Author Topic: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.  (Read 220687 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #360 on: November 29, 2018, 08:01:53 AM »
Gerry left the tapas table at around 9pm, 30 minutes after arrival which would suggest an intention to check every 30 minutes.  Kate’s check was at 10pm which again indicates an intention to check on the hour and half hour.  Does anyone dispute whether or not these checks occurred?  So that leaves the check at 9.30ish?  Who said they did it and are they lying?
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline G-Unit

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #361 on: November 29, 2018, 09:02:28 AM »
The staff between reported seeing at least 3 individuals leaving the table over the course of the 90minutes.  Given that the tapas group claimed to be chrcking on their children every 30 minutes, is it wholly unreasonable to assume that at least 3 longish absences from the table during a period of 90 minutes equals roughly 30 minute interval checks, and if doesn’t then what does it suggest was actually going on instead?

The Tapas group didn't claim to be checking every 30 minutes, just the McCanns did. There were two absences; one of 30 and one of 15 minutes, carried out by tall men. No one says how long the woman was gone but on her return they all left except Dianne. So assuming the woman was Kate the staff saw two men going to check between 8.30 and ten and staying away for quite a while.

The Tapas group reported 6 checks between 9 and ten; Matthew, Gerry, Jane, Russell, Matthew and Kate.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #362 on: November 29, 2018, 03:55:25 PM »
I'm a bit behind at the moment due to family issues but I found the parent's responses to the recent media articles rehearsing the woke and wandered theory extremely interesting. They appear desperate to rubbish this theory in favour of the abducted from the bedroom one.  Problem being there is evidence to support woke and wandered but nothing whatsoever to support abducted from the bedroom.

Have the penny finally dropped as to what really happened?
« Last Edit: November 29, 2018, 03:58:06 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #363 on: November 29, 2018, 04:09:50 PM »
So we were told back in May that the parents weren’t doing any interviews in case they have away details of the investigation......yet here we are 6 months later and what are they doing ?

Somehow I don’t think the parents and OG are best friends anymore.

A good point, it's almost as if they've hit a nerve?
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #364 on: November 29, 2018, 04:13:58 PM »


In her harrowing 2011 book about her daughter's disappearance, she stated: “I have always found the third suggestion insulting to our intelligence.

But then again intelligent people would go out leaving three toddlers alone in a strange unlocked apartment.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #365 on: November 29, 2018, 04:18:20 PM »
I’m not disputing that part of the article came from Madeleine but not the part I quoted.

Of course it isn’t only the windows/shutters issue that is problematic for the parents but also the opening and closing doors, not to mention Smithman ! I mean who knocks over a child then runs about town with the body ?

It could very well be that if someone did run her over that they panicked, put her in their vehicle and drove down to the town centre carrying her past the Smiths and the medical centre which unfortunately was closed. Then doubling back to get to their vehicle and driving off.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2018, 04:20:33 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #366 on: November 29, 2018, 04:25:58 PM »
So to make it clear you (John) wouldn't have thought it likely that Madeleine opened the shutters herself.

I doubt it Rob.  There are at least three other possibilities as to how the shutter was raised and the window opened.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #367 on: November 29, 2018, 04:29:37 PM »
I thought Fiona had confirmed Kate talked about leaving the door open so Madeleine could walk over to the Tapas.
She was capable of getting out of bed, out of her room, out of her apartment, capable of walking 80 paces to the table where Mummy and Daddy were.  Perfectly capable just like having dinner in your garden at home.

That's correct Rob so opening the patio door and child gate mustn't have been the insurmountable problem she later claimed it was.  Any thoughts on this?
« Last Edit: November 29, 2018, 04:31:38 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline jassi

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #368 on: November 29, 2018, 04:32:15 PM »
That's correct so opening the patio door and child gate mustn't have been the insurmountable problem she later claimed it was.  Any thoughts on this?

One issue though is whether she would have closed them again as she left.
I believe everything. And l believe nothing.
I suspect everyone. And l suspect no one.
I gather the facts, examine the clues... and before   you know it, the case is solved!"

Or maybe not -

OG have been pushed out by the Germans who have reserved all the deck chairs for the foreseeable future

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #369 on: November 29, 2018, 04:33:54 PM »
One issue though is whether she would have closed them again as she left.

She could have had she been mindful of her younger sibling twins within.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Sunny

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #370 on: November 29, 2018, 04:44:16 PM »
She could have had she been mindful of her younger sibling twins within.

I have known a small child (aged 3) who at that age constantly closed doors as they passed through them. This included patio doors.  Sometimes it was a nuisance when the doors were wanted to be left open or as I remember in one case, when someone else was following the child into the house.

I obviously do not have a cite for it, nevertheless it is true.
Members are reminded that cites must be provided in accordance with the forum rules. On several occasions recently cites have been requested but never provided. Asking for a cite is not goading but compliance.

From this moment onward, posts making significant claims which are not backed up by a cite will be removed.

Moderators and Editors take note!

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #371 on: November 29, 2018, 04:46:56 PM »
I have known a small child (aged 3) who at that age constantly closed doors as they passed through them. This included patio doors.  Sometimes it was a nuisance when the doors were wanted to be left open or as I remember in one case, when someone else was following the child into the house.

I obviously do not have a cite for it, nevertheless it is true.

I have seen toddlers doing this also, almost mimicking the parents.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #372 on: November 29, 2018, 04:50:02 PM »
Oh well, we’ll see if you’re right shortly shan’t we?  Meanwhile some of the other sceptics here think this article is bad news for the McCanns.  Go figure.

It's good news I suppose if considering a tossup between accidental death/concealment or simply being negligent.
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #373 on: November 29, 2018, 04:56:05 PM »
I think Kate and myself are saying the same thing.  If she wandered off through the front door or the patio door there would be parts left open.
But Kate only found the window open not the doors open. 

Solution IMO is that someone came along and closed them after Madeleine left.

Maybe she went out the front door and it slammed behind her leaving her with no option but to follow the path she was familiar with?
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Seems woke and wandered back in favour again.
« Reply #374 on: November 29, 2018, 05:04:35 PM »
It could very well be that if someone did run her over that they panicked, put her in their vehicle and drove down to the town centre carrying her past the Smiths and the medical centre which unfortunately was closed. Then doubling back to get to their vehicle and driving off.

I’m sorry John but I could believe that having knocked down a child you would seek help but having put them in the car and finding the medical centre closed surely you’d then drive to the nearest hospital ?

For me you either summon help via your phone or knocking on the door of a nearby house or you drive away afraid of the consequences of your actions. What you don’t do is pick up the child, thus perhaps making the injuries worse, put them in your car then fail to get them help just because the local medical centre is closed. That’s just bonkers.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?