“A Laughable Story”

[faithlilly]

Thank you … rather amazing this very chummy ‘supporter’ was willing to incriminate him/herself directly to you with the threat of contacting “the poor girl’s employer” thinking she was you.  I thought it was the fact that the contact had already been made which was the point you were making.

I’m amazed how you “knew” this individual had a record of doing this.  I didn't think it was usual for poison pen writers to ‘fess up.  I thought the whole point of such aberrant behaviour was anonymity, but there you are then.



Back on topic now please  ...  “A Laughable Story”

I find supporters, on the whole, don’t appear to be the brightest bulbs in the box and what’s the point of threatening to destroy someone’s career if you don’t tell them about it ? Where’s the fun in that ? Besides supporters rarely have the courage to reveal their real identity.  As to the contact already having made I have no doubt that the  person was capable of it...their online name was also connected to the Brenda Leyland affair.

So perhaps instead of attempting to dissect my experience members may think better of you if you castigate those that attempted to ruin an innocent young girls career. Just a thought.

Now....definitely....back on topic.

[Erngath]

I find supporters, on the whole, don’t appear to be the brightest bulbs in the box and what’s the point of threatening to destroy someone’s career if you don’t tell them about it ? Where’s the fun in that ? Besides supporters rarely have the courage to reveal their real identity.  As to the contact already having made I have no doubt that the  person was capable of it...their online name was also connected to the Brenda Leyland affair.

So perhaps instead of attempting to dissect my experience members may think better of you if you castigate those that attempted to ruin an innocent young girls career. Just a thought.

Now....definitely....back on topic.

That is one of the most hypocritical posts I have ever read.
Now ......... definitely .....back on topic.

[Erngath]

a reminder of the topic

According to at least one member of this forum the McCanns “abduction story” is laughable.

So what exactly is the abduction story told by the McCanns, which bits make forum members laugh and why?

We all know some find the jemmied shutters rather hilarious but that is just a semantics game played by certain members objecting to the word “jemmied” which may or may not have been uttered by Gerry.  Whether he meant actually jemmied with a crow bar or force opened by some other means is really a boring argument that seems pointless to repeat for the umpteenth time - the gist though is that the McCanns said someone else opened the shutters and window.

Does this make forum members laugh and if so please explain why it tickles you so.

Also anything else that gets you giggling about the “abduction story” as told by the McCanns, please share your views here.
Modify message

I would assume that the three current police forces do not find anything to laugh at in their investigations !

[G-Unit]

Who said the open window is  a fact....I don't know its a fact but I think its highly likely to be true based on other supporting evidence.

You show  a certain naievety in the way justice works. The whole justice system is not based on facts but on beleiving who is telling the truth....the jury decides that based on the evidence. Even  a guilty or not guilty verdict is not  a true statement of guilt or innocence

You and other sceptics have no problem with amaral and his team stating as a fact that the alerts confirmed the presence of  abody in 5a which they patently don't. The fact that you are prepared to ignore this and criticise others is what leads me to question your understanding of evidence and credibility.

Ah, but you believe the window was open when there's no evidence that it was. Your only reason for believing it is because you believe in the McCanns imo.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11656.msg615335;topicseen#msg615335

[G-Unit]

a reminder of the topic

According to at least one member of this forum the McCanns “abduction story” is laughable.

So what exactly is the abduction story told by the McCanns, which bits make forum members laugh and why?

We all know some find the jemmied shutters rather hilarious but that is just a semantics game played by certain members objecting to the word “jemmied” which may or may not have been uttered by Gerry.  Whether he meant actually jemmied with a crow bar or force opened by some other means is really a boring argument that seems pointless to repeat for the umpteenth time - the gist though is that the McCanns said someone else opened the shutters and window.

Does this make forum members laugh and if so please explain why it tickles you so.

Also anything else that gets you giggling about the “abduction story” as told by the McCanns, please share your views here.
Modify message

You seem to be concentrating on your own idea of what laughable means. It doesn't, in my opinion, mean that people 'giggle' at something. It means ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd, preposperous and irrational. The idea that the only danger facing children left home alone is being abducted, for example, fits all those descriptions. I find it absurd that mature parents were completely unaware of all the other dangers inherent in leaving children alone in an unlocked apartment.

[kizzy]

You don't seem to understand how these things work...if an abductor is found and proven guilty then that proves abduction.
You and others seem to think a crime has to be proven before there can be an investigation...that's bonkers imo

.if an abductor is found and proven guilty then that proves abduction.

IF...that's if they find one who fits into committing the perfect crime.

13 years and they haven't found one..apart from the continuous line of suspects they keep digging up.

Now it seems to be in the hands of Germans who have ulterior motives for keeping latest suspect in prison.

Even the mccs seem to think it will come to nothing...they more concerned about it disrupting their lives.


Why you can trust Sky News
The parents of Madeleine McCann say reports they have received a letter from German authorities stating that Madeleine is dead are "false".

In a statement, Kate and Gerry McCann said the "unsubstantiated stories" had "caused unnecessary anxiety to friends and family and once again disrupted our lives".

[Mr Gray]

You seem to be concentrating on your own idea of what laughable means. It doesn't, in my opinion, mean that people 'giggle' at something. It means ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd, preposperous and irrational. The idea that the only danger facing children left home alone is being abducted, for example, fits all those descriptions. I find it absurd that mature parents were completely unaware of all the other dangers inherent in leaving children alone in an unlocked apartment.

I find amarals theory as laughable. You have your opinion on the McCanns leaving the children in the apartment but your opinion is of no importance. None of our opinions here are of any importance...but some seem to think theirs are. The only opinions of any importance are the authorities....SY, the Germans are investigating an abduction....Gerry is a well respected Professor....kate works in the medical field...social services have not intervened and therefore do not see the twins as being in danger.....and on and on

[Mr Gray]

Ah, but you believe the window was open when there's no evidence that it was. Your only reason for believing it is because you believe in the McCanns imo.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11656.msg615335;topicseen#msg615335

I beleive the window was open based on all the evidence......

once again you make an incorrrect assumption

amaral and many others ...including the PJ and the portuguese judicial system beleive the alerts confirm the past presence of a cadaver in 5a...maddie's cadaver....even though theres no evidence to support that and the expert has said it cant be confirmed.....what significance an open window compared to that

[kizzy]

I find amarals theory as laughable. You have your opinion on the McCanns leaving the children in the apartment but your opinion is of no importance. None of our opinions here are of any importance...but some seem to think theirs are. The only opinions of any importance are the authorities....SY, the Germans are investigating an abduction....Gerry is a well respected Professor....kate works in the medical field...social services have not intervened and therefore do not see the twins as being in danger.....and on and on

GA is as credible as anyone ...he also worked on the case.

Who are you comparing him to ex cons traffickers drug dealers ex-girlfriends. no credibility at all especially if there is something in for them..like a £20.000 reward

What medical field does kmcc work in.........she is no longer a GP it seems.

[Mr Gray]

GA is as credible as anyone ...he also worked on the case.

Who are you comparing him to ex cons traffickers drug dealers ex-girlfriends. no credibility at all especially if there is something in for them..like a £20.000 reward

What medical field does kmcc work in.........she is no longer a GP it seems.

GA has no credibility imo based on the fact it is proven he doesnt understand the evidence.

GP is not the  entire scope of medicine

[kizzy]

I beleive the window was open based on all the evidence......

once again you make an incorrrect assumption

amaral and many others ...including the PJ and the portuguese judicial system beleive the alerts confirm the past presence of a cadaver in 5a...maddie's cadaver....even though theres no evidence to support that and the expert has said it cant be confirmed.....what significance an open window compared to that

That wasn't the only reason .was it...according to Tavares the Cheif inspectors final report.

if the checking as he says is lies and falls down...so could everything else .


The version that someone in the group that every 15 minutes or every 30 minutes went to the apartments to check if everything was alright falls down!

From the declarations of the group results a total incoherence, in the face of which it's obvious, that everyone lies.

 If anyone went to check the children and if everything was alright the disappearance could only have occurred between 21:30h and 22:00h;

' If the information didn't take into account that witness (' ) then the disappearance occurred between 21:00h and 22:00 h, enlarging the period ( assuming the father is telling the truth);

There is however another question about the timing, which is:

' The last time the child was seen outside of the GROUP, by someone that can prove that moment, it was around 17h:35m, when the parents went to fetch her from the Creche, which can enlarge the gap of time, between the disappearance and the alarm, to four hours.

[Mr Gray]

That wasn't the only reason .was it...according to Tavares the Cheif inspectors final report.

if the checking as he says is lies and falls down...so could everything else .


The version that someone in the group that every 15 minutes or every 30 minutes went to the apartments to check if everything was alright falls down!

From the declarations of the group results a total incoherence, in the face of which it's obvious, that everyone lies.

 If anyone went to check the children and if everything was alright the disappearance could only have occurred between 21:30h and 22:00h;

' If the information didn't take into account that witness (' ) then the disappearance occurred between 21:00h and 22:00 h, enlarging the period ( assuming the father is telling the truth);

There is however another question about the timing, which is:

' The last time the child was seen outside of the GROUP, by someone that can prove that moment, it was around 17h:35m, when the parents went to fetch her from the Creche, which can enlarge the gap of time, between the disappearance and the alarm, to four hours.

more from amaral the convicted liar

[Brietta]

I find supporters, on the whole, don’t appear to be the brightest bulbs in the box and what’s the point of threatening to destroy someone’s career if you don’t tell them about it ? Where’s the fun in that ? Besides supporters rarely have the courage to reveal their real identity.  As to the contact already having made I have no doubt that the  person was capable of it...their online name was also connected to the Brenda Leyland affair.

So perhaps instead of attempting to dissect my experience members may think better of you if you castigate those that attempted to ruin an innocent young girls career. Just a thought.

Now....definitely....back on topic.

Your narrative is in the first person from start to finish. 
I find it reminiscent of the technique that Amaral used to suggest he had witnessed events he had not in “The Truth of the Lie”. 

Careful reading of your posts suggest that the incident you claim was visited on another in the mistaken belief it was you, had not actually happened … it was a “threat”.

Thereafter follows the tirade of defamation the genesis of which is based on a fantastical mental image which you have convinced yourself occurred as you remember it but which I don't think ever really happened.
Your posts confirm that.

There is so much within that limited exchange that is a mirror image of what has happened to the McCann case that it is really quite spooky much more than it is laughable.

But to choose just one of the earlier ‘laughable’ instances, I think I have to go for the Calpol one.
We all know that Calpol isn’t poison.  Amaral didn’t … but he managed to convince an army of people, some to this day, that it was.
Probably more tragic than laughable.

[The General]

Your narrative is in the first person from start to finish. 
I find it reminiscent of the technique that Amaral used to suggest he had witnessed events he had not in “The Truth of the Lie”. 

Careful reading of your posts suggest that the incident you claim was visited on another in the mistaken belief it was you, had not actually happened … it was a “threat”.

Thereafter follows the tirade of defamation the genesis of which is based on a fantastical mental image which you have convinced yourself occurred as you remember it but which I don't think ever really happened.
Your posts confirm that.

There is so much within that limited exchange that is a mirror image of what has happened to the McCann case that it is really quite spooky much more than it is laughable.

But to choose just one of the earlier ‘laughable’ instances, I think I have to go for the Calpol one.
We all know that Calpol isn’t poison.  Amaral didn’t … but he managed to convince an army of people, some to this day, that it was.
Probably more tragic than laughable.

Are you suggesting a child cannot overdose on Calpol or similar, therefore it's not a poison?

[Mr Gray]

Are you suggesting a child cannot overdose on Calpol or similar, therefore it's not a poison?

a child can overdose on calpol but it takes about 3 days to die