UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: Holly Goodhead on June 23, 2019, 10:36:30 PM
-
I've come to the conclusion that the open window/shutter was 'staged' by the perp to throw investigators and that the perp entered and exited via the patio door and upon leaving with MM he/she carefully closed the door, curtain, child gate and gate leading to road.
Who...
- Knew MM was 'home alone' every night Sun to Thu from 8.30pm to 11pm ish?
- Knew the patio door was unlocked
- Knew T9 were eating at Tapas
- Knew T9 were checking every 30 mins
- Knew when T9 were all seated
Imo the perp is someone who was a guest at MW and who had a 'room with a view' allowing him/her to observe the above. Probably had a hire car too. An MW guest fits all the known facts.
-
What checks to date have been carried out on MW guests?
-
What checks to date have been carried out on MW guests?
Good question. For all the interviews done by the UK police of UK citizens were not allowed to be released at the archiving of the case.
-
I've come to the conclusion that the open window/shutter was 'staged' by the perp to throw investigators and that the perp entered and exited via the patio door and upon leaving with MM he/she carefully closed the door, curtain, child gate and gate leading to road.
Who...
- Knew MM was 'home alone' every night Sun to Thu from 8.30pm to 11pm ish?
- Knew the patio door was unlocked
- Knew T9 were eating at Tapas
- Knew T9 were checking every 30 mins
- Knew when T9 were all seated
Imo the perp is someone who was a guest at MW and who had a 'room with a view' allowing him/her to observe the above. Probably had a hire car too. An MW guest fits all the known facts.
I would call that conclusion "your theory, Holly Goodhead's theory.
-
I've come to the conclusion that the open window/shutter was 'staged' by the perp to throw investigators and that the perp entered and exited via the patio door and upon leaving with MM he/she carefully closed the door, curtain, child gate and gate leading to road.
Who...
- Knew MM was 'home alone' every night Sun to Thu from 8.30pm to 11pm ish?
- Knew the patio door was unlocked
- Knew T9 were eating at Tapas
- Knew T9 were checking every 30 mins
- Knew when T9 were all seated
Imo the perp is someone who was a guest at MW and who had a 'room with a view' allowing him/her to observe the above. Probably had a hire car too. An MW guest fits all the known facts.
In which case the PJ didn't stand a chence. Most of those people went back to the UK on 5th May. It was up to the UK police to check them all out.
-
I've come to the conclusion that the open window/shutter was 'staged' by the perp to throw investigators and that the perp entered and exited via the patio door and upon leaving with MM he/she carefully closed the door, curtain, child gate and gate leading to road.
Who...
- Knew MM was 'home alone' every night Sun to Thu from 8.30pm to 11pm ish?
- Knew the patio door was unlocked
- Knew T9 were eating at Tapas
- Knew T9 were checking every 30 mins
- Knew when T9 were all seated
Imo the perp is someone who was a guest at MW and who had a 'room with a view' allowing him/her to observe the above. Probably had a hire car too. An MW guest fits all the known facts.
Couple of things:
- what difference would it make which door was used? How would that send everyone down the wrong road?
- This MW guest - so an opportunist paedophile watched all this unravel, then tuned abductor with the wherewithal to adjust the crime scene, but just opened a window?
- How could this perp have a 'room with a view' of both entrances and where everyone was seated?
- the T7 all fit your list of criteria.
-
I've come to the conclusion that the open window/shutter was 'staged' by the perp to throw investigators and that the perp entered and exited via the patio door and upon leaving with MM he/she carefully closed the door, curtain, child gate and gate leading to road.
Who...
- Knew MM was 'home alone' every night Sun to Thu from 8.30pm to 11pm ish?
- Knew the patio door was unlocked
- Knew T9 were eating at Tapas
- Knew T9 were checking every 30 mins
- Knew when T9 were all seated
Imo the perp is someone who was a guest at MW and who had a 'room with a view' allowing him/her to observe the above. Probably had a hire car too. An MW guest fits all the known facts.
IMO it was obviously staged - but to make time to do that you would need a very good reason.
Why would the abductor - need to make it look like an abduction.
Why did the mcns think it was so safe to put twins back in the creche.
When for obvious reasons in your post - it could have been anyone close to home.
Why did the mcns trust everyone in that complex - at a time you would trust no one
Especially your acquaintances/friends - who knew the children were in an unlocked room alone.
-
I would call that conclusion "your theory, Holly Goodhead's theory.
Yeah you're right theory is better than conclusion - it sounds more flexible!
-
I've come to the conclusion that the open window/shutter was 'staged' by the perp to throw investigators and that the perp entered and exited via the patio door and upon leaving with MM he/she carefully closed the door, curtain, child gate and gate leading to road.
Who...
- Knew MM was 'home alone' every night Sun to Thu from 8.30pm to 11pm ish?
- Knew the patio door was unlocked
- Knew T9 were eating at Tapas
- Knew T9 were checking every 30 mins
- Knew when T9 were all seated
Imo the perp is someone who was a guest at MW and who had a 'room with a view' allowing him/her to observe the above. Probably had a hire car too. An MW guest fits all the known facts.
Have you thought about the motive? It is one thing to observe all these events and to know it, but what is the motive for a tourist to become a child abductor?
-
In which case the PJ didn't stand a chence. Most of those people went back to the UK on 5th May. It was up to the UK police to check them all out.
Yes KM states in her book all guests were able to leave.
I've been thinking about this further. Who actually owned all the apartments? Mrs Fenn obviously owned hers so not all guests staying in the apartments were connected with MW. Did MW rent some of the apartments and then market them as an inclusive MW hol? The Access list you uploaded shows the names of a number of tour operators but the guest list doesn't appear to contain any foreign sounding surnames ie it doesn't appear holiday makers from other European countries, or elsewhere, were staying at OC based on the access list?
-
Couple of things:
- what difference would it make which door was used? How would that send everyone down the wrong road?
It seems the front door was locked with GM carrying the key. This leaves the unlocked patio door which imo would have been a massive clue had the bedroom window not been staged.
- This MW guest - so an opportunist paedophile watched all this unravel, then tuned abductor with the wherewithal to adjust the crime scene, but just opened a window?
The window was enough to throw investigators. What else would you have expected him/her to do to 'stage' the soc?
- How could this perp have a 'room with a view' of both entrances and where everyone was seated?
Why did the perp need a room with a view of both entrances? The McCanns were entering/exiting via the unlocked patio door. The perp would know from his/her own patio door it could not be locked from outside.
- the T7 all fit your list of criteria.
T7 did not have time to carry out an abduction and dispose of a body unless T7 planned with a.n.other and passed MM over to such person.
-
The perp would know from his/her own patio door it could not be locked from outside.
I was referring to the perp trying to scope out comings and goings, rather than the knowledge or otherwise of the door locking mechanism.
-
IMO it was obviously staged - but to make time to do that you would need a very good reason.
Not getting caught after the event is surely a good enough reason. How long would it take to open window/shutter? He/she would know they had some 30 mins based on the pattern of McCann visits.
Why would the abductor - need to make it look like an abduction.
The abductor wanted to make it appear that he/she was unaware of the unlocked patio door.
Why did the mcns think it was so safe to put twins back in the creche.
Why not? MM wasn't abducted from creche. She was abducted from 5a which had an unlocked door and was unsupervised.
When for obvious reasons in your post - it could have been anyone close to home.
Not sure what you mean by anyone close to home?
Why did the mcns trust everyone in that complex - at a time you would trust no one
Not sure they did trust everyone. KM states in book words to the effect she was dismayed everyone was able to leave ie fly home as planned.
Especially your acquaintances/friends - who knew the children were in an unlocked room alone.
McCanns probably ruled out T7 on the basis they knew them well and trusted them plus they didn't have time to abduct MM and dispose of her body. You're right others should not have been trusted that they met on hol. It comes down to prejudice ie middle class families playing tennis wouldn't abduct children but many have the potential. Consider the paedophile doctor from Cambridge:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-34591633
-
The window was enough to throw investigators. What else would you have expected him/her to do to 'stage' the soc?
The window was enough to 'throw investigators' because the first person on the scene said it was so. Nobody else did.
What would I expect? I wouldn't try to make the abduction look like an abduction.
Maybe ransack the gaff, fill a duvet cover with 'valuables'. If you stage a burglary it could be argued that MM ran off once they'd left. I'm reaching here, I know that.
-
Have you thought about the motive? It is one thing to observe all these events and to know it, but what is the motive for a tourist to become a child abductor?
People get off on all sorts. It could be someone wanted to see the McCanns in turmoil and initially planned to release MM but with all the media coverage became too scared.
Could be someone wanted a child and felt unable to separate the twins.
I guess the obvious answer is some sort of sexual assault.
You say tourist to become a child abductor but paedophiles are everywhere and look and act normally. If someone is that way inclined and an opportunity presents eg child home alone in unlocked property they might well go for it and this is what imo happened. It was the coming together of all the circumstances. Plus someone that way inclined might well have been getting aroused during the week with all the young children running around in swimwear. Plus if he/she (most likely he) had been drinking as people do on hol this will only exacerbate by lowering inhibitions.
-
The window was enough to 'throw investigators' because the first person on the scene said it was so. Nobody else did.
What would I expect? I wouldn't try to make the abduction look like an abduction.
Maybe ransack the gaff, fill a duvet cover with 'valuables'. If you stage a burglary it could be argued that MM ran off once they'd left. I'm reaching here, I know that.
But all these things you've suggested take more time than opening the window/shutters plus waking the children plus leaving behind forensic evidence.
-
I was referring to the perp trying to scope out comings and goings, rather than the knowledge or otherwise of the door locking mechanism.
The perp could scope out the comings and goings from a room with a view. By all accounts T9 were loud in the tapas bar particularly GM.
-
But all these things you've suggested take more time than opening the window/shutters plus waking the children plus leaving behind forensic evidence.
So your theory consists of the shutters / window being opened by an alleged abductor, in an attempt to divert the police, by ensuring that they concentrate their efforts on someone who was watching and who knew the front door was locked?
-
So your theory consists of the shutters / window being opened by an alleged abductor, in an attempt to divert the police, by ensuring that they concentrate their efforts on someone who was watching and who knew the front door was locked?
By ensuring they didn't concentrate their efforts on someone who knew the patio door was open. Who knew the patio door was open:
McCanns
T7
Anyone with a room with a view
-
Yes KM states in her book all guests were able to leave.
I've been thinking about this further. Who actually owned all the apartments? Mrs Fenn obviously owned hers so not all guests staying in the apartments were connected with MW. Did MW rent some of the apartments and then market them as an inclusive MW hol? The Access list you uploaded shows the names of a number of tour operators but the guest list doesn't appear to contain any foreign sounding surnames ie it doesn't appear holiday makers from other European countries, or elsewhere, were staying at OC based on the access list?
Mark Warner bought the Ocean Club which owned the OC buildings and land; no apartments. As part of the deal they negotiated a rental contract;
for ten years of 27 apartments owned by George Propiedades.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ROBIN_CROSSLAND.htm
I assume therefore that only 27 apartments were always available.
The rest of the apartments were available only if the owners had an agreement with the OC, either directly or through a local property management company.
It's quite possible that people from other countries owned property in Luz and unless they had an agreement with the OC those properties could have housed anyone from anywhere; they wouldn't be listed.
-
@ Holly Goodhead.
Not getting caught after the event is surely a good enough reason. How long would it take to open window/shutter? He/she would know they had some 30 mins based on the pattern of McCann visits.[/b]
What sense would there be for an abductor - to make an abduction look like an abduction?.
Why not? MM wasn't abducted from creche. She was abducted from 5a which had an unlocked door and was unsupervised.
Yes, but how did the mccs know no one involved in the creche wasn't responsible IMO.
My point was when Maddie had gone - they felt safe enough to not want the twins with someone they trusted.
Not sure what you mean by anyone close to home?
Someone who knew the exact mccn baby care arrangements.
-
Mark Warner bought the Ocean Club which owned the OC buildings and land; no apartments. As part of the deal they negotiated a rental contract;
for ten years of 27 apartments owned by George Propiedades.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ROBIN_CROSSLAND.htm
I assume therefore that only 27 apartments were always available.
The rest of the apartments were available only if the owners had an agreement with the OC, either directly or through a local property management company.
It's quite possible that people from other countries owned property in Luz and unless they had an agreement with the OC those properties could have housed anyone from anywhere; they wouldn't be listed.
Thanks - that's interesting.
IMO every single apartment with a view needs accounting for. How can we rule out anything dodgy going on eg a local letting agency tells owner the property is vacant when in fact it is being let and the agent is pockets the rent?
-
@ Holly Goodhead.
Not getting caught after the event is surely a good enough reason. How long would it take to open window/shutter? He/she would know they had some 30 mins based on the pattern of McCann visits.[/b]
What sense would there be for an abductor - to make an abduction look like an abduction?.
Why not? MM wasn't abducted from creche. She was abducted from 5a which had an unlocked door and was unsupervised.
Yes, but how did the mccs know no one involved in the creche wasn't responsible IMO.
My point was when Maddie had gone - they felt safe enough to not want the twins with someone they trusted.
Not sure what you mean by anyone close to home?
Someone who knew the exact mccn baby care arrangements.
I think the purpose of opening the window/shutter was staged by the abductor to throw investigators, McCanns and even the likes of us into thinking maybe the window/shutter was used as an entry/exit point as opposed to the unlocked patio door.
But how could anyone abduct twins from creche/kids club or whatever it was referred to when numerous others were around?
MM was abducted from 5a during the hours of approx 9pm - 10pm from 5a because the abductor knew she was home alone and could gain access through the unlocked patio door. This was a totally different situation to the day care provided for twins by MW.
-
People get off on all sorts. It could be someone wanted to see the McCanns in turmoil and initially planned to release MM but with all the media coverage became too scared.
Could be someone wanted a child and felt unable to separate the twins.
I guess the obvious answer is some sort of sexual assault.
You say tourist to become a child abductor but paedophiles are everywhere and look and act normally. If someone is that way inclined and an opportunity presents eg child home alone in unlocked property they might well go for it and this is what imo happened. It was the coming together of all the circumstances. Plus someone that way inclined might well have been getting aroused during the week with all the young children running around in swimwear. Plus if he/she (most likely he) had been drinking as people do on hol this will only exacerbate by lowering inhibitions.
That is quite a range of possibilities.
Your suggestion " It could be someone wanted to see the McCanns in turmoil and initially planned to release MM but with all the media coverage became too scared" is a bit like the theory I proposed where "it could be someone wanted to see the McCanns in turmoil" as part of a prank. Show them that their child care methods were exposing the kids to a possible kidnapping. They "planned to release MM" but as I see it since MM had the ability to escape the apartment the prank failed in that they never got take her in the first place.
Maybe that is where the faking the crime scene came in, but I gradually came to thinking that burglars attempting to break in were enough to wake MM.
Granted my scenario involves more people, playing roles that don't add up to child abduction, whereas your theory involves one family in an apartment overlooking the scene.
-
I think the purpose of opening the window/shutter was staged by the abductor to throw investigators, McCanns and even the likes of us into thinking maybe the window/shutter was used as an entry/exit point as opposed to the unlocked patio door.
But how could anyone abduct twins from creche/kids club or whatever it was referred to when numerous others were around?
MM was abducted from 5a during the hours of approx 9pm - 10pm from 5a because the abductor knew she was home alone and could gain access through the unlocked patio door. This was a totally different situation to the day care provided for twins by MW.
The only reason an abductor would want to make it look like an abduction - would have had an ulterior motive.
Especially if it wasn't an abduction at all IMO.
Not to throw every one of the track - if that was the case why not just leave the patoio door wide open.
-
People get off on all sorts. It could be someone wanted to see the McCanns in turmoil and initially planned to release MM but with all the media coverage became too scared.
Could be someone wanted a child and felt unable to separate the twins.
I guess the obvious answer is some sort of sexual assault.
You say tourist to become a child abductor but paedophiles are everywhere and look and act normally. If someone is that way inclined and an opportunity presents eg child home alone in unlocked property they might well go for it and this is what imo happened. It was the coming together of all the circumstances. Plus someone that way inclined might well have been getting aroused during the week with all the young children running around in swimwear. Plus if he/she (most likely he) had been drinking as people do on hol this will only exacerbate by lowering inhibitions.
You appear to have eliminated those closest to MM.
-
You appear to have eliminated those closest to MM.
The Amaral investigation started the ball rolling on that one by eliminating those closest to Madeleine by dint of being unable to produce anything against them which resembled evidence.
-
Mark Warner bought the Ocean Club which owned the OC buildings and land; no apartments. As part of the deal they negotiated a rental contract;
for ten years of 27 apartments owned by George Propiedades.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ROBIN_CROSSLAND.htm
I assume therefore that only 27 apartments were always available.
The rest of the apartments were available only if the owners had an agreement with the OC, either directly or through a local property management company.
It's quite possible that people from other countries owned property in Luz and unless they had an agreement with the OC those properties could have housed anyone from anywhere; they wouldn't be listed.
Well found Gunit. It must be nearly ten years since I last read that statement
The interesting thing is that amongst other dates it fails to give the actual selling date.
Is that?
- deliberate
- accidental
- or, by a mystery hand, has the document been altered, as is so common these days on the internet
Anyone got any ideas on this?
Or is it nothing ?
- or has this got some relevance possibly ?
-
The Amaral investigation started the ball rolling on that one by eliminating those closest to Madeleine by dint of being unable to produce anything against them which resembled evidence.
There's no evidence against anyone as far as I know.
-
I think the purpose of opening the window/shutter was staged by the abductor to throw investigators, McCanns and even the likes of us into thinking maybe the window/shutter was used as an entry/exit point as opposed to the unlocked patio door.
But how could anyone abduct twins from creche/kids club or whatever it was referred to when numerous others were around?
MM was abducted from 5a during the hours of approx 9pm - 10pm from 5a because the abductor knew she was home alone and could gain access through the unlocked patio door. This was a totally different situation to the day care provided for twins by MW.
Holly, welcome btw, there has been a list of feasible reasons for an abductor to leave that window and shutter open.
It has been posted on here a number of times and amounted to nearly ten reasons on one occasion. All feasible.
I don't have the energy to think the reasons up again, but every one was valid.
I dont think the window was wide enough, except as a possible emergency escape route for the abductor, if trapped
The rear patio doors were in full view of the Tapas 9 and the patio illuminatedby the street lamp opposite. Amaral agreed that no-one would abduct Madeleine in sight, so close to her parents. She was only 50 metres away and in a n illuminated spot as she passed through that patio door and across the patio ... and partially down the steps.
I dont think the patio door was used because of these things and others.
-
Holly, welcome btw, there has been a list of feasible reasons for an abductor to leave that window and shutter open.
It has been posted on here a number of times and amounted to nearly ten reasons on one occasion. All feasible.
I don't have the energy to think the reasons up again, but every one was valid.
I dont think the window was wide enough, except as a possible emergency escape route for the abductor, if trapped
The rear patio doors were in full view of the Tapas 9 and the patio illuminatedby the street lamp opposite. Amaral agreed that no-one would abduct Madeleine in sight, so close to her parents. She was only 50 metres away and in a n illuminated spot as she passed through that patio door and across the patio ... and partially down the steps.
I dont think the patio door was used because of these things and others.
Hi Sadie. Thanks for the welcome.
I'm sure it has all been said before. I spent many a happy hour going over the same ground over and over again with the Bamber case 8)><(
I'm new to this case and I've learned a lot from other cases. Having got the basics of this case, as it stands at the moment, I believe MM was abducted by a stranger from apartment 5a. I think the shutter/window was 'staged' to throw investigators, McCanns, media etc, etc.
I believe the abductor entered and exited via the patio doors taking care to return everything as it was found ie close patio door, close child gate and gate linking 5a and road. I think the abductor then went along the alley wall at the side of the two blocks and into the car park. You can see how dark it is in the following documentary from about 14 mins to 18 mins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khP0dEsZaug
-
Hi Sadie. Thanks for the welcome.
I'm sure it has all been said before. I spent many a happy hour going over the same ground over and over again with the Bamber case 8)><(
I'm new to this case and I've learned a lot from other cases. Having got the basics of this case, as it stands at the moment, I believe MM was abducted by a stranger from apartment 5a. I think the shutter/window was 'staged' to throw investigators, McCanns, media etc, etc.
I believe the abductor entered and exited via the patio doors taking care to return everything as it was found ie close patio door, close child gate and gate linking 5a and road. I think the abductor then went along the alley wall at the side of the two blocks and into the car park. You can see how dark it is in the following documentary from about 14 mins to 18 mins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khP0dEsZaug
I think the shutter/window was 'staged' to throw investigators, McCanns, media etc, etc.
Why on earth would the so-called abductor want to do that - what would he/she achieve by doing that.
The only sense to me to do that - would be to make it look like an abduction when it wasn't an abduction.
-
I think the shutter/window was 'staged' to throw investigators, McCanns, media etc, etc.
Why on earth would the so-called abductor want to do that - what would he/she achieve by doing that.
The only sense to me to do that - would be to make it look like an abduction when it wasn't an abduction.
It's a well known phenomenon that criminals will stage the scene to throw investigators. As I keep saying only a finite number of people knew T9 were in Tapas bar, MM was home alone and the patio doors unlocked and those people all had a room with a view. If investigators were savvy enough to home in on these individuals within the first 24 hours they may well have caught him/her. But the open window/shutter threw a lot of people in the early stages.
Google 'Crime scene staging' and you can read all about it.
-
You appear to have eliminated those closest to MM.
Yes because the McCanns and T7 didn't have the time to carry out an abduction and dispose of a body unless they involved others. Plus what would be the motive for McCanns and/or T7 to harm MM and dispose of her body?
-
I think the shutter/window was 'staged' to throw investigators, McCanns, media etc, etc.
Why on earth would the so-called abductor want to do that - what would he/she achieve by doing that.
The only sense to me to do that - would be to make it look like an abduction when it wasn't an abduction.
I think it has been pointed out already but ...
It would obscure the possible fact that someone had been monitoring MBM, K&G, 5A, the routine etc.
It would obscure the possibility that an intruder had access to a front door key.
It turns a less complex scene into a more complex scene.
-
Yes because the McCanns and T7 didn't have the time to carry out an abduction and dispose of a body unless they involved others. Plus what would be the motive for McCanns and/or T7 to harm MM and dispose of her body?
Available time to move body depends upon accuracy of the timeline, which, IMO , was devised solely by the T9
Is anyone suggesting that Madeleine was deliberately harmed ?
-
It's a well known phenomenon that criminals will stage the scene to throw investigators. As I keep saying only a finite number of people knew T9 were in Tapas bar, MM was home alone and the patio doors unlocked and those people all had a room with a view. If investigators were savvy enough to home in on these individuals within the first 24 hours they may well have caught him/her. But the open window/shutter threw a lot of people in the early stages.
Google 'Crime scene staging' and you can read all about it.
'Crime scene staging' and you can read all about it.
Pointless doing that when I don't even believe there was an abductor - and it's only your theory.
what if maddie was abducted because she woke an wandered - did they go back and open the bedroom window
If an abduction was staged - a left open patio door and gate ect would have had the same effect.
an open window doesn't mean it was by someone with a room with a veiw- a left open door would suffice.
why go to the trouble of opening a window making noise when every second count - to be in and straight out.
Seems to me the open window was for an instant reaction for it to be an abduction.
What the mcns as they said - they knew Maddie had been abducted straight away by the open window.
The mcns wasn't consistent with the checking each night imo - so what good would that be to someone with a view. the actual timeline is aprox not set in stone.
-
Yes because the McCanns and T7 didn't have the time to carry out an abduction and dispose of a body unless they involved others. Plus what would be the motive for McCanns and/or T7 to harm MM and dispose of her body?
The answer to that one is very obvious, but if I state it explicitly, I will no doubt get warning points.
Just a thought. From time to time we have thrown Murder Mystery parties, where one guest gets slaughtered, the other guests play detectives, and the murderer wins by evading capture. This requires a fair bit of role playing by the guests, but it also involves thinking it through from the viewpoint of the perpetrator.
-
'Crime scene staging' and you can read all about it.
Pointless doing that when I don't even believe there was an abductor - and it's only your theory.
what if maddie was abducted because she woke an wandered - did they go back and open the bedroom window
If an abduction was staged - a left open patio door and gate ect would have had the same effect.
an open window doesn't mean it was by someone with a room with a veiw- a left open door would suffice.
why go to the trouble of opening a window making noise when every second count - to be in and straight out.
Seems to me the open window was for an instant reaction for it to be an abduction.
What the mcns as they said - they knew Maddie had been abducted straight away by the open window.
The mcns wasn't consistent with the checking each night imo - so what good would that be to someone with a view. the actual timeline is aprox not set in stone.
It's an observation point from which the Tapas restaurant can be monitored.
-
Available time to move body depends upon accuracy of the timeline, which, IMO , was devised solely by the T9
Is anyone suggesting that Madeleine was deliberately harmed ?
So what are you suggesting? That the McCanns drugged their children so they could have a carefree night and it all went horribly wrong? In which case why bother checking?
-
So what are you suggesting? That the McCanns drugged their children so they could have a carefree night and it all went horribly wrong? In which case why bother checking?
The timeline is approximate at best so you can't say something couldn't haven because there wasn't time - IMO
-
Available time to move body depends upon accuracy of the timeline, which, IMO , was devised solely by the T9
Is anyone suggesting that Madeleine was deliberately harmed ?
Yes. Spam thinks they murdered her, and others here believe she was drugged by her parents.
-
If she was drugged by her parents, it would not be with any intent to kill -IMO
I don't remember Spammy saying that they murdered her, just that they popped her a waste bin
-
The answer to that one is very obvious, but if I state it explicitly, I will no doubt get warning points.
Just a thought. From time to time we have thrown Murder Mystery parties, where one guest gets slaughtered, the other guests play detectives, and the murderer wins by evading capture. This requires a fair bit of role playing by the guests, but it also involves thinking it through from the viewpoint of the perpetrator.
Well if you state your opinion, however unpalatable that might be to some, I don't see the problem? We have 'free speech' in this country. I don't see how your opinion could be considered defamatory or libellous when no one knows for sure what happened to MM other than MM and those directly responsible for her disappearance, so I would encourage you to go for it.
The McCanns have sued the likes of Amaral over his book and the tabloid press as they're in a position of influence, we're not. The McCanns would look pretty damn sad if they tried suing individuals for allowing others to offer up an opinion on an online discussion forum. I doubt the law would be on their side and it would undoubtedly backfire on them.
I'm not sure I fancy playing the role of a child abductor 8(8-))
-
If she was drugged by her parents, it would not be with any intent to kill -IMO
I don't remember Spammy saying that they murdered her, just that they popped her a waste bin
Why would her parents drug her? Why bother carrying out checks if she was drugged?
Spammy saying they popped MM in a waste bin doesn't make it a fact.
-
Well if you state your opinion, however unpalatable that might be to some, I don't see the problem? We have 'free speech' in this country. I don't see how your opinion could be considered defamatory or libellous when no one knows for sure what happened to MM other than MM and those directly responsible for her disappearance, so I would encourage you to go for it.
The McCanns have sued the likes of Amaral over his book and the tabloid press as they're in a position of influence, we're not. The McCanns would look pretty damn sad if they tried suing individuals for allowing others to offer up an opinion on an online discussion forum. I doubt the law would be on their side and it would undoubtedly backfire on them.
I'm not sure I fancy playing the role of a child abductor 8(8-))
I think you will find we dont have free speech on the forum...amaral was found guilty of perjury but when I have said he has lied my posts ahve been removed under the excuse of libel
-
I think you will find we dont have free speech on the forum...amaral was found guilty of perjury but when I have said he has lied my posts ahve been removed under the excuse of libel
Strange. Slarti was cool with claiming Clarence lied this morning. Most odd.... *%87
-
I think you will find we dont have free speech on the forum...amaral was found guilty of perjury but when I have said he has lied my posts ahve been removed under the excuse of libel
I will have to consult with the boss over where the line is drawn. Other boards I've posted on here eg Bamber, Rettendon Murders aka Essex Boys and Jill Dando have been fairly relaxed. As a moderator I prefer not to censor posts unless it is absolutely necessary. I like to encourage all opinions and views.
Do you need to use the word lie? Can you not just say I believe Amaral is wrong and explain why you believe this to be the case?
-
Supporters just love to use the lie word and scream libel at every opportunity - IMO
-
Supporters just love to use the lie word and scream libel at every opportunity - IMO
8()(((@#
-
Well if you state your opinion, however unpalatable that might be to some, I don't see the problem? We have 'free speech' in this country. I don't see how your opinion could be considered defamatory or libellous when no one knows for sure what happened to MM other than MM and those directly responsible for her disappearance, so I would encourage you to go for it.
The McCanns have sued the likes of Amaral over his book and the tabloid press as they're in a position of influence, we're not. The McCanns would look pretty damn sad if they tried suing individuals for allowing others to offer up an opinion on an online discussion forum. I doubt the law would be on their side and it would undoubtedly backfire on them.
I'm not sure I fancy playing the role of a child abductor 8(8-))
Stick around on the forum and what you will find is that I know that I don't know what happened, so I don't have an opinion.
PS We have never run a child abductor mystery party. It's adults only, including both murdered and murderer. We leave the children with ....
*%87
-
I will have to consult with the boss over where the line is drawn. Other boards I've posted on here eg Bamber, Rettendon Murders aka Essex Boys and Jill Dando have been fairly relaxed. As a moderator I prefer not to censor posts unless it is absolutely necessary. I like to encourage all opinions and views.
Do you need to use the word lie? Can you not just say I believe Amaral is wrong and explain why you believe this to be the case?
he was convicted of false testimony in court,,...thats lying
-
Available time to move body depends upon accuracy of the timeline, which, IMO , was devised solely by the T9
Is anyone suggesting that Madeleine was deliberately harmed ?
Holly is eliminating that as a motive as I read it.
-
So here is this perp sitting in his/her room with a view. At what moment would s/he decide it was time to have a go at this abduction?
-
So here is this perp sitting in his/her room with a view. At what moment would s/he decide it was time to have a go at this abduction?
From 'a room with a view', there are 3 distinct windows of opportunity.
-
8()(((@#
Don't let opinion upset you so much.
-
I think the purpose of opening the window/shutter was staged by the abductor to throw investigators, McCanns and even the likes of us into thinking maybe the window/shutter was used as an entry/exit point as opposed to the unlocked patio door.
But how could anyone abduct twins from creche/kids club or whatever it was referred to when numerous others were around?
MM was abducted from 5a during the hours of approx 9pm - 10pm from 5a because the abductor knew she was home alone and could gain access through the unlocked patio door. This was a totally different situation to the day care provided for twins by MW.
I would think your “room with a view” theory is as likely to be a member of staff as a guest. As in my opinion, if it was an abduction scenario then the MOST likely reason to open a shutter that was not used to either enter or exit, may have been to detract from it looking like an “inside job” , i.e. use of a key. (Like Sadie I don't believe the sliding door was used - too many stairs, too much light etc.)
I personally believe that in an abduction scenario there was more than one perp - but at least one of them worked at the Ocean Club. (The wages that some of them mention seem very low…so I guess if there was the possibility of financial gain, it may have been hard to resist - especially if you were mainly a look out person etc.).
This could also explain also why the keys for block 5 supposedly mysteriously disappeared from the maintenance department for at least a period of time during that particular week. (This was reported in the media years later, which was also odd because they were supposedly under lock and key in a safe that could only be accessed by maintenance workers).
Additionally, on the Wednesday evening Rachel Oldfield was home ill directly next door to 5A. She heard no crying….so Madeleine may have been confused about which night she had actually woken. (That being the case, then the two evenings noted for disturbances i.e. Tuesday and Thursday, would have been on two of the nights that the entirety of the Tapas group were together at dinner. I think the only other night was Monday, but that was also the first time in the holiday that they had all dined together, without the children as the Sunday night Matt Oldfield was ill).
Talking of Matt, his check on 3rd May bugs me not just because he said the door was ajar but because his wife claimed in one of her statements that her husband had checked the parents room to see if M was sleeping there. Matt does not mention this in his statement. He claims that the door was ajar, that he didn’t enter the room but observed both twins and that he was distracted by books on his way out. However, due to the nature of the fabric surrounding the travel cots - he would only have seen both twins if he came further into the room, than he seems to have remembered. So I believe that if his wife’s statement is correct - I can only imagine that some part of his subconscious may have clocked that M was not in the room....but maybe after checking the parents room - he became temporarily distracted by the books and left without re-checking. If that is the case, in all likelihood he would have been embarrassed directly after the abduction and possibly adjusted his recollection accordingly.
If that was the case, it could mean there was only a 20 minute abduction window between 21.10 and 21.30.
There is also one other statement that really bugs me - Neil Berry claims a girl helped him and Raj erect a cot some time between 19.00 and 20:00 on 3rd May. Neil claimed her boyfriend worked for the maintenance dept and was called “Rob”. Yet there is no maintenance man called Rob - in fact I don’t think any member of staff was called Rob. (Neil may have remember the name incorrectly). However, from the other statements I can only find two maintenance workers who mention girlfriends that worked at the complex - Tiago and Nuno (Hayley May Crawford was Nuno's boyfriend - not sure who Tiago’s girlfriend was).
Anyway, Hayley’s statement does not fit with Neil's timeline and Tiago says he stayed at his girlfriend’s house in Burgau that night - and that they both learned about the abduction on their way to work the following day. Yet the other maintenance worker Miguel says that on 3rd May at 18.20 he travelled in the company of Tiago to Burgau. (He does not mention Tiago's girlfriend, so I am not sure if she was still working or already at home).
If the girl Neil Berry talks about was on duty between 19.00 and 20.00, I can only assume she was likely doing a late shift and would have learned about the abduction - yet from what I can see from the maintenance workers, only Nuno (someone called him looking for a torch) and Silvia Batista’s husband admit to learning about the incident on the actual night - the other maintenance workers seemed to learned about it the following morning - mostly I think from the head of maintenance). Anyhow, maybe its a "nothing burger"…..but it annoys me that I can’t work out who the girl is!
-
The maintenance man whose girlfriend helped erect the travel cot was called Robert Cook. He was a Mark Warner staff member. There is no statement from him in the files.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P4/04_VOLUME_IVa_Page_852.jpg
-
Nuno -
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NLNO-CONCEIGAO.htm Name "NUNO FILIPE GUERREIRO DA CONCEICAO"
-
From 'a room with a view', there are 3 distinct windows of opportunity.
Could you identify them please?
-
I will have to consult with the boss over where the line is drawn. Other boards I've posted on here eg Bamber, Rettendon Murders aka Essex Boys and Jill Dando have been fairly relaxed. As a moderator I prefer not to censor posts unless it is absolutely necessary. I like to encourage all opinions and views.
Do you need to use the word lie? Can you not just say I believe Amaral is wrong and explain why you believe this to be the case?
Exactly Holly. Some posters like to goad by invoking the lie word and that is why their posts get wiped. There is always a better way to frame a reply if only posters would put a little thought into it.
-
Exactly Holly. Some posters like to goad by invoking the lie word and that is why their posts get wiped.
amaral was found guilty of false testimony...thats lying
-
Exactly Holly. Some posters like to goad by invoking the lie word and that is why their posts get wiped. There is always a better way to frame a reply if only posters would put a little thought into it.
Slarti accused Clarence of lying, is this acceptable? Also what offensive language did I use recently to merit a 10% warning? Please pm me.
-
amaral was found guilty of false testimony...thats lying
It's called perjury.
-
Slarti accused Clarence of lying, is this acceptable? Also what offensive language did I use recently to merit a 10% warning? Please pm me.
You don't call other members a liar!
-
It's called perjury.
Perjury is surely lying in court?
-
It's called perjury.
Ive got the court verdict ....false testimony...same as perjury...lying under oath
-
You don't call other members a liar!
I thought it might be that. it was a joke FGS!! You have to see these things in context. Jassi said that all supporters are keen on screaming “liar” all the time, and Imwas simply making her point for her. Oh well, never mind. At least I know now.
-
So we have a perp in a room with a view. The room had to be to the east of Block 5 to see the side gate. It had to be north of the Tapas to see into the complex. It probably had to be above the ground floor too. Block 6 seems to be the obvious place for this watcher, but most of Block 6 couldn't see the side gate.
They then had to have a reason for going out for some time. Did they return acting naturally? Surely not; most people think it was impossible for the McCanns to act naturally if soomething had happened before they arrived at the Tapas.
-
I would think your “room with a view” theory is as likely to be a member of staff as a guest. As in my opinion, if it was an abduction scenario then the MOST likely reason to open a shutter that was not used to either enter or exit, may have been to detract from it looking like an “inside job” , i.e. use of a key. (Like Sadie I don't believe the sliding door was used - too many stairs, too much light etc.) (&^&
When you say "member of staff as a guest" do you mean a staff member that was staying in one of the holiday apartments? But by the McCanns own admission the patio door was left unlocked so no key required. Experts in the following docu visited PDL and the apartment at night. You can see how dark the steps are leading down to road; then take a couple of steps on the footpath, along the alley and up another alley between the two blocks which takes you into the car park. What could be easier?!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khP0dEsZaug - watch 14 mins in to 18 mins. Watch the full 4 mins.
I personally believe that in an abduction scenario there was more than one perp - but at least one of them worked at the Ocean Club. (The wages that some of them mention seem very low…so I guess if there was the possibility of financial gain, it may have been hard to resist - especially if you were mainly a look out person etc.).
Yes you may be right there may well have been more than one perp either same sex or different. I would not rule out a woman being involved. I would also not rule out some seemingly nice middle class person(s) staying in an attractive looking apartment either. The fact workers at OC may have been low paid might or might not be a feature. There are millions of low paid workers all over the globe and most don't resort to child abduction.
This could also explain also why the keys for block 5 supposedly mysteriously disappeared from the maintenance department for at least a period of time during that particular week. (This was reported in the media years later, which was also odd because they were supposedly under lock and key in a safe that could only be accessed by maintenance workers).
I've seen in other cases there are always red herrings. Did anyone check with maintenance whether or not any work was carried out on any of the apartments in block 5?
Additionally, on the Wednesday evening Rachel Oldfield was home ill directly next door to 5A. She heard no crying….so Madeleine may have been confused about which night she had actually woken. (That being the case, then the two evenings noted for disturbances i.e. Tuesday and Thursday, would have been on two of the nights that the entirety of the Tapas group were together at dinner. I think the only other night was Monday, but that was also the first time in the holiday that they had all dined together, without the children as the Sunday night Matt Oldfield was ill).
I read RO's WS but don't recall her saying she stayed in on the Wed eve but I'm new to the case any you probably no more of the detail than I do. Assuming RO was in maybe she was asleep? Mrs Fenn heard MM crying on 1st and MM said to KM on Thu why didn't you come when Shaun and I were crying so that's Tue and Wed eve not Tue and Thu eve?
Talking of Matt, his check on 3rd May bugs me not just because he said the door was ajar but because his wife claimed in one of her statements that her husband had checked the parents room to see if M was sleeping there. Matt does not mention this in his statement. He claims that the door was ajar, that he didn’t enter the room but observed both twins and that he was distracted by books on his way out. However, due to the nature of the fabric surrounding the travel cots - he would only have seen both twins if he came further into the room, than he seems to have remembered. So I believe that if his wife’s statement is correct - I can only imagine that some part of his subconscious may have clocked that M was not in the room....but maybe after checking the parents room - he became temporarily distracted by the books and left without re-checking. If that is the case, in all likelihood he would have been embarrassed directly after the abduction and possibly adjusted his recollection accordingly.
Again I don't recall reading in RO's ws that MO checked in McCanns room. I thought MO acknowledged that he did not physically observe MM from his vantage point which was limited to the twins?
If that was the case, it could mean there was only a 20 minute abduction window between 21.10 and 21.30.
How long do you think it would take to enter the unlocked patio door and leave with MM? She may well have had tape put across her mouth and then bundled into a sports holdall or small suitcase.
There is also one other statement that really bugs me - Neil Berry claims a girl helped him and Raj erect a cot some time between 19.00 and 20:00 on 3rd May. Neil claimed her boyfriend worked for the maintenance dept and was called “Rob”. Yet there is no maintenance man called Rob - in fact I don’t think any member of staff was called Rob. (Neil may have remember the name incorrectly). However, from the other statements I can only find two maintenance workers who mention girlfriends that worked at the complex - Tiago and Nuno (Hayley May Crawford was Nuno's boyfriend - not sure who Tiago’s girlfriend was).
Anyway, Hayley’s statement does not fit with Neil's timeline and Tiago says he stayed at his girlfriend’s house in Burgau that night - and that they both learned about the abduction on their way to work the following day. Yet the other maintenance worker Miguel says that on 3rd May at 18.20 he travelled in the company of Tiago to Burgau. (He does not mention Tiago's girlfriend, so I am not sure if she was still working or already at home).
If the girl Neil Berry talks about was on duty between 19.00 and 20.00, I can only assume she was likely doing a late shift and would have learned about the abduction - yet from what I can see from the maintenance workers, only Nuno (someone called him looking for a torch) and Silvia Batista’s husband admit to learning about the incident on the actual night - the other maintenance workers seemed to learned about it the following morning - mostly I think from the head of maintenance). Anyhow, maybe its a "nothing burger"…..but it annoys me that I can’t work out who the girl is!
I've no idea about any of the above. As I said I'm new to the case so can only look at the big picture at the moment not the detail which may well be where the answers are!
-
So we have a perp in a room with a view. The room had to be to the east of Block 5 to see the side gate. It had to be north of the Tapas to see into the complex. It probably had to be above the ground floor too. Block 6 seems to be the obvious place for this watcher, but most of Block 6 couldn't see the side gate.
They then had to have a reason for going out for some time. Did they return acting naturally? Surely not; most people think it was impossible for the McCanns to act naturally if soomething had happened before they arrived at the Tapas.
Block 6 would seem logical. Or perhaps the building at the top of the road?
One of Heri's pics:
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/hg/1/1026_1050/PB021116.JPG)
-
Block 6 would seem logical. Or perhaps the building at the top of the road?
One of Heri's pics:
(http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/hg/1/1026_1050/PB021116.JPG)
I don't think there were any OC guests in the building at the top of the road?
-
This photo seems to capture the whole area?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=1074.msg16127#msg16127
-
I don't think there were any OC guests in the building at the top of the road?
Did the building at the top of the road have the same patio doors? The criteria needs to be:
- Knew children were home alone
- Knew T9 were at Tapas every night from 8.30pm to latish
- Knew the patio doors were unlocked by virtue of the fact the McCanns were entering and exiting them every 30 mins or so.
-
I don't think there were any OC guests in the building at the top of the road?
Might not have been a guest, but a resident, or a private holiday rental?
-
Did the building at the top of the road have the same patio doors? The criteria needs to be:
- Knew children were home alone
- Knew T9 were at Tapas every night from 8.30pm to latish
- Knew the patio doors were unlocked by virtue of the fact the McCanns were entering and exiting them every 30 mins or so.
May I suggest that you visit the timeline thread? The gaps available for a perp to leave the 'room with a view', get to 5A, grab MM and escape were very small.
-
I don't think there were any OC guests in the building at the top of the road?
Here is the bald playground man, Mr. T***** P**** on May 4 2007
I don't know if he stayed in that building, I have not checked it up in the files..(http://)
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Here is the bald playground man, Mr. T***** P**** on May 4 2007
I don't know if he stayed in that building, I have not checked it up in the files..(http://)
g29,according to a tapas booking sheet,is that, that building?
-
May I suggest that you visit the timeline thread? The gaps available for a perp to leave the 'room with a view', get to 5A, grab MM and escape were very small.
Will do.
I set up a test at home using a similar scenario ie entering and exiting same sort of gates, doors etc with a teddy bear including opening an internal blind and window and was able to do in 80 seconds. This included applying tape to the bear's mouth but I didn't place it in a suitcase or holdall. You could certainly do the lot in under 2 minutes no problem at all.
-
Could you identify them please?
1. When starters and mains were being ordered.
2. When starters were served and consumed.
3. When mains were served and consumed.
-
Will do.
I set up a test at home using a similar scenario ie entering and exiting same sort of gates, doors etc with a teddy bear including opening an internal blind and window and was able to do in 80 seconds. This included applying tape to the bear's mouth but I didn't place it in a suitcase or holdall. You could certainly do the lot in under 2 minutes no problem at all.
o
That, of course, isn't the whole story. At some point your perp has to leave the room with a view and go to the gate of 5A During that journey they can't see what's happening. For all they know a member of the T9 left the Tapas as they left their view, reached 5A before them and is now inside.
-
Will do.
I set up a test at home using a similar scenario ie entering and exiting same sort of gates, doors etc with a teddy bear including opening an internal blind and window and was able to do in 80 seconds. This included applying tape to the bear's mouth but I didn't place it in a suitcase or holdall. You could certainly do the lot in under 2 minutes no problem at all.
You did what? Can you imagine if your SO came in mid bear taping?
-
You did what? Can you imagine if your SO came in mid bear taping?
LOL
Good on Holly, though. :)
-
Here is the bald playground man, Mr. T***** P**** on May 4 2007
I don't know if he stayed in that building, I have not checked it up in the files..(http://)
The trees outside block 5 have not yet been cut down in that photograph ... I think they are too dense from that position to allow a clear view of either Madeleine's bedroom window or the front door.
There are sight lines from block 6 as well as from residences in the car park where the GNR dogs lost the trail they were following ... and we know witnesses have described men on foot taking an interest in the Mccann apartment ... who as far as I know have not been traced.
-
o
That, of course, isn't the whole story. At some point your perp has to leave the room with a view and go to the gate of 5A During that journey they can't see what's happening. For all they know a member of the T9 left the Tapas as they left their view, reached 5A before them and is now inside.
Two men, one is acting as lookout, mobile phone on vibrate to alert abductor of impending danger.
-
o
That, of course, isn't the whole story. At some point your perp has to leave the room with a view and go to the gate of 5A During that journey they can't see what's happening. For all they know a member of the T9 left the Tapas as they left their view, reached 5A before them and is now inside.
No not necessarily. If 2 working together 1 could remain in the apartment and use a light/torch as a signal to the actual abductor eg two light flashes = T9 about to start their starters, possibly using binoculars. If solo he/she may well have hid inside apartment, garden or alley waiting for a McCann check to be over knowing he/she would have 30 mins.
JT/ROB/FO/MO were carrying out their checks via the front. The perp only needed a clear second or two from the alley to the side gate. Is it possible the perp climbed over the wall from the alley into the back garden? I'm assuming the garden then leads up to the balcony?
-
Two men, one is acting as lookout, mobile phone on vibrate to alert abductor of impending danger.
But didn't those crappy police check all mobile phone activity for instances of just that?
-
No not necessarily. If 2 working together 1 could remain in the apartment and use a light/torch as a signal to the actual abductor eg two light flashes = T9 about to start their starters, possibly using binoculars. If solo he/she may well have hid inside apartment, garden or alley waiting for a McCann check to be over knowing he/she would have 30 mins.
JT/ROB/FO/MO were carrying out their checks via the front. The perp only needed a clear second or two from the alley to the side gate. Is it possible the perp climbed over the wall from the alley into the back garden? I'm assuming the garden then leads up to the balcony?
This is all speculation, isn't it? Hit a glitch, invent an extra perp. Perhaps one day someone will manage to present an abduction story which has been carefully thought out, fits all the facts and makes sense.
-
Does anyone have any images showing the back garden at 5A and an explanation about how it connects with the rest of the apartment? Thanks.
-
This is all speculation, isn't it? Hit a glitch, invent an extra perp. Perhaps one day someone will manage to present an abduction story which has been carefully thought out, fits all the facts and makes sense.
What isn't plausible or possible about my theories? I presented two theories: 2 working together and 1 solo.
-
But didn't those crappy police check all mobile phone activity for instances of just that?
I believe so, yes. What did they uncover?
-
This is all speculation, isn't it? Hit a glitch, invent an extra perp. Perhaps one day someone will manage to present an abduction story which has been carefully thought out, fits all the facts and makes sense.
Likewise I live in hope that someone will present a plausible and cohesive story of parental involvement. 12 years on and it’s never been done.
Frankly I don’t see what you’re struggling with.
-
This is all speculation, isn't it? Hit a glitch, invent an extra perp. Perhaps one day someone will manage to present an abduction story which has been carefully thought out, fits all the facts and makes sense.
like the child snatched from her bath...which you know about
-
I believe so, yes. What did they uncover?
Nada.
-
Nada.
Really? I thought they made some people arguidos because of their phone activity in the area.
-
Really? I thought they made some people arguidos because of their phone activity in the area.
Eh? You're playing on my total lack of rigor. I'm going to have to trawl the internet now for the thing I read 13 months ago about that phone analysis they did looking for suspicious patterns.
Kinell.
-
Eh? You're playing on my total lack of rigor. I'm going to have to trawl the internet now for the thing I read 13 months ago about that phone analysis they did looking for suspicious patterns.
Kinell.
No need to trawl the internet, someone will be alomg soon to put one or both of us right.
-
Nuno -
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NLNO-CONCEIGAO.htm Name "NUNO FILIPE GUERREIRO DA CONCEICAO"
He lives in Lincoln so it would be very easy for the Detectives to go there and have a chat with him.
He needs to clarify a few things. imo.
And I wonder if those two cars they were using that evening (Opel Corsa and the service vehicle) are still on the roads somewhere.
-
Really? I thought they made some people arguidos because of their phone activity in the area.
I think that was some local burglars interviewed and eliminated by SY?
-
He lives in Lincoln so it would be very easy for the Detectives to go there and have a chat with him.
He needs to clarify a few things. imo.
And I wonder if those two cars they were using that evening (Opel Corsa and the service vehicle) are still on the roads somewhere.
What was the girl's name, do you remember?
-
I think that was some local burglars interviewed and eliminated by SY?
That's the sort of activity that could have woken Madeleine. They don't have to be involved with the abduction as such.
-
What was the girl's name, do you remember?
Do you mean the girlfriend he is married to nowadays?
H*yley Cr*wford.
-
Do you mean the girlfriend he is married to nowadays?
Hayley Crawford.
I am not sure that mentioning the name of his wife is a good idea.
-
I am not sure that mentioning the name of his wife is a good idea.
No, maybe not but she was an OC worker and was included in the original investigation and it's the same woman who was with him on the evening of May 3rd in Pdl.
-
Do you mean the girlfriend he is married to nowadays?
Hayley Crawford.
That's the one http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/HAYLEY-CRAWFORD.htm
How would you know about their martial status?
-
No, maybe not but she was an OC worker and was included in the original investigation and it's the same woman who was with him on the evening of May 3rd in Pdl.
Sorry, I didn't realise that, my bad.
However, am I right in thinking that they live in England? If so than perhaps best avoided.
-
That's the one http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/HAYLEY-CRAWFORD.htm
How would you know about their martial status?
Everything is possible to find out these days if you know where to search.
-
Everything is possible to find out these days if you know where to search.
If it is public knowledge why are you and Eleanor shy about telling me?
-
Sorry, I didn't realise that, my bad.
However, am I right in thinking that they live in England? If so than perhaps best avoided.
Yes, they live in England and seem's to be a nice happy family so it's dual feelings to discuss this but on the other hand, the withheld information and the missing ~20-25 minutes in one of their statements should cause some kind of a reaction within the detectives, especially if this would be true.
(http://)
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Yes, they live in England and seem's to be a nice happy family so it's dual feelings to discuss this but on the other hand, the withheld information and the missing ~20-25 minutes in one of their statements should cause some kind of a reaction within the detectives, especially if this would be true.
(http://)
I have no doubt that Operation Grange has this in hand without any help from us. So I think we should avoid any chance of Libel.
-
Yes, they live in England and seem's to be a nice happy family so it's dual feelings to discuss this but on the other hand, the withheld information and the missing ~20-25 minutes in one of their statements should cause some kind of a reaction within the detectives, especially if this would be true.
(http://)
Have you established which route NC travelled back to Lagos from Rua Direita?
-
Have you established which route NC travelled back to Lagos from Rua Direita?
Just goes to show that there were many people going about their legitimate business on that night about whom little is known; in my opinion anyone wishing to keep their movements secret would have had no problem in doing so.
-
Have you established which route NC travelled back to Lagos from Rua Direita?
No I have not, but I would say these ~20-25 missing minutes was a minimum.
He said he left for his resident at 20:45 but she said they went to the reception at 21:00 to collect a service vehicle and travelled home in separate vehicles and arrived at about 21:15.
Was it she who came home at 21:15?
Or did both arrived at home at 21:15?
Did they both drove the same route on their way home?
A couple of more odd things in his statement is that he was talking about himself only.
No mention at all from him that his girlfriend was with him that evening when did the job at the OC.
No mention from him that they went together in same car from their home in Lagos to the OC.
Was it already planned before they left home that they would stop to collect a service vehicle on their way home?
If not, why did not NC drove the car himself from their home to the OC?
Was there a special reason why she had to drive him to perform a small maintenance job?
I've a theory(or questions maybe) why both of them left for OC in the same car and why he was only talking about himself.
-
No I have not, but I would say these ~20-25 missing minutes was a minimum.
He said he left for his resident at 20:45 but she said they went to the reception at 21:00 to collect a service vehicle and travelled home in separate vehicles and arrived at about 21:15.
Was it she who came home at 21:15?
Or did both arrived at home at 21:15?
Did they both drove the same route on their way home?
A couple of more odd things in his statement is that he was talking about himself only.
No mention at all from him that his girlfriend was with him that evening when did the job at the OC.
No mention from him that they went together in same car from their home in Lagos to the OC.
Was it already planned before they left home that they would stop to collect a service vehicle on their way home?
If not, why did not NC drove the car himself from their home to the OC?
Was there a special reason why she had to drive him to perform a small maintenance job?
I've a theory(or questions maybe) why both of them left for OC in the same car and why he was only talking about himself.
I hope SY ask the same questions.
-
Everything is possible to find out these days if you know where to search.
Do you have an entry card to GCHQ 8(0(*
-
Do you have an entry card to GCHQ 8(0(*
Nope, but actually I have been in contact with a guy on this case for years, he is a former GCHQ traffic analyst and interpreter of voice communications.
I've not come any closer to GCHQ than this. 8((()*/
-
Nope, but actually I have been in contact with a guy on this case for years, he is a former GCHQ traffic analyst and interpreter of voice communications.
I've not come any closer to GCHQ than this. 8((()*/
Is there any evidence it is a feature in this case?
I understand a lot of mobile calls were analysed to no avail?
A lot of people were forensically aware of cell site analysis by 2007 due to the Omagh bombing in 1998.
-
No I have not, but I would say these ~20-25 missing minutes was a minimum.
He said he left for his resident at 20:45 but she said they went to the reception at 21:00 to collect a service vehicle and travelled home in separate vehicles and arrived at about 21:15.
Was it she who came home at 21:15?
Or did both arrived at home at 21:15?
Did they both drove the same route on their way home?
A couple of more odd things in his statement is that he was talking about himself only.
No mention at all from him that his girlfriend was with him that evening when did the job at the OC.
No mention from him that they went together in same car from their home in Lagos to the OC.
Was it already planned before they left home that they would stop to collect a service vehicle on their way home?
If not, why did not NC drove the car himself from their home to the OC?
Was there a special reason why she had to drive him to perform a small maintenance job?
I've a theory(or questions maybe) why both of them left for OC in the same car and why he was only talking about himself.
I believe that, in order to travel back to Lagos after leaving the main OC reception on Rua Direita, NC would have had to turn left into a one-way system which would not have taken him back up Rua dFG Martins & past 5A again.
Madeleine would have had to ventured quite a way, unseen, to have arrived in the same location as the service vehicle he picked up.
Please note that NC was questioned in his native language by a PJ Inspector, which may explain the brevity of his statement. HC was questioned via an interpreter (Murat).
-
I believe that, in order to travel back to Lagos after leaving the main OC reception on Rua Direita, NC would have had to turn left into a one-way system which would not have taken him back up Rua dFG Martins & past 5A again.
Madeleine would have had to ventured quite a way, unseen, to have arrived in the same location as the service vehicle he picked up.
Please note that NC was questioned in his native language by a PJ Inspector, which may explain the brevity of his statement. HC was questioned via an interpreter (Murat).
One simply heads east on the old road to Lagos.
-
No I have not, but I would say these ~20-25 missing minutes was a minimum.
He said he left for his resident at 20:45 but she said they went to the reception at 21:00 to collect a service vehicle and travelled home in separate vehicles and arrived at about 21:15.
Was it she who came home at 21:15?
Or did both arrived at home at 21:15?
Did they both drove the same route on their way home?
A couple of more odd things in his statement is that he was talking about himself only.
No mention at all from him that his girlfriend was with him that evening when did the job at the OC.
No mention from him that they went together in same car from their home in Lagos to the OC.
Was it already planned before they left home that they would stop to collect a service vehicle on their way home?
If not, why did not NC drove the car himself from their home to the OC?
Was there a special reason why she had to drive him to perform a small maintenance job?
I've a theory(or questions maybe) why both of them left for OC in the same car and why he was only talking about himself.
I would like to know this theory of yours it does sound interesting...
"One simply heads east on the old road to Lagos." who MBM or the couple?
I would hope local garages would have been contacted if this was part of the investigation.
-
I would like to know this theory of yours it does sound interesting...
"One simply heads east on the old road to Lagos." who MBM or the couple?
I would hope local garages would have been contacted if this was part of the investigation.
The old road is the M537. It runs from Burgau in the west, into the centre of Luz, along Rua Direita past the main OC reception, then up to the EN125 junction beside Boa Vista. One can turn right onto the EN125, to head into Lagos, or stick on the M537, and head into the centre of Lagos that way.
Both options pass the one and only petrol station on the west side of Lagos.
We would never pick a loop around the one-way system in Luz, from the OC, when it is much shorter and easier just to head along the old road.
-
Anyone who may have been "holed up" in G5J that week (the apartment with the rotting food in an open fridge) would have had a good view from their rear balcony of the path leading from Tapas reception along to the bar/restaurant. A pair of binoculars would have been the only item required to observe the target parents entering Tapas at 8.30pm. The occupant would also have had a good view from the landing outside their front door of anyone leaving or accessing the block through the car park.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Anyone who may have been "holed up" in G5J that week (the apartment with the rotting food in an open fridge) would have had a good view from their rear balcony of the path leading from Tapas reception along to the bar/restaurant. A pair of binoculars would have been the only item required to observe the target parents entering Tapas at 8.30pm. The occupant would also have had a good view from the landing outside their front door of anyone leaving or accessing the block through the car park.
Can you recall when the rotten meat was found?
-
Can you recall when the rotten meat was found?
10th may,fridge door was found to be open.
The apartment was known to have been unoccupied for sometime.
-
10th may,fridge door was found to be open.
The apartment was known to have been unoccupied for sometime.
Weird though , but probably not related to the McCann case.
-
Anyone who may have been "holed up" in G5J that week (the apartment with the rotting food in an open fridge) would have had a good view from their rear balcony of the path leading from Tapas reception along to the bar/restaurant. A pair of binoculars would have been the only item required to observe the target parents entering Tapas at 8.30pm. The occupant would also have had a good view from the landing outside their front door of anyone leaving or accessing the block through the car park.
Great idea Misty, how ever if this was the case why jemmy shutters if they knew the door was left unlocked? We always come back to the parents story.
-
Anyone who may have been "holed up" in G5J that week (the apartment with the rotting food in an open fridge) would have had a good view from their rear balcony of the path leading from Tapas reception along to the bar/restaurant. A pair of binoculars would have been the only item required to observe the target parents entering Tapas at 8.30pm. The occupant would also have had a good view from the landing outside their front door of anyone leaving or accessing the block through the car park.
Both GNR dogs followed a path to that door and the reason for that was put down to the fridge contents. Whatever, it seems that someone left that apartment in a bit of a hurry.
I wonder why the investigators showed little curiosity about why that was and who they were considering a little girl had gone missing from an apartment a few doors away.
-
Great idea Misty, how ever if this was the case why jemmy shutters if they knew the door was left unlocked? We always come back to the parents story.
I don't suppose that you could come up with anything even remotely pertinent, could you?
-
Great idea Misty, how ever if this was the case why jemmy shutters if they knew the door was left unlocked? We always come back to the parents story.
We now know that the shutters weren't jemmied.
The problem with using the patio door was that it was the same door the parents were using when checking on the children. The patio was bathed in street light and the exit stairs led out onto a road where there could be passers-by.
This wasn't the Hatton Garden heist but planning & intel were required. To me it makes sense that someone secretly observed the Tapas 9 for 2 or 3 days from G5J. Unfortunately we don't know who owned that apartment or who had access to it. We do know that other OC apartments were accessed by burglars, either with or without copy keys, so why not 5A or 5J?
-
Both GNR dogs followed a path to that door and the reason for that was put down to the fridge contents. Whatever, it seems that someone left that apartment in a bit of a hurry.
I wonder why the investigators showed little curiosity about why that was and who they were considering a little girl had gone missing from an apartment a few doors away.
IMO PJ weren't overly concerned because the apartment was said to have been unoccupied on May 3rd but that's no excuse for not suspecting 5J could be a potential crime scene when the rotting food was found.
-
Great idea Misty, how ever if this was the case why jemmy shutters if they knew the door was left unlocked? We always come back to the parents story.
Do you ever read anything I write to help you?
Several times I have listed a number of feasible reasons for an abductor to deliberately open the window and shutters
- Escape route
- To hide the fact that entry and exit with Madeleine was via an unlocked front door, so OC Personnel involved.
- To give instructions to the lifter and inspire confidence.
- To pass things (drugs?) thru to the lifter
- To confuse the PJ and family, so that the Golden Hours were lost looking for a wandering child rather than an abducted one. Give impression that Madeleine decided to leave off her own volition and went via te window
- To enable lifter to keep a better eye open for someone coming.
There were several more.
MODS: Please could I suggest that if Mistaken (or anuy other poster) repeatedly repeats the same old questions designed IMO to deceive and time waste, then her post be deleted. And she be penalized. Thank you.
-
Do you ever read anything I write to help you?
Several times I have listed a number of feasible reasons for an abductor to deliberately open the window and shutters
- Escape route
- To hide the fact that entry and exit with Madeleine was via an unlocked front door, so OC Personnel involved.
- To give instructions to the lifter and inspire confidence.
- To pass things (drugs?) thru to the lifter
- To confuse the PJ and family, so that the Golden Hours were lost looking for a wandering child rather than an abducted one. Give impression that Madeleine decided to leave off her own volition and went via te window
- To enable lifter to keep a better eye open for someone coming.
There were several more.
MODS: Please could I suggest that if Mistaken (or anuy other poster) repeatedly repeats the same old questions designed IMO to deceive and time waste, then her post be deleted. And she be penalized. Thank you.
You could suggest it but no one will take a blind bit of notice...any quite rightly so.
-
We now know that the shutters weren't jemmied.
The problem with using the patio door was that it was the same door the parents were using when checking on the children. The patio was bathed in street light and the exit stairs led out onto a road where there could be passers-by.
This wasn't the Hatton Garden heist but planning & intel were required. To me it makes sense that someone secretly observed the Tapas 9 for 2 or 3 days from G5J. Unfortunately we don't know who owned that apartment or who had access to it. We do know that other OC apartments were accessed by burglars, either with or without copy keys, so why not 5A or 5J?
Hi Misty
Your idea is a good one, but I don't think that the walled walkway to all the Tapas flats was visible to a watcher and most especially the most eastern (5A).
I am not sure that A watcher in 5J could even see any of the Tapas 9, or an abductor, cross the car park even.
It's all to do with the convex shape of the whole block, but additionally the central tower block stands several feet forward of the main block. I think that this might well block the view of the people walking across the car park to people in 5J.
I have only worked this out from Google Earth .... and it needs checking. If there is any interest, would SIL be kind enough to check this TY.
-
Hi Misty
Your idea is a good one, but I don't think that the walled walkway to all the Tapas flats was visible to a watcher and most especially the most eastern (5A).
I am not sure that A watcher in 5J could even see any of the Tapas 9, or an abductor, cross the car park even.
It's all to do with the convex shape of the whole block, but additionally the central tower block stands several feet forward of the main block. I think that this might well block the view of the people walking across the car park to people in 5J.
I have only worked this out from Google Earth .... and it needs checking. If there is any interest, would SIL be kind enough to check this TY.
A watcher didn't need to have direct sight of the walled walkway imo, Sadie; he/she only needed to watch the people crossing the car park to the exit or from the exit to the central access area. None of the Tapas 9 were residing in the western end of Block 5 & I'm not sure anyone else was either.
If you watch the first 15secs of this video you can see the balcony & potential view from it.
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/exterior-shots-of-gerry-and-kate-mccann-departing-the-news-footage/487715646?adppopup=true
-
A watcher didn't need to have direct sight of the walled walkway imo, Sadie; he/she only needed to watch the people crossing the car park to the exit or from the exit to the central access area. None of the Tapas 9 were residing in the western end of Block 5 & I'm not sure anyone else was either.
If you watch the first 15secs of this video you can see the balcony & potential view from it.
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/exterior-shots-of-gerry-and-kate-mccann-departing-the-news-footage/487715646?adppopup=true
So they would be only checking one side of the apartment block at a time?
-
Moderation
I have this morning 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. Posters who continue to flaunt the rules despite this warning will be subject to a ban without further notice.
-
A watcher didn't need to have direct sight of the walled walkway imo, Sadie; he/she only needed to watch the people crossing the car park to the exit or from the exit to the central access area. None of the Tapas 9 were residing in the western end of Block 5 & I'm not sure anyone else was either.
If you watch the first 15secs of this video you can see the balcony & potential view from it.
https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/video/exterior-shots-of-gerry-and-kate-mccann-departing-the-news-footage/487715646?adppopup=true
If one bears in mind that a walker with a purpose, say, of checking their children, will take the shortest route, cutting corners etc. He/she will come into the car park absolutely at the eastern end of the drive in entrance before heading off over the car park. I am not at all sure that a watcher on the balcony /walkwa by 5J would be able to see any one going across the car parkbecause they may be out of sight due to the tower at the middle of the building hiding that parent.
It is difficult to be certain from GE.
Maybe next time SIL passes, he could eye it up from the eastern end of that drive in entrance, then we could be certain
Thank you SIL in anticipation.
ETA : GE street scene confirms the visibility.
-
Do you ever read anything I write to help you?
Several times I have listed a number of feasible reasons for an abductor to deliberately open the window and shutters
- Escape route
- To hide the fact that entry and exit with Madeleine was via an unlocked front door, so OC Personnel involved.
- To give instructions to the lifter and inspire confidence.
- To pass things (drugs?) thru to the lifter
- To confuse the PJ and family, so that the Golden Hours were lost looking for a wandering child rather than an abducted one. Give impression that Madeleine decided to leave off her own volition and went via te window
- To enable lifter to keep a better eye open for someone coming.
There were several more.
MODS: Please could I suggest that if Mistaken (or any other poster) repeatedly repeats the same old questions, the ones designed IMO to deceive and time waste, then her post be deleted. And she be penalized.
Thank you.
Well the mods have had 24 hours now to consider your suggestion and I’m afraid it seems to be a no.
-
So they would be only checking one side of the apartment block at a time?
Hypothetically, once it had been established that the parents always left & re-entered 5A by the rear patio door the main focus would have been the pattern of movements in the front car park. Over 3 nights it wouldn't have been too hard to work out that no babysitters were looking after the children & that the various families sat at a big table in the Tapas Bar. It's possible Rachel's presence in 5B on the Wednesday night prevented an intrusion that evening.
All IMO.
-
If one bears in mind that a walker with a purpose, say, of checking their children, will take the shortest route, cutting corners etc. He/she will come into the car park absolutely at the eastern end of the drive in entrance before heading off over the car park. I am not at all sure that a watcher on the balcony /walkwa by 5J would be able to see any one going across the car parkbecause they may be out of sight due to the tower at the middle of the building hiding that parent.
It is difficult to be certain from GE.
Maybe next time SIL passes, he could eye it up from the eastern end of that drive in entrance, then we could be certain
Thank you SIL in anticipation.
Run this video clip from 58sec & you will see a GNR dog handler being filmed entering 5A car park.
https://www.gettyimages.pt/detail/v%C3%ADdeo/exterior-shots-of-police-searching-the-grounds-of-filme-de-not%C3%ADcias/649701232
I have attached a screenshot of the point at which the balcony outside 5J is visible from ground level. IMO that area would have been a good potential observation point.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Run this video clip from 58sec & you will see a GNR dog handler being filmed entering 5A car park.
https://www.gettyimages.pt/detail/v%C3%ADdeo/exterior-shots-of-police-searching-the-grounds-of-filme-de-not%C3%ADcias/649701232
I have attached a screenshot of the point at which the balcony outside 5J is visible from ground level. IMO that area would have been a good potential observation point.
Did you see the man walking down the lane behind the apartments, 23 seconds into the video. It would be a piece of cake for a fit man to leap over that fence into the yard of 5A.
Yes that would give good view of the car park.
-
Do you ever read anything I write to help you?
Several times I have listed a number of feasible reasons for an abductor to deliberately open the window and shutters
- Escape route
- To hide the fact that entry and exit with Madeleine was via an unlocked front door, so OC Personnel involved.
- To give instructions to the lifter and inspire confidence.
- To pass things (drugs?) thru to the lifter
- To confuse the PJ and family, so that the Golden Hours were lost looking for a wandering child rather than an abducted one. Give impression that Madeleine decided to leave off her own volition and went via te window
- To enable lifter to keep a better eye open for someone coming.
There were several more.
MODS: Please could I suggest that if Mistaken (or anuy other poster) repeatedly repeats the same old questions designed IMO to deceive and time waste, then her post be deleted. And she be penalized. Thank you.
Be careful of what you wish for.
-
Run this video clip from 58sec & you will see a GNR dog handler being filmed entering 5A car park.
https://www.gettyimages.pt/detail/v%C3%ADdeo/exterior-shots-of-police-searching-the-grounds-of-filme-de-not%C3%ADcias/649701232
I have attached a screenshot of the point at which the balcony outside 5J is visible from ground level. IMO that area would have been a good potential observation point.
You are absolutely correct, misty. GE street scene confirms this
My apologies.
The trouble with GE 'birds eye' images are that they are not always shot from immediately above, but from an angle of possibly 70* at times. One sees the one face of the building, but the opposite side of the building is hidden by the exaggerated roof position. In this case the viewing point on that balcony is deeply hidden, by the roof, whilst one can see 5J on the south face of the block completely.
No need for SIL to go and check, thanks. The position is clear. misty is correct; this is another good viewing point.
-
I don't suppose that you could come up with anything even remotely pertinent, could you?
It is pertinent. it wasn't written for your approval.
The relevence being the jemmied shutters claim was made- now the suppoters want to dismiss it as some sort of accident of the tongue/ or wipe it from the story. It is THE MAIN REASON Kate gives for bringing the abductor into her vision of what happened which she has claimed for over 12 years! Therefore, it is very pertinant.
I respect you as a mod, as a poster not so much. As a person you seem ok to me.
I come here to discuss the case with like minded people, your opinion is wasted on me, but feel free to get the attention as being someone of importance on here.
-
Well the mods have had 24 hours now to consider your suggestion and I’m afraid it seems to be a no.
@)(++(* words just failed me... OMG
-
Did you see the man walking down the lane behind the apartments, 23 seconds into the video. It would be a piece of cake for a fit man to leap over that fence into the yard of 5A.
Yes that would give good view of the car park.
I did notice that too, Rob having previously had the impression the boundary wall was higher than it actually is. I thought it would be easier to go into 5B garden & climb over the wall from there.
-
Did you see the man walking down the lane behind the apartments, 23 seconds into the video. It would be a piece of cake for a fit man to leap over that fence into the yard of 5A.
Yes that would give good view of the car park.
The yard of 5a? At the bottom of the stairs? Where do you mean?
-
It is pertinent. it wasn't written for your approval.
The relevence being the jemmied shutters claim was made- now the suppoters want to dismiss it as some sort of accident of the tongue/ or wipe it from the story. It is THE MAIN REASON Kate gives for bringing the abductor into her vision of what happened which she has claimed for over 12 years! Therefore, it is very pertinant.
I respect you as a mod, as a poster not so much. As a person you seem ok to me.
I come here to discuss the case with like minded people, your opinion is wasted on me, but feel free to get the attention as being someone of importance on here.
No sniping , goading or name calling. That post just about breaks all three of the commandments.
-
No sniping , goading or name calling. That post just about breaks all three of the commandments.
To be fair that post was written in answer to what (in my opinion) was an off-topic goading and insulting post.
-
To be fair that post was written in answer to what (in my opinion) was an off-topic goading and insulting post.
This is why the sniping doesn't stop... Because posters think it's justified.... How about stopping and condemning all sniping whichever side it comes from... I really would like to see all mods Cross the party line and do this... It would lead to a better forum
-
Well the mods have had 24 hours now to consider your suggestion and I’m afraid it seems to be a no.
The role of a mod, as I see it, is not to micro-manage posts but to maintain the high level rules set out on the home.
-
It is pertinent. it wasn't written for your approval.
The relevence being the jemmied shutters claim was made- now the suppoters want to dismiss it as some sort of accident of the tongue/ or wipe it from the story. It is THE MAIN REASON Kate gives for bringing the abductor into her vision of what happened which she has claimed for over 12 years! Therefore, it is very pertinant.
I respect you as a mod, as a poster not so much. As a person you seem ok to me.
I come here to discuss the case with like minded people, your opinion is wasted on me, but feel free to get the attention as being someone of importance on here.
Apologies if I'm asking basic questions, I'm new and still learning, but who claimed the shutters had been jemmied and where is it documented?
-
The role of a mod, as I see it, is not to micro-manage posts but to maintain the high level rules set out on the home.
Indeed.
-
Apologies if I'm asking basic questions, I'm new and still learning, but who claimed the shutters had been jemmied and where is it documented?
It seems such a simple question doesn't it
Sceptics will claim Kate and Gerry although there is no record of them ever saying it
-
Apologies if I'm asking basic questions, I'm new and still learning, but who claimed the shutters had been jemmied and where is it documented?
Members of the McCann family, among others.
Google 'Mccann jemmied shutters' for more details.
-
The role of a mod, as I see it, is not to micro-manage posts but to maintain the high level rules set out on the home.
Are you a moderator on this section of the forum? Like I don't consider myself a moderator on the whole forum but just in the McCann section.
John issued some new rules, did you feel they applied to you?
-
It seems such a simple question doesn't it
Sceptics will claim Kate and Gerry although there is no record of them ever saying it
Sceptics have chosen to believe the McCann's friends and relatives, Supporters have chosen not to.
Gerry's sister, The Sun, 4th May'
“He said ’Madeleine’s been abducted, she’s been abducted’.
“The door was lying open, the window in the bedroom and the shutters had been jemmied open...
Jill Renwick, friend, Evening Standard 4th May,
The shutters had been broken open ...
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/NEWS_REPORT_INDEX.htm
-
It seems such a simple question doesn't it
Sceptics will claim Kate and Gerry although there is no record of them ever saying it
Which would surely mean that family members and friends were all mistaken in unison. Or were lying in unison. (Jill, Phil, et al)
-
Are you a moderator on this section of the forum? Like I don't consider myself a moderator on the whole forum but just in the McCann section.
John issued some new rules, did you feel they applied to you?
I think you'll find we're both off topic!
-
Do we think the use of the word "jemmy" is highly significant? If Gerry actually said "jemmy" what would that imply exactly? That he is a liar? Mistaken? Just using a turn of phrase to mean opened unlawfully? "Jemmied Shutters" has become one of those memes for this case, like "Ask The Dogs Sandra" and "Dogs Don't Lie" but does it have anything important to tell us? Or is it just used as a stick with which to beat Gerry McCann, who after all may not have actually used the word at all, but whose (no doubt frantic) phone conversation with a family member may have been interpreted by that same member to mean that the shutters had been jemmied and who told this to other family members and thus the legend was born. Is this the kind of thing that keeps people including the police awake at night do we think?
-
Which would surely mean that family members and friends were all mistaken in unison. Or were lying in unison. (Jill, Phil, et al)
Two points. It is obvious from the film of Trish Cameron and her mother that ‘jemmied’ is not a word that would willingly come to Trish’s mind, in fact she has trouble with the pronunciation, suggesting whoever she spoke to used the word. That person was Gerry.
Further we were told that by the time Gerry spoke to his sister he had already tried to raise the shutters from outside and found that he could. From that point he would have known that there was no need to jemmy anything, therefore why tell his sister that they had been ?
-
Do we think the use of the word "jemmy" is highly significant? If Gerry actually said "jemmy" what would that imply exactly? That he is a liar? Mistaken? Just using a turn of phrase to mean opened unlawfully? "Jemmied Shutters" has become one of those memes for this case, like "Ask The Dogs Sandra" and "Dogs Don't Lie" but does it have anything important to tell us? Or is it just used as a stick with which to beat Gerry McCann, who after all may not have actually used the word at all, but whose (no doubt frantic) phone conversation with a family member may have been interpreted by that same member to mean that the shutters had been jemmied and who told this to other family members and thus the legend was born. Is this the kind of thing that keeps people including the police awake at night do we think?
I’m sure it’s a signpost to more important issues.
-
Do we think the use of the word "jemmy" is highly significant? If Gerry actually said "jemmy" what would that imply exactly? That he is a liar? Mistaken? Just using a turn of phrase to mean opened unlawfully? "Jemmied Shutters" has become one of those memes for this case, like "Ask The Dogs Sandra" and "Dogs Don't Lie" but does it have anything important to tell us? Or is it just used as a stick with which to beat Gerry McCann, who after all may not have actually used the word at all, but whose (no doubt frantic) phone conversation with a family member may have been interpreted by that same member to mean that the shutters had been jemmied and who told this to other family members and thus the legend was born. Is this the kind of thing that keeps people including the police awake at night do we think?
Your degree of twisting suggests that you do think it important -IMO
-
Sceptics have chosen to believe the McCamm's friends and relatives, Supporters have chosen not to.
Gerry's sister, The Sin, 4th May'
“He said ’Madeleine’s been abducted, she’s been abducted’.
“The door was lying open, the window in the bedroom and the shutters had bee\n jemmied open...
Jill Renwick, friend, Evening Stndard 4th May,
The shutters had been broken open ...
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/NEWS_REPORT_INDEX.htm
But this is hardly reliable info. Were they told the shutters had been jemmied or was this just an assumption on their part made on the basis of late night tel calls in the immediate aftermath? Does anyone continue to believe the shutters were jemmied?
I've listened to an audio clip where Jill Renwick talks about the shutters but I can't recall whether she mentioned them being jemmied or not. I will endeavor to find it.
Is there any evidence the shutters were jemmied by way of the official investigations, forensic tests etc? I don't believe there is so the shutters were obviously not jemmied and wires have been crossed?
-
Two points. It is obvious from the film of Trish Cameron and her mother that ‘jemmied’ is not a word that would willingly come to Trish’s mind, in fact she has trouble with the pronunciation, suggesting whoever she spoke to used the word. That person was Gerry.
Further we were told that by the time Gerry spoke to his sister he had already tried to raise the shutters from outside and found that he could. From that point he would have known that there was no need to jemmy anything, therefore why tell his sister that they had been ?
Good points, well made. I forgot about that; she was unsure of the parlance herself and even looked a little embarrassed and apologetic using the term. She was repeating verbatim, despite not being familiar with the word itself.
Besides, you know when a shutter / door has been jemmied / levered / cracked open. It's a destructive act, and one that is carried out as a last resort - hence why supporters must insist that Gerry and Kate never actually said it.
Our abductor however, according now to Gerry, needn't have bothered to bring his crow bar, the shutters move freely from the outside apparently. Which is it?
-
But this is hardly reliable info. Were they told the shutters had been jemmied or was this just an assumption on their part made on the basis of late night tel calls in the immediate aftermath? Does anyone continue to believe the shutters were jemmied?
I've listened to an audio clip where Jill Renwick talks about the shutters but I can't recall whether she mentioned them being jemmied or not. I will endeavor to find it.
Is there any evidence the shutters were jemmied by way of the official investigations, forensic tests etc? I don't believe there is so the shutters were obviously not jemmied and wires have been crossed?
Afaiac... The mccanns thought the shutters were security shutters and therefore if they had been opened from the outside some degree of force must have been used... So when they said in frantic phone calls that the shutters had been forced this was repeated in Chinese whisper fashion and jemmied... Broken etc entered reality... Sceptics in general here don't accept this explanation and seem to want to suggest the mccanns lied
-
But this is hardly reliable info. Were they told the shutters had been jemmied or was this just an assumption on their part made on the basis of late night tel calls in the immediate aftermath? Does anyone continue to believe the shutters were jemmied?
I've listened to an audio clip where Jill Renwick talks about the shutters but I can't recall whether she mentioned them being jemmied or not. I will endeavor to find it.
Is there any evidence the shutters were jemmied by way of the official investigations, forensic tests etc? I don't believe there is so the shutters were obviously not jemmied and wires have been crossed?
I think it was a Kate Garraway ITV morning interview - Jill's using a word she has never encountered, and is a little embarrassed. I'll try to find the link.
-
Sceptics have chosen to believe the McCamm's friends and relatives, Supporters have chosen not to.
Gerry's sister, The Sin, 4th May'
“He said ’Madeleine’s been abducted, she’s been abducted’.
“The door was lying open, the window in the bedroom and the shutters had bee\n jemmied open...
Jill Renwick, friend, Evening Stndard 4th May,
The shutters had been broken open ...
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/NEWS_REPORT_INDEX.htm
I find this sceptic/supporter thing is unhelpful and rather childish. I don't wish to be pigeonholed in this way and prefer to remain objective looking at soft and hard facts.
I think it unlikely McCanns/T7 were directly responsible for MM's disappearance but I would be foolish to completely rule it out since I have no firm evidence to do so. And I most certainly do not want to be termed a 'supporter' especially since I know so little about the case.
-
I think it was a Kate Garraway ITV morning interview - Jill's using a word she has never encountered, and is a little embarrassed. I'll try to find the link.
There’s a whole thread on the subject here http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2724.15. You may find the interview there.
-
Afaiac... The mccanns thought the shutters were security shutters and therefore if they had been opened from the outside some degree of force must have been used... So when they said in frantic phone calls that the shutters had been forced this was repeated in Chinese whisper fashion and jemmied... Broken etc entered reality... Sceptics in general here don't accept this explanation and seem to want to suggest the mccanns lied
Ok thanks for the explanation.
-
Which would surely mean that family members and friends were all mistaken in unison. Or were lying in unison. (Jill, Phil, et al)
Or simply repeating what Gerry in his initial distraught state believed.
What I cant understand is why are you all making such a lot out of this Jemmied thing ?
Poor bloke must have been near out of his mind at that time, especially as he believed someone had broken in (to abduct his lovely daughter) At that time he thought that the shutters were a security measure and that they could not be opened from outside, so they had to have been forced/ jemmied. He must have very near demented with dreadful thoughts. At this time his thoughts would have been passed on to his friends.
Hence the unison. NORMAL in such circumstances IMO
They were more concerned about the search than examining the shutters .... and once the PJ and maybe the GNR got involved the place was taped off and they no longer could.
AIMO
-
Or simply repeating what Gerry in his initial distraught state believed.
What I cant understand is why are you all making such a lot out of this Jemmied thing ?
Poor bloke must have been near out of his mind at that time, especially as he believed someone had broken in (to abduct his lovely daughter) At that time he thought that the shutters were a security measure and that they could not be opened from outside, so they had to have been forced/ jemmied. He must have very near demented with dreadful thoughts. At this time his thoughts would have been passed on to his friends.
Hence the unison. NORMAL in such circumstances IMO
They were more concerned about the search than examining the shutters .... and once the PJ and maybe the GNR got involved the place was taped off and they no longer could.
AIMO
ETA: Sorry, Davel beat me to it!
-
IMO its all to do with first impressions for the benefit of the public - the place had been broken into, whereas the truth was that it had been left unlocked and unattended for periods of time
-
Or simply repeating what Gerry in his initial distraught state believed.
What I cant understand is why are you all making such a lot out of this Jemmied thing ?
Poor bloke must have been near out of his mind at that time, especially as he believed someone had broken in (to abduct his lovely daughter) At that time he thought that the shutters were a security measure and that they could not be opened from outside, so they had to have been forced/ jemmied. He must have very near demented with dreadful thoughts. At this time his thoughts would have been passed on to his friends.
Hence the unison. NORMAL in such circumstances IMO
They were more concerned about the search than examining the shutters .... and once the PJ and maybe the GNR got involved the place was taped off and they no longer could.
AIMO
But Gerry was concerned about examining the shutters, the undamaged shutters, that's the point.
As for 'making such a lot of this jemmied thing'; I'm not, I'm discussing it in a thread on a forum about the disappearance of MM.
Perhaps we should publish a list of all of the topics considered 'proibido'.
-
Afaiac... The mccanns thought the shutters were security shutters and therefore if they had been opened from the outside some degree of force must have been used... So when they said in frantic phone calls that the shutters had been forced this was repeated in Chinese whisper fashion and jemmied... Broken etc entered reality... Sceptics in general here don't accept this explanation and seem to want to suggest the mccanns lied
Gerry is an intelligent chappie and as far as we know he inspected the shutter shortly after Madeleine's disappearance. He would have seen how the shutter works and if unlocked it can be lifted up from the outside. In Portugal shutters are primarily used to keep the sun out, if you require enhanced security you install security bars or rejas.
Added below as an attachment. Apartment 5a now has a security grill on the front bedroom window.
(http://www.securehome247.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/rejas-300x225.jpg)
-
IMO its all to do with first impressions for the benefit of the public - the place had been broken into, whereas the truth was that it had been left unlocked and unattended for periods of time
Yes I see where you're coming from - good point.
-
IMO its all to do with first impressions for the benefit of the public - the place had been broken into, whereas the truth was that it had been left unlocked and unattended for periods of time
Imagine they’d told the truth straight of the bat....that they’d facilitated the dreadful fate that had befallen their cherished grandchild/niece/goddaughter. I think they knew what the reaction would have been.....and it wouldn’t have been sympathy.
-
Imagine they’d told the truth straight of the bat....that they’d facilitated the dreadful fate that had befallen their cherished grandchild/niece/goddaughter. I think they knew what the reaction would have been.....and it wouldn’t have been sympathy.
There is a fly in this ointment, however. Why change the story to 'break in'? That would prove a knee-jerk reaction to finding their daughter missing i.e. they had no prior knowledge of her being missing up to the point Kate raised the alarm. The revisionism is only required in this instance and not if something else occurred and they had time to create a narrative.
-
Your degree of twisting suggests that you do think it important -IMO
What twisting would that be? For the record I don’t think it’s remotely important. Do you?
-
IMO its all to do with first impressions for the benefit of the public - the place had been broken into, whereas the truth was that it had been left unlocked and unattended for periods of time
Do you seriously believe that the general public was on his mind when he was on the phone to his sister?!
-
Imagine they’d told the truth straight of the bat....that they’d facilitated the dreadful fate that had befallen their cherished grandchild/niece/goddaughter. I think they knew what the reaction would have been.....and it wouldn’t have been sympathy.
Given that all these family members soon found out exactly what the situation was with the unlocked apartment, how do you account for their ongoing support and sympathy?
-
Gerry is an intelligent chappie and as far as we know he inspected the shutter shortly after Madeleine's disappearance. He would have seen how the shutter works and if unlocked it can be lifted up from the outside. In Portugal shutters are primarily used to keep the sun out, if you require enhanced security you install security bars or rejas.
Added below as an attachment. Apartment 5a now has a security grill on the front bedroom window.
(http://www.securehome247.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/rejas-300x225.jpg)
Nice pictures John but I dont think they are of 5A.
Without hesitation I can say that the upper (enlarged one) is NOT of 5A. The front door and other things are completely wrong.
I would have to check the bottom photo, but soz haven't got the energy.. However something doesn't seem right.
-
Given that all these family members soon found out exactly what the situation was with the unlocked apartment, how do you account for their ongoing support and sympathy?
Good point.
-
Nice pictures John but I dont think they are of 5A.
Without hesitation I can say that the upper (enlarged one) is NOT of 5A. The front door and other things are completely wrong.
I would have to check the bottom photo, but soz haven't got the energy.. However something doesn't seem right.
I think John was giving a typical example of the blinds and additional security measures.
-
I find this sceptic/supporter thing is unhelpful and rather childish. I don't wish to be pigeonholed in this way and prefer to remain objective looking at soft and hard facts.
I think it unlikely McCanns/T7 were directly responsible for MM's disappearance but I would be foolish to completely rule it out since I have no firm evidence to do so. And I most certainly do not want to be termed a 'supporter' especially since I know so little about the case.
I also find it unhelpful and mentioned supporters only in reply to the post I was answering which mentioned sceptics.
Whether you like it or not you will eventually be labelled just like we all have been. I have no firm convictions about what happened, but am consistently disbelieved.
-
There is a fly in this ointment, however. Why change the story to 'break in'? That would prove a knee-jerk reaction to finding their daughter missing i.e. they had no prior knowledge of her being missing up to the point Kate raised the alarm. The revisionism is only required in this instance and not if something else occurred and they had time to create a narrative.
I think the narrative was devised very much ‘on the hoof’.
-
I also find it unhelpful and mentioned supporters only in reply to the post I was answering which mentioned sceptics.
Whether you like it or not you will eventually be labelled just like we all have been. I have no firm convictions about what happened, but am consistently disbelieved.
This seems a pretty firm conviction to me. Your words:
"I've never heard such a load of rubbish in my life. Claiming that MBM was abducted is just more of the same imo".
You have all but ruled out abduction as virtually impossible have you not? Which, if true, means that you are sceptical of the McCanns claims, and therefore by definition a sceptic. Why is this such a hard admission for you?
-
Given that all these family members soon found out exactly what the situation was with the unlocked apartment, how do you account for their ongoing support and sympathy?
By the time the family, and public, had learned of the unlocked patio doors the narrative of the abductor climbing through the window had taken hold and the unlocked patio doors were relegated to a footnote in the story. The jemmied shutters also had the added advantage of proving that Madelene did wake and wander, a scenario I don’t think the family would be happy about either.
-
By the time the family, and public, had learned of the unlocked patio doors the narrative of the abductor climbing through the window had taken hold and the unlocked patio doors were relegated to a footnote in the story. The jemmied shutters also had the added advantage of proving that Madelene did wake and wander, a scenario I don’t think the family would be happy about either.
Pardon? *%87
-
I think you'll find we're both off topic!
PM me please.
-
This seems a pretty firm conviction to me. Your words:
"I've never heard such a load of rubbish in my life. Claiming that MBM was abducted is just more of the same imo".
You have all but ruled out abduction as virtually impossible have you not? Which, if true, means that you are sceptical of the McCanns claims, and therefore by definition a sceptic. Why is this such a hard admission for you?
And you find an excuse for each and every wrong move the parents have ever made. Does that make you an apologist?
-
Pardon? *%87
If Madeleine couldn’t open the window someone must have and so the open window suggested third party involvement rather than Madeleine simply wandering out of the patio doors.
Simple enough now ?
-
And you find an excuse for each and every wrong move the parents have ever made. Does that make you an apologist?
No I don't, what I do is question the beliefs of sceptics and point out that their explanations (usually of the "they are lying" variety) are not the only ones.
An apologist is a person who offers an argument in defence of something controversial - there is nothing controversial about the concept that the McCanns are the innocent parents of an abducted child. I agree they were extremely foolish and reckless to leave their kids alone in an unlocked apartment so you can't even call me a child neglect apologist, itching though you may be to do so.
-
If Madeleine couldn’t open the window someone must have and so the open window suggested third party involvement rather than Madeleine simply wandering out of the patio doors.
Simple enough now ?
Your post in question didn't read right to me either. It is possible you missed the word "not" in one sentence.
Have another look at it please. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10827.msg541758#msg541758
-
If Madeleine couldn’t open the window someone must have and so the open window suggested third party involvement rather than Madeleine simply wandering out of the patio doors.
Simple enough now ?
It's not what your post said though is it?
" The jemmied shutters also had the added advantage of proving that Madelene did wake and wander, a scenario I don’t think the family would be happy about either".
-
Your post in question didn't read right to me either. It is possible you missed the word "not" in one sentence.
Have another look at it please. http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10827.msg541758#msg541758
Apologies I did miss not out.
-
If Madeleine couldn’t open the window someone must have and so the open window suggested third party involvement rather than Madeleine simply wandering out of the patio doors.
Simple enough now ?
All moot. Your claim was that Gerry had to convince his family that the shutters were jemmied otherwise they and the public at large would be unsympathetic. This is complete post-rationalisation by you, imagining that Gerry was already considering that there would be huge public interest in the case and that his conversation would be reported verbatim in the press the next day. Was he also clairvoyant, in your view? Once every detail was known - kids left alone in an unlocked apartment while the McCanns "went out on the piss" (Sceptic meme) the public (not all, granted) were sympathetic as were their families.
-
Apologies I did miss not out.
Is this the correct version then?
"By the time the family, and public, had learned of the unlocked patio doors the narrative of the abductor climbing through the window had taken hold and the unlocked patio doors were relegated to a footnote in the story. The jemmied shutters also had the added advantage of proving that Madeleine did NOT wake and wander; a scenario I don’t think the family would be happy about either."
-
All moot. Your claim was that Gerry had to convince his family that the shutters were jemmied otherwise they and the public at large would be unsympathetic. This is complete post-rationalisation by you, imagining that Gerry was already considering that there would be huge public interest in the case and that his conversation would be reported verbatim in the press the next day. Was he also clairvoyant, in your view? Once every detail was known - kids left alone in an unlocked apartment while the McCanns "went out on the piss" (Sceptic meme) the public (not all, granted) were sympathetic as were their families.
I don’t think Gerry thought there would be huge public interest and I never said that. He knew however that there would be reporting of the disappearance back in the U.K., he’d encouraged most of it himself, and that leaving three children alone in an unlocked apartment would not go down well. So it was his way of saying ‘hey we did leave our kids alone but it didn’t really matter anyway because the abductor came through the window ‘.
-
If my sister (I have one) did what the McCanns did and one of her kids went missing (she has two) I would be nothing but totally heartbroken for her, there would be absolutely NO recriminations from me whatsoever and I sincerely can't imagine any family member at all being so heartless and cruel as to show no sympathy to her in such a situation. Perhaps I just have an extraordinarily empathetic, warm, kind, forgiving family that do not rise to instant condemnation when one of us does something stupid?
-
I don’t think Gerry thought there would be huge public interest and I never said that. He knew however that there would be reporting of the disappearance back in the U.K., he’d encouraged most of it himself, and that leaving three children alone in an unlocked apartment would not go down well. So it was his way of saying ‘hey we did leave our kids alone but it didn’t really matter anyway because the abductor came through the window ‘.
Do you believe he saw the window open and the shutters up, and that he didn't set that scene up himself?
-
I don’t think Gerry thought there would be huge public interest and I never said that. He knew however that there would be reporting of the disappearance back in the U.K., he’d encouraged most of it himself, and that leaving three children alone in an unlocked apartment would not go down well. So it was his way of saying ‘hey we did leave our kids alone but it didn’t really matter anyway because the abductor came through the window ‘.
That's a complete non-sequitur if ever I heard one. Are you inside Gerry's head? Do you know his motivations and are therefore able to tell us about them with authority? I know you've been studying him for about a quarter of your life but does that really give you this insight into his thinking?
-
I also find it unhelpful and mentioned supporters only in reply to the post I was answering which mentioned sceptics.
Whether you like it or not you will eventually be labelled just like we all have been. I have no firm convictions about what happened, but am consistently disbelieved.
If you look at your posts you will see you have used the term supporters on numerous occasions...perhaps its just second nature and you dont realise you are doing it.
-
If my sister (I have one) did what the McCanns did and one of her kids went missing (she has two) I would be nothing but totally heartbroken for her, there would be absolutely NO recriminations from me whatsoever and I sincerely can't imagine any family member at all being so heartless and cruel as to show no sympathy to her in such a situation. Perhaps I just have an extraordinarily empathetic, warm, kind, forgiving family that do not rise to instant condemnation when one of us does something stupid?
Kate’s mother certainly wasn’t overly sympathetic in one of her interviews.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/where-were-you-that-night-kate-what-grandmother-said-after-she-was-told-that-madeleine-had-been-6661215.html
It doesn’t appear as if Kate’s family are quite as empathetic, warm, kind and forgiving as your own, unfortunately.
-
That's a complete non-sequitur if ever I heard one. Are you inside Gerry's head? Do you know his motivations and are therefore able to tell us about them with authority? I know you've been studying him for about a quarter of your life but does that really give you this insight into his thinking?
It’s not hard. He’s not very complex.
-
I find this sceptic/supporter thing is unhelpful and rather childish. I don't wish to be pigeonholed in this way and prefer to remain objective looking at soft and hard facts.
I think it unlikely McCanns/T7 were directly responsible for MM's disappearance but I would be foolish to completely rule it out since I have no firm evidence to do so. And I most certainly do not want to be termed a 'supporter' especially since I know so little about the case.
for those of us who ahve been discussing the case for some time...sceptic /supporters is a useful term to use at certain times...most posters fall into one of these camps. I'm labelled an ardent supporter and even been accused as being part of the family.......but like you i understand its not possible to rule out the mccans 100% ...but highly unlikely they are involved. Im afraid you will be labelled....and perhaps already are.
I dont see my self as a mccann supporter...i see my self as a supporter of the mccanns innocence...tahts a totally different thing
-
for those of us who ahve been discussing the case for some time...sceptic /supporters is a useful term to use at certain times...most posters fall into one of these camps. I'm labelled an ardent supporter and even been accused as being part of the family.......but like you i understand its not possible to rule out the mccans 100% ...but highly unlikely they are involved. Im afraid you will be labelled....and perhaps already are.
I dont see my self as a mccann supporter...i see my self as a supporter of the mccanns innocence...tahts a totally different thing
As my old headteacher used to say, 'I support my legs and my legs support me. Now **** off!'
-
for those of us who ahve been discussing the case for some time...sceptic /supporters is a useful term to use at certain times...most posters fall into one of these camps. I'm labelled an ardent supporter and even been accused as being part of the family.......but like you i understand its not possible to rule out the mccans 100% ...but highly unlikely they are involved. Im afraid you will be labelled....and perhaps already are.
I dont see my self as a mccann supporter...i see my self as a supporter of the mccanns innocence...tahts a totally different thing
As Mrs Burns so eloquently put it “O wad some Power the giftie gie us, to see oursels as ithers see us!"
-
As Mrs Burns so eloquently put it “O wad some Power the giftie gie us, to see oursels as ithers see us!"
And different people see us differently... As I so eloquently reply
-
And different people see us differently... As I so eloquently reply
At this it’s spelled right. Well done you.
-
At this it’s spelled right. Well done you.
Unlike your quote... It was riddled with spelling mistakes
-
Unlike your quote... It was riddled with spelling mistakes
Google it. It’s in old scotch.
-
Kate’s mother certainly wasn’t overly sympathetic in one of her interviews.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/where-were-you-that-night-kate-what-grandmother-said-after-she-was-told-that-madeleine-had-been-6661215.html
It doesn’t appear as if Kate’s family are quite as empathetic, warm, kind and forgiving as your own, unfortunately.
Always a good idea to go to the source interview
She does feel persecuted, not by the general public who have been extremely supportive, but by some sections of the media, and I just feel it’s important I let people know she is not this person who is in control all the time.
“Kate is a very sensitive, caring person and one of the most maternal people I know – she puts me to shame. Her life revolves around her children but now she’s got to the point where she feels she is being persecuted, in her mind, if her twins, Sean and Amelie, cry in public – it’s absolutely crazy.”
She adds: “All this stuff is going on inside my poor daughter who’s not done anything wrong. She and Gerry went to a restaurant which was just metres away from their apartment and part of the holiday complex – it was a terrible mistake but they did it out of naivety“.
I can image me my mother saying exactly the same because she is warm, forgiving, caring and kind.
-
It’s not hard. He’s not very complex.
You sound like you know him intimately. How weird.
-
Google it. It’s in old scotch.
Scots!
Scotch is the drink.
Mind you he was fond of that .......... 8**8:/:
-
Scots!
Scotch is the drink.
Mind you he was fond of that .......... 8**8:/:
I think faith meant old Scottish ..bit of a gaffe
-
This seems a pretty firm conviction to me. Your words:
"I've never heard such a load of rubbish in my life. Claiming that MBM was abducted is just more of the same imo".
You have all but ruled out abduction as virtually impossible have you not? Which, if true, means that you are sceptical of the McCanns claims, and therefore by definition a sceptic. Why is this such a hard admission for you?
I may be sceptical, but I'm not a 'sceptic' as you and others define it.
-
I may be sceptical, but I'm not a 'sceptic' as you and others define it.
Yeah, and I support the McCanns but I’m not a Supporter as you define it.
-
I think faith meant old Scottish ..bit of a gaffe
It's the old Scots language.......I think.
Not Scotch or Scottish.
Anyway it's quite difficult to decipher and we did it at school, along with Chaucer and Shakespeare.
My grandchildren know of Burns and Shakespeare but definitely not Chaucer.........lucky them.
-
It's the old Scots language.......I think.
Not Scotch or Scottish.
Anyway it's quite difficult to decipher and we did it at school, along with Chaucer and Shakespeare.
My grandchildren know of Burns and Shakespeare but definitely not Chaucer.........lucky them.
Definitely Old Scots.
-
As Mrs Burns so eloquently put it “O wad some Power the giftie gie us, to see oursels as ithers see us!"
Mrs Burns?? I didn’t realise his missus wrote some of his stuff.
-
Always a good idea to go to the source interview
She does feel persecuted, not by the general public who have been extremely supportive, but by some sections of the media, and I just feel it’s important I let people know she is not this person who is in control all the time.
“Kate is a very sensitive, caring person and one of the most maternal people I know – she puts me to shame. Her life revolves around her children but now she’s got to the point where she feels she is being persecuted, in her mind, if her twins, Sean and Amelie, cry in public – it’s absolutely crazy.”
She adds: “All this stuff is going on inside my poor daughter who’s not done anything wrong. She and Gerry went to a restaurant which was just metres away from their apartment and part of the holiday complex – it was a terrible mistake but they did it out of naivety“.
I can image me my mother saying exactly the same because she is warm, forgiving, caring and kind.
Always a good idea to look at context.
“Madeleine McCann's grandmother yesterday criticised her daughter's fateful decision to leave the youngster and her brother and sister alone in their bedroom.
'Why did they think it was OK to do this?' asked Susan Healy, 62.
She revealed that her first words to the couple in the frantic phone call informing her of Madeleine's disappearance were: 'Where were you?'
And she said she could understand public anger at the couple for going to dinner while their children slept unattended in an unlocked apartment more than 50 yards away.
She said she wanted to 'shake' Kate and her husband Gerry for the decision, which has now haunted them for a year and which could still be used by Portuguese police to support a charge of child negligence.”
-
Always a good idea to go to the source interview
She does feel persecuted, not by the general public who have been extremely supportive, but by some sections of the media, and I just feel it’s important I let people know she is not this person who is in control all the time.
“Kate is a very sensitive, caring person and one of the most maternal people I know – she puts me to shame. Her life revolves around her children but now she’s got to the point where she feels she is being persecuted, in her mind, if her twins, Sean and Amelie, cry in public – it’s absolutely crazy.”
She adds: “All this stuff is going on inside my poor daughter who’s not done anything wrong. She and Gerry went to a restaurant which was just metres away from their apartment and part of the holiday complex – it was a terrible mistake but they did it out of naivety“.
I can image me my mother saying exactly the same because she is warm, forgiving, caring and kind.
Did Kate ever admit she made a terrible mistake?
-
Always a good idea to look at context.
“Madeleine McCann's grandmother yesterday criticised her daughter's fateful decision to leave the youngster and her brother and sister alone in their bedroom.
'Why did they think it was OK to do this?' asked Susan Healy, 62.
She revealed that her first words to the couple in the frantic phone call informing her of Madeleine's disappearance were: 'Where were you?'
And she said she could understand public anger at the couple for going to dinner while their children slept unattended in an unlocked apartment more than 50 yards away.
She said she wanted to 'shake' Kate and her husband Gerry for the decision, which has now haunted them for a year and which could still be used by Portuguese police to support a charge of child negligence.”
yeah, you already posted that. I posted the bit which clearly demonstrates that she is fully supportive and sympathetic to Kate.
-
Scots!
Scotch is the drink.
Mind you he was fond of that .......... 8**8:/:
Predictor text huh ! What can you do !
So not spelled wrong.
-
Did Kate ever admit she made a terrible mistake?
I don’t know, why don’t you google it?
-
yeah, you already posted that. I posted the bit which clearly demonstrates that she is fully supportive and sympathetic to Kate.
‘Where were you ? “ Quite damning I’d say.
And “And she said she could understand public anger at the couple for going to dinner while their children slept unattended in an unlocked apartment more than 50 yards away.”
She didn’t need to say either of those things but she did. She could have been 100% supportive, but she wasn’t.
-
On Crimewatch Kate said:
"We're not the ones that have done something wrong here. It's the person who's gone into that apartment and taken a little girl away from her family."
Spot the distancing language.
-
On Crimewatch Kate said:
"We're not the ones that have done something wrong here. It's the person who's gone into that apartment and taken a little girl away from her family."
Spot the distancing language.
Why not our daughter ?
-
‘Where were you ? “ Quite damning I’d say.
And “And she said she could understand public anger at the couple for going to dinner while their children slept unattended in an unlocked apartment more than 50 yards away.”
She didn’t need to say either of those things but she did. She could have been 100% supportive, but she wasn’t.
What is this statement then, if not 100% supprtive?
“All this stuff is going on inside my poor daughter who’s not done anything wrong”.
-
On Crimewatch Kate said:
"We're not the ones that have done something wrong here. It's the person who's gone into that apartment and taken a little girl away from her family."
Spot the distancing language.
Yeah, because she never refers to Madeleine as her daughter, or by her name, always just as “a little girl”. *%87
-
Why not our daughter ?
Do you have any suggestion as to why not?
-
Yeah, because she never refers to Madeleine as her daughter, or by her name, always just as “a little girl”. *%87
What age are you ? Putting that ‘crazy’ emoticon at the end of posts. I’d expect that of a 10 year old.
-
What age are you ? Putting that ‘crazy’ emoticon at the end of posts. I’d expect that of a 10 year old.
How old are you? I am ten years old, so well deduced.
-
Do you have any suggestion as to why not?
......because she was lying?
-
How old are you? I am ten years old, so well deduced.
How old am I? Old enough to have grown out of telling people they’re crazy via an emoticon...so that would be more than 10.....in fact scrub that....my grandson is 9 and he’s too mature to use one.
-
How old am I? Old enough to have grown out of telling people they’re crazy via an emoticon...so that would be more than 10.....in fact scrub that....my grandson is 9 and he’s too mature to use one.
Gosh, wow, I feel suitably ashamed of myself now. 8)><(
-
......because she was lying?
Lying that Madeleine was or was not her daughter?
-
Gosh, wow, I feel suitably ashamed of myself now. 8)><(
Don’t worry I know it’s not your fault.
-
Lying that Madeleine was or was not her daughter?
Lying that they weren't the ones that did something wrong.
-
Lying that they weren't the ones that did something wrong.
This is all about " distancing language"
Using the words " a little girl"
Faithlilly suggested that the word daughter should have been used .
I wondered what the implication of not using.the word daughter.did mean.
-
This is all about " distancing language"
Using the words " a little girl"
Faithlilly suggested that the word daughter should have been used .
I wondered what the implication of not using.the word daughter.did mean.
Why do you think she didn’t say daughter ?
-
There is a fly in this ointment, however. Why change the story to 'break in'? That would prove a knee-jerk reaction to finding their daughter missing i.e. they had no prior knowledge of her being missing up to the point Kate raised the alarm. The revisionism is only required in this instance and not if something else occurred and they had time to create a narrative.
We are not privvy to knowing what time MBM disappeared. Let us thnk of some reasons for claiming abduction- T9 knew what would happen if they were in the UK. They had to think about their families reaction as has been mentioned, what about being arrested, what about losing your career/job. The abduction story was their life saver, it removed any guilt they may have had, if fact it worked out brilliantly for them.
Faith is correct- if they had said they left the children alone to go wine and dine and left a door unlocked for maddie to go get them- anything could have happened- The public woulod not have been to generious IMO.If you believe the abduction and woke and wandered theory that is.
-
This is all about " distancing language"
Using the words " a little girl"
Faithlilly suggested that the word daughter should have been used .
I wondered what the implication of not using.the word daughter.did mean.
It implies that they were/are a pair of sociopathics - IMO
-
Don’t worry I know it’s not your fault.
Can I ask, is it mature to make provocative posts followed by a fluttering eye emoticon? Just so that I know which emoticons I can and cannot use when I’m a grown up. Thanks.
-
Why do you think she didn’t say daughter ?
Especially in many threads the 'supporters' are distraught about using MBM. Claiming it is disrespectful. Why would a mother not call her daughter by her name or pet name, or my daughter.
Totally distancing themselves. They used that termanology many times. I noticed that back in the day.
-
Especially in many threads the 'supporters' are distraught about using MBM. Claiming it is disrespectful. Why would a mother not call her daughter by her name or pet name, or my daughter.
Totally distancing themselves. They used that termanology many times. I noticed that back in the day.
Many times? Please provide some cites, thanks.
-
Why do you think she didn’t say daughter ?
You are the poster who has attached a great importance to this, not myself.
I do feel it is for you to explain the significance of why she didn't say daughter.
I haven't given this piece of evidence, and I assume that you do believe it to be significant, any great thought at all.
-
Can I ask, is it mature to make provocative posts followed by a fluttering eye emoticon? Just so that I know which emoticons I can and cannot use when I’m a grown up. Thanks.
Bored now.
-
Can I ask, do the McCanns rarely refer to their daughter by name or by referring to her as their daughter? Because if so then maybe it’s significant, so why not start a new thread listing all the times they have referred to her as “that missing child” or “a little girl we knew” or some such?
-
Bored now.
Of course you are @)(++(*
-
It implies that they were/are a pair of sociopathics - IMO
Interesting.
Both sociopaths.
Possibly still are, once a sociopath, always a sociopath!
Unless there is a course of treatment of.course?
-
Can I ask, do the McCanns rarely refer to their daughter by name or by referring to her as their daughter? Because if so then maybe it’s significant, so why not start a new thread listing all the times they have referred to her as “that missing child” or “a little girl we knew” or some such?
Might as well.
Someone will have done the research.
-
Interesting.
Both sociopaths.
Possibly still are, once a sociopath, always a sociopath!
Unless there is a course of treatment of.course?
We could certainly attach them to the electrodes and see what happens 8(0(*
-
Can I ask, do the McCanns rarely refer to their daughter by name or by referring to her as their daughter? Because if so then maybe it’s significant, so why not start a new thread listing all the times they have referred to her as “that missing child” or “a little girl we knew” or some such?
Not using your daughter’s name is bad enough...forgetting altogether where the sightings were that had given you the most hope of finding her is just dumbfounding.
-
Not using your daughter’s name is bad enough...forgetting altogether where the sightings were that had given you the most hope of finding her is just dumbfounding.
Them Dastardly McCanns is just evil through and through. 8()(((@#
-
You are the poster who has attached a great importance to this, not myself.
I do feel it is for you to explain the significance of why she didn't say daughter.
I haven't given this piece of evidence, and I assume that you do believe it to be significant, any great thought at all.
You have no answer. I get it.
-
Them Dastardly McCanns is just evil through and through. 8()(((@#
Evil....no....guilty...hmmmm.
-
Evil....no....guilty...hmmmm.
Guilty of what?
-
Evil....no....guilty...hmmmm.
No evil. All the terrible things you think they are guilty of makes them evil, evil, evil. They abandoned their kids to go on the piss, they sedated them, one of them died, they didn’t report it but tossed the body in the bin, they didn’t care if their other kids lived or died, they pocketed millions of pounds donated by ickle kiddies and poor pensioners, they used the money to pay off their mortgage and travel the world meeting celebrities, they lied to their families, the police, the whole wide world, they couldn’t be bothered to use their dead daughter’s name and weren’t even bothered about alleged sightings because they knew she was dead anyway blah blahblah, how is this not utterly evil?
NB Mods - the above is not representative of my oersonal views and I do not believe the McCanns are guilty of all the things I have written, it’s satirical, ok?
-
Guilty of what?
Uhuh...quid pro quo Erngath. I asked you a question earlier.
-
Not using your daughter’s name is bad enough...forgetting altogether where the sightings were that had given you the most hope of finding her is just dumbfounding.
Not to mention leaving your children alone AGAIN after your daughter the little girl complains about being left alone while the baby brother (The deep sleeping one) is crying!
.....AND when asked to answer some questions which may help the find out what happened to the little girl (I do hope it isn't disrespectful to use this ) there is no comment.
-
No evil. All the terrible things you think they are guilty of makes them evil, evil, evil. They abandoned their kids to go on the piss, they sedated them, one of them died, they didn’t report it but tossed the body in the bin, they didn’t care if their other kids lived or died, they pocketed millions of pounds donated by ickle kiddies and poor pensioners, they used the money to pay off their mortgage and travel the world meeting celebrities, they lied to their families, the police, the whole wide world, they couldn’t be bothered to use their dead daughter’s name and weren’t even bothered about alleged sightings because they knew she was dead anyway blah blahblah, how is this not utterly evil?
I’d say pragmatic but you obviously are more judgmental.
-
You have no answer. I get it.
Yes I know you get the fact that you are the poster who raised the whole issue of Kate not using the word daughter and.placed significance on that fact.
And I know you get it that I asked you what the significance was of.her not using the word daughter.
And I know you get it that so far you have not answered or explained your original query as to why she didn't use the word.daughter.
You're the one.with the.concern, not me.
I know you get exactly where you are.
-
Not to mention leaving your children alone AGAIN after your daughter the little girl complains about being left alone while the baby brother (The deep sleeping one) is crying!
.....AND when asked to answer some questions which may help the find out what happened to the little girl (I do hope it isn't disrespectful to use this ) there is no comment.
Ah I forgotten about one of Madeleine’s deep sleeping siblings ( they never could decide which one ) crying with her. Not such deep sleepers after all.
-
No evil. All the terrible things you think they are guilty of makes them evil, evil, evil. They abandoned their kids to go on the piss, they sedated them, one of them died, they didn’t report it but tossed the body in the bin, they didn’t care if their other kids lived or died, they pocketed millions of pounds donated by ickle kiddies and poor pensioners, they used the money to pay off their mortgage and travel the world meeting celebrities, they lied to their families, the police, the whole wide world, they couldn’t be bothered to use their dead daughter’s name and weren’t even bothered about alleged sightings because they knew she was dead anyway blah blahblah, how is this not utterly evil?
&%%6 Now when you put it like that.... "sounds very evil indeed my dear watson"...
-
Yes I know you get the fact that you are the poster who raised the whole issue of Kate not using the word daughter and.placed significance on that fact.
And I know you get it that I asked you what the significance was of.her not using the word daughter.
And I know you get it that so far you have not answered or explained your original query as to why she didn't use the word.daughter.
You're the one.with the.concern, not me.
I know you get exactly where you are.
I didn’t actually raise the issue first but no matter.
Let’s put it this way. Your daughter ( heaven forbid) is missing, presumed abducted....would you refer to her a ‘a little girl’ or by her name ?
-
No evil. All the terrible things you think they are guilty of makes them evil, evil, evil. They abandoned their kids to go on the piss, they sedated them, one of them died, they didn’t report it but tossed the body in the bin, they didn’t care if their other kids lived or died, they pocketed millions of pounds donated by ickle kiddies and poor pensioners, they used the money to pay off their mortgage and travel the world meeting celebrities, they lied to their families, the police, the whole wide world, they couldn’t be bothered to use their dead daughter’s name and weren’t even bothered about alleged sightings because they knew she was dead anyway blah blahblah, how is this not utterly evil?
NB Mods - the above is not representative of my oersonal views and I do not believe the McCanns are guilty of all the things I have written, it’s satirical, ok?
But in reality this is what some believe and.promote.
Quite pathetic!
-
I didn’t actually raise the issue first but no matter.
Let’s put it this way. Your daughter ( heaven forbid) is missing, presumed abducted....would you refer to her a ‘a little girl’ or by her name ?
Both at differing times, depending how strong I was feeling.
-
I’d say pragmatic but you obviously are more judgmental.
Why are you so reluctant to face the only logical conclusion of your suspicions? That the pair must be evil sociopaths? I can only imagine that you think you would behave in a similar “pragmatic” manner in the event that one of your grandkids accidentally died on your watch.
-
Both at differing times, depending how strong I was feeling.
Okay. Not how I would do it...no matter how weak I was feeling my daughter would always have a name.... but it does give me a better understanding of why you support the parents.
-
Why are you so reluctant to face the only logical conclusion of your suspicions? That the pair must be evil sociopaths? I can only imagine that you think you would behave in a similar “pragmatic” manner in the event that one of your grandkids accidentally died on your watch.
Died ? Don’t you mean disappeared?
And I don’t think the parents are sociopaths...I think they found themselves in a horrendous situation and tried to salvage their life from the wreckage...everything else stemmed from that. They aren’t sociopaths but the have the ability to be dishonest when they feel they are in danger.
And no, I’d never behave in such a manner because I wouldn’t have to. I’d never leave my grandchildren long enough to enable them to meet with such a catastrophe.
-
Okay. Not how I would do it...no matter how weak I was feeling my my daughter would always have a name.... but it does give me a better understanding of why you support the parents.
Fair enough.
For me to say my child's name in public if he was missing would reduce me to a tearful wreck.
If I was trying to stop being reduced to a tearful wreck then I might not use his name.
I do hope you are not suggesting that my love for my children is not as it should be.
-
Died ? Don’t you mean disappeared?
And I don’t think the parents are sociopaths...I think they found themselves in a horrendous situation and tried to salvage their life from the wreckage...everything else stemmed from that. They aren’t sociopaths but the have the ability to be dishonest when they feel they are in danger.
And no, I’d never behave in such a manner because I wouldn’t have to. I’d never leave my grandchildren long enough to enable them to meet with such a catastrophe.
Such a predictable response. No bad thing could ever happen to one of your grandchildren under your watch. I hope for your and your grandchildren’s sake nothing ever does but it is impossible IMO to state with any degree of certainty that it wouldn’t. And yes, I meant died, because that is what you believe happened to Madeleine.
-
Died ? Don’t you mean disappeared?
And I don’t think the parents are sociopaths...I think they found themselves in a horrendous situation and tried to salvage their life from the wreckage...everything else stemmed from that. They aren’t sociopaths but the have the ability to be dishonest when they feel they are in danger.
And no, I’d never behave in such a manner because I wouldn’t have to. I’d never leave my grandchildren long enough to enable them to meet with such a catastrophe.
No I wouldn't either, not would I have placed my children in the situation that many other disappeared,.murdered children both here and abroad have met with such catastrophe.
However I do realise that all parents of such missing, murdered.children will deeply regret the decision they made which placed their child
In that catastrophic situation.
-
Fair enough.
For me to say my child's name in public if he was missing would reduce me to a tearful wreck.
If I was trying to stop being reduced to a tearful wreck then I might not use his name.
I do hope you are not suggesting that my love for my children is not as it should be.
Not at all. TBH I think you’re made of sterner stuff than you’re letting on and you would call your child by their name no matter how hard it was. I grew up with women like you...I know how strong they can be when they have to be.
It’s possible to support the parents while not being able to explain everything they’ve done.
-
Such a predictable response. No bad thing could ever happen to one of your grandchildren under your watch. I hope for your and your grandchildren’s sake nothing ever does but it is impossible IMO to state with any degree of certainty that it wouldn’t. And yes, I meant died, because that is what you believe happened to Madeleine.
Shall we get things straight. Madeleine would almost certainly never have met the fate that befell her if her parents had been there. 30 minutes is too long to leave such young children alone....it makes me shiver just to think of it. My grandchildren would never be left alone for that long so yes I can say with absolute certainty that my grandchildren would never meet with an accident through not being properly supervised.
-
Or simply repeating what Gerry in his initial distraught state believed.
What I cant understand is why are you all making such a lot out of this Jemmied thing ?
Poor bloke must have been near out of his mind at that time, especially as he believed someone had broken in (to abduct his lovely daughter) At that time he thought that the shutters were a security measure and that they could not be opened from outside, so they had to have been forced/ jemmied. He must have very near demented with dreadful thoughts. At this time his thoughts would have been passed on to his friends.
Hence the unison. NORMAL in such circumstances IMO
They were more concerned about the search than examining the shutters .... and once the PJ and maybe the GNR got involved the place was taped off and they no longer could.
AIMO
The patio door was unlocked and you bring up a shutter as a security measure @)(++(* The mother finds one of children gone and immediately leaves her other two children unattended. What BS! No evidence of a stranger abductor at the crime scene but they tampered with it and the police know it!
-
Died ? Don’t you mean disappeared?
And I don’t think the parents are sociopaths...I think they found themselves in a horrendous situation and tried to salvage their life from the wreckage...everything else stemmed from that. They aren’t sociopaths but the have the ability to be dishonest when they feel they are in danger.
And no, I’d never behave in such a manner because I wouldn’t have to. I’d never leave my grandchildren long enough to enable them to meet with such a catastrophe.
I believe they are sociopaths in their behaviour before ,on the day and after the day MBM was declared disappeared.
It was self protection at the cost of assisting the police with as much information to find their daughter. The whole episode became a car crash of huge poportion.
They are holding back information is what I believe. Now as their abduction from the window story is blown apart by bloggers, and other interested investigators world wide, they find themselves in a position of being exposed to a wider wiser audience that they had before. They now know the reality...
-
Shall we get things straight. Madeleine would almost certainly never have met the fate that befell her if her parents had been there. 30 minutes is too long to leave such young children alone....it makes me shiver just to think of it. My grandchildren would never be left alone for that long so yes I can say with absolute certainty that my grandchildren would never meet with an accident through not being properly supervised.
We all know you wouldn’t leave your grankids alone for 30 minutes to go on the piss but there are plenty of other tragedies that can and do happen to children while in the supervision of their carers. For example a child was shot dead by his grandfather recently. That was an accident I’m sure. So please don’t tell me nothing bad could happen. It could and sadly does.
-
Incidentally, here is that “distancing” quote in full
Kate MC : I kind of knew straight away then that Madeleine had been taken. It’s not us that have committed this crime. It’s a person who’s gone into that apartment and taken a little girl away from her family.
-
More quotes from the same interview:
Gerald MC : When there is a special occasion, when you should be at your happiest and Madeleine’s not there, that’s when it really hits home.
-
KMC : I think we’ll all woke up around 7:30 and went through to have breakfast. It was at that point that Madeleine said “Where were you when Sean and I cried last night?” And it’s one of those questions that kind of throws you.
-
GMC : We had a, a lesson booked, for the two of us, a tennis lesson. And then I stayed on and Kate went for a run. So at 5 o’clock I went over, em, to meet the kids and Kate came back from her running. Madeleine looked really tired. She was really pale and quite washed out. We decided to take them straight back to the apartment. And just before six, I then headed off back to play tennis and left Kate to get them ready.
-
GMC : … Madeleine loved it. She really wanted to get in that water.
-
KMC : Again, it’s quite a nice memory really. Madeleine was sitting on my knee. Sean and Amelie were alongside. We’d had a story, and Madeleine asked if she could put my engagement ring on, which she did quite a bit. So, she had that on. Yeah, it was just a, a really nice moment really. And then Gerry got back pretty prompt at seven.
-
KMC : We sat on Madeleine’s bed and we had a story. And then, Gerry came through and we kind of put the twins into their travel cots they were sleeping in and said goodnight
-
Incidentally, here is that “distancing” quote in full
Kate MC : I kind of knew straight away then that Madeleine had been taken. It’s not us that have committed this crime. It’s a person who’s gone into that apartment and taken a little girl away from her family.
Ah so there we have it again... Kate knew straight away! so why all the searching in and around the apartment? why not Just shout from the patio- get help -phone the police Maddie is missing!
and what did she say in her book about Mrs Fenn when she asked what was wrong?
-
KMC : So at ten o’clock, em.. I got up to do the next check. I’d finished eating then so I headed back to the apartment the usual route. And I just stopped and listened in the living area for a bit and it was all quiet but it just caught my eye that the children’s door was quite far open. And at that point I thought it must have been when Matt checked and he’s left it open. And as I was just drawing it over, it was like it had been caught by a draft and it just kind of slammed shut. It was only at that point really that as I kind of opened it a bit, I kind of looked into the room. And I was, I guess I was looking at Madeleine’s bed and I couldn’t, couldn’t make her out. And then I realized actually she’s not in that bed. Aw, I wonder if she’s woken up and gone through to our bed. She wasn’t in our bed. And that was, that was the first time I guess, you know, a panic kicked in. And it was literally at that point the curtains that I said were closed just kinda whoosh... And then I could see that the window had been pushed right open. The shutters were up. So, em, alright, err, so, so I kind of knew straight away that, that Madeleine had been taken.
-
KMC : These are virtually identical to the pyjamas that Madeleine was wearing when she was taken.
-
KMC : I think Gerry was scared because he knew that we were in a system that we didn’t know. And I think I just lost it actually. I was, I was upset. I was angry and I was.. I just thought, you know, this is just crazy, you know, it’s unjust, we’re never going to find Madeleine.
-
GMC : When it’s a special occasion, when you should be at your happiest, and Madeleine’s not there, that’s when it really hits home. Obviously Madeleine’s birthday goes without saying. But it’s when you’re really getting …
-
KMC : So at ten o’clock, em.. I got up to do the next check. I’d finished eating then so I headed back to the apartment the usual route. And I just stopped and listened in the living area for a bit and it was all quiet but it just caught my eye that the children’s door was quite far open. And at that point I thought it must have been when Matt checked and he’s left it open. And as I was just drawing it over, it was like it had been caught by a draft and it just kind of slammed shut. It was only at that point really that as I kind of opened it a bit, I kind of looked into the room. And I was, I guess I was looking at Madeleine’s bed and I couldn’t, couldn’t make her out. And then I realized actually she’s not in that bed. Aw, I wonder if she’s woken up and gone through to our bed. She wasn’t in our bed. And that was, that was the first time I guess, you know, a panic kicked in. And it was literally at that point the curtains that I said were closed just kinda whoosh... And then I could see that the window had been pushed right open. The shutters were up. So, em, alright, err, so, so I kind of knew straight away that, that Madeleine had been taken.
Kate was looking at flat bed clothes & couldn't make out if they were Maddie or not @)(++(*
-
Not at all. TBH I think you’re made of sterner stuff than you’re letting on and you would call your child by their name no matter how hard it was. I grew up with women like you...I know how strong they can be when they have to be.
It’s possible to support the parents while not being able to explain everything they’ve done.
I've no desire to explain everything they've said and done.
It's not me who places such weight on their every word and action since Madeleine disappeared.
I cannot place myself in their shoes and say what I would or would not do or would or would not say.
And a story to explain how quickly a child can be.out of sight.
Our grandsons aged ten and nine at the time, some years ago, were at the cinema..
We saw them in and then sat in a little cafe within the complex with their sister aged five.
The film ended, out the boys came and within a second our granddaughter was.not beside us
My first thought was that.she had been taken, utter panic set in, then I realised one of the boys had gone to the toilet and yes she had.followed him.
So never, ever think it couldn't happen to you, no matter how careful and protective you are.
-
KMC : Yeah, you know (slightly embarrassed) I´d, you know, why did we think that was OK? You know, obviously with eh, with hindsight, but then, as Gerry said, it doesn’t help. It doesn’t help us. It doesn’t help Madeleine. to somehow put And ultimately, it’s not us that’s committed this crime. It’s a person who’s gone into an apartment and taken a little girl away from her family.
-
KMC : Well, it doesn’t matter how much heartache we put ourselves through, so long as, you know, we get the result that we need. You know, as Gerry said, the Met have made huge progress and that has given us great hope that we can find Madeleine, that we can find out what’s happened to her.
-
GMC : I think that absolutely we don’t know what’s happened to Madeleine. Ermm, we don’t know who’s taken her. Probably our best chance of finding her is identifying that person, and that’s why the e-fits and the sketches and the new information tonight are so important to us, because that’s probably the best chance we’ve got of finding Madeleine.
-
GMC : I think that absolutely we don’t know what’s happened to Madeleine. Ermm, we don’t know who’s taken her. Probably our best chance of finding her is identifying that person, and that’s why the e-fits and the sketches and the new information tonight are so important to us, because that’s probably the best chance we’ve got of finding Madeleine.
The e-fits were so important to them that they remained locked in a filing cabinet for 5 years @)(++(*
-
I make that 17 mentions of Madeleine’s name in one “distancing” interview.
-
I make that 17 mentions of Madeleine’s name in one “distancing” interview.
Who said that they always used distancing language?
-
Who said that they always used distancing language?
Oh, so just the once then? One use of distancing language and 17 uses of non-distancing language means what exactly?
-
I believe they are sociopaths in their behaviour before ,on the day and after the day MBM was declared disappeared.
It was self protection at the cost of assisting the police with as much information to find their daughter. The whole episode became a car crash of huge poportion.
They are holding back information is what I believe. Now as their abduction from the window story is blown apart by bloggers, and other interested investigators world wide, they find themselves in a position of being exposed to a wider wiser audience that they had before. They now know the reality...
I believe they didn’t help the police because it wouldn’t help Madeleine but it could implicate them.
-
GMC : I think that absolutely we don’t know what’s happened to Madeleine. Ermm, we don’t know who’s taken her. Probably our best chance of finding her is identifying that person, and that’s why the e-fits and the sketches and the new information tonight are so important to us, because that’s probably the best chance we’ve got of finding Madeleine.
Didn’t Mrs Fenn find it odd that Gerry said a little girl had disappeared rather than his daughter?
“She found it strange that Gerry when said that a girl had been abducted, he did not mention that it was his daughter and that he did not mention any other scenarios.”
-
Oh, so just the once then? One use of distancing language and 17 uses of non-distancing language means what exactly?
That Maggie was abducted?
-
I believe they didn’t help the police because it wouldn’t help Madeleine but it could implicate them.
So why did they pursue a review of the investigation by NSY?
-
That Maggie was abducted?
Your respect for Madeleine is overwhelming.
-
Your respect for Madeleine is overwhelming.
Say's someone who is here for the crack.
-
Didn’t Mrs Fenn find it odd that Gerry said a little girl had disappeared rather than his daughter?
“She found it strange that Gerry when said that a girl had been abducted, he did not mention that it was his daughter and that he did not mention any other scenarios.”
I have just proven that the McCanns overwhelmingly used Madeleine’s name in an interview which you earlier claimed to find highly revealing for the alleged distancing language used. Care to review your opinion? Or do you think one use of the term “little girl” reveals their guilt?
-
I've no desire to explain everything they've said and done.
It's not me who places such weight on their every word and action since Madeleine disappeared.
I cannot place myself in their shoes and say what I would or would not do or would or would not say.
And a story to explain how quickly a child can be.out of sight.
Our grandsons aged ten and nine at the time, some years ago, were at the cinema..
We saw them in and then sat in a little cafe within the complex with their sister aged five.
The film ended, out the boys came and within a second our granddaughter was.not beside us
My first thought was that.she had been taken, utter panic set in, then I realised one of the boys had gone to the toilet and yes she had.followed him.
So never, ever think it couldn't happen to you, no matter how careful and protective you are.
I know how quickly a child can slip from your view but that’s not what we are talking about. Imagine you’d let you granddaughter go to another film and sit alone for half an hour. Would you think she was safe ?
-
Say's someone who is here for the crack.
Yup I am, but doesn’t mean I have ever disrespected Madeleine by calling her Maggie, Maddie, MBM, or any other variation thereof,.
-
I know how quickly a child can slip from your view but that’s not what we are talking about. Imagine you’d let you granddaughter go to another film and sit alone for half an hour. Would you think she was safe ?
Children can also come to harm at home while your back is turned, or while you are distracted, by a knock at the door, a pan on the boil, a telephone call, a vosit to the toilet.
-
I have just proven that the McCanns overwhelmingly used Madeleine’s name in an interview which you earlier claimed to find highly revealing for the alleged distancing language used. Care to review your opinion? Or do you think one use of the term “little girl” reveals their guilt?
You haven’t proven anything.
-
Children can also come to harm at home while your back is turned, or while you are distracted, by a knock at the door, a pan on the boil, a telephone call, a vosit to the toilet.
If that’s the case think what can befall them in an unlocked apartment in half an hour writhing access to a cooker, kettle, steep stairs etc, etc, etc.
You seem to be saying... ah 30 seconds or 30 minutes...it’s all the same. If it’s going to happen it’ll happen.
-
I know how quickly a child can slip from your view but that’s not what we are talking about. Imagine you’d let you granddaughter go to another film and sit alone for half an hour. Would you think she was safe ?
No, but at that age I wouldn't let her out to play in the street on a dark October evening either.
-
You haven’t proven anything.
Yes I have. I have proven that Spam selectively quoted from the interview, failing to mention that in the previous sentence Kate mentioned Madeleine by name and that her and her husband referred to Madeleine by name frequently throughout the interview. You claimed to be gobsmacked that the parents would fail to use their child’s name and I’ve proven that they did, regularly.
-
If that’s the case think what can befall them in an unlocked apartment in half an hour writhing access to a cooker, kettle, steep stairs etc, etc, etc.
You seem to be saying... ah 30 seconds or 30 minutes...it’s all the same. If it’s going to happen it’ll happen.
No, what I am saying is that you can’t say for certain that no harm would ever come to grandchildren under your watch, it’s arrant nonsense and arrogant to claim you have some sort of parental superpower, IMO.
-
Indeed, so best policy is not to leave them to fend for themselves while little more than babies. IMO
-
No, but at that age I wouldn't let her out to play in the street on a dark October evening either.
So you believe that your granddaughter wouldn’t be safe if left alone for 30 minutes ?
-
Indeed, so best policy is not to leave them to fend for themselves while little more than babies. IMO
...and if you really,really have to- then pay heed to the 3 year old who comes to tell you she is concerned about being left to baby sit when she is tired herself and needs her sleep and is upset her brother is crying and no one is there.
What does one do in these circumstances... well McCanns just bloody ignored it- if it ever happened that is.
-
...and if you really,really have to- then pay heed to the 3 year old who comes to tell you she is concerned about being left to baby sit when she is tired herself and needs her sleep and is upset her brother is crying and no one is there.
What does one do in these circumstances... well McCanns just bloody ignored it- if it ever happened that is.
Yes, one just doesn't know
-
So you believe that your granddaughter wouldn’t be safe if left alone for 30 minutes ?
Not out in the street at aged five in the dark .
No..
In her bed, possibly a little safer.
-
No, what I am saying is that you can’t say for certain that no harm would ever come to grandchildren under your watch, it’s arrant nonsense and arrogant to claim you have some sort of parental superpower, IMO.
What I can say is that they will never come to any harm because I left them for dangerous amounts of time and what I can also say is that my grandchildren’s parent’s will never be fearful of being charged with neglect.
-
Not out in the street at aged five in the dark .
No..
In her bed, possibly a little safer.
Unless she’s tied to it I think not.
-
Indeed, so best policy is not to leave them to fend for themselves while little more than babies. IMO
I agree.
Best not to leave any child who is little more than a baby either inside or outside, whether in the street, or in a a play park,.or in a garden,or in a field without adult supervision.
-
I agree.
Best not to leave any child who is little more than a baby either inside or outside, whether in the street, or in a a play park,.or in a garden,or in a field without adult supervision.
Or in an unsecured, unfamiliar apartment?
-
Unless she’s tied to it I think not.
As a parent I did always think my children were possibly a little safer in their beds than out playing in the street.
-
What I can say is that they will never come to any harm because I left them for dangerous amounts of time and what I can also say is that my grandchildren’s parent’s will never be fearful of being charged with neglect.
You just don’t know.
-
Or in an unsecured, unfamiliar apartment?
I'm really not sure which would be the more worrying situation for a young child to be in.
In a dark street outside without parental supervision.
In bed asleep in an unsecured, unfamiliar apartment without parental supervision.
In a garden without parental supervision.
In a field without parental supervision.
-
As a parent I did always think my children were possibly a little safer in their beds than out playing in the street.
i
While you were in the house I’d agree. Did you ever leave them there, alone, for 30 minutes ?
Do you know that under fives are at most risk from accidents in the home and that accidents are the biggest cause of death in children over one ?
-
I'm really not sure which would be the more worrying situation for a young child to be in.
In a dark street outside without parental supervision.
In bed asleep in an unsecured, unfamiliar apartment without parental supervision.
In a garden without parental supervision.
In a field without parental supervision.
To be honest, as a young child I was frequently in all those situations (substitute fields for jungle and rubber plantations filled with menacing rubber tappers and poisonous snakes), never did me no harm!
-
To be honest, as a young child I was frequently in all those situations (substitute fields for jungle and rubber plantations filled with menacing rubber tappers and poisonous snakes), never did me no harm!
One of the few lucky ones by the sound of it.
-
To be honest, as a young child I was frequently in all those situations (substitute fields for jungle and rubber plantations filled with menacing rubber tappers and poisonous snakes), never did me no harm!
Exactly my point.
My childhood too....Apart from the menacing.rubber tappers and the poisonous snakes.
But at the wrong moment, at the wrong time and with the horribly wrong person lurking about.
That would be the outcome for most disappeared,.murdered child.
-
One of the few lucky ones by the sound of it.
LOL, no, we all played out all the time, hardly ever saw our parents, we had idyllic happy childhoods, if not entirely risk free.. The only child I knew who came to harm died on the rugby pitch.
-
To be honest, as a young child I was frequently in all those situations (substitute fields for jungle and rubber plantations filled with menacing rubber tappers and poisonous snakes), never did me no harm!
My middle son aged four used to run off down the kampong on his own. He had a whale of a time.
-
My middle son aged four used to run off down the kampong on his own. He had a whale of a time.
The worst harm I ever came to was getting bitten by red ants. I also fell off a horse and broke my arm but that was my mother’s fault for fulfilling her own ambition to ride horses via her reluctant child. Ooops, distancing!
-
The worst harm I ever came to was getting bitten by red ants. I also fell off a horse and broke my arm but that was my mother’s fault for fulfilling her own ambition to ride horses via her reluctant child. Ooops, distancing!
Whoops, Me Too. His name is Julian.
-
Whoops, Me Too. His name is Julian.
Who calls their horse Julian?
-
Who calls their horse Julian?
I dunno but the horse I fell off was called John Willy, which used to provoke a snigger.
-
By the time the family, and public, had learned of the unlocked patio doors the narrative of the abductor climbing through the window had taken hold and the unlocked patio doors were relegated to a footnote in the story. The jemmied shutters also had the added advantage of proving that Madelene did wake and wander, a scenario I don’t think the family would be happy about either.
Oh really? ^*&&
So where did Madeleine get the jemmy from ?
Tough little girl, our Madeleine. 8(>((
-
Oh really? ^*&&
So where did Madeleine get the jemmy from ?
Tough little girl, our Madeleine. 8(>((
Home Depot??
-
Children can also come to harm at home while your back is turned, or while you are distracted, by a knock at the door, a pan on the boil, a telephone call, a vosit to the toilet.
This is just an excuse to divert from the McCanns disgraceful descision, but it seems to strengthen the point that leaving babies alone in the apartment can be VERY,VERY Dangerous!
-
This is just an excuse to divert from the McCanns disgraceful descision, but it seems to strengthen the point that leaving babies alone in the apartment can be VERY,VERY Dangerous!
They weren't babies. You seem to be wanting to pull heartstrings in the last few posts.
-
They weren't babies. You seem to be wanting to pull heartstrings in the last few posts.
More pointless pedantry
Babies, Newborns, and Infants
Newborn usually refers to a baby from birth to about 2 months of age.
Infants can be considered children anywhere from birth to 1 year old.
Baby can be used to refer to any child from birth to age 4 years old, thus encompassing newborns, infants, and toddlers.8 May 2019
Baby, Newborn, Infant, and Toddler Definitions - Verywell Family
https://www.verywellfamily.com/difference-between-baby-newborn-infant-toddler-2938...
-
More pointless pedantry
Babies, Newborns, and Infants
Newborn usually refers to a baby from birth to about 2 months of age.
Infants can be considered children anywhere from birth to 1 year old.
Baby can be used to refer to any child from birth to age 4 years old, thus encompassing newborns, infants, and toddlers.8 May 2019
Baby, Newborn, Infant, and Toddler Definitions - Verywell Family
https://www.verywellfamily.com/difference-between-baby-newborn-infant-toddler-2938...
OK OK what about the heartstrings bit. Are you going to prove there are no strings in one's heart. Or worse!
-
They weren't babies. You seem to be wanting to pull heartstrings in the last few posts.
You seem to want to challenge what I write about and the way I write about it. Seriously, it isn't your job. It is beginning to feel like you want to bully/intimidate me. Back off, because I don't do 'the victim thing' -don't read my posts if you are so offended or cannot understand what I am saying.
No need for a grown man to get upset over what is essentially, words typed on a forum. ^*&&
-
OK OK what about the heartstrings bit. Are you going to prove there are no strings in one's heart. Or worse!
No strings.. sorry!
If you ar referring to emotive language that ws not my intention, however that could and should be a McCann trait.
dramatic version played out by T9- someone jemmied the window broke in and stole a little girl.
actual version= unknown could have walked out to get parents, who were drinking and enjoying a child free night, and met with an accident.
-
You seem to want to challenge what I write about and the way I write about it. Seriously, it isn't your job. It is beginning to feel like you want to bully/intimidate me. Back off, because I don't do 'the victim thing' -don't read my posts if you are so offended or cannot understand what I am saying.
No need for a grown man to get upset over what is essentially, words typed on a forum. ^*&&
Words? Words are all I have. You are getting upset by my words.
-
Words? Words are all I have. You are getting upset by my words.
No. I was pointing out your snipes are wasted on me...
-
No. I was pointing out your snipes are wasted on me...
I don't do snipes.
-
No strings.. sorry!
If you ar referring to emotive language that ws not my intention, however that could and should be a McCann trait.
dramatic version played out by T9- someone jemmied the window broke in and stole a little girl.
actual version= unknown could have walked out to get parents, who were drinking and enjoying a child free night, and met with an accident.
I was referring to your emotive language without doubt. You nearly had me in tears too reading it.
-
They weren't babies. You seem to be wanting to pull heartstrings in the last few posts.
They were clearly way, way too young to be left unsupervised.
How do you think the McCanns would have fared had they been some low income family staying in a caravan in Blackpool and going out every night to eat and drink in an on-site bar and carrying out 30 min checks via an unlocked door?
Meeting with the Pope by private jet?
Professional spokesperson?
Appeals by David Beckham, Christiano Ronaldo and John Terry?
Phillip Green, Richard Branson, JK Rowling putting up reward money?
Suing everyone and anyone who dares to disagree or speak out of turn?
The only people the low income family would see are the police and social services!
-
They were clearly way, way too young to be left unsupervised.
How do you think the McCanns would have fared had they been some low income family staying in a caravan in Blackpool and going out every night to eat and drink in an on-site bar and carrying out 30 min checks via an unlocked door?
Meeting with the Pope by private jet?
Professional spokesperson?
Appeals by David Beckham, Christiano Ronaldo and John Terry?
Phillip Green, Richard Branson, JK Rowling putting up reward money?
Suing everyone and anyone who dares to disagree or speak out of turn?
The only people the low income family would see are the police and social services!
It's worth bearing in mind that Mark Warner Group actively promoted the child-listening service in their brochures & no doubt many parents had already availed themselves of this facility in the past at other resorts. I'm not aware that the company were acting illegally or any parents were ever investigated by the police or Social Services for using it.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
It's worth bearing in mind that Mark Warner Group actively promoted the child-listening service in their brochures & no doubt many parents had already availed themselves of this facility in the past at other resorts. I'm not aware that the company were acting illegally or any parents were ever investigated by the police or Social Services for using it.
A couple of weeks back I spent some time trying to find out what the MW services were at the time (2007) and how they were marketed ie suggested age groups but to no avail.
Anyway if we assume it was based on the info you've uploaded the crucial difference is surely that the room listening service did not require guests to leave children in an unlocked apartment? Only the McCanns left the apartment unlocked. The fact the patio doors could not be locked from the outside and they repeatedly exited from them during the night, Sun - Thu, allowed many others, unknown to the McCanns, to know the children were 'home alone' in the unlocked apartment. Imo this is key to MM's disappearance.
Given the apartments could be exited via the patio doors/gates maybe there's an argument that the patio doors should have had the option of locking from outside?
I've asked the question previously: had the apartment been locked would the outcome have been different?
-
A couple of weeks back I spent some time trying to find out what the MW services were at the time (2007) and how they were marketed ie suggested age groups but to no avail.
Anyway if we assume it was based on the info you've uploaded the crucial difference is surely that the room listening service did not require guests to leave children in an unlocked apartment? Only the McCanns left the apartment unlocked. The fact the patio doors could not be locked from the inside and they repeatedly exited from them during the night, Sun - Thu, allowed many others, unknown to the McCanns, to know the children were 'home alone' in the unlocked apartment. Imo this is key to MM's disappearance.
Given the apartments could be exited via the patio doors/gates maybe there's an argument that the patio doors should have had the option of locking from outside?
I've asked the question previously: had the apartment been locked would the outcome have been different?
In my opinion the outcome would have been exactly the same and I do not think the presence of her parents would have made any difference.
I think the apartment was the catalyst.
-
In my opinion the outcome would have been exactly the same and I do not think the presence of her parents would have made any difference.
I think the apartment was the catalyst.
Are you saying the outcome in your imo would be the same:
1. Regardless of whether or not the apartment was locked?
2. Regardless of whether or not the apartment was locked and whether or not the McCanns were inside?
3. Regardless of whether or not the McCanns were inside?
In what way do you believe the apartment was the catalyst?
-
Are you saying the outcome in your imo would be the same:
1. Regardless of whether or not the apartment was locked?
2. Regardless of whether or not the apartment was locked and whether or not the McCanns were inside?
3. Regardless of whether or not the McCanns were inside?
In what way do you believe the apartment was the catalyst?
The Appartment was right on the corner and relatively easily accessible, and the front area was in darkness.
If Madeleine was targeted, which I believe, then the abductors would have got to her somehow or another, even at night when her parents were there and sleeping.
-
The Appartment was right on the corner and relatively easily accessible, and the front area was in darkness.
If Madeleine was targeted, which I believe, then the abductors would have got to her somehow or another, even at night when her parents were there and sleeping.
But if you consider apartment block 4 (to the left of 5 looking at them from poolside) the corner apartment was equally accessible and dark.
Why would MM herself be targeted?
-
But if you consider apartment block 4 (to the left of 5 looking at them from poolside) the corner apartment was equally accessible and dark.
Why would MM herself be targeted?
Perhaps it was not Madeleine in particular ... perhaps she met the profile the abductor wanted.
-
Perhaps it was not Madeleine in particular ... perhaps she met the profile the abductor wanted.
Which was by definition MM who just happened to be 'home alone' in an unlocked apartment. He/she certainly struck lucky!
-
Perhaps it was not Madeleine in particular ... perhaps she met the profile the abductor wanted.
But I thought she was the chosen one with the special bloodline 8(>((
-
Which was by definition MM who just happened to be 'home alone' in an unlocked apartment. He/she certainly struck lucky!
I don't think that luck came into it. I think the a well rehearsed plan was in operation into operation and I don't think the unlocked patio door had anything to do with it.
I think the consequence of her parents dining about 35 seconds distance away was relevant only in that the opportunity to abduct Madeleine was grasped perhaps earlier than anticipated.
-
I don't think that luck came into it. I think the a well rehearsed plan was in operation into operation and I don't think the unlocked patio door had anything to do with it.
I think the consequence of her parents dining about 35 seconds distance away was relevant only in that the opportunity to abduct Madeleine was grasped perhaps earlier than anticipated.
But the chances are that IF the patio doors had been locked and IF her parents had been at home it is likely that we would never have heard her name.
-
But the chances are that IF the patio doors had been locked and IF her parents had been at home it is likely that we would never have heard her name.
That word "if" would apply to all abducted, murdered children.
-
That word "if" would apply to all abducted, murdered children.
The parent’s actions had a conscious element to it...Kate herself said she was unsure if they should leave the children alone...you don’t find this in other missing children cases.
-
Despite the success of this organised abduction gang in stealing Maddie & leaving no trace. They haven't gone on to abduct any other child, either in the Algarve, Portugal or anywhere on planet earth.
Perhaps they just went back to their day jobs.
-
The parent’s actions had a conscious element to it...Kate herself said she was unsure if they should leave the children alone...you don’t find this in other missing children cases.
And you know for a fact that the parents of other missing, murdered children didn't have the same conscious decision to make or the same hesitation in that decision which allowed their child to be abducted or murdered?
-
But if you consider apartment block 4 (to the left of 5 looking at them from poolside) the corner apartment was equally accessible and dark.
Why would MM herself be targeted?
G4A was probably unoccupied.
-
And you know for a fact that the parents of other missing, murdered children didn't have the same conscious decision to make or the same hesitation in that decision which allowed their child to be abducted or murdered?
Doesn't matter, its not them who are being discussed on this forum
-
I don't think that luck came into it. I think the a well rehearsed plan was in operation into operation and I don't think the unlocked patio door had anything to do with it.
I think the consequence of her parents dining about 35 seconds distance away was relevant only in that the opportunity to abduct Madeleine was grasped perhaps earlier than anticipated.
So you are with the jemmied/non jemmied window entry exit. @)(++(*
Only 35 seconds away. yet they saw and heard nothing. then they claimed they could 'see the apartment' well they saw the roof at least. It was like sitting in your garden a cultural thing they claimed.
utter tosh.
Spammer says
"Despite the success of this organised abduction gang in stealing Maddie & leaving no trace. They haven't gone on to abduct any other child, either in the Algarve, Portugal or anywhere on planet earth.
Perhaps they just went back to their day jobs."
Or perhaps they did it as a bet...
-
And you know for a fact that the parents of other missing, murdered children didn't have the same conscious decision to make or the same hesitation in that decision which allowed their child to be abducted or murdered?
Letting your children out to play or loosing sight of them for a few minutes in a shop are a natural part of everyday life. Leaving 3 under fours in an unlocked, unfamiliar apartment, and shockingly, doing it because it might be better for your under four year old, if they woke up alone, to come out into the night to find you, isn’t.
-
The parent’s actions had a conscious element to it...Kate herself said she was unsure if they should leave the children alone...you don’t find this in other missing children cases.
But you certainly do find plenty only too willing to blame the parents of murdered children for the actions of others which are most certainly outwith their control.
One on the list is the mother of much loved April Jones who has been found wanting in the Kangaroo Court of opinion ...
Snip
“These people get a bit of information, they don’t have the full story, and they make a judgement. But it’s horrendous for families. These are families who have enough to put up with,” she explained.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11527029/April-Jones-mum-receives-hate-mail-blaming-her-for-the-schoolgirls-murder.html
-
But you certainly do find plenty only too willing to blame the parents of murdered children for the actions of others which are most certainly outwith their control.
One on the list is the mother of much loved April Jones who has been found wanting in the Kangaroo Court of opinion ...
Snip
“These people get a bit of information, they don’t have the full story, and they make a judgement. But it’s horrendous for families. These are families who have enough to put up with,” she explained.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11527029/April-Jones-mum-receives-hate-mail-blaming-her-for-the-schoolgirls-murder.html
See my post above.
-
Letting your children out to play or loosing sight of them for a few minutes in a shop are a natural part of everyday life. Leaving 3 under fours in an unlocked, unfamiliar apartment, and shocking
Letting your children out of your sight at any time when they are young always requires a decision to be made, sometimes when the dangers and safeguards are recognised , parents may make the wrong decision.
Leaving your child asleep in an unlocked apartment and checking on them was a wrong decision.
Equally allowing very young children out to play on a dark evening without parental observation is also a wrong decision.
It may be a natural part of everyday life for some children but it is still placing a child in danger.
I would have chosen to do neither.
-
But you certainly do find plenty only too willing to blame the parents of murdered children for the actions of others which are most certainly outwith their control.
One on the list is the mother of much loved April Jones who has been found wanting in the Kangaroo Court of opinion ...
Snip
“These people get a bit of information, they don’t have the full story, and they make a judgement. But it’s horrendous for families. These are families who have enough to put up with,” she explained.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11527029/April-Jones-mum-receives-hate-mail-blaming-her-for-the-schoolgirls-murder.html
I don't know why you use the April Jones story for this debate. We are all aware that there are nasty ,sad, ignorant people who use social media for a perverse bit of fun. but it is best not to try and associate those imbiciles with people who do not agree with the McCanns story. Especially since their accounts can be pulled apart quite easily!
It has been proved in a court of law that April ws indeed abducted by someone who knew her and her family and murdered.
McCanns - just hearsay she was abducted.
-
Letting your children out of your sight at any time when they are young always requires a decision to be made, sometimes when the dangers and safeguards are recognised , parents may make the wrong decision.
Leaving your child asleep in an unlocked apartment and checking on them was a wrong decision.
Equally allowing very young children out to play on a dark evening without parental observation is also a wrong decision.
It may be a natural part of everyday life for some children but it is still placing a child in danger.
I would have chosen to do neither.
Good for you 8((()*/
-
But you certainly do find plenty only too willing to blame the parents of murdered children for the actions of others which are most certainly outwith their control.
One on the list is the mother of much loved April Jones who has been found wanting in the Kangaroo Court of opinion ...
Snip
“These people get a bit of information, they don’t have the full story, and they make a judgement. But it’s horrendous for families. These are families who have enough to put up with,” she explained.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11527029/April-Jones-mum-receives-hate-mail-blaming-her-for-the-schoolgirls-murder.html
Sara Payne was also subjected to the same hateful abuse.
-
Despite the success of this organised abduction gang in stealing Maddie & leaving no trace. They haven't gone on to abduct any other child, either in the Algarve, Portugal or anywhere on planet earth.
Perhaps they just went back to their day jobs.
How do you know that?
Do you think anyone with a modicum of intelligence would want to precipitate another furore replicating what happened after Madeleine disappeared?
There are many hundreds of thousands displaced, orphaned, lost or abandoned children all around the Mediterranean who might vanish as Madeleine did with no-one any the wiser or to raise the alarm or insist they are looked for.
-
Good for you 8((()*/
Thank you.
It's not so easy when children get older and you do want to and indeed have to encourage some independence .
Then the decisions are much more difficult to make.
-
Letting your children out of your sight at any time when they are young always requires a decision to be made, sometimes when the dangers and safeguards are recognised , parents may make the wrong decision.
Leaving your child asleep in an unlocked apartment and checking on them was a wrong decision.
Equally allowing very young children out to play on a dark evening without parental observation is also a wrong decision.
It may be a natural part of everyday life for some children but it is still placing a child in danger.
I would have chosen to do neither.
Nonsense.
-
Thank you.
It's not so easy when children get older and you do want to and indeed have to encourage some independence .
Then the decisions are much more difficult to make.
Certainly shouldn't be a problem with the under 5 s -IMO
-
So you are with the jemmied/non jemmied window entry exit. @)(++(*
Only 35 seconds away. yet they saw and heard nothing. then they claimed they could 'see the apartment' well they saw the roof at least. It was like sitting in your garden a cultural thing they claimed.
utter tosh.
Spammer says
"Despite the success of this organised abduction gang in stealing Maddie & leaving no trace. They haven't gone on to abduct any other child, either in the Algarve, Portugal or anywhere on planet earth.
Perhaps they just went back to their day jobs."
Or perhaps they did it as a bet...
Please do not presume on what I 'am with' or not with ... I find your posts are invariably nonsensical or patronising and ill informed ... and this one adheres to that level in my opinion.
-
Nonsense.
In your opinion.
I disagree.
Letting a small child aged five or under out to play on a dark evening out with parental observation is in my opinion putting a child in danger.
Not only from road traffic but also the possibility of being hurt, abducted or murdered.
-
Certainly shouldn't be a problem with the under 5 s -IMO
It shouldn't be but many five year olds and even younger are allowed to play unsupervised in parks, streets etc.
-
In your opinion.
I disagree.
Letting a small child aged five or under out to play on a dark evening out with parental observation is in my opinion putting a child in danger.
Not only from road traffic but also the possibility of being hurt, abducted or murdered.
I think abduction would be very much the bottom of the list - after all, as Gerry himself said, abduction is incredibly rare - or something to that effect
-
Please do not presume on what I 'am with' or not with ... I find your posts are invariably nonsensical or patronising and ill informed ... and this one adheres to that level in my opinion.
And your opinion counts for nothing. It is you who claimed the unlocked door played no part in your percieved abduction- the other access was the chimney?
Your posts re the subject are mostly newspaper clips and implying all those who do not adhere to the McCann agenda are evil trolls.You also type as someone who plays the word of the day and how to use it in a sentence game. (&^&
-
I think abduction would be very much the bottom of the list - after all, as Gerry himself said, abduction is incredibly rare - or something to that effect
I agree.
But yet it does happen.
-
So you are with the jemmied/non jemmied window entry exit. @)(++(*
Only 35 seconds away. yet they saw and heard nothing. then they claimed they could 'see the apartment' well they saw the roof at least. It was like sitting in your garden a cultural thing they claimed.
utter tosh.
Spammer says
"Despite the success of this organised abduction gang in stealing Maddie & leaving no trace. They haven't gone on to abduct any other child, either in the Algarve, Portugal or anywhere on planet earth.
Perhaps they just went back to their day jobs."
Or perhaps they did it as a bet...
It amuses me.
Yet another sceptic poster who does not acknowledge the existence of a front door.
I wonder why?
-
I don't think that luck came into it. I think the a well rehearsed plan was in operation into operation and I don't think the unlocked patio door had anything to do with it.
I think the consequence of her parents dining about 35 seconds distance away was relevant only in that the opportunity to abduct Madeleine was grasped perhaps earlier than anticipated.
But your opinions are at odds with experts and police officers from the UK of long experience all of whom believed the unlocked patio door was highly relevant:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khP0dEsZaug
https://www.bgpglobalservices.com/happened-madeleine-mccann-2/
-
So you are with the jemmied/non jemmied window entry exit. @)(++(*
Only 35 seconds away. yet they saw and heard nothing. then they claimed they could 'see the apartment' well they saw the roof at least. It was like sitting in your garden a cultural thing they claimed.
utter tosh.
Spammer says
"Despite the success of this organised abduction gang in stealing Maddie & leaving no trace. They haven't gone on to abduct any other child, either in the Algarve, Portugal or anywhere on planet earth.
Perhaps they just went back to their day jobs."
Or perhaps they did it as a bet...
Totally wrong,
1) they saw virtually all the back of the apartment.
2) they did not see the roof of the apartment
Of course they could see the apartment. Anyone else would agree with the Mccanns on that one.
Have you been there and looked from the Tapas restaurant? I have
-
But your opinions are at odds with experts and police officers from the UK of long experience all of whom believed the unlocked patio door was highly relevant:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khP0dEsZaug
https://www.bgpglobalservices.com/happened-madeleine-mccann-2/
I read Briettas post as meaning that she didn't believe the patio door was the way of entering or leaving.
Having been there, seen a good deal and thought about it in great depth and detail, I totally concur
I absolutely agree with Brietta
In my opinion the way in and out was via the front door
-
I read Briettas post as meaning that she didn't believe the patio door was the way of entering or leaving.
Having been there, seen a geed deal and thought about it in great depth and detail, I totally concur
I absolutely agree.
In my opinion the way in and out was via the front door
Well your opinions are also at odds with all British based experts and police officers of long experience in that they believe the patio door was used to enter and most believe it was also used to exit with MM.
We're all entitled to our opinions, lay and professional alike, but I tend to agree with those experts and police officers of long experience who believe the patio door was used to enter and exit.
-
Well your opinions are also at odds with all British based experts and police officers of long experience in that they believe the patio door was used to enter and most believe it was also used to exit with MM.
We're all entitled to our opinions, lay and professional alike, but I tend to agree with those experts and police officers of long experience who believe the patio door was used to enter and exit.
Maybe it was neither.
-
Maybe it was neither.
The open shutter/window? Nah! 8(0(*
-
The open shutter/window? Nah! 8(0(*
Enter and exit by whom?
-
G4A was probably unoccupied.
G4A is not on the corner of two streets.
As for 5A, the one down the hill to Baptista and the Commercial Centre was probably busier than than the one just north of block 5 car park, but I have no means of measuring it.
-
Enter and exit by whom?
No one. If the forensic scientist is correct the window/shutter was 'staged'.
-
In your opinion.
I disagree.
Letting a small child aged five or under out to play on a dark evening out with parental observation is in my opinion putting a child in danger.
Not only from road traffic but also the possibility of being hurt, abducted or murdered.
What you are really trying to say, without saying it, is that April Jones’s mother put her in danger. Please have the courage of your convictions.
I disagree. April was not alone, she was with friends. Madeleine was one her own in an unsecured, unfamiliar apartment close to a public road with no one but two under 2 year olds for company. I can’t see April’s mum ignoring her daughter if she told her she had been upset, can you ?
-
How do you know that?
Do you think anyone with a modicum of intelligence would want to precipitate another furore replicating what happened after Madeleine disappeared?
There are many hundreds of thousands displaced, orphaned, lost or abandoned children all around the Mediterranean who might vanish as Madeleine did with no-one any the wiser or to raise the alarm or insist they are looked for.
Why choose a difficult target like Madeleine with hundreds of thousands ripe for the picking?
-
Why choose a difficult target like Madeleine with hundreds of thousands ripe for the picking?
What made MM a difficult target?
Who are the thousands ripe for picking?
Picking for what?
-
What you are really trying to say, without saying it, is that April Jones’s mother put her in danger. Please have the courage of your convictions.
I disagree. April was not alone, she was with friends. Madeleine was one her own in an unsecured, unfamiliar apartment close to a public road with no one but two under 2 year olds for company. I can’t see April’s mum ignoring her daughter if she told her she had been upset, can you ?
Of course you are correct.
I had no wish to name any parent who after weighing up the dangers and safeguards of allowing their child to be in a situation which could present some danger, did make the wrong decision..
We will never agree, especially if you consider a five year old child to be safe outside playing with her peers on a dark October evening.
The difference is you choose to condemn one set of parents!
I condemn neither.
-
Of course you are correct.
I had no wish to name any parent who after weighing up the dangers and safeguards of allowing their child to be in a situation which could present some danger, did make the wrong decision..
We will never agree, especially if you consider a five year old child to be safe outside playing with her peers on a dark October evening.
The difference is you choose to condemn one set of parents!
I condemn neither.
Isn’t this condemnation?
“Letting a small child aged five or under out to play on a dark evening out with parental observation is in my opinion putting a child in danger.”
Sounds very like it to me.
-
Isn’t this condemnation?
“Letting a small child aged five or under out to play on a dark evening out with parental observation is in my opinion putting a child in danger.”
Sounds very like it to me.
Does it?
It's stating a fact.
It is a danger.
Every time a child of five is not being supervised by an adult, there is an element of risk.
Hence the reason for playground supervision.
Don't you believe allowing a five year old to play out in the street in the dark and unobserved by an adult does put the child at risk of something untoward happening?
-
Does it?
It's stating a fact.
It is a danger.
Every time a child of five is not being supervised by an adult, there is an element of risk.
Hence the reason for playground supervision.
Don't you believe allowing a five year old to play out in the street in the dark and unobserved by an adult does put the child at risk of something untoward happening?
So you’re condemning April’s mother’s decision?
-
[qote author=Faithldc=10827.msg543156#msg543156 date=1562433321]
So you’re condemning April’s mother’s decision?
[/quote]
No.
-
[qote author=Faithldc=10827.msg543156#msg543156 date=1562433321]
So you’re condemning April’s mother’s decision?
No.
Yes you are.
-
Yes you are.
No, I'm not.
I appreciate that you cannot accept that I can be critical of both Madeleine and April's parents decisions without feeling the need to condemn them.
You seem to only condemn Madeleine`s parents
-
No, I'm not.
I appreciate that you cannot accept that I can be critical of both Madeleine and April's parents decisions without feeling the need to condemn them.
You seem to only condemn Madeleine`s parents
I’m sure April’s mother would take it as condemnation...and that’s really all that matters.
The difference between the McCanns and April’s mother is April’s mother had no doubt that her daughter was safe, Kate wasn’t sure but left her alone anyway.
-
I’m sure April’s mother would take it as condemnation...and that’s really all that matters.
The difference between the McCanns and April’s mother is April’s mother had no doubt that her daughter was safe, Kate wasn’t sure but left her alone anyway.
I don't think April's mother would take.it as condemnation.
She, herself expressed that she was unsure of allowing her out.
How do you know she was in no doubt April was safe.
Sadly she was wrong.
You obviously would allow a five year old out to play on a dark evening without adult.supervision.
I wouldn't condemn you either
-
(ty6e[
I don't think April's mother would take.it as condemnation.
She, herself expressed that she was unsure of allowing her out.
How do you know she had asked in no doubt April was safe.
Sadly she was wrong.
You obviously would allow a five year old out to play on a dark evening without adult.supervision.
I wouldn't condemn you either
I think no matter how well meaning you believe yourself to be April’s mother would definitely see it as condemnation...it is one thing admitting it herself, another for you to rub it in.
-
I think no matter how well meaning you believe yourself to be April’s mother would definitely see it as condemnation...it is one thing admitting it herself, another for you to rub it in.
Sorry for the silly emoticon.
On the useless phone.
Can you not see the hypocrisy in your post?
-
Sorry for the silly emoticon.
On the useless phone.
Can you not see the hypocrisy in your post?
I can certainly see the hypocrisy in yours.
-
I think no matter how well meaning you believe yourself to be April’s mother would definitely see it as condemnation...it is one thing admitting it herself, another for you to rub it in.
Oh my!
-
I can certainly see the hypocrisy in yours.
Well I can most definitely see hypocrisy and double standards and blinkered vision in yours.
I have no doubt you will respond but I am now going to watch Andy and Serena.
-
Well I can most definitely see hypocrisy and double standards and blinkered vision in yours.
I have no doubt you will respond but I am now going to watch Andy and Serena.
Enjoy the tennis. Fingers crossed for Andy.
-
Why choose a difficult target like Madeleine with hundreds of thousands ripe for the picking?
Her very special bloodline.
Madeleine McCann is pure bloodline Canaanite /Phoenician, it seems.
Modern thinking challenges that Jesus was Jewish and postulates that he was Phoenician / CANNaanite
https://www.lau.edu.lb/news-events/news/archive/was_jesus_phoenician/
It also postulates that Jesus survived the crucifiction thanks largely to the intervention of his wealthy and influential uncle " Joseph Of Arimathea". Modern anaylists think[Name removed]esus married Mary Magdeleine and settled in Southern France
I wonder if Gerrys name is a straight derivation from his origins ? Is his ancestral line straight from Jesus, John the Baptist or some other famous biblical name ?
People couldn't spell until recent centuries. Most modern names derive from ancient names, tribes, places etc.
Let's look at the names:
Gerry McCANN
Kate McCann daughter of father Healey and mother (Nee KENNedy), Meaning that Kate is a KENNedy
Seems that both Madeleines parents are from Canaanite bloodlines, and she s their direct descendent. Their first born as is Madeleine, so could she be from Jesus' bloodline ... or someone similar ?
Is someone , who at present is the first born child of a string of previous first borns in the line, desperately wanting to keep the first born contemporary descendant of Jesus, or some other revered biblical person alive ? To father that child with all its prestige etc ?
Has Madeleine been taken to produce this next in line ?
Dunno,
but if so, she will most probably have had a very priveledged upbringing ... and probably have been groomed to the idea that she willl mother the next Messiah / Cristo ... and even might like the idea.
IMO
Can you think of any other reason for the people who took her to go to such extremes of seemingly such meticulous planning ?
-
Are you actually suggesting that Madeleine may be being prepared to carry Jesus when he is reborn ?
That is not an impossibility.
The Sinclairs (St Clairs) and their offshoots are said to be from the sacred line. (Jesus and Mary Magdeleine)
Lyell admitted, on this very forum to being from the sacred line too ... but very early on. Guess it will have been wiped now.
With Madeleine, it could be any famous and worshipped Canaanite person, probably from biblical times and of pure bloodline connections. This modern day family does not want that bloodlne to die out, nor their prestige to vanish ... so they found the purist, most likeable and intelligent (very) young person they could to mother the new pureblood child.
Also first born as Kate was and I believe Gerry was first born son.
These are just ideas, Faith, but I have a personal reason within my own family, why I think these pure bloodlines are all important within several races/sects. Something my Grandfather said just before his only son died in his mid fifties forties. First born.
My mum didn't understand it and neither did I, but I think I do now
-
Any more of that and I will be dishing out Warning Points.
-
Any more of that and I will be dishing out Warning Points.
?
-
?
Nastiness directed at Sadie, which has been removed overnight.
-
Nastiness directed at Sadie, which has been removed overnight.
Early this morning actually. I am an hour ahead of you all. Just so you all know who dunnit.
-
[qote author=Faithldc=10827.msg543156#msg543156 date=1562433321]
So you’re condemning April’s mother’s decision?
No.
Here I must disagree with you Engarth.
I personally think it was a very bad decision to allow a five year old to play, in the dark, ACROSS A MAIN ROAD, with a handful of other kids.
And then poor Ben Needham,
... allowed to play on waste land type terrain (I believe) aged two, with a giant hydraulic earth moving tractor operating. Crazy.
He loved cars and would be fascinated by such a huge vehicle with all its moving parts, having died en route.. We don't know, do we? but I fear that his end was being tipped in another place
We all make mistakes however, and the carers must be forgiven imo. They have learned their lesson in a dreadful way.
-
Here I must disagree with you Engarth.
I personally think it was a very bad decision to allow a five year old to play, in the dark, ACROSS A MAIN ROAD, with a handful of other kids.
And then poor Ben Needham,
... allowed to play on waste land type terrain (I believe) aged two, with a giant hydraulic earth moving tractor operating. Crazy.
He loved cars and would be fascinated by such a huge vehicle with all its moving parts, having died en route.. We don't know, do we? but I fear that his end was being tipped in another place
We all make mistakes however, and the carers must be forgiven imo. They have learned their lesson in a dreadful way.
The McCanns decision wasn’t a mistake, it was a calculated decision ( see my strap-line ).
-
The McCanns decision wasn’t a mistake, it was a calculated decision ( see my strap-line ).
What a calculated decision can't ever be a mistake?
-
What a calculated decision can't ever be a mistake?
Of course it can.
-
What a calculated decision can't ever be a mistake?
It is the factor missing in the other cases cited.
-
It is the factor missing in the other cases cited.
Rubbish. It was a conscious decision by April Jones mother to let her daughter play out a little later than usual.
-
The McCanns decision wasn’t a mistake, it was a calculated decision ( see my strap-line ).
Ben Needham:
Mum went to work leaving Gran and Gramp tied up with Ben and painting /renovating. They all must have thought about it. They made a massive mistake. A totally wrong decision.
But we are all capable of bad decisions
April Jones
Family allowed a five year old child to play with some other kids ACROSS THE MAIN ROAD, in the dark largely out of sight. Bad decision.
At times we all make bad decisions, but these families and their little ones have paid the price.
Now I dont want to increase the angst of these parents, so I will back off.
But I do wonder why the Mccanns are always being kicked and pulled down, whilst others are promoted.
-
Rubbish. It was a conscious decision by April Jones mother to let her daughter play out a little later than usual.
To go out to play is an everyday occurrence. To be left in alone in an insecure apartment with your two baby siblings isn’t.
That they left the children alone in an unfamiliar apartment is bad enough but to then leave the door open for no other reason than their convenience is little short of atrocious.
-
To go out to play is an everyday occurrence. To be left in alone in an insecure apartment with your two baby siblings isn’t.
That they left the children alone in an unfamiliar apartment is bad enough but to then leave the door open for no other reason than their convenience is little short of atrocious.
goalpost shifting extraordinaire and appeal to emotions or whatever Slarti would deem that particular argument. we were discussing conscious decisions remember?
-
goalpost shifting extraordinaire and appeal to emotions or whatever Slarti would deem that particular argument. we were discussing conscious decisions remember?
It was a conscious decision for the McCanns to play fast as loose with their children’s safety. They knew that Madeleine may wake up but left the door open anyway ( see strap-line ).
-
It was a conscious decision for the McCanns to play fast as loose with their children’s safety. They knew that Madeleine may wake up but left the door open anyway ( see strap-line ).
You’re very proud of your strapline aren’t you? Yes it was a conscious decision, just as it was a conscious decision by parents of other children to let them out of their sights for long enough for them to come to harm. Let’s constantly remind them all of their disastrous decisions until the day they die because that will make us all feel much better about ourselves won’t it?
-
You’re very proud of your strapline aren’t you? Yes it was a conscious decision, just as it was a conscious decision by parents of other children to let them out of their sights for long enough for them to come to harm. Let’s constantly remind them all of their disastrous decisions until the day they die because that will make us all feel much better about ourselves won’t it?
The difference is that the other children’s parents envisaged no danger to their children, the McCanns accepted that there may be but went ahead anyway.
-
You’re very proud of your strapline aren’t you? Yes it was a conscious decision, just as it was a conscious decision by parents of other children to let them out of their sights for long enough for them to come to harm. Let’s constantly remind them all of their disastrous decisions until the day they die because that will make us all feel much better about ourselves won’t it?
Well why not? I'm sure its as useful as carping on about Amaral or Grime or any other perceived McCann enemy ?{)(**
-
Well why not? I'm sure its as useful as carping on about Amaral or Grime or any other perceived McCann enemy ?{)(**
Carping about the McCanns bad decisions is useful to those who need to feel good about themselves as parents, it’s an insecurity thing IMO.
-
To go out to play is an everyday occurrence. To be left in alone in an insecure apartment with your two baby siblings isn’t.
That they left the children alone in an unfamiliar apartment is bad enough but to then leave the door open for no other reason than their convenience is little short of atrocious.
To go out and play is an everyday occurrence but not for a five year old in the dark and beng across a busy road out of parental vision.
I'm actually quite surprised that you think that is a safe situation for a five year old child.
Both decisions were wrong, both families suffer, both have to live with the consequences of their wrong decisions.
-
Ben Needham:
Mum went to work leaving Gran and Gramp tied up with Ben and painting /renovating. They all must have thought about it. They made a massive mistake. A totally wrong decision.
But we are all capable of bad decisions
April Jones
Family allowed a five year old child to play with some other kids ACROSS THE MAIN ROAD, in the dark largely out of sight. Bad decision.
At times we all make bad decisions, but these families and their little ones have paid the price.
Now I dont want to increase the angst of these parents, so I will back off.
But I do wonder why the Mccanns are always being kicked and pulled down, whilst others are promoted.
Agreed.
-
To go out to play is an everyday occurrence. To be left in alone in an insecure apartment with your two baby siblings isn’t.
That they left the children alone in an unfamiliar apartment is bad enough but to then leave the door open for no other reason than their convenience is little short of atrocious.
It is like comparing apples with oranges= both friuts but not the same.
April and Bens and Jamie Bulgers parents were doing what parents do within a family setting for the good of the family.
Aprils mum was doing household chores, knowing her daghter was playing with friends- allowing her daughter a little independance.
Bens granparents were creating a comfotable family residence for future family holidays-which inclded Ben!
Jamies mum was out shopping for food for her family.
Similarities if going for the abduction story:
Kates and Gerrys behaviour was not for the benefit of the children at all.
Ben, April, and Jamies parents were absolutely distraught- they could not function and were riddled with guilt
Kate and Gerry were functioning extremely well- jogging,blogging, tennis- no emotional sign of guilt -in fact saying it could have happened if they were in the apartment!
Ben, April, and Jamies parents all cooperated fully with the police. in the UK the perptrators were found charged and convicted.
Kate and Gerry has various issued with the police- Kate refusing to answer questions
Bens family spent many years and money going to look for Ben in case he was abducted
Kate and Gerry didn't bother. they went to se lawyers regading a financial transaction via a law suit.
You see NO SIMILARITIES what -so -ever.
-
Carping about the McCanns bad decisions is useful to those who need to feel good about themselves as parents, it’s an insecurity thing IMO.
You reckon? I reckon its more to do with winding McCann supporters up
-
You reckon? I reckon its more to do with winding McCann supporters up
You could be right. But not something to be proud of, is it.
-
You reckon? I reckon its more to do with winding McCann supporters up
Well that would be childish wouldn’t it?!
-
You could be right. But not something to be proud of, is it.
Did anyone say it was?
personally not interested in these little spats, but it is amusing to see people getting annoyed about them
-
Did anyone say it was?
personally not interested in these little spats, but it is amusing to see people getting annoyed about them
What are you interested in exactly?
-
Did anyone say it was?
personally not interested in these little spats, but it is amusing to see people getting annoyed about them
They are going to get even more annoyed when I start Deleting them.
But there is on small favour that you could all do for me. Please don't reply to Nasty or Goading Posts. Just Report them.
-
What are you interested in exactly?
Interested in explanation of the various conundrums and inconsistencies and the contorted excuses they engender. Keeps me entertained for hours .
And , of course, I look forward to OG or whoever bringing forth and prosecuting a culprit.
Very interested in that
-
Interested in explanation of the various conundrums and inconsistencies and the contorted excuses they engender. Keeps me entertained for hours .
And , of course, I look forward to OG or whoever bringing forth and prosecuting a culprit.
Very interested in that
Don't bet your last penny on it.
-
It was a conscious decision for the McCanns to play fast as loose with their children’s safety. They knew that Madeleine may wake up but left the door open anyway ( see strap-line ).
Could you put a link back to your strap-line please.
-
Could you put a link back to your strap-line please.
No.
-
No.
Well, Could you someone put a link back to your Faithlilly's strap-line please?
-
Well, Could you someone put a link back to your Faithlilly's strap-line please?
You do realise it’s on the bottom of my last post, don’t you ?
-
You do realise it’s on the bottom of my last post, don’t you ?
If it is like a signature. I don't see signatures as I've turned them off.
Your signature says:
"'She ( Kate) did, she brought it up and that she, I mean, this is awful in retrospect as well, she asked what my opinion was on, erm, tut, on whether they were okay leaving the, the doors unlocked, because she was saying 'Is it better that if Madeleine wakes up she can get out and find us or', erm, 'or locking it and, you know, finding that we're not there and the door's locked if she woke up', because Madeleine had woken up, what I thought was the night before. Erm, tut, and it was in that context really, just asking, you know, what I thought. So it was obviously something that was on her mind a bit, huh'."
OK part of Fiona's rogatory statement OK. Is that a strap-line?
-
It is like comparing apples with oranges= both friuts but not the same.
April and Bens and Jamie Bulgers parents were doing what parents do within a family setting for the good of the family.
Aprils mum was doing household chores, knowing her daghter was playing with friends- allowing her daughter a little independance.
Bens granparents were creating a comfotable family residence for future family holidays-which inclded Ben!
Jamies mum was out shopping for food for her family.
Similarities if going for the abduction story:
Kates and Gerrys behaviour was not for the benefit of the children at all.
Ben, April, and Jamies parents were absolutely distraught- they could not function and were riddled with guilt
Kate and Gerry were functioning extremely well- jogging,blogging, tennis- no emotional sign of guilt -in fact saying it could have happened if they were in the apartment!
Ben, April, and Jamies parents all cooperated fully with the police. in the UK the perptrators were found charged and convicted.
Kate and Gerry has various issued with the police- Kate refusing to answer questions
Bens family spent many years and money going to look for Ben in case he was abducted
Kate and Gerry didn't bother. they went to se lawyers regading a financial transaction via a law suit.
You see NO SIMILARITIES what -so -ever.
Imo the McCanns were totally irreponsible, bordering on neglectful, in leaving the children. The 'Find Madeleine' campaign was a disaster imo. Not only did it create a scatter gun approach to the investigation but to many people the McCanns appeared arrogant with a massive sense of entitlement which alienated them from many.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Azaria_Chamberlain
Media involvement and bias
The Chamberlain trial was the most publicised in Australian history.[5][better source needed] Given that most of the evidence presented in the case against Lindy Chamberlain was later rejected, the case is now used as an example of how media and bias can adversely affect a trial.[20]
Public and media opinion during the trial was polarised, with "fanciful rumours and sickening jokes" and many cartoons.[21][22] In particular, antagonism was directed towards Lindy Chamberlain for reportedly not behaving like a "stereotypical" grieving mother.[23] Much was made of the Chamberlains' Seventh-day Adventist religion, including false allegations that the church was actually a cult that killed infants as part of bizarre religious ceremonies,[24] that the family took a newborn baby to a remote desert location, and that Lindy Chamberlain showed little emotion during the proceedings.[citation needed]
One anonymous tip was received from a man, falsely claiming to be Azaria's doctor in Mount Isa, that the name "Azaria" meant "sacrifice in the wilderness" (it actually means "God helped").[25] Others claimed that Lindy Chamberlain was a witch.[26]
The press appeared to seize upon any point that could be sensationalised. For example, it was reported that Lindy Chamberlain dressed her baby in a black dress. This provoked negative opinion, despite the trends of the early 1980s, during which black and navy cotton girls' dresses were in fashion, often trimmed with brightly coloured ribbon, or printed with brightly coloured sprigs of flowers.[27][28][
-
So you’re condemning April’s mother’s decision?
Aprils mother condemned her own decision, just as the McCann's did.
April's Mum thought April was safe, the McCann's thought Madeleine was safe.
I wouldn't let a five year old out to play in the evening, my five year old would have been in bed, or at least be having a bedtime story ready to go to sleep.
I wouldn't have left my child of almost four in an apartment by herself either.
The fact is that parents make decisions, some of them are not good decisions as they found out and regret for the rest of their lives.
What I hate is people going on and on about it, I don't condemn the McCann's or April's Mum, they made decisions for their children, which were bad ones, it's not my place to condemn them, they condemn themselves they torture themselves daily with what they did. I feel sadness for them, the wish to let them know not to condemn themselves, children should be safe where ever they are, it's the evil people out there who should be condemned. IMO
-
Aprils mother condemned her own decision, just as the McCann's did.
April's Mum thought April was safe, the McCann's thought Madeleine was safe.
I wouldn't let a five year old out to play in the evening, my five year old would have been in bed, or at least be having a bedtime story ready to go to sleep.
I wouldn't have left my child of almost four in an apartment by herself either.
The fact is that parents make decisions, some of them are not good decisions as they found out and regret for the rest of their lives.
What I hate is people going on and on about it, I don't condemn the McCann's or April's Mum, they made decisions for their children, which were bad ones, it's not my place to condemn them, they condemn themselves they torture themselves daily with what they did. I feel sadness for them, the wish to let them know not to condemn themselves, children should be safe where ever they are, it's the evil people out there who should be condemned. IMO
April’s mum thought April would be safe. Kate questioned whether her children would be safe but took the option that suited herself and her husband, not her children, most.
-
Have another dig, feel better now?
if someone would have suggested that 5 year olds routinely play outside - it's what Brits do - I'd be more inclined to agree with that than we routinely leave them unattended on holiday.
As a council estate kid it was the norm as I was growing up and little has changed. So there's this perception of societal norms and the concept of perceived negligence to be considered.
-
if someone would have suggested that 5 year olds routinely play outside - it's what Brits do - I'd be more inclined to agree with that than we routinely leave them unattended on holiday.
As a council estate kid it was the norm as I was growing up and little has changed. So there's this perception of societal norms and the concept of perceived negligence to be considered.
I went to a hotel in Cornwall next to Jamie Oliver's 15
Children were not allowed in the rest aurant after 6 so the advice on the hotel website was to leave the kids asleep in the room and pop accross to the restaurant
-
I went to a hotel in Cornwall next to Jamie Oliver's 15
Children were not allowed in the rest aurant after 6 so the advice on the hotel website was to leave the kids asleep in the room and pop accross to the restaurant
Might as well have just said 'We don't want to deter you from coming and eating our over-priced 'gourmet' faire after 6 though, so why not lock the kids up in your room and hope for the best for a few hours?'
-
Might as well have just said 'We don't want to deter you from coming and eating our over-priced 'gourmet' faire after 6 though, so why not lock the kids up in your room and hope for the best for a few hours?'
Before I say anything else, I would never leave my children in an apartment abroad or at home.
That doesn't mean that people don't do it though does it? I have seen children left alone whilst I've been on holiday. There are children left alone in tents, whilst their parents attend a bbq a few tents away. Children left to play by the pool whilst their parents have a drink or go to sleep. On the beach where ever etc.
The McCann's decided to do their own checking, every half hour or so. They thought it was safe and I'm not going to say 'hang them' because the decision was made by them all, they thought it was a safe place it was a quiet family resort. The decision back fired, and no one will be feeling any worse that the McCann's themselves, they have lost their beautiful little girl. I think that is punishment enough.
April was out playing, she was by herself when the abductor invited her into his car. It was quite dark, she was out of hear shot and eye sight of her parents. She was five. I wouldn't have done that either, my five year old wouldn't be playing in the street at that time of night. Yet again, it was the parents decision, she had no doubt played outside like that before. They are suffering the outcome of their bad decision. My heart goes out to them. They have had a backlash of abuse too just like the McCann's. What makes people want to rub salt into the wounds of these parents who have lost children?
-
Have another dig, feel better now?
Tell me what wasn’t factual about what I wrote ?
-
Before I say anything else, I would never leave my children in an apartment abroad or at home.
That doesn't mean that people don't do it though does it? I have seen children left alone whilst I've been on holiday. There are children left alone in tents, whilst their parents attend a bbq a few tents away. Children left to play by the pool whilst their parents have a drink or go to sleep. On the beach where ever etc.
The McCann's decided to do their own checking, every half hour or so. They thought it was safe and I'm not going to say 'hang them' because the decision was made by them all, they thought it was a safe place it was a quiet family resort. The decision back fired, and no one will be feeling any worse that the McCann's themselves, they have lost their beautiful little girl. I think that is punishment enough.
April was out playing, she was by herself when the abductor invited her into his car. It was quite dark, she was out of hear shot and eye sight of her parents. She was five. I wouldn't have done that either, my five year old wouldn't be playing in the street at that time of night. Yet again, it was the parents decision, she had no doubt played outside like that before. They are suffering the outcome of their bad decision. My heart goes out to them. They have had a backlash of abuse too just like the McCann's. What makes people want to rub salt into the wounds of these parents who have lost children?
Agreed.
-
Before I say anything else, I would never leave my children in an apartment abroad or at home.
That doesn't mean that people don't do it though does it? I have seen children left alone whilst I've been on holiday. There are children left alone in tents, whilst their parents attend a bbq a few tents away.
If you BBQ in tents, you tend to die quite quickly...
-
If you BBQ in tents, you tend to die quite quickly...
Serves em right for leaving their kids unattended.
-
deleted
Lace doesn't come here often so I suppose a little grace is given but the forum would be chaos if comments like the above were allowed. It would come under the title of sniping or goading. Pretty direct.
OK let's be mindful of how we approach each other.
-
What I hate is people going on and on about it
Oh so what do you intend to do about this hatred. You are quite happy to come to a forum on a thread where people are discussing a missing child case. Do you suppose John should succumb to your anxiety and close it down?
It is a thought.
-
Lace doesn't come here often so I suppose a little grace is given but the forum would be chaos if comments like the above were allowed. It would come under the title of sniping or goading. Pretty direct.
OK let's be mindful of how we approach each other.
Sorry Rob delete my post.
-
What I hate is people going on and on about it
Oh so what do you intend to do about this hatred. You are quite happy to come to a forum on a thread where people are discussing a missing child case. Do you suppose John should succumb to your anxiety and close it down?
Don't be silly. What I hate is people going on about the parents leaving the children, when that is done and dusted, what is the point of repeating it? It doesn't mean the McCann's are guilty of staging an abduction does it?
-
Don't be silly. What I hate is people going on about the parents leaving the children, when that is done and dusted, what is the point of repeating it? It doesn't mean the McCann's are guilty of staging an abduction does it?
To remind others who might be tempted to do similar while on holiday of the risks ?
That message cannot be hammered home often enough - IMO
-
To remind others who might be tempted to do similar while on holiday of the risks ?
That message cannot be hammered home often enough - IMO
Ah. Moral guardians of the likkle kiddies as well as armchair detectives.
-
Sorry Rob delete my post.
Done.
-
To remind others weho might be tempted to do similar while on holiday of the risks ?
That message cannot be hammered home often enough - IMO
I think the fact that Madeleine disappeared is enough to remind most folk not to do similar, not words on a forum read by a very, very small number of the population.
I believe "the message" has been "hammered often enough" to the readership of this forum.
-
I think the fact that Madeleine disappeared is enough to remind most folk not to do similar, not words on a forum read by a a very, very small number of the population.
I believe "the message" has been "hammered often enough" to the readership of this forum.
Others clearly don't otherwise you wouldn't feel the need to complain. - IMO
-
Others clearly don't otherwise you wouldn't feel the need to complain. - IMO
Which others?
-
Don't be silly. What I hate is people going on about the parents leaving the children, when that is done and dusted, what is the point of repeating it? It doesn't mean the McCann's are guilty of staging an abduction does it?
What's the point of forgetting it? It's part of the narrative they provided.
-
Which others?
Those that you identify as being beastly to the McCanns of course
-
What's the point of forgetting it? It's part of the narrative they provided.
I doubt if anyone will forget about it. It doesn't make a debate though does it 'the McCann's left the children' reply 'yes they did'.
This is a forum about what happened to Madeleine McCann I thought, debate is, did the McCann's stage an abduction or was Madeleine abducted. IMO
-
I doubt if anyone will forget about it. It doesn't make a debate though does it 'the McCann's left the children' reply 'yes they did'.
This is a forum about what happened to Madeleine McCann I thought, debate is, did the McCann's stage an abduction or was Madeleine abducted. IMO
About 75%, maybe more, of the content of this forum has nothing to do with what happened to her - IMO
-
Done.
New rule is it, to wait until the poster gives you permission to delete posts that break forum rules ?
-
New rule is it, to wait until the poster gives you permission to delete posts that break forum rules ?
No - I just did that so Lace is aware of why the post was removed. It could have been through a PM. In fact I wasn't going to delete it, but i WAS ASKED
-
No - I just did that so Lace is aware of why the post was removed. It could have been through a PM. In fact I wasn't going to delete it, but i WAS ASKED
So we all need to ask before our rule breaking posts are removed...is that the rule now ?
-
I doubt if anyone will forget about it. It doesn't make a debate though does it 'the McCann's left the children' reply 'yes they did'.
This is a forum about what happened to Madeleine McCann I thought, debate is, did the McCann's stage an abduction or was Madeleine abducted. IMO
In which case the parent's relationship with and attitude to their children is significant. Their relationship with their children isn't known. What is known is that it took place only during the times when childcare wasn't available, except for one occasion which no-one seemed to enjoy. Their attitude is revealed by the fact that they thought it was OK to leave them without constant supervision every evening.
-
So we all need to ask before our rule breaking posts are removed...is that the rule now ?
No the rule is to not post comments that require deletion.
-
Those that you identify as being beastly to the McCanns of course
So those very few sceptics who feel the need to remind the readership fairly frequently of their " beastly" feelings towards Madeleine's parents?
I'm sure the small readership are well aware of their feelings by now!
-
So those very few sceptics who feel the need to remind the readership fairly frequently of their " beastly" feelings towards Madeleine's parents?
I'm sure the small readership are well aware of their feelings by now!
Don't they also spread the word on twitter & Facebook ? Potentially a rather wider audience
-
I've come to the conclusion that the open window/shutter was 'staged' by the perp to throw investigators and that the perp entered and exited via the patio door and upon leaving with MM he/she carefully closed the door, curtain, child gate and gate leading to road.
Who...
- Knew MM was 'home alone' every night Sun to Thu from 8.30pm to 11pm ish?
- Knew the patio door was unlocked
- Knew T9 were eating at Tapas
- Knew T9 were checking every 30 mins
- Knew when T9 were all seated
Imo the perp is someone who was a guest at MW and who had a 'room with a view' allowing him/her to observe the above. Probably had a hire car too. An MW guest fits all the known facts.
They went through the car park when checking so who in their right mind would open a window and shutter for all to see? And nobody did see it before Kate 8)--))
Why were no glove marks on the window? Don't you think they planned to use gloves in this remarkable operation? What is even more remarkable is the only prints found on the window in question! 8)--))
-
They went through the car park when checking so who in their right mind would open a window and shutter for all to see? And nobody did see it before Kate 8)--))
Why were no glove marks on the window? Don't you think they planned to use gloves in this remarkable operation? What is even more remarkable is the only prints found on the window in question! 8)--))
There were other prints found on the window
-
There were other prints found on the window
No doubt, instead of just teasing us, you will be good enough to fill in the blanks.
-
No doubt, instead of just teasing us, you will be good enough to fill in the blanks.
It would be like painting the forth bridge
It was discussed a couple of days, ago... So I'm sure most posters, saw, it
-
It would be like painting the forth bridge
It was discussed a couple of days, ago... So I'm sure most posters, saw, it
OK. I'll just ignore your comment then.
By the way, they have stopped the act of permanently repainting the Forth Bridge.
-
OK. I'll just ignore your comment then.
By the way, they have stopped the act of permanently repainting the Forth Bridge.
I thought you took part in the discussion Re the smudged marks/prints/unidentified found in the shutter/blind
-
I thought you took part in the discussion Re the smudged marks/prints/unidentified found in the shutter/blind
Post 489.
Pathfinder says fingerprints on the window.
To which you replied "There were other prints found on the window "
It now appears there are no alleged missing prints from the window.
-
Post 489.
Pathfinder says fingerprints on the window.
To which you replied "There were other prints found on the window "
It now appears there are no alleged missing prints from the window.
I'm not being rude but do you realise we've had exactly the, same conversation before
I say prints... You say smudges
Let's call the whole thing off
-
I'm not being rude but do you realise we've had exactly the, same conversation before
I say prints... You say smudges
Let's call the whole thing off
We don't need twice-translated non-verbatim statements for that!
So whose prints were the only ones found on the window?
-
We don't need twice-translated non-verbatim statements for that!
So whose prints were the only ones found on the window?
Which window the one with the shutter.. Were prints found on the window
-
Which window the one with the shutter.. Were prints found on the window
You know they were.
You know whose prints they are.
You know Pathfinder knows.
You know I know.
-
You know they were.
You know whose prints they are.
You know Pathfinder knows.
You know I know.
My sons just arrived in his 2007 lhd Renault megane... He picked it up cheap as it's an ex Portuguese police car... I just want to check again if it's possible to read the speedo from the rear seat
-
I've come to the conclusion that the open window/shutter was 'staged' by the perp to throw investigators and that the perp entered and exited via the patio door and upon leaving with MM he/she carefully closed the door, curtain, child gate and gate leading to road.
Who...
- Knew MM was 'home alone' every night Sun to Thu from 8.30pm to 11pm ish?
- Knew the patio door was unlocked
- Knew T9 were eating at Tapas
- Knew T9 were checking every 30 mins
- Knew when T9 were all seated
Imo the perp is someone who was a guest at MW and who had a 'room with a view' allowing him/her to observe the above. Probably had a hire car too. An MW guest fits all the known facts.
I've thought about this further and my thinking was that an abductor would have a 'room with a view' and know MM was 'home alone' and the patio door unlocked by virtue of the McCanns exit for the jolly up at tapas and re-entry for checking. However I don't believe any properties in the vicinity offer a view of the front and back of 5A? How could any abductor know a baby sitter didn't enter via the front and/or the McCanns had a baby monitor in-situ? Only a very finite people understood the soc!
-
I've thought about this further and my thinking was that an abductor would have a 'room with a view' and know MM was 'home alone' and the patio door unlocked by virtue of the McCanns exit for the jolly up at tapas and re-entry for checking. However I don't believe any properties in the vicinity offer a view of the front and back of 5A? How could any abductor know a baby sitter didn't enter via the front and/or the McCanns had a baby monitor in-situ? Only a very finite people understood the soc!
Well, ofcourse that was noticed and mentioned and the reply was. there was a gang of them all watching,probably one was a plebotomist to check blood lines and all that... and one would be the 'cleaner' you know the person who cleans up after abductions, murders like in the movies ...
-
Well, ofcourse that was noticed and mentioned and the reply was. there was a gang of them all watching,probably one was a plebotomist to check blood lines and all that... and one would be the 'cleaner' you know the person who cleans up after abductions, murders like in the movies ...
Then there would be the anaesthetist for the sedation.
-
I've thought about this further and my thinking was that an abductor would have a 'room with a view' and know MM was 'home alone' and the patio door unlocked by virtue of the McCanns exit for the jolly up at tapas and re-entry for checking. However I don't believe any properties in the vicinity offer a view of the front and back of 5A? How could any abductor know a baby sitter didn't enter via the front and/or the McCanns had a baby monitor in-situ? Only a very finite people understood the soc!
I think you are undervaluing your theory.
There is no need for a front and back view, though several properties have it.
There is no need to check on a baby sitter or a monitor every half hour.
-
I think you are undervaluing your theory.
There is no need for a front and back view, though several properties have it.
Do they? From the various images it appears to me that those that can view the front can't view the back and vice-versa. Which properties can view both?
There is no need to check on a baby sitter or a monitor every half hour.
I know but any would be abductor would not necessarily think the McCanns and T7 were checking unsupervised properties? They might think the parents were just checking on baby sitters and/or reacting to baby monitors?
Only one person had direct knowledge that the McCanns were entering via the unlocked patio doors AND MM was left crying ie no baby sitter/monitor.
-
Do they? From the various images it appears to me that those that can view the front can't view the back and vice-versa. Which properties can view both?
I know but any would be abductor would not necessarily think the McCanns and T7 were checking unsupervised properties? They might think the parents were just checking on baby sitters and/or reacting to baby monitors?
Only one person had direct knowledge that the McCanns were entering via the unlocked patio doors AND MM was left crying ie no baby sitter/monitor.
Everywhere in block 5 can monitor front and back.
Some properties in block 6 can monitor front and back.
Some properties in block 4 can possibly monitor front and back, oddly enough 4G is one.
Moving on, if you had hired a baby sitter or had a monitor, why would you conduct allegedly frequent checks?
-
Everywhere in block 5 can monitor front and back.
Some properties in block 6 can monitor front and back.
Some properties in block 4 can possibly monitor front and back, oddly enough 4G is one.
Moving on, if you had hired a baby sitter or had a monitor, why would you conduct allegedly frequent checks?
But can they monitor both simultaneously? Can they be sure a sitter or other adult wasn't present despite the checks?
I guess if you hired a sitter and had a difficult to settle child you might have a need for repeat turns. If a monitor in-situ then you might be responding to alerts. I'm just trying to think from the perspective of an abductor and I think he/she would still be wary about entering for the reasons mentioned. As I said there's only 1 person outside T9 who knew MM was 'home alone' without a monitor.
-
But can they monitor both simultaneously? Can they be sure a sitter or other adult wasn't present despite the checks?
I guess if you hired a sitter and had a difficult to settle child you might have a need for repeat turns. If a monitor in-situ then you might be responding to alerts. I'm just trying to think from the perspective of an abductor and I think he/she would still be wary about entering for the reasons mentioned. As I said there's only 1 person outside T9 who knew MM was 'home alone' without a monitor.
No, I don't think so, unless two people were in these flats, Just one direction at a time, either north or south.(back or front)
The only place(s) which have one person looking views of immediately in front of the back patio door, front door and Madelienes window appear to be just across the road in block 6 on the balconys. There are two balconies that have the view. The one on the top floor and the one on the floor immediately below.
These balconies have several advantages, imo. The most important one is that they see straight into 5A lounge.
The lounge is the hub of the flat.
- All the doors, inside and out, radiate from this lounge
- If anyone is babysitting, then there is a very good chance the watcher will know. He will likely be able to see them
- The getaway vehicle can be parked immediately behind block 6, opposite the tapas reception. It is less conspicuous there and can be reached pretty privately via block 6 stairs and garden (This is an assumption but it makes sense that all parts of these block 6 flats would have access to the rear garden garden and the sunny side)
I don't know of any other spots that have these additional advantages.
Does anyone else.?
PS. I am not expecting any answers 8(0(* (&^&
-
No, I don't think so, unless two people were in these flats, Just one direction at a time, either north or south.(back or front)
The only place(s) which have one person looking views of immediately in front of the back patio door, front door and Madelienes window appear to be just across the road in block 6 on the balconys. There are two balconies that have the view. The one on the top floor and the one on the floor immediately below.
These balconies have several advantages, imo. The most important one is that they see straight into 5A lounge.
The lounge is the hub of the flat.
- All the doors, inside and out, radiate from this lounge
- If anyone is babysitting, then there is a very good chance the watcher will know. He will likely be able to see them
- The getaway vehicle can be parked immediately behind block 6, opposite the tapas reception. It is less conspicuous there and can be reached pretty privately via block 6 stairs and garden (This is an assumption but it makes sense that all parts of these block 6 flats would have access to the rear garden garden and the sunny side)
I don't know of any other spots that have these additional advantages.
Does anyone else.?
PS. I am not expecting any answers 8(0(* (&^&
Ooh, ooh, me, me....
How about this? So this 'watcher', are they there perchance; a frustrated, would-be abductor in waiting, or are they positioned strategically, on a very specific Observation Point?
-
Ooh, ooh, me, me....
How about this? So this 'watcher', are they there perchance; a frustrated, would-be abductor in waiting, or are they positioned strategically, on a very specific Observation Point?
&%%6 You have taken my post badly, haven't you?
Upsets you maybe that I could be right ?
There are a few places that have views, mistys is a good example. I am just pointing out that the balconies are the only places that I am aware of that have the additional benefits given by being able to see right into the living room (central hub) of the flat.
Imo, in answer to your question, positioned strategically, on a very specific Observation Point.
-
Ooh, ooh, me, me....
How about this? So this 'watcher', are they there perchance; a frustrated, would-be abductor in waiting, or are they positioned strategically, on a very specific Observation Point?
I am not sure I followed all of Sadies Theorem. to cut it short-it does involve stealing MBM for her bloodline thingy and this involves Jesus and jews and knights Templar- a well executed plan. sneekie b'strdds
-
&%%6 You have taken my post badly, haven't you?
Upsets you maybe that I could be right ?
There are a few places that have views, mistys is a good example. I am just pointing out that the balconies are the only places that I am aware of that have the additional benefits given by being able to see right into the living room (central hub) of the flat.
Imo, in answer to your question, positioned strategically, on a very specific Observation Point.
I'm not upset in the least. I think your theory is absurd.
So this very specific observation point was chosen when? In advance?
-
I am not sure I followed all of Sadies Theorem. to cut it short-it does involve stealing MBM for her bloodline thingy and this involves Jesus and jews and knights Templar- a well executed plan. sneekie b'strdds
There may be something in this. (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_p305OiLZRCU/SSsOJTarEkI/AAAAAAAACbA/6-YDgzjmoEg/s1600/priory+knights+templar.jpg)
-
I'm not upset in the least. I think your theory is absurd.
So this very specific observation point was chosen when? In advance?
I think Sadie reckons these people do this for a living. They are experienced kidnappers who can sus out the situation quickly.
-
I'm not upset in the least. I think your theory is absurd.
So this very specific observation point was chosen when? In advance?
That's fine, 'tis only a theory ... and it has been chopped about a bit since it was originally posted. TBH, I can't be bothered to check what has, likely, changed in the years since it was posted.
None of this is my main theory which has been passed to OG. That's an altogether more comprehensive report and on completely different aspects of the case. I shall not be sharing that.
Ya know 'Gen', I am only pointing things out; adding to the recognised facts Take it or leave it. The choice is yours. 8(>((
-
There may be something in this. (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_p305OiLZRCU/SSsOJTarEkI/AAAAAAAACbA/6-YDgzjmoEg/s1600/priory+knights+templar.jpg)
@)(++(*
-
I think Sadie reckons these people do this for a living. They are experienced kidnappers who can sus out the situation quickly.
Look, I'm all for people having a go, even, as Sadie has, going and touching and sniffing, which is commendable in itself. But I also believe that all rational thought is dispensed with once a theory has been decided upon and dogma takes hold.
I don't believe a crack band of abductors positioned themselves in an overlooking apartment waiting on their prey. If this unlikely scenario were to play out, this highly organised unit would not be faffing about observing anything. Certainly not hiring a holiday let in the name of K Templar, Rosslyn, Midlothian. As for procuring a special key from a complicit member of staff? The back door was literally open. Our elite grab team didn't deem it necessary to check if the doors were unlocked?
-
Look, I'm all for people having a go, even, as Sadie has, going and touching and sniffing, which is commendable in itself. But I also believe that all rational thought is dispensed with once a theory has been decided upon and dogma takes hold.
I don't believe a crack band of abductors positioned themselves in an overlooking apartment waiting on their prey. If this unlikely scenario were to play out, this highly organised unit would not be faffing about observing anything. Certainly not hiring a holiday let in the name of K Templar, Rosslyn, Midlothian. As for procuring a special key from a complicit member of staff? The back door was literally open. Our elite grab team didn't deem it necessary to check if the doors were unlocked?
I absolutely agree. I've seen very few theories which follow the evidence. Most of them contain a lot of speculation and rely on inventing, ignoring or denying evidence.
-
I absolutely agree. I've seen very few theories which follow the evidence. Most of them contain a lot of speculation and rely on inventing, ignoring or denying evidence.
That's your opinion... You rate the dog alerts and statement discrepancies as significant.. I dont... And as the parents, aren't suspects I don't think either police force does
-
That's your opinion... You rate the dog alerts and statement discrepancies as significant.. I dont... And as the parents, aren't suspects I don't think either police force does
What I do is pay attention to all the evidence rather than trying to explain away that which I don't like. I don't invent watchers, getaway cars and abductors either like some.
-
What I do is pay attention to all the evidence rather than trying to explain away that which I don't like. I don't invent watchers, getaway cars and abductors either like some.
I haven't invented anyone either... You decide which evidence you choose to believe and give significance to.. The dogs and the statements... I think you are, wrong on both.
-
What I do is pay attention to all the evidence rather than trying to explain away that which I don't like. I don't invent watchers, getaway cars and abductors either like some.
Madeleine has disappeared. There must be a reason for it, so what do you believe the evidence tells us?
-
What I do is pay attention to all the evidence rather than trying to explain away that which I don't like. I don't invent watchers, getaway cars and abductors either like some.
When I quoted Harrison yesterday you tried to EXPLAIN AWAY his, statement by INVENTING the idea someone had got to him... You are guilty of the things you accuse others of... Imo
-
D
-
Madeleine has disappeared. There must be a reason for it, so what do you believe the evidence tells us?
I agree with the conclusion of the archiving report;
we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is requested, which was or were the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practised on the person of the minor Madeleine McCann
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
-
I agree with the conclusion of the archiving report;
we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is requested, which was or were the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practised on the person of the minor Madeleine McCann
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
So do I... We can't state with certainty what happened.
However it seems both police forces believe the parents are not involved...
-
When I quoted Harrison yesterday you tried to EXPLAIN AWAY his, statement by INVENTING the idea someone had got to him... You are guilty of the things you accuse others of... Imo
Harrison contradicted himself. How do you explain it?
-
Harrison contradicted himself. How do you explain it?
I don't believe he did... I think Grime has contradicted himself... How do you explain that.. Am I even allowed to post that.. Fortunately your post makes it difficult ti censor mine
-
So do I... We can't state with certainty what happened.
However it seems both police forces believe the parents are not involved...
That depends what 'not suspects' means in police speak. Does it mean 'not involved' or is that just your interpretation?
-
I don't believe he did... I think Grime has contradicted himself... How do you explain that.. Am I even allowed to post that.. Fortunately your post makes it difficult ti censor mine
Beiief v evidence? I'll stay with the evidence.
-
That's your opinion... You rate the dog alerts and statement discrepancies as significant.. I dont... And as the parents, aren't suspects I don't think either police force does
I disagree.
The dogs alerts, even in their flimsiest form, don't jive with the official narrative. So 'significant', to coin your phrase means, in this case, incongruent. So the police, given their expertise in such matters, will also know that the dog alerts are at odds with the theory of an abduction.
Whether anyone puts any store in the circumstantial evidence provided by the dogs, and, let's never forget that 1. that's what they were brought in for, and 2. I doubt anybody expected them to 'find' anything, any investigation has to somehow square that circle.
In addition, it is a product of the failings on the part of a number of parties, in collection and analysis of the forensic evidence and the failure to adequately preserve the scene (and the obvious fact that she's still missing), why the mystery prevails.
-
That depends what 'not suspects' means in police speak. Does it mean 'not involved' or is that just your interpretation?
What other ways are there of interpreting “not suspects”?
-
I agree with the conclusion of the archiving report;
we do not possess any minimally solid and rigorous foundation in order to be able to state, with the safety that is requested, which was or were the exact and precise crime(s) that was or were practised on the person of the minor Madeleine McCann
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/LEGAL_SUMMARY.htm
So that shows how much weight they put on the dog alerts then. Not a lot!
-
Look, I'm all for people having a go, even, as Sadie has, going and touching and sniffing, which is commendable in itself. But I also believe that all rational thought is dispensed with once a theory has been decided upon and dogma takes hold.
I don't believe a crack band of abductors positioned themselves in an overlooking apartment waiting on their prey. If this unlikely scenario were to play out, this highly organised unit would not be faffing about observing anything. Certainly not hiring a holiday let in the name of K Templar, Rosslyn, Midlothian. As for procuring a special key from a complicit member of staff? The back door was literally open. Our elite grab team didn't deem it necessary to check if the doors were unlocked?
Going and looking, but no touching and sniffing ... I leave that to the sniffer dogs. ?>)()<
-
Going and looking, but no touching and sniffing ... I leave that to the sniffer dogs. ?>)()<
Well they are very useful, it has to be said.
-
What other ways are there of interpreting “not suspects”?
It depends what the police mean when they say it for a st"art.
Do they mean "We've investigated them thooughly and have eliminated them from our enquiries" Why not say that then?
Do they mean "We are investigating a strannger abduction so obviously the parents aren't suspects" That, in my opinion is probably OG's position.
Do they mean "We are open to parental involvement but can't prove it so they aren't formal suspects at the moment." In my opinion that may be the PJ's position.
-
Beiief v evidence? I'll stay with the evidence.
You believe Harrison contradicted himself... Based on the evidence.. We would need Harrison to clarify what he, said before your belief has any real substance... Your beliefs are not facts as you seem to think they are
-
It depends what the police mean when they say it for a st"art.
Do they mean "We've investigated them thooughly and have eliminated them from our enquiries" Why not say that then?
Do they mean "We are investigating a strannger abduction so obviously the parents aren't suspects" That, in my opinion is probably OG's position.
Do they mean "We are open to parental involvement but can't prove it so they aren't formal suspects at the moment." In my opinion that may be the PJ's position.
So the parents are not suspects, which you must find utterly staggering considering you believe abduction is virtually impossible and that pretty much every word and deed of the McCanns points to something fishy. How is it possible that the McCannd are not arguidos again when everything (in your opinion) points to their involvement?
-
It depends what the police mean when they say it for a st"art.
Do they mean "We've investigated them thooughly and have eliminated them from our enquiries" Why not say that then?
Do they mean "We are investigating a strannger abduction so obviously the parents aren't suspects" That, in my opinion is probably OG's position.
Do they mean "We are open to parental involvement but can't prove it so they aren't formal suspects at the moment." In my opinion that may be the PJ's position.
..
You are inventing a few things there.. It means they are not suspect s and are not being investigated ..the PJ also said there is no evidence against the McCanns... That's pretty clear too
-
I disagree.
The dogs alerts, even in their flimsiest form, don't jive with the official narrative. So 'significant', to coin your phrase means, in this case, incongruent. So the police, given their expertise in such matters, will also know that the dog alerts are at odds with the theory of an abduction.
Whether anyone puts any store in the circumstantial evidence provided by the dogs, and, let's never forget that 1. that's what they were brought in for, and 2. I doubt anybody expected them to 'find' anything, any investigation has to somehow square that circle.
In addition, it is a product of the failings on the part of a number of parties, in collection and analysis of the forensic evidence and the failure to adequately preserve the scene (and the obvious fact that she's still missing), why the mystery prevails.
According to Harrison the cadaver dog was brought in to search for remains
-
..
You are inventing a few things there.. It means they are not suspect s and are not being investigated ..the PJ also said there is no evidence against the McCanns... That's pretty clear too
I'm hypothesising. You're absolutely sure you're right, as usual, without being able to prove it.
-
That's your opinion... You rate the dog alerts and statement discrepancies as significant.. I dont... And as the parents, aren't suspects I don't think either police force does
Well are the parents suspects in my theory? The child replacement theory. They didn't agree to a child replacement.
-
I disagree.
The dogs alerts, even in their flimsiest form, don't jive with the official narrative. So 'significant', to coin your phrase means, in this case, incongruent. So the police, given their expertise in such matters, will also know that the dog alerts are at odds with the theory of an abduction.
Whether anyone puts any store in the circumstantial evidence provided by the dogs, and, let's never forget that 1. that's what they were brought in for, and 2. I doubt anybody expected them to 'find' anything, any investigation has to somehow square that circle.
In addition, it is a product of the failings on the part of a number of parties, in collection and analysis of the forensic evidence and the failure to adequately preserve the scene (and the obvious fact that she's still missing), why the mystery prevails.
I might be dogmatic but I don't think it's worth discussing the value if the alerts.. We each have our own view and change is doubtful... I think they are, absolute junk science... Others think they are near 100% accurate. Note I'm referring to the alerts... Not the dogs... The dogs, will reliably find cadaver odour if it's, there... It's, when it's not there the problem arises
-
What I do is pay attention to all the evidence rather than trying to explain away that which I don't like. I don't invent watchers, getaway cars and abductors either like some.
Well you can't have a theory then. If you do how about expounding it?
-
Harrison contradicted himself. How do you explain it?
Did you post the contradiction? Cite please.
-
I might be dogmatic but I don't think it's worth discussing the value if the alerts.. We each have our own view and change is doubtful... I think they are, absolute junk science... Others think they are near 100% accurate. Note I'm referring to the alerts... Not the dogs... The dogs, will reliably find cadaver odour if it's, there... It's, when it's not there the problem arises
I get it. Ad nauseum. Not sure you need to pounce on it every time it's mentioned. We know your stance.
-
According to Harrison the cadaver dog was brought in to search for remains
And?
-
I might be dogmatic but I don't think it's worth discussing the value if the alerts.. We each have our own view and change is doubtful... I think they are, absolute junk science... Others think they are near 100% accurate. Note I'm referring to the alerts... Not the dogs... The dogs, will reliably find cadaver odour if it's, there... It's, when it's not there the problem arises
How do you know when it is not there?
-
According to Harrison the cadaver dog was brought in to search for remains
'Remains', I suspect, is the term he used to explain it to laymen. 'Remains' may include vestiges - which they are capable of detecting.
-
How do you know when it is not there?
I think he means when the cadaver isn't there. Which is an odd assertion.
-
'Remains', I suspect, is the term he used to explain it to laymen. 'Remains' may include vestiges - which they are capable of detecting.
I agree ...but physical remains
-
How do you know when it is not there?
you dont
-
I think he means when the cadaver isn't there. Which is an odd assertion.
I'll see if it is possible to insert "when the cadaver isn't there" into Davel's sentence.
The dogs, will reliably find cadaver odour if it's, there... It's, when it's not there the problem arises
1. The dogs, will reliably find cadaver odour if it's, there... It's, when the cadaver isn't there the problem arises.
2. The dogs, will reliably find cadaver odour if it's there when the cadaver isn't there... It's, when it's not there the problem arises.
Neither solve the mystery of how does one work out when it is not there?
-
you dont
How do you know when you've got a problem then.
-
How do you know when you've got a problem then.
you dont...thats the whole point...uncertainty
-
I think he means when the cadaver isn't there. Which is an odd assertion.
No... Cadaver odour..
-
No... Cadaver odour..
But if a dude kills and dude, gets caught (by a police dude), admits it, shows (police dude) where he stored the dead dude and where the dead dude was subsequently found - and the dogs found the dead dude and where the dead dude was, isn't this your 'evidence'?
-
But if a dude kills and dude, gets caught (by a police dude), admits it, shows (police dude) where he stored the dead dude and where the dead dude was subsequently found - and the dogs found the dead dude and where the dead dude was, isn't this your 'evidence'?
the point Im making is....the alerts in PDL...the alerts in Jersey...how do we know they were to cadaver odour...we dont
-
the point Im making is....the alerts in PDL...the alerts in Jersey...how do we know they were to cadaver odour...we dont
Answer the question about the dudes.
-
But if a dude kills and dude, gets caught (by a police dude), admits it, shows (police dude) where he stored the dead dude and where the dead dude was subsequently found - and the dogs found the dead dude and where the dead dude was, isn't this your 'evidence'?
the dogs found the evidence ,,tahts what they are good at...thats their purpose...
-
the dogs found the evidence ,,tahts what they are good at...thats their purpose...
But the dogs found where the dead dude was stored, as the killer dude said they would.
So dogs found where dead dude was. Evidence. Proof of concept.
-
the point Im making is....the alerts in PDL...the alerts in Jersey...how do we know they were to cadaver odour...we dont
The dog was trained to bark only when it smelled cadaver odour. It had been doing that successfully for years both in training and tests and operationally. There have been numerous attempts to suggest it barked for other reasons, but none of them are feasible in my opinion.
-
The dog was trained to bark only when it smelled cadaver odour. It had been doing that successfully for years both in training and tests and operationally. There have been numerous attempts to suggest it barked for other reasons, but none of them are feasible in my opinion.
there is no real evidence to support the claim the dog only barked at cadaver odour...thats the problem
There is no evidence there was any cadaver odour in Luz or Jersey
-
there is no real evidence to support the claim the dog only barked at cadaver odour...thats the problem
There is no evidence there was any cadaver odour in Luz or Jersey
You're just copy and pasting that phrase now, aren't you?
-
You're just copy and pasting that phrase now, aren't you?
grime is now wanting to claim there is science behind the alerts...anectdotal witness sateemnts have no place in science
-
grime has gone to great lenghts to provide evidence that the dog will alert to cadaver odour...afaics...hes provided none that the dog will not bark at other things
-
there is no real evidence to support the claim the dog only barked at cadaver odour...thats the problem
There is no evidence there was any cadaver odour in Luz or Jersey
Do you mean there's no evidence or do you mean you haven't seen it? The evidence lay in the dog's rtraining, assessment and operational records. As the team were ACPO accredited/licenced that's evidence that they were meeting the required standards.
-
Do you mean there's no evidence or do you mean you haven't seen it? The evidence lay in the dog's rtraining, assessment and operational records. As the team were ACPO accredited/licenced that's evidence that they were meeting the required standards.
All we have seen is claims that that in tests the dogs have a high rate of alert recognising cadaver odour,,....they might be reaching standards but we dont know what those standards are....grime used the word anectdotal re accreditation...that isnt scientific. Any scientific test published refers to detecting cadaver odour...nothing else.
you might accept this without any evidence ...i dont
-
Do you mean there's no evidence or do you mean you haven't seen it? The evidence lay in the dog's rtraining, assessment and operational records. As the team were ACPO accredited/licenced that's evidence that they were meeting the required standards.
grime says..
'False' positives are always a possibility; to date Eddie has not so indicated
operationally or in training. In six years of operational deployment in over 200
criminal case searches the dog has never alerted to meat based and
specifically pork foodstuffs designed for human consumption. Similarly the
dog has never alerted to 'road kill', that is any other dead animal.
he says no alerts to meat for human consumption or road kill....that is not comprehensive..
-
All we have seen is claims that that in tests the dogs have a high rate of alert recognising cadaver odour,,....they might be reaching standards but we dont know what those standards are....grime used the word anectdotal re accreditation...that isnt scientific. Any scientific test published refers to detecting cadaver odour...nothing else.
you might accept this without any evidence ...i dont
Yet you're happy to accept that a shutter and window were found open on 3rd Nay 2007 without any evidence to support it.
-
grime says..
'False' positives are always a possibility; to date Eddie has not so indicated
operationally or in training. In six years of operational deployment in over 200
criminal case searches the dog has never alerted to meat based and
specifically pork foodstuffs designed for human consumption. Similarly the
dog has never alerted to 'road kill', that is any other dead animal.
he says no alerts to meat for human consumption or road kill....that is not comprehensive..
So do you have any sensible suggestions?
-
Yet you're happy to accept that a shutter and window were found open on 3rd Nay 2007 without any evidence to support it.
i accept 99% it was open based on the fact that nothing suggests that the mccanns are lying or involved in any crime...thats evidence
-
So do you have any sensible suggestions?
ive already given them...it appears to me the dogs are tested on contamination or no contamination of cadaver odour,...i would like to see other odours introduced...stale urine...etc....and see if any dogs alert to taht
-
ive already given them...it appears to me the dogs are tested on contamination or no contamination of cadaver odour,...i would like to see other odours introduced...stale urine...etc....and see if any dogs alert to taht
Problem with that is the lack of cadavers to use and the legal constraints in the UK.
-
Problem with that is the lack of cadavers to use and the legal constraints in the UK.
plenty of stale urine around
-
plenty of stale urine around
Not much use without dead dudes and a change in legislation.
-
Not much use without dead dudes and a change in legislation.
i dont think youve followed my thought process....no problem
-
i dont think youve followed my thought process....no problem
I don't think you've correctly assessed my following of your thought process. No problem.
-
plenty of stale urine around
Irrelevant. That is one of the controls which is always around, along with fodstuffs, faeces, nappies, rubbish bins and dead animals.
-
They went through the car park when checking so who in their right mind would open a window and shutter for all to see? And nobody did see it before Kate 8)--))
Why were no glove marks on the window? Don't you think they planned to use gloves in this remarkable operation? What is even more remarkable is the only prints found on the window in question! 8)--))
The window was situated in the shade quite dark, the window also had net curtains didn't it? Maybe seeing the white of the net curtains it looked as if the shutter was down. Bearing in mind none of them were making a point of actually having a good look at the window as they passed by just a glance maybe.
What marks do gloves make? Kate probably looked out of the window as you would do if you find your child missing and the window open. IMO
-
Irrelevant. That is one of the controls which is always around, along with fodstuffs, faeces, nappies, rubbish bins and dead animals.
what evidence do you have that the dogs have been sufficiently tested for alerts to other things none...thedogs seem only to be tested for theit ability to detect cadaver...
-
what evidence do you have that the dogs have been sufficiently tested for alerts to other things none...thedogs seem only to be tested for theit ability to detect cadaver...
Every time a dog finds what he's trained to find he's ignoring other scents. That's the test.
-
i accept 99% it was open based on the fact that nothing suggests that the mccanns are lying or involved in any crime...thats evidence
A nice circular argument there.
-
A nice circular argument there.
In your opinion... IMO its isn't
-
Every time a dog finds what he's trained to find he's ignoring other scents. That's the test.
That's not a scientific test
What about when nothings found... But the dog alerts
-
That's not a scientific test
What about when nothings found... But the dog alerts
Forensics aren't sensitive enough to find what the dogs alert to - IMO 8)--))
-
i accept 99% it was open based on the fact that nothing suggests that the mccanns are lying or involved in any crime...thats evidence
That might work if it was a fact. In reality it's your opinion.
-
That's not a scientific test
What about when nothings found... But the dog alerts
The dog's alering to what he's trained to alert to.
-
That might work if it was a fact. In reality it's your opinion.
Wasn’t it also the opinion of the archiving report you quoted this morning?
-
The dog's alering to what he's trained to alert to.
prove it.
-
Forensics aren't sensitive enough to find what the dogs alert to - IMO 8)--))
That makes sense.
-
what evidence do you have that the dogs have been sufficiently tested for alerts to other things none...thedogs seem only to be tested for their ability to detect cadaver...
Even if you had tested the dogs on 10,000 different odours there is only another million of other chemicals or combination of chemicals to test. There is no end to the number of substances to test if they went down that track.
-
Even if you had tested the dogs on 10,000 different odours there is only another million of other chemicals or combination of chemicals to test. There is no end to the number of substances to test if they went down that track.
Then it cannot be proved that Eddie alerted to cadaver odour in 5a
-
The dog's alering to what he's trained to alert to.
You can't prove that
-
But the dogs found where the dead dude was stored, as the killer dude said they would.
So dogs found where dead dude was. Evidence. Proof of concept.
Proof that the dogs will alert to cadaver... Not proof that every alert is confirmation of cadaver odour
-
Look, I'm all for people having a go, even, as Sadie has, going and touching and sniffing, which is commendable in itself. But I also believe that all rational thought is dispensed with once a theory has been decided upon and dogma takes hold.
I don't believe a crack band of abductors positioned themselves in an overlooking apartment waiting on their prey. If this unlikely scenario were to play out, this highly organised unit would not be faffing about observing anything. Certainly not hiring a holiday let in the name of K Templar, Rosslyn, Midlothian. As for procuring a special key from a complicit member of staff? The back door was literally open. Our elite grab team didn't deem it necessary to check if the doors were unlocked?
G5J was not a holiday let managed or cleaned by Ocean Club. IMO it was a privately-owned apartment & details are not in the public files.
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/5A_CLEANER.htm
*snipped*
Upon being asked, she states that she is a cleaner and has been working as such for around 13 years with the company 'THE OCEAN CLUB'. Her two daughters, FM and DI work with her in the same department.
Regarding her job, she points out that she is the person who is responsible for cleaning Block 5, more specifically apartments A, B, C, D, H, I, K, L, M and P, and also states that when the child disappeared only apartments A, B, D, G, H and K were occupied.
Furthermore, no keys were available for G5J at OC as the PJ had to force entry via a rear balcony window.
As far as the keys to 5A are concerned (and possibly G5J) cruciform "jiggler" skeleton keys can be purchased over the internet. There are reports Paulo Pereira Cristovao's housebreaking/robbery antics were carried out in association with a locksmith's assistant, who is currently serving time.
IMO it really wouldn't take long to plan & execute the abduction of a child once the target had been selected, especially in the relaxed environment of a quiet holiday resort.
-
Then it cannot be proved that Eddie alerted to cadaver odour in 5a
You are making it impossible for if there was another chemical combination that mimicked human cadaver odour, in cases of "genuine cadaver finds" how do you you know for sure the dog didn't alert to the chemicals?
-
You are making it impossible for if there was another chemical combination that mimicked human cadaver odour, in cases of "genuine cadaver finds" how do you you know for sure the dog didn't alert to the chemicals?
Im not making anything...in his white paper grimetalks about wanting to establish scientific basis for the alerts..
his opinion and anectdotal witness statement count for nothing in science....he cannot claim scientific basis withoutt proper scientific tests
all this should be on the dog thread
-
You can't prove that
And you, despite writing many many many words about it, can't prove that he didn't.
-
And you, despite writing many many many words about it, can't prove that he didn't.
So as it can’t be proved one way or the other these alerts are useless.
-
So as it can’t be proved one way or the other these alerts are useless.
In the tests the dogs trained by Grime were "in the high nineties". So there was no claim they were 100% accurate.
-
And you, despite writing many many many words about it, can't prove that he didn't.
I certainly cant...just as i cant prove that there isnt a giant celestial teapot in orbit around saturn whose orbit means its always hidden from earth...the alerts are in good company
-
In the tests the dogs trained by Grime were "in the high nineties". So there was no claim they were 100% accurate.
it depends what was tested
-
it depends what was tested
Training. Using the training samples.
-
Training. Using the training samples.
what was tested...the dogs ability to recognise target odour....
-
So as it can’t be proved one way or the other these alerts are useless.
Hardly, unless you are saying the police forces who deploy them, including OG, are incompetent at best.
-
Hardly, unless you are saying the police forces who deploy them, including OG, are incompetent at best.
You can hardly say the alerts in PDL were useless... Just look how useful they've been to the investigation...
-
You can hardly say the alerts in PDL were useless... Just look how useful they've been to the investigation...
You can apply that logic to everything in the public domain.
It helps not a jot.
-
You can apply that logic to everything in the public domain.
It helps not a jot.
You are correct.. The alerts help not a jot
-
Hardly, unless you are saying the police forces who deploy them, including OG, are incompetent at best.
Strawman.
-
Strawman.
As I addressed your comment head on, my reply was not a strawman.
Whereas, as you ducked my response in favour of a label, yours is a strawman.
Do you now care to address the point I made?
-
You are correct.. The alerts help not a jot
Not what I said though, is it?
-
Not what I said though, is it?
Yes it is
-
Yes it is
Hardly.
I simply showed the fallacy of your logic.
Quite, quite different.
-
Hardly.
I simply showed the fallacy of your logic.
Quite, quite different.
No you didnt
-
No you didnt
I'll leave it for the forum viewers to decide.
There is no point in boring them to death, so it's time to leave your trivial responses behind.
&^&*%
-
I'll leave it for the forum viewers to decide.
There is no point in boring them to death, so it's time to leave your trivial responses behind.
&^&*%
*&^^&
-
As I addressed your comment head on, my reply was not a strawman.
Whereas, as you ducked my response in favour of a label, yours is a strawman.
Do you now care to address the point I made?
No, your point such as it was, was a strawman, so no point in me replying.
-
Strawman - anyone care to define the term?
-
Strawman - anyone care to define the term?
OK when you argue to a point not raised in the initial premise, and claim that unrelated argument has found the first premise false.
-
Training. Using the training samples.
Rob don't you think it is time , as a mod, to delete dog talk from threads where it is NOT in the title. there is a dog thread, Davel can give his opinions on that in stead of hijacking every thread. You just encourage him and keep it going so people get lost in the actual discsussion.
-
Rob don't you think it is time , as a mod, to delete dog talk from threads where it is NOT in the title. there is a dog thread, Davel can give his opinions on that in stead of hijacking every thread. You just encourage him and keep it going so people get lost in the actual discsussion.
I already suggested this quite a few posts back... It's not me taking threads off topic
-
I already suggested this quite a few posts back... It's not me taking threads off topic
If either of you would just put the discussion back on target, that would be the best.