Richard Hall's film 'When Madeleine Died?' uploaded to YouTube 19th Feb

[ferryman]

Cat Baker made two statements; her rogatory statement and one to the PJ.

The third statement you quote is Emma Wilding ....

[mercury]

This thread was scotched (as a 'debate') as early as the 5th post of the first page.

Yet, 75 pages later ....

An absolute disgrace and a stain on this board.

A thread cant in itself be a "disgrace or a stain"

You are free to debunk any claims

Thats the nature of debate, and you dont get to decide the topics that are allowed, that is more censorship

If Halls theories are rubbish then let people decide for themselves

[ferryman]

Censorship is indeed exercised on this board.

But not by me ....

[mercury]

Censorship is indeed exercised on this board.

But not by me ....

It certainlyy is as you said this thread shouldnt exist

[ShiningInLuz]

MOD Things look to be getting a little heated.  Please tone it down a bit, otherwise one of my (elders or) betters will be taking people to one side to have a little word in their ear.

Please agree to disagree nicely.

[ferryman]

It certainlyy is as you said this thread shouldnt exist

If the thread had been pulled in response to my objection, you may have a point.

It wasn't and you don't.

Still, the continued denigration of a couple hovering between hope and grief for their (missing) daughter is deplorable ...

[mercury]

MOD Things look to be getting a little heated.  Please tone it down a bit, otherwise one of my (elders or) betters will be taking people to one side to have a little word in their ear.

Please agree to disagree nicely.

Im cool, I have posted just facts present and historical, was not abusive in any way shape or form

Ferryman thinks you should delete this thread as it is a stain but complains when his libel is moderated...its ok I shall put my slippers on and go eat honey and yoghurt, bye

[mercury]

If the thread had been pulled in response to my objection, you may have a point.

It wasn't and you don't.

Still, the continued denigration of a couple hovering between hope and grief for their (missing) daughter is deplorable ...

Yes it would be if everyone knew she was truly missing and nothing else, even the PP said they cant say what crime happened, thats me for tonight

----
But therefore we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is requested, which was or were the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practised on the person of the minor Madeleine McCann - apart from the supposed but dismissed crime of exposure or abandonment - or to hold anyone responsible over its authorship.

----

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1399.0

[blonk]

If Hall's theories are rubbish then let people decide for themselves

I see that this thread has had 15,700-plus views so far.

Perhaps more to the point, there have been 41 separate uploads on YouTube of part or all of Hall's first Madeleine film, with over 840,000 views there so far.

Similarly, his second film, 'The Phantoms', has had 31 separate uploads in part or in toto, with 110,000 views in less than a year.

His latest film was only uploaded to YouTube for the first time on 19 February and already there have been 11 uploads netting over 44,000 views in just over a month.

I make that 83 separate uploads of all or part of his films, viewed over 994,000 times.

Currently they attract a combined total of around 2,400 new views every day, or about 1 new view every 35 seconds.

And that excludes:
a) those who have viewed these films on his website - tens of thousands more views
b) those who viewed them on blip.tv - tens of thousands more views
c) those who have viewed several other YouTube upload of his 'Madeleine talks' on his tours - well over 100,000 more views there, plus   
d) those who bought his DVDs and have shown them to family and friends.

For those statistical views alone, Hall's films surely deserve discussion?

And to what extent has the content been seriously challenged during the 75 pages this thread has been going?

Only three significant challenges have been made so far AFAIK.

These were as follows:

1) He was allegedly wrong to deny that there was a 'high tea' at the Tapas restaurant every day at around 5pm

2) He was allegedly wrong to draw the inference he did from mass of contradictions about the alleged presence of Madeleine at the alleged high tea on the Thursday, and

2) He was alleged wrong to rely too much on the weather charts because the Last Photo could have been taken during a brief sunny spell.

On none of these issues has he been 'holed below the water line, so to speak, while and on the weather issue, the case made against him looks weak.                           

[Brietta]

I see that this thread has had 15,700-plus views so far.

Perhaps more to the point, there have been 41 separate uploads on YouTube of part or all of Hall's first Madeleine film, with over 840,000 views there so far.

Similarly, his second film, 'The Phantoms', has had 31 separate uploads in part or in toto, with 110,000 views in less than a year.

His latest film was only uploaded to YouTube for the first time on 19 February and already there have been 11 uploads netting over 44,000 views in just over a month.

I make that 83 separate uploads of all or part of his films, viewed over 994,000 times.

Currently they attract a combined total of around 2,400 new views every day, or about 1 new view every 35 seconds.

And that excludes:
a) those who have viewed these films on his website - tens of thousands more views
b) those who viewed them on blip.tv - tens of thousands more views
c) those who have viewed several other YouTube upload of his 'Madeleine talks' on his tours - well over 100,000 more views there, plus   
d) those who bought his DVDs and have shown them to family and friends.

For those statistical views alone, Hall's films surely deserve discussion?

And to what extent has the content been seriously challenged during the 75 pages this thread has been going?

Only three significant challenges have been made so far AFAIK.

These were as follows:

1) He was allegedly wrong to deny that there was a 'high tea' at the Tapas restaurant every day at around 5pm

2) He was allegedly wrong to draw the inference he did from mass of contradictions about the alleged presence of Madeleine at the alleged high tea on the Thursday, and

2) He was alleged wrong to rely too much on the weather charts because the Last Photo could have been taken during a brief sunny spell.

On none of these issues has he been 'holed below the water line, so to speak, while and on the weather issue, the case made against him looks weak.                           

His assertion that Madeleine 'vanished' sometime on the Sunday has been blown out of the water by the members and exposed for the libellous nonsense it is.

[ShiningInLuz]

I see that this thread has had 15,700-plus views so far.

Perhaps more to the point, there have been 41 separate uploads on YouTube of part or all of Hall's first Madeleine film, with over 840,000 views there so far.

Similarly, his second film, 'The Phantoms', has had 31 separate uploads in part or in toto, with 110,000 views in less than a year.

His latest film was only uploaded to YouTube for the first time on 19 February and already there have been 11 uploads netting over 44,000 views in just over a month.

I make that 83 separate uploads of all or part of his films, viewed over 994,000 times.

Currently they attract a combined total of around 2,400 new views every day, or about 1 new view every 35 seconds.

And that excludes:
a) those who have viewed these films on his website - tens of thousands more views
b) those who viewed them on blip.tv - tens of thousands more views
c) those who have viewed several other YouTube upload of his 'Madeleine talks' on his tours - well over 100,000 more views there, plus   
d) those who bought his DVDs and have shown them to family and friends.

For those statistical views alone, Hall's films surely deserve discussion?

And to what extent has the content been seriously challenged during the 75 pages this thread has been going?

Only three significant challenges have been made so far AFAIK.

These were as follows:

1) He was allegedly wrong to deny that there was a 'high tea' at the Tapas restaurant every day at around 5pm

2) He was allegedly wrong to draw the inference he did from mass of contradictions about the alleged presence of Madeleine at the alleged high tea on the Thursday, and

2) He was alleged wrong to rely too much on the weather charts because the Last Photo could have been taken during a brief sunny spell.

On none of these issues has he been 'holed below the water line, so to speak, while and on the weather issue, the case made against him looks weak.                           

He's got lots of views therefore meriting the discussion of his case, IMO.

Would you like to debate point 1, 2 or 3 of the challenges?  Or something else?  Take your pick - I'm happy to go with your choice.  Could be interesting.

[Benice]

I see that this thread has had 15,700-plus views so far.

Perhaps more to the point, there have been 41 separate uploads on YouTube of part or all of Hall's first Madeleine film, with over 840,000 views there so far.

Similarly, his second film, 'The Phantoms', has had 31 separate uploads in part or in toto, with 110,000 views in less than a year.

His latest film was only uploaded to YouTube for the first time on 19 February and already there have been 11 uploads netting over 44,000 views in just over a month.

I make that 83 separate uploads of all or part of his films, viewed over 994,000 times.

Currently they attract a combined total of around 2,400 new views every day, or about 1 new view every 35 seconds.

And that excludes:
a) those who have viewed these films on his website - tens of thousands more views
b) those who viewed them on blip.tv - tens of thousands more views
c) those who have viewed several other YouTube upload of his 'Madeleine talks' on his tours - well over 100,000 more views there, plus   
d) those who bought his DVDs and have shown them to family and friends.

For those statistical views alone, Hall's films surely deserve discussion?

And to what extent has the content been seriously challenged during the 75 pages this thread has been going?

Only three significant challenges have been made so far AFAIK.

These were as follows:

1) He was allegedly wrong to deny that there was a 'high tea' at the Tapas restaurant every day at around 5pm

2) He was allegedly wrong to draw the inference he did from mass of contradictions about the alleged presence of Madeleine at the alleged high tea on the Thursday, and

2) He was alleged wrong to rely too much on the weather charts because the Last Photo could have been taken during a brief sunny spell.

On none of these issues has he been 'holed below the water line, so to speak, while and on the weather issue, the case made against him looks weak.                           

With regard to the statistics you quote may I ask:-

Does a 'view' lasting only a few minutes' count as 'a view' ?      If so then surely the statistics you quote cannot be purported as being representative of the number of people who have actually watched his videos in their entirety.    What if a person 'views' the same video in it's entirety by making several repeat visits to it  - does every new visit count as another 'view' ?

Could you (or anyone else) enlighten me please?

 

[Benice]

The GNR Officers, when asked in October 2007, said;

When questioned about the windows in the bedroom, he only remembers that the window in the girl's bedroom was closed with the blind raised up the space of the width of a hand.

When questioned about the bedroom windows, he only remembers that blinds of the window of the girl’s bedroom were not totally closed.
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id258.html

That fits with the photographs of the window taken on the night in question. Amy just said the blind (shutter) was raised, not partially raised.

Perhaps she did see the blind raised and the window partly open, but the other two women didn't, and they were there before she was according to the statements.

Pointing out discrepancies between statements doesn't equate to accusing people of lying. If anyone did lie, the reason would be known only to themselves. Perjury, by the way, involves lying under oath. Was anyone under oath when giving statements?

IMO claiming that ''if anyone did lie the reason would be known only to themselves'' - is a very weak argument G.

If Amy Tierney and the nannies conspired with the MCanns to deliberately lie to the police - then there has to be a very good  reason for such a dangerous decision on their part.    IIRC RH didn't come up with a reason in his video - and so far no-one here has been able to.   That's because the whole idea is bonkers IMO.


p.s.  I take your point re 'perjury' and have edited my post accordingly.

[Lace]

Cat made three statements not just her rog one (by which time she would have forgotten).

We were told by Catriona that the only days they went to the beach were Tuesday afternoon (1 May 2007) between 15:30 and 16:30, on Wednesday (the next day) at the same time and on Thursday between 10 and 11 o'clock
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CATRIONA-TREASA-B.htm
.
She is not sure whether during the morning Madeleine's group had outdoor activities, mainly at the pool; she does remember that around 1230 Madelew's (sic) father went to fetch her for lunch.

When questioned, she states that on Wednesday May 2, her group and Madeleine's group went to the beach, but she is not sure if Madeleine was in the group or not,
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/EMMA_WILDING.htm

I don't care how hard you concentrate you'd notice six children being got ready and going, not to mention the gap in the room. We don't know how many children Emma had that day, but if there's 14 being reduced to 8, you'd notice imo.

Emma Wilding is saying that her group and Madeleine's group went to the beach on Wednesday afternoon,  but she doesn't know if Madeleine was in the group.    In other words she can't say for definite if Madeleine was in the other group that Catriona Baker was in charge of,   more than likely because she was more concerned about her own group.

If Madeleine's group didn't have going to the beach down on their activity sheet,  maybe they didn't stick rigidly to the sheet,   the weather for instance would change things.

[Lace]

His assertion that Madeleine 'vanished' sometime on the Sunday has been blown out of the water by the members and exposed for the libellous nonsense it is.

Yes,  after he has sold videos and done lectures,  that's great isn't it.   Maybe he should have got his facts right before venturing out and peddling his nonsense.