What Happened To Madeleine McCann? - by Ian Horrocks.

[Alfie]

That is not my theory i.e. carrying her all that way in one go from 5A to the Smith sighting. There was a smarter way if you examine the timeline.

Was he part of a paedo gang talk McKenzie witnessed?

Oh that's alright then!  You think the father carried the dead body of his child through the streets of a holiday resort to its resting place in two trips instead of one!  Well obviously that's not crazy at all is it?   

[pathfinder73]

5 letter answer to that question beginning with A and somebody not remembering a towel tops it

[Alfie]

5 letter answer to that question beginning with A and somebody not remembering a towel tops it

The idea that the father of a missing child (who would subsequently go on to be on the world's TV screens by the next night) would march down the streets of a holiday resort carrying the corpse of said missing child AFTER HIS WIFE RAISED THE ALARM and making no attempt to disguise himself or the child in the process is one five letter word beginning with C and rhyming with daisy.  There's no other word to describe it.  Sozaloz 

[pathfinder73]

Thanks for your words of wisdom about a person committing a crime isn't acting crazy. Madeleine was in a disguise if it was her in long sleeves. Remember the Smith sighting can't be our Maddy - she was in short sleeves and the mother was worried about how COLD she was. 

[The Singularity]

Thanks for your words of wisdom about a person committing a crime isn't acting crazy. Madeleine was in a disguise if it was her in long sleeves. Remember the Smith sighting can't be our Maddy - she was in short sleeves and the mother was worried about how COLD she was.

Knowing that Mrs McCann has already raised the alarm and the small resort was about to be descended on, don't you think if Mr McCann had to carry the lifeless body of his first born through the streets he would have at least attempted to stay in the shadows, out of sight and do something however small to conceal his identity?

If he didn't and he was seen then as soon as the story broke, people who saw him would have told the police that they had seen him carrying a child, and this is the father of a child that has just been reported missing and their other two children are safely asleep in their cots.

The theory just doesn't add up. It's why the concealment of her body by one of the parents just has no grounding because it involves too many conspiratorial elements.

[Robittybob1]

Anyone watching would be crazy to attempt it with all the comings and goings that night. 20 minute opportunity between checks is clearly not true. Jez was walking around that area aswell.

Have you ever considered that Jez is part of the problem rather than the solution?

[Robittybob1]

But Redwood claimed he was an innocent tourist and Redwood was the operational detective in charge whereas Horrocks had no such access.  Redwood did admit he was totally sure however but the chances of two men carrying a child away from the direction of block 5 between 9.15pm and 10.00pm must be slim.

Would the odds change if one was a woman and one a man?  We have the admission of crecheman, so if he admits to going past that intersection that part becomes 100% certain, therefore we are only looking at the odds of the Tanner sighting really.

We have the admission of crecheman, so if he doesn't admit to going past that intersection that Crecheman part becomes 100% uncertain.   If he didn't go past the intersection in question he is just another parent taking his kid home from the night creche.

[Alfie]

Thanks for your words of wisdom about a person committing a crime isn't acting crazy. Madeleine was in a disguise if it was her in long sleeves. Remember the Smith sighting can't be our Maddy - she was in short sleeves and the mother was worried about how COLD she was.

So, now you're suggesting Gerry was crazy and decided to take the short sleeved top off the corpse and replace it with a long sleeved top as a cunning disguise are you?   &%+((£

[pathfinder73]

Knowing that Mrs McCann has already raised the alarm and the small resort was about to be descended on, don't you think if Mr McCann had to carry the lifeless body of his first born through the streets he would have at least attempted to stay in the shadows, out of sight and do something however small to conceal his identity?

If he didn't and he was seen then as soon as the story broke, people who saw him would have told the police that they had seen him carrying a child, and this is the father of a child that has just been reported missing and their other two children are safely asleep in their cots.

The theory just doesn't add up. It's why the concealment of her body by one of the parents just has no grounding because it involves too many conspiratorial elements.

Do you know how many were outside in the tapas area when Kate raised the alarm? The rest didn't know about it until a mother went to the night creche and informed them of hearing men shouting and searching for a girl called Maddy. It wasn't descended upon, quite the opposite.

Matt didn't even go to call the police until after searches around the apartments, pool, tennis courts and then down to Baptista supermarket. They were nowhere near the Smith sighting.

[Alfie]

Do you know how many were outside in the tapas area when Kate raised the alarm? The rest didn't know about it until a mother went to the night creche and informed them of hearing men shouting and searching for a girl called Maddy. It wasn't descended upon, quite the opposite.

Matt didn't even go to call the police until after searches around the apartments, pool, tennis courts and then down to Baptista supermarket. They were nowhere near the Smith sighting.

It was descended upon within hours of Madeleine going missing.  The father of a missing girl would suddenly become very high profile, just what you wouldn't want to happen if you knew you'd been parading a corpse around town the previous evening!

[The Singularity]

Do you know how many were outside in the tapas area when Kate raised the alarm? The rest didn't know about it until a mother went to the night creche and informed them of hearing men shouting and searching for a girl called Maddy. It wasn't descended upon, quite the opposite.

Matt didn't even go to call the police until after searches around the apartments, pool, tennis courts and then down to Baptista supermarket. They were nowhere near the Smith sighting.

Your missing my point. Mr McCann walking through the resort with a child in his arms. He is seen by multiple people. They have no reason to think it's suspicious because they have no reason to.

However, once the story breaks which is did very fast, then the people who saw him would immediately think, hang on that's the gentleman we saw last night carrying the child, and wait..what..one of his children is missing?

With the details fresh in their mind, had it been Mr McCann and he didn't even bother to conceal his identity? He's a cooked goose. 

[Robittybob1]

If you take away Tannerman very little is left by way of evidence. Just because a parent claims a shutter and a window were open doesn't mean it was. Nothing was taken or even disturbed in the McCann's apartment, there was no evidence of a breakin or disturbance of any sort.

Is that fair then to take away evidence?  What case would stand that sort of treatment?

[stephen25000]

Do you know how many were outside in the tapas area when Kate raised the alarm? The rest didn't know about it until a mother went to the night creche and informed them of hearing men shouting and searching for a girl called Maddy. It wasn't descended upon, quite the opposite.

Matt didn't even go to call the police until after searches around the apartments, pool, tennis courts and then down to Baptista supermarket. They were nowhere near the Smith sighting.

Salient post.

[Robittybob1]

Do you know how many were outside in the tapas area when Kate raised the alarm? The rest didn't know about it until a mother went to the night creche and informed them of hearing men shouting and searching for a girl called Maddy. It wasn't descended upon, quite the opposite.

Matt didn't even go to call the police until after searches around the apartments, pool, tennis courts and then down to Baptista supermarket. They were nowhere near the Smith sighting.

it has different relevance to different investigators depending on their over all theory.  I appreciate that you have provided us with you theory. 

[pathfinder73]

Your missing my point. Mr McCann walking through the resort with a child in his arms. He is seen by multiple people. They have no reason to think it's suspicious because they have no reason to.

However, once the story breaks which is did very fast, then the people who saw him would immediately think, hang on that's the gentleman we saw last night carrying the child, and wait..what..one of his children is missing?

With the details fresh in their mind, had it been Mr McCann and he didn't even bother to conceal his identity? He's a cooked goose.

According to the Smiths they didn't see his face clearly because of the darkness but one later named him on his body language - an action replay in his words. The fact is the McCanns didn't release the efits of that man but were releasing efits of the others. In Kate's book Smithman efits are missing. Leaving no stone unturned?