Author Topic: The searching question about...SEARCHING?  (Read 23757 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

AnneGuedes

  • Guest
Re: The searching question about...SEARCHING?
« Reply #90 on: July 01, 2013, 10:11:19 AM »
I have opposing views as to whether Smith man and Tanner man were the same.  On the one hand it was strange that the individual seen by the Smiths never came forward if it was an innocent sighting but on the other hand if this man was seen by Tanner at 9.15pm ish and then just after 10pm by the Smiths, where was he for 45+ minutes and what was he waiting for?  And mores to the point, had it been Madeleine she should have woken up as it was such a cold night.

Back on topic.  All this searching around the town and the beach seemed a bit OTT for a nearly 4 year old.  What made anyone think she would have even left the resort grounds on such a dark cold night?
A child with a pneumonia is more manipulable. Any care will gain her confidence.
They searched up to the limit distance they thought she was capable to walk on her own.
Then they were looking for a captive, I suppose.

Redblossom

  • Guest
Re: The searching question about...SEARCHING?
« Reply #91 on: July 01, 2013, 08:08:56 PM »
You can't ask for  others to confirm what you  claim   ...  you must confirm it yourself


If you can't ,  then  stop making the claims

Only evidence of any scream,from the files, is in the surrounding immediate area, anything else is hearsay.


I ran out of the Tapas and noticed that some of the childcare works of the Mark Warner had begun to arrive. At the point I left the Tapas I heard a scream from a woman I did not know. I do not know who screamed, but I had never heard a similar cry. I cannot even describe it but thought it had come from the child's mother. I went to the reception with one of the child care workers whose name I do not remember

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JERONIMO-SALCEDAS.htm

Offline sadie

Re: The searching question about...SEARCHING?
« Reply #92 on: July 02, 2013, 02:22:36 AM »
I have mentioned the scream at least twice ... and in especially the earlier post I made it immediately clear that it was hearsay from the 3A's forum.  This time I used the word "seems".  I did not claim it as definitely being correct, but it was mentioned on the 3A's and as such should be admissable as hearsay.  I have never claimed it as cast iron fact.  As long as people are aware that it has been said, then they can use it or dismiss it as they wish.  Any problems with that?

Surely you wouldn't want such a potentially important point missed out altogether?  It could be the thing that helped track bundleman ... or perhaps you dont want that to happen?

I think someone from OC staff was connected with the abduction