Ricardo Paiva, "Kate McCann had a dream where she saw Maddie on a hillside"

[AnneGuedes]

Ah, too late, I see one thread has already turned into a thread about Carana, & yes, Paiva DID try to interpret Kate's dream, he tried to interpret the meaning of the dream as a confession by Kate, which obviously it wasn't. So maybe he should have stuck to doing police work instead.

Have you privileged information, Mrs B ? Or do you doubt inspector Paiva's aptitude concerning the Freudian concept of unconscious mind ?

I always found amazing that a lady trained in sciences and with faith in God seemed so attracted by magic thinking : isn't there a dream about a boat ? The SouthAfrican hair device, the rosaries around a toy.. Why not a premonitory dream ?
 

[Mo Stache]

"As to Paiva's 'assumption', he was privy to the whole conversation so is in a better position than us to understand what she was telling him." Paiva was hardly 'neutral' at that stage and was looking to find evidence of the parents wrong doing.
By that stage Paiva was influenced by Amarals theory.

[AnneGuedes]

Apologies Anne. Blighty means the UK.

No apologies, Faithlilly, I hesitated but it could only mean that... I'll certainly never use the word to mean the UK !

[Mo Stache]

Bumping - questions still remain unanswered.

 "Kate had seen Madeleine on a hillside in a dream" she never said Madeleine is dead and buried on that hill. The polices interpretation was that Madeleine is buried there. Dreams can have several interpretations. Kate does not specify that Madeleine was dead or a ghost, she just said "seen Madeleine on a hillside".

Is everyone you dream of dead? And when you dream of 'alive' people are they all alive? It's a matter of interpretation, but the police decided to interpret it so that it gave their agenda more weight and the anti McCann's something else to nit pick about. 

[AnneGuedes]

By that stage Paiva was influenced by Amarals theory.

No. Paiva got a feeling of a work in progress : he understood Mrs McCann distressly admitted that Madeleine could be dead.

[faithlilly]

Err, no - Paiva made it clear in caught that he "got the impression," not that Kate had outright told him Madeleine was dead.  Please let's not resort to idle speculation, especially not when we have it from the horse's mouth!

I'm afraid it is you who is speculating. There was obviously something said by Kate that lead Paiva to suspect she thought Madeleine was dead. We are not privy to that information but any intelligent adult knows that things don't always have to be explicitly stated, their meaning is often clear by the surrounding context.

[icabodcrane]

I don't understand why it matters that Kate had a dream that Madeleine was dead ...  it was a  dream and holding it up as some sort of evidence seems pretty desperate to me

Gerry's reaction and denial was strange though.  He could perfectly reasonably have just said that there had been many nightmares since Madeleine was taken,  and he was sorry that he hadn't been there to comfort Kate at the time

[Redblossom]

I don't understand why it matters that Kate had a dream that Madeleine was dead ...  it was a  dream and holding it up as some sort of evidence seems pretty desperate to me

Gerry's reaction and denial was strange though.  He could perfectly reasonably have just said that there had been many nightmares since Madeleine was taken,  and he was sorry that he hadn't been there to comfort Kate at the time

agree, seems to be such an overreaction over something which is, well, much ado about nothing

[Mo Stache]

I never made any claim on this thread and I am not the OP, all I did was try help you out with a link.Simples!!

Sorry yes, you not the OP poster BUT you do share the exact same view/claims as Faithlilly does else you would not have contributed to the conversation in her favour. That still doesn't give you the right to be rude and adjust anyone's post by striking them through.

[Redblossom]

Sorry yes, you not the OP poster BUT you do share the exact same view/claims as Faithlilly does else you would not have contributed to the conversation in her favour. That still doesn't give you the right to be rude and adjust anyone's post by striking them through.

Yes too right, I was not the Op AND I never made any claim. Lame response and backtracking, and how on earth my initial or other posts are in the OPs favour were in their favour is beyond me, never mind

I didnt adjust your post, I struck it through as it had nothing whatsoever to do with me and my post, next time I promise just to TELL you directly

[icabodcrane]

His reaction was perfectly understandable considering he was commenting after hearing Paiva's bullshit about the dream in court.

Well I don't find it understandable

Gerry insisting that  Kate never had the dream sounded unessecarily defensive  ...  as if there would be something  wrong about Kate dreaming that Madeleine was dead

There is nothing significant,  or questionable in any way I can see, in Kate having such a nightmare, given the circumstances

I don't understand Gerry's determination to deny she did 

[AnneGuedes]

I don't understand why it matters that Kate had a dream that Madeleine was dead ...  it was a  dream and holding it up as some sort of evidence seems pretty desperate to me

Gerry's reaction and denial was strange though.  He could perfectly reasonably have just said that there had been many nightmares since Madeleine was taken,  and he was sorry that he hadn't been there to comfort Kate at the time

Sure. But Mr McCann wasn't expecting this dream. He had the media in front of him and likely tried to avoid the worst, i.e something that could hamper his agenda, as the death element in Mr Amaral's book hampered, according to him, the search for Madeleine.

[Mo Stache]

Yes too right, I was not the Op AND I never made any claim. Lame response and backtracking, and how on earth my initial or other posts are in the OPs favour were in their favour is beyond me, never mind

I didnt adjust your post, I struck it through as it had nothing whatsoever to do with me and my post, next time I promise just to TELL you directly

Why did you reply to it if that be the case?

[Redblossom]

Why did you reply to it if that be the case?

I normally reply to people who address me, especially if the response is *off*, I offered a link, to your request to someone else,you then addressed me at 3.49 quoting my link, after which I responded and struck through your stuff from that post,  leave it now pls unless you need the last word, but thats mine here

[Mo Stache]

I normally reply to people who address me, especially if the response is *off*, just leave it now pls unless you need the last word, but thats mine here

I never asked you for a reply, you volunteered a reply which contributed to the discussion on the thread. When I replied to your post, you didn't like my reply and striked my post through. I addressed you AFTER the strike through occurred. I think it is plain to see who did what on the thread.