Was it Tuesday or Wednesday night?

[G-Unit]

And I provided them as requested.   They were direct 'word for word' quotes from Amaral's book which proved the points I had made. 
 
 I have no idea why my post was removed and would appreciate an explanation from someone who does know.

TY.

You did, and I thanked you.

[sadie]

I have DELETED this post because Angelo has altered Carlys offensive post to something more acceptable which doesn't libel The Mccanns any more.

[G-Unit]

Amaral says in his book that Madeleine cried on Tuesday night from 10.30 to 11.45 pm. He doesn't say where he got the information but it is in the files. He differs from her parents by placing their conversation with Madeleine about crying on the Wednesday morning rather than Thursday.

As we don't know why he wrote what he did, allegations about his motives are opinions, not facts.

[sadie]

I have DELETED this post because Angelo has altered Carlys offensive post to something more acceptable which doesn't libel The Mccanns any more.

[G-Unit]

FOR Carly to respond to:

Quote from: carlymichelle on June 18, 2017, 04:58:17 PM

    the bath thing puzzles me who leaves  2 two year olds anda  3  year old in a  bath alone and why should sean and maddie cry in the bath?? 
-End quote

Quote from sadie (unanswered as yet)
Who are you suggesting left 2 two year olds and a three year old alone in the bath?   
- End quote


So Carly, just who are you suggesting left 2 two year olds and a three year old alone in a bath.

ETA.  I notice that you are here, on forum again.  Please can I have an answer this time  TY

Perhaps you would care to answer my question Sadie. You posted;

On top of this we have Mrs Fenns words that she had not spoken to the PJ.  So how did they get her statement?  We have all witnessed Mrs Fenn saying that she did not speak to the Police . so we know that is a fact

I replied;

I have a video in which Mrs Fenn denies speaking to journalists. When did she deny speaking to the PJ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RP30PRieuU4

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8307.0

[sadie]

Perhaps you would care to answer my question Sadie. You posted;

On top of this we have Mrs Fenns words that she had not spoken to the PJ.  So how did they get her statement?  We have all witnessed Mrs Fenn saying that she did not speak to the Police . so we know that is a fact

I replied;

I have a video in which Mrs Fenn denies speaking to journalists. When did she deny speaking to the PJ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RP30PRieuU4

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8307.0

Yes and when I realised that i might have made a mistake, I deleted the offending bit straight away and on forum told you that I had ammended it.

Carly has left a post up intimating that the Mccanns left their children on their own in the bath ... with no proof ... and she is declining /refusing to do anything about it.

ETA Angelo has now removed the libellous post by Carly.


Is it OK to start new and very nasty myths against innocent people?  ... or can she prove it ?  Can you?

[Brietta]

Perhaps you would care to answer my question Sadie. You posted;

On top of this we have Mrs Fenns words that she had not spoken to the PJ.  So how did they get her statement?  We have all witnessed Mrs Fenn saying that she did not speak to the Police . so we know that is a fact

I replied;

I have a video in which Mrs Fenn denies speaking to journalists. When did she deny speaking to the PJ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RP30PRieuU4

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=8307.0

SIC news item
22 August 2007
With thanks to Textusa for transcript/translation

Presenter: The PJ has heard again, this week, the British octogenarian who lives above the apartment from where Maddie disappeared, but Pamela Fenn, botherered by the journalists' attention, denied having spoken with the police and said she didn't have any information about the case.
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id331.htm

Whether she did or whether she didn't we will never know for certain ... but apparently SIC seem to be of the opinion that she did.
Now may we please be less argumentative and get back to the riveting question of what night it was that Mrs Fenn heard an unidentified child crying.  Tuesday or Wednesday?

[G-Unit]

Yes and when I realised that i might have made a mistake, I deleted the offending bit straight away and on forum told you that I had ammended it.

Carly has left a post up intimating that the Mccanns left their children on their own in the bath ... with no proof ... and she is declining /refusing to do anything about it.


Is it OK to start new and very nasty myths against innocent people?  ... or can she prove it ?  Can you?

I think you commented to misty, not to me. Still. you did delete the offending comment.

The McCanns wondered whether the children cried at bath time. As they said they were both present, they should know the answer to that.

[Robittybob1]

I think you commented to misty, not to me. Still. you did delete the offending comment.

The McCanns wondered whether the children cried at bath time. As they said they were both present, they should know the answer to that.

It was a weird thing to say.   There is a tendency to say something weird when confused.

[Benice]

I don't think it's possible to come to any definite conclusions re the crying incident - because there is so much that we don't know.     We would need to know what all the other members of the group's reactions were to this 'news'.    For instance Russell stayed in on Tues with his daughter who was poorly.  Did she cry a lot during that time and is it possible that Jane took the short cut and went in via the patio door - left unlocked for her because Russell was home?

I doubt if Rachel who stayed in Wednesday would have missed two children crying for any length of time in the apartment right next door to hers - and did Matt also use their patio door that night?.    Could it have been their little girl who Mrs Fenn heard crying on Tuesday night? 

Surely Mrs Fenn would have heard the McCanns patio door open twice on Wednesday night as Gerry went home before Kate.

I don't take Mrs Fenns assessment of the age of the child as necessarily accurate.  A new born or very young baby's cry is easy to identify but as they get older it would be much more difficult to put an age on the child - especially as different children cry in different ways - and at different levels.

The group don't seem to have been asked any questions about this incident by the PJ -  probably because they were back in the UK by the time Mrs Fenn was finally interviewed.  And the PJ apparently didn't think it was important enough to make it one of the rogatory questions.

The account given by Amaral in his book is very convincing.

AIMHO


All from memory - it's too hot to check.   Am happy to be corrected if necessary.

FAO Starti.

By removing the comment I made immediately after the bolded sentence above, you have effectively changed it's meaning.   It now sounds almost like a compliment.  My comment - now removed - pointed out the reason why it sounded so convincing - and was not in any way complimentary.

That is exactly what Amaral does IMO. He leaves out vital bits of information and insodoing completely changes the intended meaning of a statement. - but without actually telling a lie.
     
Disgraceful.

[Mr Gray]

FAO Starti.

By removing the comment I made immediately after the bolded sentence above, you have effectively changed it's meaning.   It now sounds almost like a compliment.  My comment - now removed - pointed out the reason why it sounded so convincing - and was not in any way complimentary.

That is exactly what Amaral does IMO. He leaves out vital bits of information and insodoing completely changes the intended meaning of a statement. - but without actually telling a lie.
     
Disgraceful.

By constantly  removing any criticism  of amaral from threads it makes it appear there is no criticism and presents, a, distorted  view of the facts
Does amaral understand that a, fair amount of, what he, says is untrue
So does he not understand  the facts or, is, he, deliberately distorting them

A, good topic for a new thread

[Benice]

Amaral says in his book that Madeleine cried on Tuesday night from 10.30 to 11.45 pm. He doesn't say where he got the information but it is in the files. He differs from her parents by placing their conversation with Madeleine about crying on the Wednesday morning rather than Thursday.

As we don't know why he wrote what he did, allegations about his motives are opinions, not facts.

There is no evidence in the files to show that it is a proven fact that Madeleine was the child heard crying.  The McCanns disputed the claim.

Why would he change the date in the files of Madeleine's conversation with her parents to the morning immediately following the crying incidence.

Why would he omit to mention Sean and insodoing give his readers the impression that it was only Madeleine who cried.

Can anyone come up with any credible reasons as to how he could 'innocently' get so much so wrong in his account of the crying incident?   He claims his book is based on the files.

Is it just a happy coincidence that every wrong claim he made just happened to bolster his unproven claim that it was Madeleine who cried on Tuesday night.

I'm sure that after reading his account - a huge number of his readers would have no question in their minds that it was Madeleine who cried - and IMO that is exactly what he intended them to believe. 

AIMHO

[Robittybob1]

By constantly  removing any criticism  of amaral from threads it makes it appear there is no criticism and presents, a, distorted  view of the facts
Does amaral understand that a, fair amount of, what he, says is untrue
So does he not understand  the facts or, is, he, deliberately distorting them

A, good topic for a new thread

It has to be untrue for he has presented multiple hypotheses for the same event.

[Benice]

By constantly  removing any criticism  of amaral from threads it makes it appear there is no criticism and presents, a, distorted  view of the facts
Does amaral understand that a, fair amount of, what he, says is untrue
So does he not understand  the facts or, is, he, deliberately distorting them

A, good topic for a new thread

 If everyone else's statements can be scrutinised and commented upon when it comes to the crying incident then - even if it is only in the interest of balance -  I can see no valid reason why Amaral's  'statements' made in his book on this subject should not be included  in the debate.

IMO

[G-Unit]

There is no evidence in the files to show that it is a proven fact that Madeleine was the child heard crying.  The McCanns disputed the claim.

Why would he change the date in the files of Madeleine's conversation with her parents to the morning immediately following the crying incidence.

Why would he omit to mention Sean and insodoing give his readers the impression that it was only Madeleine who cried.

Can anyone come up with any credible reasons as to how he could 'innocently' get so much so wrong in his account of the crying incident?   He claims his book is based on the files.

Is it just a happy coincidence that every wrong claim he made just happened to bolster his unproven claim that it was Madeleine who cried on Tuesday night.

I'm sure that after reading his account - a huge number of his readers would have no question in their minds that it was Madeleine who cried - and IMO that is exactly what he intended them to believe. 

AIMHO

I am allowed to point out that the first statements made by the McCanns say that Madeline told them the twins had cried on Wednesday evening. That changed in Gerry's second statement to Madeleine and one twin.

What I am not allowed to do is accuse them of lying because I don't know why their story changed.

Why should posters be allowed to accuse Amaral of lying when they don't know why he says what he says? They can point out that his account differs from that of others, but they should stop short of accusations if we are to have a level playing field.