Latest theory lands on Portuguese AG's desk

[Robittybob1]

I think you will find the portuguese have been approached because SY are considered to be complicit in a cover up

Why would they think that?

[Lace]

Abduction is the simplest and most plausible explanation in this case, with "died before the 3rd, and death covered up by both parents and half a dozen of their friends, aided and abetted by senior members of government and UK police" probably the least likely - all in my opinion of course.

Don't forget the nannies are either mistaken,  or have been bribed.    Anyone who says they saw Madeleine are wrong. 

They are calling all witnesses who say they saw Madeleine as being liars in other words.      Why on earth would they say they have seen Madeleine if they haven't?    Surely they would say they weren't sure rather than say they did,  they were speaking to the Police after all.

I find it quite arrogant that they dispute these witnesses and what they say so that their idea of what happened to Madeleine can be shown to be plausible.

Kate went to the crèche and didn't take Madeleine,  even though the nanny said Madeleine came out pleased to see her Mum or Dad and Kate was eager to talk about what Madeleine had been doing in the crèche.   Who she was talking about is anyone's guess if Madeleine wasn't with her.   It's quite mad IMO

[jassi]

Don't forget the nannies are either mistaken,  or have been bribed.    Anyone who says they saw Madeleine are wrong. 

They are calling all witnesses who say they saw Madeleine as being liars in other words.      Why on earth would they say they have seen Madeleine if they haven't?    Surely they would say they weren't sure rather than say they did,  they were speaking to the Police after all.

I find it quite arrogant that they dispute these witnesses and what they say so that their idea of what happened to Madeleine can be shown to be plausible.

Kate went to the crèche and didn't take Madeleine,  even though the nanny said Madeleine came out pleased to see her Mum or Dad and Kate was eager to talk about what Madeleine had been doing in the crèche.   Who she was talking about is anyone's guess if Madeleine wasn't with her.   It's quite mad IMO

Bit of a wasted effort as I don't suppose there's anyone on here who would disagree with you.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Don't forget the nannies are either mistaken,  or have been bribed.    Anyone who says they saw Madeleine are wrong. 

They are calling all witnesses who say they saw Madeleine as being liars in other words.      Why on earth would they say they have seen Madeleine if they haven't?    Surely they would say they weren't sure rather than say they did,  they were speaking to the Police after all.

I find it quite arrogant that they dispute these witnesses and what they say so that their idea of what happened to Madeleine can be shown to be plausible.

Kate went to the crèche and didn't take Madeleine,  even though the nanny said Madeleine came out pleased to see her Mum or Dad and Kate was eager to talk about what Madeleine had been doing in the crèche.   Who she was talking about is anyone's guess if Madeleine wasn't with her.   It's quite mad IMO

But I do understand the necessity to create a "dead before the 3rd May" narrative.  It's because trying to work out a plausible theory of Madeleine dying on the 3rd and the McCanns being responsible for staging an abduction on the same day as the death is nigh on impossible.  Far easier to create a workable narrative if you say the child died earlier in the holiday, however it does force one to consider all sorts of other highly implausible scenarios!

[Robittybob1]

But I do understand the necessity to create a "dead before the 3rd May" narrative.  It's because trying to work out a plausible theory of Madeleine dying on the 3rd and the McCanns being responsible for staging an abduction on the same day as the death is nigh on impossible.  Far easier to create a workable narrative if you say the child died earlier in the holiday, however it does force one to consider all sorts of other highly implausible scenarios!

It might have been a different situation if David Payne had not taken a video on a bus.
"Cheer up Gerry you're on Holiday"   To which Gerry said (on film), "F*** off, I'm not here to enjoy myself".

I wonder who released that video to the media?

[faithlilly]

Don't forget the nannies are either mistaken,  or have been bribed.    Anyone who says they saw Madeleine are wrong. 

They are calling all witnesses who say they saw Madeleine as being liars in other words.      Why on earth would they say they have seen Madeleine if they haven't?    Surely they would say they weren't sure rather than say they did,  they were speaking to the Police after all.

I find it quite arrogant that they dispute these witnesses and what they say so that their idea of what happened to Madeleine can be shown to be plausible.

Kate went to the crèche and didn't take Madeleine,  even though the nanny said Madeleine came out pleased to see her Mum or Dad and Kate was eager to talk about what Madeleine had been doing in the crèche.   Who she was talking about is anyone's guess if Madeleine wasn't with her.   It's quite mad IMO

Really just as arrogant as individuals still talking about Tanner’s sighting as if he was Madeleine’s abductor even when OG have all but ruled him out or that Martin Smith was wrong in his identification or indeed second guessing just about everything that Grime ever said or did in connection with this case.

[John]

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:1pvDvPRaVhgJ:portugalresident.com/attorney-general-receives-%25E2%2580%259Cnew-theory%25E2%2580%259D-over-disappearance-of-madeleine-mccann+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk

Posted by PORTUGALPRESS on March 13, 2018
Attorney General receives “new theory” over disappearance of Madeleine McCann

A team of independent investigators working over the last decade has come up with what it believes happened to Madeleine McCann.

Just as the British Home Office is reported to be considering a new request by Metropolitan Police for the funding of its long-running Operation Grange investigation, the theory has landed on the desk of Portugal’s Attorney General.

It is explosive, it does not work to the accepted timeline, and it does not involve Portuguese gypsies or Eastern European child smugglers.

The objective of the 20-page letter, translated into Portuguese, is to prompt judicial authorities towards a reinvestigation.

Explains one the group’s principal spokespeople - a retired Nottinghamshire police superintendent - “it is important that people follow this logically, and without preconceptions, however shocking the conclusion may seem”.

“There is strong evidence, for example, that the famous Pool Photo was not taken on Thursday 3rd as was claimed.

“Weather reports, personal diaries, and many hundreds of photos on sites such as Flickr show that Thursday lunchtime was overcast and there was a cold Force 4 wind”.

The retired police officer is convinced that the mystery is “a very simple sad story” that for reasons unclear has been hopelessly muddled up.

As to why this may be the case, his response was a prememptory: “No Comment”.

“Any answers I give at this point would be personal opinions not based on facts or knowledge and therefore best avoided”, he said.

“It might be, after all, that the findings have "got through" and that a final answer is just around the corner.

“The last FOI (Freedom of Information) report from Grange stated there had been flights to Portugal in 2017:

“To date there have been 2 return flights to Portugal this year.

“In March three officers flew to Portugal at a total cost of £750 - whilst in May 2 officers flew to Portugal, costs being £500.

“To do WHAT ?

“How many of these had we heard about ?

“And don't forget that the CPS lawyers visited Portugal to speak to counterparts a couple of years ago . . .”

Thus for now, the team that calls itself the Madeleine McCann Research group waits.

The letter was sent on March 6 and has been tracked as having reached its destination.

Said one of the group’s members: “We can only hope the authorities take notice. If our findings get published in the Portuguese media, the authorities might be obliged to make an official statement and it might get reported in the UK.

“And then things finally might be able to move forwards…”

natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Presumably Peter Mac (& Amaral's) latest project.

A good catch misty.  Natasha Donn has obviously been wrong footed on this one and it has been pulled by the editor for legal reasons.

[pathfinder73]

But I do understand the necessity to create a "dead before the 3rd May" narrative.  It's because trying to work out a plausible theory of Madeleine dying on the 3rd and the McCanns being responsible for staging an abduction on the same day as the death is nigh on impossible.  Far easier to create a workable narrative if you say the child died earlier in the holiday, however it does force one to consider all sorts of other highly implausible scenarios!

Nonsense it's impossible. Cadaver odour doesn't take days to develop. You don't hide a corpse in an apartment for days. Ridiculous theory.  Did the cleaner notice any smells on the day prior? Nobody noticed smells in that apartment but the hire car is a different story!

[misty]

A good catch misty.  Natasha Donn has obviously been wrong footed on this one and it has been pulled by the editor for legal reasons.

I don't take any credit for the catch, John; that was down to someone else on Twitter & I happened to take a peek at the right time. Natasha pulled it herself, so I've heard - possibly the CdM want to publish the more comprehensive exclusive.

[John]

I don't take any credit for the catch, John; that was down to someone else on Twitter & I happened to take a peek at the right time. Natasha pulled it herself, so I've heard - possibly the CdM want to publish the more comprehensive exclusive.

The article was libellous so I'm not in the least surprised it was removed so quickly.

[slartibartfast]

The article was libellous so I'm not in the least surprised it was removed so quickly.

John, I can’t see how it is libellous?

[Vertigo Swirl]

Nonsense it's impossible. Cadaver odour doesn't take days to develop. You don't hide a corpse in an apartment for days. Ridiculous theory.  Did the cleaner notice any smells on the day prior? Nobody noticed smells in that apartment but the hire car is a different story!

Don't expect me to defend their theory, but do expect me to apply similar reasoning and exasperated epithets to any theory of parental involvement, they are all pretty ludicrous, IMO.

[Vertigo Swirl]

John, I can’t see how it is libellous?

Really??  Wow.  The premise of the theory is that Madeleine died days before the night her parents say Madeleine went missing.  And you can't see how that's libellous?

[Mr Gray]

John, I can’t see how it is libellous?

Have another think

[slartibartfast]

Have another think

Maybe if the pair if you actually read the article and not what you think it means you may have less problem understanding.