Author Topic: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"  (Read 129816 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #450 on: April 13, 2017, 12:14:04 AM »
There you go again, Alfie.  If you misquote often enough, surely one of your misquotes will strike home.

The report says, in simple English for the avoidance of doubt, that the McCanns did not go beyond the OC and the beach.

Both of them did.

I made no claim about body disposal or body concealment whatsoever.

Just to throw a little petrol on the bonfire, the McCanns did not need to leave 'the OC' to dispose of or to conceal Madeleine.

So have a little think, Alfie.  Are we talking about the archiving report?  Or are we talking about body disposal/body concealment.
Is this insider knowledge?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline ShiningInLuz

Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #451 on: April 13, 2017, 12:50:49 AM »
This is what MO told the PJ on 10/5/07 i.e.the info used in the archiving report

http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-10MAY.htm
"By the way, he relates that, on a date he does not recall for sure but on one day in the past week during which it rained in PdL (thinking it was 2 May, the day before the disappearance) he went on a 40-minute run on the streets around the resort together with KM".

This is what he said in his rogatory 9/4/08 i.e. after the archiving report had been written
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MATTHEW-OLDFIELD-ROGATORY.htm

Reply 'Erm, I remember I went running with Kate at lunchtime, she's quite a good runner, and we went out on the road all the way up to the main junc, erm, the sort of main road where you access Praia da Luz from and then back'.
 
4078 'What sort of distance would that be''
Reply 'Erm, yeah, I think it'd be about three or four miles, maybe each way'.


The PJ report was only wrong because the PJ never sought to clarify the route the runners took. Presumably it wasn't important to them at the time.
Thank you for clarifying.  I thought this only emerged from his rogatory.

So, it rained on Wed 2 May when tennis in the morning got postponed. That fits.

"the main junc, erm, the sort of main road where you access Praia da Luz from"

There were but 2 such main junctions.  There was a set of traffic lights between Luz and Espiche which is roughly 1 mile up a steep hill to the north and down the other side.  There was also a relatively flat (but sh*t) route to the east towards Lagos, on the M537 through Valverde to the N125 junction.

Please Google Earth it for yourself.  From memory, when I did this, the distance is much shorter than Matthew's 3 or 4 miles each way.  But that is the only route that fits.

This happens to be the route the McCanns would probably have entered Luz on 28 Apr 2007.  In the 2-year-on documentary, it is definitely how Gerry entered Luz.

For any of ye supporters out there looking on, do not squeal with indignation.  Instead, have a look at the M537 between Luz and the N125 junction.  The road is narrow.  Because it is the oldest W-E road in the area, it is rough and lumpy.  It has no side areas for joggers to seek safety.  It is the road to hell.

Anyone jogging on that needs a brain transplant, IMO.
What's up, old man?

Offline G-Unit

Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #452 on: April 13, 2017, 07:24:16 AM »
Thank you for clarifying.  I thought this only emerged from his rogatory.

So, it rained on Wed 2 May when tennis in the morning got postponed. That fits.

"the main junc, erm, the sort of main road where you access Praia da Luz from"

There were but 2 such main junctions.  There was a set of traffic lights between Luz and Espiche which is roughly 1 mile up a steep hill to the north and down the other side.  There was also a relatively flat (but sh*t) route to the east towards Lagos, on the M537 through Valverde to the N125 junction.

Please Google Earth it for yourself.  From memory, when I did this, the distance is much shorter than Matthew's 3 or 4 miles each way.  But that is the only route that fits.

This happens to be the route the McCanns would probably have entered Luz on 28 Apr 2007.  In the 2-year-on documentary, it is definitely how Gerry entered Luz.

For any of ye supporters out there looking on, do not squeal with indignation.  Instead, have a look at the M537 between Luz and the N125 junction.  The road is narrow.  Because it is the oldest W-E road in the area, it is rough and lumpy.  It has no side areas for joggers to seek safety.  It is the road to hell.

Anyone jogging on that needs a brain transplant, IMO.

All Kate says in her book is that they ran along the promenade and a dog attacked her leg.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #453 on: April 13, 2017, 08:12:49 AM »
Thank you for clarifying.  I thought this only emerged from his rogatory.

So, it rained on Wed 2 May when tennis in the morning got postponed. That fits.

"the main junc, erm, the sort of main road where you access Praia da Luz from"

There were but 2 such main junctions.  There was a set of traffic lights between Luz and Espiche which is roughly 1 mile up a steep hill to the north and down the other side.  There was also a relatively flat (but sh*t) route to the east towards Lagos, on the M537 through Valverde to the N125 junction.

Please Google Earth it for yourself.  From memory, when I did this, the distance is much shorter than Matthew's 3 or 4 miles each way.  But that is the only route that fits.

This happens to be the route the McCanns would probably have entered Luz on 28 Apr 2007.  In the 2-year-on documentary, it is definitely how Gerry entered Luz.

For any of ye supporters out there looking on, do not squeal with indignation.  Instead, have a look at the M537 between Luz and the N125 junction.  The road is narrow.  Because it is the oldest W-E road in the area, it is rough and lumpy.  It has no side areas for joggers to seek safety.  It is the road to hell.

Anyone jogging on that needs a brain transplant, IMO.

So they chose a bad place to go jogging
Just shows how poor their knowledge of the area was

Alfie

  • Guest
Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #454 on: April 13, 2017, 08:22:52 AM »
There you go again, Alfie.  If you misquote often enough, surely one of your misquotes will strike home.

The report says, in simple English for the avoidance of doubt, that the McCanns did not go beyond the OC and the beach.

Both of them did.

I made no claim about body disposal or body concealment whatsoever.

Just to throw a little petrol on the bonfire, the McCanns did not need to leave 'the OC' to dispose of or to conceal Madeleine.

So have a little think, Alfie.  Are we talking about the archiving report?  Or are we talking about body disposal/body concealment.
Will you stop accusing me of misquoting the Archiving Report?  It's there in black and white!  The archiving report which mentions the McCanns lack of knowledge of the outlying terrain ONLY DOES SO WITH REFERENCE TO BODY DISPOSAL.  Why else would it be mentioned in the report?  Why are you being so deliberately provocative? 
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 12:40:36 PM by John »

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #455 on: April 13, 2017, 10:36:42 AM »
I'm not following this at all.

When you out running and building up a sweat, you are not (generally) also eyeing up likely spots to dispose of the remains of your eldest daughter.

Are you?

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #456 on: April 13, 2017, 10:38:05 AM »
Will you stop accusing me of misquoting the Archiving Report?  It's there in black and white!  The archiving report which mentions the McCanns lack of knowledge of the outlying terrain ONLY DOES SO WITH REFERENCE TO BODY DISPOSAL.  Why else would it be mentioned in the report?  Why are you being so deliberately provocative? 

Yes.

But then, the archiving dispatch got it wrong (apparently).
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 12:40:55 PM by John »

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #457 on: April 13, 2017, 10:47:19 AM »
Yes.

But then, the archiving dispatch got it wrong (apparently).

The archiving dispatch clearly demonstrated they did not know what kind of crime had been committed, if any.

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #458 on: April 13, 2017, 10:50:06 AM »
The archiving dispatch clearly demonstrated they did not know what kind of crime had been committed, if any.
If that is the case why didn't the SC accept that the McCanns were innocent?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

stephen25000

  • Guest
Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #459 on: April 13, 2017, 11:22:01 AM »
If that is the case why didn't the SC accept that the McCanns were innocent?

If you have a problem with the Supreme Court in Portugal,  take it up with them.

You can post the reply.

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #460 on: April 13, 2017, 11:46:28 AM »
The archiving dispatch clearly demonstrated they did not know what kind of crime had been committed, if any.

The archiving dispatch did know who committed no crime, and very clearly stated that.

There ought to be the rub.

ETA: More accurately, the writers of the archiving dispatch ....
« Last Edit: April 13, 2017, 11:58:01 AM by ferryman »

Offline G-Unit

Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #461 on: April 13, 2017, 11:50:11 AM »
If that is the case why didn't the SC accept that the McCanns were innocent?

The SC offered no judgement on their innocence or guilt. It dealt with just one scenario;

The McCanns claimed, in their appeal, that the archiving dispatch cleared them.
In reply, the SC judges said it didn't.
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0

ferryman

  • Guest
Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #462 on: April 13, 2017, 11:56:13 AM »
The SC offered no judgement on their innocence or guilt. It dealt with just one scenario;

The McCanns claimed, in their appeal, that the archiving dispatch cleared them.
In reply, the SC judges said it didn't.

And the Supreme Court judges were right in the sense that the McCanns didn't need to be cleared because they were never charged.

But wrong to overturn the first-instance ruling.

Unless ....

Well, never mind.

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #463 on: April 13, 2017, 11:57:08 AM »
So the McCanns and their friends are insulted as dimwits once agsin by the might know it all SIL.

Some days the going is so hard that horses are are not allowed to run.
Humans voluntarily jog on hard paved surfaces..................................................... &%+((£
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey

Offline Alice Purjorick

Re: Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"
« Reply #464 on: April 13, 2017, 11:58:55 AM »
And the Supreme Court judges were right in the sense that the McCanns didn't need to be cleared because they were never charged.

But wrong to overturn the first-instance ruling.

Unless ....

Well, never mind.

Refer to post 524 above.
"Navigating the difference between weird but normal grief and truly suspicious behaviour is the key for any detective worth his salt.". ….Sarah Bailey