McCanns' Embedded Confessions - Statement Analysis ( Richard D Hall release)

[Robittybob1]

Kate McCann: My memory of that evening, it’s really vivid

Not at night when she found Madeleine missing. Evening is when someone else allegedly called and many contradictions. Yeah really vivid.

I think her memory is vivid but the pen has run out of ink.  There are bits we are not told.

[pathfinder73]

I think her memory is vivid but the pen has run out of ink.  There are bits we are not told.

Plenty - the Evening has always stood out.

[Robittybob1]

Plenty - the Evening has always stood out.

True - you mean David Payne's visit etc?

[ferryman]

My, my, how you do love to brandish the word liar about.
Just accept that not everyone believes the McCann version of events as gospel.

Depends what you mean by 'as gospel'.

I think most sensible people accept that human memory is fallible.

But fallibility in recounting a sequence of events, particularly as stressful as the abduction of Madeleine, is never going to be exact, from person to person, and will be always be subject to the fluctuations of (imperfect) memory-recall, person to person.

I think real detectives understand that. 

[pathfinder73]

True - you mean David Payne's visit etc?

Yes that time period i.e. evening.

[Miss Taken Identity]

Depends what you mean by 'as gospel'.

I think most sensible people accept that human memory is fallible.

But fallibility in recounting a sequence of events, particularly as stressful as the abduction of Madeleine, is never going to be exact, from person to person, and will be always be subject to the fluctuations of (imperfect) memory-recall, person to person.

I think real detectives understand that.

I'm sorry Ferry... that is so not the case at all.  That day/night will be embedded in their memory. They will remeber everything without thinking, because that is such an important evening-unless they were so drunk and can't recall. They do remember, they just don't want us to know what they remember because they have tried to re write the events.

1. Kate does not remember why DP paid a visit- was he in or out the apartment and for how long
2. Gerry doesn't recall why he asked DP to check on Kate
3. DP doesn't recall why he went to the apartment , how long he was there for , was he inside or out side, or what Kate was wearing ( a towel just out a shower) but recalls and mentions seeing THREE angels all happy.
 children.

4.none of the Tapas could remember what times they checked children- but claiming a fool proof aliby for each other
5 Kate and Gerry couldn't recall if Maddie was on top of the bed or snuggled up under the covers

Kate did recall the exact positioning of the door by the last time she moved it a few hours before...
Jane could not recall the pyjamas description on the 'abducted child' to the police that night, but remembered after speaking to Kate and Gerry that they matched Maddies.

Knowing and telling the truth does not require a good memory.

[Alfie]

Depends what you mean by 'as gospel'.

I think most sensible people accept that human memory is fallible.

But fallibility in recounting a sequence of events, particularly as stressful as the abduction of Madeleine, is never going to be exact, from person to person, and will be always be subject to the fluctuations of (imperfect) memory-recall, person to person.

I think real detectives understand that.

You're absolutely right.  I watched a programme tonight about the shooting of Mark Duggan and one of the talking heads (a forensic psychologist I think) reiterated the fallibility and fragility of human memory and how in times of high stress it can becoming almost elastic.  Fact is, witness statements are always going to be inaccurate to some degree.

[xtina]

You're absolutely right.  I watched a programme tonight about the shooting of Mark Duggan and one of the talking heads (a forensic psychologist I think) reiterated the fallibility and fragility of human memory and how in times of high stress it can becoming almost elastic.  Fact is, witness statements are always going to be inaccurate to some degree.

not a mother..................it would be played in your mind like a video ....over and over and over again....

[pathfinder73]

You're absolutely right.  I watched a programme tonight about the shooting of Mark Duggan and one of the talking heads (a forensic psychologist I think) reiterated the fallibility and fragility of human memory and how in times of high stress it can becoming almost elastic.  Fact is, witness statements are always going to be inaccurate to some degree.

So how did they get the evening so messed up but not the position of the bedroom door that night. I noticed the door had moved so I thought I'd best look inside. So if it wasn't for a door what were they doing in there? I thought it was to check on their children not move doors.

[Robittybob1]

not a mother..................it would be played in your mind like a video ....over and over and over again....

But a video doesn't record the actions of the camera operator person or any other others in the room unless it is panned around onto the other people present, so it is a narrow but accurate view of what is happening but the context of the memory could be wrong.
The focus could be too narrow.  Zoomed in too much.

[Robittybob1]

There are some interesting lectures on statement analysis here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u84qJYjsCSE 

[pathfinder73]

[Robittybob1]

It is very similar to what I was listening to before, actually the other site is easier to listen to. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u84qJYjsCSE  4 parts to the lecture.

[Robittybob1]

When I listen to his analysis of the McCann case I keep thinking he is relying on hindsight to a large extent.  It would be interesting to see a case from the beginning.  The thought of hindsight detracts from my respect for Hyatt.
I would like to apply his techniques to some of the other witnesses.

[slartibartfast]

I'm sorry Ferry... that is so not the case at all.  That day/night will be embedded in their memory. They will remeber everything without thinking, because that is such an important evening-unless they were so drunk and can't recall. They do remember, they just don't want us to know what they remember because they have tried to re write the events.

1. Kate does not remember why .... ...... paid a visit- was he in or out the apartment and for how long
2. Gerry doesn't recall why he asked .... ...... to check on Kate
3. .... ...... doesn't recall why he went to the apartment , how long he was there for , was he inside or out side, or what Kate was wearing ( a towel just out a shower) but recalls and mentions seeing THREE angels all happy.
 children.

4.none of the Tapas could remember what times they checked children- but claiming a fool proof aliby for each other
5 Kate and Gerry couldn't recall if Maddie was on top of the bed or snuggled up under the covers

Kate did recall the exact positioning of the door by the last time she moved it a few hours before...
Jane could not recall the pyjamas description on the 'abducted child' to the police that night, but remembered after speaking to Kate and Gerry that they matched Maddies.

Knowing and telling the truth does not require a good memory.

The other big problem is that is a natural human reaction to fill in the gaps in an individual's memory with what is logical and what they have been told.

https://consumer.healthday.com/cognitive-and-neurological-health-information-26/memory-problems-health-news-468/filling-in-the-gaps-400225.html

https://webfiles.uci.edu/eloftus/LoftusInKraut82.pdf