you.
There is more to my Theory, of course. Who was Smithman, seen heading in the direction of the beach?
Who organised the phone call to The GNR at Portimao reporting a non existent burglary?
-
Thank you.
There is more to my Theory, of course. Who was Smithman, seen heading in the direction of the beach?
Who organised the phone call to The GNR at Portimao reporting a non existent burglary?
Securitas (alarms) in Lisbon telephoned the GNR in Lagos 4 times re an incident in Odiaxere. Those calls are in the GNR Lagos phone log. I have never yet seen any proof it was a phoney incident.
-
Securitas (alarms) in Lisbon telephoned the GNR in Lagos 4 times re an incident in Odiaxere. Those calls are in the GNR Lagos phone log. I have never yet seen any proof it was a phoney incident.
I said, "Organized". I have never seen any proof that there was a burglary.
-
Securitas (alarms) in Lisbon telephoned the GNR in Lagos 4 times re an incident in Odiaxere. Those calls are in the GNR Lagos phone log. I have never yet seen any proof it was a phoney incident.
Does anyone know if they were genuine
-
Does anyone know if they were genuine
I think Misty might know. From what I can remember it was all very dubious.
-
Thank you.
There is more to my Theory, of course. Who was Smithman, seen heading in the direction of the beach?
Who organised the phone call to The GNR at Portimao reporting a non existent burglary?
To be fair the PJ would not have worked Smithman into the equation for the simple reason that they were not told of his existence until a fortnight later. But there was a lot going on in the background in and around Luz about which the McCanns and their companions wouldn't have had a clue but about which local police should have had intelligence for passing up the line to the PJ.
Nothing approaching an amber alert despite an immediate local search turning up no trace of the missing child. I think that was a game changer.
The fact that the McCanns were deemed suspicious even before the investigators had time to get their feet on the ground is absolutely tragic when there was so much else to be going on with.
-
To be fair the PJ would not have worked Smithman into the equation for the simple reason that they were not told of his existence until a fortnight later. But there was a lot going on in the background in and around Luz about which the McCanns and their companions wouldn't have had a clue but about which local police should have had intelligence for passing up the line to the PJ.
Nothing approaching an amber alert despite an immediate local search turning up no trace of the missing child. I think that was a game changer.
The fact that the McCanns were deemed suspicious even before the investigators had time to get their feet on the ground is absolutely tragic when there was so much else to be going on with.
The fact is that Smithman was seen heading in the direction of the beach at approximately the right time.
Amaral wasn't interested in anything unless it implicated The McCanns, which he later tried to do even with that one.
-
Securitas (alarms) in Lisbon telephoned the GNR in Lagos 4 times re an incident in Odiaxere. Those calls are in the GNR Lagos phone log. I have never yet seen any proof it was a phoney incident.
Nothing came of the call to Odiaxere so we must assume it was either a hoax or a system fault.
-
To be fair the PJ would not have worked Smithman into the equation for the simple reason that they were not told of his existence until a fortnight later. But there was a lot going on in the background in and around Luz about which the McCanns and their companions wouldn't have had a clue but about which local police should have had intelligence for passing up the line to the PJ.
Nothing approaching an amber alert despite an immediate local search turning up no trace of the missing child. I think that was a game changer.
The fact that the McCanns were deemed suspicious even before the investigators had time to get their feet on the ground is absolutely tragic when there was so much else to be going on with.
No doubt Tweedledee and Tweedledum passed on their concerns to the PJ detectives.
-
Nothing came of the call to Odiaxere so we must assume it was either a hoax or a system fault.
Thanks. It could have been either.
The fact remains that it tied up The GNR for over an hour giving someone time to get away imo.
-
Thanks. It could have been either.
The fact remains that it tied up The GNR for over an hour giving someone time to get away imo.
Don't forget the mandatory "imo" please Eleanor as we don't know for sure what happened to Maddie. We don't want to give the readers the wrong impression do we since various scenarios as to what befell her remain extremely valid even now 12 years on.
-
Don't forget the mandatory "imo" please Eleanor as we don't know for sure what happened to Maddie. We don't want to give the readers the wrong impression do we since various scenarios as to what befell her remain extremely valid even now 12 years on.
Whoops. Sorry. You might have to go back a bit.
-
Don't forget the mandatory "imo" please Eleanor as we don't know for sure what happened to Maddie. We don't want to give the readers the wrong impression do we since various scenarios as to what befell her remain extremely valid even now 12 years on.
Be good if you were to enforce this rule a little more
-
Nothing came of the call to Odiaxere so we must assume it was either a hoax or a system fault.
I've got no idea what became of it, as the outcome is not described in any significant source.
Therefore, at this juncture, there is no reason to assume it was anything other than a genuine alert.
The rest is speculation.
-
I've got no idea what became of it, as the outcome is not described in any significant source.
Therefore, at this juncture, there is no reason to assume it was anything other than a genuine alert.
The rest is speculation.
in your opinion
you are assuming its genuine...that by definition is speculation
-
I've got no idea what became of it, as the outcome is not described in any significant source.
Therefore, at this juncture, there is no reason to assume it was anything other than a genuine alert.
The rest is speculation.
I'm assuming it wasn't. In My Opinion.
-
Thanks. It could have been either.
The fact remains that it tied up The GNR for over an hour giving someone time to get away imo.
The GNR were told about Madeleine's disappearance at 22.41. They reached Luz around 20 minutes later. No 'hour' of being tied up.
-
A new theory? MBM a live stow away on a boat, to sail round the world or a cadaver being sailed out to sea of burial?