The Cuddlecat on the shelf myth by Mirror reporter Lori Campbell.

[mercury]

Why would any abductor of a sleeping or drugged as many claim chld put a toy on a high shelf in the first bloody place, what a waste of time this thread has been

[misty]

Does this really matter?

It only matters if you believe that CC was placed on a high shelf in the children's wardrobe. One cot was blocking the wardrobe door in reality.

[sadie]

It only matters if you believe that CC was placed on a high shelf in the children's wardrobe. One cot was blocking the wardrobe door in reality.

In all fairness, misty, I dont think that we can be sure how the beds were placed.  They would likely have been moved to look under the them and to look into the wardrobe in Madeleines bedroom several times during the searches.

If the space in the wardrobes was needed for hanging or storage, then i think it is possible that they may have been placed like this.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/apartmentdiagram.jpg


The wardrobe is missing from this image but it stood on the long wall to the left of the entrance to the room.  Probably your arrangement is correct, but we cant be sure imo.

[Robittybob1]

It only matters if you believe that CC was placed on a high shelf in the children's wardrobe. One cot was blocking the wardrobe door in reality.

The kids wardrobe or the one in the main bedroom.  I always thought the kids bedroom wasn't that practical as the cots blocked the access to it as you say.

[Brietta]

It is all improbable and impossible, Robittybob1, and you have convinced no-one of the feasibility of anything you have come up with.  The thing about a thesis is that it is not writ on tablets of stone.  When you have worked through all the options and none of them have withstood scrutiny ... it is time to move on.

You seem to have reneged on the conclusions we all thought you did reach ...

• there was no dead changeling
• there was no shelf above Madeleine's bed
• there was only one cuddle cat

... you seem to have made the same mistake Mr Amaral did with his thesis when instead of following and working to the evidence he tried to make the evidence fit his original thoughts.

I'm sorry, I don't understand from the "at each crossroads" bit of your post, so can't respond.

[Robittybob1]

It is all improbable and impossible, Robittybob1, and you have convinced no-one of the feasibility of anything you have come up with.  The thing about a thesis is that it is not writ on tablets of stone.  When you have worked through all the options and none of them have withstood scrutiny ... it is time to move on.

You seem to have reneged on the conclusions we all thought you did reach ...

• there was no dead changeling
• there was no shelf above Madeleine's bed
• there was only one cuddle cat

... you seem to have made the same mistake Mr Amaral did with his thesis when instead of following and working to the evidence he tried to make the evidence fit his original thoughts.

I'm sorry, I don't understand from the "at each crossroads" bit of your post, so can't respond.

When I talk of crossroads it is when you have to make a decision as to what someone would do next developing the theory you favour the least criminal option.  For instance if you think "Smithman was heading toward the beach" you choose a destination between here and the beach, the destination having some beneficial effect rather than a sinister one.
So "Smithman was heading toward the beach" because in that direction there as a place where he could get help.  Rather than "Smithman was heading toward the beach" for he was intending to kill her and bury her.   For if there is a more innocent reason for the action that person might actually come forward and own up. That feels like progress.

[Brietta]

When I talk of crossroads it is when you have to make a decision as to what someone would do next developing the theory you favour the least criminal option.  For instance if you think "Smithman was heading toward the beach" you choose a destination between here and the beach, the destination having some beneficial effect rather than a sinister one.
So "Smithman was heading toward the beach" because in that direction there as a place where he could get help.  Rather than "Smithman was heading toward the beach" for he was intending to kill her and bury her.   For if there is a more innocent reason for the action that person might actually come forward and own up. That feels like progress.

   Maybe categorically proving the actual existence of such an entity would be an experiment worthy of your talents?

[John]

It is all improbable and impossible, Robittybob1, and you have convinced no-one of the feasibility of anything you have come up with.  The thing about a thesis is that it is not writ on tablets of stone.  When you have worked through all the options and none of them have withstood scrutiny ... it is time to move on.

You seem to have reneged on the conclusions we all thought you did reach ...

• there was no dead changeling
• there was no shelf above Madeleine's bed
• there was only one cuddle cat

... you seem to have made the same mistake Mr Amaral did with his thesis when instead of following and working to the evidence he tried to make the evidence fit his original thoughts.

I'm sorry, I don't understand from the "at each crossroads" bit of your post, so can't respond.

That's three myths scuttled now Brietta.   

[Robittybob1]

   Maybe categorically proving the actual existence of such an entity would be an experiment worthy of your talents?

Are you doubting the Smithman as well?  Is he another myth? 

[G-Unit]

Are you doubting the Smithman as well?  Is he another myth?

Perhaps DCI Redwood was fooled into thinking he existed? A few on here prefer to stick with Tannerman. I wonder why?

[Robittybob1]

Perhaps DCI Redwood was fooled into thinking he existed? A few on here prefer to stick with Tannerman. I wonder why?

I'd like to keep both of them. 

What is your personal position G-Unit?  on one recent post you wrote "Is this the person who still insists on telling stories about Tannerman, despite SY having almost certainly eliminated him? Apparently more than one person thinks they know better than SY."
And above you say about Smithman "Perhaps DCI Redwood was fooled into thinking he existed? A few on here prefer to stick with Tannerman. I wonder why?"
I must be getting tired I can't see where you stand in this.

[G-Unit]

I'd like to keep both of them. 

What is your personal position G-Unit?  on one recent post you wrote "Is this the person who still insists on telling stories about Tannerman, despite SY having almost certainly eliminated him? Apparently more than one person thinks they know better than SY."
And above you say about Smithman "Perhaps DCI Redwood was fooled into thinking he existed? A few on here prefer to stick with Tannerman. I wonder why?"
I must be getting tired I can't see where you stand in this.

I'm what some like to call a 'sceptic'. I can see inconsistencies in the stories of the McCans and their friends. I can also see inconsistencies in some of the things SY have said and done. Others believe everything the McCanns and their friends said and did is explainable. Some think SY are wonderful and are on top of everything with a solution imminent.

I get interested when someone who usually praises SY disagrees with them re Tannerman. It's not coherent. Either they know what they're doing or they don't.

I'm not sure if they're bumbling idiots, constrained by their remit or pretty clever. I'll let you know when I work it out.

Here's an interesting anomaly; if you type 'cuddlecat.co.uk into wayback, the 'findmadeleine site comes up. Here's a link, click on 12th June and you will see.
https://web.archive.org/web/20080615000000/http://cuddlecat.co.uk

I already knew there was a website for cuddlecat linked to the findmadeleine website. Was someone hoping for a good marketing opportunity but thought better of it, or was stopped?

[mercury]

So, does anyne have an answer to why  a site called cuddlecat was set up early on? Like anyne knew the name if madelenes toy early 2007 and even f they did why on gods earth wuld they google it

[Angelo222]

So, does anyne have an answer to why  a site called cuddlecat was set up early on? Like anyne knew the name if madelenes toy early 2007 and even f they did why on gods earth wuld they google it

If it's in the archive as being linked to the OFM site then it must have been included early on but subsequently removed.  As suggested, somebody probably thought better of using the doll or there could have been copyright issues in using the name.

[mercury]

If it's in the archive as being linked to the OFM site then it must have been included early on but subsequently removed.  As suggested, somebody probably thought better of using the doll or there could have been copyright issues in using the name.

Ok thanks, I agree about the co. copyright, what I dont get is why so early on anyone thought it a good idea to have the site as a mirror site to the bringmadeleinehome one...like.
, e.g. WHO in the public arena knew what the toy was called and even if they did why would they google it for news?