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: Alfred R Jones on November 02, 2014, 07:30:19 PM
-
The nature of the crime has not been proven but the most logical scenario is stranger abduction and not coincidentally that is the view of the Met who have said they believe Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger. This isn't a believer's invention or fantasy, this is a fact. Like it or lump it.
-
In April this year, Andy Redwood, from the Homicide and Serious Crime Division at Scotland Yard, said he believed Madeleine McCann was abducted by a stranger and could be alive. "We sincerely believe that there is a possibility of her being alive", he stated.
But then, what does he know ...
-
The nature of the crime has not been proven but the most logical scenario is stranger abduction and not coincidentally that is the view of the Met who have said they believe Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger. This isn't a believer's invention or fantasy, this is a fact. Like it or lump it.
Start the thread Alfie on how the child was abducted by a stranger.
Give us your theory from alpha to omega.
The Met have never said they are investigating abduction by stranger to the exclusion of all else.
Oh sorry I forgot you have me on ignore 8(>((
-
Start the thread Alfie on how the child was abducted by a stranger.
Give us your theory from alpha to omega.
The Met have never said they are investigating abduction by stranger to the exclusion of all else.
Oh sorry I forgot you have me on ignore 8(>((
None (of us!) know all the information in the domain of the present joint enquiry.
-
Start the thread Alfie on how the child was abducted by a stranger.
Give us your theory from alpha to omega.
The Met have never said they are investigating abduction by stranger to the exclusion of all else.
Oh sorry I forgot you have me on ignore 8(>((
oh dear you are starting to sound like Stephen...abduction would have been very easy...its a simple as that..
the Met have said the are investigating a stranger abduction....no matter which way you spin it.
-
oh dear you are starting to sound like Stephen...abduction would have been very easy...its a simple as that..
the Met have said the are investigating a stranger abduction....no matter which way you spin it.
So simple and easy that you can't explain it....
-
So simple and easy that you can't explain it....
it was explained in the despatches programme
-
oh dear you are starting to sound like Stephen...abduction would have been very easy...its a simple as that..
the Met have said the are investigating a stranger abduction....no matter which way you spin it.
Yup. The "sceptics" conveniently gloss over this fact, or delude themselves into thinking that when the Met say Black they really mean White. It's terribly sad to witness such delusion amongst these so called "warriors for justice". In fact they really remind me of those saddos who go up a mountain once a year having predicted the End Of Days, only to then traipse back down again a few days later, still confidently and optimistically predicting that the End of Days is going to happen soon, tick-tock, just you wait and see etc etc.
-
None (of us!) know all the information in the domain of the present joint enquiry.
I agree ; so why do some post with the suggestion The Met are only investigating abduction by stranger?
-
absolute rubbish...they said an abduction would have been very easy
No it's true, they didn't include the window/shutters in their abduction theses....
-
Yup. The "sceptics" conveniently gloss over this fact, or delude themselves into thinking that when the Met say Black they really mean White. It's terribly sad to witness such delusion amongst these so called "warriors for justice". In fact they really remind me of those saddos who go up a mountain once a year having predicted the End Of Days, only to then traipse back down again a few days later, still confidently and optimistically predicting that the End of Days is going to happen soon, tick-tock, just you wait and see etc etc.
very well put Alfred
-
Make that a few and I will agree.
Is there such a thing as consequential twaddle?
Only when using Twaddle as a measure of causticity I suspect.
-
Yup. The "sceptics" conveniently gloss over this fact, or delude themselves into thinking that when the Met say Black they really mean White. It's terribly sad to witness such delusion amongst these so called "warriors for justice". In fact they really remind me of those saddos who go up a mountain once a year having predicted the End Of Days, only to then traipse back down again a few days later, still confidently and optimistically predicting that the End of Days is going to happen soon, tick-tock, just you wait and see etc etc.
Well we've had 7 years of 'abduction' and not one piece of evidence to prove it.
Tick-Tock indeed.
-
In April this year, Andy Redwood, from the Homicide and Serious Crime Division at Scotland Yard, said he believed Madeleine McCann was abducted by a stranger and could be alive. "We sincerely believe that there is a possibility of her being alive", he stated.
But then, what does he know ...
Well judging by the 'results' ?............
-
I agree ; so why do some post with the suggestion The Met are only investigating abduction by stranger?
Because that's what the Met says.
And because the first enquiry was shelved with no evidence pointing to the guilt of the McCanns or any of their friends.
In fact, it was shelved with nothing at all.
-
Because that's what the Met says.
And because the first enquiry was shelved with no evidence pointing to the guilt of the McCanns or any of their friends.
In fact, it was shelved with nothing at all.
and the Met has found........
-
and the Met has found........
.......that the McCanns and their friends can be eliminated from their enquiries as either suspects or persons of interest - as there is no evidence against any of them.
-
.......that the McCanns and their friends can be eliminated from their enquiries as either suspects or persons of interest - as there is no evidence against any of them.
........but the crime is unknown.
-
Because that's what the Met says.
And because the first enquiry was shelved with no evidence pointing to the guilt of the McCanns or any of their friends.
In fact, it was shelved with nothing at all.
The inquiry was archived with the statement that the type of crime was unknown. If the crime is unknown then I am sure you are able to extend that to its logical conclusion without my help.
If The Met are working on the exclusive premise of abduction by stranger why DCI Redwoods comment about "may not have left the apartment alive" and two Freudian slips by Bernard Hogan-Howe calling it a murder inquiry?
-
The inquiry was archived with the statement that the type of crime was unknown. If the crime is unknown then I am sure you are able to extend that to its logical conclusion without my help.
If The Met are working on the exclusive premise of abduction by stranger why DCI Redwoods comment about "may not have left the apartment alive" and two Freudian slips by Bernard Hogan-Howe calling it a murder inquiry?
So BHH rules out the accident theory...where does that leave many on this forum
-
The nature of the crime has not been proven but the most logical scenario is stranger abduction and not coincidentally that is the view of the Met who have said they believe Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger. This isn't a believer's invention or fantasy, this is a fact. Like it or lump it.
A strange post. When you say "this is a fact" what is "this"?
-
Well judging by the 'results' ?............
What do you know about the results?
What do any of us know? They are not going to tell us everything.
But we do know that there were 3 suspects as a result of their visit to PdL
and we do know that they have extradicted a man Roderick Robinson from Sannat Gozo to the uk for questioning
So where did they get the info for suspecting these people? Did they find some of it in Pdl or PT in general?
You dont know, do you Stephen ? So why pretend you do?
-
What do you know about the results?
What do any of us know? They are not going to tell us everything.
But we do know that there were 3 suspects as a result of their visit to PdL
and we do know that they have extradicted a man Roderick Robinson from Sannat Gozo to the uk for questioning
So where did they get the info for suspecting these people? Did they find some of it in Pdl or PT in general?
You dont know, do you Stephen ? So why pretend you do?
Stick to facts, we don't know there were 3 suspects, we know they wanted to interview a number of people and as far as I remember Robinson is wanted.
-
A strange post. When you say "this is a fact" what is "this"?
It is a fact that the Met have stated they believe Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger, or do you dispute this?
-
Stick to facts, we don't know there were 3 suspects, we know they wanted to interview a number of people and as far as I remember Robinson is wanted.
I am tired these days, perhaps I have missed something? I thought that there were three new arguidos + Roderick Robinson
Am I wrong on that?
Even if I should be wrong, there is Roderick Robinson and at least one other man, I think?
And of course we dont KNOW what other things they may have found. They aint telling us everything ... and why should they?
-
4 individuals were recently declared arguidos in the reinvestigation, but for some reason the sceptics prefer to think of these four as merely witnesses, whereas when the McCanns were arguidos the term arguido meant (to the sceptics) "them wot dunnit".
-
4 individuals were recently declared arguidos in the reinvestigation, but for some reason the sceptics prefer to think of these four as merely witnesses, whereas when the McCanns were arguidos the term arguido meant (to the sceptics) "them wot dunnit".
The Portuguese prosecutors didn't seem too impressed with the themwotdunit argument, either ...
It seems evident to us and because the files contain enough elements for such, that the crime of exposure or abandonment according to article 138 of the Penal Code can be eliminated from that range:
"1 - Whoever places another person's life in danger,
a) By exposing her in a location where she is subject to a situation from which she, on her own, cannot defend herself against; or
b) Abandoning her without defence, whenever the agent had the duty to guard her, to watch over her or to assist her;"
This legal type of crime is only fulfilled with intent, and this intent has to cover the creation of danger to the victim's life, as well as the absence of a capacity to defend herself, on the victim's behalf. In the case of the files and facing the elements that were collected it is evident that none of the arguidos Gerald or Kate acted with intent. The parents could not foresee that in the resort that they chose to spend a brief holiday, they could place the life of any of their children in danger, nor was that demanded from them: it was located in a peaceful area, where most of the residents are foreign citizens of the same nationality and without any known history of this type of criminality.
The parents didn't even represent the realisation of the fact, they trusted that everything would go well, as it had gone on the previous evenings, thus not equating, nor was it demanded from them, the possibility of the occurrence of an abduction of any of the children that were in their respective apartments.
Reinforcing what was said is also the fact that despite leaving their daughter alone with her siblings in the apartment during more or less dilated moments, it is certain that in any case they checked on them. Without any pretension or compensatory effect, we must also recognise that the parents already expiate a heavy penalty - the disappearance of Madeleine - due to their lack of caution in the surveillance and protection of their children.
Concerning the other indicated crimes, they are no more than that and despite our perception that, due to its high degree of probability, the occurrence of a homicide cannot be discarded, such cannot be more than a mere supposition, due to the lack of sustaining elements in the files.
The non involvement of the arguidos parents of Madeleine in any penally relevant action seems to result from the objective circumstances of them not being inside the apartment when she disappeared, from the normal behaviour that they adopted until said disappearance and afterwards, as can be amply concluded from the witness statements, from the telephone communications analysis and also from the forensics' conclusions, namely the Reports from the FSS and from the National Institute for Legal Medicine.
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 polices 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.
Even if, hypothetically, one could admit that Gerald and Kate McCann might be responsible over the child's death, it would still have to be explained how, where through, when, with what means, with the help of whom and where to they freed themselves of her body within the restricted time frame that would have been available to them to do so. Their daily routine, until the 3rd of May, had been circumscribed to the narrow borders of the 'Ocean Club' resort and to the beach that lies next to it, unknowing the surrounding terrain and, apart from the English friends that were with them on holiday there, they had no known friends or contacts in Portugal.
-
It is a fact that the Met have stated they believe Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger, or do you dispute this?
Cite?
-
It is a fact that the Met have stated they believe Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger, or do you dispute this?
Indeed:
Scotland Yard is calling for the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance to be reopened, as detectives revealed there is evidence to suggest she might be alive.
Senior detectives within the Metropolitan police have been reviewing the Portuguese inquiry into the girl's disappearance for a year. On Wednesday – as the fifth anniversary of her disappearance approaches – police released an age-enhanced image of what she might look like now.
Madeleine, whose ninth birthday is on 12 May, disappeared from a Portuguese resort on 3 May 2007.
Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood said he believed she was abducted by a stranger, adding that there were 195 "investigative opportunities".
Redwood said he "genuinely" believed Madeleine could be alive, though the team is following an equal line of inquiry that she might now be dead.
The officer is leading a team of 37 detectives dedicated solely to carrying out an active investigative review of all the evidence in the case.
They are sifting through 40,000 pieces of material, and within them Redwood said officers have identified 195 historic investigative opportunities.
He said the team was developing new information about what happened to Madeleine five years ago, when she disappeared from her parents' holiday villa in Praia de Luz.
"We are currently developing material which we believe represents genuine new information," said Redwood.
He said officers had carried out a forensic analysis of the timeline of events, and had identified opportunities when the child could have been taken in a criminal act.
Dismissing conspiracy theories about Madeleine's parents' involvement, Redwood said he believed the girl's disappearance was the result of "a criminal act by a stranger".
He appealed directly to anyone who might know where Madeleine was to contact the police.
The Met team is working with a Portuguese review team in Oporto, which is separate from the original inquiry and, said Redwood, was as committed as Scotland Yard to getting to the bottom of what happened to Madeleine.
"The Metropolitan police service wants the investigation reopened," he said. But he added that the decision had to be made by the Portuguese.
The Yard team is passing its information directly to the Portuguese review team. Redwood has visited Portugal seven times in the past year.
The review was set up last year on the fourth anniversary of the child's disappearance after Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, appealed to the prime minister, David Cameron, for Scotland Yard to look at the case.
Redwood said: "We have approached the material with a completely open mind. We have sought to put Madeleine McCann at the heart of everything we do."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-case-reopen-call
-
Indeed:
Scotland Yard is calling for the investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance to be reopened, as detectives revealed there is evidence to suggest she might be alive.
Senior detectives within the Metropolitan police have been reviewing the Portuguese inquiry into the girl's disappearance for a year. On Wednesday – as the fifth anniversary of her disappearance approaches – police released an age-enhanced image of what she might look like now.
Madeleine, whose ninth birthday is on 12 May, disappeared from a Portuguese resort on 3 May 2007.
Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood said he believed she was abducted by a stranger, adding that there were 195 "investigative opportunities".
Redwood said he "genuinely" believed Madeleine could be alive, though the team is following an equal line of inquiry that she might now be dead.
The officer is leading a team of 37 detectives dedicated solely to carrying out an active investigative review of all the evidence in the case.
They are sifting through 40,000 pieces of material, and within them Redwood said officers have identified 195 historic investigative opportunities.
He said the team was developing new information about what happened to Madeleine five years ago, when she disappeared from her parents' holiday villa in Praia de Luz.
"We are currently developing material which we believe represents genuine new information," said Redwood.
He said officers had carried out a forensic analysis of the timeline of events, and had identified opportunities when the child could have been taken in a criminal act.
Dismissing conspiracy theories about Madeleine's parents' involvement, Redwood said he believed the girl's disappearance was the result of "a criminal act by a stranger".
He appealed directly to anyone who might know where Madeleine was to contact the police.
The Met team is working with a Portuguese review team in Oporto, which is separate from the original inquiry and, said Redwood, was as committed as Scotland Yard to getting to the bottom of what happened to Madeleine.
"The Metropolitan police service wants the investigation reopened," he said. But he added that the decision had to be made by the Portuguese.
The Yard team is passing its information directly to the Portuguese review team. Redwood has visited Portugal seven times in the past year.
The review was set up last year on the fourth anniversary of the child's disappearance after Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, appealed to the prime minister, David Cameron, for Scotland Yard to look at the case.
Redwood said: "We have approached the material with a completely open mind. We have sought to put Madeleine McCann at the heart of everything we do."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/apr/25/madeleine-mccann-case-reopen-call
Open mind ?
So when did they formally question the mccanns and the rest of the group ?
-
Open mind ?
So when did they formally question the mccanns and the rest of the group ?
Other than (possibly) an information-gathering exercise to aid tracking down the abductor, no need.
I guess the Met are satisfied that the McCanns can't contribute to their quest to track down the abductor.
-
Other than (possibly) an information-gathering exercise to aid tracking down the abductor, no need.
I guess the Met are satisfied that the McCanns can't contribute to their quest to track down the abductor.
Open investigation ???
That means you investigate more than one possibility, as good policing would involve, and not go in just one direction.
Type of crime still not determined.
So ferryman where is the carte blanche evidence of abduction to stand up in curt.
P.S. A belief doesn't count, does it ?
-
Open investigation ???
That means you investigate more than one possibility, as good policing would involve, and not go in just one direction.
Type of crime still not determined.
So ferryman where is the carte blanche evidence of abduction to stand up in curt.
P.S. A belief doesn't count, does it ?
Depends whose belief you are talking about.
I'm happy to take Andy Redwood's word.
-
Depends whose belief you are talking about.
I'm happy to take Andy Redwood's word.
Of course you are.
However, as I said a belief means NOTHING.
-
[quote removed]
Where is the open investigation ?
When were the mccanns formally interviewed over the events in Portugal ?
-
Where is the open investigation ?
When were the mccanns formally interviewed over the events in Portugal ?
No idea. And neither have you. They may have been interviewed. They may not. Better wait until the final report.
-
It is a fact that the Met have stated they believe Madeleine was taken in a criminal act by a stranger, or do you dispute this?
Yes. Redwood states that he believes there was an opportunity for Madeleine to be abducted and it is in that opportunity that they would be looking at a criminal act by a stranger. He also states that he believes she is alive but may sadly be dead.
-
Yes. Redwood states that he believes there was an opportunity for Madeleine to be abducted and it is in that opportunity that they would be looking at a criminal act by a stranger. He also states that he believes she is alive but may sadly be dead.
• An article about police investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Portugal in 2007 (Madeleine police hunt serial sex attacker who prowled Algarve, 20 March, page 3) said Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood had said the assumption that Madeleine had been alive when she left the apartment "may not follow with all our thinking" on the case. To clarify: those quoted words actually came after Redwood had referred to the assumption that Madeleine had been abducted. However, Redwood did say during the same press conference that police were considering the possibility that Madeleine was not alive when taken from the apartment as well as the possibility that she was.
the assumption that Madeleine had been abducted....."may not follow with all our thinking" on the case....
-
• An article about police investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Portugal in 2007 (Madeleine police hunt serial sex attacker who prowled Algarve, 20 March, page 3) said Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood had said the assumption that Madeleine had been alive when she left the apartment "may not follow with all our thinking" on the case. To clarify: those quoted words actually came after Redwood had referred to the assumption that Madeleine had been abducted. However, Redwood did say during the same press conference that police were considering the possibility that Madeleine was not alive when taken from the apartment as well as the possibility that she was.
the assumption that Madeleine had been abducted....."may not follow with all our thinking" on the case....
Redwood did not put those two phrases together...the fact you have to misquote him shows the weakness of your argument
-
Redwood did not put those two phrases together...the fact you have to misquote him shows the weakness of your argument
Try reading the article.
"may not follow with all our thinking" on the case. To clarify: those quoted words actually came after Redwood had referred to the assumption that Madeleine had been abducted.
-
Try reading the article.
"may not follow with all our thinking" on the case. To clarify: those quoted words actually came after Redwood had referred to the assumption that Madeleine had been abducted.
why not supply the full quote in context...you are linking these two statements redwood didn't....cite please
-
why not supply the full quote in context...you are linking these two statements redwood didn't....cite please
Already have.
-
Already have.
a cite means a link to the actual statement...where is it
-
a cite means a link to the actual statement...where is it
Ask the Guardian,
They wrote it.
Maybe they could clarify the clarification for us.
-
Ask the Guardian,
They wrote it.
Maybe they could clarify the clarification for us.
The reluctance to provide a cite (as per forum rules) is hardly surprising.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/19/madeleine-mccann-police-intruder-girls-algarve
Given that someone has been a touch economical with the truth in order to further their argument.
-
The reluctance to provide a cite (as per forum rules) is hardly surprising.
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/mar/19/madeleine-mccann-police-intruder-girls-algarve
Given that someone has been a touch economical with the truth in order to further their argument.
No I haven't.
Corrections and clarifications column editor
The Guardian, Friday 21 March 2014
• An article about police investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Portugal in 2007 (Madeleine police hunt serial sex attacker who prowled Algarve, 20 March, page 3) said Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood had said the assumption that Madeleine had been alive when she left the apartment "may not follow with all our thinking" on the case. To clarify: those quoted words actually came after Redwood had referred to the assumption that Madeleine had been abducted. However, Redwood did say during the same press conference that police were considering the possibility that Madeleine was not alive when taken from the apartment as well as the possibility that she was.
-
No I haven't.
Corrections and clarifications column editor
The Guardian, Friday 21 March 2014
• An article about police investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Portugal in 2007 (Madeleine police hunt serial sex attacker who prowled Algarve, 20 March, page 3) said Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood had said the assumption that Madeleine had been alive when she left the apartment "may not follow with all our thinking" on the case. To clarify: those quoted words actually came after Redwood had referred to the assumption that Madeleine had been abducted. However, Redwood did say during the same press conference that police were considering the possibility that Madeleine was not alive when taken from the apartment as well as the possibility that she was.
Fair enough - apologies. Crossed eyes this morning!
-
No I haven't.
Corrections and clarifications column editor
The Guardian, Friday 21 March 2014
• An article about police investigations into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in Portugal in 2007 (Madeleine police hunt serial sex attacker who prowled Algarve, 20 March, page 3) said Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood had said the assumption that Madeleine had been alive when she left the apartment "may not follow with all our thinking" on the case. To clarify: those quoted words actually came after Redwood had referred to the assumption that Madeleine had been abducted. However, Redwood did say during the same press conference that police were considering the possibility that Madeleine was not alive when taken from the apartment as well as the possibility that she was.
we have been through all this before....Maddie may have been murdered in the apartment and removed or may have been removed alive from the apartment.....either way Redwood ahs made it clear the parents are not suspects
-
we have been through all this before....Maddie may have been murdered in the apartment and removed or may have been removed alive from the apartment.....either way Redwood ahs made it clear the parents are not suspects
So, why doesn't that nice Mr Redwood just tell us how he has been able to eliminate them from the investigation & help free the Dr's McCann from us vicious trolls?
Why doesn't he just.... do that?
-
So, why doesn't that nice Mr Redwood just tell us how he has been able to eliminate them from the investigation & help free the Dr's McCann from us vicious trolls?
Why doesn't he just.... do that?
de Sousa said the McCanns weren't suspects then wallop they were arguido/arguida!
-
Try reading the article.
"may not follow with all our thinking" on the case. To clarify: those quoted words actually came after Redwood had referred to the assumption that Madeleine had been abducted.
I don't quite understand the issue.
The context is presumably a media briefing. Redwood presents an update. This was roughly at the time of the news that pot-belly man had sexually assaulted several children in the Algarve, wasn't it?
If so, pot-belly man (or indeed anyone else) could have been involved, and so it's feasible that the perp may not have been content to sit on children's beds, nor even to molest them and leave.
If questions were taken, an obvious question for a hack to ask would be whether it had been excluded that she could have died in the apartment or could even have died after having disappeared from the apartment.
Redwood admits that there is a doubt as to whether she was taken alive or not.
At least, that's how it sounds to me in the context of a press briefing.
-
Yes. Redwood states that he believes there was an opportunity for Madeleine to be abducted and it is in that opportunity that they would be looking at a criminal act by a stranger. He also states that he believes she is alive but may sadly be dead.
With regard to the sex attacks on children of holiday makers Redwood said the following (according to the Guardian report, linked to earlier on this thread:
Redwood said the assumption that Madeleine was abducted "may not follow with all our thinking" on the case.
"These offences are very serious and no one has been charged in connection with them. We also need to eliminate this man from our inquiries and ascertain whether these offences are linked to Madeleine's disappearance," he said.
"If you have been a victim of a similar crime please come forward even if you reported the incident to police in Portugal, or anywhere else, please do not assume we have been made aware of it."
There was also a "very close resonance" to some features of Madeleine's disappearance, said Redwood.
"We really need to identify the offender, to bring to a close the trauma and the tragedy that these families have suffered, and then seek to establish whether this is connected to Madeleine's disappearance."
Now, does that sound to you like the Met are not treating this as a case of stranger abduction? Or, if you wish to be pedantic, death at the hands of a stranger? Do you see in the quote above any reason to believe that the Met are focusing any of their current enquiry on Madeleine's parents? If so, kindly highlight which bit gives you such hope? Many thanks.
-
He could stop all that, by just saying how he knows they are innocent.
Andy Redwood has.
He believes Madeleine was abducted by a stranger.
He couldn't make what he thinks more plain that that.
-
Andy Redwood has.
He believes Madeleine was abducted by a stranger.
He couldn't make what he thinks more plain that that.
He has also said what I have put in my signature line, just so's we don't forget! I mean how much more evidence does the troll need? Oh wait! When the Met says Black they really mean White - innit.
-
He has also said what I have put in my signature line, just so's we don't forget! I mean how much more evidence does the troll need? Oh wait! When the Met says Black they really mean White - innit.
Quite!
"Neither her parents or any of the members of the group who were with her are either persons of interest or suspects" - Andy Redwood Scotland Yard
-
He has also said what I have put in my signature line, just so's we don't forget! I mean how much more evidence does the troll need? Oh wait! When the Met says Black they really mean White - innit.
You mean the bit about kicking against the pricks?
[ moderated ]
-
He has also said what I have put in my signature line, just so's we don't forget! I mean how much more evidence does the troll need? Oh wait! When the Met says Black they really mean White - innit.
So Redwood knows everything ?
So what has he solved exactly ?
-
"Redwood said the assumption that Madeleine was abducted "may not follow with all our thinking" on the case.
"These offences are very serious and no one has been charged in connection with them. We also need to eliminate this man from our inquiries and ascertain whether these offences are linked to Madeleine's disappearance," he said."
Now, does that sound to you like the Met are not treating this as a case of stranger abduction? Or, if you wish to be pedantic, death at the hands of a stranger? Do you see in the quote above any reason to believe that the Met are focusing any of their current enquiry on Madeleine's parents? If so, kindly highlight which bit gives you such hope? Many thanks.
There you go Alfie. they don't all Think Maddie was abducted. see first embolden line
AND can you believe it...there is NOTHING in the second embolding saying Maddies parents are NOT involved... it boils down to:just maybe someone did something but they are not sure...
-
He has also said what I have put in my signature line, just so's we don't forget! I mean how much more evidence does the troll need? Oh wait! When the Met says Black they really mean White - innit.
Like I've said, all he need do is tell us how he knows they are innocent.. & convert us.
Maybe you could do it for him instead, seeing as though you also know they are innocent.
You could just explain to us that logcal plausible abduction thesis you keep hidden, and convert us.
Should be simple shouldn't it?
Why don't you just do that?
-
Like I've said, all he need do is tell us how he knows they are innocent.. & convert us.
Maybe you could do it for him instead, seeing as though you also know they are innocent.
You could just explain to us that logcal plausible abduction thesis you keep hidden, and convert us.
Should be simple shouldn't it?
Why don't you just do that?
he doesn't need to do anything...ever tried telling a jehova's witness there's no god
-
Like I've said, all he need do is tell us how he knows they are innocent.. & convert us.
Maybe you could do it for him instead, seeing as though you also know they are innocent.
You could just explain to us that logcal plausible abduction thesis you keep hidden, and convert us.
Should be simple shouldn't it?
Why don't you just do that?
He can't and won't.
Logic doesn't therefore enter the debate.
He merely defends the indefensible and just like the mccanns blame everyone else for their inadequacies.
Then asks us to be believbers in Redwood, who has come up with absolutely nothing, apart from bland statements.
-
he doesn't need to do anything...ever tried telling a jehova's witness there's no god
It's a bit like telling a supporter that you think the McCann's version isn't quite kosher.
-
A relaunched thread...The nature of the crime has not been proven...
of course it hasn't...that could only happen if the case went to court
-
but..looking at all the evidence Maddie was almost certainly abducted.
-
but..looking at all the evidence Maddie was almost certainly abducted.
Far be it for me to dispute your claim but the only evidence would appear to me to be a missing kid.
No evidence of an intruder
No evidence of a struggle
No evidence of a window or a shutter being opened
No confirmed sightings of an abductor
No ransom demand
No confirmed sightings of missing child
-
Far be it for me to dispute your claim but the only evidence would appear to me to be a missing kid.
No evidence of an intruder
No evidence of a struggle
No evidence of a window or a shutter being opened
No confirmed sightings of an abductor
No ransom demand
No confirmed sightings of missing child
No evidence of an intruder
Open window is evidence.
No evidence of a struggle
You are joking aren't you?
Even if Madeleine were not drugged, what impression would a 3 year old make upon a grown man.
No evidence of a window or a shutter being opened
Both open. Mothers evidence, but you guys chose to disbelieve everything The Mccanns say for some strange reason.
No confirmed sightings of an abductor
Watchers and sightings by Jane and The Smiths of possible abductors. Why do they all tell lies IYO ?
No ransom demand
Why would there be a ransom demand?
Madeleine wasn't from rich parents. Kate and Gerry were not rich per se.
She wasn't kidnapped for money. Rich elites dont need money.
No confirmed sightings of missing child
There were sightings at 3 linked places, all of which are connected via Hemp / canabis / Hashish etc.
Rich people can buy others off, especially in criminal places like
i) the Rif mountains in Morocco (Hemp/ canabis),Where a huge percentage of the worlds Hemp (Kif) is grown. IIRC 50% of the worlds hemp is grown there
ii) Molenbeek St John in Brussels (Hemp / Canabis and the main processing place to change the basic hemp into Canabis and Hashish and other designer drugs. Strong daily links between The Rif Mountains and Molenbeek St John
iii) Leh, high up in the Himalayas (Hemp, Hashish <<<< Leh is the main place on the old silk routes for importing Hshish to India)... so links to Molenbeek St John and Zinat in the Rif mountains of Morocco
IIRC 70% of all the Hashish imported into India comes thru Leh.
Especially in poor places, money [and threats] can shut mouths and already the natives in these three places were used to hiding things (drugs)
-
Far be it for me to dispute your claim but the only evidence would appear to me to be a missing kid.
No evidence of an intruder
No evidence of a struggle
No evidence of a window or a shutter being opened
No confirmed sightings of an abductor
No ransom demand
No confirmed sightings of missing child
SY seem to think that abduction is the most probable cause of the disappearance. It may be that SY will find evidence of an intruder if they are allowed to look again at the forensic evidence
-
No evidence of an intruder
Open window is evidence.
No evidence of a struggle
You are joking aren't you?
Even if Madeleine were not drugged, what impression would a 3 year old make upon a grown man.
No evidence of a window or a shutter being opened
Both open. Mothers evidence, but you guys chose to disbelieve everything The Mccanns say for some strange reason.
No confirmed sightings of an abductor
Watchers and sightings by Jane and The Smiths of possible abductors. Why do they all tell lies IYO ?
No ransom demand
Why would there be a ransom demand?
Madeleine wasn't from rich parents. Kate and Gerry were not rich per se.
She wasn't kidnapped for money. Rich elites dont need money.
No confirmed sightings of missing child
There were sightings at 3 linked places, all of which are connected via Hemp / canabis / Hashish etc.
Rich people can buy others off, especially in criminal places like
i) the Rif mountains in Morocco (Hemp/ canabis),Where a huge percentage of the worlds Hemp (Kif) is grown. IIRC 50% of the worlds hemp is grown there
ii) Molenbeek St John in Brussels (Hemp / Canabis and the main processing place to change the basic hemp into Canabis and Hashish and other designer drugs. Strong daily links between The Rif Mountains and Molenbeek St John
iii) Leh, high up in the Himalayas (Hemp, Hashish <<<< Leh is the main place on the old silk routes for importing Hshish to India)... so links to Molenbeek St John and Zinat in the Rif mountains of Morocco
IIRC 70% of all the Hashish imported into India comes thru Leh.
Especially in poor places, money [and threats] can shut mouths and already the natives in these three places were used to hiding things (drugs)
The window was closed and the shutter almost fully down when the police arrived so no evidence as I previously posted.
The rest of your post is frankly irrelevant. Consequently, there would appear to be no evidence of an abduction.
-
The window was closed and the shutter almost fully down when the police arrived so no evidence as I previously posted.
The rest of your post is frankly irrelevant. Consequently, there would appear to be no evidence of an abduction.
I am sory Mr M but the sightings are not irrelevant.
Kate and Gerry thought that both the little girl in the Rif mountains and the little girl walking around the bank in Molenbeek could well be Madeleine. They saw no pictures in Leh to judge.
It is normal for people to take on board evidence from official statements, is it not? Why are kate, Gerry and the Tapas group statements treated differently?
Kate found the window open and the shutter raised. Why are you unable to acknowledge thta ?
-
I am sory Mr M but the sightings are not irrelevant.
Kate and Gerry thought that both the little girl in the Rif mountains and the little girl walking around the bank in Molenbeek could well be Madeleine. They saw no pictures in Leh to judge.
It is normal for people to take on board evidence from official statements, is it not? Why are kate, Gerry and the Tapas group statements treated differently?
Kate found the window open and the shutter raised. Why are you unable to acknowledge thta ?
The little girls you refer to were identified and ruled out. There are no confirmed sightings of Madeleine McCann so please stop promoting myths.
What Kate may or may not have found is not evidence of an abduction because that potential evidence, if it ever existed, was interfered with. You will recall the one and only identifiable finger print which was found on the window.
All that is known is that Madeleine McCann disappeared some time on the evening of 3rd May 2007.
-
The window was closed and the shutter almost fully down when the police arrived so no evidence as I previously posted.
The rest of your post is frankly irrelevant. Consequently, there would appear to be no evidence of an abduction.
If you look ate the definition of evidence you will see that you are wrong...
1. A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment: The broken window was evidence that a burglary had taken place.....
So if we look at all the witness statements...look at everything wee know about the case...all these things help us to form a judgement...therefore all these things are evidence
-
If you look ate the definition of evidence you will see that you are wrong...
1. A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment: The broken window was evidence that a burglary had taken place.....
So if we look at all the witness statements...look at everything wee know about the case...all these things help us to form a judgement...therefore all these things are evidence
So what evidence is there which supports the abduction claim?
-
Far be it for me to dispute your claim but the only evidence would appear to me to be a missing kid.
No evidence of an intruder
No evidence of a struggle
No evidence of a window or a shutter being opened
No confirmed sightings of an abductor
No ransom demand
No confirmed sightings of missing child
"No evidence of an intruder" - hmmmm. There are numerous haplotypes that don't correspond to those known to have legitimately been there.
"No evidence of a struggle" - hard to tell what evidence of a struggle one might expect from a three-year-old, and if she'd been quickly drugged, there probably wouldn't have been one.
"No evidence of a window or a shutter being opened" - Ok. The fully open window / shutter was not seen by independent witnesses, only partially so.
"No confirmed sightings of an abductor" - Tannerman might have been one, although he appears to have been excluded and Smithman has still not been identified.
"No ransom demand" - money or political motives are not the only reasons for abducting a child.
"No confirmed sightings of missing child" - Ok. None that have appeared to have led anywhere. On the other hand, many people would still have the mental image of the little girl as she was, not as she would have been even two years later, let alone seven. Natascha Kampusch, Elizabeth Smart and Jaycee Lee Dugard had all been out and about in public numerous times before they were either rescued or escaped. There was also a little boy (a UK case, IIRC), who was often seen in the company of his "daddy", and no one thought anything of it. He was only found because a neighbour contacted the police on the off-chance.
-
So what evidence is there which supports the abduction claim?
lets start with Maddie is missing
-
The window was closed and the shutter almost fully down when the police arrived so no evidence as I previously posted.
The rest of your post is frankly irrelevant. Consequently, there would appear to be no evidence of an abduction.
On da money as dey say. Looks like the diminishing boys in blue from de olde bill have spent £7.3 mil on the McCanns say so that the window and shutter were were open once upon a time. @)(++(*
ETA Maddie being missing is evidence that Maddie is missing and nuthin more. All these years and not a slither of anything tangible says it all.
-
On da money as dey say. Looks like the diminishing boys in blue from de olde bill have spent £7.3 mil on the McCanns say so that the window and shutter were were open once upon a time. @)(++(*
That's because you do not understand the meaning of the word evidence
-
That's because you do not understand the meaning of the word evidence
Still waiting on all this evidence from you after your earlier claim that abduction was the "most probable cause of the disappearance". In reality there are two possibilities and neither have good endings but all in my opinions of course.
-
I am sory Mr M but the sightings are not irrelevant.
Kate and Gerry thought that both the little girl in the Rif mountains and the little girl walking around the bank in Molenbeek could well be Madeleine. They saw no pictures in Leh to judge.
It is normal for people to take on board evidence from official statements, is it not? Why are kate, Gerry and the Tapas group statements treated differently?
Kate found the window open and the shutter raised. Why are you unable to acknowledge thta ?
Hmmm Sadie. IIRC, the McCanns were shown pics and video stills of the first two, and the DNA of the Leh girl didn't match.
-
I have to agree. It's absurd to say there have been confirmed sightings of Madeleine. There have not, sadly, but this is not evidence that she has not been abducted nor that she may not still be alive. Too many "nots" in that sentence but hopefully you get my drift...
-
Still waiting on all this evidence from you after your earlier claim that abduction was the "most probable cause of the disappearance". In reality there are two possibilities and neither have good endings but all in my opinions of course.
Two basic possibilities I agree..one probable and one improbable..IMO
-
If Redwood believes in an abduction that is good enough for me
Can we have your theory on the abduction please Stephen? Time you gave it.
Do you seriously believe all members of the police force believe in abduction ?
If you do, you are sadly mistaken.
A brief reminder, a belief in something is not tangible. You need evidence to stand up in court.
-
Please restrict posts to the subject of the discussion.
The opening post suggests the most logical scenario is stranger abduction and points to Scotland Yard's sympathetic utterances in that direction yet fails as they do to provide any evidence for such an assertion.
What evidence was there of a crime, assuming there ever was one in the first place?
-
Please restrict posts to the subject of the discussion.
The opening post suggests the most logical scenario is stranger abduction and points to Scotland Yard's sympathetic utterances in that direction yet fails as they do to provide any evidence for such an assertion.
What evidence was there of a crime, assuming there ever was one in the first place?
The only possibility where a crime was not committed is one where the child gains egress of her own volition and has an unfortunate as yet undetected accident.
Any other possibilities with respect to her disappearance involve a crime of some sort which remains unidentified and undetected.
IMHO in the nicest possible way of course.
-
if Maddie didn't wander out....which seems highly unlikely.....then there are only two options...stranger or parent
-
if Maddie didn't wander out....which seems highly unlikely.....then there are only two options...stranger or parent
No parent that was responsible for a crime against their child would have repeatedly put themselves at risk by searching, searching and pushing, pushing, as the Mccanns have.
The Mccanns are not dumbwits, they are highly intelligent people.
They would know that if they were responsible, they necessarily MUST keep reputedly the Worlds best Detectives (NSY) away from the case. They would know that NSY, with a big team, has considerably more intellect collectively than they do. They would be found out.
They pressed for SY to be involved.
Proof on its own that they were not involved
-
If the parents were not involved then that pretty well proves Maddie was the victim of a crime by a stranger
-
if Maddie didn't wander out....which seems highly unlikely.....then there are only two options...stranger or parent
Three actually! Parent, person known to the victim or stranger.
Tempered with the comment by Leicestershire's Assistant Chief Constable with which most will be familiar.
-
No parent that was responsible for a crime against their child would have repeatedly put themselves at risk by searching, searching and pushing, pushing, as the Mccanns have.
The Mccanns are not dumbwits, they are highly Gintelligent people.
They would know that if they were responsible, they necessarily MUST keep reputedly the Worlds best Detectives (NSY) away from the case. They would know that NSY, with a big team, has considerably more intellect collectively than they do. They would be found out.
They pressed for SY to be involved.
Proof on its own that they were not involved
That's what they want you to think... 8(0(*
P.S. That isn't an accusation but suggesting that any perpetrator who thinks they are in the clear may press for investigation to divert attention. So no proof of innocence.
-
That's what they want you to think... 8(0(*
P.S. That isn't an accusation but suggesting that any perpetrator who thinks they are in the clear may press for investigation to divert attention. So no proof of innocence.
Just another example IMO of sceptics convincing themselves that black is actually white. In seven years the McCanns behaviour has been the complete opposite of that of guilty people - therefore that is proof that they ARE guilty? Bizarre logic.
IMO life wouldn't be worth living if every second of every day you had to make sure you never slipped up and had to learn by heart everything you were going to say in public - and then remember everything you had said year in year out. The strain would be intolerable. And why do that anyway when you could just as easily have kept your head down and slipped quietly into obscurity - which is surely what guilty people would want to do.
I don't know of any guilty person who ever tried to get a case re-opened, let alone devote as much time and effort to doing that as the McCanns did.
Why would their friends sit back and watch them do that if they knew the McCanns were guilty and that they themselves were implicated in a heinous crime - which apparently they had been lucky enough to get away with?
The whole idea is too daft for words IMO.
-
That's what they want you to think... 8(0(*
P.S. That isn't an accusation but suggesting that any perpetrator who thinks they are in the clear may press for investigation to divert attention. So no proof of innocence.
a bizarre suggestion...there was no attention...the case was closed...if the mccanns were guilty they were home and dry
-
Three actually! Parent, person known to the victim or stranger.
Tempered with the comment by Leicestershire's Assistant Chief Constable with which most will be familiar.
are you seriously suggesting a friend of the family carried out a criminal act against maddie.......without the knowledge of her parents
-
a bizarre suggestion...there was no attention...the case was closed...if the mccanns were guilty they were home and dry
Also there would have been no fear of the PJ stopping them from 'quietly slipping into obscurity' as that is what they wanted this whole case to do - and as soon as possible IMO.
-
are you seriously suggesting a friend of the family carried out a criminal act against maddie.......without the knowledge of her parents
No.
Why would you think that from the content of my post?
-
No.
Why would you think that from the content of my post?
then theres only two possibilities..stranger or parent
-
then theres only two possibilities..stranger or parent
Three!
Someone known to the child is not of necessity a family member or a friend of her parents.
-
No parent that was responsible for a crime against their child would have repeatedly put themselves at risk by searching, searching and pushing, pushing, as the Mccanns have.
The Mccanns are not dumbwits, they are highly intelligent people.
They would know that if they were responsible, they necessarily MUST keep reputedly the Worlds best Detectives (NSY) away from the case. They would know that NSY, with a big team, has considerably more intellect collectively than they do. They would be found out.
They pressed for SY to be involved.
Proof on its own that they were not involved
That proves nothing if she can never be found. There's one area in PDL where the yard should properly search for clues and it's on top of a hill possibly under rocks.
(http://i1258.photobucket.com/albums/ii530/cocquerelle/rocneg_zps7ca453b4.jpg)
This is the crime scene photo of the shutters (not jemmied or broken!):
(http://amradaronline.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/madeleine-mccann-5.jpg)
(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/maddiebedroom3.jpg)
-
Can someone remind me when exactly did the McCanns start 'pushing for a review' ?
When, & where, are they first on record as 'trying to get the case re-opened'?
-
That proves nothing if she can never be found.......
'She's out there until proven otherwise'..........to Dr McCanns amusement.
(@ 7:54)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=lhACS6ck-Dw#t=474
-
Three!
Someone known to the child is not of necessity a family member or a friend of her parents.
The mccanns didn't know anyone in Portugal apart from their friends
-
That proves nothing if she can never be found. There's one area in PDL where the yard should properly search for clues and it's on top of a hill possibly under rocks.
(http://i1258.photobucket.com/albums/ii530/cocquerelle/rocneg_zps7ca453b4.jpg)
This is the crime scene photo of the shutters (not jemmied or broken!):
(http://amradaronline.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/madeleine-mccann-5.jpg)
(http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/maddiebedroom3.jpg)
mccanns never said jemmied or broken...the shutters were forced open from the outside
-
mccanns never said jemmied or broken...the shutters were forced open from the outside
There's no evidence of the shutters being forced open but they were tampered with before the police arrived.
-
There's no evidence of the shutters being forced open but they were tampered with before the police arrived.
The evidence is the mccanns statements...they admitted they moved the shutters before the police arrived...
-
The mccanns didn't know anyone in Portugal apart from their friends
Didn't they?
Evidence suggests that by the Friday they knew quite a few people.
-
Madeleine wouldn't have known them though, she spent most of her waking hours in a creche
-
Madeleine wouldn't have known them though, she spent most of her waking hours in a creche
With creche nannies, club workers, attendants and mums and dads all becoming familiar to her.
-
The evidence is the mccanns statements...they admitted they moved the shutters before the police arrived...
There's no evidence of anybody going through the window so it's an anomaly. A window facing the car park which anybody would notice open if passing through to check on their children. It's not normal to open a window that wasn't used when the front door was only yards away, hidden from the car park and a safer exit.
-
Didn't they?
Evidence suggests that by the Friday they knew quite a few people.
I would still class those as strangers...SY are only questioning Portuguese residents...not other holiday makers
-
There's no evidence of anybody going through the window so it's an anomaly. A window facing the car park which anybody would notice open if passing through to check on their children. It's not normal to open a window that wasn't used when the front door was only yards away, hidden from the car park and a safer exit.
didn't say there was..just saying mccanns never used the words jemmied or broken
-
Can someone remind me when exactly did the McCanns start 'pushing for a review' ?
When, & where, are they first on record as 'trying to get the case re-opened'?
Home Office launches secret review into Madeleine McCann's disappearance
The Home Office has secretly begun a review that could lead to a fresh police inquiry into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.
By Robert Mendick
9:00PM GMT 06 Mar 2010
The move follows the release of 2,000 pages of evidence last week which Portuguese detectives are accused of having failed to fully investigate.
According to sources close to the McCanns, Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, has ordered officials to examine the 'feasibility' of British or Portuguese detectives looking afresh at all the evidence.
Kate and Gerry McCann met with Mr Johnson last year to plead for help in their search for Madeleine, who vanished without trace in May 2007 from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal.
The couple have also met with John Yates, the Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner, who has headed up a number of high profile inquiries in recent years.
He is said to be "sympathetic" and to have made "general offers of assistance".
The source said: "The latest we have heard from the Home Office is officials are undertaking a 'scoping exercise' to look into the possibility of a review of the case.
"They are looking at all the options. It is basically a feasibility study.
"Kate and Gerry met with Alan Johnson to request a review is done. Hopefully any political intervention can unlock obstructions that might be in the way."
Pressure is now being put on Portuguese authorities to agree in the first instance to a three-day review of the case that could be held at Interpol's headquarters in Lyon in France.
The McCanns will hope the Home Office can persuade their Portuguese counterparts to co-operate in a case review.
The review – were it to go ahead – would involve British police working with Portuguese counterparts as well as experts in child abduction across other European forces.
The Portuguese police have been heavily criticised for their handling of the case which led to detectives naming the McCanns, both doctors from Leicestershire, as arguidos – or suspects – in the case and accusing them of involvement in her disappearance.
Their arguido status was subsequently lifted and the police investigation shelved.
But with the senior officer in charge Goncalo Amaral now widely discredited and facing financial ruin after being sued for libel by the McCanns over a book he wrote, it may become harder for the Portuguese to refuse the request for a thorough review.
The revelation that possible leads – many passed to Portuguese police by the McCanns' own private detectives – had apparently been ignored will add to the clamour.
Last week, details emerged of a series of possible sightings of Madeleine, who was just three when she vanished.
Guilhermino Encarnacao, who was in charge of the Policia Judiciaria in the Algarve, died two weeks ago from stomach cancer.
Mr Encarnacao was convinced Madeleine had died in her parents' apartment and was a major source of a series of off the record briefings to journalists against the McCanns.
A Home Office spokesman said: "We can confirm that the Home Secretary had a private meeting with Kate and Gerry McCann.
"Leicestershire Police stand ready to co-ordinate and complete enquiries if further information comes to light in the UK; or if requested to do so by the Portuguese authorities, who continue to lead on the overall investigation."
The spokesman refused to discuss what talks took place at the meeting or whether there was the chance of a review of the evidence at Interpol.
The spokesman added: "We are not going to comment on the outcome of any private meeting with the McCanns."
Mr Yates was unavailable for comment. He led the cash for honours investigation and was also involved in a new inquiry into the murder of Julie Ward, who was murdered in Kenya in 1988.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/7384911/Home-Office-launches-secret-review-into-Madeleine-McCanns-disappearance.html
They met with Johnson in 2009; the push to get even a scoping exercise done may have started earlier.
-
didn't say there was..just saying mccanns never used the words jemmied or broken
Who told Brian Healy that they were jemmied? The door was also said to be open.
"Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone," said Mr Healy. "She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open."
Speaking in Glasgow, Ms Cameron told BBC News 24: "The front door was lying open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open, or whatever you call it, and Madeleine was missing."It looks as if somebody has come in the window, they've either been watching or they've targeted her.
-
Who told Brian Healy that they were jemmied? The door was also said to be open.
"Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone," said Mr Healy. "She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open."
Speaking in Glasgow, Ms Cameron told BBC News 24: "The front door was lying open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open, or whatever you call it, and Madeleine was missing."It looks as if somebody has come in the window, they've either been watching or they've targeted her.
We've been through this before...Chinese whispers......there is no proof that Gerry used the words jemmied or broken but posters have used this to prove Gerry has lied..utter tosh
-
"Jemmied" Is an age old Glaswegian word meaning "Broken Into." I know this to be true because I once lived in one of the rougher areas of Glasgow.
-
PS. I expect that one of Gerry's relatives interpreted it as Jemmied, and then repeated it as such.
-
Who told Brian Healy that they were jemmied? The door was also said to be open.
"Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone," said Mr Healy. "She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open."
Speaking in Glasgow, Ms Cameron told BBC News 24: "The front door was lying open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open, or whatever you call it, and Madeleine was missing."It looks as if somebody has come in the window, they've either been watching or they've targeted her.
She had been taken from the Chalet !!!
Sounds like The Haeleys took their holidays at Butlins , with the half hourly(roughly) ride past and listen at the window.
-
Who told Brian Healy that they were jemmied? The door was also said to be open.
"Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone," said Mr Healy. "She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open."
Speaking in Glasgow, Ms Cameron told BBC News 24: "The front door was lying open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open, or whatever you call it, and Madeleine was missing."It looks as if somebody has come in the window, they've either been watching or they've targeted her.
The family were obviously and understandably in shock. They were relaying what they thought they'd understood to try to help get the ball rolling faster.
Their recollections of the content of what they were told that night can't have been totally accurate as the McCanns weren't staying in a chalet for a start.
-
Who told Brian Healy that they were jemmied? The door was also said to be open.
"Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone," said Mr Healy. "She'd been taken from the chalet. The door was open."
Speaking in Glasgow, Ms Cameron told BBC News 24: "The front door was lying open, the window had been tampered with, the shutters had been jemmied open, or whatever you call it, and Madeleine was missing."It looks as if somebody has come in the window, they've either been watching or they've targeted her.
If you think Gerry used the word jemmied then you must also think he used the word chalet.....he didn't
-
Chalet isn't a word repeated in interviews but jemmied most definitely is. Whatever you call it not a word that originated from them but rather the source of it.
-
Chalet isn't a word repeated in interviews but jemmied most definitely is. Whatever you call it not a word that originated from them but rather the source of it.
There is not one recorded use of the word by Gerry
-
I would still class those as strangers...SY are only questioning Portuguese residents...not other holiday makers
Of course you would because you are now wriggling 8(>((
Who or what SY are doing is not germane to issue of who who could have taken her.
It is parents, stranger or someone with whom she was familiar.
I understood that some of the persons that The Met want interviewed by the Portuguese Police are British.
-
Of course you would because you are now wriggling 8(>((
Who or what SY are doing is not germane to issue of who who could have taken her.
It is parents, stranger or someone with whom she was familiar.
I understood that some of the persons that The Met want interviewed by the Portuguese Police are British.
Yep and some of them will have dual nationality almost certainly. Not all neighbours, or friends, I think
-
Of course you would because you are now wriggling 8(>((
Who or what SY are doing is not germane to issue of who who could have taken her.
It is parents, stranger or someone with whom she was familiar.
I understood that some of the persons that The Met want interviewed by the Portuguese Police are British.
Yes, as in British residents in Portugal or people with dual nationality living there. They wouldn't have to ask the PJ to interview British people in the UK, would they?
-
I wonder where they got the names of these ten new ?suspects from?
I wonder if Roderick Robinson (Macdonald) is the source, or whether the four arguidos have sung ?
Maybe more locals, or visitors trusting NSY, have come forward, .... maybe someone has fallen out with the perp and has shopped him and his friends?
-
Of course you would because you are now wriggling 8(>((
Who or what SY are doing is not germane to issue of who who could have taken her.
It is parents, stranger or someone with whom she was familiar.
I understood that some of the persons that The Met want interviewed by the Portuguese Police are British.
British and living in Portugal...wriggling is your new favourite phrase now when you have nothing of substance to say