Author Topic: Timeline May 3rd  (Read 129509 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #675 on: July 07, 2020, 03:48:47 PM »
Presumably In Your Opinion.
an opinion which is contradicted by numerous independent witness statements as I have demonstrated.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #676 on: July 07, 2020, 03:50:29 PM »
Fascinating!

Their timeline falls apart under scrutiny. ... (IMO)

Offline faithlilly

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #677 on: July 07, 2020, 03:50:41 PM »
Then please say so.  Contrary to popular opinion I don't actually enjoy deleting comments.

Delete away.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #678 on: July 07, 2020, 03:55:12 PM »
Their timeline falls apart under scrutiny. ... (IMO)
Hardly surprising when you have so many people's witness statements to try and weave together - even if you completely disregard the Tapas 9 statements it's virtually impossible to come up with a workable timeline of events from the statements of the independent witnesses which is why when challenged no one here even bothers to try.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline kizzy

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #679 on: July 07, 2020, 04:08:34 PM »
an opinion which is contradicted by numerous independent witness statements as I have demonstrated.

Yes, but it could not be worth anything or prove anything it was never tested.

It's not evidence of anything ..not even worth the paper it was written on.

Something was done by a group who had been drinking wine ..Oh, and thinking Maddie had been taking by an abductor.

So how could they think so rationally exact times?

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm









Although the entire group was at the table and starting the meal, they began the 'visits' to the children in a way that is neither coherent nor acceptable; that could not be confirmed and only the group defends it, in a sort of 'unique version'.

Although they say in the 'Autos' that their strategic position in the Tapas restaurant allowed them, the McCann, to see the apartment where they'd left their children, minor, sleeping, the exam of the local reveals it is false.

It must be noted, also, that by the stated in the 'Autos' everything points to their position at the table with their back to the apartment.

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #680 on: July 07, 2020, 04:56:54 PM »
Yes, but it could not be worth anything or prove anything it was never tested.

It's not evidence of anything ..not even worth the paper it was written on.

Something was done by a group who had been drinking wine ..Oh, and thinking Maddie had been taking by an abductor.

So how could they think so rationally exact times?

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm









Although the entire group was at the table and starting the meal, they began the 'visits' to the children in a way that is neither coherent nor acceptable; that could not be confirmed and only the group defends it, in a sort of 'unique version'.

Although they say in the 'Autos' that their strategic position in the Tapas restaurant allowed them, the McCann, to see the apartment where they'd left their children, minor, sleeping, the exam of the local reveals it is false.

It must be noted, also, that by the stated in the 'Autos' everything points to their position at the table with their back to the apartment.
I was referring to inconsistencies between independent witness statements - I guess everyone must have been drunk that night, staff and guests.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline faithlilly

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #681 on: July 07, 2020, 05:51:27 PM »
One thing absolutely stands out to me.

Not one of the tapas staff who must have been milling about around ten o’clock have said that they saw Kate raising the alarm.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Robittybob1

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #682 on: July 07, 2020, 05:59:28 PM »
Madeleine was found missing around. 9.30. There was searching by the group. The alarm was raised, according to Gerry, at 10.13. It really isn’t that hard to get your head around.
The group did this but didn't inform Kate.  Is that how it happens?

Is this your scenario?
1.  Madeleine was found missing around. 9.30. by one member of the T9.
2.  There was searching by other members the group.
3.  The alarm was raised, according to Gerry, at 10.13. after Kate goes to the apartment on her check.

It really isn’t that hard to get your head around.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Billy Whizz Fan Club

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #683 on: July 07, 2020, 06:10:03 PM »
Hardly surprising when you have so many people's witness statements to try and weave together - even if you completely disregard the Tapas 9 statements it's virtually impossible to come up with a workable timeline of events from the statements of the independent witnesses which is why when challenged no one here even bothers to try.

I think people have done a fine job. I’ve learnt some new things about the events. And then what we’re left with is looking for concrete evidence. I’m yet to see any that supports rare stranger abduction.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2020, 10:22:21 PM by Billy Whizz Fan Club »

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #684 on: July 07, 2020, 06:15:28 PM »
I think people have done a fine job. I’ve learnt some new things about the events. And then what we’re left with then is concrete evidence. I’m yet to see any that supports rare stranger abduction.
That’s your problem.
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #685 on: July 07, 2020, 06:19:23 PM »
I think people have done a fine job. I’ve learnt some new things about the events. And then what we’re left with then is concrete evidence. I’m yet to see any that supports rare stranger abduction.

Perhaps that's because you don't know where to look. I would say the evidence supports stranger abduction to be the most probable solution and it probably fits in well with the statistics
« Last Edit: July 07, 2020, 06:21:38 PM by Davel »

Offline faithlilly

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #686 on: July 07, 2020, 06:33:09 PM »
Perhaps that's because you don't know where to look. I would say the evidence supports stranger abduction to be the most probable solution and it probably fits in well with the statistics

The statistics say that children are in far more danger from their parents than a stranger. You know that.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Vertigo Swirl

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #687 on: July 07, 2020, 06:35:44 PM »
It’s a wonder children aren’t removed from their parents at birth and given to strangers for their own safety
"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Mr Gray

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #688 on: July 07, 2020, 06:37:59 PM »
The statistics say that children are in far more danger from their parents than a stranger. You know that.

The statistics also point to stranger abduction being rare.so in the last 15 years how many stranger abductions have there been in Portugal...if Maddie was abducted would that fit in with the stats .yes it would

Offline G-Unit

Re: Timeline May 3rd
« Reply #689 on: July 07, 2020, 07:56:29 PM »
and must we ignore this statement as well, if we want to stick to an earlier time for the alarm to have been raised?  this guy Salcedas was only a waiter and therefore not a senior professional, nor a chef, so can we disregard his testimony? 

Referring to the day of 3rd May when Madeleine disappeared, the witness says that he was working.

At that time, at about 22.20 – 22.30 he noticed that there was only one person sitting at the group’s table, the oldest of them and he asked her jokingly whether they had left her alone.

The person in question said that the others had gone to the apartment to look for a girl who had disappeared. Seconds later Madeleine’s father appeared, greatly agitated, looking for his daughter everywhere, obviously and immediately heading towards the pool and surrounding areas.

Maybe Dianne stayed there to finish the wine?
Read and abide by the forum rules.
Result = happy posting.
Ignore and break the rules
Result = edits, deletions and unhappiness
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?board=2.0